Pre-Incorportion BRB 555-01 Proposed Incorporation Staff Report 07/2001 ✓ G t_ c l
�`
CAx X 'Ww
o.F.'. .i.> w
MI 6ma. a�* - y/1} 4A . .
` •t!iY`'CI
}}c� , Y.t L 1!f"17.cs. 4�*+.44,3{{4-r 1y l`a `cif.
1 S rktt t1.3,.
vlf.. b.'1Z�}
,..'" `!.Y-- ' �"z 11,
r_G a �' t :+yd.'s a s}'3 ., s.iC.t a -+�
r % r E. - _. .. _.
.' u. a: t.. 'a' ..' .t ..e t,..1 ice:- �'..M .£...mdni:.
IIM
1. M 33 �� s.. 1 Li
', �y,. ''-¢g ,,r�88+ ba'.L r rte. r r �z
j 0
'YP � ; 4.x a$ ^vt_' atir' *.e . `':
#*r+x* sy.IIIIII Z .tc ..,4144-14,atitiPr41,'Itti:ItZrc-trit-t.:t.,114.-4--,t7s7.-.iiit
x
��r�7:"h�' w.%RTG^tcY -r4 ...�.R�� u.
isi4 0 _
+ h -'- -a
w* 4.. £,; !x i'� -`°¢'a u t ref .4t- r`k5«A 0 1 !,i,.
PPP.
"y x .v. wt..D i.i. F. l /t"w'T •si`�. '.."" 'r7.
�C :iaa ' �3�d'` -r�iGi ^` ;r^i�. S ' "k4 ft,h+'w �-a�«- -- ;
.i--_ 3y,.,t, gt4.&a ,-4.. rr.,a-�"`- r x x ^.-m.—e:
Yom... _ ,pri. 's`a' ., +g {v i )a� ' -.,t2 s # K
Z t... ,,,,,,„..i?,'� ,i, 2 ,.. `t n •*.„ F... 'i7 $x„yx r. +. �'awws"%t=; .4.,'
s 'Yr4�'{sf.. 3��> rh yd e � ' 5ss `'�t v"a tJ . r' .4.---..v } -
p i'al 41 . .:
., ti `1h Xe.CV if M 5 r g"c" u
O .�1t1 s ±*.S t-el »d t ^ 9fai,t, F`-gy .ac. * Y �.C'+"4C' --
, ,,,
FF 4} fid' .�+.: .RY:�' v
ug , xa
„......„ . .,..::‘,.....,..i y V
r;.;
,:. At 7
O y:- ,...1; .„.
- lc e' �- }�\,.� .. ”
1140 '
idP
li r � int ",lbs�. 4 `Ai I
v.„.....,„,,,,OSdA 'dam t•
r ' .;la®F .Ys. 'Yb• -- sac: a` ,...,:,.,,,,,.,„:„.t., .„.„,-.T..,,,..2.22
oa cmaa aaoa9�14,ya000eeovsvuvv 1"'. 7 eara+.`
6 .' t':. Y,; sa..,,&6T¢.aur=,B2e3E4E1va^:9 s h .44:7,ire+•.:t��'lF' ua.3. •''t� „'+r f Y's 't41'^
U)
61 J Washington State Boundary Review Boards
Zfor Spokane County t,\;,
July 2001 k.r
,.
Spokane Valley Incorporation Study
for
Washington State Boundary Review Board
for Spokane County
Incorporation Study Team
Susan Winchell, AICP, Director, Boundary Review Board Office
Michael Basinger, Planner, Boundary Review Board Office
Peter Fortin, Fiscal Analysis Consultant
Mary Jane Honegger, Historic Preservation Consultant
July 10, 2001
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF MAPS iv
Overview of Study 1
PART I: INCORPORATION PROPOSAL 3
PROPOSED CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 3
Type of Government 3
Form of Government 3
BACKGROUND OF SPOKANE VALLEY INCORPORATION 3
INCORPORATION PROCESS 5
Boundary Review Board Process 5
Incorporation of New Cities 7
EXISTING CONDITIONS IN THE SPOKANE VALLEY 10
Population 10
Assessed Valuation 12
Land Use 12
TOPOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENT 17
PART II: SPOKANE VALLEY COMMUNITY 18
HISTORY OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY 18
SPOKANE VALLEY COMMUNITY VIEWS 25
Survey of Residents 25
Steering Committee 28
PART 11I: MUNICIPAL SERVICE ANALYSIS 29
GENERAL GOVERNMENT 30
Legislative 30
Administrative 30
City Clerk 31
human Resources/Risk Management 31
Finance 31
Information Services 31
Other Administrative 31
JUDICIAL AND LEGAL 31
District Court 31
Probation 32
Prosecutor's Office 32
Public Defender 33
PUBLIC SAFETY 33
Law Enforcement 33
Corrections 34
Jail 34
Animal Control 34
Fire Protection 35
PUBLIC WORKS 35
Engineering Administration 35
Roads Maintenance 36
i
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Comparison of Past Incorporation Proposals 4
Table 2: Incorporation Election Dates 10
Table 3: Population Density of Spokane County Cities (2000) 11
Table 4: Population Density of Washington Cities over 50,000* 11
Table 5: 10-year Population Projection for the Spokane Valley Incorporation Area 12
Table 6: Per Capita Assessed Value of Washington Cities over 50,000 12
Table 7: Spokane Valley Cultural and Historic Sites 24
Table 8: Spokane Valley Survey Results 26
Table 9: Septic Tank Elimination program Funding 38
Table 10: Water Purveyors within the Spokane Valley Incorporation Area 43
Table 11: Spokane Valley Parks within the Incorporation Area 47
Table 12: Comparison with Similar Cities in Washington 49
Table 13: New City Budget 56
Table 14: Revenues Available to the New City 57
Table 15: Utility Tax Revenue Rates 60
Table 16: 2002-2006 Planned Capital Improvements for Sewers 62
Table 17: 2002-2006 Planned Capital Improvements for Parks 63
Table 18: 2002 Planned Spokane County Road Projects within Incorporation Area 63
Table 19: 2003 Planned Spokane County Road Projects within Incorporation Area 64
• Table 20: Summary of Modification Areas 68
•
iii
OVERVIEW OF STUDY
Purpose
The purpose of the Spokane Valley Incorporation Study is two-fold: 1) to provide the
Boundary Review Board with an analysis of factors required to be considered and objectives
required to be met in making its decision on the proposal; and 2) to provide the citizens of
the Spokane Valley with clear and factual information upon which to base their vote on the
incorporation issue. To accomplish this, the Study includes:
• A description of each of the factors identified in RCW 36.93.180 required to be
considered by the Boundary Review Board in making its decision (i.e. population and
territory, municipal services, and the impact of the proposal on other governments).
• An assessment of the objectives the Board shall attempt to achieve as identified in
RCW 36.93.170 (i.e. preservation of neighborhoods and communities, logical services
areas, and inclusion of areas urban in character).
• An analysis of service delivery options for the new city including contracting with
existing service providers, establishing new city departments, and contracting with
other entities.
• A financial analysis of the proposal and possible modification areas including an
estimate of revenues collected in the new city boundaries and an estimate of
expenses for its first full year of operation.
• A description of other governance options available for the Spokane Valley.
The information in this Study was based on interviews and research as of July 1, 2001. The
Boundary Review Board will receive additional testimony, both written and oral, during the
public review period for this Study and during the public hearing process. The final
decision of the Boundary Review Board will be based upon any additions or changes to the
information in this Study.
Study Team
An Incorporation Study team was formed to prepare, research, and analyze the
incorporation proposal. The team was composed of Susan Winchell, AICP, Director, and
Michael Basinger, Planner, Boundary Review Board Office; Peter Fortin, consultant to the
Boundary Review Board, who provided information on the municipal services and prepared
the revenue and expenditure analysis; and Mary Jane Honegger who contributed the history
of the Spokane Valley. Michael Basinger, using a GIS application, developed population
figures and land use analysis for the proposal and as well as preparing the maps and
graphics for the Study.
1
>II
0
I.':
PART I:
.J 0
all Z INCORPORATION PROPOSAL
O
I1Jlm
Z a
g0 _ ,
ON
a
°L
y0
V
Z
PART I: INCORPORATION PROPOSAL
Proposed City of Spokane Valley
The proposed new City of Spokane Valley is bounded on the west by the City of Spokane and
on the east by the newly formed City of Liberty Lake (Map 1). The proposed City's current
estimated population is 82,135 and is projected to grow to a population of 90,300 in ten
years. The new city boundaries encompass about forty-five square miles.
Type of Government
The type of government selected for the new city is classified as a non-charter code city.
Code cities follow the Optional Municipal Code (RCW 35A) that provides for broad powers of
local self-government; a judicial rule of liberal construction of code city powers; liberal
interpretation of statutory construction; and a grant of "omnibus authority". There are two
classes of code cities: charter and non-charter. The essential difference between a charter
and non-charter code city is that a charter code city can provide for an individualized plan
of government with a unique administrative structure, whereas a non-charter code city must
choose one of the forms of government provided and are governed by statutory provisions.
Form of Government
The City of Spokane Valley will have a council-manager form of government. This form of
government is for cities over 2,500 population and has seven council members elected by
the voters. Either the council may elect a council member to serve as mayor and chair of
the council or the city council may, by resolution, submit a proposition to the voters to
designate the person elected to council position "one" as the chair of the council. If the
proposition is approved, at all subsequent general elections, the person elected to position
one becomes council chair and the city's mayor. Because the "mayor" continues to be a
council member, however, the only elective position under a council-manager form remains
that of council member.
The elected officials must be residents of the city for one year and are elected for a four-
year term. Until a salary ordinance is passed, the salaries are restricted to $500 per month
plus expenses for the Mayor and $400 per month plus expenses for the council members.
The council appoints a person to the position of "city manager". The city manager is the
Chief Executive Officer of the city and the head of the administrative branch of the city's
government. Appointments of all department heads, officers, and employees are made by
the city manager.
Under a council-manager form of government, two positions must be appointed by the
council: City Clerk and Chief Law Enforcement Officer. Legal Counsel must be provided for
either by appointment or by contract.
Background of Spokane Valley Incorporation
Government alternatives for the Spokane Valley have been proposed and discussed for many
years, dating back to the 1950s. In the late 1970s, there were a number of Valley residents
who began to look at the issue of incorporation as a means for self-government. In 1984,
the Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce published Directions for Tomorrow: Local
Government in the Spokane Valley on local government options for Valley residents.
3
must elapse before an incorporation may be placed on the ballot again. November 1993 was
the earliest that the incorporation could be placed on the ballot.
1993 Spokane Valley Incorporation Proposal
Proponents for the Spokane Valley incorporation continued their efforts and a petition was
circulated in early 1993 for another proposal to incorporate. In the proposal, the
boundaries encompassed less land area and a smaller population. The Boundary Review
Board held several public hearings and after deliberation, again recommended to deny the
proposal because of the large amount of rural land included. The Board's decision was
appealed because a request for modification to exclude the Kaiser and Spokane Industrial
Park property was not approved. Both the Superior Court and later the Court of Appeals
upheld the Board's decision and the matter went on the ballot in April 1994. The proposal
was defeated but received 44 percent of the vote so that the matter could be placed on the
ballot without any time restrictions.
1995 Spokane Valley Incorporation Proposal
Inspired by the 1993 election results, the proponents again initiated the incorporation
process. A Notice of Intention for the incorporation was filed on January 12, 1995. The
Boundary Review Board held a public hearing on the proposal on February 13, 1995. The
matter was placed on the ballot in May of 1995 and was again defeated at the polls. The
vote for incorporation was greater than forty percent in favor, which enabled the proposal
to go on the ballot the following year.
1996 Cities of Opportunity and Evergreen Proposals
Immediately after the 1995 election, proposals to incorporate five separate cities in the
Spokane Valley were filed with the County. Proponents of two of the five cities submitted
petitions in a timely manner and the petitions were certified by the County Auditor. The
proposed cities of Opportunity and Evergreen were scheduled for public hearings before the
Boundary Review Board on February 26th and 29th, 1996, respectively. The incorporations
went to the voters, but received less than forty percent of the vote, preventing another
election for three years.
2000 City of Liberty Lake
Proponents for Spokane Valley incorporation had in the past included the Liberty Lake
community within its incorporation boundaries. In 1999, a committee was formed to look
at governance options for the Liberty Lake community. An incorporation of the area was
proposed in early 2000; was placed on the ballot in November 2000; and was approved by
the voters. The official incorporation date for the new City of Liberty Lake will be August
31, 2001.
Incorporation Process
Boundary Review Board Process
The Board bases its decisions on many criteria as directed by statute. These criteria are:
the factors and objectives of the Boundary Review Board law, consistency with the Growth
Management Act, and oral and written testimony.
5
(8) Incorporation as cities or towns or annexation to cities or towns of incorporated
areas which are urban in character; and
(9) Protection of agricultural and rural lands which are designated for long term
productive agricultural and resource use by a comprehensive plan adopted by the
county legislative authority.
Following the final public hearing, the Board will deliberate on the above issues. The Board
may then decide to approve the incorporation proposal, modify the boundaries by
increasing or decreasing the land area up to ten percent, or recommend against the
proposal. A written decision of the Board will then be adopted and filed. An appeal period
of thirty days follows filing of the Board's written decision. If the proposal is approved or
modified, the Spokane County Board of County Commissioners will then set the election
date for the incorporation of the City of Spokane Valley.
Incorporation of New Cities
The statues guiding new incorporation proceedings in the State of Washington are described
in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 35 and 35A. The role of the Boundary Review
Boards in the incorporation process is outlined in RCW 36.93. The necessary legal steps for
the incorporation of a new city in the State of Washington are outlined below:
STEP 1: A notice of the proposed incorporation is filed with the County Commissioners
together with a one hundred dollar filing fee and an affidavit from the person submitting
the notice stating that he or she is a registered voter in the incorporation area. The notice
must include the following information:
1. The type of city proposed.
2. The form of government proposed.
3. Legal description of the proposed boundaries.
4. Proposed name of the new city.
5. Estimated population of the new city.
The notice for the incorporation of the City of Spokane Valley with the filing fee was submitted
to the County Commissioners on August 24, 2000. It stated that it would be 1) a non-charter
code city; 2) a council-manager form of government, 3) the legal description; 4) named the
City of Spokane Valley; 5) with an estimated population of 90,000; and included an affidavit
from proponent, Ed Mertens.
STEP 2: The Board of County Commissioners then notifies the Boundary Review Board of
the proposal.
On September 5, 2000, the County Commissioners adopted Resolution No. 0-0767 forwarding
the Notice of Incorporation to the Boundary Review Board.
STEP 3: The Boundary Review Board schedules a public meeting in the area proposed for
incorporation to allow persons favoring and opposing the proposed incorporation an
opportunity to state their views.
7
STEP 9: The Boundary Review Board distributes the Notice of Intention to affected
governmental agencies for their review and the Incorporation Study is presented to public
officials and citizen groups.
The Notice of Intention was distributed to affected agencies on June 7, 2001 and presentations
'of the Incorporation Study were made.
STEP 10: The Boundary Review Board holds a public hearing on the proposal, reviews the
factors and objectives required by state law, and then decides to approve the proposal,
modify it by increasing or decreasing the land area up to ten percent, or recommends
against the proposal. The Board then files its written decision. There is an appeal period of
thirty days following the filing of the written decision.
The Boundary Review Board has set a public hearing for Wednesday, August 8, 2001 at 7:00
pm in the Spokane Valley. If the hearing or the Board's decision is continued, the
continuation date will be set at the hearing.
STEP 11: The Board of County Commissioners sets the incorporation proposal for the next
regularly scheduled general election at least sixty days from when the Board's written
decision is filed, to be voted on by registered voters in the proposed incorporation area.
If the Boundary Review Board's written Resolution and Hearing Decision is filed before
September 6, 2001, the County Commissioners will set the matter for an election on November
6, 2001.
STEP 12: If the new city is approved by a majority of voters within the proposed
jurisdiction, the new city has between 180 and 360 days to incorporate. At least 60 days
after the election on incorporation, a primary election for city officials will be held.
Candidates may file for office 30 to 45 days prior to this primary election. If more than
sixty percent of the votes are against incorporation, another election on any portion of the
area cannot be held for three years.
-STEP 13: The final election of city officials is to be held at least thirty days after the
certification of the results of the primary election.
STEP 14: An interim period exists between the time the new city officials are elected and
qualified and the official date of incorporation. During this interim period, the newly
elected officials are authorized to adopt ordinances and resolutions, enter into contracts
and agreements, issue tax or revenue anticipation notes or warrants, submit ballot
propositions to the voters to authorize taxes or annexation by a fire protection district or
library district. However, these cannot become effective until on or after the official date of
incorporation. The new city may acquire needed facilities, supplies, equipment, insurance
and staff as if they were in existence.
STEP 15: After the transition period of 180 to 360 days elapses, the new city officially
incorporates.
9
•
Table 3: Population Density of Spokane County Cities (2000)
s a v- =wands xa POPuldtl0na
i„ n i 7. n .&-'T4tl.
Name?of,City? '- ,,2000aPopulatron4 'Area; _Densrty�K
Spokane 195,629 59 3,315/sq mi
Spokane Valley 81,277 45 1,806/sq mi
Cheney 8,832 4 2,154/sq mi
Airway Heights 4,500 5 900/sq mi
Medical Lake 3,758 4 1,043/sq mi •
Deer Park 3,017 6 479/sq mi
Millwood 1,649 1 2,356/sq nil
When analyzing population density, it is important to realize that concentrated
development can lead to greater efficiency, reduced fiscal and social costs, and potentially a
better quality of life. Population density can also be used to identify areas that are urban
character. Out of the twelve cities on the table below, the proposed City of Spokane Valley
has the lowest population density.
Table 4: Population Density of Washington Cities over 50,000
N X, � � 2000cy ., ;, Land{ tiPoputatron z,
ame"
Nof City !;,,,-Populatronk Area r,, 3 ,Densrtyr. :,1;
Shoreline 53,025 12 4,418/sq mi
Tacoma 193,556 49 3,942/sq mi
Federal Way 83,259 21 3,927/sq mi
Bellevue 109,569 31 3,534/sq mi
Spokane 195,629 59 3,315/sq mi
Everett 91,488 28 3,279/sq mi
Vancouver 143,560 44 3,240/sq mi
Lakewood 58,211 19 3,063/sq mi
Yakima 71,845 26 2,763/sq mi
Kent 79,524 29 2,704/sq mi
Bellingham 67,171 25 2,686/sq mi
Kennewick 54,693 25 2,187/sq mi
Spokane Valley 81,277 45 1,806/sq mi
Projecting population growth into the future is exceedingly speculative and can be
particularly complicated considering all the potential constraints that could be imposed on
future growth. In order to estimate growth within the boundaries of proposed City of
Spokane Valley; the total population growth from 1990 to 2000. (9.7%) was continued to
2010. Population projections for Spokane County and the City'of Spokane were estimated as
a part of the growth management planning process. For the table below, the 1990-2000
population growth rate was continued to 2010.
11
existing land use by these smaller areas and major characteristics of each area. The
percentages have been rounded. Refer to Map 5 for the boundaries of each sub-area.
1. Yardley
Yardley is geographically defined as the area south of Rutter Road, west of Thierman, east
of Havana Road and north of Sprague Avenue. Approximately 34 percent of this area is
vacant land. Most of the vacant land within the area is owned by Spokane County and the
City of Spokane. Single-family residential (2%) and multi-family residential (0.2%) is
located primarily north of Trent Road. The commercial (200/0) and industrial (24%) uses are
dispersed throughout the area. Some of the industrial uses in the area are Scafco, Snyders,
Fruehauf Trailers, Central Pre Mix, WW Grainger Inc., Humble Oil, Kolbar, Brown Bearing
Company, B&B Distributors, and ASC Machine Tool. Some of the commercial uses within this
area are Home Depot, Continental Oil Company, Costco, Shea Construction, and Western
States Equipment Company. Public and semi-public uses (13%) within this area include the
Spokane County Fairgrounds and Avista Ballpark. The acreage for this area is 883 acres or
1.4 square miles. The area is within the City of Spokane's Urban Growth Area.
2. Alcott
Alcott is geographically defined as the area south of 8th Avenue, east of Havana, west of
Carnahan and north of 35th Avenue. Only the portion north of 16th Avenue is within the
boundaries of the incorporation; however, the entire area is described in this section.
Approximately nine percent of this area is vacant land. Dispersed throughout the area is
single-family (32%) and multi-family residential (0.2%). Public and semi-public uses (3%)
within this area consist of Instructional Technology Support Center and the Holy Temple
Church. The acreage for this area is 492 acres or 0.8 square miles. The entire Alcott area is
within the City of Spokane's Urban Growth Area.
3. East Spokane
East Spokane is geographically defined as the area south of Trent Avenue and Interstate 90,
west of Argonne, and east of Havana Road. Approximately 22 percent of this area is vacant
land. Most of the vacant land within the area is owned by Washington State Department of
Natural Resources and the.Federal Government. Single-family residential (40%) and multi-
family residential (3%) is dispersed throughout the area. The commercial (7°/o) and
industrial (4%) uses are distributed throughout the area. Some identifiable commercial uses
within the area are Safeway, Tidyman's, K-mart, and Food Rainbow. The largest industrial
uses in the area are Boise Cascade and Caterpillar located off Mission Avenue. The largest
commercial use within the area is Acme Materials and Construction, which is located off
Valleyway Avenue between Ella Road and Park Road. Acme Materials also has a rock quarry
within this area and does a considerable amount of mining (4%); its location is between
Park Road and Thierinan Road. Public and semi-public uses (6.5%) within this area consist
of several schools including Spokane Valley High, Seth Woodard Elementary, Centennial
Middle, and Pratt Elementary. Open space (1%) is owned by Spokane County, which is
located off Park Road. The acreage for this area is 4,806 acres or 7.5 square miles.
4. Orchard Avenue
Orchard Avenue is geographically defined as the area north of Trent Avenue, west of Vista
Road and south of the Spokane River. Approximately 11 percent of this area is vacant land.
Single-family residential (56%) and multi-family residential (1.4%) is dispersed throughout
13
Opportunity Elementary. There are also several churches within the area. The acreage for
this area is 4,824 acres or 7.6 square miles.
9. Chester
Chester is geographically defined as the area south of 16th Avenue, east of Dishman, west of
State Route 27 and north of 40th Avenue. Approximately ten percent of this area is vacant
land. Dispersed throughout the area is single-family (62%) and multi-family residential
(6%). The commercial (2%) uses in the area are located along State Route 27 and Dishman
Mica Road. Public and semi-public uses (15%) within this area consist of Chester
Elementary, University Elementary, South Pines Elementary, Valley Christian, Bowdish
Junior High, Horizon Junior High Schools, Avista Corporation, Modern Electric Water
Company and several churches. The acreage for this area is 3,338 acres or 2.4 square miles.
10. Ponderosa
Ponderosa is geographically defined as the area south of 40th Avenue, west of Evergreen
Road and bisected by Dishman Mica Road. A poition of the Ponderosa area south of 44th
Avenue is not within the incorporation area, however, the entire Ponderosa area is
described in this section. Approximately 6 percent of this area is vacant land. Dispersed
throughout the area is single-family (49%) and multi-family residential (0.4%). The
commercial (1%) and industrial (1%) uses are located off Dishman Mica Road. Some
identifiable commercial uses within the area are Barney's Soopermarket and Chester Store.
Public and semi-public uses (5%) consist of Ponderosa Elementary and various churches
dispersed throughout the area. The acreage for this area is 1,647 acres or 2.6 square miles.
11. Veradale
Veradale is geographically defined as the area south of Interstate 90, north of 32nd Avenue,
west of Flora Road and east of Pines Road. Approximately 10 percent of this area is vacant
land. Dispersed throughout the area is single-family (58%) and multi-family residential
(6.5%). The commercial (10%) and industrial (1%) uses are congregated along the Sprague
Avenue corridor. Some identifiable commercial uses within the area are the West Coast
Hotel, K-Mart, Les Schwab Tires, Safeway, Fred Meyers, Albertson's and Yokes. Public and
semi-public uses (7%) within this area consist of several schools including Central Valley
High School; Sunrise, McDonald, Adams, Progress, Blake, Keystone, Pioneer and Rainbow
Elementary Schools; Evergreen Junior High School and various churches. The acreage for
this area is 4,561 acres or 7.1 square miles.
12. Mirabeau
Mirabeau is geographically defined as the area south of Trent Avenue, north of Interstate
90, west of Flora and east of Pines. Approximately 42 percent of this area is vacant land.
Most of the vacant land within the area is owned by Washington State Department of
Natural Resources. There is very little single-family residential (4%), which is located off
Shannon Road and Indiana Avenue. The commercial (8%) and industrial (28%) uses are
dispersed throughout the area and constitute more than one third of total land use within
the area. The largest industrial use in the area is Kaiser Aluminum located north of the
Spokane River and west of Sullivan Road. The largest commercial use within the area is the
Spokane Valley Mall, which is located off Interstate 90 between Evergreen and Sullivan
Roads. Central Pre Mix is also located within this area and does a considerable amount of
mining (6%); its location is at the intersection of Sullivan Road and Flora Pit Road. Public
15
Topography and Environment
Topography
The proposed city is relatively flat with moderate slopes (15 percent to 30 percent) within
the Mirabeau area and south of Shelley Lake (Map 4). Steep slopes}(exceeding 30 percent)
are located in the surrounding areas near Dishman Hills Natural Area, East Spokane (south
of Eighth Avenue), southeast of Shelly Lake, and the Carlson Hill area. Because of the
relative flatness of the valley floor, the incorporation area contains a large number of
drainage basins.
Surface Water and Wetlands
The Spokane River and Shelley Lake are the largest natural water bodies located within the
proposed city. Man-made water bodies are located within the Yardley area where surface
mining has penetrated the Spokane/Rathdrum Aquifer. Surface water within the Spokane
Valley basin generally flows from the north to the south on the north side of the Spokane
River and from the south to the north on the south side of the Spokane River. However,
most surface water percolates into the Spokane Valley/Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer. Wetlands
have been inventoried for the area with maps located and maintained by the Spokane
County Planning Department.
Groundwater
The majority of the proposed city is over the Spokane Valley/Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer. The
Mirabeau area and the slopes south and east of Shelley Lake are "islands" not connected to
the aquifer but within the Aquifer Sensitive Area. The Spokane Valley/Rathdrum Prairie
Aquifer is an unconfined aquifer and is considered one of the most productive aquifers in
the United States. The aquifer has been identified as the only significant source of good-
quality water supply in the Spokane Valley and was designated as a "Sole Source Aquifer" by
the Environmental Protection Agency in 1978.
Vegetation and Wildlife
Much of the original landscape within the proposed city has beer-alteied by human activity.
Agricultural activities, residential, commercial, and industrial activity have displaced much
of the native vegetation and altered the wildlife patterns. Natural areas still exist along the
Spokane River bank and in the Dishman Hills area.
Proximity to Other Populated Areas
The proposed City of Spokane Valley lies directly east of the City of Spokane (Map 1). The
City of Spokane is the County's largest urban area and is the second largest city in
Washington. It has a 2000 population of 195,629. The Town of Millwood is surrounded by
the proposed new city and has a 2000 population of 1,649. The newly incorporated City of
Liberty Lake lies directly east of the incorporation area and has an estimated 2001
population of 3,654.
•
17
>ma
PART II:
z SPOKANE VALLEY COMMUNITY
I1J �
Zg 0CL�
oo. re
yo
v
z
Trails and Roads
Early travelers in the Spokane Valley followed trails traveled by generations of Spokane
Indians. Fur traders, prospectors and later settlers followed these faint trails, which
gradually became roads, some of which remain in use today.
The most important road through the Valley was the Mullan Military Road. Captain John
Mullan was commissioned by the U.S. government in 1859 to survey and build a road
connecting Fort Benton at the head of navigation on the Missouri River with Old Fort Walla
Walla on the Columbia River. The road was built to insure a military presence following the
Indian uprisings of 1858. Completed in 1862, the road crossed the Spokane River at Plantes
Ferry.
Small Settlement Begins - 1864
In 1862 A. C. "Charley" Kendall built a cabin and established a store on the north side of
the Spokane River. Seeing a business opportunity, Joe Herring, Timothy Lee and Ned
Jordan built the first bridge to cross the Spokane River at the site of Kendall's store in 1864.
A small community, known as Spokane Bridge, began to build up near the bridge. M. M.
Cowley took over the holdings of Charley Kendall in 1872, including the bridge, a trading
post and a log hotel.
Interestingly, the history of the settlement of the Spokane Valley predates the history of
the City of Spokane. Spokane Valley holds many of the "firsts" for the Spokane area. In
addition to being home to the area's first settler, Antoine Plante, in 1849, the Spokane
Valley had the first business and first ferry in 1850; the first store and bridge in 1862; the
first house in 1866; and the first post office in 1867. All these "firsts" occurred before the
1873 arrival of James Glover, "The Father of Spokane".
First Settlers 1865 - 1882
During the next few years, growth was slow, but a few early settlers set down roots in the
Valley area. William Newman, an escort to boundary surveyors for the U.S. Army, settled
and farmed near Newman Lake, later named for him. Daniel Courchaine, a French Canadian,
began ranching in the Saltese area in 1866. Stephen Liberty moved from Rathdrum in 1871
to settle on the west side of Liberty Lake with his wife and nine children. Other early
settlers included the families of Albert Edmond Canfield, Benjamin Lewis and Joe Goodner in
1880; the Joseph Woodard family of nine in 1882; and the William Pringle family in 1883.
Most of these early settlers were ranchers who raised stock, letting them graze on the dry,
bunch grass-covered land of the Valley.
Railroad Brings Early Growth 1883 - 1898
The Northern Pacific Railroad began laying tracks through the Spokane Valley in 1881. The
first township was platted as new businesses started up to supply services to the men
building the railroad. More early pioneers settled in the Valley as money and jobs began to
come into the area. By 1883, the final tracks liad been laid, and a transcontinental link was
established. This transcontinental link and the discovery of the silver mines in the Coeur
d'Alenes created a rush of traffic. Within a few years, Spokane was tied to the outside world
by five transcontinental railroads, making it the hub of commerce it remains today.
19
Spokane Valley Growers Union to help market their produce and built a huge packing plant
in 1911.
During these years, the Spokane Valley was promoted as a wonderful place to live. Though
most Valley residents were farmers or orchardists, canneries, brickyards, railroad
maintenance facilities and lumber mills provided jobs for many. The beauty of the
surrounding area, pleasant communities, fertile farmlands, business opportunities, outdoor
sports and activities, local recreational areas and community organizations caused it to be
called "Spokane Valley, the Valley Bountiful". As the population increased, small
communities with schools, churches, businesses, community clubs and organizations
thrived. Tied to Spokane, local lakes and Coeur d'Alene by railroads and bus systems, the
people of the Valley enjoyed a full life.
Truck Farms — 1920s
As early as 1915, area orchardists began to have crop trouble. By the end of 1928, early
frosts, disease, soil depletion and competition from other apple producing areas ended the
apple dreams of the Spokane Valley. In addition to crop problems, no provisions had been
made for repair or upkeep and many of the unique ditches and irrigation systems built near
the turn of the century were failing.
Despite their best efforts, more than three-quarters of the apple trees grown in the Valley
had been pulled out by 1926. Area residents began losing their farms or selling them in
five, ten, or twenty-acre lots as suburban home sites. Others converted them to truck
farms, successfully raising many crops in the gravelly soil of the Valley, including
strawberries, raspberries, tomatoes, beans, peas, watermelons, asparagus, squash, cucumbers
and thousands of acres of Heart of Gold cantaloupes. Dairy, poultry and fur farms also
appeared in the Valley during these years.
Depression — 1930s
Like the rest of the nation, the Spokane Valley was hit with a depression in the 1930s.
Although hunger was not a problem, as most people had enough land to grow food for their
families, there were few jobs and money was scarce until 1940. -
The Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce adhered to a positive agenda throughout these
hard times. They placed street signs on Valley roads and in an effort to show solidarity with
Spokane, east-west roads were re-named to correspond with Spokane's roads. Observing
that fires were a constant and catastrophic problem for area residents, the Chamber lobbied
to begin a fire protection district in the Valley. Their efforts were successful and Valley
residents were first offered fire protection in 1940, with the formation of Spokane County
Fire Protection District Number One.
New activities flourished during these years. Miniature golf and golf.became favorite
pastimes. Skiing was brought close to the area with the opening in 1933 of Ski-More,just
south of Dishman, and in 1935 Playfair Race Course was built. An Inland Empire Regatta
was held at Liberty Lake in 1937, and fourteen dancing schools sprang up as a dancing craze
hit the area. Movies were a favorite pastime for Valley residents, and the Dishman Theater
opened in 1939.
21
Steady Growth — 1960s
The 1960s found the Valley still a quiet, but ever growing suburb of the City of Spokane.
Rapid growth continued as more and more land was subdivided. This growth seemed to be a
minor problem to the people of the Valley, as jobs were plentiful and industries were
growing. The Navy Supply Depot, which closed in 1958, was reopened as Spokane Industrial
Park by a subsidiary of Washington Water Power. It successfully began attracting light
industries in 1962.
Throughout the 1960s, the semi-rural life residents had sought by moving to the Valley was
still intact. Most Valley residents had a little acreage and could ride a horse up into the
foothills. Valley businesses continued to grow in number and size and Valley residents were
thrilled when the first shopping center, University City, opened in 1965. The opening of
the Spokane Valley Hospital was another big step forward for Valley residents.
Growth and Environmental Concerns — 1970s and 1980s
Following national trends, Valley residents began to question environmental issues during
the 1970s. Problems from prior growth began to surface. Concerned citizens began to
question growing pollution of the aquifer and area lakes. The lakes, especially Liberty Lake,
began showing signs of deterioration. Yet, despite the fact that these environmental issues
were being discussed, thousands of new homes and many new businesses continued to
locate in the Valley. No protection was given to the aquifer, as no sewers were required for
new construction.
Steady residential and commercial growth continued in the Spokane Valley throughout the
1980s. Hewlett Packard, which had established operation in the area in 1979, was the first
of several high tech companies that opened for businesses in the Industrial Park and Liberty
Lake areas. Although area residents continued to enjoy their semi-rural, but increasingly
urban, lifestyle, the influx of people finally began to be felt as area schools became crowded
and.a few major roadways became congested.
Fears concerning the aquifer continued into the 1980s, leading State Board of Health
officials to threaten a moratorium on new construction in 1983, unless sewering of the
Valley began. In answer, Spokane County developed a wastewater management plan and
designated a priority sewer service area. A sewer trunk line was eventually extended into
the area, and at long last, the Valley slowly began to hook up to sewers.
Following up on an earlier proposal by the Spokane County Parks Department, the Parks and
Recreation Committee of the Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce proposed a ten and one-
half mile hiking, biking, and recreational trail to be built in conjunction with the
Washington State Centennial in 1989. Gaining support from a multitude of sources, the
Centennial Trail quickly became a reality. By 1989, the trail meandering through the Valley
along the Spokane River began providing enjoyment to thousands of residents.
Urbanization — 1990s
Throughout the 1990s, the Spokane Valley continued to grow more urban, becoming one of
the fastest growing regions in the state. Commercial growth increased and joined
residential growth as it moved towards the state line. The urban development included the
opening of the long-awaited Spokane Valley Mall in 1997, the establishment of dozens of
23
Spokane Valley Community Views
Survey of Residents
At the onset of the Spokane Valley Incorporation Study, a survey of Spokane Valley
residents was conducted with the cooperation of the Spokesman Review newspaper. The
survey attempted to identify Valley residents' satisfaction with existing service providers,
service levels, community identity, and governance options. The results were used in
determining staffing levels for a new city, assumptions for service providers, boundaries of
neighborhoods and communities within the Valley, and priorities of residents for future
capital projects.
The survey was prepared by the Incorporation Study staff and published in the Valley Voice edition of
the Spokesman Review in November 2000. Five hundred responses were received and the results were
compiled and analyzed as shown on Table 8 on the following page. A score of 1 indicates a high level
of satisfaction with the service provided; a score of 2 indicates an acceptable level; and a score of 3
indicates that residents are unsatisfied with the service provided.
Open-Ended Questions
In addition to the quantifiable responses on the survey, open-ended questions were asked
regarding the most positive change in the Valley, most negative change, and biggest
concern with the development of the Valley. Some of the responses from the survey are
summarized below:
What do you think has been the most positive change in the Spokane Valley?
By a large majority, citizens listed investment in roads, with new additions and
improvements to the freeway and road system, as the most positive change in the Spokane
Valley. Over one hundred respondents noted the freeway improvements and widening of I-
90, and the new Evergreen Road Exchange. Additional new roads were mentioned by over
ninety citizens, who listed both the Valley Couplet and the Argonne railroad overpass at
Trent Road as important projects.
Business and commercial growth received the second largest response as being a positive
change in the Spokane Valley. Although most mentioned the Spokane Valley Mall, others
mentioned various new commercial developments that have brought businesses and services
that they no longer have to go to Spokane to find.
Citing their pleasure in maintaining natural areas, a few people mentioned the development
of the Dishman Hills Natural Area and the Mirabeau Point area as positive developments for
the Valley. Others indicated the recreational facilities created by the construction of the
Centennial Trail and the Mirabeau Point/YMCA complex were their picks for.the most
positive changes.
25
Nearly fifty respondents listed sewer construction as a slow, but positive development. A
few mentioned improvements in other services, such as police or fire, but the availability of
medical services did receive a few positive responses.
Government was mentioned several times as bringing positive changes to the Valley. Some
mentioned their satisfaction with the fiscal responsibility shown by the current County
Commissioners.
What do you think has been the most negative change in the Spokane Valley?
Overwhelmingly, respondents to the survey listed uncontrolled and poorly managed
business, commercial and residential growth, and the resultant traffic problems they have
caused, as the most negative change in the Spokane Valley. Many residents expressed their
discouragement concerning the continued lack of use of the University City Mall and the
closure of dozens of businesses along the Sprague corridor. The proliferation of new
businesses and strip malls being built, while dozens of commercial and retail stores remain
vacant, was viewed by some as leading to urban sprawl.
A few residents surveyed indicated that rapid growth has brought increased crime, heavy
traffic, poor air quality, loss of natural habitat and a reduced quality of life to them. They
expressed their displeasure with the small, clustered, gated developments, too many
apartment complexes, and the small lot size in new subdivisions.
Other respondents mentioned environmental concerns, such as not enough protection for
the aquifer and danger to the river from pollution and increased shoreline building. Loss of
natural habitat with resultant negative effects on wildlife and quality of life was a concern
expressed by others.
Do you feel a sense of community in the Spokane Valley?
Although greatly outnumbered, a few residents felt positive about their sense of
community, either through their schools or community events. Valleyfest, a fall community
event, was listed by many as giving a sense of community. Others mentioned the Dishman
Hills Association, the Centennial Trail, the Mirabeau Point/YMCA complex and the Spokane
Valley Mall as providing new ties for Valley residents and offering great hope for future
cultural events.
Those few positives aside, the overwhelming majority of Spokane Valleyites responded that
they do not feel a sense of community. While a few voiced the opinion that they relate to
Spokane County, many others felt they are a part of the City of Spokane. Still others
revealed that although they do not feel they are affiliated with Spokane, they believe they
have to go into the City of Spokane to find any cultural opportunities.
Rather than feeling part of another larger community, a few responding felt that a cohesive,
community-defining element is missing in the Spokane Valley. Some reasons proposed for
this deficiency in sense of community included: lack of a civic center and other meeting
places, lack of events, both community and cultural, and lack of communication about
community and cultural events.
27
›.
0
1.1
PART III:
..1 0
4z
MUNICIPAL SERVICE ANALYSIS
0
W1.1
Z g
ga _ _
�
°C
0 V
Z
PART III: MUNICIPAL SERVICE ANALYSIS
The proposed incorporation area is served by a large number of public agencies and private
companies. In addition to the services provided by county, federal and state agencies,
various local taxing districts have jurisdiction within this area. These governmental units
are:
Spokane County: Within general government are the legislative, administrative, budget
and support services. Judicial and legal include the district courts, superior courts,
prosecutor's office, and public defender's office. The public safety function of Spokane
County includes the Sheriffs department, corrections, probation, and jail. Other
departments within the County include planning; building and code enforcement;
hearing examiner; parks, recreation and fairgrounds; animal control; noxious weed
control; geographic information services; community development; and public works
including engineering, wastewater management, solid waste management, stormwater
management, and transportation.
City of Spokane: Water and sewer service and wastewater treatment.
Special Purpose Districts:
Fire Protection: Spokane County Fire District 1
Schools: Central Valley School District No. 356
East Valley School District No. 361
West Valley School District No. 363
Spokane School District No. 81
Library: Spokane County Library District
Water Purveyors:
Consolidated Irrigation District No. 19
Vera Irrigation District No. 15
Trentwood Irrigation District No. 3
Model Irrigation District No. 18
Carnhope Irrigation District No. 7
Hutchinson Irrigation District No. 16
Orchard Avenue Irrigation District No. 6
Pasadena Park Irrigation District No. 17
Spokane County Water District No. 3
Irvin Water District No. 6
East Spokane Water District No. 1
Solid Waste Collection: Waste Management of Spokane
Private Water Purveyors:
Modern Electric Company
Holiday Trailer Court
29
City Clerk
The City Clerk is responsible for maintaining a record of all official actions of the City
Council including the publication of notices and minutes of meetings. The estimated cost
for the first year of operation for this responsibility is $160,062.
Human Resources/Risk`Management
For the new city, a Human Resources Department would be required for administration of
personnel including hiring, benefits coordination, disciplinary investigations, and risk
management. The estimated cost for the first year of operation for this function includes
staff costs of $185,722, maintenance and operation costs of $117,744 including a liability
insurance premium of $106,000 for a total department budget of $303,477.
Finance
For the new city, a Finance Department would be responsible for financial management
systems and reports, budget preparation and monitoring, acting as Treasurer for investment
of City funds, and purchasing supplies and capital items. The estimated cost for the first
year of operation for this function includes staff costs of $452,538 and maintenance and
operation costs of $29,667 for a total of $482,205.
Information Services
For the new city, an Information Services Department would be responsible for providing
information technology to city departments to assist them in achieving its goals including
financial and payroll systems, geographic information in conjunction with Spokane County
personnel, data and records management and network development and support. The
estimated cost for the first year of operation for this function includes staff costs of
$330,956, maintenance and operation costs of $46,928, which includes $25,000 for capital
and an additional $500 annual capital expense for each city employee in departmental
budgets, for a total of $377,884.
Options for the new city in providing this service include hiring its own staff, contracting
with Spokane County, or hiring a consultant or any combination of these.
Other Administrative
For the new city, temporary positions are budgeted to be used as needed with the
concurrence of the Human Resources Director and the City Manager for a staff cost of
$82,500 and maintenance and operation cost of $8,750 for a total for the first year of
$91,250.
In addition, expenses for dues and assessments, copiers and lease of a facility for city hall
are estimated to be $236,845 for the first year.
Judicial and Legal
District Court
Existing Service: Spokane County has one District Court with countywide jurisdiction. The
district court has nine judges; five serving Spokane County and four that provide services to
the City of Spokane.
31
contract either partially or totally with the Prosecutor's Office; or contract with a private
attorney.
Incorporation Impacts: It is assumed for this Study that the new city would provide this
service.
•
Public Defender
Existing Service: The Spokane County Public Defender's Office represents persons otherwise
unable to afford legal counsel for adult, juvenile, felony and misdemeanor crimes.
Cost of Existing Service: Costs for providing services to the proposed incorporation area are
based on the Sheriffs estimate of sixty percent of its workload being generated in that area.
For the Public Defender, sixty percent of the costs for adult misdemeanor defense would be
$463,413 for 2001 and $491,218 for 2003.
Incorporation Options: The new city could contract with Spokane County for Public
Defender services; contract with an independent attorney; or set up its own office within an
internal legal department.
Incorporation Impacts: For this study, it was assumed that the new city would contract
with Spokane County.
Public Safety
Law Enforcement
Existing Service: The primary agency providing police service in the unincorporated area of
Spokane County is the Sheriffs Department. It is responsible for 1,725 square miles and
provides services to residents of the unincorporated area (Map 12). Some of the services
that the Sheriff's Department provides to the Spokane Valley include a portion of Patrol,
Community Services, Detectives, Traffic, K-9, Drug Unit, DARE, School Resource officers,
Identification, Radio Dispatch, CAD/RMS, Fleet Lease, and Garage. The Department also
provides contract services to some of the smaller cities in the county.
The Washington State Patrol also provides services within the incorporation area including
traffic enforcement on state and interstate highways and back up to local agencies on
emergencies.
Cost of Existing Service: The Sheriffs Department estimates that approximately sixty
percent of its resources are required in the proposed incorporation area. This was calculated
on a functional basis including some support activities as there is no reliable data available
based upon the geographic location of chargeable activities. Based upon its 2001 budget
including indirect costs this amount is $12,236,273 for 2001 and increases to $12,970,449
for 2003.
Incorporation Options: The new city could negotiate an agreement with the County Sheriff
to provide service or establish its own municipal police department.
33
animal control, the new city could contract with Spokane County Animal Control, hire a
private enterprise, or provide the service itself.
Incorporation Impacts: If the new city contracted with Spokane County, there would be no
impact on the existing operations of the animal control department.
Fire Protection
Existing Service: Spokane County Fire District 1 is a fully paid fire department with 143
employees, responding from seven fire stations and providing the following services:
structural fire suppression; wildland fire suppression; hazardous materials response; incident
management; technical rescue response for automobile extrication, confined space rescue,
high angle rope rescue, trench rescue, and ice rescue; EMS basic life support response (EMT);
EMS advanced life support response (paramedic); fire and arson investigation; plan review;
commercial building inspection; incident pre-planning; and public safety education.
It is a separate taxing jurisdiction governed by an elected board of commissioners and it is
not a part of the county government. The district covers 75 square miles and at a
population of 115,000, Fire District 1 is the largest fire district in Spokane County (Map 11).
Cost of Existing Service: The tax valuation of the district for 2001 is $5,071,297,990. A
regular property tax of $1.3992 per $1,000 and a special property tax of $1.5422 per $1,000
generates $14,795,859 for the operation of the district.
Incorporation Options: The new city will be annexed into Fire District 1 upon incorporation,
but voters within the new city will have the option during the first year of operation to
either remain a part of the District or form their own fire department as per state law.
Incorporation Impacts: With forty-five square miles proposed for the City of Spokane
Valley, 59 percent of Fire District 1 would be inside the new city and 30 square miles or 41
percent would remain unincorporated within Fire District 1.
Serving the southern portion of the Spokane Valley is Spokane County Fire District 8 and •
serving the northern portion of the Spokane Valley is Spokane County Fire District 9.
Modifications to the proposed boundaries could include portions of these Districts.
Public Works
Engineering Administration
Existing Service: Spokane County performs project management, bridge design, urban street
and rural road design, construction, traffic and traffic safety programs, and transportation
demand management for the unincorporated areas of Spokane County. In addition, the u
Engineering Division applies for and administers the Arterial Improvement Program, the
Transportation Partnership Program, and other federal and state grants.
Cost of Existing Service: The estimated costs of engineering and administration for programs
in the incorporation area are $3,063,000 for 2001 and $3,246,780 for 2003.
35
The Transportation Improvement Board has two funding methods: the Arterial Improvement
Program and the Transportation Partnership Program. The 2002 construction program has
over $7 million in approved projects, which would require over $2 million in local match
funds to secure. •
The estimated cost of providing roadway maintenance service to the new city by Spokane
County is $4,065,250 for 2001 and $4,309,165 for 2003.
Spokane County has $15,365,000 in road projects planned for the incorporation area in
2002; of that total, the County has $4,244,000 in local funds have been committed. In
2003, Spokane County has $12,877,000 planned in road projects, of which $3,559,000 in
local funds has been committed. Tables 18 and 19 list these projects and Map 8 shows their
locations.
Incorporation Options: The new city could contract with the County ordevelopa capital
plan and bring the service in-house and contract with Spokane County for an interim
period.
Incorporation Impacts: All of the planning, capital programming, and construction in
relation to local road improvements in the newly incorporated area would become the
responsibility of the new city as well. This work usually starts up in the interim period
between the election on incorporation and the effective date of incorporation. The County
would continue to supervise construction until the effective date of incorporation.
Highway Maintenance
Existing Service: The Washington State Department of Transportation provides maintenance
for the two state highways within the incorporation boundaries: State Route 27 (Pines
Road) and State Route 290 (Trent Road). In addition, the DOT provides maintenance to
Interstate 90.
Cost of Existing Service: State law requires that when a city over 22,500iin population
incorporates, the city immediately assume the responsibility for maintenance activities. The
Department of Transportation would enter into an agreement with the new city to perform
these activities at the city's cost. The estimated cost for these highway maintenance
services by the Department of Transportation for 2001 is $300,000 and $318,000 for 2003.
Incorporation Options: The new city could contract with the State Department of
Transportation or Spokane County or provide the service itself.
Incorporation Impacts: There would be no impact on Spokane County; the assumption for
this Study is that the new city would contract with the Department of Transportation.
Wastewater Management
Existing Service: The Spokane County Sewer Utility is the designated sewer service provider
to the area within the proposed city. The Utility currently has 19,300 customers, of which
15,400 are within this area.
37
annual allocation to the City of Spokane for septic tank elimination within its
boundaries.
SALES Tax: The County currently allocates one-eighth of a cent of its sales tax to the
sewer utility to provide a subsidy to property owners when hooking up to the sewer.
The sewer subsidy (approximately $3,700,000) is provided by the County and will
most likely dissolve with the incorporation of a new city.
An additional amount known as the General Facilities Charge (GFC) of $2,220 per household
is assessed at the time of hook-up. Currently, 25 percent of the GFC is subsidized from Sales
Tax and APA revenues, so the amount paid by each household is $1,665. The GFC is an
allocation to all sewer customers for the County's cost of wastewater treatment capacity at
the City of Spokane's wastewater treatment facility, and for construction of major
interceptors and pumping stations. The GFC is projected to increase in the future to help
pay for new treatment plant capacity.
The last source of revenue for wastewater facilities is the Wastewater Treatment Plant
Charge of $4.00 per month per household. The revenue from this charge is being used
exclusively to upgrade the existing treatment plant, and provide for new wastewater
treatment capacity.
Currently, the aggregate amount of revenue exceeds the annual expenditures for the STEP.
Excess revenues are placed in sewer construction program reserve accounts. However, it is
projected that in the future, the revenues will fall short of expenditures, and the reserves
will be spent to complete the last few years of the sewer construction program.
Incorporation Options: The incorporation of the City of Spokane Valley would require
negotiations with Spokane County on the continuation of the Septic Tank Elimination
Program in many areas. The Centennial Clean Water Grant funding would appear to be
forthcoming if the current level of conversion could be maintained or increased. Aquifer
Protection Area fees are collected by the County in an area larger than the proposed city, so
an equitable method of apportioning the revenue would require negotiation.
Incorporation Impacts: Upon the incorporation of the new city, the County would lose 85
percent of the sales tax revenue it currently receives from the incorporation area, which
almost certainly would affect the current subsidy given to the sewer utility. The new city
would need to either continue the dedication of the sales tax revenue, or find another
source of funding to continue the current level of subsidy, or pass the costs on to the
homeowners within the new city.
The ownership of the wastewater system should remain with Spokane County because of the
regional nature of the utility, but other areas would need investigation such as the
collection of the hook-up fees mentioned previously and also collection of monthly sewer
fees. (i.e. should the collection effort remain with the County or be assumed by the city).
•
39
There is increasing recognition by this community that stormwater facilities are an
important part of the infrastructure needed in this growing region. State and federal
regulations assure that stormwater management will be a big issue facing local agencies and
municipalities in the next few years.
Incorporation Options: The new city could adopt the existing County plans, prepare its
own, or contract with a private firm. In either case, the cost would be about the same to
the new city.
Incorporation Impacts: Upon incorporation, the new city could contract with Spokane
County or hire its own staff to provide the service. In any case, the jurisdiction with
stormwater management responsibilities for the new city will need to address the issue of
how to finance a stormwater program to comply with federal and state requirements and
construct necessary stormwater improvements.
Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
Exiting Service: Spokane County has turned over future solid waste disposal activities to a
joint City of Spokane-Spokane County Liaison Board to build and operate a waste-to-energy
facility and to provide for the disposal of the resultant ash. Solid waste collection is
currently provided by Waste Management Inc., with rates and service boundaries regulated
by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission.
Plans and Policies: The new city, if not a participant in the county-wide system, would also
be required to submit a solid waste plan to the Department of Ecology for approval and
negotiate for a disposal site outside of Spokane County.
Cost of Existing Service: Currently the costs to the Valley area for solid waste collection and
disposal vary depending on the geographical location. An estimation of this service with
recycling and two garbage cans is approximately $18.00 per month.
Incorporation Options for Collection: The new city could not create any immediate changes
to solid waste collection services because of the requirements to honor the life of the
franchise agreement. After the agreement has expired, the new city could honor previous .
agreements for disposal, enter into a new agreement, or arrange for different methods of
disposal. If the new city chooses other methods of disposal and not to use the waste-to-
energy plant, the County residents would get an increase to the solid waste collection and
disposal fee.
Incorporation Options for Disposal: The new city could join the City-County Flow Control
Agreement and accept the County Solid Waste Master Plan or develop its own plan.
Incorporation Impacts: The new city could not alter solid waste collection franchise
agreements until the expiration of the agreements or agreement options.
Water Provision
Existing Service: The proposed incorporation area includes eighteen separate entities
providing water services. Currently, Spokane County's role in the provision of water service
is primarily coordination. The table following depicts the water purveyors with corporate
41
Table 10: Water Purveyors within the Spokane Valley Incorporation Area
4 S'1" cam.x ra+'Q fa { s, ,,c4 e r x 1T ' �/ i* 71: /r t %+Wlthln r 1
`4 S � y 2000 i ;Res deet al, '-4 T of l iI corporation
Water Purveyor,,,.p„j ,.,Population,$, rgOnnection sb4 LAcres,i' `'Area qt,:. ”
Carnhope Irrigation 1,200 480 248 1000/0
District No. 7
City of Spokane 195,000 57,957 NA NA
Consolidated Irrigation 17,795 5,589 12308 47%
District No. 19
East Spokane Water 4,063 1,018 1356 93%
District No. 1
Holiday Trailer Court 21 12 5 100°/a
Hutchinson Irrigation 1,950 780 332 100%
District No. 16
Hutton Settlement T 53 18 333 930/a
Irvin Water District 2,531 729 999 100%
No. 6
Kaiser - Trentwood 563 100%
Model Irrigation 5,708 2,129 945 100%
District No. 16
Modern Electric 16,677 5,187 2887 100%
Company
Orchard Avenue 3,178 1,271 678 100%
Irrigation District No.
6
Pasadena Park 4,168 1,667 1868 54%
Irrigation District No.
17
Pinecroft Mobile Home 248 143 16 100%
Park
Spokane County:Watei 22,140 8,856 6690 46%
District No. 3
Spokane Industrial 273 100%
Park
Trentwood Irrigation 4,048 1,453 2293 90%
District No. 3
Vera Irrigation District 19,801 5,641 9843 41%
No. 15
Spokane County Capital Facilities Plan, March 2001
43
new Comprehensive Plan, including a final Urban Growth Area, in early August 2001 (Map
6).
The Spokane County Zoning Code is the set of land use regulations, adopted under RCW
36.70, designed to protect the health, safety, and general welfare, to promote community
goals and to implement the goals and policies of the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan.
The zoning code establishes specific, binding regulations in the zone categories. Within the
proposed city boundary, a variety of land use zones are found. They include industrial,
commercial, with a mix of low to high-density residential zones. The zoning code will be
updated to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan developed under the Growth
Management Act. The existing zoning for the Spokane Valley is shown on Map 7.
Also included in the zoning regulations is the establishment of an aquifer sensitive overlay
zone (ASA). It is intended to coincide with the recharge area for the Spokane/Rathdrum
Aquifer. The ASA overlay zone provides supplemental development regulations to
permanently protect the source of metropolitan Spokane's water supply.
Other regulations influencing the incorporation include the Spokane County Shoreline
Program, the Spokane County Subdivision Ordinance, the Spokane County Short Plat
Ordinance, and the Spokane County Environmental Ordinance. Spokane County has also
adopted wetland policies directing development on or near wetland areas.
Cost of Service: The cost of providing planning services by setting up a City Planning
Department is estimated at $481,667 for 2001 and $509,847 in 2003.
Incorporation Options: The first task the new city will be required to do, as mandated by
the Growth Management Act (GMA), is develop a Comprehensive Plan, which includes
designating an Urban Growth Area. The new city can hire its own staff, contract with
Spokane County, or hire a consultant to develop its plan. For other planning services, the
new city would have the same options.
Incorporation Impacts::For;this Study, it was assumed that the new city would set up its
own Planning Department. This would impact Spokane County by reducing its workload by
an amount that could result in a reduction of County planning staff.
Building and Code Enforcement
Existing Service: The Building and Code Enforcement Division administers and enforces the
State Building Code Act and other regulations governing land use and construction,
alteration, and use of new and existing buildings and structures within unincorporated
Spokane County. It is operated on the basis that it will "break-even", or operate as an
enterprise fund, which is geared to generate surpluses in high activity years to cover
potential deficits in years when construction activity is low.
Cost of Existing Service: The Building and Code Enforcement Division provided permit data
for the last ten years within the boundaries of the new city to estimate the cost to the new
city. It was recommended that the City retain from the building permit fees collected for its
own use a "minimum fee". The "minimum fee" would be ten percent of the building permit fee
45
Table 11: Spokane Valley Parks within the Incorporation Area
++"x y;-.�i P'�G'rv .Lfp
Name`,;,a�,�,�„�,, ;��r,,Location
Balfour Park Balfour and Main 2.8 $12,359
Brown Park Pines and 32nd Avenue 8.2 $36,193
Castle Park University and 33'd Avenue 2.7 $11,917
Centennial Trail Spokane River (13 miles) 300.0 $67,519
Edgecliff Park Park and 6th Avenue 4.8 $21,186
Mirabeau Park Spokane River and Mirabeau 17.3 $72,500
Orchard Park Park Road and Bridgeport 3.8 $16,772
Park Road Park and 9t° Avenue 2.0 $8,828
Sullivan Park Sullivan at Spokane River 10.3 $22,104
Terrace View Park 24th and Blake Road 9.1 $40,165
Valley Mission Park Mission and Bowdish 27.2 $88,323
Three County Pools Park Road, Valley Mission, Terrace View $68,950
Senior Center Valley Mission Park $30,000
Admin/Capital Costs $324,765
County Indirect Costs $70,383
Total 388.2 $891,964
Incorporation Options: Incorporation of the new City of Spokane Valley would essentially
put eleven County parks within the jurisdictional boundaries of the new city; however, the
new City would not gain ownership of these park properties by act of incorporation. In the
event of incorporation, Spokane County would most likely undertake detailed analysis of
the alternatives available for County-owned park property within the new city boundaries.
After incorporation, Spokane County may decide to maintain ownership and operation of
these facilities or transfer the parks to the new city upon negotiations.
The new city would have three options if the facilities are transferred, contract with the
County for maintenance of the parks, operate.and maintain the parks themselves, or
contract with a private company.
Incorporation Impacts: There would be no cost impacts under either option; recreation
opportunities for County residents outside of the new city may decrease depending on new
city policies for facilities.
Geographic Information Systems
Existing Service: Provides technical staff and support in developing and maintaining the
County's computerized mapping and analysis of geographic information. The County also
provides GIS services to other jurisdictions and private parties on a contract basis. For the
new city, GIS services would include continued maintenance of the map layers required for
updating planning information for both long range and current planning.
Cost of Existing Service: The Spokane County estimate of the cost to provide this service to
the new city is $70,318 in 2001 and $74,537 in 2003.
47
Table 12: Comparison with Similar Cities in Washington
City , Populations , Co Poveity-Lev l CDBG Entitlement_
Everett 87,520 7.800/0 $930,000
Federal Way 77,010 8.60% $589,000
Yakima 65,830 20.20% $1,009,000
Spokane Valley 82,135 12.2% See Options
Incorporation Options: The new city would have three options for continuing to receive
Community Development funds.
OPTION 1: The proposed City of Spokane Valley could make application for entitlement status
and receive an allotment of Community Development Block Grant funds directly from HUD
to address essential community development needs for low income people within its
boundaries. Based on an evaluation of similar sized jurisdictions with comparable
demographic characteristics (population, poverty levels, condition of housing stock, growth
lag, etc.) a new city could receive an estimated $800,000 entitlement amount per year.
With this option, the loss to the County and other cities and towns would be approximately
$2,600,000.
OPTION2: A new city could elect to forego its entitlement status and continue participation
in the Urban County entitlement. This would involve entering into a cooperation agreement
with Spokane County every three years and changing the composition of the Housing and
Community Development Advisory Committee to provide for representation of a new city.
Based on historic allocation amounts, the area of the proposed city currently receives an
average annual allocation of approximately $521,717. With this option, there would be no
loss in funds for the County or other cities or towns.
OPTION 3: The proposed City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County could submit a request
for a joint entitlement and the new city would be eligible to become a pass-through city.
This would entitle the city to receive a direct share of the federatfunds to allocate to local
needs. In order to qualify as a pass-through city, the city would need to develop a
Consolidated Plan and an allocation process for distribution of their anticipated funds.
However, this option removes the staffing requirements for the proposed city and leaves the
county with responsibility for entitlement management of the program for the City of
Spokane Valley. The funds the new city could expect under this option would be an
estimated $800,000 with a loss to the unincorporated areas and other cities and towns of
approximately $278,283.
Incorporation Impacts: The impacts are dependent upon which option the new city chooses
in order to continue Community Development funds.
49
which have annexed to the District under RCW 27.12. The Library District also provides
services under contract to the cities of Airway Heights, Fairfield, and Deer Park.
Plans and Policies: The Spokane County Library District Board of Trustees recognizes that
cities and towns may wish to annex to the Library District, as provided for in RCW 27.12,
rather than contract for library services. Therefore, the Board of Trustees will concur with
requests from cities and towns to annex to the District under the following conditions:
1. If the city or town has an interlocal cooperation agreement with the District, the city
or town agrees that if the annexation is approved:
a. All financial responsibilities related to the library facilities shall remain
identical to those in the interlocal cooperation agreement
b. A new interlocal cooperation agreement shall be executed, reflecting the
change in contracting status and including the financial responsibilities
related to library facilities
2. If the city or town has no interlocal cooperation agreement with the District,
annexation will not obligate the District to provide a library facility in that city or
town
3. The annexation will not cause a reduction in the District's regular property tax levy
rate, either immediately or in future years, based upon reasonable projections
Further, to extend public library services to all residents within Spokane County, the
District encourages annexation of non-contracting cities and towns to the District.
Cost of Existing Service: A regular property tax of 50¢/$1000 of assessed valuation is
collected by the Library District. The district also has an excess levy of .09/$1,000. In
2001, $2,225,000 was generated from within the incorporation boundaries.
Incorporation Options: The Spokane County Library District, a separate taxing district,
serves the proposed incorporation area. The new city can annex to or contract with the
library district, provide its own library service, or not offer the service.
Incorporation Impacts: It is assumed that the new city would annex'to the District with the
property tax levy paid directly to the District.
County-Wide Services
Noxious Weed Control
Existing Service: The local noxious weed control boards and weed districts carry out the
state's noxious weed law at the local level. Each county board has the authority to hire staff
to regulate the control of noxious weeds in its jurisdiction.
Plans and Policies: The Board has the authority to charge all landowners within cities for
weed control work performed countywide.
Cost of Existing Service: Funding of these local programs is either through a weed
assessment on land or an appropriation from the county general fund. Currently, 45 percent
of these programs are funded by a weed assessment on land. The remainder have budgets
51
Directors, which is limited to nine members. The meeting could result in a revised Board
structure that provides the new city with direct representation on the STA Board.
Spokane Regional Transportation Council
Governance: SRTC was established through inter-local agreement between local
jurisdictions, Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and Spokane Transit
Authority under the auspices of Title 23 U.S.0 Section 134 and Part III of the Growth
Management Act. A nine-member board comprised of elected officials from City of Spokane,
Spokane County, and small towns; WSDOT Regional Administrator, WSDOT Transportation
Commissioner, and a private sector transportation provider govern SRTC. Presently, two
Spokane County Commissioners represent the Spokane Valley.
Existing Service: SRTC serves as the federally designated metropolitan planning
organization (MPO) for Spokane County. As the MPO, SRTC is responsible for conducting a
continuing, coordinated and comprehensive transportation planning program that identifies.,
problems and solutions for inclusion in a twenty year Metropolitan Transportation Plan.
SRTC is also responsible for the prioritization, selection, and programming of transportation
projects eligible to receive funding from both Federal Highway Administration and Federal
Transit Administration. SRTC also conducts transportation air quality planning in
coordination with the Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority, Washington State
Department of Ecology, and the Environmental Protection Agency.
Plans and Policies: SRTC is responsible for developing and updating the Metropolitan
Transportation Plan consistent with Federal and State laws and regulations. The plan takes
into account the safe and efficient movement of people and goods into and through the
Spokane Metropolitan Area, addressing highways, transit, rail and non-motorized
transportation.
Cost of Existing Service: SRTC is funded from Federal, State and local resources. Local
funding requirements are shared equally between the City of Spokane, Spokane County and
the Spokane Transit Authority. WSDOT contributes funding related to specific projects and
tasks undertaken as a part of the defined workiprogram.
Incorporation Options: If the new city incorporated, it would be required to participate in
the metropolitan planning process conducted by the SRTC, as a pre-requisite to being
eligible to receive Federal or State transportation funding. The SRTC Board would most
likely seek an elected official from the new city to join the Board.
Incorporation Impacts: The impacts of incorporation to the new city would relate to active
participation in the metropolitan transportation planning process conducted by SRTC,
compliance with the Metropolitan Transportation Plan in the developing the regional
transportation system, providing its share of funding to support the program, and
demonstrating the ability to comply with Federal and State laws and regulations related to
the use for transportation funding.
53
›.
111.:
PART IV:
Z � REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE
0 ANALYSIS
I1J4I1
g
CL
O0.
ix
(1) �
Z
PART IV: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE ANALYSIS
New City Expenditures
Based upon the description of each municipal service in Part III, an example of a new city
budget was developed. The following section represents an allocation of resources to
specific functions to provide the basic municipal services to the new city during the first
full year of operations using 2001 costs as a base. There are many options available both as
to who provides the service and also as to the way the services are organized. This budget
is provided as an example.
The ultimate decision as to the types of service provided, the levels of service and the
choice of service provider for each function will depend on the priorities established by the
new city council. The hypothetical budget that has been created was done using
conservative amounts for both revenues (low) and expenditures (high) in order to test the
financial feasibility of the incorporation.
The expenditure budget is divided into two sections, the first are departments, which would
be created and staffed by city employees, and the second group is services that by their
nature may require substantial study or capital outlay to provide internally. Many newly
incorporated cities have contracted with the county in which they are located to provide
these services; some cities continue to contract for services while others have decided after
a period of years to bring some service in-house. This budget proposes contracting with
Spokane County for these services.
In compiling this budget, many resources were used including budgets from other
Washington cities of similar size including Federal Way, Kent, Everett, Bellevue, Yakima,
Lakewood, Vancouver, and Spokane to analyze costs of providing service including staffing
levels along with the overall scope of services provided.
Spokane County departments were interviewed extensively to determine the cost of service
currently being provided to the area to be incorporated. It became apparent that most
departments other than the Road Department, County Jail and the Sewer Utility did not
have the capability to unit cost their service to a specific area within the County. Therefore,
many departmental costs are estimates of the percentage of resources allocated to the area.
There is now an effort within the County to develop methodologies to more accurately track
the expenditure of resources on a geographic basis and data should be available if the new
city desires to negotiate for services with the County.
Table 13, on the following page, is an example of a new city budget.
55
City Revenues
The financial and tax information presented below is intended to provide the types of
revenue sources available to new cities and estimates of the amount that could be generated
from each source. If projected expenditures are less than revenues currently generated in
the new city boundaries, additional revenue sources will not be assumed. However, if
. projected expenditures are greater than the amount of revenue currently generated in the
new city boundaries, additional revenue sources will be needed to balance the new city
budget.
Table 14: Revenues Available to the New City
Reyenue;Source, .;_ks', 2001;1 , ` !2002liil y,„,s;k2003 Al+f ,; x-'2004, a w2g05 t
Property Taxes $7,120,000 $7,452,000 $7,793,960 $8,146,179 $8,508,964
Sales Tax $14,311,514 $15,027,090 $15,628,173 $16,253,300 $16,903,432
Criminal Justice $1,036,694 $1,078,162 $1,121,288 $1,166,140 $1,212,785
Franchise Fees $385,000 $404,250 $424,463 $445,686 $467,970
Gambling Taxes $875,000 $875,000 $875,000 $875,000 $875,000
Admissions Tax $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000
Building Permits $894,890 $939,634 $986,616 $1,035,947 $1,087,744
Planning Fees $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000
State-shared
Revenues $2,112,012 $2,132,287 $2,152,757 $2,173,424 $2,194,289
Grants $100,000 $100,000 $100,000
Fines and Forfeits $1,501,575 $1,516,591 $1,531,757 $1,547,074 $1,562,545
Interest Earnings $175,000 $180,250 $185,658 $191,227 $196,964
Total Revenues $28,636,684 $29,930,263 $31,024,671 $32,158,976 $33,234,693
Tourr ni " . 2001 ,_.','2002 ,2003 ',CI2004`''
Hotel/Motel Tax $400,000 $412,000 $424,360 $437,091 $450,204
Ca rtal 2001 j '2002 i 200318 2004 2005 ` '
#'.f� z s } W ^. 9P f. , °' Va'@5
, !s a r f w, 3 u a tkS S gni / ,r mri'.r �.N, t u
�IIhpI0v2I1tent '� �x s�,`E�'`�.,,'."." i, � '-`.�; f�_'•�',�', +��� wi nryA-+5. ;'��a'.E'1�V�,r�1.Y�.Is�_e.9,�� 'd_ , �`�:2.,:''.a,. 1�G`°
Arterial Gas Tax $596,820 $602,549 $608,334 $614,174 $620,070
Real Estate Excise
Tax (1" 1/40/a) $845,798 $879,630 $914,815 $951,408 $989,464
Real Estate Excise
Tax (2n" 1/40/a) $845,798 $879,630 $914,815 $951,408 $989,464
Total Capital
Improvement
Revenues $2,288,416 $2,361,810 $2,437,964 $2,516,990 $2,598,998
• a Special levies and property taxes for Fire District No. 1 and the Spokane County Library District are not included. - -
Property Tax Revenue
The regular levy property tax is based upon the total assessed value of all taxable property
within the city boundaries multiplied by the city's annual levy rate. The assessed value of
taxable property is determined by the County Assessor. Taxable property includes land and
improvements; and can include certain personal property such as machinery, some business
57
collection for 2002 and beyond is based upon general inflationary growth in the amount
currently collected and new sales tax revenue attributable to increased business activity.
This is projected to increase to $16,903,432 in 2005.
Criminal Justice
On a county-by-county basis, voters were given the option in 1990 to approve the imposition
of a 0.1 percent sales tax for the benefit of criminal justice purposes. Voters in Spokane
County approved this sales tax for all qualifying transactions, whether they occur in cities or
unincorporated Spokane County.
By statute, ten percent of the total amount remitted to the county is retained by that county
for its own criminal justice purposes. The remaining ninety percent is divided between the
county and the cities in that county on a per capita basis.
The City of Spokane Valley would not need to enact any special legislation to benefit from
this sales tax, since the tax already has been approved by the voters of Spokane County.
The estimated revenue for 2001 is $1,036,694 increasing to $1,212,785 in 2005.
State-Shared Revenues
The State of Washington generates a number of revenues that it distributes partially to
jurisdictions in the state on a per capita basis and retains the rest. The City of Spokane Valley
would not need to enact any special legislation to receive these revenues.
General-purpose revenues to be refunded by the state are estimated to be $2,112,012 in 2001
and are projected to increase to $2,194,289 in 2005; and the arterial gas tax, which is limited
to road projects, is projected to increase from $596,820 in 2001 to $620,070 in 2005.
Hotel/Motel Tax
Local jurisdictions can impose a special tax of up to 2.0 percent on the charges for lodging
at hotels, motels, private campgrounds, RV parks, and similar facilities on stays lasting up
to 30 days. This tax is a part of the 8.1 percent sales tax collected, and the State
reimburses 2.0 percent of the 6.0 percent sales tax that it receives. Use of the revenues is
restricted to purposes that promote tourist-related activities. Revenues of $400,000 are
projected for 2001 and are expected to increase to $450,204 in 2005.
Business and Occupation Tax
Although, not imposed by any cities in eastern Washington, this revenue source allows for a
certain degree of responsiveness to local jurisdictions. Unlike many municipal revenues,
which are derived by affixing a certain tax or fee to a readily-identifiable base, business and
occupation taxes can be based upon gross business income, or other rational factors; and
can differentiate between different classes of business provided every business in such a
class is assessed on the same basis.
This source of revenue was not considered for the City of Spokane Valley and therefore, an
estimate of potential revenues was not calculated.
Utility Tax
In Washington State, cities are statutorily authorized to levy utility taxes but counties are
not. Therefore, the Spokane Valley does not pay local utility taxes at this time because, as
a part of unincorporated Spokane County, such taxes cannot be levied.
59
as Spokane County's current fee structure. This would provide $125,000 from planning fees
and $894,890 in building permit fees in revenue to the new city.
Franchise Fees
A franchise fee of up to five percent can be imposed by either counties or cities on the gross
receipts of cable television providers in the jurisdiction. This would.generate $385,000 in
revenue in 2001, increasing to $467,970 in 2005.
Business Licensing Fee
Local jurisdictions can charge a fee to license all businesses that operate in the jurisdiction.
There are no set guidelines for these fees. Some jurisdictions charge only a modest amount in
order to track business activity in their jurisdiction. Others charge a sizable licensing fee in
place of a business and occupation tax. Still others require licenses only from those businesses
that have special regulatory issues associated with them, such as taxi services or pawn shops.
The taxes collected can be used for any municipal purpose. It was assumed that a business
license fee would not be collected.
Fines and Forfeits
Every city collects a certain amount in fines and forfeit revenues through the judicial
enforcement of its municipal code. The court system in Washington and the nation operates
according to a well-defined hierarchy, so the kinds of infractions, citations, and other judicial
proceedings that are within a city's purview is somewhat limited. In broad terms, a city court
handles primarily traffic infractions and criminal traffic citations, though some other cases
such as certain domestic violence or misdemeanors also can be "city " cases.
The maximum fine for each type of court filing is defined in State law. The amount that is
actually assessed, though, is decided by the judge - unless a person simply "pays the ticket"
without contest. Revenues collected can be used for any municipal purpose.
The level of filing activity for the Spokane Valley was based upon a percentage of Spokane
County as a whole. An estimate of revenues collected in 2001 is $1,501,575 increasing to
$1,562,545 in 2005.
Capital Expenses = .
Capital improvements are those investments a city makes in its physicat infrastructure that
allow that city to improve its overall position for the future. These improvements could
include repair and construction of roads, acquisition and development of parklands,
construction of sewer lines and facilities, or development of structures to enhance stormwater
management. These investments are as important to a new city as the day-to-day operations
of the city. Because the returns to capital improvements are generally received over a long
period, and because the costs of these improvements are substantial, it is important that a city
plan these investments carefully. In fact, as required by the Growth Management Act, the City
of Spokane Valley is required to develop a six-year capital improvement plan that conforms to
the policies outlined in its comprehensive plan.
While it is not possible to know what a new city would develop as its comprehensive plan, to
give an idea of possible capital projects, those identified in the Capital Facilities Plan for
Spokane County area used. Some of the Spokane Valley projects identified in the Capital
Facilities Plan include parks, sewers, and roads as identified on Tables 16 through 19. Spokane
County plans to contribute over $20 million in local funds for park and sewer projects in the
61
Table 17: 2002-2006 Planned Capital Improvements for Parks
;ParkstProlect'#' 'EActrvity;, 1 ,; „Total,Cost Locat'Cost
Valley Senior Center Construct $1,868,000 $1,400,000
Valley Mission Park Redevelopment $1,000,000 $1,000,000
Centennial Trail Restrooms - Harvard, Flora, Mission Road $210,000 $210,000
Trailheads -
Picnic Shelters Valley Mission, Edgecliff Parks $214,000 $214,000
Edgecliff Park Tennis Court $150,000 $150,000
Barker Road Trailhead Parking lot paving $350,000 $350,000
Total Parks $3,792,000 $3,324,000
Table 18: 2002 Planned Spokane County Road Projects within Incorporation Area
';Locatron'°E; &„; ' ,Projects , ,, . . _ _,.u ,x_ ,yu_ , Total Cost` Local;Cost,,,,
16th Avenue Reconstruct to three-lanes with curbs $253,000 $25,000
(State Route 27 to Sullivan) and sidewalks.
Valley Couplet Construct multi-lane road with curbs
(University to Evergreen) and sidewalks; remove islands and $6,733,000 $1,656,000
restripe.
Reconstruct and widen to three lanes;
Mission Avenue construct curbs and sidewalks; traffic
(McDonald to Sullivan) signal at McDonald; overlay; $3,010,000 $602,000
preliminary engineering; right of way;
construction.
Evergreen Road Reconstruct and widen to three lanes;
$1,274,000 $255,000
(16th Ave to 2nd Ave) preliminary engineering; right of way.
Park Road/BNSF Reconstruct and separate road and
(Indiana to Montgomery railroad grades; preliminary $100,000 $40,000
Ave) engineering; right of way.
16th Avenue
(Dishman Mica Rd to SR 27) Reconstruct as three-lane arterial. $1,335,000 $180,000
Commute Trip Reduction Implement and evaluate voluntary CTR
(Sullivan Road) programs among Sullivan Road $104,000 $94,000
businesses.
Various Roads Resurface arterial and residential roads $800,000 $300,000
(Sewer Paveback Projects) after sewer construction.
Various Roads (Urban Resurface or reconstruct road surface. $900,000 $600,000
Arterial Preservation)
Various Roads Minor improvements. $400,000 $400,000
(Minor Urban Projects)
Havana Street (Sprague to Sidewalk $45,000 $9,000
Broadway Avenue)
Barker Road Engineering and design costs to
(Spokane River) replace bridge over Spokane River. $411,000 $83,000
TOTAL $15,365,000 $4,244,000
63
Public Works Trust Fund
The Public Works Trust Fund makes low-interest loans for the repair, replacement,
rehabilitation or improvement of eligible public works systems to meet current standards
and to adequately serve the needs of existing population. It is not designed to finance
growth-related public works expenditures. The Public Works Board relates all project
applications and prepares a prioritized list of qualifying projects to become part of an
appropriation bill to be sent to the Legislature for review and modification.
General Obligation (GO) Bonds
These bonds represent a liability against all non-exempt property in the taxing district. GO
bonds may be issued subject to voter approval, which involves a special property tax levy
beyond the regular levy. The limit for the amount of GO bonds that can be issued for a city
is based on the city's total assessed value, as follows: 2.5 percent for general purposes; 2.5
percent for municipally-owned water, light, or sewer systems; and 2.5 percent for acquiring
and developing open space and park facilities. For the new City of Spokane Valley, the limit
for GO bonds is estimated using the 2001 assessed value of $4,445,000,000 at $333,750,000
or $111,250,000 for each purpose.
Long Term General Obligation (LTGO) Bonds
Also known as "councilmanic" bonds, these bonds could be issued by the new city council
without a vote of the people. The limit in this case is 0.75 percent of the city's total
assessed value (which counts as a part of the GO bond limit discussed above.) In the case of
the City of Spokane Valley, the limit on councilmanic bonds is estimated at $33,375,000.
Councilmanic bonds are a general obligation of the city.
Revenue Bonds
Revenue bonds are supported by specific guarantees based on revenue from fees or service
charges. Cities frequently use revenue bonds to finance sewer and water capital
improvements.
Federal Grants • - -
A number of grant programs may be available for capital purposes.
State Grants
State funding in addition to state-shared revenue and street construction programs is
available on a limited basis.
Impact of the Proposal on Spokane County
The impacts of the incorporation of a new city in the Spokane Valley on the Spokane
County budget can only be generalized. Spokane County will-continue to receive property
tax revenue in the General Fund from the incorporation area at the current rate of
$1.55/$1,000 of assessed value after incorporation. Sales tax to Spokane County will be
reduced by an estimated $14,311,514 which is the amount generated in the proposed
incorporation area not including the County's portion of fifteen percent. The total sales tax
collected in Spokane County for 2001 is estimated at $29,747,807 including fifteen percent
65
>1
1:5
11119 -
Jy
x PART V:
QO •ALTERNATIVES TO INCORPORATION
Wim
z g
o 2 ,
�
°C
0v
Z
PART V: ALTERNATIVES TO INCORPORATION
Governance Alternatives
In addition to incorporation,other government options that have been proposed for the Spokane Valley include:
1)an increase in County Commissioners to five;2)annexation of a portion of the Spokane Valley to the City of
Spokane;3)consolidation of local governments;4)consolidation of services;or 5)remaining unincorporated.
Expanded County Commission
In 1990,the State Legislature adopted a law allowing counties like Spokane to put on the ballot a measure that
would increase the number of County Commissioners from three to five. The Board of County Commissioners can
place this directly on the ballot or if a sufficient number of voters petition the Commissioners it can be set for
election. The purpose of increasing the number of commissioners is to inaaasv representation and legislative
responsiveness to county residents. This change makes or provides for no other fundamental changes in the
operation of County government This alternative could be considered regardless of the outcome of the
incorporation
Partial Annexation
An alternative for a portion of the Spokane Valley is annexation to the City of Spokane. The Yardley and Alcull
areas are within the incorporation boundaries and yet within the City of Spokane's Urban Growth Area as defined
in its Growth Management Act Comprehensive Ran. These areas are currently sewed by the City of Spokane for
water and sewer and are a part of a joint planning area with Spokane County. To complete the annexation of
these areas,the City of Spokane is required to have a petition with signatures of owners of seventy-five percent of
the assessed valuation. At this point in time,the City does not have the required number of signatures and there
is no annexation effort underway.
Consolidation of Governments
In 1992,voters elected twenty-five freeholders to develop alternatives for government structures for Spokane
County. A proposal to consolidate Spokane County and City of Spokane governments was placed on the ballot in
1995 and rejected by voters. The purpose of this alternative is to merge municipal service functions under one
updated and single administrative structure.
Functional Consolidation of Services
The State of Washington has long provided authority for local governments to act cooperatively by
contracting with each other for the provision of various types of services. Such contracting is possible in
Spokane County and indeed has been utilized particularly between the City of Spokane and Spokane
County on a number of occasions. Some of the areas that the two entities share services are the law
enforcement facilities in the Public Safety Building,including numerous support services such as
communications,police records,property control, and joint jail service. In addition,the two share District
and Municipal Courts services;Public Defender services;Probation and Parole services;wastewater
treatment and solid waste disposal.
Remain Unincorporated
A viable alternative for the Spokane Valley is to remain unincorporated. Doing so would mean
maintaining the status quo,with no differences in local representation,land use control, or necessanly any
change in services. Municipal services would continue to be provided by Spokane County and special
purpose districts. The area would follow the plans,policies, ordinances and codes that are currently in
effect or being developed for the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan under the Growth Management Act.
67
1. Yardley
Decrease in boundaries: The area between Havana Street and Thierman Road, Rutter
Parkway and Interstate 90 is designated as the Urban Growth Area for the City of Spokane
in its recently adopted comprehensive plan under the Growth Management Act. It receives
water and sewer service from the City of Spokane and is within the City's water and sewer
service area according to the Coordinated Water System Plan and the Wastewater
Management Plan. It is predominantly an older industrial and commercial area, with
railroad access.
Statistically, it has 88 housing units within its boundaries and an estimated population of
220, approximately .2 percent of the total incorporation population. At 840 acres, the area
represents approximately 2.7 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $139,999,100, which is 3.1 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
2. Alcott
Decrease in boundaries: The Alcott area considered for exclusion is that part of Alcott
within the incorporation boundaries (north of 16th Avenue within Fire District 1). This area
together with the area south to approximately 37`h Avenue is within the City of Spokane's
Urban Growth Area according to its recently adopted comprehensive plan under the Growth
Management Act. It receives water and sewer service from the City of Spokane and is within
the City's water and sewer service area according to the Coordinated Water System Plan and
the Wastewater Management Plan.
Statistically, it has 140 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 350,
approximately .4 percent of the total incorporation population. At 133 acres, the area
represents approximately .5 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $13,339,180, which is .3 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
3. Carnahan
Increase in boundaries: The Carnahan area south of 16th Avenue is mainly within Fire
District 8 and therefore, was excluded from the incorporation area. It is within the Urban
Growth Area designated by Spokane County. The boundary line between Fire District 1 and
8 is not easily followed as it does not follow roads or other readily identifiable physical
features. In some instances, the boundary line uses parcel lines between houses. The
Carnahan area between 16th Avenue and approximately 19th Avenue is part of one of these
residential subdivisions: Devon Ridge Planned Unit Development, Heather Park plat, or
Valley View Hills plat.
Statistically, it has 230 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 577,
approximately .7 percent of the total incorporation population. At 106 acres, the area
represents approximately .4 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $33,807,920, which is .8 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
69
6. East of Sullivan Road
Decrease in boundaries: An area south of 241h Avenue and east of Sullivan Road includes
vacant and sparsely developed land. It is within the Spokane County Urban Growth Area
and included within Fire District 1 and therefore, was included in the incorporation
proposal. The area isnot served with sewers and the County has notincluded the area in
its twenty-year sewer project priorities.
Statistically, it has 30 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 75,
approximately .1 percent of the total incorporation population. At 214 acres, the area
represents approximately .7 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $6,860,970, which is .1 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation. .
7. Morningside PUD
Increase in boundaries: A small area east of the proposed incorporation boundary is
included in the Spokane County Urban Growth Area but is in Fire District 8 and was
therefore, excluded from the incorporation proposal. It is a part of the Morningside Planned
Unit Development, which is located partially in Fire District 1 and partially in Fire District 8
with some of the parcels in the PUD divided by the proposed incorporation boundary. The
area is connected to the Spokane County sewer system.
Statistically, it has 13 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 32,
approximately .04 percent of the total incorporation population. At 9 acres, the area
represents approximately .03 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $2,355,300, which is .05 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
8. Greenacres
Decrease in boundaries: The portion of Greenacres within the Urban Growth Area south of
Appleway and east of Hodges Road was requested to be excluded from the incorporation
boundaries because of the rural nature, vacant land, and proximity to the City of Liberty
Lake. The area within these boundaries is predominately vacant and agriculture with low-
density homesites. It does not have sewer service and a portion of the area south of
Appleway is included in the Spokane County sewering plan for 2015; the balance of the area
is not planned to be connected to sewers within the next twenty years.
Statistically, it has 140 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 348,
approximately 1.2 percent of the total incorporation population. At 322 acres, the area
represents approximately 1.1 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $18,800,350, which is .4 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
9. West of Liberty Lake
Decrease in boundaries: The portion of Greenacres within the Urban Growth Area south of
the Spokane River and east of Hodges Road was requested to be excluded from the
71
,
r�
t. t.b
•
e
tt*
Sir:7:7?)
k t • * .•�4L 4'y's�l Syi' 4'y3E;R�' wdy�..
iaki
0
:11,,: t ti� s ry + t ti4"at 1
$ T .a{ G T A'• 14 v. -"' It r t5 ' Oi 4 ... ...,�. ..ihr 4\� W.
D J t a kf gL w, t r '4).46W" Yy ..* L�YF4 veli
4.Z.4:56;-:,t. �, - ° 4 k. i. m`• " .r"_.-•,: ';'. -•S' + +>r- .,n. ..
:s!,,
�a �� ll 0 .. r*4. 'it+ ' :IA;
hi" �1' s yrs iz ';".'1,1043 _
4M . I.� , w� ?
o-6 `AI- 6 !. ,.,_,
•
m
J n . Y5^•rie �.iN '^sM }FIm
iX
1 v$rz S• • th R
R`N
Mi Z •
OM, erreXi'
• Itt
0k. �s� ..
jj�y' d ' 7‘..r.:*; z ' - .61
x'" firF •',D!r
t J' 1 r 9" '( .F �. 37f -� � �i 4,1 n
'� ` �dt�E' -r•-"Er„„,;.„„0.,e-
.- *4. ”" Vis! s.
c L Ty+ 4Ya e ,�. �t yirzi,` lCaw�-sali. r-..1
s ',.."1. t t'. `i'�?"•Im"' c-tr^'; q�..-•�a t—/... �" -„ic..;.--,„__,,,,4,r4•
"'4C?aceta
k > r i ..v
n + d+1 +�{�,.rte- j��� -�
t•`'�.a� .,'ca y�tr�s�Ls� �FG � •�ssj� gnr��t���d'MKMf��'3�"'j'ip ?1��l,.�PN�iS�i��,� �.b �
z
':1 .7[ 1 { � 3T TkC 14:"..{ f 4, to , ya.lt,
is i'{.t ; _ > n;� ! yt .� ' { # t rak.Ys:._.
i r r y.t 4 § � t "�"fl8'• N y C« 'sl... _ .a t � "?S.�
O V.. * Vr .n .�3�`+r..:'- 'riird yy x 1`,P•' '.'",..s..-Tei.1,471-711,1,-114724.
u �" s.,r*`
7..+ r�� . ..'a, }, { .. s ,�v� �Y � 'ya vii-"•�'
11
.„„ ..
�Y K Y N! frll4:�
„:.,.,,:.i......:4,...:"......;,;...:...?„,..4
• am
.JlY 1,
„..
.. ,
O . OP ISPleattl5N-. , '. —
h;, 41/2„.e,,,.
,. .#0..... ... . .3m, ....,. .
� . . ., ,,,,, . ,.1/2 :,
, . . ,
Y
x
O ^^ C i �..�_ •mak t - �'. ,..
i�¢ 1„I�77'L•f =i . moi+• 4.„,m,,- ...,... #xtt.. .... ,..,: -ypx 9
,..1-vel .. .„**_
AIfi�., -- -��r• a..ee4:11:i®5°=_c2L i:.. ssyss..t"a:;t°.,"'R'.'tr>�''.a F"7`b '.t`�`"^d,,;;..' "_"�1,, ,..,5,r.,--:5
IA 6 ...:e�w ( iY :A.1/4,7,
�
111)
61 Washington State Boundary Review Board Nit
Zfor Spokane County
July 2001
�x
imn"1
Spokane Valley Incorporation Study
for
Washington State Boundary Review Board
for Spokane County
Incorporation Study Team
Susan Winchell, AICP, Director, Boundary Review Board Office
Michael Basinger, Planner, Boundary Review Board Office
Peter Fortin, Fiscal Analysis Consultant
Mary Jane Honegger, Historic Preservation Consultant
July 10, 2001
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF MAPS iv
Overview of Study 1
PART I: INCORPORATION PROPOSAL 3
PROPOSED CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 3
Type of Government 3
Form of Government 3
BACKGROUND OF SPOKANE VALLEY INCORPORATION 3
INCORPORATION PROCESS 5
Boundary Review Board Process 5
Incorporation of New Cities 7
EXISTING CONDITIONS IN THE SPOKANE VALLEY 10
Population 10
Assessed Valuation 12
Land Use 12
TOPOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENT 17
PART II: SPOKANE VALLEY COMMUNITY 18
HISTORY OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY 18
SPOKANE VALLEY COMMUNITY VIEWS 25
Survey of Residents 25
Steering Committee 28
PART III: MUNICIPAL SERVICE ANALYSIS 29
GENERAL GOVERNMENT 30
Legislative 30
Administrative 30
City Clerk 31
Human Resources/Risk Management 31
Finance 31
Information Services 31
Other Administrative 31
JUDICIAL AND LEGAL 31
District Court 31
Probation 32
Prosecutor's Office 32
Public Defender 33
PUBLIC SAFETY 33
Law Enforcement 33
Corrections 34
Jail 34
Animal Control 34
Fire Protection 35
PUBLIC WORKS 35
Engineering Administration 35
Roads Maintenance 36
i
Highway Maintenance 37
Wastewater Management 37
Stormwater Management 40
Solid Waste Collection and Disposal 41
Water Provision 41
OTHER MUNICIPAL SERVICES 44
Planning 44
Building and Code Enforcement 45
Hearing Examiner 46
Parks and Recreation Services 46
Geographic Information Systems 47
Community Development 48
EDUCATIONAL SERVICES 50
Schools 50
Library Services 50
COUNTY-WIDE SERVICES 51
Noxious Weed Control 51
Spokane Transit Authority 52
Spokane Regional Transportation Council 53
Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority 54
Spokane Regional Health District 54
PART IV: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE ANALYSIS 55
NEW CITY EXPENDITURES 55
CITY REVENUES 57
CAPITAL EXPENSES 61
CAPITAL REVENUES 64
IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL ON SPOKANE COUNTY 65
IMPACTS ON HOME OWNERS AND BUSINESSES 66
PART V: ALTERNATIVES TO INCORPORATION 67
GOVERNANCE ALTERNATIVES 67
MODIFIED BOUNDARIES 68
11
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Comparison of Past Incorporation Proposals 4
Table 2: Incorporation Election Dates 10
Table 3: Population Density of Spokane County Cities (2000) 11
Table 4: Population Density of Washington Cities over 50,000* 11
Table 5: 10-year Population Projection for the Spokane Valley Incorporation Area 12
Table 6: Per Capita Assessed Value of Washington Cities over 50,000 12
Table 7: Spokane Valley Cultural and Historic Sites 24
Table 8: Spokane Valley Survey Results 26
Table 9: Septic Tank Elimination program Funding 38
Table 10: Water Purveyors within the Spokane Valley Incorporation Area 43
Table 11: Spokane Valley Parks within the Incorporation Area 47
Table 12: Comparison with Similar Cities in Washington 49
Table 13: New City Budget 56
Table 14: Revenues Available to the New City 57
Table 15: Utility Tax Revenue Rates 60
Table 16: 2002-2006 Planned Capital Improvements for Sewers 62
Table 17: 2002-2006 Planned Capital Improvements for Parks 63
Table 18: 2002 Planned Spokane County Road Projects within Incorporation Area 63
Table 19: 2003 Planned Spokane County Road Projects within Incorporation Area 64
Table 20: Summary of Modification Areas 68
•
iii
LIST OF MAPS
Map 1: Spokane Valley Incorporation Area and Vicinity
Map 2: City of Spokane Valley's Proposed Boundary
Map 3: Cultural and Historic Sites
Map 4: Elevation and Hydrology
Map 5: Land Use by Communities
Map 6: Spokane County Recommended Comprehensive Plan
Map 7: Spokane County General Zoning
Map 8: Spokane County Road Projects 2002-2003
Map 9: Spokane Valley Water Purveyors
Map 10: Spokane County Sewer Project Priorities
Map 11: Fire Districts
Map 12: Spokane County Sheriff Districts
Map 13: School Districts
Map 14: Community Facilities
Map 15: Possible Modification Areas
iv
OVERVIEW OF STUDY
Purpose
The purpose of the Spokane Valley Incorporation Study is two-fold: 1) to provide the
Boundary Review Board with an analysis of factors required to be considered and objectives
required to be met in making its decision on the proposal; and 2) to provide the citizens of
the Spokane Valley with clear and factual information upon which to base their vote on the
incorporation issue. To accomplish this, the Study includes:
• A description of each of the factors identified in RCW 36.93.180 required to be : ,
considered by the Boundary Review Board in making its decision (i.e. population and
territory, municipal services, and the impact of the proposal on other governments).
• An assessment of the objectives the Board shall attempt to achieve as identified in
RCW 36.93.170 (i.e. preservation of neighborhoods and communities, logical services
areas, and inclusion of areas urban in character).
• An analysis of service delivery options for the new city including contracting with
existing service providers, establishing new city departments, and contracting with
other entities.
• A financial analysis of the proposal and possible modification areas including an
estimate of revenues collected in the new city boundaries and an estimate of
expenses for its first full year of operation.
• A description of other governance options available for the Spokane Valley.
The information in this Study was based on interviews and research as of July 1, 2001. The
Boundary Review Board will receive additional testimony, both written and oral, during the
public review period for this Study and during the public hearing process. The final
decision of the Boundary Review Board will be based upon any additions or changes to the
information in this Study.
Study Team
An Incorporation Study team was formed to prepare, research, and analyze the
incorporation proposal. The team was composed of Susan Winchell, AICP, Director, and
Michael Basinger, Planner, Boundary Review Board Office; Peter Fortin, consultant to the
Boundary Review Board, who provided information on the municipal services and prepared
the revenue and expenditure analysis; and Mary Jane Honegger who contributed the history
of the Spokane Valley. Michael Basinger, using a GIS application, developed population
figures and land use analysis for the proposal and as well as preparing the maps and
graphics for the Study.
1
Study Organization
The "incorporation area" as referred to in this Study is the proposed incorporation
boundaries within Spokane County's Urban Growth Area (Map 2). Except where noted,
population, land use, revenues, and expenses have,been based on this boundary.
The Incorporation Study describes the proposed City of Spokane Valley and discusses
pertinent information about the criteria that the Boundary Review Board is required to
consider in making its decision. It is divided as follows:
Part I: Incorporation Proposal provides a background of the incorporation proposal, a
description of the government proposed for the new City of Spokane Valley, an
overview of the incorporation process, criteria of the Boundary Review Board, and
existing conditions including population, land use by sub-areas, topography and
environment.
Part II: Spokane Valley Community is a portrait of the Spokane Valley community
including a history of development in the Valley and results of a survey of
residents.
Part III: Municipal Service Analysis is an analysis of municipal services currently
available in the Spokane Valley and anticipated if a new city is formed. In
addition, the existing cost of providing services, options for service providers, and
the impacts of incorporation for each service is described.
Part IV: Revenue and Expenditure Analysis addresses the fiscal aspects of the
incorporation. This includes a proposed budget for the first full year of operation
for the City of Spokane Valley and an estimate of available revenues.
Part V: Alternatives to Incorporation includes both governance alternatives to
incorporation and modifications to the incorporation proposal.
Part VI: Maps includes maps of the incorporation area showing physical features, service
boundaries and plans for the area.
2
>m
0
1.9
V)
PART I:
QATION Z INCORPORPROPOSAL
O
W �
Z0 ,IL�
�
°C
y 0
V
Z
PART I: INCORPORATION PROPOSAL
Proposed City of Spokane Valley
The proposed new City of Spokane Valley is bounded on the west by the City of Spokane and
on the east by the newly formed City of Liberty Lake (Map 1). The proposed City's current
estimated population is 82,135 and is projected to grow to a population of 90,300 in ten
years. The new city boundaries encompass about forty-five square miles.
Type of Government
The type of government selected for the new city is classified as a non-charter code city.
Code cities follow the Optional Municipal Code (RCW 35A) that provides for broad powers of
local self-government; a judicial rule of liberal construction of code city powers; liberal
interpretation of statutory construction; and a grant of "omnibus authority". There are two
classes of code cities: charter and non-charter. The essential difference between a charter
and non-charter code city is that a charter code city can provide for an individualized plan
of government with a unique administrative"structure, whereas a non-charter code city must
choose one of the forms of government provided and are governed by statutory provisions.
Form of Government
The City of Spokane Valley will have a council-manager form of government. This form of
government is for cities over 2,500 population and has seven council members elected by
the voters. Either the council may elect a council member to serve as mayor and chair of
the council or the city council may, by resolution, submit a proposition to the voters to
designate the person elected to council position "one" as the chair of the council. If the
proposition is approved, at all subsequent general elections, the person elected to position
one becomes council chair and the city's mayor. Because the "mayor" continues to be a
council member, however, the only elective position under a council-manager form remains
that of council member.
The elected officials must be residents of the city for one year and are elected for a four-
year term. Until a salary ordinance is passed, the salaries are restricted to $500 per month
plus expenses for the Mayor and $400 per month plus expenses for the council members.
The council appoints a person to the position of "city manager". The city manager is the
Chief Executive Officer of the city and the head of the administrative branch of the city's
government. Appointments of all department heads, officers, and employees are made by
the city manager.
Under a council-manager form of government, two positions must be appointed by the
council: City Clerk and Chief Law Enforcement Officer. Legal Counsel must be provided for
either by appointment or by contract.
Background of Spokane Valley Incorporation
Government alternatives for the Spokane Valley have been proposed and discussed for many
years, dating back to the 1950s. In the late 1970s, there were a number of Valley residents
who began to look at the issue of incorporation as a means for self-government. In 1984,
the Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce published Directions for Tomorrow: Local
Government in the Spokane Valley on local government options for Valley residents.
3
Table 1: Comparison of Past Incorporation Proposals
RaganD'9t i993fi,: '7,r001
Land Area (square miles) 55 75 50 33 45
Population 78,200 91,200 76,700 64,800 82,100
Housing Units 32,349 34,992 30,929 25,600 37,867
Population Density (persons/sq 1,422 1,216 1,534 1,963 1,806
mi)
Taxable Assessed Value (million) $2,160.0 $2,364.3 $2,096.6 $2,500.3 $4,450.0
1987 Spokane Valley Incorporation Proposal
In 1985, the Committee for Incorporation was formed and proposed the incorporation of the
City of Spokane Valley as a new city in Spokane County. A Notice of Intention to
incorporate the Spokane Valley was submitted to and subsequently filed by the Washington
State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County on July 3, 1985. On November 9, 1985,
following a series of public hearings on the proposal, the Board approved the proposal with
modified boundaries.
Before the incorporation proposal was placed on the ballot, the Board's decision was
challenged in Spokane County Superior Court by a consortium of affected entities. One of
the principal reasons for the suit was the consortium's claim that the Board had reached its
decision without sufficient information, particularly financial information. On September
22, 1986, the Court found in favor of the consortium, remanding the issue back to the
Boundary Review Board for further consideration.
A report entitled Fiscal and Service Analysis of the Proposed City of Spokane Valley was
then prepared. Following publication of this document in September 1987, the Board held
three public hearings in the Spokane Valley. After reviewing the report and considering the
factors and objectives of the state law for Boundary Review Boards, the Board voted to deny
the proposal on December 9, 1987.
1990 City of Chief Joseph Proposal
In February 1990, a Notice of Intention for incorporation of the Spokane Valley as the City
of Chief Joseph was submitted to the Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane
County. The Boundary Review Board filed the Notice of Intention on March 9, 1990. A
report entitled Chief Joseph Incorporation Study was prepared and published in July 1990.
After four public hearings on the incorporation, the Boundary Review Board deliberated on
the proposal and recommended against the incorporation. The state law had changed and
Boundary Review Boards could no longer deny a proposal if the population was over 7,500;
the Board's decision was limited to approve as submitted, modify the proposal by up to ten
percent of the land area, or recommend against the proposal. With the change in the state
law, even though the Board recommended against the proposal, the incorporation was
placed on the ballot.
The issue was brought to an election in November 1990 and was defeated by a large margin.
It needed a simple majority to pass but received only 34 percent of the vote. State law
requires that if an incorporation ballot receives less than 40 percent of the vote, three years
4
must elapse before an incorporation may be placed on the ballot again. November 1993 was
the earliest that the incorporation could be placed on the ballot.
1993 Spokane Valley Incorporation Proposal
Proponents for the Spokane Valley incorporation continued their efforts and a petition was
circulated in early 1993 for another proposal to incorporate. In the proposal, the
boundaries encompassed less land area and a smaller population. The Boundary Review
Board held several public hearings and after deliberation, again recommended to deny the
proposal because of the large amount of rural land included. The Board's decision was
appealed because a request for modification to exclude the Kaiser and Spokane Industrial
Park property was not approved. Both the Superior Court and later the Court of Appeals
upheld the Board's decision and the matter went on the ballot in April 1994. The proposal
was defeated but received 44 percent of the vote so that the matter could be placed on the
ballot without any time restrictions.
1995 Spokane Valley Incorporation Proposal
Inspired by the 1993 election results, the proponents again initiated the incorporation
process. A Notice of Intention for the incorporation was filed on January 12, 1995. The
Boundary Review Board held a public hearing on the proposal on February 13, 1995. The
matter was placed on the ballot in May of 1995 and was again defeated at the polls. The
vote for incorporation was greater than forty percent in favor, which enabled the proposal
to go on the ballot the following year.
1996 Cities of Opportunity and Evergreen Proposals
Immediately after the 1995 election, proposals to incorporate five separate cities in the
Spokane Valley were filed with the County. Proponents of two of the five cities submitted
petitions in a timely manner and the petitions were certified by the County Auditor. The
proposed cities of Opportunity and Evergreen were scheduled for public hearings before the
Boundary Review Board on February 26th and 29th, 1996, respectively. The incorporations
went to the voters, but received less than forty percent of the vote, preventing another
election for three years.
2000 City of Liberty Lake
Proponents for Spokane Valley incorporation had in the past included the Liberty Lake
community within its incorporation boundaries. In 1999, a committee was formed to look
at governance options for the Liberty Lake community. An incorporation of the area was
proposed in early 2000; was placed on the ballot in November 2000; and was approved by
the voters. The official incorporation date for the new City of Liberty Lake will be August
31, 2001.
Incorporation Process
Boundary Review Board Process
The Board bases its decisions on many criteria as directed by statute. These criteria are:
the factors and objectives of the Boundary Review Board law, consistency with the Growth
Management Act, and oral and written testimony.
5
Factors of the Boundary Review Board
In reaching a decision on a proposal or an alternative, the Board specifically considers the
factors (RCW 36.93.170) affecting such a proposal, which include, but are not limited to the
following:
1) Population and Territory
• Population density;
• Land area and land uses;
• Comprehensive plans and zoning as adopted under RCW 35.63, 35A.63 or 36.70;
• Applicable service agreements entered into under RCW 36.115 or 39.34;
• Applicable interlocal agreements between a county and its cities;
• Per capita assessed valuation;
• Topography, natural boundaries and drainage basins, proximity to other populated
areas;
• The existence and preservation of prime agricultural soils and productive r
agricultural uses;
• The likelihood of significant growth in the area and in adjacent incorporated and
unincorporated areas during the next ten years;
• Location and most desirable future locations of community facilities;
2) Municipal Services
• Need for municipal services;
• Effect of ordinances, governmental codes, regulations, and resolutions on existing
uses;
• Present cost and adequacy of governmental services and controls in area;
• Prospects of governmental services from other sources;
• Probable future needs for such services and controls;
• Probable effect of proposal or alternative on cost and adequacy of services and
controls in area and adjacent area;
• The effect on the finances, debt structure, and contractual obligations and
rights of all affected governmental units; and
3) The effect of the proposal or alternative on adjacent areas, on mutual economic and
social interests, and on the local government structure of the county.
Objectives of the Boundary Review Board
The decisions of the Boundary Review Board shall attempt to achieve the following
objectives (RCW 36.93.180):
(1) Preservation of natural neighborhoods and communities;
(2) Use of physical boundaries, including but not limited to bodies of water,
highways and land contours;
(3) Creation and preservation of logical service areas;
(4) Prevention of abnormally irregular boundaries;
(5) Discouragement of multiple incorporations of small cities and encouragement of
incorporation of cities in excess of ten thousand population in heavily populated
urban areas;
(6) Dissolution of inactive special purpose districts; "
(7) Adjustment of impractical boundaries;
6
(8) Incorporation as cities or towns or annexation to cities or towns of incorporated
areas which are urban in character; and
(9) Protection of agricultural and rural lands which are designated for long term
productive agricultural and resource use by a comprehensive plan adopted by the
county legislative authority.
Following the final public hearing, the Board will deliberate on the above issues. The Board
may then decide to approve the incorporation proposal, modify the boundaries by
increasing or decreasing the land area up to ten percent, or recommend against the
proposal. A written decision of the Board will then be adopted and filed. An appeal period
of thirty days follows filing of the Board's written decision. If the proposal is approved or
modified, the Spokane County Board of County Commissioners will then set the election
date for the incorporation of the City of Spokane Valley.
Incorporation of New Cities
The statues guiding new incorporation proceedings in the State of Washington are described
in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 35 and 35A. The role of the Boundary Review
Boards in the incorporation process is outlined in RCW 36.93. The necessary legal steps for
the incorporation of a new city in the State of Washington are outlined below:
STEP 1: A notice of the proposed incorporation is filed with the County Commissioners
together with a one hundred dollar filing fee and an affidavit from the person submitting
the notice stating that he or she is a registered voter in the incorporation area. The notice
must include the following information:
1. The type of city proposed.
2. The form of government proposed.
3. Legal description of the proposed boundaries.
4. Proposed name of the new city.
5. Estimated population of the new city.
The notice for the incorporation of the City of Spokane Valley with the filing fee was submitted
to the County Commissioners on August 24, 2000. It stated that it would be 1) a non-charter
code city; 2) a council-manager form of government, 3) the legal description; 4) named the
City of Spokane Valley; 5) with an estimated population of 90,000; and included an affidavit
from proponent, Ed Mertens.
STEP 2: The Board of County Commissioners then notifies the Boundary Review Board of
the proposal.
On September 5, 2000, the County Commissioners adopted Resolution No. 0-0767 forwarding
the Notice of Incorporation to the Boundary Review Board.
STEP 3: The Boundary Review Board schedules a public meeting in the area proposed for
incorporation to allow persons favoring and opposing the proposed incorporation an
opportunity to state their views.
7
The informational public meeting on the proposed City of Spokane Valley incorporation was
held on September 11, 2000 in the Spokane Valley.
STEP 4: Within one working day after the public meeting, the County Auditor provides an
identification number to be included on petitions circulated for the incorporation proposal.
The proponent may retain or alter the proposed boundaries for the petition at this time.
On September 21 2000, the County Auditor provided an identification number to the proponent
to be used on petitions circulated for the City of Spokane Valley proposal.
STEP 5: The petition for incorporation with the identification number is circulated and
must include:
1. The type of city proposed.
2. The form of government proposed.
3. Legal description of the proposed boundaries.
4. Proposed name of the new city.
5. Estimated population of the new city.
6. Official request for incorporation.
7. The last date by which the petition must be filed.
The petition for the incorporation of the City of Spokane Valley stated that it would be 1) a
non-charter code city; 2) a council-manager form of government, 3) the legal description; 4)
named the City of Spokane Valley; 5) with an estimated population of 90,000; 6) officially
request incorporation and 7) March 9, 2001 was the last date to file the petition.
STEP 6: The petition is submitted to the County Auditor for validation within 180 days of
the public meeting. The number of signatures on the petition must be at least ten percent
of the registered voters within the incorporation area.
The petition for the incorporation of the City of Spokane Valley required approximately 4,300
signatures and wassubmitted to the County Auditor on March 8, 2001.
STEP 7: The County Auditor shall notify the County Commissioners within thirty days that
the number of signatures on the petition is sufficient.
The County Auditor validated the petition and notified the County Commissioners on March 23,
2001.
STEP 8: A Notice of Intention for incorporation is submitted to the Boundary Review Board.
With the completion of the Incorporation Study, the Notice of Intention is filed. The
Board's jurisdiction is invoked at this time providing the Board 120 days to file a written
decision on the matter.
The Notice of Intention was filed by the Boundary Review Board on May 31, 2001 and the
proponent waived the 120-day limit for review on October 10, 2000.
8
STEP 9: The Boundary Review Board distributes the Notice of Intention to affected
governmental agencies for their review and the Incorporation Study is presented to public
officials and citizen groups.
The Notice of Intention was distributed to affected agencies on June 7, 2001 and presentations
'of the Incorporation Study were made.
STEP 10: The Boundary Review Board holds a public hearing on the proposal, reviews the
factors and objectives required by state law, and then decides to approve the proposal,
modify it by increasing or decreasing the land area up to ten percent, or recommends
against the proposal. The Board then files its written decision. There is an appeal period of
thirty days following the filing of the written decision.
The Boundary Review Board has set a public hearing for Wednesday, August 8, 2001 at 7:00
pm in the Spokane Valley. If the hearing or the Board's decision is continued, the
continuation date will be set at the hearing.
STEP 11: The Board of County Commissioners sets the incorporation proposal for the next
regularly scheduled general election at least sixty days from when the Board's written
decision is filed, to be voted on by registered voters in the proposed incorporation area.
If the Boundary Review Board's written Resolution and Hearing Decision is filed before
September 6, 2001, the County Commissioners will set the matter for an election on November
6, 2001.
STEP 12: If the new city is approved by a majority of voters within the proposed
jurisdiction, the new city has between 180 and 360 days to incorporate. At least 60 days
after the election on incorporation, a primary election for city officials will be held.
Candidates may file for office 30 to 45 days prior to this primary election. If more than
sixty percent of the votes are against incorporation, another election on any portion of the
area cannot be held for three years.
STEP 13: The final election of city officials is to be held at least thirty days after the
certification of the results of the primary election.
STEP 14: An interim period exists between the time the new city officials are elected and
qualified and the official date of incorporation. During this interim period, the newly
elected officials are authorized to adopt ordinances and resolutions, enter into contracts
and agreements, issue tax or revenue anticipation notes or warrants, submit ballot
propositions to the voters to authorize taxes or annexation by a fire protection district or
library district. However, these cannot become effective until on or after the official date of
incorporation. The new city may acquire needed facilities, supplies, equipment, insurance
and staff as if they were in existence.
STEP 15: After the transition period of 180 to 360 days elapses, the new city officially
incorporates.
9
Table 2: Incorporation Election Dates
;Incorporation Eleet on tNovemberr6 '2001 i i "y t u
Fel%r'uary 5"x2002 p 4
A five-day filing period for December 21, 2001 - January
candidates is chosen by the 4, 2002 March 12 - 23, 2002
Auditor between these dates
Primary election for city February 5, 2002 April 23, 2002
officials held
Final election could be held April 23, 2002 September 18, 2002
Interim period would begin May 2002 September 2002
New city must incorporate
between 180 and 360 days May 2 - November 1, 2002 August 6, 2002 - January
after first election 31, 2003
Optimal Incorporation Date August 31, 2002 December 31, 2002
The optimal date for a new city incorporation was provided by the Municipal Research
Services Center based upon the flow of revenue to a new city.
Existing Conditions in the Spokane Valley
Population
The estimated 2001 population for the proposed City of Spokane Valley is 82,100 people.
There are approximately 37,867 residential units. These numbers are based upon the 2000
U.S. Census data updated with Spokane County residential building permit information from
April 2000-2001. The population density for the new city would be 1,825 people per square
mile based on a land area of 45 square miles. The tables are based on 2000 Census data for
each city (the proposed City of Spokane Valley has a 2000 population of 81,277) and show
how the new city would compare to other cities in Spokane County and Washington.
10
Table 3: Population Density of Spokane County Cities (2000)
£ y .,� C„�'Z6r' _* z $srj -r tr I{and£`?Fi, Populatlon, :,,
Nametof Crtyg- 2000 PPopulation Area i
Spokane 195,629 59 3,315/sq mi
Spokane Valley 81,277 45 1,806/sq mi
Cheney 8,832 4 2,154/sq mi
Airway Heights 4,500 5 900/sq mi
Medical Lake 3,758 4 1,043/sq mi
Deer Park 3,017 6 479/sq mi
Millwood 1,649 1 2,356/sq mi
When analyzing population density, it is important to realize that concentrated
development can lead to greater efficiency, reduced fiscal and social costs, and potentially a
better quality of life. Population density can also be used to identify areas that are urban
character. Out of the twelve cities on the table below, the proposed City of Spokane Valley
has the lowest population density.
Table 4: Population Density of Washington Cities over 50,000
r p{ t 2 x o- + e n C°
PAS
�4.'%% h M r'A 'C2000xd,�� �'lf Ldn, �+,pp� PO4:Fn. 30n�iy'.iriy
��.�7 # xf y 4^!,�'�-0$'i� K3 ii�' P � 7rngf t t Pv,Jh n��"it�
Name of City. a„ ,Populatronk ,,;r Area. ,,6 F „,Densityh
Shoreline 53,025 12 4,418/sq mi
Tacoma 193,556 49 3,942/sq mi
Federal Way 83,259 21 3,927/sq mi
Bellevue 109,569 31 3,534/sq mi
Spokane 195,629 59 3,315/sq mi
Everett 91,488 28 3,279/sq mi
Vancouver 143,560 44 3,240/sq mi
Lakewood 58,211 19 3,063/sq mi
Yakima 71,845 26 2,763/sq mi
Kent 79,524 29 2,704/sq mi
Bellingham 67,171 25 2,686/sq mi
Kennewick 54,693 25 2,187/sq mi
Spokane Valley 81,277 45 1,806/sq mi
Projecting population growth into the future is exceedingly speculative and can be
particularly complicated considering all the potential constraints that could be imposed on
future growth. In order to estimate growth within the boundaries of proposed City of
Spokane Valley; the total population growth from 1990 to 2000 (9.7%) was continued to
2010. Population projections for Spokane County and the Cify'of Spokane were estimated as
a part of the growth management planning process. For the table below, the 1990-2000
population growth rate was continued to 2010.
11
Table 5: 10-year Population Projection for the Spokane Valley Incorporation Area
� r
ataifgark ;199_0 `y 2000, °aangets'::2010x,'
Spokane County 361,333 417,939 13.5 453,881
Unincorporated Area 165,443 199,135 16.9 232,788
Incorporated Area 195,890 218,804 10.5 221,093
City of Spokane 177,165 195,629 9.4 214,018
Spokane Valley Incorporation Area 74,081 81,277 9.7 89,425
Assessed Valuation
The proposed city has an estimated 2001 assessed value of real property of $4,450,000,000.
This estimate of value is for taxable regular value and includes a component for personal
property and state assessed value and excludes certain taxable value exemptions. Table 6
compares assessed valuation and per capita assessed value to Washington cities with
populations of 50,000 or more.
Table 6: Per Capita Assessed Value of Washington Cities over 50,000
Name of'Crt ` ` ' "' ° ;?' AssessedhValuatron Per Ca ita`A'ss'essed Value;_
Bellevue $14,980,866,542 $136,725
Kent $6,468,268,324 $81,337
Everett $7,183,712,229 $78,521
Shoreline $3,708,147,323 $69,932
Vancouver $8,479,116,092 $59,063
Bellingham $3,932,604,474 $58,546
Federal Way $4,717,399,199 $56,659
Spokane Valley $4,450,000,000 $53,120
Lakewood $2,968,214,814 $50,990
Tacoma $9,847,273,062 $50,875
Spokane $8,461,699,950 $43,254
Yakima $3,076,532,870 . - $42,822
Kennewick $2,261,626,148 $41,350
Land Use
The Spokane Valley incorporation area contains a typical mix of urban land uses as well as
rural and suburban uses (Map 5). Urban land uses in the Valley consist of single and multi-
family dwellings; recreational areas; light manufacturing; commercial, including many retail
stores; professional office buildings; business parks; schools; and undeveloped land suitable
for residential, commercial and industrial growth. Rural and suburban land uses include low
density residential and agriculture.
The land use inventory information was compiled using aerial photos, windshield surveys,
and parcel data from the Spokane County Assessor's Office. In order to make better use of
the data, smaller areas within the incorporation boundaries were identified. These were
based upon the responses to the Valley Survey questions on community identity and on
observable physical and cultural features. The following section provides an overview of
12
existing land use by these smaller areas and major characteristics of each area. The
percentages have been rounded. Refer to Map 5 for the boundaries of each sub-area.
1. Yardley
Yardley is geographically defined as the area south of Rutter Road, west of Thierman, east
of Havana Road and north of Sprague Avenue. Approximately 34 percent of this area is
vacant land. Most of the vacant land within the area is owned by Spokane County and the
City of Spokane. Single-family residential (2%) and multi-family residential (0.2%) is
located primarily north of Trent Road. The commercial (20%) and industrial (24%) uses are
dispersed throughout the area. Some of the industrial uses in the area are Scafco, Snyders,
Fruehauf Trailers, Central Pre Mix, WW Grainger Inc., Humble Oil, Kolbar, Brown Bearing
Company, B&B Distributors, and ASC Machine Tool. Some of the commercial uses within this
area are Home Depot, Continental Oil Company, Costco, Shea Construction, and Western
States Equipment Company. Public and semi-public uses (13%) within this area include the
Spokane County Fairgrounds and Avista Ballpark. The acreage for this area is 883 acres or
1.4 square miles. The area is within the City of Spokane's Urban Growth Area.
2. Alcott
Alcott is geographically defined as the area south of 8th Avenue, east of Havana, west of
Carnahan and north of 35th Avenue. Only the portion north of 16th Avenue is within the
boundaries of the incorporation; however, the entire area is described in this section.
Approximately nine percent of this area is vacant land. Dispersed throughout the area is
single-family (32%) and multi-family residential (0.2%). Public and semi-public uses (3%)
within this area consist of Instructional Technology Support Center and the Holy Temple
Church. The acreage for this area is 492 acres or 0.8 square miles. The entire Alcott area is
within the City of Spokane's Urban Growth Area.
3. East Spokane
East Spokane is geographically defined as the area south of Trent Avenue and Interstate 90,
west of Argonne, and east of Havana Road. Approximately 22 percent of this area is vacant
land. Most of the vacant land within the area is owned by Washington State Department of
Natural Resources and the.Federal Government. Single-family residential (40%) and multi-
family residential (3%) is dispersed throughout the area. The commercial (7%) and
industrial (4°/a) uses are distributed throughout the area. Some identifiable commercial uses
within the area are Safeway, Tidymari s, K-mart, and Food Rainbow. The largest industrial
uses in the area are Boise Cascade and Caterpillar located off Mission Avenue. The largest
commercial use within the area is Acme Materials and Construction, which is located off
Valleyway Avenue between Ella Road and Park Road. Acme Materials also has a rock quarry
within this area and does a considerable amount of mining (4%); its location is between
Park Road and Thierman Road. Public and semi-public uses (6.5%) within this area consist
of several schools including Spokane Valley High, Seth Woodard Elementary, Centennial
Middle, and Pratt Elementary. Open space (1%) is owned by Spokane County, which is
located off Park Road. The acreage for this area is 4,806 acres or 7.5 square miles.
4. Orchard Avenue
Orchard Avenue is geographically defined as the area north of Trent Avenue, west of Vista
Road and south of the Spokane River. Approximately 11 percent of this area is vacant land.
Single-family residential (56%) and multi-family residential (1.4%) is dispersed throughout
13
•
the area. The commercial (3%) and industrial (0.4%) uses in the area are primarily located
along Trent Avenue. Public and semi-public uses (28%) within this area consist of West
Valley High School, Orchard Center Elementary, and St. Pascal's School, Orchard Avenue
Irrigation District office, and South Hill Baptist Church. Also, centrally located within the
area, there is a cultural/recreation area owned by Victory Faith_(0.10/0). The acreage for this
area is 653 acres or approximately one square mile.
5. Northwood
Northwood is not within the incorporation boundaries. Geographically defined as the area
south of Francis Avenue, east of Girard, west of Argonne Road and north of Wellesley
Avenue. Approximately 27 percent of this area is vacant land. Dispersed throughout the
area is single-family (29%) and multi-family residential (5%). The commercial area (0.4%) is
located west of Argonne Road on Columbia Drive. There is some forestry land (2°/a) located
in the southwest corner of this area owned by the City of Spokane. The agricultural land
(14°/a) is located east of Argonne Road and west of Lehman Road and north of Wellesley
Avenue. Public and semi-public uses (15%) consist of several drainage ponds owned and
maintained by Spokane County. The acreage for this area is 1,133 acres or 1.7 square miles.
6. Pasadena Park
Pasadena Park is geographically defined as the area south of Wellesley Avenue and north of
the Spokane River. Approximately 34 percent of this area is vacant land. Dispersed
throughout the area is single-family (37%) and multi-family residential (2%). The
commercial (3%) and industrial (2%) uses in the area are primarily located along Wellesley
Avenue. There is a large portion of open space (5%) located in the northeast corner of this
area owned by the Mielke Properties. The agricultural land (14%) is also located in the
southeast. Public and semi-public uses (10%) consist of Pasadena Elementary and the
Nazarene Church. The acreage for this area is 1,495 acres or 2.3 square miles.
7. Irvin
Irvin is geographically defined as the area south of Trent Avenue, east of Argonne Road,
west of Pines Road and north of Interstate 90. Approximately 26 percent of this area is
vacant land. Dispersed throughout the area is single-family (30%) and multi-family residential
(7%). The commercial (10%) and industrial (21%) uses are located off Interstate 90 and
Montgomery Road. A recognizable commercial use within the area is Spalding's wrecking yard
located off Knox Road. Public and semi-public uses (3%) include Trent Elementary. The
acreage for this area is 1,134 acres or 1.7 square miles.
8. Opportunity
Opportunity is geographically defined as the area north of 16th Avenue, south of Interstate
90, west of Pines Road and east of Opportunity Road. Approximately 9 percent of this area
is vacant land. Single-family residential (60°/a) and multi-family residential (9%) is
dispersed throughout the area. The commercial (12%) and industrial (2°/a) uses in the area
are predominantly located along Sprague Avenue. The largest commercial use in the area is
University City Mall located along Sprague Avenue and University Road. Public and semi-
public uses (7%) within this area consist of several schools including St John Vianney, North
Pines Junior High, Gethsemane Lutheran, Broadway Elementary, University High, and
14
Opportunity Elementary. There are also several churches within the area. The acreage for
this area is 4,824 acres or 7.6 square miles.
9. Chester
Chester is geographically defined as the area south of 16th Avenue, east of Dishman, west of
State Route 27 and north of 40th Avenue. Approximately ten percent of this area is vacant
land. Dispersed throughout the area is single-family (62%) and multi-family residential
(6%). The commercial (2%) uses in the area are located along State Route 27 and Dishman
Mica Road. Public and semi-public uses (15%) within this area consist of Chester
Elementary, University Elementary, South Pines Elementary, Valley Christian, Bowdish
Junior High, Horizon Junior High Schools, Avista Corporation, Modem Electric Water
Company and several churches. The acreage for this area is 3,338 acres or 2.4 square miles.
10. Ponderosa
Ponderosa is geographically defined as the area south of 40th Avenue, west of Evergreen
' Road and bisected by Dishman Mica Road. A poition of the Ponderosa area south of 44th
Avenue is not within the incorporation area, however, the entire Ponderosa area is
described in this section. Approximately 6 percent of this area is vacant land. Dispersed
throughout the area is single-family (49%) and multi-family residential (0.4%). The
commercial (1%) and industrial (1%) uses are located off Dishman Mica Road. Some
identifiable commercial uses within the area are Barney's Soopermarket and Chester Store.
Public and semi-public uses (5%) consist of Ponderosa Elementary and various churches
dispersed throughout the area. The acreage for this area is 1,647 acres or 2.6 square mites.
11. Veradale
Veradale is geographically defined as the area south of Interstate 90, north of 32"" Avenue,
west of Flora Road and east of Pines Road. Approximately 10 percent of this area is vacant
land. Dispersed throughout the area is single-family (58%) and multi-family residential
(6.5°/a). The commercial (100/0) and industrial (1%) uses are congregated along the Sprague
Avenue corridor. Some identifiable commercial uses within the area are the West Coast
Hotel, K-Mart, Les Schwab Tires, Safeway, Fred Meyers, Albertson's and Yokes. Public and
semi-public uses (7%) within this area consist of several schools including Central Valley
High School; Sunrise, McDonald, Adams, Progress, Blake, Keystone, Pioneer and Rainbow
Elementary Schools; Evergreen Junior High School and various churches. The acreage for
this area is 4,561 acres or 7.1 square mites.
12. Mirabeau
Mirabeau is geographically defined as the area south of Trent Avenue, north of Interstate
90, west of Flora and east of Pines. Approximately 42 percent of this area is vacant land.
Most of the vacant land within the area is owned by Washington State Department of
Natural Resources. There is very little single-family residential (4%), which is located off
• Shannon Road and Indiana Avenue. The commercial (8%) and industrial (28°/s) uses are •
dispersed throughout the area and constitute more than one third of total land use within
the area. The largest industrial use in the area is Kaiser Aluminum located north of the
Spokane River and west of Sullivan Road. The largest commercial use within the area is the
Spokane Valley Mall, which is located off Interstate 90 between Evergreen and Sullivan
Roads. Central Pre Mix is also located within this area and does a considerable amount of
mining (6%); its location is at the intersection of Sullivan Road and Flora Pit Road. Public
15
and semi-public uses (6%) within this area consist of the YMCA recreation complex. Open
space (4%) primarily located north of the Spokane River is owned by Spokane County and
the Washington State Department of Parks and Recreation. The acreage for this area is
2,454 acres or 3.8 square miles.
13. Trentwood
Trentwood is geographically defined as the area north of Trent Avenue, west of Flora and
east of Pines. Approximately 22 percent of this area is vacant land. Spokane County Parks
and Recreation owns a large portion of the vacant land within the area, which is located on
the Spokane River in the southwest corner of the area. Single-family residential (45%) is
dispersed throughout the area; there is also multi-family residential (2%) located along
Trent Ave and Sullivan Road. The commercial (2%) and industrial (1%) uses in the area are
mainly located along Trent Avenue. The largest industrial use in the area is Key Tronic
situated east of Sullivan Road along Trent Avenue. Public and semi-public uses (6%) within
this area consist of several schools including Skyview and Trentwood Elementary, East
Valley Middle, and East Valley High; there are also several churches within the area. Open
space (1°/a) located along the Spokane River in the southwest corner is owned by Spokane
County and Washington State Department of Parks and Recreation. Also, centrally located
within the area is a large percentage of agricultural land (16%). The acreage for this area is
2,029 acres or 3.1 square miles.
14. Otis Orchards
Otis Orchards is generally defined as the area north of the Spokane River and east of Barker
Road. The following land use information is limited to the portion of Otis Orchards within
the incorporation area. Approximately 57 percent of this area is vacant land. Inland
Empire Paper owns most of the vacant land within the area; there is also some vacant land
owned by the Washington State Department of Transportation, and the Washington State
Department of Parks and Recreation. The second largest land use within this area is single-
family residential (32%) including the Barker Road Mobile Home Park located mainly along
Barker Road in the eastern portion of the study area. The commercial (4%) and industrial
(6%) uses in the area are congregated along Euclid Street, Eden Road and Flora Road. The
chief commercial uses within the area are Bayliner Marine and Free Enterprise Center. The
agricultural land (1%) is located south of Euclid Road and west of Barker Road. The acreage
for this area is 1,305 acres or 2 square miles.
15. Greenacres
Greenacres is generally defined as the area south of the Spokane River and west of Henry
Road. Approximately 31 percent of this area is vacant land. Inland Empire Paper and
Liberty Lake Land Company hold most of the vacant land within this area. The largest land
use within this area is single-family residential (39%) dispersed evenly throughout the area.
The commercial (6°/a) and industrial (1%) uses in the area are congregated along Interstate
90, Appleway Road and 8th Street. The agricultural land (14°/a) is located south of Appleway
Road and east of Barker Road. Public and semi-public uses within this area consist of
Greenacres Elementary and Junior High, Barker Community Learning Center, Educational
Service Center, and several churches (1%), which are dispersed throughout the area. The
acreage for this area is 3,776 acres or 5.9 square mites.
16
Topography and Environment
Topography
The proposed city is relatively flat with moderate slopes (15 percent to 30 percent) within
the Mirabeau area and south of Shelley Lake (Map 4). Steep slopes}(exceeding 30 percent)
are located in the surrounding areas near Dishman Hills Natural Area, East Spokane (south
of Eighth Avenue), southeast of Shelly Lake, and the Carlson Hill area. Because of the
relative flatness of the valley floor, the incorporation area contains a large number of
drainage basins.
Surface Water and Wetlands
The Spokane River and Shelley Lake are the largest natural water bodies located within the
proposed city. Man-made water bodies are located within the Yardley area where surface
mining has penetrated the Spokane/Rathdrum Aquifer. Surface water within the Spokane
Valley basin generally flows from the north to the south on the north side of the Spokane
River and from the south to the north on the south side of the Spokane River. However,
most surface water percolates into the Spokane Valley/Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer. Wetlands
have been inventoried for the area with maps located and maintained by the Spokane
County Planning Department.
Groundwater
The majority of the proposed city is over the Spokane Valley/Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer. The
Mirabeau area and the slopes south and east of Shelley Lake are "islands" not connected to
the aquifer but within the Aquifer Sensitive Area. The Spokane Valley/Rathdrum Prairie
Aquifer is an unconfined aquifer and is considered one of the most productive aquifers in
the United States. The aquifer has been identified as the only significant source of good-
quality water supply in the Spokane Valley and was designated as a "Sole Source Aquifer" by
the Environmental Protection Agency in 1978.
Vegetation and Wildlife
Much of the original landscape within the proposed city has been altered by human activity.
Agricultural activities, residential, commercial, and industrial activity have displaced much
of the native vegetation and altered the wildlife patterns. Natural areas still exist along the
Spokane River bank and in the Dishman Hills area.
Proximity to Other Populated Areas
The proposed City of Spokane Valley lies directly east of the City of Spokane (Map 1). The
City of Spokane is the County's largest urban area and is the second largest city in
Washington. It has a 2000 population of 195,629. The Town of Millwood is surrounded by
the proposed new city and has a 2000 population of 1,649. The newly incorporated City of
Liberty Lake lies directly east of the incorporation area and has an estimated 2001
population of 3,654.
17
PART II: SPOKANE VALLEY COMMUNITY
History of the Spokane Valley
It took the forces of nature millions of years to carve the Spokane Valley. Volcanoes,
lava flows, glaciers and finally flood waters combined to create this thirty-four miles
long Valley situated on the west slope of the Rocky Mountains. Surrounded by
heavily treed foothills, the Valley varies from fifteen miles in width, to just over two
miles wide at its narrowest point near the city of Spokane. The Valley extends from
the western side of Spokane to the shores of Coeur d'Alene Lake and the Coeur
d'Alene Mountains. It contains 57 square mites of lowland plain, which is divided by
the Spokane River and the Idaho-Washington state line (Map 4). It contains many
cultural and historical sites of significance described below and shown on Map 3.
The First Inhabitants
For thousands of years, Indians lived quietly in the Spokane Valley area. They were
members of the Upper Band of the Interior Salish Indians and called themselves "Sn-
tutu-ul-i", the meaning of which is not known. In about 1783, fur traders from the
North West Company began traveling through the area. They called these Indians
the "Spokanes", which has been interpreted as meaning "Children of the Sun".
The Spokanes were a peaceful people, on friendly terms with neighboring tribes, and
later the fur traders and missionaries who came to the area. They fished for the
plentiful salmon in the river, hunted game, and ate camas roots and berries they
gathered. As with most American Indians, the Spokanes honored and respected the
earth and left little mark on the land with the exception of the faint trails on which
they traveled.
Despite their many years of peaceful acceptance of the white settlers, and the
calming influence of Chief Spokan Garry, the Spokanes protested the loss of their
lands by joining in the Indian uprisings of the 1850's. The final battle, in 1858,
culminated in the Spokane Valley with the destruction of over 800 of their horses,
their food and teepees. The Spokanes were eventually forced from the lands of their
ancestors to a reservation north of the Spokane River, just east of the Spokane area.
First Permanent Settler - 1849
Antoine Plante, the first permanent settler in the Spokane Valley, was a retired
French-Canadian trapper who built a small cabin near the Spokane River in 1849. He
maintained a small Hudson's Bay Company trading post in the home he shared with
his Indian wife and family. In 1850, Plante built the first ferry across the Spokane
River. The ferry, operated by cables and pulleys, was the only means of crossing the
Spokane River, and proved to be a lucrative business for him for many years. The
ferry was used to provide transportation across the river to military personnel
heading north to Fort Colville, as well as U.S. Army surveyors and miners heading for
the mining districts in western Montana and southeastern British Columbia.
18
>.
Im
ZO4 PART II:
SPOKANE VALLEY COMMUNITY
uJIL�
o re
0
V
Z
Trails and Roads
Early travelers in the Spokane Valley followed trails traveled by generations of Spokane
Indians. Fur traders, prospectors and later settlers followed these faint trails, which
gradually became roads, some of which remain in use today.
The most important road through the Valley was the Mullan Military Road. Captain John
Mullan was commissioned by the U.S. government in 1859 to survey and build a road
connecting Fort Benton at the head of navigation on the Missouri River with Old Fort Walla
Walla on the Columbia River. The road was built to insure a military presence following the
Indian uprisings of 1858. Completed in 1862, the road crossed the Spokane River at Plantes
Ferry.
Small Settlement Begins - 1864
In 1862 A. C. "Charley" Kendall built a cabin and established a store on the north side of
the Spokane River. Seeing a business opportunity, Joe Herring, Timothy Lee and Ned
Jordan built the first bridge to cross the Spokane River at the site of Kendall's store in 1864.
A small community, known as Spokane Bridge, began to build up near the bridge. M. M.
Cowley took over the holdings of Charley Kendall in 1872, including the bridge, a trading
post and a tog hotel.
Interestingly, the history of the settlement of the Spokane Valley predates the history of
the City of Spokane. Spokane Valley holds many of the "firsts" for the Spokane area. In
addition to being home to the area's first settler, Antoine Plante, in 1849, the Spokane
Valley had the first business and first ferry in 1850; the first store and bridge in 1862; the
first house in 1866; and the first post office in 1867. All these "firsts" occurred before the
1873 arrival of James Glover, "The Father of Spokane".
First Settlers 1865 - 1882
During the next few years, growth was slow, but a few early settlers set down roots in the
Valley area. William Newman, an escort to boundary surveyors for the U.S. Army, settled
and farmed near Newman Lake, later named for him. Daniel Courchaine, a French Canadian,
began ranching in the Saltese area in 1866. Stephen Liberty moved from Rathdrum in 1871
to settle on the west side of Liberty Lake with his wife and nine children. Other early -_
settlers included the families of Albert Edmond Canfield, Benjamin Lewis and Joe Goodner in
1880; the Joseph Woodard family of nine in 1882; and the William Pringle family in 1883.
Most of these early settlers were ranchers who raised stock, letting them graze on the dry,
bunch grass-covered land of the Valley.
Railroad Brings Early Growth 1883 - 1898
The Northern Pacific Railroad began laying tracks through the Spokane Valley in 1881. The
first township was platted as new businesses started up to supply services to the men
building the railroad. More early pioneers settled in the Valley as money and jobs began to
come into the area. By 1883, the final tracks liad been laid, and a transcontinental link was
established. This transcontinental link and the discovery of the silver mines in the Coeur
d'Alenes created a rush of traffic. Within a few years, Spokane was tied to the outside world
by five transcontinental railroads, making it the hub of commerce it remains today.
19
Thus, it was that by 1889, while Spokane was beginning to rebuild after its devastating fire,
the Spokane Valley was bustling with activity. Schools, churches, and communities were
springing up. Cattle and dairy farms dotted the land where Indians still roamed and were
frequent visitors to Valley homes. Mr. A. T. Dishman traded his interest in a Spokane livery
stable for a work team and wagon and bought land south of what is now Dishman. He
began hauling granite to help rebuild Spokane buildings after the fire.
Irrigation Brings Land and Valley to Life - 1899 - 1920
Attempts to irrigate the Spokane Valley began as early as 1895. Developers and real estate
speculators tapped into nearby lakes, the Spokane River and the aquifer lying under the
valley in an effort to turn the dry land into saleable agricultural acreage. In 1899, the
Spokane Valley Land and Water Co., later owned by long-time irrigation advocate D.C.
Corbin, built a canal to irrigate acreage in the Greenacres area with water from Liberty Lake.
In 1905, the Spokane Canal Company built a canal to irrigate the Otis Orchard area with
water from Newman Lake, and Modern Irrigation and Land Company tapped into the
underground aquifer to irrigate 3,000 acres in Opportunity.
The promise of irrigation brought prosperity to the Valley. Within an amazing twenty years,
30,000 acres of dry land had been converted into fertile farmland. Access to water
increased land values immensely and fortunes were made as promoters purchased land,
furnished irrigation and resold the land. Promoted by the developers and the railroad in the
East and the Midwest as prime agricultural land, the Valley attracted Easterners by the
thousands. Valley population swelled from 1,000 residents in 1900 to nearly 10,000 by
1922.
Valley Townships
With the exception of the incorporated Town of Millwood, the Spokane Valley was developed
as townships with no governmental functions. Most of the townships platted in the early
1900's were surveyed as a tool for promotion and sales, and remain as names for
neighborhoods and post office designations today.
A few Spokane Valley townships were developed for residential and/or business purposes.
Trent was originally platted as a residential area for Northern Pacific railroad workers in
1881, Millwood began as a "company town", developed by Inland Empire Paper Mill for their
employees, and Dishman developed primarily as a business center. All other Valley
townships were developed as irrigation districts and owe their existence to their agricultural
roots. Between 1901 and 1915, the townships of Orchard Avenue, Greenacres, Otis Orchards,
Opportunity, Vera, Dishman, Liberty Lake, Newman Lake, East Spokane, Mica and Chester
were platted.
Apple Is King - 1904 - 1920
The first apple trees were planted as an agricultural experiment in Opportunity in 1904.
The apples thrived in the gravelly soil of the Valley and by 1912; nearly 2 million apple
trees had been planted. Acres of apples soon lined Sprague Avenue, causing it to be
renamed "The Appleway". Fruit stands were a common sight throughout the area, and the
Spokane Valley hosted its first national apple show in 1908. Fruit growers formed the
20
Spokane Valley Growers Union to help market their produce and built a huge packing plant
in 1911.
During these years, the Spokane Valley was promoted as a wonderful place to live. Though
most Valley residents were farmers or orchardists, canneries, brickyards, railroad
maintenance facilities and lumber mills provided jobs for many. The beauty of the
surrounding area, pleasant communities, fertile farmlands, business opportunities, outdoor
sports and activities, local recreational areas and community organizations caused it to be
called "Spokane Valley, the Valley Bountiful". As the population increased, small
communities with schools, churches, businesses, community clubs and organizations
thrived. Tied to Spokane, local lakes and Coeur d'Alene by railroads and bus systems, the
people of the Valley enjoyed a full life.
Truck Farms — 1920s
As early as 1915, area orchardists began to have crop trouble. By the end of 1928, early
frosts, disease, soil depletion and competition from other apple producing areas ended the
apple dreams of the Spokane Valley. In addition to crop problems, no provisions had been
made for repair or upkeep and many of the unique ditches and irrigation systems built near
the turn of the century were failing.
Despite their best efforts, more than three-quarters of the apple trees grown in the Valley
had been pulled out by 1926. Area residents began losing their farms or selling them in
five, ten, or twenty-acre lots as suburban home sites. Others converted them to truck
farms, successfully raising many crops in the gravelly soil of the Valley, including
strawberries, raspberries, tomatoes, beans, peas, watermelons, asparagus, squash, cucumbers
and thousands of acres of Heart of Gold cantaloupes. Dairy, poultry and fur farms also
appeared in the Valley during these years.
Depression — 1930s
Like the rest of the nation, the Spokane Valley was hit with a depression in the 1930s.
Although hunger was not a problem, as most people had enough land to grow food for their
families, there were few jobs and money was scarce until 1940.
The Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce adhered to a positive agenda throughout these
hard times. They placed street signs on Valley roads and in an effort to show solidarity with
Spokane, east-west roads were re-named to correspond with Spokane's roads. Observing
that fires were a constant and catastrophic problem for area residents, the Chamber lobbied
to begin a fire protection district in the Valley. Their efforts were successful and Valley
residents were first offered fire protection in 1940, with the formation of Spokane County
Fire Protection District Number One.
New activities flourished during these years. Miniature golf and golf became favorite
pastimes. Skiing was brought close to the area with the opening in 1933 of Ski-More, just
south of Dishman, and in 1935 Playfair Race Course was built. An Inland Empire Regatta
was held at Liberty Lake in 1937, and fourteen dancing schools sprang up as a dancing craze
hit the area. Movies were a favorite pastime for Valley residents, and the Dishman Theater
opened in 1939.
21
In 1932, the Diamond, Ohio and Federal Match Companies were located in the eastern part
of the Valley. Making match blocks was the largest industry in the Spokane area during
that time, and over 200,000 feet of white pine Umber were used by the match block
industry each day. New businesses included Peter's Hardware in 1934, and Jacklin Seed in
1936. The first Safeway opened in 1937, and the Aslin Finch Feed Store opened for business
the following year.
War Brings Activity and Renewed Growth — 1940s
With the fear of war looming, the U.S. government made the decision to build an aluminum
plant in the Spokane Valley. The federal Government also recognized the need for
warehouse space and facilities to support the coastal naval activities during wartime. In
1942, the Spokane Valley was chosen as a site for one of these Inland Supply Depots.
Almost overnight unemployment disappeared and a labor shortage began in the Spokane
Valley as hundreds of workers immediately began working on:the aluminum plant and the
Naval Supply Depot. Begun in 1941, the Trentwood Aluminum Rolling Mill opened in 1942
with 450 employees. By May 1944, the $12 million supply depot included twelve general
storehouses, five heavy material storehouses and outside storage for approximately 3,000
railroad carloads.
The war years were a boom time as new people arrived to work in both the aluminum mill
and the Naval Supply Depot. Valley residents cleaned out old houses, barns and even
chicken coops to use as rentals to house the newcomers. Businesses and the community
thrived despite wartime shortages and rationing.
In 1948, with the war over, the Valley was growing rapidly and looking forward to a bright
future. Valley industries were impressive - an aluminum rolling mill, cement plant, paper
mill, brick and lime plant, trailer fabricating plants, match block factories, seed plants,
canning factories, a Naval Supply Depot besides dozens of smaller industries and businesses.
Bedroom Community/Suburb of Spokane — 1950s
The 1950's found the Valley quietly becoming a suburb, or a bedroom community to
Spokane. Although the agricultural economy that had supported the Valley in the past was
disappearing, many area residents realized they wanted to live in the less urbanized and
surroundings of the Spokane Valley. As the small farms disappeared one by one,
subdivisions appeared and hundreds of new homes were built, creating a semi-rural
community. The construction of an east-west freeway, I-90, made the commute to the City
of Spokane easier.
The influx of people moving into the Valley provided a basis for continuing business and
prosperity. Business hubs in Millwood, Dishman and Opportunity continued to thrive. A .
1950 Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce information sheet listed the following facts
about the Spokane Valley: 14,212 irrigated acres, 9,090 homes, fourteen grade schools and
three high schools, 352.81 miles of paved roads, forty motor courts and motels, twenty-two
churches, 660 businesses, four fire stations, two airports and one flying field, twelve
community and service clubs, one country club, two theaters, one roller rink, one bowling
alley, two lakes with sixteen resorts and two Chambers of Commerce.
22
Steady Growth — 1960s
The 1960s found the Valley still a quiet, but ever growing suburb of the City of Spokane.
Rapid growth continued as more and more land was subdivided. This growth seemed to be a
minor problem to the people of the Valley, as jobs were plentiful and industries were
growing. The Navy Supply Depot, which closed in 1958, was reopened as Spokane Industrial
Park by a subsidiary of Washington Water Power. It successfully began attracting light
industries in 1962.
Throughout the 1960s, the semi-rural life residents had sought by moving to the Valley was
still intact. Most Valley residents had a little acreage and could ride a horse up into the
foothills. Valley businesses continued to grow in number and size and Valley residents were
thrilled when the first shopping center, University City, opened in 1965. The opening of
the Spokane Valley Hospital was another big step forward for Valley residents.
Growth and Environmental Concerns — 1970s and 1980s
Following national trends, Valley residents began to question environmental issues during
the 1970s. Problems from prior growth began to surface. Concerned citizens began to
question growing pollution of the aquifer and area lakes. The lakes, especially Liberty Lake,
began showing signs of deterioration. Yet, despite the fact that these environmental issues
were being discussed, thousands of new homes and many new businesses continued to
locate in the Valley. No protection was given to the aquifer, as no sewers were required for
new construction.
Steady residential and commercial growth continued in the Spokane Valley throughout the
1980s. Hewlett Packard, which had established operation in the area in 1979, was the first
of several high tech companies that opened for businesses in the Industrial Park and Liberty
Lake areas. Although area residents continued to enjoy their semi-rural, but increasingly
urban, lifestyle, the influx of people finally began to be felt as area schools became crowded
and a few major roadways became congested.
Fears concerning the aquifer continued into the 1980s, leading State Board of Health
officials to threaten a moratorium on new construction in 1983, unless sewering of the
Valley began. In answer, Spokane County developed a wastewater management plan and
designated a priority sewer service area. A sewer trunk line was eventually extended into
the area, and at long last, the Valley slowly began to hook up to sewers.
Following up on an earlier proposal by the Spokane County Parks Department, the Parks and
Recreation Committee of the Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce proposed a ten and one-
half mile hiking, biking, and recreational trail to be built in conjunction with the
Washington State Centennial in 1989. Gaining support from a multitude of sources, the
Centennial Trail quickly became a reality. By 1989, the trail meandering through the Valley
along the Spokane River began providing enjoyment to thousands of residents.
Urbanization — 1990s
Throughout the 1990s, the Spokane Valley continued to grow more urban, becoming one of
the fastest growing regions in the state. Commercial growth increased and joined
residential growth as it moved towards the state line. The urban development included the
opening of the long-awaited Spokane Valley Mall in 1997, the establishment of dozens of
23
other businesses along business corridors, and the development of the Mirabeau Point
community complex.
Table 7: Spokane Valley Cultural and Historic Sites
Eeatuier ,'amu r�+i .`.(tt`&'.kS: LocationZ tf Xi c4 .k:SSignJficancel d ...,e�.r,'. ;':E'•.... '"�k zc a. '',�{
1. Central Valley Barn NW corner of 32vd Avenue & Agricultural history, upstairs once used for
Sullivan Road CVHS basketball
2. Chester Teacher's Cottage - 11626 E. Sands Road School history in Chester community
1890s
3. Dishman Depot - 1939 100 S. Argonne Road Train history community platted in 1908
4. Dishman Quarry - 1889 South of Sprague in Site of A.T. Dishman's granite quarry used for
Dishman area Gonzaga U, LCHS, Great Northern Depot
5. Dishman Theater- 1930 8722 E. Sprague Avenue First theater
6. Edgecliff- 1916 511 to 601 S. Park Road Medical history - tuberculosis sanitarium
7. Federal, Ohio & Diamond Yardley area- between Match block factories, the largest industry in
Match Companies - 1929 Trent and Sprague Avenue Spokane for many years
8. Felts Field - 1919 5629 to 6105 E. Rutter Pkwy Early aviation history
9. Greenacres Business District - 18100 E. Appleway Avenue Agricultural community •
1904
10. Intl Portland Cement Co. 3800 N. Cement Road One of first large industries
11. Mullan Road Marker - 8122 E. Sprague Avenue Historical reference to Mullan Road, early
1861-62 development of the Valley
12. Opportunity Township Hall 12114 E. Sprague Avenue Meeting place for Valley residents, used for
&Business District - 1912 political and social functions
13. Orchard Avenue 2810 N. Park Road Meeting place/Orchard Avenue
Community Center - 1917
14. Pine Creek Dairy- 1889 Corner of University & 8" One of two large dairies with hundreds of cows
Avenue which ranged on thousands of acres before
settlement - stone walled milk house still
stands
15. Plante's Ferry Monument - 12000 E. Upriver Drive Historical reference to first permanent
1849 settler in Valley
16. River Rock House 11907 E. Broadway Avenue Relates to use of local materials to build
17. Spokane University - 1912 10212 E. 9h Avenue School history, site of a university and the
center of the University area community
18. Van Marter Orchard & 322 N. University Avenue Henry Van Marter apple orchardist, top floor
House - 1910 of house once used by Valley residents for
skating rink
19. Velox Naval Supply Depot 3808 N. Sullivan Road 1942 WW H history -Valley industrial
- 1942 (Spokane Industrial Park) history
20. Vera Pump House - 1906 500 N. Evergreen Road Irrigation/Vera community
Reminders of the Past
Looking across the Spokane Valley, although much has disappeared, one can still see the
remnants of the past. Interspersed throughout the new fenced subdivisions, a few homes
still remain that were built out of the river rocks that the farmers and orchardists picked
out of their fields. Craftsman bungalows with cobblestone foundations, chimneys and porch
columns stand in contrast to the new apartment buildings. Rushing traffic bypasses many
of the old farmhouses, a few quietly decaying old barns stand in backyards, and a small
number of apple trees still dot the landscape. Table 7 lists some of the cultural and historic
features in the Spokane Valley that are located on Map 3.
24
Spokane Valley Community Views
Survey of Residents
At the onset of the Spokane Valley Incorporation Study, a survey of Spokane Valley
residents was conducted with the cooperation of the Spokesman Review newspaper. The
survey attempted to identify Valley residents' satisfaction with existing service providers,
service levels, community identity, and governance options. The results were used in
determining staffing levels for a new city, assumptions for service providers, boundaries of
neighborhoods and communities within the Valley, and priorities of residents for future
capital projects.
The survey was prepared by the Incorporation Study staff and published in the Valley Voice edition of
the Spokesman Review in November 2000. Five hundred responses were received and the results were
compiled and analyzed as shown on Table 8 on the following page. A score of 1 indicates a high level
of satisfaction with the service provided; a score of 2 indicates an acceptable level; and a score of 3
indicates that residents are unsatisfied with the service provided.
Open-Ended Questions
In addition to the quantifiable responses on the survey, open-ended questions were asked
regarding the most positive change in the Valley, most negative change, and biggest
concern with the development of the Valley. Some of the responses from the survey are
summarized below:
What do you think has been the most positive change in the Spokane Valley?
By a large majority, citizens listed investment in roads, with new additions and
improvements to the freeway and road system, as the most positive change in the Spokane
Valley. Over one hundred respondents noted the freeway improvements and widening of I-
90, and the new Evergreen Road Exchange. Additional new roads were mentioned by over
ninety citizens, who listed both the Valley Couplet and the Argonne railroad overpass at
Trent Road as important projects.
Business and commercial growth received the second largest response as being a positive
change in the Spokane Valley. Although most mentioned the Spokane Valley Mall, others
mentioned various new commercial developments that have brought businesses and services
that they no longer have to go to Spokane to find.
Citing their pleasure in maintaining natural areas, a few people mentioned the development
of the Dishman Hills Natural Area and the Mirabeau Point area as positive developments for
the Valley. Others indicated the recreational facilities created by the construction of the
Centennial Trail and the Mirabeau Point/YMCA complex were their picks for.the most
positive changes.
25
Table 8: Spokane Valley Survey Results
r:sERVICEi °` ��{' VP'y&% d t LI 'e SATISFACTION' ^�
+ IL' iF s..«�'�a`.r',rChav tt.��. .at Viral tt7i a''°.Zat&
e.
Transportation
Traffic Movement X ._
Public Transit Service X
Sidewalks X _
Bike and Pedestrian Trails X
Pedestrian Access to Schools X
Planning and Land Use
Quality of Planning for Growth X
Land Use Regulations X
Enforcement of Zoning Violations X
Quality of New Development X
Land Use Decision-making Process X
Sign and Billboard Regulations X
Environment
Noise Levels X
Visual and Aesthetic Quality X
Air Quality X
Protection of Natural Areas X
Protection of Shorelines X
Sense of Community
Community Events and Gatherings X
Employment Opportunities X
Arts and Cultural Events X
Preservation of Historic Sites/Buildings X
Parks and Open Space
Availability of Parks/Open Space X
Quality of Parks and Open Space X
Quality of Recreation Facilities X
Public Safety
Enforcement of Safe Traffic Speeds X
_ ___ __ Fire Protection X
Sheriff Response Time X
Safe to Walk in your Neighborhood X
Neighborhood Crime Rate X
Animal Control X
Utility Services
Sewer Service and Availability X
Water Service X
Garbage Service X
Street Cleaning X
Snow Removal X
Street Repair and Maintenance X
Street Lighting X
Stormwater Control/Flooding X
Community Services
Library Services and Facilities X
Shopping X
Schools X
26
Nearly fifty respondents listed sewer construction as a slow, but positive development. A
few mentioned improvements in other services, such as police or fire, but the availability of
medical services did receive a few positive responses.
Government was mentioned several times as bringing positive changes to the Valley. Some
mentioned their satisfaction with the fiscal responsibility shown by the current County
Commissioners.
What do you think has been the most negative change in the Spokane Valley?
Overwhelmingly, respondents to the survey listed uncontrolled and poorly managed
business, commercial and residential growth, and the resultant traffic problems they have
caused, as the most negative change in the Spokane Valley. Many residents expressed their
discouragement concerning the continued lack of use of the University City Mall and the
closure of dozens of businesses along the Sprague corridor. The proliferation of new
businesses and strip malls being built, white dozens of commercial and retail stores remain
vacant, was viewed by some as leading to urban sprawl.
A few residents surveyed indicated that rapid growth has brought increased crime, heavy
traffic, poor air quality, loss of natural habitat and a reduced quality of life to them. They
expressed their displeasure with the small, clustered, gated developments, too many
apartment complexes, and the small lot size in new subdivisions.
Other respondents mentioned environmental concerns, such as not enough protection for
the aquifer and danger to the river from pollution and increased shoreline building. Loss of
natural habitat with resultant negative effects on wildlife and quality of life was a concern
expressed by others.
Do you feel a sense of community in the Spokane Valley?
Although greatly outnumbered, a few residents felt positive about their sense of
community, either through their schools or community events. Valleyfest, a fall community
event, was listed by many as giving a sense of community. Others mentioned the Dishman
Hills Association, the Centennial Trail, the Mirabeau Point/YMCA complex and the Spokane
Valley Mall as providing new ties for Valley residents and offering great hope for future
cultural events.
Those few positives aside, the overwhelming majority of Spokane Valleyites responded that
they do not feel a sense of community. While a few voiced the opinion that they relate to
Spokane County, many others felt they are a part of the City of Spokane. Still others
revealed that although they do not feel they are affiliated with Spokane, they believe they
have to go into the City of Spokane to find any cultural opportunities.
Rather than feeling part of another larger community, a few responding felt that a cohesive,
community-defining element is missing in the Spokane Valley. Some reasons proposed for
this deficiency in sense of community included: lack of a civic center and other meeting
places, lack of events, both community and cultural, and lack of communication about
community and cultural events.
27
Steering Committee
The Incorporation Study team selected Spokane Valley residents who indicated on the
survey a willingness to participate to a Spokane Valley Incorporation Study Steering
Committee. The Steering Committee included a mix of residents from eighteen to over
sixty-five, men and women, living in all areas of the Valley, and not having been involved
in incorporation efforts in the past. Fifteen members were originally included and, in
addition, the incorporation proponent and the chair of the Spokane Valley Chamber of
Commerce Governance Committee were included. The Steering Committee met five times
from January 2001 through June 2001 and reviewed preliminary budget proposals, staffing
levels, potential revenue sources, and community identification. Based upon the comments
and suggestions, the staff formulated assumptions for a new city budget, acceptable levels
of taxation, and service providers.
28
>II
0
D -
Im
J 0
'I PART III:
Z4 MUNICIPAL SERVICE ANALYSIS
W �
Zg
� a
�
°C
H �
V
Z
PART III: MUNICIPAL SERVICE ANALYSIS
The proposed incorporation area is served by a large number of public agencies and private
companies. In addition to the services provided by county, federal and state agencies,
various local taxing districts have jurisdiction within this area. These governmental units
are:
Spokane County: Within general government are the legislative, administrative, budget
and support services. Judicial and legal include the district courts, superior courts,
prosecutor's office, and public defender's office. The public safety function of Spokane
County includes the Sheriffs department, corrections, probation, and jail. Other
departments within the County include planning; building and code enforcement;
hearing examiner; parks, recreation and fairgrounds; animal control; noxious weed
control; geographic information services; community development; and public works
including engineering, wastewater management, solid waste management, stormwater
management, and transportation.
City of Spokane: Water and sewer service and wastewater treatment.
Special Purpose Districts:
Fire Protection: Spokane County Fire District 1
Schools: Central Valley School District No. 356
East Valley School District No. 361
West Valley School District No. 363
Spokane School District No. 81
Library: Spokane County Library District
Water Purveyors:
Consolidated Irrigation District No. 19
Vera Irrigation District No. 15
Trentwood Irrigation District No. 3
Model Irrigation District No. 18
Carnhope Irrigation District No. 7
Hutchinson Irrigation District No. 16
Orchard Avenue Irrigation District No. 6
Pasadena Park Irrigation District No. 17
Spokane County Water District No. 3
Irvin Water District No. 6
East Spokane Water District No. 1
Solid Waste Collection: Waste Management of Spokane
Private Water Purveyors:
Modern Electric Company
Holiday Trailer Court
29
Hutton Settlement
Pinecroft Mobile Home Park
Kaiser-Trentwood
Spokane Industrial Park
Countywide Authorities:
Spokane Transit Authority
Spokane Regional Transportation Council
Spokane County Health District
Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority
Noxious Weed Control Board
State of Washington:
Washington State Patrol
Washington State Department of Transportation
The services provided by these entities are normally referred to as "municipal", that is, they
are usually performed by a city within a city's jurisdictional boundaries. Cities require that
these services be provided at a higher level than rural areas. Law enforcement would be an
example of a municipal service now being provided to the Spokane Valley by the County.
County services such as the Coroner, Auditor, Assessor, Treasurer, Superior Court,
Prosecutor, Public Defender, and District Courts are performed countywide in both
incorporated and unincorporated and are therefore considered "non-municipal". These
services will not be affected to the same degree as municipal services. The provision of
educational services is another non-municipal service that will not be directly affected by
incorporation of a new city.
INVENTORY OF SERVICES
General Government
Legislative
The Board of County Commissioners now provides the policy-making and oversight of
general government operations for Spokane County. With a new city, a Mayor and City
Council will serve these functions by representing citizens, setting policy, establishing
priorities and goals, and adopting a budget. The estimated cost for the Mayor and Council
for the first year of operation is $150,842.
Administrative
The County Administrative Officer, appointed by the Board of County Commissioners, now
oversees the operation.of Spokane County. With a new city, a City Manager will provide the
administrative leadership to implement Council policies and is responsible for management
direction to city departments and staff and for monitoring all contracts with other agencies.
The estimated cost for the City Management is $285,759 for the first year of operation.
30
City Clerk
The City Clerk is responsible for maintaining a record of all official actions of the City
Council including the publication of notices and minutes of meetings. The estimated cost
for the first year of operation for this responsibility is $160,062.
Human Resources/RisktManagement
For the new city, a Human Resources Department would be required for administration of
personnel including hiring, benefits coordination, disciplinary investigations, and risk
management. The estimated cost for the first year of operation for this function includes
staff costs of $185,722, maintenance and operation costs of $117,744 including a liability
insurance premium of $106,000 for a total department budget of $303,477.
Finance
For the new city, a Finance Department would be responsible for financial management
systems and reports, budget preparation and monitoring, acting as Treasurer for investment
of City funds, and purchasing supplies and capital items. The estimated cost for the first
year of operation for this function includes staff costs of $452,538 and maintenance and
operation costs of $29,667 for a total of $482,205.
Information Services
For the new city, an Information Services Department would be responsible for providing
information technology to city departments to assist them in achieving its goals including
financial and payroll systems, geographic information in conjunction with Spokane County
personnel, data and records management and network development and support. The
estimated cost for the first year of operation for this function includes staff costs of
$330,956, maintenance and operation costs of $46,928, which includes $25,000 for capital
and an additional $500 annual capital expense for each city employee in departmental
budgets, for a total of $377,884.
Options for the new city in providing this service include hiring its own staff, contracting
with Spokane County, or hiring a consultant or any combination of these.
Other Administrative
For the new city, temporary positions are budgeted to be used as needed with the
concurrence of the Human Resources Director and the City Manager for a staff cost of
$82,500 and maintenance and operation cost of $8,750 for a total for the first year of
$91,250.
In addition, expenses for dues and assessments, copiers and lease of a facility for city hall
are estimated to be $236,845 for the first year.
Judicial and Legal
District Court
Existing Service: Spokane County has one District Court with countywide jurisdiction. The
district court has nine judges; five serving Spokane County and four that provide services to
the City of Spokane.
31
Cost of Existing Service: The District Court estimates that sixty percent of its caseload is
generated in the new city boundaries with an estimated 2001 cost of $1,792,732 increasing
to $1,900,296 in 2003.
Incorporation Options: The new city of Spokane Valley can create either a municipal court
or a municipal department of the Spokane County District Court similar to the arrangement
with the City of Spokane. The jurisdiction of municipal courts is the same as that of
municipal departments of district courts. If the new city chooses to have municipal
department judges, their appointment would be from the elected District Court judges and
would serve under contract. This decision will be dependent on the City of Spokane Valley's
desire to be a self-governing body of the District Court. In either case,jurisdiction is
limited to matters that arise under city ordinances (i.e. traffic or criminal matters).
Incorporation Impacts: The District Court system currently serves the entire county and
would not be affected by the incorporation boundaries aside from traffic infractions, which
would be included in the new city municipal court system.
Probation
Existing Service: The Probation Department provides supportive services to the Court
including investigations and monitoring defendants' compliance with Court-ordered
conditions. The City of Spokane and Spokane County each have separate probation staff.
Cost of Existing Service: The number of cases assigned to the Probation Department within
the incorporation boundary was calculated with projected costs of $276,682 in 2001 and
$293,283 in 2003.
Incorporation Options: The new city has the option of hiring its own staff or contracting
with Spokane County.
Incorporation Impacts: If the new city contracts with the District Court, residents could
receive the same level of service with the Spokane County Probation Department.
Prosecutor's Office
Existing Service: The Spokane County Prosecutor's Office provides administration of both
civil and criminal cases for the County. This office is responsible for legal advice and
counsel to the Board of County Commissioners and employees drafting of ordinances,
defense of the County administrative and policy matters, and prosecuting misdemeanors in
District Court.
Cost of Existing Service: Costs for the new city for these services are estimated at $479,400
for staff and $30,727 for operation and maintenance for a total of $510,127. for the first
year of operation.
Incorporation Options: The new city could establish a new city attorney's office which
would undertake the estimated workload now handled by the county Prosecutor's Office;
32
contract either partially or totally with the Prosecutor's Office; or contract with a private
attorney.
Incorporation Impacts: It is assumed for this Study that the new city would provide this
service.
Public Defender
Existing Service: The Spokane County Public Defender's Office represents persons otherwise
unable to afford legal counsel for adult, juvenile, felony and misdemeanor crimes.
Cost of Existing Service: Costs for providing services to the proposed incorporation area are
based on the Sheriffs estimate of sixty percent of its workload being generated in that area.
For the Public Defender, sixty percent of the costs for adult misdemeanor defense would be
$463,413 for 2001 and $491,218 for 2003.
Incorporation Options: The new city could contract with Spokane County for Public
Defender services; contract with an independent attorney; or set up its own office within an
internal legal department.
Incorporation Impacts: For this study, it was assumed that the new city would contract
with Spokane County.
Public Safety
Law Enforcement
Existing Service: The primary agency providing police service in the unincorporated area of
Spokane County is the Sheriffs Department. It is responsible for 1,725 square miles and
provides services to residents of the unincorporated area (Map 12). Some of the services
that the Sheriffs Department provides to the Spokane Valley include a portion of Patrol,
Community Services, Detectives, Traffic, K-9, Drug Unit, DARE, School Resource officers,
Identification, Radio Dispatch, CAD/RMS, Fleet Lease, and Garage. The Department also
provides contract services to some of the smaller cities in the county.
The Washington State Patrol also provides services within the incorporation area including
traffic enforcement on state and interstate highways and back up to local agencies on
emergencies.
Cost of Existing Service: The Sheriffs Department estimates that approximately sixty
percent of its resources are required in the proposed incorporation area. This was calculated
on a functional basis including some support activities as there is no reliable data available
based upon the geographic location of chargeable activities. Based upon its 2001 budget
including indirect costs this amount is $12,236,273 for 2001 and increases to $12,970,449
for 2003.
Incorporation Options: The new city could negotiate an agreement with the County Sheriff
to provide service or establish its own municipal police department.
33
Incorporation Impacts: If the new city contracts with Spokane County, residents could
receive the same level of service or negotiate a higher level of service with the Sheriffs
Department.
Corrections
Existing Service: The Geiger Corrections Center provides confinement and supervision of low
security, adult offenders and provides rehabilitation services for the unincorporated areas of
Spokane County and for other jurisdictions by contract.
Cost of Existing Service: Cost for 2001 for adult misdemeanant confinement is based upon
sixty percent of the resources allocated by the Sheriffs Department to the incorporation
area; for 2001, it is estimated at $1,223,539 and $1,296,951 for 2003.
Incorporation Option: The new city can contract with Spokane County Corrections to
provide correction services.
Incorporation Impacts: There would be no impact on this department, as the contract
amount would equal the cost of the services.
Jail
Existing Service: Spokane County provides a safe and secure environment for the
incarceration of suspected and convicted offenders. It is operated by Spokane County and
serves the City of Spokane, the federal government, and other cities and towns by contract.
Cost of Existing Service: Current costs for jail for the Spokane Valley incorporation area are
based on a percentage of the new city population compared to the City of Spokane; this
would be $997,831 in 2001 and $1,057,701 in 2003.
Incorporation Options: The new city could contract with Spokane County in the same
manner as the City of Spokane or build a new jail facility, hire and train a new staff and
contract with Spokane County until those actions area completed.
Incorporation Impacts: If the new city contracted with the Spokane County Jail, there
would be no impact on the existing operations of the jail.
Animal Control
Existing Service: The Spokane County Animal Control Department currently provides this
services for the proposed City of Spokane Valley. Animal Control Officers are trained and
commissioned by the County Sheriffs Department. The Spokane County Animal Shelter is
located on Flora Road within the proposed incorporation area.
Cost of Existing Service: The main revenue source for this department is license fees. Based
on a net cost of operation of $3.47 per person, approximately $284,887 is the estimated cost
in 2001 for the proposed incorporation area and $301,980 is the estimated cost for 2003.
Incorporation Options: Spokane County Animal Control currently provides animal control
services by contract to the Cities of Millwood, Cheney, and Fairchild Air Force Base. For
•
34
animal control, the new city could contract with Spokane County Animal Control, hire a
private enterprise, or provide the service itself.
Incorporation Impacts: If the new city contracted with Spokane County, there would be no
impact on the existing operations of the animal control department.
Fire Protection
Existing Service: Spokane County Fire District 1 is a fully paid fire department with 143
employees, responding from seven fire stations and providing the following services:
structural fire suppression; wildland fire suppression; hazardous materials response; incident
management; technical rescue response for automobile extrication, confined space rescue,
high angle rope rescue, trench rescue, and ice rescue; EMS basic life support response (EMT);
EMS advanced life support response (paramedic); fire and arson investigation; plan review;
commercial building inspection; incident pre-planning; and public safety education.
It is a separate taxing jurisdiction governed by an elected board of commissioners and it is
not a part of the county government. The district covers 75 square miles and at a
population of 115,000, Fire District 1 is the largest fire district in Spokane County (Map 11).
Cost of Existing Service: The tax valuation of the district for 2001 is $5,071,297,990. A
regular property tax of $1.3992 per $1,000 and a special property tax of $1.5422 per $1,000
generates $14,795,859 for the operation of the district.
Incorporation Options: The new city will be annexed into Fire District 1 upon incorporation,
but voters within the new city will have the option during the first year of operation to
either remain a part of the District or form their own fire department as per state law.
Incorporation Impacts: With forty-five square miles proposed for the City of Spokane
Valley, 59 percent of Fire District 1 would be inside the new city and 30 square miles or 41
percent would remain unincorporated within Fire District 1.
Serving the southern portion of the Spokane Valley is Spokane County Fire District 8 and •
serving the northern portion of the Spokane Valley is Spokane County Fire District 9.
Modifications to the proposed boundaries could include portions of these Districts.
Public Works
Engineering Administration
Existing Service: Spokane County performs project management, bridge design, urban street
and rural road design, construction, traffic and traffic safety programs, and transportation
demand management for the unincorporated areas of Spokane County. In addition, the c
Engineering Division applies for and administers the Arterial Improvement Program, the
Transportation Partnership Program, and other federal and state grants.
Cost of Existing Service: The estimated costs of engineering and administration for programs
in the incorporation area are $3,063,000 for 2001 and $3,246,780 for 2003.
35 •
Incorporation Options: The new city can contract with Spokane County to continue to
provide these services or establish its own engineering department.
Incorporation Impacts: For this Study, it was assumed that the new city would contract, at
least initially, with Spokane County.
Roads Maintenance
Existing Service: Within the City of Spokane Valley's boundaries, there are 420 miles of
County Roads. The County roads within the proposed City of Spokane Valley represents 14
percent of the 2,925 road miles for which Spokane County is responsible countywide. The
County Road Department provides maintenance of the roadways, storm drainage, winter
maintenance including plowing, roadside facilities, street cleaning, traffic signs, traffic
striping and legends, utility payments for street lighting and traffic engineering services.
There are also two State highways within the proposed boundaries consisting of State Route
27 (Pines Road) and State Route 290 (Trent Road) and Interstate 90 (I-90), which are
maintained by the Washington Department of Transportation.
The urban principle east-west arterials include Broadway, Sprague, Appleway, 16th and 32nd.
Through traffic is primarily carried by I-90 and secondarily by Trent. Travel orientation in
the Spokane Valley is east west with a majority of local traffic traveling by means of
Sprague, Appleway and Trent.
The urban principal north-south arterials are spaced approximately a mite a part, which
include Fancher, Park, Argonne, Mullan, University, Pines, Evergreen, Sullivan, and Barker,
all of which, pass over or under I-90, except for University that ends at Mission Rd.
Fancher, Argonne, and Sullivan have overpasses over the Burlington Northern railroad
tracks running parallel with Trent Road on southern side; the remaining north-south
corridors are subject to 10 to 15 minute delays if a train is passing through.
Plans and Policies: To manage and implement the Spokane Regional Transportation
Council's comprehensive transportation planning, required by Federal law, for Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Areas, such as Spokane County.
Cost of Existing Service: The County Road Fund is comprised of the funds described below
and local public funds. There are several funding mechanisms available for the City of
Spokane Valley contingent upon approval. Funding is available from the Federal
Transportation Acts that are passed by Congress to cover periods of five to six years. The
present Federal Transportation Act, called TEA 21, has made more than $50 million available
each year of the Act. Most of these funds are passed through the Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT) to the Spokane Regional Transportation Council
(SRTC) for distribution. A portion-of the funding is distributed on a competitive basis
through the Olympia office of the WSDOT. The local distribution of funds is done by SRTC
on a priority basis with governmental agencies within Spokane County competing for a
limited amount of funding. These Federal funds may be used for urban roadways, bridges,
sidewalks, pathways, railroad crossings, and special safety projects. In 2001, Spokane
County expects to use nearly $8 million in federal grant funds in the Spokane Valley
incorporation area, which will require over $2 million in local matching funds to secure.
36
The Transportation Improvement Board has two funding methods: the Arterial Improvement
Program and the Transportation Partnership Program. The 2002 construction program has
over $7 million in approved projects, which would require over $2 million in local match
funds to secure.
The estimated cost of providing roadway maintenance service to the new city by Spokane
County is $4,065,250 for 2001 and $4,309,165 for 2003.
Spokane County has $15,365,000 in road projects planned for the incorporation area in
2002; of that total, the County has $4,244,000 in local funds have been committed. In
2003, Spokane County has $12,877,000 planned in road projects, of which $3,559,000 in
local funds has been committed. Tables 18 and 19 list these projects and Map 8 shows their
locations.
Incorporation Options: The new city could contract with the County oirdevelop a capital
plan and bring the service in-house and contract with Spokane County for an interim
period.
Incorporation Impacts: All of the planning, capital programming, and construction in
relation to local road improvements in the newly incorporated area would become the
responsibility of the new city as well. This work usually starts up in the interim period
between the election on incorporation and the effective date of incorporation. The County
would continue to supervise construction until the effective date of incorporation.
Highway Maintenance
Existing Service: The Washington State Department of Transportation provides maintenance
for the two state highways within the incorporation boundaries: State Route 27 (Pines
Road) and State Route 290 (Trent Road). In addition, the DOT provides maintenance to
Interstate 90.
Cost of Existing Service: State law requires that when a city over 22,5001n population
incorporates, the city immediately assume the responsibility for maintenance activities. The
Department of Transportation would enter into an agreement with the new city to perform
these activities at the city's cost. The estimated cost for these highway maintenance
services by the Department of Transportation for 2001 is $300,000 and $318,000 for 2003.
Incorporation Options: The new city could contract with the State Department of
Transportation or Spokane County or provide the service itself.
Incorporation Impacts: There would be no impact on Spokane County; the assumption for
this Study is that the new city would contract with the Department of Transportation.
Wastewater Management
Existing Service: The Spokane County Sewer Utility is the designated sewer service provider
to the area within the proposed city. The Utility currently has 19,300 customers, of which
15,400 are within this area.
37
Plans and Policies: In 1996, Spokane County adopted an Interim Comprehensive Wastewater
Management Plan to revise and refine the County's original 1981 plan. The intent of the
plan was to develop strategies to advance the sewer program for the protection of the
aquifer and to satisfy regulations established by the Washington State Departments of
Health and Ecology, the Spokane County Health District and other regulatory requirements.
The plan prioritizes sewer projects into six-, fifteen-, and twenty-year programs shown on
Map 10.
Spokane County is developing a Wastewater Facilities Plan to identify wastewater treatment
facilities that must be implemented to meet the 20-year and long-term needs for the
County's Urban Growth Area. Presently, it is anticipated that 10 million gallons per day will
continue to go to the City of Spokane Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant, and a new
plant will be constructed to treat 12 million gallons per day in the 20-year planning
horizon. Presently, it is projected that about 120 million dollars (in 2001 dollars) will be
required for wastewater treatment in the 20-year horizon. Table 16 lists the sewer projects
planned for the next five years in the Spokane Valley.
Cost of Existing Service: Each year the Utility spends approximately $12 million in a Septic
Tank Elimination Program (STEP), which adds about 2,000 new customers to the sewer
utility. Approximately eighty percent of the program budget and new connections are
within the incorporation area. The revenues to fund the STEP program come from four
major sources. The table below shows the revenue generated from each funding source and
the amount expended.
Table 9: Septic Tank Elimination Program Funding
vrr7 20 ` _,o«.i Typical Annual Sewe 'p
Revenue Source t) , Amount 4 5 ]
.-.. ;° . ,,> ° ^,1. Program !xpenditureiAii
Centennial Clean Water Grant $3,750,000 $3,750,000
Capital Facilities Rate $6,250,000 $6,250,000
Aquifer Protection Area Fund $1,500, 000 $2,000,000
County Sales Tax Contribution $3,700,000
TOTAL $15,200,000 $11,950,000
These four funding sources are described below:
CENTENNIAL CLEAN WATER EXTENDED GRANT: A twenty-year extended grant was awarded to
Spokane County in 1996, with annual payments scheduled to end in 2015.
CAPITAL FACILITIES RATE: A one-time charge per household when hooking up to the
sewer, it is currently set at $3,020 per household or equivalent residential unit. This
rate will most likely increase without the subsidization (1/8 of a percent on sates
tax) provided by the County currently.
AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA (APA) FUND: Currently fees are collected in the aquifer
sensitive area of Spokane County; these fees were voted in for a 20-year period that
ends in 2005. If the fees are to be reauthorized, a vote will be required. The amount
of fees used for the STEP is the net amount available to the County after paying
administrative costs, an annual allocation to the Regional Health District, and an
38
annual allocation to the City of Spokane for septic tank elimination within its
boundaries.
SALES TAX: The County currently allocates one-eighth of a cent of its sales tax to the
sewer utility to provide a subsidy to property owners when hooking up to the sewer.
The sewer subsidy (approximately $3,700,000) is provided by the.County and will
most likely dissolve with the incorporation of a new city.
An additional amount known as the General Facilities Charge (GFC) of $2,220 per household
is assessed at the time of hook-up. Currently, 25 percent of the GFC is subsidized from Sales
Tax and APA revenues, so the amount paid by each household is $1,665. The GFC is an
allocation to all sewer customers for the County's cost of wastewater treatment capacity at
the City of Spokane's wastewater treatment facility, and for construction of major
interceptors and pumping stations. The GFC is projected to increase in the future to help
pay for new treatment plant capacity.
The last source of revenue for wastewater facilities is the Wastewater Treatment Plant
Charge of $4.00 per month per household. The revenue from this charge is being used
exclusively to upgrade the existing treatment plant, and provide for new wastewater
treatment capacity.
Currently, the aggregate amount of revenue exceeds the annual expenditures for the STEP.
Excess revenues are placed in sewer construction program reserve accounts. However, it is
projected that in the future, the revenues will fall short of expenditures, and the reserves
will be spent to complete the last few years of the sewer construction program.
Incorporation Options: The incorporation of the City of Spokane Valley would require
negotiations with Spokane County on the continuation of the Septic Tank Elimination
Program in many areas. The Centennial Clean Water Grant funding would appear to be
forthcoming if the current level of conversion could be maintained or increased. Aquifer
Protection Area fees are collected by the County in an area larger than the proposed city, so
an equitable method of apportioning the revenue would require negotiation:
Incorporation Impacts: Upon the incorporation of the new city, the County would lose 85
percent of the sales tax revenue it currently receives from the incorporation area, which
almost certainly would affect the current subsidy given to the sewer utility. The new city
would need to either continue the dedication of the sales tax revenue, or find another
source of funding to continue the current level of subsidy, or pass the costs on to the
homeowners within the new city.
The ownership of the wastewater system should remain with Spokane County because of the
regional nature of the utility, but other areas would need investigation such as the
collection of the hook-up fees mentioned previously and also collection of monthly sewer
fees. (i.e. should the collection effort remain with the County or be assumed by the city).
•
39
Stormwater Management
Existing Service: Spokane County provides the following stormwater management services
to the unincorporated areas of Spokane County: inventorying and maintaining stormwater
facilities inside county road rights-of-way; developing plans for regional storm water
facilities; implementation (currently not funded); enforcement of grassy swale regulations;
and meeting NPDES requirements for water quality.
Major stormwater management issues facing Spokane County including the proposed City of
Spokane Valley include: 1) reducing surface flooding and groundwater-related problems; 2)
meeting federal and state surface-, ground-, and drinking water quality standards and
requirements, including developing and administering a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit; 3) planning and constructing needed infrastructure;
and 4) funding a stormwater program to handle all these responsibilities.
Plans and Policies: The Department of Ecology is expected to require the new city to
implement a stormwater plan to address the impacts of stormwater as mandated by State
regulations and the Federal Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act, including
Underground Injection Control regulations.
Cost of Existing Service: Currently, the county's stormwater management program is
financed through an annual stormwater charge. The annual charge is $10 for an average
single family home (which is equal to one Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU). One ERU is
defined as 3,160 square feet of impervious surface(s). Businesses, industries, schools,
churches, apartment buildings, etc. are charged $10 per year per ERU. The square footages
are measured from digital aerial ortho-photographs and building permit plans. The County
Treasurer bills property owners the stormwater service charge on the tax statement each
year. The stormwater fee is a line item on the tax statement.
It is estimated that there are 99,720 stormwater ERUs in the proposed City of Spokane
Valley. This translates into annual revenue of $997,200.
When the county's stormwater utility was established in 1992, the annual stormwater
charge was intended to be used primarily for preparing basin plans, inventorying public
stormwater facilities, maintaining existing public stormwater facilities and related work.
The fee was not intended to fund major capital improvements. The intent was that after
individual basins plans were completed and the needed capital facilities and costs were
identified, a decision would be made about how to finance plan implementation. Although
public meetings and a public hearing were held in 1999 to discuss increasing stormwater
fees, the means of raising funds has not been decided.
New development is generally required to handle its runoff on-site where possible. The
Stormwater Utility is re-focusing its efforts on preventing new stormwater problems by
mapping and preserving natural drainage systems, reviewing and commenting on
development proposals, and providing technical assistance to homeowners associations
responsible for maintaining private stormwater facilities, and similar activities.
40
There is increasing recognition by this community that stormwater facilities are an
important part of the infrastructure needed in this growing region. State and federal
regulations assure that stormwater management will be a big issue facing local agencies and
municipalities in the next few years.
Incorporation Options: The new city could adopt the existing County plans, prepare its
own, or contract with a private firm. In either case, the cost would be about the same to
the new city.
Incorporation Impacts: Upon incorporation, the new city could contract with Spokane
County or hire its own staff to provide the service. In any case, the jurisdiction with
stormwater management responsibilities for the new city will need to address the issue of
how to finance a stormwater program to comply with federal and state requirements and
construct necessary stormwater improvements.
Solid Waste Collection and Disposal
Existing Service: Spokane County has turned over future solid waste disposal activities to a
joint City of Spokane-Spokane County Liaison Board to build and operate a waste-to-energy
facility and to provide for the disposal of the resultant ash. Solid waste collection is
currently provided by Waste Management Inc., with rates and service boundaries regulated
by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission.
Plans and Policies: The new city, if not a participant in the county-wide system, would also
be required to submit a solid waste plan to the Department of Ecology for approval and
negotiate for a disposal site outside of Spokane County.
Cost of Existing Service: Currently the costs to the Valley area for solid waste collection and
disposal vary depending on the geographical location. An estimation of this service with
recycling and two garbage cans is approximately $18.00 per month.
Incorporation Options for Collection: The new city could not create any immediate changes
to solid waste collection services because of the requirements to honor the life of the
franchise agreement. After the agreement has expired, the new city could honor previous
agreements for disposal, enter into a new agreement, or arrange for different methods of
disposal. If the new city chooses other methods of disposal and not to use the waste-to-
energy plant, the County residents would get an increase to the solid waste collection and
disposal fee.
Incorporation Options for Disposal: The new city could join the City-County Flow Control
Agreement and accept the County Solid Waste Master Plan or develop its own plan.
Incorporation Impacts: The new city could not alter solid waste collection franchise
agreements until the expiration of the agreements or agreement options.
Water Provision
Existing Service: The proposed incorporation area includes eighteen separate entities
providing water services. Currently, Spokane County's role in the provision of water service
is primarily coordination. The table following depicts the water purveyors with corporate
41
boundaries within the proposed new city. Boundaries for each purveyor are shown on Map
9.
Plans and Policies: The Coordinated Water System Plan (CWSP) was completed in 1982 and
most recently updated in 1999. It addresses the requirements of the Public Water System
Coordination Act and the County Services Act. The plan establishes future service areas for
public water utilities, minimum design standards, a utility services review procedure, a
conflict appeals process, and regional supply needs. Spokane County's current role in the
provision of water services is limited to general coordination with the water purveyors
within the incorporation area.
The proposed incorporation area is entirely within the Critical Water Supply Service Areas
designated in the CWSP.
Cost of Existing Service: Each water purveyor sets its own fees and charges for water service.
Incorporation Options: Cities have the option of assuming jurisdiction of water districts
under RCW 35.13A and each has varying impacts depending on the amount of the area or
assessed valuation that is within the city:
1000: The city may by resolution or ordinance assume jurisdiction over all assets of
the district including taxes levied but not collected.
600/0: A city may assume jurisdiction over the entire district except portions that
are within another city's boundaries. If this is done, the water district, by
means of an election, can require the city to assume jurisdiction of the entire
district.
Less 6004: The city may only assume jurisdiction of the portion that is within its
boundaries.
The new city could allow all of the water purveyors to continue operations as before
incorporation, or assume jurisdiction and operation of some or all of the water purveyors
serving the incorporation area. The State law addresses how to take over water districts,
but there is no established procedure relative to other water purveyors such as private
companies, other municipal organizations, irrigation districts, mobile home parks;
subdivisions, or Kaiser-Trentwood and the Spokane Industrial Park.
Incorporation Impacts: For the purposes of this study, it is assumed that the new city
would not assume jurisdiction of water purveyors within its boundaries.
42
Table 10: Water Purveyors within the Spokane Valley Incorporation Area
tea A.¢3y*f uc"t .
":".. .. ±.41-?;- 4 to x ;C:f ,2000 tt „� Residential", Tot l$ , Incorp ro attiionnz
N... '^.,t l , r t 3 ✓fir M'"< i.r=e:e
,Water;Purveygr,� �.,z Populationr,�s r�Connectrons�� Acres
Carnhope Irrigation 1,200 480 248 100%
District No. 7
City of Spokane 195,000 57,957 NA NA
Consolidated Irrigation 17,795 5,589 12308 47%
District No. 19
East Spokane Water 4,063 1,018 1356 93%
District No. 1
Holiday Trailer Court 21 12 5 1000/0
Hutchinson Irrigation 1,950 780 332 100%
District No. 16
Hutton Settlement ' 53 18 333 930/0
Irvin Water District 2,531 729 999 100%
No. 6
Kaiser - Trentwood 563 100%
Model Irrigation 5,708 2,129 945 100%
District No. 16
Modern Electric 16,677 5,187 2887 100%
Company
Orchard Avenue 3,178 1,271 678 100%
Irrigation District No.
6
Pasadena Park 4,168 1,667 1868 54%
Irrigation District No.
17
Pinecroft Mobile Home 248 143 16 100%
Park
Spokane County:-Watei 22,140 8,856 6690 46%
District No. 3
Spokane Industrial 273 1000/0
Park
Trentwood Irrigation 4,048 1,453 2293 90%
District No. 3
Vera Irrigation District 19,801 5,641 9843 410/0
No. 15
Spokane County Capital Facilities Plan, March 2001
43
Other Municipal Services
Planning
Existing Service: The Spokane County Division of Planning provides long range and current
planning services to the unincorporated areas of the County. The Planning Division
provides professional and administrative services for the County including permit review
and issuance, field inspection and zoning code compliance services. The Division is also
responsible for implementing provisions of the Growth Management Act for the
unincorporated areas of Spokane County and coordinating with other municipal
governments for countywide implementation of GMA provisions.
Plans and Policies: The Spokane County Comprehensive Land Use Plan, adopted on January
12, 1980, is the official policy document for decisions relating to future physical
development and public resources. In addition to the required land use and transportation
elements, the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan also incorporates by reference: the
Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan, Parks and Recreation Plan, and the
Coordinated Water System Plan.
The current plan was developed under the Planning Enabling Act (RCW 36.70). This plan
will be replaced by the comprehensive plan developed under the Growth Management Act
and expected to be adopted by the Board of County Commissioners in August 2001.
On July 1, 1993, Spokane County reached the threshold for mandatory compliance with the
Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A). Growth management planning is nearing
completion in Spokane County. The County is charged with developing countywide
planning policies, identifying urban growth areas, identifying and protecting
critical/sensitive areas, writing and adopting a new comprehensive plan and the regulations
to implement it. Each incorporated city must also develop a plan with the required
elements based upon the countywide planning policies.
On December 22, 1994, Spokane County adopted its County-Wide Planning Policies for the
development and adoption of comprehensive plans under the Growth Management Act.
Consistency with adopted policies would be required of the new city at the time of its
formal incorporation.
On April 8, 1997, Spokane County adopted an interim Urban Growth Area (IUGA) and
Interim Development Regulations. The statutes prohibit new cities from incorporating
outside of urban growth areas; therefore, the proposed City of Spokane Valley and any
modifications are limited to incorporating territory within the IUGA.
In March 2000, the Spokane County Planning Commission issued a draft Comprehensive
Plari,referred to as Draft Plan 2000. The draft Comprehensive Plan included land use maps,
policies, and a draft Urban Growth Area. The Planning Commission held public hearings and
accepted public comment on the draft plan until March 5, 2001, and after considering public
input, the Planning Commission made final revisions and forwarded the Planning
Commission Recommended Comprehensive Plan to the Board of County Commissioners on
March 7, 2001. The Board of County Commissioners held a series of public hearings on the
Recommended Comprehensive Plan (Map 11) in early May 2001 and is expected to adopt a
44
new Comprehensive Plan, including a final Urban Growth Area, in early August 2001 (Map
6).
The Spokane County Zoning Code is the set of land use regulations, adopted under RCW
36.70, designed to protect the health, safety, and general welfare, to promote community
goals and to implement the goals and policies of the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan.
The zoning code establishes specific, binding regulations in the zone categories. Within the
proposed city boundary, a variety of land use zones are found. They include industrial,
commercial, with a mix of low to high-density residential zones. The zoning code will be
updated to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan developed under the Growth
Management Act. The existing zoning for the Spokane Valley is shown on Map 7.
Also included in the zoning regulations is the establishment of an aquifer sensitive overlay
zone (ASA). It is intended to coincide with the recharge area for the Spokane/Rathdrum
Aquifer. The ASA overlay zone provides supplemental development regulations to
permanently protect the source of metropolitan Spokane's water supply.
Other regulations influencing the incorporation include the Spokane County Shoreline
Program, the Spokane County Subdivision Ordinance, the Spokane County Short Plat
Ordinance, and the Spokane County Environmental Ordinance. Spokane County has also
adopted wetland policies directing development on or near wetland areas.
Cost of Service: The cost of providing planning services by setting up a City Planning
Department is estimated at $481,667 for 2001 and $509,847 in 2003.
Incorporation Options: The first task the new city will be required to do, as mandated by
the Growth Management Act (GMA), is develop a Comprehensive Plan, which includes
designating an Urban Growth Area. The new city can hire its own staff, contract with
Spokane County, or hire a consultant to develop its plan. For other planning services, the
new city would have the same options.
Incorporation Impacts:=For.this Study, it was assumed that the new city would set up its
own Planning Department. This would impact Spokane County by reducing its workload by
an amount that could result in a reduction of County planning staff.
Building and Code Enforcement
Existing Service: The Building and Code Enforcement Division administers and enforces the
State Building Code Act and other regulations governing land use and construction,
alteration, and use of new and existing buildings and structures within unincorporated
Spokane County. It is operated on the basis that it will "break-even", or operate as an
enterprise fund, which is geared to generate surpluses in high activity years to cover
potential deficits in years when construction activity is low.
Cost of Existing Service: The Building and Code Enforcement Division provided permit data
for the last ten years within the boundaries of the new city to estimate the cost to the new
city. It was recommended that the City retain from the building permit fees collected for its
own use a "minimum fee". The "minimum fee" would be ten percent of the building permit fee
45
as adopted by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County. The County would be
compensated for 100 percent of those plan review fees collected pursuant to the Building Code,
as well as 100 percent of those fees collected pursuant to the Plumbing Code and the
Mechanical Code as amended by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County. The
cost of providing building services to the new city is estimated at $805,401 for 2001 and
$853,725 in 2003.
Incorporation Options: The new city could contract with Spokane County or hire staff to
perform these functions. Spokane County currently provides building services to small
cities and towns within the County.
Incorporation Impacts: It was assumed for this Study that the new city would contract with
Spokane County.
Hearing Examiner
Existing Service: The Hearing Examiner issues decisions on Spokane County land use
applications within the unincorporated area.
Cost of Existing Service: Approximately fifty percent of the cases heard by the Hearing
Examiner are generated in the incorporation area at an estimated cost of $81,529 for 2001
increasing to $86,421 in 2003.
Incorporation Options: The new city could contract with the Spokane County Hearing
Examiner, hire its own staff, contract with a private attorney, or use a volunteer committee
system.
Incorporation Impacts: For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that the new city
would use one of the first three options and that the costs would be similar.
Parks and Recreation Services
Existing Service: Spokane County has 31 parks located in.the.unincorporated areas of the
County with thirteen of these located in the proposed incorporation boundaries and eleven
of these parks are within the Urban Growth Area (UGA). The area also includes three
County swimming pools. Map 14 shows the location of Spokane County parks as well as
other community facilities.
Plans and Policies: The Parks and Recreation Department is responsible for enhancing the
general quality of life for the residents of Spokane County by providing the highest quality
and quantity of park, recreation, open space, and related cultural opportunities given the
available resources.
Cost of Existing Service: The Spokane County Parks Department estimated that the annual
maintenance and operation costs on a per park basis, including administration, capital
equipment and capital improvements on a percentage basis and the net cost of pool
operations in the new city for the eleven parks within the proposed new city and the Urban
Growth Area would amount to $891,964 in 2001 and $945,482 in 2003. Spokane County
also has capital improvements planned for 2002-2006 that are listed on Table 17.
46
Table 11: Spokane Valley Parks within the Incorporation Area
°'� r%`.�t�Y' ' . :1,a: o • i .a o -
Namej;� z, � � _Location tl xi, � tirti yt dAcrescAnnualFCost�
Balfour Park Balfour and Main 2.8 $12,359
Brown Park Pines and 32nd Avenue 8.2 $36,193
Castle Park University and 33`d Avenue 2.7 $11,917
Centennial Trail Spokane River (13 miles) 300.0 $67,519
Edgecliff Park Park and 6th Avenue 4.8 $21,186
Mirabeau Park Spokane River and Mirabeau 17.3 $72,500
Orchard Park Park Road and Bridgeport 3.8 $16,772
Park Road Park and 9`h Avenue 2.0 $8,828
Sullivan Park Sullivan at Spokane River 10.3 $22,104
Terrace View Park 24th and Blake Road 9.1 $40,165
Valley Mission Park Mission and Bowdish 27.2 $88,323
Three County Pools Park Road, Valley Mission, Terrace View $68,950
Senior Center Valley Mission Park $30,000
Admin/Capital Costs $324,765
County Indirect Costs $70,383
Total 388.2 $891,964
Incorporation Options: Incorporation of the new City of Spokane Valley would essentially
put eleven County parks within the jurisdictional boundaries of the new city; however, the
new City would not gain ownership of these park properties by act of incorporation. In the
event of incorporation, Spokane County would most likely undertake detailed analysis of
the alternatives available for County-owned park property within the new city boundaries.
After incorporation, Spokane County may decide to maintain ownership and operation of
these facilities or transfer the parks to the new city upon negotiations.
The new city would have three options if the facilities are transferred, contract with the
County for maintenance of the parks, operate ;rid maintain the parks themselves, or
contract with a private company.
Incorporation Impacts: There would be no cost impacts under either option; recreation
opportunities for County residents outside of the new city may decrease depending on new
city policies for facilities.
Geographic Information Systems
Existing Service: Provides technical staff and support in developing and maintaining the
County's computerized mapping and analysis of geographic information. The County also
provides GIS services to other jurisdictions and private parties on a contract basis. For the
new city, GIS services would include continued maintenance of the map layers required for
updating planning information for both long range and current planning.
Cost of Existing Service: The Spokane County estimate of the cost to provide this service to
the new city is $70,318 in 2001 and $74,537 in 2003.
47
Incorporation Options: The new city can contract with Spokane County, hire its own staff,
or contract for this service.
Incorporation Impacts: For the purposes of this study, it was assumed that the cost of the
service would remain the same under each of the alternatives.
Community Development
Existing Service: Spokane County receives an entitlement allocation of federal Community
Development Block Grant and HOME Affordable Housing Funds from the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) each year. Approximately $2.6 million is granted or
loaned each year by Spokane County to local governments, special purpose districts, not-
for-profit organizations, and for-profit businesses to conduct activities, which improve the
lives of lower income residents of the ten small cities and unincorporated areas of the
County.
These programs provide funding for renovation of water and sewer systems, connection of
homes to centralized sewer, road paving, repair of sub-standard homes, construction of
multi-family housing, down payment assistance for first-time homebuyers, child-care
services, crisis counseling, emergency food and transportation assistance, and medical and
dental services for people in need.
Plans and Policies: Funds are allocated through a competitive "Request for Proposal"
process, with project applications generally due in December of each year. Applications are
initially reviewed and rated by Department staff on the degree to which they address
identified priority needs, project readiness, cost eligibility and reasonableness, activity
eligibility, applicant capacity, etc.
Funding recommendations are made to the Board of County Commissioners by the Spokane
County Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee, a citizen advisory
committee made up of one representative from each of the County's ten small cities and
towns and ten "at-large" County residents. Following a public comment period, final
funding recommendations are approved by the County Commissioners as part of the County's
Annual Action Plan, which is then forwarded to HUD for final approval. Approved activities
are conducted from July 1 to June 30 of the following year.
Cost of Existing Service: Federal entitlement funding allocated to the proposed City of
Spokane Valley has been $6,260,605 in the last 12 years and has been used predominately
for water and sewer infrastructure improvements. Spokane County has a poverty rate of
12.2 percent. The following cities were used as comparables for determining an estimated
amount of entitlement funds that could be available to the proposed city:
48
Table 12: Comparison with Similar Cities in Washington
Crty w, , ' ; } r P,opulahon , Otif verty.LLevel CDBG Entrtl`ement'
Everett 87,520 7.80% $930,000
Federal Way 77,010 8.60% $589,000
• Yakima 65,830 20.20% $1,009,000
Spokane Valley 82,135 12.2% See Options
Incorporation Options: The new city would have three options for continuing to receive
Community Development funds.
OPTION 1: The proposed City of Spokane Valley could make application for entitlement status
and receive an allotment of Community Development Block Grant funds directly from HUD
to address essential community development needs for low income people within its
boundaries. Based on an evaluation of similar sized jurisdictions with comparable
demographic characteristics (population, poverty levels, condition of housing stock, growth
lag, etc.) a new city could receive an estimated $800,000 entitlement amount per year.
With this option, the loss to the County and other cities and towns would be approximately
$2,600,000.
OPTION 2: A new city could elect to forego its entitlement status and continue participation
in the Urban County entitlement. This would involve entering into a cooperation agreement
with Spokane County every three years and changing the composition of the Housing and
Community Development Advisory Committee to provide for representation of a new city.
Based on historic allocation amounts, the area of the proposed city currently receives an
average annual allocation of approximately $521,717. With this option, there would be no
loss in funds for the County or other cities or towns.
OPTION 3: The proposed City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County could submit a request
for a joint entitlement and the new city would be eligible to become a pass-through city.
This would entitle the city to receive a direct share of the federal funds to allocate to local
needs. In order to qualify as a pass-through city, the city would need to develop a
Consolidated Plan and an allocation process for distribution of their anticipated funds.
However, this option removes the staffing requirements for the proposed city and leaves the
county with responsibility for entitlement management of the program for the City of
Spokane Valley. The funds the new city could expect under this option would be an
estimated $800,000 with a loss to the unincorporated areas and other cities and towns of
approximately $278,283.
Incorporation Impacts: The impacts are dependent upon which option the new city chooses
in order to continue Community Development funds.
49
Educational Services
Schools
Existing Service: Four school districts serve the proposed new city: Central Valley School
District No.`356, East Valley School District No. 361, Spokane School District No. 81, and
West Valley School District No. 363 (Map 13). In addition to public schools, there are
several private schools in the incorporation area. Facilities within the proposed
incorporation area are listed below:
Central Valley School District
Elementary: Adams, Blake, Broadway, Chester, Greenacres, Keystone, McDonald,
Opportunity, Ponderosa, Progress, South Pines, Sunrise, and University.
Junior High Schools: Bowdish, Evergreen, Greenacres, Horizon, North Pines.
High Schools: Central Valley, University.
West Valley School District
Elementary: Arthur B. Ness, Pasadena Park, Seth Woodard, and West Valley
City School.
Junior High School: Centennial.
High School: Spokane Valley, West Valley.
East Valley School District
Elementary: Skyview, Trent, Trentwood.
Junior High School: East Valley.
High School: East Valley.
Spokane School District
Elementary: Pratt.
Private Schools
Gethsemane Lutheran
Pioneer and Rainbow
Saint John Vianney
Saint Mary's
Saint Paschal's
Spokane Valley Seventh Day Adventist
Valley Christian
Incorporation Impacts: School districts and educational facilities will not be affected by the
incorporation of a new city.
Library Services
Existing Service: The Spokane County Library District serves the proposed incorporation
area with the Argonne and Valley Libraries and the administration offices in the proposed
incorporation area. (Map 14). The Library District includes the unincorporated areas of the
county and the cities of Cheney, Medical Lake, Millwood, Rockford, Latah, and Waverly,
50
which have annexed to the District under RCW 27.12. The Library District also provides
services under contract to the cities of Airway Heights, Fairfield, and Deer Park.
Plans and Policies: The Spokane County Library District Board of Trustees recognizes that
cities and towns may wish to annex to the Library District, as provided for in RCW 27.12,
rather than contract for library services. Therefore, the Board of Trustees will concur with
requests from cities and towns to annex to the District under the following conditions:
1. If the city or town has an interlocal cooperation agreement with the District, the city
or town agrees that if the annexation is approved:
a. All financial responsibilities related to the library facilities shall remain
identical to those in the interlocal cooperation agreement
b. A new interlocal cooperation agreement shall be executed, reflecting the
change in contracting status and including the financial responsibilities
related to library facilities
2. If the city or town has no interlocal cooperation agreement with the District,
annexation will not obligate the District to provide a library facility in that city or
town
3. The annexation will not cause a reduction in the District's regular property tax levy
rate, either immediately or in future years, based upon reasonable projections
Further, to extend public library services to all residents within Spokane County, the
District encourages annexation of non-contracting cities and towns to the District.
Cost of Existing Service: A regular property tax of 50¢/$1000 of assessed valuation is
collected by the Library District. The district also has an excess levy of .09/$1,000. In
2001, $2,225,000 was generated from within the incorporation boundaries.
Incorporation Options: The Spokane County Library District, a separate taxing district,
serves the proposed incorporation area. The new city can annex to or contract with the
library district, provide its own library service, or not offer the service.
Incorporation Impacts: It is assumed that the new city would anneZsto the District with the
property tax levy paid directly to the District.
County-Wide Services
Noxious Weed Control
Existing Service: The local noxious weed control boards and weed districts carry out the
state's noxious weed law at the local level. Each county board has the authority to hire staff
to regulate the control of noxious weeds in its jurisdiction.
Plans and Policies: The Board has the authority to charge all landowners within cities for
weed control work performed countywide.
Cost of Existing Service: Funding of these local programs is either through a weed
assessment on land or an appropriation from the county general fund. Currently, 45 percent
of these programs are funded by a weed assessment on land. The remainder have budgets
51
appropriated from the county general fund. Whether by assessment or general fund, more
than $3,000,000 is locally invested in the annual budgets of these programs statewide.
They, in turn, direct the substantial investment made by landowners throughout
Washington for actual noxious weed control work. The existing cost to landowners is $3.00
per platted parcel in Spokane County.
At the current assessment rate of $3.00 per platted parcel and the area of proposed
incorporation consisting of approximately 32,162 parcels, the amount for noxious weed
control services would be $96,486.
Incorporation Options: The new city could either contract with the Board to provide the
services at a cost similar to that which is presently charged or establish a weed control
program as a function of local government, either on a departmental or contract basis.
However, RCW 17.10 provides that only County Noxious Weed Boards can enforce the
control of noxious weeds.
Incorporation Impacts: For this study, it was assumed that the new city would contract
with the Noxious Weed Control Board for these services.
Spokane Transit Authority
Existing Service: Spokane Transit Authority is a regional public transportation agency, and
as such provides a variety of transportation services, including fixed-route service on thirty-
seven routes to the cities of Airway Heights, Cheney, Medical Lake, Millwood, and Spokane.
These services include connections between the Central Business District (CBD) in Spokane
to the Spokane International Airport, major shopping malls, area colleges and universities,
and Fairchild Air Force Base. In addition to regular fixed route bus service, STA also
provides door-to-door paratransit van service for persons of disability who are unable to
reach or use traditional public transportation. Lastly, STA also operates a fleet of thirty-
four rideshare vans to assist those commuters wishing to participate in vanpools. Taken
together, these STA services provided over nine million customer trips in 2000, an all-time
record for STA.
Cost of Existing Service: A municipal corporation was formed in 1980, to administer mass
transit services throughout the established Public Transportation Benefit Area (PTBA), with
levy of the sales tax beginning in April 1981. The sales tax is $.03 per $10.00 of retail sales
within STA's service area boundary. This tax, which has been level since 1982, currently
provides $17.3 million toward a total of $41.3 million in operating and capital expenditures
for the 2001 budget. The recent loss of the local transit portion of the Motor Vehicle Excise
Tax has decreased operating revenues in 2001 by approximately $17 million per year, or
about forty percent from 1999 levels.
Incorporation Options: STA would continue to serve the incorporation area regardless of the
success or failure of an incorporation vote.
Incorporation Impacts: The creation of this city would not have a direct effect on the
provision of public transportation services in the incorporation area or on the financing of
those services. Under state law, the creation of a new city within the STA service area
would trigger a regional meeting to determine the future make-up of the STA Board of
52
Directors, which is limited to nine members. The meeting could result in a revised Board
structure that provides the new city with direct representation on the STA Board.
Spokane Regional Transportation Council
Governance: SRTC was established through inter-local agreement between local
jurisdictions, Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and Spokane Transit
Authority under the auspices of Title 23 U.S.0 Section 134 and Part III of the Growth
Management Act. A nine-member board comprised of elected officials from City of Spokane,
Spokane County, and small towns; WSDOT Regional Administrator, WSDOT Transportation
Commissioner, and a private sector transportation provider govern SRTC. Presently, two
Spokane County Commissioners represent the Spokane Valley.
Existing Service: SRTC serves as the federally designated metropolitan planning
organization (MPO) for Spokane County. As the MPO, SRTC is responsible for conducting a
continuing, coordinated and comprehensive transportation planning program that identifies,.
problems and solutions for inclusion in a twenty year Metropolitan Transportation Plan.
SRTC is also responsible for the prioritization, selection, and programming of transportation
projects eligible to receive funding from both Federal Highway Administration and Federal
Transit Administration. SRTC also conducts transportation air quality planning in
coordination with the Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority, Washington State
Department of Ecology, and the Environmental Protection Agency.
Plans and Policies: SRTC is responsible for developing and updating the Metropolitan
Transportation Plan consistent with Federal and State laws and regulations. The plan takes
into account the safe and efficient movement of people and goods into and through the
Spokane Metropolitan Area, addressing highways, transit, rail and non-motorized
transportation.
Cost of Existing Service: SRTC is funded from Federal, State and local resources. Local
funding requirements are shared equally between the City of Spokane, Spokane County and
the Spokane Transit Authority. WSDOT contributes funding related to specific projects and
tasks undertaken as a part of the defined workiprogram.
Incorporation Options: If the new city incorporated, it would be required to participate in
the metropolitan planning process conducted by the SRTC, as a pre-requisite to being
eligible to receive Federal or State transportation funding. The SRTC Board would most
likely seek an elected official from the new city to join the Board.
Incorporation Impacts: The impacts of incorporation to the new city would relate to active
participation in the metropolitan transportation planning process conducted by SRTC,
compliance with the Metropolitan Transportation Plan in the developing the regional
transportation system, providing its share of funding to support the program, and
demonstrating the ability to comply with Federal and State taws and regulations related to
the use for transportation funding.
53
Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority
Existing Service: The Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority(SCAPCA)is the local agency,which
administers state,federal and local laws and regulations regarding air pollution control in the incorporated
cities and towns and unincorporated portions of Spokane County.SCAPCA inspects air pollution sources
and assists with control technology,monitors ambient air quality, and strives to educate the public about
air quality.
Cost of Existing Service:The State Clean Air Act empowers local air pollution control boards to apply to the
state and federal governments for grants-in-aid,to charge fees for certain services, and to assess cities and
counties within the Authority's boundaries for"supplemental income"in proportion to the population,
assessed property value, or a 50-50 combination of population and assessed property value. SCAPCA has
financed its program through state and federal grants,local assessments of cities within Spokane County
according to third method, and though permit fees. Based upon this formula, costs to the new city would
be$135,000 for 2001 and$143,100 for 2003.
Incorporation Options: SCAPCA would continue to serve the residents of the Spokane Valley regardless of
the outcome on a vote on incorporation.
Incorporation Impacts: The new city's mayor or a designated council member would most likely become a
member of the SCAPCA Board of Directors.
Spokane Regional Health District
Existing Service: The Spokane Regional Health District serves as the region's public health leader and
partner by demonstrating and advocating sound policies,principles, and practices to promote and protect
the public's health.
Plans and Policies: The Health District provides a wide array of public health services, such as public health
clinics for TB, sexually transmitted diseases and immunizations;other communicable disease control
functions including surveillance, outbreak investigations, and contact tracing;maternal child health
services including public health nurse home visiting,0-3 services for children with special health care
needs, and health and safety consulting for childcare;women,infant, children and senior nutrition
programs;community health assessment public health laboratory including water testing;HIV case
management;oral health access programs;various disease and injury prevention and health promotion
activities including tobacco control, HIV prevention,heart health,injury prevention, adolescent health,
sexual health,breast and cervical health;methadone treatment;substance abuse outreach and
assessment;public health policy development,etc. The environmental health services include licensing
and inspection of food outlets,issuance of permits for on-site sewage systems,review of plans and specs
for proposed water system,licensing and inspection of solid waste facilities,etc.
Cost of Existing Service: The revenue for the Health District is provided from the state,the county, grants
and fees.
Incorporation Options: The Spokane Regional Health District would continue to provide services to the
new city.
Incorporation Impacts: The governing Board consists of eleven members:three County Commissioners,
three City of Spokane elected officials,two small cities and towns'elected officials,and three members-at-
large appointed by the County Commissioners. The County Commissioners may include a representative
from the new city if it incorporates.
54
›.
PART IV:
Z REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE
0 ANALYSIS
W -1
Z �
Z
PART IV: REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE ANALYSIS
New City Expenditures
Based upon the description of each municipal service in Part III, an example of a new city
budget was developed. The following section represents an allocation of resources to
specific functions to provide the basic municipal services to the new city during the first
full year of operations using 2001 costs as a base. There are many options available both as
to who provides the service and also as to the way the services are organized. This budget
is provided as an example.
The ultimate decision as to the types of service provided, the levels of service and the
choice of service provider for each function will depend on the priorities established by the
new city council. The hypothetical budget that has been created was done using
conservative amounts for both revenues (low) and expenditures (high) in order to test the
financial feasibility of the incorporation.
The expenditure budget is divided into two sections, the first are departments, which would
be created and staffed by city employees, and the second group is services that by their
nature may require substantial study or capital outlay to provide internally. Many newly
incorporated cities have contracted with the county in which they are located to provide
these services; some cities continue to contract for services while others have decided after
a period of years to bring some service in-house. This budget proposes contracting with
Spokane County for these services.
In compiling this budget, many resources were used including budgets from other
Washington cities of similar size including Federal Way, Kent, Everett, Bellevue, Yakima,
Lakewood, Vancouver, and Spokane to analyze costs of providing service including staffing
levels along with the overall scope of services provided.
Spokane County departments were interviewed extensively to determine the cost of service
currently being provided to the area to be incorporated. It became apparent that most
departments other than the Road Department, County Jail and the Sewer Utility did not
have the capability to unit cost their service to a specific area within the County. Therefore,
many departmental costs are estimates of the percentage of resources allocated to the area.
There is now an effort within the County to develop methodologies to more accurately track
the expenditure of resources on a geographic basis and data should be available if the new
city desires to negotiate for services with the County.
Table 13, on the following page, is an example of a new city budget.
55
Table 13: New City Budget t
Ct 't :a; C�z fiin; N f it 4t t 'y�J'"a4i i e :til .x. l'` Y 't i 4 F3"dO:
xpense�r:� � .�t'a��� �r �, !`.�.��� �J:a��.+�:«�+r..� 2001��. 1 _re2003
Mayor/Council $150,842 $156,455
City Manager $281,919 $298,564
City Clerk $160,062 $169,396
City Attorney/Prosecutor $510,128 $540,016
Human Resources/Risk Management $303,477 $321,416
Finance $482,205 $510,417
Planning $481,669 $509,849
Information Services $377,885 $400,018
Temporary Help $91,250 $93,988
General Administrative $236,845 $251,056
Total City Departments $3,076,282 $3,251,173
Municipal/District Court $1,792,732 $1,900,296
Probation $276,682 $293,283
Public Defender $463,413 $491,218
Sheriff $12,236,273 $12,970,449
Corrections (Geiger) $1,223,539 $1,296,951
Jail $997,831 $1,057,701
Animal Control $284,887 $301,980
Engineering Administration $3,063,000 $3,246,780
Street Maintenance $4,065,250 $4,309,165
Sewer Connection Subsidy $2,960,000 $2,960,000
Building and Code Enforcement $805,401 $853,725
Hearing Examiner $81,529 $86,421
Parks $891,964 $945,482
GIS $70,318 $74,537
Total Contracted Services $29,212,319 $30,787,988
SCAPCA $135,000 $143,100
State DOT $300,000 $318,000
Total Other Services $435,000 $461,100
Total City Budget $32,724,101 $34,500,262
56
City Revenues
The financial and tax information presented below is intended to provide the types of
revenue sources available to new cities and estimates of the amount that could be generated
from each source. If projected expenditures are less than revenues currently generated in
the new city boundaries, additional revenue sources will not be assumed. However, if
. projected expenditures are greater than the amount of revenue currently generated in the
new city boundaries, additional revenue sources will be needed to balance the new city
budget.
Table 14: Revenues Available to the New City
Reyenue'SourceigrrVg2001$'sca2u200flguk,,,),120U3',TM��7200,4Mi,„rVIt~'2005ra
Property Taxes $7,120,000 $7,452,000 $7,793,960 $8,146,179 $8,508,964
Sales Tax $14,311,514 $15,027,090 $15,628,173 $16,253,300 $16,903,432
Criminal Justice $1,036,694 $1,078,162 $1,121,288 $1,166,140 $1,212,785
Franchise Fees $385,000 $404,250 $424,463 $445,686 $467,970
Gambling Taxes $875,000 $875,000 $875,000 $875,000 $875,000
Admissions Tax $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000
Building Permits $894,890 $939,634 $986,616 $1,035,947 $1,087,744
Planning Fees $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000
State-shared
Revenues $2,112,012 $2,132,287 $2,152,757 $2,173,424 $2,194,289
Grants $100,000 $100,000 $100,000
Fines and Forfeits $1,501,575 $1,516,591 $1,531,757 $1,547,074 $1,562,545
Interest Earnings $175,000 $180,250 $185,658 $191,227 $196,964
Total Revenues $28,636,684 $29,930,263 $31,024,671 $32,158,976 $33,234,693
lourrsms:, 1144,7 ;42001Alrg::,. 2002,",; , :x20031:EAR 2004 ;; 12005
Hotel/Motel Tax $400,000 $412,000 $424,360 $437,091 $450,204
'=2001sT' 4;`it2002�> s�„�k 20031 4, `o , 2004 ; x" ;p ' ' 2005 rt 4
f Y �. U ` tNi 5 �'l Pt $r
s 1,1�'f y�,Y 4 ✓fki�� �1 u..krt
Arterial Gas Tax $596,820 $602,549 $608,334 $614,174 $620,070
Real Estate Excise
Tax (1a 1/4%) $845,798 $879,630 $914,815 $951,408 $989,464
Real Estate Excise
Tax (2" 1/406) $845,798 $879,630 $914,815 $951,408 $989,464
Total Capital
Improvement
Revenues $2,288,416 $2,361,810 $2,437,964 $2,516,990 $2,598,998
Special levies and property taxes for Fire District No. 1 and the Spokane County Library District are not included. .
Property Tax Revenue
The regular levy property tax is based upon the total assessed value of all taxable property
within the city boundaries multiplied by the city's annual levy rate. The assessed value of
taxable property is determined by the County Assessor. Taxable property includes land and
improvements; and can include certain personal property such as machinery, some business
57
equipment, and non-attached mobile homes. Specifically, it does not include household
goods or business inventories. It is an unrestricted tax to be used for any municipal purpose.
The maximum property tax levy for Washington State cities is $3.60 per thousand of taxable
assessed value. Of this, $1.50 is to be used for fire protection services, and $0.50 is to be used
for library services. If a city is annexed to a fire district, a library district, or both, it cannot
levy those corresponding amounts.
For this study, it is assumed that the City of Spokane Valley annexes to both Fire District 1
and the Spokane County Library District. Therefore, the City of Spokane Valley's maximum
Regular Levy would be $1.60 per thousand of taxable assessed value.
The Spokane County Assessor's Office has estimated that the 2001 property tax revenues for
the proposed incorporation area are $7,120,000. This is projected to increase to $8,508,964 in
2005 because of the general growth in the community's assessed value and new construction.
Property Tax — Excess Levy
A property tax levy in addition to the one cited immediately above also can be imposed by a
municipality either to pay the debt service on a voter-approved or Council-approved
("councilmanic") municipal bond, or can be imposed for a voter-approved annual
maintenance and operation levy. Usually, such an excess levy is imposed in order to
finance a major public improvement or land acquisition.
Leasehold Excise Tax
Can apply to the lease or rent amount a private entity pays to occupy space in a publicly
owned building (or use of land). There was no revenue assumed to be generated from this
source.
Sales Tax Revenue
A sales and use tax is applied to all qualifying retail sales in Washington State. Qualifying
sales include tangible personal property (except groceries and prescription drugs) and certain
personal services, and the tax is applied to the selling price. In the Spokane Valley, which is
part of the Spokane County Transportation Benefit Area, the retail sales tax is 8.1 percent.
A portion of the total sales tax is considered the "local" sales tax. In unincorporated areas,
this amount is imposed by the county and accrues to its benefit. In incorporated cities, the
local portion is levied by that city. Eighty-five percent of the local portion accrues to the
city, but the remaining fifteen percent is remitted to the county in which the city is located.
The local sales tax is 1.0 percent. In the Spokane Valley, this amount is currently imposed by
Spokane County. The City of Spokane Valley could impose this same 1.0 percent tax to
replace what is imposed by Spokane County, though the City would only be able to receive
eighty-five percent of the amount, the balance accruing to Spokane County.
The net effect to the consumer is zero, since the local rate would be the same and the
Spokane Valley levy would replace and not add to the total sales tax. The revenue generated
from this source is unrestricted and can be used for any municipal purpose.
The Spokane County Budget Office estimated the retail sates tax that would be generated in
the incorporation area. With the deduction of the fifteen percent that the County receives,
the sales tax revenue to the new city for 2001 would be $14,311,514. Growth of that annual
58
collection for 2002 and beyond is based upon general inflationary growth in the amount
currently collected and new sales tax revenue attributable to increased business activity.
This is projected to increase to $16,903,432 in 2005.
Criminal Justice
On a county-by-county basis, voters were given the option in 1990 to approve the imposition
of a 0.1 percent sales tax for the benefit of criminal justice purposes. Voters in Spokane
County approved this sales tax for all qualifying transactions, whether they occur in cities or
unincorporated Spokane County.
By statute, ten percent of the total amount remitted to the county is retained by that county
for its own criminal justice purposes. The remaining ninety percent is divided between the
county and the cities in that county on a per capita basis.
The City of Spokane Valley would not need to enact any special legislation to benefit from
this sates tax, since the tax already has been approved by the voters of Spokane County.
The estimated revenue for 2001 is $1,036,694 increasing to $1,212,785 in 2005.
State-Shared Revenues
The State of Washington generates a number of revenues that it distributes partially to
jurisdictions in the state on a per capita basis and retains the rest. The City of Spokane Valley
would not need to enact any special legislation to receive these revenues.
General-purpose revenues to be refunded by the state are estimated to be $2,112,012 in 2001
and are projected to increase to $2,194,289 in 2005; and the arterial gas tax, which is limited
to road projects, is projected to increase from $596,820 in 2001 to $620,070 in 2005.
Hotel/Motel Tax
Local jurisdictions can impose a special tax of up to 2.0 percent on the charges for lodging
at hotels, motels, private campgrounds, RV parks, and similar facilities on stays lasting up
to 30 days. This tax is a part of the 8.1 percent sates tax collected, and the State
reimburses 2.0 percent of the 6.0 percent sales tax that it receives. Use of the revenues is
restricted to purposes that promote tourist-related activities. Revenues of $400,000 are
projected for 2001 and are expected to increase to $450,204 in 2005.
Business and Occupation Tax
Although, not imposed by any cities in eastern Washington, this revenue source allows for a
certain degree of responsiveness to local jurisdictions. Unlike many municipal revenues,
which are derived by affixing a certain tax or fee to a readily-identifiable base, business and
occupation taxes can be based upon gross business income, or other rational factors; and
can differentiate between different classes of business provided every business in such a
class is assessed on the same basis.
This source of revenue was not considered for the City of Spokane Valley and therefore, an
estimate of potential revenues was not calculated.
Utility Tax
In Washington State, cities are statutorily authorized to levy utility taxes but counties are
not. Therefore, the Spokane Valley does not pay local utility taxes at this time because, as
a part of unincorporated Spokane County, such taxes cannot be levied.
59
Local utility taxes can be applied to any private utility operating within the boundaries of
the city, and to public utilities if the public utility is an enterprise of the city itself. No city
can legally tax a public utility that is its own special purpose district. For example, the City
of Spokane Valley cannot levy a utility tax on the many water districts within its
boundaries.
A city's local utility tax levy can range up to 6.0 percent on private utilities. There is no
established utility tax rate limit on city-owned public utilities. The city's tax is levied upon
the utility provider and is based upon the gross revenue the utility provider derived from
sales within the city. The private utilities in turn are authorized to collect an amount equal
to the tax from its customers.
For the Spokane Valley, the following utilities could be charged up to six percent in a utility
tax with the amount for each percentage listed.
Table 15: Utility Tax Revenue Rates
1 /o Tax-i'.r 2%§Tax ., .310' 4"/61Taxh,z3 5% Tax s •6%Tax"
Electricity $427,000 $854,000 $1,281,000 $1,708,000 $2,135,000 $2,562,000
Natural Gas $173,600 $347,200 $520,800 $694,400 $868,000 $1,041,600
Telephone $453,600 $907,200 $1,360,800 $1,814,400 $2,268,000 $2,721,600
Cable TV1 $77,000
Refuse $104,728 $209,456 $314,184 $418,912 $523,640 $628,368
'Spokane County currently assesses a five percent cable television franchise fee; a one percent
utility tax could be assessed in addition to this by the new city.
Gambling Tax
Gambling activity as reported to the Washington State Gambling Commission is the basis for
this revenue source. The maximum rate varies from two to twenty percent depending upon
the nature of the activity (amusement games to card rooms), and the base is the gross ..
receipt the business derives from the activity. Taxes collected must be used to offset costs ,
a jurisdiction incurs to enforce such activities.
Spokane County currently collects $1,000,000 in gambling taxes in the Spokane Valley. The
study assumes that the same rate of tax would be levied; however, with the impact of Native
American casinos, it was assumed that the gaming activity in the incorporation area would
decrease, lowering gambling taxes collected to $875,000 annually.
Admissions Tax
The City of Spokane Valley has the option of imposing a tax of up to five percent on
admissions. The tax collected can be used for any municipal purpose. Counties cannot impose
an admission tax; therefore, one is not being collected at this time. It was assumed that
$100,000 annually could be generated by this source in the Spokane Valley.
Planning and Building Permit Fees
Local jurisdictions can charge a fee for special services, such as those services associated with
planning, zoning, and development. For the Spokane Valley, fees were assumed to be the same
60
as Spokane County's current fee structure. This would provide $125,000 from planning fees
and $894,890 in building permit fees in revenue to the new city.
Franchise Fees
A franchise fee of up to five percent can be imposed by either counties or cities on the gross
receipts of cable television providers in the jurisdiction. This would.generate $385,000 in
revenue in 2001, increasing to $467,970 in 2005.
Business Licensing Fee
Local jurisdictions can charge a fee to license all businesses that operate in the jurisdiction.
There are no set guidelines for these fees. Some jurisdictions charge only a modest amount in
order to track business activity in their jurisdiction. Others charge a sizable licensing fee in
place of a business and occupation tax. Still others require licenses only from those businesses
that have special regulatory issues associated with them, such as taxi services or pawn shops.
The taxes collected can be used for any municipal purpose. It was assumed that a business
license fee would not be collected.
Fines and Forfeits
Every city collects a certain amount in fines and forfeit revenues through the judicial
enforcement of its municipal code. The court system in Washington and the nation operates
according to a well-defined hierarchy, so the kinds of infractions, citations, and other judicial
proceedings that are within a city's purview is somewhat limited. In broad terms, a city court
handles primarily traffic infractions and criminal traffic citations, though some other cases
such as certain domestic violence or misdemeanors also can be "city " cases.
The maximum fine for each type of court filing is defined in State law. The amount that is
actually assessed, though, is decided by the judge - unless a person simply "pays the ticket"
without contest. Revenues collected can be used for any municipal purpose.
The level of filing activity for the Spokane Valley was based upon a percentage of Spokane
County as a whole. An estimate of revenues collected in 2001 is $1,501,575 increasing to
$1,562,545 in 2005.
Capital Expenses , .
Capital improvements are those investments a city makes in its physical'infrastructure that
allow that city to improve its overall position for the future. These improvements could
include repair and construction of roads, acquisition and development of parklands,
construction of sewer lines and facilities, or development of structures to enhance stormwater
management. These investments are as important to a new city as the day-to-day operations
of the city. Because the returns to capital improvements are generally received over a long
period, and because the costs of these improvements are substantial, it is important that a city
plan these investments carefully. In fact, as required by the Growth Management Act, the City
of Spokane Valley is required to develop a six-year capital improvement plan that conforms to
the policies outlined in its comprehensive plan.
While it is not possible to know what a new city would develop as its comprehensive plan, to
give an idea of possible capital projects, those identified in the Capital Facilities Plan for
Spokane County area used. Some of the Spokane Valley projects identified in the Capital
Facilities Plan include parks, sewers, and roads as identified on Tables 16 through 19. Spokane
County plans to contribute over $20 million in local funds for park and sewer projects in the
61
next five years in the incorporation area and close to $20 million in local funds in road
projects.
Stormwater facilities have not been identified in the Capital Facility Plan because Spokane
County has not as of this time, committed to a capital facilities plan that will fund the needed
regional stormwater facilities.
Table 16: 2002-2006 Planned Capital Improvements for Sewers
Sewer Projects °„"Activity, Sla5aT '„; ; Rj W j 2J, iit0411000, jLtocal cost .?
Pasadena Park Sewer Construction $4,776,000 $1,579,000
Woodlawn/Beverly Sewer Construction $3,141,000 $377,000
Hills
Chronicle Sewer Construction $2,296,000 $276,000
Misc. Projects - Minor sewer construction in conjunction with
2002 County roads, maintenance projects, and $400,000 $163,000
repairs (80% of total budgeted)
Mansfield Sewer construction $246,000 $99,000
Pinecroft Sewer construction $116,000 $47,000
Harrington Sewer construction $3,063,000 $1,220,000
Upriver Drive Sewer construction $2,097,000 $836,000
Misc. Projects - Minor sewer construction in conjunction with
2003 County roads, maintenance projects, and $400,000 $159,000
repairs (80% of total budgeted)
Carnahan Sewer construction $2,385,000 $824,000
Weatherwood Sewer construction $3,166,000 $1,092,000
Sipple Sewer construction $2,690,000 $928,000
Owens Sewer construction $411,000 $142,000
Veradale Sewer construction $2,619,000 $903,000
Misc. Projects - Minor sewer construction in conjunction with
2004 County roads, maintenance projects, and $400,000 $172,000
repairs (80% of total budgeted)
Mica Park Sewer construction $774,000 $293,000
Orchard Avenue Sewer construction $2,905,000 $1,099,000
Inland Sewer construction $685,000 $155,000
Parks Road Sewer construction $1,450,000 $550,000
Edgerton Sewer construction $3,497,000 $1,322,000
Misc. Projects - Minor sewer construction in conjunction with
2005 County roads, maintenance projects, and $400,000 $189,000
repairs (80% of total budgeted)
Electric RR Sewer construction $3,021,000 $1,131,000
Veradale Heights Sewer construction $3,598,000 $1,348,000
Vera Terrace Sewer construction $2,232,000 $836,000
Upriver Terrace Sewer construction $2,694,000 $897,000
Misc. Projects - Minor sewer construction in conjunction with
2006 County roads, maintenance projects, and $400,000 $188,000
repairs (80% of total budgeted)
Total Sewer $49,862,000 $16,825,000
62
Table 17: 2002-2006 Planned Capital Improvements for Parks
larks;P,r_olect , „_, 1,Actrvrty,:�, , =�� 'z ��,� , ��� ,r ,Total Cost Local'Cost
Valley Senior Center Construct $1,868,000 $1,400,000
Valley Mission Park Redevelopment $1,000,000 $1,000,000
Centennial Trail Restrooms - Harvard, Flora, Mission Road $210,000 $210,000
Trailheads -
Picnic Shelters Valley Mission, Edgecliff Parks $214,000 $214,000
Edgecliff Park Tennis Court $150,000 $150,000
Barker Road Trailhead Parking lot paving $350,000 $350,000
Total Parks $3,792,000 $3,324,000
Table 18: 2002 Planned Spokane County Road Projects within Incorporation Area
Cost;'; 1Local,Cost
16th Avenue Reconstruct to three-lanes with curbs $253,000 $25,000
(State Route 27 to Sullivan) and sidewalks.
Valley Couplet Construct multi-lane road with curbs
(University to Evergreen) and sidewalks; remove islands and $6,733,000 $1,656,000
restripe.
Reconstruct and widen to three lanes;
Mission Avenue construct curbs and sidewalks; traffic
(McDonald to Sullivan) signal at McDonald; overlay; $3,010,000 $602,000
preliminary engineering; right of way;
construction.
Evergreen Road Reconstruct and widen to three lanes; $1,274,000 $255,000
(16th Ave to 2nd Ave) preliminary engineering; right of way.
Park Road/BNSF Reconstruct and separate road and
(Indiana to Montgomery railroad grades; preliminary $100,000 $40,000
Ave) engineering; right of way.
16th Avenue Reconstruct as three-lane arterial. $1,335,000 $180,000
(Dishman Mica Rd to SR 27)
Commute Trip Reduction Implement and evaluate voluntary CTR
(Sullivan Road) programs among Sullivan Road $104,000 $94,000
businesses.
Various Roads Resurface arterial and residential roads $800,000 $300,000
(Sewer Paveback Projects) after sewer construction.
Various Roads (Urban Resurface or reconstruct road surface. $900,000 $600,000
Arterial Preservation)
Various Roads Minor improvements. $400,000 $400,000
(Minor Urban Projects)
Havana Street (Sprague to Sidewalk $45,000 $9,000
Broadway Avenue)
Barker Road Engineering and design costs to
(Spokane River) replace bridge over Spokane River. $411,000 $83,000
TOTAL $15,365,000 $4,244,000
63
Table 19: 2003 Planned Spokane County Road Projects within Incorporation Area
let Ga n e"Y��e a n s �E,P t r`M1r { {�r a a- s cfra xi LOCdIK` trc
w. � r xy yam,.-.r {� s '� t cox -u- `4 t*Ykl*T �.. � G
Locatron�} ':. x 'i Pro eat al Cost 4 s
' .:t_ �.«..� , •�`ck"a�w'ri"5;,,,.e '. -� •="�, k'� ss>,.�* &-tt ` �_. .T� ''`... r. Cost??ij*
Evergreen Road Reconstruct and widen to three
(16th Avenue to 2nd Avenue) lanes. $1,876,000 $375,000
32nd Avenue Reconstruct and widen to three
(SR 27 to Sullivan Road) lanes; sidewalks. $533,000 $72,000
Park Road/BNSF Reconstruct Park Road to separate $1,480,000 $592,000
(Indiana to Montgomery Ave) road and railroad grades.
Park Road Reconstruct and widen to five
(Broadway to Indiana Avenue) lanes. $365,000 $73,000
Appleway Road Reconstruct to five-lane urban
(Tschirley to Hodges Road) arterial. $438,000 $60,000
Bowdish Road Reconstruct and widen to three $659,000 $132,000
(32nd Avenue to 8th Avenue) lanes; preliminary engineering.
16th Avenue (Dishman Mica Road Resurface as three-lane arterial. $2,000,000 $270,000
to State Route 27)
Various Roads Resurface arterial and residential $$00,000 $300,000
(Sewer Paveback Projects) roads after sewer construction.
Various Roads Resurface or reconstruct road $900,000 $600,000
(Urban Arterial Preservation) structural section.
Various Roads
(Minor Urban Projects) Minor improvements. $400,000 $400,000
Barker Road Construction costs to replace bridge
$3,426,000 $685,000
(Spokane River) over the Spokane River.
TOTAL $12,877,000 $3,559,000
In addition to the infrastructure needs identified by Spokane County for the Spokane Valley
in its Capital Facilities Plan, the incorporation of a new city may require other capital
projects such as space for city hall, possibly a law enforcement facility, or other needs
dependent on the service delivery option selected and decision to purchase or lease
facilities.
Capital Revenues
Many revenue options are available to cities to fund capital projects. These are described
below:
Real Estate Excise Taxes
This is one obvious source of capital funding earmarked under State law for capital
spending. It is projected that the new city would generate $1,691,596 in 2001 from real
estate excise tax.
State-Shared Revenues •
The Arterial Gas Tax is a state-shared revenue earmarked for arterial street improvement
projects. Approximately 32 percent of the new city's fuel tax revenue is allocated for this
purposed and cannot be used for operating expenses.
64
Public Works Trust Fund
The Public Works Trust Fund makes low-interest loans for the repair, replacement,
rehabilitation or improvement of eligible public works systems to meet current standards
and to adequately serve the needs of existing population. It is not designed to finance
growth-related public works expenditures. The Public Works Board relates all project
applications and prepares a prioritized list of qualifying projects to become part of an
appropriation bill to be sent to the Legislature for review and modification.
General Obligation (GO) Bonds
These bonds represent a liability against all non-exempt property in the taxing district. GO
bonds may be issued subject to voter approval, which involves a special property tax levy
beyond the regular levy. The limit for the amount of GO bonds that can be issued for a city
is based on the city's total assessed value, as follows: 2.5 percent for general purposes; 2.5
percent for municipally-owned water, light, or sewer systems; and 2.5 percent for acquiring
and developing open space and park facilities. For the new City of Spokane Valley, the limit
for GO bonds is estimated using the 2001 assessed value of $4,445,000,000 at $333,750,000
or $111,250,000 for each purpose.
Long Term General Obligation (LTGO) Bonds
Also known as "councilmanic" bonds, these bonds could be issued by the new city council
without a vote of the people. The limit in this case is 0.75 percent of the city's total
assessed value (which counts as a part of the GO bond limit discussed above.) In the case of
the City of Spokane Valley, the limit on councilmanic bonds is estimated at $33,375,000.
Councilmanic bonds are a general obligation of the city.
Revenue Bonds
Revenue bonds are supported by specific guarantees based on revenue from fees or service
charges. Cities frequently use revenue bonds to finance sewer and water capital
improvements.
Federal Grants • •- ' •
A number of grant programs may be available for capital purposes.
State Grants
State funding in addition to state-shared revenue and street construction programs is
available on a limited basis.
Impact of the Proposal on Spokane County
The impacts of the incorporation of a new city in the Spokane Valley on the Spokane
County budget can only be generalized. Spokane County will,continue to receive property
tax revenue in the General Fund from the incorporation area at the current rate of
$1.55/$1,000 of assessed value after incorporation. Sales tax to Spokane County will be
reduced by an estimated $14,311,514 which is the amount generated in the proposed
incorporation area not including the County's portion of fifteen percent. The total sales tax
collected in Spokane County for 2001 is estimated at $29,747,807 including fifteen percent
65
from cities and towns and 100 percent from unincorporated areas. This is approximately 48
percent of total sales tax received by Spokane County.
The 2001 General Fund Budget for Spokane County is $132,756,653; the Spokane County
total budget of all funds including capital funds is $234,146,441. The proposed Spokane
Valley incorporation will reduce revenues to the Spokane County by $18,755,392. The 2001
cost of providing the existing level of service to the incorporation area by Spokane County
is estimated at $29,212,819.
Spokane County will lose $8,366,000 in property tax revenue that contributes to the County
Road Fund, since it will no longer collect its current levy of $1.88/$1,000 in the area. The
County Road Fund revenues projected in the 2001 County Budget are $57,970,000. State-
shared gas tax receipts of $2,572,000 would be reduced by $500,000 per year for five years
reducing the initial impact on Spokane County. County Arterial Preservation funds of
$246,500 will also be lost to Spokane County.
Some capital projects funding for the County would also be lost upon incorporation of the
area including approximately $1,691,596 in Real Estate Excise Tax out of $3,724,170
collected in Spokane County and an indeterminate amount in grants.
In addition, the County will lose $400,000 in 2001 in Hotel/Motel taxes in 2001. These
taxes are limited to tourism-related expenses only.
Impacts on Home Owners and Businesses
Property owners will be affected by the incorporation in the amount of taxes paid. Property
taxes will decrease, but the new city may increase other taxes paid by residents and
businesses. Property owners in the unincorporated area of Spokane County pay $1.88 per
$1,000 of assessed valuation in Road Fund taxes. Cities cannot collect this tax and must
pay for roads out of its general fund or other source of revenue. Cities can impose property
taxes of $1.60 per $1,000 of assessed valuation for its general fund that counties cannot
impose. The difference in property taxes between unincorporated Spokane County property
and property within a new City of Spokane Valley would be a savings of $28 per $1,000 of
assessed valuation. If the new city were to provide the same level of services and continued
infrastructure improvements, a new revenue source would have to be implemented as
discussed in the previous section.
66
>.
0
1.9 .
Jy
-I 4
PART V:
OALTERNATIVES TO INCORPORATION
W Im
z g
0 ,
a.
OC.
0 v
Z
PART V: ALTERNATIVES TO INCORPORATION
Governance Alternatives
In addition to incorporation,other government options that have been proposed for the Spokane Valley include:
1)an increase in County Commissioners to five;2)annexation of a portion of the Spokane Valley to the City of
Spokane;3)consolidation of local governments;4)consolidation of services;or 5)remaining unincorporated.
Expanded County Commission
In 1990,the State Legislature adopted a law allowing counties like Spokane to put on the ballot a measure that
would inc rPacr=the number of County Commissioners from three to five. The Board of County Commissioners can
place this directly on the ballot or if a sufficient number of voters petition the Commissioners it can be set for
election. The purpose of increasing the number of commissioners is to increase representation and legislative
responsiveness to county residents. This change makes or provides for no other fundamental changes in the
operation of County government This alternative could be considered regardless of the outcome of the
incorporation
Partial Annexation
An alternative for a portion of the Spokane Valley is annexation to the City of Spokane. The Yardley and Alcott
areas are within the incorporation boundaries and yet within the City of Spokane's Urban Growth Area as defined
in its Growth Management Act Comprehensive flan. These areas are currently served by the City of Spokane for
water and sewer and are a part of a joint planning area with Spokane County. To complete the annexation of
these areas,the City of Spokane is required to have a petition with signatures of owners of seventy-five percent of
the assessed valuation. At this point in time,the City does not have the required nut of signatures and there
is no annexation effort underway. -
Consolidation of Governments
In 1992,voters elected twenty-five freeholders to develop alternatives for government structures for Spokane
County. A proposal to consolidate Spokane County and City of Spokane governments was placed on the ballot in
1995 and rejected by voters. The purpose of this alternative is to merge municipal service functions under one
updated and single administrative structure.
Functional Consolidation of Services
The State of Washington has long provided authority for local governments to act cooperatively by
contracting with each other for the provision of various types of services. Such contracting is possible in
Spokane County and indeed has been utilized particularly between the City of Spokane and Spokane
County on a number of occasions. Some of the areas that the two entities share services are the law
enforcement facilities in the Public Safety Building,including numerous support services such as
communications,police records,property control, and joint jail service. In addition,the two share District
and Municipal Courts services;Public Defender services;Probation and Parole services;wastewater
treatment and solid waste disposal.
Remain Unincorporated
A viable alternative for the Spokane Valley is to remain unincorporated. Doing so would mean
maintaining the status quo, with no differences in local representation,land use control, or necessanly any
change in services. Municipal services would continue to be provided by Spokane County and special
purpose districts. The area would follow the plans,policies, ordinances and codes that are currently in
effect or being developed for the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan under the Growth Management Act.
67
Modified Boundaries
The Boundary Review Board can modify boundaries of a proposed incorporation area by
increasing or decreasing the area by no more than ten percent. Removing territory outside
of an Urban Growth Area must be done first and is not included in the ten percent of land
area that can be increased or decreased. Areas that are outside of the Urban Growth Area
are shown in light green on Map 2. For the Spokane Valley proposal, the total land area is
45 square miles; therefore, the area can be modified by 4.5 square miles or 2,880 acres.
The Board must consider its factors and objectives when making modifications to the
proposal. Some specific issues that the Board must consider when making modifications are
the impacts on Fire Districts 8 and 9 in the case of extending the boundaries into those fire
districts; consistency with growth management plans in the case of including areas within
the City of Spokane's Urban Growth Area; and the urban character of the area included.
The Board has received requests to consider modifications to the proposed incorporation
boundaries and will likely receive additional requests during the public hearing process.
The areas that have been discussed for modification include those described below and
shown on Map 15.
Table 20: Summary of Modification Areas
;-' n ,�w„ r0/ Of to F2a 9207T I 9 3 Y i".' a °# ry„ o. aN 'J.xS'# �; &N. tZ Kti.
T'giy r r { ° Ft ti '€' "�"` �`i '";!! # t,{{ p Ys , dYfa '0 dYa:
an'�t' a £ 5 r r t g:1114;";' ., rr "im t it e d i i F u ?! 4 Nk# o fiery. ',4�, "re., �':..y",.
„Land�� w�tt� tl� Estlmated�+E'>" �i � ���`�S`� �wz1���Fn,�"+�!
r ' f Estimated '"�Housin Assessed!k E y Vacant %-A, " "
Modification'Area ,c"Acres "Area' a iPopulation Units 9 ry'a' ale ,, � "r
V , -,Land, ;.�Sewered?�t
1. Yardley 802 -2.70% 220 88 $139,999,100 35% 100%
2. Alcott 133 -.50% 350 140 $13,339,180 89% City
3. Carnahan 106 +. 40% 577 230 $33,807,920 13% 100%
4. Ponderosa (A) 423 -1.40°/a 1,367 546 $69,454,471 20% 50%
Ponderosa (B) 440 +1.50% 1,448 580 $71,601,221 16% 40%
5. 40`"Avenue 601 -2.00% 259 104 $16,943,063 33% 10%
6. East of Sullivan Rd 214 -.70% 75 30 $6,860,970 42% 0%
7. Morningside PUD 9 +. 04% 32 13 $2,355,300 38% 100%
8. Green Acres 322 -1.10% 348 140 $18,800,350 23°/a 0%
9. West-Liberty Lake 348 -1.20% 302 121 $13,102,981 88°/a 0%
10. Otis Orchards 1,027 -3.50% 1,150 460 $44,871,900 52% 0%
11. Northwood 582 +2.00% 1,646 658 $136,402,308 36% 30°/a
68
1. Yardley
Decrease in boundaries: The area between Havana Street and Thierman Road, Rutter
Parkway and Interstate 90 is designated as the Urban Growth Area for the City of Spokane
in its recently adopted comprehensive plan under the Growth Management Act. It receives
water and sewer service from the City of Spokane and is within=the City's water and sewer
service area according to the Coordinated Water System Plan and the Wastewater
Management Plan. It is predominantly an older industrial and commercial area, with
railroad access.
Statistically, it has 88 housing units within its boundaries and an estimated population of
220, approximately .2 percent of the total incorporation population. At 840 acres, the area
represents approximately 2.7 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $139,999,100, which is 3.1 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
2. Alcott
Decrease in boundaries: The Alcott area considered for exclusion is that part of Alcott
within the incorporation boundaries (north of 16`" Avenue within Fire District 1). This area
together with the area south to approximately 37th Avenue is within the City of Spokane's
Urban Growth Area according to its recently adopted comprehensive plan under the Growth
Management Act. It receives water and sewer service from the City of Spokane and is within
the City's water and sewer service area according to the Coordinated Water System Plan and
the Wastewater Management Plan.
Statistically, it has 140 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 350,
approximately .4 percent of the total incorporation population. At 133 acres, the area
represents approximately .5 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $13,339,180, which is .3 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
3. Carnahan
Increase in boundaries: The Carnahan area south of 16th Avenue is mainly within Fire
District 8 and therefore, was excluded from the incorporation area. It is within the Urban
Growth Area designated by Spokane County. The boundary line between Fire District 1 and
8 is not easily followed as it does not follow roads or other readily identifiable physical
features. In some instances, the boundary line uses parcel lines between houses. The
Carnahan area between 16th Avenue and approximately 19`" Avenue is part of one of these
residential subdivisions: Devon Ridge Planned Unit Development, Heather Park plat, or
Valley View Hills plat.
Statistically, it has 230 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 577,
approximately .7 percent of the total incorporation population. At 106 acres, the area
represents approximately .4 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $33,807,920, which is .8 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
69
4. Ponderosa
The Ponderosa community can be described as the residential area west of Dishman Mica
Road. The incorporation boundary bisects the Ponderosa community at this time. The
proponents used 44th Avenue as the new city boundary because it is the boundary between
Fire Districts 1 and 8. Requests from residents have been to either include or exclude the
entire Ponderosa area within the incorporation boundaries.
Decrease in boundaries (1): North of 44th Avenue is within the incorporation boundaries and
within the Urban Growth Area as designated by Spokane County. It is a residential area of
predominately single-family homes in a wooded setting. About half of the area is
connected to the County sewer system, with the other half scheduled to be connected by
2014.
Statistically, it has 546 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 1,367,
approximately 1.6 percent of the total incorporation population. At 423 acres, the area
represents approximately 1.4 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $69,454,471, which is 1.5 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
Increase in boundaries (21: South of 44th Avenue and west of Dishman Mica Road is within
the Spokane.County Urban Growth Area and is within Fire District 8. It is a suburban
residential area. About a third of the area is connected to the County sewer system with
the rest scheduled to be connected by 2014.
Statistically, it has 580 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 1,448,
approximately 1.7 percent of the total incorporation population. At 440 acres, the area
represents approximately 1.5 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $71,601,221, which is 1.6 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
5. 40" Avenue
Decrease in boundaries: The area south of 40`h Avenue and east of Dishman Mica was
included in the Spokane County Urban Growth Area and is within Fire District 1; therefore,
it was included in the incorporation boundaries. It is predominately vacant and agriculture,
with some scattered residential. It is not served with sewers and the County has not
included the area in its twenty-year sewer project priorities. In addition, other urban
infrastructure is not available or planned for the area.
Statistically, it has 104 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 259, •
approximately .3 percent of the total incorporation population. At 601 acres, the area
represents approximately 2.0 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $16,943,063, which is .4 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation
70
6. East of Sullivan Road
Decrease in boundaries: An area south of 24th Avenue and east of Sullivan Road includes
vacant and sparsely developed land. It is within the Spokane County Urban Growth Area
and included within Fire District 1 and therefore, was included in the incorporation
proposal. The area isnot served with sewers and the County has not-included the area in
its twenty-year sewer project priorities.
Statistically, it has 30 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 75,
approximately .1 percent of the total incorporation population. At 214 acres, the area
represents approximately .7 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $6,860,970, which is .1 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation. .
7. Morningside PUD
Increase in boundaries: A small area east of the proposed incorporation boundary is
included in the Spokane County Urban Growth Area but is in Fire District 8 and was
therefore, excluded from the incorporation proposal. It is a part of the Morningside Planned
Unit Development, which is located partially in Fire District 1 and partially in Fire District 8
with some of the parcels in the PUD divided by the proposed incorporation boundary. The
area is connected to the Spokane County sewer system.
Statistically, it has 13 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 32,
approximately .04 percent of the total incorporation population. At 9 acres, the area
represents approximately .03 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $2,355,300, which is .05 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
8. Greenacres
Decrease in boundaries: The portion of Greenacres within the Urban Growth Area south of
Appleway and east of Hodges Road was requested to be excluded from the incorporation
boundaries because of the rural nature, vacant land, and proximity to the City of Liberty
Lake. The area within these boundaries is predominately vacant and agriculture with low-
density homesites. It does not have sewer service and a portion of the area south of
Appleway is included in the Spokane County sewering plan for 2015; the balance of the area
is not planned to be connected to sewers within the next twenty years.
Statistically, it has 140 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 348,
approximately 1.2 percent of the total incorporation population. At 322 acres, the area
represents approximately 1.1 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $18,800,350, which is .4 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
9. West of Liberty Lake
Decrease in boundaries: The portion of Greenacres within the Urban Growth Area south of
the Spokane River and east of Hodges Road was requested to be excluded from the
71
incorporation boundaries because of the rural nature, vacant land, and proximity to the City
of Liberty Lake. A portion of the area is included in a development proposal that is also
included in the City of Liberty Lake. The area within these boundaries is predominately
vacant and agriculture. It does not have sewer service; however, a portion of the area south
of Mission is included in the Spokane County sewering plan for 2015; the balance of the
area is not planned to be connected to sewers within the next twenty years.
Statistically, it has 121 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 302,
approximately .36 percent of the total incorporation population. At 348 acres, the area
represents approximately 1.2 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $13,102,981, which is .29 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
10. Otis Orchards .
Decrease in boundaries: A part of the Otis Orchards community within the Urban Growth
Area was included in the incorporation boundaries. The entire Otis Orchards community
extends east to Idaho and is not within the Urban Growth Area. The included area is
predominately vacant with a mobile home park along the Spokane River east of Barker
Road. It is not sewed with sewers and the County has not included the area in its twenty-
year sewer project priorities. In addition, other urban infrastructure is not available or
planned for the area.
Statistically, it has 460 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 1,150,
approximately 1.4 percent of the total incorporation population. At 1,027 acres, the area
represents approximately 3.5 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $44,871,900 that is 1 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
11. Northwood
Increase in boundaries: The Northwood area is a suburban development of single-family
homes and apartments on a wooded hillside north of Wellesley and west of Argonne, north
of the Town of Millwood. It is within the Spokane County Urban Growth Area, but because
of its location within Fire District 9, was not included within the incorporation area.
Statistically, it has 658 housing units within its boundaries and a population of 1,646,
approximately 2 percent of the total incorporation population. At 582 acres, the area
represents approximately 2 percent of the incorporation area. The taxable assessed value
for the area is $136,402,380, which is 3 percent of the assessed value for the proposed
incorporation.
•
72
-__„1
r i
I +`,� ,/ 1 '.,l „ I Map 1
I 1
_-n I
- - Spokane Valley Incorporation
i 19 ,. Area and Vicinity
,. \ II . 1 . 7:1—' ________ _
___. 7--A
__ ii \\\ ,'''\ S I, 1 1-' 1 i
, ., _____ __ ________ lu; - • - , . .
., tir Jprll. /moi 1
I It
-r-vd. -- lo-t\ ;- .--- .- 1 . " I -' '
J. 4:' I''/ rqral _ f - 4:::://) "1
•
I-`� ...I •i I I _. _ 11
-25 _ _.-.x1 ;kT
, , I rf " '— J 6 X ) J
-i- -- I - - 1 - !, I_ I ,. ,.I•. I �'• ( �' �•T n -•�.�.,. 1 I - II .---- "r -- r - - - l.,\ n
•
n c
„ I - 1 I hlif to !
r II. f f 1 + n s n n n = 1
-4 1 _
t. it s� . .�m ��� I , I.
i --,11,:\
. y I ' . I - — LIQ•�ri�i xm� �_ n >,,,
I ' �,����� 1! ; ,t rT`t Far::RIIII INIIIIININ/fl'111NI=z s=s="=�lrl� -,111.--:--41:1
--1 a �- - -
1 A I�1 3¢ - ry ..
\ ▪ -1 4• {1.. �'NII 10 EIII IIIU IIW===ir-tir III1 X / I ' i •I I-- '"`--� rr �,-i� ��'« I Iae4 17 Ir -���E=>�€rt��g E3•�� r'` Il.�'�'r - �"dI -----�.v- F �rF
•
rp p INI UN � I�fI
1 f� ��1 .. _ p 10111N1 Ills}��IIii dillFill = �UI= ' - - _� - I -
- I F� ` ': .� III'I�II 11�II1 IINI 1111 I1 11 E_ IYN�PIIFrt . �__- - - !�
� LC.- s I II _ IUII IWFI_,i
° n u I. l1.:'''''
e�> — UN�IINI NNNNIIIIIJ1111`�HI7111� __ —'
.__- .,.---� -. __---__-__-"_— -':_�i . '. ) nnuw��almmm;lKl`s'1 7 - _7 .r I - ,'1� �° ", �I -• . .. _ _
r+___ :+_�— -- I y- _s 1 17 II,.:1 IIF ,i a.! _ - i..=1 -E I'?•
� i ---- ` - - - I li
Ik,YJ ,� �t-7 y" I 1
w _t
i
Millwood ,-
� ,.7.a 1 J s 't. y�� I
I
f_�-eu.— � ';. {9-_- �- •. .j7;1 I o _ ... {•1 I r . ( a I 9•L - i.,/,,,
1
I w-+-. 4.,.. �._,:. ,� I ' •
:..,,^. � rti-__{!,(�u li� -s �,,� - ! - rr• � � - - ..._ -. . I
t - -•` -3.•tia Sil'HJJ ._ ,-=I 4 �. '��" � ' I '�I gr.h �` - {. lir
-i^ ,
,,,.-• - , I : .1 1 ..'. " " .i. w I 3e_. r°'.5�`i is - 3� ?fit a ' �'. t• -.T• __ ' C�ty Of i r.
0 NO I—.-T �r r F '. ; : 13°' t• 'El r I 4 ii,alga� � Proposed City of -`" Llbe Lake -_w ! ,, I
• 44.,----,I — r - — r I i �� kl _, ' ■■.LI`�I'�1 Spokane ValleII
128
1 .� LFA w � I1 'fi 1-,,,,,Lt: -I t 1 .11, __II, 30 - I I _ --: �'�.
�I. I� X v w n 'I ,Ir= ; -1. -��l`tr� r�y��� ��'' I - r `-1 L >,\
w , ,µ., --- )1 , -:�•=t-e- --
LK.._ } _tom ,L .---,---2_,.—g--- *iL� , I- - 'ma = -i• 7�.= ,..aril I - �_.� Y71Ut`I" n� rr
i',,
. yI -_ ,''._ r-iii2 : 1� g-' :a►-- mw, I + u = - ■L Pte'
f. a 1t '`� = � __�.. = 1I� +.,. �C�! A�F ■ = .,_ �_ I
_ { M { it 1 ti , 3 - ,-1 , ; J. �''�'a= It tp , r
X L I ,,{J j � +_ �J
•"� 1• . `I F IF - y F ',I:1
fii ' M f s.YS-; �C a_ r r`ir I`,,,.. *AB re,--,!7"" % � ir11-- P - " . * ° l
d If
_ _ ini� _ ,_ - .�' t 9 a I L ri 1=.=a � 5�s'-/,,-';'...-119;ve��1 t " M��e �_ I�rracs3ll[ X I
- 1 �r I - .-I , /) - - � , e- I '4 kr.,-4::-
,
• g = ,." ,:.�r" # -; f f~.eF N` �" - -- I ire''.. _.
� { ' ---1--• ---k,
i JAY^: 1. tr F� `/ r fr "at 1�3 7_=_r "`. 4- y1 r • -I i--1 l- ,� t
""Kv. YM +F�. d,,_-_� V I...WF+� Itit w , r-.0 1_LS= sS Irl ~s'• . - `-f- 1 Y M _��� \ I
I_'��-,f�_ „ 6;�yK ^ ..y / 1. ,a....--r I--.. Ir-- t ! / 1 �•.*, •-�.IIL I'_gy�--Zr7- - -' _ I �.--.m�
i�� ��l►� �,�[r(4 ... �'._ �,IJIJ`. " / I %- Fir -� - t 5= w \ 1� .. r.- �II -r _--- _L.
'_7--I I---_ _.a.s. •I6. Or41„ 9 }I�- 1 jam..,— C-.,�" �f{ �_1 1 I •; {I ^�C ,� � �:F.. it �!•!,� ..- L
-
H
_ I4.
`. '. .. 1. ,r % =� i`�-ii .— -- .t'.IiC` °;IN1t rii 'it... S'� _� I� y�' -/ g, I r \y- ,- w
f, 11,i • !w-. �' ..1_,,..,1_„...._,,,1,14--.
• .I r .r
slrchild - -- --- -- -. _ ,,r � /, r 1
--- -L�-----�lk�Force B�rer�-- I .., _ rtF �, • 1 ! I,
I
s.
ry 1 ' ` t�
' ' t ' 'I, . ' Li ..". I , i _.,
1 13 { w /1 _ • ' ' Water Bodies
,. '--- -- __ - -C {-_� / �. r 1 _I >.> ,...-.R_ -r, { n�,d `I r1,', 1:;� _ Roads II
Hied sl I, _ w \\\' . a • \ L.--. {. '3711 -- -4,
t Ise II? �8 s..w� s
• v:_ �..� l- I` -- l; �`.. i `'I ,, ,//.
Incorporated Areas
• ,_ Urban Growth Area
I:
T.,-------- / �I ,�. !f-' ) i 1p
n Proposed Ci of Spokane Valle
i, I - w N
fl �J \ 5[�d-' - i n .,\ „ a '�=c-- J t - •� ._! e,. j_J+-L��_ ` 1 0 1'
Il A
Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County Spokane Valley Incorporation Study July 2001
— /
— Jacobs — — Map 2
Lycos �\
I in /.__-- •..•
I ,f-., ,`?`_,,
� C City of Spokane Valley's
_,,
mom T = — Proposed Boundaries
_ IIIP :now
' . Ia.. 11111InsiNN 11111 Ili
-=MM.... :MEV i L„....:. ,, :r-i."' --. (.') ,c3 i
'(( I Wetletleyf
iIIhIVr ! j
•crl g:
■
=^ A■,� �� L Mirabcau :
511111 '1 Li1�— r • '� 1_ Euclid.
0_■m1 .1r1-■�0IC ■ _ Millwood'1 I "
�� ■ ....�r7����1 11 �,�.. Mantgo /
:1111�,111:�p ���C � j" a_
��� �t�CJ1N 1 --1. z 1.
lathe
� .\= = /: _Knox ' 1901.1 .1
"/fr..0 .- C'' �� Trent .A bili
•� 11�• •••�x11.11=AM -- City of \ w_ ,/. llMia.imtMission Igpg. . Spokaaelli
-
...� — �� City of Liberty Lake-
"""CMI IZ - \ % 0 2 Broadway Allo
■/ �" Broadway o % "
�■ n 1 L..
'-
MOM � umein -
- �■�1 �i� a 2nd , q Sprague i J sir._
1mim•m ■
,� ,u _ ■■■ ■■■_ Sprague � c y 4th i
w L- ■■ S
-o "":■'N1iU1�n 4 h '
••=.:11111111111111111111< �! _41WI'''''"'''''''' :1111111111111 —�_ 5th a� 1 3
p�� 11=11=1=■===� L
p.C.I1U11■T.II ■ .� 9th fr c>'
:IYIlllilplll�= m
Ifiiii�.. o
''-z-=1= ii°INI1111�=it. _ :_ 6: 1 sth �,
Cs
�is � '�,� 16th--Ti.,I •
N
o 18th
_ l mi>-=„"1.111121.11ar 1 . 22nd
I.....4
Y l� ������ , - i
lc VII ''". mimeI —
_L-
- �
im
irommori ,
I-tit•M-r- —
——
m�- —sti- sia:in
= ( ------- I 32nd
•
� r _ ....' t- _-:. - Urban Growth Area(UGA)
KI11111 _ 1
/
1SIIII ammo eft ma — Water Bodies
ili 1 r; Aillr" 1�1. �� I � ' : ne
rfill 11111111„, . rr. v Valley
f� �.- -,,_.67,)
_. �; V') Proposed City outside of UGA
i11 iil�:1,�1� J
i ) �� \,.,--
I
r 1 0 1 N
2.
lamffilimmai . _ ti a
Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County Spokane Valley Incorporation Study July 2001
p ,t Parie
-� !� � — _ aav�z Map 3
1111
�• Cultural & Historic Sites
�__r Hi, • __ I
- � II — Jacobs
,� -A , I Jw_ePh
Lyoet
• .. to Park { \___ I
. IBM A u -.,-„
-=mograis nits Mullan Rosa - .-
--r�!' --. ■■■.N • • �t��■smart•
��� i�,i. ■■.tea L�, {' H— Welealey
TIMM
1 =� 0,waBil . �yl lWA •
1 Treat iI i _____
nrlllllN^ce '� J` �'� • A d
Ill 111M1== ts. 1 10 rr,
a._■ ��rr M •
Kiernan ,,�
ries,■ CMN i • .� 1 Aril
� Calr .■. 19•
unuuri ]ttirabesu
r��= Euclid Bur _
���� �■■ Iiberh , /.
�== mom_ _ � ` Millwood
IIl ��� ■tii� 8
.x;111 G ��^ 13 Fairview Z
I■111■■■ ■�!� • kyr Hirkeye Moatgotam j ��
s� Indiana �' 4r
f .-
� .". _._11111111 ■■ !Zn; Carlisle _
oaa m
�`,;xb _ ,+�' • ' i },:nor • 1911 �; Mu��R _ Cit Q. -Y i
o'111.1 ....)..� y�� Trcnt �Lj' �/ �� -
e • • iN=_= No. Mision yam. Liberty Lal e
�il■1(��st�sm Mission �/: �I 1 Va1ky Y
1
i 1�r��.1�■�i" o,aril I 20 Broadway I ���
Isla.-4:=rt; .f■■ r,��y� , `" / 7 HroadwaY . ,il • ad �'apcYwsY
+* st r rEs1 - \ . ager p i /.
C:S zz� - y 11t;a►ie+ &udway - . s =- 3 / 1$. VypeywaY I � Sprague . f
1111'irarre
ta�1111�N11ig i • SPS gIt._., • __ ,
�Illl���� s��All '�s. - • . o p
y • APPIewaY• • _ 4th { Q
nuc uuls�. �■■til, 11 3 14 _ - y � 8th 1
rC� Lllnlllr �� 17 • edt ' '�� 11th )1
=�CSC'1-�-:���.t IIIIN7111,C % • 69th li
`J
liA"—�a-- --�.�IIIA III/��+- Ti -��- _ i
..
IMO lin
•-__s-_n__,.2 .1314: 35=lin nu1111iU11�� / I t _.., i.r -\-:%.
•1•1 ,'714th 4 16th _ i S-` ,� f
_01
14th i
71,_),
a�G _ ._i , it _,. ,_. /' • '�� 1�'� T Ipid 1`r''
==�•■■i■ err—mss■ �� _t__Th . It
25b
A,
■_■■■ mai. ...........,_ L.%/ 1 ge�etariat
�i■tt.........., r7 G•■~t■� r b i ;_ 32nd
'..all Hal.al. r e � ro 32nd •
■■C r Historic
■■ tom T•• ".� �_�_��1- I 32nd 36th (See Table 7: Spokane Valley Cultural&Historic Sites)
rrl
3 ��■ 2=10 ;2901
-������ 3ytd • Spokane Valley Cultural Sites
rn■� 39th 40th •
I
�rS N Trails
3s,h r■ rr 1 —C10'r�' } — �-� ) 2 Water Bodies
rw
-'m ��r ?■�.�� 44dt 46th ' - incorporated Areas
Y \�, r r
—��`11 "' --4th----V _ a I l - f Spokane Valley
j��1111 :E W, 1 Proposed City o p
}- )' of UCCA
1 ` I f' r _- t (', \ i� Proposed City outside
^' 1 N
A
tali
t� 1% , : I ` —. r -_
■ i11� 1 1
1
-- 2001
I
-1l I, �� ; Baer Spokane Valley Incorporation Study July
Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County
1
r. i - f rte-+Y>�: � ,?r1!� ,-'\.•4r NNILt;''Ic- - ' '-1-o' 1 i'�;'. ht' ;�.e ", >s�^t��re rid; • p� l� . �' :.� �' ;Ht.� •
IV.r7c%G�i-�!'- vv - , r �,,,, ,i. lil c, �5.`` r. ` �...+1; t it-Cr
.104,
� �1 --. do- 0.-., :4_t.,..1,..?, a`
�; ,� ° �� ; C„ f, •_, ,,,,,,t4,/,i,..
�,�,.;�r ►:.. - �,.- t zt ` :t.,� Elevation and Hydrology
..„,,,,,„„.......,472,c,, st/ lnt �L" ( iyi .,., , ..
4)N rZ __ 1� ; is _ U _:,. rr F
...r '^'%�r���I / i '�t1.l t...-.„ ,i41,4 ilt ''''( 1, I ' •r •�� ' y.r V AIL ".r \'r C;,•., ` _ ��liFal�� -
Aw .1 fr R�((C �<. i • % ✓tom, :____. A\�.cs_ 1'y n -
11 t� � „JJ((((()ff) +�,�' ` pIiti1i!
it amMU IA�1 iii '- 0 Y "Y > `�� `, �t�� v 1' a11:',i rt y ..:M�', ,.+- r , •�'. a \`l)si`SCc'"� - /, ,,_�
. .,
L
" 4==�-�.11111krtu �+ ,F'
.,r ■..11ric+M� • '7'7--''''•.':.' '."1;""'.4,71-11;''-i P$00Grial . .-4111 i r II 01111111.P.1
0.
, .,01- 1 , :-Ili 11,1
• If----- -�C_,- Hatt:: . � �`;4. - ',� •41W 111 '
,.i.' :rrr�r ,., . ` _ - � � ,� Irl �1 `t�i •V_ ■rl IL
j „! ��
cpr `�'--.� .• -�1� -r' '� ,.R'�• .r �r�-J� �itl■.� _ J•r, w i
_s.ilim�l / .• `}' ��`.� r f.:6' _-.4 * t7 > L`- _ .'� N r�l�,I> y'1 r..
lig-:;----1511-.11:1712MISIENt-211�- -__ =sf�s .r �' ��� �Atr► �t,� ter►- - �� r �� h� ��E
1111111 ==p"'=====IIIIIIIIIIIA'JIAII___ '"�' ' � ��'� �. ' .L"""•� �i�
_------_ =:mill,, i3' t r �'S,' '"-'`` ; •'
InAI�_w_�_ _==uluuuul�nAll _ � r • is .r �1M► - t'.,�. �� Yi �1
01----,-----.-a.--,-111....,.....--.2:1 [1'�__rn • �� ¢ t a-wa .. fit
..- _-_pt__ a..r ,•r .i. .�t�. 11 " W \
�f • ;~-`l I` _s YJ111111.1114 I cam+ `.t 1Y ispa- 1► "` _ i
111118-----3®- ---= _�8� 7!�1■r (I �-- . ■..■ sr, y! r '\ �c:�I1 l ( l
t,,.i= 1.--_•a-_--•-_ �■■rr _� , �-«f / ....■11111 p!
1•:1-11!•�S=_�=-"= ---tn:�� A:�1,.=='!'_ - .,;•, i_ yi1111111111 I��...�::F■�.r.`•.♦i1f � . '1'
Z.e�� s..= =R!ltll�■■■s ■ _ + ■srr I .r. rry �- �.a0. - -_.. 'c5=a�n�n.lnle>ewt:■ilw _ "11-voi, + 111>?.■ii,111► ►s. ■i•a�....m. �ts ,c�(----- � � f i.►i - _. m-ac.= .=„ate ■ ■r■RA� - EiI '. ,■era■.fikaw■/a■ * �� ivir1 - ` refr Ilri.,-- 911.11.,-
AL : t y y. .� �.�t/��� r
1, •-�=¢s giii e.■hill 21011_u� -1� r�/a�,Mange p.... �'' r�rl.,•� �t ! ��
lO.
ip, --y@2 %,,It .. ■.:.....----w�� 1 •..'�... ! ..--fi ', !��'+�{
r �f
a+iil�tti .ylt �lt®a®11111111--.. 1�idCa�.�..li '� - _
1111111 �` I�lenv■�ws IGsr•-'�S1Yre.a. r.■ ,: ■- "'�"�� '•1���=- �_,`,,`,i�'-� �� �._.jil,_ r �� �r J`i
111/11111 ,ar i 14_
1111 unnnu■mlr"'511 ■�-::alt111111 // - ��trsin ..=1;o= Jllll� ,��11■r1. �C=lwsomia + / y0_t■. LL__mom. {�'- �i1�1 111 ' �y �-' . i■ �'� *�. �F�r ,■_a--! ---- -=_=�f '® rim 1 - ii="111 1 '!' rri �: -r .. ! _ .' `-`- ''T ` _ =� ► 1 /'iter'' ji. 1'� i;ter■., ill __ _c- �I .;�::'7'1 S � .t r�""" _ =
='=e ' i� Gi�Sr�ktia. �1 r-- r .�.+.� ',rs =�.,�^� .1'.
, !I/r �.'4�, •fir►;..•
-=1� ^''-� _ - 0*, 111 nuraJ - / i�IVr is71�11, •I•4111��� >•r ir-,,%' `` �■ .-. g•le,111 = ,''
■.. __==1 alli•p,.► ,.� - ...NI 9y._ �' i ti1-`�--,_ .1- -,� Ti>.. � - ,,, n1
�men ;-.--=_i . - ';_:: r;tile�.'ter 'ie���*d ilr /l�i� ��.c� ..� :� 'rr�rl�l/• i - --�` ��/' h�r�Or Ott., :�
'1�►1N -.e: ^� C: .r/�/��I -4��'_ ,rrl 041-f.�■.�_, . [ � �*1arkrIS - r Iilp- �/��� _gyp
lir N-a-__IAC= / 's=:-=_.e===• `!.4 �o 2111_.■':!:. gline]griif.-Ii-1 `4 �i'1
ibli alll`■ r •iii,i, --_= lir fr:1y l�r iso!t. ■�' � adrii��•'� • ` Nwalla' N=ta■ li ���iri�_ ■n�neek �.� r ,,1+1Ii .Y\ lt•.
' - 1 r� 1.1,11�II�� 1 �!� .�
...rr_r
u_ir
:1 sll�i:� _ �, _ ` _ _
J G - _
11117C
c," , ftitlE�i .2......„_-,...r.:=, M [testi. ■', i1 ■� iFsf�L��I�C.� -
' .� alt- owit
�- -ems I 1171- aump _
tJ- 1111•II1N11 1111�Ir+ www.+rrn.■`��...,�. "',�a:�.�.���c� -�►,i■1 �=- \4 '-•, .•a � 11 L `.t1..1 ;-.:'1 -- �`PI
a.i .---"Z"'"'''=::'
-��? _�:r=_--''-�A1181111 -�
........n.... .„■'w .7....„...._..., . „' \-` r. -_ �/ r
..�in•nu■1 °,-_r��._ � - "*! Yr--•r► 111 1 '�� �� I !, w�7l_+rl� `�i �,
� singablii� �1--=- _ _41'!"-!!-_,,:::-:„7..=r...,....aan = - =1c� c '. ` X � �.- ..!�� ���I.s'El1•■l-; -.masa � ,1R' - 1� � ,rl'' ,..„.....4: . 1.
CC71R.�r-:r�ls;�i�s=`--- x�111.1,j�11r :- -�lil f'°ir. =�m.r. . \ I i f�r��r;tlrlf""' -' =1. -� �1 -'
e•--r_!■11111 �- - _ -_- Iilsu■ .IA161� - � 'Q Ic -�r ■.■yilar \�4,i.It,w./�_,^��-.■.�.rrr�' ■■� ,,,....mill i ;j al ���vn- ' �\l•�\ rr,••�E..
- - f:: E111{Ihllllll===� rt..� ► gyral■ ,■l„ ,wsi��lr �n iR.,_llfi!�I �' ir. � � J`1
1112110116111114,'"' - _In-7411:1111111 .� b_ „■_�.... Ott c��, I �,iC/�1, �.�. t_ `== , �rr�i0 ; r ,,_ , . ., � ,: q
Y_11�d1 �5 ■�n■■■■■��/ � ��' lii" �.'Ial lr 1 d e 1` Iii",1 1111 AI `•2.i`,. t I . , 11wi
c3,�a '� _
- ='9MI■i r��r •� �� _ ,•. ,.•,�r.�i a` - r�wyar: 1.�1�11■A�{� _. - .0 ♦ .1 ,,,,,•!;...,,..!..14,..` - _ �•�=' /J -.-pox,t i y
�-.. �• t,.,.-r-��r►r+arr. Ii tori W � ;:`� ;.... .�r,■.a■.��r3�,M 4R' � it '� r.l... ,'� 1 �rp )7,'-,,,ap,
. - ., � r •;;1, � _ -"
.fir. ,�6 �r���rr=p [.i'.r►-c5�.�} r■■ r ,1 � ►:.¢�.w�� �,li _ rb i i l \ �- �5
` I f 11..
/N.� tCr•�. _ 1 y9'r'RI - .•E u.-_� , �� \G.,. .ar►1.431 \� ■11■■ �! ti1ir�1,� ` l 1\ .�/ �` 1 r �+
•a f t►r` V.r r,r�ra. _ l��� `` 11• s:n.n�wa �„ iyr. \,� :'T• 17.+� `�i � /� r�^•1 1 7rr1".,4,
t�R9f,/t1\' 1 ",rr r'fia,&-ir .. 9 F �/ f} r �`�.► .' 7w �`� r�. 1r
■.ems-.1r7i'1•_ ,re� a lrfi■■as � 1 ♦ l 1 �.�� `� r w�II� �J�I Cf;[ -
.,4 t 1LSGi....q Y.� lz,,,�=-^3[a °. .tsr� 1■l.r►-.``:. w .T ��,. �� 'Tl i� +•.,
�> ,,d v i !A'r,';` - t ( \ ��. -��"a1t �Jllr_ I �� \ 't1'; 11 ;dt1:,,.
r■---- trr.„. •
... �z s�� �"�-:.airis:.a w.'m �,k'��: `� . i:...■.p ..IRI«, QI /J. l'. �,`
r ...Ji rrair■ �' ,-.&.,.. ;;;I--...:41,� (Il` 1 1��4-iA `1",:="1 illifi‘A'4,1-..
liv`
r� jt • rr.�'rrr .t 1 . r r- . \ 1� ►-� w +, ,1 ` ;, .,.. o v■0s. i � , mii,.e,' `l7, ���.a- trr .■►-+ 1 llf E . 1 �1 `: G 1,:r'�~`firi1i%i!�` �i.4 C:, ! r r r..uscp a U/ 1 / z:-ar I ` �ra� r iS:��' �� _ o._ 7� ►.�V■'� r fS� u��Ir rivic,tiaR M1 r• ...� �'1�� 11�� r fi-.' ��+( rq� ci 11 ♦;',.1! -� �r� •It, �r;� ,� +,� °r (lZZ( <`. J SIr-is�� 1 ,F 11 „._ -
-d [[ GG y [moi L ,rr�T 11� - _•�
��TQt�a,a.0 7''. �'tl� y ..a,rc .7 Il�l1�!". � ' ,j/ ';1�,�.�t'f/J - - ,..�.. /�'l .$ >�r�- ` rte
_per avomir rrr_ i r 1.C�1ia110 IAAIti - C\, Z r 1 ,
�.C��II'II:•_ms's+�_ /� 1„ rte , r �1' ., �� A J411.1 �, ��`9'L �r ^�111.0
��. l� �,
ftt.,:.-----.
. .
\\t‘
lRl ►!i' rlr.�s�"� ,,ry lu... 1 ,�� �; ,�/
16,01.`:
/ IP���rl l.l� - ,, Water Bodies +
'i--?...7„tlw7r1 21wrg._� (C..,••••,,r,i)A,k ,'.!
t' `{� �•\lni� LY�l�. ;�, 1/ ,_ .tom i,1�i �j, h ,: .
e,,....,.,...„-=_-.=_-_-_-:.._,r,„,= ' � .i r� r4 ((lr' l ]CICO orated Areas
1,1 �r■■yl+..,,......a.,--_-_,-,_
- e'�-- itr,:�4. it/�f� 1'�! i„11= .i1 ..ii
-� ! 7/
•+ ■■.i /' �4 w.�rev/;awl �, ( ] •Y
+1ql�vim. /�.�ll N/�' rl�t {I �t�.,...-1L., - - 1.I � int•»■@ ����F.1 l A-- IT
a• ( 1 ..-
----Iv.
. ••,• Urban Growth Area
...T,N".1:0yl I ire „ '' .C;\�i3' �►� r�I
`' ✓1�5 ')a d
�I r , i S `.^ �(C�( II'1';`r� � r�l'�. .: 4 ,I ,�5 k;• ,���eiN 1✓ Proposed City of Spokane Valley
1��/f es `1,, r f��: 4( �}l� T '1�i � '!N 1 +/ `' 1
�� �� L- j' ♦ ",;,,:'---,•,',,••• V A y ij1f� i''..:-.71144111137-",1.4V, 47-:-...,.....-.'.,•i c` v �� i. ' � � / Streams ,
•- ,: . --'''.f . • _ '1 �. -1.,...(c111.44 .- .•'! 1 i y L/ �/
"� „ f t' . ^ , .. Contour Lines y--.: ( 1 es(Elevation)
1 �s /� e-
''' `� „ f S t � f ill �' r 1�}
`' f i r> 11 � � t r , �. 5 s� :. r ` Glenro Watershed
IT
��*r /yr. �1, ' �,�i i - �, r yti'11 : ++`(y� t] .1riioit -�" Wetlands
�l`SI(�}y'. • �.f��ir t �7�ra'111 1* I.. I- , - '_ - , f 3.,„-,,_•-,....,,,,,,,„,,.r,-` 'P, J / �, .4 -a�
• • 7
ob �.�rl ..4r; 1 , • Erodable Soils
Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County Spokane Valley Incorporation Study July 2001
— -- -.
1 i
07,111011
rrin
xi "A
rip.:441411
E.^.11TINIIIMI
INISIMIlarril
•ii.,--••
.":17."1111
PLIA111
irilli• ''
Tar et-
F riogi es•
. • . . 111-4,,...01,‘-- j
e--\kr111111111 I
-
31. ...ALIJA .10,01, .=.-- -'''.1
. • . I e . I 1
ri101 AIII
,-- ii,t-0.1,, .,.........0,-,-,,, •
,..„....._„. ..... ,r, ......, ,
0,,-
. ,.._ ...deral Nil i_ Map 5
Land Use by Communities
11' tri11111.11111
..... .iii --
ph
=iruppl, 7
tt,,,atomorilF ,
1- gm 14
1. Yardley
1111"Plripipp---____,iii riores 1 . '
wit 2. Alcott
tkv.....,„ •Isi 00.-to., .• i ,... .
.' moo r . i4114,10 3. East Spokane , -
Ig --2 , - iiiiiimbri ,04.00e 7 ipi _Now - Ai i _
4,111.1._ it 4. Orchard Avenue ,, -
as.,..- • . ,
1 :l'All II. . ..4-ipiis. iiii- ,Aasai.e.- --, ---• }IIINF
1 ,isr. .11, iql stguill.‘5=„1,21.,10 ..,' im. ..gls ir- diWiser-z,la _...,
im AI : - ,,;,',1A 5. Northwood
own-__ an wvrviorar ow
or.::_•_,.-= saniormwo rr,'II 1— ,..,..P*4* .S.1
ipply•iur *lir in, -„, 0* ,, 0 , , lc-. - 6. Pasadena Park Ilirli °H. 11111
tr. • ........: immirort1111 I _.,04111111116,rs.ar vili Y4
1..4.414.,........0,70.- • -211.1:6•1.0:41 ,,.11.00 • 4-t' lifr irlirb . 7. Irvin
,
11.:•.... ir R.
_ , #011 1 : iii*l11-4,1:17').164.5/:41
craimlAra, al - -4011 LAST 'Ir.441,6115 41 ' '
Al vies- -- --•-• -,,, H 1 ElLit—LI---
I ill gill 1111-mirL71 , 8. Opportunity
vs a..-_,4u:-;.•;mai..."- ---11.------.
'111 ,-rmorr 'Th- "Ill;' c‘ 'lliCililea. irAls ' 4 tit. 11 irii ii
9. Chester isre'r
.. •
1- iiiiii li. ' aimisr% Aka et.,i,if_rriiinsi 11--'---2.=. - ..,--,,,..4 .Frn alai
• It. .....vim
wIrill" - r ' lir MEW N 1 wo S WM
. - d Ifl MI s . _ ..
•r--11 weal „„ -.. -.1-41;/ ". I NIN1.441:41111_, _j•
aim%
117-"r 61 10. Ponderosa
11111_-_„-_--. ---- 11. Veradale
ilarfdri 2. muiroipproli ____FAIWII , i nr.„_..,,,p rimy 4. , • dimv eivi II iti__--..... . ' NI-11,11. '
PI 46 .
lir_aim ILIMPION. ,. _a . ---_.,_ --11
li jog...i at I E___1,9 . Pr..i,, on it 4311 ir-1 raMilli '1111,,,ANE• Fs a gi ,, 6 somodoma oida.,, 12. Mirabeau
,Pip..61Q• i _,,,,„.,-••• - 1., _ • .,.. 1 —.
I Rail 111 PI 17216.1 - I SIMS ir-11 ,-,
IMPIII • ogm'm- .1 Jr-Li KrZZAIII Mir".""WPOI; 117.I I IrrilicijA%nom 72•11101L1'?------ 1,_ 13. Trentwood
4"''''''-±1- -t-I±-- 1 ' ''-11 imihipla F ri PM 'Pffil"t* 744.1111a ilinpliki,F41111 ...J I,al 1,.a . tip-dr----------. - G . mu=
...„ anaist-.- IA_ 11111.1.1galetAio._ irgirrunerrianprzcipiturr •Plirt.twalli(7.11:10.1--Al ria,
IlliPTNI" LA 14. Otis Orchards - -
ierwriiil
....,..-... II .
1111111;011rpr--'-'1 -
'Iron - . - . 151117141111Iiir4.1_'..:".,, 7161117,..ciaL.,-911-a. • „,:
ragnodavi, —
imlie 4 i li 1 , _ ,w.,....i,, iiialF4"1'AM& a rir°_sr 1 jp1
.--rdwi,i v:irstazilmr-LT.Illibr L-__, _ . Vir-iir _Lm,-me.ir imair an*imam 1 soy i an wire ra4rki,,,,z,„,-..- ii.1 ti...2.... Immo ., 11 •
ownili•-=--41140 lv.-- lrfusissir. L
1.'•ifia.1.4..-4,..__ail, implirmr-Rilim •:- '-itill 1 i IIMB A turuN iircausire ii car, lc, ar.,:., ay
-,. , ill
imm0,-=....;--,...77,,..„..„ En._.L......_LL _........-___:A.-,' ,....?,____Lom. mili.), sr 6 L rir.s sii 2 4.
iin-fraiiiir-1--„,-=:- W‘ill'heti,1711 aliMagaraN !''''' 1111111411 7.:11r541111."1111"liCiar 1-iiillt Ill&X-T-- • -1.1re i; me von rill 11
Illitaz..e.wri : lig . p -Immir.ma me ,
es,
A vimi.... -.... .Pqr-AINNIM ,r,i a 10-- ---sorinflA .
itiolipi 1==:....„ Aumm,s4,111,01ii.trigyinwourmsam „jar, Prerrys-Itior T. _ 1 C=I Sub Areas
-1-11.146 maw 7rrowslamw"°' i it maw,air _ ,a , 4,,,, la , , .,
I Imv r" 11Wwirr•we: ! ri.1Pii EMI il
.poliiiiimilMILITM ./*
. .. i : iii.irsirriasIMIE* r
l 11 Water Bodies
4
rpm 11,1111111111hArz l' IV 0Ifirriiirli 13r i-Jrnr 111W5- ' guy
WArild1711 L.-EiTE AI 1,-..,II "PI _ . •I
Schools
.eliri— li '''''Itt ' MUNN saimMeill• •
ilirlitilr",1!i' 4 7-11-.;'4- dr-Tif ':%,4 , \\-,"."am till It: tail..1 mr"IN1111.4 .irr'ir.9 pis , , i r M,,
t minim iniovsir ih_ ger1114111111.11111,40, ir,114 ip, I. 1 ortre....., ill /\,/ Roads
iii- -,..... . ‘. ..,4,4 , . . 14_ AL no,,a,,,- womoor7wa_..„0,w Arg• • "Iiiitioltirm,wish,,,,. ...e . I= Incorporated Areas
OMINNI•11 inim. ...till i Nilli . ma\t. 2411=grra TAITIF-1104, imilL•Will &-iii7WAZI "OM OF ji,. , 11
-+.4 '\1411117•7412• —91`!".1;- ' to,X•iiiiii I iiiiirmL ill tit ft. ,,,i1 Land Use
animort,..mirvilip4 :i
_ 1111PPI6-, A NW
wr 3.1nrSiOssio..=
is
MIIIIIIIIMrrllIlr
MilliMilliir Ir. . ,
rruiphirr la . • -
• riaorrersomr,_,. -simmuy,i,',A14\,. riFir ..
urrsWia Ill 11167inig#1 Ali^—vis r i . wil,.. ,,
=I Building Permit
I= Conunercial
: csmCuit:eniltuti Cultural/Recreation
loam-um.dr
imuftrz-7r-'-,t 7 VirKrrsx*Ii tea r i - 11111
III. Forestry
marrnagranza. _
1111.11rammoommm _ Industrial
Mlinfai 11111ilinsmo ,
MIWIMIVISIWITIIIR .
.,
1,
---\'.} I: VPMuianbclianncral!SpalReiniamceeli Public
1111 NEP/ . " ' -TNII : •
..-_----......7,;-,Tirsro
--pdairlIMIIIM ,
Ilk
wr. 7:„. --,1.,_.11
map
il dirrappri .
. Mei,"'" ,'' 4,) _ 77, 11111ri
ft AIR'ai •
lial •.• -A miliwi _,_ ,
L-_,..111-. ---ir•Ii., 7p1 r..0114.-- !. CIIIIIIji 1111119111. i 1 L., v Single Family
Vacant-Final Plat
.i. ow- •
Sili ,
lre . .. :
. , , .vervise, .
Pir":11V I. "I1' Vitt
A \
\-n't I
OW'
- ',
- • i
L
11.1 Vacant-Improyed
1 16- 11110/1 •# i,. !
/
1 ,
Mil Vacant- o Value
IIIIIIINFIL _ I
: IMI Vacant-Preplat
Vacant-Unusable
'
" 4111111,- . ,7
eft,••• N
1 ‘. 1 0 I A
. , 2.,....,......
Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County Spokane Valley Incorporation Study July 2001
I
1
:• r Map
s 1111 2002-2003 County Road Projects I
' r 1111 y .1l:.yi .' 4T. Sw� - _ t•r•
� �rr
g_
ii:i.
JcSa is ]� a :.►• �. f� Alin
NI
71.11.
Iy. �.71111.15111 in
w� k..h!!!
��� lY�i atl , ,, CIII
I11:11 {� '' ` %
m— C ��= _ ,ti°t�As!_ ■� i•' it r'
. .7, c..±,.
VAINI • ,..:. iilII
:i �l ill = 7 :,.i 'ask'A'
• .G,1j. 7 1i 47' �.EIS , t4... AIMPRIC Irk
lLfl , {1Ib \ .�t,, WPM , , s �,, 5� ti
•M IIrbilla�'� i Wait-
4�r 1
Mil '"•-• 7 1.11���:, '� {,, y. .hf . 1l'I t:.,. WM , 1111 ' �.�
Ho `70{:1111 �� r �r.
111111101_, 1 -!!��� i..... iW� :11 11 a. `' f,n
11•.�
i7� - _gym' aw /-�Ir/'��rioyer
�+� 1//1��! �E�'�� .";I�Isr,�*s>•!rrrr �,•f �/ t
—moi 111151147,111111'r �' -44lini. s .-,
Ji`�L� � � - `� ,��"tea
11 ; 111 _ Ns
��� �3 .,�i:: ,{�ri� •
Vill}J��. , !Ell. • ,1 C�, ` _------ 1,1�R.-_�<__ _-- ='�71", Pk - �.^ y,
1 ..• • .,...,,,_-
_I. 11 i,i14'• ���S•%!., s _ L."jam :i g�,,ffT :tel 1'� { 0 • '_ - - - --- ....,11,.. .""
..,11 .' ili ;tom: 4 t k .1
mordild NIL
yrr
.„ i
' f v.• ;��t ' 1 ix,„,...
���' . millrsc + iL-,"� � { ,, :�^4.7- i•I1. f7i�"r • 1111
mom
■�'' •^' "'r` G nminomrc��I......amid 71111 r 1111. �. :,i. F ';7 E =MI '�1' r..-
' lli'.. ,..ii riii
,• 1111 ` ,:,. `�'!/j ri1 .r' ! / ,,:. r ' J!Jim
� __ r�'•
fn ���� ,� Ira �� rilret"*.am—
minnil
I �■;'� -s;
1111111111111111111. ,:,
:,., • ..-caw �.r�/ is.-/� . 1 ... 110.!..1,,..'4110 s y
;mac-'> �� l■ 1- wit. �'� ��. :--- miiii
�iialS �� inni � uta„ - l� G� �`' llirg, ms's
Emma aliViii ni opti ..r . ett, �` ir.�a •: �'• •:\".y i
S
:41
11111 , MIE. 10414-------.1 . illnallpillgrA•
osi gym rm.:
ririorigra
....2. 4. -lril - • . amallimililli. ...Ilk wirialiw• 1111%A P-Z ;,..
Illi �.itrt.�- tMil l _
email ii, ::�- "w-mill% �•'.ilrw�� 11 ..��w'. -us ".,immil♦r i iii
- =: "-tel-- . ti�wmfi7 ► ,
{_iii . —_- i ,rV� .i.� ■ - .�- acii„rrllsai.w!.st4immilmicia � �w�r=����� ,1111. �;+
P 'f ilk
MIMINIIIIIMIS
ILIMP c 0,
�,—+rU.,..:a ,.1111141116,41,3 .. ut■ .-1111 R �� �.,. � �� ....i l ell"rig
_
Egli 411 NM
C�/Aitrscaa _ -ski„ ■..1�-■� � '� �� + iii .�. •=I.NW 0i �. ;,:
---rrat,..
! 1 r\ J
lf1:lag-111^1a ra N �rr+�s�, n1>• 4141 ka mostmimm.rmlisonsitt... ,.., vorMiti r Mr 1
,fit y
1111.1
11101. aMIIVA,, . o 1 MR
iiiiiiiimr,wir I_Ati ,
11111144Z 1110fAl MO.
MININIMAIElemili
.4.12132,417 lit,, .."ITIM410:411/dir 'fril' ;
. '' '.. ' iglf 1.111.1ballal OVIMI.1.11,1114,Sh lilloW 1 C. ”
.'c '�wRr':.. TWATIZILIF-di
rIw11�011 �■�
iw�[�r�i'iw�w ;17
or.4:1.,mmr+ � k�_ il�•7 3 141 Water Bodies
"74ALL r� ' W B di
i� Ii�P%.: _ / V
wino rmill1.�riMi L.111111MIIIMIONPINI 'C Vol-z-*Atini
County Road Projects
w10'4�rMn�r+�r• i. '. /V
-=,==� �� _ ,O - ` • v� Proposed City of Spokane Valley
aii_mg' � Ilig - ohm 7� 11
t.:211: ,
. ,;,;�� 1; :. r� c y,. _ Incorporated Areas N
�� 1 A
..., .
. . ., .,.. ,.„ 1 0
w lc.
`► �y�=l .Glen = ' h tr. ..,.., �'. ...
Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County Spokane Valley Incorporation Study July 2001
Map
T- ,/J---,-----(71 - Moab Irrigation District#20. ,.._,_ ,
9
+ Spokane Valley
d r—�t�� _ � I Water Purveyors
( \. ( I
- , \• y
h 1
fount St.11 k ae s :
ti
I I \ H I HigclnW Cilli L.. i I _ )---Imar a
I
._--,' VI IL: I .
l - I f.,,,,,,,,,...„ , Pioneer
m.o..SEEM I r r...s - Pkasaz:'i
Water Company r "
-rola Water..-- -==s1aintatemyri2 .11115 Dist .Duttsi • I •
—�"r yi. , ,
Consolidated Irrl tion
- ....um _ �,�■ A--" Spokane District#19
-111LInun• ■■ ( u 'r' Industrial
==r---,=---= SPark
.......,-... ...-c.,.... ..„.._ 1.1a,_-,..?„ll
Nw:,t.;,: Trentw0dd-- J
L---.7-5=7_--.474r----271211
_�_: ��� C:'1— \ ., '
Millwood Irvin Water _
n•uu - District#6 I .
.�a_�.Ezr,f: 1111ps = =- �.► Orchard Av �,
`'II1� ■ thief =' ti11Z�v ,n brig.Dist.# �6r
�ilnrurl//� ■cam: s vf
ns, .1.^ •• Pinec oft M.H.P. ...ml�.a 4r��1�_��.�Holed. �� � • !�.�`_ - _ — � _�- �� -,,--T---
�1U Trait yCourt iii:_ �� i
_= a /1111= s> =... :, _ �, Liberty Lake
✓ Illl�,nnete^�4� 'a- �
�I % 111�1_/lU=K1 ". I. si, -- � Sewer and Waters
�\ low • � r- Walla �__, -
__ �_==_;■■■ k .utchIlison trig. I � District a = ;
District#1b , ■ `0•i �_
Consolidated brig. 411 Greenridge
�1� "''� Y ''' :r c FINN
■ t _ District#19
kane County Modern Electric CC •-- i ""--'71101 Estates
1�1NIi1r11 1 t ■� ■ �.dk�,n,_ wI�
Meer• ■ ��ini , •D.#3 Water Company i• }, `
I 1
�"u= 93111NIM"i" Carnhope i... hilijr1111 A.. ,/,..24
M � •.�L
eeeu=s:unun..n brig.Dist#7 '• y j_ a. � �
hE=u-11111111itiU I.
9 -__: .l\ 1 I Model Irrig iris 1
i MES rI! _ . . _ 4i' ► :A J■ District#18 stEsin .
7-41,1110111%%4%0%
.�
••1••Cr a `�-:.. __14
� �_- fl+lr/ts Pritailki ,; .• .
1�r�■� ~� -- • �. "7 , +. -)`.':� ugh j. YR —' rim �.y'l'�.
,�•�L�1,�r•r••■■ .� � •eta - 1 1 w , ,
1■=tom �y%� 1-� ■'3�'.�Cal..�ownorn _, mom imipossaa. — - • �` •, Spokane County f: - !
Lm ':: , ,,
assomE
, i
�sr_....,..lism- -r1 • j
___ems _ . • ,f-,1�
gin."�C 1�===, p rim _ Spokane County t =-�'
='�iICC7 _ -a_.�.`_ Water Bodies
nr. � l/1 um is
1S ,.,-. _L,',-_ - c
In. 1!,,/1 � ` +� ,mil I Ogn, .., 1 �f ^EL r L L.
Spokane Cgptty (y?} , Urban Growth Area
�ill� T
.--) =-----• •
, . r •. . Proposed City of Spokane Valley
-,. 0 )6 7-- ) J • • • •
i i ,,i,.
-�f }t a7•'(` City of Spokane's Water Service Area
• - . f`L�3 j :,' ,..-1\11. City of Liberty Lake
Jti .4;.,; \ `-�_ I
1 Incorporated areas N
4 I U 1 A
7- - -(,
Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County Spokane Valley Incorporation Study July 2001
Map 10
_ : ll. _ ____ _ - Spokane Valley
mg
W 2003 2013row Sewer Projects Priorities
I." i 2014
11�..
��oa �f 2003 1
Mamma "-_ iit �i — i 2013
1111P-as seism D--- '. ,
_..,_1 i; \ 012 -- . iss joillilli •
Car 1.......-...._D- -----,
` r� 2002 './ AMEIMPEREM
m!�_ 2006 I \\ V \ ',
2011 �.
�. __; 2005 �,, iiio. �`
Imam S`', WO u
i� iiia .. �'; ~ II
IO
rlip i im7
l.f.7�• � a 2006 , iii
_ 2003
��� -/ �.- 2015 -� -
_�_ _ "��__ 111 � • ■
�/ 'ri �� 2009 201 !I. ,-
�a_a.. 2005 - 1� __.___ 1
I
,_ - � � _ �- � City Of
_ .
'II �` 2001 '�,i' 03 ��rill
204' 2004 Lake
IN1'I� �]'� 20
,��;,. _._.City of Spokane - 2oos r 2001 0
Liberty
2006...err �. �� � e2012.mm- rr f III
04 2004 1� 2004 i 011 2015
■r--
--• � 2001 i!ilI 2003 •
I•
1� i`�! 2003 10I i U�ll{I/1 W i ImixiWIr ri '-�5 - rm.-
1t;� i� 201 ,.�� 2UU1 _.- �..—._._._. _ 6 � � O.X111 _.._ —_ _ , ^'�\ 2005
sti—.-. rn`��1� 2002 ' �__ 1•\ •
•
mom,--'----101.1111 2001 �. ` 2010
■I1�ozitruit1- C+ i* \ 2011
3'=" niikilil�plllllm• 2002 20 , q0 11 ,
(.1.-'Tye,-,-r` •■ I--:-.7sui. i
_..-_��� Interceptors and Extensions
�, ir lti{4
meal u�p� �:a ,� •
I Water Bodies
�;�I ri c_ ,. ` - I. ?001 ! Urban Growth Area
'41-Ir lace 1 '` L _ Proposed City of Spokane Valley
W I -�`
•
Waw , �I'
I r�=_� Incorporated areas
IIIII VIII
liiik
City of Spokane's Sewer Service Area
C CpWW ��; - —j r ► l
WWW- - J 2012
Sewer Projects
�'—rlr�,ies-
�r.Ei��m,m�/1" — 1 f I 6 years
�:.- - --mli hi,� - 15rs
MI los T I I years
2014 200041 _;
I ` IWE ii\-T- « -_
_ ,... . ' ao years
�� y. _ _ , _ i Sewed
lei -
�, )�7 '�, 200 o `
)
1 r •-
Spokane Valley Incorporation Study July 2001
Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County
��� 'MIL
1 Big., I.
III! Map6
glighall
NMI
ha
,�� I '1� r.h - Spokane County Recommended
. Ilv ; ) III ,.a Comprehensive Plan
Mil whi
1 1 IS ill
—mo-'NJ:. / III
i m�, r� i�
. 81' 11.411111- 11.1111r. ?.'.l limp. ..., •illillanso ''"'1111 :. •
■
1
1111x. .II :
: 1rr * u
amnia_
- �,�— n' iiV, _ '
r �u„ i
1W rr
rrr ( ,
ØI !!' 1
iar
in4,r tor-ippla.
IMINE
r.r.._ °fir.,, �,.r ■r ■ ,�. �.-.111110 „Ingl.lry NON w•+
r - I. iimmoni ALJ mmmr'321 MOM 1111111- rapr.efthr# ':' Nal rialillarir- ' 1::l:1111116 `M�
fix '41 7mmillat IIIIINIIIR��,F r5�111�.r..1Nowr �,l, lifie �f •-•111111151111.12111 .—
ill „► .
111=III 1 --I.11al�,-
~� --■•emairillill 1-111"""irC e [� Proposed City of Spokane Valley
„�' `` .i 111 1 BR I . 'I i,'41 1.11111111111111111111 ••• Urban Growth Area
°.. ! ` Water Bodies
�.'�.:��Iiis�r.� ..warms- .. '
'1ra�U"671'31112"1:11
rrrr' rA '.r. rrrr! rtr., i
rr � .■rrrr �ww ww�r.� -- rrrr [ IK�� • ` - Incorporated Areas
linprepom.......etsii wri��i�2� - 11ww .wC1 :/Ili ..rlr ggr�
1 Pi
Recommended Com Plan
:iisi:e•��f�� ''�a�1 r �r� �!r �R IncorporatedArea'."sre� �:`f �.....r/�� �1►r,,,`�1�hlti��; �� �`1��t ® CommunityCenter
I 1 'Sr;
w ^•�,�� \ -� rr �� g.t` i Community Commercial
\ �,.. l ` r�Ir:1V�f!� a• Forest Land.r��rr��..,. �; . HeavyIndustrialrrrr` gY%� raLi'� �`��...� �...� �,t.���+r�!"`� ,-. Illbk. 3 1 High Density Residential
, Ill MI`r � . �� !II
LDA
-.01104
,• ���L�r .Y1�1 i ! �,�1
.. �� :am_r� i LDA Residential
�l�l�=� g��,l •� �� � Large Tract Ag
rr!� w' Light Industrial n
illiP�+► �" •'"' Low Density Residential
roplis
• � f Ea Medium DensityResidential
� a�� P
:.II � ` Mineral Land
Mixed Use
„F., F..,.. �� ■1��4Ar147
by i Neighborhood Commercial
r�� „ 35M�r Rural Activity Center
a-4'A
� Regional Commercial
,� !!! Rural
t 9,sfi i_i ad,��' l ,c—'� 3 {���r.�' RUral$
-grit,, !��I ?;�' ,,w,. Rural Conservation
1.r.iri 111.1—Til aJAIME Small Activity
Ag
2j2011/TrarlliregraL.
i. ^'�• " Urban Activity Center
Lig
c7 �i N
r
Urban Rese ve
Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County Spokane Valley Incorporation Study July 2001
1
- IN
IIiI
Si .WGulch r vpi •
Spokane County
llrm. L'�" �� III 111111L ct:e 11 idi
General ZoningI
pol
i.
L 60 .... .:(446 .7 . / II likirrallil
i. Iwaffirlri 111111111111106111,
: Billijilligilli 5111111476'iallill II 1.11111111'''..111....1144111111 ' ' , . -.-__. --- - - 111
., .
. 1
7_,_,__ .7.:1,1173zweHeel—'- '.. ..-.1- 1., \ I
Immo.
mum
Iii_ sat
.,.,
1111:1111111 0iiitx.:711: 11:40-��� i ----'.
711.---711 .211-1"11 trier s *O. -
ilim".. ..." \
I," !F.-- iii i immil ,
; _________Li idisis
411_ "Fir .,
� mi
�'� _! CII � � arillin:l.II T-11,7 - '
2
NMI .11111111
111163=1"A-
1:0mill 7
11.1"'"Villginilialibilarripilibmr rliI�r� ' /imu r I '���CJ�,aJaL_ � `. �r� ��1 �- s..rck "I:i 'Jtk,1'*l• ;'�r ;Cr �a1i "'A ., _ -� ►
rie-
.-'? -i sumgav P. I ". irs'illirliiirr;miliMilip111411,q1PIPIII .MIL'it _-_. ......... wask---irr.vs.,
- ., Ar.-, ,Er
i -' -- r ""
111111111111:.1 11 I -717.....17_,'.._r__7_7_74."‘_---eri:7' 1.--!---l'r-- • :-------',-—---- '1-kilt i' '.."0.1-.im,' - ' 111111-mi. INN
-------- - * 1.
. , •r M `•• ICA.IIA� �'� A�� A
k, ....itg, !..1., . 1,
..i.iiIjralllemi� r.�.
--�'-� •-` v'I .'"a ' ` 1 ~ t C[51.i Nome +� '■t� , . Proposed City of Spokane Valley
.�Jir3i �ielarnr�i A �12�`'r�sl,a'e� � ���A : ., • Incorporated Areas
lirM "!. . _ :
�\ ► , �,� ` ,/s,w�.GTiTr :� lV't1: now • . • Urban Growth Area
•�. ` ,4__�w� � " �'bei water Bodies
1
\iZ......1 `^�� , Ina... i General Zoning
• • marc ��.. 1■1i 1 11■�ENipmdrefilllik 3 bid
General Agriculture
•- i -m 'inVil Rural Res.- 1 unit/10 ac.
�'` ILLomso' Suburban Res. - 1 unit/5 ac.
15.1NA/tit:A \ Suburban Res. - 1 unit/5Urban Residential- 3.5 =Jac.
,7. V�� Urban Res. -7 units/cc.
. i�� ` Urban Res. - 12 units/cc.
�- ,� rM�r \,° Urban Res. -22 units/ac.
li
11-717
_ ,' �� \., . Regional Business
�,�/' �, - - Community Business
■ •
6 \f/. . v •= A.-----.x•- ..
:_,, , •. Neighborhood Business
atialliugran iii..-. EN
1 Light Industrial
� �� /, - Industrial
Eat n
priatieirtu Mineral Extraction
Miliple.4 i N
. 0 1 A
Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County Spokane Valley Incorporation Study July 2001
•
( ' •' �� I IL
t 1
f
1` '� �;, Map 11
, i 1 - L.110.___.,_.t Pleasant __ II-_-J/ Fire Districts
X11 — ( � ��
Big. w Gukb {, 1 Roscwaad
yr 0,. ..., . . :.. 1. - I „L....-
mi
i.,. _ •,•
• -----------,
1
L� Fire.`Dist ict 9 JJ
91111111
EE=":2'511.11110 11211111
=== - ifirr I
CiClll tpC ��� � � 91e I '� �. inn,
�M f � 1 i ` � r t J 0 min – Rill 11 7 � r
11+i11111-ii NNal -� _ _1 3 / , I I ��
ppliril
\ •P
_..--amGRiammionnum _ ru
: '—
\ � I, , , ..° 1111111R \
III' ■t i�
111111111,..... .r,-- - y ■�
Vila==nn11 'I'1 ::.ir 1N1.1111111 IC.,.� . , • �r III B obit s--,7,,,, : \1
/�
Iii1!JLllIhI'
- Dis>n�ct 1 '-� ma 1• :IW y—
+�' � ���'r_ "� ��� '�`��_.a A.--- 5.--,1 willii-le
.1/�1' l M.opoomidp
.S� �irig- mil la ..ini � ��-it'11si„. � i� i N (iglac
11111.1:111".' r20+11:
•
imiso
�.11111111111�_� ■■�lir.”
-moi k
�_o= '_=.41roi•! . im :.SAI '� Qni 1a r rutin"
r". "1� � =.� —
•
anr__s,- ,� 0 �.tre /moi i�_- __:.:� i711"' �::�.': H j��� IC'r19'r".*n l 1 1 1i! rr- • \16)\;91.-111.71'
'
NO / lilligleigill WillnialallalliillillpliMilnel IIIIIr . .
• m IMOIK MS
.■tet
�_�iiiiiM�!-,1,1,1, ___ ��=1A�' .�. ..,. ---. -.1.::° 0i r�.� . ' „i1111 t
�i V 6q
.�_ �. - =- -� �,.. ■r <�VISIIIIIIMIINDI ~ • tem mg'. . _ • . f )
Pr =-� _=e.waso ml_m==�=.._ . .-ri.r'�.a ?-II �yurr1 rr.r ���. �1..
::1::'.:E:IYIIIIrI11N1=��'��. - n r:��rss . +�1`w� "�''�ri /� r.■; !l ~�1! �.
II — ,-__=== Inllltillll�ll .r+--..... '':, 1IM.� _ •�1� �� j,��t_ c _� �`►
1ir _ III ....um.. .y^'. "e <.*iw�t.. 1. �. mosis
tom-- r �r rAira�r�, 4th rsmr.r r •s _.rrwink L.4.,..
lrill
i—c—u_r—.Gi ��_!�'=�.�.. ..�—�I a.`i '} �rim
��c . '---i'M1i� \1� '+w a r o,' �(.,,,I h,` ?‘
m__w■r. �=� �� r■i� r.r a '!. g��c,war- ` � ` ■ �' f
' ilibroirmirig=11144,4Wireir lit I '
..... l_.._.J -:'.nig 29.bogroga gonna1 I' 1
• i 1--, \
�•: 0n111111.r.- ISN y 1 1
;mamar- ----,.......-- ...■�
m'p`g§� l—� _ ± Fire Distri i t 8
J I -- \
= ,r, A \ , (
_---Ea_: IV SEP' n �`' �� �� --1 ` Pro osed Ci of S okane Valley
arm =11e� � e District 8 .,. ii
:at=:l�ta111111 ,_-4G- / p e
112011/1111111.1116EEll�'r` tai s nM I
I.. f f City of Liberty Lake
IIIII .....1�11l / r % 41
1111. 1n t— 1 � �„- � � p�D�s � • FireStations
lr , ) (''.,`") . M • Urban Growth Area
t�pie. j ssn Li } , ,�, \---- ` 6.444�_ _ Water Bodies
�... s ;y3 t �1_,�,,� I Incorporated Areas
4111111111 r
JUNN ilir*roan �� c.,-,-, / itIo 1 2 A
•
Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County Spokane Valley Incorporation Study July 2001
•
I
�_ 1 Pleasant Map 12
r'--- - 1.. - Spokane County
- ! p e ou
_ r�
... .l
4
l '; i , , _--.__, Sheriff Districts
%.
Brasier
_H- 1r t I,
11
t1-� I (' , 1,.'l�`;-------y- fl/pad'' 7 V. 11
, - � _.._. .� 1ijj4JIIIh
. .,
•(' „_ _. .
-_ 4314.1:3B iimailit k.orfiii. ' F -- ..._.,...,.. ; _,.
• .I• J•
•
•..... ,I.,,,,.,..1_.= -_,,i---..-.5...
diepti.; . .,
.. --g. . •
�_� i ::_7, i ---• •
'1
. ;-� p ,-,- ......•
I. __
_ itr..arAill IIi�I .. ri'.• 3- .1-\c.:,..:711 z .. .....0
7 _1...Pvii., ili... ,._.. - -- lI . .
fir. ■_ e t _ —, , Fri-mos: Z`
/
illki- : . .
+�] ..; _ "is-s3; ^ill rr m1 _ ...t-„ - . I -�:1:- . Y .� 1-1:\s
.p ct
Rt�n; __ 10 , ( t- I .I -I . _... t_......_ _T\
__ kt 4
;mgr. g,= Itl 11 1 -- __ _ i _,... ,_
.,., ,..,,.,
....... _ a =
. J. 1''
_:4,-lemmifisslis 1
In M j [ 1 men , ,
deep. _mLt-...17:.7.. ''41..0 e. . — _ .1 Z1 1 --r - 16 ( ,i
• ._ ill _-_ III I �i` 11 � 1 1 :_ r - � . �-'"- _.�..,..>�.-� i -�
_•-! rr j',-' �f fl---- IND"', Wi ■ � �>r� .., i ••
- .. ,...}:i0,..._.. ....,..:----7-1 , hC- j.`_: , I ' ,+ .11'
e\ l
y �111�1;1 1� S �' / _ .r - L _•.l. _... .__-._"1.�. j 1 I l'� NIKiton
,II •4:,.:11114%411 I
rill tall - ■�i ll
10 . ;:_ti.la -SE PEES -•:4 ' III 1.2.3 -ill-- . It",
L _ _.
=.... ■ _ �, I �� 1 ..I 7 \f „IF�'"�' i�T �.. - _,I.:2:7„..1
�.;.T 1 - _ :1-'''','':.: Fliytl
1 -C renrams r.pr _ -E 1 • Ai .!_i _. � re
1:'. 1!1 f� EMS til-14x1- -Y' 'Z'21,1:3� _ T ' fl _ 1 I I .1lryiis�, q�8,.
}kotyjwal
•
m - 1 g- ■ -..�Z ,J� iF I +- -' _•!, , I -! . ��j{ I . — I•Va. X111 � .. r r .._ � c_ � i. "MIl11,,,,.,,
�rrl •_
11221411
_ I_� .
1 • i'- ■• r ' r.. !�' 'ri III FA,.,4 soil
1r lii n T _. ,-iria AiLL„.. il�iiio t� � i ...•.4 ' r. '; C.
7� Q .��/IR37S•!'W1. --�C=�C5,9C-.Iu1tIJ,l�ea7 - .. -. ..r'- • - •�, rg. •1i 1-„ �•
! ■ >r 311 .z: -
»�_aYl
OE .9i-gain 1 ._..�_ r,iimarutY . r �� \ ( 9d
C ter.- .1.•
— Y{I11�1I�IYIIhII �_
.�a 1■■ i1111 . %':: -` �i'1'lill{t 3t; 1r � ?; r � � 1
vat
'—_'fig r .--...,.•-•• •••••••"" i 5
x. 1.1 .. t 6i� "u L_.. �I
_-1 mi `' .,��L. _ ��+ rte: lz rt�..,...� .a .t L, .0•, ' lY •- • ..
3 1Y� l�ral�i. r�1 i .�.' `'• ,_ .ie ” I S F f7 aMr �' w,
-i gir ._ -�- �..X -r .---2..,
- _;511.111414
I" ~1 . _ •� .� ♦. "91.1 ^.. • .rl'.�� 1
;t..- E. ,:c.,_._,
•-,
.. a
••• _
pg., ,
•.\•-v._,_...le ,,,,„t-,--;,,.: :_litc..,1,..
1
1 : 1 -11,
1 ile.ms- el .
. 00115. m
•
•
J y ,■".!I I ._'� .,. - �' ""r� � Josh 1 Sw6./1,,
ji • I— r 12=°III•._.. �rj I 26
m
-,:;.:.1...,,,,-1...._01 � q', :.:w .1 --woe —Mol - _. -- , ,-•
trkihm_o • _ a -
Fa •
- '•
�., �.. • 11'tltillYtt7vii- .. lI;,t,`�•I. I . I e r -l „1...1,."i _ + - ..._._._.._.--
- l-1 , 2 TO.'. If 1 \
` 1 }
I
Ill'
11i I ��1L I �'! .1 ..L_ -c'
r:. `••�. t.-. yni , - .- (:r' . a _ , :i'-1 r^ City of Liberty Lake
�1 •- 1 L__. a'! i • COPS Facilities
1 I `•
�.. { l; n I
., �1-16t
�,I 1 55th 1 I! t ! ?h . t,4th ,
— H
I■— ,, '' _ an row rea
•• f' - • -- Urb G th Ated _'1-Yr” ,L"'. -I• •,-!,_____,q,-T. --- ' - ' -- - -- - I�
,•-'l.n. ".L�. 1Proposed City of Spokane Valley
:{' �;j f i - Water Bodies
� 1 �.;'��? C' r'_ 1 - � `` • — 1st --- _6-, �. . Roads
' 35re,`' I"1 .� �_� �r N
i. . , ..
..______
Ir 1 01 ______ ! z
\ 1
Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County Spokane Valley Incorporation Study July 2001
1
1111
. in Map13
Imimmmak. --.... .L--r-
hiT
Lyon.1111 .•- ��-��� •-: ;East Valle #�3_"6"- iiiieumwraschool Districts '
L
. ,� 77zeL:: alley #363 Y J1I4!
�
41
a Ni31 t., Ira. we 7,--- .....---A ill ellskillifill I 1 7
nit
= 1111.:- _ __f. r.. r
-qIIU"=n = fes 5vi"'� r ir's
�>' ■ G rill II 110 lip ,/c�1111ull1111 1 _ il. � �_1111111111+m11 n =!1.� �, ' _� ` ■Ir •
r-rr��r .. EMI
.
�"�r=moi - � t. iii r•�R�1111r 1 ��
,....
2212=�n.:=S= II till .1• #8 1 NH _ , i �.: - joy di ,
go
0111111
/(L....
--- "iii1ZS ma a rr off � �•���� t►
__r, m r ire ■ _ s1111111111rll■. 1/0111 ,
�1'� s■I11If111M %�•!� -7'rte■ I� � 't��r � � �r
' 111I1■.g°■ralt� i rre�
Ixigr`�J' iso " jR utnr ,+ �l�j' �' s r� ►1ll -�� •��.
A .,)fr Will.Allalialio 4,
Nr ,;-%:.ni • id!
'I 440 ir= 4"1111111 c WWIjiarirlIll- .� ■ .! "�rri ■■gla .■'.1 _....."....._,l 113rT JIM ai '
"�!1/i�5SS1111l==_ N1"'$ij,.. � n r.'r'"'r■V1 i1',
PFi=�_= _--222222'2E5 ran" .■ liS ii Win Lin111
rC _ ;:��' 11 /Ra Ir �ermom rr' areagabil: ail rarliktrINIMEN �■.Wirassuni ! - �� < �"wsIL.�°""%:+a►'
LA
j fnnlrff/'Amu. 1 Emu= ;r :L, .�"'� i�sow ff:a- 1,-� MOE
oll �,, ilI
PiIllli lllills__ i����r ■■r■■ t• .• �u • S • -
-rateiren=6=a011114=1 ■r.rr-,i- �" . . ` �r �."� 1. • ' r` ''=.� -glnl ^ -=�E..���^� ■n1a! - • 1 s.r 1�irr`si n
-_ s:u,i■„�,.,�n =�1 ,r.rara r■..■■r■. S■.■■■r•*� ter: ' II r•
bey-- -ri - = _ am,■sour +�,■ii ■■'r�r�'�S1 �Crr. iM!
% : :auuu:ulnl===�-,. rr�ir.� _ •
..- ` R ,1rie ` - ! .■w
'� _ ....=° iilt 11111111�`■� '- lr ..rrr�■.��•. .r Vi fi aul ft I tEdi f K
rim w Alt �1ri% am iuii rr 1■rr�r� 1101111,14010400
11� r�'
,. - - �.� 4•iiii bow — Il• 'x.1111■., ••
•... Central Va ey #354
�rnSaii �r■�r�`- ■■■ice y- I 1 'l j
u. r<r 1 ' 3 �� `■w�„;�! ■:ter .� ..�r�+IR
weri■r■i �rrr■r ii. � •w }- �rrri•�rri.R1 e/e��� i>.r■.1'!"�'J
.rM i�--ri�rr ■ 1a 32.dIi,IIIIII
• r_ r��� � • �. err!{! '�:� �'.�. ' '
Voll
a
�. rar■ rrr1ar era w Grim �Rr'�"` Wail i (� IIII I (:it,
....Li
.ana . er,. ..1 ,
�- r .rrr .7.' rrauk-
...........== ..
oizrammum
.....
_ . .100,411,
it I
,wigpi
rig
Uy w=NI '11711 r. ----&
'leer 1li -
71� +1 � f
ortio � ass
SA
. : I VIncorporated Areas
�i 1.■ � 1 � d Schools
"+ ,'"N „' �� Recommended UGA
� �� ,� �.
�� .r1,�1 , / Proposed City of Spokane Valley
orr vim reeman #358 - Water Bodies 2
A
s
IMP: \, .,,,. /' 1
Spokane Valley Incorporation Study July 2001
Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County
1
f ,..4
' 7 \,,r',.:\ Granite
.� l J _.1; Map 14
i , ..I -, ; . -—ill � ' Community Facilities
i �'`��
niill - I g : .' 4 '•'f��' l lante's Ferry Irll 'd I 1 r . ; i --
,1t •SQn .1°..1_117.1.:
I _ `.
—' Ill r .(� r Trent �� I i 4
I � l � 1
G , '/.'.__.l ..-if-,� ��.- --•'- - � �_,- _••�"_ u:.r- ._1��._�-��, -•.,;.;�-- II i , \
Lire - � , �-'� -_ �i-�x ate.. __ .... �_ 11_ _� -._ .,. `� e
.•' ," 1...• Imo,._ _ _
■' \ \
_ Shields Park1 ._- r •
..• ' 1 - I \ buclid L—_-i--
ti
r
(Minnehah Rocks) o ,q ,, .1J-1 .J _ ._ - ' __ _ - ,
eau
I i_-; ' r +-, l
■- ��• H Ti I ;_ Xybpi1 111 1 - Mirabeau Park r 4 �. !yam
11. ;:. - YMCA 7
, ,!,, •• ,.. \!1.iii
- ;,
•
"'-• ,,,:iti
all i• l
-:,-,:i -tl"
�� , ... - � ... l•.�.. . r -i•rl.l. .-.f � r I —� •„ + [ ',� �. I P�'1 �'.\,'.+.` '' ��-
•
Cityi of
I `
Spon ne A _ -i.__r_.1 -- " �._. _ - : City of Liberty' Lake!
•L.-_.1---. . .,.. l( �
�l 7 t l t
- .,i:_„.
� u' I ._,Iii. i, _ I _ ,. _ _ _ _. .:- , i 1 -� ,_. ley 1_.i t i 111.-. i_.r - 1 _i. r' , I "-..1_:.•__1,1_,.._--_.„
w.
•
Fal =rou tls" L. Balfour P _ .rl�_ ►�.
1 d_ .r s � � ;� t �:
■■ ��palrtity _ ! 11 -n 11 _
' 211 �. • ` 111 �i�.�.. -�.� x� ��-�� >I 000 J _ •7
,._:
vis mg -1:7-117E1.77 j_l i
teen.
in
_ Sth'` ,•. ,,C" ro \ • : LI4
-aI � l l 1;.__i; -- _ F � -
r r 3th T
�r'sl Dlshman �\ L ly_
■ 14th I _ `r
f, -27 l fir.. _� fT
' � ' n _ _ � Hills 1 �- �n i 1 1 I
- +_�.1� I , t �y _. — L1 1j `:ti ---12.7.-
. 1h.. ,F1 I l l , ,
- '1.11-17..71.----;:::2-<‘'s:'‘...:‘'.7.:;:---,`",'.711::::-,.7.Ct E ''� �+ 1: T 4 - •� r1::: 1.1..,1 5ecn±etaciat
32nd ,
_p , \1 I-.) DFirownsPark .. ,
l
�•_RI '49th- - t !` di `,J i 36th Urban Growth Area
elm
.-1--1-32'11 •, 2 j jJiI Proposed City of Spokane Valley
01011-11,b. . I,
> _.
�_ -=rs-•�—_ 16' , ...-- _ 1__� !� � Yaintcid x lls-- County Parks
37th —��
;t i Gol; C. c)u CI 1-1 C• onservation Lands
` - , r I I
42nd 1 (ci i id- --- l i. 4314-LL-_L.f_, 1 .L. -- ` _! 46thI 1C• ommunity Parks
thh
H
—� _ T�,_ r—� i i Regional Parks
,, �.
l ,•lrrmio —1 '',..-1A-`,---7-'!"_ 1 0.
r; i 1 �_ a r � r--1' _ i! Special Use Facilities
i
T _
11
L1 _ er Conservation
-
.. .� I - , " . ---- - Centennial Trail
� � I I
- I Morrow � N
,sit, TIP?' i,t. J� - \ ❑conservation
Washington State Boundary Review Board for Spokane County Spokane Valley Incorporation Study July 2001
-s--cr-•••1 imoni--- mmimi••••...mismos
lila
Milliri.11..M11111111111111111 gill aTEJ:1.7:Fililliiinn411
-01 UNE
•=14.11alli'll.""iiiiiiiiiIIIII iffilliliMill1111.'''-.1.0/141 eV VI illiri.111110Mil Map 15 1
1
, .
4 115
11".." 11.1tmeurriirilllimmulmolig
MINI -7111111*--somm•r-d""-gralimis• 11_4',,,t, 11 ti 1Pilliallian . 111111..
is vs sinus sr-
him al di I IOW
..... Imp .........-.w., ,S-11fAviglillialldi
g°1 11111111111 Illiiiiii;111 111,1.k!Ili larA/00111111111111111111111 11011111117c . 11.1..lidit.iltill
.37.:
' ‘nrili.101111.11111111
:.7Ellirtillillil i' 111111111141.11.11 410, 11. IsMIEWIWIrm 11.1r amMilir OA ma se
,1111111111Nre IIMMINMI
".".".ingfililliki Ilk*."6111111111111111M11.11 ,,,fai,,,,,a,, ,,,, A am mi
';',C4..:: a p. Wok.
-til „,...b,- 1 ......,....
--
1,1"------- =-es ., -.÷-.. mi •.., -I 1, 14.?...zi,..,11,4,,-.1
....„7... ..iwiiiri. ..,04.1.4111.o...soismi mom:a:17....11; Ilt...,71:1;74.0.4::::;;RH.:4,1 flu Am?5...445:116.111.11_140:L--II- sot Pum_upposi.sipb____:.....::::1 1
':-.27.1.;i11.1,0:_erillir.3.- araTir ig 10.11.117nrilLilat,-, ,..,,,.. ,i,s-'iled._rhittirim
711,---isjaillill I .:.401
,.... v•im; L nil arr._ m..!,..... vow • Al,. . 1,1,..„„„, jildisivoirge:$7,14,:.-i,,,...'-':1,..ill.:-..,;;„'-i;,2116:.4.. ..,:i, ::,:Tre,,11.,11.,:e1:77.1tENy,iriglftitin !IIII:°11
111111gillatkv siji41,,,......... ........4............ ' ;•,.. ,,,• =1:..,-• .•••........"mall II Ora
;'''''''''''''''''''"II':1111.7.uporttiiiinilIP'----.' mionwenli -. *) 1114.)4111111.511-11.
E'_'''..;, •,.imi,,,-,....,de, 4r. _, mitittion!,,,,,, „,.„.. ,,,..„ .... ,,,.1.4st/nv,..,!,.".1 IA. _11111115111"111,...______Ist"
limaii .._::_. ,,,‘4..-1.......... , ,,,,,,.,,Anrom,„„...1.....x.,...,:a:...„.,„....ma_
elillOtt;,..1
0
ii':•.:.;.'-;-•;0,.itErli,,, ' lktrz'sr.,mr.•.= • -; tv....--
Modification Areas
--.a..--.
•Oltit'''',.---,--4..-,3-"-----..*-•'.`"Vii3:1:::.s-11-.:...1.. -771:1113""*""" m ....Aro iiii3iiilelifilka:101316",,,,,„
31,,..4:r..1141411iPlif 11•113 11; 11=1 __------ 4---;••>.r10,,;!iiisii.;ii;.:7,1r-:F-!'.1:,.-E-e-ar-:---: .,,,or 40,10.,A,,\,,,,,,,.,v0 .0. ill 0- r...-..... 111
Mk Imo W
IIIII
Mil' Il t'''''.11..,„ 1P44;llitlindillir'''"I'lir7'1'7:f66112r1 •Aus$!'iot.,;13:1,000.• _.__or ,,_,
' lifilildfr v ',.-"--'i•-•',....1103111111Klawsra
solirk
1611, -IrL:'!...,,''.g,,,,,,.„„,......11„11Ati1.111911e101111t; 0\41:31.0•1'.,., -/.. . ''\.111 i
,. --,...,514
:42.7......0100,41.01•:40........ria_14:,.....tcor.:.;.1...,.,;•...m........litri.enitimitertilsit.;•=1; 2435::Ac4poloilirhOdntA:t
1..RM . ,
IirIP;
_,,,,,m.,..,Av't,tvalliNr.s:A ...,... , livi r-'
• :- .- 7=e...7:::::.:::.•••-•,,V. .•
0
Shr -Mit 11.1•1 rhy:esn:u
v-1, -!,:::.......... :-.,-'...,..,F4., .......„„,,f..am.„,..,..„*.. ..tis,.... .................. -.11 Ilisfe..;frop,..;010..".0.2.„1 sill ......1.4.a..6vatelfsoiet 'It' ''''!.. _....-7.. ,_. 6. East of Sullivapnun
:.,'._:". 1" 4.-.T..!ili:t:::::-,,,.... citme.r.,,‘ -.too ..- otwaar.vge.......dr,::;;;;;;;•:„..,..4•11
li, .
''...- • ".-'" - ' ' '- 7-1--ivar.. -1 6.,,, r,S ••1',4, ••••.....: ....:;:s.:,...................
"'-'47.:'ITIF 1 I 11114111107.- • ':11r,;-. .. .,,,,,,-„,,.7:,..• ;,.. • ----1-1T1 t 'W." m_....gtrill.r4ins,...T,. .....N„,..••........,,,..,
______m•.;;ilittr.13 -...,;, ,_....„... ,
,,•, ,, , . 1 V. =, "''`'.'.. IIIIVI'''''417.;-_Fi-:.:7;;:r.,?.04,,,: /01,6T=.1111:111104.01 aAiiiii,.'-;;I„til, 4 '--,5- r" irNitinkr,221116114",1; •'?' -41
,... ,
,.., prt 4 :::-.'''.1'.‘ 11:"..ii:;'.1=-• ,;;4:''':;,:":. Ar'.'""ii,':';"'ll'•' ..tpttllial .M....i.m....:1.6111'ling 1 11111111101,0•00
'. : • .. 1311:',.1:11%17.:02"...:217 ill.,_..,r.:,,r,.__•t.: , ..„•7,1,;,1„,.; g.,...1,'.0 1,.. Eliva;14;111:11111.16.'L' . rtavirlir-inme.,.. \_\. , ,.„,..1,1111.1.1.1.141...:...1.1 faiirtialltr=7:11=1:1111.......1,-/ii.:a7"ym.;17.11:111;41.::si,:117., .1!:;t.r.:;.:.,1..s..1:r1:i....ii_aLli__Ti:::'111111116:rmi:11.5ri,7r.i.i..4.,1,,.,:. , 791...01MGW.. 0Nr°eeortsierntsntioohanfwcgrLrscobosaederrdtys Lake ri'll
A
r- •-"71-141111::.-- :,. ' - ;„„•;,.....1 al 1.......004-, ........0,1 .win ... ..,_ linglar .
441-^.'"'''''''' alswilv•Itt:-11- 101111..e.--,1,;":" ;4- --vt-:;•; ....;"jiill"' al.-....iiiiring xi..to -.61.1
-z; 1 -kali 111 Sopy • r:„,i„,r---gd{,„ a...47.1,,,1,1_-,,;_.,..,:;..,_, -.1._i,,,.„,,As...iiirmlloollib taillt,iglaltillilE1116 ----- ,•,1"11
'..4‘..1- '.4'. 111 -, ---AM --,'"1111111 1.-i-7-it-!11. -II. ."1"v..=Ill'- d'I" • • - ..1rIMilr_rAni...,ormile 6 sip arm _ .... _ _ ., , 10, 1 „ ,..':°- '' "'Imam,‘,...,..,-,„.. „,!.., ... _
-,2-mv:- p..o'.4 ...itt.,17,-mirg:'.;.:1•7':.:,.: :::-.;,--i-,P0 ,, . ,'„, --15:00:--.....t...7,rzolwi."11 - -niourgill1111011. • , --.;,,,,.......quipur..- ,
-- ow 1 -'•-r-i . - - 12,-_-- . • - - lit-,-,M-1:....:-r . .j. ..::: !al „,,,diTi.
'..;14,t‘...„...,...„.-....1.2 ir,,,„14, • ',--1,,,-.7, _Le.1..=,F.E..F. . 0; ;• - ' li ,Nui - '"'"- 1 r 0 ' Ma -"'-'- ----fteliiii. imam.- s-..millremr-i,' „..._111_1=---- -',.. ,---',.
,n,;;-,-„,: '-.;=1.2....7,,,,,,:iii..---.-' •'.-.ii..141.v..;n7,!Ili.-...„,g, .:,....- ..,,.:,. - -. :ilir....., ,. ,ii;;,,,,,,..;:„...1...:.i..,..;,--,v,t;,77,-,.:!.---,. ,,,•,7,:z!,-..,,,,I.,,,,,,..,i!,,,Illi.:,52111112#.010;,:.. .-ii.,:i.l.„,:,......... -..1011 --- ..- .--- .-.;-.-:"....--,-ztsinwavritI,; - did111111.-'71*M
._.11,....,,r1-._..,..--:.- 4 5-,t11„ 01111ffillwrifii:',"'.':'':...".. .:-..--':'''Z,iii 4 s.,IF'''.1'.....iinViiF'Ttl,...':'-. 1.:-.117-,-!:, if VAtiatlalt-nFirmlleffilifi:--:::417'.',..''';1''''!,;-::"-±1--:='..Tz' .:::i4111111 .;•,gii !, ,III,VM!!.1;161011 ,Rn"100.• ' " I ib ;rty L e- .
4 1
- '
\ '1
. 171.711..":**iiiiiiiite'r11-11'**--e-dliKA7 :,--:::11.4111,11111AP/11:111.11.1.111:::: 11..i1:;:a-14.1':::: ,•:,'"f,:1;1'.1........'-' 11*::ia- '`...:1?-:2, ,:::;77----'''''.:!-.1"::::!'..".1'..74'.."-'1,i-*;1:1111,-107I-'.-i-'11"7:•'%11;11iticiLl,...11.10 ilLiii.rnmillli'lliLlitliillifFiirtili:sil :-..:,::: r..:1:1.1...:.:',11•:,,,..i.---;:z.-fi,i1.!!_'..sui:.:12!;,,,Iriiriupall7;24-.'-tilii-nlijm"": •,..r11;14,Firi'llinreanimiths:*;;;-:.plitit.:.112:-.;•-ii....e,;:z.vzi.f.z...,;k:t..i......:. ma
;sill II::•: L:'.. . ";'.' 'In:.'r 11411%`140,1 '',=_•- ,..._-,-;„'„,2,_....... .;....‘,.„,,,,.... ,. -....= 11 .i, .....ci.,T., ..i,._I,.4..,.1,,,.,..wirig.=,...,,.., - .:.-.....,,,,,,,..., 7, _,... ...,. ,i..1. 41„ „, ......,!, -.0„,. ,i, .,..„.,...1.,.,..,„,,.....,;.„),,11:2,,,i.2 44/ Aki
ie ''''-'iata4 i''. -- 1 .4-1."11.11u P 'r- -''''' -:i'""- ' ''''''''''' 'fa-11111-7-''''' 'z'''''''--' " ''''''''' ; ' l'illuirilkail' :'''''''-'1"'''' '''" 64117;11-' -Illtr---riAlltriAll:(4"11:rag:14111 011'41 ;11r40s. -1-1-4•"-*Aill+.4.k1'.-411 illftViiiit.
6...'''..t"11111.-"' M1111712:. . 717.111'124' :it "1%4 r1"7-. ...,9'..--:-IIVIII-11-111 '''';':'''""- '''“ ''::..1 "'-'. Illir''''' .f1111'11101111 IL '''f'. .,.:::i..,c,rw"..uvi-1........,, ,....,, „!., 1.,,itl.!.1......,411,41,...milati:....v..,:, =isr• . soktost.„...„-__,.....,Et. .._.-..:.,„,,...., , 1 F11111 vistiri:21 ,...,,,
11 1".....1.7.‘"1/...1113•9 ...00°°#."§m1111:r- :--7. '1121"Irekinlif Pli • ''-- ""1111111 - "'!-I --y;tu'illis-:!.,••ilj.::117:1111 .' -.: , '', - , .. . :, .011-11101JtAlri,141110,;:::11,...JWali .1,11.....„..1.::::' rilittitf.,120111:', winir-.1...Amsis r trri 02t,„--,..,!_--3..t,,Tv....... ,i!,..-_,_;,,,itl,„"gulal..,a.:legv,4W-. i 11111_111k 024(e.
1pip.--4,g 'mlillik_:.-71--• im: ii7---,70416- 'c":,• ;•- _1-'1:: .-,..ti -01v.;x"'....!:,-6....---=;.-:,-ii..-----__ " -.. - :i• II';t7...iiiiiiiii1,10101..10.1.',/min41:-„?,2M4-i.,,.'"7.1;:::,:r.,&.;•0:.011:•..../irelle rallitt'%%MO
"--4-'- ' .- ---"17-''''''' 4 III-11-11.11," -s'::*------ III ';':•117;•7."7.7...':.''''.-- -5--''''.1:7'.--A ',11. ---11.-el.i;''''IC l'..siii.ull'ul.11`11.--€1-01116111000.,•:..,I:. itlir,',11:,....:,,,,,;1-E=Amt:,tur,;,; . _in, ..,40_1 ifouni--• ...... irilirellruriisiza.4:407.4119:4..i,etsomi
1 1011111111170111....1}3Mad -Mir-gar .';'''th't-:-•iiirp.II r ;Emil.--1,, '4.,_...'23.0._1:1• '1111i";;10 Z it:=1.77--.".elvt,..F.:',":"::.,,,,:,:: '....-..-- ........ ,licie. --,,,,,,,......,,...: „IA.% . .11,t1, 1,...Irtions,c3_ ....., oiler i i::5.. 141,411...i. ni it rdiatica;s1,Fitlit al
,.....
lilt:-
.1.-Ei•si. .__ ,-,,, ......17;;;;,=.7.---,•,Net.rliky'f '' ,,____ Esonvoi ,41111111t26 _1.44"'.-,q-..••• imig ....„ sedio...1:,•••:•-•,••:.;;-_,,,,-7,..Fun talairsT1 dna_::.14:,...,....,,z=„r axiom
...-..--,:r...i...--...-z,:,:,.......7.,,IL::::-...- , 171'':iiillii ,...... .,_:::--is-,F,..4,. _'-.:-..41.,...'1.„..,...-- :1111,-„Yris„;:::-;-.,:._7-- ll......-115.--11111;
'IT t."16-174: ....,--ip.;;.•=m1:':iiiii.....u,r-.:---- Tiai-jo,-sim - ma. '1- 1, ..". .2.......m.fil:,-,4,...„,..,.7.,,„ ..111,,,,„alai 1.ijiru_ ,:•• • .,... ,„,„,z..intin a
..=170*-11111111 •1..1-_,,...,_:-.1 Iii -.
IIIPP'insiiir -.--:--2::,...:-,..,..,..`-•-al,z:16:414V"-*----a -f---di chirk414 ,:-.56,,,,!0.4,---,_.::::.-t-r-1,1 i moit..-1,„Ii,Li.:Anf.1.....-1,r „Amu ,,,. i .. , it ..„,..
9•-iii.
L.,....:-.10, ,.......1- -"P 111111111111:_:- 1::::.............!-::.,-„.. „
.......11,,„..„, .242.40. .. ",,, ,,,,i.,1Aiwiriegra0_11100.!.., --".....,... ....plitiviiillisini-,r'I,II 11,1,- ,, , .4,,,qv •!.I. .: :: ,i,14.. ,:.,,,::. ,,--`-01-5-.,,r,.......-1111.1,..._ ••• IL:
5 "1-...-- '''-.-Fi2''' kj-agg'ill'illIVI"254Y1'10'' -I.:' :P--1't ,,,:rir,
' 11111'4311111` -1161"L'''' - ;`-.7- • - I- 1_011-aiit st..• "..., --.!'. ,,'.."•:'........‘:::‘:: l', '..,' ;,,i.„-= iii... ilniel....2.1
'. , •-- -5,''..1-:.".., 1 '`."7'2'.' 11111"11.11111 d 7':*. Iligi•.' "Is s'101 - 's,"11P . i'm?....!--'• ---- ''-'-' '.--.• •, 4 -.---t'III.•.''.;...7.:::•:: ,„.. • 01 ... 1 ...: ,.....t. 1 in.iii..„.vv,„4- g111040;015211111111 '...."...'7,;70;:',1
MARI -
III- imm.11.17 1
111111111.1r114
'''''1 ' ... -7-'1'.7.1'11-`.'••=tt.517t'1'''':.11111-'. mg.111111.'•=11I101111 _ '',...0•41 iliAlr ' ''''7'; "''':..4.'1-10: '''• '''''':''-:1111110111-'4';';;;;;;,•;:.'L.3.-'" F.11::::,:;:liii:,.:1; it: ....: , , ,..!,..,JluLa,,a_,,,t,_„,„zcm, $
.,..... •,,,- ..,...,-- , , „.,..-;......:.-- . .-:----os--------..-.;.,, 14;ups • . ,, 2 VII. 2-:7-7.:r...........WW It. Mlle 'Row. .M=11
EMMI
=MB
-:-.4'''-:-- -1-11" °I. -...'....,:l., t.I.:',."'.'';'..".;7::1';.•.''..,'..... ..•Virtkr-ir..",;;-:"I'ir:. ....... -7...-.,. ..._1.......itrizt....a...i.:...t...,,,,,f,
IL, 111111M-
- .: -; .. , . . . . •--' _t I.;,'•.---,:, 111111.. :!, -Iiiiii,.."3.... : -....:r ._- ..- .1115,4Z•v,,,...,..: 1.„-=.3 _ ..........rr:: %b.
OIL .....,
wall
l .
. ....--, ...5. , % ..-1 =7,1.: :Gs: " -liFill..A I.::: NIL'1",....=
, " •
' -.. •- ' "ill • ..,' :::= ,,.Z. 7:-": 1 ....:, Viiim0.'""."."'":„..: -_ .. • $.4 ,,,
OHM"
' . . ' s:: . . ''''. "'It- ------ --.: %„r...- ,...-...- . -.....,2.;:, . :.:,..... . ......,.. .,. ,,... . - ......,..:. ,:,.*,...•••;',.4-
:L.- --• ....)1 Wiltl-w••••---- ..:F.z.z.........., „rip 1...
. ....::. ,....,:.,..,_0........„..A.4.,* „ .. ..,.....,"..„ ., ,,,.'..... . ,...,....,.....-‘4., 1- •.:•-•,-;- ....., z='-.1'.;::.,-- -..... .-..ri....7....11-4...:-, • ,.r• •• • ..„,,-.. ..;:i .. 111111111
meal
1.:11. ...i.,' ....7-;:. '',...--li,,,',Iaii,S-2,2171-4..„.-r11.........iljoi.1.;.;_. .,:_.;.............,i4.1,%•agirmillili,kimiritt,,,,,,i,:. ammi'l."-ip ....:1-t *.7V-:;'11,.,:: ...... .....,...ppm,._• ,,;-...,.. . * '..........:4-'....]:"'-'-.• -z'••:•-•::,;;;%•:1,11::::•• •.,iiik,.:..:_...t...;:••/.:.;F.:::::”...7.•:t;;;',,:•..:•;...,..silip .••• irl
wag
Igrat..,'.......7•7::"1,---;i f;''..-2•':`:,::;:-.',1'.." il:1 ...................:.:''.:\"'• '447.:.::.*::.‘::::.'112;:i %., • -1-iii';': ",',.:.--.'it...-1fivi..f:.',s,;:-..i'r'.1."1:;::...-'2;::3,-:°-'40,r,„ if
UM limn . t: :...d.:-.•
;t.' ---•• ••-2 larill.tkilt#:1, .,i'%,,:iiiltAi .......ii..','.....,,,:::f.:.;.:,..,.:.:"';'j.'.'±..;.H.1111f.:„. ::,,,,,-;.,, ::::::Ili,,.,,linivi.k.ils is,: .7,in!,:....,.....-,-.„,i1A.,• -iii:. ••-:. _ ri,
, ,...., ......„.„„-,z,„:.lib . •.2.eismi.• -2',..-4, grim a .,;(=I'''•"i•• ••'''''':.':!..1:•.. . .,..,:"° --.' '. • ... ..'•• : •. -,, I. :,,:•• ••=1.74ea.,-6r-, -,.:,:......
INIIIIV11,1 ; 1111 lir...
Modification Areas
Ilk..N 11 a % _ .„, ,,-. -4.. _--,;,,„•, _ .2•:: ii,.; '•• • r. ---Llimp.111111.- ', ..t I riglirr.-
pressiiiiimatr...--,,,..,:;-,.-2,:.,, , ..,.... , .._ ...,,,v,,,,,„,,,,,,,,,, ,„„:„..: ,, .., :::- ,..1....„ .. ..: ,,--.. ...-,s1.=;,..1.;.,7,,-,4,
,..............ffis alai %,„:,-,----,:.-;.??._,,,.,::..::::::...-:, 7. ..,::::.,....,4:-,,,,,,,,-,r,.. ... . .-. . .i. . „-- ...,...:-- •=4,1,711r.;-„,.j., :
11111111b.--.1.-• ' sills-Iqirallaglialmilil
. .• -,.';., ..7 .t.,?-li illrAMIE.m.di limmigilimeiffil,11.:...t...11.1111111.•-•1611.111 IS11111111111111Ammi'-- imummingialCIL.l',=1`2','.........:,.....'=;:i---....r.:;;;'=';‘:"...1 '"-',"" 1'..1 ...,s.,,,...,',-..j iiiis-silin. a Fir,....moiwilipilinmordolloh.‘ Within proposed boundaries
Ism .-------,....,111111111.111,40,X!'-''.'•" 2:-I,...- '• ':,„'::••••-: "7'':471. -'1.-:;,,,. •ii- i iiii,:latvink_liii,1 mi ilwirm,../.7.14,_
si i II MM.riSirgbISIMMIlle
MEI
11,111 os
."II.7 iglinaliiiinliiiiiiIMMEMI MEMO Illeinim.*"..1111111111 211 111.11_,.L‘v‘7:..:ilii.n.:::..
t-I" . ..: 1 rialliairli""aral:711111111 Willi' Illf 1111Sorik\-4'.'. :...,:.......: :::::..,:••,..:.:::sinic,:s:Ell ""11"11--1111 us•••••••r nwalwavimiow,
. • -•., i„. Illin."1..""jilleil
..,___________._ .,...Nlip ..,,,. _
i
ulasossilp , mom t.-...-.,... - ......•.,.... ,-;,‘,3.-:-. 2 a immommaiL....alimmommostAgrommigleg.
liiiistsmurinFus.14 lit ..?"1"....z-::;;-:.-:\z",(4140111......'..--.:::.'N'10'6111111 8--0AP4,-;:sziPoo""-,INIENITINISII•wil-millrijgb 1." 1- Outside s of proposed boundaries
ii,
1 Allisailliiiim,sumo por 1111111.:-.- -;.;:-:i:: ,l'.4W.:'::,;2..-i.;H:,:-...:V.-:::'..:,.:.:::-. 7.,:ii..... ...oral
E1116-716riiiagoill 111411-fico .4.-...00.6=IFAu.„,....,
.,.
Urban Growth Area
. .. ..„,... sanorszymum Elf
MIMS 1111111111111MIL-
: • ' 1 1111111!11.011 ............. i . 4,.....zirls EINE SitralliPS 1111111::RielViillitlitalift
..:1., -1„:-..,4, t.„,..,
Water Bodies '
' . . •P''''-'---IIr'4lliirill..Saoi19rllfouirllMllaNIIIIII - - MIN'''.'...Ari:",.`‘1.-,911•=-1 170.• • ;IT::rzsmswiivng4,11111173,4„, Ell17:201..misms ossuramos11111
--'•-ar 5 :'"OP 4:'7.0') 11,'-11 ' r‘1".1011110111411161 111112 it rIA_,‘PAilfittiir --goi--..1,....,___,J, ruir„,-101.12=
rAri.iv,.. i', --al "'..'''.•••W 102.0.11.10,111111 '7,t z,11,--,., iretti-_-ri...t.,,-,owismismos i irgor.limmiii Incorporated Areas
L
.,,.........4447.....22,:41i-_-.2.11„,,,,-1 ,,,,,„,;,,,,,,..011.14:43e,......_,,,u,,,,r1.4.....„.... i•B
I , ein,..,....:..',:''....i:. '''::..51111moi.,16ot iiiiiiii11104119.. iiill.........1111111.3111111• .-di%..;.'''...-,.,,,ii,,,,,,,.,;:1-,.,.....„fly.:Fir.....-..... it mrWI
.1',' ._.t--,ti7 .,1:1:.".:
iIIMiil.'
.'-.i_lililllkidll IRIIIIII'i"Tko"a4 l^.o1w6ro,.o11m-NmI"sii-oomn-llmsig0i1w..1.1-...u.4-..-1.m1191•I11!1„„1I..L_I=7,.-,,.i--,,=.-.r;=..-..Ii:-i.-_-.,i--ilt.itn.i.gl.Tl-f.i..:.,.m-,,.=...i..,,,.Fr,....,1i.,1•l•1t•„0'a•m.1..7,,,.::4,,=:7:4.,.=,,:.....:...:::..:-i-..,..i:..;..e:;.,:;;;!-::l:i,...s,;,,t..:.o...,.:ip__-,rA imIilN.hrao.. ..7-m_,%.,v_.-ri....ta.4., _.-„1•.N..i1ta t
iff,0ne,.,.i ,,-„, 'NmE u1111S1.lai1ltil1ig
0le.0ok
11
441 Proposedd Cityy 000futSspic0::nfeuVGaAley
11
AN ii
,. .,,,Ini., ...!„„0-,..,,,,P .•,,, .... 0,00,47.11... ,. 1.111.11.M.... =MI
Miele Pallirgillairilrliftitrpt;•.;.;i4tirl.",1,7,::..s.,"...4'11111 lifall INA%:: 1.....zooms-111111111.m1111111fillim o°111, _.oi III
4,m......,
------
A diall hi ,....m= ,•**,,i,:ti;',1110-4'.'111111.1111k
ig.:..:Vir- 'ilti:4_A.;;'-f4,7;;Aje *MON 1111102tWAIMIIMmum Iv li.,.flio.1..., - 4111.1.111111111411111.1111ral..71\611111111.2 Krilitral ~I..
lie OA 1
lei: t„: iti..3r.."*.,_,b; Ping-.....111111 -diside„,•LI---..,.... iiirilillaillgiiiir7:‘.7-7,-. ,,,moil• --"Lorgr-4.--14,,cm....1„,..-1,„„saam, I All"----imualies-
............-_ _______
1....,...4„.....,
July 2001
101111211. l'i-Iiii"" Plilk."1"sa. iiM d illiglamml•-••••mmoisimillou- '-'--I"'"--1111 1-h-
IVO 111•1111141. --,:xtexerpag.,,,..,.
Washington State BoundaReview Board for Spokane County Spokane Valley Inco
oration
rporation Study
1