Loading...
2010, 05-04 Study Session AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STUDY SESSION FORMAT 6:00 p.m. Tuesday,May 4,2010 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11707 East Sprague Avenue,First Floor (Please Silence Your Cell Phones During the Meeting) DISCUSSION LEADER SUBJECT/ACTIVITY GOAL 1. Briahna Taylor Legislative Update Discussion/Information 2. Ian Robertson Panhandling Discussion/Information 3. Cary Driskell Comcast Contract Extension Discussion/Information 4. Mike Basinger Collaborative Planning Discussion/Information 5. Steve Worley Six Year 2011-2016 Transportation Discussion/Information Improvement Plan 6. Lori Barlow Shoreline Master Program Discussion/Information 7. Carolbelle Branch Website Update Discussion/Information 8. Greg McCormick Subarea Plan (SARP) Sprague/ Discussion/Information Appleway Revitalization Plan Economic Analysis 9. John Whitehead City Manager Recruitment Discussion/Information 10. Mike Connelly/Kathy Pending Zoning Matters Discussion/Information McClung 11. Mayor Towey Advance Agenda Discussion/Information 12. Information Only (will not be discussed or reported): (a)Summer Construction (b)Administration Quarterly Report 13. Mayor Towey Council Check in Discussion/Information 14. Mike Jackson City Manager Comments Discussion/Information ADJOURN Note: Unless otherwise noted above, there will be no public comments at Council Study Sessions. However, Council always reserves the right to request information from the public and staff as appropriate. During meetings held by the City of Spokane Valley Council,the Council reserves the right to take"action"on any item listed or subsequently added to the agenda. The term"action" means to deliberate,discuss,review,consider,evaluate,or make a collective positive or negative decision. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other impairments,please contact the City Clerk at(509)921-1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. Study Session Format Agenda May 4,2010 Page 1 of 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Legislative Program Update GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Governmental Affairs Consultant Briahna Taylor, of Gordon Thomas Honeywell Governmental Affairs, will give Council an update on the 2010 Legislative Program. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: City of Spokane Valley Legislative Program 2010 Presented by: Gordon Thomas Honeywell Governmental Affairs Briahna Taylor, Governmental Affairs Consultant ❑ Short Legislative Session -m Supplemental Budget — Deficit! m Special Session CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Panhandling Update GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: ChangePoint Spokane (two -page flyer) History of Panhandling Issue discussed at council meetings Chan. 6 Point SPOKANE What to help a p anhandler? Don't give money from your car Handling money to panhandlers on busy streets and freeway intersections endangers the life of the panhandler and other motorists. If you want to help, please give money to the social services that provide food, clothing, shelter, and a way off the streets. Give change to a panhandler and 80 percent of the money will not be spent on food and shelter. At the same time, generous people in our area want to help all who have real needs: people with mental illnesses... those who have lost jobs, homes, income... disadvantaged families many with children going through tough times. That's where Change for the Better comes in. Will you help us get rid of those who beg on our streets because it is lucrative? Will you also generously support our area -wide effort to better serve the poor and needy through ChangePoint and Spokane Valley Partners? With their permission, we borrowed the theme "Change for the Better" from Anchorage, AK. This includes some of the graphics. We are learning how that city made a start in solving the problem. With your help, Change for the Better will be a very real ChangePoint for the disadvantaged and needy in our community. There are homeless children and adults in our community who truly need help and hope. Together, we can make real change. With the economic crisis, the needs are never been greater. Please complete the form on the other side and let's partner together for the common good. There are two parts to (' mm w�Rv ad Ucation Tell FRAN (Friends, Associates, N eighbors, Associates) about "change for the Better. ". Sign up below to get the word out! Give each employee a flyer with the next paycheck. Distribute them at your next neighborhood watch meeting. Get a supply for members of your church or service club. Show your friends there is a better way to bring about real change. 2. Helping the disadvantaged in our c ommunit y Local and national statistics show that 80 percent of panhandling is done by people taking advantage of the generosity of others. We're updating the old Burma Shave ads! "Panhandlers aren't.., what they appear.., some make begging... their career." or "Your loose change... makes addicts worse... speeds the time... to call the hearse.' or "Offer money... I will grab it... need your cash.., to feed my habit." Let's direct local charitable giving to the agencies that have the professional staff and resources to offer needed help. Our local Chamber of Commerce has endorsed Spokane Valley Partners. Here's where your change can bring real change. "A society's character is defined by how it cares for the elderly and the disadvantaged." — Tocqueville, French philosopher and here's ' how you can hit.. y UI,1:? Panhandler Sam's Story By Colin K. Robertson Let me intro myself. I'm panhandler Sam. Some make accusations that I'm running a scam do have my wheel -chair and wear some grungy clothes But standing on the curb gives pain that nobody knows So I need a Ip ace to sit and rest my hurting leg. And by the way my doy's the one who showed me how to beg. Old ladies like him and give mon ey for his food For me not to ac cept it would ap pear very rude. I do have a cardboard sign that says "Will Work For f=ood But most days that I'm offered work I'm not in the mood And all the skills I seem to have are not in de All I do is stand there, they put money in my hand There are places I can go and get three meals a day. So wh take a 'job and get deductions from my pay? I'm copying the government; they take more than they give. Don't you under it that a man's got to live. If anyone Is thinking that I'm really not a gent My wife's taken care of with subsidized rent! They give her clothes and medical assistance, so to speak And also plenty food stamps to last her through the week I don't have to worry if my children might get sick. They all can take the bus and seek assistance from the WIC. And, yes, my children go to school; they don't have to pay. Children are a blessing; there's another on the way, Business owners �jay that we keep customers awl, hone that they will understand that begging's here to stay But we'll make this peace pledge; we do not want a war. We won't lake the time to defecate behind your store Everyone's got habits. Under me, I have mine Even though it's drugs ciga beer and wine. If you want to help me, get those wierdos off �the street Too much competition really clutters up my beat. Pan not a problem. (I ex press my point of view.) I know that you're discussing all the things that you might do. Dem ocrats, Republicans, everyone's the same Each are looking out for some other guy to blame But don't make any new laws in case you over I'm sure there's plenty lawyers who'll protect my free speech " Change for the better." I like your chosen theme Give me all your change because it helps my self- es to OGE 4 � ] THE E TTIE R) iwj,j"WXVA'��IMOLOAWI .loin the "Change for the Better" team. Complete and mail in the form below, or sign up at www.svpart.org ---------------------------------------------------------- •-- _...._.. --- - - - - -- We want to be part of the "Change for the Better" team in the greater Spokane Valley area. Name Company /Church /Club /Neighborhood Phone E -mail ❑ Send us (8% x 3g /) flyers to distribute to each of our employees or members ❑ Send us posters (8'/ x 11) to post at our business/church/club ❑..We can supply volunteer(s) to help with the campaign. Contact us on how we can help. Mail to: CitangePoint Spokane, 10814 E. Broadway, Suite 204, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Panhandling regulations discussed at council meetings 7 -13 -2004: 8. Panhandling Regulations — Cary Driskell Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained the memo accompanying his July 13 Request for Council Action, which is a synopsis of the research performed by legal intern Joshua Leonard. Attorney Driskell stressed that the Courts give this issue very close scrutiny as it deals with constitutionally protected speech. Discussion turned to traffic flow, littering, other donating options, requiring a business license, and for safety reasons, prohibiting panhandling at intersections. Refined options concerning this issue will be brought back again for further discussion. 10 -19 -04 7. Panhandling Research Report Cal Walker /Cary Driskell Chief Walker summarized his October 11 report, and shoved several slides of areas of concerns, he mentioned that he met with several individuals from various social agencies to discuss ways to work together in contacting the homeless to assist them in their situation and to also aid in criminal prevention; he mentioned that at I -90 and Sullivan next to the Mirabeau Hotel, there have been about fifteen to twenty people camping regularly in a spot near the freeway; that most businesses don't want the transients using their facilities; and with the people camping in that and other areas, human waste is a problem; that some of these people are mentally impaired, and he asked how Council desires to address this in the community. Discussion turned to the issue of people passing money from their cars to the panhandlers which at times infringes on the flow of traffic; and along with this to perhaps set some guidelines about people volunteering their time to solicit donations for valid charities. Mayor DeVleming asked what we can do to help protect businesses in the community and those who are being victimized by those campers. Chief Walker will direct his staff to work on camping issue, and Attorney Driskell said he will also check to see the approach used by other Cities facing these similar issues 5 -22 -07 8. Panhandling Update — Cary Driskell /Erik Lamb Legal Intern Lamb told Council that currently the City regulates panhandling under Spokane Valley Municipal Code 8.25.020, described as aggressive panhandling that regulates begging that intimidates or threatens or coerces people into giving money. Mr. Lamb defined panhandling and cautioned Council that in terms of regulating panhandling, the City needs to remember that legally it is a form of expression and is protected. He presented options for regulation as being 1.) to promote a public awareness campaign to encourage other means of charitable contributions and discourage donating to individual panhandlers; 2) to expand the definition of aggressive begging to include other behaviors such as fraud, exploitation of children or obstruction of traffic with intent to intimidate; or 3) to continue enforcement of SVMC 8.25.020. 1 -15 -08 1. Panhandling — Cary Driskell Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained that this issue has been discussed several times in the past particularly where it concerned aggressive begging; that more recently Council requested research on the effectiveness of public awareness campaigns in other cities, and wanted an analysis of the legality of a licensing or permitting approach. Mr. Driskell briefly explained his January 15, 2008 Memorandum and pointed out other cities' practices in dealing with panhandling, that some cities have a downtown core or specific area where regulations apply, thereby making administration of policies somewhat easier than trying to regulate the entire city, and he added that some cities focus on the "root" problem, e.g. substance abuse, rather than a perceived homeless problem. Deputy Mayor Denenny stated that he feels education and signage can make a difference, that our focus should be on abating traffic conditions at intersections, or people standing along streets, and that there are Page 1 of 6 Panhandling regulations discussed at council meetings specific areas which would see a significant reduction in the amount of panhandling should education and signage be instigated; and that people have a natural tendency to help so if we educate them that giving money is not helping, we stop the giving and the panhandling will stop. Councilmember Gothmann stated that newly elected Planning Commission Chair Ian Robertson indicated a willingness to work as part of an ad hoc committee to develop an education system. Mayor Munson also mentioned he would like to see an ad hoc committee of two councilmembers, some representation from the faith community and other organizations, to provide this education; that the City of Spokane and Liberty Lake have programs, yet nothing is being coordinated in the area; and with council permission, he'd like to authorize forming an ad hoc committee to flush out this task" with the primary job to coordinate all programs, to make contact with others to see how other cities handle this situation„ and to set up a regional coordination effort. Mayor Munson said he will put together some names and have specific tasks for this committee; that it should consist of five or six people; and that we should publicize the desire for community volunteers. Deputy City Attorney Driskell then briefed Council on the possibility of the City adopting a licensing approach and of charging people a panhandling licensing fee; he said that such approach must be done carefully as we cannot impose an undue financial hardship and it cannot be a long licensing process as it could be perceived as an infringement on protected speech; and he said he is only aware of a few places that have panhandling licensing requirements, and that the Cincinnati ordinance was challenged; that he is very apprehensive on moving forward on this; and suggests we exhaust other remedies before considering a licensing approach. Councilmember Taylor said he would like to approach this more as a traffic safety issue; that people are not supposed to receive anything from someone in a vehicle on the road, and that any contact with a vehicle on the road is a potential hazard; that this should be addressed and perhaps the person giving the money could be ticketed as well as the one receiving the donation. Mr. Driskell said staff would need to work with the police to identify the scope of the program from a traffic impact standpoint and show a safety issue; and that data would have to be collected regarding the history of accidents while people are accepting money. In response to inquiry from Mayor Munson, Police Chief VanLeuven said that officers are briefed on watching for aggressive panhandling; that they receive numerous calls from businesses and citizens complaining about panhandling, or trespassing and /or obstructing traffic, and such is included in his monthly report. Mr. Driskell said that any enforcement of this issue must be done uniformly, and activities such as the Fire Department's "fill the boot" would not be permitted to be in traffic, but they could be directed to have such fundraisers in private parking lots. Councilmember Taylor said he feels the "fill the boot" activities are obstructing traffic and causing hazards. Mayor Munson said that the licensing or registering of businesses is an effort to identify business to make sure they are in the correct zone, that a criminal records check is performed, and that the license could be free but the process would give us an opportunity to check out the panhandlers, which would be beneficial for public safety; and that he agrees to start with a less intrusive aspect, and if this problem can't be solved, it will need further examination. 2 -26 -08 6. Ad Hoc Committee Charters — Mayor Munson/Deputy Mayor Denenny Mayor Munson explained that regarding panhandling, a goal is to identify other programs throughout the county that are addressing this issue, and to find out what other cities are doing, then begin the process of cooperation in applying programs; and ultimately have the committee recommend what kind of community information program to institute to help people understand the choices in helping panhandlers; and to recommend to council any other actions needed to address this. Mayor Munson suggested opening the committee formulation process to application, then write a task for the committee members based on those points just mentioned; and he mentioned that Spokane City Mayor Verner and Page 2 of 6 Panhandling regulations discussed at council meetings Liberty Lake Mayor are amicable to this process; and that we should have at least two councilmembers to give guidance on what we can and cannot do. Councilmembers Gothmann and Dempsey volunteered for this ad hoc committee. Councilmember Wilhite mentioned she would like to see a report from Spokane and Liberty Lake on how they are handling this issue and what they are doing, for us to see what has been accomplished then decide what the charter would be for our committee as committee members must be aware of First Amendment rights. Mayor Munson said he would also like the faith community involved in program development, and that perhaps another source of information would be the Gospel Mission, adding that we do not want to duplicate efforts, but the first step would be to gather information on what is already available in the community. Mayor Munson asked staff to advertise for these committee members, and of the seven total committee members, we have two councilmembers and Planning Commission Chair Ian Robertson has volunteered, leaving a need for four more committee members. 3 -25 -08 6. Motion Consideration: Panhandling Ad Hoc Committee — Mike Jackson It was moved by Councibnember Taylor and seconded to establish a panhandling ad hoc committee. Deputy City Manager Jackson explained that per previous council discussion, Council desired to form a Panhandling Ad Hoc Committee consisting of a total of seven members, two of which would be Councilmembers Gothmann and Dempsey, and a Ian Robertson as a representative of the faith -based community, leaving openings for four other members; that the purpose of the committee would be to investigate matters related to panhandling and advise Council on those findings; and to identify other programs throughout the County that address this issue, research what other cities are doing, explore the potential of cooperation in applying programs, then determine what program to implement in order to help people understand the choices they have to assist panhandlers; and that the sunset provision would not exceed the term of the appointing Mayor. Councilmember Gothmann suggested adding that the Committee should consider whether the City should have an ordinance. Mayor Munson invited public comment, no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion passed. 7 -29 -08 (Joint meeting with Spokane City Council) 5. Panhandlinm Councilmember McLaughlin said that Spokane Attorney Mike Piccolo has drafted several ordinances; and Councilmember Gothmann indicated he received those proposed ordinances. Ms. McLaughlin said the proposed ordinance deal with pedestrian interference, sitting or lying on public sidewalks, solicitation of vehicle occupants, street performers, and that these draft ordinances have been circulated for feedback. Mr. Piccolo said this issue can't be discussed without discussing constitutional issues and constitutionally protected expressions; that they sent their draft ordinances to the Center for Justice and to Gonzaga University's legal assistance program, which both agreed to review them and provide input; that the draft ordinances are still in the early stages; that they continue to collect input, and that the draft ordinances will eventually come before Spokane's public safety committee then to the full council. Research Analyst Todd Babcock added that the group is studying overlap concerning panhandling restrictions, and that Spokane's issues may be a little broader then the Valley's as Spokane deals with panhandling and anarchists as well as pedestrian interference, loitering and vandalism, which are all related to panhandling; and said Mr. Gothmann expressed interest that the Spokane Valley ordinance has good overlap with the City of Spokane's so as to approach this issue regionally and have consistency in the ordinance, and not to criminalize panhandling but to address similar concerns. Councilmember Gothmann said he has the drafts from Spokane's legal department, but has not yet sent them to Spokane Valley's legal department, but the entire committee received copies today. Councilmember Gothmann said his committee is only examining panhandling, but realizes those other issues mentioned could be addressed and coordinated later; he explained how members of law enforcement visited the committee meeting who explained that panhandling is primarily done by professional panhandlers and not by people with legitimate social needs; and he gave examples of reported people who make their living as a panhandler; Page 3 of 6 Panhandling regulations discussed at council meetings and added that some panhandlers have outstanding warrants; and that the committee realizes the need for a public education program, and of law changes, but stressed the problem would be better addressed through public education. Councilmember Gothmann also mentioned some of the suggested changes in the law, such as prohibiting drivers from giving funds while driving, and time and place restrictions. Mr. Gothmann shared some information he received from Ian Robertson on Alaska programs and mentioned the website of changeforthebetteralaska.org he mentioned ideas from other social service agencies such as the Catholic Social Service, and ideas to collect money to help those in need; and said that giving money to panhandlers likely will go toward drugs and alcohol rather than food and shelter. Councilmember Gothmann said his next step is to write a final report to Council explaining their suggested changes to the law, how to conduct an ad campaign, and how to turn this project into a community driven organization. Discussion ensued regarding any proposed law and its enforcement, public education, the charge of the committee from Mayor Munson, involving the County (if needed), and other municipalities. 9 -30 -08 2. Panhandling Committee Report — Councilmember Gothmann Councilmember Gothmann went through his PowerPoint and written report giving examples of the problems associated with panhandlers, and stressed several times of the importance of not directly giving to panhandlers as many have drug and /or alcohol problems, and said there are numerous public service agencies such as Spokane Valley Partners, Meals on Wheels, 2 Hands, and others, which can assist panhandlers with meals, shelter, etc., and mentioned the program used in Anchorage Alaska which encourages giving special wooden nickels which panhandlers can cash in for food, clothing, and other essentials. Councilmember Gothmann mentioned the recommendations of the Panhandling Committee such as having an ordinance prohibiting panhandling within one hundred feet of an ATM, bus stop, traffic signal, or freeway entrance; to prohibit motorists and passengers from giving while in a traffic lane, and to prohibit panhandling while intoxicated. Mayor Munson suggested adding into any local ordinance, provisions for law enforcement to address the issue; and Attorney Connelly mentioned that a "public drunkenness" prohibition might be better described as "disorderly and lewdness" according to state statute, but that he will research that further. Continued discussion included advertising on websites, via posters, radio and newspapers to inform citizens of the alternatives to giving money directly to the panhandlers; and Councilmember Gothmann suggested entering into an agreement with Anchorage to acquire some of their materials. Aside from education and enforcement, Councilmember Gothmann suggested having a standing committee, perhaps regionally, to further handle these issues, and to involve businesses, service clubs, members of the faith - based community, and to include a media director; that such could be funded by Spokane Valley and /or businesses, the city of Spokane, or others, to help address this area -wide problem, and that it would be best if such committee were run by businesses throughout the area rather then by Spokane Valley or other municipalities, although Councilmembers might want to be represented on such a committee. City of Spokane Research Analyst Todd Babcock was invited to speak, and he mentioned they are waiting to hear from the Center for Justice at the Gonzaga Law School concerning sample ordinances as the committee is searching for a good example of an anti - enabling ordinance or something that has some Constitutional review, but they have not found any samples yet; as penalizing drivers could be problematic. Further discussion included similar problems faced in other cities, and additional problems to panhandling such as vandalism, anarchists, and obstructionists; and Chief VanLeuven estimated there are between thirty and fifty panhandlers in Spokane Valley, said there are some panhandlers here with outstanding warrants from other states which will not extradite those people; and added that "no trespassing" signs are a good deterrent. Mayor Munson thanked the members of the committee and suggested he and Councilmember Gothmann visit the Board of County Commissioners, and the City of Spokane, to give them a similar presentation; with the idea of speaking to civic organizations later; and he Page 4 of 6 Panhandling regulations discussed at council meetings asked for Council's comments concerning drafting of an ordinance. Councilmember Gothmann suggested staff draft an ordinance simultaneously with he and Mayor Munson making presentations to other jurisdictions, and Councilmember Taylor mentioned that the City of Spokane is working on an ordinance and he would like to see a package of ordinances. Mr. Babcock mentioned that other cities such as Tacoma, Seattle, Issaquah, and Portland have implemented ordinances and implemented programs a few years ago; but that no ordinance he has seen includes any anti - enabling clause. Being mindful of staff s workload, it was determined that Council can shop this presentation to other jurisdictions to detennine if there is regional interest to address this problem uniformly while staff works on drafting an ordinance to address panhandling. There was Council consensus that staff draft an ordinance to include anti - enabling provisions or to discourage people from giving from their cars while in the middle of a public right -of- way and other safety issues, that Mr. Mercier will consult with staff to determine the best timeframe to bring this issue back before Council, and that Councilmember Gothmann and Mayor Munson will get together to work on mentioned issues with other entities. 1 -5 -09 Panhandling Councilmember Gothmann asked about the next steps for panhandling; that the concept was that Council would promote a regional organization to develop an education program and he suggested Ian Robertson form a regional committee. Council concurred with that suggestion. 4 -14 -09 Ian Robertson, 1716 S Rotchford Drive: said he wanted to give a report from the Panhandling Committee and discuss a clean air proposal using federal grants to help fund infrastructure improvements without increasing local taxes. Regarding panhandling, Mr. Robertson said that Council appointed a committee last year to investigate what could be done about the growing panhandling problem, and said when Council is ready, that Committee would like to give a presentation to Council; the committee has three recommendations such as safety and security issues which would require local ordinance changes, said that about 20% of panhandlers need genuine help in dealing with drug problems and /or mental illness, and he said the Committee will recommend that police and others may refer those people to existing social service agencies, and that the Committee will recommend authorizing a PAC (panhandling action committee) to educate the public about the problem; and Mr. Robertson volunteer to lead such a group if that is Council's desire. Mr. Robertson said he was informed by one panhandler that he made between $60 and $80 every two hours, and the panhandlers himself told Mr. Robertson that there is something wrong when a panhandlers outside Wal -Mart can make more money in one day then an employee of Wal- Mart. Regarding turning trash into cash, Mr. Robertson said he distributed a copy of a letter previously given to Mayor Munson regarding Community Minded Enterprises, of which Mr. Robertson is a member, wrote a $4.1 million grant application for F.B. ScoSolutions (a Spokane Valley company) to the Department of Energy to build an Advanced Anaerobic Digester System and a Methanol Reactor somewhere in Washington State; and said if this is built adjacent to the Waste -to- Energy plant by the Spokane airport, and if our City, Spokane City and Spokane County designate the new federal energy block grants of $3.5 million, this facility could be built without local or state tax money; and he explained it would provide clean energy that could provide a source of income for Spokane Valley and its neighbors for years to come; and would save millions of dollars by not hauling over 66,000 tons of waste every year to the Regional Landfill in Klickitat County. Mr. Robertson said he is available to make a presentation to Council later on this issue as well. 7 -14 -09 8. Panhandling Ordinance — Cary Driskell Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained the background of the panhandling issue as indicated on his July 14, 2009 Request for Council Action form; that in review of Spokane City's ordinance, Mr. Driskell mentioned two additional possible prohibitions: (1) that panhandling not be permitted within fifty feet of Page 5 of 6 Panhandling regulations discussed at council meetings a payphoneI and (2) that it not be permitted within fifteen feet of a self -serve car wash. Mr. Driskell said with the rapid decline of the payphone, and the limited number of self -serve car washes, Council may not want to include those prohibitions, and after brief Council discussion, there was no Council objection to remove those prohibitions. There was some discussion concerning very small median strips and obstructing traffic, and mention that solicitation within the right -of -way can only be done with a special events permit as that activity addresses several safety requirements. Prior to moving this ordinance forward for a first reading, Mr. Driskell said he would like to send it to the Center for Justice for their comments, adding that he would inform Council once he receives comments from the Center for Justice. There was also mention of the education committee and moving that issue forward including detennining who might chair the committee, but it was determined to wait until an ordinance is passed. 8 -11 -09 11. Proposed Panhandling Ordinance — Cary Driskell Deputy City Attorney Driskell mentioned that his Request for Council Action form references an attachment which was not attached and he distributed copies of the July 16, 2009 letter to him from Bonne Beavers of the Center for Justice. As per his August 4, 2009 memorandum, Mr. Driskell provided Council an update on the panhandling issue including an opinion from the Center for Justice; he explained that due to Constitutional limitations as set forth in a number of case law decisions as referenced in his memorandum, Mr. Driskell advised it would be in the best interest of the City not to pursue this, but to proceed with the educational element previously discussed; and it was determined to proceed with that educational element, that Councilmembers Gothmann and Robertson would volunteer their time and work to form a regional committee to include citizens from Spokane and Liberty Lake. 2 -23 -10 11. Panhandling Update — Cary Driskell Deputy- City Attorney Driskell gave an update on the panhandling issue as per the materials included in the council's packet; he mentioned his discussions with staff from the City of Spokane; that he examined Seattle's code provisions; the Ninth Court of Appeals cases which ultimately considers panhandling freedom of speech and expression; and that we sent a draft ordinance to the Center for Justice to get their input and the accompanying letter from them states their analysis of our draft under existing and new Constitutional case decisions. Mr. Driskell said we have provisions on obstructing traffic and or on aggressive panhandling and on disorderly conduct; that he recommends focusing on enforcing those provisions and proceed with an educational program to let citizens know they can donate to such places as the House of Charity or any of the Missions instead of giving money to panhandlers, as about 80% of money given to panhandlers is used for drugs and alcohol. Councilmember Gothmann mentioned the efforts of the Panhandling Committee and his report of September 26, 2008, and said that the "Card and Wooden Nickel" program used in Alaska appears to be an effective program (wooden nickels to give to the homeless for two days of food, clothing and shelter); and he said he would be willing to act as liaison to proceed with an education program and to report back to council periodically. Council concurred. Page 6 of 6 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative Report — Ordinance extending time for acceptance of franchise. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Ordinance 09 -034 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Approval of Comcast franchise December 1, 2009; discussion regarding PEG fees February 16, 2010; discussion on PEG fees March 9, 2010; discussion on broadcasting options April 27, 2010. BACKGROUND: The Council adopted Ordinance 09 -034, which approved the franchise between Spokane Valley and Comcast so that Comcast may place its cable facilities in the City's right -of -way so it can operate its' business. One of the requirements of the franchise (a contract granted by ordinance), Section 43, is for Comcast to return it signed within 60 days of it being in effect. It was in effect February 10, 2010, so it would have to have been returned by April 11, 2010. Before April 11, 2010, the City Council decided it wanted to look closely at whether it wanted to broadcast Council and other public meetings, which could impact whether some of the PEG fees would need to be collected and spent. This resulted in discussions with Comcast that apparently led to an understanding by Comcast that it should not return the signed franchise by April 11, 2010. City staff has had subsequent discussions with Comcast, and that issue has been cleared up. The proposal is to extend the time to return the signed franchise from April 11, 2010 to June 11, 2010. In conjunction with this proposed ordinance, staff has requested from Comcast that they immediately return the signed franchise, and not wait until after this proposed franchise is signed. OPTIONS: (1) consensus to put proposed ordinance on May 11, 2010 agenda for first reading with no changes (2) consensus to put proposed ordinance on May 11, 2010 agenda for first reading with requested changes; (3) consensus to put on the May 11, 2010 agenda, suspend rules and adopt as drafted. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to put this issue on the May 11, 2010 agenda, to suspend the rules at that time and adopt the ordinance. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: 1) Draft Proposed ordinance extending time for Comcast to return signed franchise DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 10- * * * AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, EXTENDING THE TIME PERIOD FOR ACCEPTANCE OF ORDINANCE 09- 034, SECTION 43, BY GRANTEE, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley passed Ordinance 09 -034 on December 1, 2009 granting Comcast of Pennsylvania/Washington/West Virginia, LP a non - exclusive franchise to construct, maintain and operate certain facilities within the public right -of -way and public properties within the City of Spokane Valley, Washington; and WHEREAS, Section 43 of Ordinance 09 -034 states that not later than 60 days after passage and publication of the Ordinance, Grantee must accept the franchise by filing with the City Clerk an unconditional written acceptance thereof; and WHEREAS, the City published Ordinance 09 -034 on February 5, 2010, and the effective date was February 10, 2010, beginning the 60 day acceptance period; and WHEREAS, due to communication from the City of Spokane Valley regarding Public, Education and Government (PEG) fees under Section 13.8 of the franchise, Comcast was unclear as to whether the City intended to receive the PEG fees. As such, Comcast did not return the fully executed franchise within 60 days as set forth in Section 43; and WHEREAS, Section 43 of Ordinance 09 -034 provides that the time period for acceptance may be extended by an ordinance passed for that purpose; and WHEREAS, the City has cleared up the communication issue with Comcast, and wishes to extend the time period for acceptance for 60 additional days from April 11, 2010 to June 11, 2010. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, ordains as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to extend the time period for acceptance by Grantee of Ordinance 09 -034 an additional 60 days, from April 11, 2010, to June 11, 2010. Section 2. Extending Time For Acceptance of Ordinance 09 -034 Additional 60 Days The time period for Grantee to accept Ordinance 09 -034 is extended 60 additional days from the effective date of February 10, 2010. Grantee must accept the franchise by June 11, 2010. Failure of Grantee to accept this franchise within said period will result in the consequences set forth in Ordinance 09 -034, Section 43. Section 3 . Severability If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Draft Ordinance extending time for Comcast Acceptance (Franchise) Page 1 of 2 DRAFT Section 4 . Effective Date This Ordinance shall become effective five days after publication of the Ordinance, or a summary thereof, in the official newspaper of the City. Adopted this day of 1 2010. City of Spokane Valley ATTEST: City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved as to Form: Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Office of the City Attorney Draft Ordinance extending time for Comcast Acceptance (Franchise) Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Collaborative Planning GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A (Growth Management Act) PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: This grant was used to evaluate differences in land use (zoning) and development standards, identify fiscal restraints related to annexation, and explore service delivery options within the metropolitan Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). OPTIONS: N/A RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: No action required BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: $10,000 STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger, AICP, Senior Planner ATTACHMENT: Memorandum - Collaborative Planning 1 of 1 PO -Kane ..;,oOValley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 * Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhatt@spokanevalley.org Memorandum To: Mike Jackson, City Manager; City Council From: Mike Basinger, Senior Planner CC: Kathy McClung, Community Development Director Date: May 4, 2010 Re: CTED Regional Collaboration Grant The collaborative planning process began in 2006 with the development of a committee comprised of representatives from Spokane County and the cities of Spokane, Spokane Valley, Liberty Lake, Millwood, and Airway Heights. The committee determined there was a need for coordinated planning within the Metro Urban Growth Areas. This was an outcome of the metro cities' concerns regarding development in the Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) adjacent to their municipal boundaries. In addition, Spokane County was concerned about potential annexations and lost revenues. In 2007, the committee acquired funding through a competitive grant offered by the Washington State Department of Community Trade and Economic Development (CTED). Funding from this grant was used to evaluate differences in land use, zoning, and development standards, fiscal impacts related to annexation, and service delivery options within the metro UGAs. In 2008, the committee obtained further funding through a CTED Emerging Issues Grant to identify potential efficiencies and /or revenue solutions that will enhance fiscal sustainability and identify the cost of regional and local services provided by Spokane County. Last year, the County funded a study to address long -term fiscal sustainability. This study evaluated regional revenues and the regional services the County is required to provide. In addition, it analyzed local revenues and local services that the County provides to unincorporated areas. Through this collaborative planning process, Spokane County is now in a better position to address its ongoing fiscal challenges. In order to address these fiscal challenges now and in the future, the County will likely need the support of the collaborating cities. This last phase of the collaborative effort will identify opportunities for local and regional service efficiencies that will benefit Spokane County and the metropolitan cities. Furthermore, this analysis should benefit the City of Spokane Valley by providing a better understanding of the service delivery in Spokane County. At this point, the Collaborative Planning committee requests that the metropolitan cities make a financial commitment based on population to identify a fiscally sustainable revenue and service delivery structure for Spokane County. In order to continue this effort, the City of Spokane Valley's contribution would be $10,000, City of Spokane's would be $20,000, and the other metro cities would contribute $5,000. T " " (.1SP AW Department of Community Devel "pikane .'able Planning Division E� ktd.. "I - o k 41c tmtrn rban nowt h A Spokane Spokane Valley Lake Airway Heights Metro Urban Growth Area aka•► "TYHA"�`SPKA"F` Department of Community Development r'Ualley Planning Division A . r,1JC;%Lr initexho CTED Grant - $68,000 in zoo6 to Survey Development Regulations CTED Grant - $150,000 in Zoo8 to Develop Consistent Development Regulations Determine Fiscal Issues Associated with UGAs And Ultimately, Negotiate Interlocal Agreements CTED Grant - $zo,000 in aoog to Identify General Service Delivery and Revenue Options Spokane County - $33,000 in zoog to Determine Local and Regional Revenues/ Service Delivery Costs [: iTV HA I. I Q S PC7 KA V F'J ,,. Department of Community Development y `pokane Valk Planning Division i MCgordinated- Development f QwIUGAs CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Draft 2011 — 2016 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.77.010, Perpetual advanced six -year plans for coordinated transportation program expenditures. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adopted 2010 -2015 Six Year TIP last year on June 16, 2009, Resolution #09 -009. BACKGROUND: The City is required by RCW 35.77.010 to prepare and after public hearing adopt a revised and extended comprehensive transportation program for the ensuing six calendar years. This plan must be submitted to the Washington State Secretary of Transportation before July 1s' of each year. The attached draft 2011 — 2016 Six Year TIP represents a preliminary update to the 2010 -2015 adopted Six Year TIP. This first draft should be considered a `work in progress' and may be updated again prior to, and after receiving comments from, the Public Hearing scheduled for May 25, 2010. Staff will also be presenting an overview on street improvement categories and funding for street improvements. OPTIONS: Discuss TIP project list and /or project schedules RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Provide feedback and direction to staff. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: As the proposed 2011 -2016 TIP continues to evolve, staff will coordinate with the Finance Department to ensure the proposed 2011 -2016 TIP projects are budgeted within the Street Capital Projects Fund. STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten, Public Works Director; Steve Worley, Senior Engineer — Capital Projects ATTACHMENTS: 1) Street Grant Funding Summary, 2) Draft 2011 - 2016 Six Year TIP City of Spokane Valley Grant Funding Summary Street Projects, 2006 -2010 Project Name Total Project Cost Outside Funding Sources % Outside Funding City Share % City Funding Dish man-Mica/Montgomery Rehab $ 505,600 $ - 0% $ 505,600 100% 0003 Barker Road Bridge $ 11,817,000 $ 10,340,000 88% $ 1,477,000 12% 0004 Barker - Boone to Spokane River $ 2,524,000 $ 2,223,000 88% $ 301,000 12% 0005 Pines - Mansfield $ 6,397,100 $ 5,405,600 85% $ 991,500 15% 0016 Appleway - Tshirley to Hodges $ 5,888,600 $ 5,472,600 93% $ 416,000 7% 0016 Sprague /Conklin Signal $ 285,000 $ 250,000 88% $ 35,000 12% 0019 Broadway Rehab - Pines to Sullivan $ 902,000 $ 703,000 78% $ 199,000 22% 0022 Dishman -Mica PCC - 1 st to Sprague $ 235,000 $ 187,000 80% $ 48,000 20% 0053 24th Ave - Sullivan to Vera Crest $ 598,000 $ - 0% $ 598,000 100% 0054 44th Ave Pathway $ 334,000 $ 334,000 100% $ - 0% 0060 Argonne Resurfacing - 1 -90 to Trent $ 385,000 $ 274,000 71% $ 111,000 29% 0062 Appleway /Sprague ITS $ 672,000 $ 607,000 90% $ 65,000 10% 0063 Broadway Ave Safety Project $ 932,850 $ 746,280 80% $ 186,570 20% 0065 Sprague /Sullivan PCC $ 1,164,400 $ 745,100 64% $ 419,300 36% 0066 Broadway Rehab - Fancher to 1 -90 $ 608,000 $ 525,600 86% $ 82,400 14% 0067 Broadway /Fancher PCC $ 760,900 $ 658,000 86% $ 102,900 14% 0068 Broadway Rehab - 1 -90 to Park $ 684,700 $ 615,800 90% $ 68,900 10% 0071 Signal Controller Upgrades $ 258,400 $ 223,500 86% $ 34,900 14% 0092 Sprague /Bowdish PCC $ 1,066,000 $ 709,100 67% $ 356,900 33% 0098 Sprague ADA Upgrades $ 60,000 $ 49,000 82% $ 11,000 18% 0099 1 -90 Ramp Resurfacing $ 300,000 $ - 0% $ 300,000 100% 0102 Sprague /Evergreen PCC $ 953,000 $ 758,000 80% $ 195,000 20% 0103 Sprague /Pines PCC $ 946,000 $ 752,000 79% $ 194,000 21% 0104 Sprague /McDonald PCC $ 909,000 $ 723,000 80% $ 186,000 20% 0110 Sprague Rehab - Univ. to Evergreen $ 2,838,000 $ 2,607,000 92% $ 231,000 8% 0127 Sprague 2009 ADA Upgrades $ 110,700 $ 88,570 80% $ 22,130 20% Funded Projects in Design Phase: 0060 Argonne ITS - Trent to 1 -90 $ 1,289,200 $ 1,111,000 86% $ 178,200 14% 0061 Pines ITS - Sprague to Trent $ 2,080,700 $ 1,801,900 87% $ 278,800 13% 0069 Park Rd - Broadway to Trent $ 352,000 $ 304,500 87% $ 47,500 13% 0088 Broadway - Moore to Flora $ 2,757,000 $ 2,416,000 88% $ 341,000 12% 0112 Indiana Extension - Sullivan to Flora $ 2,612,000 $ 2,297,000 88% $ 315,000 12% 0113 Indiana /Sullivan PCC $ 1,342,000 $ 1,067,000 80% $ 275,000 20% 0114 Broadway /Sullivan PCC $ 1,230,000 $ 978,000 80% $ 252,000 20% STEP Re- paving Projects: 0057 Grandview Acres $ 1,094,000 $ 975,700 89% $ 118,300 11% 0058 Trentwood $ 1,178,900 $ 1,133,800 96% $ 45,100 4% 0081 White Birch $ 541,000 $ 377,800 70% $ 163,200 30% 0082 Sutters $ 1,013,100 $ 787,300 78% $ 225,800 22% 0084 Summerfield Phase 2 $ 748,200 $ 603,800 81% $ 144,400 19% 0091 Rockwell /Summerfield Phase 1 $ 401,400 $ 359,900 90% $ 41,500 10% 0094 Rockwell Phase 2 $ 799,300 $ 694,000 87% $ 105,300 13% 0106 West Ponderosa Phase 1 $ 1,750,100 $ 1,077,300 62% $ 672,800 38% 0106 West Ponderosa Phase 2 $ 1,802,600 $ 1,550,800 86% $ 251,800 14% 0107 Valleyview $ 1,600,100 $ 1,152,200 72% $ 447,900 28% 0108 Rotchford Acres $ 1,129,600 $ 753,800 67% $ 375,800 33% 0109 Clement $ 1,263,800 $ 925,600 73% $ 338,200 27% Total Costs $ 67,120,000 $ 55,365,000 82% $11,756,000 18% Leveraged City Match: $ 4.71 Received in Outside Funding for Every Dollar of City Matching Funds P: \Public Works \Capital Projects \Project Funding Applications \Sorted Project Grant Funding Summary.As 4/27/2010 W 13 O rMIL rmIL _ ■ O � � I _ N O O � �1 < Cl) �D x r M I L O r E e W A Vii+ d R 5 AL � i B O R (D -+ � C!�_ �+ I 0 0 7c Cr (D n A- h r �E s N v m � N D p m � � Q Q� Q v CD m nN CD FD: Q CD 5. CD o —1 0 m 0 o C - C O D 0 < 0 o = T. CD m Q oCD CL (n CD 0 CD C) v� Q 0 < 0 5—ca 6 (p Q =CD CL 0v v . 0 n N N 0 (7 CD Sn Q U) X O --i N U) A CL 0 Ut O W v a o U) n � (D v � 'c N U) j Q 3 m O l ^^ m CL m @ o' O U) N CD U N 3 O o n 3 CD ( CJ (D� v Q � 7 77 � C O_ (D rt � O O 0) CD 3 (D C s _ � O m N o n 0 n 2 0 o' O N CD O O m 0 N W A Q) N W A Q) N W O � � V T N O C D N U) O CL v Ut N W 0) U) n � (D v � 'c N N O j J N W O � � V T C D U) W CL 0 U) (Q (D m 0 D 01 N Q o O w o Q O N N 3 CD CD � Q � o � C `m' (D rt � O O 0) CD 3 rt m m' 0 Q) O �O Q) O �O N N d) O O 0) O 0) O 0 n A � W W d) W � W Q1 T Q D O N CD 0 m CL U) D O w N w CD x x m v O (D o_ C7 T 0 `m' 0 0 ID ID' 0 0 N Q) N Q) Cl) U) N s 9 Q s 3 r O ) s cn i C• 3 O s � `r CD i N (D S n s rt L 0 i 3 3 � s n O n N 0 D � (D Ili 0) A v 0 A V CO T Q O W m 0 m Q C7 O Cl) n v O `m' 0 0 O O 0 O m m' 0 V W V W U) D ! ! O o CD r � ! !- O s 2) : Q CD i i 0 � o O 3 7 v"f O Cl) W O O Cl) W 0 n A � d) O N � O N � 0 n rt Q� U) m N n fD O N rt a1 C N cn X� m r � � Q � � O T � V 1"r O (D rn o � � N 0 C s Z N O O � O m a1 m O P� 0 a U) `° O L4 N O N O N N O W N O A N O G1 N O O rt 9) N v N � N D p m � � Q CD CL CD � v s CD CD CD o N CD C: Q CD 5. Q� CD o � m FD C) o C m CD �o o= �N CDQ CD CD �Q CD QN CD CD s CN D �0 v� � 91 C2 C) < CD 5-ca 6 CD CD � Co v C) v FD N 0 C) n v 0 0 Sn m Q m m' 0 E W N W N Q) N A C7 Z1 - m ao < O 0 cn m O U) m N < 7 V CD C? N - 0 CD N W m CD A O O W ( m 3 N o Q N Q N � � O m rt S U O CD W N n to 3 rt Q m o v O CD (Q T O CD CD 3 Q O 0 N (P O) N (P O O O) N A n N w_ N Q) N A m m' 0 Q) 0 N Q) O N C7 •G T C: C2 U) U V cn m (D cr O n O O O * 0 W S2 A OD O N A 10 ID 0 0 N O O O N 0 O O N 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 N O 0 0 N O O O C7 D A O C 7 - u CA 7 T O o m � . O � < N A < Z m O O O O O m 9 o U CD O m 3 n to rt m m o v O T O to Q O CD U) O m 7 m o (D N 3 rt m CL CL O cc v � r O n D n n CD O N O O O 0 0 O N O O O n N O O O N 0 O O N 0 O O N 0 O O N 0 O O N O O O N O O O C7 D A O C 7 - u CA 7 T O o m . O m < N A < Z m O O O O O m CD O U m O S� m 3 n to rt m m o v O T O to L O U) O ET m 7 CL o (D m N 3 CL O cc v � D P. O f� N A O O O m' T O o Q - . O m A N N O O O O O O O O O A N N 0 0 0 O O O A N N 0 0 0 O O O O O O A N N 0 0 0 O O O O O O A N N 0 0 0 O O O O O O A N N o O O O O O O O O N � s A N N O O O O O O O O O - 0 k cr 0 n rt Q� U) m N n 0 " rt OD O wow 7 N rt v c N cn X� m r � � Q s O V 1"r O (D � � N 0 3 Z N CL N O O � rt m 91 m O n rn `° O L4 N O N 0 N N 0 w N 0 A N 0 to N O rn O 9rt1 N v N � 0 D 0 o ° s m � �Q Q Q sCD CD m o N. CD Q as C: Q CD 5 . CD Q CD 0 I m FD O O � CD CD o o N CD Q CD CD Q oCD QN CD o m CD (n �0 v� � 91 Q n < C 5-ca 6 (D CD � CL 0v v m a, FD W O 0 n 0 0 CD N Q m m' 0 E co W m o� (o A co co V (D N O O N 2 O 9 3 Q D cD o 1 Cl) T v o m O O (D I cn ao o O W rn A W OD V n M K C ( N A A W � W O) A O N Q� V O m m' 0 N O O N O O O 7 O cp 6 m v M c N m 3 EP Q n O CL O ZJl 0 O N CL O O y Q n O CD C Q o l< (D CD (O o N rt O N N O 0 O O N O O (n n C v N W v 1 N V V W T CD Q m v m v v C CD S S 4 U) s CD Q 0 ffl rn o' D 5' T CD N 0 O m 0 m O O N V O O A Q1 O O 0 O O 7 a 2 O O C (D CL v m O CD Q v v W D Z CD T W � v CD W Q CD W CD T (D Z1 � (D 'r D O W Z1 � m o O 3 O W O O O 0 O 0 O A 0 O O ru TO TO o 3 ID ID 3 K m m m Ul (D O OD v A N Ul A N V W W N Q1 O N � m 0 N Q1 (7� N o� to C" W O X CD O co p o0 0 rI t 3 C Q N of 2 v CD < N CD < O CD m m CD 3 0 �+ 0 y m (D 0 3 rt O' rt O N O W O � C X� m CD r O V 1"r O C W O rn p ii o O O 3 0 0 O z N O O cn C Cl) O rt fl1 _ B CD n 0 O n Q T N `Q O L4 N N O C71 N O� N O � N N O W N O A N O G1 N O O W O O 2) N v N � N D p O � m � � Q Q_ CL CD CD v sCD o N. CD 0 3 C: Q CD 5 . CL CD o -� m FD 0 o � CD m CD < 0 0 N CD o- CD m Q 0 m CL CD �. O CD CD N 0 � v Q 0 < CD 5 - 0 m E Q CL 0v v � o 0 0 N N 0 CD Sn 91 Q m m' . 0 N to 0 N C7� O 7 � � CA L C 3 1 C err L Q s (O � O n i O a G CD N cn rt C Q l < O N U1 O O O N U1 O � n � K C Cl) W A N W � A U) X N C CD - u CA CS O U) O U N C CD (D CL m _ G U) N O 0 O o N m 3 E m O c U) N m O 0 W Cl) c -> 6 O 0 n D � D' Q ( O Cp O O n 0 n o m m ° 1D rt 0 � (D < U) `° I C7 N N O CD Cn CD N n CD N O rr CL O 7 A N N O 7 N O C O s 0 N U) . X CD 0 O A O_ n N CD ° O 0 m m' . 0 A Q1 A Q1 rn W O N (P W A CA n M K C N Cp N cn N � N � C7� m m' . 0 N to 0 N C7� O 3 N n � v A 0 U) O C N r _L (D N m (D 0 N O 0 (� o N m (p (D O c U) 0 O N W Cl) cn O N 0 < m O N O m 0' O � m o 91 o m 0 rr n U) `° O C7 O N O Cn N G N O O N O 7 A N O m N O U) O 0 O U) . m O A O_ 0 m' 0 0 a m m' . 0 N to 0 N C7� O O a- N 0) W ID 0 0 O O 0 A °O O O C7� O O O W 3 _r O O CL N �7 9 n Z O 3 K I W O 2) Q 2) l< O 0 rn cn O �! O O O (P O O O (1) 0 � K C U1 U1 W Ul o ° A O W V C7� � - 0 k cr 0 n rt Q� v m N CD 0 0 Wi � � I N rt rt C N L x N 1 A m O N r (A N s cn O 0 M0(1)0 N m O (D O K O 0 O N W Cl) cn N O a- N 0) W ID 0 0 O O 0 A °O O O C7� O O O W 3 _r O O CL N �7 9 n Z O 3 K I W O 2) Q 2) l< O 0 rn cn O �! O O O (P O O O (1) 0 � K C U1 U1 W Ul o ° A O W V C7� � - 0 k cr 0 n rt Q� v m N CD 0 0 Wi � � I N rt rt C N L x 1 m r s O O (D � � N 0 CL Z N O O � m o 91 B m 0 rr n U) `° O N O N O N N O w N O A N O V1 N O O 0 91 N V N � N D p m � � Q Q� Q v sCD CD CD o N. CD Q 0� C: Q (D 5 . CD CL CD C) m 0 o � CD m o O = CL CD CD �Q oCD CL � �. O ry CD N v� Q n < C FCC - 0 CD E Q = CD CL 0v v cn 0 N Q 0 0 m' O N cn m' 0 E 0 N � O mW O � 3 i o l M O > Q i cn O S n > err _r s rt S N ) O m 9 l< S b 0 L cn i A i V Cl) O O v N n K N ao ^ oo N A W V to C) 0 cn m Q9 o U) .Z7 (<D N (Q V N W o Q C 0 N W (�D Q9 N < (D Cl n Z m w 3 v N Cl) O Z 3 Cl) HT Q Ol CD U) 3 D 'Z < D 3 Q U) K O O s v m CD W CD N o (p 3 F.I. Q W v 3 fA m W � N O (D Q rt tQ � CD � D rt CD T_ 3 rt O O � N C7! N O O 0 O O V W C7! m' (1) n C 0 C E N ao ^ oo N A W V to Cl) O Q9 O) O A N W QO Q N W V Q9 < <' G O A V N A V N t>t �O m' 0 E cn � A O v O A O Q9 N A t>t co p O co � Q9 O N m C) ao ^ oo m C) V to o V � n QO Q < <' 0 it - 4 Cl n Z 3 v N Cl) O n C N CD U) 3 D 'Z < � 7 Q �. rt CD O W1 s v m CD U CD o (p s CL F.I. W v 3 fA m W � N O Q rt � � D rt T_ rt O � N O O W cn C X� CD o r D ao s O T � V 1"r O (D O v rn O O ° o O O a w o n z N O N O --I < N O CD 0 n N _Q C4 y U) O N O N O N W A ODD O N O t>t V OD W N O O O t v W A O O m o O cn O N O O O ()7 W N QD Q9 C" — W P N N O O N O O O A O O A N co co j O O N CD A m 9! � 0 � }\ \\ \CD /} CD CL CD CD CL CD 0 FD CD CD \\ )CL CD \ ,§ CL 0 CD CD )\ \/ CL (j ƒ 4 \ \ ; 2 m \ $ 2 \ ° @ / cn : 7 _ 0 ; < i @ @ . � § ■ = � CD Sn @ % CL � $ j E k 0 0 � k [ 0 3 Cl) ca / 0 k G ca 0 / ƒ o E C 0 Cl) I 0 \ \ 3 k G _ 0) § A CD o / % 2 0 \ G e , K) � ( m ® m 0 CD * » ¢ m CL ■ K \ « 2 § m q ? cn CL U) � E � / � � 0 = m / 0 E ) 0 \ m e } � N 0 2 } O CL ( ± . ° z (n O \ 4�- 2 C � j � 3 m 0 ƒr — 4 2 § ® 0 � \ � � § , § w / e § o � 0 e § 0 o � / / � k [ ID §/ 0 � k [ { 2 D cn � @ CL - � » C \ * � \ � Q / ] 0 3 Cl) ca k G ca 0 / ƒ o C 0 Cl) I 0 \ \ 3 k G _ 0) § �� CD o / 2 \ G @ , K) � k ® m CD � ¢ ® ■ K � « 2 § { 2 D cn � @ CL - � » C \ * � \ � Q / ] \ A { Cl) \ \ k � k [ k CD 0 3 o f 0 0 / ƒ m C 0 § I 0 \ OD i _ 0 § �� CD k / 2 \ A { Cl) \ \ k � k [ k CD 3 o f 0� / ƒ m C § I 0 \ i _ § �� CD k / @ , / � k ® m B � ¢ ® � m ? cn X' � CD � � > = 0 @ � 0 \ m e } � N 0 2 } O ( ± . ° z (n O 4�- 2 C � © _ � m 0 ƒr 4 2 ƒ ® 0 � \ � � § � § w e § o � e § o � / k [ N v N � N (D p O � m � �Q Q_ Q� v s CD m nN Q CD 0 3 C: Q CD 5 . CD o —� m FD 0 o � CD m CD o o= �N CD Q CD CD �Q oCD QN CD CD CD 0 CD 0 � 91 Q n < C 5-ca 6 (p Q Q0 0v v FD m a, v o n 3 (7 Sn m Q m' 0 E A W co A W co OD O Q E O � C . N G m O v O s Q c v a D 3 C Z11 � O O n S (D �7 Q 0 m CD cQ I (D (D 3 cn A Cl) O O A Cl) 0 m Cl) Ul 00 (D O W N O O O m' 0 E W N Q) W c)) O) X T V lD cn 7 O_ � n o �7 a a U CD (A 3 - 0 O C7 � o CD CL O N S C71 cn O O J cn v W Ul W 0 0 I A 0 _ V v W O W co V � co N V W O W o � 3 O (D O N T cn D 0 0 � n � 7 Q O- D v 0 a Q v c CL 00 U) o cn T � W / v � m Q (D m cn O CD C m O U O m 'Or � v O 77 � X O v Q g v 3 Q Ww (D co Z U) T O 0) N O 01 O_ U) 01 O A N cn O Cl) O O O O N v cn O 0 c ru O T 0 T o n ;] 3 3 m K m ID N T W Cl) Cl) N T cn D 0 0 rI t (D O W O- D A �I \ co W N W v E C 0 X T cn D 0 0 rI t (D O W O- D N n of It \ D �° v E C K N 00 m iv n rt CD 3 g 3 0 Ww N U) 7 C O ; N 0 N 3 m rt T n rt rt N m rr o � O O N _Q m Cl) a m X� U) m D 3 (D C U Q � o D U N N rt O T � V 1"r C C D rn rn o � � N 3 0 0 CL O z N O O 0 C W � CD -0' O C N n- 3 .�. m v v r a 0 O m U) 0 N O N O N N O W N O A N O G1 O O) v N N O O Q) V N O O) W V rt a1 � 0 ° }\ \\ \k 0\ \( CD CL CD CD CL CD 0 FD CD CD \k CD } CL CD \( CD !\ )\ CL 0 CD CD \/ CL (j ƒ 4 \ \ CD Sn CL 2 g P & t � $ � [ � 2 co CD ca 0) co a = 0 b J \ m EQ k \ \ ƒj \ Ek 0 5' ;r CD gk 0 } m E Am _ k-3 r° § \ £ / / \ ƒ W� U) \ 0 \ o E _� E c g § 7 to § \ 2 K CD C / § -4 k / ƒ E / � m \ A g � ° = 0 @ � 0 CD ) m ° 0 } � N 0 0 2 ) O ( . 0 0 ± 2 ` O 2 2 C ) o »_ CD § / 3 \ § / @ - 2 G 0 f § $ E ® 0 � \ � § � § W § � § � ) ) > / o co o [ N N D p O O O � . N O o_ O_ Q s CD O O (7 N Q O O . C. O_ (D 5. (D O_ O C) �_ O O O � CD O O < O O O C O Q O O v� Q o m CL CD CD CD �. CD (n v� O_ n < O N F CC - 0 O E O_ .0.. O O_ O CD m 0 `m o m a, o 0 0 v 0 0 CD Sn Q 0 N N N N N N 21 O O O O O O (D N N - n O ffl ffl ffl ffl ffl O G. C" O O O O O U) (D 2) Eft ffl ffl ffl ffl ffl 0 O O O O O O m O y A N � m 1A ffl Q m (o O V 0 O O O O � S ID � O. m Cf� cn n (� Q O O O O O N < W W a (n a) o <09 <09 <09 O O O — A f� f� O N W (O � W (D 00 W Ln W N O O W (O n �I A w Cl) (n A A rt A A O O O <09 <09 4 E (D 3 3 m CC" W O O O w (ten 0 rn <09 a n N � O cn N N N rt O A �I A O Cl) Cl) W <0 ffl L9 L9 ffl ffl co 00 O W A W 0 co W O OD -I O) O A N O O N a) C" Cl) A U) — ffl ffl _ N W (O � W Q. _ O ( W N O N W (O Ln � U) N a) <0 ffl A W ffl ffl V v O O Hi ffl <, rt A A O O O O O a) N 1A ffl A <09 W O 0 N v O O O W N 0 s A O) O) A Ul U) O) o (O O) M N � O Q) co �I A O W W (WO K co N ffl t9 L, L, N (O W A W U) O A A O N O O O) W W A W C� ` L X 1 m � D � o O � 1-r N O 1"F V ,^ -1 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program Projects w/ No Currently Identified Local Match Within Existing Resources Dollars in Thousands Project Name Description Total Cost 32nd Avenue - Evergreen to Best Reconstruct and widen to three lanes with curbs $1,647 and sidewalks. 8th Avenue Phase 1- Carnahan to Reconstruct 8th Ave. to a three -lane section with $2,868 Havana curb, gutter, sidewalks and bike lanes. 8th Avenue Phase 2 - Park to Dickey Reconstruct 8th Ave. to a three -lane section with $4,188 curb, gutter, sidewalks and bike lanes. 8th Avenue Phase 3 - Dickey to Reconstruct 8th Ave. to a three -lane section with $3,754 Carnahan curb, gutter, sidewalks and bike lanes. Appleway Extension - Evergreen to Extend Appleway Blvd. with a multi -lane facility $17,381 Tshirley including curbs and sidewalks. Barker Road - South City Limits to Reconstruct to 3 -lane roadway w/ center turn $3,978 Appleway (RW &CN Only) lane, sidewalks, curb & gutter and stormwater Barker Road - Appleway to Reconstruct to a 3 -lane arterial with center turn $2,596 Broadway Avenue lane from Appleway to Broadway Ave.; realign Broadway east of Barker Barker Road - Spokane River to Trent Reconstruct to a 2 -lane curbed arterial $5,872 Bowdish Road - 32nd to 8th (RW /CN Reconstruct & widen to 3 -lane roadway $6,539 Only) Carnahan Truck Lane - 8th to City Add SB truck Lane to road $5,034 Limits, Euclid Ave/ Flora Rd - Flora, Euclid Reconstruct to provide a 2 -lane, shouldered $5,550 to Euclid; Euclid, Flora to Barker arterial Flora Road - Sprague to Mission Reconstruct & widen to 3 -lane roadway $3,806 (RW & CN Only) Sullivan / Kiernan PCC Reconstruct Intersection in PCC $1,352 Park Road - #3 - Sprague to Reconstruct and widen to a standard three -lane $3,359 Broadway arterial street with curbs and sidewalks Pines Corridor ITS: Sprague to 16th Traffic Signal Control System for Corridor $785 Sprague / Barker Traffic Signal Install Traffic Signal $457 Sullivan Road, 1 -90 to Wellesley Reconstruct urban arterial. $11,500 Sullivan Road North Extension Reconstruct and widen the Sullivan Road $55 (Bigelow Gulch) extension north also known as Bigelow Gulch Road to a 4 -lane roadway with 8 -foot shoulders and a 12 -foot two way left turn lane. Trent (SR290) - Del Ray to Barker Widen Trent from Barker to Del Ray to $532 Turn Lane accommodate Turning traffic movements Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Tuesday, April 27, 2010 Page 1 of 2 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program Projects w/ No Currently Identified Local Match Within Existing Resources Dollars in Thousands Project Name Description Total Cost University /Sprague Intersection PCC Replace asphalt pavement with portland cement $1,515 concrete pavement. Park Road #4, South City Limits to Reconstruct and widen roadway with sidewalk, $1,761 8th curb, and stormwater facilities Totals: $84,529 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Tuesday, April 27, 2010 Page 2 of 2 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2011 - 2016 Dollars in Thousands 2011 SR27 (PE Only) 2011 Totals: $6,089 $15,163 Item # Project Name Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 1 Argonne Road - 190 to Trent, CMAQ 101 713 2 Indiana /Sullivan Intersection PCC STA 249 1,216 3 Pines Corridor ITS: Sprague to Trent CMAQ 216 1,609 4 Broadway @ Argonne /Mullan Intersections PCC STP(U) 317 2,346 5 Pavement Management Program - Arterials Other Fed 2,000 4,000 6 Pavement Management Program - Local Access City 2,000 2,000 7 STEP Paveback City 602 602 8 Evergreen /32nd - 16th to 32nd, Evergreen to City 312 312 SR27 (PE Only) 9 Broadway Ave. Extension - Flora to Barker (PE City 265 265 Only) 10 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation (PE Only) Other Fed 0 1,900 11 Sullivan Road Corridor Traffic Study (1 -90 to STP(U) 27 200 Wellesley) 2013 Totals: $5,223 $14,704 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Tuesday, April 27, 2010 Page 1 of 2 SR27 (PE Only) 2011 Totals: $6,089 $15,163 2012 Broadway Ave. Extension - Flora to Barker (PE City 265 265 Item # Project Name Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 5 Pavement Management Program - Arterials Other Fed 2,000 4,000 6 Pavement Management Program - Local Access City 2,000 2,000 8 Evergreen /32nd - 16th to 32nd, Evergreen to City 312 312 2013 Totals: $5,223 $14,704 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Tuesday, April 27, 2010 Page 1 of 2 SR27 (PE Only) 2012 Totals: $5,123 $13,111 9 Broadway Ave. Extension - Flora to Barker (PE City 265 265 Item # Only) Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 10 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation (PE Only) Other Fed 0 2,700 12 Mission Ave. - Flora to Barker STP(U) 124 918 13 Park Road - #2 (RW & CN Only)- Broadway to STP(U) 135 1,000 13 Indiana STP(U) 540 4,000 14 Saltese /Sullivan Signal Developers 62 250 15 Sullivan / Euclid PCC Intersection STP(U) 191 1,416 16 University Rd /1 -90 Overpass Study STP(U) 34 250 2013 Totals: $5,223 $14,704 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Tuesday, April 27, 2010 Page 1 of 2 2012 Totals: $5,123 $13,111 2013 Item # Project Name Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 5 Pavement Management Program - Arterials Other Fed 2,000 4,000 6 Pavement Management Program - Local Access City 2,000 2,000 12 Mission Ave. - Flora to Barker STP(U) 536 3,969 13 Park Road - #2 (RW & CN Only)- Broadway to STP(U) 540 4,000 Indiana 17 Sullivan Road West Bridge BR 147 735 2013 Totals: $5,223 $14,704 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Tuesday, April 27, 2010 Page 1 of 2 2014 Item # Project Name Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 5 Pavement Management Program - Arterials Other Fed 2,000 4,000 6 Pavement Management Program - Local Access City 2,000 2,000 17 Sullivan Road West Bridge BR 147 735 18 Broadway Ave. Extension - Flora to Barker UCP 100 500 21 (RW &CN Only) City 216 216 19 Evergreen /32nd - 16th to 32nd, Evergreen to SR- STP(U) 54 400 23 27 (RW &CN Only) STP(U) 52 384 20 Barker Road - South City Limits to Appleway (PE City 236 236 Only) 21 Flora Road - Sprague to Mission (PE Only) City 216 216 22 Sidewalk Infill Program STP(E) 45 330 23 Bowdish Road - 32nd to 8th (PE Only) STP(U) 52 384 2014 Totals: $4,850 $8,801 2015 Item # Project Name Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 5 Pavement Management Program - Arterials Other Fed 2,000 4,000 6 Pavement Management Program - Local Access City 2,000 2,000 17 Sullivan Road West Bridge BR 1,300 6,500 18 Broadway Ave. Extension - Flora to Barker UCP 100 500 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Tuesday, April 27, 2010 Page 2 of 2 (RW &CN Only) 2015 Totals: $6,604 $19,023 19 Evergreen /32nd - 16th to 32nd, Evergreen to SR STP(U) 647 4,791 Item # 27 (RW &CN Only) Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 20 Barker Road - South City Limits to Appleway (PE City 236 236 6 Only) City 2,000 2,000 21 Flora Road - Sprague to Mission (PE Only) City 216 216 22 Sidewalk Infill Program STP(E) 36 270 23 Bowdish Road - 32nd to 8th (PE Only) STP(U) 52 384 24 Evergreen ITS Improvements CMAQ 17 126 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Tuesday, April 27, 2010 Page 2 of 2 (RW &CN Only) 2015 Totals: $6,604 $19,023 2016 Sidewalk Infill Program STP(E) 162 1,200 Item # Project Name Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 5 Pavement Management Program - Arterials Other Fed 2,000 4,000 6 Pavement Management Program - Local Access City 2,000 2,000 17 Sullivan Road West Bridge BR 1,300 6,500 18 Broadway Ave. Extension - Flora to Barker UCP 812 4,062 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Tuesday, April 27, 2010 Page 2 of 2 (RW &CN Only) 22 Sidewalk Infill Program STP(E) 162 1,200 24 Evergreen ITS Improvements CMAQ 79 582 25 Appleway Extension - University to Evergreen STP 127 406 26 Park Road / BNSF Grade Separation Other Fed 31 750 27 Sullivan Rd ITS, Sprague to 24th CMAQ 183 1,356 28 Millwood Urban Trail, Fancher Rd. to Evergreen STP(E) 59 439 Rd. 29 Greenacres Trail Planning Study (Sullivan Rd. to STP(E) 28 210 Liberty Lake) 30 Mansfield Extension - Pines(SR27) to 300 -ft east City 136 136 of Houk Rd. 2016 Totals: $6,917 $21,641 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Tuesday, April 27, 2010 Page 2 of 2 2011-2o16 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Agenda 1. Street Improvement Categories 2. Street Funding Overview 3. Capital Projects -TIP Funding Overview 4. Funding Future Projects 5. Draft 2011 -2016 Six Year TIP Street Improvement Categori es Annual Capital Grant O & M Projects Arterials & Local Streets Pothole Patching Sweeping Stormwater Maint. Small Mill & Overlays Snowplowing Crack Sealing Shouldering Striping Signal Repair / Maint. Emergency Response Bridge Maintenance Arterials & Local Streets Crack Sealing Large Mill & Overlays Reconstructions Fog Seals Pavement Rating Arterials Onl y Large Preservations (Grind /Overlays, etc.) Full Road Reconstructs Widening Improvements Safety Improvements Bridge Replacement New Traffic Signals ITS Projects STEP Projects Paving Street Funding Overview STREET FUND Gas Tax Telephone Tax No Current Revenue for Pavement Managemen, Approximately $4.8 million /year CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND (Local Matching Funds) REET 1 & 2 Streets Bridges Parks Buildings Capital Projects —TIP: Funding Overview Typically Three Levels of Funding Sources: ➢ FHWA: ➢ TIB: ✓STP(U) ✓UAP ✓CMAQ ✓UCP ✓STP (E) /SP ✓BR ➢ FMSIB ✓ARRA ➢ WTSC ➢ HUD — CDBG ➢ WSDOT ➢ Safe Routes to Schools ➢ EECBG ➢WUTC — Bike /Ped Safety ➢ STA Capital Projects -TIP: Funding Overview • Typ. 86.5% Funding • 13.5% Local Match • Local Match can be State Grant • TIB — 80% Funding • 20% Local Match • Local Match can be Federal Grant • Variations • Variations • STA- 80% Funding • 20% Local Match Capital Projects —TIP: Funding Overview • Funding Received Since 2006 Federal, State and Local Grants $55,400,000 City Share $11,800,000 Total rruject Funding $67,100,000 Average: 82% Grant funds, 18% City funds (See attached list of projects and funding) Funding Future Projects • REET Revenues -Down due to current economy $3,030,000 in 2007 $ 777,000 estimated for 2010 ,;,oOUalley May 4, 2010 9 Public Works Department Local Match for Future Projects • Where will Local Match come from for: 0 Mission Avenue —Flora to Barker(PE /RW) Broadway /Argonne /Mullan PCC (PE) Euclid /Sullivan PCC (PE) 2011 STEP Projects • Sullivan Rd Bridge (PE /RW /CN) • Other Future Projects? $123,900 $ 37,400 $ 23700 $518 Po M :$1 1II P, Draft 2011-2oi6 Six Year TIP • Required by RCW 35.77.010 • Updated Annually (by June 30) • Transportation Planning Tool ,;,oOUalley Anticipated Spending Adopted 2019 • 2416 Schedule Ol{a11C Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Vztlley Wd Funding Proiectd Descnpti0 Slaw: Length PE R1N CN rota! Sou 2011 2D12 2013 8014 2015 2 Total rgonrle Road - 190 to Trent 0.38 0 0 713 71 Cily tat 101 Q "Secured" Funding cNAC s12 s12 Ravt,e signal Pheaing. Add Na Right rum Lane at Mmdgearrary. Imponenre ft at K> Funding Se-d (SRTC 0831), C'ry Pqj *5060 Year Federal Prejeet TOtel 713 7'19 2 IndianalSDllivan Irdersection PCC 0 0 0 1,246 1,216 CJtV 249 249 5 S7A 967 967 Rapaw asphall par fit with ppnland cement -crete pav Vt. Funding ° red - STA 0.3%caO- lax levy ppr -d, City Praiect *0113 Prn Tull 1,216 0 1 IAN ffiy 216 CVAQ 1,393 3 Pines Gorridor ITS: Sprague to Trent 5 Traft Signaf Cantrof Sydem for Cpmidor Funding Secured ($RTC 06-26), City Pried *0061 225 0 y @ Argonnerhtuilan Intersections PCC D P "Planned" Funding Rewn vuct lnterse b-in PGC S1P Grant Submined Sept. 2009, Ranked *1 in 67P Urban Race -CWn category 1,249 215 7 993 �� Adopted 2011 - 2418 Sjl0kaxle Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Valley 271 D 2,075 2,346 Six - Year Transportation Improvement Program Totals Plq- an4 Em¢hame5.d -".d b 9e nP ae ro Ce C eedmaRe on1~ a drerge due to a varletr of dmurr� and M na1 fnbMN by the Chy 0 be nele4 ­r try' P"arrRy rsvrns m derclq�r %1n mebxl deveEro^� deosiofis 4lE wa Page 1 May 4, 2010 12 Public Works Department Secured Projects Planned Projects Totals Year Federal State Other City Total Federal Stm Dow City Total Federal slate Other City Total 2MI $2405 so 6997 6M Sa,t138 $6,007 $0 595 $5.523 571.625 $8.012 s0 61,062 $6,089 $15.163 2612 so s0 $0 so $o $7,665 $0 3324 $5,123 $13,111 67,666 $5 6323 95,123 $13,111 2413 $0 $0 so s0 $0 $9,481 So so 1:5223 $14,704 $9,481 w $0 55,223 614.704 2414 $0 30 so so 3o 63.551 1400 $0 $4, 650 $0,801 $3,551 $400 so 64,650 98.801 2015 so so $0 $o s0 $12,019 sw w $6,604 $19,023 $12,019 $409 30 MOM $19,023 2016 $0 $o $D so $o $11, 113 $3,674 $37 $6, 917 $21,641 $11,113 $3,574 $37 66,917 $21,641 Total $2,005 $0 $967 4569 $3,539 $49,835 $4,374 $455 $34,24 MODS $81,941 $4,374 $1,422 $31,90 $92,443 D 4 May 4, 2010 12 Public Works Department ,;,oOUalley Tnra rSAa60)- OaF R+Ym EErNr WaMn TnM ream B•nx 1a041%. $c. Tum LNe +unmmndWe TlBnldp lralAU mavmwnls Nttea. mereama xlamnaanme mrx xnnwrmry NPmey w en nm maxq NCryetruNetl ugngpap+b FmeklnB tl+x /aprin ewm TnumeaY, APrll a2, 2510 Awe I W a City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Six Year Transpatatlan Improvement Program roger MFb C—Ay Ift,UM LO M,U, YVINN Ex gRwalrcN 9aamm YFexewr Pro �tKM �tv4d® TOW fit 0rvvr WSNaaue N111 —mn PLC $1.615 ®.err pewrNm Pekawa8•.a CRILNNeb PewrnauG Naw4Yn reWwry ndh�m&, s1?bk nth rnnerrf ti n ere}=n. vcl��ue er. �hnrµ�wm.. o-.3 •r. nm +wnam %Na cchmb a rum pea %pmpartye..nemor n a Tau1M•y, Mnl aa, 20l0 Paw a al a May 4, 2010 13 Public Works Department City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Warks Six Y Year Transportation Improvement Program Pra;5uls wr NB cuPensr mBBPBBd {RCBI March wmN Ewa!alg RBSON ®a ftw16m 0 0"0*tlru T Totddet iantl AwnrnEVxyxen WBxl R RewraUUp eM wgen bNrw lwee wlNwdn 5 51,8"7 Bdr AVNN PMN I- CamaM1en la R RewnemG fiN Aw,la+Nnsrew vxliw vdM1 f f28B8 SN AYmw PMwa -Pxk W0144eY R RawanmG MaAw 19a[dmPlNa'BRGNn wdF s s ;irx Gro, Bamr. Laewelr,, •na ewe I•nN. BH AYNw PMN3�0i A•y 1• R R•Na•ING BIN Aw.9a•MneAma amalipn Md 6 65.356 Applw.y EMm[ae- EnxSmnb F Fxlerid Appeaay aM. w1Na.mu`alRen ran py M M.- TeNleby I I— NBr— end •eewmu. Sarkar e— S-h Cay lYnaaM R Remwlr+Ga 3.1. m+dw +y wl cvnlo-r lum 8 85,BiB aeMrRwtl- Appbwey oo P PawnelnrGb eSbN arlenelwBM1 aenlerWm 1 12,M 9 w. Avenue W WeNem Appbewy le BrweWeY —10 ..d a 858Yi exvdeF RUea -Jaen mNM1 (PVJlCN N NawnRrvtlEwgn lO EJaN mNw•Y 5 55.5N Ualp GrnaMn Trwk lam -RFmLry P Ptd sa VwG Lanemeuatl 5 55,ON vaefbre Ra- Fbn,eudA R RewnaWGto q+Mdea2+ane, prwlepxd 5 55535 to euw.aww. l+0an•r a aMdal mrb RaN- SanBan ie Meamn P PamnawGExeaenm Ynm rnetlwEY E EEB05 (RW 0 GII Oaty) sullivNVNiernN PGL P PetM.1 -1nter 111 PCc 9 97,352 P® na.d- Ma -a". R ReconslmU errs wammerMed ft. +arn E E3.359 amPM1Ny e eredal +wel wdh Wree erne slaewe6s PInN CaMtler fra sPwwmlfiN — — slBRel Lanlml syalvn br cxrNBr 5 5755 .q .—I— 1 1-11 Tnft$,a.. B B657 SWINn R.mtl.lA5la YMlhxby R Rarm•ImG Uro+n •NMI 5 511.690 SudlNn Rned NaM fLm1+1011 R ReronslmU e.rM'wMen Ne SuIIMn Raatl 5 55fi 1a041%. $c. Tum LNe +unmmndWe TlBnldp lralAU mavmwnls Nttea. mereama xlamnaanme mrx xnnwrmry NPmey w en nm maxq NCryetruNetl ugngpap+b FmeklnB tl+x /aprin ewm TnumeaY, APrll a2, 2510 Awe I W a City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Six Year Transpatatlan Improvement Program roger MFb C—Ay Ift,UM LO M,U, YVINN Ex gRwalrcN 9aamm YFexewr Pro �tKM �tv4d® TOW fit 0rvvr WSNaaue N111 —mn PLC $1.615 ®.err pewrNm Pekawa8•.a CRILNNeb PewrnauG Naw4Yn reWwry ndh�m&, s1?bk nth rnnerrf ti n ere}=n. vcl��ue er. �hnrµ�wm.. o-.3 •r. nm +wnam %Na cchmb a rum pea %pmpartye..nemor n a Tau1M•y, Mnl aa, 20l0 Paw a al a May 4, 2010 13 Public Works Department ,;,oOUalley City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Ng4Y MWNM Six Year Transponebon Improvement Program mtpllaw 90N 906 pam, a 1+eanaa 6 Iiii nl Maneaemeni IN— - Afte.1, 4111 2,006 qom NAe1# "WOM Firki la" MAI 10fw AmmRt 1 Argmn.R.ad mole Trent, CMA(1 161 713 2 IndierlaYSWllven InlmnedlXn PCC STA 249 1,216 3 Pbee Ce,ddor ITS. Sprague t9 Trenl CMAC 216 1;899 erae(XVay�ArOOnn.IMl4tan lntm4etlbna lY:C STP(U; 317 2,34e 6 PavemenE Managamml Program- ANarlab MO Fad 2.990 4,099 a Peverrmnf Me,'.n )Program- lmBlAmzsn City 2,066 2,000 7 STEP Paaehedk Clay 602 Sgt 1 Evels,eelte2rtl- Mi, IO 32nd, Evergreen b Chy 312 312 SR2] mE cyan 236 235 S amadWm, Aw Ea"ml- Fbre Io Berkgr(PE MAY 286 285 nldy) 21 10 Barker FIRM l 131 F 6111, apmglm 1E Orly) Other PM 0 1.,900 11 Si Rmd COnld« TrerSC SUdy(I.a010 STPM 27 200 VA IIWI -- 46 ]]o dell Tglpa: ".an Imai 9112 364 fpm# NNW Male hi bra Glly Amoral Us! e 5 Pavement Marla2emmlProprem •Arbebla Other Fed 2,08] 4000 , Favemenl ManagemanI"e e - L=I A=ss City 2,000 2400 a 1 IBIh1.32nd,Eoergreenle Ch, 212 312 "g o rp) TOM” 6 2 &vadway A. Frdeeg. - Flpm b Berke," CRY 265 266 .z 6 Pavement Marlpemeet Pre2ranr -Lapp A— 10 Berke, Read y BNSF Grade Sepaplon(RE Bray) C MFed 0 Moo 72 MMMOn Aw. - 1'116 tp rhi SIAM 124 sle 13 Petit R000 -#2(RW 1 CN Cn1yt-&r w)W ONO III 135 1,000 14 ulseyx9lileem Slgndl 9wgopen a 260 15 wii—1 EdoIM PCC Igasegbn STP(U) fat IAIM 1 9 Uryroi Rdei Cae7a- -SIIHY STROJ) 34 260 2012 1ob1a. 16.123 11 All 4.]91 It.# R*Nlkm Wile" R" CIIy Ammer TSWAmmmf 5 Pavm I Manegamenl Prugmm- Adarlels M1, Fed 2000 4,006 6 Pwe I wrilioMnl Program -IAEY Access CSy 21000 2,009 12 M1IISeWn AVe rlSre to Barker sTP(U) 536 3,Bae 13 Park III -#2 IRIN A CN OpyP BrwQV,ay W 11 540 A fndfuna City 213 17 S elliva„ RLV+J Weal BIOg. SR 147 736 21113 Tdala: x1223 1114 764 EpvN ma anWrnraa ldndmnee lW mmbaaWaM raFW®mM1 ne ma cringe sue lo, relary gdewnenca, memml Vic Glb9a M mba upm eY CaN4yoAnmm4ap!opnF n amMy 0l,Wpmirt4txana inn - -.:,. Irr ,.Ir. ,.r n. J Fwmee Fro,anaveammmnaua TM1R,i,Rr AP114 -i) r' IW I e12 161 Ng4Y MWNM irklsry9am mtpllaw 3abilAaml 6 Iiii nl Maneaemeni IN— - Afte.1, Cha, Fad 2,006 qom 5 PevemenllYbrtaaement Raarem L.ral Aoseae City 2,696 2000 , 17 Sulllrzn li - 1'JV „�'6: BR 167 735 is ld lidI M. La4—Ii FI—lp 11— UCP too 509 (RWBCN Only) 10 ErarpieaFll32nd -11IM1 b32nel Fvdryreen to SR- 2, IRW4CN Ungl Si 5M1 400 20 B1Ri -Baum Clly Limib m Appie y(PC Car 236 235 G,Y) 21 Flare ROad- SIXi Ip Me—(RE 0,10 My 216 216 22 Sitl 0 nha P ✓Rgrem SME) 46 ]]o 23 BovrdMh R.dd- 32 1 SPE C OY) STP(Uf 52 364 2014 Tools: S4.050 Meel 761E n ag# mr301NM Wa" smm '. Amemn TOM” 6 Payamenl MemOameni RqO— AMdab Chle Fed VOID 4 M 6 Pavement Marlpemeet Pre2ranr -Lapp A— CRY 2,900 2,000 11 5.i�rar, R -Iweal R +Id' m 1,MO Ewe TO Erpedaay Avd. EM.O.- Fbre 1. Hi UCP 190 500 (RWBCN -0 t9 F.vaglaerl;32ntl1NM1 to 32rxl,fverymdn to SR xTr'M 34] 4.]91 2] fRN6CN Onryl 20 Barter Road S1IhCMLeToiMARRlewoYlPE Cxy 236 236 Deli 21 Flare Redd Spmaee 1. MIaq.X SPE Orly) City 213 216 22 Sda Ii Pbgr.m STP(E) Ss 270 23 Se W.11 Rand 32 Rlllh(PEUnIy) Si 52 364 24 Ever 1151mPmv.meRb CIANO 17 2015 Totals: 88.664 3 + 266 MM# R'8f6at Name TCllimy 261166 GRYA110111 TDi11Am611N 6 Pavement Manaaemanl PrcOrem- Adarbb Cher Fed 2,000 4.003 e PavameXI Managamanl Prograyn -Ltle31 M,Lmba Gay Z,O00 2000 17 1 �i..vun Rrwxi Y'J.nl Bn08a BR 1,300 a.500 16 ayo AV EMenpon -Fb. to eakn UCP alt 4.902 (RWBCN ONy) 22 Si rape P.".,e STP(E) 192 1,200 24 E.T. ll'S lmpre T_ CMAO 70 522 26 Aal^mray €mane ^.a+ J-- Iyl.Ercgreen STP 127 406 26 '- R.ad I BNSF Grade Saps+mlon Wray Fed 31 750 27 Si Rd ITS, Sprague to 7411, OMAO 183 1,SS3 2s Mi—d! Urban Trell, Fi,mh Rd. In Edrg. 911P(E) a 436 Rd 20 Celli s Tres Pldnelnlg Sludy(SuMm Rd. io Si 26 210 Llhmly Lek.) >D MBndi Exlerlalon - Rne.(SR27) Cp 206-11 Bap el Ili Rd. COY 136 136 2D18 Ti $6.217 x21.011 P.eiecna� nu„w -11 mbre n F,aw n,. ltl,gn., I... ya+mnceawlopan In mrlrq eenlo ¢nenamelon_r M.trlel av:•+.; -:: T.4ruMry, ApXl22,.rotp May 4, 2010 14 Public Works Department Summary • Review TIP List of Projects • Future Presentation — Pavement Management Costs • Future Discussion —Local Match for Future Projects • Continue with Six Year TIP Adoption S CM' Of dopoo^%4� jvalley May 4, 2010 16 Public Works Department Funding Source Definitions • ARRA — American Recovery & Reinvestment Act 0 PE — Preliminary Engineering • BR — Bridge Replacement Program 0 RW — Right -of -Way • CDBG — Community Development Block Grant 0 CN — Construction • CMAQ — Congestion Management/Air Quality • EECBG — Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant • FHWA — Federal Highway Administration • FMSIB — Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Program • HUD — Housing & Urban Development • REET — Real Estate Excise Tax • SP — Sidewalk Program • STA — Spokane Transit Authority • STP(E) — Surface Transportation Program (Enhancement) • STP(U) — Surface Transportation Program (Urban) • TI — Transportation Improvement Board • UAP — Urban Arterial Program • UCP — Urban Corridor Program • WTSC — Washington Traffic Safety Commission • WUTC — Washington Utilities & Transportation Commission CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Shoreline Master Program Update — Receiving Planning Commission Recommendation on Inventory and Shoreline Characterization Report GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 90.58 and WAC 173 -26 PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION TAKEN: N/A BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Management Program (SMP) update process commenced in late summer, 2009. Shoreline Management Programs include the following major components: - Inventory and Shoreline Characterization - Environmental Designations - Goal, Policies and Regulations - Cumulative Impacts - Shoreline Restoration Due to the complexity of Shoreline Management Programs, the Planning Commission and City Council will review the individual SMP components at public hearings over the next year. Once formally "accepted" by City Council resolution, the components will be compiled into a final Public Hearing Draft. This Public Hearing Draft SMP document will be the subject of final public hearings with the entire process for local adoption anticipated to reach completion in 2011. The first component of the SMP update is the Inventory and Shoreline Characterization report. URS Corporation was contracted to assist the City with the update. URS and City Staff worked collaboratively to acquire relevant baseline data used for the shoreline inventory. This data included GIS maps, reports, input from local experts and direct field observations from an ecologist and an engineer working to document the natural resources and the condition of the build environment along the shorelines. Further information was gathered during two public Open Houses in November, 2009 and February, 2010. On March 2, 2010, a Joint Planning Commission /City Council Study Session was conducted where the SMP Update Team presented the Technical Review Draft Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report. Comments received from Technical Review Group, which largely consists of government agencies, tribes and technical experts, is incorporated into the attached Public Review Draft. On April 22, 2010, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the Draft Shoreline Inventory Report. The Commission did not receive any comments at the hearing. Representatives from the Department of Ecology were present and answered a few questions about the Shoreline Management Act. The Commission recommends that the Council formally accept the report by resolution. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Direct staff to prepare a resolution to be placed on the next agenda. The resolution would establish formal "acceptance" of the Shoreline Inventory and Characterization report by Council but would not constitute final adoption. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: $150,000 Budgeted STAFF CONTACT: Scott Kuhta, AICP — Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff PowerPoint presentation. 2. Memo from Planning Commission Chair 3. Public Review Draft Inventory and Shoreline Characterization Report (attached separately) Spokane jValley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhatt@spokanevalley.org Memorandum To: Mike Jackson, Acting City Manager; City Council From: John Carroll, Planning Commission Chair CC: Kathy McClung, CD Director; Greg McCormick, Planning Manager Date: April 23, 2010 Re: Planning Commission Recommendation — Shoreline Management Program Update — Draft Inventory and Shoreline Characterization Report The Planning Commission is pleased to forward the attached Draft Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report for Council's review. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the draft document on April 22, 2010. The Commission did not receive any public comment at the hearing. Doug Pineo, Washington State Department of Ecology, was present at the hearing and answered questions on the Shoreline Management Act. Mr. Pineo mentioned that the Draft Inventory and Characterization report was the best he had reviewed. After deliberation, the Commission voted unanimously to forward the document as drafted, understanding that new information may be presented to the Council and added to the document prior to final adoption. Please contact Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner, if you have questions. N IIiTiFSra' reTSTMM Develop Shoreline Environment Designations Revise Goals and Policies Local Adoption State Adoption « n ,;oOV,alley Conduct Inventory And Analysis Address Cumulative Impacts Develop Restoration Plan Revise Development Regulations Inventory and Characterization Report Development and Review Process Staff and Consultant Role /Process Planning Commission Review Council Review Purpose and Goals of Shoreline Inventory Provides the baseline from which "No Net Loss" of Ecological Function is measured; . Provides supporting information for development of Environmental Designations; m . Provides information that Shoreline Policies and Regulations are developed from. . The Inventory includes: Map shoreline physical, biological and cultural features. • Summarize shoreline characteristics, ecological functions and uses. Identify management issues. Identify recreation, development, conservation, and restoratio opportunities. Determine localized shoreline priorities and goals. Determine potential cumulative impacts. Balance these to achieve "no net loss" of ecological function L i a ;.%� S` p+a an'` Galley Significant Resources Reviewed • City of Spokane Valley • Spokane County • Avista Corp. FERC Relicensing • Spokane County Conservation District • WRIA 57 Watershed Planning • Agencies — Ecology, WDFW, DNR, USGS, EPA 0 Public and User Groups Field Inventory - by UI City of Spokane Vi Shoreline Master Program Update & �. Spokane River - Overview Land Use Immediate shoreline generally protected from developments. 63% (201 acres) Parks /Open Space, 15% (47 acres) Residential, 22% (68 acres) Industrial /Commercial. High level of recreation use. Many formal and informal access points. Natural Environment Narrow continuous vegetation zone — 65% native vegetation. Provides an east -west wildlife migration corridor. . Lack of diversity — indicates environmental stress. . Native fishery (Rainbow /red -band trout) is in poor condition. Heavy metals, PCB contamination. Aquifer interchange. Spokane River - Segment 1 Eastern City Line to Flora Road Natural Environment Ponderosa pine /serviceberry - high quality habitat. Riparian area 71% native vegetation. Fair ecological condition (SCCD). End of losing river reach — lowest flows on river. CT trail damage due to periodic river flooding. Heavy metal contamination at Barker and Flora Road Potential Management Issues Conserve/ protect existing forest and upland areas. Control non - native landscaping /cutting on public lands. Support WDFW efforts to improve spawning/ habitat Support State Parks — CT improvements. Increased residential density along south shore. Lijk . - Spokane River - Segment 2 Flora Road to Trent Ave. Bridge Natural Environment Ponderosa pine /serviceberry, large fields provides good habitat for wildlife. • Unique community of western juniper. Riparian area 57% native vegetation. Fair -good ecological condition (SCCD). Gaining river reach — aquifer discharge into river. A Provides cold water refuge for fisheries, very important. Management Issues Conserve /protect /enhance forest and upland areas. Sullivan Park River Access —one of the most heavily used on '- the entire river. Sullivan Road, BNSF RR and UP RR bridges. Support WDFW to protect cold water refuge. t `" Increased commercial /mixed use development. L J a ;.%� Spokane River - Segment 3 Trent Ave Bridge to Coyote Rocks Natural Environment r :e Ponderosa pine /hawthorne, cottonwood/ hawthorne plus cliff habitat provides good diversity. Riparian area 76% native vegetation. Poor -fair ecological condition (SCCD). High value bird /wildlife habitat on steep slopes by Trent bridge. Management Issues Conserve/ protect existing forest and upland areas. Management of Myrtle Point Conservation Area. Coyote Rocks development impacts. New boater access, motorized - non - motorized? I H 0 • 00^Nl.l S ne ,al ley Spokane River - Segment 4 Orchard Avenue Area :- Land Use Characteristics j 0.5 miles long - 12 acres of shoreland. Entirely single family residential. Public Access — none. Docks, motorized boating permitted. Natural Environment Characteristics a Bdan E. Smen Modified shoreline - bulkheads, landscaping and docks. Poor -fair ecological condition (SCCD). Within Upriver Dam pool, local anglers report poor fishing. High value wintering waterfowl area Management Issues - Encourage planting of native species. Limit motorized boating in winter to protect waterfowl habitat. Use of bulkheads/ docks. ["'1"I' a ,� Va lley Shelley Lake Land Use 29 acres of shoreland. Entirely single family residential. Common area surrounding lake. Lake and common area managed by HOA. Public Access — none. Natural Environment ,. Granite outcrop on east bank, wetland, and Saltese Creek provide good habitat and connectivity to the east. M Natural lake, steep gravelly shoreline modified by development. Little native vegetation observed, landscaped, little shade. Lake levels varies about 17 feet, low DO and high temp. A good wintering waterfowl area. Management Issues Shelley Lake is the end of the Saltese Flats drainage system. ✓ - Protect the Steen Road Gravel Pit - provides overflow for the system. Protect granite outcropping habitat on the east side of the lake (less dense future land use ?) Establish native vegetation. a J Gravel Pits =- Park Road and Sullivan Road Land Use Characteristics Heavy Industrial, active surface mining. Constructed shorelines. Natural Environment Characteristics Valley gravels. Park Road Pit has mature trees and shrubs. . Excellent wintering waterfowl habitat. s _ Reclamation plans include conversion to wildlife /conservation areas. Management Issues Monitoring of reclamation plans. Aquifer protection. Potential limited public access for birding? LiJIL . - 3poKa l Valley CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Update on new city website GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 40.14, WAC 434 - 663 -600 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of 2009 Budget Administrative Report to Council on 12/1/2009 BACKGROUND: In 2008, we were informed by NextlT that they were "abandoning" the InSuite software that we use for managing the content of our website. Since that time, we have been operating without software maintenance or support. If the software has problems or fails, our website is at risk. With half a million hits a year, it is our single largest point of contact with the community. Acquisition of new website software was finalized in late 2009. Design is finalized and development is under way. This report provides an overview of the new website and implementation in preparation for the June 14 launch. OPTIONS: Report only RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Report only BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Acquisition, design, development, training and first year hosting /support/maintenance included in 2009 budget. Annual hosting, support & maintenance: $9,060 (already in budget) STAFF CONTACT: Carolbelle Branch, PIO; Greg "Bing" Bingaman, IT Specialist; Michelle Rasmussen, Administrative Assistant for Deputy City Manager ATTACHMENTS Website software upgrade presentation City of Spokane Valley City Website www.spokanevalley.org or •Retains www.spoKanevaiiey.org *Software web based, hosted and supported *Retains valuable features •Editing and publishing permissions /security *Document and image uploading *Create links to files, pages, other websites •Copy and paste text content *Add images •Online polls and surveys Improved Scheduled Improved usage Dept- publish & Navigation reports specific age - off templates MS -style Retains old formatting _ content for retrieval Broken link Style Emergency notices sheets notiices FAQ pages .� Is A Photo • • • • galleries Larger Emergency content notices area and more... Web 2.0 •Audio files •RSS Feeds •News flashes •Emergency bulletins •Calendar updates •Meetings •Job postings •RFPs Traffic alerts •Web page changes °P4)lranc' e .� X'al y °:n the City of Spokane Valley, WA 'A c0=11niN nf npparrunily where indmirtuaLs and families Mn 91"OW and play, and t,inesses u;M jlniu-ish and prespE7_ 80F Flo¢ — 5 Day April p 5 M T W T F 5 27 2B 29 _. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 30 31 1 2 ilk Contact Us Enter Search Tenn February 3, 2010 Hot Topics Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adiplscing elit. Pellentesque Community Newsletter tristique tempus turpis. a seelerisque FAQs February 3, 2010 Lorem 1psum dolor sit amet consectetur adlpiscing efit. Pellent sque Public NoticesIRFPs tnstique tempos turpis. a scelerisque .. ..... Spokane Valley City Hall . 11707 E. Sprague Ave., Suite 106. Spokane Valley, VA 99206 + Phone: 509 -921 -1000 . Fax 509- 921-1438 = Ensvil: cilyhall@spokanevailey. org Copyright ® 2010 City of Spokane Valley. All Rights Reserved Introducing the new www.spokanevalley.or website. S0006kant a lley 1 �c lty Attorney : <1 eosramuiiit?f QlFnppoa runitq iadiuicfuaLc City Clerk ziif�c�re mad�ftxrl�zl3s can grow andplay, and Pairsaaresses will ourM eared prosper.' Giky P�e?c�na��r Code Compliance 0 - Community Development 5 Day Directory April ExecutiveiLeg i sl atIve S M T W T F 5 Finance 3 27 28 29 10 7 }} 4'. f• •' Admin � 2 yy - - 4 R .7 10 Parks & Recreation 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Permit Center 18 19 20 22 23 24 Planning & Zoning 25 26 27 28 0 30 31 Police 1 .. Publlc Information ��� Contract Us Ems Public Works Enter Searrh Terre I + February Hot Topics Lor rn ips Street Maintenance ipiscirtg �Iit. Pallr?nt�.�r��.� n Community Newsletter tr istiquw February 3. 2010 FA Qs Los ern ipsurn dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Pellentesque Public NoticeslRFPs tristiQue tempus ttlrpis, a scelerisque Spokane Valley City Hall + 1. 1 707 E. Sprague Ave., Suite 1la6 • Spokane Valley, YVA992H * Phone: 509 -:x21 -1000 ■ Fax: 599- 921 -1008 + Ernail- cityhall,@aspnkaneaalley.org Copyright @ 2010 City of Spokane Valley. Al Rights Reserved ErnallPage Print Page Text Semlices Departments Government Butsmiesses Residents Visitors 0 '%�W April S M 4 5 11 12 is 19 25 26 0 80 F E'2Y T W T F S 1 2 3 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 15 16 17 20 21 22 23 24 27 28 0 30 31 A-uick Search Parks & Recreation News -1 0 Contact Us L -A Enter Search April 25, 21110 ONVIa CenterPlace Tliecornmunity pool has now been re-opened for the summer season. All of Regional Event Center the upgrades have been completed. j �7C3 April 27, 2011D W Farrns Signap forms for all parks & recreation activities and events now avauilable at S pokane City Ha See the Town Clerk for more information. 0 Recreation Brochure Spokane Valley Giry Hall 0i07' . Sprague Ave., Suite 1(k6 * Spokane Valley, WA99206 @ Phone: 509-a21 -1000 ■ Fax: 50 Email- cilyhall@spDkanevalley.org Copyright @ 2 010 City of Spokane Valley. All Rights Reserved Parks & Recreation Department - . , I Conamulift -PO?-Tuni( . Y Qf OT, 4 where in&uiduab; cmdJamilies can grow andplay, and busines-Fes willfiourM aind prasper.' -�7 �.pmane Val ley Enter Search Term Parks & Recreation Department The City of Spokane Valley owns and operates (3) three sea- sonal outdoor pools. The City contracts with the Valley Y MCA to operate and maintain the pools. If you have any questions regarding Park Road, Terrace View or Valley Mission Pools, please ntact the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department at 509-6N-0300- Attention Day Care/Camp ProN iders or Birthdav Parties Due to the high volume -of large groups visitng Spokane Valley Q4 Pools. Groups that do not pre - schedule wJ11 riot be all-owed pool entry. Click here to download the Group Open Swim Registration Form- If you have any questions please contact Recreation Coordinator Jennifer Pap4ch at 509-720-54D8 of via email at jpapich iga,, spkaneval ley- orn. Triank. yowl Pools: Val? ey Mission Closed for the Season WZTEWS Phone 922-7091 Te�face View Pool - Closed for the Season 13625 E. 24thAve. Phone 924-4707 Pa Road Pool - Closed f or the S eason 666 N. Road Phone 926-1840 Contact I is CenterPlace I Parks and RecreatiGn Main PhGne: (509) 668-0300 Fax (509) 6H-0188 General e-mail: parksandrec(gspokanevalley.org Spokane Valley Gity Hail a 11707 E. Sprague Ave., Suite 106 a Spokane Valley, WA 992 * Phone: 509 - 921 -1000 ■ Fax: 599 -921 -1998 a Emaiii: eityhall@spakanevalley.org Copyright @ 2010 City of SpokaneValley. All Rights Reserved N K[3r- >> �ften�tfi >> Darks & IkEicGaLiac >> Aquatics Aquatics File Edit To -als Help a QContent - User: admin Settings Log Gut More help _' Contact su Dy namic Content Template to apply: Default Template Content name: ( default Content title: Aquatics > Meta description: Meta keywords: Q Publish on date: 4/2012010 Expire on date 4,120/2010 i = J Paragraph 5...- B I H Fant Poame �� A - F = s- X X. S�6 �+ � � � ZGOm { Aquatics r "- The City of Spokane Valley ovvns and operates 3) three seasonal outdoor pools. The , Mth the Valley YNIC'A to operate and maintain the pools_ If you have any questions re Road, Terrace View or Valley `fission Pools_ please contact the Spokane Valley Park Recreation Department at 509 - 658 - 0300_ Attention Darr 'are Camp Providers or Birthday P Thank you! Due to the high volume of large groups ��siting Spokane � alley City Pools_ Groups thal schedule -k rill not be allo pool entry- Click here to day - nload the Group Open Svrir yForm_ If you have any questions please contact Recreation Coordinator Jennifer Papicl 5408 or N' email at jpapich'd spokanevalle_ .orgy " Editing Content Departments : Parks & Recreation : Aquatics : default 0 P Click here to return to the list E Content Instance Content Type M >> Select the content inEtance to edit: Live content . Dynamic Content Open new window: Primary Web Document Storage .aspx ?dbid =o SpokaneValley Free Hotmail Spokane Valley Help Desk JL Laserfiche Documents .e NFuse A Get More Add -ons - Barracuda Message Archiver I SpokaneValley - LaserFiohe WebLink Laserfiche WebL'rnk" Browse Search SpokaneValley Entry Properties Full path SpokaneValley Creation [)ate 1102008 1:54:31 Pl`vl Last Modified 411612010 4:16:53 Pl`vl Metadata No I'vletadata.Assigned Laserfiche I11:11I I ': Iso.ggl Entire Repository Search Name qV 011 City Council qV 013 City Clerk qV 014 Finance qV 016 Community Development F0 017 Public Works E] City Clerk -Ad Hoc Committees fD City Clerk - Salary Commission L7 PublicWarks - Street Standards - December 2009 fD Spokane Regional Stormwater Ivianual April 2008 9 Entries MyWebLink Help .About Logout _° Page Count Template Name C c:urrert maragerrert portal Faran=_rec by La_rfirhe'WebLink 8.0.0 @ ti 2DM W - Page - Safety - Tools - r. » Volume Name CLERK000001 CLERK000001 DEFAULT DEFAULT DEFAULT DEFAULT DEFAULT DEFAULT DEFAULT q" E mployment Application Personal Information Position Title I Public information lntem V 0 How did Vou first hear about this "ob opening? l`acebook F irst Name Ml Pio A e Last Name l lnternius Enter Se mich Te nn dates; Address_ g9 �a 66th �. Penta Suite City Rom State Zip L IT Dl�bbt}- 4234 page 2 of 8 Spokane Valley City ball + 11707 E Sprague Ave , Suite 106 * Spokane Valley. WA 99206 • Phone. 509. 921 -1000 + Fax 509- 921 -1008 • Ernad cityhaiCspokanevalley.arg Capynght C 2010 CPty of Spokane Valley All Rights Reserved 4" 3.8. 34. Pelt & Rocnita — Aquiitkas r#' Citizen Action Request Click here to Login I Click here to Register rl L. Enter Search Term 0] Purpose. Use this ferm to report a pothole. x Infurmition is require& Contact Information First Name: Last Name,'— Business Name. C Email; r— Daytime Phone: Fax: address; City: State, ZIP: Location of pothoie (be as specific as possible). r Spokane Valley City Hall . 41707 E Sprague Ave. Suite 106 a Spokane Valley, WA 99208 • Phone: 549 °921 -1040 • Fax. 549. 921.1048 ■ Email tityhalo spokanevatley org Copyright 0 2410 City of Spokane Valley All Rights Reserved t' y � r7 1 :o * DMeftw* >> Pafts 6Rec — T;m Ac.,,nt P(W11r]C Website Launch Schedule May 4/5 Content manager training May 4 -21 Uploading content May 24 -28 Testing Internal — council, staff External — existing users General public Jun 3 -9 Modifications Jun 10/11 Final review E Sea T erm _ Jun 11, 5pm Existing Website offline Jun 12 12:01am New website online Spokane Valley City Mall a 11707 E - Sprague Ave . Suite 106 . Spokane Valley. WA 99206 . Phone. 505-921.1 000 a Fax 509.921 -1008 e Emad oityhall 3pokanevalley.org Copyright (D 2010 City of Spokane Valley All Rights Reserved � to tit — tee# merts — Pat*% & Recreation — Aquatic Questions CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ Consent ❑ Old business ❑ New business ❑ Public Hearing ® Information ❑ Admin. Report F Pending Legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Review of Economic Studies related to the Sprague /Appleway Revitalization Plan GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of the Sprague /Appleway Revitalization Plan (2009). BACKGROUND: The Sprague /Appleway Revitalization Plan (subarea plan) was adopted in June 2009 with an effective date of October 2009. Since the adoption of the subarea plan city council has directed staff to place review of the subarea plan on the 2011 annual comprehensive plan review docket. Council further directed staff to conduct a section -by- section review of the subarea plan. The work plan and timelines for this process were presented to council at the April 20 meeting at which time council approved the work program as presented. The first in a series of informational items on the subarea plan is this overview of the various economic studies that were conducted as part of the preliminary analysis of the Sprague /Appleway corridor prior to or in conjunction with the preparation of the subarea plan. The purpose of this presentation is to merely provide council with the results of the economic studies previously prepared that provided some of the foundation basis for the subarea plan and a recent memorandum prepared by ECONorthwest regarding a recent review of the 2006 findings and recommendations. 2006 ECONorthwest study — The 2006 ECO study was more focused on the revitalization strategy for the Sprague /Appleway corridor and to conduct a market conditions study for the Spokane regional overall and more specifically on the corridor. The attached memorandum from ECO reviews the conclusions and recommendations made in the 2006 study in light of current economic conditions. Major findings of the 2006 study included the following: 1. Supply of commercial /retail zoned land could accommodate an additional 7.3 million square feet of retail space (365,000 sq.ft. per year for 20 years) 2. Demand for commercial space estimated at 40,000 square feet per year (21,000 of retail and 19,000 square feet of office) 3. Compared to commercial properties in Spokane, Spokane Valley has higher vacancy rates and lower rents. 2010 ECONorthwest Memorandum —The city requested ECO to review the findings and conclusions of their 2006 study and provide the city a memo describing any changes that ECO would recommend based on the current regional and national economy. One of the key findings of the 2006 study is that the supply of commercial space in the corridor in 2006 was approximately 5.5 million square feet. ECO estimated that if redevelopment in the corridor occurred to the density of a typical suburban strip mall the supply of commercial space would increase to 7.3 million square feet or an additional 365,000 square feet per year for the next 20 years. Moreover, the zoning in place in 2006 allowed much greater densities that could add millions of available square feet to the estimate. The 2006 study also estimated the demand for commercial space in the corridor. The study concluded that a demand of 40,000 square feet (retail- 21,000 and office - 19,000) could be expected per year for the next 20 years. The 2010 review of these major findings indicate that if ECO were forecasting the average future demand today for retail sales in Spokane Valley the rate of growth in retail demand would likely be (by as much as 10 %) than was forecasted in the 2006 study due to current economic conditions. The 2006 ECO study (as well as all studies completed for the subarea plan) can be reviewed on the city's website on the Community Development homepage - Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan page under documents. Staff has also drafted a notice letter that will be used as a template to notify property owners of the upcoming review process. Staff requests that Council review the contents of the letter and provide feedback at the May 4 meeting so the letter can be finalized and mailed out on May 51n OPTIONS: N/A RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: N /A. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N /A. STAFF CONTACT: Greg McCormick, AICP — Planning Division Manager Attachment: 2010 ECONorthwest Memorandum Draft Notification Letter ECONorthwest ECONOMICS • FINANCE • PLANNING Phone • (503) 222 -6060 Suite 1600 Other Offices FAX • (503) 222 -1504 222 SW Columbia Eugene • (541) 687 -0051 info @econw.com Portland, Oregon 97201 -6616 Seattle • (206) 622 -2403 27 April 2010 Project #: 20216 TO: Mayor Towey and City Council CC: Kathy McClung, Community Development Director FROM: Terry Moore SUBJECT: COMMENTS ON THE IMPLICATIONS OF RECENT RETAIL TRENDS FOR SARP PURPOSE OF THIS MEMORANDUM The City Council of Spokane Valley is reviewing the Sprague - Appleway Revitalization Plan (SARP), which was adopted in June 2009. Greg McCormick, the City's Planning Manager, called me on 12 April to discuss the City's interest in having ECONorthwest (ECO) prepare a "letter of opinion' regarding its findings in 2006 study of market conditions in Spokane Valley. In particular, the City wants ECO's opinion on whether current national and local economic conditions would change the conclusions of that study in ways that would have implications for the current review of the SARP. Mr. McCormick asked for something quick and simple, not something requiring extensive data - collection, analysis, or writing. CONTEXT FOR THE QUESTION ABOUT RETAIL After ECONorthwest completed its retail analysis, City staff and consultants developed a plan whose main purpose was to provide a vision for the creation of a city center, and whose secondary purpose was to address land use and transportation issues in the western half of the Sprague - Appleway Corridor. The Council direction for that plan (based on citizen surveys and on citizen and city- council workshops) was that the new city center should (1) be near the intersection of University and Sprague, (2) contain a new city hall and possibly a new library, (3) have a mix of uses, and (4) be something that the market, not the City, would develop. Some conclusions in ECO's 2006 market analysis were clearly pertinent to achieving those objectives. With respect to retail, I quote the summary of our conclusions: • Characteristics of commercial properties. Spokane Valley is a good location for businesses that need to spread out: auto dealers and very large big -box stores. Businesses that prefer urban centers are less likely to locate in Spokane Valley. Compared with commercial properties in Spokane, properties in Spokane Valley Moore to Spokane Valley re SARP and retail ECONorthwest 27 April 2010 Page 2 have higher vacancies and lower rents. Competing retail developments could be an obstacle to developing denser retail in the Corridor. Estimated supply of commercial space. The existing supply of commercial space on the Corridor is about 5.5 million square feet. If the entire Corridor redeveloped to the density of a typical suburban strip mall, the supply of commercial space would increase to 7.3 million square feet, or 365,000 square feet per year for the next 20 years. Current zoning allows much greater densities that would add millions of available square feet to this total. • Estimated demand for commercial space. Estimated demand for commercial space on the Corridor will average about 40,000 square feet per year for the next 20 years: demand for retail space will make up about 21,000 square feet annually, and demand for office space will make up about 19,000 square feet annually. Comparisons of supply and demand for commercial space. The potential supply of commercial space greatly exceeds projected demand for commercial space on the Corridor. Redeveloping larger sections of the Corridor would create much more commercial space than the Corridor will be likely to absorb. The demographic composition of Spokane Valley indicates that mid - priced retailers are most likely to succeed. With respect to the City's desire to create a new city center on the Sprague - Appleway corridor, I think our findings were correctly interpreted by City staff and consultants as cautionary: the market would not be strong for the kind of denser, mixed -use development that the citizens expressed a preference for, so the City might need to use fiscal and regulatory tools to encourage such development. We also noted a related point about housing: that demand for multifamily housing could grow in the City, but that if it were going to occur in the kind of mixed -use project the City was hoping to see in a new city center and elsewhere along the Sprague - Appleway Corridor, both the center and the corridor would need a coherent plan and investment in public amenities. REFINING THE QUESTION The purposes of the 2006 retail analysis are relevant to my response to your question in this memorandum. I am not trying to update all that analysis or to do a market - segmentation study that would forecast demand for different types of retail. The question that I am to address is a specific one about whether the conclusions of the retail analysis as they related to the development of the SARP and its plans for a city center and corridor redevelopment are still valid three years later, given the substantial changes in U.S. economic conditions over the last 18 months. Our market analysis did not address the desirability of having a new city center for the City or its location: citizen surveys and public workshops had previously supported Moore to Spokane Valley re SARP and retail ECONorthwest 27 April 2010 Page 3 the idea of (1) a new city center, and (2) a location on the south side of I -90 and along Sprague Avenue, the City's historical central corridor, and we accepted those ideas as givens. Nor did our analysis address the composition of the development in the city center: the City specified that it wanted a mixed -use center and worked with its consultant FTB to decide on the mix of uses. Our market analysis was, however, part of the basis for SARP's eventual recommendations to (1) anchor a new city center with public investment (a new city hall and public open space, and a library if possible), and (2) change zoning along the corridor to create retail centers with residential development in between (as opposed to continuous retail that the zoning allowed). The second point is the subject of this memorandum. I'll restate the question this memorandum addresses as follows: In 2006, ECONorthwest concluded that Spokane Valley had substantially more land zoned for retail uses than the market was likely to require for the next 20 years. But the retail market has changed substantially over the last 18 months. Do the changes in the retail market change the conclusion that the City has a substantial excess of land zoned for retail development? ANSWER TO THE QUESTION ABOUT RETAIL IN THE CONTEXT OF THE SARP Before I answer that question, a word of caution. It is quite common for people to use information about short -run cycles to question forecasts based on long -run trends. The history of markets in the U.S. strongly suggests that cycles are inevitable: booms and busts, expansions and recessions are inherent in the economy. The stock market is an example. The standard advice from financial planners is: "over the long -run, stocks will out - perform a savings account." But anyone who listened to that advice questioned its validity by the Fall of 2008. Since it bottomed out in March 2009 after 18 months of a downward trend, it has had a year of relatively consistent upward movement. The long -run trend (Figure 1) is still up, despite many cycles that have knocked it down.l 1 But note that despite almost 30% swings in both directions, the DJIA is about the same now as it was 10 years ago. Does that mean that we are starting on a new long -run trend of slow or no growth with high variability around the average? If I knew the answer, or thought I did, I'd be in a different profession. Moore to Spokane Valley re SARP and retail ECONorthwest 27 April 2010 Page 4 Figure 1: Dow Jones Industrial average, 1928 -2010 19K 12K SDK 5K 5K 4K 2K 193U 1935 1941) 1945 1956 1955 1950 1955 1976 1975 1956 1965 199{! 1995 2060 2495 2616 Source: httr): // fi nance. yahoo. com/ echarts? s=^ DJI #chart3:symbol= ^dii:range =5v: indicator = volume:charttvoe= line: crosshair =on: ohlcvalues= O:Iogscale= off:source= undefined Accessed 23 April 2010. To bring that point back to the question you are asking, my advice is to be cautious about viewing a cycle as a trend. The two main drivers of retail expenditure in the greater Spokane region are the number of households and the average disposal incomes of those households. z Population in the region will probably continue to grow (but on the order its long -run average historical rate of 1 -2% per year, not at a sustained boom rate of 5 -10% per year). Per capita income and disposable income across the region have taken a hit over the last couple years and, if long -run economic forecasts are to be believed, will recover very slowly. These long -run trends provide some justification for hoping that the current recession is a cycle and not a new trend. They also give reason to believe that neither the national nor regional economies are likely to have explosive growth in the short run. Taken together, those points suggest that if ECO's forecast of the level of annual absorption of retail in Spokane Valley was justified in 2006, it probably is justified now. But let's examine that conclusion a little closer by looking at data for the Spokane region (Table 1). 2 Other drivers include the relative prices and preferences for other goods and services, and the competing opportunities to buy retail goods outside of the region. Moore to Spokane Valley re SARP and retail ECONorthwest 27 April 2010 Page 5 Table 1: Taxable retail sales for Washington, Spokane County, and Spokane Valley, 2003 -2009 Taxable Retail Sales (billions) Spokane Spokane Washington County Valley 2003 $87.21 $5.82 $1.03 2004 $92.72 $6.16 $1.54 2005 $101.37 $6.65 $1.73 2006 $110.52 $7.28 $1.88 2007 $118.24 $7.68 $1.97 2008 $113.22 $7.36 $1.80 2009 $100.54 $6.83 $1.61 Change 2807 -2009 Number - $17.71 -$0.85 -$0.35 Percent -15.0% - 11.1% - 18.0% AAGR - 7.79% - 5.69% -9.42% Source: Washington Department of Revenue, http: / /dor.wa..qov/ content / aboutus /statisticandreports /stats taxretail.aspx Table 1 shows that for all three areas retail sales (1) grew from 2006 to 2007, and (2) dropped by around 15% from 2007 through 2009. Figures 2 and 3 show the same information graphically. Figure 2 shows the change in the growth rate from positive to negative in 2007 for Spokane County and Spokane Valley. Figure 3 standardizes the data for the three geographies by setting each of their sales in 2006 at a value of 1 so that they are all on the same scale, and then showing their rates of change: it illustrates that Spokane Valley's changes in retail sales, in relative terms, were very similar to those experienced by the state and the county. Figure 2: Retail sales, Spokane County and Spokane Valley, 2003 -2009 $9 $8 $7 0 B $6 b $5 N b $4 $3 F $2 $1 $6 2003 N Figure 3: Standardized retail sales in WA, SC, and SV 2003 -09 B 1.0 ° a 0.9 v m , v) 0,8 d rr 0,7 m a I o6 2004 2065 2006 2007 2068 20x9 2603 2004 2005 2606 Year Year Spokane County Spokane Valley !Washington Spokane County Source: derived from data in Table 1 2007 2068 2099 Spokane Valley My interpretation of these data, in the context of other reading I have done of recent articles about the long -run future of the U.S. economy, is: • If ECONorthwest were forecasting today the long -run regional demand for retail sales in Spokane Valley, our forecast of average future demand would be likely to Moore to Spokane Valley re SARP and retail ECONorthwest 27 April 2010 Page 6 be lozver than it was in our 2006 study. The rate of growth in retail demand would probably be lower, but probably not by much. Another way of saying that is that I would be starting from a lower base and expecting that base to grow at about the same rate or little slower, with the result that the estimate of average annual retail sales for Spokane Valley would be lower than the estimate in 2006. Without doing any further analysis, and based just on a visual inspection of the data, I would expect our estimates of average annual sales and, as a result, of average annual development of retail space, to be on the order of 10% lower. Whether 10% is exactly the right number or not, I think the direction of the change is clear: the forecast would be lower. I think any analyst would be hard -put to make the case that changes in the national and local economy since 2006 are likely to make our 2006 estimates higher. If one agrees that the future expected average retail demand in Spokane Valley calculated today is likely to be either less than or, at best, equal to the forecast of 2006, then the implications for SARP are clear: if a problem for developing a new city center in 2006 was that the future demand for retail was not large relative to the supply of commercial land, then that is likely to be at least as likely, if not more so, now. Some final comment related to the purposes of your question (i.e., an evaluation of the SARP). As an outsider it seems to me that the citizens of Spokane Valley would like to achieve several things: create a new city center; redevelop the Sprague - Appleway corridor; and have the private sector do all that so that property entitlements and the level of public expenditures, taxes, and fees remain unchanged. Those are understandable goals, but they may not be simultaneously achievable. In particular, I think the bulk of the planning and market analysis suggests that (1) the private sector will not have sufficient market incentives to develop a mixed -use, higher - density city center in Spokane Valley; it will need significant City participation in planning, implementation, and the development of the public realm; and (2) the Sprague - Appleway corridor cannot change its character without agreements on how to create high - density neighborhood centers along its length (which is what the SARP proposed, and which is why it proposed changes in zoning to implement those changes). Consider this thought experiment. What if the Sprague corridor lead not developed so that today it were mainly vacant land? Yes, that's not the case, but, what if? Would the citizens of Spokane Valley choose to develop it the way it is developed now? I will not s Note an important point here: namely, I am assuming that we accept our analysis and estimates from 2006 as a starting point and then talk about how they would change. One could also go back to re- evaluate the 2006 report and decide whether that forecast could have been different, which, of course, it could have. But that is not your question, and it does not seem to me to be the right question. The 2006 analysis was reviewed extensively and accepted as the best available basis for decisions at the time. Your question now is effectively "Assuming the 2006 estimate was adequately done and justified in 2006, if one used the same methods now to forecast retail demand, how would the forecast change in light of recent economic events ?" That is the question I am answering in this memorandum. Moore to Spokane Valley re SARP and retail ECONorthwest 27 April 2010 Page 7 pretend to speak on behalf of the citizens of Spokane Valley, but I will speak for myself: no. The land development pattern along Sprague is one driven by the technologies and economic forces of the 20th century. It worked in its time, but the evidence —both theoretical and observable —is that it does not work now. New retail in areas that are trying to be urban is arranging itself in centers; urban areas are trying to reduce the costs of public facilities by increasing densities; alternative transportation that may reduce congestion and greenhouse gas emissions works better with densities and centers. A more appropriate pattern given the costs of extending public services, concerns about greenhouses gases and congestion, concerns about farmland, and desires for proximate and varied shopping would be something more in the direction that SARP is trying to go. One may, of course, disagree with that conclusion. But if one accepts it, then another builds from it: the problem for Spokane Valley and the SARP is less with the vision of desired future development pattern, and more with the sacrifices that have to be made to achieve it. Citizens would like a city center, but it will cost money. They would like it (according to most of the surveys and workshops) near the intersection of Sprague and University, where land assembly will add to cost. All the preferred designs for such a center suggests citizens desire it to have a mix of public space, retail, office, and housing.. Getting that mix of uses to happen in a way and on a schedule that delivers a functional, desirable urban place requires a lot of work by the City, which means yet more money. As I understand it, the City is at an important decision point. It may be considering suspending (perhaps indefinitely) its efforts to negotiate for a site for a new city hall. Mr. McCormick asked me whether the creation of a new city hall, and one that is part of a new town center, would have an effect on my forecasts of retail sales and development. One could argue for such an effect (if, for example, the center were successful in the long run in starting rejuvenation of retail along large parts of Sprague), but one could argue as well that the large amount of vacant or underutilized retail land in Spokane Valley give retailers ample opportunity to meet the market without the need to congregate around a new city hall. I think the importance of a city hall, however, is not that it will cause more retail growth overall, but that it will help concentrate some significant portion of that new growth in a town center that citizens have previously said they would like to have. The primary reason to build a city hall is because of a need or desire to have a new city hall. The secondary reason is to help catalyze a new town center. A tertiary reason is to improve the amount, character, and success of development along the Sprague - Appleway corridor. Whether the sum value of those potential effects merits the public expenditure and changes to public policy that might be necessary to make them happen is a question that ultimately must be answered by the City Council after it is satisfied that it has heard all the relevant evidence. S po�rne- � jVaue April 27, 2010 Name Company /Organization Address City, ST Zip 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhall@spokanevalley.org RE: Invitation to a Discussion of the Gateway Commercial and Gateway Avenue Zones Dear The Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan has been in effect since October 15, 2009. The Spokane Valley City Council has made it a priority to review the plan and determine if changes are necessary to better serve the public interests. As a result of this decision the council will be conducting a detailed review of the document on a zone by zone basis. Community meetings will be held that focus on each zoning district so that staff may talk in detail about the regulations and receive input from those affected property owners. The first meeting will focus on the Gateway Commercial and Gateway Avenue Zone Districts and is scheduled for: Thursday, May 20 at 8:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. - Council Chambers at 11707E Sprague Ave. Your property is zoned either Gateway Commercial or Gateway Avenue, and this meeting directly relates to the regulations that affect land uses and other development standards applicable to your property. As part of this important group, you will be asked to share your thoughts concerning the zoning district and the possibilities for its future. Staff will provide your comments to the City Council at the June 8 City Council meeting as a report that includes a summary of the comments and recommendations on how to address the issues. Your involvement in the discussion will be very valuable in determining the future of the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan, and I hope that you will take the time to participate. For more information, please contact Lori Barlow, Associate Planner, at 720- 5335, or by email at lbarlow@spokanevalley.org Sincerely, Kathy McClung, Director Community Development Department "TYHA "«5PQ'A'4" Department of Community Development Planning Division Sprague /Appleway Revitalization Plan Review ECONorthwest Economic Study } Department of Community Development ..O �vlt Planning Division Background • 2006 ECO Study — Market analysis for corridor — Basis for redevelopment strategy — Key questions: • How much commercial development /redevelopment supportable in the corridor; and • Likely residential development in the corridor • 2010 Opinion Letter — Review 2006 study results in light of current regional &national economy "TYHA "«5PQ'A'4" Department of Community Development Planning Division 2006 Study —Major Findings • Existing 5.5 million sq. ft. of commercial space • Capacity of additional 7.3 million sq. ft. — (365,000 sq. ft. per year for 20 years) — Much higher capacity allowed under zoning • Demand — 40,000 sq. ft. per year — (21,000 sq. ft. commercial — 19,000 sq. ft. office) • Land values lower due to over - supply 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 0 "TYHA "«5PQ'A '4F, Department of Community Development Planning Division Retail Space Supply —vs- Demand Demand Supply 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 "TYHA "«5PQ'A'4" Department of Community Development Planning Division 2010 Opinion Letter •Purpose — review findings of 2006 study • Provide opinion regarding 2006 study • Key findings: — Retail spending dependent on number of households and disposable income — Economic downturn negative impact to income — Forecasts call for slow recovery — ECO's 2006 retail absorption still valid "TYHA "«5PQ'A'4" Department of Community Development Planning Division Questions? CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: City Manager Recruitment GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.13.050 "City Manager —Qualifications" PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: April 20, 2010, Administrative Report to council. Council members agreed to provide information, to be used to update the City Manager position description, by April 27, 2010, to the Mayor and to have further discussion on May 4, 2010. BACKGROUND: On April 20, 2010 Council requested Staff to edit the City Manager position description using the Council Members input. The council also requested additional salary information regarding the City Manager position. Staff have prepared these documents for council review and discussion. Some Council Members suggested advertising this position locally, based on that, Staff could advertise the City Manager position using the local media of the Spokesman Review, Valley News Herald and Worksource (Employment Security). OPTIONS: Provide direction to staff on the revised Position Description, salary range, and advertisement of the City Manager Position. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: To be determined by the process chosen. STAFF CONTACT: John Whitehead, Human Resource Manager ATTACHMENTS: City Manager Recruitment packet which includes: Exhibit 1 — Draft Position Description Exhibit 2 — Salary Data CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY POSITION DESCRIPTION Class Title: City Manager Job Code Number: 100 Department: City Manager Grade Number: NA Division: NA FLSA Status: Exempt Date: i °.' 'April, XX 20101 Location: City Hall ��1► 1d.7 \I11�1.�1�3.YD Performs high level administrative, technical and professional work in directing and supervising the administration of city government. SUPERVISION RECEIVED: Works under the broad policy guidance of the City Council. SUPERVISION EXERCISED Exercises supervision over all municipal employees either directly or through subordinate supervisors. ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Manages and supervises all departments, agencies and offices of the city to achieve goals within available resources; plans and organizes workloads and staff assignments; trains, motivates and evaluates assigned staff, reviews progress and directs changes as needed. Provides leadership and direction in the development of short and long range plans; gathers, interprets, and prepares data for studies, reports and recommendations; coordinates department activities with other departments and agencies as needed. Provides professional advice to the city Council and department heads; makes presentations to councils, boards, commissions, civic groups and the general public. Communicates official plans, policies and procedures to staff and the general public Assures that assigned areas of responsibility are performed within budget; performs cost control activities; monitors revenues and expenditures in assigned area to assure sound fiscal control; prepares annual budget requests; assures effective and efficient use of budgeted funds, personnel, materials, facilities, and time. Determines work procedures, prepares work schedules, and expedites workflow; studies and standardizes procedures to improve efficiency and effectiveness of operations. Issues written and oral instructions; assigns duties and examines work for exactness, neatness, and Comment [ill: Suggested deletion by Sohn Whitehead City Manager conformance to policies and procedures. Maintains harmony among workers and resolves grievances. Performs or assists subordinates in performing duties; adjusts errors and complaints. Prepares a variety of studies, reports and related information for decision - making purposes. Appoints and removes all department heads, officers, and employees of the city, except members of the council. Sees that all laws and ordinances are faithfully performed. Prepares and submits a preliminary annual City budget. Administers the adopted budget of the City. Advises the City Council of financial conditions and current and future city needs. Attends all meetings of the Council at which attendance may be required by the Council. PERIPHERAL DUTIES Recommends for adoption by the council such measures as manager may deem necessary or expedient. Prepares and submits to the council such reports as may be required by that body or as manager may deem it advisable to submit. May serve as the head of one or more departments of city government. DESIRED NIlNIMUM QUALIFICATIONS Education and Experience (A) Graduation from an accredited four -year college or university with a degree in public administration, political science, business management br a background of equivalent real world experience in the management of large multifaceted organizations ^+ i oi.- " " d ate d +:ou an d fi Comment [j2]: suggested additions and deletions by Dean Grafos Necessary Knowledge, Skills and Abilities: (A) Considerable knowledge of modern policies and practices of public administration, working knowledge of municipal finance, human resources, public works, public safety, and community development,: City Manager (B) Skill in preparing administering and directing the implementation of multi-dept. budQets,ffmRieipal b ^a`°' ski io •,',... ng difeeti and administering municipal programs; skill in operating the listed tools and equipment, (C) Ability to prepare and analyze comprehensive reports; ability to carry out assigned projects to their completion; ability to communicate effectively verbally and in writing; ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships with employees, city officials and the public; ability to efficiently and effectively administer a municipal government. (D) A key value of the City is customer service. This position requires considerable knowledge, ability and skill in the principles and practices of excellent customer service as practiced in both the private and public sectors. It requires the ability to effectively meet and deal with the public; the ability to handle stressful situations; the ability to greet and respond to customers in a friendly, pleasant and professional manner using appropriate inflection, grammar and syntax; the ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships with employees, supervisors, and the general public; the ability to maintain a professional, courteous, and pleasant demeanor in difficult and stressful situations; and the ability to diplomatically deal with difficult people. A willingness to expend extra effort to help the public find answers or information relative to their inquiry or complaint is expected. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS Must be bondable. Valid Washington Driver's license or ability to obtain one by the start of employment. TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT USED Requires frequent use of personal computer, including word processing and spreadsheet programs, calculator, telephone, copy machine and fax machine. PHYSICAL DEMANDS The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. While performing the duties of this job, the employee is frequently required to sit and talk or hear. The employee is occasionally required to walk; use hands to finger, handle, or feel objects, tools, or controls; and reach with hands and arms. The employee must occasionally lift and/or move up to 10 pounds. Specific vision abilities required by this job include close vision and the ability to adjust focus. WORK ENVIRONMENT The work environment characteristics described here are representative of those an employee Comment 01: suggested additions and deletions by Dean Grofos City Manager encounters while performing the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. The noise level in the work environment is usually moderately quiet. SELECTION GUIDELINES Formal application, rating of education and experience; oral interview and reference check; job related tests may be required. The duties listed above are intended only as illustrations of the various types of work that may be performed. The omission of specific statements of duties does not exclude them from the position if the work is similar, related or a logical assignment to the position. The job description does not constitute an employment agreement between the employer and employee and is subject to change by the employer as the needs of the employer and requirements of the job change. Effective Date: May 13, 2003 Revision History: established May 13, 2003 Adopted by the City Council May 13, 2003 by Resolution No. 03 -031 Revised by the City Council April XX, 2010 by Resolution No. 10 -XXX comment [j4]: su gg ested updates b Sohn Whitehead and Dean Grafos City Manager 4 Employment Security Workforce Data Executive Officer Compensation (Spokane MSA)* : Washington State Employment Security Department $12,9 Milliman Compensation Study of Private and Public Employers D09 Milliman Compensation Study (Avg Range Midpoint) $14,354.2 City Manager Compensation (Association of Washington Cities Salary Survey for 2009) Salary Range Citv Title Low High Flat Rate Bellevue (120,600) City Manager .$17,983 Bellingham (76,130) Chief Administrative Officer $10,125 Everett (103,500) Chief Administrative Assistant $9,831 $12,806 Federal Way (88,580) City Manager $12,669 Kennewick (67,180) City Manager $8,336 $12,315 Kent (88,380) Chief Administrative Officer $9,461 $13,244 Lakewood (58,840) City Manager $12,629 Pasco (54,490) City Manager $12,149 Renton (83,650) Chief Administrative Officer $10,900 $13,272 Shoreline (54,320) City Manager $13,991 Spokane (205,500) City Administrator $10,927 Spokane Valley (89,440) City Manager $13,841 Tacoma (203,400) City Manager $15,300 $19,614 Vancouver (164,500) City Manager $14,304 Yakima (84,850) City Manager $9,559 $11,618 Averages $10,565 $13,812 $13,180 Employment Security Workforce Data Executive Officer Compensation (Spokane MSA)* : Washington State Employment Security Department $12,9 Milliman Compensation Study of Private and Public Employers D09 Milliman Compensation Study (Avg Range Midpoint) $14,354.2 Compensation Study by Milliman of Private and Public Employers 2009 Survey Job Descriptions Job Code Job Title /Job Description Minimum Qualifications 105 Records Manager Performs managerial and administrative work. Duties include coordinating recording and licensing matters Typically requires a Bachelor's degree in with officials of professional organizations, special interest groups and the general public. Researches business, public administration or records legislation pertaining to recorder and archival functions. Develops written procedures and policies. Assigns administration and five years of related and directs the work of subordinate employees. experience. 106 Secretary Performs specialized secretarial and clerical duties. Duties include organizing, prioritizing and coordinating Typically requires a high school diploma and production into a usable form for management's analysis, redew or release. Schedules, assists, directs three years of prior secretarial experience. and evaluates the work of others as needed. Acts as an intermediary between the superior and the public or other clients prodding information or policy interpretation. Types, formats and prints complex written or dictated material. Catalogs and files, updates existing records to accommodate changes in material on file. 107 Staff Assistant Performs complex administrative support work. Duties include prodding direct administrative support to a Typically requires a high school diploma and manager, preparing reports and documentation. Collects and analyzes data and coordinates preparation five years of office support experience, for department's annual budget. Supervises day -to -day operations of the office and monitors and reports on including three years of executive secretarial new legislation, regulations or policies and plans. Maintains personnel records and confidential files. experience. 108 Top Organization The executive serves as an addsor and proddes administrative support to the board. Responsible for Typically requires a Bachelor's degree and directing the actidties of all departments. Directs issues to the board and makes recommendations for several years of related experience. board action and decisions. Coordinates all department goals to meet the organization's needs. Addresses and /or meets and confers with local business groups, indidduals and other government officials regarding issues, needs and problems brought to the attention of the board. Directs studies of administration, management and organizational matters and recommends solutions to the departments and the board for approval. Compensation Study by Milliman of Private and Public Employers 2009 Range Summary Survey Avg Range Avg Range Avg Range Other Job Code Survey Job Title # of Orgs Minimum Midpoint Maximum Cash 101 Office Assistant 14 $25,994 $30,268 $34,543 0 102 Office Technician 14 $26,343 $31,369 $36,395 0 103 Purchasing Director 9 $64,965 $76,422 $87,880 0 104 Recording Specialist 8 $29,257 $34,183 $39,109 0 105 Records Manager 11 $51,292 $60,865 $70,439 0 106 Secretary 14 $31,719 $37,833 $43,947 0 107 Staff Assistant 16 $33,707 $40,012 $46,316 1 108 Top Organization Executive 8 $118,687 $172,251 $225,815 1 201 Accounting Technician 12 $37,511 $44,629 $51,747 0 202 Budget Analyst 12 $50,547 $60,195 $69,843 0 203 Chief Deputy Treasurer 13 $74,271 $87,129 $99,988 0 204 Customer Accounting Specialist 16 $34,704 $40,561 $46,417 0 205 Risk Manager 12 $71,677 $85,305 $98,933 1 206 Senior Accountant 15 $54,299 $63,463 $72,626 1 207 Tax Collections Specialist 9 $33,118 $38,635 $44,151 0 208 Tax Collections Supervisor 6 $49,596 $57,860 $66,124 0 301 Director of Community Services & Community Development 6 $73,860 $86,281 $98,702 0 303 Human Services Coordinator 6 $63,875 $74,740 $85,605 0 304 Personal Property Evaluator 8 $37,129 $43,670 $50,211 0 305 Planner 11 $46,358 $53,551 $60,744 0 306 Program Planner /Evaluator 5 $53,666 $62,275 $70,883 0 Compensation Study by Milliman of Private and Public Employers 2009 Survey Participants • Ada County • Benton County • City of Cheney • City of Coeur d'Alene • City of Spokane Valley • Guardian Insurance • Kootenai County • PEMCO Insurance • Pierce County ■ Sacred Heart Medical Center • Snohomish County • Spokane County • Spokane Transit • Sterling Savings Bank • Washington County • Washington State Dept of Revenue ■ Washington State Dept of Transportation ■ Yakima County CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Pending Zoning Matters GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: City Attorney Mike Connelly will lead a discussion on pending zoning matters. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of April 28, 2010; 11:00 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative To: Council & Staff From: City Clerk, by direction of Acting City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings May 11, 2010 Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. jdue date Mon, May 3] Introduction of Special Guests & Presentations: Miss Spokane Valley Ambassadors; Peggy Doering: Wa Recreation & ParkAssoc. Citation ofMerit, Citizen Award for 2010 Proclamations: Motorcycle Awareness Day; Older American's Month; Helmet Awareness Month 1. Consent Agenda: Claims, Payroll, Minutes (5 minutes) 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending CTR Plan — Morgan Koudelka (10 minutes) 3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance Comcast Franchise Update (suspend rules ?) — C Driskell (10 minutes) 4. Proposed Resolution Accepting Shoreline Masterplan Report — Lori Barlow (10 minutes) 5. Proposed Resolution for Greenacres Park Grant — Mike Stone (10 minutes) 6. Admin Report: Subarea Plan (SARP /Sprague Appleway Revit.Plan) a. Nonconfonning Uses & Sites- Kathy McClung /Mike Connelly (30 minutes) b. General Layout of the Plan — Kathy McClung (15 minutes) 7. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: 95 minutes] May 18, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, May 10] 1. Budget 2011 — Mike Jackson (30 minutes) 2. Subarea Plan (SARP /Sprague Appleway Revit Plan) Zone Discussion: Gateway Comm & Gateway Ave - Lori Barlow (30 minutes) 3. Street Maintenance Site — Neil Kersten (15 minute) 4. PEG Channels — Morgan Koudelka (15 minutes) 5. Advance Agenda [ *estimated meeting: 90 minutes] May 25, 2010, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, May 17] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Six -Year 2011 -2016 Transp. Improvement Plan (10 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda: Claims, Payroll, Minutes (5 minutes) 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending CTR Plan — Morgan Koudelka (10 minutes) 4. Admin Report: Street Vacation STV 01 -10 — Karen Kendall (15 minutes) 5. Admin Report: CTA 02 -10 Code Text Amendments — Lori Barlow (15 minutes) 6. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 7. Info Only: Department Reports [ *estimated meeting: 60 minutes] June 1, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, May 24] 1. Council Computer Training /Paperless Agenda Packets - Chris & Bing (20 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: minutes] June 8, 2010 Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, May 31] 1. Consent Agenda: Claims, Payroll, Minutes (5 minutes) 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance Vacating Street (STV 01 -10)- Karen Kendall (15 minutes) 3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance CTA 02 -10 Code Text Amendments — Lori Barlow (15 minutes) 4. Proposed Resolution Adopting Six -Year 2011 -2016 TIP — Steve Worley (10 minutes) 5. Admin Report: Greenacres Park Design Presentation — Mike Terrell, Design Consultant (20 minutes) 6. Admin Report: Advance Agenda [ *estimated meeting: 65 minutes] Draft Advance Agenda 4/29/2010 2:10:02 PM Page 1 of 4 June 15, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, June 7] 1. Action Item: 2 nd reading Ordinance CTA 02 -10 Code Text Amendments — Lori Barlow (5 minutes) 2. Subarea Plan (SARP /Sprague Appleway Revit Plan) Zone Discussion: City Center— Scott Kuhta (30 min) 3. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: minutes] June 22, 2010: No Meeting Council Attends AWC Conference in Vancouver (June 22 -25) June 29, 2010, Special Regular meeting format 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, June 21] 1. Consent Agenda: Claims, Payroll, Minutes (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Vacating Street (STV 01 -10)- Karen Kendall (10 minutes) 3. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 4. Info Only: Department Report [ *estimated meeting: minutes] July 6, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, June 28] 1. Budget Process Update — Mike Jackson/Ken Thompson (20 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: minutes] Julv 13, 2010, Special Meeting: Budget Retreat — CenterPlace Classroom 9:00 a.m. to approx 4:00 p.m. [due date Mon, July 5] July 13, 2010 Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, July 51 1. Consent Agenda: Claims, Payroll, Minutes (5 minutes) 2. Subarea Plan (SARP /Sprague Appleway Revit Plan) Check -in — Kathy McClung (15 minutes) 3. Admin Report: Advance Agenda [ *estimated meeting: minutes] July 20, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, July 12] 1. Subarea Plan (SARP /Sprague Appleway Revit. Plan) Zone Discussion: Neighborhood Ctrs — Scott Kuhta (30 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda 3. Info Only: Department Reports July 27, 2010, Formal Meeting Format 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, July 191 1. Consent Agenda: Claims, Payroll, Minutes (5 minutes) 2. Admin Report: Estimates of 2010 & 2011 Revenue/Expenditures — Ken Thompson (10 minutes) 3. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 4. Info Only: Department Reports [ *estimated meeting: minutes] August 3, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, July 26] 1. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: minutes] August 10, 2010 Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. jdue date Mon, Aug 2]] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2011 Budget Revenues — Ken Thompson (10 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda: Claims, Payroll, Minutes (5 minutes) 3. Motion Consideration: Setting 2011 budget Hearings for September 14 & Sept 28 — K.Thompson (5 min) 4. Subarea Plan (SARP /Sprague Appleway Revit. Plan) Report to Council re Public Mtg — S. Kuhta — (20 min) 5. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: minutes] Draft Advance Agenda 4/29/2010 2:10:02 PM Page 2 of 4 August 17, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Aug 9] 1. Subarea Plan (SARP /Sprague Appleway Revit. Plan) Zone Discussion: Mixed Use — Mike Basinger (30 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda August 24, 2010, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Admin Report: Outside Agency Presentations — Ken Thompson 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda 3. Info Only Department Reports August 31, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda September 7, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda [ *estimated meeting: minutes] [due date Mon, Aug 16] (60 minutes) (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: minutes] [due date Mon, Aug 23] [ *estimated meeting: minutes] [due date Mon, Aug 30] (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: minutes] September 14, 2010 Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. jdue date Fri Sept 3] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2011 budget — Ken Thompson (5 minutes) 2. First Reading Ordinance adopting 2011 Property tax — Ken Thompson (15 minutes) 3. Motion Consideration: Allocation of Funds to Outside Agencies — Ken Thompson (25 minutes) 4. Subarea Plan (SARP, Sprague /Appleway Revit. Plan) — Update to Council — Mike Basinger (30 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: minutes] September 21, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Sept 13] 1. Advance Agenda [ *estimated meeting: minutes] September 28, 2010, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Sept 20] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2011 budget — Ken Thompson (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Ordinance adopting 2011 property tax — Ken Thompson (10 minutes) 3. First Reading Ordinance to adopt 2011 Budget — ken Thompson (15 minutes) 4. Subarea Plan (SARP /Sprague Appleway Revit. Plan) Zone Comm. Blvd — Lori Barlow (30 minutes) 5. Info Only: Department Reports [ *estimated meeting: minutes] Draft Advance Agenda 4/29/2010 2:10:02 PM Page 3 of 4 OTHER PENDING AND /OR UPCOMING ISSUES /MEETINGS ADA Plan Affordable Housing Participation Alternative Analysis (contracts) Area Agency on Aging Bidding Contracts (SVMC 3. — bidding exceptions) Broadcasting Budget 2011 (ordinance to adopt Oct 12) Capital Projects Funding Clean Air Agency Code Amendments (Kathy McClung) Community Development Block Grant (Fall 20 10) Concurrencv Contract Ordinance Amendment East Gateway Monument Structure # Hotel/Motel Grant Proposals for 2011 (Nov 20 10) Jail Update Law Enforcement Interlocal Milwaukee Right -of -way ■ Overweight /over size vehicle ordinance Planned Action Ordinance SARP: Oct 19, report to council Signage Solid Waste Amended Interlocal Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) Interlocal Sprague Appleway Corridor Environ. Assessment Street Maintenance Facility Transportation Benefit District Interlocal Transportation Benefit District: (a). Establish ord.; (b) set public hearing; (c) draft resolution; (d) ballot language Transportation Impacts WIRA, Water Protection Commitment, public education ■ = request for Council's early consideration # = Awaiting action by others * = doesn't include time for public or council comments Draft Advance Agenda 4/29/2010 2:10:02 PM Page 4 of 4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 4, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ® information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Summer Construction — Sullivan Road Corridor GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adopted the 2010 -2015 Six Year TIP, Resolution #09 -009 on June 16, 2009 which included the Projects along the Sullivan Rd Corridor; Info RCA on upcoming 2010 Public Works Project Council Actions in Council's February 16, 2010 packets; Bid Award for Broadway /Sullivan PCC Intersection Project on March 9, 2010. BACKGROUND: See attached information OPTIONS: Info Only RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Info Only BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, PE — Senior Capital Projects Engineer Neil Kersten, AIA — Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: Fact Sheet — 2010 Sullivan Corridor Road Construction Projects MY OF Public Works Department Capital Improvement Program 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhatt@spokanevalley.org Fact Sheet — 2010 Sullivan Corridor Road Construction Projects The 2010 construction season includes the following three capital projects within or near the Sullivan Road corridor between Sprague Avenue and Broadway Avenue: 1. Broadway Ave /Sullivan Rd Concrete Intersection Project 2. Sprague Ave /Sullivan Rd Concrete Intersection Project 3. Broadway Ave Reconstruction Project— Moore Rd to Flora Rd Each project is evaluated in detail by Public Works staff to determine how best to not only construct the project in the most efficient and least costly manner possible but also with the least possible disruption to traffic. Staff looked at possible construction stages, temporary traffic control plans, and potential detour routes. Following is information on how each of the above project details was determined. BROADWAY AVE /SULLIVAN RD CONCRETE INTERSECTION PROJECT A full closure of the Broadway / Sullivan PCCP Intersection project was evaluated and eventually ruled out because of: the close proximity to I -90 and the surrounding street grid did not contain adequate detours to successfully route traffic around the project Therefore, a preliminary temporary traffic control plan for constructing the project under traffic was developed. The focus was to continuously support the following traffic movements with the highest volumes: 2lanes for north and southbound vehicles on Sullivan Rd continuing through the intersection • Southbound vehicles on Sullivan Rd turning left to travel eastbound on Broadway Ave Westbound vehicles on Broadway Ave. turning right to travel northbound on Sullivan Rd. Reconstructing the intersection with traffic requires the Contractor to build the project in 6 stages, each with a different traffic control plan. Even with the closure of Broadway Avenue west of Sullivan Road, an experienced concrete paving Contractor estimated the construction would take 6 weeks. SPRAGUE AVE /SULLIVAN RD CONCRETE INTERSECTION PROJECT A full closure of the Sprague / Sullivan PCCP Intersection project was compared to building the project under traffic. Preliminary construction staging and temporary traffic control plans were developed to continuously support the following traffic movements with the highest volumes: 2 lanes for southbound vehicles on Sullivan Rd turning right (westbound) onto Sprague and one lane turning left onto Sprague (Eastbound). • 1 lane eastbound on Sprague turning left (North) and one lane continuing through on Sprague. • 1 lane westbound on Sprague turning right (North) and one lane continuing through. • 2 week temporary closure of Sullivan Rd south of Sprague Ave. The length of time to build the project under this scenario was 6 to 8 weeks. The estimated time to reconstruct the intersection with a full closure was estimated at 3 weeks and a reduced cost of at least $100,000. BROADWAY AVE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT — MOORE RD TO FLORA RD This project will widen the existing 2 lane roadway and include curb, gutter, sidewalk, and stormwater collection and treatment systems. This project will also include the construction of Spokane County's White Birch sanitary sewer. Therefore, the temporary traffic control measures will be similar to many of the recent sewer projects in the City. Broadway Avenue, east of Conklin Road will be closed to through traffic during the duration of the project, but access to local residences will always be provided during the project. PROJECT COORDINATION Since these projects are located in the same area of the City the detours of one project will route through the other project areas. Therefore, staff coordinated the project schedules so no two projects would be under construction at the same time. Preliminary schedules were developed to start the next project after the previous one was completed. PUBLIC OUTREACH I. In early January of 2010, the City Public Information Officer prepared and mailed out 5,596 brochures to addresses along the corridor. The brochure described the three projects and invited all interested parties to a public open house to hear more about each project and get any questions answered. A copy of the brochure was also posted on the City's website. 2. On January 13, 2010, the City Public Information Officer prepared and distributed a media release inviting community members to learn more about the project at the Open House scheduled for January 21. The media release was posted to the City website, and the Open House was added to the City website calendar. 3. Public Works staff met with the following businesses and property owners between January 4 th to January 20 to explain the proposed project traffic control measures: Broadway / Sullivan Concrete Intersection Project # 0114 Corner Prop Owner/ Mgr Business Address NW Corner Schlotsky's Deli McDonalds Restaurant Larry Fulton Office Building Owner WKA Innovations Inc Human Touch Valley Massage Holistic Physical Therapy NE Corner 901 N. Sullivan Rd 819 N. Sullivan Rd 807 N. Sullivan Rd 807 N. Sullivan Rd 807 N. Sullivan Rd 807 N. Sullivan Rd Goodale and Barbieri Commercial Property Management Co. Toys R Us Michael's Vida Nails Mattress Outlet Ross Dress for Less Great Clips Pet Smart Eddie Bauer 15505 E. Broadway 15521 E. Broadway 15607 E. Broadway 15607 E. Broadway 15529 E. Broadway 15607 E. Broadway 15615 E. Broadway 15635 E. Broadway Lowe's Kohls Department Store Wal -Mart SE Corner SW Corner Valley Assembly Church Emmet Burley Burley Sullivan Rd Enterprises Jacob's Java Pioneer School Starbuck's Jack -in- the -Box Restaurant Noodle Express Sprague / Sullivan Concrete Intersection Project #0065 Petco Fred Meyer Corner Prop O 'svner/ Mgr Business Address NW Corner Ace Hardware Ciena NE Corner SE Corner SW Corner Walgreens American West Bank 16205 E. Broadway 16301 E. Broadway 15727 E. Broadway 15618 E. Broadway 618 N. Sullivan Rd 624 N. Sullivan Rd 618 N. Sullivan Rd 506 N. Sullivan Rd 15420 E Broadway 15421 E. Springfield 15405 E. Sprague 115 N. Sullivan Rd 10 N. Sullivan Rd 15609 E. Sprague 15510 E. Sprague 15606 E. Sprague Goodale and Barbieri Commercial Property Management Co for Sullivan Sq. US Bank 15426 E. Sprague 4. The Public Works staff held a public Open House on the three projects on January 21, 2009 from 4:00 PM to 7:00 PM. The majority of the attendees supported the short three week construction time proposed by the staff by closing the Sprague /Sullivan Intersection during the project. This agreed with the general preference of the business owners that the staff had contacted prior to the project during construction. 5. Based on the public input from the meeting the staff made the following changes to the projects: The start date for the Sprague /Sullivan intersection project was delayed until June 21 at the request of Plantland (15614 E. Sprague Ave.) owners, Bill Coyle and Jan Love to avoid the highest sales season in the nursery business. Ace Hardware (15405 E. Sprague Ave.) and Fred Meyers (15609 E. Sprague Ave.) also requested the project start be delayed to this date. Many residents at the meeting requested additional information concerning the proposed improvements adjacent to their property on Broadway Avenue resulting from the Broadway Avenue Reconstruction Project. Over the next two weeks, in early February, the public works staff contacted each resident along the project to finalize project details. 6. In late January, City staff worked with McDonalds, Jack -in- the -Box and Larry Fulton to tailor access to the businesses on the northwest and southwest corners of Broadway and Sullivan. 7. In early February, City Staff discussed the traffic control measures for the Sprague / Sullivan PCCP intersection with the following businesses in Sullivan Square, a commercial mall operated by Goodale & Barbieri: Sprague / Sullivan PCCP Intersection Project — CIP 0065 Corner Prop Owner/ Mgr Business Address SW Corner Hastings Book & Video 15312 E. Sprague Harbor Freight 15312 E. Sprague Edward Jones 15412 E. Sprague Scollards Cleaners 15412 E. Sprague Bronz Beauty 15412 E. Sprague H & R Block 15412 E. Sprague Amalfi 15412 E. Sprague Kentucky Fried Chicken 15330 E. Sprague Transition Studios 15412 E. Sprague Star Nails 15412 E. Sprague Hancock Fabrics 15530 E. Sprague Rockwood Clinic 15412 E. Sprague In early March, the City Public Information Officer prepared and mailed out 5,655 brochures to address along the corridor providing an overview of the projects, including Broadway /Sullivan, Sprague /Sullivan, and Broadway Avenue — Moore to Flora. This brochure was also posted on the website. Project locations and descriptions were also included in the 2010 Regional Construction Map. Map is posted on City website and distributed through SRTC, City of Spokane and Spokane County's websites and in print. 9. In early April, the City Public Information Officer prepared and mailed out 9,205 brochures to addresses along the corridor describing the temporary traffic control measures for the Broadway /Sullivan project. The brochure was also posted on the website. The construction of the Broadway /Sullivan PCCP Intersection Project began on April 12 and will end the last week of May. 10. On April 7, the City Public Information Officer prepared a media release alerting community members of the project start. The media release was also sent to emergency responders, school transportation providers, public transit, subscribers to the email traffic alerts, and those on the project email update list. The media release was posted on the website as well. 10. In addition, project descriptions and a map of the project area were included in the Apr /May /Jun Hot Topics community newsletter, which has a 20,000 total copy distribution in the Spokane Valley News Herald, Spokesman Review, and at local distribution points including Spokane Valley Library, Spokane Valley Police Precinct, Spokane Valley Partners, Greater Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce, Spokane Valley Heritage Museum, CenterPlace, Pen Center, Central Reception, and Council Chambers. The newsletter was also posted to the website and distributed via email to a list of about 350 subscribers. 11. Status on the project is also provided throughout its construction in the weekly traffic alerts distributed to the media, emergency responders, school transportation providers, public transit, subscribers to the email traffic alerts, and those on the project email update list. Weekly traffic alerts are posted on the website as well. 12. Media coverage to date: 1/2/10 Spokesman Review article • 1/14/10 Inlander article 1115110 Valley News Herald article • 1/16/10 Spokesman Review article 1/29/10 Valley News Herald article • 1/25/10 Spokesman Review article • 2/11/10 Inlander article • 3/8/10 KHQ report • 3/11/10 Journal of Business `Building the Northwest" magazine insert article • 3/27/10 Spokesman Review article • 4/1/10 Spokesman Review correction to project dates 4/9/10 Valley News Herald article • 4/10/10 Spokesman Review article • 4/11/10 KHQ report on project start • 4/12/10 KREM report on project start • 4/12/10 KXLY report on project start • 4/12/10 KHQ report on project start • 4/15/10 Spokesman - Review article 13. In late May, the City Public Information Officer will mail out to about 9,000 addresses along the corridor a brochure describing the temporary traffic control measures for the Sprague /Sullivan project. This information will also be added to the website and distributed to those on the project email interest list and to the traffic alert email lists. The project is scheduled to begin on June 21st. 14. In early June, the Public Information Officer will send out a media release on the start of the Sprague /Sullivan project, and will work to arrange live coverage immediately prior to, and at the start of the project. The media release will also be posted on the city website and will be distributed to those on the project email interest list and to the traffic alert email lists. 15. In early July, the City Public Information Officer will mail out to about 9,000 addresses along the corridor a brochure describing the temporary traffic control measures for the Broadway Reconstruction Project (from Moore Rd to Flora Rd). The project is scheduled to begin in late July. 16. In mid July, the Public Information Officer will send out a media release on the start of the Broadway Reconstruction Project (Moore to Flora). The media release will also be posted on the city website and will be distributed to those on the project email interest list and to the traffic alert email lists. 17. As each project is completed, that information will be included in the appropriate weekly traffic alert. ,,;oOValleyl Operations & Administrative Services 2010 - 1s' Quarter Report Administrative • At the resignation of the City Manager, the Deputy City Manager has served as City Manager from January 5 to present. Provide support to staff and City Council. • The Council Winter Retreat was held on February 9, 2010. Subsequently, Administration has been working with Staff and Council to schedule review of the SARP. • Along with Finance Director, initiated Finance Committee meetings to establish 2011 Budget process. • Provided Department Directors direction for 2011 Business Plan and Budget preparation. Set objectives to limit 2010 spending to 97% of established budgets. Departments are working on 3 %, 6 %, and 9% potential budget reductions in 2011. Budget retreat with Council set for July 19, 2010. • Ongoing progress in Law Enforcement Contract negotiations with Spokane County. • Ongoing progress Settle and Adjust meetings with Spokane County for Police Services. • Received Council approval for Precinct Commander, participated in Precinct Commander interviews for Spokane Valley Police Department. • Worked with the City of Airway Heights on Interlocal Agreement for Plan Review Services. Interlocal was approved by Council. • Attended with City Council number of meetings such as joint meetings with Spokane County and the City of Spokane; Council of Government; tours of the Spokane County Jail and the Spokane County Waste to Energy Plant, etc. Human Resources Recruiting/Employment Recruitment Applicants Interviews Admin Assistant — Public Works 30 6 Recreation Assistant — Host 1 0 Recreation Assistant — summer positions 48 9 Senior Plans Examiner 1 0 Storm Water Interns 3 0 TOTAL: 83* 15 * Numbers do not reflect duplicate applications Deputy City Manager Quarterly Report — continued , 2010 Recruiting/Employment, continued -2- Position Status Admin Assistant — Public Works Filled Recreation Assistant — Host Accepting applications Recreation Assistant — summer positions Accepting applications /Interviewing Senior Plans Examiner Interviewing Storm Water Interns Accepting applications Special Projects: Preparation for WCIA Personnel Audit, on -line application development, and personnel policy updates. Public Information Key Reporting Areas Media relations 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 # 1st Qtr f2ndQtr 3rd Qtr - -4th Qtr Other • Citizen contacts: 114 • Website Updates: 136 (Does not include PIO- initiated, and regularly scheduled updates) • Areas of Significant focus: • Website design /development • Discovery Playground promotion • Sprague /Sullivan projects public information effort Media Media Earned Total Media Hot Topic Contacts Releases & Media Stories Community Traffic Stories Enewsletter Alerts Deputy City Manager Quarterly Report — continued , 2010 Web Site -3- Web Site Summary 1st Quarter 2010 I Unique User Sessions Top Five Pages Viewed Employment Spokanevalley.org Police Bldg. GIS maps Top Five "Referrer" Web Sites Spokane County — employment Municipal Research (MRSC) County Ideas Spokanevalley.org City o f Spokane Valley January February March Year to Date 44,884 42,159 47,745 134,788 4,564 4,319 5,624 14,507 1,067 1,423 1,535 4,025 1,033 1,040 1,238 3,311 789 818 982 2,589 686 704 797 2,187 703 524 536 1,763 224 206 197 627 207 170 185 562 50 202 138 390 92 94 80 266 Central Reception Business Registration • 535 New registrations • 1455 Annual renewals (Due annually in December) Call Volume 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 CD Council H R Legal Misc Crps /Ad min P& R PW I Total ■January 299 84 30 22 190 65 22 85 797 ■ February 420 94 7 16 187 104 12 90 930 []March 501 58 19 26 266 110 18 86 1084 Deputy City Manager Quarterly Report — continued , 2010 Visitor Volume Citizen Action Requests -4-