2010, 06-29 Regular Meeting Minutes MINUTES
City of Spokane Valley
City Council Regular Meeting
Formal Meeting Format
Tuesday,June 29,2010
Mayor Towey called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Attendance: City Staff:
Tom Towey,Mayor Mike Jackson,Acting City Manager
Gary Schimmels,Deputy Mayor Mike Connelly, City Attorney
Rose Dempsey,Councilmember Ken Thompson,Finance Director
Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Mike Stone,Parks&Recreation Director
Dean Grafos, Councilmember Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir.
Brenda Grassel Councilmember Steve Worley, Senior Engineer
Karen Kendall, Assistant Planner
Absent: Morgan Koudelka, Sr. Administrative Analyst
Bob McCaslin, Councilmember Inga Note, Senior Traffic Engineer
Carrie Koudelka,Deputy City Clerk
INVOCATION: Mayor Towey asked for a moment of silence in honor of a Spokane Valley U.S.
Marine Corpsman recently killed. Cpl. Joseph Dumow was a West Valley student. After a brief silence,
Dr. Dempsey gave the invocation in the absence of Pastor Craig Goodwin of Millwood Community
Presbyterian Church.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Towey led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL: Deputy City Clerk Koudelka called the roll; all councilmembers were present except
Councilmember McCaslin. It was moved by Councilmember Grafos, seconded and unanimously agreed
to excuse Councilmember McCaslin from tonight's meeting. Acting City Manager Jackson told Council
that last week two councilmembers were not excused and that typically during the study session meetings
roll is not called.He said Council may want to consider having roll call at every meeting. It was moved by
Councilmember Gothmann, seconded and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmembers Dempsey and
McCaslin from the June 15, 2010 meeting.
APPROVAL OF AMENDED AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and
unanimously agreed to approve the agenda.
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS:
COMMITTEE,BOARD,LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS:
Councilmember Gothmann said he went to thirteen meetings including the Housing and Community
Development Advisory Committee (HCDAC) meeting, the DISP graduation, a voluntary program for
repeat DUI offenders, HCDAC Grant workshop, two Motorola 9-1-1 meetings regarding emergency
communications, the Board of Health executive committee meeting, a Chamber of Commerce breakfast,
and the MLK Way dedication in Spokane. He also said he took a mobile tour of the AWC (Association of
Washington Cities) Subarea Plan during the AWC Convention in Vancouver, and a TIB (Transportation
Improvement Board)committee meeting in Vancouver.
Councilmember Dempsey said she attended the AWC Convention in Vancouver and had the honor of
carrying the Spokane Valley flag in the Parade of Flags at the convention.
Councilmember Grafos said he attended the annual Homebuilders Show in Liberty Lake and a Mixed Use
meeting at City Hall. He said he did not attend the AWC Convention in Vancouver.
Council Regular Meeting 6-29-2010 Page 1 of 11
Approved by Council:07-27-2010
Deputy Mayor Schimmels said he attended a board meeting with Spokane Transit Authority (STA), two
sessions with the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) regarding their HUB and freight
mobility study bringing freight from Canada to Mexico. He attended a Solid Waste Advisory Committee
meeting, and an SRTC visioning meeting.
Councilmember Grassel said she attended the Homebuilders Show in Liberty Lake, a Growth
Management Steering Committee meeting and the AWC Conference in Vancouver.
MAYOR'S REPORT:
Mayor Towey said he attended the DUI graduation night at the Valley Precinct, the Bicycle Master Plan
meeting in Council Chambers,the MLK Way dedication in Spokane,the AWC Conference in Vancouver,
and the SRTC workshop this morning.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited general public comments.
Ian Robertson, 1716 S. Rotchford Drive: Spoke about the "Change for the Better" campaign in place to
help educate the public about panhandling and directing their financial support to agencies offering help.
Terry Lynch, Spokane Valley Business Association: had his letter read into the record requesting an
increase in the patrol of speeds along one-way Sprague Avenue from University to Thierman.
Mike King, 9300 E. Sprague: Requested Council table or postpone the ballot measure of committing
Sprague to a one-way couplet concept.
Carlos Landa, 12019 E Sprague: Spoke against the ballot measure and said businesses need traffic and
need traffic after work to succeed.
Gordon Curry 14413 E Trent: Spokane about his disappointment in the service he received during his
application for a Lot Line Adjustment. Acting City Manager Jackson said staff will look into his
concerns and report back to Council and to Mr. Curry.
Ray Ward 13404 E 9th Ave: Asked if there is an ordinance or any laws that permit trucks to park in
residential areas. Acting City Manager Jackson said that is an informational item next week and if it is the
desire of Council we can come back after that for a full discussion.
1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any
member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered
separately.
a. Approval of the following claim vouchers:
VOUCHER LIST DATE W/VOUCHER NUMBERS: TOTAL AMOUNT
05/27/10 20278—20306 $87,432.76
06/04/10 3162—3164 $54,407.37
06/08/10 3172-3185; 20314—203 19 $204,648.83
06/11/10 20320 — 20375; 527100023;
528100137; 604100027 $1,842,674.78
06/11/10 20376—20416 $87,420.86
06/17/10 20417 — 20446; 611100026;
617100023 $494,540.56
06/17/10 3187—3189 $59,242.14
GRAND TOTAL $2,830,367.30
b. Approval of Payroll for Period Ending June 15,2010: $260,133.98
Council Regular Meeting 6-29-2010 Page 2 of 11
Approved by Council:07-27-2010
c. Approval of Formal Council Meeting Minutes of June 8, 2010
d. Approval of Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 15, 2010
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the consent
agenda.
NEW BUSINESS:
2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Vacating Street (W of 16th and Kahuna) (STV 01-10) — Karen
Kendall
After Deputy City Clerk Koudelka read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels
and seconded to adopt the ordinance. Associate Planner Kendall went through her presentation describing
the street vacation with conditions as listed in the ordinance. There were no questions from council.
Mayor Towey invited public comment; no public comment, no comments from Council. Vote by
Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Abstentions:None. Motion passed.
3. Proposed Resolution Adopting 2011 —2016 Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP)— Steve
Worley
After Deputy City Clerk Koudelka read the resolution title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels
and seconded to approve the resolution adopting the 2011-2016 Six Year Transportation Improvement
Program as presented. Senior Engineer Worley pointed out the changes made since the last time he
presented the TIP to Council as the addition of Park Road: Broadway to Indiana, funded for the design
phase only, and the Indiana Avenue Extension Project. He said both were added to the 2011 TIP because
completion is not expected until next year. There are also three projects recently approved by the SRTC
board for engineering and right-of-way funding that were added and separated into two phases: the PE
and right-of-way phase and the construction phase. Councilmember Grassel asked if there is no funding
source for street preservation and maintenance and we are looking at funding roads, at what point does
that become the priority before doing new construction or coordinated light systems. She also asked if we
are able to manipulate the projects and reroute funds for them based on priority. Mr. Worley confirmed
these are planned projects for state funds and that prioritizing the projects is a decision Council has. He
said they will present the Pavement Management Program (PMP) to Council at a future meeting and that
Council can make changes to the Six-Year Plan at any time. Mayor Towey invited public comment; no
comments offered. Councilmember Gothmann said that Councilmember Grassel said we should not have
any surprises on public works projects and in the interest of no surprises, he said he wants to address
Project 30 —PE for the extension of Appleway. He passed out a memo dated September 6, 2008, issued
for cost estimates for Sprague and Appleway, which, he said, includes everything in the future plans that
were adopted last year by the previous Council. He directed attention to the front page of the memo,
Appleway Extension, which was $24 million. He said he looked carefully through the TIP and that is
roughly the same as the TIP lists for both extensions from University to Evergreen and Evergreen to
Tshirley. He then directed attention to the third page at the top,where he said Stage Three was rejected by
the Council, and the total cost for Stage Three was $6.7 million so, from the first page taking the $4.2
million, then subtracting the $6.7 million that Council rejected, you come up with about $35 million. He
said the total project for the City was about $35 million and of that, $24 million was for the extension of
Appleway. He said the $24 million for the extension of Appleway represents 69% of the $35 million
funding. He said 5% was for existing Appleway changes over the next twenty years, and $8 million for
Sprague Avenue changes over the next twenty years that represents 22%, and includes all eight miles of
Sprague. He said last year alone we spent $6 million in funds on Sprague and what this is proposing is
that we spend $8 million over the next twenty years. He also said $1.3 million of the $35 million, or
3.7%, was for conversion of the one-mile of University to Argonne from one-way to two-way. He said
September 25 — 27`h during Valleyfest, Dean Grafos and Senator McCaslin were interviewed by a T.V.
reporter and Mr. Gothmann read the following quote stated by Mr. McCaslin in the interview: "They want
to spend $42 million for developing Sprague Avenue and they do not have $42 million and the only way
they can get $42 million is either through grants or raising taxes to the people in Spokane Valley. We're
Council Regular Meeting 6-29-2010 Page 3 of 11
Approved by Council:07-27-2010
opposing raising taxes." Councilmember Gothmann said that statement is wrong; it is not $42 million
dollars, but $35 million dollars; two-thirds of the expenses are not for developing Sprague, but for the
extension of Appleway; and there was no raising of taxes involved. He said this Council knows that street
projects are not funded by property or sales taxes, but are funded from real estate excise tax, taxes raised
through grants. He further noted that Council cannot "raise taxes to the people in Spokane Valley"
because we have no authority, only the legislature has authority, to raise real estate excise taxes. He said
the statement was blatantly false. He said in his opinion the purpose of the statement was meant not to
inform, but to scare our citizens by using false and misleading information. He noted that Mr. McCaslin
and Mr. Grafos were interviewed by the T.V. reporter and Mr. Grafos did not correct this mistake;
however, he said Mr. McCaslin was repeating the false and misleading mantra preached by the
disincorporation movement that was funded in part by Mr. Grafos. Thus, two of our present
Councilmembers are on record as opposed to this. He said Councilmember Grafos on April 10 in a letter
to the editor articulated his vision for Spokane Valley. What is not included is "a $42 million dollar
unfunded mandate called SARP — or Sprague Appleway Revitalization Plan." Mr. Gothmann said this
statement is wrong, the amount is $35 million, not$42 million; it is wrong to expect anything on the TIP
that is ten years out to be funded. He said if you do not apply for funding for a grant, you obviously will
not receive it and you cannot apply funding for a grant that is ten years out, this is a twenty-year plan. He
said a mandate is defined as an authoritative command and we have no authoritative command standing
over our head right now telling us either adopt or do not adopt Project 30, namely the PE for the
Extension of Appleway. He also noted the $35 million dollars is not called "The Sprague Appleway
Revitalization Plan," the Sprague Appleway Revitalization Plan is a complete book and on one page of
that book the plan consists of a mini Comp Plan and development regulations. He said future City actions
are listed as a part of that plan on one page. He said the $35 million dollars cannot be called SARP any
more than his big toe can be called Bill. Bill is more than his big toe just like SARP is more than the
street configuration. The bulk of the $35 million dollars, $24 million, is for the extension of Appleway,
Project 30 on our TIP. He said he understands if people object to lane changes, the direction and how
many lanes there are; he understands if people object to pedestrian pads as were proposed; and if people
object to landscaping as proposed. But, he said to object to the extension of Appleway for the next twenty
years, which is the bulk of the $35 million dollars, he does not understand. He said Mr. Grafos is not
informing, but misleading the citizens. He said multiple times the new Councilmembers have opposed
these three projects by opposing the expenditure of future funds. He said by doing this, they are saying
they do not want to apply for grants and they do not want our funds to go for this extension. He said the
question before the Council tonight is whether the Council wants to include Project 30 - Project
Engineering of the Appleway Extension-at$406,000, in the TIP that we're considering tonight, knowing
that eventually over the next twenty years we may have to spend $24 million dollars on it. He said he
does not want any surprises for Councilmembers and that he supports the TIP.
Mayor Towey said he does not know if we can talk about extending Appleway (Project 30) in the future
when we do not own the land. He said if we were working on purchasing the land,we could talk about the
future of the extension of Appleway and he does not understand both the planning department and this
Council continually talking about extending the Appleway couplet in the future when talks to the County
and to STA are not happening. He said he cannot imagine and he will not vote and will not consider the
extension of Appleway when we do not even have a hint of owning it. Councilmember Gothmann agreed
that he does not support this program now, but this is not scheduled for four years, so looking into the
future four years from now, his approach is that he favors it as a placeholder in case it happens, but he
agrees as far as anything immediate. Mayor Towey asked how often we could add to the Six-Year Plan.
Mr. Worley said we could adjust the Six-Year Plan at any time, adding or removing projects. Mayor
Towey said if something should happen in the near future or after six years that dictates that we have a
glimmer of hope to own this piece of property,we could add Project 30 at that time and he would suggest
they do, at that time. It was moved by Councilmember Gothmann to amend the original motion to include
Project 30 in the TIP. Councilmember Grafos said Mr. Gothmann lost him on all those figures. He said he
does not have a problem putting the Appleway Couplet Extension on the TIP because like Mr. Worley
Council Regular Meeting 6-29-2010 Page 4 of 11
Approved by Council:07-27-2010
said, projects could be added and taken off. He said he cannot speak for what Mr. McCaslin was talking
about over at the park, but he said he's confused about the $42 million he was talking about, and he's
looking at the memo from the City of Spokane Valley, September 16, 2008, and it has a total funding of
$42.1 million as the cost of those projects. Councilmember Gothmann said that came from the Planning
Commission, the question is what did Council adopt and Council did not adopt the item on page three at
the top;therefore,the amount was $35 million.Mr. Grafos said this is a public document and if people are
reading it and it came from the Planning Commission, they are probably the figures Mr. McCaslin was
using. Councilmember Gothmann said to note the date was 2008. Mr. Grafos said he cannot speak for Mr.
McCaslin, but the reason we are talking about this, and he said he is also addressing Mr. Landa's and Mr.
King's comments, he is not changing the traffic on Sprague Avenue. He said we are putting that up to a
vote of the people,the taxpayers are the people who have to pay for it and he said it is only right that they
have a voice in this. He said the reason we are doing this is to finally put this at rest; this has been going
on, there are a lot of vacancies and he agrees that is a problem. He said the reason is because there is no
consistency and no certainty in what is going to happen in the Spokane Valley. Once and for all, he said,
we want to put that to rest. Mayor Towey said this is not the motion before the Council and directed
Council back to the motion. Deputy Mayor Schimmels stated as a point of order the motion on the floor
needs to be addressed before going further. City Attorney Connelly said the original motion to adopt the
TIP includes Project 30; therefore, no amendment is necessary. Without a second, the motion to amend
failed. Vote by Acclamation on the motion to adopt the 2011-2016 TIP: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:
None. Abstentions:None. Motion passed.
4. Motion Consideration: Bid Award, Sprague/Sullivan Concrete Intersection Project—Steve Worley
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to authorize the City Manager to finalize and
execute the bid award contract for the Sprague/Sullivan PCCP Intersection Project to the lowest
responsible bidder, Acme Concrete Paving, Inc.,for$835,000. Senior Engineer Worley discussed the bid
opening, that we had successful bids and he is requesting approval to move ahead with the award of the
contract. He explained that the bids came in lower than the engineer's estimate, allowing them to fund the
bigger project. Councilmember Grafos asked if the amount is for the total cost of the project. Mr. Worley
said it is for the cost of construction, not the design. He said they do not need all the federal funds they
had available to us for this project. Councilmember Grafos said it was $120,000.00 more to keep the
Sprague and Sullivan intersection open during construction, but what we save by not keeping it open is
$16,000.00. Mayor Towey invited public comment; no public comments, no comments from Council.
Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Abstentions:None. Motion passed.
5. Motion Consideration: Bid Award, Broadway Avenue Reconstruction Project, Moor to Flora— Steve
Worley
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to authorize the City Manager to finalize and
execute the bid award contract for the Broadway Reconstruction Project to the lowest responsible bidder,
MJM Grand, Inc., in the amount of$1,298,320.28. Senior Engineer Worley said they received very good
bids and this contract is in coordination with the County sewer project. He said the County has been
gracious in working with us in the delaying of their sewer project so as not to interrupt our citizens twice
with two separate projects. Mayor Towey invited Council questions; none. Mayor Towey invited public
comment; no public comment, no comments from Council. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous.
Opposed:None.Abstentions:None. Motion passed.
Mayor Towey called for a recess at 7:28 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 7:40 p.m.
6. Motion Consideration: Suspend Broadway Safety Project—Neil Kersten
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to suspend the Broadway Avenue Safety Project.
Senior Engineer Worley explained over the past few years Council has been provided information about
the Broadway Safety Project regarding the conversion of Broadway from Pines to Park from four lanes to
the proposed three lanes. They have been provided accident data, information from other jurisdictions
Council Regular Meeting 6-29-2010 Page 5 of 11
Approved by Council:07-27-2010
throughout the country that have done similar projects and their results. He said they have the most recent
information from Washington State Dept. of Transportation regarding accident data that shows accidents
have gone down from the stretch of Broadway between Pines to Sullivan, though not as much as they
would have liked. He explained the timeframe for which they collected this data is a very short period of
time and that during this time period we have experienced two record-setting winters which have a
tendency to increase the number of accidents.Mayor Towey invited questions from Council; none. Mayor
Towey invited public comment:
Curt Leitzinger, 10005 E. 14th Ave.: Requested his comments be read into the record in opposition of the
motion to suspend the project.
Catherine Harris, 13908 E. 32nd Ave: Spoke in opposition of the motion to suspend the project. She said
it is not a cyclist project; it involves a huge number of improvements and reduces traffic collisions. She
said the majority of the accidents on this road could have been avoided with a continuous left turn lane. It
also improves school safety for pedestrians, students and staff crossings. It accommodates growth,
includes ADA curb ramps, minimum clear zones, and promotes pedestrian and bicycle safety.
Frank Ping, 116 N. Clinton Rd.: Spoke in opposition of the motion to suspend the project. He asked the
Council not to delay, given the size of the grant and the relatively low matching funds the City has to put
up. He said this project encompasses several school zones for pedestrians to cross; that the ADA ramps
are important; and having the left turn lanes in the middle allow drivers to see what is coming.
Christopher Pierce, 404 N. Farr: Spoke in opposition of the motion to suspend the project. He said his
daughter will go to Ness in the fall and he would like to walk her to school but he will not cross
Broadway with a five-year old and a three-year old.
Cathy Bonin, 2803 S. Bowdish: Spoke in opposition of the motion to suspend the project. She said the
traffic flows well where the changes were made to the other parts of Broadway; there are bike lanes and
sidewalks for pedestrians. She said if there are no bike lanes on the roads, there is not enough room for
bikers, drivers of cars get angry because they are stuck behind slow bikes. If the bikes are on the
sidewalk, it puts the pedestrians in jeopardy. She said the improvements are safer, family friendly, and
parents can teach their children how to bike correctly: with traffic.
Brian Bale, 403 N. Farr Rd.: Spoke in opposition of the motion to suspend the project. He said his kids
go to Ness and he will not allow his kids to walk to school; there is limited space on the sidewalk for
walking and there is not enough room for his stroller.He said it is a safety concern.
Erik Muhs, 1404 N. Locust Rd.: Spoke in opposition of the motion to suspend the project. He said he is a
bicyclist and a commuter in Spokane Valley; he said he has noticed an increase in bike riders with the gas
price increase.
David Scott, 9418 E. Broadway: Spoke in opposition of the motion to suspend the project. He said he has
a small child who walks across the street to Ness, he said it is dangerous to cross and you cannot see
traffic in the inside lane to see if cars are coming and the street is too narrow for bikes.
Chris Wetherell, 7712 E. Utah: Spoke in opposition of the motion to suspend the project. He said he does
not think it is selfish to want to improve the safety of the community and that we should not let something
like this slip away, especially considering the grant that is available.
Marc Mims, 15127 E. 26th Ave: Spoke in opposition of the motion to suspend the project. He said the
primary goal of the project is to reduce auto collisions, providing a safer center turn lane, ADA
improvements and compliance, curb cuts, and removing power poles and mailboxes from the sidewalks.
Council Regular Meeting 6-29-2010 Page 6 of 11
Approved by Council:07-27-2010
He said incorporating bike lanes help make pedestrians and biking safer. He said it is cost effective,
business friendly, and safer.
Rick Dawson, 13307 E. 14th Ave.: Spoke in favor of the motion to suspend the project. He said in the
winter traffic in two lanes gets people backed up and will be worse if it goes down to one lane. He said if
you take all the traffic in both lanes and funnel them into one lane, it will make it more difficult for
pedestrians to cross the street. He said the schools along Broadway all have good crosswalks. He said he
is in favor of the ADA improvements, but not the bike lanes or condensing it down to one lane.
Mark Harris, 13908 E. 32nd Ave.: Spoke in opposition of the motion to suspend the project. He said the
current level of service on this section of Broadway is a rating of"E" which is failing. He said this would
inhibit any future development along the Broadway corridor. He said this rating would improve to a"C"
if they proceed with the project. He said four lanes of traffic is not safe because you cannot see the inside
lanes. He said the project provides ADA and better access to businesses and to homeowners on the
corridor.
Sheila Gates Ping, 116 N Clinton: Spoke in opposition of the motion to suspend the project. She said that
two-lane traffic with a center turn lane encourages people to drive slower making it safer for bicyclists
and pedestrians wanting to cross the street. ADA regulations make a smooth transition for pedestrians
and bike lanes allow bicycles not to be in conflict with pedestrians on the sidewalk or with cars in traffic.
She said the economic climate right now is bringing low bids from contractors and by not waiting we will
be saving even more money for the portion the City has to match.
Heleen Dewey, 1101 W. College Ave.: Read a letter from Dr. Joel McCullough of the Spokane Regional
Health District in opposition of the motion to suspend the project.
Councilmember Dempsey said that her husband is in a wheelchair and cannot travel on Broadway due to
its inaccessibility. She said the ramps to driveways are too steep for people using a walker or a wheelchair
and she encourages Councilmembers to allow the project to move forward. Deputy Mayor Schimmels
said he has had enough years here to examine that street and make corrections. He said there are six
schools on the stretch from Pines to Park, and another three schools east of Pines that access Broadway
from the north and south. He said he thinks the accidents are a result of excessive speed. He said he would
like to proceed with the project. Councilmember Gothmann said the primary responsibility of any
governmental agency is mentioned in the RCW's as health and safety and this project entails both and the
documentation is overwhelming. Councilmember Grafos said he thinks ADA requirements are necessary
but the data is incomplete on Broadway. He said he would like to do the ADA improvements now and
leave the striping until the spring after seeing the kind of winter we have. He said he does not think we
have enough information. Councilmember Grassel said she leans toward Councilmember Grafos'
comments. She said she has not seen any problems with traffic flow on Broadway but has experienced
road rage incidents on Mission where the road is two-lane traffic with a center turn lane. She said she
would like to postpone the project until we can get apples-to-apples comparisons. Mayor Towey said this
issue has been studied more than any other issue that has been before them. He said he will encourage
Councilmembers to vote no on the suspension of the project due to the safety factor. Vote by
Acclamation: In Favor: Councilmembers Grassel and Grafos. Opposed: Deputy Mayor Schimmels,
Mayor Towey, Councilmembers Dempsey and Gothmann.Abstentions:None. Motion failed.
7. Motion Consideration: Justice Assistance Grant(JAG)—Morgan Koudelka
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to authorize the City Manager to submit the
application for the 2010 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant. Senior Administrative
Analyst Koudelka said this is the third time this item has been before Council. The amount of funds
available is $44,231.00 and there is no match required. He said the funds are to purchase seven rugged
notebook computers and ammunition. Councilmember Dempsey asked what a rugged notebook computer
Council Regular Meeting 6-29-2010 Page 7 of 11
Approved by Council:07-27-2010
is. Mr. Koudelka explained it is a laptop computer designed for heavy impact of cars,jarring and general
abuse from being in a car. He said his understanding is that it they are portable and not mounted in the
cars. Mayor Towey invited public comment; no comments offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor:
Unanimous. Opposed:None. Abstentions:None. Motion passed.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited general public comments.
Carlos Landa, 12019 E. Sprague Ave.: He said during Council discussion Councilmember Grafos made
specific comments directed at him and he wishes to address those comments. He said the last Council put
the issue of the couplet and the one-way streets to bed and they were in a position to start changing
Sprague back from University to Argonne soon. He said that to say now that you are trying to"put this to
bed," he would submit that we have dug up a body that was already cold and you are trying to revitalize
it. He then said Councilmember Gothmann stated that the public pays very little for road projects because
most of these are TIB projects funded with federal and state dollars. He said Councilmember Grafos
stated that in the instance of the Sullivan corridor only a few thousand dollars was actually City money,
so the idea that he is saying the citizens have a right to vote because the citizens are paying for it is an
extremely misleading statement.
Cathey Bonin, 2803 S. Bowdish: Spoke regarding the lighting at Bowdish Middle School. She said in the
winter it gets dark at four or five in afternoon and the lighting along Bowdish is very poor and you cannot
see children walking. She asked that we check the lighting to make it safer for kids.
Shirley Rademacher, 19303 E. River Rock Lane: Spoke concerning the heavy commercial truck traffic on
Barker road. She said she is concerned with the cattle trucks that come from Canada that she said are
overweight and illegally taking back-roads. She said that Liberty Lake is also fighting this battle and that
trucks belong on interstates and need weighed and inspected. She said Barker Road has bike lanes now
and the trucks take up most of the road. She suggested placing signs after Euclid expressing no trucks
over 10,000 gross vehicle weight to keep the trucks out of the neighborhoods filled with children.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS:
8. Cattlemen of Spokane County—Cindy Marshall
Cindy Marshall from Otis Orchards discussed her concerns over the Canadian cattle trucks that use
Harvard Rd. She said this affects the safety of our communities and has an impact on the infrastructure of
the secondary roads the cattle trucks are taking. She said the trucks are bypassing the port of entry by
taking Trent, which is legal in Washington. She said she will work on legislation this year to encourage
trucks to go through the port of entry. She introduced Corporal Bob Sola of the Spokane County
Sherriff's office and Willard Wolf who is a member of the Cattleman's Association. Cpl. Sola said there
are no laws in Washington regulating that trucks use the ports of entry, which creates a strenuous
obligation for law enforcement and puts a strain on our resources. He said 40-70 cattle trucks come in
through Canada and travel through Spokane Valley per day, depending on the time of year. He said the
County is considering restricting Harvard Rd. to a strict truck weight that would move trucks to Sullivan,
Barker, and Argonne Roads. Mr. Wolf said the trucks are four-axel trucks and they are illegal in 44 states
for interstate travel, but they are legal in Idaho, Washington and Montana. He said they tear up the roads
and come with 110,000 pound payload. He said the legal limit in Washington is 105,500 pounds. He said
they also pose a health issue because FMD (foot and mouth disease) gets into cattle, swine, sheep, goats,
deer, and elk and there are no assurances as to where the cattle from Canada originally came from or what
has spread because they have not gone through a port of entry. He said there are other diseases to be
concerned with such as tuberculosis, brucellosis, and Red Water. He said they want enforcement to put
the trucks on the interstates and signage to direct them to use the ports of entry. Acting City Manager
Jackson said if Council chooses our City Attorneys can look at the jurisdiction the City has over this item
and could come back to Council with a range of options for consideration.
Council Regular Meeting 6-29-2010 Page 8 of 11
Approved by Council:07-27-2010
Deputy Mayor Schimmels moved, seconded, and it was unanimously agreed to extend the meeting one
hour.
Councilmember Dempsey asked since they know the time the trucks are coming through, why are they
not using the portable scales to weigh them. Cpl. Sola said there are only two officers to enforce the
weight limits and one was deployed a couple months ago. If they try to intercept them at the state line on
Trent, they have to pull over onto a small shoulder and weighing a cattle truck is not easy to do. He said
they put themselves at risk due to the small shoulder and speeding traffic. He said they are inclined not to
use the portable scales as much, but rather to do emphasis details. Councilmember Dempsey asked if we
could post signs in Idaho for the Washington Port of Entry. Cpl. Sola said they have signs there currently,
but they are unenforceable. He said they have gone to the state and the Dept. of Transportation and asked
for help. Councilmember Dempsey said we cannot enforce trucks on state highways and Trent and Pines
are both highways. Cpl. Sola said it is a regional problem that needs addressing. Councilmember
Gothmann suggested they talk to our lobbyist and ask her to check into this, then bring it up for
discussion at the first half of the legislative session. He said they could also ask our local representative,
Matt Shea, and then go from there. Mayor Towey asked staff to look at the three options mentioned by
Mr. Jackson and Councilmember Gothmann and to bring this back to Council at a future meeting.
9. Pavement Requirements—Kathy McClung
Community Development Director McClung reported on the issue of a citizen request not to have paving
for his business lot. She explained that having pavement requirements protect the aquifer, abide by the
regional plan to protect air quality, and are a requirement of the County code that carried forward to the
City code. She said to change the code would require a Comprehensive Plan amendment because it is
stated in the Comprehensive Plan that pavement is required. Councilmember Dempsey said that to
require lots be paved is the responsible thing to do to ensure nothing is going into the aquifer or
contaminating the air quality. Councilmember Grassel asked how many acres of land in Spokane Valley
is either gravel or unpaved. Ms. McClung said she does not have that information and she is not sure she
can get it. She said there are a number of gravel lots and she assumes they occurred prior to the County
adopting the regulations. Councilmember Grassel said that according to the Clean Air Act, it looks like
gravel surfaces are fine for lots and her concern is there are many unpaved vacant lots and paving is
expensive. She said she would like to look into another option because paving could be cost prohibitive
and we could end up with several vacant lots with gravel because people could not afford to pave it.
Councilmember Dempsey said the value of the health of our citizens and the health of our aquifer is more
important. Councilmember Grafos asked if we could encourage businesses by bonding the pavement for a
limited number of years for a new business. He said they could require the business to perform a certain
percentage of that paving or the landscaping requirements up front, but give time to complete it and still
encourage businesses to move into our area. Deputy Mayor Schimmels said the City spends money every
year to pave some of our gravel roadways and he asked Mr. Worley how much we paved last year due to
pollutants. Mr. Worley said he does not have those specific numbers but whenever the County does a
sewer project the City has taken the position that we will replace the gravel roads for air quality purposes.
Councilmember Dempsey asked if there is consensus to proceed with a change to the Comprehensive
Plan.Mayor Towey noted there is not a consensus of Council to move forward.
10. Ballot Measure—Mike Jackson
Acting City Manager Jackson said this item is to discuss the potential ballot measure for conversion of
one-way to two-way on Sprague Avenue. He said the cost to place a ballot measure on the November
ballot would be approximately $10,000.00 - $15,000.00, which will vary depending on the number of
items on that particular ballot. He said that to place it on a special ballot with no other ballot measure
would cost approximately $100,000.00. The deadline to file a resolution for the November 2nd general
election ballot is August 10th and the deadline to file a resolution for the February 8, 2011 election is
December 25, 2010. He said this is achievable. He said Public Works is concerned with the figures we
have for conversion because the numbers we have are planning level numbers. Currently they are working
Council Regular Meeting 6-29-2010 Page 9 of 11
Approved by Council:07-27-2010
on looking at the cost to convert from Argonne to University, which is the portion previously identified.
To look at the entire couplet, it is difficult to say if we can get accurate estimates. He said the question for
Council is to define the scope of the conversion, whether to go from University to Argonne or to include
the entire couplet. He said they also should consider if they want to pursue the streetscape (landscaping)
improvements and if they want to include a funding measure, such as a bond issue, to fund the actual
change and the construction. Mr. Jackson said he recommends that if there is interest to bring this back as
a motion consideration from Council, determine whether Council wants to pursue this. If we wait to bring
an ordinance forward for consideration, we will have spent money with a bond attorney and used
considerable amounts of staff time, and if we look at total conversion of the couplet and include
streetscaping we will spend additional money to determine the construction figures.
Deputy Mayor Schimmels said that while he was initially for this,he thinks this is too much,too soon and
that they voted last year whether to do this. He said he would like to see the from the language from the
previous minutes and have it brought back to Council as an action item, but that he thinks they need more
time. Councilmember Gothmann said he is concerned with street amenities and that the amenities should
reflect what the street serves. He said he would like to get all the facts, put it all together, and then
approach the problem. Councilmember Dempsey said she is a little distressed because the previous
Council put a lot of time and effort trying to come up with something that would satisfy the business
community and the commuters and she is afraid this will hurt our community. She asked why we cannot
let a decision that was previously made forward. Mayor Towey said he thinks the previous decision was
made in conjunction with a City Center and they have not been in negotiations for a City Center for over
two years. He said he thinks that as a Council they have to decide whether to accept the previous decision
and treat the conversion as a separate issue. Councilmember Dempsey said they voted on the conversion
as separate issue. Councilmember Gothmann said he thinks they need to address the zoning around that
area. Councilmember Grafos said this is a separate issue from zoning and he wants to put this to rest
"once and for all." He said he thinks they should have two options: conversion of the one-way to the two-
way from University to Argonne, and the other option to make the entire couplet two-way, from
University to the freeway. Councilmember Gothmann asked why they would not to all the way to
Evergreen and Mr. Grafos said he is addressing the portions currently one-way. Councilmember Dempsey
said this was decided"once and for all"by the last Council and asked if it would be decided"once and for
all" again by the next Council. Mr. Grafos replied, "No, it's going to go to the November ballot."Deputy
Mayor Schimmels said the only place we would spend any money is from University to Argonne if we do
this. He said going to Evergreen is a moot point because we do not own that property. Mayor Towey
asked if we are looking at the November ballot due to cost considerations. Mr. Jackson it was part of
Council's original discussion and recommendation and said there are several options available, but this is
the earliest possible time. Mayor Towey said he agrees with Mr. Schimmels; he would like more
information from the minutes of previous Council meetings. Councilmember Gothmann said that when
talking about funding a street, 80% comes from the State, only 20% comes from local funds. He said that
20% comes from real estate excise tax that comes from buying and selling property. Deputy Mayor
Schimmels said this would be reversing something that has already been paid for, and to change it the
City would either pay for it entirely or put out a bond measure. Mr. Connelly said that they can have a
ballot measure accompanied by a bond paid by additional property taxes or they can have a ballot
measure that is simply an advisory vote, one that is not tied to any money. Mr. Grafos asked if it would be
better to put this on the November ballot with a bond issue, not an advisory vote. Mr. Connelly said
another option is that we may have existing allocated funds for this project and we would have to ask Mr.
Worley all of our funding options. Mr. Worley said when the City incorporated we had a TIB grant of
$4.2 million and that the SRTC agreed by Board vote to supplant the TIB funding with federal funding
when the City needed. Spokane Valley relinquished the $4.2 million in TIB funding with the assurance
that when federal funds became available and the City was ready to move forward, they would take the
$4.2 million that to use for the Sprague Appleway corridor provided there is a plan in place to suggest that
project is needed. He said that is what the SARP does for us. Mr.Jackson said staff can do research on the
previous decision, look at possible funding options and cost estimates, and come back to Council in two
Council Regular Meeting 6-29-2010 Page 10 of 11
Approved by Council:07-27-2010
weeks. He said it could be very difficult to meet the August 10th deadline to submit a resolution to the
County. He said they could bring this back to continue discussion, which would have minimal cost in
addition to the time of City staff. It was the consensus of Council to have staff gather more facts and
bring back for further discussion as Mr. Jackson suggested.
11. Advance Agenda
No discussion.
INFORMATION ONLY: The Greater Spokane, Inc., Report, SCRAPS, Interstate Signage, Response to
Public Comments, and Department Reports were for information only and were not reported on or
discussed.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pending Litigation [RCW 42.30.110(i)]
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive
session for approximately twenty minutes to discuss Pending Litigation and that no action is anticipated
thereafter and to extend the meeting twenty minutes.
Council adjourned into executive session at 10:00 p.m. At approximately 10:09 p.m., Mayor Towey
declared Council out of executive session and it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and
unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
- (I/If
AT ': omas E. owe ,Mayor •
,
hristine Bainbridge, City Clerk /
Council Regular Meeting 6-29-2010 Page 11 of 11
Approved by Council:07-27-2010
PUBLIC COMMENT
SHEET
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DATE: June 29, 2010
CITIZEN COMMENTS
YOUR SPEAKING TIlVIE WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES
Sign in if you wish to make public comments.
NAME TOPIC OF CONCERN YOU ADDRESS TELEPHONE
PLEASE PRINT WILL SPEAK ABOUT
6)(111 f it.11'is (k w /E rf I fcig 3d,n`/4e
M. r c. ivi t M s brociAtfr.e,„„ ." fir� W� zc,— /4_,/c. 9' r�t
u :: ,•A) 40w,- / 307 6' /V'`y Fe;f1-Co?)
ffr/2 l 0-62_5 r� 13,rff g'► ; - 9,z2'6'75f
.42)z 62 9360 , Sipte.7 cPo 3 zleS3
€e St,evv a a v -v e. (a w • CzI(.493eA, "Q04-
�, I�s L,#uoA Iln(S r mss/-oa��
F1^ow.k Pi1 road umis Avt I t 6 N* C-t-i row 9 V-t -( '/�"
3 h e,jo, (� �i nq oppot �c L U W 6'u• Clinbarr ility_
v
��rS r.,� , /i/o / lace 7
� ray ,man a l e `fly
(2�J1 c-1 NC`s ,Ce y 114 i4.; t2S
PUBLIC COMMENT
SIGN-IN SHEET
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DATE: June 29, 2010
CITIZEN COMMENTS
YOUR SPEAKING TIME WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES
Sign in if you wish to make public comments.
NAME TOPIC OF CONCERN YOU ADDRESS TELEPHONE
PLEASE PRINT WILL SPEAK ABOUT
r; P,�!i'l�_ F7 w.. / s$ kri. 6E14 /Uo ?a-er- 1-6 4'-6)27
'-,-; Bar/-W/ (73, --‘r 7/ -- r--rvii Y 3 S— 2la cJc.)
PUBLIC COMMENT
SIGN-IN SHEET
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DATE: June 29, 2010
CITIZEN COMMENTS
YOUR SPEAKING TIME WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES
Sign in if you wish to make public comments.
NAME TOPIC OF CONCERN YOU ADDRESS TELEPHONE
PLEASE PRINT WILL SPEAK ABOUT
S..47 (p
gori 4,h gr cQe. y = v3 S -.evlvd 1'A qa(i-7c y•
r s 1
Carrie Koudelka
From: R. Terry [rterry@zepublic.com]
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 11:57 AM
To: Carrie Koudelka
Cc: Dick Behm
Subject: Letter to Spokane Valley City Council on Sprague Avenue Speeding
- -
fir s. Koh e ,
Today � � that . will n t be at the next o n
eet ng. had asked Kar she d read this letter for me. W you be kind
to read this message to the ar,hd i that not able aUend th
meeting due t r or engagement?
regard',
Derr yncht President
SPOKANE ALLEN S ASS T O
e ciriA
LETTER TO SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
6-29-10
Honorable Mayor and Council Members:
As you are well aware, the SPOKANE VALLEY BUSINESS ASSOCIATION has been consistent in
bringing to the Council, issues dealing with Sprague Avenue. We believe Sprague Avenue is
the "MAIN" avenue of the city of Spokane Valley. Sprague was also US 10 for many years,
heavily used for transporting goods and services through the valley both east and west. It
was and still is the center of all that happens in the Spokane Valley. Sprague Avenue is the
economic engine that drives the prosperity of the City of Spokane Valley
The County Commissioners in their wisdom with information that was not adequately
correct, decided to make it one way going into Spokane, anticipating huge volumes of
vehicle traffic. The Commissioners created a high speed one-way avenue going west from
University to Thierman. Their expectation of major vehicle use increase has not
materialized due to the expansion of Interstate 90. However, among the many problems
with this concept came one of a much too wide avenue for pedestrians to cross safely and a
i
.
speedway was created. This less than friendly speedway has inhibited the development of
businesses providing goods and services along Sprague.
We believe Sprague Avenue as it exists from Thierman to University needs considerably
more aggressive speed enforcement for public safety. If the council would direct the
Spokane Valley Police Department to strictly enforce the speed limit on the one way portion
of Sprague Avenue, there would be less opportunity for the public to be put in jeopardy
from speeding autos and trucks. While the speed LIMIT is 35, we believe the reality is that it
is common for vehicles to be travelling in excess of 40-45 MPH and some over 50 MPH or
more.
Please note for those businesses on one way Sprague Avenue, excess speed is detrimental
to encourage shopping and services. Businesses from University to Auto Row have
customers that are challenged trying to cross Sprague, by auto or on foot to the other side.
If anyone on the Council doubts this, I recommend they try to cross Sprague from the South
side to a bus stop on the North side as many of our citizens are forced to do during rush
hour. It is especially difficult for our Seniors and young children, it's a constantly dangerous
effort. We ask you to increase traffic patrol along this speedway. We believe enhanced
speed control will reduce potential loss of life and damage.
My personal regards,
?env .dreci, President
SPOKANE VALLEY BUSINESS ASSOCIATION
ITl7eity4d
722 W.Wedgewood Ave.
Spokane,WA. 99208-4161
USA
509-475-2673
rterry @zepublic.com
R.Terry Lynch, President
SPOKANE VALLEY BUSINESS ASSOCIATION
Past President Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce
Past Chair Better Business Bureau
Past Chair Washington State Hotel/Motel Association
Past Chair Spokane County Fair& Expo Center
Past Chair&Co-founder Inland Empire Innkeepers Association
Past Vice Chair-20 Year Member Carnhope Irrigation Board
Certified Hotel Administrator-AH&MA-1988
Community contributions:
14 years Treasurer of Valley Fest&
Valleyfest Children's Breakfast fund raiser
2
. . ?
Treasurer of SRCVB four years/Member of Momentum Board
Former Member of Hospitality Services Board-Expo'74
Former Member of Good Samaritan Advisory Board
Former Member Spokane County Community
Development Block Grant Board
Retired
Former owner(38 years)
PARK LANE MOTEL,SUITES& RV PARK,Spokane Valley,Washington
3
SPOKANE • REGIONAL
H LT H
D I S T R I C T
1101 West College Avenue
Spokane,WA 99201-2095
509.324.1500 I TEL
509.324.1464 I TDD
www.SRHD.org
June 29,2010
The Honorable Tom Towey and
Spokane Valley City Council Members
City of Spokane Valley
11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Dear Mayor Towey and Spokane Valley Council Members:
The Spokane Regional Health District's mission is to serve as the region's public health leader and
partner to protect and improve the community's health. It is our vision that all citizens in Spokane County
will live safe,healthy and productive lives.
The Spokane Regional Health District staff works on many levels to ensure a healthy quality of life.
While education and encouragement are very important pieces of making communities healthier, research
has shown that environmental and infrastructure changes are the most effective ways to get a community
active, safely.
In Spokane County, 63%of adult residents are considered obese or overweight,putting them at risk for
chronic diseases such as diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure,and some cancers.The Institute of
Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences recommends fighting obesity by establishing policies to
encourage the construction of quality sidewalks, bikeways,and other places for physical activity. One
study found that 43%of people with safe places to walk met the recommended activity levels. The
Federal Highways Administration safety review found that streets designed with sidewalks, raised
medians,traffic-calming measures and treatments for disabled travelers improve pedestrian safety.
The Spokane Regional Health District supports the construction of projects that are intended to increase
the safety of the community and increase the activity levels of the residents who live nearby. We believe
the Broadway Avenue Safety Project is one of those projects.
We look forward to partnering with the City of Spokane Valley to help reach our mission to protect and
improve the community's health.
Sincerely,
MP hi PY
Joel McCullough, MD, MPH,MS
Health Officer
sireNEmARK f"` COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
SALES LEASING
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
REAL ESTATE COMPANY
June 29, 2010
To: City of Spokane Valley From: Mike King
City Council Members Stonemark Commercial Real Estate
Spokane Valley, WA. 9300 E Sprague, Suite 100
Spokane Valley, WA.
City Council member, Good Evening.
This council ran largely on a platform to enhance the business climate of the Spokane
Valley. By lessening the government entanglements of local business and creating a
better business environment for its residence. By lowering or not creating additional
taxes and fees, upon its residents, its business community, its taxpayers. These very
taxpayers who fund the services provided by the contracting of the Sheriff's
Department from Spokane County and fund the services provided the City of the Valley.
This council was elected under this concept, small government expenditures and pro
business.
I am before you tonight to request you table, or postpone your decision on a public
ballot measure committing Sprague and Appleway to a one way couplet concept. I
stand before you with shocking evidence that retaining and extending the one way
traffic concept is devastating local business.
I have little doubt that the commuting public favors the faster one way couplet concept
and will vote as such. I also have little doubt res comprehend the impact on the local
business, city government tax revenue lost and just who will be accountable for making
up the lost tax income that is required to fund county and city government.
It will surprise you to know that since the one way was implemented, in November of
2000 there have been over 100 years of accumulated Vacancies on Sprague Avenue
between University and Argonne Rd. In this short stretch of MAIN STREET in the City of
the Valley there are indeed over 100 years of accumulated vacancies.
hand out spread sheets
In this hand out I have carefully documented the commercial vacancies of the 9,000 and
10,000 blocks of E Sprague Avenue. Those blocks on the impacted business area
between University and Argonne Rd. Those blocks devastate by the one way couplet.
I am aware there are errors and omissions to this data, but it is as accurate as I could
make it after hours and hours of interviews of the business community, property
owners and personal research of Stonemark's historical real estate records. It is
susceptible to picking at the details. I'm aware there are errors and omissions.
But what is indisputable is that this couplet of Sprague Avenue is littered with
commercial real estate vacancies. Vacancies that are the highest in Spokane County.
Commercial vacancies that have not sustained business. Individual business people
and property ow.,ars who have been devastated by the conversion or uie MAIN STREET
to a one way, five lane couplet, to sustain commuter convenience, over business logic.
The spread sheet before you has:
• the address for commercial space
• the years since the one way couplet was opened in November 2000
• and three years of prior occupancy in 2000, 1999, & 1998
• NOTE: the years of accumulated vacancies of these properties is NOT 100 years,
the accumulated vacancies on the 9,000 and 10,000 block of E Sprague Avenue is
indeed 284 years. That is 284 years of lost jobs to local residence, 284 years of
lost sales tax revenue to Spokane Valley to sustain government services and 284
years of accumulated vacancies of property tax to Spokane County.
I neglected to mention that Spokane Valley also has lower assessed value on
commercial buildings than its counterpart, the City of Spokane.
This is undisputable fact that the one way couplet is killing business on the MAIN
STREET of the City of Spokane Valley. Look and compare the vacancies in this small
segment of Sprague Avenue and the realty signs in this portion compared to anywhere
else in Spokane County. The economic cost of keeping the one way couplet is just too
much. And for heaven's sake don't extend it in the next segment and devastate those
areas of Bowdish, Pines and Evergreen.
This sitting City Council ran on the platform to enhance the business climate of the
Spokane Valley. Sustaining and then extending the one way couplet.
I am before you tonight to request you table, or postpone your decision on a public
ballot measure committing Sprague and Appleway to a one way couplet concept. For
fiscal responsibly, and business sense do not move forward and continue this travesty.
I will take any questions you might have.
Respectfully,
Mix 'X'efef
Mike King
9300 East Sprague Avenue—Suite 100—Spokane Valley,WA 99206
Ph: (509)924-7110 Fax: (509)924-7123
www.stonemark.org
f ' '
i
it
. 1
j .
I
t
"I
A
,i!
1 a 'ieO ,',A'^ ,ys k t U'.,z Paj' '' *, it {h °' ',¢ �'€, ,ha�z .lit 1::S' au a -
r{, „, sc c ..,;e1 -4 { !� r ,y j v,� :€ ;� s' ,_ :,fir rt,° -}�- "u�
I r YX ,. 5 1A.+ 1,0 . iu # -r Lr ,. 'et.t a*:::'
�v {fl - kj ,* IW 'Z 4 E.T -i9k7 . 1 gyY. , 141
{ 7a ;h n s y Kar � r'",u r lai r 4- . r4Wiwi we T
U E O,>7f - - 0) '' }",. LrLi".�,, �, ,j+ .y� t s ,nG. w} - "� tf+wr 1V
^� {!E r01- <+s ! m a s C t+5- u ".-I Y 4 .•t "' Y'. t:
10 �1b 7'r. ,0,'1,,,,,044..01„'l.,�w � [, p1 .� s t- i p•:Gn ,�t 4 I`�4'� rx t � 4,1".-'4.),I { ��k a�&�� �fi'I�� V'''r MID
00'.'Do "- w BCD a Yv>f 4 " ' of ,' r,IfIt o. 43,r ;$1� k� a''' 7"' a . ,-+'1g Q:�
i m } 5 ,bj N tlr z �„ .0I i 4L. ,s r 3 • r "" QY gig
$j • Oc t. c i + . .y� Kir
m `bdl s+ s y C 'w u1 �9 �+ r �.. �n v"
a , " . G' m `a +7 k+ ' + #+ . al, a'L 4,- f • r 3 ,1 �� -a^* . .
��#e N a � u.3 S � LL LL {LL U � :G � o�s i0 ��� #^` 3�!°�r a)�'s- nog �� �„$� [ {
k - y ; - ,� .7 roM. t..,1 w :y t 1 ''ys-'.0 l'r*'is F tt.� (fj f ..a t¢ ,,Lq Sw � . q,:pt,
: VI; kk +n m¢ , m Y�, riff c -w >.,� J �: ,. L-(0 ,4,,,,' n''`�, a{ate ,:t ,,, it E'},, i. �-,,p h'
al' ' 'w r s �, Q Ire .»s t .. u5-� 3 .rct rT a i k a5 W , .Vor c , a
1� 1•''Da O.i",-` b0 ����� 10 a m,, YO-' c w"1tu. wPd�,t�+..e, t k O ri, {4w �a _,sue' y"''�' rz a0
'�' 0';:173-; • hQQ "X"'',.,1 :. 41 (k4¢.Le-5,- rte+.:�a d•+ ``C.,' ,. 1 ' i' .sI - i'1 x O,'� .�rtJ>' ,a 11 `t'�t!S ¢>,
i ,, a va. 37 z, it ti i yy-�"O *','S1" r .k.,.
ea,1 _N 2 F u1 a • 10 1, �.t ..-!:(42g.,..74.•,- K " 1 .,�p" ., r+ '-- '� s ^f' , s Jo^ F ... ,p �1 rz�e�
b ;Ti ,, ,.. ,' Y 0L e ^ CM Y s #» Y iwret ,._.. - i w. p 3. dal--', s= J 'Fa ate'
t k?� ry �" �•-t.�s mss, C { IOs Cpl'z �^t #ar ��, v � ,i -� a}�� �;a C .
Cf`r Na n+n�r Lb0 t0' '0� ytL.q nCr rc $ :;1 3. %'IE r4 *-: G r,u ,.g ' _ ++ iv. .'..:',:',41.4--..;=". P,!:,,' 'j_ $ 119,iro c
N .,..., :a._a"{ :. O-„,a, 5,,,_t.,._tak. i )1 .10 >i "1G=,,,,,ht,�y,D.ar,'! ,; ,.3 *,. � -+� ,..w,_:;,,�fr r �.,:lp`.. ,..-� .. ,F .,"`'..._ 'W _s>°,€. ' .in E {
L = C Y }/
.••I N C L° LL
N y .1-/C Q Q Y 7 Y Q 7 3> Y VI N Y Y Y Y Y c >a c Y 10
O O E O) - O L c u " Y C u C o LL C C C e 0 0 e t v C C w C C C C C u
� m ° ° ° � a o ° c LL 2 u u c c >
O N L - o m 44, a CI a - a a a a a a a a c o a a a c a >
.•1 a a f- a 2 LL S ¢ LL LL LL LL J > Y > 0 N, > Q Z > c N. > > > > U N. N. CO > > > > c > n
M
Zr, V O N 1 •1- C o y Y C
CO CU N w c N ' e E CO Q Q Q tn / > e e e e e c 4 14 44 I.E a C U O ii W -C LL e a e d d e e g O
.58 0".4 a a > a 0 LL S L m LL LL LL U > Y >a 0y > > > > > > U > w > > > O C U C O V
it 2 ° u) f0 10 Y N /b 10 f0 c H Y V/ N
C '� a m 1n ¢ H 7 a p L L L Vi O > U �.- G V) V) C G G G C O G C m C O C
N `1 N N 00 'f0 p '10 E (1) fu0 L L L L C LL p 1-un W U) 7 ,n a d d a e, a a a U. a a C a L 0 0 7 •C O (u0
a a o a S > S o U LL 0 0 0 = > Y > 0 g Q is > 2 2 > > > > > Y > > > C9 a 2v) = . >
7
t,11 41 C C G G C O Y O m E v) -c 'c L E O .- f0 • G C O N u > 0C C U C E n > 8 O i a a 0 b - n u h - C U m a+ .-' a U u b b b b b b b b 0
N 0
. a 2 a S > S N O O O v 1x 3 3 N Q Z > 2 2 > > > > > 7 > > L > L a 0 e, > E O ¢ LL i.
C c c +•' 0 C - le = - L
0 N d p C O OL L V O O
d d V m O > b t v 'L > 0 u ,2, .i-•'. - L L u 7 U C v) 7 YN u u v u u u /0 v O
N 6 a 2 a S . S > u LL 0 0 0 > ,, LL 7 •0
0 Q Z > 2 2 > > > > > U S > r > 6 a > 1n 0 > cc
as L u XO N V N V w C C L = ' 10 U = u LL C 'I
F' tD w m Id 15 Y .O N C co co F-. 7 U C f0 0 y- !n RI E '.
T O G N C n - L L L C �. Y �V.1/ �VI Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y
(0 N C Q = •� L C L Y E U VI V) .- 3 (0 U M N C > 0 :r Y U U Y V O ° Y Y L (v a y - ..... o N 0 X _
L f0 10 > O) b (6 0) L L L (O LL 7 N 7 10 b b O b O b fb N O O �' O a 7 V O ?� 1
a a 2 'n. 2 7 S > U LL 0 0 0 a Y _1 (7 Q z > 2 2 > > 3 > > > S N 1-- > C7 a > v) c > in
V f0
00 Cb 10 m E ` v) C C O C C C e O > U O C N N C N C L C C C C C C C C . v) •n C 4,
a-, a 10 10 •> •(O Y a O. a a a O LL w . c 10 a d d a , a L a a a a a a a a ac., 7 Q a O
N C C ?
V N > a L d S J S N > LL > > > 3 S Y 0 0 Q Z > L L > �b > U > > > > > > > > LL N i+• > Z
O L
O 00 m w b0 G) H Cl)N 1- 7 Y 1n in Y C C C H m i
0 > 0 C m - E b0 c bC P u .`-' t E +r a w °u c , c o Gf CJ C v a o 0 C. C 0 0 e LL i.6 6j N i C
p C N O m '° -rib •j N m 7 w E C O LL "' J a a U U a C O a O a O a O a f- H ° •C a F
P u > L 2 L - Y o: LL C IS i- > Y -9 0 o +o+ > > 2 2 > a > > > > > > > > w Cl)te H (n > > Y
ai g o 1n
Y
m 7
n bO ••C L Q Y Y H V Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 5 ., +0
Y Y '°
> Y n •
Q 0 b a = _ bw 1n L L Em Y bd d b b b b b b b b b " " 8 bO 0 N 0 g # W O L t .c > C t O
A, 46 g V o ° u)m > a ,e a w J G -2c ` ± •....=. N w .G Y w = m > N. O K C v) > > al .1
N 0 7 . U° O 7 c U 2 i (7 w w •c i H a 0 Y m 1n V) CO E N Y Y ~ 7 ) NN a •a Q Y y n n
m (�R N'•I N b 0 7 j 0 w w ,E_ u w. w u Y V/ ,Vy u u Y u O Y Y Y C LL LL Y u V - -a d '= • N w w V Y L N C > V u u0 zC - -
mW > a2am mm z LL SS � > I > 3o a; > > > 22 > > > > _ 2 2 2 3oc2 31 2 2
I- ,- L t O -1 O O N O N i O rl -1 ei N .7rl I) O O N 0 .72 0 0 Ca0 m m m st < m .70M M u) M N 0}
>- >- ,-
LT) = M (n of N vV1
pL , 5 L L •c L 0 0
0 - 0 n O O m b0 `, N O O O O `"iN i N M ul 0 N0
06 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Q m m U 0 W LL Cl) Y m U 0 Q m Q U N N N N N N N N
in w w w w w w w 7 7 aw, +w-, r w ;; w w w w w w w w w r
L V) v) N N v) v) v) N N v) 4111.4V) VI N to N to v) N N V) N V) V)
O w N N N N O1 or O1 N N w a N w' w w w co w w w w w N a N W N w' N N N w w w w w co w w
10 L
.-1 w 'O 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 w 7 w 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 no a N } Q co IV CO C 10 N IV M CD to art CD N 10 MI CO CCD N N (O N CD 10 (O CO RI M N 10 CO C CO N 110 (O N CO CO N CD N CO N to
Lb a 0. a a a a a 0. 0. 0. a a a 0. o. o. 0. a 0. 0. a 0. a 0. Q a a 0. 0. n a 0. 0. a. a 0. 0. a a a a f
w N in v) v) N v) v) N N v) N Cl) v) N v) N v) N v) v) v) N N v1 ut v) N v) N v) v) N v) N v) V) V) N v) V) N
y,. W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W
m t0 t0 W W W 0 t0 O O N u) u) u) 00 O N t0 Ol u) N .-1 D W N N N N N N N N N N P N N N N m m
N N .-1 .-1 .-1 e-1 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N .1 O .-1 N O O .-I N .-1 .-1 .-I N .•i .-I .••1 .••I .•-1 .-1 O N N N N N O .'-1
O. ri r1 r1 e•I .••1 cI .-1 M M .7 .7 .7 a V• a N u) u) .4 u) t0 t0 t0 tD t0 t0 tD t0 t0 t0 t0 t0 t0 N N 00 00 00 00 m O)
0 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
1.
I
1
.7,„.4:3,-.„...,,.,,, _ -,,-if i+rr, 1, "°_^".„ d rw.p°'� } ' ` , °!n•��R"' '""M 3 '•5tt �p °"per" �,. 3
wr .' a rr- ;t' r! ue-t`a'x`{ '�.1 rr},r'- + q.4 �.n�„ S
!� D9 ti ! q r .f x „Jr. d k+ .g'' I c ' S�: 21 w.v ! iF,,, th ,J r }5f w_
v a a !C i. , r {f { it,,,f a u La -c Ol t0- r,
'C-`' 1�a.r 0.y;,' 0 a§ J,sr m7 a 4., 3 } .4,>,.,- 0.: FIa dI r O 'lr
LI t i.,,y tJ 3-4: N. h`I-' r,,,,,,,'-`,.% '!h, } 7 Y' 3£k tt i i •1 Ai,l ' yy' { '' '3 -.L itttt!
< s r At .p,§', j 1i( L'� i a r 11t1�° ...'te y .� �'
lti. '0` DO{,t-,1,-..C 'N 4 .r,n,ers �,,.r .4'*k� -p at z � u t I"
CI 3 �! t� (ol:. ,,='.,,,V.
aY O +§ ,44:' C Q la.]`41.0- a ki d #,a,' s.'i .,T t-f �'
r �* -r Iy
Q1 t,,,W ` I m m{ 0. �i t a� Q! r O '" i 4 a I 1 s" � a sdrm'-' 1 I. #},� 1
+∎''� : '.7 ,4"' f,1 M- "''''''' 4i.u:F� sy }.-. t P 111: ''C.�7
1. {Yr '14," .4-,-�..'t� .r��z' "� h. 'V)1 yr ,-`'� .�." , • V.;, N1' �,a '3 ti T! �' - y �,'" f
Oj -s ed. -#Z : ��",�,� a ,"r :.fir Q t2 0:
C �IC'', !S'-- -! a a`'; -- 8.‘,F,lc 4... ',If !`�'s h -.y -
,r„ J7 for t -13,,,,,,,,t,, .)=-.0 �- ," e ", r u ar '°a �y a r - +� t"` (03 a 'a c"F. z-
i ,4; ^^ ; C+}vk^ ■ Z,rl'r. -r h *,'...,.1 P(0 a.N.y;ul`. ,-� J 11 .0 ,1 F, C,s' 4 ' ' 0i ,C '`�k
i_ - i ��� r{a '#+ a R { „:.>' Wfi &'* 4 s 'CO xu 0 f.. ih 'Q . 6 y) si12 1'0-.1'1
-
o ? ,&;. '`..44 1. 4 s GY r .Y 1,-1.1._,,--,- > 7u {,u, 4 fJ .x�.'":-1.11 In [ . -i Z. i'
o Y u s Z,1 C C7 s 3 C ° N,1' ' 'O C - to i E *G? r)T1 Ytl C "*t" i z"`
? a x ,,,'.)w a -a Al pl i�", e 5f s a ! s L' 0 lit} > ,=i
-N-
? s a. is , .. w a =„, 0 t/1 ar $- 10 Ci� -or +Ssn ° to = r� ;fC F"f40.'4
O �' a ' a� V)� 1 P- N �f. �lx' :: Q 1.�I i f- _ . M
.a..t� � �;���� ��,r .n G � � � i'+1A I „y�l ,�� CL .�V -'.FJ'5 a� Q-•.r.�"-,
Y Y N Y Y Y Y W Y Y Y M 3 Y Y to U co Y Y Y -0 ` f+ 'O L Y Y Y )
ri C' C a0 C a a C a e a C 'O C C to O •vl C C C Iy N (6 C
0 0 'n o o co o a a a ° ° a o a a ° 0 0 g o o a > Y o 0 0 co
c N 0 a a - o a o o > > a1 ° a a o a ° o o ° to o a a cu to co t to a o a in-
T-4 a N > > o. o, o. > a a z x > o. > > C 7 > 2 3 > > N N In w In H 3 > > > 4.,
v N a0 ;u L v O O C
W N Y W Y Y O Y Y N Y ODD = 71° 7 0 'D L f+ 1.� Y Y Y CO
O O a) aN1 la u u ° u u , yf u u u u u V u p 2 a ao N to > O u u u j
°' N U C a - a a L a a O ° a a a a a ° a N O W a0 cc) L a a O
0 < ,.-. > > N N °. N N a " _ > > > > o. 2 N 2 3 > Z W N W N H ►d.. > > N N co
U N Y 7
M >. Y 'U Y Y O Y S Y Y Y Y N Y Y = .° 3 L .0 to W
■ co 0 o m o o *' o ° ° 3 0 0 0 0 'O ' o o g a CO N ° 41 0 o E o o •o +r
N C 73 a - a it a = = W ° o a o a0 ° o a co w 3 g 8 a 00 a o ° a o0 c
> > > > c. a. a a Z z > a. N In 2 > > > z H w > > > > H Z.
et 0 ; C m IA
Y . N Y Y 0 Y Y ,�.I 3v Y Y Y Y N � Y •= Y = ° 4_ '6 L Y Y QI Y Y Y C
o vie C 00 C C }r C o C c T C C C C ° 0 C C a •` LL y C C Y C C Cos
o N au a fO au u ° aU u 8 0 aU au au +' ' t� 02 u (o U ca a°n a au m u au law
N 4-) N > > N N a �° Q > > _ N > > > Q S N. 3 Z 2 IL N w > o. > > > > >
H O N !a
.O L
•°
O N Y Y � Y Y L Y Y Y Y N Y Y U Y Y •. Y Y 4.
O p C C C Y C O CO C C C C O O C C O C C .` C -a y y C C C
O p u aO uu ° u 4-' u u u 8 Z u u 2 u u ti u N on t u W u u u 0
N ; CW a . L
U V > n. a N O X N > N a X > N . N N .e a, V1 I
E
L
N O O N - W O
L t." to Y Y Y Y 0 d Y Y Y Y N K Y U Y rn ,O *" �O L V UJ y Y Y Y in
1- o C C N C C ., 93 0 T C C C C O w o o d o V' N co (U . o o a _E
N Ca) u a 7 u a L u.i 7 0 -7.5. a O a u O 0 5 a m Y cO a N d�0 2 0. cu a a a O
G > . es g . G. aJ a 7 ,0 m > > > > a I v, g t3 (a G 3 N W C a U_ > > . O
In a In O N - -
a) e\ Y Y Y N Y Y 0 CI to L j Y M Y ° N Y M u .0 'n .L H Y to Y M Y
C o C C C 00 C C 4, N CO T C C C C C ° A LL N .2 (0 . C C C lD
O o u u u �a u u ° -, 4' u u u 4' Y u u ° Y t`a -0 tC bp ° 3 N u u u x
O N a a a - a a t H 3 ° ° a a a 3 0 ° a a ca :� O N o0 t 0' L a a a
> > N > a. ] O. a -, O 2 > > > a a 2 > > -1 a 2 .e 0G N W N a u. N N N N
U 'O N
so
co
{ O W 00 Y L O Y Y Y N Y M U Y .O 'C L M UJ N Y Y Y
I m t"' o Cc =C C C C u. . O C (a C) C C C o W o o ' o N .L T u. W a 7 o o e Y
i oo c N o 0 0 0 o a 0 ,,, 4_, o -0 a o o v 4_, o
0 0 0 o a a s '^ 0 o ° > o 0 0 > > ° o a a Y f° 3 aa) m o 6 L1 a o 0
O ° a > > > N a 3 a N O N > > a a x N N -, N. .c c cc In w N. a u. > > a z
O U °
i :•-•C O (n
o
W Q Y � W C
Y I Y 1.... Y Y Y n C O L Y 0)
Y U
N . _ J4
° a u u u u C 3 u - coo 71, ow C ° g0 u O C o y 7
W v tH Q O W N O ia ° o L fC a N 4d W ;
'22 0 . >, C +° p 2 O m , N N z. a Q Q V
' 2 G3 C C 1y E '11 • a) L n W
CO a+ L .(U 7 0 (a •• t O
U. 0 o C 0- 2 _ : .
N NY >. >. Y Y Y n W Y Y Y Y O ~ C W N N L
N 41 ++ C V cr
1 0 H u
u u u O to o al u u u u -� " u in ?� 7. ) . co 7 m o Q L1 Y u L `-i FFF
1, M m a CO R a a a L N n 0 a a a a ° 3 0 , a i
m w > > > o. N > C7 J C7 N O a. > > > a a > m Z J IL a' W U a u. a U
, L. V1 t0 n m O� O. e1 V1 e-1 m r-1 ,-i O O O t0 ri e-i n t° O et N r-t M O O d' M O a0 Oe, 00 }
m 1
M W \ \ � � i.
\ '\ N ei ei ei s-I I
N N ..., Y Y Y W W W W N N W W W a) W W W W W W W W W >• - a) W a) W
O (n 7 C O 7 O 3 7 7 7 3 7 3 7 = = O 7 7 7 3 O !_' 7 7 7 7
e1 w E o O O O R N co c COO (0a e(a (MO ((a N ((o L g ca ((a ((a ((U co c to co N tea N N tL�a eL�a N CCIC
N �" Q in - -. L 1 O.t) 0. N N 0. V) 0. VI O. Ia N y� N 0. Inn VI 0. N V) to y C C N Inn VO1 t�
W L 0 0 0 W W W W W W W W W W �a 03 W W W W W W LU W LL1 O O W W W W
CU
tC O = = N V1 N 0 .7 i1 V1 N N N N N V1 m V1 n N m m m V1 n 01 Z Z 01 N N t0
0 N N N N M d' .7 VI M UU) M U1 V1 Z Z to to tO tto tto to to VD tNO ri e-I U) N n 01 ,
0. 0 Z Z 000000000000000000000000000000 I
1 O e1 1� N e-i r-1 ei ri e-i r--I e-i r-I e-4 ,-I r-I ei s--I N N ri r--I e1 e-i r-1 e-I s--1 4-1 ri e-I I-I ,•I r•I a-i s--I
S
i
11
,
Carrie Koudelka
From: Chris Bainbridge
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 12:13 PM
To: Carrie Koudelka
Subject: FW: Please read this into the record at the June 29th city council meeting.
Chris
Christine Bainbridge, CMC
Spokane Valley City Clerk
(509) 720-5102 [Note new Phone#1
From: Curt Leitzinger [mailto:jon.leitzinger @gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 3:21 PM
To: councilmembers @spokanevalley.org
Cc: Chris Bainbridge
Subject: Please read this into the record at the June 29th city council meeting.
Curt Leitzinger
10005 East 14th Ave
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Please vote in favor of the Broadway safety project. Spokane Valley is in dire need of safer bike transportation
lanes. I commute daily using a bicycle and welcome more bike lanes. Roads will be safer for both cyclists
AND motorists! Thank you.
1
Comments to the Spokane Valley City Council re : Broadway Ave Safety Project
29-Jun-2010
Marc Mims
15127 E 26th Ave
Spokane Valley, WA 99037
Mayor Towey and Council Members :
I have advocated for the Broadway Safety project as a cyclist . That was
a mistake. The project is not about bike lanes .
The primary goal of this project is reducing automobile collisions . To
meet that goal, the primary feature of the project is a continuous
center turn lane. It will make intersections, in particular, safer.
Another goal is compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act .
Curb cuts, moving power poles, mailboxes, and other obstacles from the
sidewalks will meet this goal .
The current road is too narrow to safely accommodate 4 lanes of fast
moving traffic. A happy byproduct of the reconfiguration to include a
center turn lane is bike lanes . They will also act as buffer zones
between pedestrians and auto lanes making pedestrians safer, and making
it safer and easier for residents on Broadway to enter and leave their
driveways .
There are many schools along Broadway. This project will make getting to
and from school safer for our children.
With ADA compliance alone costing significantly more than the city' s 20%
share of the cost, I don't see any costs saved by suspending or
canceling the project . The ADA compliance work must be done, at some
point, even if the project is canceled.
With an 80% matching grant, the majority of this project will be paid
with outside funds . Being able to put three-quarters of a million
dollars into our local economy, putting local people to work on this
project is certainly the business friendly thing to do.
Council member Grassel, your campaign website says : "I pledge . . . to
make public safety a top priority. " I, for one, will see a vote to
suspend or cancel this project as a violation of that pledge .
The community wants and needs this project . It is cost effective . It
is business friendly. And it makes our community safer.
Please vote NO on the motion to suspend the Broadway Ave Safety Project .
Thank you.
Marc Mims
' ��^,����� .: ` �� '� � � VANCOUVER
i Pi�ll,.ai;� E WASHINGTON
f ifte• ill .Iliilll.
, " ' ,. , Downtown Redevelopment_ , AWC Walking Tour
SS
Vii .: . _ ,ri fM1�_ 7 h I" �_.__ Iy ; 10.00am-1 1 .50am
,�,.�. � � June 24 2010
a r a Euerg reran,.} I vd
.; r,!1' ,_ r7-1-7, _ ; Following adoption of the Esther Short
4' '1 * ,_,y,, ._ r subarea plan, the City of Vancouver
�a ►� I-"—"1 _ •
a witnessed approximately $300 million in
a j � ' jL .LUILLt t new investment downtown between 1998
s � w' and 2005. The area surrounding Esther
�: � _ � 0., Short Park has seen growth in the form of
_ `' �- . x _ t „ ' 4•••••t ' new offices, condominiums, apartments,
i
9 =� retail shops and a new hotel and
. � convention center.
+,� t C �tom!�;-° �� .
Lk
i 6i 1 ' C This tour will highlight some of the steps
,.' f i -, • 4, that Vancouver has taken toward
f � , � lj 4° downtown revitalization and provide
` °` examples of how the city's past is helping
to shape its future. We will showcase the
f•� Hilton Hotel and Convention Center,
r
-7, u
�- -� �, �"t ��w.��,r � 1,_ i ..�� , � I. / Esther Short Park and Turtle Place, three
-i k; ,�---� = successful public redevelopment projects
dam ' -� - �s�� x ` .�. J: ! -
" '{` that have helped to encourage vibrant
I r reuse of their surrounding properties. Staff
': r �s;_ will also escort guests to the future home
-p vo &,� - ..., of Fort Vancouver Regional Library's new
„ 1 A�`� main branch and the proposed Library
"` —,,,,_,-.7i--- - Square Development.
•
OHilton Hotel and Convention Center
The Vancouver Convention Center and Hilton Hotel is the only publicly- k ";
owned convention center and four-star hotel in the Pacific Northwest.
Because of its superior environmental design, it has become the first hotel to
achieve both LEED and Green Seal certifications.
Esther Short Park A,' 'fi'
Esther Short is the oldest public square in the state, and is considered to be is h
the oldest designated city park in the West. Private donations of $3.6
million and city investment of $2 million were used in 1998 to redevelop the
park, its amenities and relationship to the surrounding streetscape. The site ;.n "
hosts activity year round with a variety of events, programs and concerts. '-'
•
0 Esther Short Commons
Two square-block development with 139 work force apartments, 21 market � `=�"~'Y'
rate apartments, 20,000 s.f. of retail of which 8,000 s.f. is occupied by the "° ■ .
P p Y - NE on
Vancouver Farmers Market and 100 parking spaces. ' IN r +
Investment $18.6 million
4
Heritage Place �' - `f 11 I
137 condominium units; plus covered, gated parking and 14,500 sf of retail ; 'I
space. Current retail includes a coffee shops, boutiques, restaurants, ---
children's stores and gift shops.
Investment $25 million , '
Vancouvercenter i=1
Mixed-use development offering 200,000 square feet of offices ace, �° :"
p
4 11
g q p 20,000 "
square feet of retails ace 34 condominiums a '4b r.,
q p 3 mums with panoramic views of ,�
Vancouver and Portland, 194 apartments adjacent to Esther Short Park and I
an 800-car garage in three levels underground. •- '
Investment: $100 million
O Turtle Place
This model of sustainability and a vision of urban beauty being created ,r ,. r,„ t,,
where C-Tran once operated a transit center for more than two decades. .. N-
Spearheaded and funded by Vancouver's Downtown Association, Turtle - ° "-Iv Place is possible only because VDA, C-Tran, and the City of Vancouver °- - ,'
have worked together step by step to bring this temporary plaza into being.
O Main Street Plan —Two Way Conversion Strategy `
As the city awaits funding for complete reconstruction of Main Street, it is ;.-
working to implement traffic changes as cost effectively as possible. Main <I
was recently converted from one to two-way traffic from 6th St to Mill Plain.
_ . _
0 Library Square/ Fort Vancouver Regional Library
This is a $165 million public-private mixed use development. In addition to
the new main library of the Fort Vancouver Library system, Riverwest will ,o' , 4-
offer a new civic plaza, 200 multi-family residences, 100,000 square feet of �.` �3, " 'iii �,;j
offices, 17,000 square feet of retail, a boutique hotel and a 900-stall �P, r I
underground parking garage. it �0 �i,fi
I r� a#in
9
City Center 21
This investment houses a 44,000 square foot theater and 3,000 s.f. of office / , { `>, A_ ../ J •�
retail. Key to the developer's consideration of this project was a 548-space `y: _.` 'n
public parking structure located across the street from project site. At time - - .-..*.- ° ,
of development, the City held a long-term lease on the parking structure. r ' ,r , ,
Subsequent to development, the City negotiated purchase of the parking k
structure, assigning the purchase agreement to the theater developer.
O West Coast Bank Building
This project sits at downtown Vancouver's front door and boasts 71,000 at i'; ,:
square feet of commercial space, 21 luxury condominiums and a 267- -,
space public parking structure. Tenants include West Coast Bank (anchor), i 's, ,rte* *`
Miller Nash Attorneys and the University of Phoenix. 1 1 r I 1 I 4 1
Investment: $23million 1iA....... ,(14
Y
010°N.mtes, Go4-10,Atv\4..Aivrk--
p
Valley
11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106
509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhall@spokanevalley.org
Memorandum
To: City Council; Dave Mercier, City Manager; Mike Jackson, Deputy City Manager
From: Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner
CC: Kathy McClung, Community Development Director
Date: September 16, 2008
Re: Cost Estimates for Sprague and Appleway
The total projected cost to convert Sprague Avenue and Appleway Boulevard into a two-way
system between 1-90 and Sullivan Road, as recommended in Book Ill of the Sprague and
Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan, is about $42 million. The following table breaks this all-
inclusive estimate into major categories.
Two-way Appleway Lane Sidewalks, curbs Total
Conversion Extension Narrowing landscaping (streetscape)
Sprague $1.5 million - - - - $500K $9.8 million* $11.4 million
Appleway $1.4 million $24 million - - -- $4.9 million $30.3 million
Total 1 $2.9 million $24 million $500K $14.7 million $42.1 million
The tables attached to this memo provide a detailed breakdown of the cost estimates per
the recommended implementation stages as presented by Troy Russ of Glatting Jackson at
the February 19, 2008, Joint City Council/Planning Commission study session. A graphic
depiction is presented for each stage, followed by a table showing projected costs.
Please direct questions to either Scott Kuhta (688-0049) or Steve Worley (688-0191).
I
STAGE 1: TWO-WAY CONVERSION OF SPRAGUE AND APPLEWAY–
DISHMAN-MICA/ARGONNE TO UNIVERSITY
I �- �– i �— 1 E-
5 lanes,one-way i SPRAGUE
l Q ' 1 �� Lt.a T. N W / Z
Z® l TOWN '^' TOWN W ¢l
o i . 1g S w / I CENTER W a CENTER 3 V' a I
Is �`; 1 z' m >ce
NI
^ ..� _- W
3 lanes,two-way
TWO-WAY INTERSECTION CURBS, SIDEWALKS,
STAGE 1 CONVERSION ENHANCEMENT LANDSCAPING AND TOTAL
MULTI-USE PATH*
Sprague $611,400 $600,000 $1,757,016 $2,968,416
Appleway $653,687 0 $1,688,568 $2,342,255
Total $1,265,087 $600,000 $3,445,584 $5,310,671
*Includes multi-use path along the Appleway
STAGE 2: EXTEND APPLEWAY FROM UNIVERSITY TO EVERGREEN –
REDUCE SPRAGUE FROM 7 TO 5 LANES I
1 "44— I 1 –
5 lanes,one-way SPRAGUE 5lanes,two-way 5lanes,two-way 7 lanes,two-way
zV = -41' W' —*-- -IC Z` l g TOWN a^' TOWN W l
I w ® I CENTER W I CENTER l7 I
—
1x Telil .1 im >I
~ E— — w a
APPLEWAY •n- •," , 'Y 1-- ...-,. '- I
1 I
I 1 i I
STAGE 2 EXTEND LANE NARROWING CURBS, SIDEWALKS, TOTAL
APPLEWAY* AND RESTRIPING AND LANDSCAPING
Sprague 0 $369,360 $3,217,708 $3,587,068
Appleway $12,155,937 0 $633,600 $12,789,537
Total $12,155,937 $369,360 $3,851,308 $16,376,605
*Includes upgraded landscaping for City Center between University and Bowdish
STAGE 3: TWO-WAY CONVERSION OF AUTO ROW REJECTED BY COUNCIL 6 -zr_L
I n ¢ I f- I
E-- I 1 F 1
Vanes,two-way SPRAGUE 5 lanes,two-way,.; 7 lanes,two-way r
—� t33:, Z T- x <
!,
Z 1; TowN +^I TOWN I ', �"` w _� z
w Off';. I CENTER W I CENTER 13 U qI SI
-4— (— I I F `L
APPLEWAY 4lanes..two-way
— I I I
I I 1
STAGE 3 TWO-WAY CONVERSION CURBS, SIDEWALKS AND TOTAL
LANDSCAPING
Sprague $858,874 $2,512,032 $3,370,906
Appleway $760,247 $2,600,795 $3,361,042
Total $1,619,121 $5,112,827 $6,731,948
*Does not include proposed 1-90 Ramp Extension.
STAGE 4: COMPLETE THE SYSTEM - EXTEND APPLEWAY FROM EVERGREEN TO
TSCHIRLEY, CONVERT SPRAGUE FROM 7 TO 5 LANES BETWEEN SULLIVAN
AND EVERGREEN
I I E- I 1 E-
5 lanes,two-way
0 Si i J TOWN I! TOWN I t^
w �% I= CENTER W I CENTER 1 0
Ix ai1m zI 1 m w N
II- E- F =I 1 E- w E-
APPLLWAY 4 lanes,two-way 3lones,two-way 3lanes,two-way
I ")1°' , I I ,_ - 3.-
1 li I t r
STAGE 4 EXTEND LANE NARROWING CURBS, SIDEWALKS, TOTAL
APPLEWAY* AND RESTRIPING AND LANDSCAPING
Sprague 0 $184,320 $1,699,204 $1,883,524
Appleway $11,651,471 0 0 $11,651,471
Total $11,651,471 $184,320 $1,699,204
$13,534,995
*Appleway is extended to Tshirley and Includes Multi-Use Path
DRAFT
ADVANCE AGENDA
For Planning Discussion Purposes Only
as of June 29,2010; 11:20 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
July 6,2010,Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,June 28]
Citizen Recognition:Floodplain Contributions
Action Item:
1.Motion Consideration: Bid Award,44th Ave Pathway Project—Steve Worley (5 minutes)
Non-action Items:
2. Dr.Joel McCullough, Spokane Regional Health District Chief Medical Officer (confirmed) (10 minutes)
3. Comcast Extension Ordinance—Cary Driskell/Mike Connelly (20 minutes)
4. Budget Process Update—Mike Jackson/Ken Thompson (20 minutes)
5. Transportation Benefit District—Mike Connelly (15 minutes)
6.Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
7. Info Only: Truck Parking, Residential Areas
8. Info Only: CTA-04-10 Code Text Amendment—Scott Kuhta
9. Info Only: SC Housing&Community Development Advisory Committee(HCDAC)Vacancy
l0.Executive Session: To Evaluate the Qualifications of Applicants for Public Employment[RCW 42.30.110(1)(g)]
[*estimated meeting: 75 minutes]
July 13,2010, Special Meeting: Budget Retreat—CenterPlace Classroom 212
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 5]
Proclamation: Parks &Recreation Month
1. Consent Agenda: Claims,Payroll,Minutes (5 minutes)
2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending Comcast Franchise—Mike Connelly (20 minutes)
3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance,Panhandling—Cary Driskell (15 minutes)
4.Admin Report: Subarea Plan(SARP)Check-in—Kathy McClung (15 minutes)
5.Admin Report: Code Text CTA 03-10 amendment—Christina Janssen (15 minutes)
6. Mixed Avenue Report Back to Council—Scott Kuhta (45 minutes)
7.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
8. Info Only: TIB Call for Projects [*estimated meeting: 120 minutes]
July 20,2010, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,July 12]
ACTION ITEM:
1. First Reading Ordinance,Ballot Measure—Mike Jackson/Mike Connelly/Mike Ormbsy (20 minutes)
2. Mayoral Appointment to SC Housing&Community Development Committee—Mayor Towey (5 minutes)
NON-ACTION ITEMS:
3. Bike Helmets—Marion Lee—Spokane County Health Dept(confirmed) (15 minutes)
4. TIB Call for Projects—Steve Worley (20 minutes)
5. Admin Report: Street Preservation Program—Steve Worley (30 minutes)
6. Subarea Plan(SARP)Zone Discussion:Neighborhood Ctrs—Mike Basinger (30 minutes)
7. CTA-04-10 Code Text Amendment—Scott Kuhta (20 minutes)
8. Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
9. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: 145 minutes]
July 27,2010,Formal Meeting Format 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,July 19]
1. Consent Agenda: Claims,Payroll,Minutes (5 minutes)
2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending Comcast Franchise—Driskell (20 minutes)
Draft Advance Agenda 6/29/2010 11:26:35 AM Page 1 of 3
3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance,Panhandling-Driskell (15 minutes)
4. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance,Ballot Measure-Mike Jackson/Mike Connelly (15 minutes)
5. First Reading Proposed Ordinance, CTA 03-10 Code text Amendment-Christina Janssen (15 minutes)
6. Proposed Resolution: Ballot Measure-Mike Jackson/Mike Connelly (10 minutes)
7. Motion Consideration: SRTC (Spokane Regional Transportation Council)Interlocal-M.Connelly(10 min)
8. Motion Consideration: TIB Call for Projects-Steve Worley (10 minutes)
9. Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
10. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: 105 minutes]
August 3,2010, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. (National Night Out) [due date Mon,July 26]
1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
August 10,2010 Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. 'due date Mon,Aug 2]]
1. Consent Agenda: Claims,Payroll,Minutes (5 minutes)
2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance, CTA 03-10 Code Text Amendment-Christina Janssen (15 minutes)
3. Motion Consideration: Setting Prelim.Budget Hearings 9-14& 9-28-Ken Thompson (5 minutes)
4. Admin Report: Estimates of 2010 &2011 Revenue/Expenditures-Ken Thompson (10 minutes)
5. Admin Report: Subarea Plan(SARP)Report to Council re Public Mtg-S.Kuhta- (45 minutes)
6. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 85 minutes]
August 17, 2010, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Aug 9]
1. Subarea Plan(SARP)Zone Discussion: City Center-Mike Basinger (30 minutes).
2. 2011 Budget-Property Tax Levies-Ken Thompson (15 minutes)
3. Admin Report: Code Text Amendment,CTA 05-10-Christina Janssen (10 minutes)
4. Advance Agenda [*estimated meeting: 55 minutes]
August 24,2010,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Aug 16]
1.PUBLIC HEARING: 2011 Budget Revenues-Ken Thompson (10 minutes)
2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance adopting 2011 Property Tax Levy-Ken Thompson (15 minutes)
3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance property tax confirmation-Ken Thompson (10 minutes)
4. Admin Report: Outside Agency Presentations-Ken Thompson (60 minutes)
5. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
6. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: 100 minutes]
August 31, 2010,Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Aug 23]
1. Advance Agenda
2. Info Only: Preliminary Budget [*estimated meeting: minutes]
September 7,2010, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Aug 30]
1. Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: minutes]
September 14,2010 Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. 'due date Fri Sept 3]
1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2011 budget-Ken Thompson (5 minutes)
2. Second Reading Ordinance adopting 2011 Property tax Levy Ken Thompson (15 minutes)
3. Second Reading Ordinance property tax confirmation-Ken Thompson (5 minutes)
4. Motion Consideration: Allocation of Funds to Outside Agencies-Ken Thompson (25 minutes)
5. Subarea Plan(SARP)Plan)-Update to Council-Mike Basinger (30 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 80 minutes]
September 21, 2010, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Sept 13]
1. Community Development Block Grant-Greg McCormick (15 minutes)
2. Advance Agenda
[*estimated meeting: minutes]
Draft Advance Agenda 6/29/2010 11:26:35 AM Page 2 of 3
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. First Reading Ordinance to adopt 2011 Budget—Ken Thompson (15 minutes)
3. Subarea Plan(SARP)Zone Comm. Blvd—Lori Barlow (45 minutes)
4. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: 65 minutes]
October 5,2010,Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Sept 27]
1. Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: minutes]
October 12,2010 Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. jdue date Mon Oct 4]
1. Consent Agenda(Claims,minutes,payroll) (5 minutes)
2. Second Reading Ordinance to adopt 2011 Budget—Ken Thompson (15 minutes)
3. Admin Report: Fee Resolution Proposed Changes—Mike Jackson (15 minutes)
4. Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 40 minutes]
October 19, 2010,Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Oct 11]
1. SARP Report to Council—Kathy McClung (45 minutes)
2. Advance Agenda [*estimated meeting: minutes]
October 26,2010,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Oct 18]
1. Consent Agenda(Claims, minutes,payroll)
2. Proposed Resolution Amending Fee Resolution—Mike Jackson (15 minutes)
3. Advance Agenda
4. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: minutes]
OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS:
Affordable Housing Participation Street Maintenance Facility
Alternative Analysis(contracts) Transportation Benefit District Interlocal
Area Agency on Aging
Bidding Contracts(SVMC 3.—bidding exceptions) Transportation Benefit District: (a). Establish ord.;
Broadcasting (b)set public hearing; (c) draft resolution; (d) ballot
Capital Projects Funding language
Clean Air Agency Transportation Impacts
Code Amendments(Kathy McClung) WIRA, Water Protection Commitment,public
Proposed Ordinance Amending CTR Plan—Morgan education
Concurrency
Contract Ordinance Amendment
East Gateway Monument Structure# • =request for Council's early consideration
Hotel/Motel Grant Proposals for 2011 (Nov 2010) #=Awaiting action by others
Industrial Pre-treatment Interlocal w/City of Spokane * = doesn't include time for public or council
Jail Update comments
Law Enforcement Interlocal
Mayoral Appointments(Dec 2010)
Milwaukee Right-of-way •
Overweight/over size vehicle ordinance
Planned Action Ordinance
Planning Commission Mayoral Apptmnts(Dec 2010)
Shoreline Master Program"Inventory& Charac.Rpt"
Solid Waste Amended Interlocal
Speed Limits
Sprague Appleway Corridor Environ. Assessment
Draft Advance Agenda 6/29/2010 11:26:35 AM Page 3 of 3
5. Motion Consideration: Bid Award—Broadway Reconstruction Project(#0088)
I move to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the bid award contract for the
Broadway Reconstruction Project to the lowest responsible bidder, MJM Grand, Inc., in
the amount of$1,298,320.28.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pending Litigation [RCW 42.30.110(i)]
I move to adjourn into executive session for approximately twenty minutes to discuss
Pending Litigation and that no action is anticipated thereafter.
0
BID TABULATION
Broadway-Moore to Flora Reconstruction Project Si �l���
Project CIP No. 0088 5'"' Valley.
BID OPENING DATE-June 26,2010 10:00 A.M.
Engineer's Estimate MJM Grand Inc. Eller Corporation Spokane Rock Products Red Diamond Constr.Inc.
ITEM TOTAL
NUMBER ITEM Unit QUANTIT Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost
_ � -�. i 4 4,gam ,
gig t3 1D. DU•F7 sLYi',r. �, � ;a. z� s P � ; _ r.., "- -. _ i -4.,;
s - -ys $ - .-.=; �'; E .-.:a �7 - '� .: l.. 5•.aL�'3 -. - -`- �' - •t4ae _ y"- M.t".l„,` `!�
1.111.. : 111 a rt��I $kt�clrriI komm AKiiiir0� -: ;y3[aiiiF $LJL0lr r r,r• \ pWA y t•:
•• R• •• 1-. •• .•n.• .rrr•r • 0 0•,11 1111,14 1111.,1 ..1 .0 1,11 ,111.1 000.00 I„4.. '00 ,�/yn°T ?��9
3 PROJEC I EMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL LS 1 20500.00 25000 00 31790.00 31'700.00 25000.00 25000.00 -45000.00 •5 000 00 26 500.00 526 500.00 U .P '° ,-, -.
r.•'I n. -_ . 1-�S - T LS 1 1,000.00 u111 $1/26.00 $1,776.00 ��50 0.00 11,11 11.11 11.11 ,131 --0.00 �z. -,
BOSTON CONTROL LS 1 2000.00 2000 00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $500.00 00.00 $ 500.00 $ 500.00 5800.00 800.00 1�/ , j �:
6 CLEARING AND GRUBBING LS 1 5 000.00 000 00 $6910.00 55 910.00 $1 500.01 ...00 55500.00 S3 500.00 530 000.00 •000.00 -,O r •.Sd
- I•R • - •• • EA 25 500.00 2500 00 .40.00 11 000.00 5.760.00 9000.00 '750.00 18 50.00 ••700.00 17 500.00 '2').-
• vier •v 1.: LF 90 ,u 111 '7.1Fi,1�..•rs1.911 ' 1 r1 v.r• .1.11 0 2757
• '•♦ -R • 7• ,.11 -,,11 •YDk9�'3i19 -5�.1•i•7fQ61�" 1 'Y#ixixi) . ..•• ''.01 B .
•. •:9U•• ISTINGDRYWELL O. -11,11 1111 594.1• •111 ,,11 ',.1.1 11.11 11.11 -11.11 ,700.00 : %& FOrSTEP�O U.\�.
11 REMOVE BOU OER SPOIL PILE OR WALL L 1 5500.00 5000 10 5 060.00 080.00 •10.00 .00.00 500.00 500.00 11 000.00 "19 000.00 6%
• ••, LF 490 5.00 ,11 • 1 yxa:99 11a•!71�jffy0 .0.x.231 .5JA$$f6. �::•. UNAL�.
•n 1 •.r r LF-IN 5151 1 1 65'500•. 1 :7.1,11 g•1. 5 •:, • i. g,:0..• •.1 ,1.1.11
14 REMOVE ACP SY 8500 3.00 15 ROADWAY EXCAV.INCL.HAUL CY 8200 12.50 5102 500 00 5 1.95 $97 990.00 $12 98 $131,035.00 13 35.00 $6.00 $1311:200.00 $4.00 51 4,800.00
16 S CTBOHHOW INCL.HAUL CY 1100 15.00 18000 00 7,32 8 052.00 $12.85 $13,915.00 53.00 53,300.00
17 1ANKMENT COMPAC ION MEI HOD C CY 1100 5.00 $5500 00 .24 6..1• •. I • 0.00 85 $10 835.00 $3.00 3 300.00
RU • •SU` AC NG TOPCOU'S ,2 IN.D • H SY 500 4.00 00000 .88 91 340.00 1.75 675.00 3.71 1 501.11 50 2;-0.00
19 CRU 'ED SURFACING OPCOURS- 4 IN.DEPTH SY 3.10 ,u • 1111 '9_j '',11 10,25.00 ,2 8.00 $$43.60 $13650.00
20 -1c�' D SURFACING OP COURSE TN.DEPTH SY 17000 5.00 $02 000 00 EI1 •65130.00 3.40 57 800.00 53.68 2,220.00 $4.00 $$66500.00
=1 -• 1• •• •1• . ,,•-• • 1 ... . 1 08.21 "II 'I'S $12.20, $2664.00 10.00 2,200.00
•
22 • 1,:0.4 • - SY 15200 28.00 • 5 600 00- 7.64 9265128.00 5 .00 55400.00 •16.80 25513...5. iriamint. 360.00
`r/•. I :• OUSFREAS . .1.11 :,:1111 ,I" • n. 7.01
24 ANT-S RIPPING ADDITIVE CALC 1 1,000.00 1,00000 $7,100.00 1,000.00 51,100.00 1,000.00 51,.00.00 51,000.00 51,100.00 1,000.00
•1 M1 CO • •1• --- EADJU MENT _ CALC 1 1.00, Si 00 51.00 $1.00 1.00 $1.00 7.00 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00,
•M-• ••-- - '• • ,��•������[ - CALC 1 .11 $1 00 $1.00 $1.00 1.00 $1.00 $$1.00 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00
27 [CEMENT CONCRETE PAVE 0', • L.DOWELS SY 284 50.00 $13,20000 529.70 840.80 0.40 025.80 $27.00 128.00 9997.00 59,788.00
2: URNISHIN •• - E CRC •• - -E PAVE • 0.00 59 000 00 5115.60 :030.00 06.25 •5375.00 '105.00 5300.00 •8.00 • 880.00
• ••• ••■• -• • •• - ••• •• •• 1 V , • ,11 a .11 1.11 .11 .11 . ,11 .11 .0•
30 REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF UNSUITABLE MATERIAL CY 500 22.00 11,0.0 00 4.33 g7 1.5,0 .40 93,7.0.00 7.60 $3,7 1.00 0.25 $1 5.00
i1 ••• --0-• ==IPE 10 IN.DIAM. LF 540 50.00 27,.0000 29.89 9g15140.60 0,50 $1.,470.00 0.00 $18,200.00 4.00 $g10360.00
32 DUG I LE IRON STORM S ' ---0 12 IN.DIAM. ZF 430 55.00 3'650 00 9.74 $17 088.20 6.50 $15,695.00 .00 $15,050.00 40.00 $17'200.00
33 DUCTILE IRONS ORM S-, ••-E 18 IN.DIAM. IF 65 8.5. '' I I 2.89 $4`737.85 62.00 54 030.00 82.00 $4 030.00 .70.00 54550.00
34 SOLID WALL PVC STORM SEWER PIPE 10 IN.DIAM. LF 10 40.00 x$40000 77.28 772.80 67.00 670.00 57.00 $$570.00 25.00 250.00
35 SOLID WALL PVC STORM SEWER PIP512 IN.DIAM. LF 1540 40.00 :180000 17.02 52 210.80 15.00 923,100.00 •15.00 23100.00 28.00 543,120.00
36 SOLID WALL PVC STORM SEWER PIPE'15 IN.DIAM. LF 320 45.00 1440000 21.88 $6,037.60 20.00 6400.00 20.00 •,400.00 30.00 $9800.00
• ••,• •. r•.1 • --• . 1 5'1,, LF 230 50.00 145.000 29.94 $$6888.20 28.00 :440.00 .28.00 .440.00 33.00 155$7590,00
-.......7. • •--•-1- LF 240 50.00 12 000 00 •8.881 15731.20 30.00 ••7'200.00 30.00 .7200.001 10.00 2400.00
• 1•: •__- y •00.1• $imXm)�1:YL1m_1:FA1rt. .-:1,.. .1,11 111.11 '.1111.1. 111.11 1,000.00
.I •, - y 111,1. -i1:JUb7'7•IIE4:0L'w.'3F.53:F11F1�. 1 650 15 50..0 1'000.00 5'000.00 900.00 - 3,600.00
• • EA- .1.11 • •1.11 •.- 2.•.•• ... ,,• 1,.1 •,n •-1111 ,•11.11 -1•,•I
42 CATCHBASIN TYPE 2,48 IN.DIAM. EA 11 1500.00 16 500.00 9 720 74 518028.14 1:75.00 18 425.00 15700.00 18 700.00 2,200.00 24 200.00
43 PRECAST CONCRETE DRYWELL TYPE A EA 3 2 500.00 57.500.00 $1'046 67 $5,840.01 '1',900.00 555700.00 1,900.00 $6 700.00 2 400.00 7,200.00
4. •- '•' - -E DRYW m1YPE B EA 2 3000.00 57 000.00 $2070 00 $5 140.00 2 300.00 54 600.00 52 300.00 5460...• -:51.00 600.00
45 EXISTING DRYWELL CONNECTION EA 1 3500.00 5500.00 5150000 500.00 500.00 44500.00 500.00 500.00 .800.00 800.00
•7.1••• - -7.1, •1. -7. •U I--• • i• 11.11 1000.., i .11 *691113 _ 1J• '701,01 II,11 •.11 11.11 n,n
--C". ••� SF 280 20.00 5,•11.11 • :,n ; :,. ,11 ■ ,1.1... . x6,440.00
•• •• • : • •• -• 1 ,. SF 3370 35.00 51 7 950..0 25 00 5:4250.00 8.75 $6,8:7.51 $31.27 9105,379.90 28.00 597,820.00
• •,1 -•• 8 1.•1,, EA 1 2,000.00 $2000.00 92,3000 52,730.00 $3,00.00 $3,500.50 53,500.00 $35.0.00 52100.00 53100.00
50 NEW WATER SERVICE 2'NCH DIAM LF 310 35.00 $15850.00 '110 22 $3,t168.20 $12.50 $3875.00 $12.60 3,608.00 -25.00 975750.00
61 EXTEND OR REPAIR EXISTING WATER SE-VICE LF 85 40.00 400.00 $11 12 0945.20 $13.00 51105.00 $13.20 51 122.00 25.00 '2 125.00
•- • i9' ,• -R • - •. EA 12 2 000.00 24000.00 $11111176 17 114.04 .00.00 1 ;••,.i .•00.00 54800.00 •50.00 5400.66
• 1111.-,-••.- •21 i• .11.11 u..1• . .:1• 2 .:.0 11.11 , 10.00 11,11 , 11,1• --.611 7 ..11
HYDRANT ASSEMBLY EA 2 5000.00 $15111,.1 00 15710_.00 900.00 '1800.00 .•00.00 '1800.00 •50.00 1000.00
5 '•JUST VA EBOX EA 13 200.00 260.... • • - .. .•.•. • .00 '5.00 .11 ,. .11 . 11.11 '10.00
56 CEM N CONCRE E CURB AND GUTTER LF 8000 18.0. 14'M."• 'r:a 1,440.00 51.60 96;800.00 '..,50 18,000.00 98.00 •4000.00
5- •_• •y APPROACH SY 1020 40.00 0000.00 94• 29988.00 .30.80 • .0. 8.00 28580.00 $30.00 -0800.00
•1••.•1 •1 •••••• r-,- •• • - 1•I - If 111 "u,i• a •i.1i 1, '•k, ..1 1.11 • ,:11.11 1,11 ,:11,11
59 ROUNDABOUICEN -• P 0 -M NT CONCRETE CURB LF 95 30.00 2,850.00 2100 1'995.00 $20.25 $1923.75 20.00 1900.00 5.00 -2375.00
80 • DESTRIAN CURB IF 270 20.00 55400.00 1470 989.00 14.00 8$3780.00 14.00 5780.00 13.00 53,010.00
•• • - - •-n• ' SY 2750 35,00 $45250.06 .21 00 $7750.00 22.70 $2.425.00 20.00 $5 000.00 $22.00 960 500.00
�___Ua____r=.7_T3yUII•9M9. IMIAN : .11�$ 11.7 • g8�]. �. •• •1 :FT'Ii7�. \.I.• �$.jpap1 •i I,
63 CEMENT CONCR E SIDEWALK RAMP TYPE 2 EA 9 600.00 $4 500.00 $22 50 $5J42.50 0 $850.00 55 850.00
50.00 645.00 554x605.00 55300.00 5400.00
84 CEMEN f CONCRETE SIDEWALK RAMP TYPE 4A EA 1 500.00 .0.06
65 1NS- ABLE WARNING SURFACE 7.50 40.00 36 46 2 625.12 20.25 '1 458.00 -20.00 • 440.00 $23.00 658.00
•1'•••••• 21.•1 ;1,11 . 1 1 11 . .,11 11.11 1pgi.pit 1 I,II
67 MONUMENT CASE AND COVER EA 1 1,000.00 $ 000.00 $$26500 225.00 $135.00 135.00 1200.00 $ 200.00 -g 11,11 •.,.•
II SY 10 12 00 120.00 $16 43 164.30 512.15 1211.50 .18.00 $180.00 $30.00 $$300.00
70 TOPSOIL,TYPE B SY 3000 4.00 5121,000.00 $2 2 20 '6,600.00 0.00 .15 L9,450.00 455 00 3 00 5666 050 00 $1.80.80 $75440 00
71 SOD INS ALLATION SY 1860 7.00 $13,020.00 $6 $4
72 EDING ERI ILIZING AND MULCHING SY 3540 2.00 $7080.00 5068 2336.40 0.60 ,124.00 0.60 2,124,00 $0.70 $2.478.00
73 IRRIGATION SYSTEM REVISION EA 12 1000.00 12600.00 39500 '620.00 253.00 036.00 3 0.00 •200.00 • 50.00 54200.00
74 • Me•E AND•E-INS[ALL VINYL I-tN'5 .1, 5 1•e•FSIIIIi S�;JA_'Jl9E 4 NIIIII5 '. I .. • -s-.: '5J,56W.9 ?:A. , • .. •
75 TEMPORARY FENCE -Cr 1 1." - ,111.11 1 , 11. 1 .15 ,• 1,11 1.11 , 11.11 ' 1.01 , 11.11
JP
Engineer's Estimate MJM Grand Inc. Eller Corporation Spokane Rock Products Red Diamond Constr.Inc.
ITEM TOTAL
NUMBER ITEM Unit QUANT1T Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price I Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost
. -•6...._ ^10"y• , ., _.P .0� 5,10 •0.11 51: ��. 1 7 � •1.01 '1 � l ,11 . 1 •1.n
77 DOUBLE 14-FOOT CHAINLINK GA E EA 3 1,000.00 63000.00 .24.80 91074.40 5.00 $1,725.00 66.00 .15704.00 70.00 1'710.00
78 DELINEATOR AND CORE HOLE EA 10 400.00 54'000.00 128.15 51281.50 131.00 $1310.00 116.32 1183.20 120.00 15100.00
7' `1 ■•" •ph' R EA 5 ' . I 'I . I ^k :..1 Ir I I, 1,,, 1 ,: 1.11 ,11
80 PERMANENL SIGNING LS 1 10,000.00 $0,000.00 $4070.00 4,07..00 5 700.00 3700.00 685.00 685.00 •750.00 •'750.00
g, •1:•- •- EA 2 500.00 $1 000.00 4550.00 1,100.00 5500:01 .././. 11 '• I I 11,11 .11.1 _ ' .. •_
82 CONDUIT PIPE 3"DIAMETER LF 230 10.00 $2300.00 510.18 2341.40 9.50 2185.00 '.25 $2 127.50 $13.00 2,990.00 - W.ALp
83 TEMPORARY•IVEMENT MARKING LF 6055 0.10 $5 5.50 $0.17 $859.35 0.12 008.60 0.12 606.60 $0.25 1,263.76 -\� WAS V0
84 REMOVE PAVEMENT MARKIN LF 6900 0.50 53,450.00 $0.94 $6486.00 0.86 $5934.00 0.85 5865.00 $0.90 56210.00 ,_P OF Nit, .�
85 PLASTIC LINE LF 27000 0.60 $16,200.00 1$$ 07 628890.00 1.00 $27000.00 1.02 $27540.00 $$$1.05 $285250.00 <L'A4' '%. .' y
86 PLASTIC CROSSWALK LINE SF 432 5.25 $2288.00 6.75 $2916.00 56.25 $2'700.00 6.14 $2852.48 8.20 $2078.40 0
-/ 7 •• LF 30 7.40 42 2.00 $0.63 431 B.90 51.60 hum 9.51 285.30 9.51 285.30 " 1'. �''
88 PLAST C -7• (,•RROW EA 32 77.00 $ 464.00 $83.70 52 678.40 $7700 52 464.00 5 6.10 55435.20 $76.50 $6448.00 5t9' - .' ���'
89 PLASTIC BICYCLE SYMBOL EA 5 160.00 $000.00 $"1148.50 742.50 $114.00 SI 71.00 $112.48 ay$562.40 $113.00 y�565.00 ,0,...:
90 PLASTIC TRAFFIC LETTER EA 12 55.00 $660.00 5547.92 575.04 $42.00 $504.00 $41.36 1$496.32 $45.00 $540.0 - -r•Z445.�
91 MINOR CHANGE CALC 1 5,000.00 95 000.00 $5 000.00 S 000.00 $5 000.00 5%000.00 $5 000.00 55 000.00 $5 000.00 9555 000.00 27678
92 SPCC PLAN LS 1 500.00 500.00 51500.00 00 41000.00 $1600.00 4500.00 500.50 4600.00 $800.00 A)e "kg/57o O ;�
93 NEW WATER SERV CE 1 INCH DIAM F 92 50.00 $4,600.00 $16.71 $$1 537.32 $13.00 $1 196.00 $13.00 1,198.00 $25.00 $2,300.00 , SS ��'
94 INSTALL NEW WATER METER ASSEMBLY 1 INCH EA 3 2700.00 $8100.00 $710.87 57132.81 5750.00 $$$2250.00 5$750.00 $$2250.00 51450.017 54,350.00 .�C)N Ai-F-
95 SWAL- -RIGA7ION SYSTEM EA 3 2000.00 56 000.00 $3,832.50 5114439-.60 51,8800.00 $5'400.00 $5'538.00 000.00 $15 000.00 $3;700.00 $11 100.00
96 P • ECLON-UTAH SERVICEBERRY EA 9 )00.00 4900.00 $43.70 $1002.80 $25.00 $57500 $38.00 87400 $440.00 $920.00
87 PLANT SELECTION-WOODS ROSE EA 23 50.05 $1,150.00 2$$443.60 3$ 2$ g
98 PLAN ....r• r•-711 - EA 26 50.00 1,300.00 2.31 1'100.08 25.00 $650.00 $38.00 988.00 0.00 gf 040.00 -
99 MAILBOX SUPPORt,1 YPE 1 EA 15 400.00 6000.00 9 10.00 3150.00 40.00 $3,600.00 $236.25 543.75 50.00 $3,750.00
100 MAILBOX SUPPORT TYPE2 EA 13 -500.00 6300.00 $403.85 $5''250.05 $500.00 $6600.00 5498.69 482.97 550.00 $7 150.00
101 REMOVE• C S• WALK UR AY APPROA H 55 r5 10.55 47 0.011 57.73 4579.75 $9.00 467505 510.10 750.00 $4.08 4'd00.0U
re-_, %1,,•ti . . s. n
"' ' 909 $1or'8s'71 0 $4 i$`T.. liz.nromtictowitem rawmafievii., 1318.' �* 11110,,9 4$
Engineer's Estimate MJM Grand Inc. Eller Corporation Spokane Rock Products Red Diamond Constr.Inc.
ITEM TOTAL
NUMBER ITEM Unit QUANTIT Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost U0.,5:74.-;,-,-.A.it Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost
r'''-.- ' °~ . ; 1 ry € 'la 4- 174`A 7. Fes''
S ' A o1 33 x ate_- e mac. F ,ea x� - - 3 • i"'r .¢4 --1,--.--:-. .sue -1 ,CS .-
4-,_,S§ c_„f=5,2=',--'_-, v -_�}. 3 r•'� C r 7 _.y§.. - ....w - ..!<.�'i Y
a.Ye 'sin.Ilk des 7• • II.,, 11.11 1.1$ •'1 11 1..11 I.II 11.11 11.11 ' 11,11 $.11.11
ran o e ype •• E•CH 8 2 800.00 $ 400.11 $ 361.5 510 894.00 $ 400.00 51'200.00 $ 350,00 511 800.00 $ 000.00 924 000.00
3 ManFole Test EACH 2 '450.00 $900.00 4276.00 4550.00 $675.00 $1;330.00 4100.00 $1'400.00 $400.00 4800.00
4 Removal and Replacement of UnsulL Foundation Material C.Y. 70 22.00 $ 540.00_ $16.57 1,159.90 7.40 $518.10 0- 4525.00 0.25 $17.50
6 Removal and Replacement ofUnsuiL Metedal C.Y. 500 22.00 $11000.00 9.42 710.00 .40 $3 700 00 5 i $3,750.00 0.25
6 Imported Pipe Bedding L.F. 3598 2.00 $7'195.00 $$1.28 604.80 .75 $13'490.63 3.75 $13390.63 1.00 535_45:2 1
8 8" Dia.Gravity Sewer Pipe System L.F. 6 98 5.00 14'295.00 916.78 1,505.40 5.00 $1 4475.00 $0.20
5.00 $13,475.00 $7.00 $14 553.00
8 8"Dia.Excavation Sewer Pipe L.F. 639 40.00 $21250.00 $0.78 0,505.42_ 5.00 13 475.00 V. 53 $
tv Sewer Ape L.F. 1627 50.00 $81'350.00 20.19 132 6455'3 18.00 95186.00 19.00 1 913.00 9 00 $47,183.00
10 12'Dia.Gravi Sewer Pipe -- L.F. 165 55.00 04.50 29.64 B 9.33 '50.00 $493500 30.00 $1 935.00 $31.00 099.50
11 Extend Side Sewer EA H 6 850.00 ,100.00 $31.67 990.02 $500.00 $3000.00 00.00 $3000.00 $800.00 800.00
12 4"Side Sewer Pipe L.F. 717 48.00 5_9994 416.00 12.45 8926.65 19.00 $13023.00 19.00 $1,623.011 30.00 21610.00
13 8"Side Sewer Pipe L.F. 550 52,00 $28600.00 16.64 9152.00 19.00 $10,450.00 22.00 $12 100.00 31.00 17050.00
14 Sale Sewer Riser 4-inch EACH 19 72.00 $1,288.00 4 16.58 25115.02 11.60 4220.40 15.00 $1285.00 20.00 11380.00
15 Side Sewer Riser 6-Inch EACH 13 78.00 5 014.00 $238.46 309998 25.00 $325.00 26.00 $32-.00 26.00 $325.00
16 Side Sewer 8'X 4"Tee EACH 4 212.00 $1048.00 $5.63 4222.52 $g440.00 $$1460.00 0.00 888180.00 0.00 $160.00
17 Side Sewer B'k 6"Tee EACH 1 213.00 $213.00 $107.50 $$107.50 145.00 1940.00 00.00 $$1,$05.00 45.00 $114500
18 Side Sewer 10 k4"Tee EACH 13 232.00 53,016.00 $135.38 $1'759.04 105.00 $1 $1 300.00 85.00 $1 105.00
19 Side Sewer 10'x 6"Tee EACH 12 240.00 $2,880.00 $154.17 1 260.00 105.06
20 Side Sewer 12 X 4"Tee EACH 2 232.00 4464.00 $181.50 363.00 150,00 300.00 130.00 260.00 20.00 240.00 MIL M.22 Connect Dry Line EACH 12 570.00 58 840.00 595 00 $1 140.00 00.00 $8,000.00 500.00 0 100 00 00.11 $1,000.00
23 D Hole EACH 2 375.00 750.00 $460.00 4920.00 00.00 $1,000.00 500.00 $1000.00 $55500.00 $1 000.00
$ALES TAX(8.7%) $241295.25 $102 811.55 $125,207.53 corrected $128,366.13 1151090.00
SUB I UI AL 2142769 58944.80 510,893.05 511,167.85 513,188.33
t0. -.-.;.. , ,,..,,.;010. 'T:: _ - - ., _ 6"/. aldt ,., fii _,u;-...t,.:: M.01 as5r•' araa�s 23. i olY`s8t.10; 35.
Engineer's Estimate MJM Grand Inc. Eller Corporation Spokane Rock Products Red Diamond Constr.Inc.
SCHEDULE
x -db1k.- o-- 4- 8 TS 5935$Es'FRO4p,WG$T( $1,878,770.00 $1,166,564.13 $1,206929.15 $1,271,603.87 51,293.918.45
-•,�,.- ' ., i X11°% 1„ I -`3 ����yyg�'9�.O�.K $28l777�222.9�4 N^5511p1,75661�5 $136,1g0g0...-5�8 $139,5333.998$ $164,778.33
.!?W _:` _, .__ _ a,:„ L>:-1 j4y'"4`=* a- -- _�,illafs•.6•P3.z52N) 20..4.031 1M4 51120.33 97 5i - - $5 1SX1W$$.0, - . ignER 3 a '
Bid Items A88&A69 were miscalculated. Rounding erraron Bld Item Be. Total for Schedule A was miscalculated.
OP
,
Engineer's Estimate I LBL Cargill Inc. Inland Asphalt Co. Knife River Co. Sacco,tnc.
ITEM TOTAL
NUMBER ITEM Unit QUANTIT Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost
v
-. r ; 7.i- .S°r .' r xi rr� d _ - . ^7'_:. _ s` _ .r, '-..
--�. '•f. �• - •q1 a "u,11 i* .0.11 1 :.i 1 -.50 1.11 '_'. ..1. 1
77 DOUBLE 14-FOOT CHAINL NK GA E EA 3 1,000.00 300.00 •50.00 51950.00 $85.00 755.00 60.00 51,660.00 $632.98 1,898.94
78 DELINEATOR AND CORE HOLE EA 10 400.00 4,000.00 125.00 15250.00 120.00 1200.00 137.00 1370.00 54$$144,88 1,448.80 . -
79 BULLNOSE MARKER EA 5 281.5* 1407.50 325.00 1'625.00 16.00 1075.00 380.00 1900.00 390.04 1,950.20 - ''..11
:* • •rp, RING 1111.10 1110,.. * ,11 ,:11,11 :11.11 0,11 *1,11 T 111.1* 108.54 ,106.54 ._ 94.ALOyyO.
_ • IN •■:•' -P EA 2 '500.00 $1000.00 4500.00 1,000.00 55.0.00 1,600.00 *44515.00 $'.030.00 5555.20 1,114.40 \ OF WASpr4, �'
82 CONDUIT PIPE 0"DIAMETER LF 230 10.00 $2 300.00 $8.50 1 955.00 $9.50 $2 185,00 $9.50 $2 185.00 $8.36 11,922.80 57' 5 G
83 MPORARY PA M NT MARKING LF 5055 0.10 505.50 0.12 .08.60 0.25 $1 283.75 $0.12 08.60 $0.28 $1 415.40 Q 4 �""' T ',s.
84 REMOVE PAVEMENT MARKING LF 6900 0.50 450.00 0.65 14,485.00 0.85 $5,865.00 50.70 830.00 $0.95 56 555.00 0 ry
85 PLASTIC LINE LF 27000 0.60 $6,200.00 $$$1.04 928'08000 1.05 $28 350.00 $165 4,550.00 51.14 9301/80.00° ���
86 PLASTIC CROSSWALK LINE SF 432 5.25 92,268.00 6.50 $2,008.00 6.30 $ 721.60 $4.25 $1 838.00 56.85 52 959.20 /=fig ' /''
87 PLASTIC STOP LINE LF 30 7,40 25222.00 5110.00 22$300.00 9.80 4294.00 $6.00 4$180.00 $10.80 4318.00 '0 V
88 PLASTIC TRAFFIC ARROW EA 32 77.00 124464.00 $80.00 $ 560.00 $78.70 $2 518.40 5130.00 $ 160.00 584.81 $2 13.92 276786.4.-
89 PLASTIC BICYCLE SYMBOL EA 5 160.00 800.00 $115.00 475.00 $115.00 5 6.00 5.10 325.00 $150.42 752.10 a
90 PLAST C TRAFFIC LETTER EA 12 55.00 60.00 $43.00 $516.00 ^$42.75 513.00 $$860.00 720.00 $46.10 553.20 T� 99Orere8QO G\
91 MINOR UHANUS CALC 1 5 000.00 500.00 $5 000.00 $5 000.00 $5,000.00 $,000.00 $5 000.00 000.00 $5 000.00 $581000.60 S',$', 4 E�557.21
93 NEW WATER SERV CE N H DIAM LF 92 '500.00
50.00 $$9600.00 $41$009000 828.00 $4523.45 $$?15237.40 S1 1625.00 010.50 831900.00 18.43 $1895.58
94 95 SWALE IRRIGATION SYSTEM ASS MBLYIINCH EEA A 3 200000 $6000.00 $1,85000 5050.00 53,775.00 $11'325.00 $f 0.00 $650.00 $707,09 920121.27 - • .. -
•W9• ••-1 • E. 9 100.00 4900.00 27.00 243.00 ' 9.50 55.50 27.00 4243.00 •2.35 . 81.15
97 PLANT SELE TON-WOODS ROSE EA 23 50.00 'I150.00 2.00 121.00 39.50 1308.50 27.00 821.00 '2.35 974.05
-98-•IF` LECTION-MOCK ORANGE 8' 1,11 10610705^9 5 -10.4S�•r1• 0 -0* *SLID A 1* . * . 1
n ;•• 1•••° •- Y• - 411.11 a*.0 0 'fliO.f1 111111111111111111 .-vlBSit51>M '&Db51 -i15D11I1',•S 01 11 '5tM44 1'. .:, 1
Art TM 1•• 1•••`- Y• -11,11 . 11. * 0,00 .. 1.11 ,11 016DS' . . •
1 ••• - • • ••. -••• - 1.10 * * 1 ,•1
tort ff- ;.4,.' �3 7/0357 ,. CIVAS€sj=ebi 3.1X+semis 5, -1:114:01 198 : ;' ,3 .7151.
Engineer's Estimate I LEL Carglie Inc. inland Asphalt Co. Knife River Co. Safco,Inc.
ITEM TOTAL
NUMBER ITEM Unit QUANTIT Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Coat Unit Price Total Cost
S fir nm!„;- ,L , -t _ 4,1' . ,Y ,-, 1
.- 1 'L,1,::e.Jeri AMes FAC 30. 510600 120-0.00-
S b �'� .0 551-5.00 15.00 $�&f0.00 - �- 9 0.98 921.•6
2 Manhole_Igoe 1-4 6 EACH 8 2,800.00 $22400.00 $1410.00 $1 200.00 $2430.00 519440.00 $1&50.00 514$80000 90903.53 515,228.24
3 Manhole Test EACH 2 450.00 54900.00 4400.00 4800.00 55720.00 11'440.00 4334.00 4666.00 4521.31 $1 042.62
4 Removal and Replacement of Unsull.Foundation Material C.Y. 70 22.00 $1 540.00 $0.00 $0.00 7.70 539.00 $26.55 $1 858.60 $31.10 $2,177.00
5 Removal an.Replacement of limit.Material C.Y. 500 22.00 911 000.16 0.00 50.00 7.70 $,850.00 511.50 35/50.00 $25.47 512735.00
6 Imported Pipe Bedding L.F. 3598 2.00 52195.00 0.00 $ $0.00 85 $13 8850.38 $$4.25 $15 289.38 $$61.00 $345597.50.24 7
8 8"DIIe..Excavation
tyaSewer Poe��m L.F. 539 45.00 5$4255.00 50.00 516,590.00 5.50 513,744.50 $25.100 $13528.90 08.68 119770.52
9 10"Dia.Gravity Sewer Pie L.F. 1627 60.00 $811350.00 5$32.00 $52 004.00 $$18.60 530,099.50 $28.60 $43~278.20 8$28.87 $43717.49
10 12"Dia.Gravity Sewer Pipe L.F.- 185 55.00 9 047.5* $38.00 SE922.00 $31.00 55,099.50 537.50 $61166 75 S34.50 $5E75.25
11 Extend Side Sewer EACH 8 850.00 5,100.00 $1,2200.00 $7`200.00 9915.00 $3,090.00 $2,130.00 $2780.00 5939.44 95 636.84
12 4"Side Sewer Pipe L.F:-717 48.00 441800 $44.00 131,348.00 $19.5* 3 81.50 .50 $34057.50 $54.02 $38732.34
13 8"Side Sewer PI e L.F. 550 2.00 28000.00 6.00 925 30000 20.60 11 330.00 2.45 $28047.50 $54.92 930,208.00
65 266.95 $7.37 $1,471.03
EACH 13 78.00 11848.00 014.00 35.00 455.00 5.80 35.40 0.15 91.95 $102.66 $1334.58
e ewer• •e e EACH 1 213.00 53 213.00 110.00 $ 110.00 1103.00 548.50 $ 165.40
$34346.50 35.50 535.50 $$$$450.16 $$4d$150.16
e ewer ee EACH 13 232.00 1• ide Sewer 10'X 8"Tee EACH 12 240.00 $2 080.00 170.00 52040.00 08.00 $1'298.00 81.30 11,037.40 5.60 $112.84 $1'054 08
20 Side Sewer 12'1r4"Tee EACH 2 232.00 -84.00 200.00 400.00 134.00 268.00 S 05.15 '210.30 $142.09 284.18
an•out 5' • 1 ,*11.1, 100,1 11,11 .11,1 1,11 1.11 1 1,11 ,10.11
22 Connect•ry Line EACH 12 570.00 840.00 $�500.00 8'000.00 $510.00 $8,120.00 500.00 000.00 421 5: 2 538.96
23 Dry Hole EACH 2 375.00 4750.00 $200.00 .9�d*D.00 $510.00 $1020.00 $585.00 11,170.00 $398.84 4797.28
SALES TA3f' 795) $246,295.25 $175',820.50 $129,273.56 1189,968.01 $191,189.34
51.3101AL 521,42769 515,296.91 511,246.80 516,52722 916,933.47
t9T ..1 ..:..�,. 74 :?.c :°-„u_ *-=---..:- -'2:__i.: .,-,7',. .4c-a. Mi3 1"X{2:9 fifi1:'IRy '.311. a0..- A'f=015-'.r ' '9 ' . '$$om4 W 1 w`x- '`cIS26XI1<2.
Engineer's Estimate L&L Carglie inc. Inland Asphalt Co. Knife River Co. Safco,Inc.
SCHEDULE
SAE.111.1$. E01WQ 00-I 0-K $1,878,770.00 $1,312,557.60 $1,395,049.75 $1,438,877.10 51,524,725.12
rria,i*.i A 13 b$ 1 _)„.._-_ $287722.94 $191,123.41 $140,520.36 1206,495.23 $207822.81
$ ..... _.._ E, . . -:_ s6 a: :,x. ,_ .4- ..� Lo ViSitargeNSSIMUSSAISSASSIMM =a'1 tiMh Z4;id1 111;11:45`575 V Nta,SIWASiONtif31
0
BID TABULATION
Broadway•Moore to Flora Reconstruction Project SO J n
Project CIP No. 0088 5y
BID OPENING DATE-June 26,2010 10:00 A.M.
Engineer's Estimate I L&L Cargile Inc. Inland Asphalt Co. Knife River Co. Safco,Inc.
ITEM TOTAL
NUMBER ITEM Unit QUANTIT Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost
-'1 1 f1 .4. 1 t 3,r m3_ . *` �. ;- - .)41.ALQiv -'
- ..4.:_• "s.,.- .- ,.'-' _,,,,&'4'S� ,`° ,�,�`'� -=,.2. -- _ 3 3 - _ '"';=. - -_sue :- - O H
'1 •-:1Li •T. -+„. 1 ,111..0 $1$8100.10 0 17.00 :01 .11- 592,000.•tl 92 00,.0 •1-.00 $9:50.00 237.72 $138237,72 ..V Apo 02,02
2 CONS RUCTION SURVEYING LS 1 20 000.00 520 000.00 20 500.00 20 600,00 •18 000.00 $$18 000.00 23,500.00 $$$23300.00 $22'984.38 22,984.38 y
3 PROJ '.RARY IR4FFC CON ROL LS 1 ••n•n 1,•11.11 •0.... I•'.11 .0 $63326.00 20000.00 $21'000.00 $44'400.80 $44400.80 /12'; i
-STORM AND WATER TRENCH SAFETY SYSTEM LS 1 1'000.00 room 4000.00 500.00 6$515.00 $516.00 - 200.00 250.00 S<805.32 $1,805.32 ' -•,;"t,
5 EROSION CONTROL LS 1 22,000.00 $$ 000.00 $3,000.00 53000.00 $3 000.00 03000.00 $12200.00 51 ,200.00 02,239.18 52,239.18 /j��/'
8 CLEARING AND GRUBBING LS 1 5000.00 $5,000.00 $12000.00 512'000.00 51100.00 $5,100.00 $32000.00 532000.00 $10615.30_ 10615.30 -� 2767 '
• ••T EA 25 500.00 12 500.00 4$640.00 16'000.00 5770.00 5119 250.00 875.00 21875.00 594.84 14 871.00 •
8 REMOVE P C CURB LF 90 1... --- -- - 1-1 '5:, _ rr 1.111 r_.ii +' .40 • .' 9FGISn6P'6 �j=.-
9 REMO E IRRIGATION PIPE LF 270 10.00 11.11 .•• 1. I . 1 1 :,11 .6 .-• 112.80 ts.., E� -
10 ABANDON EXISTING DRYW L EA 1 1 500.00 1600.00 $3.0.00 350.00 $3.0.00 51380.00 $:00.00 800.00 $566.33 $566.33 `
11 REMOVE BOULDE',SPOIL P LE OR WALL LS 1 5,000.00 5500.00 $1,100.00 S 100.00 $825.00 5825.00 520,000.00 92000.00 $16,475.88 $13,476.86
12 REMOVE FENCE LF 490 5.00 2450.00 1.00 4$490.00 2.20 1,078.00, 5.00 '2,450.00 2.83 $1,388.70
• ` I • .... 0 1.T r 1 LF-IN 5160 0.50 $2 575.00 020 1 030.00 .1.05 5407.50 0.27 1390.50 0.27 $1 390.50 •--.
�4 REMOVE ACP : •r ,u , 11.11 -.11 111.1 •,. ,u . . 1 •,11 . . :, :•,u
15-ROADWAY EXCAV.INCL.HAUL CY 8200 12.60 $02,500.00 •50 77500.00 5 5.60 $27,920,00 $12.50 $02500.00 $0.11 82,902.00
16 SEL CT BORROW INCL.H•UL CY 1100 15.00 $16,500.00 2:110 62300.00 612.80 $14,080.00 9.50 $10,450.00 511716 12,278.00
17 EMBANKMENT COMPACT ON METHOD C CY 1100 5.00 $5,500.00 $3.00 53 300.00 $10.15 $11,165.00 '5.15 $5665.00 258 $2 838.00
18 CRUSHED SURF• O'COURSE 2 IN.DEPTH SY 10 4.00 $2000.00 .10 52550.00 $8.50 $4250.00 7.10 $3,550.00 5.78 $2,890.50"
19 CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE 4 IN.DEPTH SY 3900 5.00 '19500.00 '.60 17940.00 ..75 26 325.00 ''.1.5 16185.00 2.85 11 115.00
20 CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE 5 IN.DEPTH 1-1 ••• ' • •5•.•1 $$.., •• .:,•••.•• $a,-• 62,992.00•••,•• +, • g:, •1.00 -r. : • •.0-
22 HMA,CL,1/2"PG 70-28 0.42 T.DEPTH IN.DEPTH SY 15200 28.00 425600.00 20 00 5304'000.00 520.50 311 800.00 $8.45 280 440.00 9.89 299388.00
••... -1. V V,\.. ''S • 1 -1,1, :,••1.i• ,-1 •...D1 '.1• '5 :1,•• -. •11 9:, :•..• -, - .41•
24 ANTI-STRIPPING ADDITIVE CALC 1 1,000.00 1,000.00 51,.00.00 1,000.05 0,100.00 1,000.50 51,100.00 .1,000.00 41,100.00 1,000.00
25 JOB MIX COMPLIANCE PRICE ADJUSTMENT CALC 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
26 COMPACT ION PRICE ADJUSTMENT CALC 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ,,1.00 1.00 1.00
r 1 .` - •• r • 1 -•1 • T' ..Tr ;a -•• 11..1 J1 .:.n - ••,.• •.19 ..n vc .
28 FURNISHING CON "E t FOR CEMENT CUNL:HETE PAVEMENT Y 60 150.00 111,000.00 59,000,00 5 05.00 $$16,300.00 559993,00 r 55;580.00 $06.00 $$$6,360.00 $17.02 $0"7,02120
32 POR LAND CEMENT CONCRETE COMPLIANCE
LE IRO,STORM SEW RR OF UNSUITABLE.DDIIAM MATERLALNT CALC
430 55.00 27'00.00 $1.00
5.76 $19;$1.00
6.00 322.05 $17 280.00 $
9.00 $21,3.00 r 537.25 $20116.00
33 DUCTILE IRON STORMS WOK PIPE 18 IN.DIAM. LF 65 65.00 $4'225.00 :8.00 $4420.00 • .60 55160.00 70.00 54550.00 570.87 $4606.55
34 SOLID WALL PVC S I ORM SEW R PIPE,10 IN.DIAM. LF 10 40.00 $100.00 24.00 4y 240.00' - 9.00 4y 590.00 .6.00 .60.00 25.12 251.20
36 SOLID WALL PVC STORM SEWER PIPE 12 IN.DIAM. LF 1640 40.00 61600.00 22.00 33860.00 15.50 23: 1,1 1 'i1I8,I,.. • .1,10 23.02 53 450.80
. .n. -1 ••1 1r ..- . ..11 • ,1• ..1•.11 .11 .:III," •.' 1.11,11 - • -:.1.11 - :- 1 ,11
37 SOLID WALL PVC STORM SEWER PIPE 18 IN.DIAM. LF 230 60.00 11,500.00 31.50 .7 245.00 29.00 .6,670.00 32.60 7',475.00 37.33 8,585.90
38 STORM DRAIN NCASEMENT LF 240 50.00 12 000.00 19.00 ',560.00 1.00 7,440.00 34.00 8,160.00 22.34 '5,381.80
39 CURB INLET TYPE 2 EA 1 500.00 $500.00 $70.00 $4770.00 776.00 776.00 50.00 4$750.00 $01.40 $701.40
40 CONCRETE INL T EA 15 1,000.00 $16q00.00 1,370.00 -921 550.00 15035..0 0.00 617,250.00 1,018.12 $15,241.80
41 CATCHBAS N TYPE 1 EA 13 1500.00, 519300.00 360.00 17'080.00 1180.00 16,040.00 1,275.00 518,575.00 1,156.40 $15,033.20
42 CATCH:AS N TYPE 2 48 IN.DIAM. EA 11 1300.00 '18 500.00 2160.00 23760.00 11'755.00 519 305.00 2150.00 $23,850.00 1'078.39 520,'062.29
•1 - - .••n
• 112.0 , '.0. -'I.'' $7,200.00 1,080.00 $5381.00 25220..0 $6 660.00 3,021.26 $9 063.78
44 'PRECAST CONCRETE DRYWELL TYPE B EA 2 3,600.00 7,000.00 2 600,00 $5 200.00 2 275.00 $4350.00 2 875.00 $5750.00 '141.78 58 283.52
45 :XIS ING DRYW I.CONNECTION EA 1 3500.00 3,500.00 .700.00 700.00 .515.00 515.00 316.00 315.00 127.82 127.82
43-MANHOLE FRAME AND GRATE INCL.ADJUSTMENT EA 2 500.00 1 000.00 850.00 300.00 360.00 5720.00 .75.00 •50.00 309.08 .818.16
-37-SEGMEN • o, • . • `■ n. :1 1,10 -11t1Eln . 1,11 7:.0..1 -.. ,:11.111 •• 1J, a . 4-
48 CONCRETEBLOCK RETAINING WALL SF 3370 35.00 $1 - 1,II ,11 ' -660- 5,2.25 0118 382.50 '33.00 51115210.10 5.31 $1 8994.70
49 WATERLINE LOWERING,6 IN.DIAM. EA 1 2,000,00 52000.00 53263.00 $$3263.00, $3 620.00 $3,620,00 $4100,00 100.00 56,040.60 $8340.60
50 N W WATER SERVICE 2 INCH DIAM LF 310 35.00 10'850.00 3$15.00 $7100.00 $13.40 $4 154.00 19.25 5 967.50 $22.18 $6875.80
.0560 5$14.00 $$1,190.00 5513.40 $$85,13900 '18.00 1530.00 $90.91 $7727.35
52 RELOCATE EXISTING WATER METER ASSEMBLY EA 12 2000.00 4 000,00 54.00' 8848.00 15.00 180.00 S 4600 6 480.00 $64.23 770.76
53 INS IOL ` W WA ER ER R!.x3d01:1\•/1l5L9 tt- e- 111.11 ,101,10 ' .-1.1• . -'1.41 1.11 - , •,u .11.•• .
54 RE OCATE HYDRANT ASSEMBL EA 2 5000.00 9 0,000.00 1089.00 7178.00 $$930.00 1,860,00 <150.00 '2300.00 1'218.90 $2437.80
55 ADJUS1 VALVE BOX EA 13 200.00 $2'000.00 $1220.00 $2,860.00 $77.60 • 00.-• ..00 2795.00 4$409.87 $$55 328.31
55 CEM ` CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER - LF 8000 18.00 '144'000.05 9.76 75 000.00 8.85 . 0'000,00 9.30 4400.00 510.71 85680.00
67 DRIVEWAY AP•ROACH 1 1 '1,1- .1:u.0 1,11 1•10,01 ;.'i •.:,•1 111 3 1.11 .4 :
58 ROUNDABOUT TRUCK APRON CEMENT CONCRETE CURB LF 190 30.00 05700.00 16.00 $3,040.00 18.55 x$,524.0 21.00 X3990.00 '27.89 $5,299,10
59 ROU DABOUT CENTRAL ISLAND CEMENT CONCRETE CURB LF 95 30.00 $2'050.00 19.00 $1 805.00 523.75 82,256.25 21,00 $1095.00 32.40 $3 078.00
. •f•1` a•: F 270 20.00 5��59$5,400.00 13.60 3 645.00 13.40 $543,618.00 524.00.15.00 $S4 050.00 126.72 18.24 0315.40 54 924.80
81 CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK SY 2750 35.00 83 CEMENT CONCRETE TE SI EWALK RAMP TYPE 2 EA 180 600.00 54 500.00 •75 00 $6075.00 $390.00 $3 5110.00 $700.00 $$6 4,320.00
00.00 ' 48.61 573 6189.49
64 CEM N CO:C-' E S DEWAL'RAM. YPE 4A EA 1 500.00 500.00 '620.00 $520.00 S465.00 $455.00 5700.00 5700.00 $10.52 4$910.52
85 INSTALL DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE SF 72 7.00 540.00 47.50 320.00 20.65 '',1186.80 $21.00 1 512.00 24.29 1 748.88
•1 °-• - 1,10 :1.10 .11 - ,11 - :,11 -•
87 MONUMEN •SE AND CO E• EA 1 1,000.00 5 000.00 5 90.00 90.00 29.00 '125.00 75.00 75.00 ''79.20 -79.20
68 BARK MULCH SY 2 5.00 110.00 $10.00 $$2220.00 18.60 09.20 $9.50 5209.00 $17.70 89.40
ROCK Y 10 12.00 120.00 $10.00 $100.00 $18.60 185.00 $13.00 $130.00 538.71 53.
7.10
70 ••-•L YP B SY 3000 4.00 $1 000.00 5.00 $15 000.00 2.05 5 150.00 3.30 9 900.00 2.32 56030.00
71 SOD INSTALLATION SY 1860 7.00 $13320.00 $5450 $5370.00 3.60 6'098.00 '.25 7,905.00 7.29 $13559.40
•` • I `e 41.TI •1 Y 3540 2.00 57080.00 00.80 $2,632.00 0.65 301.00 0.80 2,124.00 .67 21371.80
73 IRRIGATION SYSTEM REVISION EA 1 I .111.00 01200600 6 50.00 $3000.00 3 5.00 •310.1• 270.00 3240.00 .3 0.04 '680.48
4 L MOVE AND RE-INS ALL VINY ENCE LF 45 50.00 52 250.00 '15.00 $675.00 '7.00 11 1 11 0.11 0.88 289.60
E VT1•' ` - 21..1 ,1.1.11 .11 1, 1 .11 ,1 11.11 ',II ,1 1,11 •.1 . -
Carrie Koudelka
From: Sue Passmore
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 8:23 AM
To: City Council; Mike Jackson; Neil Kersten; Steve Worley
Cc: Chris Bainbridge; Carrie Koudelka; Deanna Griffith
Subject: FW: ADA compliance on Broadway was mandatory after 1992 after any resurfacing of the
street
From: Margaret Mortz [mailto:mmortz @gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2010 6:52 PM
To: mayor/ councilmembers
Cc: Mortz; Chris Bainbridge; Deanna Griffith; Dick Behm
Subject: ADA compliance on Broadway was mandatory after 1992 after any resurfacing of the street
Dear City Council Members:
Upgrading Broadway is about fiscal prudence as well as public safety. I previously gave you data that showed
improving Broadway made it safer during two severe winters with persistently icy streets. Now I want to point
out that continued ADA non-compliance will bring fiscal risk to the city. Part of the Broadway grant will pay
for making the sidewalks wheelchair accessible. That means providing curb ramps at all intersections and
removing the barriers that currently narrow the sidewalks to impede a wheelchair user.
Unfortunately, the city inherited an out-of-compliance situation from the county when it failed to bring the
sidewalks into ADA compliance when they resurfaced Broadway. The ADA requires that, after 1992, any
major alteration of a street would require curb cuts and unobstructed sidewalks. The U.S. Dept. of Justice
defines repaving as a major alternation.
Fiscal prudence means that you should consider that, if there were to be a lawsuit or DOJ complaint, the city
could end up paying for both the Broadway ADA compliance repairs and also additional legal costs. They
might also open themselves to an official DOJ audit and end up with additional requirements on other streets.
I drove down Broadway and found a number of intersections without curb ramps. I also found that power line
poles are placed in the sidewalks and a number of them obstruct the sidewalk to widths that would impede
someone in a powered wheelchair. Those are out of compliance with the Americans' with Disabilities Act
(ADA).
http://www.ada.gov/taman2.html#II-5.3000
"I1-6.0000 NEW CONSTRUCTION AND ALTERATIONS
Regulatory references: 28 CFR 35.151.
I1-6.1000 General. All facilities designed, constructed, or altered by, on behalf of, or for the use of a public
entity must be readily accessible and usable by individuals with disabilities, if the construction or
alteration is begun after January 26, 1992."
"1I-6.6000 Curb ramps. When streets, roads, or highways are newly built or altered, they must have ramps
or sloped areas wherever there are curbs or other barriers to entry from a sidewalk or path. Likewise, when new
sidewalks or paths are built or are altered,they must contain curb ramps or sloped areas wherever they intersect
with streets, roads, or highways. "
1
Definition of altered is iuund in a DOJ settlement.
http://www.ada.gov/poplarville_pca/poplarville sa.htm
" Paving, repaving, or resurfacing a street, road, or highway is considered an alteration for the purposes of
this Agreement. "
Curb ramps and obstruction removals on Broadway sidewalks are not optional and are overdue.
Since the existing Broadway grant would pay the for ADA legally required improvements, turning this down
would raise doubts about the city's good faith efforts to implement the ADA.
I'd like to give website links and excerpts from articles indicating that this is worthy of serious consideration on
your part.
1. http://www.ada.gov/poplarville pca/poplarville sa.htm
This reference shows what the law requires from a city. It also points out the risk of having a formal complaint
filed with the DOJ to trigger an ADA audit. The ADA audit would be city wide. Broadway is not the only
street out of compliance with the law.
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND CITY OF POPLARVILLE, MISSISSIPPI UNDER THE
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
DJ 204-41-76
37. Within three months of the effective date of this Agreement, the City will implement and report to the
Department its written process for soliciting and receiving input from persons with disabilities regarding
the accessibility of its sidewalks, including, for example, requests to add curb cuts at particular locations.
38. Within three months of the effective date of this Agreement, the City will identify and report to the
Department all streets, roads, and highways that have been constructed or altered since January 26, 1992.
Paving, repaving, or resurfacing a street, road, or highway is considered an alteration for the purposes of
this Agreement. Filling a pothole is not considered an alteration for the purposes of this Agreement.
39. Within three years of the effective date of this Agreement, the City will provide curb ramps or other
sloped areas complying with the Standards or UFAS at all intersections of the streets, roads, and
highways identified under this paragraph having curbs or other barriers to entry from a street level
pedestrian walkway.
40. Beginning no later than three months after the effective date of this Agreement, the Citywill provide
curb ramps or other sloped areas complying with the Standards or UFAS at any intersection having curbs
or other barriers to entry from a street level pedestrian walkway, whenever a new street, road, or highway
is constructed or altered.
41. Within three months of the effective date of this Agreement, the City will identify all street level
pedestrian walkways that have been constructed or altered since January 26, 1992. Paving, repaving, or
resurfacing a walkway is considered an alteration for the purposes of this Agreement.
42. Within three years of the effective date of this Agreement, the City will provide curb ramps or other
sloped areas complying with the Standards or UFAS at all places where a street level pedestrian walkway
identified under this paragraph intersects with a street, road, or highway.
2
43. Beginning nu rater than three months after the effective date of this Agreemein, the City will provide
curb ramps or other sloped areas complying with the Standards or UFAS at all newly constructed or
altered pedestrian walkways where they intersect a street, road, or highway.
2.
http://www.fresnobee.com/2009/12/07/1739722 clovis-oks-funding-for-87-curb.html
Clovis OKs funding for 87 curb cuts
Posted at 08:51 AM on Tuesday, Dec. 08, 2009
The city will build or rebuild 87 curb cuts after the council accepted a contractor's bid of$155,720. Curb cuts
are required to have a slight upward slope from street level to allow easy access for wheelchair users and the
disabled."Haussler said the ADA improvements are in response to a settlement reached earlier this year with
disability rights advocates. He said he expects additional improvements for disabled access to be installed for
several years.
3.
http://www.completestreets.org/news/settlement-ensures-improved-access-for-califormans-with-disabilities/
"Settlement Ensures Improved Access for Californians with Disabilities"
By Barbara McCann, on December 30th, 2009 in News
"Just before the holidays, the California Department of Transportation(Caltrans) settled two long-running ADA
lawsuits filed by disability rights advocates over poor access for people with disabilities on state roads. Under
the settlement, Caltrans has agreed to spend $1.1 billion over the next 30 years to make existing sidewalks
accessible. The agency will upgrade existing curb ramps that do not comply with access laws and install curb
ramps where needed when resurfacing or reconstructing roadways. The settlement applies to 2,500 miles of
existing sidewalk, crosswalks, and 300 park-and-ride facilities that are owned and maintained by Caltrans.
Intersections and pedestrian overpasses and underpasses are also covered."
4.
http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/legal-services-litigation/53 80755-1.html
"From Delaware to Detroit and from Chicago to Oakland, dozens of cities are facing, or have settled, lawsuits
for failure to provide or properly maintain curb cuts that comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) of 1990. The complaints focus on the inconvenience and danger inherent in traversing sidewalks that
require a step up or down at intersections."
"The plaintiffs in these actions represent only a small number of those affected by the lack of curb cuts," said
Ted Woerthwein, of the law firm.Woerthwein & Miller which is representing the Council for Disability Rights,
a Chicago non-profit organization that is suing the City of Chicago. "We recognize that conforming to ADA
requirements is not something that can be accomplished overnight, but we see a real lack of urgency on the part
of many municipalities, and the potential for serious injury and even greater liability is constant."
5.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09305/1009931-147.stm
"Lawsuits have prompted the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation to budget $820 million over the next
decade to replace 117,000 handicapped curb ramps along state roads -- a program that attorneys say would be
unnecessary had the agency installed the ramps properly the first time."
" But J. Mark Finnegan, a Michigan lawyer representing disabled people who has filed scores of curb-ramp
suits against targets such as PennDOT and the cities of Erie and Meadville, views the agency's decision as more
strategic than altruistic."
3
"PennDOT, Erie and Ni..adville all recently entered into consent decrees or settled litigation brought by
advocates for disabled people. They are on schedule to rebuild or install thousands of ramps in the two
communities during the next several years."
"Mr. Finnegan believes PennDOT adopted its statewide push last year only when it realized it could potentially
lose similar suits across the commonwealth."
"They saved us the trouble of filing an identical lawsuit in every city across the state," Mr. Finnegan said. "
5.
If you are interested in ADA standards, please see
http://www.access-board.govjprowac/alterations/guide.pdf
For fiscal responsibility, as well as public safety, please do not delay or stop the program to bring Broadway
into compliance with the ADA. Broadway has been repaved since 1992, so it is long overdue for ADA
compliance. It would be a pity for the city to have to pay for this as a separate project when there is grant
money available and there might not be future grant money. The current city grant would widen the sidewalk
and install the remaining curb ramps to bring the street into ADA compliance.
Margaret Mortz
4
Carrie Koudelka
From: Deanna Griffith
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 2:42 PM
To: Sue Passmore; Chris Bainbridge; Carrie Koudelka
Subject: FW: Broadway Avenue Safety Project#0063
.Den wwa
From: Gerry Schuldt [mailto:GSchuldt @mountaingear.com]
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 12:51 PM
To: Tom Towey
Cc: Deanna Griffith; 'Erika Henry'; paul.fish @mountaingear.com
Subject: Broadway Avenue Safety Project #0063
June 25, 2010
Honorable Mayor Towey;
RE: Broadway Avenue Safety Project#0063
I'm responding in support of Spokane Valley's Master Bicycle Plan and the use of state funding allocations for
alternative infrastructure improvements along the Broadway street arterial. As a daily bicycle commuter
between Spokane and Spokane Valley working at Mountain Gear the need for alternative facilities continues to
grow and for many reasons. The main reason is we're continuing to try to play catch up with limited resources
while trying to share the roads. However we cannot afford not to spend any allocated resources to improve
transportation facilities for children. It's interesting to note that there are 7 plus schools sharing Broadway St.
Frontage or are within a block of so of this major arterial. We cannot afford not to allocate every dollar possible
to improve conditions for children. Parents should be outraged that children do not have complete and safe
sidewalks and separated bicycle paths infrastructure along this entire arterial. This is one reason why parents
continue to drive their kids to schools and back and thus create additional environmental problems. A similar
issue occurred in the Netherlands in the 1970's when parents had to band together to push for improvements of
pedestrian and bicycle facilities to and from their homes and schools. In the 1960's autos had become
affordable, and had overtaken streets once filled with people and cyclists. Dutch kids were at risk traveling
between once safe neighborhoods schools & homes. Parents pushed back, politicians followed & increased
funding for over two decades and have made a significant difference nation wide on this issue. We in America
are currently are about were the Dutch were in the 60's, our infrastructure has been neglected and autos are
everywhere and don't share the roads very well. We've learned auto's always win between pedestrian and
bicyclists when accidents occur. Action is needed now to maximize our children's safety. Continued funding
with matching local and state funds is needed for planning, design, and construction of safe bicycle and
pedestrian facilities. Studying to death &comparing yearly accident statistics is a red herring; alternative action
should be taken now; it should be a no brainer for common sense, safety and environmental reasons.
Your consideration is appreciated,
Gerald Schuldt
1
rrrr
6era1G� SCIiu16t
MOUNTAIN GEAR, INC.
Customer Service Representative--Government Sales
6021 E Mansfield
Spokane Valley, WA 99212-5007
509 242-4524 voice
509 340 1 170 fax
please consider the environment before printing this email
2
Carrie Koudelka
From: Sue Passmore
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 8:22 AM
To: City Council; Mike Jackson; Neil Kersten; Steve Worley
Cc: Chris Bainbridge; Carrie Koudelka; Deanna Griffith
Subject: FW: Support of the Broadway Avenue Safety Project
From: Christopher Pierce [mailto:piercecc @comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:15 PM
To: mayor/ councilmembers; Deanna Griffith; Chris Bainbridge
Subject: Support of the Broadway Avenue Safety Project
I am writing in support of the Broadway Avenue Safety Project moving forward now.This Project contains many important improvements that
will benefit a large variety of users.This project:
1. Improves vehicle safety by providing a continuous left-turn lane.Collision Analysis showed a number of collisions related to making left
turns.
2. Improves safety for children, staff and families in school zones by adding center islands at Centennial Middle School, Ness Elementary,and
Broadway Elementary schools for safer crossings.
3. Supports area growth and improves the level of service from an E(considered failing)to a level C.
4. Makes many enhancements to upgrade RDA compliance including: improving access to existing bus routes; moving utilities to provide clear
access to disables users; installing or upgrading ramps as required by ADA at each intersection.It is required that the city have an ADA
evaluation/action plan.
The ADA improvements alone consist of a greater estimated percentage of the cost than the current 20% matching that the city is being asked
to provide.
5.Add bicycle lanes which, in addition to improving bicycle safety, provide a needed buffer between vehicle travel lanes and sidewalks.
This project needs to be permitted to begin without delay.
Thank You
Christopher Pierce
404 N Farr Rd
Spokane Valley
1
Chris Bainbridge
From: Sue Passmore
Sent: Friday, June 18, 2010 12:59 PM
To: Chris Bainbridge; Carrie Koudelka
Cc: Mike Jackson; kathymcclung @spokanevalley.org; Deanna Griffith
Subject: FW: Broadway Safety Project
Chris and Carrie:
This following email came through the mayor/councilmembers email address. I originally
forwarded it to council, Mike Jackson and Neil. I received this email with a flurry of other
emails (all the same-just from different recipients) relating to the Broadway Safety Project.
I apologize because I did not notice that Ms. Harris wanted her email read at the June 9
council meeting and I did not forward it to you. I would be more than happy to give her a
call to let her know the error was on my part. Please let me know how I should proceed.
Thank you.
Sue
Original Message
From: Sue Passmore
Sent: Tue 6/8/2010 2:37 PM
To: City Council; Mike Jackson; Neil Kersten
Subject: FW: Broadway Safety Project
From: Cathy [mailto:cathyblueyes @comcast.net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 2:33 PM
To: mayor/ councilmembers
Subject: Broadway Safety Project
Catherine Harris
13908 E 32nd Ave.
Veradale, WA 99037
Spokane Valley City Council
Dear Sirs and Madams,
Please read the following letter into record for June 9th Council meeting. Thank You.
1
• In spite of r.._ e.nt kudos I have read regarding bike-friendliness 1,. the Spokane area,
I am one of many who are disappointed that the Spokane Valley City Council may choose to
suspend the Broadway Avenue Safety Project; which would have improved safety for multiple
modes of transportation in Spokane Valley. What a shame to lose grant money in hand for
improvements to Broadway Avenue. It seems hypocritical to apply for further grants while
throwing away one already awarded. One citizen recommended that bicycles ride on the
sidewalks. This is Illegal in Spokane Valley and many other areas with reason. Not
consistently enforcing a law doesn't make it an unnecessary law. Bicycles were originally
relegated to the streets (see 100 Years ago May 23rd; Spokesman-Review) and have been banned
in many areas from sidewalks for safety reasons. A pedestrian-bicycle collision can and has
caused fatal injury to the pedestrian. As a motorist, I have had several near-collisions with
bicycles on sidewalks due to the narrow field of vision and speed of the bicycle. As a
cyclist, I ride in areas both with and without bike lanes. Where bike lanes are present, I
have had very few problems with motorists. With 2/3 of Valley residents overweight/obese
(cited by Spokane County Health District), it is imperative to provide opportunities for our
citizens to be both active and safe. My fellow cyclists represent educated and professional
citizens who are also motorists. Bicycle lanes provide a guideline for safe clearance for
both motorists and cyclists. Please do not throw away this opportunity to enrich and enhance
Spokane Valley.
2
S lir 0 11)
THE SPREAD OF FMD
At%
•if
If you, or someone in your group, has traveled to Japan
or Korea in the past month, please DO NOT enter the
livestock barns.
Foot & Mouth Disease (FMD) has been discovered in
these countries and can be spread to animals as easily as
through your shoes - even if you do not work or spend
time on a ranch or farm.
FMD does not affect humans.
For more information contact the Washington State Beef Commission:
wabeef.org Battn
206-444-2902 "
. . ,
. . .
L..,. . , ..
• A).vt ,.e.
F
0 v
IN
FMO Bilosecurty . . .
. . .
0 . • ,. . •%.: .. •
losuv9 "
RemLlnder Ftirt LiivrItlf.ck .
• •
..
• WOKING
Prducrs ,,
IR
.,.
•. ' .
. . GROUP
., . . . . .
I.. For those traveling to Japan and Korea, do not visit farms or ranches until the outbreak is over Travelers are being '• . ' : ..'," . ' , '
asked to avoid contact with livestock or wildlife for five days prior to and after returning home from these regions. . . . . .
,
. 2. Know the source of incoming animals and do the required testing before the animals reach your ranch,feedlot or
dairy. If possible, isolate newly purchased animals from resident animals for at least a week, and preferably two weeks, Feed
and care for those animals after you have cared for all your other animals first. Do not allow common watering and feeding areas.
Follow these procedures if you are showing livestock at fairs,
3. Monitor those who enter your operation. Get to know employees and service personnel. Learn about outside activities relating to the
health of your animals, (Do they keep animals of their own, or do close family members work for other animal operations?) Keep a visitor''',
log and inquire if visitors have been in a disease outbreak area within the previous two weeks. Politely refuse admittance to your ranch,
feedlot or dairy if you are not satisfied with their answers. Consider disposable footwear for visitors or disinfecting shoe mats. ..
4. Don't allow rendering transport vehicles into feeding or housing areas. Consider having a designated,easily disinfected, pickup spot away
from other animals. ,
, .
S. Monitor your livestock closely for early signs of disease. '
Report all possible reportable conditions to the State Veterinarian's office IMMEDIATELY at any of the following phone numbers
360.902.1878 360.9011881 360.902.183.5.
For more Information about FMD visit.!•Y •..., ..,.
„ ,.. .... r
i
..on6
Washington Washington Washington Washington Washington Washington Washington State Cattle Producers of
Cattle Feeders Dairy Products Cattlemen's Dairy State Duel State University Department of Washington
Association Commission Association Federation Commission Agriculture
. .
. .
. .