Loading...
2011, 05-24 Regular Meeting AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL/REGULAR MEETING FORMAL MEETING FORMAT Tuesday,May 24,2011 6:00 p.m. Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers 11707 E Sprague Avenue Council Requests Please Silence Your Cell Phones During Council Meeting CALL TO ORDER: INVOCATION: Pastor Al Hulten,Valley Assembly PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: ROLL CALL: APPROVAL OF AGENDA: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: COMMITTEE,BOARD,LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: MAYOR'S REPORT: PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except those on this agenda as action items. (Action items include public hearings, and those items under NEW BUSINESS. Public Comments will be taken on those items at the time those items are discussed.)When you come to the podium, please state your name and address for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. 1.PUBLIC HEARING: Draft 2012-2017 Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan—Steve Worley 2. 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 attached listing of claim vouchers,with grand total of$$2,252,862.66 b.Approval of Payroll for Period Ending May 15,2011: $245,752.42 c. Confirmation of Mayoral Appointment,Rhea Coble to Spokane Housing Authority Board of Commissioners d.Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of May 3,2011, Study Session Format e.Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of May 10,2011 Formal Meeting Format f.Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of May 17,2011 Special,Executive Session NEW BUSINESS: 3.Motion Consideration: Shoreline Master Program Grant—Lori Barlow [public comment] 4.Motion Consideration: Permit Software Replacement—MaryKate McGee [public comment] 5.Motion Consideration: Participation in PACE Program—Carolbelle Branch [public comment] Council Agenda 05-24-2011 Regular Meeting Page 1 of 2 PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except those on this agenda as action items. (Action items include public hearings, and those items under NEW BUSINESS. Public Comments will be taken on those items at the time those items are discussed.)When you come to the podium, please state your name and address for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 6. Spokane Regional Convention Visitor's Bureau—Cheryl Kilday,CEO 7.Avista Energy Grant—Mary May 8.Advance Agenda—Mayor Towey INFORMATION ONLY(will not be discussed or reported): 9. Department Reports 10. Sprague Avenue: one-way vs.two-way EXECUTIVE SESSION: 11. Potential Litigation [RCW 42.30.110(i)] ADJOURNMENT General Meeting Schedule(meeting schedule is always subject to change) Regular Council meetings are generally held every Tuesday beginning at 6:00 p.m. The Formal meeting formats are generally held the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays. Formal meeting have time allocated for general public comments as well as comments after each action item. The Study Session formats (the less formal meeting) are generally held the 1St 3rd and sometimes 5th Tuesdays. Study Session formats DO NOT have time allocated for general public comments; but if action items are included,comments are permitted after those specific action items. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk at (509) 921-1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. Council Agenda 05-24-2011 Regular Meeting Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 24, 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ® public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING — Draft 2012 —2017 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.77.010, Perpetual advanced six-year plans for coordinated transportation program expenditures. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adopted 2011-2016 Six Year TIP last year on June 29, 2010, Resolution #10-013. Presentation of Draft 2012-2017 Six Year TIP at Council's May 3, 2010 Study Session. Presentation of Draft 2012-2017 Six Year TIP at Council's May 17, 2011 Council Meeting. BACKGROUND: The City is required by RCW 35.77.010 to prepare and after public hearing adopt a revised and extended comprehensive transportation program for the ensuing six calendar years. This plan must be submitted to the Washington State Secretary of Transportation before July 1st of each year. Any project that uses Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) funds to meet local match requirements must be included in the TIP. The TIP also fulfills the transportation planning requirement for the City's Comprehensive Plan. To comply with this planning requirement, Staff prepares the enclosed 6-Year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). Projects listed in the TIP have been developed to address safety, capacity, structural, and functional issues, complete gaps in the street and sidewalk system, accommodate on-going and planned growth and development, and address various street and sidewalk system needs. Projects listed in the TIP are also screened for their expected ability to score well with state and federal funding agencies and leverage city matching funds. The attached draft 2012 —2017 Six Year TIP includes minor updates based upon the comments received at the May 3, 2011 Council Meeting and May 17, 2011 Council Meeting. This draft should be considered a `work in progress' and may be updated again after receiving comments from the Public Hearing. OPTIONS: Conduct Public Hearing RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Conduct Public Hearing. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The proposed projects listed in the Draft 2012-2017 Six Year TIP projects will be budgeted within the Street Capital Projects Fund, which has the revenue resources to accommodate those projects identified as having secured funding. At the current level of projected REET revenues, not all planned projects listed in the draft 2012-2017 Six Year TIP can be funded at this time. STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten, Public Works Director; Steve Worley, Senior Engineer— Capital Projects ATTACHMENTS: Draft 2012-2017 Six Year TIP, Project Descriptions List City of Spokane Valley Public Works Department Spokane . Valley DRAFT 2012 - 2017 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program Funding Sources: • ARRA • BR • City • CDBG • CMAQ • Developers • EECBG • FHWA • FMSIB • HUD • REET • Other Fed • Other RR • Other State • SP • SRTS • SW • STA • STP(E) • STP(U) • TIB • UAP • UCP • WSDOT • WTSC • WUTC City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works 2012 — 2017 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Glossary & Abbreviations American Recovery & Reinvestment Act Bridge Replacement Program City Funds Community Development Block Grant Congestion Management/Air Quality Private Developer Funds Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Federal Highway Administration Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Program Housing & Urban Development Real Estate Excise Tax Misc. Federal Funding Sources Railroad Funding Misc. State Funding Sources TIB Sidewalk Program Safe Routes to School City Stormwater Funds Spokane Transit Authority Surface Transportation Program (Enhancement) Surface Transportation Program (Urban) Transportation Improvement Board TIB Urban Arterial Program TIB Urban Corridor Program Washington Department of Transportation Washington Traffic Safety Commission Washington Utilities &Transportation Commission Spokane .Valley Funding Status: • S Project Funding is Secured • P Project Funding is Planned. The Most Probable Funding Sources have been Identified. Project Phases: • PE • RW • CN • VE Construction • PCC • HMA • ITS • STEP Preliminary Engineering Right-of-Way Construction Value Engineering Type: Portland Cement Concrete Hot Mix Asphalt Intelligent Transportation System (Integrated Traffic Signal Control Systems) Septic Tank Elimination Program Street Functional Classifications: Urban: • 14 Principal Arterial • 16 Minor Arterial • 17 Collector Arterial • 19 Local Access Spokane Valley Project/Description/Current Status Draft 2012 - 2017 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total 1 Argonne Road- 190 to Trent, S 0.38 0 0 582 582 City 79 79 CMAQ 503 503 Revise Signal Phasing,Add NB Right Turn Lane at Montgomery, Intersection Improvements at Knox Funding Secured(SRTC 06-31),City Project#0060 Project Total 582 582 2 Pines Corridor ITS: Sprague to Trent S Traffic Signal Control System for Corridor Funding Secured(SRTC 06-26), City Project#0061 2.26 56 125 1,593 1,775 City 238 CMAQ 1,537 238 1,537 Project Total 1,775 1,775 3 Greenacres Trail, Sullivan Rd. to Liberty Lake 0 50 0 0 50 City s (PE Only) Other 50 50 Fed Preliminary planning for shared use pathway on abandoned Railroad right-of-way PE Funded Project Total 50 50 4 Mansfield Ave Connection- Pines(SR27)to 200- 0.21 63 675 0 738 City 100 100 S ft east of Houk Rd(PE/RW Only) CMAQ 638 638 Construct 3-lane arterial gap connection from Pines to Houk,w/sidewalk,curb,and stormwater facilities PE/RW funded by CMAQ(SRTC#10-12)City Project# Project Total 738 738 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances,any are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/19/2011 Page 1 Spokane Valley Project/Description/Current Status Draft 2012 - 2017 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total 5 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trail, SCC to s Evergreen Rd(PE Only) Construct Shared Use Pathway on abandoned Railroad Right-of-way PE Funded 5 559 0 0 558 City STP(E) 372 186 558 Project Total 372 186 558 6 Mission Ave.- Flora Rd.to Barker Rd. (PE/RW 1 311 400 0 711 City 96 96 s Only) STP(U) 615 615 Reconstruct to a 3-lane section with curb,sidewalks,bike lanes and stormwater facilities; Partial Preservation related project PE&RW Funding Secured, (SRTC# ) City Project#0123, Project Total 711 711 7 Sidewalk Infill Program 0 0 0 539 539 City 108 108 S CMAQ 431 431 Fill in gaps in sidewalk system throughout city Funded by CMAQ(SRTC# ),City Project# Project Total 539 539 8 Sprague/Sullivan Rd ITS, Bowdish to s Sullivan/Sprague to 1-90 Extend Traffic Control System for Corridor Funded by CMAQ,(SRTC# ),City Project# 3.2 0 0 253 253 City 34 CMAQ 219 Other Fed 34 219 Project Total 253 253 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances,any are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/19/2011 Page 2 Spokane Valley Project/Description/Current Status Draft 2012 - 2017 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total 9 Sullivan Road West Bridge S Reconstruct and widen west(southbound)bridge Recv'd FMSIB and BR grants 0.08 2,136 200 16,880 19,216 BR 902 966 2,852 2,852 7,572 City 226 242 213 213 894 FMSIB 1,000 1,000 2,000 Other 4,375 4,375 8,750 Fed Project Total 1,128 1,208 8,440 8,440 19,216 10 24th Ave Sidewalk, Adams to Sullivan S Fill in gaps in sidewalk Funded,TIB Grant 0.25 0 0 258 258 City 132 Other 126 State 132 126 Project Total 258 258 11 Broadway Ave. Improvements- Flora to Barker P 1 511 1,000 3,920 5,430 City 151 151 392 392 UCP 604 604 1,568 1,568 Reconstruct to a 3-lane section with curb,sidewalks,bike lanes and stormwater facilities; Partial preservation related project 1,086 4,344 Project Total 755 755 1,960 1,960 5,430 12 Park Road-#2, Broadway to Indiana (RW&CN 0.75 0 150 2,500 2,650 City 20 338 358 p Only) STP(U) 130 2,162 2,292 Reconstruct to a 3-lane section with curb,sidewalks,bike lanes and stormwater facilities; Partial Preservation Related Project Project Total 150 2,500 2,650 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances,any are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/19/2011 Page 3 Spokane Valley Project/Description/Current Status Draft 2012 - 2017 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total 13 Sullivan Road Corridor Traffic Study (1-90 to p Wellesley) Conceptual Planning for Sullivan Road corridor improvements 2 200 0 0 200 City 27 27 STP(U) 173 173 Project Total 200 200 14 University Rd/1-90 Overpass Study S 0 250 0 0 250 City 34 CMAQ 216 Study of feasibility and benefits of overpass at University/I-90 to Argonne/SR-27 34 216 Project Total 250 250 15 Sullivan Rd/UPRR Overpass Bridge Resurfacing 0.05 86 0 660 746 City 149 149 p Project BR 597 597 Resurfacing of RR Overpass Bridge Deck; Full Preservation project Project Total 746 746 16 Sprague Resurfacing#2, Evergreen to Sullivan P 1 0 0 1,394 1,394 City 188 STP(P) 1,206 Grind and Inlay pavement,Storm Water improvements,ADA upgrades; Full Preservation Project PE completed in 2009 188 1,206 Project Total 1,394 1,394 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances,any are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/19/2011 Page 4 Spokane Valley Project/Description/Current Status Draft 2012 - 2017 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total 17 Sidewalk&Transit Stop Accessibility Project o 36 25 254 315 City 63 63 S Other- 252 252 FTA Sidewalk and bus stop improvements Project Total 315 315 18 Barker Road-Appleway to Broadway Avenue 0.26 221 1,000 1,694 2,916 City 62 104 229 395 P STP(U) 393 663 1,465 2,521 Reconstruct to a 3-lane section with curb,sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities; Realign Broadway east of Barker; Partial preservation related project Project Total 455 767 1,694 2,916 19 Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation (PE& p RW Only) Construct Grade Separation at Barker/BNSF RR/Trent(SR290) 0 3,000 1,600 0 4,599 City 101 256 263 620 Other 180 540 720 Fed Other 611 1,368 1,049 3,028 Fed Other- 38 95 98 231 RR FY09 Federal Earmark for$720K million,$10M received from FMSIB for CN phase Project Total 750 1,899 1,950 4,599 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances,any are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/19/2011 Page 5 Spokane Valley Project/Description/Current Status Draft 2012 - 2017 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total 20 Bowdish Road- 16th to Sprague P 1 303 200 2,322 2,825 City 101 464 565 UAP 402 1,858 2,260 Sprague to 8th: Inlay&Enhancement;8th to 16th: Reconstruct as 2-lane section w/curb,sidewalk,bike lanes and new stormwater facilities; Partial preservation related project Project Total 503 2,322 2,825 21 Mission Ave.- Flora Rd.to Barker Rd. (CN Only) P 1 0 0 3,969 3,969 City UAP Reconstruct to a 3-lane section with curb,sidewalks,bike lanes and stormwater facilities; Partial Preservation related project City Project#123 794 3,175 794 3,175 Project Total 3,969 3,969 22 Sullivan/ Euclid Concrete Intersection (RW/CN p Only) Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement; Full Preservation project 0 0 0 1,263 1,263 City STP(U) 171 1,092 171 1,092 Project Total 1,263 1,263 23 Mansfield Ave. Connection-Pines(SR27)to 200- 2 ft east of Houk Rd(CN Only) 0 0 0 965 965 City CMAQ Construct 3-lane arterial gap connection from Pines to Houk,w/sidewalk,curb,and stormwater facilities 130 835 130 835 Project Total 965 965 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances,any are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/19/2011 Page 6 Spokane Valley Project/Description/Current Status Draft 2012 - 2017 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total 24 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan Concrete p Intersections(CN Only) Reconstruct Intersections in concrete pavement; Full Preservation project 0 0 0 2,075 2,075 City 280 280 STP(U) 1,795 1,795 Project Total 2,075 2,075 25 Flora Road-Sprague to Mission P 1 362 500 2,773 3,635 City 80 92 555 727 UAP 323 367 2,218 2,908 Widen to 3-lane roadway and add new curb,sidewalk,bike lanes and stormwater facilities; Partial Preservation project City Project#0122 Project Total 403 459 2,773 3,635 26 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trail, SCC to p Evergreen Rd(RW&CN Only) Construct Shared Use Pathway on abandoned Railroad Right-of-way 6.5 0 100 4,280 4,380 City STP(E) 100 2,140 2,140 4,380 Project Total 100 2,140 2,140 4,380 27 Greenacres Trail, Sullivan to Liberty Lake P (RW&CN Only) Construct Shared Use Pathway on abandoned railroad right-of-way 2.2 0 0 1,095 1,095 STP(E) 1,095 1,095 Project Total 1,095 1,095 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances,any are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/19/2011 Page 7 Spokane Valley Project/Description/Current Status Draft 2012 - 2017 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total 28 Barker Road-South City Limits to Appleway 0.75 490 350 3,753 4,593 City 60 53 507 620 P Reconstruct to a 3-lane section with curb,sidewalks,bike lanes and stormwater facilities; Partial preservation related project City Project#0125 STP(U) 388 339 3,246 3,973 Project Total 448 392 3,753 4,593 29 Bowdish Road-24th to 16th P 0.5 298 250 2,288 2,836 City 110 458 568 UAP 438 1,830 2,268 Reconstruct Roadway as 2-lane section w/curb,sidewalk and new stormwater facilities; Partial preservation related project Project Total 548 2,288 2,836 30 Sullivan/ Kiernan Concrete Intersection P Reconstruct Intersection in concrete pavement; Full Preservation Project 0 152 0 1,166 1,318 City STP(P) 178 1,140 178 1,140 Project Total 1,318 1,318 31 Wellesley Realignment @ Barker/SR290 P 0.65 402 1,700 3,085 5,187 City 124 160 416 700 STP(U) 797 1,021 2,669 4,487 Realign connection of Wellesley to Barker Rd and SR290,3-lane section, Part of Barker/BNSF Grade Separation Project Total 921 1,181 3,085 5,187 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances,any are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/19/2011 Page 8 Spokane Valley Project/Description/Current Status Draft 2012 - 2017 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total 32 Sprague Resurfacing#3, Fancher to Havana P 1 140 0 1,562 1,702 City 230 230 STP(P) 1,472 1,472 Grind& Inlay,Stormwater Repairs and ADA Upgrades; Full Preservation project Project Total 1,702 1,702 33 Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement, Indiana to p Wellesley 2 1,259 800 0 2,059 City 117 161 278 STP(U) 752 1,029 1,781 Reconstruct urban arterial in concrete pavement; Partial Preservation related project Project Total 869 1,190 2,059 34 Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation(CN p Only) Construct Grade Separation at Barker/BNSF RR/Trent(SR290) $10M received from FMSIB 0.2 0 0 21,344 21,344 City Other Fed Other- RR WSDOT FMSIB 534 533 1,067 5,750 5,733 11,483 534 533 1,067 534 533 1,067 3,335 3,325 6,660 Project Total 10,687 10,657 21,344 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances,any are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/19/2011 Page 9 Spokane Valley Project/Description/Current Status Draft 2012 - 2017 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Dollars in Thousands Length PE RW CN Total Funding Sources 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total 35 Park Road/BNSF Grade Separation 0.2 450 300 0 750 City 31 31 P FMSIB 227 227 Other 364 364 Fed Reconstruct Park Road to separate the grades of Park Road and the BNSF railroad tracks. Other- 37 37 RR UCP 91 91 "Other"Funding from BNSF RR Project Total 750 750 36 University/Sprague Concrete Intersection 0 175 0 1,340 1,515 City 205 205 P STP 1,310 1,310 Replace asphalt pavement with portland cement concrete pavement. Full Preservation project Project Total 1,515 1,515 37 Bowdish Road, 32nd to 24th P 0.5 258 300 0 558 City 75 75 STP(U) 483 483 Reconstruct Roadway as 2-lane section w/curb,sidewalk and new stormwater facilities; Partial preservation related project Project Total 558 558 Totals: 11,768 9,675 83,807 105,250 10,216 12,554 19,061 21,580 20,330 21,508 105,249 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances,any are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/19/2011 Page 10 Spokane .000Valley Draft 2012 - 2017 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Totals Secured Projects Planned Projects Totals Year Federal State Other City Total Federal State Other City Total Federal State Other City Total 2012 $5,735 $126 $0 $1,110 $6,971 $2,106 $604 $0 $535 $3,245 $7,841 $730 $0 $1,645 $10,216 2013 $1,152 $0 $0 $242 $1,394 $5,093 $4,181 $38 $1,848 $11,160 $6,245 $4,181 $38 $2,090 $12,554 2014 $7,227 $1,000 $0 $213 $8,440 $5,201 $3,749 $95 $1,576 $10,621 $12,428 $4,749 $95 $1,789 $19,061 2015 $7,227 $1,000 $0 $213 $8,440 $8,991 $2,373 $98 $1,678 $13,140 $16,218 $3,373 $98 $1,891 $21,580 2016 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $10,002 $7,917 $534 $1,877 $20,330 $10,002 $7,917 $534 $1,877 $20,330 2017 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,834 $4,176 $570 $1,928 $21,508 $14,834 $4,176 $570 $1,928 $21,508 Total $21,341 $2,126 $0 $1,778 $25,245 $46,227 $23,00 $1,335 $9,442 $80,004 $67,568 $25,12 $1,335 $11,220 $105,249 0 6 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances,and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 5/19/2011 Page 1 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program Projects w/No Currently Identified Local Match Within Existing Resources Dollars in Thousands Project Name Description Total Cost 32nd Avenue-Evergreen to Best Reconstruct to 3 lanes with curbs,sidewalks, bike $1,683 lanes and new stormwater facilities; Partial preservation related project 8th Avenue Phase 1-Carnahan to Reconstruct to a 3-lane section with curb, $2,963 Havana sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities; Partial preservation related project 8th Avenue Phase 2-Park to Dickey Reconstruct to a 3-lane section with curb, $4,259 sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities; Partial preservation related project 8th Avenue Phase 3-Dickey to Reconstruct to a 3-lane section with curb, $3,861 Carnahan sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities; Partial preservation related project Appleway Extension-Evergreen to Extend Appleway Blvd.with a multi-lane facility $17,381 Tshirley including curbs and sidewalks. Appleway Extension-University to Extend Appleway Blvd.with a multi-lane facility $14,729 Evergreen including curbs and sidewalks. Barker Road-Spokane River to Trent Reconstruct to a 2-lane curbed arterial with $6,136 sidewalk and stormwater facilities; Partial preservation related project Carnahan Truck Lane-8th to City Add southbound truck lane to roadway; Partial $5,034 Limits, preservation related project Euclid Ave/Flora Rd-Flora, Euclid Reconstruct to provide a 2-lane,shouldered $5,675 to Euclid; Euclid, Flora to Barker arterial, new stormwater facilities; Partial preservation related project Evergreen ITS Improvements Traffic Control Systems Upgrades for $708 Evergreen(Broadway to 16th) Evergreen/32nd- 16th to 32nd, Reconstruct to a 3-lane section with curb, $6,045 Evergreen to SR-27 sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities; Partial Preservation related project Park Road-#3-Sprague to Reconstruct to a 3-lane section with curb, $3,376 Broadway sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities; Partial Preservation related project Park Road#4, South City Limits to Reconstruct to a 3-lane section with curb, $1,761 8th sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities; Partial Preservation related project Pavement Management Program- Annual street preservation projects per PMP $24,000 Arterials Pavement Management Program- Annual street preservation projects $12,000 Local Access Pines Corridor ITS: Sprague to 16th Traffic Signal Control System for Corridor $785 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances,and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Thursday, May 19,2011 Page 1 of 2 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program Projects w/No Currently Identified Local Match Within Existing Resources Dollars in Thousands Project Name Description Total Cost Saltese/Sullivan Traffic Signal Improvements to Intersection, Install Traffic $250 Signal(In coordination w/Spokane County) Sprague/Barker Traffic Signal Install Traffic Signal $457 Sullivan Road North Extension Reconstruct and widen the Sullivan Road $55 (Bigelow Gulch) extension north also known as Bigelow Gulch Road to a 4-lane roadway with 8-foot shoulders and a 12-foot two way left turn lane. Trent(SR290)-Del Ray to Barker Widen Trent from Barker to Del Ray to $532 Turn Lane accommodate Turning traffic movements Bowdish Road, Sands to 32nd Reconstruct Roadway as 2-lane section w/curb, $3,430 sidewalk and new stormwater facilities; Partial preservation related project Totals: $115,120 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances,and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Thursday, May 19,2011 Page 2 of 2 ScITY of Pubic Works Department pokane Capita( Improvement Program Valle y 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall@spokanevalley.org City of Spokane Valley 2012-2017 Six-year Transportation Improvement Program Project Descriptions PROJECTS STARTING/CONTINUING IN 2012 1. ARGONNE ROAD CORRIDOR UPGRADE#0060 FUNDED This project will provide a new signal system at Knox, adds a northbound right turn lane at Montgomery and improves curb radiuses at the Argonne/Knox and Argonne/Montgomery intersections to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion. The project is funded by a Federal CMAQ grant. Cost: $1,291,000, City Share: $174,000. 2. PINES(SR27) ITS IMPROVEMENTS#0061 FUNDED This project will install conduit and fiber optic cabling to connect the traffic signals between Sprague and Trent Avenues to the Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center (SRTMC). This will improve signal coordination and timing and allow changes during peak hours and/or emergency events. The project is funded by a Federal CMAQ grant. Cost: $2,081,000, City share: $280,000. 3. GREENACRES TRAIL, SULLIVAN RD TO EAST OF CITY LIMITS#0148(PE ONLY) FUNDED Planning and design the of Greenacres Trail from the Walt Worthy Building to Hodges Rd. - approximately 2.2 miles of non-motorized multi-use trail from the Centennial Trail just east of Sullivan to the east Spokane Valley city limits. The project is funded by a Federal Department of Energy grant. Cost: $100,000, City Share: $0. 4. MANSFIELD AVE CONNECTION—PINES(SR27) TO 200 FT EAST OF HOUK RD(PE/RW ONLY) FUNDED Design and Right-of-way acquisition of a 3-lane arterial gap connection from Pines Rd. to Mansfield Avenue west of Mirabeau Parkway with continuous left turn lane, bike lanes, ADA sidewalk, curb and stormwater facilities. The project is funded by a Federal CMAQ grant. Cost: $1,026,000, City Share: $139,000. 5. SPOKANE VALLEY-MILLWOOD TRAIL#0145(PE ONLY) FUNDED The project will provide the planning and design of a 6.5 mile non-motorized multi- use trail from Spokane Community College to the Spokane Valley Mall. The trail would be located mostly on Spokane County owned railroad right-of-way that was once the route of the Great Northern Railway. The project is funded by a Federal STP(E) grant. Cost: $745,000, City Share: $0. PE=Preliminary Engineering(Design&Environmental); RW=Right-of-Way; CN=Construction P:AClerk\AgendaPackets for Web\agendapacket 05-24-11\Item 1 TIP 2011 Project descriptions.docx Page 1 6. MISSION AVE—FLORA TO BARKER#0123(PE/RW ONLY) FUNDED This project will design and acquire right-of-way for the reconstruction of Mission Avenue to an arterial from Flora Road to Barker Road. The project is funded by a Federal STP(U) grant. Cost: $918,000, City Share: $124,000. Partial Preservation project. 7. SIDEWALK INFILL PROGRAM FUNDED This project will complete the design and construction for Phase 1 of the City's effort to fill in sidewalk gaps and improve transit access at selected locations throughout the City. The project segments will focus on improvements within the walking radius of schools, high density housing, commercial districts and transit facilities. It will also look at installing transit shelters at high use stops and public facilities which are expected to increase ridership and reduce single occupancy vehicle trips. For example: Sidewalks on Farr Road from 4th to Appleway and a transit shelter at Appleway/Farr; sidewalk on Perrine Road north of Sprague and a transit shelter on Sprague; sidewalk on Pines Road west side from 16th to 19th and east side from 16th to 23rd; install transit shelters at high-use locations. The project is funded by Federal CMAQ and EECBG funds. Cost: $716,000, City Share: $143,000. 8. SPRAGUE AVE/SULLIVAN RD ITS PROJECT FUNDED Install fiber optic cable and signal interconnect on Sprague Ave. between Evergreen and Sullivan Rd. and Sullivan Rd. from Sprague to 1-90. The project is funded by a Federal CMAQ grant. Cost: $345,000, City Share: $101,000. 9. SULLIVAN ROAD WEST BRIDGE PARTIALLY FUNDED This project will reconstruct and widen the west bridge of Sullivan Road over the Spokane River, just north of Indiana Ave. This project is 50% funded by FMSIB ($2M) and Federal Bridge Replacement ($8M) grants. Cost: $19,582,000. Project is part of a 4-part Sullivan Corridor Improvement Plan. 10. 24TH AVENUE SIDEWALK—ADAMS TO SULLIVAN #0146 FUNDED This project will complete the gaps in the sidewalk between Adams Rd and Sullivan Rd with a new 6-ft wide sidewalk and barrier curb on north side. This project is funded by a TIB grant. Cost: $292,000, City Share: $152,000. 11. BROADWAY AVE. IMPROVEMENTS—FLORA TO BARKER UNFUNDED This project will reconstruct roadway as three-lane urban arterial from Flora Road to Barker Road with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. Includes completing the gap in roadway between Greenacres and Long roads. Cost: $5,431,000. Partial Preservation project. 12. PARK ROAD IMPROVEMENTS—BROADWAY TO INDIANA#0069(RW/CN ONLY) UNFUNDED This project will reconstruct and widen Park Road to a three-lane urban street with sidewalks, bike lanes, curbs, gutters and associated drainage systems. The PE phase was funded through a Federal STP(U) grant. Cost: $2,650,000. Partial Preservation project. 13. SULLIVAN ROAD CORRIDOR TRAFFIC STUDY(1-90 TO WELLESLEY) UNFUNDED Conceptual planning for Sullivan Road corridor improvements. Will evaluate future traffic needs based on impacts from Spokane County's Bigelow Gulch project, Bridging the Valley Overpass improvements at Trent and Sullivan Road West Bridge improvements. Cost: $250,000 PE=Preliminary Engineering(Design&Environmental); RW=Right-of-Way; CN=Construction P:AClerk\AgendaPackets for Web\agendapacket 05-24-11\Item 1 TIP 2011 Project descriptions.docx Page 2 14. UNIVERSITY RD/I-90 OVERPASS STUDY FUNDED Study feasibility and potential congestion relief benefits of an overpass at University/I-90 to Montgomery and between Argonne and SR27. The project is funded by a Federal CMAQ grant. Cost: $250,000, City Share: $34,000. 15. SULLIVAN RD/UPRR OVERPASS BRIDGE RESURFACING PROJECT UNFUNDED Resurface railroad overpass bridge deck which is currently delaminating. Project is part of a 4-part Sullivan Corridor Improvement Plan. Cost: $746,000. Full Preservation project. 16. SPRAGUE RESURFACING #2 PROJECT(EVERGREEN TO SULLIVAN RD.) UNFUNDED Resurface Sprague from Evergreen to Sullivan Rd. The design phase was completed in 2009. Cost: $1,394,000. Preservation project. 17. SIDEWALK AND TRANSIT STOP ACCESSIBILITY PROJECT FUNDED Sidewalk and bus stop improvements in conjunction with STA. Representative sidewalk segments to complete gaps: Montgomery Avenue (University to Wilbur); 4th Ave (University to Pierce Rd); Tshirley Rd (Sprague to Coach); Mansfield Ave (Pines to Houk); Park Rd (8th to 12th). Representative transit stop improvements: bus pads, curb ramps, sites for future bus shelters and related improvements: Sprague @ Pines Rd (NW & SE corners); Sprague @ University (NW corner); Sprague @ Argonne/Mullan (north side); Sprague @ Farr (NW corner); Sprague @ Havana (NE corner); Appleway @ Farr (SE corner); Mission @ Mullan (east of intersection); Mission east of Barker; Sullivan @ Spokane Industrial Park; Indiana @ Evergreen (SW & NE corners); Indiana @ ITT (south side); Indiana @ Staples (SW corner); Indiana @ Krispy Kreme (north side); Sullivan (4th to 16th). Funded with Federal FTA funds through STA. Cost: $315,000, City Share: $63,000. .;TS STARTING IN 21., 18. BARKER ROAD—APPLEWAY TO BROADWAY AVENUE UNFUNDED Reconstruct to a 3-lane section with curb, sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities; realign Broadway east of Barker to match Broadway west of Barker. Cost: $2,916,000. Partial Preservation project 19. BARKER ROAD/BNSF GRADE SEPARATION#0143(PE/RW ONLY) PARTIALLY FUNDED Design of a grade separation at Barker/BNSF railroad/Trent (SR290). The project is partially funded (with $10 million) by FMSIB for the construction phase. This is part of the Bridging the Valley project. Cost: $4,599,000. 20. BOWDISH ROAD—16TH TO SPRAGUE UNFUNDED Resurface and upgrade sidewalk ramps to meet ADA from Sprague to 8th; reconstruct as 2-lane section with curb, sidewalk and new stormwater facilities from 8th to 16th. Cost: $2,825,000. Partial Preservation project 21. MISSION AVE—FLORA TO BARKER#0123(CN ONLY) UNFUNDED Reconstruct as a three-lane roadway with curb, sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities from Flora Road to Barker Road. Cost: $3,969,000. Partial Preservation project PE=Preliminary Engineering(Design&Environmental); RW=Right-of-Way; CN=Construction P:AClerk\AgendaPackets for Web\agendapacket 05-24-11\Item 1 TIP 2011 Project descriptions.docx Page 3 22. SULLIVAN/EUCLID CONCRETE INTERSECTION PROJECT#0141 (RW/CN ONLY) UNFUNDED Reconstruct intersection with concrete due to sever rutting from high truck traffic, repairs/upgrades will be made to stormwater facilities and ADA modifications will be made to sidewalks. Cost: $1,263,000. Preservation project. 23. MANSFIELD AVE CONNECTION—PINES(SR27) TO 200 FT EAST OF HOUK RD(CN ONLY) UNFUNDED Construct a 3-lane arterial gap connection from Pines to Mansfield Avenue west of Mirabeau Parkway with continuous left turn lane, bike lanes, ADA sidewalk, curb and stormwater facilities. Cost: $965,000 PROJECTS STARTING IN 2014 24. BROADWAY @ ARGONNE/MULLAN CONCRETE INTERSECTIONS#0142(CN ONLY) UNFUNDED Reconstruct intersection with concrete due to sever rutting from high truck traffic. Repairs/upgrades will be made to stormwater facilities and ADA modifications will be made to sidewalks. Cost: $2,075,000. Preservation project. 25. FLORA ROAD—SPRAGUE TO MISSION#0122 UNFUNDED Widen roadway to 3 lanes and add new curb, sidewalks, bike lanes & stormwater facilities. Cost: $3,655,000. Partial Preservation project. 26. SPOKANE VALLEY-MILLWOOD TRAIL#0145(RW/CN ONLY) UNFUNDED Right-of-way acquisition and construction of a 6.5 mile non-motorized multi-use trail from Spokane Community College to the Spokane Valley Mall. The trail would be located mostly on Spokane County owned railroad right-of-way that was once the route of the Great Northern Railway. Cost: $4,380,000 27. GREENACRES TRAIL, SULLIVAN RD TO EAST OF CITY LIMITS#0148(RW/CN ONLY) UNFUNDED Right-of-way acquisition and construction of Greenacres Trail from the Walt Worthy Building to Hodges Rd. - approximately 2.2 miles of non-motorized multi-use trail from the Centennial Trail just east of Sullivan to the east Spokane Valley city limits. Cost: $1,095,000 PROJECTS STARTING IN 2015 28. BARKER ROAD—SOUTH CITY LIMITS TO APPLEWAY#0125 UNFUNDED Reconstruct roadway to a 3-lane section with curb, sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities. Cost: $4,593,000. Partial Preservation project. 29. BOWDISH ROAD—24TH TO 16TH UNFUNDED Reconstruct roadway as 2-lane section with curbs, sidewalks and new stormwater facilities. Install flashing beacons at school zone. Cost: $2,836,000. Partial Preservation project. 30. SULLIVAN/KIERNAN CONCRETE INTERSECTION UNFUNDED Reconstruct intersection with concrete due to sever rutting from high truck traffic, repairs/upgrades will be made to stormwater facilities and ADA modifications will be made to sidewalks. Cost: $1,318,000. Preservation project. PE=Preliminary Engineering(Design&Environmental); RW=Right-of-Way; CN=Construction P:AClerk\AgendaPackets for Web\agendapacket 05-24-11\Item 1 TIP 2011 Project descriptions.docx Page 4 31. WELLESLEY AVE. REALIGNMENT @BARKER RD./TRENT(SR290) UNFUNDED Construct new 3 lane roadway connection with curb, sidewalks, bike lanes & stormwater facilities to realign connection of Wellesley to Barker Road and Trent Ave. (SR290). Project is part of Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project. Cost: $5,187,000. 32. SPRAGUE RESURFACING #3 PROJECT(FANCHER TO HAVANA RD.) UNFUNDED Resurface Sprague from Fancher Rd to Havana Rd. Cost: $1,702,000. Preservation project. PROJECTS STARTING IN 2016 33. SULLIVAN RD CONCRETE PAVEMENT, INDIANA TO WELLESLEY UNFUNDED Reconstruct roadway in concrete pavement. Project is part of a 4-part Sullivan Corridor Improvement Plan. Cost: $11,713,000. Partial Preservation project. 34. BARKER ROAD/BNSF GRADE SEPARATION#0143(CN ONLY) PARTIALLY FUNDED Construct grade separation at Barker/BNSF railroad/Trent (SR290). The project is partially funded (with $10 million) by FMSIB for the construction phase. This is part of the Bridging the Valley project. Cost: $44,500,000 PROJECTS STARTING IN 201 35. PARK ROAD/BNSF GRADE SEPARATION PARTIALLY FUNDED This project is part of the Bridging the Valley program and proposes to construct a bridge to allow vehicle traffic over the BNSF tracks at Trent Avenue. A Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) grant for $5 million was received for this project. We anticipate additional funding support from the BNSF, federal grants, and possibly WSDOT & TIB. Cost: $16,520,000 36. UNIVERSITY/SPRAGUE CONCRETE INTERSECTION UNFUNDED Replace asphalt pavement with concrete, repairs/upgrades will be made to stormwater facilities and ADA modifications will be made to sidewalks. Cost: $1,515,000. Preservation project. 37. BOWDISH ROAD, 32ND TO 24TH UNFUNDED Reconstruct roadway as 2-lane section with curb, sidewalk and new stormwater facilities. Cost: $2,836,000. Partial Preservation project. PE=Preliminary Engineering(Design&Environmental); RW=Right-of-Way; CN=Construction P:AClerk\AgendaPackets for Web\agendapacket 05-24-11\Item 1 TIP 2011 Project descriptions.docx Page 5 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 05-24- 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers: VOUCHER LIST DATE WIVOUCHER NUMBERS: TOTAL AMOUNT 05-09-2011 22767-22799; 429110020, 505110007 $2,002,161.83 05-11-2011 22803-22835 $107,078.33 05-13-2011 22836-22845 $31,071.45 05-17-2011 22846-22886 $112,551.05 GRAND TOTAL $2,252,862.66 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve claims for vouchers as listed above. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS Voucher Lists 1-. +' 0 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 N N 0 0 LOU) 0 0 0 0 N N CO CO 0 0 .- 0 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 r� h (0 (0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M r u) h 0 G O O 0D CO 4fi O O CO l0 CO (D CO 00 MI •r , l[) MOD in 00 co (0 N H 10 Ln •r 1- M M 10 (n 0 0 N N c0 (n •r r (0 (0 V- (0 N N 6) ai CJ) 0 co a a 0) 1- 1- Et1- D1- vi°- O1- ,_ i°- r°- 1-- 1- 1 W _ h- Y J LPL] D W U W .5 U _1 Z C Z Z O O _� o a z a 2 0 - LU g 2 00 < z (ri Q a w �- 0 c W z a 0. J J o a z w -i w ww as 'v X p < O U A 0 O Q a d Q Q 0 o 0 m O 0 < (a!) 2 0 co co J J co 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 O 0 0 (0 (0 r O O 0 r O 0 0 r O 0 0 u7 • O O O 0 O O 0 0 O q 0 0 0 0 O N N o3 N O (D co o N N 00 00 r 0 0) 0 .4- t— v- 0) r r 0) Tr v. '0 L() '0 O q q O O q q O O O o o O 0 c r r r r r r r r r r r r r r a 0 O O 0 0 0 O O 0 O O O O O LL 0 0 O r 0 — O O o o r r 0 0 1 To o .0 G a) M 0 0 a •X O W W r LL w 0) O O O 0) U) (I) O N O co N '5 0 V (0 0 co W W o "J W co (ND 0. 0. a o [ 0. 0 y� a. (O o r 5 J 7r W W 0) Q 0 6 0 (n (M/J 0 0 0 1-z 0 z 0 Z W -J 0. -J 5 o 1 U -- u) W d D (¢ ? n W Y W 0 CO Y_ a 0 W CD a Z a h- U D CK ~ O ce Q a w cn Z T (n J a Z W 0 0 0 < < 0 -J < O Z i a U Z ( Z > x }- W co cn Q Q m m 0 0 0 0 O O < C r¢i u_ 0 r. r M o 8 r. 0o o co N h n c o 0 r (0 0) 0) CO r - - 0 N co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n' _e r r r r r T ¶ r r r r r r r r r r T T r r r r 0 47 c y1., 0 0 O O O O O O 0 O O O M ❑ rn rn rn a) a) 0) a) 0)) Q Q �. �n 1n re') m m m in in u) (0 a u) T a1 .r 0 O N N 1.) r+ co O 0 r N M in 0 co h 7 C3 1.0 0 W N N N N N N N N N N N N I N C O in (f) d' !� O O L) I 4- 4- M CO r M 03 4) 00 tP 1f) O 0 O O CD (0 07 00 N ti r r in 03 0 O i- I. t-• r r O N 00 O N CO N o) O O O O N N r In CI M M 'd' ck 0 0 CO CM r r y') in N O Co Co N co CO o 0 u7 in / 'd' LO c� r 00 03 1+ h 0 O 0) 0) 00 cr u) O ' cr N et Cr) C) N N N+ 1- M d' N 0 0 CO M 'd' r r elf r r 'cr., r 07 M N N al a) . CQ t 0 a O O O II O F O O O U 0. * U x ¢a a z ZZZZZZ w a o ix N CO Z m l Z Z w 4... co < I1 < < < < < < c)ei o < z Y W W W c z LU LI LU IA LIJ U I J JJJJJJJ LL W C ' Q a. (i. n. CL n. a a. a W CL Q Z W Q CC CO 0. IZ0. 0. 0. Q.. 0 0 W IP 0 V) J J 0 fn CO (n (O (n cO CO V) .J J Q X Q 2 T 0 W W W W W W W W 0 0 Z 2 2 U. C7 pp J UUUUUU00 ¢ 0 W co Z ❑ LL LL W W W LL. LL LL. � _I J 8 a 0 0 cc a � IL � I� � LJ L1 L1 z �, 00 0 LL J M 0 u 00000000 a 0 aY 00 0 0 o 0 o co 00o000101 (D o O 0 R. O O 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 r r r r O O 0 0 N O O O 0 O o o o o o 0 o o 0 O 0 0 C] CO r C (D N CO N r r r C4 00 (0 00 (D co N N T T T T r (4) r r (N� O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O N C r r r r N r r r r r O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 LL O O O 0 00000000 0 O 0 r r l T 0) 03 0) i� N d IN+ o J id M W CO in 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co Z C 0 N O o OO O O 0) ( T : m ON10 (Di� r J N co 0 O ) ) N V 0 T N E r CC�I CN�I �' 0~0 O N O '- C O Q LY O (0 (0 O (0 O Q LX O 0 0 CO < 0 O 0 03 u) to u) L0) LO U) < 0 N In Ln 0 Z 0. z a co ❑ Z W Z w a 0 �; CO W IY 0 w U 0 o w LI 0 0 U < 0 Z 1- z cii ix > 0 ❑ a 0 Z a O O Z N. a Z in 0 g 0 E O 0 o- W W CL od 0 CCD 0 --5 -> >C 0 0 CL cn ((0 I- 1+ u) co in N CO N 00 Vt 0) 00 O N 0 04 o 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 E > 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 a' r r r r T ,— ,— r r r r O r r r r T T T r r r r 4� 03 . o o O O O 0 0 O O O O M Q. 0 ml N a) co O) 00)) m W ot N 01 T. 7 u) in (n i in in in in ) S. y T. 0O s. N N C1 t 03 0) 0 r N 0) ' 10 co ti 00 0) . V shy II-- (00 �0y0 00 co co co N co N co co N.> 0 m 0 N N N N N N N ("4 7 O . C) 4 r r h CO Tr CO 0 O 0 47 4) h h N N r (O L0 N 0 0 0 0 r r- h CO N- 4) CO OD Nr cr CO O O 0 r r cf 'd' er 0 CO 0 st 0 0 0 0 m (rO N O hr Cr) et n Co o O La 47 O) 0) O O I[) 49 co O 40 CO (V {' O o (O (O a) v- h h v- O) 4) h N h h 0 O V (0 r r 1• h N N r 4r- CO r (o 0 co 47 CO CO N v- ct CO (7 r r- CO N r M (h Id L()C7 r 'a; 't vr 0) 00) CO C0 A d OH H H H � H w - H H � 1- I- <W IL --I 0 C7 C7 Z J ❑ I- oty ¢ Z_ Z Z W a l� WZ LJ Z CO ++ w - 0 ((1) Q E2 J d Lu LWLL (ce 0 ❑ W ❑ 1 0_ CO — Z Y CC C U ce ✓ . ( iU QQ 0 co Q co ce tL' 65 U m • E �' Z_ Z LZL1 w W 0 O WO OW co WR' m W CO co• N W ZZ P W ti 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ o E W a H z Ww Ctw 0 0 ❑ 00J _1 Q z it 0 0 dd 00 ZZ 0 J IX (l! CC < 0 J ct❑ r , < < W W rr Cr) • ¢ ¢ (1) 0 0 0 (o (0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o O 0 0 +, oo ,,- 0 as 0 0 0 o00 o O 0 O 0 o r 0 a a s 0 a 0 o o O 0 0 0 o O M m m cV (V O v- (i (O (O c' C7 (D CV r W O r v- O O d) t- o. r r cf 0) r 0 r 0. m CO Tr. v a aOo 0 o tr o N N r r r r r r r v- 01 r 7 0 0 O 0 0 0 a a a a O O O 0 0 O LL 0 CO 0 0 'd' 't 0 0 r o O r 0 0 'Cf O ti ,-I � i 7 c N CD d =r-: o C 0 N- CO O m 0 0 hcoo NN 0 co 0000) 000 a) 00 CO W (� V 0 0 (0 (OO N N O O M M C 3 10 Z O 0 0 N r 0 0 0 d 0) 0) 0) rn r- d CO CO O) 0 0 CO (o (o CO CO h '� 0 L() ('3 0) 0) 0 x 0) 0) (0 ', r y� = r 'cr N N 00 m W (o o a (0 N 0 O W O 0 }. Vr J z a a a ce � d w 0 CO en 0 co I-0 ° 2 Q L tf wCI w 0 W 1 p! Q LLu LOCI H Y ct CO 0 Z U 2 0 0 0 co Q 0 rzi m § < O o ¢Z w 2 ~ z ¢ W m ix o X Y ❑ O❑ 0 C 0 < ti . w z o v) co 1- H ° > > h OD v- C.) N 4) cr 0 h 'd' 0 r r O (Q `a CO 0 0) CO CC\ o O) (O � 0 0 0 0 r 0 h N o 0 N N N W 0 0 0 0 0 O O o 0 0 0 O N > O 0 O O 0 0 O o 0 0 0 O n' _C r^ c' r r r r r r r r r r 0 r r r r r r r r r ,- r r Q; a a a a a a a O O 0 O O 5 N .0 m Q Q Q Q Q ( ' Q Q Q N (.1 N ❑ O O) Q) O O O) W O) O) O -C-F2 a) 72 � a) a) r 0 u) 0 L) 0 4) 4) 4) 4) 4) 4) 4) t-° V O O 1- N N 0 co O) O r N M �t 4) (O N- co 0) 47 1G o CC) co a) 0) rn 6i a) o) rn 0 O 2 O c 0 4'- h h h h h Chy (hy (hy h h N- U 1-25 co 0 O N N N N N N N N N N N I. « N Q T. \ CO CO CO R CO I' CO d k k � n % % g § ° o g § J N & A o o § co a. w k / 3 2 § • • I— CO . 2 5 a ( cc { z I- Iv 2 z < 0 0 w Q k i w $ I z \ R 0 ci \m 0 0 / 0 0 0 a e a \ - u S S (0 0 c > ) a) ° to k 0) § % E. \ 0 3 g u IX cc IX < ai ui CI R / { � k � \ \ ƒ i £ ) 2 � 2 G 2 \ \ 0 \ / k ] 2 $ ) o Q f , e § § } ƒ o o o O Z z f 2 ( 2 $ 0 f $ ) ] 2 f § 0 M. * t ` k s) § m 2 S CL f § £ .0 � t0 e a E 4' E C N o o / v ) k t \ k fo> G 0 0 k / \ ® ® i k ez _c ,— - E 2 CO / ) ' ] ) 8 ] B § a 3 & 3 » § a m 2 \ co S k CI § § / .c .c 2 § E 2 0 _ $ ƒ ) .2 . r @ a > y ƒ t - = E Lc) R . § § ] £ k q \ T-• o b 0 0 en c, c \ \ ,-• \ > 0 m > N 2 G h N- 00 CO M CO M M O 0 (O 00 00 h co Lf) ti h 0 0 ti N 0 r h h N N N N N N 0 0 O) (O r N LC) In h ti 00 00 0 0 ' 0 CV N O) OA L (0 N (V 0 0 CV (O c' N 03 0) LIB V' r w LC) if) r r O r w to Lf) CO O (O 0)0,1 N O O r (O N O M M co in co r w O O cr r r O) to co. if) N r a r w 0 0 Q N hl r w CA Of r N a rn 10 0 a a a,.._ •s a• a• •• •• •• •• �y •s �y •• H H H 0 F H p W W W H H 2 H H O 0 H N N U U U Z n! 0 0 U1— =' z a s 5 ' W al a LL C7 0 U W U z a a g W W W V n V m z U oF 0 U ( >- < < < m (°�i 0)) Cz7 c~i) v z ca >- >- rn z 0 O 5<¢ < o < a a a ° Q z 0 CC n N o can c=n c=n ( 0 w C 0- .E 0 J z z z z H W c Zi 0 x u. < < 0 n z Z u) a. D 2 W in 0 0 r O LC) LC) L() in 0 0 0 0 C r-' 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r CI M 0 0 c O M M M M 0 0 0 w O (0 (O (O (O O O co (D (D cV cV O 00 00 N_ r r N- 0) N- R R N- O 0 (0 r '� O O O O O 0 0 0 O O O O C r w r r r r r r' r N r r r r ^J O O O O O O O O O O O O O O LL O 0 O O O O O O O . r O O O 1 t L Q) 4, (.) co co O r r (O r (0 r O o r r C, O! r O ((0 N O) CO N Ion O O p N .O O C O r O ��, O O 0) C C T (0 r o.C ¢ Z 000 a 0) cn (n W O) 0 a) ? I* x X >- z z 0 D. 0 Q 0 CC R _1 6 co Q 0 w 0 ¢ c? w Li W z Z in 0 05 0 z a z 0 I- i ¢ 0 m x co 0 0. 0 J O o co W!) X1 1 0 0 ° ( 0 0 0 o/ 0 W U D Z m w F- z 1- cn - C7 < < < 03 00 W U U OU 0 0 W L 0 r (0 (0 CO N a) co (0 Ln (0 0 LC) 00 A O N r r4 c0 N 00 00 O 'a O co (0 O O) LC) r co (0 co N G 0 r 0 r r O O r 0 0 N N 0) O 0 0 O O 0 O O 0 0 0 O 2 > 0 O 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 < r r r r r r r r w r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r C Oj O O O O O O O O O O O O ca ,P �D D M Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q ,a, a Q r r r r r w r r r r r r r r r T r r r r L L L in O In LC) C) iii LC) LC) LC) C) in lC) LC) l() T. I, r -0 O 0 'N N 0 t M L() (0 1� 00 a) 0 r N co .1 T () �0 �0 (0 O 0 �0 0 (w� (r� r dry (r� 7 C m N N N N N N N N N N N N C 0 r r M CO COO CO cU) LO 0 c) CO CD a)) 0 0 CD CO 0 0 N N OO) 10+ NI- N 0 O CO In ID l0 CO CO O N CO CD Ft r CD (D CC) l0 h 1� 1- 1- co co F6 N o0 E CO CO r r N N CO (O O) r to CO CO CO (O W CO CO h 1- LO IL) 1� r OO 0 o NI- r r O CO CO N Cl r r r r r T C`) 0) N T T T T T tri 4 cri T T T CU (I) co co co CO O. 0. O O O Ts 0 O O o ~ U O W X z O iz 0 o LLI LLI CD U °� U D 0 0. U U Z U a p' z a a CO d rn W as Q CD d LU cna c z CC z CC 03 b Q c 0 co 0.0 U o N U z a Y 0 co I- CJ Z U) IY Z Z r `1 U M U U Lu Q c z o W W N d Q vi O LL. U U 0. Z J W W W C' N co U) >Cf) z U) Q p Q. W IZ' .J J J j V W W 1- F. �-' U F. N Z p D. D. D. m J J LZU w U) Z 0 U ti co co co [Wi_ 2 D D 0 0 Ii Cr) IS O O O 0 0 0 .1. O O O O O o 0 co co C') C') ) O O O co c) 0 co O O f0 CO cc (o co co LO I() (V CO (O CO (O c) C') 13 1"- 1"- 1- 1` 1` O O 1` 1~ r h r r 'p O O O 0 0 T T O O O O o O O c r r r r r Lc) Lc) r r r r r r r a O O O O O 0 0 O O O O O O. 0 LL O 0 O O O r r r O O O O O O J 713 a) L 7 a a) (1) I~ .0. U T T 44- Q 0 N p co ti cl(0��! O O N N CO (a J r N co~ O O O N IMN(C+')) N co r r (n r N N r N (�! G In 'Z (C) O O c Z < r a) LOC) co r 1- CD < N < (C) N N ^I W 0 a W 0 1 w o - 0 U z U 0 W UO c o zo 0 Q cr' 0 z 0 W Z 06 H uJ Cr) a CO 0 W 0 W Q U U Ct d 0 8j w o a 0. a 0 r � 0�0 Z U W W p IZ Q 0 Z 0 zz o z z Q -j z W O cn a p li C6 U' T Z Z Ct CO �O z 0. L a, 0 co O r O 0 co c) INC) co T O 'CI O (NN! CO 0 O O COV 0 O (0 O O 0 N O O O O O O O O O O O O > O 0 O O O O O O O 0 O O Q r r r r r r r r r r r T 4 x r r r r r r r r r r r c CL O O O O O O O O O O O O (O 2 ris Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Tr o. T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T r to T r G co l( l( 71) t 1() 71) 71) IL1 LC7 to In r Q1 T- '13 C O >~ N Y ,oc V r r r r t N N N co N N Lo B 1 O = (COO �0y0 coo fro ((7y0 ((7y0 X03 CO C CO co� CO CO CS RI N N N N N N N N N N N i 1 (4 C er r� r r- 4) r h co 00 Co O O co 0) CO r 0 0 N M r� N O O 0 0 C) CO 41 0 N. ON- CO N 1!) 0 0 0 0 r• CO h 0 0 0 O N N 0 0 0 0 0 CO O N N 4) NCO er CO 4') M 0) 0) 0 0 O N O CO TY 71 (0 h 47 07 0 0 0 0 CO i L.E c��!! N T cO 0 h Cr) r 00 00 0) W 0) 'ct N. 0) CO CO r 0) 0) LO 4) h (0 CO N 4 i N 0) h T 0) <0 CO 0) co. CO TY 7 V t- h N N CO M N N O 0 co r r r r T r r (y 0p 0p r dl r to 0 a a z a T a u a# w o v a #0 I- 0 - 0 0 0- 0 - J 0Lu1- a0 ~ OF I-0 1- F0 � rui � D. w � � ¢ av w CO ¢ z a w m < H < zw cn - w � z 1- v z w o m z O z O w Z 0 ¢ a 0 < a U a w Q I��u 2 w � O FU- 0 (ten � wJ U a z W co o w 0 W 0 cco c¢r) 0 0 0 0 �O 0 0 co z 0 10 Z w W Z cA 0 0 a ww i- ce z2 www u� 0 W z1- z as 0 ¢ JC/) 1- CO 00 In a rz as O a a. ¢ N (0 ¢ ¢ ¢ r w a u 0 (°.r 0 ((n co 0))a. a co ? c°v +' 00 0 0 0 it) p O N 4) 4) 4) T 0 4) 0 0 'd' 0. 0 c+7 0 0 C�7 co 0 0 0 0040 C04 0 0 0 O C - h r. N. r ti - CO V Ln a ," r- r~ o o Q 1880 0 0 0 0 000 o ttoo o C r T T T T T r r r r r r T T T r 5 O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 O NO 0 0 0 O w 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 er 00 T 0 CO 0 ,J d y % in r- r t c T 0p (73 r O O w + i r 0 rNN A > 0. 0 G N co CO M COO h O N 0 ti ti C5 N .O 0 (O LO L0 44 N r 00)) 00 IT CO (0 (0 - 0 C' ?wF52 CO T T O O r 0) N N a I4) T T 'C r c0 hN� � � 0 eorna) CL Ornrn 0. N CO COO < O N N < 0) F'- Z 0 °� O O ¢ ¢J 0 0) 0) 0 W g 0 0 0 u. W W .J w Z Z DU -A Z a U w w Q 06 a O w w w 0 z w a r 0 0 c Q a co (n z z .0 w w Z Z O Q N T CO cc o o Q z 1- < 0 w a CO CO LO o ` O M CO CO�r CO CO r 2 . O b G 0 0 O 0 8 r N 0 N 0 .O 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 F, 5 > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q. r r r r r r r T T - C r T T r r r r T T r 6i ai s - 0 r r r r T T r r r r r r r t- T ,in r r T o o c(0 u) in n n n n n in in .. M r a M r o O d .m 0 �Ny ('4 ('4 N ((0 ((0 CO n0! M (0 co CO CO c0 c0 c0 CO CO c0 03 O• 0 m > N N N N N N N N N N A- 1L) M) (a O co ONO 40 CD 0) 4) 1f) 4) 0 10 r T o 00 CD N COON r ' ' 00 a O h (O 0) .- e- h h 't h 10 0 0 O O M N O Nr 00 0 f+ h o W) c CO N ~ (D 0 or CO CO Cr) O O O O OD T O 17 N CO 10 N N f- n N i) CO CO )f) O 0) (Q (D CO M V' 0) 0) M 11) O N N r CO a M r T r r r T r r (D 03 01 Cr q r r N T 1C) h r r h r O h h 00 r 0 r T r Of r b T 'Eli o) co ca CI. a 0 4 X 3 71 71 3 3 S9 aZ 5UJuLUa Qr H w wW H H 0 0 0 (Jj } LUQ } Q � Z_ VUZ W a 0 00 ~ U W JW _1J � `LU � 2 � CL J Z 0 J Z J J J cC W Q' f O a as 2 a. WW > 0 ) > maaIF- m 0 o z w CL x w m0 rx 1- zz Lo a z 1- 1- 1- 1- 1- 1- 1- HHHH Y < ce w C on U o - UU a. a. W CC < W WWWWWWWWWW a o_ o_ a a_ a_ a_ a a. a. a. ° 0_ m >Cr) r » 6 i� < w V) 00000000000 a s H Ntntn w w a V) W CL a: a' CC a! a! a! a: a: a: a: •= J I H J H H p p Z J a_ a_ a_ a_ a_ a_ a_ a. a. a. a. u Q Z Z z z } w a r Y Y r r r J J o r. , ,,- rr a) WW 0 > a > > HH 0 x0. a a000006000O A J W W QWUJ D D 0 W Cn N NNN NNNNNNN a) 0 1r) to to 10) o N O u) O 0 cacao 0 0 0 0 0 0 +-, h o 0 000 0 0 o O 0 0 Oa000OOOas O. o C) M r) r) r) 0 C) O C CO o OoaooDOOaa CO CO CD CD CD CV co o CO (D 0D CO 03 0D 0D CO O cd cd Cc cd 0 O h h hhh h 0A h h f+ hhh hhh hhh c O O a a a O o a a a a O O O O O O O O O O C (n co a 3333 3 a a a O r o o r r 3 r r a r u. co) a 0 0 0 o rO a 0 o0000000000 N a) J TO a) to L c) ca r o it) f+ CANhh00 (D 7 Y r r o r rN47Ce) Na001 4) y 00C) arNO0O a a) 'r' 0 0 N- 0) o r o wC) aCACnaCT) Q) CA V h M N 11) CDr N N f+ C co M47Nr NNr NN Y M m r r 0) a) O 0A O r CD h CO 0V h h h ' N N N NN 1f 0) Cj4 ) 41f11) 11) M N NNV ¢ ¢ 0 W 00 Z 0_ CC U 5 W W CL Z CL I V D 03 0 CL m Z w = 6 D H W a_ Li_ a , (0. U J 0. Z 0 w m r Z Z w Z 0 W W LT_ U Q 0 u 2 2 a a¢.. a a.. 03 0 '�, h 0 o OOD a a) O O o a O O O O 2 > a a O 0 O O O a a_ - r r r r c c a) a a o 0 0 ('S a a CO Tr N N o A M ,-. M M M co N u_f I-..n 1 u_) 175 �( 1�fi u) r a T- T) 0 0 U CO M )C co 0 V C) r-.co co co co co co co CO) co 1 0 CO N N N N N N N I ccc / E �r- S ® \ % � � I- I-/ kG$ w � O),_ § I e e ; § a. a � E EL- Ea. 2 < < < 0 k k . § w k HWWW � c 0000 c 0000 z j m P@PP \ 2 U 0 uJal \ � < \ 0 0000 0 / 0. CC ƒ � a.) _ _ _ _ ¢� � � CO k � R R CI k 0 @ ggoq \ / = , , , , u. 0000 k k GO 11 2 ■ $ k -V Sb2gn k 00 G2tococo 6 > 0 § •§ waKw c \ 0 iFo (0 r £ �Tr222 < \ w } 2 0- $ IX \ � \ z _ 2 ) / i q t 1.7 < k > .. m � \ / Z .se / / 7 c \ / 2 2 0 § c > ) H - / / 0yk 2 \ \ / \ t / j o o # o .4 o . oy � 2 q o § ■ o ; a 13 k .0 § 0 0 0 , CO 2 a @ E > o o o ] a) _ E t 2 ) E _ � _ a ' b g £ ) ) 2 8 $ o c a o o o ■ e 2 ) \ ) E 2 c k CC k o % / / \ k § / § ] i ] 0 o .c , ® CO \ E \ j j 2 \ 2 - $ tki 0 0 a k % o o k / c c / / / > o > . Y C (() 10 T N 0 0 0 0 0 CO O) N- �} I` 0 0 N O) 00 er et T (0 I� N r I. ti co T 0 0 0 0 0 n 0 (D CO Cl N N 00 I- r 0 Q) co (A n r r a) co co T (I 4, O (C) (C1 (C) co Lo .- (o (c) oo cV (A I- cV o I. 000 i .4 .4 co co co '�t (0 '7 0 N N N 1 N (L) 00 (0 LO C) T O CO I,- CO CO r T (0 N N T T N M N 00 (0 (0 N r T N CO 0) N r T r N c~- , M 61 0 o) m c0 f0 a a z w a o o 0 -ii 1 m 0_ F h F F U h Z F 0 w °u o N g CD OF w z U U o w Ce CL Z _I C O EX O a a ax Data a 0 aaaa aaa C? a aaa o ( iri 0 (2 iri iri ir) Ui ir) N iri w >-' U) iri ir) a JU Lil Q ¢ 0 20. IelwwWWJW W 0 W wW Z a � � � a � aaaaaaaa To aaCL y cLo zz O u a. aaaa. aaa oo aaa a w z z 0 x a D D D D D » o IX D D S o 0- (0 CO < < 0 cn o cn cn cn cn cn cn CD cn T CO N CA CO co 0 0 CO (0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO CO 0 0 0 co 0 0 T T 0 0 0 00000000 (0 (C) 0 00 a T o o O O 0 o 0 00000000 O T 0 o 0 a( N- N (V 06 Uo (O N (V N N cV c'1 c'1 CV cV cV M N CV cV c'1 NI- p O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 M O O Li C T T r T r T r r r c' r T T . r r c4 i. T r T c O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 LL T r r 0 0 0 r r r r T T T T T r CO r T r T • N d • J Lo o .0 C rn SC Cp O J N T N N 00 N G7 (p co r (NC-' 0 .- rp co T00oor0NO) N N er (0 (0 '� (00 N CO (n 1.00\10.1v- (00 ( 0 (c) ca r 0) N 00 O r M O M co(D co CO o (O N- .- T a' N CO T v (C) (0 I� C7) N N (0 (0 (0 C (p (0 (0 (O (O 0 0 M CO O O O T T r 0) 0) 0 T 2 co co co co co (o co CO N N (0 (0 CO 0 N O w F a 0 FO 1— N a ce z co 0 U Z M a 0 O 5 O w w S w 0 a Pe- m cFn ¢ >- O IX 0 I F- Q IQ CO Q w < Q a Ea0 0 0 Cr.) 16 o � s � co co N -0 (O N A (co ((0 003 (((3 7 00 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 00 0 OT T r T r r T r C dl p O O O O O O O CV (d cz h N- I- N- N- N N ti h_ cS _a N 0. a r r — 4 (d (0 (() (c) -Co (() (n ((3 ((1 T CU T 0 0 a. N N 0 (O I- c(00 O) 0 T N cco 03 CO CO 00 co co d m N N N N N N N N N 10 1 1 C) O 0 0 0 0) CO r~ CO CO 0) 0) O (0 0 0 0 in O o 0 0 0 co (\I T T T r I• O O O O O r~ 00 N N (0 CO CO 0) I-, N r CO. CO CO. M 0 0 Cr) O CO CO' 4 CO O r~ r~ O O r O r c.[ N O O (.1 4(j 4 Dj r op 0) o) 44 (Ij h (n L0 r L0 r- u) u) O O M co (h 0) 0) 10 10 M M CO CO I- CO N N N. r-- 0) r (n 0 0 r r N N- N N N N N N CO M N CO- M N N r r Gi 4i 0 co 4 0- 4 a 0 0 co 0 0 D 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 I- I- 0 H I- 01 I-- 0 I-- I- I- I- 0 U.CC > U1 co w F w H 3 J Z W 0 U ce W D '_ z z z z z z z c 0 0 W 3 = < w co 0 m 0 0. a ( ° wa Q Q Q Q Q Q < 3 i i u. UUUUU0 0) Q Q 0 Z 0_ 0_ 0_ 0 J J z O . J JJJ JJ (n I- C 4. 0 0 0 T 101010101010 0 0 Z m r 333333 U fq Q a (../5 63 W = � � 0 N 0. 0. 40. 0. 0. 0.r CO .0 JJJJ CC 0 J J J J -I -I J J 1 W LL tl aa)• 3333 0 Q 0- W UUUJLL.IWLLW 0 0 0 ❑, (n (n (n 0) 0 2 (,) (/) > < .J J J J J J 0 4 0) O O O O O O O O (A O O O O O O c 0 r~ (0 O +' O O O O O O O O r O O O O O O 10 4) r O a. O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 A N (.t (�[ (.t cJ o (.t N M (V P7 ai cri M cei oo cc; ai (Ni 0 0 0 0 0 0) D O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c T T T . T T , . r r r r = 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL. T r r r T O r r O r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r N L. > CU d p r CO N M w W Y Z 0 y 0 0 r o0 (1) 0 w 101.0 ((0 � w O0 w (O 0 , N0 u) --I M • C (0 (D (D (O 4 N. (0 CO w T 0) 0) 0) O) on 0) a 0 0 O co (D (D (D (0 (0 (0 00 (0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 O T (0 CO CO (0 CO CO tl r'- 0) C c (0 (p (p (p W CO I' UJ CI CO CO M CO CO M < (0 'V' 0) W (n 4 U se W W Z Z D Z Z 2 0 I- W J J Z 0 O T J Q LL 0_ Z U. 3 ( 0 CO O Z Z r 4 w F- 0.¢ 2 O m ;0 4 0 U DU w z w 0 Z }. J J z Z D a W 0 z >- (n w w z se z 0 0 0 c7 J c 0 3 U 0 0 0 0 W u- s 1 s 0 h 0) 0) (j h () O N 0 O 1:1 to r r O N r 0 N. N CL g > O O O O O O O 0 O O T T T T r r r r r N- 0 T T T T r r r r r r '.. N as w N O O O N N 0 N N N.O . 8 ti Q N 0. r r r N. r r r r r r r in ii-3 r 0 r O 0 6 V N N C M u v.) (~C) (ij (of) c00 ( (0 co co co co vchlist 05/0912011 1:32:50PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 22767 22768 22769 22770 22771 22772 22773 22774 22775 22776 22777 5/9/2011 000197 AIRFACTZ 5/9/2011 001081 ALSCO 5/9/2011 001473 APWA 5/9/2011 002650 BERGAN, MIKE 5/9/2011 000904 BRANCH, CAROLBELLE 5/9/2011 000957 COBALT TRUCK EQUIPMENT 5/9/2011 001888 COMCAST 5/9/2011 001770 CONSOLIDATED SUPPLY CO 5/9/2011 001926 DAVENPORT, SARAH 5/9/2011 000422 DISHMAN DODGE INC 5/9/2011 002507 FASTENERS, INC 52266 LSPO958059 41228 EXPENSES EXPENSES SR08104 APRIL 2011 CRYWOLF:405041 EXPENSES DOCS244133 53028802.001 S3033426.001 22778 5/9/2011 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 36151 36162 Fund/Dept Description/Account 001.018.016 BACKGROUND CHECKS: HR 001.090.000 FLOOR MATS:CITY HALL Total Total : 001.032.000 2011 APWAANNUAL MEMBERSHIP Total : 101.042.000 AWC CONF PARKING REIMBURSED Total : 001.018.013 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:C.BR Total 101.042.000 SANDBLAST&PAINT FRAME ON PI Total: 001.090.000 HIGH SPEED INTERNET: CITY HALl Total: 001.016.000 CRYWOLF REFUND: PERMIT#V29 Total: 001.018.014 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT: S. DA Total : 001.090.000 40204D:VAN MAINT 101.042.000 SUPPLIES:PW 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 001.058.056 LEGAL PUBLICATION 001.058.056 LEGAL PUBLICATION Total : Total : Amount 160.00' 160.00 28.88 28.88 155.00 155.00 10.00 10.00 .36.72 36.72 2,056.60 2,056.60 108.95 108.95 25.00 25.00 51.00 51.00 114.02 114.02 65.38 3.16 68.54 145.70 68.00 Page: 1 vchlist 0510912011 1:32:50PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code: Voucher 22778 22779 22780 22781 22782 22783 22784 apbank Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account 5/9/2011 001447 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC (Continued) 5/9/2011 002365 GENERAL DYNAMICS ITRONIX CORP 50009229 5/9/2011 001253 GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL 5/9/2011 000265 JACKSON, MIKE 5/9/2011 002652 JEANES, BRAD 5/9/2011 000786 K&N ELECTRIC MOTORS, INC. 5/9/2011 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 22785 5/9/2011 000058 OMA 22786 5/9/2011 002654 RUSS,KEVIN 22787 5/9/2011 000709 SENSKE LAWN&TREE CARE INC. 22788 5/9/2011 000318 SHAMROCK PAVING CO. Apr 11 1042 MAY 2011 001.016.000 FREIGHT ON NOTEBOOKS 001.011.000 LOBBYIST SERVICES 001.013.000 MONTHLY AUTO ALLOWANCE Total : Total : Total : CRYWOLF:58814972931 001.016.000 Total : CRYWOLF REFUND: PERMIT#V27 Total : 0101698 402.02.000 FAULTY GAS ALARM INSPECTION Total: 561117295001 561143799001 561270051001 561270355001 561434194001 561877367001 561888284001 562071675001 April 2011 001.018.013 001.032.000 001.011.000 001.011.000 001.011.000 001.018.013 001.018.013 001.018.013 OFFICE SUPPLIES:ADMIN OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW OFFICE SUPPLIES:ADMIN OFFICE SUPPLIES:ADMIN OFFICE SUPPLIES:ADMIN OFFICE SUPPLIES:ADMIN OFFICE SUPPLIES:ADMIN OFFICE SUPPLIES:ADMIN Total : 001.018.016 PHYSICAL EXAMS:NEW EMPLOYE Total : CRYWOLF: 3542390178 001.016.000 2010 RETAINAGE 50916 50917 CRYWOLF REFUND: PERMIT#V38 Total: 001.223.40. RETAINAGE RELEASE:2010 PARK Total : 101.042.000 101-042.000 COLD MIX COLD MIX Amount 213.70 83,15 83.15 3,074,54 3,074.54 300.00 300.00 3.75 3.75 491.14 491.14 185.13 45.06 42.21 50.83 163.05 -8.25 42.68 23.24 543.95 130.00 130.00 25.00 25.00 27,474.26 27,474.26 35.13 144.58 Page: 2 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 05/09/2011 1:32:50PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account 22788 5/9/2011 000318 000318 SHAMROCK PAVING CO. 22789 5/9/2011 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 22790 5/9/2011 000093 SPOKESMAN-REVIEW 22791 5/9/2011 001472 TESTAMERICA LAB 22792 22793 22794 22795 5/9/2011 000335 TIRE-RAMA 5/9/2011 007254 TOWEY,TOM 5/9/2011 002188 VALLEY BEST-WAY BLDG SUPPLY 5/9/2011 000087 VERIZON WIRELESS 22796 5/9/2011 000964 VOLT MANAGEMENT CORP 22797 5/9/2011 002653 WEEDEN, KATHY&STEVE 22798 5/9/2011 002501 WHITE BLOCK COMPANY 22799 5/9/2011 002651 WOODARD,ARNE (Continued) Total: 14500179 001.090.000 1ST QTR 2011: EXCISE&LIQUOR" 40300068 303.303.106 W. PONDEROSA DRAINAGE&ROA Total : 253253 001.018.016 ADVERTISING:HR 259169 001.013.000 ADVERTISING:CLERKS 59002424 402A02.000 ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING:SWEE 59002425 402.402.000 ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING:SULLI\ Total : 8080010948 001.090.000 40204D:TIRES FOR VAN EXPENSES 001.011.000 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:TOWE Total: 604404 101.042.000 SMALL TOOLS AND SUPPLIES: PW Total 0969358630 001.016.000 AIR CARD FOR SHERIFF 0969359443 001,016.000 AIR CARDS FOR POLICE DEPARTN 6569428903 101.042.000 AIR CARDS FOR ST MAINT BLDG. Total: 24895498 001.090.000 STAFFING SVCS: 1T CRYWOLF:10625/352374 001.016.000 CRYWOLF REFUND: PERMIT#V25 Total: 0171524-IN 402.402.000 CONCRETE BRICK EXPENSES 001.011.000 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT:A.WC Total : Total : Total : Total : Amount 179.71 5,611.51 465,073.37 470,684,88 577.44 313.44 890.88 250.00 175.00 425.00 379.15 379.15 100.47 100.47 5.42 5.42 43.01 860.36 215.05 1,118.42 372.00 372.00 20.00 20.00 16.31 16.31 39.27 Page: 3 vchlist 05/09/2011 1:32:50PM Voucher List Page: 4 Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor 22799 5/9/2011 002651 002651 WOODARD,ARNE 429110020 4129,2011 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 505110007 5/5/2011 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 35 Vouchers for bank code: apbank 35 Vouchers in this report I,the undersigned,do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished,the services rendered,or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just,due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley,and that am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Mayor Date Council Member Date Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount (Continued) 9290200151 APRIL 2011 Total : 39,27 001.016.000 LAW ENFORCEMENT 1,282,372.81 Total : 1,282,372.81 001.016.000 SPOKANE COUNTY SERVICES 210,403.31 Total : 210,403.31 Bank total : 2,002,1 6 1.83 Total vouchers : 2,002,161.83 Page: 4 vchlist 05/11/2011 10:46:44AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code: Voucher 22803 22804 22805 22806 22807 22808 22809 22810 22811 22812 22813 22814 apbank Date Vendor Invoice 5/11/2011 000150 ALLIED FIRE&SECURITY 5/11/2011 001081 ALSCO 5/11/2011 000334 ARGUS JANITORIAL LLC 5/11/2011 001606 BANNER BANK 5/11/2011 001026 BIG BROTHERS-BIG SISTERS 5/11/2011 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 5/11/2011 000572 CARTER,CAROL 5/11/2011 001169 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 5/11/2011 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION#19 5/11/2011 000686 DEPT OF LICENSING 5/11/2011 002385 DKS ASSOCIATES 5/11/2011 002296 ELECTRONIC COMMERCE LINK IVC1012618 April 2011 INV006060 8861 PR01-2011 9221491 50010234 S0010266 Expenses April 2011 April 2011 May 2011 47657 9151 Fund/Dept 001.076.305 001.016.000 001.016.000 001.076.301 001.090.000 001.076.305 001.076.305 001.076.305 001.076.305 402.402.000 101.041000 001.000.000 001.058.140 001.018.013 Description/Account KEYS FOR CENTERPLACE FLOOR MATS: PRECINCT Total: Total : JANITORIAL SVCS:APRIL 2011 PRI Total : APRIL 2011:8861 Total : OUTSIDE AGENCY GRANT 2011 Total: LINEN SUPPLY AND SERVICE FOR LINEN SUPPLY AND SERVICE FOR LINEN SUPPLY AND SERVICE FOR Total: EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : PETTY CASH:9389,90,91,92,93,94 Total: UTILITIES:PW Total: MASTER LICENSE: MINOR WORK F Total : ENG&PLANNING SVCS FOR BPMF Total : MAINT AND HOSTING: E GOV BAST' Amount 12.77 12.77 5928 59.28 2,165.23 2,165.23 922.23 922.23 1,500.00 1,500.00 212.94 162.66 27.18 402.78 39.57 39.57 54.75 54.75 151.87 151.87 15.00 15.00 9,001.47 9,001.47 1,440.00 Page: 1 vchlist 05/11/2011 10:46:44AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code: Voucher 22814 22815 22816 22817 22818 22819 22820 22821 22822 22823 22824 22825 apbank Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept 5/11/2011 002296 002296 ELECTRONIC COMMERCE LINK (Continued) 5/11/2011 002308 F1NKE, MELISSA APRIL 2011 5/11/2011 002076 GINNO CONSTRUCTION OF IDAHO 1191-01 5/11/2011 000007 GRAINGER 9514287482 5/11/2011 000441 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 5023526 81287 5/11/2011 002607 HUB SPORTS CENTER 5/11/2011 000070 INLAND POWER&LIGHT CO 5/11/2011 000388 IRVIN WATER DIST.#6 5/11/2011 001635 ISS FACILITY/EVENT SERVICES 5/11/2011 000252 LOWE'S BUSINESS ACCOUNT 5/11/2011 000008 NORLIFT 5/11/2011 000041 PROTHMAN COMPANY 1119 1120 94202 April 2011 25352 April 2011 55018845 2011-2945 2011-2947 Description/Account Total: 001.076.301 DANCE LESSONS INSTRUCTOR Pll Total: 001.076.300 FLOOR DRAINS FOR DISCOVERY F Total: 001.076.305 SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE Total: 001.076.305 001.076.305 105.105.004 105.105.004 101.042.000 UTILIT1ES:APRIL 2011 PW SUPPLIES:CENTERPLACE SUPPLIES:CENTERPLACE Total : FEBRUARY 2011 -LODGING TAX RE MARCH 2011-LODGING TAX REIME Total Total : 001.076.300 UTILITIES:PARKS 001.076.305 EVENT SVCS: CENTERPLACE Total: Total : 001.016.000 OPERATING SUPPLIES: CP 001.076.305 CASTERS FOR CHAIRS:PARKS Total : 001.013.000 001.013.000 Total : FINANCE DIRECTOR SEARCH CITY ATTORNEY SEARCH Total: Amount 1,440.00 1,085.15 1,085.15 1,416.36 1,416.36 23.89 23,89 130.52 62.50 193.02 5,016.37 14,864.79 19,881.16 266.96 266.96 166.00 166.00 137.90 137.90 174.06 174.06 53.26 53.26 375.96 912.78 1,288.74 Page: 2 vchlist 05/11/2011 10:46:44AM Voucher List Page: 3 Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account 22826 5/11/2011 000064 SCHIMMELS, GARY Expenses 001.011.000 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 22827 5/11/2011 000709 SENSKE LAWN&TREE CARE INC. 3886721 001.076.300 CONTRACT MAINT:APRIL 2011 PA] 4115680 101.042.000 2011 EMERGENCY TRAFFIC CONTI 4215351 001.016.000 CONTRACT MAINT:APRIL 2011 PRI Total: 22828 5/11/2011 000935 SERVICE PAPER CO 110483677 001.076.305 SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE 110487344 001.076.305 SUPPLIES AT CENTERPLACE Total : 22829 5/11/2011 000323 SPOKANE CO UTILITIES May 2011 001.076.302 SPOKANE COUNTY SEWER Total: 22830 5/11/2011 000420 SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DIST 2011 001.076.302 PERMIT FEES FOR WATER REC Fi Total: 22831 5/11/2011 001206 SWANSON'S REFRIGERATION&, RESTI 68993 001.076.305 REPAIRS ON WALK IN REFRIGERA 69206 001.076.305 WALKIN COOLER REPAIR AT CEN1 69208 001.076.305 SYSTEM CHECK ON WALK IN COO Total : 22832 5/11/2011 002576 TUNE TALES MUSIC, INC APRIL 2011 001.076.301 INSTRUCTOR PAYMNT:MUSIC CL/ Total: 22833 5/11/2011 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 0053099-1518-8 402.402.000 WASTE MGMT: PW 2916171-2681-3 001.076.305 WASTE MGMT; CENTERPLACE 2916172-2681-1 001.016.000 WASTE MGMT: PRECINCT Total: 22834 5/11/2011 002111 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE April/May 2011 101.042.000 2011 LEASE ON MAINTENANCE FA Total : 22835 5/11/2011 000255 WFOA 9710 001.018.014 WFOA CONFERENCE REGISTRAT• Total: 33 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total : Amount 322.54 322.54 48,215.07 542.71 236.97 48,994.75 1,778.31 135.27 1,913.58 1,689.08 1,689.08 1,890.00 1,890.00 40.76 392.39 40.76 473.91 484.00 48400 1,196,02 737.73 285.27 2,219.02 8,390.00 8,390.00 250.00 250.00 107,078.33 Page; 3 vchlist 05/13/2011 2:03:40 PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code: Voucher 22836 22837 22838 22839 22840 22841 22842 22843 apbank Date Vendor 5/13/2011 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 5/13/2011 000741 HONEY BUCKETS 5/13/2011 001635 1SS FACILITY/EVENT SERVICES 5/13/2011 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO 5/13/2011 001604 PACIFIC NW PAPER 5/13/2011 001084 PAPICH,JENNIFER 5/13/2011 001860 PLATT 5/13/2011 000668 SPOKANE CO TREASURER Invoice 35897 1-283115 25142 25415 25416 25481 April 2011 April 2011 120977 Expenses 9440304 35241.1401 45093.0646 45105.9010 45114.9015 45162.0327 45174.9059 45182.9132 45222.0227 45271.9007 45271,9008 45273,9036 Fund/Dept 309.309.079 001.076.300 001.076.305 001.076.305 001.076.305 001.076.305 101.042.000 001.076.302 001.090.000 001.076.301 001.076.305 Description/Account 001.076.000 001.076.000 001.076.000 001.076.000 001.076.000 001.076.000 001.076.000 001.016.000 001.076.000 001.076.000 001.076.000 LEGAL PUBLICATION:GREENACRI Total : HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: PARKS Total: EVENT SVCS: CENTERPLACE APRIL 2011 EVENT SVCS: CENTERPLACE EVENT SVCS:CENTERPLACE Total : UTILITIES: PW UTILITIES: PARKS COPY PAPER EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : Total : Total: SUPPLIES AT CENTERPLACE Total: 2011 PROPERTY TAX: EDGECL1FF 2011 PROPERTY TAX:VALLEY MIS 2011 PROPERTY TAX: CENTERPLA 2011 PROPERTY TAX: SULLIVAN P, 2011 PROPERTY TAX:VALLEY MIS 2011 PROPERTY TAX: BALFOUR PI 2011 PROPERTY TAX: PARK ROAD 2011 PROPERTY TAX: PRECINCT 2011 PROPERTY TAX:TERRACEVI1 2011 PROPERTY TAX:TERRACEVII 2011 PROPERTY TAX: BROWNS P/ Amount 157.45 157.45 154.00 154.00 150.08 7,136.00 162.72 157.60 7,606.40 8,898.96 1,467.19 10,366.15 1,433.75 1,433.75 140.45 140,45 90.71 90.71 238.50 1,747.98 2,550.36 743.04 1,105.44 122.52 428.91 715.21 162.06 302.40 437.82 Page: 1 vchlist 05/13/2011 2:03:40PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor 22843 5/13/2011 000668 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 22844 22845 Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account 5/13/2011 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST#3 (Continued) 45332.1517 55182.1553 55182.1623 55182.1624 April 2011 5/13/2011 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 2916173-2681-9 10 Vouchers for bank code: apbank 10 Vouchers in this report I,the undersigned,do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished,the services rendered,or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just,due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley,and that 1 am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Mayor Date Council Member Date 00t076.000 001.076.000 001.076.000 001.076.000 2011 PROPERTY TAX:CASTLE PAF 2011 PROPERTY TAX:GREENACRI 2011 PROPERTY TAX:GREENACRI 2011 PROPERTY TAX:GREENACRI Total: 101.042.000 WATER CHARGES: PW Total: 101.042.000 WASTE MANAGEMENT: PW Total: Bank total : Total vouchers: Amount 168.00 292.00 1,824.30 101.25 10,939.79 8.96 8.96 173.79 173.79 31,071.45 31,071.45 Page: 2 vchlist 0511712011 4:20:20PM Voucher List Page: 1 Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept DescriptionlAccount Amount 22846 5/17/2011 000648 ABADAN 160696 101.042.133 PLANS&SPECS:SPRAGUEAVENL 269.75 Total : 269.75 22847 5/17/2011 002543 AIR ELECTRIC EQUIPMENT&TOOLS 166298 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 141.31 167561 101.042.000 SERVICE CHARGE 2.12 Total : 143.43 22848 5/17/2011 000277 AWC 961-30769 001.018.016 ANNUAL LABOR REGIST:WHITEHE 60.00 961-30770 001.018.016 ANNUAL LABOR RELATIONS REGI: 245.00 Total: 305.00 22849 5/17/2011 002657 BITZ, DEBBIE CRYWOLF:40275 001.016.000 CRYWOLF REFUND: PERMIT#V28 25.00 Total : 25.00 22850 5/17/2011 002544 CAR QUEST AUTO PARTS STORES 1921-102197 • 101.042.000 SHOP MAINTTOOLSAND EQU1PME 26.76 May 2011 101.042.000 OVERPAID CREDITS -5.09 Total: 21.67 22851 5/17/2011 002562 CD'A METALS 306593 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 256.84 311751 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 1,88527 314828 101.042.000 SUPPLES: PW 668.20 315028 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW -652.20 316111 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 239.82 317360 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 117.79 317702 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 102.18 319949 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 260.04 Total : 2,877.94 22852 5/17/2011 000863 CENTURY WEST ENG CORP 232342 303.303.063 10-011 DESIGN ROW CIP 0063 17,980.81 232342 101.042.153 BRODWAY RESURFACE SW COOR 15,268.96 Total : 33,249.77 22853 5/17/2011 002572 CINTAS CORPORATOIN 606654268 101.042.000 SUPPLIES:PW 114.14 606656243 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 114.14 606656931 101.042.000 SUPPLIES:; PW 68.92 Page: 1 vchlist 05/17/2011 4:20:20PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 22853 5/17/2011 002572 CINTAS CORPORATOIN 22854 22855 22856 5/17/2011 001137 COLLIER, BRANT (Continued) 606657901 606658903 606659212 606659883 EXPENSES 5/17/2011 002469 COMMUNITY MINDED ENTERPRISES 3567 5/17/2011 001157 COUNTRY HOMES POWER EQUIP 406606 406607 22857 5/17/2011 000278 DRISKELL, CARY 22858 5/17/2011 002157 ELJAY OIL COMPANY 22859 5/17/2011 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 22860 5/17/2011 000002 H&H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. 22861 5/17/2011 001723 HEDEEN&CADITZ, PLLC 22862 5/17/2011 002520 HUSKY INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS EXPENSES 4181623 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 53.15 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 53.15 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 114.14 101,042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 53.15 Total : 570.79 101.042.000 CDL RENEWAL: B.COLLIER 57.00 Total : 57.00 001.090.000 MARCH BROADCASTING SVCS 3,000.00 Total : 3,000.00 101.042.000 SMALL TOOLS: PW 131.09 101.042.000 SMALL TOOLS: PW 100.78 Total : 231.87 001.013.015 WSAMA CONFERENCE REIMBURS 792.23 Total : 792.23 101,042.000 APRIL 2011 OIL PRODUCTS FOR PI. 250.69 Total: 250.69 36190 001.013.000 LEGAL PUBLICATION 32.30 36191 001.013.000 LEGAL PUBLICATION 39.95 36192 001.013.000 LEGAL PUBLICATION 35/0 36193 001.013.000 LEGAL PUBLICATION 44.20 36194 001.013.000 LEGAL PUBLICATION 39.10 36195 001.058.056 LEGAL PUBLICATION 77.35 Total : 268.60 APRIL 2011 6760 49003 001.058.057 COPIER COST 2,229.30 Total : 2,229.30 001.013.015 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,375.00 Total : 1,375.00 101.042.000 SHOP MAINT SUPPLIES:TRUCK PA 297.96 Page: 2 vchlist 05/17/2011 4:20:20PM Voucher List Page: 3 Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 22862 5/17/2011 002520 002520 HUSKY INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS (Continued) Total : 297.96 22863 5/17/2011 002259 MENKE JACKSON BEYER EHILS 470 001.013.015 PROFESSIONAL SVCS:AT&T MOBIL 315.00 497 001.013.015 PROFESSIONALSVCS:HOLCIM PR 1,522.50 499 001.013.015 GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 396.06 511 001.013.015 SPOKANE VALLEY/MONTGOMERY 1,001.94 Total : 3,235.50 22864 5/17/2011 000616 NEW HORIZONS INC. 30340 001.018.014 WINDOWS TRAINING: BING 2,500.00 30427 001.018.014 WINDOWS TRAINING. B.MILLER 2,500.00 Total : 5,000.00 22865 5/17/2011 001546 NORCO, INC 07936932 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 4,158.65 07936932 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 86.95 07936933 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 280.45 07954790 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 239.19 07975853 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 33.53 07990672 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 197.71 07990673 101.042.000 SUPPLIES:PW 31.99 07990674 101.042.000 SUPPLIES:PW 4.11 Total : 5,032.58 22866 5/17/2011 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 562949464001 001.013.015 OFFICE SUPPLIES: LEGAL 62.90 Total : 62.90 22867 5/17/2011 002243 ORBITCOM 00455497 001.090.000 EITHERNET:APRIL 2011 590.00 Total : 590.00 22868 5/17/2011 000881 OXARC R054555 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 90.05 Total : 90.05 22869 5/17/2011 000119 PLESE PRINTING 1330048446 001.011.000 NAME PLATE:A.WOODARD 16.88 Total : 16.88 22870 5/17/2011 002510 POHL SPRING WORKS INC 150955 101.042.000 SUPPLIES FOR SHOP MAINT FACIL 219.14 Total : 219.14 22871 5/17/2011 000019 PURRFECT LOGOS, INC. 27469 001.032.000 CITY LOGO ON FORD EXPLORER 115.22 Page: 3 vchlist 05/17/2011 4:20:20PM Voucher List Page: 3 Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 22862 5/17/2011 002520 002520 HUSKY INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS (Continued) Total : 297.96 22863 5/17/2011 002259 MENKE JACKSON BEYER EHILS 470 001.013.015 PROFESSIONAL SVCS:AT&T MOBIL 315.00 497 001.013.015 PROFESSIONALSVCS:HOLCIM PR 1,522.50 499 001.013.015 GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 396.06 511 001.013.015 SPOKANE VALLEY/MONTGOMERY 1,001.94 Total : 3,235.50 22864 5/17/2011 000616 NEW HORIZONS INC. 30340 001.018.014 WINDOWS TRAINING: BING 2,500.00 30427 001.018.014 WINDOWS TRAINING. B.MILLER 2,500.00 Total : 5,000.00 22865 5/17/2011 001546 NORCO, INC 07936932 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 4,158.65 07936932 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 86.95 07936933 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 280.45 07954790 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 239.19 07975853 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 33.53 07990672 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 197.71 07990673 101.042.000 SUPPLIES:PW 31.99 07990674 101.042.000 SUPPLIES:PW 4.11 Total : 5,032.58 22866 5/17/2011 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 562949464001 001.013.015 OFFICE SUPPLIES: LEGAL 62.90 Total : 62.90 22867 5/17/2011 002243 ORBITCOM 00455497 001.090.000 EITHERNET:APRIL 2011 590.00 Total : 590.00 22868 5/17/2011 000881 OXARC R054555 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 90.05 Total : 90.05 22869 5/17/2011 000119 PLESE PRINTING 1330048446 001.011.000 NAME PLATE:A.WOODARD 16.88 Total : 16.88 22870 5/17/2011 002510 POHL SPRING WORKS INC 150955 101.042.000 SUPPLIES FOR SHOP MAINT FACIL 219.14 Total : 219.14 22871 5/17/2011 000019 PURRFECT LOGOS, INC. 27469 001.032.000 CITY LOGO ON FORD EXPLORER 115.22 Page: 3 vchlist 05/17/2011 4:20:20PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 4 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account 22871 5/17/2011 000019 000019 PURRFECT LOGOS, INC. 22872 5/17/2011 001874 RED DIAMOND CONSTRUCTION INC 22873 5/1712011 002656 S.L. START LLC 22874 5/17/2011 000064 SCHIMMELS,GARY 22875 5/17/2011 000318 SHAMROCK PAVING CO. 22876 5/17/2011 002531 SIX ROBBLEES INC 22877 22878 22879 22880 22881 5/17/2011 001892 SKILLINGS CONNOLLY INC 5/17/2011 5/17/2011 5/17/2011 5/17/2011 000090 SPOKANE CO INFO SYSTEMS 000898 SPOKANE PROCARE 002254 TOWEY,TOM 002658 TRELLIS MARKET PLACE 22882 5/17/2011 000964 VOLT MANAGEMENT CORP 22883 5/17/2011 000140 WALTS MAILING SERVICE (Continued) May 2011 CRYWOLF:3603 EXPENSES Total : 307.223.40. 44TH AVE PATHWAY RETAINAGE R Total : 001.016.000 CRYWOLF REFUND: PERMIT#V27 Total : 001.011.000 TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT:"G.SCH Total : 25 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 32 101.042.000 COLD MIX 58969 101.042.000 SHOP MAINT SUPPLIES 7213 7215 50306858 2011-04 EXPENSES CRYWOLF: 1987 24935967 28113 Total : Total : 101.042.153 ON CALL ACQUISITION&APPRAIS, 001.032.000 RIGHT-OF-WAY POLICIES&PROCE Total : 001.018.013 COUNTY IT SUPPORT Total: 101.042.000 2011 LANDSCAPING CONTRACT#' Total: 001.011.000 MAYOR EXCHANGE REIMBURSEMI Total : 001.016.000 CRYWOLF REFUND:PERMIT#V37 Total : 001.090.000 STAFFING SVCS: IT 303.303.112 INDIANAAVE EXT SELF-MAILER Total : Amount 115.22 14,161.37 14,161.37 40.00 40.00 74.28 74.28 41.05 175.05 216.10 179.75 179.75 4,171.75 650.00 4,821.75 16,819.33 16,819.33 7,464.59 7,464.59 219.30 219.30 55.00 55.00 418.50 418.50 644.95 Page: 4 vchlist 05/17/2011 4:20:20PM Voucher List Page: 5 Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 22883 5/17/2011 000140 000140 WALT'S MAILING SERVICE (Continued) Total: 644.95 22884 5/17/2011 000676 WEST 822737405 001.013.015 LEGAL SUBSCRIPTION 658.62 Total : 658.62 22885 5/17/2011 000980 WESTERN SYSTEMS 20353 101.042.136 PW PROJECT#0136-WSDOT CON 6,174.05 Total : 6,174.05 22886 5/17/2011 000089 XO COMMUNICATIONS 0243067114 001.090.000 INTERNET/DATA LINES:APRIL 2011 275.19 Total : 275.19 41 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total: 112,551.05 41 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 112,551.05 I,the undersigned,do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been fumished,the services rendered,or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just,due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley,and that 1 am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: 5 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 05-24-11 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Payroll for Period Ending May 15, 2011 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Budget/Financial impacts: Gross: $ 216,118.56 Benefits: $ 29,633.86 Total payroll $ 245,752.42 STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri ATTACHMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 24, 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Mayoral Appointment: Rhea Coble to Spokane Housing Authority Board of Commissioners GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Created in 1971, the Spokane Housing Authority (SHA) "is dedicated to increasing safe, affordable housing and providing opportunities to persons experiencing barriers to housing." SHA annually provides housing assistance to over 4,000 families of low income in four eastern Washington counties through a combination of tenant-based rental assistance, and SHA-owned apartment complexes and scattered-site housing. A six-member Board of Commissioners appointed by the Mayor of Spokane, County Commissioners, and the Mayor of the City of Spokane Valley, governs SHA. (SHA Website,About SHA [See also RCW 35.82.070(13)] PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On May 26, 2009, Council confirmed Mayor Munson's appointment of Rhea Coble to the SHA Board of Commissioners, with a term beginning June 1, 2009, and expiring March 15,2011. BACKGROUND: Spokane Housing Executive Assistant Amanda Carpenter has brought to our attention the expired term of Ms. Coble, and asks on behalf of Steve Cervantes, Executive Director, and the Spokane Housing Authority Board of Commissioners, that Rhea Coble be re-appointed to the Board for five more years from March 15,2011. OPTIONS: Confirm the Mayor's Appointment RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to confirm the Mayoral appointment of Rhea Coble to the Spokane Housing Authority Board of Commissioners, with a term of March 15, 2011, through March 15, 2016. ATTACHMENTS: May 9,2011 e-mail request from Spokane Housing Authority Spokane County Resolution 9-0476 Spokane Valley Resolution 03-033 RCW 35.82.070(13) From: Amanda Carpentier [maiito:acarpentier @spokanehousing.org] Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 1:14 PM To: mayor/ councilmembers Subject: Board of Commissioner's Reappointment Honorable Mayor Towey and Spokane Valley Councilmembers, On behalf of Steve Cervantes, Executive Director, and the Spokane Housing Authority Board of Commissioners, we would like to request the reappointment of Rhea Coble to SHA's Board as a Resident Commissioner. Ms. Coble served as our commissioner for two years, has strong background of volunteerism and a professional background in finances which has added to the diversity of backgrounds on our Board. Furthermore, Rhea is currently a Section 8 participant who previously served on the SHA Resident Advisory Board and has a passion for advocating affordable housing. This request is being separately addressed to the Mayor of Spokane and the Spokane County Commissioners, who must also appoint Ms. Coble as a Resident Commissioner. We look forward to hearing from you in this matter. Please contact me if you need more information. Thank you, A n a vtd a.Ca v'pe vt ''l e r Executive Assistant Spokane Housing Authority 55 W.Mission Ave.,Spokane,WA 99201 PHONE: 509-252-7125 FAX: 509-323-2364 Email: acarpentier @spokanehousinn.orq Providing Housing --Improving Lives Find us on facebook CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:This electronic mail transmission may contain privileged/confidential information belonging to the sender. The Information is Intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,distribution or taking any action based on the contents of this electronic mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this electronic mail in error please contact sender by replying to this message before deleting it from your computer.Thank you. Spokane Housing Authority Please consider the environment before printing this email. 2 NO, q•04--pc, BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON IN THE MATTER OF AN APPOINTMENT ) TO THE SPOKANE HOUSING AUTHORITY ) RESOLUTION D/B/A NORTHEAST WASHINGTON HOUSING ) SOLUTIONS BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ) WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.32.120(6), the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County has the care of County property and the management of County funds and business;and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Spokane and the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County jointly established a Joint City/County Housing Authority authorized by RCW 35.82.300, comprised of five (5) members, two of whom work or reside within the City of Spokane and are appointed by the Mayor,two of whom work or reside within the unincorporated areas of Spokane and are appointed by the Board of County Commissioners and one individual who is jointly appointed by the Mayor of the City of Spokane and the Chairperson of the Board of County Commissioners. The term of each appointment shall be(5)years on a rotating basis;and WHEREAS, there presently exists one vacancy on the Spokane Housing Authority d/b/a Northeast Washington Housing Solutions Board of Commissioners;and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has selected Rhea Coble to fill the vacancy on the Spokane Housing Authority d/b/a Northeast Washington Housing Solutions Board of Commissioners, NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington, that the following appointment to the Spokane Housing Authority d/b/a Northeast Washington Housing Solutions Board of Commissioners is hereby approved as follows: RHEA COBLE TERM EXPIRES: MARCH 15,2013 PROVED BY THE BOARD this BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS day of May 2009 OF SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON commJS,, III . `4: N If TODi 1t, - c t. 1 411. ATTEST: 1111 `� ss� " A/ ` \ MARK RICHARD,VICE CHAIR YJA-jY -AC(J t9490 —al 4 Daniela Erickson,Clerk o`. he Boar.` :ONNIE MAGE',COMMISS 4NER RCW 35.82.070: Powers of authority. Page 2 of 3 books and papers and to issue commissions for the examination of witnesses who are outside of the state or unable to attend before the authority, or excused from attendance;to make available to appropriate agencies(including those charged with the duty of abating or requiring the correction of nuisances or like conditions, or of demolishing unsafe or insanitary structures within its area of operation) its findings and recommendations with regard to any building or property where conditions exist which are dangerous to the public health, morals, safety or welfare. (9)To initiate eviction proceedings against any tenant as provided by law.Activity occurring in any housing authority unit that constitutes a violation of chapter 69.41, 69.50 or 6952 RCW shall constitute a nuisance for the purpose of RCW 59.12.030(5). (10)To exercise all or any part or combination of powers herein granted. No provisions of law with respect to the acquisition, operation or disposition of property by other public bodies shall be applicable to an authority unless the legislature shall specifically so state. (11)To agree(notwithstanding the limitation contained in RCW 35.82.210)to make such payments in lieu of taxes as the authority finds consistent with the achievement of the purposes of this chapter. (12) Upon the request of a county or city, to exercise any powers of a community renewal agency under chapter 35.81 RCW or a public corporation, commission, or authority under chapter 35.21 RCW. (13)To exercise the powers granted in this chapter within the boundaries of any city, town, or county not included in the area in which such housing authority is originally authorized to function: PROVIDED, HOWEVER,The governing or legislative body of such city,town, or county, as the case may be, adopts a resolution declaring that there is a need for the authority to function in such territory. (14)To administer contracts for assistance payments to persons of low income in accordance with section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended by Title II, section 201 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, P.L. 93-383. (15)To sell at public or private sale, with or without public bidding, for fair market value, any mortgage or other obligation held by the authority. (16)To the extent permitted under its contract with the holders of bonds, notes, and other obligations of the authority,to consent to any modification with respect to rate of interest, time and payment of any installment of principal or interest security, or any other term of any contract, mortgage, mortgage loan, mortgage loan commitment,contract or agreement of any kind to which the authority is a party. (17)To make, purchase, participate in, invest in,take assignments of,or otherwise acquire loans to persons of low income to enable them to acquire, construct, reconstruct, rehabilitate, improve, lease, or refinance their dwellings,and to take such security therefor as is deemed necessary and prudent by the authority. (18)To make, purchase, participate in, invest in, take assignments of,or otherwise acquire loans for the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, improvement, leasing, or refinancing of land, buildings, or developments for housing for persons of low income. For purposes of this subsection, development shall include either land or buildings or both. (a)Any development financed under this subsection shall be subject to an agreement that for at least twenty years the dwelling units made available to persons of low income together with functionally related and subordinate facilities shall occupy at least fifty percent of the interior space in the total development or at least fifty percent of the total number of units in the development,whichever produces the greater number of units for persons of low income. For mobile home parks,the mobile home lots made available to persons of[ow income shall be at least fifty percent of the total number of mobile home lots in the park. During the term of the agreement, the owner shall use its best efforts in good faith to maintain the dwelling units or mobile home lots required to be made available to persons of low income at rents affordable to persons of low income. The twenty-year requirement under this subsection(18)(a)shall not apply when an authority finances the development by nonprofit corporations or governmental units of dwellings or mobile home lots intended for sale to persons of low and moderate income, and shall not apply to construction or other short-term financing provided to nonprofit corporations or governmental units when the financing has a repayment term of one year or Tess. (b) In addition, if the development is owned by a for-profit entity,the dwelling units or mobile home lots required to be made available to persons of low income shall be rented to persons whose incomes do not exceed fifty percent of the area median income, adjusted for household size, and shall have unit or lot rents that do not exceed fifteen percent of area median income, adjusted for household size, unless rent subsidies are provided to make them affordable to persons of low income. For purposes of this subsection(18)(b), if the development is owned directly or through a partnership by a governmental entity or a nonprofit organization, which nonprofit organization is itself not controlled by a for-profit entity or affiliated with any for-profit entity that a nonprofit organization itself does not control, it shall not be treated as being owned by a for-profit entity when the governmental entity or nonprofit organization exercises legal control of the ownership entity and in addition, (i)the dwelling units or mobile home lots required to be made available to persons of low income are rented to persons whose http://apps.leg.wa.govh'cw/default.aspx?cite=35.82.070 05/17/2011 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 03-033 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE NEED AN.D AUTHORIZING T.HE SPOKANE HOUSING AUTHORITY TO EXERCISE AUTHORITY WITHIN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY WHEREAS, RCW 35.82.070(13)provides that a housing authority may exercise its powers within the boundaries of any city not included in its area of operation if the governing or legislative body of that city adopts a resolution declaring that there is a need for the housing authority to exercise its powers within the city; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley (the "City") has determined that there is a need for a housing authority to exercise its powers within the City. WHEREAS,the Spokane Housing Authority (the "Authority") has indicated that it is willing to exercise its powers within the City. NOW',THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, as follows: Section 1. Declaration of Need; Auithorization. The City Council of the City declares that there is a need for the Authority to exercise its powers within the City. Section 2. Effective Date. This resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption and approval. ADOPTED this 1.5 'day of May, 2003, City of Spokane Valley 1 . )ALII ATTE `-' Mayor Michael DeV •ming interim City Clerk, Ruth Muller Approved as to Form: M. tz, City ttorney DRAFT MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STUDY SESSION FORMAT Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley,Washington May 3,2011 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Tom Towey,Mayor Mike Jackson,City Manager Bill Gothmann,Councilmember Cary Driskell,Acting City Attorney Dean Grafos,Councilmember Neil Kersten,Public Works Director Brenda Grassel,Councilmember Kathy McClung,Community Dev Director Gary Schimmels,Deputy Mayor Ken Thompson,Finance Director Arne Woodard,Councilmember Mike Stone,Parks&Rec Director Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Rick VanLeuven,Police Chief Morgan Koudelka, Sr.Administrative Analyst Carolbelle Branch,Public Information Officer Chris Bainbridge,City Clerk Mayor Towey called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 1.Appleway Court Alternative Funding—John Fisher,Community Frameworks Speaking in the absence of John Fisher, Community Frameworks Development Services Program Manager Jelili Ogundele explained that concerning the Appleway Court phase two project,that the owner of the project is a non-profit corporation which provides affordable housing for seniors; that a month ago the Phase 1 grand opening was held; and tonight he said they want to share information about the second phase of the project;that they came to Council in January requesting support for their application for the low income task credit,which is very competitive and he said they were unable to score very high on that application; and therefore they decided to look for alternative funding for this project; and said it is not unusual when dealing with affordable housing, to look around for several years before all the resources are received. He said they will be applying for HUD 202, which is a federal housing program that provides funding for senior housing across the country; and said this funding is similar to the one they used for phase one; and he explained that they are requesting over $4 million from the federal housing agency in support of the Appleway Court Two, and said the funding will leverage other funding sources from the state and also from the Spokane County Home Program. Mr. Ogundele said they are asking for a confirmation of Council's support based on the letter of support in January;that they are seeking a similar letter but this will be addressed to someone different at the federal housing agency; he said this project will have thirty-eight units, all one-bedroom, and the resident of the facility would pay no more than 30% of their monthly income as rent; and the rest of the rent would come from the federal housing program as rent subsidies. He said the idea is to have a facility that will provide housing services while they age in place, such as meals,health services,and a library,for a one-stop shop for seniors. Councilmember Gothmann asked if there is any reason why council cannot act on this tonight,and Mayor Towey said a motion could be made tonight. Therefore, it was moved by Councilmember Gothmann, seconded and unanimously agreed to provide a supporting letter. Council Study Session Minutes May 3,2011 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT 2. Investment Accounts—Ken Thompson Finance Director Thompson explained that currently we have most of the city's money in the state investment pool; that the state gathers money from a lot of the smaller organizations and invests it, with the idea that they would get a better investment on $100 million than on $1 million a piece for a hundred different agencies; that the difficulty now is that the rates are low and have been low for so long that we only earn between 2/10 and 3/10 of 1%, which is a very low rate. Mr. Thompson said staff would like to begin the process of obtaining authorization from Council for the City Manager and the Finance Director to invest in state authorized investments, which he said would be primarily federal notes and mortgages guaranteed by the federal government,or state bonds and the bonds of other small governments within the state of Washington; he said we know we can get those at a return of between 1 and 1.4% and that difference on the amount of money we invest,would likely generate over$200,000 a year more than what we are currently receiving; and said if Council is agreeable with that, staff would like to bring back a resolution next week to authorize the Finance Director and City Manager to invest in state approved investments. Mr. Thompson stressed that any investment made in this regard would be guaranteed by the federal government; and that we would take some money out of the state investment pool and use that to buy the other federally-backed securities; he said we would not totally give up on the state investment pool but would keep some money there, keeping in mind that if the funds are spread around there is less chance of losing money. Councilmember Gothmann suggested council should come up with a policy before authorizing this, and said he also wants to see the kinds of investments the policy would permit; and suggested doing that prior to council moving forward with the authorization process. Director Thompson explained that an investment policy current exists, and he said he would be happy to share that with councilmembers,that it tracks with state law which explains there must be a guarantee when making investments; adding that this policy was approved several years ago by Council, and the finance committee reviewed it recently as well. Mr. Jackson said staff would be happy to bring that back to council for council's review and that council can makes changes as necessary;he also stated that our fiscal policies in the current resolution now allow the finance director and the city manager to make these investments, but because these would be new investments to the City,he and Mr. Thompson wanted to bring this forward to Council; and said we need a resolution which combines these policies; he said many times when Mr. Thompson moves forward to make an investment, the investment company asks for proof from this legislative body that those staff members have the authority to make those investments; and said that is the real intent; that we will bring those policies before council for discussion,and there is no hurry with this item. In response to a question from Councilmember Grassel, Mr. Jackson said it would not be his intent for council to have to approve every investment, but instead to set the parameters by which the City Manager and the Finance Director can make those investments, which is currently permitted by the fiscal policies and resolution in place, but we are now moving into new territory and wanted council to be appraised; and he emphasized that these would be totally federally insured, safe investments and that we are not talking about the city taking risks; and he reiterated that the return on the state investment pool is very low which has caused us to move from our ultra conservative investment policy,and examine a super conservative investment policy; and said it is not the intent to bring to council each investment opportunity. Councilmember Grassel asked about the frequency of making investments, and Mr. Thompson said it is a matter of being able to move when an instrument comes up; that he gets e-mails from different organizations such as Wells Fargo, and Seattle NW which deal in securities, explaining that they have instruments backed by the federal government, and if the rate is good, it will likely only be available for sometimes as little as twenty minutes. Mayor Towey agreed it would not be feasible to gather council every time the Finance Director wanted to make an investment, but as a council, those parameters and guidelines should be established, and said he has no objection to staff bringing this back May 10 for that policy discussion. Councilmember Gothmann recommended Councilmembers read the Local Government Investment Policy, which he said is on-line. Councilmember Grassel asked if council could get a quarterly report on those investments, and Mr. Thompson explained that information is contained in the Finance Council Study Session Minutes May 3,2011 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT Department's Monthly report each month,which shows that some of our money is in the state investment pool,that we have a time certificate with a local bank, and that is council's opportunity to see where and how money is being invested. Mr. Jackson said we can include that material in next week's packet so council can see that first quarter 2011 report again. 3. Public Access Funding Process—Morgan Koudelka Senior Administrative Analyst Koudelka explained that staff issued a Request for Proposals(RFP) on the "public" portion of those PEG (public, education, government) funds, and received one proposal, from Community Minded Television, which is the current channel manager for public access broadcasting on channel 14; that they have a contract with the City of Spokane and currently record our council meetings to later broadcast on channel 14; he said that proposal met all the requirements specified in the Request for Proposal; that they currently provide public access broadcasting twenty-four hours a day, every day, and they provide six different types of training classes; they have one full time and one part-time employee; and said staff recommends we make available $35,000 of PEG funds for qualifying capital expenditures for 2011 to Community Minded Television, and reiterated that this is only for the public portion, and he said staff will follow up with a separate RFP for the educational programming. Mr. Koudelka said the complete proposal is included in the council materials for tonight's meeting, and that this is an opportunity for council to ask questions about the proposal and whether council has any objection to staff bringing this back next week as a motion consideration to award those funds. Mr. Koudelka said we would only make funds available for the first year,that the amount is approximate and dependent upon what we actually receive from Comcast, and would operate in a reimbursement format so when the provider makes a purchase of a qualified item,they would submit their documentation to us for reimbursement if we determined such as a qualifying expense, but such reimbursement would only be done if the funds had been received from Comcast, and said we would not use other city funds. Attorney Driskell mentioned the contract would expire December 31, 2015; that this contract covers a grant for $35,000 for capital equipment and that the actual amount of funding will be determined by the actual PEG contributions provided by Comcast, with any additional funds subject to the same requirements as the original PEG fee grant. 4. Draft 2012-2017 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan(TIP)—Steve Worley Public Works Director Kersten and Senior Engineer Worley went over the project list explaining the projects and some of the funding options,and asked for council's feedback.Mr.Worley explained that we are mandated to submit our Six-Year TIP prior to July 1 every year. Some of the projects,he said, such as the Greenacres Trail include the need to acquire right-of-way, which is in the process. Councilmember Woodard commented on his preference for changing the Greenacres Trail to a two lane instead of a three lane, and Mr. Worley explained that three-lane description was included in the application when they received the grant, that if could still be modified, and those kinds of comments are what staff looks forward to when seeking community feedback. Mr. Kersten added that typically when we're going to have the volumes that we're going to have on that road, we would want a three lane from a safety standpoint; that not having that left-turn lane for people to pull in makes it much less safe; so although it is a residential area, it's still going to have quite a volume of traffic and a road is needed there that can handle that level of traffic safely. Council and staff discussed the process for adopting and amending the TIP, including the need for a public hearing,and Mr.Worley explained that even once adopted,the TIP can be amended whenever,and as many times as necessary. Councilmember Grafos suggested moving some of the projects to 2013 until the funding can be determined,while Councilmember Gothmann suggested leaving the projects as listed, and said we could always turn down funding if necessary, and added that unless the projects are listed on the TIP,we don't get them. Mr.Kersten added that of the few projects that are unfunded,that we are just looking for design money now and not total project money; that at the earliest something concerning Council Study Session Minutes May 3,2011 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT federal funding would be available late fall, so these projects wouldn't happen until next year anyway, adding that council has the option to keep them where they are, move then down a year, or remove them from the list. Director Kersten said that f you leave it on the list for 2013 and projects come out, we would still look at putting that application in, and so the question is, is there a point when grant funding becomes available and council doesn't want us to turn in an application. Mr. Kersten said staff tries to always come to Council prior to turning in those grant applications. However, he explained that in the past sometimes the agency hasn't given us more than a week's notice to get them turned in, although he indicated he felt that would change in the future; and said there are other projects as well that council might like to fund, such as a city entrance, and said staff is planning to come back for a discussion of that bigger picture and of all funding availability. Further discussion included street preservation and mention that the topic of capital projects is scheduled for the May 17 council agenda, and City Manager Jackson stressed that as we move forward with the budget process, Council can make those decisions concerning funding projects, adding that essentially we can fund the projects that are on the list, but we'll have to make some decisions on future projects, and will need decisions between preservation and other grant projects. Public Works Director Kersten added that if council wants staff to come back to council on some of these projects, such as project#6,we would need to do that very soon. Other issues discussed included the use of grant money for our sidewalk infill program; Sullivan Bridge concerning possible restrictions; and discussion concerning rights-of-way. Mr. Kersten again noted that the needed $4.5 million for street preservation is not included but the funds are desperately needed in order to maintain the streets. Councilmember Grafos said he feels it makes sense to defer some of the projects, and Mr. Kersten said that decision is council's prerogative. Councilmember Grassel stressed her concern with not having preservation maintenance in the budget,and said she feels it should be a top priority,and questioned why we would add more streets if we can't maintain what we have, and that she doesn't mind approving the TIP if any of the projects can be rejected later, and it was noted again that is Council's prerogative. Mr. Kersten said that tonight's discussion is a work session, and the topic of how to fund street maintenance and capital projects will be discussed more at the May 17 meeting; and that Council will have a few more opportunities to discuss these projects before ultimately considering approval of the resolution which will adopt the TIP. Mayor Towey called for a recess at 7:26 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:38 p.m. 5.Flashing Beacons—Neil Kersten Public Works Director Kersten explained that the Washington Traffic Safety Commission issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for school zone flashing beacon projects, and that speed studies must be completed prior to submitting the application, which is due May 20. Mr. Kersten said staff plans to submit applications for two school zones: Orchard Center Elementary along Park Road, and Chester Elementary along Pines. Mr. Kersten said just applying for two schools still leaves many elementary schools without beacons, and said that staff will continue to work on those as grants keep coming around, but said the grants come in pretty slow, and once we receive notification, the schedule is tight as they must be completed by the end of summer, adding that grants are only for funding elementary schools. Councilmember Grafos asked why we couldn't include in that Bowdish project since that's about traffic, and the criteria for these flashing beacons match what we have on Bowdish, and he asked why we couldn't include that as part of that project, and as we do that road, to put those beacons in. Mr. Kersten said that if that is Council's desire,we can do that, and Councilmember Grassel agreed and there were no objections from council to include that in the project. Mr.Kersten said staff will move forward with those two schools as noted,and there were no objections from Council. Council Study Session Minutes May 3,2011 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT 6.Advance Agenda—Mayor Towey Issues Councilmembers indicated a desire to discuss during future meetings included signage on I-90, speed limits, capital project funding, a prioritized list of preservation projects, the Broadway Stormwater issue, and Sprague/City entrance improvements. Councilmembers also requested a copy of the pavement preservation program prior to review of that topic. Mr. Jackson said concerning the signage on I-90, we are waiting for information from Washington State Department of Transportation,capital projects funding is scheduled for the May 17 meeting, that Mr. Kersten is in the process of updating the preservation lists from a 2008 study that listed projects by year by priority for six years and that we will likely have that list available during this summer,that preservation will be discussed at the retreat,that the stormwater issue is connected with an upcoming budget amendment as are the city entrance improvements, and that staff will make sure council gets a copy of the current pavement preservation plan. 7. Information Only The Parks and Rec. Quarterly Report and Regional Animal Control Facility Update were for information only and were not reported or discussed. 8. Council Check-in—Mayor Towey Other than mention of the State of the City addresses, there were no reports or comments. 9. City Manager Check-in—Mike Jackson City Manager Jackson said he spoke with Briahna Taylor and that at approximately 2:30 today, the Governor signed the port of entry bill, which means that will become law ninety days after the end of the session; and he mentioned there were many people involved in the movement of that bill. There being no further business, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 7:51 p.m. Thomas E.Towey,Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Council Study Session Minutes May 3,2011 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meetings Formal Meeting Format Tuesday, May 10,2011 Mayor Towey called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Attendance: City Staff Tom Towey,Mayor Mike Jackson,City Manager Gary Schimmels,Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell,Acting City Attorney Bill Gothmann,Councilmember Ken Thompson,Finance Director Dean Grafos,Councilmember Rick VanLeuven,Police Chief Brenda Grassel,Councilmember Mike Stone,Parks&Recreation Director Arne Woodard,Councilmember Neil Kersten,Public Works Director Scott Kuhta,Planning Manager Mary Kate McGee,Building Official Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Karen Kendall,Associate Planner Morgan Koudelka, Sr.Administrative Analyst Carolbelle Branch,Public Information Officer Chris Bainbridge,City Clerk INVOCATION: Pastor Craig Smart of Valleypoint Church gave the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Towey led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll;all councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the agenda. Mayor Towey gave a brief explanation of what an agenda"action item" is and of the two general public comment opportunities; and said that at that time, he would appreciate citizens limiting their comments to no longer than three minutes. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: n/a COMMITTEE,BOARD,LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Councilmember Woodard: said he attended today's Law Enforcement Memorial Service; he stood in for the Mayor as a member of last Friday's REDCON (Real Estate Development and Construction Conference) panel,and extended thanks to the city for an excellent job. Councilmember Gothmann: reported that he attended the recent Health Board meeting where it was reported that the radiation level in Spokane as a result of the Japanese nuclear disaster is 5,000 times below levels of concern; he mentioned that the County is considering a bike helmet ordinance; reported he also attended the Government Affairs meeting where representatives from the Public Facilities District (PFD) and the Convention Visitor's Bureau spoke about the likes and dislikes of people in our area, and that the PFD gave a presentation on the proposed expansion of the Convention Center. Councilmember Gothmann said he also attended the Junior Lilac Parade,as well as the Law Enforcement Memorial. Councilmember Grafos: said he had no report but met with several citizens and will discuss that issue during the advance agenda topic later tonight. Deputy Mayor Schimmels: said he went to three SRTC (Spokane Regional Transportation Council) meetings in the last two weeks; and a STA (Spokane Transit Authority) Operations Committee Meeting, and a Solid Waste Task Force Meeting; and said he attended our Town Hall Meetings and thanked all those who attended. Council Regular Meeting 05-10-2011 Page 1 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT Councilmember Grassel: said she went to the monthly Chamber of Commerce Board Meeting where this month's special guest was a representative from the Human Rights Commission; she participated in Spokane Valley's Take our Kids to Work Day and she extended thanks to the Human Resources personnel; also attended the REDCON meeting where they discussed zoning regulations for Spokane Valley, Spokane City,and Spokane County, and said it was a good discussion. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Towey reported that last week he participated in the 76th Junior Livestock in Spokane County, which had over 300 entrants; he participated in the Bring Your Kids to Work Day; went to a law enforcement prayer breakfast; met with the Mayor of Liberty Lake and Superintendent of Central Valley School District; and also attended the law enforcement memorial. Mayor Towey then read the "Motorcycle Awareness Day" proclamation, which was received with thanks from several members of the Lilac City Wings chapter,including Michael Mustered,Motorcycle Awareness Day Coordinator. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited general public comments. Mark Vovos, Delphi Building, 1309 W. Dean Avenue, Spokane: said he represents home owners, citizens, and taxpayers of this community regarding the proposal by St. John Vianney, and said there are over one hundred citizens opposed to the development of the church; and asked Council to deny the upcoming request for a sixty-day extension. He said the application was denied by the Planning Commission, that this has been in progress over a year now, and said an additional thirty days might be appropriate,but not sixty. Tim Bieber, 312 N. Farr: concerning the St. John Vianney proposal, said he represents citizens living on Farr, Locust and the surrounding area; that the neighborhood and area is pristine and he hopes Council considers the history of the neighborhood, and denies the request; said he agrees with taking care of the elderly,but there are existing HUD homes on Appleway, and if the Catholic Charities build this under an LLC (limited liability company), then it becomes a corporation; and he mentioned parking is currently inadequate. Gary Anderson, 420 N Felts: said he wanted to see by a show of hands, how many people were here tonight for this issue, and Mayor Towey said council encourages people to speak, but they do not want to take votes. Mr. Anderson said if he wanted to be on a busy street, he could have bought property on Argonne or elsewhere. Bill Mihalic, 10824 East Steve Lane: read his statement concerning the proposal of St. John Vianney and of his agreement with the proposal and of the need to help the poor and needy. 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 attached listing of claim vouchers,with grand total of$284,700.37 b.Approval of Payroll for Period Ending April 30,2011: $335,647.29 c.Approval of City Council Executive Session Meeting Minutes of April 26,2011 d.Approval of City Council Minutes of April 26,2011 Formal Meeting Format It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the consent agenda. NEW BUSINESS: 2.Motion Consideration: Approval of CDBG/HOME Consortium Agreement—Scott Kuhta It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to authorize the City Manager's signature on the Cooperation Agreement for Community Development Block Grant and Home Investments Partnership Funds for the years 2012 to 2014. Planning Manager Kuhta explained that every three years, Spokane County is required to re-qualify as an Urban County Consortium in order to participate in the U.S. Council Regular Meeting 05-10-2011 Page 2 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT Department of Urban and Housing Development's (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Entitlement Program; and that we are again in the position to decide whether to renew our participation in that Consortium or become a direct entitlement recipient from HUD. Mr. Kuhta explained that he went over the details of this agreement last week, and showed a map of the affected areas that meet criteria for low and moderate income. Mayor Towey invited public comments; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 3.Motion Consideration: Public Access Programming Funding Proposal—Morgan Koudelka It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement with Community Minded Television to act as the public access channel manager. Senior Administrative Analyst Koudelka again went over the highlights of this agreement, including the funding aspects. Mayor Towey invited public comment. Robert Foote, General Manager of Community Minded Television thanked council for considering the agreement, and he encouraged use of Community Minded Television for transmitting council messages to the general public. In response to a question about closed- captioning, Mr. Foote said the newest edition of the software has that capability, and that there is a good chance with their first annual report in October, that they will ask for funding to do that. Jennie Willardson, 12722 E. 23rd Avenue said she was formerly a member of the Cable Board and is glad to see this issue of having council meetings shown on the cable, finally come to fruition. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 4.Mayoral Appointment: Planning Commission Vacancy—Mayor Towey Mayor Towey explained the background of this commission vacancy, and expressed thanks to all applicants for submitting an application, and said it was a difficult decision, and he recommended appointment of Steven Neill. It was then moved by Councilmember Woodard and seconded, to approve the Mayor's recommended appointment of Steven Neill to the Planning Commission to fill the position recently vacated, which term expires December 31, 2011. Mayor Towey invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited general public comments;no comments were offered. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 5. Council Position#5 Interviews—Mayor Towey As Mayor Towey had previously recused himself from this issue, he turned the meeting over to Deputy Mayor Schimmels and left the room. As per the previously approved procedure, Council candidates were interviewed in alphabetical order, with Chuck Hafner first, followed by Ben Wick; with each Councilmember asking each candidate three questions. At the conclusion of the interviews, Deputy Mayor Schimmels thanked the candidates for applying for this position, and said the interim council position appointment is scheduled to take place at the May 17 council meeting. Deputy Mayor Schimmels called for a recess at 7:30 p.m., and the meeting was reconvened at 7:43 p.m., with Mayor Towey presiding. 6. Shoreline Master Program(SMP)Update—Grant Funding Opportunity—Lori Barlow Senior Planner Barlow explained that the Department of Ecology (DOE) recently made staff aware of a grant funding opportunity; the legislature has funds sufficient to award grants to jurisdictions required to adopt new Shoreline Master Programs by 2013, which category includes Spokane Valley, and that DOE had indicated they have earmarked up to $125,000 which could be used to help subsidize our existing budget; and she explained that the funding may not be used to offset costs previously incurred and may only be used to pay for tasks, deliverables, or staff time that will be encumbered after July 1, 2011. Ms. Barlow said that although we have a contract with URS to complete the update process, grant monies could be used to supplement the budget to pay for tasks or deliverables anticipated to begin after July 1, as well as pay for staff time associated with the update,and she said that additional projects,which would Council Regular Meeting 05-10-2011 Page 3 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT benefit the SMP update but which were not contemplated within the scope of work with URS could be completed with grant funds, and said if the City is interested in pursuing the grant, a draft scope of work must be provided to DOE by mid May, and she said that DOE is committed to providing as much technical and financial assistance as possible to ensure we successfully complete the update by the 2013 timeline, and said if we are not interested in these funds, we need to inform DOE. Planner Barlow also explained about public access,critical areas analysis, state regulations specific to shoreline areas,pros and cons to either pursuing the grant or not; the more rigid and lengthy amendment process for shoreline amendments; DOE's willingness to help and of our need to give them our answer regarding accepting this grant; that there is no need to hire an additional consultant as staff could manage the additional work needed, and staffs cost could be reimbursed as part of the grant, and mention again that we have consultant URS on board currently. There was council discussion concerning how to manage the grant funds,with Ms.Barlow explaining that this is a performance-based grant,where we set up the grant and establish the timeframe and deliverables, with DOE reimbursing us for each deliverable; so if we didn't spend all the money, no reimbursement would be required. In response to council question,Ms.Barlow said that Council has the option to revise the entire document;that the Shoreline Advisory Group is the volunteer group to assist staff in developing the initial draft, which goes to the public for comment, then to council for initial acceptance, at which point Council will have opportunity to make changes; adding that staff would be bringing council periodic updates, and she stressed there would be numerous opportunities for council to make changes; that acceptance of the grant does not tie our hands to make changes nor does it change DOE's authority. Councilmember Woodard said he has serious concerns with DOE's involvement and said there are always strings attached beyond deliverables, that he has been watching the County's process and said it is alarming that the County will end up suing to get the plan accepted; and said if we accept additional grant money, DOE would impose more controls, and said he feels there are already too many controls. Planner Barlow said the DOE does not have any additional authority other than what is given to them via the state statutes,and would not have more authority if we accepted the grant;that we are not required to adopt this until 2013, and the DOE wants to ensure our success, and in fact, are using us as a model for many aspects of the planning process. Mayor Towey said he feels the positives outweigh the negatives as the grant would allow us to do lot more than what we are doing now, and Councilmember Gothmann said he would be in favor of requesting staff to apply for the grant. Councilmember Grassel said it appears the grant would cost us more in the form of needed reports and analysis work by staff,and agrees strings have been attached with the DOE working with other jurisdictions; and said she would prefer some sort of legal analysis with someone expert in shoreline management, that she feels we don't have a lot of firm information,and said she is reluctant to participate with the DOE at this time. City Manager Jackson said tonight's intent is to see if council would like us to bring this issue back for a motion, that the timeframe is short, that he is not happy with short timeframes,but said we don't want to deny this opportunity based on a short time frame, but rather preferred to bring the issue to council for direction. Ms. Barlow said that this grant would impose specific timelines on the deliverables, that we have already prolonged certain phases to get additional information, and we were free to do that without any sort of DOE approval; and if we have an agreement with the DOE, she fully anticipates if we submit an explanation, deadlines could shift, but it would require an additional layer of review to extend those deadlines;adding that our representative has assured staff that this is a fluid document, and changes occur frequently. Councilmember Woodard said he is not opposed to having this come back before council, Mayor Towey and Deputy Mayor Schimmels indicated they would like more information concerning those additional aspects of the project, such as public access and critical areas, and how all that fits in with the goals and policies; and Councilmember Grafos said we want to make sure we do this right as DOE has their own agenda,that he would like to look at this as a total project and that the grant will help but perhaps we need to bring in a consultant or attorney to give us some guidance as we move along and as we spend the money. Planner Barlow explained that we already have our expert consultant; that we can't deviate from guidelines as if we stray too far DOE, who has ultimate authority for approval, DOE Council Regular Meeting 05-10-2011 Page 4 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT won't approve it; and that the consultant we have is there to give us technical guidance. Councilmember Grassel said she feels DOE is giving the opportunity for grant money to do additional reports that are not required,that we'd have to pay for,and said we don't have figures on how much time and money that will cost; and that she has an overall concern the grant money won't cover all the things we need to do, and that she feels this would be opening Pandora's Box. It was determined that staff will bring this back for a motion consideration on the May 24th agenda. 7. Permit Tracking System—Mary Kate McGee Building Official McGee explained that the City currently uses the PLUS permit tracking system as provided through Spokane County; that it is a system created by the County's Information Services Department, and the system was scheduled to be retired in 2012; she said the City and County staff investigated six systems and it appears the County is ready to procure the system's replacement; and she explained the one-time cost to purchase hardware and software is estimated at$146,000,which includes a 10% contingency, and on-going budget allocation for estimated yearly maintenance cost of the new Paladin-SmartGov tracking system is approximately $19,300, which is 28% less than the allocation for the current yearly permit tracking system.Ms.McGee said we have not made any obligations at this point and would like to discuss how to pay for the system as it is not included in the current budget, and would thus likely necessitate a budget amendment, and said the County has not yet settled on the amount, but said if we use the same system as the County,it ensure future connectivity. No objections were noted. 8. Development Agreement,CPA 02-11 (St.John Vianney)—Karen Kendall As Councilmember Woodard had previously recused himself from this topic,he left the dias and the room at 8:47 p.m. Planner Kendall gave a status report on the amendment to change the property from low density to medium density, and of the concept proposal for a 40-unit senior housing building; and said that as of last week, the neighborhood representative notified Catholic Charities, the applicant and city staff that they no longer wish to participant in drafting a development agreement; but that Catholic Charities has expressed willingness to continue to work toward finalization of such an agreement, and with that in mind, staff seeks an extension of up to sixty days for additional review, which time includes time to hold a public hearing including the legal notification process for such hearing. City Manager Jackson said we are not seeking action tonight,but depending on council's desire,we can bring this back for a motion consideration next week. Mayor Towey said sixty days seems reasonable as that will give staff additional time to gather more information so that council can make a better decision. It was determined to bring this back next week for a motion consideration to grant up to an additional sixty days for submittal of a development agreement. Councilmember Woodard returned to the meeting. 9.Advance Agenda—Mayor Towey Councilmember Woodard asked about the Broadway drywell issue and Mr. Jackson said that it takes some time to prepare, and staff wants to make sure they get the date set internally prior to placing that on the advance agenda. The June 21 and August 2 meetings were discussed,and it was decided that Council will not holding council meetings on those dates, as June 21 is the AWC (Association of Washington Cities) conference, and August 2 is National Night Out. Mayor Towey also mentioned that Mako the fire dog is scheduled to visit us at the May 31 council meeting. Councilmember Grafos said he met with a representative of a towing company in our city who has concerns about the agreement the city signed in 2010 concerning towing junk vehicles, and that the citizen was curious if that agreement was construed to allow Spaulding to have all that business. Attorney Driskell said the Request for Proposal process was used including advertising, and that he would be happy to sit down and go over the procedure with the citizen and Councilmember Grafos. Councilmember Grassel asked about the timing of the May 17 six- year TIP report and of the upcoming May 24 public hearing,and Mr. Jackson said there should be enough time to hold the hearing as planned,and if not,the hearing could be pushed back as needed. Council Regular Meeting 05-10-2011 Page 5 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT INFORMATION ONLY: The "Choose Spokane Valley"was for information only and was not reported or discussed. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive session for approximately twenty minutes to discuss potential land acquisition and potential litigation, and that no action is anticipated upon return to open session. Council adjourned into executive session at 9:00 p.m. At 9:22 p.m. Mayor Towey declared council out of executive session; and it was then moved, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:22 p.m. ATTEST: Thomas E.Towey,Mayor Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Council Regular Meeting 05-10-2011 Page 6 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Executive Session Tuesday,May 17,2011 Attendance: Councilmembers: Staff: Tom Towey,Mayor Mike Jackson,City Manager Gary Schimmels,Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell,Acting City Attorney Bill Gothmann,Councilmember Dean Grafos,Councilmember Brenda Grassel,Councilmember Arne Woodard,Councilmember EXECUTIVE SESSION: Mayor Towey called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. It was then moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to adjourn into executive session for approximately sixty minutes to evaluate the qualifications of candidates for appointment to elective office [RCW 42.30.110(1)(h)J, and that action is anticipated thereafter during the regular 6:00 p.m. council meeting. Prior to council exiting to executive session,Mayor Towey again announced he had recused himself from these proceedings for reasons stated previously, and he did not join the executive session. The vote by acclamation was unanimous in favor and Council,minus Mayor Towey adjourned into Executive Session at 5:02 p.m. At approximately 5:05 p.m. Deputy Mayor Schimmels declared council out of Executive Session. It was moved by Councilmember Gothmann,seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m. Thomas E.Towey,Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Council Minutes:05-17-2011 Page 1 of 1 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 24, 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Shoreline Master Program Update — Grant Funding Opportunity GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 90.58 and WAC 173-26 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None. BACKGROUND: At the May 10, 2011 council meeting staff presented information regarding a grant opportunity from the Department of Ecology (DOE) to supplement the budget for the City's Shoreline Master Program Update. During the discussion Council asked for additional information regarding DOE's involvement, additional staff time required to manage the grant, and identification of the projects that are required by the Shoreline Management Act rules, and the projects that are optional. The attached memo addresses these items. The draft grant application should be presented to DOE staff by the end of May. If approved, the application will be finalized and returned to the City for signature not later than early July 2011. Monies spent on or after July 1, 2011 are reimbursable by the grant application if approved by DOE. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Authorize the City Manager to finalize the grant agreement with the Department of Ecology requesting $125,000 to assist with the update of the Comprehensive Shoreline Master Program. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: $150,000 Budgeted in 2009; STAFF CONTACT: Lori Barlow, AICP— Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: Memo to City Manager dated 5/17/11. STVoka•ii., ne �� From the Community Development Department 4000 a e Interoffice Memorandum To: Mike Jackson, City Manager From: Lori Barlow,Senior Planner CC: Kathy McClung,Director CD; Scott Kuhta,Planning Manager Date: May 17,2011 Re: DOE Grant Funding for SMP Update Project—Additional Information At the May 10, 2011 Council Meeting I presented information regarding a grant funding opportunity that could be used to supplement the budget for the Shoreline Management Program Update project. The Council asked for additional information to be provided at the May 24th meeting and directed staff to move forward with preparing the application. This memo provides additional information regarding the following topics: 1. Projects—clarifies which of the proposed tasks are required by the SMA; 2. Staff time—an estimate of staff time required to meet the grant reporting requirements; and 3. DOE Involvement — Defines DOE's role in the update process when a grant has been awarded. Background Information: The legislature has funds sufficient to award grants to jurisdictions that are required to adopt in 2013. DOE staff has indicated that up to $125,000.00 is available to the City of Spokane Valley if additional funding is needed to complete the update. However, a draft scope of work must be provided to DOE by the end of May in order to obtain funding. SMA Required Elements or Tasks and the Current Contract The current contract funds all the required tasks necessary to complete the Shoreline Master Program Update. However, as discussed previously, the grant funding offers an opportunity to improve the update process by incorporating two additional planning related pieces, amending the existing contract to provide for additional negotiations with DOE, and recovering staff time associated with the update process. The table below, which was previously provided, has been updated to indicate which tasks are required by the SMA, tasks included in the current URS contract,new tasks proposed, and tasks eligible for reimbursement by the grant. Memo to City Manager SMP Grant Memo May 17,2011 Page 2 of 3 Note -All tasks that have been completed, or are currently in progress are not eligible for DOE Funding. Staff time for all tasks was not included in the budget, nor the costs associated with the public participation program. SMP U,date Tasks ai ai c +, sz ar o c Q. }, co ai m Task -, z E s 0 � � ,—a L1.1 N I— uJ V co E 0 W 0 Z a/ Inventory and Map Shoreline Conditions 28,877.66 W-W---_ Conduct Analysis 18,957.95 W-W---_ Prepare Analysis Report and map Portfolio 27,695.98 W-W---_ Develop Shoreline Environmental Designations 4,440.49 In ■■- progress Shoreline Goals,Policies 8,154.80 N. In ■■- progress Regulations 29,147.96 W-—El WM Address Cumulative Impacts 6016.90 W-—El WM SMP Adoption Process 3001.71 W-—El WM SEPA Review W--E1EIW■ Staff Time (1/2 time over 2 year period) 65,000 ---EW■ Public Access Element* —15,000.00 ---EW■ Critical Areas Regulations* Analysis 7,500.00 ---EIW■ *New task proposed Possible funding opportunities Below are brief descriptions of the additional tasks or staff components that could be reimbursed by the grant. Public Access Plan — Develop a comprehensive public access plan to eliminate public access review at the project level. Public access is a required component of the SMA regulations and a significant issue for the community. Additional benefits of a public access plan include increasing grant opportunities for public access projects by contemplating preliminary projects supported by the community, and recognizing the benefits of public access as an Economic Development Tool. Critical Areas Analysis - SMA requires critical area regulations to meet a higher standard than GMA; Current critical area regulations could be reviewed for consistency with SMA requirements for adoption in SMP regulations. HB 1653 was passed in 2010, which clarifies the integration of Shoreline Management Act policies with the Growth Management Act and notes that critical areas regulations within the shoreline jurisdiction must "assure no net loss of shoreline ecological functions." This bill was passed Memo to City Manager SMP Grant Memo May 17,2011 Page 3 of 3 subsequent to the development of our work program and was not contemplated in the contract. Revisions to all sections of the Plan - Experiences of other jurisdictions have indicated an "unplanned for amount of revisions" to each element of the plan. This has in some cases led to over spending of the consultant contract leaving staff without the technical support for DOE discussions. While the contract contemplates some modifications, it does not contemplate complete review of each element for consistency with required changes. This would likely be an increase to the current contract with URS. Local Adoption Process and potential negotiations with DOE — The contract does not contemplate staff time for the local adoption process, nor does it incorporate assistance from URS in negotiating with DOE through their review process. Once again, experiences of other jurisdictions have indicated that this can be a costly and time-consuming effort. This may require an increase in the current contract with URS. SEPA Review — The contract does not contemplate this required review. Staff time and notification costs could be recovered. Staff Time Required to Manage DOE Contract In the previous memo staff noted that additional staff time would be required to meet the grant requirements. It is estimated that 15-20 hours per quarter will be dedicated to this task. Staff time associated with project management is reimbursable by the grant. Tasks that are unique to the grant, and that would not be completed if the grant were not received, include the following: 1. Quarterly Reports to DOE that identify progress, issues, project delays, etc.; 2. Payment requests that account for staff time, consultant billing, and deliverables to be reimbursed by grant funds; and 3. Completing a comprehensive checklist to accompany each deliverable. DOE's Authority in SMP Update Process As mentioned in the previous memo, DOE's current involvement is limited to review of documents and the final review and adoption of the SMP. DOE's involvement would not change in the approval process other than insuring that the grant deliverables are met. The grant agreement does not increase the authority of DOE in the development of the SMP beyond ensuring consistency with RCW 90.58 and WAC 173.26. DOE's approval procedure is elaborated in RCW 90.58.090. Additional background information regarding grants can be found in RCW 90.58.080 and 90.58.250. In summary these two sections will explain that the SMA requires local government to update their SMP's "consistent with the required elements of the guidelines adopted by the department," (RCW 90.58.080(1)). Local governments are eligible for grants subject to available funding and subject to the deadline for completion as noted in RCW 90.58. The Department is directed to allocate grants to local jurisdictions in an amount "reasonable and adequate" to fund the update (RCW 90.58.080 (6). The grant monies are intended to offset the cost to local government to meet the state mandated requirement to update or develop shoreline master programs (RCW 90.58.250). Memo to City Manager SMP Grant Memo May 17,2011 Page 4 of 3 Please let me know if you would like additional information. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 24, 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Motion Consideration: Replacement of Permit Tracking Software GOVERNING LEGISLATION: None PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: No action taken, information only on 03-29-2011; Admin report on 05-10-2011 BACKGROUND: Staff presented an information only report to Council on March 29, 2011 and an admin report on May 10, 2011 regarding replacement of the City's permit tracking system. The City is currently using the PLUS permit tracking system, provided through the County. The PLUS system was developed by the County Information Services Department and will be retired in 2012. The City will need to find a system to replace the PLUS system. City and County staff have investigated six systems and it appears that the County is ready to procure its PLUS replacement. Staff is requesting that Council make a motion to authorize staff to proceed with purchase of the Paladin SmartGov permit tracking system. OPTIONS: 1. Authorize purchase of Paladin Smart Gov permit tracking system 2. Request staff investigate other permitting software systems. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move to authorize the City Manager to purchase the Paladin Smart Gov permitting software and necessary hardware with funding estimated at $146,000. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Estimated 120 hours per year of Database Administrator's time for system maintenance. The 2011 budget amendment for purchase of hardware and software to replace the existing PLUS permitting system is estimated at $146,000 (which includes a 10% contingency) and an on-going budget allocation for estimated yearly maintenance costs of $19,300. The yearly maintenance fee is estimated to be $7,000 less than the current yearly fee charged by the County. This item would come back to Council at a later date as a budget amendment. STAFF CONTACT: Mary Kate McGee, Building Official ATTACHMENTS: None CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 24, 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Motion Consideration: PACE Partnership Pledge request GOVERNING LEGISLATION: n/a PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Materials were included as an "information only" item with the May 17, 2011 council packet materials. BACKGROUND: PACE (Partners Advancing Character Education) is a grassroots Spokane Valley initiative to promote the importance of good character through partnerships with schools, businesses, public agencies, residents, faith-based organizations and community service groups. At the root of the initiative is a list of monthly character traits, including Respect, Diligence, Responsibility and nine others. Working from this common list, PACE partners promote and integrate each trait into the regular activities of the organization. Each month features a different character trait to be the focus of multi-faceted communication, motivation and educational programs throughout the entire month. Mayor Tom Towey has already signed a personal partnership pledge, and Central Valley School District has invited the City of Spokane Valley to become a formal partner by signing the Partnership Pledge to help promote the positive character traits. In order to participate, our City Manager would need council authorization to sign a Partnership Pledge on behalf of the City of Spokane Valley. OPTIONS: Council's discretion. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move to authorize the City Manager to execute the PACE "Partnership Pledge." BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: No impact to budget; minimal staff time to post PACE information and share monthly PACE character traits with Council and staff to help advance character education in our community. STAFF CONTACT: Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer. ATTACHMENTS Brochure—"Becoming a PACE Partner— Bringing Character to Light" Character Is s than a vvor h you ire! ore Good character is a guide to making good choices.It creates a value system that strengthens individuals, communities and society.Its not material things that define who we are,but rather our values,ethics and behaviors.Character Improvement is self improvement and a foundation for true success. Across the Spokane Valley,our community is embracing the opportunity to work together in a cooperative effort to build good character.Together we are creating a foundation for future generations and developing the potential within us all. What is Character Education? Character education is an intentional effort by schools and communities to develop in their youth important qualities such as honesty,respect,responsibility and citizenship.Character education promotes judging what is right,desiring good,and then doing what is right.It teaches and recognizes good character traits to help improve attitudes and academic performance,reduce a nd/or prevent disciplinary problems in and out of th e classroom,and nurture a strong work ethic to create a productive future work force. What is PACE? Partners Advancing Character Education(PACE)is a grassroots Spokane Valley initiative to promote the importance of good character through partnerships with schools,businesses,public agencies,residents,faith- based organizations and community service groups. At the root of the initiative is a list of monthly character traits.Working from this common list,partners promote and integrate each trait into the regular activities of the organization.Each month features a different character trait to be the focus of multi-faceted communication, motivation and educational programs throughout the entire month. Monthly character Traits September Respect March Diligence October it si tr ibiiity April "i'iatstivorth0iuss November CitIzertship May Courage December Garb-kg June integrity January Fairness July Generosity February honesty August Gratitude Partnershlp Pledge Our organization pledges to partner in advancing character education and join the PACE initiative to raise awareness about the importance of good character throughout our community. We understand that we are an integral part to the success of PACE and will commit to the program in a way that fits our organization.As a partner,we agree to allow PACE to list our organization's name to represent our commitment to character education. We Wedge to 5epport the program by r3?➢d2'ien:sntra:at one or more of the fedeardog parteer t€? ctrs tiea: • Display PACE poster in place of business(window/door) O Use our reader board/signage to display the character trait of the month [1 Involve our employees in the program 'l Promote PACE and the character trait of the month and encourage others to get involved El Designate a person from our organization to act in a leadership role as a"Character Champion"who would be available to speak at school or community functions O Make a financial contdbulion to support the PACE initiative The NortheastWashinglon Education Could(NEWEL)is the designated fiscal agent for PAGE Contributions may be sent to 4202 S.Regal, Spokane,WA 99223.NEWEC is a tax-exempt 501(c)(3)organization. O Other: Name of Organization Your Name Title Street Address City,State Zip Telephone Email Please use one of the following methods to submit this form and receive your PACE Partnership Kit. • Mail: 19307 E.Cataldo Ave.,Spokane Valley,WA 99016 • Fax: (509)228-5439 • Pledge online at: www.pacecommunity.org Fur mere Worm atiort, easli ter eora0. ACE PARTNERS ADVANCING CHARACTER EDUCATION 19307 E Cataldo Ave. Spokane Valley,WA 99016 (509)228-5400 info©pacecommunity.org www.pacecommunity.org Follow us on Facebook "Gir ureter.net circumstance,-makes:the ......... ......:....: ... ....... ...... .: The:.quality of ones character:speaks:louder t words Integrity ism of the most important cha: Er 111 F•. hl Fldonna Shan),President CFO Grealn-SpokaneVnlitay Chamharef Commerce "EmployeesremplOyers.andbusinesses:cannotthrive: wiTho it,chaiacter To build character in a student is :.to.estat lisp a:ltfetime:of success:::;Their life will be improved:and dol ream nunitywillbenefit.from:having such;quality individuals:":..:';'.:.':.:` ,.At:Vista,every aspect of what we do:is aligned with these principles::Trus,Intagi11ty;Intiova roltr tteiationships'and:,C llaboration lHvnoringthis;code of conduct requires employeeS tleinonstrating strong karacter eacb and every:day-3ntcrnaiiy as we work ogetiie-and eternally as-we:uucrkArrith:our rrstomers and atlterlcoTrstduerds:' Getting involved There are may ways to get involved in this oxeiting.initiative,. starting by demonstrating good character in your daily life and encouraging those around you to participate as well. As a bu.;_: ,;�.-'�;ganization,take the time t : • Join PACE in this important initiative and commit to the Partnership'Pledge • Display the character trait of the month with PACE • posters,your reader boards and signage Become a"Character Champion"and be the guest speaker for a classroom activity or event • Involve employees to strengthen the initiative within • your organization and the community • Recognize children and adults who demonstrate good character while visiting your place of business. Get MORE involved by becoming a PACE Your financial contribution will help offset the costs of character education curriculum materials for schools,• printing and PACE promotion[items used to recognize good character and increase awareness.Partners who:: : donate$250 or more through financial or in-kind services are designated as PACE Sponsors and will receive: .:: Recognition on the PACE website with a link to your organization's website Invitations to participate in events and promotional and media opportunities The Northeast Washington Education Council(NEWEL)is the desig r;1 : instal agent for PACE and is a 501(o)(3)organization. PARTNERS ADVANCING CHARACTER EDUCATION 19307 E Cataldo Ave. Spokane Valley,WA 99016 (509)228-5400 info@pacecommunity.org www.pacecommunity.org Graphic design contributed by ScottGraphics rmour MEEEN PARTNERS ADVANCING CHARACTER EDUCATION www.pacecommunity.org CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 24, 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Spokane Regional Convention Visitor's Bureau GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Spokane Regional CVB President & CEO Cheryl Kilday will give a report to Council on the CVB's tourism marketing efforts for Spokane Valley. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint • 1 ....it 1/t,CifiN • 4i 141 • /171te: iyth,frem • • 741 : 14°. Create economic growth for the Spokane Region by effectively marketing - Sigokane and Spokane County as a preferrecP • convention and visitor destinatio • .411 El!IT• _. SPOKANE REGIONAL CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU 1,8138SPOKANE I www.VisitSpokanexom I SPOKANE REGIONAL CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU 2011 Program Areas • Sales and Marketing Destination Positioning Group Sales and Services Public Relations Informing , Educating , and Advising the Visitor 2011 Spokane. Near nature. Near perfect. 1 www.VisitSpokane. corn I SPOKANE REGIONAL CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU SPOKANE REGIONAL CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU U 2011 Program Areas 2011 Program Areas • Advocating the Total Visitor Experience Community Awareness and Destination Training Supporting Destination Development 2011 Spokane. Near nature. Near perfect. 1 www.VisitSpokane. corn SPOKANE REGIONAL CONVENTION &AVISITORS BUREAU gram Expansion in 2011 ➢ Expand marketing campaigns through online and social media to position Spokane County as a preferred destination ➢ Conduct key market research to capture the voice of the visitor and fully understand the market segmentation in hotels ➢ Support the sales efforts for priority market segments to attract meetings and conventions, tour and travel, leisure, and events ➢ Update and enhance the destination website 2011 Spokane. Near nature. Near perfect. 1 www.VisitSpokane. co SPOKANE REGIONAL CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU Pe Performance Measure - TL/SV Actuals 2011 Goal IConfirmed group sales room nights 9,932/683 56,000 Sales Lead room night goal 43, 145/3,372 190,000 Public Relations — earned media $824,206/$232,526 $1 .2 million Website unique visitors 268,047 1 ,015,934 Membership Dues $355,445 $356,380 TL = Total SV= Spokane Valley The Spokane Valley numbers are also within the Total numbers 2011 Spokane. Near nature. Near perfect. 1 www.VisitSpokane. co SPOKANE REGIONAL CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU Performance Update Spokane Valley Project Updates 18 Trade Shows and 8 Consumer Shows 1 15 Sales Missions Status Report 3 Meetings Trade Shows 2 Travel Trade Shows 5 Sales/Client Development Missions/Events Familiarization Tours & Site Visits 2 Groups Serviced 1 Group/1 ,005 RN Destination Pieces Map/Plan Spokane/Visitors Guide Completed Marketing RM= Room nights Spokane. Near nature. Near perfect. On-going Pfuri www.VisitSpokane. co 2011 SPOKANE REGIONAL CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU ce Update Spokane Valley Project Updates Website Re-design Market Research Distinct Communities Piece in Visitors Guide Distinct Communities Piece for Website Spokane River Forum Status Report Underway Underway Completed Underway On-going 2011 Spokane. Near nature. Near perfect. 1 www.VisitSpokane. co CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 24, 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Energy Efficiency Block Grant Update GOVERNING LEGISLATION: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Information Item July 20 and July 27, 2010 BACKGROUND: The 2009 City Council approved several projects under the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) program. One of the projects is a partnership with Avista Utilities for residential and commercial energy audits, whereby the cost of the audit is subsidized by EECBG dollars to encourage owners to identify potential energy efficiency improvements. Avista serves as the lead in marketing and conducting the overall program. Launched in the spring of 2010, participation was minimal, with only five Spokane Valley households taking part. A modification to increase EECBG subsidy per audit was approved in July 2010, spurring an additional 26 audits to date. To generate additional participation, Avista has requested approval to increase the amount of EECBG subsidy per audit from $138 to $187 so that the cost to the homeowner is reduced from $99 to $50. The City originally allocated $88,000 for the Utility Partnering project. This amount was reduced in December 2011 to $23,000 to better meet EECBG project implementation requirements. Increasing the amount of EECBG funds per audit to $187 will result in a maximum total of 123 home energy audits. OPTIONS: Do not direct the increase in EECBG fund amount per home audit. Reallocate entire remaining EECBG funds for the utility partnering/home energy audit program to another project approved under the City's EECBG Strategy (see attached). RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to increase the amount of EECBG funds to $187 per home energy audit. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: There is no impact to the City of Spokane Valley budget. Increasing the EECBG funding amount per audit would result in a lower maximum number of audits. However, the reduced cost to homeowners is hoped to increase the actual number of participants and realize a greater energy savings throughout the residential sector. STAFF CONTACT: Mary E. May, AICP ATTACHMENTS: DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of May 19,2011; 8:00 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative To: Council& Staff From: City Clerk,by direction of City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings May 31,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,May 23] 1.Fire Department Canine,Mako—Assistant Fire Marshall Rick Freier (15 minutes) 2. EWU Regional Services Presentation a.An Analysis of Regional government and Reforms—Kevin Pirch,Ph.D. (30 minutes) b.Municipal Economics of Scale & Scope—Grant Forsyth,Ph.D. (30 minutes) 3.UGA(Urban Growth Area)Update—Scott Kuhta/Mike Basinger (30 minutes) 4. Investment Accounts(includes monthly report)—Ken Thompson (30 minutes) 5. Solid Waste Update—Bill Gothmann,Gary Schimmels (20 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 155 minutes] June 7,2011, Confirmed Joint Meeting with Planning Commission 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,May 30] Joint Meeting Agenda Items: 1. Economic Development (—90 minutes) Council only meeting agenda items: 2.Admin Report: Airway Heights Plan Review Renewal—MaryKate McGee (10 minutes) 3. Street Vacation, STV 01-11 —Micki Harnois (15 minutes) 4.Advance Agenda—Mayor Towey (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 120 minutes] June 14,2011, Council/Staff Summer Retreat,9 a.m.—4 p.m., CenterPlace Classroom June 14,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,June 6] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2.First Reading Proposed Ordinance re STV 01-11 Street Vacation—Micki Harnois (15 minutes) 3. Proposed Resolution Adopting 2012-2017 TIP—Steve Worley (10 minutes) 4. Proposed Resolution Authorizing Investment Accounts—Ken Thompson (10 minutes) 5.Motion Consideration: Airway Heights Plan Review Renewal—MaryKate McGee (10 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 50 minutes] June 21,2011, Confirmed no Meeting, (A WC Conference, Spokane, Wa) June 28,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,June 20] Proclamation:Parks &Recreation Month 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance re STV 01-11 Street Vacation—Micki Harnois (15 minutes) 3. Info Only: Dept Reports [*estimated meeting: minutes] July 5,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,June 27] 1. Proposed 2013 TIB Project List—Steve Worley (15 minutes) 2.Advance Agenda—Mayor Towey (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] July 12,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Tues,July 5] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) Draft Advance Agenda 5/19/2011 4:08:44 PM Page 1 of 3 July 19,2011,Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,July 11] 1.Bike &Pedestrian Master Program(BPMP)—Mike Basinger (15 minutes) 2. Proposed 2013 TIB Project Applications—Steve Worley (15 minutes) July 26,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,July 18] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2.Admin Report: Revenues&Expenditures for Preliminary 2012 Budget—Mike Jackson (30 minutes) 3. Info Only: Dept Reports [*estimated meeting: minutes] August 2,2011, Study Session Format Confirmed no meeting: (National Night Out) August 9,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Tues,Aug 1] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2012 Revenues&Property Taxes (15 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 3.First Reading Proposed Ordinance,BPMP—Mike Basinger (15 minutes) 4.Motion Consideration: Approval of Proposed 2013 TIB Project List—Steve Worley (10 minutes) 5.Admin Report: Review of ordinance that levies 2012 property tax—Finance (15 minutes) 6.Admin Report: Review Ordinance to Confirm Tax Levy—Finance (15 minutes) 7. City Manager's Presentation of Preliminary 2012 Budget-City Manager (30 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 105 minutes] August 16,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Aug 8] 1. Outside Agency Presentations — Finance (-60 minutes) August 23,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Aug 15] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance,BPMP—Mike Basinger (10 minutes) 3.Motion Consideration: Set 2012 Budget Hearings for Sept 13 and Sept 27—Finance Director(10 minutes) 4. Info Only: Dept Reports [*estimated meeting: minutes] August 30,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Aug 22] 1.Advance Agenda—Mayor Towey (5 minutes) Wed,August 31,2011,confirmed Joint Council and County Commissioners Meeting,9:00 a.m.—Noon, Spokane County Fairgrounds,Bay 4. Tentative agenda topics TBA. September 6,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Aug 29] 1.Advance Agenda—Mayor Towey (5 minutes) September 13,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Sept 5] 1. Public Hearing: 2012 Budget —Finance Director (10 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 3.First Reading Proposed Ordinance,2012 budget Property Tax (15 minutes) 4.First Reading Proposed Ordinance 2012 budget,tax confirmation (15 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 45 minutes] September 20,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Sept 12] 1.Advance Agenda—Mayor Towey (5 minutes) 2.Fee Resolution Review—Finance (15 minutes) Draft Advance Agenda 5/19/2011 4:08:44 PM Page 2 of 3 September 27,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Sept 19] 1. Public Hearing: 2012 Budget —Finance Director (10 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance,2012 budget Property Tax (15 minutes) 4. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 2012 budget,tax confirmation (15 minutes) 5.First Reading Proposed Ordinance Adopting 2012 Budget (15 minutes) 6. Info Only: Dept Reports October 4,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Sept 26 1.Advance Agenda—Mayor Towey (5 minutes) October 11,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Oct 3]] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Adopting 2012 Budget (15 minutes) 3. Proposed Resolution Amending Fee Resolution for 2012—Finance (20 minutes) OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: Bidding Contracts(SVMC 3.—bidding exceptions) Budget amendments(2011) Centennial Trail Agreement Clean Air Agency City Sign Plan Commute Trip Reduction Program Renewal East Gateway Monument Structure Economic Development Governance Manual(resolution)Update Liberty Lake City Sign Lodging Tax Funding for 2012 (Oct 2011) Milwaukee Right-of-way Mission Ave Design(Mission&Long ped. crossing) Monument(Veterans') Sign Old Mission Ave Trail Access Parking/Paving Options(for driveways,etc.) Pavement Management Program Update Prosecution Services Public Input Process for Capital Projects Railroad Quiet Zone Shoreline Master Program, Chapter 1 Sidewalks Signage (I-90) Site Selector Update Solid Waste Amended Interlocal Speed Limits Signs/Landscaping(SVMC Chapter 22) Sprague Appleway Corridor Environ.Assessment Sprague,one-way vs.two-way WIRA,Water Protection Commitment,Public Educ. *time for public or council comments not included Draft Advance Agenda 5/19/2011 4:08:44 PM Page 3 of 3 mblane a11e 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Vattey WA 99206 509,921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhatt @spokanevaltey.org Memorandum To: Mike Jackson, City Manager From: Ken Thompson, Finance Director Date: May 17, 2011 Re Finance Activity Report--April 2011 Activities in April in the Finance Department included: Financial reports Reports showing a comparison of actual revenues and expenditures at April 30, 2011 to the 2011 Budget, are attached. Gambling tax receipts are expected to be near our budgeted amounts for 2011. The majority of gambling tax comes from our three casinos and all three are open and operating at this time. Investment earnings are likely to be less than projected in our 2011 budget as interest rates are down dramatically from prior years. The City will soon be investing in instruments backed by the federal and/or state government to increase our return. Sales tax receipts are expected to be close to our projected budget as our projections have been reduced based on 2010 experience. Actual sales tax receipts for the first three months of 2011 are very close to our receipts in 2010. The investment report is also attached for your review. Note the investment balance at $47 million at April 30, 2011. The $47 million will increase in May as a significant portion of our property tax collections were received in May. 2011 Budget amendments A few amendments are being prepared for the 2011 budget as adjustments are needed for a few capital projects. These include the purchase of the street/stormwater maintenance facility and potentially some of the capital projects planned for discussion at the May 17, council meeting. 2012 budget preparation First drafts of the 2012 budget are due to the Finance Department on May 18. A budget summit is planned for council review of proposed budgets on June 14. Audit of 2010 records Staff is preparing the 2010 financial records for audit by the State Auditor. This audit will start in mid July but won't be complete until late fall. City of Spokane Valley General Fund Budget Variance Report For the Period Ended April 30,2011 Budget April YTD Unrealized Percent 2011 Revenues Revenues Revenue Realized General Fund Revenues: Begining Fund Balance $ 24,600,000 26,000,000 $ (1,400,000) 105.69% 5 Property Tax 10,875,000 386,868 643,930 10,231,070 5.92% 4 Sales Tax 16,200,000 1,149,483 3,939,624 12,260,376 24.32% Gambling Tax 425,000 17,504 17,853 407,147 4.20% 10 Franchise Fees/Business Licenses 1,111,000 271,594 296,304 814,696 26.67% State Shared Revenues 1,665,625 215,601 569,255 1,096,370 34.18% Planning&Building Fees 1,600,000 128,182 450,271 1,149,729 28.14% Fines and Forfeitures 1,800,000 168,172 434,010 1,365,990 24.11% Recreation&Centerplace Fees 555,500 42,487 184,739 370,761 33.26% Miscellaneous 200,000 9,702 41,723 158,277 20.86% Operating Transfers 2,040,000 - - 2,040,000 0.00% Total General Fund Revenues: $ 61,072,125 2,389,593 32,577,711 $ 28,494,414 53.34% Budget April YTD Unrealized Percent 2011 Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures Realized General Fund Expenditures: Ending Fund Balance 24,147,039 - - 24,147,039 0.00% 5 Council 324,298 18,907 126,325 197,973 38.95% City Manager 1,055,906 91,804 308,564 747,342 29.22% Public Safety 22,179,880 1,854,733 6,398,152 15,781,728 28.85% Operations&Administrative Svcs 1,810,928 125,737 515,666 1,295,262 28.48% Public Works 892,617 53,990 205,397 687,220 23.01% Planning&Community Dev. 3,229,295 259,924 920,053 2,309,242 28.49% Parks&Recreation 2,813,412 121,328 489,546 2,323,866 17,40% General Government 4,618,750 516,521 832,680 3,786,070 18.03% Total General Fund Expenditures: $ 61,072,125 $ 3,042,943 $ 9,796,382 $ 51,275,743 16.041 05/17)20i T 2:54 PM City of Spokane Valley Other Funds Budget Variance Report For the Period Ended April 30,2011 Budget April YTD Unrealized Percent 2011 Revenues Revenues Revenue Realized Other Funds Revenues: Street Fund $ 7,042,050 $ 466,433 $ 1,243,486 5,798,564 17.66% 7 Trails and Paths 48,000 5 19 47,981 0.04% 3 Hotel/Motel Fund 500,000 24,645 69,744 430,256 13.95% Civic Facilities Replacement 1,629,000 158 595 1,628,405 0.04% 14 Debt Service-LTGO 03 685,000 - - 685,000 0.00% Capital Projects Fund 1,013,598 48,325 99,208 914,390 9.79% 3 Special Capital Projects Fund 1,021,069 47,832 98,297 922,772 9.63% 3 Street Capital Projects 8,437,307 100,392 207,790 8,229,517 2.46% 3 Mirabeau Point Project - 4 14 (14) 13 Community Developmt Block Grnts - - - - 0.00% 12 Capital Grants Fund 55,000 - - 55,000 0.00% 3 Barker Bridge Reconstruction - - 765 (765) 13 Parks Capital 1,959,036 136 511 1,958,525 0.03% 3 Street Capital Improvements 2011+ 500,000 - - 500,000 0.00% 3 Stormwater Mgmt Fund 3,632,000 76,776 121,452 3,510,548 3.34% 7 Equip,Rental&Replacement 909,000 115 436 908,564 0.05% 7 Risk Management 319,000 319,002 319,008 (8) 100.00% 13 Reserves: Centerpiece Operating 353,000 44 166 352,834 0.05% 6 Service Level Stabilization 5,464,000 684 2,584 5,461,416 0.05% 6 Winter Weather 505,000 66 250 504,750 0.05% 6 Civic Buildings 4,040,000 735 2,777 4,037,223 0.07% 6 Total Other Funds Revenues: $ 38,112,060 $ 1,085,353 $ 2,167,101 $ 35,944,959 5.69% Budget April YTD Unrealized Percent 2011 Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures Realized Other Funds Expenditures: Street Fund $ 7,042,050 115,648 1,014,454 $ 6,027,596 14.41% 16 Trails and Paths 48,000 - - 48,000 0.00% 3 Hotel/Motel Fund 500,000 - 53,423 446,577 10.68% Civic Facilities Replacement 1,629,000 - - 1,629,000 0.00% 14 Debt Service LTGO 03 685,000 - (50,969) 735,969 -7.44% 15 Capital Projects Fund 1,013,598 - - 1,013,598 0.00% 3 Special Capital Projects Fund 1,021,069 - - 1,021,069 0.00% 3 Street Capital Projects 8,437,307 93,772 314,160 8,123,147 3.72% 3 Community Developmt Block Grnts - - - - 12 Capital Grants Fund 55,000 3,003 11,575 43,425 21.04% 3 Barker Bridge Reconstruction - 107 129,559 (129,559) 13 Parks Capital 1,959,036 9,438 113,022 1,846,014 5.77% 3 Street Capital Improvements 2011+ 500,000 - - 500,000 0.00% Stormwater Mgmt Fund 3,632,000 851,455 1,017,806 2,614,194 28.02% 13 Equip.Rental&Replacemnt 909,000 - - 909,000 0.00% 8 Risk Management 319,000 13,644 296,063 22,937 92.81% Reserves: Centerpiece Operating 353,000 - - 353,000 0.00% 9 Service Level Stabilization 5,464,000 - - 5,464,000 0.00% 11 Winter Weather 505,000 - - 505,000 0.00% 11 Civic Facilities Capital 4,040,000 - - 4,040,000 0.00% 3 Total Other Funds Expenditures: $ 38,112,060 $ 1,087,088 2,899,094 $ 35,212,966 7.61% 05/17/2011 2:54 PM City of Spokane Valley Investment Report For the Month of April 2011 Total LGIP* BB CD 2 Investments Beginning $ 44,587,488.56 $ 3,022,494.34 $ 47,609,982.90 Deposits 1,499,961.46 - $ 1,499,961.46 Withdrawls (2,000,000.00) - $ (2,000,000.00) Interest 6,239.23 - $ 6,239.23 Ending $ 44,093,689.25 $ 3,022,494.34 $ 47,116,183.59 Balances by Fund 001 General Fund $ 25,369,814.53 101 Street Fund 3,117,816.94 103 Trails& Paths 37,806.06 105 Hotel/Motel 254,440.29 120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve 332,569.19 121 Service Level Stabilization Reserve 5,167,591.86 122 Winter Weather Reserve 501,248.62 123 Civic Facilities Replacement 1,191,536.71 301 Capital Projects 1,044,823.18 302 Special Capital Projects 1,055,035.68 304 Mirabeau Point Project 26,395.77 309 Parks Capital Project 1,023,640.12 310 Civic Buildings Capital Projects 5,553,207.10 402 Stormwater Management 1,553,458.05 501 Equipment Rental & Replacement 871,733.49 502 Risk Management 15,066.02 $ 47,116,183.61 Rounding $ 0.02 *Local Government Investment Pool City of Spokane Valley Sales Tax Receipts Month by Month Comparison Year to date Month Percentage Received 2010 2011 Change February $ 1,693,974.29 $ 1,659,128.77 -2.06% March 1,097,126.08 1,131,012.49 -0.03% April 1,160,934.77 1,149,483.10 -0.31% May 1,349,758.63 June 1,252,377.28 July 1,271,607.01 August 1,442,679.59 September 1,380,147.05 October 1,354,001.39 November 1,452,269.26 December 1,301,846.34 January 2011 1,299,191.80 2012 $ 16,055,913.49 $ 3,939,624.36 FOOTNOTES 1 Most costs are typically late in the year. 2 Debt paid twice each year(June and December.) 3 Capital projects often take a number of years to plan, engineer, acquire right of way and construct. 4 Most property tax received in May and November. 5 Estimated 6 Interest earnings. 7 Beg. Bal. included in budget which understates percent realized for current year 8 For replacement of vehicles & computers. 9 Required operating reserve, no expenditures planned for 2011. 10 Quarterly Payment to City. 11 Emergency use only. 12 Fund being phased out. 13 Budget adjustment needed 14 In reserve for replacement of buildings. 15 Accounting adjustment pending 16 Budget includes ending fund balances, which understates % realized 17 Interest rates are down significantly. 18 Shows revenue earned, some will not be collected. 05/17/2011 2:54 PM MEMO TO: Mike Jackson, City Manager FROM: Rick VanLeuven, Chief of Police DATE: May 16,2011 RE: Monthly Report April 2011 April 2011: April 2010: CAD incidents: 4,196 CAD incidents: 5,099 Reports taken: 1,487 Reports taken: 1,514 Traffic stops: 1,133 Traffic stops: 1,858 Traffic reports: 283 Traffic reports: 282 CAD incidents indicate calls for service as well as self-initiated officer contacts. Hot spot maps are attached showing April residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, traffic collision hot spots and vehicle prowling hot spots, along with April 2011 stolen vehicle hot spots. Also attached are nine bar graphs for 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011: commercial burglary, garage burglary, residential burglary, forgery, malicious mischief, stolen vehicles,theft,vehicle prowling,and property crimes comparisons for 2007 through 2010. ADMINISTRATIVE: Chief VanLeuven attended the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) sponsored State and Local Anti-Terrorism Training (SLATT) Program Workshop in Richland WA at the beginning of April. Topics discussed included Muslim Culture vs. Radical Violent Extremism,The Psychopathology of Hate Groups,and Explosives,Methods and Attacks. Chief VanLeuven was on-call for one week this month;Lt. Lyons also took on-call for one week during April. Chief VanLeuven attended the Our Kids: Our Business 5th Celebration Luncheon at the Spokane Convention Center in mid-April. This year's theme was Minds in the Making—Our Future Workforce. The Drug Enforcement Administration and its partners held their second National Prescription Drug Take-Back Day at the end of April 30th,with the Spokane Valley Police Precinct being one of the national sites. This was a great opportunity to safely and responsibly disposal of expired or unwanted prescription drugs. COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING: S.C.O.P.E.participated in the following events during the month of April: ➢ S.C.O.P.E.Basic Training ➢ S.C.O.P.E. Training: Bicycle Safety and OFID ➢ Take 25 planning meeting ➢ Paint a Helmet Event at the Spokane County Fairgrounds ➢ SVFD Wellness event at Valley Hospital ➢ Valley YMCA Kids Safety event ➢ "Our Kids: Our Business" Luncheon ➢ Girl Scouts Luncheon and presentation ➢ "Spokane Moves"Bike Helmet Safety promotion ➢ United Methodist Church Community Safety meeting ➢ Bicycle Safety at Broadway Elementary School ➢ Greater Spokane Substance Abuse Council Coalition meeting ➢ GSSAC Drug Free Community Meeting ➢ Operation Family ID Page 1 ➢ Community Emergency Response Team(CERT)meeting; and, ➢ Child Sexual Predator Task Force meeting S.C.O.P.E.brought in 31 new Volunteers to the organization this month. April 2011 Volunteers Hours per station: Location #Volunteers Admin Hours L.E.Hours Total Hours Central Valley 18 750.5 144.5 895.0 Edgecliff 26 814.0 10.0 824.0 Trentwood 5 175.0 68.0 243.0 University 20 595.0 127.0 722.0 TOTALS 69 2,334.5 349.5 2,684.0 S.C.O.P.E. Incident Response Team(SIRT)volunteers contributed 107 on-scene hours(including travel time)in April, responding to crime scenes, structure fires, motor vehicle accidents and providing traffic control. Of those hours, 58 hours were for incidents in the City of Spokane Valley. Total April volunteer hours contributed by SIRT,including training, stand-by,response and special events is 509 year-to-date total is 2,105 hours. There were four juveniles who ran away from their residence in Spokane Valley a total of 18 times during the month of April 2011. Abandoned vehicles tagged by S.C.O.P.E. volunteers for impoundment in the Spokane Valley in March totaled 10 and in April 18, with 2 and 9 respectively, vehicles eventually cited and towed. Eleven were processed in March and 33 hulks processed in April. During the month of April,a total of 87 vehicles were processed. S.C.O.P.E.DISABLED PARKING ACTIVITY REPORT JANUARY-DECEMBER 2011 Citv of Spokane Valley #of Vol. #of Hrs #of Disabled #of #of Non- Infractions Warnings Disabled Issued Issued Infractions Issued January 7 51 5 1 5 February 10 87 6 1 0 March 8 89 16 0 4 April 11 130 15 0 3 Total 36 357 42 2 12 S.C.O.P.E.DISABLED PARKING ACTIVITY REPORT(cont.) Spokane County #of Vol. #of Hrs #of Disabled #of #of Non- Infractions Warnings Disabled Issued Issued Infractions Issued January 8 42 1 0 0 February 7 3815 0 0 0 March 9 42.5 1 4 0 April 8 46 1 7 7 Total 32 168.75 3 11 7 Page 2 OPERATIONS: Commercial Burglar Arrested - Officers were dispatched to the Pines Manor Apartments on North Pines after a witness called 9-1-1 and reported hearing and seeing a suspect break into the manager's office. Officer Jeremy Howe was first to arrive and spotted the male suspect running from the office with a lockbox under his arm. He pursued and quickly captured the suspect. Inside the lockbox were cash, checks, and other rental receipts and paperwork. The suspect told officers he had been suspended for two days without pay from his job and had gambled away most of his paycheck trying to win enough money to cover his rent. When that didn't pan out, he found himself at the apartment complex. Officer Mark Brownell arrested the male suspect and booked him into the Spokane County Jail on a felony count of Second-Degree Burglary. Commercial Diesel Fuel Spill-A Spokane Valley commercial driver lost as much as 100 gallons of diesel fuel on busy North Sullivan Road. Sgt. Dale Golman said fuel began spilling from a vehicle in the southbound lanes of 3400 North Sullivan Road mid-morning. The trail of diesel continued south and into the left turn lane for Euclid, then about another two blocks eastbound on Euclid. It appeared that the driver of the leaking vehicle stopped there and fixed or stopped the leak. He did not report the spill to police and instead drove away leaving a quarter-mile long mess for officers and firefighters to eliminate. Lanes on Sullivan Road were closed to traffic while crews attempted to clean up the diesel fuel. SVPD worked under unified command with Spokane Valley Public Works during this investigation to facilitate traffic control and clean up. The commercial driver was eventually identified and cited for driving with defective equipment. Spokane Valley Man Arrested in Stolen Vehicle - A 31-year-old Spokane Valley man was arrested after his suspicious driving caught the eye of police Sergeant Matt Smith. Smith was patrolling the area of University and Valleyway about 10:30 p.m. when he noticed a gray sport utility vehicle driving slowly through the neighborhood. The sergeant began following at a distance and watched as the vehicle slowed near numerous residences, but never stopped. After following the SUV in a large circuitous route through the residential area, Smith closed distance and discovered the vehicle had no back license plate. He stopped it and identified the driver. A check of the male suspect's driving status showed his license is suspended and that he had three outstanding misdemeanor warrants for driving while license suspended. Smith arrested the driver and then ran the Dodge Durango's vehicle identification number. The Dodge returned as a stolen vehicle. It had been reported stolen by the manager of Blue Chip Motors earlier Wednesday and this male had been listed as the suspect. Smith drove the male suspect to the Spokane County Jail and booked him on his warrants, a fresh count of Third-Degree Driving while License Suspended and a felony count of Possession of a Stolen Motor Vehicle. The Dodge was returned to the dealership. This underscores one of the important reasons officers enforce driving while license suspended violations. Three Hurt in Spokane Valley Collision - Police say a combination of speed, alcohol and no seatbelts sent three people to the hospital in Spokane Valley on a late Monday night. Police believe the 21-year-old male driver was under the influence of alcohol when he ran the stop sign at 4th and Bowdish. The male suffered numerous internal injuries and was in critical condition when taken to the hospital. He was driving west on Fourth in a 1996 Honda Civic just after midnight when he t-boned a 1984 Chevrolet pickup driven by a 43- year-old Spokane Valley woman, who was headed north on Bowdish. The Chevy pickup truck was hit so hard both vehicles skidded over 35 feet. The woman was not wearing a seat belt and was ejected, landing under the front of her vehicle, where she suffered burns on her arms and cuts on her face. A passenger with the male suspect was treated at a hospital and released. An investigation of the accident is continuing. "The number one purpose of a seatbelt is to prevent ejection," Spokane Valley Police Corporal Dave Thornburg said. Officers Seek Tobacco Thief- A burglar smashed glass from a front window of the Broadway Mini Mart and escaped with a half-dozen or more packages of cigarettes. Officers received an alarm from the business minutes after midnight and arrived to find glass smashed from a window. When the owner arrived, they entered the business and viewed security video which showed the suspect jumping onto the counter and taking packs of cigarettes from a display rack. A K-9 team tracked the suspect to the east from the business, but no viable suspect was found. Anyone with information regarding the break-in is encouraged to call Crime Check at 456- 2233. Page 3 Repeat Shoplifter Arrested for Burglary - A 36-year-old Spokane woman was arrested for Second-Degree Burglary after she returned to the Spokane Valley Wal-Mart to steal merchandise after having been banned from the business after a previous theft. Officer Tom Walker checked her name through police records and learned she was already wanted on warrants charging her with theft and drug possession. At Wal-Mart,he learned that the female suspect had been "trespassed" from all Wal-Mart stores when she was caught shoplifting in October 2010. On this visit, the suspect had attempted to steal more than $80 in men's clothing. Walker arrested the female and drove her to the Spokane County Jail where he booked her on her two outstanding warrants and fresh counts of burglary and Third-Degree Theft. Cell Phone Leads to Cell Stay - A 15-year-old Spokane Valley resident was arrested after he left his cellular phone inside a vehicle that he had prowled the previous night. The victim, a woman living in the 10100 block of East Fourth,reported to Crime Check that she parked her car in front of her home Sunday evening. When she went out to the car Monday morning, she discovered it had been entered and several items had been stolen. She also discovered a cellular phone on the front seat that didn't belong to her. She checked the addresses and called the one marked "mom." The woman who answered said that the phone belonged to her 15-year-old son. Officer Darell Stidham received the report and obtained the phone from the victim. He contacted the teen suspect and learned that the stolen items were hidden beneath his bed at his home. Stidham and the suspect recovered the stolen property from beneath the bed. Placing the teen into handcuffs,the officer frisked him and recovered a metal pipe containing unburned marijuana from his clothing. Stidham drove the suspect to Spokane County Juvenile Detention and booked him on charges of Third-Degree Possession of Stolen Property, Third- Degree Theft,Vehicle Prowling and Possession of Marijuana. Carjacking suspects located by Air-1—Shortly after assisting officers with the location and arrest of a reckless driver, around 11 pm on a Saturday night in late April,Air-1 once again helped ground units arrest two robbery suspects. Two male suspects were both arrested for 1st degree robbery and possession of a stolen vehicle after Spokane Valley Police units responded to the area of 9300 E 1st Ave on the report of carjacking. During the investigation, Deputy Lamont Peterson found the stolen 2001 Volkswagen Bug used in the robbery near Bowman on Cataldo. The VW was stopped on the side of the road, but no one was inside it. Deputy David Lawhorn arrived in the area to assist and set up north of Cataldo on the east side of Park for scene containment. As Deputy Lawhorn was sitting at his location monitoring the area, Air-1 flew over and advised there was something in the grass on the west side of Park from where he was parked. Air-1 was using its forward looking infra-red(FLIR)and found the two suspects hiding in the grass near a fence. After other ground units arrived on scene, Deputy Lawhorn made contact with the two males, who were identified and taken into custody. The victims in this case were able to positively identify the suspects after a "show up" was done. Items of the victims were also found in the suspects' possession. Arrest Made in Cold Case Homicide - Sheriff's major crimes detectives in early May arrested a 58-year-old suspect in the November 1992 murder of a Spokane Valley furniture store owner. The male suspect was arrested by Detectives Lyle Johnston and Mike Drapeau in Stanwood,Washington and booked into jail there on a First-Degree Murder charge. He has since been transferred to the Spokane County Jail. On November 7, 1992, Brian Cole and his wife were working late in their East Sprague business, Cole's Traditions in Oak, a furniture store. A man entered the store and demanded their money, stating this was a "stickup." Brian responded by saying,"You're kidding?" The suspect produced a pistol and began aiming it at both of the Coles. They explained to the suspect that most customers paid for furniture by check or credit card and that they didn't have any cash. Mrs. Cole handed the robber $18 from her purse. The suspect ordered them to the back of the store. Mrs. Cole used a scooter because of her multiple sclerosis and Brian asked the robber if he was going to hurt a handicapped woman. The man said he `just might." Brian attempted to overpower the suspect and was shot in the head and chest. Although he managed to call 911,he died of his injuries at Spokane Valley Medical Center. During the struggle, Brian was able to rip off the suspect's baseball cap and sunglasses. Detectives worked the case extensively, and the case was featured on America's Most Wanted in January 1993. Still, no suspect was developed. In December 2010, a review of the case revealed some evidence that had not been submitted for DNA testing. It was, and on April 18th, Det. Johnston received notification that DNA on the Page 4 evidence had been matched to a male suspect's DNA profile, on record from a previous conviction and incarceration in the federal prison system. Johnston researched the suspect's history and learned that he was not incarcerated at the time of the murder and that his name had been checked by law enforcement agencies in Seattle, Montana and Nevada during 1992, 1993 and 1994. National crime databases showed he had prior convictions for kidnapping, rape, robbery and unlawful possession of a firearm. On April 20th, Det. Johnston spoke with FBI Special Agent Frank Harrill about robberies the suspect had previously been convicted of committing, and he learned that the suspect wore similar disguises during the course of those crimes — fake beard,hat and trench coat. Based on the DNA match and supporting events and information, Johnston obtained an arrest warrant charging the male suspect with one count of First-Degree Murder in connection with the death of Brian Cole in Spokane County as a result of homicidal violence which occurred during the commission of a felony crime, robbery. Detectives were able to quickly locate the male suspect in Stanwood because he is a convicted sex/kidnap offender and must register his home address with law enforcement there. Suspect in Knife Assault Located and Arrested — Officers were contacted by personnel at Valley Hospital regarding a victim who had been transported to the hospital with a laceration from ear to ear as well as a stab wound in the back. Following up on leads, officers quickly located the incident location where a party had been going on and the victim and suspect had fought. The suspect was found to be a confirmed gang member and when located at his residence, was found to have blood stains on his person and clothing. He was booked into the Spokane County Jail that evening on 1st degree Assault charges. Those charges were upgraded to 1st Degree Attempted Murder after further investigation by detectives. KUDO: Sgt. Mark Nygren is a deputy with the Spokane County Sheriffs Office, assigned to the Spokane Valley Precinct, and has served Spokane County for over 23 years. Mark's hard work and dedication have been instrumental in the upgrading of the laptop system used by the officers of the Sheriffs Office. Countless long hours and a desire to make things better have reduced the repair turn time for the portable laptops from 1 - 2 months down to 1 - 3 days. He has also been responsible for improving the recurring training in the department, providing 12 new training sessions. Mark is a true professional and exemplifies the standards set forth by the Spokane County Sheriffs Office. He was recognized by the Spokane County Commissioners as Spokane County's Employee of the Quarter for the first quarter of 2011. Shooting Inquiries Complete - Inquiries into the circumstances surrounding the August 25th fatal shooting of Spokane Valley resident Scott Creach have been completed by both the sheriffs Citizen Advisory Board and Deadly Force Review Board, and both panels echoed the Spokane County Prosecutor's decision that Officer Brian Hirzel was reasonable and justified in his use of force. On that date, Officer Hirzel parked his plain-marked patrol car in the parking lot of The Plant Farm, a nursery owned by Creach, in order to complete paperwork and to watch a nearby residence where a person had requested a prowl check. Creach apparently spotted the car in the parking lot. Armed with a pistol which was his custom, he approached Hirzel who was unable to exit his car in time to take cover. Hirzel drew his pistol, identified himself as a police officer and ordered Creach to drop his gun. Mr. Creach was argumentative, but eventually put his pistol in the waistband of his pants. He backed up several steps and Hirzel was able to exit his patrol car while telling him to keep his hands visible. Hirzel ordered Creach to the ground in order to restrain and disarm him,but Creach refused. The officer struck him once on the leg with his baton in an attempt to gain compliance, but Creach did not fall and instead reached for the pistol. When Hirzel saw the butt of the pistol as Creach was drawing it,he fired a single shot which struck Creach in the chest. He later died from his injury. In his review of the incident, Chief Criminal Deputy Jack Driscoll noted that Officer Hirzel was in full uniform in an unmarked police car equipped with push bars, a spotlight, numerous antennas and a full compliment of police equipment inside. He was in a place he was legally entitled to be, and the fact that the patrol car was not marked is of no consequence to the use of force issue. "There is no indication that Hirzel acted with malice toward Mr. Creach. They had no prior history and did not know each other. This appears to be a tragic situation where an officer,because he felt he was about to be shot, felt no other recourse but to use deadly force after Mr. Page 5 Creach repeatedly failed to comply with the officer's commands." Driscoll wrote that Deputy Hirzel was justified in his use of force and that under these facts, Deputy Hirzel cannot be held criminally liable for his use of force. Subsequent to the prosecutor's decision, the incident was reviewed internally by the sheriff's Deadly Force Review Board which is composed of subject matter experts within the agency. The intent is to determine if the deputy acted within reasonable parameters of law and training. The board reviewed the investigative file as well as Prosecutor Driscoll's decision, and on February 11t'` advised Sheriff Knezovich that it was unanimously decided that Deputy Brian Hirzel's use of force in this incident was reasonable based on policies of the Spokane County Sheriffs Office. A second review on the incident and the investigation itself was conducted by the Spokane County Sheriff s Citizen Advisory Board. The board is comprised of 12 citizens and it reviews some case files in order to determine if the investigation was handled in an appropriate manner. The board reviewed the investigative files for two weeks and then returned with specific questions and concerns. On March 14th the board met directly with investigators and subject matter experts from the both the sheriffs office and Spokane Police Department. This briefing was monitored by SPD Ombudsman Tim Burns. The membership reported to Sheriff Knezovich that (the experts/investigators') presentations were "invaluable to understanding of the files, timeline and scene of the incident. The questions and concerns of the Advisory Board were answered completely and with transparency." A letter to the sheriff dated April 11th, stated "We, the Citizens Advisory Board, unanimously found that the investigation was handled in an appropriate, professional and thorough manner. During our review, we found the investigation was a well organized and coordinated effort among multi-agencies. We felt that though this was a tragic incident, Sheriffs Deputy Brian Hirzel acted in a reasonable manner based on our review of the case files. We appreciate the sheriffs Office for their full support in our review, transparency of the investigation and production of the documentation they presented to the Advisory Board." A final internal review of the investigation is underway, based on concerns and issues the Creach family have expressed to the sheriff. The inquiry is expected to be complete by the end of May. A copy of the letter from the Citizens Advisory Board as well as a description of the Citizens Advisory Board are attached. Page 6 AHIi � April 11;2011 Ozzie Knezovich,Sheriff Spokane County Sheriffs Office Public Safety Building. 1100 W.Mallon Spokane,Washington 99260 Sheriff Knezovich, On February 14,2011,Undersheriff Jeff Tower presented The Citizens Advisory Board with the investigation files for the officer involved shooting at the Plant Farm in the City of the Spokane Valley-As members of the Sheriff s Department Citizen's Advisory Board we were reviewing the case files in order to determine if the investigation was handled in an appropriate manner. In the two weeks following,we reviewed the files and came up with specific questions and concerns regarding the investigation_ On March?,2011,we niet again and collaborated on the questions and requested Investigators and Subject Matter Experts from the Sheriff's department to meet with us_They were to address questions and clarify items not understood in the investigation. On March 14,2011,we met directly with the Investigators and Subject Matter Experts.They spent a great deal of time going over our questions and concerns_ Their presentations were invaluable to the understanding of the files, timeline and scene of the incident.The questions and concerns of the Advisory Board were answered completely and with transparency. We,the Citizens Advisory Board.unanimously found that the investigation was handled in an appropriate, professional and thorough manner_During our review we found the investigation was a well organized and coordinated effort among multi-agencies_We felt that though this was a tragic incident.Sheriffs Deputy Brian Hirzel acted in a reasonable manner based on our review of the case files.We appreciate the Sheriff's department for their full support in our review,transparency of the investigation and production of the documentation they presented to the Advisory Board_ Sincerely, The Citizens Advisory Board: Chuck G.Parker,Chairmen Leigh O'Neill Marie Palac.huk Mike Davisson John F.Bergman Jr. Kenneth L.Winn Mehrdad Samadi Larry Marlett Kelly Crockett Mary M.Lewis John P.Nollette Skip Johnson Page 1 of 2 Page 7 Cc: Spokane County Commissioners The City of the Spokane Valley City Council The City of Spokane City Council Washington State Patrol Brian Hirzel KREM KXLY KHQ The Spokesniin Review Page 8 SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE CITIZEN ADVISORY BOARD PURPOSE A close relationship between the 5pokdne County Sheriffs Office and the Community 15 an essential part of a responsive and responsible Sookarre County govemment. The benefits pf such d relatonshtp are immeasurable For not only the Sherin CNlce, but also the citizens and business community. The 5hariff"s Advisor Uoa.rd wr1I be a means of enharrdng pelicefoornmunity relations,,communications, and community confidante, FUNCrIQNS OF THE BARD • Acct In an advisory capacity to the Sheriff. • Represent the interests of the member's groups as well es the interests of the public at large, - • Advise the Sheriff on Issues and concerns involving it teradIon between the Sheriff's Office and ririz.ns in the community,as well as for specific irlcideritt involving agency polieles and procedures- . Assist in educating the community about agency p Iici 2nd prooaduresr and the community-based philosophy of operation. • Provide input and feedback On Sheriffs Office programs and projecl2s, and advise the Sheriff about negative law enforcement needs of the oornmmity, • Communicate Inrormanon about the 5henr5 Office and its goals to- the citizens that are served. NON-FUNCTION OF THE BOARD • The Advisory ,Board shall have no Gower or authority to investigate, review, or otherwise participate in matters im+olwing specific Sheriffs personnel or specific Sheriff's office-related events unless dIrcttcd to do to by the sheriff. APROINTMENT-TERMS - The high School member appointment to the Board will be for a one-year term. • The Sheriff may remove members at will at any time prior to the end of their term. • The Sheriff has the authority to disband the Citizen's Advisory Board. • Members may remain in office until their Successors are appointed and confirmed, Page 9 • Vecariaes occurring by termination, reSognatian, or expiration shall he filled in the same manner as the original appointments_ [4MPENSATT011 • All Board members shalt be appointed by the Sheriff and shall Serye without compensation, ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERSHIP • The Board shalt not exceed 25 members and should normally have not Fewer than 15 members. MEETINGS • lrh Bra shall have at least one regular meeting per quarter on such day of the month and as may be determined by the Board. • Special meetings may be field as necessary. • AN meetings of the Board shall be open to the public, except as otherwise provided for in the S#te Open Pubic Meeting Act, • For purpOSin of Conducting the Board's business and for other purposes, a quorum of the Board shall consist of five or more members, Any action taken by the majority of those present, when those present constitute a quorum at regular or special meetings of the Boom,shall be deemed and taken as the action and decision of the Board, ▪ The Board shall elect such officers,as it deems rtieeesSary h order to conduct business. • The Board Shah adopt such rules of procedure,as It de erns necessary. • The Board shall tape record or keep minutes of all meetings held and business transacted. • All records shall be open for public Insipedion, except thOSe that may be exempt from public disclosure under Stake law. ATTENDANCE • Members who fail to attend three conser:utive regular meetings may be considered to have vacatcd their pasikipnS and may be replaced at the Sheriffs Li5cretipn, 2 Page 10 2011 APRIL CRIME REPORT To date: Yearly totals: Apr-11 Apr-10 2011 2010 2,010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 BURGLARY 97 66 319 303 936 725 753 584 714 744 FORGERY 36 25 131 105 341 297 354 365 334 464 MALICIOUS MISCHIEF 95 98 346 343 1183 1245 893 1,265 1,122 904 NON-CRIMINAL 6 69 101 284 917 892 944 839 811 749 PROPERTY OTHER 82 78 305 330 837 933 828 890 982 1,154 RECOVERED VEHICLES 22 25 65 103 365 187 319 343 403 333 STOLEN VEHICLES 31 37 143 162 496 298 496 478 711 603 THEFT 185 168 709 691 2365 2162 1,846 1,881 1,888 2,256 UIOBC 0 0 0 0 3 4 4 8 11 8 VEHICLE OTHER 0 0 1 1 3 5 7 3 3 5 VEHICLE PROWLING 107 103 403 439 1395 920 1069 682 937 958 TOTAL PROPERTY CRIMES 661 669 2,486 2,761 8,852 7,668 7,513 7,338 7,916 8,178 ASSAULT 66 68 269 288 895 927 869 853 846 894 DOA/SUICIDE 21 13 75 64 188 210 269 221 167 159 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 44 103 360 386 1297 1226 1063 874 736 762 HOMICIDE 0 0 3 0 1 3 3 1 5 1 KIDNAP 1 4 5 7 16 21 16 23 22 35 MENTAL 24 30 80 109 289 310 360 350 425 425 MP 6 8 33 33 128 115 95 83 88 97 PERSONS OTHER 189 134 548 609 1692 1621 1,354 1,337 1,159 1,256 ROBBERY 36 8 51 24 68 75 71 60 58 56 TELEPHONE HARASSMENT 11 13 45 43 153 159 95 73 83 92 TOTAL MAJOR CRIMES 365 381 1436 1563 4727 4,667 4,195 3,875 3,589 3,777 ADULT RAPE 5 2 15 13 44 35 44 43 29 39 CHILD ABUSE 9 8 41 36 115 159 148 104 78 101 CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE 20 28 71 54 206 157 86 92 105 88 SEX REGISTRATION F 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 3 6 INDECENT LIBERTIES 1 0 5 2 8 10 11 18 15 9 CHILD MOLESTATION 1 4 17 11 47 35 66 46 69 67 CHILD RAPE 5 3 12 5 28 35 39 31 62 35 RUNAWAY 59 45 179 134 490 440 369 295 309 311 SEX OTHER 4 12 31 66 215 211 179 194 203 181 STALKING 0 1 4 2 18 15 21 17 17 27 SUSPICIOUS PERSON 28 23 102 78 215 175 142 152 177 244 TOTAL SEX CRIMES 132 126 477 401 1387 1271 1,108 996 1,067 1,108 DRUG 46 56 202 231 541 670 838 807 665 891 ITF OTHER 0 0 2 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 TOTAL ITF 46 56 204 231 542 671 838 808 665 891 TOTAL TRAFFIC REPORTS 283 282 1144 1130 3081 3,183 3,811 3,800 3,345 2,403 TOTAL REPORTS RECEIVED 1,487 1,514 5,747 6,086 18,589 17,460 17,465 16,817 16,582 16,357 EITORtial Bride 3y -- i� 'a\to 3!e����Y���f�!,�a—..Ern•i re ug,.o .noo ` a mia offEwEPre wpm YI t !�rY�-- ' Alki �iniM�IM � j,��.� -N.•w• �.unu r:w E� J■n■�WIE271eJ tests .LlllJ YI ., ' "� �1�^l�TY1litFIM6� a YIY -►:IC'Iwi� -141•4611n� L k �. YVia1 -4th e-- -I.w' rm�i \° - F.-e.ii.1� �r-ter ' .... F/`-I�� p �11t ElraiNaninialliEFIVERIE I 1� YI �1. YI .ill-�:, �\,i � c� •�i'����� _.� �. "9:Af 18th a etc �iarili F� w�l� r i 0, Jenn �acK a i-!.lill■ °Ii 1. ``aMi MINI ---•l1lI�J 1 a#..s-111 ��F��i ``f l:Vl--- i 32nd 1 0 �11',1E1 r' a53"'ii E7uplI7 �fr�.=y1 Traffic Collisions 0 1 0 2 0 3 I-1 Low I-1 Medium Medium or High 2011 April Traffic Collision Hotspots 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 Spokane Valley Commercial Burglary 1i 1 1 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC •2008 2009 ❑2010 ■2011 Clements lin • nd ir Freder ash IMF; 0 Brid•ey ■ ' wlL'�amor=i. �a�to •�eilL���111111wallsEn•ire "cr tri 1141 ox 8 Fruit °Hill Walla anson 0 Y Ilesle I rat I 0 Lacros_ 5 In t ial PaI I Urial ■1.1211! MINN MEM IPPIIP Boone 1 .y�� nevi aii7 I11�7JC1-L' PEREINIMEN Broadwa rounds EaMA uh } Alki 3rd MVP/ Intairgkra ide pea S•r ague 1 1 !-MaLlas ti Granite TreO o J oCourtl m nd Euclid Marie Euclid 111� 0 ial J!1J11!UI,J to Edumidi IIE Sh.nnon sfield Broadwa Al 1111!!1C Mumma 0 y Broadwa w Rive!�"�.Yil lenb IML a fa O��do •p Joa•wa�� Mission ∎ma===r 0 - ��u1 002 4th �BMNIU 111 9 Saslow Nommymwe �` �__ym��'s !'JR1G1lIA■�� '14th ■�R 21st 25th 27th 31st 32nd E W 2 Jenn e 10 random point 44th l311�, �`411L •iiu i liir•i r 18th m Sy a . m r,==uuw 12t IA E! •• �1!111y „� Mrlill O 'e LLyY � 11111111111111h.7 m Main wan 2nd OREM 14./NI I W . � 44th 5) Ira==r , [1R,�,.. ��: 1� r+,aliCl�s��•.1 �IE == ■cr_.• \ • 1i N111==•N'yi I 1�R�Nod !mamma jai "AT O K1LT1-6171 vas 2 '1/Do 2 st 0 < � 32nd /� e 44th co RoCk°test ° Wi 1t Commercial Burglaries 0 1 02 n Low or Medium High 0.5 Miles 2011 April Commercial Burglary Hotspots Map Produced: 10 May 2011 50 - 45 40 - 35 - 30 - 25 - 20 - 15 - 10 - Spokane Valley Forgery 1 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■2008 2009 ❑2010 ■2011 35 30 25 20 15 10 Spokane Valley Garage Burglary 1 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC •2008 2009 ❑2010 ■2011 180 - 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 - 20 - Spokane Valley Malicious Mischief 1 1 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 112008 2009 ❑2010 ■2011 ■ 1 2500 - 2000 1500 1000 500 Spokane Valley Property Crimes Comparisons (2011 is through April) 1 Commercial Burglary Residential Burglary Forgery Malicious Mischief Stolen Vehicle Theft ■2008 al 2009 12010 ■2011 Spokane Valley Residential Burglary 1 1 I 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■2008 2009 ❑2010 ■2011 ill :mum_ I w 12i IAIL��� _Qasr�r�E7■Tra c.. .iw�vu�s�����■f ikl 111 I Mm 2alg Residential Burglaries 0 1 0 2 I—I Low Miles 2011 April Residential Burglary Hotspots EITORtial Ki=�Lt�� Brid■.:1111111: 111§111111111 11111•11 111411111 Broadwa Ewa 1Y11® }; 11116 rai� AMEN Ems' Iag147I `�1 Rice and e• so k. „or- r ��� �� -��' � S O 12nh APENT E _ rte+„ - •"i ■ � !NINE!11 4th ■�=4th L . ^� 4t rast�-�� ! —•u � G7L�©�iiit N K IBM —go•m nr�F1Ur--F]��3'—muti ■a, ■ '•I�I� :. �1 LL1! y we L.�� �� : A��'�II■ . A 1w,��> A � 11t I�h�04.� -�-�- ---Rlli w 12t ■ �� ��'!,®----`�l� r�lumpi mh1,'w ��z� iwr • v---�'����► ieti:�l���a■�. �i■l���il�a`a Jenn acK a \ --t@1l1—m-■ a te 7m rr �"•G TN ytia 2: iw—i1��1P�p���`�T�:• ��� R--M g/ PO" 10 ` . � � aTLJ `EFrai�n:1 l� ��ifill� �r il �5th ��1� taSe• 32nd • random ]a. 1 � nr �✓,J� 0 Stolen Vehicles 0 1 0 2 0 3- 4 r— Low ME Medium High Miles 2011 March & April Stolen Vehicle Hotspots 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Spokane Valley Stolen Vehicles fi h I JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■2008 2009 ❑2010 ■2011 250 - 200 150 Spokane Valley Theft 100 - 50 - 0 1 i 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 112008 2009 ❑2010 ■2011 Bride S -- ,alto ■—..I�i111E<1�i�L1� IIMillllNMM Em•ire410 pal mows wig■ Pow" IIPPit r Rpm '`I110�i1�� , Sh•.�Ij l�jll 190 ,` L ndia Nora�li 01 ��C % yy01�� 01��01�� •PI �:L•- .vim- "I�ilf li�plllplump terliliniimm mg,�I�:lli11+�•� „mu Vehicle Prowling 0 1 0 2 0 3 Low ME Medium IP High 2011 April Vehicle Prowling Hotspots 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 Spokane Valley Vehicle Prowling 1 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC • 2008 2009 ❑2010 ■2011 Spokane Walley PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT April 2011 AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICES ADOPTED AND IN OPERATION • Emergency After Hours Call-out— Senske • Engineering Services Support—Agreements with private engineering firms • Landscaping Contract— Spokane ProCare • Litter and Weed Control — Spokane County Geiger Work Crew • Solid Waste - Regional Solid Waste Interlocal • Street Maintenance —2011 Signal, Sign & Striping County Interlocal • Street Sweeping —AAA sweeping • Street and Stormwater Maintenance and Repair contract—Poe Asphalt Paving Inc. • Street Maintenance (Pines & Trent) —WSDOT Interlocal • Vactoring Contract—AAA Sweeping WASTEWATER Status of the process can be monitored at: http://www.spokaneriver.net/ http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/tmdl/spokaneriver/dissolved oxygen/status.html http://www.spokanecounty.org/utilities/WaterReclamation/content.aspx?c=2224 and http://www.spokaneriverpartners.com/ REGIONAL SOLID WASTE SYSTEM Solid Waste Liaison Board and the Solid Waste Governance Task Force will continue to discuss Regional Governance. STREET MASTER PLAN JUB Engineers completed the traffic counts/accident data collection and evaluation. They have also completed the street pavement ratings on one half of the city's arterials and one third of the residential streets. Results are being compiled and evaluated. A report to council on the updated pavement management program will be scheduled in the near future. CAPITAL PROJECTS (See attached Capital Projects Spreadsheet) 1 STREET & STORMWATER MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY The following is a summary of Public Works/Contractor maintenance activities in the City of Spokane Valley for April 2011: Winter Street and Stormwater Maintenance Items: • AAA continued cleaning underground stormwater structures under the Vactoring Services Agreement. • AAA is sweeping arterials and began residential sweeping. • Poe Asphalt graded gravel roadways • Poe Asphalt completed several asphalt repairs and shouldered gravel shoulders along arterials throughout the city. STORMWATER • Small Improvement Projects for 2011 These projects are individually estimated to be less than $30,000, address street flooding problems, and involve excavation work. 1. 8th and Park— replace failing drainfield, provide improved treatment including swales if possible. Awaiting survey/design, to be assigned to a 2011 Small Works Contract. 2. 11th and Herald — improve catchbasins and rehabilitate existing failing UIC. Awaiting survey/design, to be assigned to a 2011 Small Works Contract. 3. 13618 E. 4th (west of Evergreen) — replace existing pipe sump with deep catch basin and a Drywell, replace existing soil with pervious gravel from mailboxes to new pavement and new catch basin. Project ranks below all other projects being considered for this year. Staff talked with adjacent property owner who indicated that the problem appears to have subsided. Design is to be delayed for future year. 4. 32nd and Bowdish intersection, north leg — mitigate ongoing stormwater ponding. Evaluating various alternatives, including possible larger Bowdish stormwater improvements from 32nd to 16th. 5. Park and Valleyway— replace failing drain field, provide improved treatment including swales if possible. Awaiting survey, anticipated for future Small Works Contract. 6. Evergreen and 17th — replace existing failing drain field, provide additional treatment through catchbasins. Awaiting topo survey. Design/Construction scheduled for 2011. 7. Woodward & 35th - replace existing failing drain field, provide additional treatment through catchbasins. Awaiting topo survey. Design/Construction scheduled for 2011. 8. Archery & Farr— improve capture of runoff through installation of improved inlet structures, mitigate for pine needle debris, and protect/improve existing drain fields. Awaiting topo survey. Design in 2011, Schedule improvements for 2011 or later. • Stormwater Capital Improvement Projects These projects are estimated to be over$30,000, address larger flooding and water quality problems, and/or make major improvements to bring systems closer to current standards. 1. 14th Avenue, Custer to Chronicle— mitigates erosion undermining existing City roadway, capture runoff, and eliminate outfall to waters of the state. Researching current system and ownership outside of Publicly owned right of way. Awaiting topo survey. Design in 2011, possible construction in 2012. 2. Broadway SW Upgrade (part of CIP #153) - Project will replace/improve failing drainfields at up to 14 existing locations serving the Broadway (Park to Vista), includes improvements to extend life of drainage system, opportunity land purchase for swale. Property appraised at $65,000. 30% Construction Cost Estimate to 2 replace drain fields, and install catchbasins, e is revised to $110,260 with alternate to install piped system and swale $277,617. Awaiting topo survey for design, geotech report, and construction bid price for property purchase. Improvements to be installed in conjunction with Broadway Safety Improvement CIP# 063. 3. Bettman/Dickey Stormwater Improvements — Project to improve conveyance of stormwater from 14th to 11th and develop existing City property for regional stormwater infiltration facilities at 11th and Dickey. Site survey and geotechnical work completed, final design by fall, for construction as early as 2012. • Sullivan Road Bridge Drain Retrofit Project (Ecology Facility Grant) The City received notification of a $186,665 grant award in January 2011 to divert stormwater runoff discharging to the Spokane River from the Sullivan Road northbound bridge and, if possible, southbound bridge. Staff anticipates that Ecology staff will finalize and send agreement in May. Preliminary design has commenced, paperwork completed to negotiate property requirements with State Parks, see CIP Project #150. • Pines/Mansfield - swales (near Montgomery and behind fire station) Staff is negotiating costs with landscape contractors for removal of compacted, clay soils and replacing with an engineered soil and sod. • Thorpe Road Flooding Parts of Chester Creek have escaped existing farmer-created floodways south of the city limits. Low-volume/shallow depth flows over a city-owned portion of Thorpe Road during the past several years have increased, especially this year with the wet spring weather. Staff investigation found two culverts that apparently were buried during development of the area north of Thorpe Road. Possible solution includes uncovering the culverts on the north side of the road and re-establishing a ditch on the south side of the road to carry water to the culverts. • Stormwater Decant Facility — Proposed to be located at the new maintenance facility. Decant will decrease costs in handling catch basin debris by 80% by allowing water to be drained to sanitary sewer. Staff will start preliminary design after a topographic site survey is completed. Planning-level construction estimated at $325,000 to build facility with roof, no walls. Project is a strong candidate for 2012 Ecology grant application. • Vactor Services Program Review Staff is reviewing current "Vactoring Services" contract and overall program for stormwater structure cleaning. Current contract ends December 2011 with no renewals options remaining. Staff will be drafting a new bid package to go out by late summer for the 2012 contract year. • Underground Injection Control (UIC) Assessment Staff continues work on compliance requirements for the City's 7,350 drywells (UICs) and performing required assessments by February 2013. • 2012 Stormwater Fee Assessor Rolls Update Staff is starting the process of updating stormwater fees to existing or new commercial properties for the 2012 Stormwater Fee Assessor Roll. 3 • Ecology NPDES Permit Implementation Grants 2010/2011 $50k: The City received a $50k Ecology Grant to implement NPDES Permit requirements for stormwater; funding will need to be expended by June 2011. City staff has submitted for reimbursement for this year's spring sweeping efforts. 2011/2012 $308k: The City received a $308k Ecology Grant; funding will need to be expended by June 2012, Staff is seeking Ecology approval to use funding to reimburse City for part of the sweeping operation costs. BRIDGE MAINTENANCE • Specifications and bid packet covering Bridge Repair and Maintenance will be issued this summer. • Sullivan Road over Trent (4501) repair and Sullivan SB over UPRR tracks (4507) expansion joint repairs are being reviewed by our bridge consultant. SEWER PROJECTS • 2010 County Sewer Projects —Carry over West Farms and South Greenacres Phase 3 projects are substantially complete. Only minor/punchlist items remain for 2011. Cronk - Grinding complete, mainline installation is progressing along Boone East of Barker. Corbin — Re-Started...Bow, Barker and Sprague to be impacted. Paving scheduled May 24 through 26. Mainline installed in Barker, proceeding East on Sprague. Side services along Barker should be in shortly. Some concerns with the `path' along the west edge of Barker between Sprague and Appleway. South Greenacres Phase 4 — Re-started...Boone, Greenacres, Long and Desmet first scheduled for main installation and side services. Existing asphalt has been ground off, installation continuing along Mission, Long, Greenacres, etc. Storm drain concerns on Boone under review, West of Long. `Greenacres Park' change order for frontage improvements may be handled by the Park contractor. • 2011 STEP sewer projects Green Haven (SW Area) — Bids completed. MDM to begin after South Greenacres, estimating the week of May 23rd. Micaview West Area — L&L Cargile expecting to begin the week of 4/5/11 if they have their paperwork resolved with the County. Green Haven (NE Area) — MDM expecting to begin after SW Area, tentatively - late July. 4 TRAFFIC • School Zone Beacon Upgrade The City was awarded a grant by WTSC to upgrade all 20 of the existing school zone beacon controllers. Half have been ordered and are scheduled to be delivered in and installed in May. The other half will be ordered and installed this by the end of August. • WTSC School Zone Beacon Grant The City is preparing an application to install new school zone beacons for Orchard Center Elementary and Chester Elementary. The grant is for up to $7,500, per school, for the purchase of the school zone beacons. The application is due in May and award notification is in June. • School Zone Speed Panel Upgrade The City is preparing a request to WTSC to request funds to install speed panel feedback signs on the existing school zone beacons at Broadway Elementary. GRANT APPLICATIONS TIB is planning to issue a call for projects later this year. A few projects under consideration for this future call are: Mission Avenue Improvements — Flora to Barker (construction funding needed); Mansfield Avenue Connection — east of Pines Road (construction funding needed); Park Road Reconstruction — Broadway to Indiana (construction funding needed); Barker Road Improvements — Flora to Barker (design, right of way, and construction funding needed). Ecology is planning to issue a call for stormwater related projects later this summer, based on if State legislature passes the Governor's proposed budget. The Decant Facility could be a strong candidate as other projects staff is considering for Drywell retrofits. New CaII for Projects • New Freedom Funds Applied for funding to construct sidewalks and accessible pathways to transit stops. Our project was ranked #1 out of 2. The STA Board approved our project in the amount of $252,009. 5 Sc'`'okane Public Works Department p Capital Improvement Program Valle y 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall@spokanevalley.org 2011 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM STREET CONSTRUCTION PROJECT: PINES/MANSFIELD PROJECT#0005(UPRR CROSSING IMPROVEMENTS) Waiting for agreement with UPRR to complete the crossing improvements. We will then complete the sidewalk on the west side of Pines Road at the railroad crossing and final striping on the southbound approach. ARGONNE ROAD CORRIDOR UPGRADE#0060 This project will provide a new signal system at Knox, adds a northbound right turn lane at Montgomery and improves curb radiuses at the Argonne/Knox and Argonne/Montgomery intersections to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion. The project is partially funded by a Federal CMAQ grant. PINES(SR27) ITS IMPROVEMENTS#0061 This project will install conduit and fiber optic cabling to connect the traffic signals between Sprague and Trent Avenues to the Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center (SRTMC). This will improve signal coordination and timing and allow changes during peak hours and/or emergency events. Partially funded by a Federal CMAQ grant. Cost: $2,081,000. City share: $280,000. BROADWAY AVENUE SAFETY PROJECT—PARK RD TO PINES RD#0063 This project will provide safety improvements by restriping the roadway to a three-lane section with two travel lanes and a center turn lane and bike lanes. Improvements will be made to the sidewalks to meet current ADA standards. This project is partially funded through a grant from TIB. Complete: Summer 2011. BROADWAY AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION - MOORE TO FLORA#0088 This project will reconstruct and widen Broadway to a three-lane section (two travel lanes and a center left-turn lane) with bike lanes and sidewalks on both sides. A sanitary sewer line will be constructed at the same time to serve the surrounding residents. Curb, gutter, and stormwater facilities will also be constructed. A roundabout will also be constructed at the intersection of Broadway & Flora Rd. This project is partially funded through a grant from TIB and should be completed by Summer 2011. INDIANA AVENUE EXTENSION PROJECT#0112 This project will extend Indiana to the intersection of Flora Rd and Mission Ave as a S- lane roadway including a center left turn lane, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, bike lanes and drainage improvements. A roundabout will be constructed at the intersection of Mission Ave. & Flora Rd. The project is partially funded with a TIB Urban Corridor Program grant and developer contributions. Complete: Summer 2011. INDIANA/SULLIVAN CONCRETE INTERSECTION PROJECT#0113 Reconstruct intersection with concrete due to sever rutting from high truck traffic, repairs/upgrades will be made to stormwater facilities and ADA modifications will be made to sidewalks. SPRAGUE AVE ITS PROJECT#0133 The project includes the installation of conduit and extension of the fiber optic lines for the continuation of the Intelligent Traffic System (ITS) along Sprague Ave from Bowdish Road to Sullivan Road and along Sullivan Road from Sprague Ave to 1-90. Partially funded by a federal CMAQ grant. Complete: Fall 2011. .ET DESIGN PROJECTS PARK ROAD IMPROVEMENTS-BROADWAY TO INDIANA#0069 This project will reconstruct and widen Park Road to a three-lane urban street with sidewalks, bike lanes, curbs, gutters and associated drainage systems. This project is partially funded through a federal STP(U) grant. MISSION AVE-FLORA TO BARKER#0123 This project will design Mission Avenue, from Flora Road to Barker Road, to a three-lane urban arterial with curb, sidewalk, bike lanes and improved access to local trailheads. This project connects two previous TIB funded improvements — Barker Road and the Indiana Avenue Extension west of Flora Rd. SULLIVAN/EUCLID CONCRETE INTERSECTION PROJECT#0141 Reconstruct intersection with concrete due to sever rutting from high truck traffic, repairs/upgrades will be made to stormwater facilities and ADA modifications will be made to sidewalks. BROADWAY @ ARGONNE/MULLAN CONCRETE INTERSECTIONS#0142 Reconstruct intersection with concrete due to sever rutting from high truck traffic, repairs/upgrades will be made to stormwater facilities and ADA modifications will be made to sidewalks. SPOKANE VALLEY-MILLWOOD TRAIL#0145 The project will provide the planning, design and construction of a 6.5 mile non- motorized multi-use trail from Spokane Community College to the Spokane Valley Mall. The trail would be located mostly on Spokane County owned railroad right-of-way that was once the route of the Great Northern Railway. SEWER PAVEBACK PROJECTS WEST FARMS STEP#0128 This basin includes the area north of 1-90 Avenue and south of the Spokane River between Flora Road to the west and Barker Road to the east. This is a carryover project from 2010. 5% of the project remains to be completed in 2011. SOUTH GREENACRES PHASE 3 STEP#0129 This basin includes the area north of Wellesley Avenue and south of Sanson Ave. between McDonald Road to the west and Barker Road to the east. This is a carryover project from 2010. 5% of the project remains to be completed in 2011. SOUTH GREENACRES PHASE 4 STEP#0129 This basin includes the area north of Wellesley Avenue and south of Sanson Ave. between McDonald Road to the west and Barker Road to the east. This is a carryover project from 2010. 70% of the project remains to be completed in 2011. CORBIN STEP#0130 This basin includes the area north of Sprague Avenue and south of the Appleway Ave. between Greenacres Road to the west and Hodges Road to the east. This is a carryover project from 2010. 30% of the project remains to be completed in 2011. CRONK STEP#131 This basin includes the area north of Cataldo Avenue and south of the Mission Ave. between Barker Road to the west and Hodges Road to the east. This is a carryover project from 2010. 20% of the project remains to be completed in 2011. GREEN HAVEN STEP This basin includes the area south of Broadway to Appleway and east of Flora to Barker, including Alki, Main, Cowley, Corbin, Long, Greenacres. The project will be split into two phases to ensure completion by November 2011. MICA VIEW STEP This basin includes the area south of Sprague to the north of 8th Avenue and between Barker and Hodges Roads, including 2nd and 4th Avenues. The project will be split into two phases to ensure completion by November 2011. OTHER PROJECTS BIKE LANE RESTRIPING Pines from 32nd to 24th; University from Sprague to Mission; Sprague from Sullivan to Corbin. 24TH AVENUE SIDEWALK-ADAMS TO SULLIVAN This project will complete the gaps in the sidewalk between Adams Rd and Sullivan Rd with a new 6-ft wide sidewalk and barrier curb. This project is partially funded by a TIB grant. GREENACRES TRAIL Consultant design of Greenacres Trail from the Walt Worthy Building to Hodges Rd. - approximately 2.2 miles of non-motorized multi-use trail from the Centennial Trail just east of Sullivan to the east of Spokane Valley city limits. Partially funded by an energy grant. April-11 0005 Pines/Manfield, Wilbur Rd to Pines 0063 Broadway Avenue Safety Project, Pines RD 0065 Sullivan/Sprague PCC Intersection 0069 Park Rd Recon. #2 Brdwy& Ind. SRTC06-12 0088 Broadway Ave. Moore to Flora 0102 Evergreen -Sprague PCC 0112 Indiana Ave Extension 0113 Indiana/Sullivan PCC Intersection 0123 Mission Ave- Flora to Barker 0127 2009 ADA Improvements 0139 Park Road RR Crossing Safety Improvement 0141 Sullivan & Euclid PCC 0142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan 0143 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation 0146 24th Ave Sidewalk Adams to Sullivan Sewer Projects 0129 South Greenacres (STEP) 0130 Corbin (STEP) 0131 Cronk (STEP) 0151 Green Haven STEP 0152 Micaview STEP TIB UAP STP(P) STP(U) TIB STA UCP STA STP(U) CDBG W UTC STP(U) STP(U) Fed Program 302 Knutson Knutson Knutson Aldworth Knutson Aldworth Aldworth Aldworth Aldworth Aldworth Aldworth Knutson Amsden Knutson 001 001 001 001 001 Iris Iris Iris Iris Iris Street Preservation Projects 0153 Broadway Ave Resurfacing/SW Upgrade 402 Knutson 05/23/08 05/15/11 05/28/10 06/04/10 04/24/10 02/18/11 04/07/10 08/20/10 03/03/10 05/05/10 04/14/10 02/22/11 03/09/11 100 90 100 75 100 100 100 95 5 100 100 0 0 0 0 100 100 100 100 100 95 0 100 0 90 100 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 60 70 80 0 0 06/30/11 08/31/11 10/31/10 $ 6,627,000 $ 932,850 $ 995,520 $ 352,002 11/14/10 $ 2,172,811 02/09/10 $ 685,000 07/01/11 $ 2,082,000 12/31/11 $ 1,252,000 $ 517,919 06/30/10 $ 110,713 04/30/11 $ 44,000 $ 175,260 $ 276,301 $ 720,000 07/31/12 $ 292,000 07/01/11 06/01/11 06/01/10 10/15/11 10/15/11 $ 640,500 $ 705,000 $ 315,000 $ 620,000 $ 280,000 0 0 $ 547,488 Estimated Total Project Proposed %Complete Construction Project # Road Projects Funding Manager Bid Date PE I CN Completion Cost 0005 Pines/Manfield, Wilbur Rd to Pines 0063 Broadway Avenue Safety Project, Pines RD 0065 Sullivan/Sprague PCC Intersection 0069 Park Rd Recon. #2 Brdwy& Ind. SRTC06-12 0088 Broadway Ave. Moore to Flora 0102 Evergreen -Sprague PCC 0112 Indiana Ave Extension 0113 Indiana/Sullivan PCC Intersection 0123 Mission Ave- Flora to Barker 0127 2009 ADA Improvements 0139 Park Road RR Crossing Safety Improvement 0141 Sullivan & Euclid PCC 0142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan 0143 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation 0146 24th Ave Sidewalk Adams to Sullivan Sewer Projects 0129 South Greenacres (STEP) 0130 Corbin (STEP) 0131 Cronk (STEP) 0151 Green Haven STEP 0152 Micaview STEP TIB UAP STP(P) STP(U) TIB STA UCP STA STP(U) CDBG W UTC STP(U) STP(U) Fed Program 302 Knutson Knutson Knutson Aldworth Knutson Aldworth Aldworth Aldworth Aldworth Aldworth Aldworth Knutson Amsden Knutson 001 001 001 001 001 Iris Iris Iris Iris Iris Street Preservation Projects 0153 Broadway Ave Resurfacing/SW Upgrade 402 Knutson 05/23/08 05/15/11 05/28/10 06/04/10 04/24/10 02/18/11 04/07/10 08/20/10 03/03/10 05/05/10 04/14/10 02/22/11 03/09/11 100 90 100 75 100 100 100 95 5 100 100 0 0 0 0 100 100 100 100 100 95 0 100 0 90 100 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 60 70 80 0 0 06/30/11 08/31/11 10/31/10 $ 6,627,000 $ 932,850 $ 995,520 $ 352,002 11/14/10 $ 2,172,811 02/09/10 $ 685,000 07/01/11 $ 2,082,000 12/31/11 $ 1,252,000 $ 517,919 06/30/10 $ 110,713 04/30/11 $ 44,000 $ 175,260 $ 276,301 $ 720,000 07/31/12 $ 292,000 07/01/11 06/01/11 06/01/10 10/15/11 10/15/11 $ 640,500 $ 705,000 $ 315,000 $ 620,000 $ 280,000 0 0 $ 547,488 Traffic Projects 0060 Argonne Road Corridor Upgrade (SRTC 06-3 0061 Pines (SR27) ITS Improvements (SRTC 06-2 0133 Sprague Ave ITS 0136 Traffic Signal LED Replacement 0147 Bike Lane Restriping Stormwater Projects 0150 Sullivan Rd Bridge Drain Retrofit Other Projects 0140 Bike & Ped MP Doc Prep 0145 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trail 0148 Greenacres Trail - Design 0149 In-House Design -Sidewalk Infill Closeout Phase 0003 Barker Road Bridge Replacement 0019 Broadway Ave Road Rehab 0055 NPDES Phase II - Prog Devel -Stormwater 0076 Valley Mission Park 0081 White Birch (STEP) 0086 Discovery Playground 0106 West Pondersoa (STEP) 0135 Flashing Yellow Arrow Installation CMAQ CMAQ USDOE(d) USDOE(d) USDOE(d) Knutson Knutson Knutson Kipp Kipp Aldworth USDOE(d) Basinger STP(e) USDOE(d) USDOE(d) Amsden BR Program Knutson Fed Program Arlt Jenkins 301 Kersten 302 Arlt CTED Worley 302 Arlt USDOE(d) Kipp 04/15/11 60 0 04/15/11 0 0 03/04/11 100 0 100 40 50 0 $ 1,290,636 $ 2,083,121 $ 400,000 $ 90,000 $ 50,000 0 0 12/31/12 $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 51,850 $ 745,000 $ 100,000 $ 65,000 04/18/08 100 99 08/31/10 $ 11,817,000 06/02/06 100 99 11/26/07 $ 879,195 100 99 12/31/10 $ - 03/13/09 100 99 06/08/09 $ - 05/09/08 100 99 12/31/08 $ - 05/01/09 100 99 05/12/10 $ - 05/06/09 100 99 06/01/10 $ 1,215,335 100 99 12/31/10 $ 34,210 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 24, 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ® information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Sprague/Appleway One Way vs. Two Way GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council last discussed this matter on July 27, 2010. Prior to that time, there have been numerous council discussions to consider this matter. BACKGROUND: At the May 17, 2011 Study Session, Council requested that staff schedule a future agenda item to discuss the potential conversion of Sprague/Appleway from one-way to two-way traffic from University Ave to Mullan Ave. In recognition of that request, the attached background material is provided as an information item. NOTE: the July 27, 2010 RCA - Item 1) Cost Estimate—Sprague Appleway Conversion bullet point#3: "Traffic Modeling to determine intersection Level of Service (LOS) with the proposed configuration has not been completed. The estimated cost for this effort is approximately $75,000 and would take an estimated 3 months to complete. OPTIONS: n/a RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: n/a BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Mike Jackson, Neil Kersten, Cary Driskell ATTACHMENTS: RCA and Minutes from July 27, 2010 Council Meeting; various other meeting minutes and information related to Sprague/Appleway conversion. JULY 27, 2010 MEETING MATERIALS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 27, 2010 City Manager Sign-off:_ !tern: Check all that apply: ❑consent ❑ old business ❑new business ❑ public hearing ❑information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Potential Ballot Measure (One-Way vs. Two-Way Sprague) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, RCW 36.70A, RCW 39.50 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Discussion on this issue at the June 29 council meeting. BACKGROUND: This RCA will cover five areas related to the discussion on a potential ballot measure for the one-way versus two-way conversion of Sprague and Appleway Avenues: 1) Cost estimate to convert Sprague Avenue and Appleway Avenue between Argonne Road and University Road from one-way to two-way 2) Cost to develop an engineering level estimate to convert that portion of Sprague Avenue and Appleway Avenue from one-way to two-way between Thiennan Road and Argonne Road 3) Overview of the federal funds available for the Sprague/Appleway corridor 4) What the ballot measure could include 5) Minutes from the previous council meetings in which the discussion was held, and a decision was made, on which portions of the Sprague/Appleway corridor would remain one-way, two-way, or converted from one-way to two-way. 1)COST ESTIMATE—SPRAGUEIAPPLEWAY CONVERSION Public 1Norks staff completed a planning level cost estimate to convert the existing one-way streets of Sprague and Appleway Avenues between Argonne Road to University Road, to two way streets. The total estimate is $1.34 million and includes the following issues and assumptions: • All work to be completed between existing curbs; no widening or narrowing of roadway, additional lanes, parking or streetscape improvements as proposed and shown in the approved Sprague &Appleway Subarea Plan Includes ADA improvements to intersection curb ramps > includes design and construction inspection/administration work y Traffic modeling to determine intersection level of service (LOS) with the proposed configuration has not been completed. The estimated cost for this effort is approximately $75,000 and would take an estimated 3 months to complete. Y Road resurfacing and stormwater system upgrade work not included • Revisions to existing concrete driveway approaches to meet new ADA standards not included Since these roadways are 10+ years old and beginning to deteriorate, it would be prudent to consider resurfacing these roadways prior to making the striping and signal changes. Stormwater upgrades would also be advisable as was done last year on the Sprague Avenue Resurfacing Project from University to Evergreen. The estimated cost of doing this resurfacing and stormwater work would be an additional $1.4 million ($2.7 million total for the conversion and resurfacing combined). 2)COST ESTIMATE FOR CONVERTING SPRAGUE/APPLEWAY-THIERMAN ROAD TO ARGONNE ROAD The estimated cost to develop a planning-level engineering cost estimate for the conversion of Sprague Avenue and Appleway Avenue from one-way to two-way between Thierman Road and Argonne Road is$150,000. This cost includes the following: ➢ The hiring of a traffic engineering consultant (no staff available for this effort) ➢ Work with SRTC and the new version of the regional traffic demand model to develop future traffic volumes for Sprague/Appleway conversions ➢ Coordinate with, and get approval from, WSDOT for any changes proposed at, and west of Thierman Road ➢ Synchro or VISSIM traffic modeling of all intersection's level of service (LOS) in this segment to ensure acceptable operations ➢ Developing planning-level engineering cost estimate 3)FEDERAL FUNDING AVAILABILITY At the June 29 council meeting, staff briefly mentioned the availability of $4.2 million in federal funding for the Sprague/Appleway corridor. Additional clarification on the availability and use of these funds is provided below. ➢ $4.2M originally for the extension of Appleway Avenue east of University was approved by the SRTC Board in March, 2006. ➢ It may be possible to use these funds for other projects in the corridor provided: o A plan exists showing how all improvements within the Sprague/Appleway corridor fit together in the operation of the overall transportation network (currently the SARP provides this) o The federal environmental process (NEPA) on the extension of Appleway Ave is complete. This would include the development and approval of an Environmental Assessment (EA) or a Documented Categorical Exclusion (DCE) o FHWA approves of the project using these funds o SRTC Board approves the project using these funds o The project is included in the Regional MTP and TIP ➢ Federal funds currently are not available ➢ Without a new federal six-year Transportation Bill, it is unknown at this time how much federal funding will come to the Spokane Region and when. 4) BALLOT MEASURE- Following the June 29th City council meeting, staff suspended work on a draft ballot measure. However the work provided by bond counsel is provided as an example of a ballot measure. The actual language of a ballot measure would be determined by city council and formally adopted by ordinance. Attached is a copy of a sample ordinance which would authorize the issuance of bonds and approve the ballot language as well as other documents necessary to complete the bond offering. 5) PREVIOUS COUNCIL MINUTES-The City Clerk has researched past minutes and has provided the attached for council review. OPTIONS: Discussion only RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion only BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Mike Jackson, Steve Worley ATTACHMENTS: Example Ballot Measure; Excerpts from Council Minutes; Exhibits of two- way conversion JULY 27,2010 MINUTES EXCERPT: 12.Ballot Measure(one-way vs. two-way Sprague)—Mike Jackson/Steve Worley Mr- -Tacksnn said that tonight he, M•. Worley, and Mr. Connelly will discuss several facets associated with one-way versus two-way on Sprague as a potential ballot measure, including cost estimate to convert Sprague and Appleway between Argonne Road and University from one-way to two-way; the cost to develop an engineering estimate to convert that portion of Sprague and Appleway from one-way to two- way between Thierman and Argonne; an overview of the federal funds available for the Sprague/Appleway corridor; what the ballot measure could include; and minutes from previous council meetings where this topic was discussed. Staff went over the information contained in the Request for Council Forms including the $I.34 million cost estimate for the SpraguelAppleway Conversion; the $150,000 cost estimate for converting Sprague/Appleway Thierman Road to Argonne Road; clarified information concerning the previously mentioned $4.2 million available federal funds and the process to use those funds; discussed briefly the limited work done by Bond Attorney Mike Ormsby, and brought council's attention to included past council meeting minutes. Council/staff discussion included the process of and probletns with implementing a tax increment district; the estimated two to three years it will take to turn the road back to two-ways since it would take approximately a year to get the needed environmental assessment; whether to put this on an upcoming ballot for the voters to decide and then consideration of whether a bond issue would be needed;comments that businesses have a sense of urgenc-y in resolving this issue; whether to pursue state and/or federal funding and of waiting to see what happens in the next five to ten years. Councilmember Gothmann said that this issue has been decided and is in comp plan now to convert back between University and Argonne; and he suggested the real question is when and how to put that into effect; he suggested not going to the voters, but to get the environmental assessment done: and if we want to change the comp plan that is an option, and he suggested if council is proposing a bond, that this is not the time to go to people to ask them to boost their property tax; he said we haven't looked at the city center zoning to determine what kind of livability we want so at this point, said he feels we are not in a position to deter nine the street issue as the zoning issue should be addressed first;and Mayor Towey agreed that we don't have a downtown section, we have a road;that it is too late to put this on the November ballot; that council will be finished with the SARP review this fall so Council by then should have a clear picture of what land use this council wants to go forward with; and that should determine the street issue; and there was Council consensus to wait until the land use issue is settled before approaching the street funding. SAMPLE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON UNLIMITED TAX GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, providing for a form of the ballot proposition and specifying certain other details concerning submission to the qualified electors of the city at a special election to be held therein on , for the issuance of its unlimited tax general obligation bonds in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $ , or so much thereof as may be issued under the laws governing the indebtedness of cities, for the purpose of providing funds to construct improvements necessary to redirect traffic on portions of Appleway Boulevard and Sprague Avenue. ADOP 1'ED: , 2010 Prepared by: K&L GATES LLP SPOKANE,WASHINGTON 1 SAMPLE ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, providing for a form of the ballot proposition and specifying certain other details concerning submission to the qualified electors of the city at a special election to be held therein on for the issuance of its general obligation bonds in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $ , or so much thereof as may be issued under the laws governing the indebtedness of cities, for the purpose of providing funds to construct improvements necessary to redirect traffic on portions of Appleway Boulevard and Sprague Avenue. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, Washington (the "City"), consistent with its Comprehensive Plan, Subarea Plan and the Growth Management Act, proposes to undertake the traffic redirection of a portion of Appleway Boulevard and Sprague Avenue through repaving, signalization, striping, curbing and signage installations and related improvements (the "Improvements"); and WHEREAS, in order to provide all or a part of the funds to enable the City to undertake the construction and equipping of the Improvements, it is deemed necessary and advisable that the City issue and sell its unlimited tax general obligation bonds to provide funds for such purposes in the principal amount of not to exceed $ (the"Bonds"); and WHEREAS, the Constitution and laws of the State of Washington provide that the question of whether or not such Bonds may be issued and sold for such purposes shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the City for their ratification or rejection; SAMPLE NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ORDAINS, as follows: Section 1. Findings. This City Council (the "Council") hereby finds and declares that the best interest of the residents and property owners of the City require the City to carry out the plans hereinafter provided at the time or times and in the order deemed most necessary and advisable by the Council. Section 2. Capital Improvements. The City shall undertake the traffic redirection of a portion of Appleway Boulevard and Sprague Avenue, more specifically described as follows: All located on right of way presently owned by the City, through repaving, signalization, striping, curbing and signage installations and related improvements (the"Improvements"). The cost of all necessary architectural, engineering and other consulting services, inspection and testing, administrative and relocation expenses, site acquisition, on and off-site utilities, related improvements and other costs incurred in connection with the foregoing improvements shall be deemed a part of the costs of such Improvements. Such Improvements shall be complete with all necessary furniture, equipment and appurtenances. If available funds are sufficient from the proceeds of Bonds authorized for the above purposes, and state or local circumstances require, the City shall use such funds to pay the principal of or interest on the Bonds, as the Council may determine. The City shall determine the application of available moneys so as to accomplish, as -2- SA LE nearly as may be, all of the Improvements. The City shall determine the exact extent and specifications for construction of structures or other improvements. If the Council shall determine that it has become impractical to accomplish any portion of the Improvements by reason of state or local circumstances, including changed conditions, incompatible development, or costs substantially in excess of those estimated, the City shall not be required to accomplish such portions of the Improvements and may apply the Bond proceeds or any portion thereof, to payment of principal of or interest on the Bonds, as the Council may determine. In the event that the proceeds of sale of the Bonds, plus any other moneys of the City legally available, are insufficient to accomplish all of the Improvements, the City shall use the available funds for paying the cost of those portions of the Improvements for which the Bonds were approved deemed by the Council most necessary and in the best interest of the City. Section 3. Authorization of Bonds. For the purpose of providing all or a part of the funds necessary to pay the cost of the Improvements described in Section 2 hereof and/or to reimburse the City for such costs to the extent that City funds have been used for such purpose, together with incidental costs and costs related to the sale and issuance of the Bonds, the City shall issue and sell its unlimited tax general obligation bonds in the principal amount of not to exceed $ . The balance of the cost of the Improvements shall be paid out of any money which the City now has or may later have on hand which are legally available for such purposes. None of said Bond proceeds shall be used for the replacement of equipment or for any other than a capital purpose relating to the Improvements. Such Bonds shall be issued in an -3- SAMPLE amount not exceeding the amount approved by the qualified electors of the City as required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Washington or exceeding the amount permitted by the Constitution and laws of the State of Washington. Section 4. Details of Bonds. The Bonds provided for in Section 3 hereof shall be sold in such amounts and at such time or times as deemed necessary and advisable by this Council and as permitted by law, shall bear interest at a rate or rates not to exceed the maximum rate permitted by law at the time the Bonds are sold, and shall mature in such amounts and at such times within a maximum term of not to exceed years from date of issue, but may mature at an earlier date or dates, as authorized by this Council and as provided by law. Said Bonds shall be general obligations of the City and, unless paid from other sources, both principal thereof and interest thereon shall be payable out of annual tax levies to be made upon all the taxable property within the City without limitation as to rate or amount and in excess of any constitutional or statutory tax limitations. The exact date, form, terms and maturities of said Bonds shall be as hereafter fixed by ordinance of the Council. After voter approval of the bond proposition and in anticipation of the issuance of such bonds, the City may issue short terrn obligations as authorized and provided by chapter 39.50 RCW. The proceeds of such bonds may be used to redeem and retire short term obligations or to reimburse the City for expenditures previously made for such Improvements. Section 5. Bond Election. It is hereby found and declared that the best interests of the City requires the submission to the qualified electors of the City of the proposition of whether the City shall issue the Bonds at a special election to be held on . The Spokane -4- SAMPLE County Auditor as ex officio supervisor of elections in Spokane County, Washington is hereby requested to call and conduct said special election to be held within the City on said date and to submit to the qualified electors of the City the proposition set forth below. The Clerk of the City is hereby authorized and directed to certify said proposition to said official in the following form: PROPOSITION NO. 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON APPLEWAY BOULEVARD/SPRAGUE AVENUE REDIRECTION GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS - $ The City Council of the City of Spokane Valley approved a proposition for bonds. This proposition authorizes the City to construct improvements necessary to redirect traffic flow on a portion of Appleway Boulevard and Sprague Avenue on City right of way, more specifically described as , to issue $ of general obligation bonds maturing within a maximum term of years and to levy excess property taxes annually to repay such bonds, all as provided in Ordinance No. . Should this proposition be: APPROVED? REJECTED? The City Clerk is hereby authorized to deliver a certified copy of this ordinance to the Spokane County Auditor. Section 6. Severability. In the event that any provision of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect or invalidate any other provision of this ordinance or the Bonds, but they shall be construed and enforced as if such invalid provision had not been contained herein; provided, however, that any provision which shall for any reason be -5- SAMPLE held by reason of its extent to be invalid shall be deemed to be in effect to the extent permitted by law. Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective as provided by law. APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, at a regular meeting thereof held the day of , 2010, after first reading of the Ordinance on , 20_ CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON By Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk -6- SAMPLE CERTIFICATE I, the undersigned, City Clerk of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington (the "City"), and keeper of the records of the City Council (the"Council"), DO HEREBY CERTIFY: 1. That the attached Ordinance is a true and correct copy of Ordinance No. of the City of Spokane Valley (herein called the"Ordinance"), duly approved at a regular meeting of the Council held on the day of , 2010. 2. That said meeting was duly convened and held in all respects in accordance with law, and to the extent required by law, due and proper notice of such meeting was given; that a legal quorum was present throughout the meeting and a legally sufficient number of members of the Council voted in the proper manner for the passage of said Ordinance; that all other requirements and proceedings incident to the proper passage of said Ordinance have been duly fulfilled, carried out and otherwise observed; and that I am authorized to execute this certificate. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this day of 20 City Clerk SAMPLE OFFICIAL BALLOT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON , 20 INS[RUCTIONS TO VOTERS: To vote in favor of the following proposition, place a cross (X) in the square opposite the word "APPROVED"; to vote against the following proposition, place a cross (X)in the square opposite the word "REJEC[ED." PROPOSITION NO. 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WASHINGTON APPLEWAY BOULEVARD/SPRAGUE AVENUE REDIRECTION GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS - $ The City Council of the City of Spokane Valley approved a proposition for bonds. This proposition authorizes the City to construct improvements necessary to redirect traffic flow on a portion of Appleway Boulevard and Sprague Avenue on City right of way, more specifically described as , to issue $ of general obligation bonds maturing within a maximum term of ten years and to levy excess property taxes annually to repay such bonds, all as provided in Ordinance No. . Should this proposition be: APPROVED? REJECTED? SAMPLE OFFICE OF THE SPOKANE COUNTY AUDITOR WHEREAS, the undersigned as the duly elected, qualified and acting Spokane County Auditor, has jurisdiction of and is required by law to conduct all special elections for cities within the County; and WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, lies entirely within the boundaries of the County; and WHEREAS, the City Council of said City by Ordinance adopted Ordinance No. a certified copy of which has been delivered to the undersigned, has found that the best interests of the City require the holding of a special election on ; and WHEREAS, said City by said Ordinance has authorized and directed the undersigned to assume jurisdiction of and conduct said special election within Spokane County; NOW, THEREFORE,it is hereby authorized and ordered as follows: The undersigned hereby assumes jurisdiction within Spokane County of the above- mentioned special election of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, authorized and ordered by Ordinance of its City Council adopted , 20_, and will conduct said special election to be held on DA'ZED at Spokane,Washington,this day of Spokane County Auditor Spokane County, Washington SAMPLE NOTICE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON , 20 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on , 20 , a special election will be held in the above-named city for the submission to the qualified electors of said city of the following proposition: PROPOSITION NO. 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WASHINGTON APPLEWAY BOULEVARD/SPRAGUE AVENUE REDIRECTION GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS -$ The City Council of the City of Spokane Valley approved a proposition for bonds. This proposition authorizes the City to construct improvements necessary to redirect traffic flow on a portion of Appleway Boulevard and Sprague Avenue on City right of way, more specifically described as .to issue $ of general obligation bonds maturing within a maximum term of ten years and to levy excess property taxes annually to repay such bonds, all as provided in Ordinance No. . Should this proposition be: APPROVED? REJECTED ? This election shall be conducted by mail-in ballot, with ballots mailed to the qualified electors of the City. Ballots will be mailed out to qualified electors on or about , and must be post marked on or before , to be counted. Spokane County Auditor Spokane County, Washington SP-2041 vl E'hbA:Am..to Lavfl I _ !' { .� Y t l is 1 -,-- I = ,Vii_ —: ` { i , saa�'.cle •i• ._---'• -1 5:- 1 .q ryyp4 k"y,m. i ,mnw.raamM vp'r.mni"Wp jT,i1j!f!' { . , : Il k _ n I �. I tip' m P •,?. ar'ar r 11111 , -• i r . I 4 \ L i (.--„ , ,N. \ .\' ff�s?s 1 41 ''' •.; Til, '-7.‘.'-- -'..... ."..; 1 11 .-- • i M.'.-.Z.4 4.. 410111 Ai- t74-'''''',,---..1-_,--.7.,t-'7;t7, 7,777:77..".-7-.,=-:,_.._. _,_i' -- w:�={ S , : .y�' :- i s _n[ ;L g i F •d 4 .-` i-.: .( El.':t t e.:,',..••10,...1...,1:..y _ , . • I==.. - • :. . • : . . . . .. ! ',2- r '-=- ' • • -- -P 1 •- .i _ i - ) ,' ... p, j 1 - • • - .. '—.--. '.— . -... .. : swAdve i • • i 4 c, ,. ..,,,,1- ,.• . 4 .--•- P. ."'' . . .. _ t.. ..■it K r..,r.-.7.,,,.........., - . . 1.--1 , ....:r.,....b..........4 , 1 . r . ....- I 1 . .e.t:. Ea : .4- .1 [II= ..-.. .. i 7, ti.A #:: -' i''' 71. :?-• • . :•:' ''.' l ., -4 6.' :; S;-.- ••••■•• "-I'' .- p . I ,: .... . , ,.., ,. P.!"._.,,,.........4..r.i. tif• ..', 'V." . . & , . . 4. 1 ".i'„ '-';-_,:. ":-.!..-.• .1: D.-.=. -.." ,.:1 1 1 1 • 1 , • .r5,•j . 1 i .,;Pi ,, ..1 p S.Z.. 4,-4 72; si '.s.!. ..e. 1 • .1 A 1 f r:-- '- I _ 0 " 1 I : 4 .... . I ■-• . i I • . - i. .. . .• „ . • , To;a•-•i;r0rwer Fw.. . 1 :.m4..0.c.m.:cr-. • : •- ----'---- . ._,.- _ . - AP PLEWAY A wawa.4-04 xi,...An 9-5.,,,',A-7 c.r i 1 V - opt..eao.A1.•••■• - - . . -----9 p :,i-: „1 t.';'.7-'=7-• : ..; :;..e: .. ;. . .0...em. 1 1 FnOnIt Flirt le D.M*Th `•` s _ S •-. ! :, _ - I` e•o _h • 1 '11 '• n W� 1m „.� -... ; 3 it - .�"r 1.1 x• .:W m^ - '1 i - •4 ! i . �"S1 F:in' - _ 4 !'a x SPRAGUE i r r ' 6 ' ' ! — ten"C. T ::...,�. - —1 *▪ -2..F.. u 1 1 f h4e.v. 41 ."_� .". ." '. -- ,_ "ef 1, 1. .r.ara G�. 1.,_ -P _ l _3 1 ,. - r w — .,w+wroaa .N 0 I.a•:an.+.f a • W.▪ M� . -- I .m• a...&..N:ti ; :m..fxr , 4 4. Council meetin s concerning the discussion of one-way/two-way option for$lr ne Avenue: 1.2003,10-07 Right-of-way and Cross Circulation between Appleway and Sprague 2.2003,11-18 Right of way and Cross Circulation between Appleway and Sprague Discussion 3.2004,01-15 Community Workshop:Three Land Scenarios 4.2004,09-21 Question and Council discussion(paraphrased) 5.2005, 11-15 Part of Council deliberation on Transportation Chapter of the Draft Comp Plan 6.2005,12-13 Motion Consideration: Sprague Appleway Traffic Flow Corridor Configuration from University road to I- 90 (motion failed) 7.2006,03-21 Motion Consideration:Authorizing City Manager to Negotiate Agreement for the Sprague Corridor, Sub- area Plan with ECONorthwest,Freedman,Tung&Bottomley to assist in preparing a subarea plan. 8 200,09-14 Joint Meeting, Council and Planning Commission re SARP; Question and Answer Session with staff and Consultants 9.2007,03-01 Special Joint Workshop Meeting with Council and Planning Commission, with Michael Freedman and others in attendance. Meting dedicated to discussing corridor revitalization framework, 10.2007,05-29 Special Meeting: Sprague-Appleway Revitalization Plan 11.2007,08-14 Special Meeting: Special meeting dedicated to SARP: City Center Retail Principles 12.2007,10-02 Special Meeting with Spokane County Library District Board. Presentation by Michael Freedman on Development of City Center and Library Site Plan Option 13.2008,01-12 Special Meeting; Council Retreat:Discussion of 2008 Council Budget Goals 14.2008,02-19 Special Meeting: Council and Planning Commission,with Mr.Freedman presentation P:\Clerk\Council meetings concerning the two-way,docx 15.2048,06-14 Discussion:City Center Initiative 16.2008,07-22 Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan Discussion/Deliberation 17.2008,08-19 Public Hearing: Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan Book III 18.2008,09-09 Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan iFutu to Corridors Discussion 19.2008,09-23 Deliberation: Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan, Book II Development Regulations (with attached September 16,2008 Cost Estimates for Sprague and Appleway) 20.2008,10-28 Deliberation: SpraguelAppletivayRevitalization Plan Book III,City Actions (Goal:Make decision concerning the one-way/two-way issue) 21.2009,01-06 Continued discussion of SARP and Mixed Use Avenue District zone; and other zones 22.2009,03-03 Continued discussion of SARP 23.2009,05-19 Addressing remaining concerns or comments of SARP 24.2009,05-26 Discussion and comments on the First Reading Proposed Ordinance 09-012 Adopting Subarea Plan Book I and II 25.2009,06-16 Discussion on Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 09-012 Adopting Subarea Plan 26.2009,10-06 SARP/Road Project Funding Update P:1Clerk\CounciI meetings concerning the t►vo-way.docs know what staff feels Barker'will be like in the future as he is uncomfortable with the designation for the urban property and would like a broader viewpoint when this comes on the next agenda. It was moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded by Counci/meniber Flanigan to place this item on the next council meeting agenda for formal consideration, Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Abstentions:None. Motion carried. It was the consensus of Council to bring these items forth on the October 28 council agenda us individual ordinances with opportunity for public comment but not to conduct a public hearing. 3. Comprehensive Plan Rousing Element Discussion. Community Development Director Marina Sukup, in her PowerPoint presentation, gave a brief overview of the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan,and in her presentation,included the requirements of the Growth Management Act, the adopted Countywide Planning Policies, and an overview of relevant elements of the Interim Plnn. 4. Right-of-way and Cross Circulation between Appleway and Sprague. Public Works Director Neil Kersten explained that reasonable street connections are approximately 600 feet in distance, that seine of the connections between Appleway and Sprague are between 1500 to 1800 feet in distance,and that there is no real existing right-of-way and the City would have to acquire right-of- way. Director Kersten also discussed a ring-road concept,which is a rather smootb road to easily enable getting around a facility without using city streets. Director Kersten noted staff has not talked to any property owners to gain opinions about where they would like certain cross connections, or how to fund such a project; that he spoke with TIB and was told for them to consider participation,the streets would have to become arterials;Director Kersten said that he will work with WSDOT and TIB on these issues. Director Kersteu added that other options include use of local funds, or LID projects where the local property owners participate in the project. Other items to consider which were briefly discussed,included the size of signs, foot traffic problems,distance between traffic signals,keeping the one way or changing back to two-way,and all the financial implications of each aspect. Director Kersten said that the TIB has approved phase two funding and is waiting for our decision on the couplet;that staff can examine the one- way versus the two-way option, examine cross-connections to get an estimate of costs, get estimates on signage, and start to analyze the project in terms of the comp plan. Discussion ensued regarding securing an economic impact statement, the various variables connected with such a statement, and that perhaps the economic departments at the universities could be of assistance: This item will be brought back to the next study session for further discussion including cost,funding options,property owners' interest,signs, foot traffic,access,and the economic impact study. Mayor DeViem ing called for a recess at 7:50 p.m.,and reconvened the meeting at 8:00 p.m. 5. Proposed Resolution for Participation in Commission on Regional Wastewater Treatment Issues. Deputy City Attorney Caty Driskell stated that members of the respective legislative governing bodies met over the past few months to determine the extent the various jurisdictions will be able, and are required to work together on regional wastewater treatment issues, and that although Spokane County adopted a similar resolution,that Council may approve a member to the committee by motion rather than by resolution. It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilme nher Munson to appoint Councilirreimber Denenny as representative on the Governance Committee. After discussion concerning the goals of the committee, it was determined that each councilmeniber will consider items such as ownership and rate determination, and bring those ideas back for further discussion at the next study session. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed. Nome, Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Study Session Minutes 10-07-03 rage 3 of 4 Date Approved by Commit:10-14.03 7. Right-of-Way and Cross Circulation between Appleway and Sprague Discussion. Public Works Director Kersten discussed his November 18 memo to council. Discussion ensued regarding the accompanying roads report, and the large range of cost (3.5 to 6 million) to purchase the right-of-way on Appleway to ~vest of Dishntan-Mica. Director Kersten said preliminary estimates are needed from comparable projects, and on what an in-depth evaluation of converting back to two-way would cost. Other issues brought up from Mr.Kersten's PowerPoint presentation included the impact of additional lanes on traffic circulation (either one-way, two-way or a combination); impact on existing businesses;potential for development with current land use regulatory provisions; and how far to extend the couplet east. Other considerations included 190 construction which would distort traffic patterns during the next three years; and new east/west streets which might shift traffic away from Sprague; also that there appears to be more vacant undeveloped land west of University Road than east; that key intersections will need to be identified to establish where to focus efforts; who should perform an analysis, and if we should (or could) piggyback on other planning studies. City Manager Mercier suggested that an economic analysis will only provide a slice of the data to use in making the overall decision to provide better traffic along corridors and generate economic development;and that rather than find the outcome of a study, Mr. Mercier prefers to define the criteria of the study first. Mayor De111eming added that we also need to know what the community wants and what it will cost, Councilmember Flanigan said that he feels some of these issues will be decided upon as we go through the GMA process, but before we decide to switch one way or not, we need to know traffic patterns projected for the next 20 years. Councilmember Munson stated he feels Council and the Planning Commission should have another joint meeting to come up with positive ideas and build questions to ensure the right questions are asked in order to develop the kind of plan which will carry the community through the next 20 years; and that perhaps re-examine the time frame within which to accomplish these goals. Mr, Mercier recommended moving forward with a joint Council/Planning Commission session to sort through questions,and to provide concentrated effort on trying to define criteria we think would be valid for the basis of an economic analysis study. Mayor DeVleming added that a timeline needs to be addressed as this process affects people's ability to sign leases and make other plans related to their locations. Councilmember Taylor stated he feels conducting an economic analysis will not contribute significantly to this debate and that it will only postpone the decision to go forward;that Ile is opposed to further delays; likes the idea of a joint session with the Planning Commission,but feels we are no closer than we were before because we want some kind of study to show that the plan can go forward. Councibnember Taylor stated he feels Council should make that decision. Council Meeting: 11-18-2003 Approved by Council: 11--25-2003 NOTES SPECIAL JOINT WORKSHOP MEETING SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL AND SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION January 15,2004 3:00 -5:00 p.m. Atte»daiice: Councilrtnember•s Staff Planning Commissioners Michael DeVleming,Mayor Dave Mercier,City Manager Bill Gothmann,Chair Diana Wilhite,Deputy Mayor Nina Regor,Deputy City Mgr Ian Robertson,Vice-Chair Dick Dener.nny,Councilmernber Marina Sulcup,Comm.Dev,Dir. Fred Beaulac Mike Flanigan,Connncihnember Greg McCormick,Long Range Planning Mgr. Bob Blum Rich Munson,Council member Scott Kuhta,Long Range Planner John Carroll Gary Schim mels,Conuncilniennber Ncil Kcrstcrn,Public Works Director David Crosby Steve Taylor,Councilmeinber Kevin Snyder,Current Planning Mgr. Gail ICogle Toni Scholtens,Building Official Steve Worley,Senior Engineering for CIP Don Ramsey,Traffic Engineer Chris Bainbridge,City Clerk Report on November 6,2003 Courncil/Commission Meeting Deputy City Manager Regor gave a recap of the Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting of November 6, 2003, including the team exercise of identifying the top three strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats, and that the purpose of conducting such an analysis is that it provides a framework for community discussion and sets the stage for future work on the City's overall community vision. An additional theme mentioned during the Jan 15 meeting is to maintain safe communities. Draft Vision Statement Ms.Regor then focused attention on the approach to draft a vision statement. Suggestions for drafting such a statement included tying the vision statement in with the past,to draft in a group of less than 15,to be sure to seek public comment after coining up with a draft, and to form several groups then have the groups get together to compare notes. It was determined that anyone interested in being part of a sub-committee,should let Ms. Regor know of their interests; and that the sub-committees could also present suggestions on how best to diea]with commmiity involvement and a timefra me. Three Laud Scenarios Community Development Director Sukup then went over her PowerPoint presentation which addressed couplet issues; the three land use scenarios(modify existing conditions, centers& corridors, and city center emphasis); different views on one-way couplets(traffic engineer's view and planner's view); and options to consider to make the couplet functional. Meeting participants were divided into the following three groups: Table 1 —Marina Sukup Table 2—Scott Iuhta Table 3—Greg McCormick Fred Beaulac Mike DeVleming Bill Gotlunann Ian Robertson Dave Crosby Dave Mercier John G.Carroll Gail ICogle Gary Schimmels Rich Munson Bob Blum Dick Denenny Diana Wilhite Steve Taylor Mike Flanigan The three separate groups discussed among themselves the various scenarios and which they preferred, and drafted or identified criteria which could be used in choosing the preferred scenario,some of which included: Page I 01'2 Table 1---Marina Sukup Need multiple centers wlspecific focus Mixed use on north;industrial on south Maybe limited HDR—like assisted living Criteria: Couplet as access for industrial uses Direction of traffic flow not relevant Look at 2-way from Argonne/MutIan East Land uses—centers&corridors with urban activity centers—modified scenario 3 Would look at possibility of gateways to 190 into community Appleway one-way east or two-way high speed on Appleway Convert the one way between University and Appleway to two way and keep one way after that Table 2—Scott Kuhta Generally do not exclude or ignore key corridors—Pines,Sullivan,Trent,Evergreen Sub-centers already in existence Criteria: Traffic impacts Environmental impacts Economic possibilities Public Investment—what would it take or what would be required Design ascetics Safety issues--fire response times,traffic speeds,pedestrian safety,police Table 3--Greg McCormick A city center probably of interest to entire group Public uses should be considered Mixed use between major nodes—intersections of Sprague&major arterials Mixed use surrounding with smaller more compact city center Make appropriate provisions for auto dealerships Criteria: Mixed-use zoning needed(versus single zone) Consider multiple centers by type Provide for employment opportunities Links to regional transit system Landscape,street-scape,ascetics Not all uses need to be pedestrian friendly Need high density residential. Group members then openly discussed their responses and voted for scenarios and criteria. Results of the voting will be a separate document. WRAP UP Deputy City Manager Regor mentioned it appears scenario 1 —the City Center with mixed use received the most votes. Ms.Regor also mentioned that the notes from this meeting will be transcribed and results will be returned to Council and Planning Commission members. It was also noted that follow-up from this meeting will be inducted on the February 3 agenda, at which time staff can discuss how best to get the public involved in the process,and will give timeline options and discuss future long range planning. The meeting ended at 5:00 p.m. Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Pngc 2 of 2 are as those are the places where there is new net retail. To restore property values and vitality to corridors,land use and development and the design of the thoroughfare must be significantly restricted to reflect investor preferences and to respond to the real pattern of demand in the locality. To optimize the corridor's land values again and make it a highly visible and successful piece of the City, they suggest the following strategies: 1.significantly reduce the amt of land intended for commercial development along the corridor. 2.go with the marketplace:provide retail concentrations at major crossroads(in amounts that do not overwhehn market demand)in compact,walkable,lifestyle town center configurations. 3.corridor restructuring must be planned in relation to the envisioned pattern of retail in the City and in the region and the comprehensive plan is a major opportunity to plan the healthy co-existence of a pattern of commercial centers. 4. look for opportunities to redevelop grayfield malls no longer advantageously developed; promote the development of a town center at the U-City mall. Geographically,U-City is at the center; is at a crossroads and is ready to go. S. modify land use and development policies to focus high quality residential, workplace and lodging investment like a mixed use grand boulevard, which will lend to a very successful retail work place, and have residential domination. As part of the comp plan, focus on land use decisions that consider transforming the most damaged segments away from retail, and redevelop them into housing, offices and residences which would all support a town center itself. What form should the residential segments take? Single family homes, or zoned for higher densities like multi family, townhouses? Longer setbacks,larger masses; bigger planting strips; or multi-family that looks similar to large homes to fit in well with neighborhood, that all works well. We also need to figure out how to do that with the corridor,and to do that plus meet market demands for homes without the need for having large mansions. As resources allow, focus capital improvements on setting the stage for residential development in targeted segments where it is damaged,and use capital improvements to create green Ieafy developments to create what is desired in that area, 6. neighborhood serving retail and services should be planned in limited clusters at strategic locations(facing the corridors). 7. promote continued success of the specialist segments of auto sales and services; and cluster such specialized uses whenever possible. He recommends we bolster the area for the auto sales and build on the best of what's already there, 8. focus street improvement resources to reconfigure each segment to create environments that are supportive of the enhanced market focus of the desired forms of investment; that is; each segment's development types must be paired with the appropriate form of street design. We need to focus improvements on the gateway to create, identify and make highly visible the city's commitment to revitalization, we want to send a positive message and not a negative message. The hardest thing to do and most necessary is to re-envision the corridor as a series of segments with their own market areas of focus and different right-of-way treatments., Design must match the needs of development for the area next door, Qiiaatioiu and Council discussion(paraphrased): Courrcihne'itber Taylor:How do you sell this as a City center if it takes seven to ten minutes to get there from the nearest highway exit? Michael Freedman, the mall is matte up entirely of national retailers which creates a certain kind of environment.The opportunity we have is to pick a local crossroads where land is available and which is geographically central to the town itself, and to create a different kind of place,not to compete with the mall but more of an anti-mall conglomeration with shared parking,walking orientated,cafes,town green, new town hall, a kind of place where the community gathers and where people go to lunch, We have to keep in mind that the life-style retail is the now the hottest thing;major investors want to be inside urban environments; he looked at single family housing in this area and stated we should keep in mind that the Study Session Minutes 09.2l-Q4 Page 3 oI 6 Date Approved by Council: 02-28-44 baby boomers are now moving out in greater numbers and want to live by eaf6s,bookstores,art galleries, and theatres, Terry Moore: you only need a small amount of multi-family residences; other areas generally show a 601/40 split,and with that split we will only need less than five percent of the multifamily market into this type of unit. Michael Freedman: says in connection with transportation issues, it is essential to work with a good economic study and a good economist, so the community is not dreaming of an investment it can't get. He feels the land use pattern must be developed within realistic frameworks, but that there are limits; configuration of a roadway should be set to follow,serve and instigate what the market could deliver;we don't want people to cross five lanes of traffic,it would be better to have office or Housing on one side so those people can be customers of the downtown uses on the other side. Tina Fuestow integrating transit depends on what people want;with greater densities we don't want a lot of connecting roads and so transit doesn't make a lot of sense, but with rnulti-family, transit does make sense. Michael Freedman:In response to Couneilnnehuber Dummy's question about not having overhead wires; this should be a prioritization issue; that up to a certain point it is not worth doing undergrounding because it's not just wires making the condition; and with the first five to ten million,you can get more for the buck to develop in ways to hide most wires; and later have it more of a priority to do undergrounding. Now undergrounding would be very expensive, usually newly incorporated cities should probably not do undergrounding because it would blow the whole pot. Additionally,suicide lanes are very dangerous and you don't get mhhclh from them. He found lie could put in a narrow landscape medium down the middle of the street, and steal 16' from the middle to get eight foot parking on both sides, and add parallel parking curbside. The dealership communities tell him there is a segment of their customer base that buys cars on impulse so curbside parking would be advantageous. Dave Mercier: where are the next most likely nodes along the corridor that could benefit from a similar approach? Michael Freedman: said there are several options: if you divide the area into three-thirds,one seems to be a pretty strongly established commercial development in old-fashioned traditional forms in boxes,parking lots and big signs like up from Sullivan to the mall, and in the area of Sullivan to Pines. That is an area that can be improved because it is not flattering to business. The City can invest to improve signage, street improvements, or even have a business improvement district. On the other side are the auto sales and services. He suggests we try to find a way that the community can partner with them to make sure this is marketed as a growing and continued strong regional center to come buy a car. Terry Moore: said they have a legal requirement to get a plan done and a process is going that is pant of the camp plan,to make a decision of where do you want to start and where you want things to go; and it is not clear that the first investment should be the middle; that maybe working at the two ends to ]Hake sure auto Arad retail ends are right would be a better start,or maybe start with the gateway improvement to show this is the start of something big. Deputy Mayor Wilhite:asked about one way or two-way. Michael Freedman: said that the street design should serve the development; this site is a site already in ownership and has visibility on both sides; and the most important place to be is where someone does not have to go across traffic on the way home. Turning into two-way would be problematic,and the evening commuters would have to turn across traffic to get in Tina Fueslon: having the couplet one or two ways is not the major issue as either way works. Part of the basic question is we need to decide what is the function;we inherited that structure with the intention of having it as a primary commute through this valley. The couplet one way or two or not is not the central question: we need to decide an land use and let the infrastructure support it. Study Session Minutes 09-21-04 Page 4 of Date Approved by Council: 09.28.04 1 Mr. Worley also mentioned that there was discussion of the connection of Mission to Indiana Avenue west of Fiore Road; and that there is a road right-of-way which has been negotiated with the owners of that property; a sewer line was previously put in with the property owners in mind so there is already a road right-of-way designated for that, although the road won't be built until the developer decides to develop that property. Mr.Worley added that there is also an abandoned railroad right-of-way adjacent to the Boone railroad right-of-way; all of the railroad right-of-way west of Barker Road is incorporated into the railroad right-of-way; but east of Barker Road the raihroad right-of-way is a separate parcel owned by Spokane County; and the Boone Road right-of-way is public right-of-way;so there is some discrepancy in terms of who owns what; and that the pedestrian bicycle plan that is being proposed, also looked at using that old railroad right-of-way as that path to get people in the Greeenacres area to Flora and then onward north, Councihnember DeV lensing asked for council consensus on making a stronger push with the County to get the right-of-way agreement for extending Appleway; and he brought up the continuing issue of Sprague and the portion that is one-way west of University,that some members of the community felt that issue remains undecided; and through public comments, he has heard a clear statement needs to be made of what Council's intensions are concerning whether to reverse Sprague back to a two-way; that several businesses wait for Council decision before ordering signs, and other business-related activities dealing with the issue; and asked if Council feels more information is needed,or if a Ietter should be sent to the Valley Chamber advising them of council decision. Deputy Mayor Munson said it was agreed at last summer's retreat,that we would do an overlay study of Sprague and Appleway west of University to determine how best to move forward with re-development; and that overlay study might make the direction a moot issue as it would provide a plan that would most effectively use the corridor; and until the study is completed based on the necessary inventory,there is inadequate information at this point to make a recommendation. Councihuember Flanigan voiced his concern over how much time should lapse before a recommendation is made on that section; followed by Counciltnember Taylor's comments that he would be amenable to scheduling discussion within the next few weeks. Deputy City Manager Regor mentioned that the valley corridor update is scheduled for the December 13 council agenda, and that presentation of information should be of assistance to council hi their decision-making process. Councilmember Taylor added that when the alternatives were presented last year, two alternatives were chosen as possibilities, and at that time, he feels the decision was made not to change Sprague west of University, back; and that the matter at debate now is whether to take the area on Sprague east of University and leave that as a two-way as Appleway is extended east, Deputy Mayor Munson said be felt the plan was to make the roads fit the comprehensive plan,and not make the comprehensive plan fit the roads; which would be the affect if such decision were made now; that Council agreed to work a re- development area for auto row,and to hire a consultant next year to tell us the best way to do that. It was also suggested if possible,to move the study up to have it done sooner than currently scheduled. It was determined this will be discussed further at the December 13 council meeting, EXECUTIVE SESSION:Pending Litigation It was moved by Mayor Wilhite, seconded and unanhnorrsly agreed upon to adjourn into Executive Session for approximately thirty minutes regarding pending litigation,' and that afterinards upon reconvening the meeting, a decision may be made. Council adjourned into Executive Session at 8:41 p.m. Deputy Mayor Munson returned to the meeting at 9:15 pan. and announced that the Executive Session would be extended for approximately 15 minutes, Mayor Wilhite declared Council out of Executive Session and reconvened the open meeting at 9:20 p.m. Deputy City Attorney Driskell stated that he received on Thursday last week, a Motion from the City of Liberty Lake to remand to the Boundary Review Board, the denial of their previous petition for annexation of that 644 acres laying between the two cities. He explained that Council options are to Council Meeting: 11-15-05 Page 7 of 3 Approved by Council: 12-13-05 6. Motion Consideration: Sprague Applewny Traffic Flow Corridor Configuration from University Road to I90—NeiI ICersteniSteve Worley Engineer Worley stated that Council previously asked that this item be brought forward in anticipation of the previous agenda presentation, and that staff is available to help with Council's deliberation on the issue. Council/staff discussion included traffic counts underway, changing direction on Sprague between University and Dislunan and any resulting impact on the corridor project; that staff has heard comments from the community suggesting staff evaluate alternatives in terms of Sprague Avenue, but that staff has not received any direction to do anything different from what is currently in place on Sprague; and projected peak-hour traffic numbers on various parts of the couplet. it was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and seconded by Councilmerrrber Deneitnj to change the direction of Sprague between the north and south sheels of University and Dishrrrarr Mica, to cr two-ivory street. That motion generated much discussion including the technical information concerning traffic patterns; auto row and the Heed for further information from them; the desire to have the study results before making any recommendations;funding needed if the direction were changed back to two-way;and if there is a need or community desire to address this issue now.Mayor Wilhite invited public comment, Philip Rudy. 5647 N Frvithill: said he represents Spokane Valley Business Association, that they have trouble with the traffic modeling and feels that information is necessary before any decision can be made; that he recommends having the Comprehensive Plan finalized prior to making such decision; and he recommends the motion be withdrawn and Council take no action now. Howard Heiman, 117 N McDonald: said that there is a public safety issue regarding Fire Station#1 and if the Fire Station receives a call to go north, east or south they must first go west taking away precious response time. Tony Lazanis. E Empire: said it was a mistake to begin with making Sprague a two-way; and that Council needs to make a decision of what is best for the people who use it and for businesses who use it; amid suggests having the road two ways from Argonne to University. Dick BeInn,9405 E Sprague:said he owns a business in that area;and is a Board member of the Spokane Valley Business Association; that not everyone is in agreement, but suggests waiting another six months as it won't make any difference as they have waited for three years; that he wants to see what the study suggests;and recommends killing the motion and finishing the Comprehensive Plan. Ray Perry. 2020 N Eli: stated he is not really affected by the road except when he wants to shop; and suggests Council throw out the motion and wait until the study is completed; and not to waste money but to leave the road as it is at least for now, Bill Gothmann, 10010 E 48111: recommends voting against the motion; said during his campaigning most comments he received were concerning finishing the couplet, and that he perhaps only received one comment to reverse the road. Deputy Mayor Munson stated his preference to withdraw the motion, but the seconder denied the withdraw request. Vote: by Acclamation: in Favor: Deputy Mayor Munson. Opposed: Mayor Wilhite, and Cormcihnembers Schirurxels, Taylor, Denerm}; Flanigan and Del/tenting. Abstentions: Wane- Motion failed, Council Meeting: 12-13-2005 Approved by Council: 1-10-2006 on the criteria as shown in the March 21, 2006 Request for Council Action, the panel decided to recommend ECONorthwest,which includes the Iocal planning firth of Studio Cascade. After hearing from Glatting Jackson, a transportation and urban design firm from Florida, Mr. Kuhta reported that the panel felt that type of expertise was needed for this project in order to link urban design planning and transportation. Mr.Kuhta said that staff seeks authorization tonight from Council to begin those negotiations with the Freedman Tung Group and to include Glatting Jackson on That team; adding that ECONorth has no objection in substituting Glatting Jackson into the mix. Regarding the proposal bid, staff plans to negotiate the scope in an attempt to lower it to a comfortable level and to also get the best value from this project, as this project will be the development catalyst for the next 20 years. Mr. Kuhta also mentioned the March 21,2006 letter received from Glatting Jackson. Cotrcil/staff discussion ensued including that ECONorthwest would be the controlling consultant with input from Gattling, the budgeted amount of$250,000 versus the proposal amounts;narrowing the scope to the original discussion rather than the broad project and/or phasing the project versus considering the whole corridor project;the upcoming discussion with Glatting and the need to address their objectivity regarding a one or two-way couplet; that a budget is a guideline and can be revised; and to integrate land use, transportation, and economics into this project to make it something the community can be proud of. Mr.Kuhte clarified that ECONorthwest is agreeable to have Glatting Jackson do the transportation portion rather than the consultant they would have brought on board; and that the meeting Monday will include a re-scoping to determine Glatting Jackson's piece in this project. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded to authorize the Department of Community Development to negotiate a contract with ECONorllru'est, Freedman, Tung and T3ottontley team to assist the City in preparing a subarea plan for the Sprague/Ippleway Corridor, Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions:None. Motion carried. 5.Presentation and Commentary:Update Sign Code Compliance--Marina Sukup Community Development Director Sukup gave her PowerPoint presentation covering the history of the sign regulations ordinance, the ad hoc Sign Committee, the brochure distribution last August, and the compliance efforts, and stated that she anticipates it will take approximately five or six months to get through all the principal arterials in town; that the objective is to be consistent and fair in gaining compliance from community members. Council/staff discussion ensued, including reiterating that Council welcomes public input,that previous public meetings were not\veil attended by members of the community; the difference between a sign and a decoration;regulating structures and not content;that the legal department is researching the issue of flags; exempt signs; garage sale signs; and real estate signs; and that the ordinance can be amended to further clarify any gray areas. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment. PUBLIC COMMENT: J.R. Haase. 11003 E Sprague: expressed concern about not being allowed to put up a sign on private property; he stated he needs his reader boards to state his daily specials; that reader boards are economical, and people need them to advertise their business; that he objects to needing a permit to put up a sign on his own building or to put up seasonal banners; the law is unclear on what is a permanent sign and what is not;he wondered who would be the judge if a sign is seasonal; and questioned giving a citation to someone for putting up an Irish flag. Kep Paulson,E 1220 Sprague: said that many business owners have contacted him and are angry, that it appears we are still working on the sign ordinance so it should be rescinded until finalized; and that getting permits for the signage is a lot of taxation. Council Meeting:03-21-06 Page 4 of 7 Approved by Council:04-11-06 closer to University frankly, than if you went through one of the interchanges farther east. From that direction you have perfect interchange access, there Is nothing on the Freeway that says, City of Spokane Valley next 6 exits, this way to Spokane Valley, you have a right to this mind of signage and we suggest that we work very hard with the State to get this signage changed. The off ramp at Sprague Ave should say Downtown Spokane Valley exit. It is a bit more difficult coming from the east, you can take Sullivan or Pines, which would make Pines a better City Center site but it is not as viable and University is a pretty good site and it can be signed so that it works. a Commissioner Carroll: Where will the North/South Freeway terminate? It will terminate closer to Freya, will that add or detract from your recommendation? Freedman: I don't know enough about it and I would like to have the traffic consultant Glatting/Jackson get back to you with an answer for that at a later time, O Comrrlcilmemllber DeVieming: Clearly the recommended site is a good one, what are some of its downsides? Freedman: Well, it does not have a University labeled interchange, as Sullivan and Pines clo, it does not have quite enough north-south traffic, It has a confusing one-way/two- way traffic configuration, gas station on the corner, couplet is too far apart, University Road redirection is too confusing, market visibility is split, the grocery store is a good add, would recommend redesign of University to link better to the U-City site, would be good for everyone, designed the street so that the grocery store traffic would feed out right to the main street across the street, never get a grocery store to share a parking lot. fl Commissioner Beaulac: What happens to the businesses on the north sIde of Sprague as the City Center develops? Freedman: Typically it would develop around and expand the City Center and the thought is it would expand there first. Eventually you could encounter so much growth around the city that you would need to redesign the sub-area plan. ▪ Caunci!member Munson: The suggestion is that people will want to live and walk to work; at this time the City Center does not have an industry that would reasonably support that. Is there a place in the plan that would support that? Freedman: The suggestion would be that any place in the City Center that allows for housing you would allow for lodging or offices in order to allow for more uses to be incorporated into the upper levels of the Center, For example, female travelers will stay farther away from an airport, closer to the population in order to feel safer and net have to drive In order to fulfill the needs they have in their travels. City Center hotels are perfect examples of this type of development. • Cuuncihnember Scliirlimels: In relation to the housing issue, what is the general mix preferred, rentals or owners? Freedman: Both works, but ownership housing is preferred. Attached family housing is a good example; and there are many forms that attached single family housing can take on and still look like a single home, where you enter your own home from a street entrance and not from a joint entrance like an apartment, It is easier for developers to do rentals on top of retail, and wait to see if townhouses are selling before wanting to add it to their development. It is normal for developers to have to draw up special agreements with people to make sure that they understand it is not normal housing because there are different noises than In a residential neighborhood, street noise, smells, service trucks; will need to write special codes to cover the housing and mandate that the edifice of the building be flattering to the image of the City. O Cannel!member Gothrnann: You show on the plan a civic building, let's say that it is a City Hall and a library together, what would you do If you needed to expand those? Freedman: Currently the diagram shows the civic building to be 6510 sq ft. Currently City Hall is using 30K sq Council/Planning Commission Joint Meeting Minutes 09-14-06 Page 4 of 7 Approved by Council: 10-10.06 MINUTES SPECIAL JOINT WORKSHOP MEETING SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL AND SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION CENTERPLACE GREAT ROOM March 1,2007 5:00 p.m. Attendance: Councihnembers Staff Planning Commissioners Diana Wilhite,Mayor Dave Mercier,City Manager Gail Kogle,Chair Steve Taylor,Deputy Mayor Nina Regor,Deputy City Mgr Fred Beaulac Rich Munson,Councilmember Greg McCormick,Planning Manager Marcia Sands Dick Denenny,Councilmember Scott Kuhta,Long Range Planner John Carroll Mike DeVleming,Councilmember Mike Basinger,Associate Planner Ian Robertson Gary Schimmels,Councilmember Micki Hamois,Associate Planner David Crosby Bill Gothmann,Councilmember Carolbelle Branch,Public Info, Officer Bob Blum Tavis Schmidt,Planning Technician Marina Sukuup,Conununity Dev Director Jnga Note,Traffic Engineer Ken Thompson,Finance Director Carrie Acosta,Deputy City Clerk Steve Worley,Senior Engineer Deanna Griffith,Administrative Assistant Others in attendance: Troy Russ,Michael Freedman,Bill Grimes Mayor Wilhite opened the meeting at approximately 5:14 p.m., welcomed everyone, and turned the meeting over to Michael Freedman,who also welcomed everyone to the meeting, and then went through his PowerPoint presentation of the"Corridor Revitalization Framework." Michael Freedman began by explaining that the objective of tonight's study session is to present recommendations to retrofit the Sprague/Appleway Corridor for success; to report on the input and feedback received at the Community Workshops; to discuss and clarify these recommendations; and to receive informal direction from City Council to either move forward with the implementation of these recommendations in a subarea plan; or move forward with the implementation of a modified set of plan contents; or to bring back further information and modifications in subsequent study session(s). Mr. Freedman explained that "corridor" means all new development defined by the single-family transition line, and it includes the land across the street. He said that the corridor has been caught in a change which resulted in a tremendous amount of clustered retail development; that customers left the corridor and moved to other freeway interchanges and major crossroad areas; and that such exodus was no one's fault. He said existing conditions drained a huge amount from the corridor and that the corridor suffers from disinvestment. The question he said, is how to bring it back and make it viable. He explained that one way to determine what the community would aspire to have, is through a community survey. He said the survey demonstrated overwhelming community consensus on the importance of a city center; respondents understand there is a lack of designated funds; and community members had several comments regarding Appleway's extension. As a result of several community workshops,he said they determined what were or are the barriers from the various aspects of the community; and what are those entities' or individual's desirable changes,including continent of what they do not want. Joint Meeting Council cis Planning Commission 03-01-07 Page 1 of 4 Approved by Council:07-24-07 He said they learned that potential developers of the corridor said it needs an identity, that we need a city center, and we also need affordable housing. Mr, Freedman then went over the listed opportunities such as underground parking; slowing the traffic flow; having a city design center, and the opportunity to create a city center with identity that will draw developers. He also mentioned what property owners' concerns are including barriers such as failure to extend Appleway;whether to keep the couplet the way it is or change it;and what they want in a city center such as getting rid of all vacant buildings. Mr. Freedman said that regarding the state of the corridor,most workshop participants confirmed that the corridor needs revitalization, but a minority disagreed and said business is coming back and there is no need to make any change. He said that major community aspirations included beatification (the corridor is ugly and a detriment); economic revitalization; maintained nobility; enhanced access; and authentic and identify the corridor. Mr. Freedman went over the highlights of key conununity meetings and workshops and explained what works or doesn't work today, and said that two-way traffic provides better visibility and access and is generally better for business; and that one-way traffic accommodates tluough traffic, He continued by explaining that the one-way traffic transition is confusing, the turn around time is not good;business access and visibility is not good; and there are not enough north-south cross streets. Concerning future circulation results, Mr. Freedman said that in the workshop with fourteen tables of community members, only one table wanted to see one-way traffic; that thirteen wanted primarily two- way on both Sprague and Appleway; and of those, seven wanted two way on the whole area, while six wanted seine combination. He said they came up with a series of recommendations based on those workshops; that workshop participants envision Sprague with bike lanes, wider sidewalks and planter strips,more pedestrian friendly and to have more and safer crosswalks. Troy Russ then explained some of the existing conditions. By using select link analysis, Mr. Russ said they determined where people are coining front who are on the coridor;and that the goal is to make sure people can get through the entire corridor as fast as possible; that 1-90 is a regional main street and Sprague is our main street, He also explained that of the 1,945 getting off onto Appleway during peak hours, only 80 are going completely through the corridor and getting out, and that is a very small percentage. Moving west bound, he said that of those 27,600 passing through, only 110 are actually coming to the end of Sprague;so therefore it is not the through street many think it is, but it is more of a "main"street. He said that morning rush hour on Sprague west bound at Mullen has about 553 vehicles; and Appleway during evening peak is about 1750; and that the level of service between Evergreen and McDonald is a "C" (on a grading scale of A-F); but some intersections are "D" which some cities consider acceptable. Mr.Russ ROOher explained that the corridor circulation options to serve the land use vision of a city center include: no change; extend Appleway one-way or the whole corridor into a one- way couplet;or not complete the one-way couplet but convert Sprague to two-way and Appleway to two- way even when extended and at the two way street switch it to one way—so half two ways and half one way; or complete the conversion of the entire area from I-90 all the way down. He said that their conclusion is that the best transportation strategy is a one way couplet or two way and not a hybrid, and that their study showed that the difference in travel time was significant when a hybrid was involved, He added that this study is not today's traffic but is future traffic, about 20 years out. There was some discussion on Spokane Regional Transportation Commission's traffic model and the changes made over time;and it was mentioned that Mr.Russ's figures are the figures from the highest traffic model. Recommendations, stated Mr. Russ, are in the long run, building a two-way system is worth the additional 60 seconds delay; it will strengthen businesses along the entire corridor; eliminate uncertainty over the ultimate configuration of auto row. He then explained the five stages to implement the recommendations, and concluded that the two-way conversion done in phases means that (1) two-way Sprague to Argonne-Mullan can be done now; (2) two-way Sprague to I-90 and two-way Appleway to Thierznan can be done now;and the(3)roundabout at I-90 won't be needed until after 2021. Joint Meeting Council&Planning Commission 03-01-07 Page 2 of 4 Approved by Council:07-24-07 Councilmember Gothmannn brought up the survey done quite some time ago, wherein it was shown that GS% preferred the one-way. Mr. Gotiunann said to change that perception there should be significant reasons for us to go against that; that it could be justified by direct access from both Appleway and Sprague,but he asked if putting the roundabout up front would that be more efficient. Mr. Russ said that the roundabout won't be needed until about 2030 and that perhaps Washington State Department of Transportation(WSDOT)could be engaged to assist. Mr.Freeman added that surveys tend to be interpreted differently;when he came here he heard that 65% preferred the one-way; but answers can change based on how the questions were posed; and in the workshops,there was overwhelming response to two-way at this point,which tells him that at some point some large percentage of the community says things have changed since that older survey was done;that he is not cleat about what the survey said about any strong preference one way or the other; and it is highly unlikely that that large percentage would actually favor the one-way. Mr.Russ said that when this survey was conducted, there was no conversation about having a town center or city center; so lots of things have changed and the assumption going into this is different now. Discussion ensued regarding traffic issues, including mention that Pines has the worst intersection; brief discussion of one-way versus two ways; what to do first to get the most "bang for the buck"; timing issues; changing the number of lanes; the use of the corridor for through traffic; multi-modal transportation which includes automobiles,bikes(bike lanes),pedestrians, light rail or other rapid transit; the desire to have an appealing city center; and the mention by Mr,Freedman that the businesses and city center would be better served by two-way streets. Mr. Freedman added that so far he has not heard anyone way they don't want this; and that they are hearing a level of comfort sufficient to suit them they are on the right path. Mayor Wilhite asked if there is a consensus to continue with this;and several Councihnentbers nodded in agreement, and Deputy Mayor Taylor voiced his agreement. Cauncilrrrember DeVleming, however; stated that he feels this is a step backwards, but he realizes he is only one courrcihuember. Deputy Mayor Taylor said that it appears it is six to one in favor of continuing Mayor Wilhite said we will therefore procee. She thanked Mr.Freedman and Mr.Russ for the presentation,and called for a recess at 6:51 p.m. She resumed the meeting at 7:00 p,im. Mr. Freeman continued the presentation by moving to Iand use development within the circulation of the corridor. He gave an overview of previous meetings where the city center core was discussed, including all that the core might entail such as mixed used buildings to include shop fronts, clear glass, a civic building;and housing facing the road.He then moved to the question of where to start to in order to allow growth to the area; and he discussed new development on Main Street, the possible location at U-city; retail possibilities, and shorter walking distances. He explained the concept of using both sides of University in order to get equal entitlements and to have the core area not look too long,but have it so it invites walking; and that he recommends no on-surface parking, Things to consider,he explained,would include which types of colors and materials to use; streetscapes; improved infrastructure; building to the front; parking in the rear; and the concept of what the outside city center would be comprised of as opposed to the core; and he said to keep in mind zoning by use and density; and to prohibit anything in the City Center that would not promote the center; and to also focus on not having the area too congested. He mentioned the need to have good lighting and turn lanes,outdoor seating,and street parking off to the side of the road. He explained the concept of"neighborhood center retail: and defined "neighborhood centers" (community commercial) as serving retail and services featuring contiguous small scale shop fronts.He continued through the remainder of the slide presentation. Further discussion/comments ensued and included how to pay for everything; business offices along the corridor, some on Appleway but most on Sprague; keeping and marketing auto row with other uses such Joint Meeting Council&Planning Commission 03-01-07 Page 3 of 4 Approved by Council:07-24-07 as restaurants; underground parking in the city core and whether the private sector would support that or the City would provide it;more green space;future light rail;and a"gateway"to the city. Mr.Freedman asked if is enough consensus to allow marketing of an auto row, but to keep in mind that the"gateway" entrance to the City would be different from the actual physical entrance of auto row. Cou ncihnember Denenny said tonight's meeting gave Rini much to digest as Mr.Freedman consolidated all the information he's heard over the Iast several months;and that all along he agrees with the way Mr. Freedman has set up the city center. Regarding auto row, Councilmember Denenny said we are already seeing development in communities where they are drawing dealers away and if we do not react appropriately, we are likely going to lose that tax revenue. Canncilmember Munson responded that he'd like to move forward but would like more detailed information about the cross streets at north/south;and Deputy Mayor Taylor stated that he would agree with those comments, but if we move to a two-way system on the couplet, that would negate the need for mandatory through cross streets; that if you're sticking with one ways on the couplet,you have to have more turn streets; in this case you can just put in the additional blocks,and you'll still going have the two-way traffic on Sprague. Mr. Freedman asked if there is a enough level of comfort with the key ideas in terms of the land use development patterns they are recommending, to implement them in a series of detailed standards and guidelines in the sub-area plan,with a list of every one with the traffic patterns as well as bring it back in its usual form for the public hearing process through the Planning Commission. Mayor Wilhite asked for consensus, and Deputy Mayor Taylor responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Munson responded that there is still one sticking point,which is do we hire a consultant to look at the best way to buy the land or not buy the land;and would that delay the overall plan. Mr.Freedman responded that that will not change the plan;that we have to determine the desired outcome,because if we don't know what we want, we might as well forget it. He stated that the sub-area plan's main job is to entitle the property, but it doesn't tell where to entitle the property,or on which side of the street to build the city center. The plan makes its own provision,Iie explained,so the sub-area plan allows you to get the plan incrementally or all at once;as long as you know you want it,the kind and place,you're ready to act;he recommended talking with property owners and ultimately pursue the property. Cou nciltnetnber Munson said.to Mayor Wilhite that he feels we should move forward;and Mayor Wilhite and Deputy Mayor Taylor vocally concurred. Mayor Wilhite said that we like this concept absolutely. Mr.Freedman said he will work with the core team to draft a plan with all these parts for a hearing,and bring it back in roughly a couple of months.Mayor Wilhite agreed, Mayor Wilhite and council thanked Mr.Freedman and his assistants,and thanked everyone for attending. The meeting attended at approximately 8:30 p.m. ATTEST: Diana Wilhite,Mayor Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Joint Meeting Council&Planning Commission 03-01-07 Page 4 or Approved by Council:07-24-07 Engineer Worley then brought Council attention to Mr. Worley's May 25, 2007 Informational Memo as an aid to explain some of the transportation issues to consider in conjunction with this project. After going over his tnentorandutn, further discussion was held concerning conversion of the existing one-way couplet between Argonne RoadfDisbman-Mica Road and University Road to two, two-way streets; the extension of Appleway Avenue from University Road to beyond Sullivan as a two-lane, two-way residential boulevard; reducing Sprague Avenue from seven lanes to five lanes east of University Road and the timing of each aspect. Mr. Worley said that the request on the MTP is the entire corridor; and construction can be done in phases. Mr, Worley also mentioned that if Council desires to change the proposal as noted in the meinorandiun,staff would need that decision by June 15 to give SRTC time to do an air quality analysis on the proposal and have the results ready to be included in that Board's packets by July 2. The regional traffic model was also discussed, and Mr. Worley said that the transportation modeling for the Plan was based on the "interim" regional traffic model completed in late 2005, The issue of intersections and capacity was also discussed, as well as projected growth, bike Ianes, sidewalks; speed limits to gain the highest number of traffic passing through and/or slowing traffic through the City Center; rapid transit or light rail potential;acquiring additional right-of-way on Appleway;whether there has been ample public input or if there is need for further public input, and if further public hearings should be scheduled, and if so,when those should take place, The idea of further presentations to Council was also brought up,and it was suggested that Council should have a list of the pros and cons of keeping the road as is,or reversing back to two-ways. Mr.Kuhta mentioned that if further public hearings will be held,he suggests educating the public prior to such hearings, to unveil the Plan and go out to the community to explain what it means;then schedule any public hearing. The motion made at the Council's previous meeting concerning the Spokane Regional Metropolitan Transportation Plan, was discussed and there was some disagreement on what exactly that motion was. Staff will research that and have the answer by the next Council meeting, Mr. Worley recommended that Gladding Jackson perform another analysis, and as soon as we get the regional model, to give them the results, then they can go through and re-evaluate and compare that to what we are recommending now; but that no scope has been developed for that work yet, but such could be done between now and time the model is received. Cotutcil concurred and said they want to know costs, Mayon Wilhite recommend moving forward with the three bulleted items in the proposal for the MTP and the THB while we wait to see how long it takes for SRTC to come up with the new model, and to have staff report back as to what progress has been made. 2.Executive Session:Pending Litigation---Land Acquisition It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded to adjoin into Executive Session for,forty urr»utes regarding pending litigation and land acquisition, and that there may be a decision made regarding land acquisition upon MUM to regular open session Mayor Wilhite announced that Council will take a five- minute break prior to convening the Executive Session;and Council left open session at 8:15 p.m. Mayor Wilhite declared Council out of Executive Session at 8:39 pan. It teas moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor, seconded, and unanimously agreed to authorize the City Manager or designee to continue negotiations and awake an offer to pw clulse for park purposes,property located at 17721 East Boone, Spokane Valet', as is set forth in the attached offer dated May 29, 2007;subject to the approval of final documents by the City Council. Special Council Study Session Meeting May 29,2007 Page 3 of 4 Approved by City Council: 05-26-07 DRAFT also explained that whole foods and "green grocers" are very popular in city centers; and he mentioned the importance of having a vibrant grocery store where we are planning our center, Mi'. Gibbs explained that the average American family earns about$4Z000 per year per household; and that they like to save on shopping and most consider Penney's to be a moderately luxury store. He showed that the largest retailers in the Country are (in order of large to small): WaI-mart; Home Depot;Krogers; Target, Sears, Costco,Albertson's,and Penney's. Mr.Gibbs showed examples of cities which have built the town center with the right framework of having walkable town centers, and added that hotels love to be in town centers, and rental housing above retail works well,Ha advised that we demand high standards,develop a plan,stick to it and resist compromises; and said that Rather resources for new urbanism include the "Congress for the New Urbanism,"and the "Harvard School of Architecture." He also mentioned that a library can definitely be an anchor and can generate as much retail as a department store;and said to create a lifestyle center we need retail,housing, office and civic. During discussion, Councilmember Munson asked how do we attract enough retailers,and Mr.Gibbs said that he couldn't state how for certain, but that we have good retail here already,and that he feels we will be able to attract a lot to this new format, as this format doesn't exist in this region except downtown Spokane;and he feels it is highly likely we will attract restaurants and retailers who aren't here, or who are here and would like to open a duplicate store. Councilmernber DeVleming asked Mr. Gibbs to explain where we are "over"or"under" in some retail categories; and Mr. Gibbs said that he did a very general study and can't say specifically,but that we seem to have snore retail than most cities our size;but that we also have a large trade area of 80 to 100 miles;that we likely don't need a detailed market study, but could work with a private study group and have their brokers present possible tenants; as there are likely retailers out there we don't know about; that he knows of developers all over the country who would be interested in coming here;that many developers are ready to go,and once we have our planning finalized,he feels we will have a large number of interested people locally and nationally. In response to Council member Gothman n's question of which works better,one-way or two-way streets,Mr.Gibbs said as a rule, two-way is better as it provides more people opportunity to go past a storefront, and doesn't confuse or frustrate the shopper if they miss a turn for a store,having one-way could mean going around the block again —which in most cases the shopper will just go home, He stated there is no definitive answer,but the majority of the time, two-way is better. Councilmember Sclllrnmels asked about the time frame from start to finish, and Mr. Gibbs said that it is possible to have an engineer plan and have a building built in twenty-four months; but that the threshold is acquiring the property and hazing it zoned properly, and having site plan approval from the City could add another two years to that tirnefranae; but some buildings can be built as quickly as nine months, Mayor Wilhite thanked Mr.Gibbs for his presentation,and thanked everyone for attending,and exl,laiued that council will take a short break then move to an Executive Session. It was moved by Deputy Taylo,; seconded and x►nwil»rorrsly agreed to adjourn into executive session for about thirty minutes to discuss a pel;so,f,re1 matter; and that no decision iuill he made afterwards. Council adjourned at 5:05 p.m. for a break, and then to convene their Executive session at approximately 5:30 p.m. Mayor Wilhite declared Council out of executive session at 5;50 p.m. It was then moved by Councilnrember Gothmann,seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 5:51 p.m. ATTEST: Diana W i lln rte,Mayor Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Special Council Study Session 7 pit meeting CIS-H-07 Page 3 of 3 Approved by City Council: 08-28-207 those needed 400 spaces; and with tuck-under town homes, he said,there would be nothing on Appleway or Sprague that has a parking lot in front. Mr. Freedman then showed examples of other cities which have added a main street experience to a town green experience. He also explained that the goal is to have the area sufficiently self-enclosed so that the developer doesn't have to feel that the imagery of the corridor is particularly visible when you are actually inside the area,and the area would include mix.uses with houses, office and lodging and housing on top, and a green on bottom. Regarding traffic control, Mr. Freedman said he feels it very important to have two, one-way streets, more narrow,to cut through the green to feel like a town green,controlled with stop signs which are safer than signal lights as people tend to Push through a light as it is about to change;but can't do so with a stop sign. Mr.Freedman also mentioned that in the earlier meeting today,there was discussion about the possibility of having the library have a front parch, and/or pull the library back some so that the library would not only feel as if it were behind some green on Appleway, but there would be an extension of the green or some plaza space in front of the building where they could program some library activities. Additionally, Mr.Freedman said it is still not determined if we can rely on two-way traffic;and that the highest priority for capital improvements for the city center, is to take the short segment from University to Dishman- Mica, and to change that to a two-way segment; and that he feels that we would still need the protected angle parking out front on the Sprague frontage to nuke that retailing successful;and in so doing,the city center in this site would further re-affirm the importance of this being a two-way segment. Discussion topics included parking for library patrons which would accommodate the safety of children, seniors and those with handicaps, including comment from Mr, Wirt that staff would park in the shared parking areas; the approximately quarter-mile walking distance from the buildings to shared parking areas;that there will be four cars per 1,00 for retail,and 400 separate spaces for the public buildings, Mr, Freedman said although they are on a "fast-track," there is time to do a new site plan if Council and Library Board Members prefer to see more than the 74 parking spaces close up to the building. Deputy Mayor Taylor and Councihneinnber DeVlemiug said they like this layout;but Councilmember DeVIeniiug asked about the creation of covered walkways; and Mr. Freedman said covered sidewalks is possible in some areas, that it would cost more, but another consideration is arcaded retail, and explained that an arcade is where the building is built over the sidewalk and you walk under;arcaded retail makes the retail a Iittle less visible; and in his business of making city centers, there was thought that outdoor centers would not be more successful then indoor shopping malls in areas with cold weather; but a developer proved that to be wrong with his city center in Easton Ohio, which became a model, and we know that the urban format outdoor ones are more successful than shopping malls,even in areas with cold weather. Mr. Freedtnau also stressed that Councilnembers and Library Board members are the best ones to make that judgment call, and if they feel covered walkways would make this more successful and be worth adding,Mr.Freedman said he awaits that direction,although he personally does not feel those are needed. Regarding parking, Councilmember Scltimtnels asked if the street in front of the library would be widened and put in diagonal parking, giving about three times the parking, to which Mr. Freedman responded that would be passible, but it would pull the library further away from the retail;but that is an option to change all the parking to angled;but it would also make the space to cross wider. in response to a question about trips generated by the library, Mr. Wirt said he recalls that in 2006, there were approximately 280,000 people who walked in the doors, give or take 10,000 or so; but that he could not estimate how many daily trips there are for the library. Library Board Member Mary Lloyd said that when she looks at Appleway Boulevard,she sees some sight issues that she also experiences at the Valley Mall;and that she can't see left to turn left;that she wants sufficient parking and she feels that 74 is not ample parking taking into account the daily trips and that they have already outgrown the library they currently occupy. Mr.Freedman explained that there are 200 separate spaces for the library; and that 74 of them are in one area, another 20 or so in another section, and the other 100+ in another section. Ms. Lloyd said site has concern in getting in and out of the Minutes Special Meeting Council/Library 10-02-07 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: 10-23-07 Goal#3:Formulate a six-year strategic financial plan by July 2008 that forecasts expected revenues and eaheuses; incorporales the cost elements of departmental business plans; identifies fiscal constrains;and proposes formulas for Council consideration that institute sustainable budget-balancing approaches and itemizes necessary service reductions or revenue increases or combinations thereof There were no suggested changes for this goal and Finance Director Thompson said we need to begin to take action on this and he will address this issue later today. Goal#4:Initiate Implementation of the sub-area plan for the Sprague/Appleit'ay Revitalization Plan. Community Development Director McClung said that the next steps are public meetings for February, including the Consultant's presentation of Book 3 for February 19, which will be to Council and the Planning Commission. Ms. McClung stated that a SEPA Determination has been issued on the City Center portion of the platy, and we should have estimates on infrastructure cost soon. Public Works Director Kersten said that he and Glaclding Jackson are working on those estimates, and should have some numbers within the next few weeks, but he estimates the cost in the twelve to fourteen million dollar range,and said that costs will cover streets,underground water and power, sewer,and landscaping clown that part of the Center;and that the City Center street by itself is about$3 million;he added that the numbers will include frontages but not the actual upgrade of the whole sheets or new interchanges. Mr. Kersten also stated that the library is obligated to build their half of the street, and that there are some minor streets which could be built by a developer, City Attorney Connelly remarked that the condition of purchase and sale is the road extending south to the library which has to be built, and there is no indication as to who or how that will be accomplished; that they have had contacts from at least one developer concerning the city, and are finally getting down to costs, and said he anticipates the next month or two will be productive. Mr. Kersten stated that we don't have to use all-$12 million to satisfy the library; and Mr. Connelly responded that we can start with the idea that the developer will build the streets.The issue of turning Sprague and Appleway back to two-ways was broached, and Mr. Kersten said that Glatting Jackson is working on that And should have some figures in the next few weeks and will consolidate that into another report. Mr, Kersten also mentioned we will have a list of all potential projects that it will take to have the City Center Project; and said some developers are interested who want to look at the project in the next few weeks, after which time Mr. Kersten said he should know if those developers are genuinely interested. Mr.Connelly also mentioned that any developers meeting with Mr. Munson should include Mr. Denenny as well, and he (Mr. Connelly)sent Council a memo on what they can and cannot do regarding developer contact.There were no suggested changes for this goal. Goal S: Adopt area-wide rezoning proposals consistent with the comprehensive plan that reflect appropriate adjustments in zoning designations. Deputy City Manager Jackson stated that the just initiated quarterly updates for Council are in keeping with Council requests for opportunity for input into future Comp Plan changes. Ms. McClung explained that they are putting together a schedule for the next"batch" of comp plan change requests, which are from eleven individual property owners. In response to Mayor Munson's question about Council protocol on how to address comp plan changes, it was mentioned that Mr. McCormick will be giving Council a report on this at the next council meeting, and will subsequently give quarterly updates. Councilmember Taylor mentioned that this is in response to his and other Councilmembers' previous continents concerning giving input into the comp plan changes process;and Council concurred that they do not need written documentation prior to discussion of these quarterly updates. There were no suggested changes for this goal.[See further discussion below for this goal.] Goal 6:Perform an analysis of a land owner initiated request for annexation. Community Development Director McClung explained that this is the end of a process which begins with reaching consensus with tine County regarding where the annexation boundaries are going to be;she said that a meeting is scheduled for February 6 as a"kick-off'meeting with us, Spokane County and others, and she said that the meeting notice explained that the Washington State Community and Economic Council Retreat Minutes:01-12-2008 Page 2 of 11 Approved by Council:01-22-08 Mr, Russ said there isn't a single mode of attack and that the automobile and more pavement doesn't mean more efficiency. Iie explained that the object is to move people not cars, to try to improve the quality of the trip and maybe get people to live closer to where they work. He said that cities generally manage the problem by having more connection streets which gives more citizens more choices; and that having three two-lane streets carry traffic more efficiently then one six-lane highway as we lose efficiency when we go larger than three lanes;that two two-lanes carry more than a four-lane; that speed also matters,and going faster than 30-35 lends to result in more room between cars thereby allowing less cars on the roadway; and that higher speeds are also not compatible with pedestrians and bikes. In their analysis, he explained that they found that only a very small percentage (4%) of all trips on the Sprague/Appleway Corridor are from people passing through(end to end on the corridor);and that all the rest of the travelers are local.Mr.Russ said that if trips are 96%local, that changes the land use concept perspective;that we want lower travel speeds,open access to properties and good connectivity. Mr.Russ in explaining trip purpose,said that 70%of all trips Occur within three miles of an individual's home; that when we create a city center,transportation challenges must be addressed;that there will be a need to create a roadway that would enable a mixed use city center to strengthen businesses along the corridor and eliminate the confusion of the one way and create a safe environment for all modes of travel; that the purpose of the street is not just automobiles but pedestrians as well He explained that the options before us are(1)keep what we have, (2)extend the one-way couplet from University east; (3)create the hybrid of a two-way system from Dishman Mica east then two-way all the way east but one way west to 1-90; and (4) do it all as a two-way street. Mr. Russ said that the options have been evaluated and they recommend the two-way system,even though the one-way is the fastest, but speed he explained, is not the utmost concern. Mr. Russ reminded everyone that this plan is taking into account the projected traffic volumes for the year 2030. [Mayor Munson arrived at 6;45 p.m.]Mr.Russ said that the rationale for their street configuration is as mentioned: it strengthens businesses along the corridor,eliminates conflicts and confusion,keeps the desirable level of service,and establishes a clean gateway to the City. To implement this plan, Mr,Russ explained that there are several stages. He explained that Stage One is$6 million to establish the transportation framework and enable the City Center which includes converting Sprague to two-way between Argonne and University and reducing Sprague from seven to five lanes between Argonne and University; and converting Appleway to a two-way street from Dishunan-Mica to University; Stage Two is $14.3 million, and to strengthen the City Center and extend the network, they recommend extending Appleway from University to Evergreen, and convert Sprague to two-ways between University and Evergreen; State Three is $6.6 million to give the City Center an address and invest in auto row by converting Sprague to two-way between Argonne and I-90, and converting Appleway to two-ways from Thierman to Dishman-Mica; Stage Four is $I2.9 million to extend the network and continue to invest in Sprague by having Appleway as a three-lane street to Sullivan, and reducing Sprague from seven to five lanes between Evergreen and Sullivan; and that Stage Five is not included in this plan,to extend the network and continue to invest in Sprague; all for a grand project total of approximately $37 million, with approximately $19 million of that used for Appleway and its extension. At the conclusion of Mr.Russ'presentation,Mr.Kuhta mentioned that the entire subarea plan Joint CouncillPlanning Commission Meeting 02-19-08 Page 2 of 4 Approved by Council:03-25-08 ) is up for review and will be the subject of an upcoming public heating set for March 13, and that he encourages Council and Commissioners to contact staff with questions. Mayor Munson opened the floor for questions and discussion. Discussion included levels of service at various intersections; the one-way versus two-way options; where public/mass transit fits in; and of a perceived concern of downgrading some property from commercial to residential and the mention that there are over 1,000 individual pieces of property in question; and Commission Chair Robertson mentioned he wants to ensure no property would be downgraded. Mayor Munson opened the floor for public comments. 8.City Center Initiative--Ken Thompson Finance Director Thompson explained that the added series of documents are good for future reading;and some of the finding sources mentioned in the handout, such as sales tax, won't be very significant for n city center. Attorney Connelly added that there are several separate incremental financial methods, such as a tax increment financing area (TN) using regular property taxes generated by private new development, use of sales tax, or going through other legislative procedures such as Transportation Benefit District(TBD), or Local improvement District (LID). Mr. Thompson further explained that we would likely place this issue before the citizens to ask for some kind of funding; that the cost of a City Center including going back to two-way on Sprague/Appleway,would be approximately$30 million; a parking structure is estimated at $10 million; that we are looking for some portion that would attract a developer and make people want to come to town; that $13 million would be in internal streets such as Iandscaping and open space such as a plaza. If such proposal would be placed on the ballot, Mr. Thompson explained, we could be asking for about 200 per $1,000 assessed value to handle the debt services, which would amount to an annual average increase of$40.00 per homeowner. Mr. Thompson reminded everyone that there are other city needs competing for that same property tax dollar, such as street maintenance, capital projects, parks projects, and a City HaII; and added that the County needs approximately seven to eleven week's notice to place an issue on a ballot. Discussion included the idea of waiting another year; concentrating on what funding we need for City Hall,which Mr. Kersten estimated to be$18 million; attracting a developer to develop the City Center; and having something in place prior to attracting a developer. Council concurred with Deputy Mayor Denenny's suggestion of concentrating on city hall,then go to the voter's. Attorney Connelly added that negotiations are on-going for the purchase and sale, and he encouraged Council to look at all financing options, and mentioned that there might be some federal tax credits available which could be used to allure developers; but that most tax increment financing takes money from the city general thuds from other years.The idea of grants was mentioned, and Mr. Mercier said our lobbyist did a five-year review of capital budget allocations made and only one city hall project received funding; adding that we are also examining the idea of leasing to own.Concerning a timeline,Mr.Mercier said the plant is to acquire the site and pay for it this year, and continue with city hall planning, then license staff to pursue a call for interest to firms willing to consider a construct lease-to-own proposition. The group stopped for lunch at 12:25 p.m.,and the meeting reconvened at 1:15 p.m. 9. Law Enforcement Services—Dave Mercier City Manager Mercier brought attention to the supplemental materials in the packet,and distributed a new sheet entitled: "Law Enforcement" Assessment of Issues and Items of Interest May 19, 2008." Mr. Mercier explained that as we do for all the County services we contract for, we asked for alternative analysis; and said that there was a wide range of conversation at the last January retreat concerning a performance analysis; and to examine options and look at data on how to approach that,we rely on the services of an external agent,and added that everything we've done with law since the beginning,has had political undertones; and that he would like to de-politify this issue; that ICMA (International City/County Management Association) has a consulting group which specializes in this particular type of review,which they have conducted with other cities; that the ICMA Public Safety Services team is led by Leonard Matarese, Director of Public Safety Services, ICMA Consulting Services, who visited us last April and met with the Sheriff's Office, our police Chief Rick VanLeuven, dispatch, and Mr.Mercier to assess what information is available, Mx. Mercier said that he composed a list of issues on the handout, and asked that team to include the scope of services with these critical indicators; that this list was shared with Chief VanLeuven to make sure the most critical indicates were included in the study. Mr. Mercier further explained that they composed a team of highly credentialed individuals to look at our situation; that the price tag for their participation is$110,000 for their basic consultant services,plus about$16,000 for non-overhead expenses,which is primarily travel;and he further explained that this group tried to set the ceiling of cost to equate to the cost of having one police officer on force for one year. The Scope of Retreat Minutes 6-14-08 Page 7 of l 0 Approved by Council:07-08-08 9.Draft Project List for TIB Grant Applications--Steve Worley Senior Engineer Worley explained that this is our animal draft project list for the TI8 Grant applications; and explained the projects on the list,which include Indiana Avenue Extension,3600 feet east of Sullivan to Flora; Mansfield Extension Houk to Mirabeau; Flora Road Improvements Sprague to Mission; and Sprague Avenue Rehabilitation and safety project, Evergreen to Sullivan, Mr. Worley said that this preliminary list of projects is being presented for Council comments or questions and to see if Council would like to move forward with these projects; adding that the applications are due August 29. It was agreed that this issue will come back to Council August 12 for approval of the final list, Mayor Munson called for a short recess at 7:25 p.m.and reconvened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. 10. Sprague/Appleway Revitalization PIan--.Scott Kul]ta/Lori Harlow Prior to Mr.Kulita's presentation,Mayor Munson reminded Council that tonight's agenda item is not an opportunity for deliberation,as that will occur after the public hearing,but is an opportunity for Council to ask questions. Mr,Kuhta explained that although the PowerPoint is not included in the packets,this is not new information and most comes directly from the Plan, Mr. Kuhta explained that the Planning Commission bad no recommended changes to Book 1, which is why that was not included in the notebook; but that the entire Plan will ultimately be re-formatted into one document, and he extended thanks to Community Development Administrative Assistant Deanna Griffith for her diligence in that regard. Mr, Kuhta explained that there is one proposed change to book 3, which is the street network phasing schedule. Mr.Kuhta brought Council's attention to the strike-out recommended changes in Book 2, which are the development regulations; he said that most changes are related to the city center regulations, and said that the Planning Commission spent a lot of time on the applicability 20%rule in Section 2.0,1(a)(i), and said that originally it was 10%, staff suggested 15%, and the Planning Commission recommended 20% based on public testimony that the 15%was too tight. Mayor Munson asked if the Chamber received the new plan,and Mr.Kuhta responded that yes,and that he met with them as well, Mr.Kuhta also mentioned that the maps and photos are easier to view in the Iarge Plan than in the notebook, as they were difficult to format; and said that information on bow the district zone boundaries were created would be a goad topic for Mr.Freedman at tomorrow's meeting,as well as how the building use chapter is organized. In response to the Mayor's question about not allowing used car sales,Mr.Kuhta said there are plenty of areas in the City where used cars sales can be regulated,and that topic can be further discussed after the public hearing. Mr.Kuhta also mentioned that page 9A,2.1.1 City Center District zone regulations, shows the proposed changes in yellow. Mr, Kuhta mentioned that Council and staff will need to further address Book II concerning the street network map,and will need to have an entire discussion on signs to include plastic panels,electronic reader boards,etc. Mr.Kuhta said that in Book III,the Planning Commission is still recommending the two-way system,and there was a Iot of generated discussion on phasing with auto row. Mayor Munson said that when Council gets into the deliberation of this Plan,that perhaps they should deal with the"hot button issues"first to ensure a logical flow of issues;and that Council will look to Mr.Kuhta to help organize the meeting. I I.Delegation of Authority—Police Emphasis Grants—Chief VanLeuven Mr, Mercier mentioned the prior study session presentation about the "Drive Nailed get Hammered" police emphasis grant and of the short turn-around time; and in that regard, Council asked that we come back and describe other types of traffic safety related grants that could also come in with a very short turn around time, and thus this is a proposal to delegate authority to the City Manager or designee to sign future Memorandums of Understanding in order to facilitate meeting grant deadlines. Chief VanLeuven mentioned the current traffic grants include "X-52 DUI and Speeding Traffic Safety Emphasis; "State Route 27"; and the "Nighttime seat belt enforcement." Chief VanLeuven said there are simply reimbursements of overtone funds to pay for these grants, and that it is critical to timely submit the paperwork to the Traffic Safety Commission. There was Council consent to place this on the August 12 consent agenda. Council Regular Meeting:07-22-08 Page 5 of Approved by Council: 08-12-08 Mayor Munson said there remains approximately thirty minutes before the scheduled 7:00 p,rm hearing; and mentioned that he attended several meetings over the last month with the Association of Washington Cities, and he heard reports of many distressed cities throughout the state; and said Spokane Valley has always had a balanced budget, that we spend money wisely and plan ahead, and he thanked staff for developing workable budgets and for forward budget planning. Mayor Munson called for a recess at 6:30 p.m. Mayor Munson reconvened the meeting at 7:00 p.m, and opened the public hearing for Book III of the Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan. Mayor Munson asked speakers to please speak slowly,and said that questions will not be answered tonight, but Council may ask for clarification if necessary; and that the public's questions will be answered as Council deliberates on this Plan;and said that everyone has the opportunity to provide written comments, and that a cut-off for submitting comments may be determined later tonight. 7 p.m.PUBLIC BEARING: Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan Book III—Scott ICuhta Mr, Kuhta said that tonight's focus is Book III: City Actions, which include the street center, street nehvork and streetscape improvements; per Mr. Kuhta's August 19, 2008 Memorandum, he briefly explained about the City center section 3.1, and the list of strategies used to attract developers; that the City actions include recommendations on street network improvements,which includes the one-way/two- way issue,and desired transportation system;he said there were intensive interactive workshops in 2006 on circulation and street design to gather ideas on the kinds of streets desired to match the city center concept; and concerning that workshop, Mr. Kuhta said that out of fourteen tables of individuals with a total of approximately 100 individuals,only one table wanted one-way; while the remainder wanted the two ways on both Sprague and Appleway, Mr.Kuhta explained about the recommendations to complete the two-way conversion of Appleway and Sprague and said that will help enable the city center and strengthen businesses along the corridor as it establishes a clear gateway to the city,and that it would also eliminate confusion related to a one-way system,all while maintaining the desirable level of service, and that this is the concept for twenty years hence.Mr.Kuhta then briefly explained the various stages needed to accomplish this Plan. Mr.Kuhta said in response to Mayor Munson's question about funding, that we have to have a plan before we determine how to pay for this; and said that regarding the figures from Spokane Regional Transportation Commission, it is important to get the capacity figures at the intersections correct to ensure congestion is addressed, Mayor Munson invited public cormnent, emphasized that no decisions have been made on this plan, and reminded everyone that Council will continue to accept written comments. 1. Bill Berry, 16010 E Sprague: said that the last time he spoke he stated that he owns three commercial properties in what will be the new zoning and the new street situation; that in concentrating on the property at 16010 B Sprague, he said his three properties will end up in four different zones with this particular property having two zones; that currently is it community commercial which allows the business and improvements for additions to the current operation in the buildings, but under the proposal it would be the new lesser zoning,which will put the current structure in nonconformance;he said on this property, there is a pre-located street shown going through the rear half of this property; the property is 565 feet deep, the road is proposed about the middle of that which is at the end of the current existing structures; he said he can't get answer from the Planning Department or front the City on two things: when or where will the prelocated street be placed; and he said dozens of other properties are facing similar pre-located street issues; as a hypothetical case, he said if he were to bring in an acceptable permitted plan to build a house, a four-plea, a business office or whatever is allowed; and he spent the money and even put in the street that is shown as a pre-located street; how would he access whatever he would build; he said if he puts the street in there and Appleway is not done,even if this is some fifteen to twenty years out;will that property be held in abeyance and nothing done with it? Study Session Meeting Minutes: 08-19-08 Page 3 of 13 Approved by Council: 08-26-08 9.Sprague/Appleway Revitalization(SARP)—Scott Kuhta Senior Planter Kuhta informed Council we are continuing with Book 1, page 3 of 21 of the Planning Commission recommended draft.He reminded Council there were no changes to the Intent section. 1.4 Future Corridors;Mr.Kuhta said the primary focus of this section is to transform the corridor from a commercial strip to patterns of sections and segments.He explained the different market focus discussed in this section is the reason for differences in the types of retail going into commercial use and the different land use categories that translate into zoning.He said the City Center core is the most urban part, whereas City Center neighborhood areas are less intense in development.Camel1mennber Dempsey asked what the boundary for Auto Row is. Mr. Kuhta explained the boundary is from 1-90 to Dishnnan Mica mainly between the Appleway right-of-way and the northern edge of Sprague. Councilmember Wilhite said the book indicates the boundary is the railroad overpass. Mr. Kuhta said they will clarify the language to say Dishman-Mica/Argonne. Councilmember Wilhite asked if on page 14 of 21 (actually page 9 of21)they will leave the language regarding on-street parking and two way traffic along Sprague Avenue under the"Gateway Commercial Avenue"section.Mr.Kuhta said that will need to be decided by Council.Councilmember Gothmanun said he would like to delay the decision on two-way traffic until they discuss Book III.Mr.Kuhta mentioned that it will be important to monitor and update whatever plan they adopt as conditions change and that they establish criteria to measure the success of the document, Councilmember Wilhite said she is concerned with the word"limited" in the Iast sentence of the second paragraph in the Gateway Commercial Avenue section regarding signage. Site said some auto dealers have requirements by the manufacturer for signage that may not coincide with what we allow in the code. She said we need to have flexibility in our sign code so businesses can meet their requirements and still do business in our community.Couneilnnennber Gotbniann would like to take the word"limited"out and change "two-way" to "street". There was consensus of Council to make those two changes. Mr. Kuhta suggested the change read: "hi this district, Sprague Avenue will provide on-street parking and easy access to all dealers and other businesses in the district. There was consensus of Council to,nod i the language as M.Kuhta suggested. Councilmember Dempsey said with regard to the City Center Core on page 5 of 21,she is concerned with "continuous"in referring to ground level shops, cafes, and small restaurants because she doesn't think it fits the concept of Spokane Valley. She said she thinks a tight,enclosed City Center is counterproductive. Deputy Mayor Deiienny said the intent is to make the core extremely walkable,with open public spaces and common spaces. Mr.Kuhta said the vision for Appleway is primarily residential and office boulevard with buildings that are smaller in scale. Dempsey asked if there will be a lot of pavement cuts for driveways or if property owners will access properties from the back side.Mr.Kuhta said it will be addressed iu Book II, but the intent is to have access from side and rear access streets and limited access to Appleway.Councilmember Wilhite said she thinks it would be more conducive to have commercial or retail businesses on the north side of Appleway, which is the south side of Sprague, rather than residential because the back of those properties will be facing commercial properties.She also said that one of the things citizens like is there is not a lot of traffic coining out onto Appleway and there are not a lot of pavement cuts so traffic moves quickly.Her recollection was if they allow for residential properties we would not do many curb cuts on the south side of Appleway and she said she has concerns with the front doors of properties facing north and with how to blend residential uses in to the commercial uses.Mr.Kuhta said they address that in the plan with development standards and architectural guidelines and by creating a better pedestrian environment so you can transition from an office or retail to residential in one block. He directed Council to the example of page 13 of 21 showing how compatible uses co-exist. He also said he doesn't think we will see a lot of residential development between Sprague and Appleway in the near future because of Council Regular Meeting:09-09-08 Page 7 of 9 Approved by Council: 10-14-08 through Friday, 8:00 asti, to 5:00 p.m. City Hall schedule. Deputy Mayor Denenny invited public comment,none were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor Unanimous, Opposed:None. Abstentions:. None. Motion carried PUBLIC COMMENTS: Deputy Mayor Denenny invited general public comment; no comments were offered. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 5,Fee Resolution Discussion--Ken Thompson Finance Director Thompson said that there will be some proposed changes to the eminent fee resolution, a copy of which is included in council's packet; and that some changes will be changes to existing fees, some will include new fees; said that the organization of the fee resolution will be changed to make finding certain fees easier; and that a cost of living increase will be reflected on all fees; and said that most fees have not changed since 2003. There was brief mention of the heed to recover direct costs, justifying a cost of living increase on fees,and of Council's desire to remain competitive and in line with other jurisdictions,such as Spokane City and Spokane County, 6.Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)Overview—Greg McCormick Planning Manager McCormick said we are preparing for the 2009 CDBG process; that the County will receive an estimated$1.5 million which will result in a 20%set aside for our City's capital projects;and mentioned the preliminaiy list of projects including full width paving with the Clement Sewer Project; various street projects to include ADA improvements;and a self-assessment study of ADA compliance, Mr. McCormick added that although we have a set aside amount, we are still required to hold a public hearing and such is scheduled for October 14, 2008. As mentioned earlier,the County Committee will review these projects, and will review the City's projects as the set aside funds does not change that procedure; and also that the Committee has no authority to recommend allocations or approve the projects. DELIBERATION: 7_S ra.ue/A lewa Revitalization Plan Book U: Deveto utent Re_ulations—Scott Kuhta Prior to deliberation,Council decided to hold future deliberations nutch like those held for comp plan and UDC deliberations,by setting up the tables on the floor rather than sitting at the dais,thereby giving more roots to spread out the documents to tackle this Plan in more of a workshop style, Senior Planner Kuhta brought attention to the map which shows the entire proposed corridor, and mentioned there are extra copies on the counter for the public. Mr. Knhta also mentioned the enclosed September 16, 2008 memorandum regarding cost estimates for Sprague and Appleway, and said this shows how that $42 million breaks down through the four stages, with the Stage 1 two-way conversion intersection enhancement total of approximately $5.3 million; Stage 2 extension of Appleway from University to Evergreen reducing Sprague from seven to five Ianes at approximately $16.3 million; Stage 3 two-way conversion with curbs, sidewalks and landscaping at approximately $6.7 million; and Stage 4 the completion of the system by extending Appleway from Evergreen to Tschirley and converting Sprague from seven to five lanes between Sullivan and Evergreen,at approximately$13.5 million. Mr,luhta said that Stage 2 in terms of engineering and design, is what was proposed next when the County was working on that area. There was brief discussion of the Memorandum; mention that there are items specific to the City Center such as changes to sidewalks for pedestrians crossing Sprague and Appleway; and that$3.4 million of all the road enhancements include wider sidewalks, separated walking paths, street trees,landscaping,street lights, and general street soaping. Counciimember Gothnlann also mentioned the Planning Commission Minority Report to reverse the streets in stage 3 and 4, and having nothing to do with Thierman to Argonne until Appleway is extended all the way to Sullivan. Mr.Kuhte then brought Council's attention Council Regular Meeting:0423-08 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council:10-14-08 ti°r �ti- 11701:Sprague Avfi Suite 106 8 Spokane volley WA 992(H 509.921.1000$Fax: 509.921.1008 4 cllylial1espakanw valley,nre eirimoir IJt}idlUI}ri� 1'a: City Council; Dave Mercier,City Manager;Mike Jackson, Deputy City Manager Fromm; Scott ILuhte, Senior Planner CC: Kathy McClung,Community Development Director Date: September 16, 2005 Re: Cost Estimates for Sprague and Appieway The total projected cost to convert Sprague Avenue and Appieway Boulevard Into a two-way system between 1-90 and Sullivan Road, as recommended in Book 111 of the Sprague and Apploway Corridors Subarea Plan,is about$42 million, The following table breaks this all- inclusive estimate into major categories Two way Apploway Lane Sidewalks, curbs Total Conversion Extensions Narrowin _ ialldecapina(streelscepoJ Sprague $1.5 million ----_4Y $5001( _ $9.8 million' $11.4 million - Apptowny $1.4 million $24 million --- - $4.9 million $30.3 million Total $2.9 million $24 million $500K $14.7 million $42.1 million Includes$8001L for City Center curb enhancements. i The tables attached to this Menlo provide a detailed breakdown of the cost estimates per the recommended implementation stages as presented by Troy Russ of G1alling 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 ollher Scott Kuhta(684.4049)or Steve Worley 0088.0101), ji STAGE: 1: TWO•V AY CONVERSION OF SPRAGUE AND APPI.I:UVAY DISHMAW-MICAIARGONNE:TO UNIVERSITY I 1 ! t 1 .- 1 I 1_----%:: I -•i--- y I i I _ 1 � E f I r „ 3 I Al‘. I1 . , 1 {OW! `s� I $ ': Efts Waif( i i - r I X R I CURDS,S1[]EWALFiS, '_ TWC WAY INTERSECTION SI AGE LANDSCAPING AND TOl'AL CONVERSION ENHANCEMENT MULTIUSE PATH* Sprague $611,1100 9600,000 $1,757,016 $2,968,416 Apploway $653,687 0 $1,l386,566 $2,342,255 Total $1,265,087 $600,000 $3.445,564 $5,310,671 _ 'Inoiudas multi-use path along the Appleway STAGE 2: EXTEND AI'PLEWAY FROM UNIVERSITY TO EVERGREEN--• REDUCE SPRAGUE FROM 7 TO 6 LANES I I I E I I 1 I {t�- _.it 1 --.<—_. I �`` 11 z- - - -I. tf. � I�iil�����If� x .`' 7 I ''�jiF'ii i:ii ?{r ex� tit � b.:—�� .+ y� _ { c, 41) - : 1 - . I ---r- I % F I 1 I n t'Arm 2 -- EXTEND 1 LANG NARROWING - - CURBS,SIUEWAt.ICS, DIAL APPI.EWAr_ AND Rl?STRIPING AND LANDSCAPING Sprnt;uo 0 $369,360 $3,217,708 $3,587,060 Apploway $12,155,937* 0 9633,600 $12,789,537 — I Total $12,165,037 $369,360 $3,851,308 $16,376,605 ' Includes multi-use path along App1eway f STAGE 3: TWO-WAY 1:01■]VI:f2Sloi'•1 OF Illl-I o NOW I T 1 w k f - I: j k .,, _. I i _ =T aY � - �j d&- 1_, • .�r_;:;1 i Z :a' J�IAt,.ti.hrrnlfllY J I L t `, rctivN E ;r t Erl IM {t' i'h 8 mom 11- �.!;i ! E;: `;14_ •:k: y� I Pik: �3' i� R try - T ..- i I ---- % •--3— I �.I k i t% I I I STAGE 3 wo-WAY CONV1=RSCON GURUS,SIDEWALKS AN D TOTAL `- LANDSCAPING Sprague $858,874 $2,512,032 $3,370,90G Apploway $700,247 $2,600,795 53,361,042 Total $1,610,121 $5,112,027 $6,731,948 "Does not include proposed 1.90 Ramp Extension. STAGE: 4: COMPLETE THE SYSTEM••EXTEN❑APPE.EWAY FROM EVERGREEN TO ISOI-IIRLEY, CONVERT SPRAGUE IRO1V17 TO 6 LANES BETWEEN SULLIVAN AND EVERGREEN ------- I 11 II 1 I I f I. ':.• _I . I -4;-`- -,'.— I �4— I ii 1 - •-,z41:,:.1,!1-.J. g n`i'i ll'ii� , 'L-t'7/� Yl,inrt,r,o.,,i .'.I 1 I _ -`1'' ni ii 161 it I P t!. 1 (WM E 0 I 1411-- f...__ II . . 1 J ICI _1 11 • .- ii II I • ; - tir 1 E I I 1 , STAGE � EXTEND LANE NARROWING -C1112i3y, 510EWAL Its, TOTAL APPL.EWAYS AND RESTIZIt ING AND L.ANDSCAI IN( Sprague 0 $184,320 $1,099,204 1,O8 ,52'4 Apploway 11,651,471" 0 0 $11,651,471 II Total $$11,G51,471 $184,320 $x,699,204 $13,634,0 5'Applctiiray is oxlanded to T•shlricy and Includes Multi-use Pat1h Planning Commission Recommended SpragueIAppleway District Zones Map ---- 'Pr-- i _ _ -.. _ 1 ._ - 1 N.-, ,i . I - 1 -.7-r 11 • j 1 J r I j — r L-1 L1 - 1 T ' 1. t i 1 , -- ; ,_._ ._.. 1 I ...,._1 i — i il"-- — 1 — • • -1 1-'1 j •1 --, , illi -I - CI- L 1 I ' .... 1'1_ 1 I. r 1 I I 1 1... 1 .,L--r---' - --,-_-.__- • FIF:IIIINV3A2.7-____i_iFi__:..-.-_:+_1_,-L-1.-,-.1-1:-.4--_.:,---- ._,_ '1 _ -_1- c'''''-'•"'-'',--gillia==:='R'-.;-.,-: 1,7,1F„: 1.___: : -74•'-,':F-7..--_?_ _1-1I773=` -..--. . r—,:-.:::::: -_ -_i \ r--- 1.---,-.,,_, I - - 1 - i • ii, 7 -IL.- IR 1 1 - - 1 . 1 I.J. 1 1 - - -3 'r ' 1 1- t'I I- 'J.'.- - -J -• - 1 - N '.I 1- r ' • 1 3- - 3 r I I - • J I• ' ^ 1 --- - City of Spokane Valley :.... ..! Official Zoning Map .1 r 4••FILIA•SIMI•L.7.1=e=L. e• -••• 1 ‘.5 i./ - • - ' - - J- ' - I - 11- 1 1 1 11 71 1.1 I i- . II 7, ''7' t.LI r . - -- 1 --Z-1 i - ' 111 3- .r i .. ._.1 . 1_, ''..• I 1 -r -- .. I. -, 1. ..' . iL 1 1 -• . t I,' ' 1 ' 1- r 1 1 • ', 3 . - -2 _ . .. ' I -1---- F _ 1_.1 ::: ..■ , ... _ - -... ....seess-° ..-- - . -77—I—Tf=7___—V..,-- ._lirr.___..."'- '1"-:- .-''`.r" -i - --7,7-- -. 142'7m2E1111in-t.--- 'i ----..-1, ; __J1. ni---s-'- ..7-t_r-1 , j --/=..11- s-.4-731- ' " --J • / 2' .. L-•1.1.> _- , -.-e1/4.----21W=' --_. '--7-.='..F-71 .--. - - -.3 9zial 7------ -,--_- -.:_:_.--- v.,..,67.-i - ,- : 1 LJ '1,1 I L.I' I •-./Mr111' _ r --- ' . 1 •I r■ " 61. : ,-. I r.J. 1 -j' xr..,3,...-• ._ .• -- I„I'i ' 1 - -- .1 1 - -•, - ''•I N _ 1 I..• 1 • r -I 2.._r . _ . •. -. ,• , --."- - —_ compared with Spokane County and the City of Spokane,and will also flag which fees have changed over the last five years; and will bring that information at the next iteration of this resolution, Regarding the cost of living increase,Deputy Mayor Denenny said he would be willing to look at that increase on those items which have not changed over the last few years;Mayor Munson stated his preference to cover costs if fees are not meeting costs, but was not in favor of raising all fees. Mr. Thompson brought council attention to his PowerPoint where it shows the average fee increases in other cities, and that our departments which provide the services, in the last three years, our costs in those departments has increased 16% per year; so an overall 10% increase would still be prudent. Couneilmeniber Taylor also stated his preference not to have a cost of living fee increase as these costs are examined annually; that each fee should be tested on its own merits; and as we move into a recession,he said now is not the time to have a general fee increase; and stated regarding the pre-application meeting fee,as the meeting is set to help streamline the process and ward off potential problems, that he feels the mandatory meeting should not be accompanied by a fee. The Fire Code fees were also mentioned and Mr. Thompson explained that these figures, which represent a 10% increase to cover costs, are supplied by the Fire District;that the fees go to the fire district and the City receives a$35.00 fee each time a fee is charged as we handle the fee for the fire district.Councilmember Gothnnann mentioned something to keep in mind is that rather than raise fees substantially in future years to catch up on rising costs, it might be better to initiate a small fee increase now instead of a more substantial fee later. 6.Universal Playground Site Recommendation—Mike Stone Parks and Recreation Director Stone went through his PowerPoint presentation,he explained the purpose of a Universal Playground, explained about the stakeholder meetings,and as per the information on the October 28, 2008 Request for Council Action form, went over the pros and cons of the site options including site criteria;explained that the site options are: (1)located at the most southern end of Mirabeau site just south of the existing CenterPlace parking lot;(2)site of the original MasterPlanLacationn;and (3) on the north end of the site at Mirabeau Meadows Park, adjacent to the restrooms, near the stage amid parking area.Mr. Stone also said a survey needs to be initiated prior to winter, and the data needs to be available in order to complete the design and construction over the winter in order to stay on schedule and have the park constructed by fall. Based on feedback received, the design team determined that option 2 was not sufficient for the new Playground as it is narrow, has insufficient parking, areas of extreme grades, and is adjacent to a busy road; hence option two was removed as a potential site; and the final group consensus was to bring a recommendation of option 1 as the preferred site as it is adjacent to adequate parking, has a size which allows for expansion, can be done in phases, the location will complete and enhance tine CenterPIace landscaping, will be visible to attract users, and more observable for security, and will help market CenterPlace. After brief discussion, there was Council consensus to proceed with Option 1:the south side location. Mayor Munson called for a recess at 8:02 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:17 p.m. DELIBERATION: 7.SpraguefAp 3leway Revitalization Plan Book Iin,City Actions--Scott ICubta Community Development Director McClung stated that she appreciates Council's discussions on ways to enhance Plan deliberation as staff has also pondered this issue; and that every session staff would like to begin with a brief written sununnamy of what was accomplished and discussed dining the previous deliberations; and said that she will take notes during the meetings so council can readily see the issues agreed upon, as well as those issues which need further information or clarification, Ms. McClung said last time, Council discussed nonconforming issues; and at the next meeting where the Plan is discussed, staff will bring examples of applying nonconformance to specific properties as well as examples of what other cities do with nonconforming issues. Ms.McClung continued by explaining that tonight's goal is to make a decision concerning the one-way/two-way issue, and if such decision can be reached tonight,this Council Regular Meeting: 10.28.18 Page 9 of i Approved by Council: 11-18-08 will give staff a tremendous advantage as they work to adjust the plan in accordance with whatever decision is made. Senior Planner Kuhta event through a brief PowerPoint which reviewed the overall transportation policies in the comprehensive plan as he explained that the Subarea Plan must be consistent with the comprehensive plan; then he moved to the council approved Subarea Plan intent statements on transportation; he also mentioned the one revitalization strategy relative to the transportation issues, which is to"implement phased transportation, design street scape improvements to enhance mobility and access for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians, and in keeping with city and regional growth, while simultaneously supporting the land use and development pattern necessary to the upgrading of properties as envisioned by the Subarea Plan." Mr. Kuhta went over the four alternatives for transportation along the corridor,projecting out to the year 2030, all as seen in the transportation analysis report prepared by Gladding .Iaokson, and added that the growth numbers do not take into consideration any increased percentage in ridership, adding further that the number of vehicle miles traveled in the United States dropped four billion miles in August of this year compared to August of last year; and that the options are: (1)the no-build, (2)full, one-way couplet extension, (3) the hybrid where the road transitions from one-way to two-way at Dislunan-Mica(or thereabouts); and(4) a full two-way cross street, which is the recommended system, Mr.Kuhta further explained that the heaviest part of the commute would be from Thierman to Mullan, and he discussed the various levels of service based on the different options; and said that the hybrid option is one-way to Dislunan-Mica, and somewhere along there, will be a transition to two-way, with the Thierman to Mullen remaining one-way. Mayor Munson said that the numbers discussed in locating city center, aren't the same as the numbers displayed tonight; and in looking at traffic flow on Appleway, we were figuring 1500 cars, which equates more toward the Appleway that precedes the City Center; and he asked for clarification on the numbers. Public Works Director Kersten said that the numbers are trips that enter on the west side and move all the way through;in looking at the far side there are only twenty trips,so the 1940 trips that enter at I-90,only twenty of them go all the way through the system;but there are many more than twenty at the other site,so it does not account for all the other trips, and most trips don't go clear across the corridor but rather come up University, go down Sprague, head up Pines,so they are intermittent trips that catch the system, and this does not display the amount of traffic on the streets at one time, but is the amount of time that moves all the way through the system. Councihnennber Wilhite said in relation to which option to choose, that she spoke with several auto row new ear dealers,and Jeremko is both on the coiner of Thierman and Sprague and the owner indicated he has access from two areas and therefore has no objection to remaining one-way; that the owner of the Honda Dealership has no preference;but the one most landlocked is the Hyundai Dealer,and that his top choice would be one-way/two-way, but he sees some advantages when the area is signified as an auto- row gateway, and if we were to come with a plan to help bring some attention to that area,he thought it would be a benefit for him and he would not strenuously object if the area remained one-way. Mr.Kuhta concurred that was the same testimony given during the Planning Commission public hearings, and that the Hyundai owner said that one-way or two-way doesn't matter as it is a destination;and said he felt the plan was visionary, and if you Like Sprague the way it is then don't do anything. Mr.Kuhta stressed that of the total $42 million cost, $24 million is the Appleway Extension. There was also brief discussion concerning costs, includinig the possibility of acquiring state funds through grants. Mr. Worley also explained that concerning the lane changes, sidewalks and greenspace, the two-way option or the hybrid option include the narrowing of Sprague Avenue;so instead of the current seven lanes,the curb would be brought in towards the center to create five lanes;and the area between the existing curb and the new curb would be that landscape area estimated to the plan in terms of streetscape; and said that sidewalks will be larger; that the current sidewalks on Sprague are sub-standard, so any improvements would at least bring those sidewalks up to standard, which is a six-foot wide sidewalk; and said while there are bike lanes planned for Appleway, there are none for Sprague as we ran out of room in trying to keep the sidewalks Council Regular Meeting:10-28-08 Page 10 of 11 Approved by Council: 11-18-013 and landscape on that section. Mr.Kuhta mentioned the plan is for east/west bike lanes on both sides of Appleway;and sidewalk width is dependent upon which zone hi which is rests. Mr.Worley also brought up about the corridor level of service,and if it included the intersection level of service;and that there are two ways of determining level of service: one is the intersection and how well it operates and how vouch delay there is in any direction at that intersection; and the corridor is from one end to the other, which includes the delay at every intersection.Mr. Worley added that concerning the idea that there is one-way all the way to Mullan, that the hybrid system on Sprague between Argonne and Mullen is a two-way street; and provides an opportunity for people coining south on Argonne to turn left onto Sprague and not have to go all the way to Appleway and then cross back over. Mayor Munson suggested, since we have no indication we will get access to Appleway,that issue should be addressed Iater; and he suggested moving forward with changing Sprague between Argonne and Sullivan to two-ways, but not do so until development starts at City Center; and keep the lanes at four ways because of the delay of getting Appleway completed,to have two lanes in each direction;so to work on the section between Argonne and University and change that to two-ways, and have it in the plan so when development begins,the change can be made,and to keep Appleway in that same section four lanes total, with two Ianes in each direction. Concerning specifically what is development at City Center, Mayor Munson said perhaps building city hall would be a start, but that would be something to be determined. Councilmember Taylor said that we will finish this process with the zoning, and once it is enacted and development occurs within the particular zones, in terms of timing any change, it is a matter of as soon as the plan is adopted,we would be ready to move in that direction once the funding occurs. Deputy Mayor Denenny asked if we don't change those and people come in for development, how that would affect applications,and how would businesses decide egress and access. Mr. Kulita said if you do the development prior to turning the roads, you would have to take into account where the future curbs would be and we would need to work with the businesses on the road design,curbs and sidewalks;and if the direction doesn't match, it would be troubling. Councilmember Gotlunann suggested that the hybrid model be the one to adopt as the twenty year plan for the City; and the number of lanes can be discussed later. Theme was Council consensus, with no Conncihnembers dissenting, to adopt Alternative Plan B— the Hybrid Model,and only address the two-way on the current couplet between Argonne and University. INFORMATION ONLY: The Spokane Valley Fire Department Quarterly Report and Department Reports were for information only and were not reported or discussed. EXECUTIVE SESSION: 111vas moved by Councihnember Wilhite, seconded and uraartia►mo'sly agreed to enter into Executive Session for an estimated thirty minutes to discuss land acquisition, and that no action is anticipated thereafier. Council adjourned into Executive Session at 9:02 p.m. At 9:30 p.m. Community Development Director McClung announced that the Executive Session would be extended for an additional ten minutes. At 9:39 p.m.,Mayor Munson declared Council out of Executive Session. It was then moved by Cornrcihnember Wilhite, seconded, and unanimous ly agreed to adjonin. The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. ATTEST: _ Rici mtcl Munson,Mayor Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Council Regular Meeting: 10.28.08 Page 11 of 11 Approved by Council: 11-18-08 Mr.Kultta said he would show some pictures tonight of the auto row area for fiuther discussion,and said that staff has a definition for light industrial for council consideration. Mr.Kuhta said on the mixed used avenue districts,there were questions about outdoor storage and items for sale,and that will be discussed tonight as well. Concerning amusement parks,Mr. Kultta said staff recommends defining that as outdoor recreation use, and recommends requiring a conditional use permit for that. Mr.Kuhta said this would not include parks, but there would be a list of what it would include,such as a water park,or more commercial type uses and not public park uses. Council concurred to make this a conditional use. Mr. Kuhta displayed pictures of the gateway commercial area, including diagrams which show the intended form of the district zone,such as in this zone,buildings can be set back as far as thirty feet,or be up to the lot;that there is a requirement for a minimum of 40%of the property to be covered by buildings within the setback; and Mr.Kuhta said discussion for a future meeting would be if we want to propose a new cross section for Sprague and Appleway; and he mentioned the previous decision on the one- way/two-section; and said he would be proposing a new cross section `vitich would narrow the streets and allow on-street parking, Regarding meeting the minimum frontage requirement of 40%, Mr. IC.ultta explained that the owner could either do a boundary line adjustment or a binding site plan where they create a lot,or if th.ere is a lot of land and the owner doesn't want to build a lot of buildings at once,staff would work with any property owner to have a phasing plan if needed; and he said that we can keep the 40%or it can be changed if Council feels that is too restrictive.Mr.I uhta said this was brought up due to a letter from Taylor Engineering on behalf of AntoNation,recommending 25%.This prompted discussion on what that percentage should be,with Councilmember Gollunann mentioning that the number should be between 25 and 40, and he suggested 30% as a compromise. Deputy Mayor Denenny said there is substantially more than that on the Appleway property now;and Councilmember Taylor said their issue is they want to use the double frontage situation,which is a unique situation, and he questioned if we want the Plain to address this unique situation or handle this through a boundary lot adjustment or other manner; and he said he would like the percentage based on more than a mid-point. Councilmember Gotlunatut said he feels 30%allows flexibility; which he said is the issue. Councilmember Wilhite asked if it could be written that if there are two major arterials on your land, it would be 40%and it could be split 20/20; as if there were no major arterials on the side, it would be back to the 40%. Mr. Kuhta said there is presently no minimum frontage coverage for any street except Sprague; and he would not recommend requiring a frontage coverage on those other streets at this point; but maintaining flexibility is important; and he said that the original recommendation was to create a two-way Sprague, and with that,we would get the traffic right off the freeway onto Sprague;so this was the gateway to the commercial area;and the idea was that people would want most of their business to front on Sprague because traffic could go either way on or off the freeway and onto Sprague,so requiring all the frontage on Sprague isn't as important if there is the one-way. Councilmember Gothmaun further suggested having the 40%, and said that could either be obtained by 40%of Sprague, or add into that the percentage one would have on Appleway;so if there was 20%on Appleway,they would only need 20% on Sprague;and Mr. Kuhta said that would be difficult to administer and he would prefer to establish a minimum frontage requirement; and if Council wants,can establish such on the other streets as well. After further discussion on Taylor Engineer's letter, and how it ~night affect the desired overall look; likely resulting in many of the buildings remaining as they are,oriented math/south without much exposure to the street; there was some consensus with Mayor Munson,Deputy Mayor Denenny,and Councilmembers Dempsey and Gotltmanu agreeing to the 30%. Mr.Kultta moved to the handout concerning the outside storage and display, and explained what is and is not allowed, with the front page showing what is allowed in our current code in the community commercial zone, corridor mixed use zone, and the regional commercial zone; he explained that these regulations discuss what can be displayed for sale outside the building; and he explained that there is no provision currently in the community commercial zone for any permanent type of outdoor storage other Sludy Session Meeting Minutes: 1-06.2009 Page 2 of 6 Approved by Council: 01-27-09 1, Sprague-Appleway Revitalization Plan Scott Kuhta Senior Planner Kuhta explained that the hope is to finish tonight and then prepare for the April final public hearing. Mayor Munson added that there will be an opportunity after these discussions for staff to compile the findings with changes to the original draft;then publish that to give citizens the opportunity to review the plan and comment at the April public hearing. Mr. Kuhta mentioned that he has more information on the street network system, and said he would like to get council's ideas on the public hearing format;and said that the decision was made to put a place holder on any proposed changes to the street network and the streetscape until some time after the Plan is completed, and said staff can work with the business and property owners in that area. Mr, Kuhta explained that there are three proposed changes to the street network that will be part of the public hearing draft: Stage#1 stays the saute: to convert Sprague and Appleway from Argonne/Mullan and University to two-way; and said he was reminded by Mr.Worley of the transportation analysis done last year lo accommodate traffic over the next twenty years; that the Consultants came up with some conceptual intersection designs, and Mr. I{uhta showed the conceptual designs depicting the Dlshmanilvlica and Appleway showing how Appleway would intersect with DishmanlMica and Mullan Roads, and said there is room in the cross-section within the right-of-way to keep two lanes going east- bound on Appleway; so even though there is sufficient capacity to do a three-lane section,we could do a four-lane section: two lanes eastbound, one west-bound with a center turn lane; and he said this would include the bike lanes; that we don't know exactly how much right-of-way will be needed and won't know that-until we have the specific design. Mr. Kuhta also showed the conceptual intersection design at Appleway and University; where there would be two lanes coming in east-bound; there would be a right-hand turn and a left-hand turn onto University; with one lane going through; and he explained that section would be where Appleway does not exist today; and said there would be one lane in each direction for the travel lanes,then once you hit the intersections,the turn lanes would be there;and said this is all part of Stage 2 where we are extending Appleway from University to Evergreen as a three-lane section; and reduce the lanes on Sprague Fiona seven to five lanes.Mr.Kuhta mentioned that the reason for the section of tlu•ee-lanes is to accommodate the need for extra right of way along Appleway,and that in the next twenty years,the existing system and number of lanes will have ample capacity to handle the traffic; and said if we receive any federal funding for the extension of Appleway,staff believes we would need this as part of the plan to get development on those properties,and to do that,we would need to show reduction on the lanes in Sprague, as we won't get more funds for increased capacity where there is sufficient capacity. Reducing Sprague from seven to five lanes, Mr. Kuhta explained, accomplishes the goal of getting the traffic moved sufficiently while having wider sidewalks giving safer areas and easier pedestrian crossing while still allowing traffic to flow. Mayor Munson said that Mr. Kuhta mentioned last week, that the concept of transportation in this Platt is the concept of a place holder,until we know when the development will take place;and said that these drawings are conceptual ideas of what it could be; and Mr.Kuhta said that these are part of Book 3 City actions and are the actions that we intend to take as resources become available;this is not dependent upon development, but if we get funds from grants or federal government or other sources,them we will implement these transportation improvements to help stimulate development and to assist with the revitalization of the corridor. Mr. Kuhta said that stage 3 extends this network east of Evergreen three lanes on Appleway and five lanes on Sprague;and that these are the three stages to include in the Plan for the public hearing; and said he would like to include the intersection drawings in the white notebook, which represent the hybrid option Council has decided to put in the draft plan. council concurred. Mayor Munson asked councilmembers if they have continents on any of the Books. Counciimember Gothmann said there have been some citizens concerned about the one year dark rule; that is if a building is dark for one year; and the question arose,what happens if a building had a unique use; and he asked if that would that seriously disadvantage someone, like warehouses or restaurants, In Council Meeting Minutes:03-03-09 Page 3 of 8 Approved by Council:03-24-09 6. Spraglte and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan--Scott TCultta Mayor Munson said that each councilmemher is committed to do what is right,and for him doing what is right is the most difficult as it would be easy to go along with the most vocal components in the community;he said it is difficult to determine if those vocal people represent the majority of the community; that some of the people who have voiced their opinion in support of the plan represent a large number of businesses;and about 27 to 30 people have voiced their dissent;and that he strives to Iook at comments objectively without allowing rhetoric disbursed over time to influence his decision. Councilmember Goth mann said the easiest thing is to nothing; and he acknowledged that many people have had good Ideas and he appreciates their help on this project, Councilmember Taylor added that we have a situation of a dying corridor with a lot of dis-investment, which will continue if Council doesn't try to provide a framework fox that area to grow again and thrive;and said he feels it is Council's paramount duty to see to the revitalization of the business corridor,and he thanked staff and the public for putting so much time and effort into this plan. As well, Councilrnermber Wilhite acknowledged the tremendous amount of work and the numerous revisions, and said she appreciates citizens who came to talk about their concerns and how Council's decisions impact them;that Council needs to know these things and said it is good to have that dialogue with the community. Senior Planner Kuhta explained that this Plan is a result of over three year's work,the final public hearing was held April 28 and final written testimony was received until 5:00 p.m.Friday,May 1;and tonight's purpose is to address any remaining or unresolved issues, After Council and staff discussion,and Councll deliberation on such issues as signage standards, the one-way/two-way issues and relative public comments, corporate businesses including those in AutoRow, and businesses conforming to standards, and after breaking briefly from 7:20 p.m.to 7:30 p.m.,Council made the following determinations: 1. Reference letter from Sean Lumsden about expanding the gateway commercial area, there was Council consensus(five in favor,two opposed)to grant the change to incorporate the gray area, 2. Allow Cottage Restaurant area to be commercial; and increase the dark blue area for an additional four blocks:Thierman to Coleman,south side of Appleway. 3.Staff will some back with suggestions for a different term for the"residential boulevard"designation as that term is misleading. 4. Increase the non-conforming period from one year to two. 5. Keep the 100%build-out,realizing Council can make changes later if needed. 6. By council Consensus(six in favor,one opposed)to remove the Lark Property from the Plan, 7.Winter Snow Removal--Neil ICersten Public Works Director Kersten explained that the County will not be assisting is uu preparing arm RFP (request for proposal)and therefore,we have selected HDR Engineering,Imo,from our Consultant Roster. Mr. Kersten said staff has the draft Letter of Interest(LOI) and HDR wants to review that prior to staff advertising that later in May. Mr. Kersten also repotted that the time required for this selection process will not allow for a long-term contractor for this winter, but this process could provide winter services for 2010/2011. As an option,Mr.ICersten explained,there is a possibility we could obtain surplus equipment from Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT); and said staff and WSDOT are exploring that possibility; other equipment would also be needed,and Mr.Kersten said it is possible such could be rented.Mr.Kersten said other research included discussions with Waste Management regarding a site across from City Hall which has a three-bay maintenance building, fueling facility and small office which could be operational by this winter with minor upgrades. For manpower, Mr. Kersten said based on our current contract with Poe,there is a possibility to bring on that crew and operate next winter, and Poe has indicated their interest in such a possibility. Mr.Mercier added that it is difficult to calculate the Council Meethrg Modes:05-19-09 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Cowzcll'06-09-09 the City's inception that this Plan is really Council's follow-Through on what the community told Council they wanted; and that this is a major milestone for Spokane Valley; and said this permits a tremendous opportunity to put in a unique city/town center of which none exist throughout this entire region, and which will make us a standout community,and will let us achieve our own identity and accomplish some of the basic goals since the City's inception. Councilmember Taylor said the passage will result in an outstanding legacy for the entire community, In response to Mayor Munson's question about Mr. Grafo's request, Mr. Connelly said Mr. Grafos is requesting that the map be altered,and that would be a part of ordinance 09-013,and when that ordinance is considered, Council can direct staff to amend or modify that ordinance; and he said the zoning map would also have to be adjusted for the second reading. Councilmember Gatlunauu explained that when the City was incorporated,many citizens asked Council to do something about Sprague Avenue as vacancies were skyrooketing and values were plummeting;and council listened, then acted. In response to those citizens, he explained that Council engaged EcoNorihwest and they found that although we had 40% of the commercial space, we had 60% of the vacancies. In addition,we knew that some Sprague intersections were near failure and we had to address that problem, thus revitalization is essential to the City. In response, through 76 different meetings involving hundreds of citizens, the Sprague Appleway revitalization PIan was developed. Councilmember Gotiunann said that some people said Council did not listen, but Councilmember Gothmaum suggested the facts be examined: (1) Grafos, Inc had problems with both rezoning and designated streets provisions;Council removed the far eastern property from the Plan;(2)Lark Properties had problems with rezoning; and their property was removed from the Plan; (3)Walt's Mailing Service was concerned about rezoning the rear of their property which they use, and Council passed a provision permitting existing Appleway uses to continue;(4)Ruby Motors wanted to be included in the Auto Zone, and at Councilmember Dempsey's suggestion, Council moved the eastern border to Appleway; (6)Big Boys Auto Dealers were concerned about rezoning and all along those blocks, and at Coundihnember Wilhite's suggestion,the plan would permit commercial along the four western blocks on the south side of Appleway; (7)Auto Row wanted land rezoned to accommodate a future recreation park and Council enlarged the Gateway Commercial area to accommodate this;(8)in response to public testimony,Council changed the plan to accommodate both businesses and commuters by making Sprague and Appleway one-way west of Argonne,and two-way east of Argonne;(9)Council permitted additional light industrial uses in both mixed use and gateway commercial zones; (10) the Greater Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce expressed reservations about the one-year non-conforming grandfather provision;and Council changed it to two years;(11)Mr.Prang expressed concern about restricting retail elsewhere in City Center to core streets; and Council agreed this can be changed if it becomes a problem; and(12)in response to public testimony, Council changed the minimum frontage requirements,the outside display and storage requirements,increased the acreage trigger for new streets,and prohibited billboards from the City center. Councilmember Gotlunamn said this is a plan that exchanges one set of zoning requirements for another, we are not putting in new zoning requirements as zoning requirements already exist; and that is designed to increase values and revitalize Sprague; and in developing the Plan, Council has listened and has responded to the hundreds of people in over 70 meetings who have provided suggestions and input to Council,and he said Council is grateful for such input. Deputy Mayor Denenny re-emphasized the number of documents he has gone through; the reviewing of materials, drafts, listening to comments, looking at the plan and drafts, talking to staff, reading e-mails, and spending time to get educated about the plan; he heard some public comment that many Cou ncilmembers are doing this for egos;but he said he has seen no egos on this Council;and at the end of his tenu at the end of this year,he said he will carry many fond memories about the hard work of this Council, and said there is and has been no ego other then the desire to have an improved community which will be the envy of others around us, and something which will enhance the economy so his children and grandchildren can continue to have jobs and stay in this beautiful community;and he said he Council Regular Meeting:05 26.2009 Page 6 of 9 Approved by Council:06-09-09 First Amendment to the Motion It ivas proved by Couriclhnember Wilhite and seconded to make the technical changes as outlined by Mr. Connelly on the sheet received Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Council voted unanimously by acclamation to amend as noted. Second Amendment to the Motion It was proved by Conncilrnember• Wilhite and seconded to exclude front the subarea plait, the property owned by Mr. Grafos, also the property next to Mr. Grafos, the music school. There was brief discussion on the issue of what would or would not be nonconforming, with mention front Mr. Kuhta that if kept under the Plan,the Grafos property would not be permitted so it would be a Iegal nonconforming use,and the music school would he a conforming use;and if excluded front the Plan the Grafas property would be a conforming use. Mayor Munson invited public comment no comments were offered. Cointcihnember Taylor said he feels they should he kept in the Plan as it sets a had precedence to take particular properties out of the Plan,thereby making it appear if someone doesn't like a particular use,even though they would be nonconforming and grand fathered in,they could be removed from the Plan because they asked. Other couici members stated they felt it would not impact the overall plan to have the properties removed, with Mayor Munson adding that there is no access from the Fred Meyer property onto these two properties which makes future development difficult. Vote by Acclamation:In favor Mayor Munson,Deputy Mayor Denennny, rind Councihnenrbers Schinuiiels, Gothnranu, Dempsey, and Wilhite. Opposed: Councihuember Taylor. Abstentions:None. Motion to amend passed. Third Amendment to the Motion It was moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny and seconded to implement the Pkoz October 1, 2009, which Deputy Mayor Denenny stated, would allow staff time to begin the implementation process properly. Mayor Munson invited public comment. Pr.Phillip Rudy, 5647 N Fruithill:said he feels the sooner the better, and compared waiting here to a lag time involved when the County was addressing billboards, which lag time seemed to allow a proliferation of billboards in the interim. After brief council discussion on the motion,and attention to a specific date rather than sixty or ninety days,Council voted unanimously by acclamation to amend as noted. Editorial Change_ Noted: Cotincilmentber Gotlunann said he was surprised to see that Book III was included, and Mr. Connelly said it contained some development regulations and part of Book III was referenced in Book II,and said it made sense to adopt as a cohesive unit, Councilrnentber Gothmann mentioned that Appendix A to Book III, "Starting Point"page 1 of 5,and other areas where the text references"figures"that the figures and/or diagrams are missing. Mr. Kuhta said the figures, graphs and diagrams were in the original draft which was created with a program we don't have,and staff had to take the text out,convert it to Word, and then will use the figures in the original,so they will all be re-inserted, Councilmeinber Gothmanu mentioned that the last sentence on page 2 of 5 appears that something got dropped, and there are a few missing words in paragraph seven of the last page. Mr.Kuhta said he will do some cutting and pasting to make sure the original text is represented as Council intends. Mr. Kuhta also summarized what is included in Book III, such as the intended city actions and what the city intends to do to help implement this Plan as funding becomes available; mention of future street networks, and one or two-way issues, future street crass-sections, how they look and function;and said that these can change as conditions change and we will get a better idea when we start to improve the streets;adding that the only segment Council included in the future to change to a two-way system is between Dislunan Mica and University Road; and just to change the direction of travel,which includes signalization and stripping, is approximately $1.2 million; and said the full street with new sidewalks increases to n total of about$5.3 million,and a lot of that is around the City center,but we will consider the cost when we get there, Council Meeting Minutes:6-16-09 Page 2 of 10 Approved by Council:06-30-09 3.Motion Consideration: Spokane County Traffic Inter local—Neil Kersten It was moved by Camel/member Wilhite and seconded to authorize the City Manager or designee to sign the Spokane County 7lac Interlocal Agreement. Public Works Director Kersten said that the current interiocal expires October I5,2009;that this contract is for signs,signals and stripping,and he mentioned that the County crews do a great job;that their crew and our crew work well together;there have been no problems, and staff recommends council approve this contract, which is a year-to-year contract with option to cancel,and he said the costs are for 2009 as the 2010 costs have not been calculated yet. Mayor Munson asked about the automatic renewal process and Mr.Kersten said it is as it has been in past years. There was some council/staff discussion concerning the priority for having an alternative plan, and while there was no disagreement on having an alternative plan,there was no council consensus to have such as a top priority. Vote by acclamation: In Favor: Urraninrous. Opposed: Voce. Abstentions.None. Motion carried NON-ACTION ITEMS 4.Residential Lighting—Greg McCormick Planning Manager McCormick stated that the lighting standards were included in the batch amendments in 2008; That it was removed from the batch and sent back to the Planning Commission for a public hearing, which was held September 24; that at the conclusion of that hearing, the Planning Commission recommended the changes as noted in the attached material. Mr. McCormick went over the proposed changes which were to add a new section concerning design standards to apply to all outdoor lighting in residential zones,and that all new development would be required to provide Iighting within parking lots, along pedestrian walkways and accessible routes of travel; that lighting fixtures would be limited to not greater than 24 feet in height for parking lots mad not more than 16 feet for pedestrian walkways; that all lighting would be shielded from producing off-site glare, either through exterior shields or optical design inside the fixtures, and would not emit light above 90°; and that street lighting installed by the City of Spokane Valley or other public utilities would be exempt from the regulations. Mr.McCormick said staff would also recommend modifying the last regulation to address investor owned utilities as being exempt as well. Discussion ensued regarding private streets which are not under the City's jurisdiction;that these new regulations would not be retroactive but only apply to new development moving forward from the effective date of any change; and that blinding lights are addressed in the nuisance code. Councilme;nbers said they would like to see further research on residential light issues or on someone putting lights in their backyard, and how to address existing residential lighting problems; and Mr. McCormick said he would have that information at the ordinance's first reading. 5.Continuity of Operations Plan Addendum--Mike Jackson Deputy City Manager Jackson explained that a few weeks ago Council adopted the Pandemic Response Plan, and pointed out that the plan did not include Council; and he said this is the addendum to that plan and if Council concurs,we can add this to the previously approved plan. Council concurred. 6.SARPIRoad Project Funding Update—Neil Kersten/Scott Kuhta Senior Planner Kuhta went over the material in his September 30 Memorandum to Council,and explained that the total$35.4 million is the total projected high level for all improvements and includes the ttvo tivay conversion. Mr. Kuhta also mentioned that this information will be up on our website after tonight. Councilmember Wilhite suggested including information indicating how far the Appleway Extension travels; and Mr. Kuhta indicated that it is included in the stages,and he will include that in the summary chart as well, Mr.Kersten added that these are estimated costs and have not yet been engineered. Mr. Kuhta also reminded everyone that these figures do not include anything for City Hall, and that anything associated with a City Hall would go to some kind of a bond vote if and when we get to that point. Mayor Munson said council would like periodic updates on these costs as more information becomes available. Council Meeting Minutes:10-06-09 Page 3 of Approved by Council;10-27-09 JUNE 29, 2010 Meeting Materials CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 29, 2010 City Manager Sign-off: Item Check all that apply: ❑consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑infcrmatlon ®admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Ballot Measure —One-Way vs Two-Way--Sprague Appleway GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: At the regular Council meeting on June 8th, 2010, Councllmember Grafos introduced the concept of placing the issue of one-way versus two-way traffic around the couplet and U-City on the General Election Ballot in November. Mayor Towey and Deputy Mayor Schimmels also expressed interest in this concept. Pursuant to this, City Clerk Chris Bainbridge has contacted Mike McLaughlin, Spokane County Elections Manager, and has determined the following: The cost to place this matter on the November ballot is approximately $10,000 to $15,000. The cost to place the measure on a special ballot (with no other ballot measures) would be approximately $100,000. The November ballot so far does not include any bond issue but it does include a Fire Department LID levy lift. The deadline to file a resolution for the November 254 General Election is August 10, 2010. The deadline to file a resolution for the February 8, 2011 election is December 25, 2010. Current Action Taken: On Thursday, June 13, 2010, Acting City Manager Mike Jackson and City Attorney Mike Connelly met with Mike Ornnsbsy, Bond Attorney with K & L Gates to discuss the proposed measure. Mr. Ormsby felt the deadline of filing a resolution with Spokane County by August 10 is achievable and should have a draft ballot measure for the City to review in the near future. Public Works Department has expressed concern over the budget numbers provided by Gladding Jackson for the Sprague Appleway conversion. The costs previously provided are planning level estimates only. Public Works recommends the preparation of engineering level cost estimates and will proceed with developing those estimates. If Council decides not to move forward with the ballot measure, Public Works can discontinue work on this project. Public Works will provide the engineering estimates for the transportation portion only. The landscaping, sidewalk and other improvements were prepared by Gladding Jackson and we will rely on them for an update on their costs. Issues to Resolve: The questions for City Council at this time include: 1) Define the scope of conversion of one-way or two-way i.e. from University to Argonne, or to include the entire couplet. 2) Does City Council wish to pursue the streetscape improvements? 3) Does the Council wish to include a funding measure i.e. a bond issue with the transportation improvements? Schedule: An administrative report to the City Council to discuss this information and other issues as desired by Council has been scheduled for June 29, 2010. Additional discussions can occur on July 6 and July 13,2010, as needed. First reading of an ordinance authorizing the ballot measure and related funding July 22, 2010. Second reading proposed ordinance authorizing the ballot measure and related funding July 27, 2010. A resolution requesting that Spokane County place this matter on the ballot July 27, 2010. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Mike Jackson ATTACHMENTS: JUNE 29 2010 MINUTES EXCERPT: I0. BalIot Measure--Mike Jackson Acting City Manager Jackson said this item is to disctnss 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 on Iooking 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 Ianguage 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 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. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 24, 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ® executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: EXECUTIVE SESSION: Potential Litigation GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 42.30.110(i). PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: "I Move that Council adjourn into executive session for approximately minutes to discuss Potential Litigation and that no action will be taken upon return to open session." BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: