The URL can be used to link to this page

2012, 06-12 Regular MeetingAGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL FORMAT MEETING Tuesday, June 12, 2012 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 Craig Smart, Valleypoint Church 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 2013 -2018 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 following claim vouchers: VOUCHER LIST DATE VOUCHER NUMBERS; TOTAL AMOUNT 05/11/2012 25922 -25973 (- 25942); 504120023, 504120120 $553,500.02 05/17/2012 26000 -26040 $996,220.36 05/17/2012 26041 -26051 $95,310.01 05/17/2012 26052 $23.81 05/18/2012 2928 -3931 $63,503.07 05/21/2012 26053 $54,260.87 05/25/2012 26055 -26076 $151,968.68 05/25/2012 26077 -26101 $66,954.69 05/31/2012 26102 - 26126; 529120029 $254,125.44 05/31/2012 26127 -26133 $9,449.39 GRAND TOTAL $2,245,316.34 b. Approval of Payroll for period ending May 31, 2012: $397,473.86 c. Approval of Minutes of May 15, 2012 Council Study Session Format Meeting d. Approval of Minutes of May 22, 2012 Council Formal Format Meeting e. Approval of Minutes of May 29, 2012 Council Study Session Format Meeting Council Agenda 06 -12 -12 Formal Format Meeting Page 1 of 2 NEW BUSINESS: 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 12 -016 Amending Spokane Valley Municipal Code Title 24 — John Hohman [public comment] SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: 4. Pavement Preservation Update Projects — Steve Worley [no public comment] NEW BUSINESS 5. Motion Consideration: Bid Award — Pavement Preservation Project Phase 1— Steve Worley [public comment] 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. Project Access Update — Sarah Bates, Project Operations Manager 7. Proposed Comp Plan Amendment CPA 05 -12 (601 N Conklin) — Mike Basinger 8. Old Milwaukee Trail Draft Interlocal Agreement— Cary Driskell 9. Washington State Department of Transportation Grant, Call for Projects — Inga Note 10. Sprague Swale Project Update — Steve Worley 11. Advance Agenda — Mayor Towey INFORMATION ONLY 12. Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) Call for Projects CITY MANAGER COMMENTS 13. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pending /Potential Litigation [(RCW 42.30.110(1)(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 5`h 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 06 -12 -12 Formal Format Meeting Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 12, 2012 Department Director Approval: ❑ Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ® public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING -Draft 2013 —2018 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 2012 -2017 Six Year TIP last year on June 28, 2011, Resolution #11 -005; Presentation of Draft 2013 -2018 Six Year TIP at Council's May 29, 2012 Study Session 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 by July 1St of each year. The attached draft Six Year TIP incorporates minor comments received from the May 291h Council Meetings and represents a significant revision to previously adopted TIPs. A new report is included that groups projects by category, including a new `Street Preservation Projects' category. This draft TIP provides an increased emphasis on street preservation projects in accordance with council goals. It also identifies from the recently adopted Pavement Management Program (PMP) specific reconstruction and arterial preservation projects that could qualify for federal funding. Projects not specifically identified, but included in the PMP, have been collectively identified under the title "Pavement Preservation Program 20XX" for each year in this six -year TIP. Staff has reviewed historical funding levels for federal, state and City funds from the past five years to estimate projected funding levels available during the next six years. The final adopted Six -Year TIP is required to be fiscally constrained and reflect realistic expectations of annual funding levels. Other needed and worthwhile projects that do not fit within the limited amount of funding anticipated from state and federal grants and City revenues are listed in the Projects List `with no identified Local Match'. Based on council discussion, staff will continue to develop the TIP centered on Council priorities and goals. This draft should be considered a `work in progress'. It may be updated again after receiving comments. OPTIONS: Public Hearing RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Public Hearing BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: As the proposed 2013 -2018 Six Year TIP continues to evolve, staff will coordinate with the Finance Department regarding the city's ability to meet local match requirements for grants. STAFF CONTACT: Steve Worley, Senior Engineer— Capital Projects ATTACHMENTS: 1) Draft 2013 -2018 TIP, 2) Unfunded Projects List, 3) Categorized List of Projects, 4) Annual List of Projects City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works 2013 — 2018 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Glossary & Abbreviations Funding Sources: Principal Arterial • ARRA American Recovery & Reinvestment Act • BR Bridge Replacement Program • City City Funds • CDBG Community Development Block Grant • CMAQ Congestion Management/Air Quality • Developers Private Developer Funds • EECBG Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant • FHWA Federal Highway Administration • FMSIB Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Program • HUD Housing & Urban Development • REET Real Estate Excise Tax • Other Fed Misc. Federal Funding Sources • Other RR Railroad Funding • Other State Misc. State Funding Sources • SP TIB Sidewalk Program • SRTS Safe Routes to School • SW City Stormwater Funds • STA Spokane Transit Authority • STP(E) Surface Transportation Program (Enhancement) • STP(U) Surface Transportation Program (Urban) • TIB Transportation Improvement Board • UAP TIB Urban Arterial Program • UCP TIB Urban Corridor Program • WSDOT Washington Department of Transportation • WTSC Washington Traffic Safety Commission • WUTC Washington Utilities & Transportation Commission Fundina Status: Ifs ftt` •��11 • S Project Funding is Secured • P Project Funding is Planned. The Most Probable Funding Sources have been Identified. Project Phases: • PE Preliminary Engineering • RW Right -of -Way • CN Construction • VE Value Engineering Construction Tvae: • PCC Portland Cement Concrete • HMA Hot Mix Asphalt • ITS Intelligent Transportation System (Integrated Traffic Signal Control Systems) • STEP Septic Tank Elimination Program Street Functional Classifications: • Urban: • 14 Principal Arterial • 16 Minor Arterial • 17 Collector Arterial • 19 Local Access t, Draft 2013- 2018 Spokane Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Valley Dollars in Thousands Funding Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 1 Argonne Road - 190 to Trent 0.38 50 250 582 882 City 120 S CMAQ 762 Revise Signal Phasing, Add NB Right Turn Lane at Montgomery, Intersection Improvements at Knox Funding Secured (SRTC 06 -31), City Project #0060 Project Total 882 2 Mission Ave. - Flora Rd. to Barker Rd. (PE /RW) 1 259 400 0 659 City 89 S STP(U) 570 120 762 882 89 570 Reconstruct to a 3 -lane section with curb, sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities; PE & RW Funding Secured, (SRTC # ) City Project #0123, Project Total 659 659 3 Sidewalk Infill Program 0 0 0 323 324 City 65 65 S CMAQ 259 259 Fill in gaps in sidewalk system throughout city Funded by CMAQ (SRTC # ), City Project # Project Total 324 324 4 Sullivan Road West Bridge 0.08 1,068 140 16,880 18,088 BR 966 2,852 2,852 6,670 S City 242 213 213 668 FMSIB 1,000 1,000 2,000 Reconstruct and widen west (southbound) bridge Other 4,375 4,375 8,750 Fed Recv'd FMSIB and BR grants Project Total 1,208 89440 89440 189088 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 1 Draft 2013- 2018 �„ Spokane six -Year Transportation Improvement Program ValleyDollars in Thousands Funding Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 5 24th Ave Sidewalk - Adams to Sullivan 0.25 0 0 258 258 City 132 132 S Other 126 126 State Fill in gaps in sidewalk Funded, TIB Grant Project Total 258 258 6 Mansfield Ave Connection - Pines (SR -27) to 0.21 50 540 951 1,541 City 61 61 S 200 -ft East of Houk Rd CMAQ 511 511 UCP 792 792 Construct 3 -lane arterial gap connection from Pines to Houk, w/ sidewalk, curb, and stormwater facilities Develop 177 177 ers PE /RW funded by CMAQ (SRTC #10 -12), CN Funded by TIB( #9 -E- 208(003) -1), City Project #0156 Project Total 1,541 19541 7 Sidewalk & Transit Stop Accessibility Project 0 7 3 102 111 City 22 22 S Other- 89 89 FTA Sidewalk and bus stop improvements Project Total 111 111 8 Spokane Valley- Millwood Trail - SCC to 5 559 0 0 559 City S Evergreen Rd (PE) STP(E) 559 559 Construct Shared Use Pathway on abandoned Railroad Right -of -way PE Funded Project Total 559 559 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 2 Draft 2013- 2018 t,,, �„ Spokane Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program ValleyDollars in Thousands Funding Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 9 Sullivan Rd /UPRR Overpass Bridge Resurfacing 0.05 52 0 410 461 City 92 92 P Project BR 369 369 Resurfacing of RR Overpass Bridge Deck Project Total 461 461 10 University Rd /1 -90 Overpass Study 0 188 0 0 188 City 26 26 S CMAQ 162 162 Study of feasibility and benefits of overpass at University /1 -90 to Argonne /SR -27 Project Total 188 188 11 Wellesley / Adams Sidewalk Project 0.85 32 38 500 570 Other 568 568 State S City 2 2 Construct 6 -ft sidewalk on one side of Adams (Trent to Wellesley) and north side of Wellesley (Sullivan to 200 -ft East of Isenhart) Funded by SRTS Project Total 570 570 12 Park Road - #2 - Broadway to Indiana (RW & CN) 0.75 0 150 2,877 3,027 City 20 388 408 P STP(U) 130 2,489 2,619 Reconstruct to a 3 -lane section with curb, sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities Project Total 150 2,877 3,027 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 3 Draft 2013- 2018 �„ Spokane six -Year Transportation Improvement Program ValleyDollars in Thousands Funding Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 13 Park Road #1 Sidewalk Project - Sinto Ave. to 0.44 49 25 360 434 City 2 19 21 p Indiana Ave. Other 47 366 413 State Construct sidewalk along east side of Park Road from 200 -ft S. of Sinto to Indiana Ave. and 165 -ft gap on Mission Ave. east of Park Rd SRTS Application Submitted 2012 Project Total 49 385 434 14 Park Road #2 Sidewalk Project - Marietta Ave. 0.11 14 25 104 143 City 1 6 7 p to Buckeye Ave. Other 22 114 136 State Construct sidewalk along one side of Park Road and 160 -ft gap on north side of Buckeye Ave east of Park Road SRTS Application submitted 2012 Project Total 23 120 143 15 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Fancher to Dollar 0.4 24 0 225 249 City 249 249 P Grind /Overlay; OCI: 35.83 Project Total 249 249 16 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Havana to Fancher 1 50 0 450 500 City 500 500 p (EB Lanes) Grind /Overlay EB lanes; OCI : 38.53 Project Total 500 500 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 4 Project Total 2,110 2,110 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 5 Draft 2013- 2018 �„ Spokane six -Year Transportation Improvement Program ValleyDollars in Thousands Funding Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 17 Sullivan / Euclid Concrete Intersection (RW /CN) 0 0 0 1,562 1,562 City 211 211 P STP(U) 1,351 1,351 Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement Project Total 1,562 19562 18 Sullivan Road Corridor Traffic Study - 1 -90 to 2 200 0 0 200 City 27 27 p Wellesley STP(U) 173 173 Conceptual Planning for Sullivan Road corridor improvements Project Total 200 200 19 Argonne Road Resurfacing - Sprague to 0.5 30 0 265 295 City 295 295 p Broadway Grind /Overlay; OCI: 35.63 Project Total 295 295 20 Broadway @ Argonne /Mullan Concrete 0 0 0 2,110 2,110 City 285 285 p Intersections (CN Only) STP(U) 1,825 19825 Reconstruct intersections in concrete pavement Project Total 2,110 2,110 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 5 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 6 Draft 2013- 2018 �„ Spokane six -Year Transportation Improvement Program ValleyDollars in Thousands Funding Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 21 Euclid Ave Reconstruction - Flora to E City 1.5 110 0 1,500 1,610 City 1,610 1,610 P Limits Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 27.3 Project Total 1,610 1,610 22 Evergreen Road Resurfacing - Sprague to 0.9 45 0 950 995 City 995 995 P Mission Grind /Overlay; OCI: 35.07 Project Total 995 995 23 Greenacres Trail - Sullivan to E City Limits 2.2 0 0 1,095 1,095 STP(E) 1,095 1,095 P (RW &CN) Construct Shared Use Pathway on abandoned railroad right -of -way Project Total 1,095 1,095 24 Mission Ave. - Flora Rd. to Barker Rd. (CN) 0 0 0 3,416 3,416 City 683 683 P UAP 2,733 2,733 Widen & Overlay to a 3 -lane section with curb, sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities Project Total 3,416 3,416 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 6 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 7 Draft 2013- 2018 �„ Spokane six -Year Transportation Improvement Program ValleyDollars in Thousands Funding Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 25 Mullan Road Resurfacing - Dishman Mica to 0.6 30 0 265 295 City 295 295 P Broadway Grind /Overlay; OCI: 35.56 Project Total 295 295 26 Spokane Valley- Millwood Trail - SCC to 6.5 0 100 4,280 4,380 City P Evergreen Rd (RW &CN) STP(E) 100 2,140 2,140 4,380 Construct Shared Use Pathway on abandoned Railroad Right -of -way Project Total 100 2,140 2,140 4,380 27 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Herald to University 0.4 30 0 375 405 City 405 405 P Grind /Overlay; OCI: 35.01 Project Total 405 405 28 Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 1 - 0.24 277 0 2,121 2,398 City 28 295 323 P Spokane River to Inland Asphalt Entrance STP(U) 180 1,895 2,075 Reconstruct urban arterial in concrete pavement; OCI: 37.28 (2013) Project Total 208 2,190 2,398 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 7 Draft 2013- 2018 �„ Spokane six -Year Transportation Improvement Program ValleyDollars in Thousands Funding Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 29 Appleway Trail - University to Tshirley 4 300 0 3,000 3,300 City P STP(E) 150 150 1,500 1,500 3,300 Construct Shared Use Pathway along abandoned Railroad Right -of -Way Project Total 150 150 1,500 1,500 3,300 30 Dishman Mica Resurfacing - Sands to Thorpe 0.6 25 0 328 353 City 353 353 P Grind /Overlay; OCI: 34.43 Project Total 353 353 31 Euclid Ave Reconstruction - W end to Sullivan 0.3 40 0 515 555 City 555 555 P STP(U) Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 21.42 Project Total 555 555 32 Flora Road Reconstruction - Euclid to Trent 1 95 0 1,300 1,395 City 1,395 1,395 P Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 27.96 Project Total 1,395 1,395 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 8 Draft 2013- 2018 �„ Spokane six -Year Transportation Improvement Program ValleyDollars in Thousands Funding Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 33 Madison Road Reconstruction - 40th to Thorpe 0.5 100 0 1,450 1,550 City 1,550 1,550 P Full Road Reconstruct; OCI: 22.06 Project Total 1,550 1,550 34 Mission Ave Resurfacing - Argonne to Herald 0.6 30 0 440 470 City 470 470 P Grind /Overlay; OCI: 33.68 Project Total 470 470 35 Mullan Road Resurfacing - Broadway to Mission 0.5 25 0 286 311 City 311 311 P Grind /Overlay; OCI: 33.38 Project Total 311 311 36 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Argonne to Herald 0.6 30 0 680 710 City 96 96 P STP(U) 614 614 Grind /Overlay; OCI: 33.28 Project Total 710 710 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 9 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 10 Draft 2013- 2018 �„ Spokane six -Year Transportation Improvement Program ValleyDollars in Thousands Funding Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 37 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Thierman to Park 0.5 30 0 615 645 City 87 87 P STP(U) 558 558 Grind /Overlay; OCI: 34.3 Project Total 645 645 38 Sullivan Road Resurfacing - Broadway to 0.5 30 0 250 280 City 38 38 p Mission STP(U) 242 242 Grind /Overlay; OCI: 32.49 Project Total 280 280 39 Appleway Blvd Resurfacing - Vista to Dishman 0.5 55 0 1,100 1,155 City 1,155 1,155 p Mica Grind /Overlay; OCI: 33.37 Project Total 1,155 1,155 40 Argonne Road Concrete Pavement- 1 -90 to 0 362 0 2,776 3,138 City 362 2,776 3,138 p Montgomery Reconstruct pavement in concrete; OCI: 40.35 (2012) Project Total 362 2,776 3,138 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 10 Draft 2013- 2018 �„ Spokane six -Year Transportation Improvement Program ValleyDollars in Thousands Funding Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 41 Dishman Mica Road Resurfacing - 40th to Sands 0.25 20 0 260 280 City 280 280 P Grind /Overlay; OCI: 33.67 Project Total 280 280 42 Dishman Mica Road Resurfacing - Thorpe to S 0.3 20 0 190 210 City 210 210 P City Limit Grind /Overlay; OCI: 32.58 Project Total 210 210 43 Euclid Ave Reconstruction - Sullivan to Marietta 0.5 150 0 1,960 2,110 City 285 285 P STP(U) 1,825 1,825 Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 28.41 Project Total 2,110 2,110 44 Farr Road Reconstruction - 4th to 8th 0.25 25 0 500 525 City 525 525 P Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 28.93 Project Total 525 525 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 11 48 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation (PE & 0 2,250 400 Draft 2013- 2018 357 p RW Only) Other t,,, �„ Spokane Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Fed Other 611 1,368 1,979 ValleyDollars Fed in Thousands Funding Construct Grade Separation at Barker /BNSF RR/ Trent (SR290) Other- Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 45 Progress Road Reconstruction - Wellesley to 0.25 35 0 450 485 City 485 485 p Crown 2,649 Full Road Reconstruct; OCI: 17.15 Project Total 485 485 46 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Vista to Argonne 0.5 30 0 640 670 City 90 90 P STP(U) 580 580 Grind /Overlay; OCI: 34.04 Project Total 670 670 47 Sullivan Road Resurfacing - Sprague to 0.5 40 0 800 840 City 113 113 p Broadway STP(U) 727 727 Grind /Overlay; OCI: 31.2 Project Total 840 840 48 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation (PE & 0 2,250 400 0 2,649 City 101 256 357 p RW Only) Other 180 180 Fed Other 611 1,368 1,979 Fed Construct Grade Separation at Barker /BNSF RR/ Trent (SR290) Other- 38 95 133 RR FY09 Federal Earmark for $720K million, $10M received from FMSIB for CN phase Project Total 750 1,899 2,649 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 12 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 13 Draft 2013- 2018 �„ Spokane six -Year Transportation Improvement Program ValleyDollars in Thousands Funding Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 49 Euclid Ave Reconstruction - Marietta to Flora 0.5 100 0 1,335 1,435 City 1,435 1,435 P Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 29.21 Project Total 1,435 1,435 50 Evergreen Road Resurfacing - 1 -90 to Indiana 0.25 20 0 260 280 City 280 280 P Grind /Overlay; OCI: 30.43 Project Total 280 280 51 Farr Road Reconstruction - Appleway to 4th 0.25 20 0 230 250 City 250 260 P Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 29.63 Project Total 250 250 52 Sprague / Fancher Concrete Intersection 0 181 0 1,391 1,572 City 212 212 P STP(U) 1,360 1,360 Reconstruct Intersection in concrete pavement Project Total 1,572 1,572 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 13 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 14 Draft 2013- 2018 �„ Spokane six -Year Transportation Improvement Program ValleyDollars in Thousands Funding Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 53 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Flora to Corbin 0.25 20 0 410 430 City 58 58 P STP(U) 372 372 Grind /Overlay; OCI: 32.76 Project Total 430 430 54 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Park to Vista 0.5 30 0 565 595 City 80 80 P STP(U) 515 515 Grind /Overlay; OCI: 31.58 Project Total 595 595 55 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Sullivan to Conklin 0.5 35 0 660 695 City 94 94 P STP(U) 601 601 Grind /Overlay; OCI: 31.46 Project Total 695 695 56 Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 2 - 0.32 338 0 2,595 2,933 STP(U) 219 2,318 2,537 P Inland Asphalt Entrance to Marietta City 34 362 396 Concrete Pavement; OCI: 37.28 (2013) Project Total 253 2,680 2,933 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 14 �„ Draft 2013- 2018 Spokane six -Year Transportation Improvement Program ValleyDollars in Thousands Funding Project / Description / Current Status Length PE RW CN Total Sources 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Total 57 Sprague / Argonne - Mullan Concrete P Intersections Reconstruct intersections in concrete pavement 0 270 0 2,072 2,342 City Project Total Totals: 7,830 2,070 69,019 78,919 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 15 2,342 2,342 2,342 2,342 9,494 22,351 19,189 8,927 10,536 8,421 78,918 Spokane ,;,o0Va11ey Draft 2013- 2018 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Totals Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 1 Secured Projects Federal State Other Planned Projects $5,901 Year Federal State Other City Total Federal State Other City Total 2013 $3,878 $1,486 $177 $759 $6,300 $2,023 $69 $0 $1,102 $3,194 2014 $7,227 $1,000 $0 $213 $8,440 $5,689 $3,720 $0 $5,136 $14,545 2016 $7,227 $1,000 $0 $213 $8,440 $5,599 $0 $0 $5,150 $10,749 2016 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,422 $0 $0 $3,505 $8,927 2017 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,178 $0 $38 $5,320 $10,536 2018 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,366 $0 $95 $2,960 $8,421 Total $18,332 $3,486 $177 $1,186 $23,180 $29,277 $3,789 $133 $23,173 $66,372 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, an are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. 6/7/2012 Page 1 Totals Federal State Other City Total $5,901 $1,555 $177 $1,861 $9,494 $12,916 $4,720 $0 $5,349 $22,985 $12,826 $1,000 $0 $5,363 $19,189 $5,422 $0 $0 $3,505 $8,927 $5,178 $0 $38 $5,320 $10,536 $5,366 $0 $95 $2,960 $8,421 $47,609 $7,276 $310 $24,368 $799662 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 Arterial Improvement Projects Bowdish Road - 16th to Sprague Sprague to 8th: Inlay & Enhancement; 8th to 16th: $2,851 Reconstruct as 2 -lane section w/ curb, sidewalk, bike lanes and new stormwater facilities; Bowdish Road - 24th to 16th Reconstruct Roadway as 2 -lane section w/ curb, sidewalk and $2,846 new stormwater facilities; Bowdish Road - 32nd to 24th Reconstruct Roadway as 2 -lane section w/ curb, sidewalk and $2,637 new stormwater facilities; Sullivan Road North Extension Reconstruct and widen the Sullivan Road extension north also $55 (Bigelow Gulch) known as Bigelow Gulch Road to a 4 -lane roadway with 8 -foot shoulders and a 12 -foot two way left turn lane. Wellesley Realignment @ Realign connection of Wellesley to Barker Rd and SR290, 3- $5,187 Barker /SR290 lane section, Part of Barker /BNSF Grade Separation Bridge Projects Barker Road / BNSF Grade Construct Grade Separation at Barker /BNSF RR/ Trent $32,000 Separation (CN Only) (SR290) Park Road / BNSF Grade Separation Reconstruct Park Road to separate the grades of Park Road $16,520 and the BNSF railroad tracks. Congestion Improvement Projects Evergreen ITS Improvements Traffic Control Systems Upgrades for Eve rg reen (Broadway to $708 16th) Pines Corridor ITS: Sprague to 16th Traffic Signal Control System for Corridor $785 Saltese /Sullivan Traffic Signal Improvements to Intersection, Install Traffic Signal (In $586 coordination w/ Spokane County) Sprague / Barker Traffic Signal Install Traffic Signal $594 Reconstruction Projects Sprague / Thierman Concrete Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement $1,242 Intersection Sprague / University Concrete Reconstruct Intersection in concrete pavement; $1,660 Intersection Sullivan / Kiernan Concrete Reconstruct Intersection in concrete pavement; $1,423 Intersection 6/7/2012 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 Reconstruction Projects Sullivan / Marietta Concrete Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement $1,493 Intersection Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Concrete Pavement; OCI: 37.28 (2013) $2,722 Phase 3 - Marietta to Euclid Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Concrete Pavement OCI: 37.45 (2013) $3,360 Phase 4 - Euclid to Kiernan Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Concrete Pavement; OCI 37.45 (2013) $2,720 Phase 5 - Kiernan to Trent Street Preservation Projects Pavement Management Program - Annual street preservation projects per PMP $3,729 2013 Pavement Management Program - Annual street preservation projects per PMP $4,229 2014 Pavement Management Program - Annual street preservation projects per PMP $3,806 2015 Pavement Management Program - Annual street preservation projects per PMP $3,206 2016 Pavement Management Program - Annual street preservation projects per PMP $3,914 2017 Pavement Management Program - Annual street preservation projects per PMP $4,200 2018 Pavement Management Program - Annual street preservation projects $12,000 Local Access Total $114,473 6/7/2012 Page 2 of 2 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, June 07, 2012 Page 1 of 7 City of Spokane Valley Total: $1,180 $7,102 Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program Project Name Description Start Year ProjectsListed by Category for the 2013 Six -Year TIP iotai Cost Sullivan Road West Bridge Reconstruct and widen west Dollars in Thousands $668 $18,088 Arterial Improvements (southbound) bridge Project Name Description Start Year City Cost iotai Cost Mission Ave. - Flora Rd. to Barker Reconstruct to a 3 -lane section with 2013 $89 $659 Rd. (PE /RW) curb, sidewalks, bike lanes and Barker Road / BNSF Grade stormwater facilities; 2017 $357 Park Road - #2 - Broadway to Reconstruct to a 3 -lane section with 2013 $408 $3,027 Indiana (RW & CN) curb, sidewalks, bike lanes and Total: stormwater facilities $21,198 Mission Ave. - Flora Rd. to Barker Widen & Overlay to a 3 -lane section 2014 $683 $3,416 Rd. (CN) with curb, sidewalks, bike lanes and stormwater facilities 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, June 07, 2012 Page 1 of 7 Total: $1,180 $7,102 Bridge Projects Project Name Description Start Year City Cost iotai Cost Sullivan Road West Bridge Reconstruct and widen west 2013 $668 $18,088 (southbound) bridge Sullivan Rd /UPRR Overpass Bridge Resurfacing of RR Overpass Bridge 2013 $92 $461 Resurfacing Project Deck Barker Road / BNSF Grade Construct Grade Separation at 2017 $357 $2,649 Separation (PE & RW Only) Barker /BNSF RR/ Trent (SR290) Total: $1,117 $21,198 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, June 07, 2012 Page 1 of 7 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program ProjectsListed by Category for the 2013 Six -Year TIP Dollars in Thousands Congestion Improvements Project Name Description Start Year City Cost Total Cost Argonne Road - 190 to Trent Revise Signal Phasing, Add NB 2013 $120 $882 Right Turn Lane at Montgomery, Intersection Improvements at Knox Mansfield Ave Connection - Pines Construct 3 -lane arterial gap 2013 $61 $1,541 (SR -27) to 200 -ft East of Houk Rd connection from Pines to Houk, w/ sidewalk, curb, and stormwater facilities University Rd /1 -90 Overpass Study Study of feasibility and benefits of 2013 $26 $188 overpass at University /1 -90 to Argonne /SR -27 Sullivan Road Corridor Traffic Study - Conceptual Planning for Sullivan 2013 $27 $200 1 -90 to Wellesley Road corridor improvements Total: $234 $2,811 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, June 07, 2012 Page 2 of 7 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program ProjectsListed by Category for the 2013 Six -Year TIP Dollars in Thousands Pedestrian /Bicycle Program Project Name Description Start Year City Cost Total Cost Sidewalk Infill Program Fill in gaps in sidewalk system 2013 $65 $324 Park Road #1 Sidewalk Project - throughout city 2013 $21 24th Ave Sidewalk - Adams to Fill in gaps in sidewalk 2013 $132 $258 Sullivan Indiana Ave. and 165 -ft gap on Sidewalk & Transit Stop Accessibility Sidewalk and bus stop improvements 2013 $22 $111 Project Spokane Valley- Millwood Trail - SCC Construct Shared Use Pathway on 2013 $0 $559 to Evergreen Rd (PE) abandoned Railroad Right -of -way Park Road and 160 -ft gap on north Wellesley /Adams Sidewalk Project Construct 6 -ft sidewalk on one side 2013 $2 $570 of Adams (Trent to Wellesley) and Road north side of Wellesley (Sullivan to Greenacres Trail - Sullivan to E City 200 -ft East of Isenhart) 2014 $0 Park Road #1 Sidewalk Project - Construct sidewalk along east side of 2013 $21 $434 Sinto Ave. to Indiana Ave. Park Road from 200 -ft S. of Sinto to Indiana Ave. and 165 -ft gap on Mission Ave. east of Park Rd Park Road #2 Sidewalk Project - Construct sidewalk along one side of 2013 $7 $143 Marietta Ave. to Buckeye Ave. Park Road and 160 -ft gap on north side of Buckeye Ave east of Park Road Greenacres Trail - Sullivan to E City Construct Shared Use Pathway on 2014 $0 $1,095 Limits (RW &CN) abandoned railroad right -of -way Spokane Valley- Millwood Trail - SCC Construct Shared Use Pathway on 2014 $0 $4,380 to Evergreen Rd (RW &CN) abandoned Railroad Right -of -way Appleway Trail - University to Tshirley Construct Shared Use Pathway 2015 $0 $3,300 along abandoned Railroad Right -of- Way Total: $249 $11,174 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, June 07, 2012 Page 3 of 7 Mullan Road Resurfacing - Broadway Grind /Overlay; OCI: 33.38 2015 $311 $311 to Mission Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Argonne City of Spokane Valley 2015 $96 $710 Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Thierman Grind /Overlay; OCI: 34.3 ProjectsListed by Category for the 2013 Six -Year TIP $87 $645 to Park Dollars in Thousands Street Preservation Projects Sullivan Road Resurfacing - Grind /Overlay; OCI: 32.49 2015 Project Name Description Start Year City Cost Total Cost Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Fancher Grind /Overlay; OCI: 35.83 2013 $249 $249 to Dollar 2016 $1,155 $1,155 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Havana Grind /Overlay EB lanes; OCI : 38.53 2013 $500 $500 to Fancher (EB Lanes) Dishman Mica Road Resurfacing - Grind /Overlay; OCI: 33.67 2016 Argonne Road Resurfacing - Grind /Overlay; OCI: 35.63 2014 $295 $295 Sprague to Broadway Dishman Mica Road Resurfacing - Evergreen Road Resurfacing - Grind /Overlay; OCI: 35.07 2014 $995 $995 Sprague to Mission Mullan Road Resurfacing - Dishman Grind /Overlay; OCI: 35.56 2014 $295 $295 Mica to Broadway Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Herald to Grind /Overlay; OCI: 35.01 2014 $405 $405 University Dishman Mica Resurfacing - Sands Grind /Overlay; OCI: 34.43 2015 $353 $353 to Thorpe Mission Ave Resurfacing - Argonne Grind /Overlay; OCI: 33.68 2015 $470 $470 to Herald Mullan Road Resurfacing - Broadway Grind /Overlay; OCI: 33.38 2015 $311 $311 to Mission Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Argonne Grind /Overlay; OCI: 33.28 2015 $96 $710 to Herald Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Thierman Grind /Overlay; OCI: 34.3 2015 $87 $645 to Park Sullivan Road Resurfacing - Grind /Overlay; OCI: 32.49 2015 $38 $280 Broadway to Mission Appleway Blvd Resurfacing -Vista to Grind /Overlay; OCI: 33.37 2016 $1,155 $1,155 Dishman Mica Dishman Mica Road Resurfacing - Grind /Overlay; OCI: 33.67 2016 $280 $280 40th to Sands Dishman Mica Road Resurfacing - Grind /Overlay; OCI: 32.58 2016 $210 $210 Thorpe to S City Limit 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, June 07, 2012 Page 4 of 7 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program ProjectsListed by Category for the 2013 Six -Year TIP Dollars in Thousands Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Vista to Grind /Overlay; OCI: 34.04 2016 $90 $670 Argonne Sullivan Road Resurfacing - Sprague Grind /Overlay; OCI: 31.2 2016 $113 $840 to Broadway Evergreen Road Resurfacing - 1 -90 Grind /Overlay; OCI: 30.43 2017 $280 $280 to Indiana Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Flora to Grind /Overlay; OCI: 32.76 2017 $58 $430 Corbin Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Park to Grind /Overlay; OCI: 31.58 2017 $80 $595 Vista Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Sullivan Grind /Overlay; OCI: 31.46 2017 $94 $695 to Conklin Total: $6,454 $10,663 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, June 07, 2012 Page 5 of 7 Progress Road Reconstruction - City of Spokane Valley 2016 $485 $485 Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program Euclid Ave Reconstruction - Marietta Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 29.21 ProjectsListed by Category for the 2013 Six -Year TIP $1,435 $1,435 to Flora Dollars in Thousands Street Reconstruction Projects Farr Road Reconstruction - Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 29.63 Project Name Description Start Year City Cost iotai Cost Sullivan / Euclid Concrete Reconstruct intersection in concrete 2013 $211 $1,562 Intersection (RW /CN) pavement 2017 $212 Broadway @ Argonne /Mullan Reconstruct intersections in concrete 2014 $285 $2,110 Concrete Intersections (CN Only) pavement Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Concrete Pavement; OCI: 37.28 Euclid Ave Reconstruction - Flora to Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 27.3 2014 $1,610 $1,610 E City Limits Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Reconstruct urban arterial in 2014 $323 $2,398 Phase 1 - Spokane River to Inland concrete pavement; OCI: 37.28 Asphalt Entrance (2013) Euclid Ave Reconstruction - W end Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 21.42 2015 $555 $555 to Sullivan Flora Road Reconstruction - Euclid Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 27.96 2015 $1,395 $1,395 to Trent Madison Road Reconstruction -40th Full Road Reconstruct; OCI: 22.06 2015 $1,550 $1,550 to Thorpe Argonne Road Concrete Pavement - Reconstruct pavement in concrete; 2016 $3,138 $3,138 1 -90 to Montgomery OCI: 40.35 (2012) Euclid Ave Reconstruction - Sullivan Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 28.41 2016 $285 $2,110 to Marietta Farr Road Reconstruction - 4th to 8th Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 28.93 2016 $525 $525 Progress Road Reconstruction - Full Road Reconstruct; OCI: 17.15 2016 $485 $485 Wellesley to Crown Euclid Ave Reconstruction - Marietta Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 29.21 2017 $1,435 $1,435 to Flora Farr Road Reconstruction - Full Road Reconstruction; OCI: 29.63 2017 $250 $250 Appleway to 4th Sprague / Fancher Concrete Reconstruct Intersection in concrete 2017 $212 $1,572 Intersection pavement Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Concrete Pavement; OCI: 37.28 2017 $396 $2,933 Phase 2 - Inland Asphalt Entrance to (2013) Marietta 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, June 07, 2012 Page 6 of 7 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program ProjectsListed by Category for the 2013 Six -Year TIP Dollars in Thousands Sprague / Argonne - Mullan Concrete Reconstruct intersections in concrete 2018 $2,342 $2,342 Intersections pavement Total: $14,997 $25,970 Overall Total: $24,231 $78,918 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, June 07, 2012 Page 7 of 7 City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2013 - 2018 Dollars in Thousands 2013 Item # Project Name Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 1 Argonne Road - 190 to Trent CMAQ 120 882 2 Mission Ave. - Flora Rd. to Barker Rd. (PE /RW) STP(U) 89 659 3 Sidewalk Infill Program CMAQ 65 324 4 Sullivan Road West Bridge BR 242 1,208 5 24th Ave Sidewalk - Adams to Sullivan City 132 258 6 Mansfield Ave Connection - Pines (SR -27) to UCP 61 1,541 200 -ft East of Houk Rd 7 Sidewalk & Transit Stop Accessibility Project Other - FTA 22 111 8 Spokane Valley- Millwood Trail - SCC to STP(E) 0 559 Evergreen Rd (PE) 9 Sullivan Rd /UPRR Overpass Bridge Resurfacing BR 92 461 Project 10 University Rd /1 -90 Overpass Study CMAQ 26 188 11 Wellesley / Adams Sidewalk Project Other State 2 570 12 Park Road - #2 - Broadway to Indiana (RW & STP(U) 20 150 CN) 13 Park Road #1 Sidewalk Project - Sinto Ave. to Other State 2 49 Indiana Ave. 14 Park Road #2 Sidewalk Project - Marietta Ave. to Other State 1 23 Buckeye Ave. 15 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Fancher to Dollar City 249 249 16 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Havana to Fancher City 500 500 (EB Lanes) 17 Sullivan / Euclid Concrete Intersection (RW /CN) STP(U) 211 1,562 18 Sullivan Road Corridor Traffic Study - 1 -90 to STP(U) 27 200 Wellesley 2013 Totals: $1,861 $9,494 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Thursday, June 07, 2012 Page 1 of 3 2014 2014 Totals: $5,349 $22,985 Item # Project Name Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 4 Sullivan Road West Bridge Other Fed 213 8,440 12 Park Road - #2 - Broadway to Indiana (RW & STP(U) 388 2,877 26 CN) STP(E) 0 2,140 13 Park Road #1 Sidewalk Project - Sinto Ave. to Other State 19 385 28 Indiana Ave. STP(U) 295 2,190 14 Park Road #2 Sidewalk Project - Marietta Ave. to Other State 6 120 29 Buckeye Ave. STP(E) 0 150 19 Argonne Road Resurfacing - Sprague to City 295 295 31 Broadway City 555 555 20 Broadway @ Argonne /Mullan Concrete STP(U) 285 2,110 33 Intersections (CN Only) City 1,550 1,550 21 Euclid Ave Reconstruction - Flora to E City Limits City 1,610 1,610 22 Evergreen Road Resurfacing - Sprague to City 995 995 36 Mission STP(U) 96 710 23 Greenacres Trail - Sullivan to E City Limits STP(E) 0 1,095 38 (RW &CN) STP(U) 38 280 24 Mission Ave. - Flora Rd. to Barker Rd. (CN) UAP 810 4,050 25 Mullan Road Resurfacing - Dishman Mica to City 295 295 Broadway 26 Spokane Valley- Millwood Trail - SCC to STP(E) 0 100 Evergreen Rd (RW &CN) 27 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Herald to University City 405 405 28 Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 1 - STP(U) 28 208 Spokane River to Inland Asphalt Entrance 2015 Totals: $5,363 $19,189 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Thursday, June 07, 2012 Page 2 of 3 2014 Totals: $5,349 $22,985 2015 Item # Project Name Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 4 Sullivan Road West Bridge Other Fed 213 8,440 26 Spokane Valley- Millwood Trail - SCC to STP(E) 0 2,140 Evergreen Rd (RW &CN) 28 Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 1 - STP(U) 295 2,190 Spokane River to Inland Asphalt Entrance 29 Appleway Trail - University to Tshirley STP(E) 0 150 30 Dishman Mica Resurfacing - Sands to Thorpe City 353 353 31 Euclid Ave Reconstruction - W end to Sullivan City 555 555 32 Flora Road Reconstruction - Euclid to Trent City 1,395 1,395 33 Madison Road Reconstruction - 40th to Thorpe City 1,550 1,550 34 Mission Ave Resurfacing - Argonne to Herald City 470 470 35 Mullan Road Resurfacing - Broadway to Mission City 311 311 36 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Argonne to Herald STP(U) 96 710 37 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Thierman to Park STP(U) 87 645 38 Sullivan Road Resurfacing - Broadway to Mission STP(U) 38 280 2015 Totals: $5,363 $19,189 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Thursday, June 07, 2012 Page 2 of 3 2016 2016 Totals: $3,505 $8,927 2017 Item # Project Name Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 26 Spokane Valley- Millwood Trail - SCC to STP(E) 0 2,140 1,500 Evergreen Rd (RW &CN) City 2,776 2,776 29 Appleway Trail - University to Tshirley STP(E) 0 150 39 Appleway Blvd Resurfacing - Vista to Dishman City 1,155 1,155 52 Mica STP(U) 212 1,572 40 Argonne Road Concrete Pavement - 1 -90 to City 362 362 54 Montgomery STP(U) 80 595 41 Dishman Mica Road Resurfacing - 40th to Sands City 280 280 42 Dishman Mica Road Resurfacing - Thorpe to S City 210 210 City Limit 43 Euclid Ave Reconstruction - Sullivan to Marietta STP(U) 285 2,110 44 Farr Road Reconstruction - 4th to 8th City 525 525 45 Progress Road Reconstruction - Wellesley to City 485 485 Crown 46 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Vista to Argonne STP(U) 90 670 47 Sullivan Road Resurfacing - Sprague to STP(U) 113 840 Broadway RW Only) 56 Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 2 - STP(U) 362 2,680 Inland Asphalt Entrance to Marietta 57 Sprague/ Argonne - Mullan Concrete Intersections City 2,342 2,342 2018 Totals: $2,960 $8,421 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Thursday, June 07, 2012 Page 3 of 3 2016 Totals: $3,505 $8,927 2017 48 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation (PE & Other Fed Item # Project Name Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 29 Appleway Trail - University to Tshirley STP(E) 0 1,500 40 Argonne Road Concrete Pavement - 1 -90 to City 2,776 2,776 RW Only) 56 Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 2 - STP(U) 362 2,680 Inland Asphalt Entrance to Marietta 57 Sprague/ Argonne - Mullan Concrete Intersections City 2,342 2,342 2018 Totals: $2,960 $8,421 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Thursday, June 07, 2012 Page 3 of 3 Montgomery $5,320 $10,536 2018 48 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation (PE & Other Fed 101 750 City Amount RW Only) 29 Appleway Trail - University to Tshirley STP(E) 0 49 Euclid Ave Reconstruction - Marietta to Flora City 1,435 1,435 50 Evergreen Road Resurfacing - 1 -90 to Indiana City 280 280 51 Farr Road Reconstruction - Appleway to 4th City 250 250 52 Sprague/ Fancher Concrete Intersection STP(U) 212 1,572 53 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Flora to Corbin STP(U) 58 430 54 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Park to Vista STP(U) 80 595 55 Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Sullivan to Conklin STP(U) 94 695 56 Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 2 - STP(U) 34 253 Inland Asphalt Entrance to Marietta RW Only) 56 Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 2 - STP(U) 362 2,680 Inland Asphalt Entrance to Marietta 57 Sprague/ Argonne - Mullan Concrete Intersections City 2,342 2,342 2018 Totals: $2,960 $8,421 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Thursday, June 07, 2012 Page 3 of 3 2017 Totals: $5,320 $10,536 2018 Item # Project Name Primary Source City Amount Total Amount 29 Appleway Trail - University to Tshirley STP(E) 0 1,500 48 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation (PE & Other Fed 256 1,899 RW Only) 56 Sullivan Road Concrete Pavement Phase 2 - STP(U) 362 2,680 Inland Asphalt Entrance to Marietta 57 Sprague/ Argonne - Mullan Concrete Intersections City 2,342 2,342 2018 Totals: $2,960 $8,421 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Added Projects are shown in Green Funded Projects are shown in Blue Thursday, June 07, 2012 Page 3 of 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 12, 2012 Department Director Approval: M Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing AUtNUA I I kM TITLE: Approval of the 1- ollowlna Vouchers: VOUCHER LIST DATE VOUCHER NUMBERS, TOTAL AMOUNT 05/11/2012 25922 -25973 (- 25942); 504120023, 504120120 $553,500.02 05/17/2012 26000 -26040 $996,220.36 05/17/2012 26041 -26051 $95,310.01 05/17/2012 26052 $23.81 05/18/2012 2928 -3931 $63,503.07 05/21/2012 26053 $54,260.87 05/25/2012 26055 -26076 $ I51,968.68 05/25/2012 26077 -26101 $66,954.69 05/31/2012 26102 - 26126; 529120029 $254,125.44 05/31/2012 26127 -26133 $9,449.39 GRAND TOTAL $2,245,316.34 Explanation of Fund Numbers fi ##001- General Fund 001.011.000.511 City Council 001.013.000.513. City Manager 001.013.015.515. Legal 001.016.000. 001.018.013.513. 001.018.014.514. 001.018.016.516. 001.032.000. 001.058.050.558. 001.058.055.559. 001.058.056.558. 001.058.057.559, 001.076.000.576. 00I.076.300,576. 001.076.301.574. 001.076.302.576. 001.076.304.575. 001.076.305.574. 001.090.000.511. 001 .090.000.514. 001.090.000.517. 001.090.000.518. 001.090.000.519. 001.090.000.531. 001.090.000.550. 001.090.000.560. 001.090.000.594. Public Safety Deputy City Manager Finance Human Resources Public Works Comm. Develop. - Administration Comm. Develop. -- Develop.Eng. Community Develop.- Planning Community Develop.- Building Parks & Rec— Administration Parks & Rec - Maintenance Parks & Rec - Recreation Parks & Rec- Aquatics Parks & Rec- Senior Center Parks & Rec - CenterPlace General Gov't- Council related General Gov't - Finance related General Gov't - Employee supply General,Gov't- Centralized Services General Gov't- Otlter Services General Gov't-Natural Resources General Gov't - Economic Dev. General Gov't - Social Services General Gov't - Capital Outlay )und on Voucher Lists Other Funds 101 — Street Fund 103 — Paths & Trails 105 — Hotel /Motel Tax 120 -- CenterPlace Operating Reserve 121 — Service Level Stabilization Reserve 122 — Winter Weather Reserve 123 — Civic Facilities Replacement 204 — Debt Set-vice 301 — Capital Projects (1st %4 %REET) 302 — Special Capital Proj (2nd' /4% REST) 303 — Street Capital Projects 304 Mirabeau Point Project 307 — Capital Grants 309 — Parks Capital Grants 310 — Civic Bldg Capital Projects 311 — Street Capital Improvements 2011+ 402 — Stormwater Management 403 — Aquifer Protection Area 501 -- Equipment Rental & Replacement 502 —Risk Management RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve claims for vouchers as listed above. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: Voucher Lists CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 12, 2012 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑new business ❑ public hearing AGENDA 11 EM 1 I I Lh: Approval of the t-onowing voucners: VOUCHER LIST DATE VOUCHER NUMBERS, AMOUNT 05/11/2012 25922 -25973 (- 25942); 504120023, 504120120 $553,500.02 05/17/2012 26000 -26040 $996,220.36 05/17/2012 26041 -26051 $95,310.01 05/17/2012 26052 $23.81 05/18/2012 2928 -3931 $63,503.07 05/21/2012 26053 $54,260.87 05/25/2012 26055 -26076 $151,968.68 05/25/2012 26077 -26101 $66,954.69 05/31/2012 26102 - 26126; 529120029 $254,125.44 05/31/2012 26127 -26133 $9,449.39 001.076.302.576. GRAND TOTAL $ and on Voucher Lists Explanation of Fund Numbers ft 4001 - General Fund 001.011.000.511 City Council 001.013.000.513. City Manager 001.013.015.515. Legal 001.016.000. Public Safety 001.018.013.513. Deputy City Manager 001.018.014.514. Finance 001.018.016.516. Human Resources 001.032.000. Public Works 001.058.050.558. Comm. Develop.- Administration 001.058.055.559. Comm. Develop,— Develop.Eng. 001.058.056.558. Community Develop.- Planning 001.058.057.559. Community Develop.- Building 001.076.000.576. Parks & Rec— Administration 001.076.300.576. Parks & Rec - Maintenance 001.076.301.574. Parks & Rec - Recreation 001.076.302.576. Parks & Rec- Aquatics 001.076.304.575. Parks & Rec- Senior Center 001.076.305.574. Parks & Rec - CenterPlace 001.090.000.511, General Gov't- Council related 001 .090.000.514. General Gov't - Finance related 001.090.000.517. General Gov't - Employee supply 001.090.000.518. General,Gov't- Centralized Services 001.090.000.519. General Gov't -Other Services 001.090.000.531. General Gov't - Natural Resources 001.090.000.550. General Gov't - Economic Dev. 001.090.000.560. General Gov't - Social Services 001.090.000.594. General Gov't - Capital Outlay and on Voucher Lists Other Funds 101 — Street Fund 103 — Paths & Trails 105 -- Hotel/Motel Tax 120 — CenterPlace Operating Reserve 121 — Service Level Stabilization Reserve 122 — Winter Weather Reserve 123 —Civic Facilities Replacement 204 -- Debt Service 301 -- Capital Projects (151' /n% REET) 302 — Special Capital Proj (2nd' /,% REET) 303 — Street Capital Projects 304 — Mirabeau Point Project 307 — Capital Grants 309 — Parks Capital Grants 310 — Civic Bldg Capital Projects 311 -- Street Capital Improvements 2011+ 402 — Stormwater Management 403 — Aquifer Protection Area 501-- Equipment Rental & Replacement 502 — Risk Management RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve claims for vouchers as listed above. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: Voucher Lists Vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 05/11/2012 12:25:28PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 25922 5/11/2012 000958 AAA SWEEPING, LLC 47839 25923 5/11/2012 000648 ABADAN 168800 25924 5/11/2012 002931 ALL WESTERN INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY 93266 25925 5/11/2012 002966 CARNAG FEBRUARY 2012 25926 5/11/2012 000863 CENTURY WEST ENG CORP 233039 25927 5/11/2012 000729 CH2MHILL 1NC 3828354 25928 5/11/2012 002572 CINTAS CORPORATOIN 606706950 606706988 606707863 606708347 606708810 606709731 606710208 25929 5/11/2012 002469 COMMUNITY MINDED ENTERPRISES 4.18.2012 25930 5/11/2012 000508 CONOCOPHILLIPS FLEET 29314614 25931 5/11/2012 003016 CRESCENT ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO 122- 601522 -00 122- 601649 -00 122601802 -00 122- 601830.00 Fund /Dept DescriptionlAccount Amount 402.402.000.538 2012 STREET SWEEPING SERVICE 72,034.42 Total : 72,034.42 303.303.160.595 EVERGREEN RD RECONSTRUCTIC 84.53 Total : 84.53 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 127.29 Total : 127.29 303.303.060.595 RIGHT -OF -WAY ACQUISITION 1,000.00 Total : 1,000.00 101.042.000.542 2012 TIP SERVICES _ EXPIRES 121: 3,891.60 Total: 3,891.60 303.303.155.595 0155 - SULLIVAN RD W BRIDGE SL 73,325.19 Total : 73,325.19 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 112.24 101.042.000.543 SUPPLIES: PW 143.48 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 94.55 101.042.000.543 SUPPLIES: PW 143.48 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 94.55 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 94.55 101.042.000.543 SUPPLIES: PW 143.48 Total : 826.33 001.011.000.511 BROADCASTING FORMAT CONVEF 250.00 Total : 250.00 001.058.057.559 APRIL 2012: FLEET FUEL BILL 3,159.27 Total : 3,159.27 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR UNIVERSITY PROJ 713.40 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR UNIVERSITY PROJ 488.38 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR UNIVERSITY PROJ 353.45 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR UNIVERSITY PROJ 1,258.53 Page: 1 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 05/11/2012 12:25:28PM Spokane Valley. Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund /Dept Description /Account Amount 25931 5/11/2012 003016 CRESCENT ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO (Continued) 122 - 601845 -00 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR UNIVERSITY PROJ 78.56 Total : 2,892.32 25932 5/11/2012 000683 DAVID EVANS & ASSOCIATES 317578 101.042.000.542 2012 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERI 6,072.80 Total : 6,072.80 25933 5/11/2012 002385 DKS ASSOCIATES 49840 303.303.060.595 ARGONNE CORRIDOR SIGNAL & D 7,560.39 Total : 7,560.39 25934 5/11/2012 000278 DR[SKELL, CARY EXPENSES 001.013.015.515 TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT: WSAM 844.09 Total: 844.09 25935 5/11/2012 002157 ELJAY OIL COMPANY 4196645 101.000.000.542 APRIL 2012: OIL PRODUCTS FOR F 432.71 Total : 432.71 25936 5/11/2012 002134 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE 861 -425931695 310.000.161.594 SUBDIVISIONIPLATCERTIFICATE 271.75 Total : 271.75 25937 5/11/2012 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 37820 303.303.160.595 LEGAL PUBLICATIONS 105.60 37868 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 51.85 37869 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 87.55 37870 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 25.00 Total : 270.00 25938 5/11/2012 001253 GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL Apr 12 1042 001.011.000.511 LOBBYIST SERVICES 3,389.46 Total : 3,389.46 25939 5/11/2012 002568 GRANICUS INC 35318 001.011.000.511 BROADCASTING SERVICES 1,200.00 35319 001.011.000.511 BROADCASTING SERVICES 44.00 Total : 1,244.00 25940 5/11/2012 002682 HAFNER, CHARLES EXPENSES 001.011.000.511 MILEAGE FOR MARCH 2012 91.02 Total : 91.02 25941 5/11/2012 001723 HEDEEN & CADITZ, PLLC 7037 001.013.015.515 GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVIC 150.00 7038 303.303.005.595 UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD SERVIC 105.00 Page: 2 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 05/11/2012 12:25:28PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund /Dept Description /Account Amount 25941 5/11/2012 001723 001723 HEDEEN & CADITZ, PLLC (Continued) r Total : 255.00 25943 5/11/2012 000220 ICMA MAY 2012 001.018.016.516 MEMBERSHIP DUES: JACKSON , 1,294.00 Total : 1,294.00 25944 5/11/2012 002466 KENWORTH SALES 106050 101.042.000.542 PARTS: PW 184.31 Total : 184.31 25945 5/11/2012 002522 KOEGEN EDWARDS LLP 2131 001.013.015.515 PROFESSIONAL SVCS: GENERAL 76.40 Total : 76.40 25946 5/11/2012 003011 MANPOWER 8004199 001.018.016.516 STAFFING SERVICE: HR 1,396.82 Total : 1,396.82 25947 5/11/2012 002221 MAY, MARY EXPENSES 001.018.016.516 BLOOMSDAY REIMBURSEMENT 35.00 Total : 35.00 25948 5/11/2012 002259 MENKE JACKSON BEYER EHILS 439 001.013.015.515 PROF SVCS: HOLLYWOOD EROTIC 1,542.44 470 001.013.015.515 AT &T MOBILE TAX REFUND 87.50 511 001.013.015.515 SPOKANE VALLEY/MONTGOMERY 95.96 Total : 1,725.90 25949 5/11/2012 002203 NAPA AUTO PARTS 704969 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 12.37 Total : 12.37 25950 5/11/2012 001035 NETWORK DESIGN & MANAGEMENT 3332 001.090.000.518 SYSTEM MONTHLY MAINTENANCE 5,450.00 Total : 5,450.00 25951 5/11/2012 000239 NORTHWEST BUSINESS STAMP INC. 86917 001.018.016.516 PICTURE ID BADGES 16.85 Total : 16.85 25952 5/11/2012 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 604949792001 001.076.305.575 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CP 138.33 605715548001 001.076.000.576 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CP 42.91 606034915001 001.058.050.558 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CD 224.19 606531650001 001.090.000.519 OFFICE SUPPLIES: BING 10.47 Page: 3 vchlist Voucher List Page: 4 05/1112012 12:25:28PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund /Dept Description /Account Amount 25952 5/11/2012 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. (Continued) 606854958001 001.076.000.576 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CP 77.92 606855015001 001.076.301.574 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CP 22.79 607400119001 001.032.000.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 34.88 Total : 551.49 25953 5/11/2012 000307 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER MARCH 2012 001.016.000.586 STATE REMITTANCE 60,413.22 Total : 60,413.22 25954 5/11/2012 000058 OMA A500163 001.018.016.516 PHYSICAL EXAMS: NEW EMPLOYE 325.00 Total : 325.00 25955 5/7712012 000881 OXARC R126449 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 88.05 Total : 88.05 25956 5/11/2012 003020 PACE MAY 2012 001.077.000.511 2012 PACE AWARDS REGISTRATIC 25.00 Total : 25.00 25957 5/11/2012 002294 PATRIOT DETECTION, LLC 4316 101.042.000.542 PREFORMED INDUCTIVE LOOPS- 6,942.80 Total : 6,942.80 25958 5/11/2012 000019 PURRFECT LOGOS, INC. 29273 303.303.115.595 PROJECT SIGN 48.92 29287 303.303.115.595 PROJECT SIGN 52.18 Total : 101.10 25959 5/11/2012 000235 SECURE SHRED 78769 001.090.000.518 SHREDDING CHARGES 168.00 Total : 168.00 25960 5/11/2012 002531 SIX ROBBLEES INC 5- 633462 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 42.63 5- 633462 -1 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 19.26 Total : 61.89 25961 5/77/2012 002815 SPOKANE CO COMMUNITY SERVICES 14500316 001.090.000.566 1 ST QTR 2012: EXCISE & LIQUOR 4,728.67 Total : 4,728.67 25962 5/11/2012 000308 SPOKANE CO PROSECUTING AlTY MARCH 2012 001.016.000.586 CRIME VICTIMS COMPENSATION F 918.05 Total : 918.05 Page: 4 vchlist Voucher List Page: 5 05/11/2012 12:25:28PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund /Dept Description /Account Amount 25963 511'112012 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 51501139 101.042.000.542 APRIL 2012: WORK CREW 6,048.35 Total : 6,048.35 25964 5/11/2012 002835 SPOKANE COURIER SERVICES LLC 2421 001.011.000.511 BROADCASTING SVCS. 80.00 Total : 80.00 25965 5/11/2012 002540 SPOKANE HOUSE OF HOSE INC. 205062 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 49.31 Total : 49.31 25966 5/11/2012 000093 SPOKESMAN - REVIEW 308992 001.013.000.513 ADVERTISEMENT: ACCT #42365 1,580.20 Total : 1,580.20 25967 5/11/2012 003030 TOPSA PIZZA MAY 2012 001.000.000.319 GAMBLING TAX RETURN REFUND 28.75 Total : 28.75 25968 5/11/2012 000717 TRANSPO GROUP, INC. 14500 303.303.061.595 PINES ITS DESIGN CONSULTANT 33,069.82 Total : 33,069.82 25969 5/11/2012 002597 TWISTED PAIR ENTERPRIZES L.L.0 3302012 001.011.000.511 BROADCASTING COUNCIL MTGSP 1,630.50 Total : 1,630.50 25970 5/11/2012 000087 VERIZON WIRELESS 1076237269 101.042.000.542 APRIL 2012- VERIZON CELL PHONI 977.85 6724236982 101.042.000.542 APRIL 2012 — WIRELESS DATA CARI 358.84 Total : 1,336.69 25971 5/11/2012 000140 WAL7S MAILING SERVICE 32733 303.303A 15.595 SPRAGUE RECONSTRUCTION PR( 1,278.88 Total : 1,278.88 25972 5/11/2012 000980 WESTERN SYSTEMS 21929 303.303.115.595 TS2 -TYPE 1 CABINET W/ PLUGINS 17,364.19 21930 303.303.115.595 TS2-TYPE 1 CABINET W/ PLUGINS 17,364.19 Total : 34,728.38 25973 5/11/2012 002839 WIND WIRELESS INC. 73993 101.042.000.542 WIRELESS TE LEPH 0 N Ell NTE REW 84.95 Total : 84.95 504120023 5/4/2012 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER APRIL 2012 001.016.000.539 SPOKANE COUNTY SERVICES 207,856.17 Total : 207,856.17 .Page: 5 vchlist Voucher List Page: 6 05/11/2012 12:25:28PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 504120120 5/4/2012 002244 AOT PUBLIC SAFETY CORPORATION SPKVLY -28 54 Vouchers for bank code: apbank 54 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 Fund /Dept Description/Account 001.016.000.521 CRY WOLF CHARGESWARCH 201: Total : Bank total : Total vouchers : Amount 3,190.93 3,190.93 555,673.17 5�5;fi73:1'7`` 5CO . o z Page: 6 vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 0511712012 10:24:15AM Spokane Valley Bank code., apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice FundlDept Description/Account Amount 26000 5/17/2012 000921 ATO Z RENTALS 88527 -1 101.042.000.542 TRENCHER COMPACT RENTAL 173.96 Total : 173.96 26001 5/17/2012 001816 BENTHIN & ASSOCIATES 1880 101.042.000.542 APPLEWAY MONUMENTS 2,439.50 Total : 2,439.50 26002 5/17/2012 000796 BUDINGER & ASSOC INC H12089 -1 402.402.000.538 512 N PINES DRAINAGE IMPROVEI 6,670.65 M12161-1 101.042.000.542 APPLEWAY-ARGONNE TO UNIVER 5,259.68 M12166 -1 101.042.000.542 UNIVERSITY RD 4TH -6TH 447.53 Total : 12,377.86 26003 5/1712012 000322 CENTURYLINK MAY 2012 001.076.302.576 TERRACE VIEW POOL 115.14 Total : 115.14 26004 5/172012 000835 CERIUM NETWORKS LLC 026669 001.090.000.518 HARDWARE CONTRACT 9,807.35 Total : 9,807.35 26005 5117/2012 000571 CODE PUBLISHING CO 40732 001.013.000.513 MUNICIPAL CODE UPDATE 170.82 Total: 170.82 26006 5/17/2012 001888 COMCAST MAY 2012 001.090.000.518 HIGH SPEED INTERNET: CITY HAL 115.95 TofiaI: 115.95 26007 5/17/2012 000686 DEPT OF LICENSING 0036377 402.402.000.538 ENGINEERING LICENSE FOR ART. 76.00 Total : 76.00 26008 5/17/2012 002920 DIRECTV, INC 17722934435 101.042.000.543 MAY 2012 CABLE SERVICES: MAIN 34.99 Total : 34.99 26009 5/17/2012 002507 FASTENERS, INC S3323658.001 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 324.21 Total: 324.21 26010 5/17/2012 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 37898 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 92.65 Total : 92.65 26011 5/17/2012 000917 GRAYBAR 02158166 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR UNIVERSITY PROJ 15.07 Page: 1 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 05/17/2012 10:24:15AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description /Account Amount 26011 5/17/2012 000917 000917 GRAYBAR (Continued) Total: 15.07 26012 5/17/2012 000002 H & H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. April 2012 001.058.057.559 COPIER COST 2,575.59 Total : 2,575.59 26013 5/17/2012 003037 H2 PRE -CAST CONCRETE 113336 101.042.000.542 UNIVERSITY & 8TH AVE WORK: SU 10,706.95 Total : 10,706.95 26014 5/17/2012 001112 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS 02151745 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 24.43 Total : 24.43 26015 5/17/2012 001728 HP FINANCIAL SERVICES CO .TUNE 2012 001.090.000.548 JUNE 2012: LEASE PAYMENTS 2,172.94 Total : 2,172.94 26016 5/17/2012 003011 MANPOWER 8004232 001.018.016.516 STAFFING SERVICE: HR 426.07 Total : 426.07 26017 5/17/2012 000258 MICROFLEX INC. 00020617 001.090.000.518 TAXTOOLS SOFTWARE RENTAL: A 343.83 Total : 343.83 26018 5/17/2012 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 607400011001 001.032.000.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 6.95 607763129001 001.032.000.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 200.36 Total : 207.31 26019 5/17/2012 000307 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER April 2012 001.016.000.586 STATE REMITTANCE 54,269.87 Total : 54,269.87 26020 5/17/2012 002844 ONE CALL CONCEPTS, INC 1204303 001.058.050.558 LOCATOR TICKET MGMT SYSTEM 73.30 Total : 73.30 26021 5/17/2012 002243 ORBITCOM 00565005 001.090.000.518 ETHERNET: MAY 2012 590.00 Total: 590.00 26022 5/17/2012 000881 OXARC SST9553 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 100.55 Total : 100.55 26023 5/17/2012 001089 POE ASPHALT PAVING, INC. APRIL 2012 101.042.000.542 2012 STREET AND STORMWATER 837,914.47 Total : 837,914.47 Page: 2 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 05/17/2012 10.24:15AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description /Account Amount 26024 5/17/2012 003033 PRICE, TERRA CRYWOLF: 3564027911 001.000.000.342 CRYWOLF REFUND: PERMIT #V43! 25.00 Total : 25.00 26025 5/17/2012 000675 RAMAX PRINTING & AWARDS 22739 001.013.000.513 PRINTING OF NAME TAG 15.54 Total : 15.54 26026 5/17/2012 002288 SARGENT ENGINEERS INC. 27677 303.303.157.541 SULLIVAN BRIDGE TEMP REPAIRS 709.94 27677 101.042.000.542 SULLIVAN BRIDGE TEMP REPAIRS 474.99 Total : 1,184.93 26027 5/17/2012 000318 SHAMROCK MANUFACTURING 113 101.042.000.542 COLD MIX: PW 1,063.09 Total : 1,063 -09 26028 5/17/2012 002957 SHERWIN WILIAMS PAINT CRYWOLF:101509714 001.000.000.342 CRYWOLF REFUND: PERMIT#V37• 165.00 Total : 165.00 26029 5/17/2012 000779 SOUTHARD, BRAD APRIL 2012 101.042.000.542 2012 DEAD ANIMAL REMOVAL 440.00 Total : 440.00 26030 5/17/2012 001140 SPECIAL ASPHALT PRODUCTS INVC057571 101.042.000.542 SAP PREMIER: PW 7,652.48 Total: 7,652.48 26031 5/17/2012 000172 SPOKANE CO ENGINEER VLY1204 101.042.000.542 COUNTY SERVICES 39,307.16 Total : 39,307.16 26032 5/17/2012 000308 SPOKANE CO PROSECUTING ATTY APRIL 2012 001.016.000.586 CRIME VICTIMS COMPENSATION F 790.15 Total : 790.15 26033 5/17/2012 003034 STAUDINGER, DARCY & KENNETH CRYWOLF: 3564887006 001.000.000.342 CRYWOLF REFUND: PERMIT #V441 25.00 Total : 25.00 26034 5/17/2012 000335 TIRE -RAMA 8080017064 101.042.000.542 40210D: OUL CHANGE & WIPER BL 55.46 Total : 55.46 26035 5/17/2012 003035 TONEY, LOREN CRYWOLF: 3564388478 001.000.000.342 CRYWOLF REFUND: PERMIT #V43! 25.00 Total : 25.00 26036 5/1712012 003036 VELDRAN, ALICE CRYWOLF: 3564026614 001.000.000.342 CRYWOLF REFUND: PERMIT #V43! 25.00 Page: 3 vchlist Voucher List Page_ 4 0511712012 10 :24 :15AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund /Dept Description/Account Amount 26036 5/17/2012 003036 003036 VELDRAN, ALICE (Continued) Total : 25.00 26037 5/17/2012 003032 WASHINGTON APPRAISAL SERVICES 7037 310.000.161.594 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDf 8,962.34 Total : 8,962.34 26038 5117/2012 000676 WEST 824907447 001.013.015.515 SUBSCRIPTION: LEGAL 696.29 Total : 696.29 26039 5/17/2042 003002 XO COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES 0250688520 001.090.000.518 MAY 2012: INTERNETIDATA LINES 396.72 Total : 396.72 26040 5/17/2042 001885 ZAYO BANDWIDTH LLC May 2012 001.090.000.518 MAY 2012: DARK FIBER LEASE 242.39 Total : 242.39 41 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total : 996,220.36 41 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 996,220.36 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 I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: 4 vchlist 5/17/2012 000321 GREATER SPOKANE INC 84574 Voucher List 1ST QTR 2012 GRANT REIMBURSE 10,375.00 Page: 1 05/17/2012 1:39:OOPM Spokane Valley Total : 10,375.00 26045 Bank code: apbank 001.076.300.576 UTILITIES: PARKS 166.00 Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund /Dept Description /Account Amount 26041 5/17/2012 003038 A& M CONSTRUCTION Permit Refund 001.237.10.94 BUILDING PERMIT REFUND 315.00 Total : 256.00 26046 5/17/2012 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO April 2012 Total : 315.00 26042 5/17/2012 000334 ARGUS JANITORIAL LLC INVO07310 001.016.000.521 JANITORIAL SVCS: APRIL 2012 2,165.23 26047 5/77/2012 000895 NEWBILL, BRANDON Expenses 001.076.305.575 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 2,165.23 26043 5/17/2012 000030 AVISTA Aoril 2012 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES: PW MASTERAVISTA 25 330.05 Total : 25,330.05 26044 5/17/2012 000321 GREATER SPOKANE INC 84574 001.090.000.550 1ST QTR 2012 GRANT REIMBURSE 10,375.00 Total : 10,375.00 26045 5/17/2012 000388 IRVIN WATER DIST. #6 April 2012 001.076.300.576 UTILITIES: PARKS 166.00 April 2012 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES: PW 45.00 April 2012 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES: PW 45.00 Total : 256.00 26046 5/17/2012 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO April 2012 001.076.302.576 UTILITIES: PARKS 1,505.14 Total : 1,505.14 26047 5/77/2012 000895 NEWBILL, BRANDON Expenses 001.076.305.575 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 448.09 Total : 448.09 26048 5/17/2012 001860 PLATT 1477858 001.076.305.575 SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE 99.38 1532586 001.076.305.575 SUPPLIES AT CENTERPLACE 77,18 Total : 17656 26049 5/17/2012 000709 SENSKE LAWN & TREE CARE INC. 4216541 001.076.300.576 CONTRACT MAINT: APRIL 2012 54,123.81 Total: 54,123.81 26050 5/17/2012 000935 SERVICE PAPER CO 110670158 001.076.305.575 RESTROOM SUPPLIES AT CENTEF 320.56 Total : 320.56 26051 5/17/2012 001083 STANDARD PLBG HEATING CONTROLS 30947 001.076.305.575 REPLACED PULLEY AND INSTALL 1 197.83 30996 001.076.305.575 PLUMBING REPAIR AT CENTERPU 96.74 Total : 294.57 Page: 1 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 05/17/2012 1:39:OOPM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor 11 Vouchers for bank code: apbank 11 Vouchers in this report 1, 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 I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Mayor Council Member uate Date Invoice Fu nd /Dept Description /Account Bank total Total vouchers : Amount 95,310.01 95,310.01 Page: 2 vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 05/17/2012 2:57:13PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher pate Vendor 26052 5/17/2012 002807 BOUTEN CONSTRUCTION CO. 1 Vouchers for bank code: apbank 1 Vouchers in this report 1, 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 I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Mayor Date Council Member Date Invoice FundlDept Description/Account Amount MAY 2012 309.309.079.594 SHORTAGE OF PAY APP # 5 23.81 Total : 23.81 Bank total : 23.81 Total vouchers: 23.81 Page: 1 vchlist Voucher List page: 1 05/18/2012 8:52:10AM Spokane Valley Sankcode: Voucher apbank Date Vendor Invoice 3928 5/18/2012 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A PLAN Ben43887 3929 5/18/2012 000682 EFTPS Ben43889 3930 5/18/2012 000145 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS, 457 PLf Ben43891 3931 5/18/2012 000162 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A EXEC Pl Ben43893 001,231.18.00 4 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 7,586.74 4 Vouchers in this report 1, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the mateda[s 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 FundlDept Description/Account Amount 001.231.14.00 401A: Payment 23,413.00 Total : 23,413.00 001231.11.00 FEDERALTAXES: Payment 31,451.00 Total: 31,451.00 001,231.18.00 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION: Payr 7,586.74 Total : 7,586.74 001.231.14.00 401 EXEC PLAN: Payment 1,052.33 Total : 1,052.33 Bank total : 63,503.07 Total vouchers : 63,503.07 Page: 1 vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 05/21/2012 12:04:10PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor 26053 5/21/2012 000307 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER 1 Vouchers for bank code: apbank 1 Vouchers in this report f, 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 I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Mayor Council Member Date Date ul= Invoice FundlDept Description /Account April 2012 001.096.000.586 STATE REMITTANCE Total : Bank total : Total vouchers: Amount 54,260.87 54,260.87 54,260.87 54,260.87 Page: 1 vchlist 5/25/2012 Voucher List Page: 1 05/25/2012 7:59:29AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Total Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description /Account Amount 26055 5/25/2012 002890 ALTUS INDUSTRIES INC Z- 110476 303.303.115.595 ALTUS INDUSTRIES QUOTE # 2101 24,135.75 K742270 001.090.000.518 Total: 24,135.75 26056 5/25/2012 000271 BAINBRIDGE, CHRISTINE EXPENSES 001.013.000.513 REIMBURSEMENT FOR 2012 IIMC I 8289 Total : 26057 5/25/2012 000168 BLACK BOX NETWORK SVC SPO- 029233 001.076.305.575 SERVICE CALL Total 26058 5/25/2012 000101 CDW -G K429633 001.090.000.518 COMPUTER HARDWARE K742270 001.090.000.518 COMPUTER SOFTWARE/HARDWAI Total 26059 5/25/2012 000322 CENTURYLINK MAY 2012 001.076.302.576 MAY 2012: PHONE SERVICE Total 26060 5/25/2012 003041 DANIEL, CAROLANN CRYWOLF: 3566082819 001.000.000.342 CRYWOLF REFUND: PERMIT# V44 Total 26061 5/25/2012 000912 DEX MEDIA WEST MAY 2012 001.076.305.575 ADVERTISING: CP MAY 2012 001.076.304.575 ADVERTISING: SENIOR CENTER Total: 26062 5/25/2012 002568 GRANICUS INC 33261 001.011.000.511 BROADCASTING SERVICES 35570 001.011,000.511 BROADCASTING SERVICES Total: 26063 5/25/2012 000265 JACKSON, MIKE JUNE 2012 001.013.000.513 MONTHLY AUTO ALLOWANCE Total: 26064 5/25/2012 003011 MANPOWER 8004269 001.018.016.516 STAFFING SERVICE: HR Total 26065 5/25/2012 000696 MITEL BUSINESS SYSTEM, INC 92947185 001.076.305.575 MITEL 5310 1 CONFERENCE MOD Total 26066 5/25/2012 000239 NORTHWEST BUSINESS STAMP INC. 85900 001.018.016.516 PICTURE ID BADGES 82.89 86.42 86.42 246.05 715.68 961.73 376.22 376.22 25.00 25.00 158.90 39.55 198.45 695.68 719.59 1,415.27 300.00 300.00 456.82 456.82 89.68 89.68 16.85 Page: 1 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 05/25/2012 7:59:29AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description /Account Amount 26066 5/25/2012 000239 NORTHWEST BUSINESS STAMP INC. (Continued) 86987 001.018.016.516 NAME BADGE 28.26 87048 001.018.016,516 NAME BADGES 28.26 Total : 73.37 26067 5/25/2012 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 607849492001 001.076.305.575 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CP 215.22 609604158009 001.076.000.576 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CP 37.62 609604264001 001.076.301,574 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CP 7.60 Total : 260.44 26068 5/25/2012 009604 PACIFIC NW PAPER 130920 001.090.000,519 COPY PAPER 193.49 Total : 193.49 26069 5/25/2012 002424 PITNEY BOWES GLOBAL 1428301 -MY12 001.090.000.518 MAY 2012: POSTAGE METER RENT 275.00 Total : 275.00 26070 5/25/2012 002288 SARGENT ENGINEERS INC. 27804 101.042.000.542 ESTIMATE FOR BRIDGE #4507 153.51 Total : 153.51 26071 5/25/2012 000090 SPOKANE CO INFO SYSTEMS 50308233 001.018.013.513 COUNTY IT SUPPORT 17,193.99 Total : 17,193.99 26072 5/25/2012 001100 SPOKANE CO SHERIFF'S OFFICE April 2012 001.016.000.598 STICKAMN KNOWS CAMPAIGN 812.43 May 2012 001.016.000,598 STICKMAN KNOWS CAMPAIGN 780,06 Total : 1,592.49 26073 5/25/2012 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 51501126 001.016.000.523 APRIL 2012 HOUSING INVOICE 97,739.00 Total : 97,739.00 26074 5/25/2012 000311 SPRINT 959698810 -054 001.058.057.559 GPS PHONE 71.21 Total : 71.21 26075 5/25/2012 003040 SZILASI, TERRY CRYWOLF: 3565545884 001.000.000.342 CRYWOLF REFUND: PERMIT #V44: 25.00 Total : 25.00 26076 5/25/2012 000361 WSDOT APRIL 2012 303.303.065.333 SULLIVAN SPRAGUE INTERSECTIC 6,262.95 Total : 6,262.95 Page: 2 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 05/25/2012 7:59:29AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor 22 Vouchers for bank code: apbank 22 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 Bank total : 151,968.68 Total vouchers: 151,968.68 Page: 3 Vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 05/25/2012 11:08:28AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 26077 5/25/2092 000030 AVISTA April 2012 001.076.300.576 UTILITIES: PARKS MASTERAVISTA 7,771.66 Total : 7,771.66 26078 5/25/2012 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 9327883 001.076.305.575 LINEN SUPPLYAND SERVICE FOR 116.78 9329867 001.076.305.575 LINEN SUPPLYAND SERVICE FOR 230.70 S0031350 001.076.305.575 LINEN SUPPLYAND SERVICE FOR 202.76 S0031467 001.076.305.575 LINEN SUPPLYAND SERVICE FOR 194.39 S0031508 001.076,305.575 LINEN SUPPLYAND SERVICE FOR 153.76 S0031537 001.076.305.575 LINEN SUPPLYAND SERVICE FOR 64.51 S0031540 001.076.305.575 LINEN SUPPLYAND SERVICE FOR 25.00 S0032017 001.076.305.575 LINEN SUPPLYAND SERVICE FOR 408.45 Total : 1,396.35 26079 5/25/2012 001169 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY May 2012 001.058.056.558 PETTY CASH: 7788,89,90,91 14.45 May 2012 001.076.305.575 PETTY CASH PARKS: 8960,61,62,6 20.11 Total : 34.56 26080 5/25/2012 000839 GENERAL FIRE EQUIP CO 0023550 001.076.305.575 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SERVICE: CE 135.88 Total : 135.88 26081 5/25/2012 002682 HAFNER, CHARLES Expenses 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 86.58 Total : 86.58 26082 5/25/2012 002196 HOLTEN, MELISSA Expenses 001.018.014.514 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 16.65 Total : 16.65 26083 5/25/2012 000741 HONEY BUCKETS 1- 457937 001.076.300.576 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: PARKS 154.00 Total : 154.44 26084 5/25/2012 002607 HUB SPORTS CENTER May 2012 105.105.000.557 LODGING TAX 2012 GRANT REIMB 8,827.34 Total: 8,827.34 26085 5/25/2012 001635 ISS FACILITYIEVENT SERVICES 328631 001.076.305.575 EVENT SERVICES - APRIL 2012 144.03 333484 001.076.305.575 EVENT SERVICES - APRIL 2012 206.02 Total : 350.05 26086 5/25/2012 001684 MARKETING SOLUTIONS NW CP 5152012A -Prod 001.076.305.575 ADVERTISING: CP PLANNINGIPRO 250.00 Page: 1 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 05/2512012 11:08:28AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund /Dept Description/Account Amount 26086 512512012 001684 MARKETING SOLUTIONS NW (Continued) Cp 5152012 -Media 001.076,305.575 ADVERTISING, CP MEDIA 1,852.00 Total : 2,102.00 26087 5/25/2012 000788 MEDIA JOE, INC. 3386 001.076305.575 SERVICE CALL ON TOUCHPANEL 163.05 Total : 163.05 26088 5/25/2012 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO 17930875 101.042.000.542 FINAL BILL FOR OLD MA1NT FACILI 206.63 Total : 206.63 26089 5/25/2012 001844 NIMRI, RABA Expenses 001.018.014.514 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 16.54 Total : 16.54 26090 5/25/2012 000193 NORTHWEST CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC June 2012 001.090.000.518 CITY HALL RENT 39,566.35 Total : 39,566.35 26091 5/25/2012 001860 PLATT 1623655 001.076.305.575 SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE 41.00 1637511 001.076.305.575 SUPPLIES AT CENTERPLACE 101.61 Total : 142.61 26092 5121 512012 000064 SCHIMMELS, GARY Expenses 001.011,000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 95.25 Total : 95.25 26093 5/25/2012 000709 SENSKE LAWN &TREE CARE INC. 4524988 101.042.000.542 2012 EMERGENCY TRAFFIC CONT 542.71 4667944 001.016.000.521 CONTRACT MAINT: APRIL 2012 PR 588.02 Total : 1,130.73 26094 5/25/2012 001970 STADIUM SPORTS 35939 001.076.301.574 SHIRTS FOR SUMMER DAY CAMP : 538.72 35940 001.076.301.574 SHIRTS FOR SUMMER CAMP 933.46 Total : 1,472.18 26095 5/25/2012 000385 SUN RENTAL CENTER 173200 001.076.305.575 LINEN NAPKIN RENTAL 57.39 Total : 57.39 26096 5/25/2012 001206 SWANSON'S REFRIGERATION &, RESTA 81632 001.076.305.575 DISHWASHER REPAIR - CP 77.14 Total : 77.14 26097 5/25/2012 002306 TERRELL, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, MIC 777 310.000.164.594 COSV SIGN DEVELOPMENT 1,811.10 Page: 2 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 05/2512012 11:08:28AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 26097 5/25/2012 002306 TERRELL, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, MIC (Continued) 785 309.309.079.594 GREENACRES PARK PHASE I PER 81.25 Total : 1,892.35 26098 5/25/2012 001472 TESTAMERICA LAB 59004668 001.076.300.576 ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING: PARK: 27.00 Total: 27.00 26099 5/25/2012 001911 THE GLOVER MANSION CP467 001.076.305.575 EVENT SERVICES AT CENTERPLA( 985.88 CP489 001.076305.575 EVENT SERVICES AT CENTERPLA( 530.46 CP509 001.076.305.575 EVENT SERVICES AT CENTERPLA( 140.22 CP535 001.076.305.575 EVENT SERVICES AT CENTERPLA( 195.00 CP539 001.076.305.575 EVENT SERVICES AT CENTERPLA( 152.18 Total: 1,203.74 26100 5/25/2012 001409 WORLD CLASS COMMUNICATIONS 120501201 001.076.305.575 ANSWERING SVC. CENTERPLACE 22.00 Total : 22.00 26101 5/25/2012 003042 ZURCHER, JULIA Expenses 001.018.013.513 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 6.66 Total : 6.66 25 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total : 66,954.69 25 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 66,954.69 Page: 3 Vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 0513112012 9:49:10AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 26102 5/31/2012 000921 ATO Z RENTALS 89297 -1 26103 26104 26105 26106 26107 26108 26109 26110 5/31/2012 000648 ABADAN 171118 171718 5/31/2012 002931 ALL WESTERN INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY 21006 5/31/2012 002562 CD'A METALS 5/31/2012 003016 CRESCENT ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO 5/31/2012 000425 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS 5/31/2012 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 5/31/2012 002075 ENVIROTECH SERVICES 5/31/2012 001926 FARR, SARAH 464443 122 -001522 -01 122 - 601845-01 122 - 602085-00 122 - 602305-00 122- 602467 -00 59720 RE- 313- ATB20515049 RE- 313- ATB20515053 RE- 313- ATB20515062 Re- 313- ATB20515106 CD201212593 CD201212594 C D201212595 CD201212596 C D201212597 EXPENSES Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 101,042.000.542 TRENCHER COMPACT RENTAL 97.40 Total : 97,40 311.000.162.541 2012 STREET ORES. PROJECT PH, 409.58 303.303.160.595 S. EVERGREEN RD RECONSTRUC 687.53 Total : 1,097 -11 101.000.000,542 SUPPLIES 208.70 Total : 208.70 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 125.11 Total: 125.11 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR UNIVERSITY PROJ 3,792.52 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR UNIVERSITY PROJ 157.12 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR UNIVERSITY PROJ 25.29 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR UNIVERSITY PROJ 239.25 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR UNIVERSITY PROJ 224.19 Total : 4,438.37 101.042.000.542 TOWER RENTAL: PW 200.00 Total : 200.00 101.042.000.542 STATE ROUTE ROADWAY MAINT 8,965.15 101.042.000.542 SIGNAL & ILLUMINATION MAIN 8,926.68 101.042.000.542 INTELLIGENT TRAFFIC SYSTEMS ; 68.86 303.303.155.595 SULLIVAN BRIDGE REPLACEMEN7 80.56 Total : 18,041.25 101.000.000.542 ICE SLICER: PW 5,198.52 101.000.000.542 ICE SLICER: PW 4,870.96 101.000.000.542 ICE SLICER: PW 5,002.62 101.000.000.542 ICE SLICER: PW 4,767.54 101.000.000.542 ICE SLICER: PW 5,134.27 Total : 24,973.91 001.018.014.514 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 104.34 Page: 1 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 05/31/2012 9:49:10AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept DescriptionlAccount Amount 26110 5/31/2012 001926 001926 FARR, SARAH (Continued) Total : 104.34 26111 5/31/2012 001232 FASTENAL CO IDLEW82601 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES.PW 14.78 IDLEW82609 101.000,000.542 SUPPLIES:PW 6.38 Total: 21.16 26112 5/31/2012 002507 FASTENERS, INC S3325492.001 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 39.07 Total : 39.07 26113 5/31/2012 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 37909 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 90.10 37939 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 11475 37940 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 68.85 37941 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 81.60 37942 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 69.70 37943 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 90.95 37944 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 88.40 Tota 1 : 604.35 26114 5/31/2012 000609 GENDRONS CO 2144 001.032.000.543 SUPPLIES: PW 248.43 Total : 248.43 26115 5/31/2012 000007 GRAINGER 9829355537 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 1,436.32 Total : 1,436.32 26116 5/31/2012 000917 GRAYBAR 960290757 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR UNIVERSITY PROJ 4.43 960411807 402.402.000.538 STORMWATER SUPPLIES 20.45 960465068 402.402.000.538 STORMWATER SUPPLIES 121.66 Total : 146.54 26117 5/31/2012 001944 LANCER LTD 0427332 001.032.000.543 BUSINESS CARDS: PW 36.14 Total : 36.14 26118 5/31/2012 000239 NORTHWEST BUSINESS STAMP INC. 87132 001.018.016.516 NAME BADGE 28.26 Total: 28.26 26119 5/31/2012 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 610228625001 001.032.000,543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 9.34 610249621001 001.032.000.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 4.17 Page: 2 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 05/31/2012 9:49:10AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund /Dept Description/Account Amount 26119 5/31/2012 000652 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. (Continued) Total . 13.51 26120 5/31/2012 000881 OXARC SSU1452 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 654.46 Total : 654.46 26121 5/31/2012 002294 PATRIOT DETECTION, LLC 4321 101.042.000.542 VEHICLE DETECTION LOOPS - UNI 3,198.44 Total : 3,198.44 26122 5/31/2012 002531 SIX ROBBLEES INC 5- 636472 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 15.62 Total : 15.62 26123 5/31/2012 001140 SPECIAL ASPHALT PRODUCTS INVC057660 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 217.40 Total : 217.40 26124 5/31/2012 001217 THOMAS, DEAF! & HOSKINS INC. 30162 303.303.154.595 TOPOGRAPHIC & BOUNDARY SUR 2,276.98 Total : 2,276.98 26125 5/31/2012 002254 TOWEY, TOM EXPENSES 001.011.000.511 MAY 2012'S MILEAGE 132.06 Total : 132.06 26126 5/31/2012 000980 WESTERN SYSTEMS 22038 303,303.115.595 SIEMENS CONTROLLERAND MMU 6,959.26 Total : 6,959.26 529120029 5/29/2012 000497 BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON MAY 2012 204.204.000.592 2003 IT GO ADMIN FEE 188,811.25 Total: 188,811.25 26 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total : 254,125.44 26 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 254,125.44 Page: 3 vchlist Voucher list Page: 1 05/31/2012 1:24:50PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund /Dept Description/Account Amount 26127 5/31/2012 001606 BANNER BANK 0618 001.011.000.511 APRIL 2012: 0618 455.00 4064 001.058.056.558 APRIL2012:4064 2,951.35 4375 001.011.000.511 APRIL2012:4375 325.00 4458 001.011.000.511 APRIL 2012: 4458 1,077.98 8861 001.076.305.575 APRIL2012:8861 792.75 9048 101.042.000.542 APRIL 2012: 9048 2 379.19 Page: 1 Total : 7,981.27 26128 5/31/2012 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION #19 May 2012 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES: PW 265.33 Total : 265.33 26129 5/31/2012 001880 CROWN WEST REALTY LLC June 2012 101.042.000.543 MAINTENANCE CHARGES: MAINT 1 197.27 Total : 197.27 26130 5/31/2012 000246 EAST SPOKANE WATER DIST #1 May 2012 101.042.000.542 WATER CHARGES: PW 367.40 Total : 367.40 26131 5/31/2012 000658 SPOKANE CO SUPERIOR COURT May 29 2012 001.013.015.515 FILE COMPLAINT: 3550.187 230.00 Total : 230.00 26132 5/31/2012 000658 SPOKANE CO SUPERIOR COURT May 29 2012 001.013.015.515 FILE COMPLAINT: 3550.186 230.00 Total : 230.00 26133 5/31/2012 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 1492372 - 2681 -1 101.042.000.543 WASTE MGMT: MAINTENANCE FAC 178.12 Total : 178.12 7 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total : 9,449.39 7 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 9,449.39 Page: 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 06 -12 -2012 Department Director Approval : ❑ 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 31, 2012 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Budget/Financial impacts: Employees Council Total Gross: $ 249,252.22 $ 5,475.00 $254,727.22 Benefits: $ 134,252.34 $ 8,494.30 $142,746.64 Total payroll $ 383,504.56 $ 13,969.30 $397,473.86 STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri DRAFT MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STUDY SESSION FORMAT Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley, Washington May 15, 2012 Attendance: 6:00 p.m. Councilmembers Staff Tom Towey, Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager Gary Schimmels, Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, City Attorney Dean Grafos, Councilmember John Hohman, Community Development Dir. Brenda Grassel, Councilmember Mark Calhoun, Finance Director Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director Ben Wick, Councilmember Kelly Konkright, Deputy City Attorney Arne Woodard, Councilmember Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Towey called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and asked the City Clerk to call the roll. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll. All Councilmembers were present. ACTION ITEM: 1. Evergreen Road Construction Bid Award — Steve Worley It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to award the bid for the Evergreen Road Preservation Project #0160 to Shamrock Paving, Inc., in the amount of $1,503,303.67 and to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the construction contract. Senior Engineer Worley explained the background of the project as per his May 15, 2012 Request for Council Action form; he said the road work is included in the bid under Schedule A; that the waterline work which is paid by Vera is included under Schedule B, and that Schedule C is for the ITS (Intelligent Transportation System) plan. Mr. Worley said the project was advertised for bid on April 20, 2012, the bids were opened May 4, 2012 with nine bidders responding. Mr. Worley said Shamrock Paving is the apparent low bidder with a total bid of $1,503,303.67. Mayor Towey invited public comments; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed. None. Motion carried. NON - ACTION ITEMS: 2. Spokane Convention & Visitors Bureau Update — Cheryl Kilday Cheryl Kilday, Visit Spokane President and CEO introduced several of her key staff including Mr. Keith Backsen, Vice President and Director of Convention Sales. Ms. Kilday explained that their mission statement is to "create economic growth to the Spokane Region by effectively marketing Spokane and Spokane County as a preferred convention and visitor's destination;" and paraphrased, she said this means their job is to direct visitors to cash registers as that brings economic benefit to the region. Mayor Towey explained that when he first saw the mission statement, as well as that first slide, he noted it obviously speaks of Spokane, but that it has nothing to do with Spokane Valley; and he said the omission is glaring; and said he feels "Spokane Valley" could fit in there someplace. Mayor Towey said stating "Spokane Region" tells a different story; and said council realizes they are not just concentrating on Spokane, but it appears as if they are. Ms. Kilday said they are trying to connect to what visitors view as the region; she said many people come to Spokane and expect Coeur d'Alene to be part of that visit; or people may talk about going to Seattle but they intend to include Edmonds and Bellevue; she said the goal is to create a sense of a footprint, they need to pick a place to start that conversation, and she said that is why Spokane is the lead; she said what they are doing is announcing that Spokane is the regional Council Study Session Minutes 05 -15 -12 Page 1 of 11 Approved by Council: DRAFT brand; she said they are working to recognize the distinctive qualities of the various communities within the regional context, and direct visitors throughout that region without having a long list of distinctive places; and added that they also work to make Spokane Valley a presence, and said they will discuss that tonight as well. Mayor Towey said the word "region" has many implications, but in looking at the slide, all he sees is Spokane; and said he doesn't see them promoting the region, but does see them promoting Spokane; although he knows they do support the region; and he added that it would have been nice to have seen "Spokane Valley" on some of the PowerPoint slides. Councilmember Grassel stated that Ms. Kilday is explaining that when you create a marketing plan, that a brand identity must be first created, and that the brand is the Spokane Region; and said that people in marketing don't want to confuse the public with a lot of different names. Councilmember Grassel said when she looks at this slide, she sees a beautiful picture of Spokane Valley; and that the mission includes creating economic growth for the "Spokane Region." Councilmember Grassel gave the analogy of how people view the Tri- Cities, and that marketing materials simply call attention to the Tri Cities, but not necessarily to the three individual cities. Mayor Towey asked for an explanation of the branding of the Spokane Region, and Ms. Kilday said to a visitor, we want to be a destination, and that a destination has one name; she said very few places are a single identify or a single place; and she explained that their name is still the Spokane Regional Convention and Visitor's Bureau, but visitors don't understand what a Convention and Visitor's Bureau is, and referring to them as a CVB has no meaning. However, Ms. Kilday explained, when people search the Internet, they use words such as "visit" or "explore" or "destination" and therefore, they determined that the word "visit" was the most common word used when people do these types of searches; so organizations are now actually changing their names to align with the word "visit" as it more connects to the public; she said they want to find every way possible to direct people to Spokane Valley under that "Spokane" branding as that will get more people to come to and travel throughout the region, including Spokane Valley. Councilmember Hafner said he feels this is a matter of perception; that many elected officials work together collectively on various committees and boards and are aware of the regional concept; he said he feels they should be able to alleviate the perception of just Spokane; and said that Spokane Valley is the second largest city in the area and we are a destination, and said the literature should include that we are not just Spokane. Councilmember Hafner said he disagrees with Councilmember Grassel's analogy of the "Tri- Cities" as people realize that means three cities: Kennewick, Pasco, and Richland; and said perhaps some time in the future, people will think of Spokane and Spokane Valley as a common point, but that the only way that will occur, is if the literature shows that the City of Spokane Valley is involved; and added that in looking at all the literature Ms. Kilday provided, if he were a visitor to the area, he would not even know that the City of Spokane Valley exists. Councilmember Grafos said council appreciates what their organization does as a regional voice, but that from a marketing standpoint, it might be more effective to say "Spokane Regional Visitor's Guide, Encompassing the Cities of Spokane Valley, Spokane, Liberty Lake, etc. and the greater Spokane area with a market area of 500,000+ people;" and agreed that somewhere in the literature, Spokane Valley and the other partners should be identified. Ms. Kilday said that they do identify Spokane Valley in the literature, and she continued explaining what they do via her PowerPoint presentation, including explaining that they work with other organizations to help target visitors and distinguish themselves as a destination. Ms. Kilday said the tour groups really like Spokane Valley as the Valley Mall with its close proximity to hotels and golf courses, is a positive draw; and added that the goal is to find out what the customer wants, and then to guide them to those services; and said they support Valleyfest and the Museum. Councilmember Grassel stated that as part of the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee, many hoteliers have told her how much they appreciate Visit Spokane, and that they hope Spokane Valley will continue to use those lodging tax funds to help support Visit Spokane. Mayor Towey thanked them for their presentation and information, and for the work they do for the community. At 7:20 p.m., Mayor Towey called for a recess. The meeting was reconvened at 7:35 p.m. Council Study Session Minutes 05 -15 -12 Page 2 of 11 Approved by Council: DRAFT 3. Spokane Arts Council Review — Mike Stone, Dr. Harken Parks and Recreation Director Stone introduced Dr. Harken of the Spokane Valley Arts Council, who is here tonight to discuss a project of their Council. Dr. Harken introduced Brian Daniels, member of the Valley Arts Council, and Dr. Jerry McKellar, former dentist and the author of the "Working the Line" sculpture now at CenterPlace Regional Event Center. Dr. Harken said after they finished their last project, which was the Berry Picker by the late Nancy McLaughlin, and which project is also located at CenterPlace, they started looking for their next project, and while contemplating that project, they became aware of the City's Gateway project on Thierman and Appleway, to welcome people coming in from the freeway. Dr. Harken said he and others from the Arts Council looked at the area and eventually became aware of Dr. McKellar's piece "Dance of the Sun and Moon;" and said once that piece was presented to the Arts Council, the Council gave unanimous approval for the use of that piece. Dr. Harken said prior to presenting the piece to the Arts Council, he also discussed it with Director Stone. Dr. Harken said the project they envision would be part of the ten -year anniversary, but would not be ready for the Gateway project's completion. Dr. Harken said their idea was to bring this before Council for this Council's consideration, and if approved, to discuss the project with the engineers to make sure they get a footprint on the site at the right place; and said it is his understanding that the welcome sign would be placed so it could be seen from two streets at the tip o f the triangle area, and to put the arts council project right behind the sign, thereby not obscuring the sign yet showing off the sign and the sculpture. Dr. Harken said the piece "Dance of the Sun and Moon" currently exists in the Chicago area, and a life -sized version would be 16.5 feet high from the base up; that it would be placed on and affixed to a concrete pad with steel crib work underneath, thereby making it almost impossible to move. After Dr. McKellar explained more about the sculpture, and in response to council comments, said these sculptures generally do not attract vandalism; that the art usually brings a sense of civic pride to the community, that the piece doesn't have anything breakable and if someone were to use spray paint on the sculpture, they would have to use something to remove it and then possibly re -do the damaged part. Director Stone said this sight would also be highly visible with a lot of traffic and lights and the area would be an improved space with trees, landscaping and lighting, and Dr. Harken added that the piece should be well -lit, and that the lights are generally shown from the base up. Mr. Stone said staff can work with the Arts Council to make sure we have the proper base. Mayor Towey said he feels this piece will be something unique and would be recognizable for the Spokane Valley, and he extended his appreciation to the artist for his work. City Manager Jackson asked Dr. Harken if he is looking for a definite response from council tonight, or if this is something to consider; that we realize these pieces take in wide community support; that he doesn't know how Council feels about this and they might be ready now, but that he wanted to clarify with Dr. Harken if this is something the Arts Council wants this council to consider, or are they saying that this is the one the Arts Council has selected; and said he assumes based on tonight's discussion, that they might move forward with plans. Dr. Harken said in past discussions with various members of City Council and Parks and Recreation, was that the intent was that the Valley Arts Council are the experts on the arts; and that they bring this forward as a suggestion of what they would like to do; he said City Council can certainly turn down anything they wish. Dr. Harken said the Arts Council is not coming before council with options, as this is what they want to do and he wanted to present this to council to see how they respond; and added they are not asking for any funds. Dr. McKellar said people often times discuss controversial pieces, and to him, this is a noncontroversial piece and is a love story. Councilmember Grassel said she likes the theme of the passing and the coming and going and feels that would be a good relationship with that concept and the area in which to place the piece. In response to Mr. Jackson's statement about the goal for tonight, Dr. Harken said he would like to see a show of support for this, or let him know there is no support, or any other remarks; and said if this Council supports the project, their Arts Council will be moving on this and putting out a poster within three weeks. Dr. Harken mentioned he anticipates getting the piece done in 2013. Councilmember Woodard said he likes the sculpture. Mayor Towey thanked Drs. McKellar and Harken for their information tonight; and said he feels all the council has been impressed with tonight's presentation; he Council Study Session Minutes 05 -15 -12 Page 3 of 11 Approved by Council: DRAFT also extended thanks to the Arts Council for their efforts as well; and said if there are no objections, then Council is very supportive of this piece. There were no objections from council. 4. 2012 Street Preservation Proiects — Steve W Senior Engineer Worley explained that tonight's discussion will cover the status of the street preservation program which Council approved about a month ago. Mr. Worley said he wanted to make a few corrections to his Request for Council Action form wherein he said there was $2.8 million dollars that Council approved from the general fund; but said rather there was $2.045 in general fund money and there were other funds already in the fund 311 reserves, that were combined together to give the $2.8 million. Mr. Worley said council approved $2.8 million for street preservation projects this year; he explained that staff went to Council and Council adopted the Pavement Management Plan, and part of that included a table that showed all the preservation projects recommended for 2012; he said staff examined that table and with the approved $2.8 million for preservation projects this year, there was also about $1.1 million in the Poe Contract for street maintenance that was slated for pavement preservation projects; he said the city maintenance crews have been out with the Poe Contract starting on the projects that were on the 2012 list; he mentioned that the Appleway Project has now been completed, and that was part of the list for 2012. Mr. Worley said they took all the projects and broke them into different groups: projects identified to be done through the Poe Contract, which include some grind and overlay, or chip /seal or patching; and the remainder of the projects were split into two different bid packets. He said the Phase 1 bid on the second table is ready to go out to bid this Friday; that staff wanted to see how the bids come in; and said the engineer's estimate for those projects is just about $1.3 million; and said they want to see how the bids actually come in to see how close the estimates are, and said the hope is the estimate is high and that the bids come in low. Mr. Worley said they thought it would be good to split this up because it would allow them to monitor the current prices for this type of work and how many more projects could be completed with the approved funding; and said splitting this up also allows for more than one contractor to bid on some of the work for street preservation. Councilmember Hafner asked why all those projects are listed under the Poe Contract while the other projects have to go out to bid. Mr. Jackson explained what we have done through the budget process is appropriate a certain amount of money for projects such as grind and overlay, which also is preservation work; and as discussed earlier, as we construct the 2013 budget, if we want to pull those preservation funds out and put them at bid, that is something we can do; but within the scope of the Poe Contract, preservation work such as grind and overlay is an acceptable project and within the budget that council has adopted and is available for use with that contract. Mr. Jackson said as Mr. Worley mentioned, Appleway is completed and University is well on the way; and by having those funds available, we can act quicker to accomplish those projects. Councilmember Hafner asked if when the Poe Contract was approved, were the listed projects approved. Mr. Jackson explained that we did not itemize the projects; but the projects came within the budget amount. Councilmember Hafner said in looking at the Street Master Plan, there were twenty -seven residential street projects; and that the information in the plan indicates that if "steps are not taken to maintain existing pavements immediately, this number will steadily grow over time" and he asked why we are not looking at those twenty -seven residential projects which cost $10 million; and said if we allow those streets to deteriorate, it will cost more money. Mr. Worley said there are more street preservation needs then there are funds available; and said it is his understanding from Council's decision back in April that the focus is to be on the high - needed arterial projects only; he said there was not funding available to address any residential streets; and said those twenty -seven projects mentioned, are those identified for full re- construction; he said there has been no money allocated to addressing those projects. Regarding the Poe Contract, Mr. Worley said it is his understanding that as the public works budget was put together over the last seven years, Council and staff knew there was a need for road preservation, but there wasn't a funding mechanism for them; he said there were revenues coming into the street fund to allow us to put a very small amount of money into street preservation projects; and said it was decided to put that into the Poe Contract as we could address those quickly and easily on an annual basis; and said over the years, we have been slowing building that Council Study Session Minutes 05 -15 -12 Page 4 of 11 Approved by Council: DRAFT amount of money into the street fund to do at least a little street preservation work that we could manage; then this year council decided to put the $2.8 million toward preservation. Therefore, Mr. Worley explained, this is the first year we are facing the $2.8 million approved funds and the money that had been building up in the street fund for street preservation; and combining those together to go after what we heard was Council's highest priority: to address the arterial street preservation projects as approved in the adopted plan; and said therefore, this is the list for 2012. Mr. Worley further explained that when council approved the Pavement Management Program and staff started this season with the Poe Contract, the question was, what work should Poe do with the funds in their contract; and our maintenance superintendent immediately went to the adopted plan and said this is the list of priority projects, so let's start working on these first; and so Appleway was done and University is in the works; and said staff started dividing up the projects in an attempt to get as many projects completed as possible within the given budget. Mr. Worley said we don't know what will happen next year as there is no funding associated with street preservation for next year; so what we do with the Poe Contract and with street preservation next year has not been determined; and what we are looking at now, is what Council approved for arterial projects for 2012 along with the funds in the Poe Contract. Mr. Worley said staff looks at each project individually. He said when the streets were scored, it was done in the summer of 2010 so there have been two winters since then, and said those scores are based on the evaluation done in 2010; he said two winters make a lot of difference in the condition of any road. Mr. Worley said staff looks at the road and compares them to each other and to roads on future lists, and determines which road is in the worst condition. As an example, Mr. Worley said the Phase 2 list includes 32nd Avenue; he said there was a large crack on that construction joint on that road and that was one of the things that brought the score of that road down back in 2010; but he said they filled that crack with a different type of material which has held up well; and over the last two winters since that road was scored, it has held up well; and in comparing 32nd to Sprague Avenue, said we think Sprague is in worse condition. Mr. Worley said staff looks at each project individually to determine if it is the best use of preservation dollars; but if there is a better road to use those funds, then they would like to have the ability to make those changes. Mr. Worley also noted that the Plan needs to be updated as it has been two years since the streets were scored; and said they have money in the street fund budget to hire a consultant to re- evaluate the roads and see which have changed in priority; and said that re- evaluation will result in a priority change of the roads, and said they would like to have that done again, and keep doing that as often as they can in order to put the funds toward the best projects possible in order to maintain the streets. Councilmember Grafos said he disagrees with Mr. Worley's approach; and explained that when council discussed this two to three weeks ago, when the pavement management program was approved, one question was that if the program is approved, are we stuck with those projects; and said the discussion then included the critical part of Sprague Avenue being resurfaced, that it is the gateway to our city and if we had funds we would use those funds to dress up the areas for the business owners; and at that time the swale project was also discussed. Councilmember Grafos said in looking at the OCI on those projects, Sprague Avenue is in worse shape than the projects staff has put up for Phase 1; and said as he recalled, council asked for the public works department to bring those projects back to discuss and discuss the projects on Sprague Avenue; and he said not one of those projects are on this list now. City Manager Jackson said that Councilmember Grafos is correct, and that project is included in the RCA (Request for Council Action form), and if council wants to guarantee that is the project to do, that is possible; and said if council prefers to see these projects again and work through them, staff can do that as well. Mr. Jackson said the issue is that Sprague is a much wider and larger section of roadway, and the question becomes how many of the other projects can we accomplish if we focus on Sprague. Mr. Jackson explained that the hope is that Phase 2 will provide enough money after Phase 1 gives us an idea of the cost; that the 32nd Avenue stretches monies can be used for Sprague; and said the only reason that is not in there now is we just don't know what the total cost will be. Mr. Jackson said if council directs to focus first on Sprague we can do that; and stated that this is simply the engineer's best estimate; and added that there are so few dollars trying to be stretched over so many projects; he said if we want to slow down and Council Study Session Minutes 05 -15 -12 Page 5 of 11 Approved by Council: DRAFT bring these back and work through them with Council, staff can do that if that is Council's direction. Mr. Jackson said the objective is to try to move forward on these projects this year; and said that is the process staff has been proceeding along, and added that the Sprague project is listed and included in the RCA, but we just don't know the total project costs at this point; which he said is what led to the idea of bidding the Phase 1. Councilmember Grafos said that Mr. Jackson was referring to the stormwater project from Park to Thierman, but that he, Mr. Grafos is referring to Sprague Avenue; he said we are trying to ensure as we approach our tenth anniversary, that we have shown our business owners our intent to beautify the area; he said the car owners represent about one - quarter of our business revenues and we have done nothing in ten years; he said that road looks a lot worse than 32"d, and if we are going to discuss economic development and ideas to bring in businesses into our city, we would want to concentrate on that area first; he said that was what he thought we were going to do when this was brought up a couple of weeks ago; and said he would have assumed that staff would have brought back information showing the projects on Sprague Avenue, from University or Argonne down to Thierman, and back the other way, in that car dealer area, that we would have some information on that in order to make a decision. Mr. Jackson said staff can come back with that approach if that is council's desire; and he asked Council for confirmation. Councilmember Hafner said he believes that was what Mr. Worley had explained; that staff discovered that Sprague is in worse condition than 32"d, so he wants the flexibility now to make that change. Mr. Worley confirmed that is the case; and asked if what Mr. Grafos is stating, is that he would like to see all of Sprague done rather than any of those other projects, and Mr. Grafos confirmed that is his preference. Mr. Worley said another element that staff tries to keep in mind is that there will be a call for projects from SRTC (Spokane Regional Transportation Council) in July, which is federal funding that will become available to our region; and he said federal funds are the only ones that help pay for preservation projects; he said staff has examined the projects in this six -year plan and tried to identify projects we think will score well for receiving federal grant funds; and said obviously the largest, highest volume arterials are the ones that will score the greatest. Councilmember Grafos asked how many years will we chase those grants; and Mr. Worley responded every chance we get. Mr. Grafos said those grants funds could be five years from now, and that those projects on Sprague, based on the OCI scoring, are lower than the projects identified on the screen; and said therefore, in two to three years, we will need a complete construction project on that arterial as it is at 31 or 32% now. Mr. Worley said staff looks at all the streets and tries to spread the preservation dollars around the city as much as possible; and said they did not anticipate focusing all the funds on one street. Mr. Jackson said that is the reason for tonight's discussion; to get council's input. Councilmember Grassel said it is a little tricky in that some of these roads will never qualify for grant money, but some will, but what we could potentially have is our priority list for grant money, and if those funds aren't allotted, that would move to the top and become first in line; and in the meantime, she said she's not sure it would be wise to put off other roads that will never grant money since we would lose the OCI ratings; and said she agrees with Councilmember Grafos that we would not want to postpone this for the next five years; but it's not that staff won't pursue Sprague, but rather that staff is waiting to see what the grants might cover. Mr. Jackson said there are two separate projects; the one connected with the stormwater project which is the one included in tonight's RCA, and then there's the rest of Sprague. Councilmember Grassel said by waiting we actually did get funds from the DOE (Department of Ecology) for the stormwater project; which she said is a good example of leveraging funds for projects. Councilmember Grafos said his concern is if you don't look at those major arterials that they will go from a grind and overlay to a complete reconstruct project; which would thereby prolong the construction period for that project as well; and said if we are going to discuss economic development; within eight years we will hopefully have a connector to the freeway coming down Freya, which is 1.4 miles from Sprague; but if we continue to postpone this, he said he doesn't feel that is in the best interests of the City. Councilmember Wick said at some point we need to afford staff the ability to make some of these judgment calls since they are in the field; he said he doesn't think staff would have a preference for one project over another or to delay one project so far into the grant process to risk a project going into a complete reconstruction; and said he is inclined to continue down the path where council allows staff to Council Study Session Minutes 05 -15 -12 Page 6 of 11 Approved by Council: DRAFT focus on which streets are at the most risk and get those done; and said that the Sprague construction has the ability to continue on for a little while to offer the ability to go for a grant cycle; and said his preference is to let it run its course; and if we don't get the grant this year; we can do that as a grind and overlay in the future if needed. Councilmember Hafner asked if at this point, is the OCI on Sprague worse than that of 32nd; and Mr. Worley said that is correct. Mr. Worley said the idea is to exchange three 32nd Avenue projects in the Phase 2, for the portion of Sprague from Park to the Interchange; an area of about one mile. Councilmember Grafos said the area he was referring to is the section of Sprague from Argonne west to the city limits; and said part of that is the stormwater project from Park to Thierman; and said it was his understanding that Park was a grind and overlay; and he asked if anything was going to be done with the road or was the plan to just do the stormwater. Mr. Jackson said that is the project we are hoping to accomplish is from Park to the interchange; and then to do the balance from the interchange to the City limits as a separate project. Councilmember Grafos again said that the OCI rating from Sprague Avenue from Argonne to Park Road is lower than the other projects listed; either the project given to Poe or the Phase 1 bids; and said we did the same thing on Evergreen and now we're in a full reconstruct; that it was going to cost $1,400,000 and now it will cost $2.5 million to re- build. Mr. Worley said to clarify, one of the things to keep in mind on the pavement preservation plan, is that in looking at the Offs for future years, that is the OCI in that year; it is not the current OCI but the projected OCI for that future year. Mr. Worley said the program they use in pavement management uses deterioration curves, and it examines the stresses in the current pavement, and said it's based on certain conditions, if the road is not treated, it will cause the pavement to deteriorate over the next three, four or five years, so in a future year like 2015, that will be the score of that road based on the condition of the road taken in 2010 and spread out over the next five years; the OCIs are future OCIs and not 2012 OCIs. Mr. Worley said the point exists, that Sprague Avenue didn't appear to fare as well in the last two winters as 32nd because of some of the work that was done on 32nd; he said Sprague Avenue has been crack - sealed and they have tried to maintain it as best as possible given the available funds; and said it is probably worse than what this plan currently shows; and said that is why an update to the plan would be good; and concluded by stating that you can't compare OCIs from year to year as they are different. Councilmember Grafos said he agrees with that, but in looking at the OCI for 2013 on part of Sprague, is about 35, which is about what some of the projects are; so Sprague and those listed projects are probably close to the same. Councilmember Hafner suggested that if we are considering substituting the 32nd project for the Sprague project, and then the difference in what Mr. Grafos stated, perhaps we could come up with a cost factor; and asked if the OCI isn't accurate, what is the point of having them. Mr. Worley explained that they were accurate at the time the roads were scored in 2010; and every year we have a different winter, and the impact on the roads from each winter has an impact on the score of the road, and whether we can do any preservation work to protect those roads; he said the street preservation plan is a living document and it needs to be upgraded every few years to make sure we account for all these different changes. Councilmember Hafner said he understands that, but if he looks at what we have, for example Appleway, Argonne to University, and it's 37.3, is that accurate today? Mr. Worley said based on the deterioration curves from when this plan was done in 2010, which is the estimated OCI, that yes, that is accurate. Mr. Worley said if we were to have scored that before it just got overlaid, the score might have been better or worse; but that staff would have had to examine the road and see how well it fared, and whether it deteriorated like the curse in the program indicated it would. Mr. Worley reminded Council that the program we use is merely a planning tool; he said it is the best tool we have to evaluate our streets in order to develop the program, but it is not the answer to everything as staff must go out and physically view each road; and use engineering judgment to determine what the best fix is for each road and how the road conditions have changed over time. Councilmember Hafner said if we look at the Poe Contract, and look at the OCI, how can we select those if we're not sure those are accurate. Mr. Worley responded that we can select those because this is the best information we have available based on the scores we have now; and again recommended that this plan be updated to see how some of these have changed in priority. Councilmember Hafner asked what it would cost to update the plan and Mr. Worley said there is currently $100,000 in the street fund to pay for and update this plan. Mr. Jackson said there is always some judgment when the streets are assessed; and said the finance committee discussed the plan Council Study Session Minutes 05 -15 -12 Page 7 of 11 Approved by Council: DRAFT and at that time Mr. Jackson asked if the committee would like to go look at some streets; and said it comes down to the engineers making as assessment of the street after examining the street, discussing the condition and the aspects of each project, and said there are numerous influences on each project and not just the OCI, such as if a grant is available, or a partner might be available, or if the project is in conjunction with another project; and said what we need to do is come back and look at the cost of Sprague; talk about what influences all the projects and about the condition, if that is what council would like to do; and again said this is a balancing act; he said he feels engineering and Public Works have done a good job of assembling the list, but we want to make sure Council is satisfied, and it appears such a conclusion won't be reached tonight; and he again asked Council how they would like to proceed. Councilmember Hafner said the whole idea of what we will have Poe do and what we will do in Phase 1 and Phase 2 bids, could all change once we have what the study determines is the OCL Mr. Jackson said that could be the case, but it comes down to when you look at the road and make a determination of which road to repair; that one would never reach a point to take these roads in rank order as it involves an incredible amount of study on each road and decisions by the contractor to tell us which roads to repair; and it doesn't take all the variables into consideration; and said similar to Evergreen, we had a partner in the Water Department with Vera Water, so we decided to move forward; and if we had a grant we would move forward; if we were to do Sprague from Park to the overpass it would be because it's in conjunction with the stormwater program; and again stressed there are numerous variables to consider; that ideally what we want to do is have a matrix where we can determine these; but to do that in advance of getting these projects done this year would take some time. Mr. Jackson said he feels we should come back, re- examine the Sprague Projects, and discuss what goes into the decision. Councilmember Grassel mentioned that in the past, after going through those meetings with the business owners, that several on the one -way going west, the Auto Row section, requested on -street parking; she said we were going to talk about those issues, about pedestrian crossings on some of those areas as well; and said if this is going to be a focus those discussions should take place; and added that she was aware of one business owner who had to rent parking spaces from the next door business. Councilmember Woodard added that if we are going to do some traffic calming or pedestrian crossings or other things that could be done to slow down the traffic on that section of road, that should also be taken into consideration; and he asked Mr. Worley why we didn't break up the projects more to get more contractors into the bidding process. Mr. Worley said based on staffs experience, the size of these projects are a good size for the contractors we have in our area; each time projects are broken up any further, it costs more to prepare the plans and the specs, bid it and then manage the contract as well; so by doing just two, we are limiting to only two contracts that we have to work with this summer, and we are also trying to get as many of these done as possible this year; and by combining these into two phases, we believe we can get them all done if we have the budget funds. Regarding Sprague, Councilmember Woodard said he would like to have more information on that project. Councilmember Hafner asked if anyone else agrees we need another study of the roads before the selection is made and City Manager Jackson said that would take at least another year to accomplish. Councilmember Grassel stated that we do the JUB Engineer report every two years, and then we take that report and have software to give us further information on the project potentials. Mr. Worley explained that we would hire JUB Engineers to update the report, but we contract separately with a company that has the laser scanning truck; and in 2010 we used the laser scanning truck for the first time; he said it was efficient and quick and allowed for detailed information on the roadway condition; that we would hire them to do the other half of the arterials and the other third of the local /residential streets; and then that information would go to JUB Engineers who would input it into the pavement management program; and that program calculates the data from the scanner truck, runs all the different scenarios, and it calculates the OCIs for each project; and then different scenarios can be run concerning how much money to put in each year, and it will tell you how much more money will be needed, and it has the ability to run various financial scenarios based on the current scores of each road, and comes up with the recommendations you see in the pavement management plan based on the 2010 scores. Council Study Session Minutes 05 -15 -12 Page 8 of 11 Approved by Council: DRAFT Councilmember Hafner said again going back to the Street Master Plan on the bottom it states January 23, 2012; when the last study was made; he asked why aren't we using that information as that was just done in January of this year. Mr. Jackson said it was adopted then but was based on 2010 data; and explained that is the amount of time it took after JUB Engineers made the assessment and for Public Works to work with JUB Engineers to develop the plan; and again said this is a planning level document and is no substitute for when we look at the roads, but helps us put all the city's roads into context; but for the amount of projects we have, we can look at and inspect the roads and don't need to wait for another study; just like Mr. Worley was stating earlier that they are not so sure now that Sprague wouldn't be a higher priority than 32nd; but it takes physically examining each road. Mr. Jackson said he sees no reason to wait for another report; that he would like to move ahead with this and stay current. Mr. Jackson asked if we came back in a few weeks if that would delay any projects, and Mr. Worley said we have advertised for the Phase 1 bid this Friday; but the bids could be pulled if Council desired. Councilmember Woodard said he is hearing that staff feels the 32nd projects are the same value as Sprague from Park to the interchange; or drop off some other little project to get the funds to do what they would like to do; and said he doesn't see why Phase 1 doesn't just move forward; but prior to doing anything with Phase 2, he would like to see what staff comes up with for Sprague. Mr. Jackson said if you award Phase 1, we could find ourselves short of funds to accomplish what we want on Sprague; and said part of the project with the stormwater project on Sprague is that we don't have a design unless that was accomplished today. Mr. Worley said they were working on that today; and looked at the estimated cost of grinding and overlaying Sprague between Park and I -90 and to compare it to the numbers in this budget for Dishman- Mica, and said it is very comparable, and we are looking at a total cost for Sprague Avenue from Park to Thierman, and also Sprague Avenue westbound from Thierman to the I -90 interchange right up to where the concrete is under the overpass, and includes eastbound Sprague from I -90 to Appleway; so there's one part before it splits into the Y that we would consider, so the total estimated cost for that is $869,000; and if you add the total amount of 32nd Avenue on this phase 2 bid, that is $982,000, so we are within that rough same budget amount to switch out that portion of Sprague for 32nd Avenue. Mr. Worley cautioned that we don't know how far the curbs are moving in in order to get in the swales on Sprague; that this is the worst case scenario of moving the curbs in about eight feet, but they might move in further to meet some of our street standards for swale widths; so if that area is actually smaller, this cost could go down; and said provided the funds are available, they believe it could be easily switched. Councilmember Grafos said in using those estimated figures, they could take Sprague Avenue, since that condition at 31 or 32 is comparable to some of the other projects; and probably take that section from Argonne to Park Road where you don't have to do any swales; a grind and overlay would probably be in the ballpark of $600,000 or $700,000. Mr. Worley said the width of Sprague Avenue in that area is wider; that we won't bring the curbs in on that area but on the portion of Park to Thierman, we are thinking of bringing in the curbs far enough to drop one of the lanes and go to a four -lane road instead of a five lane, which helps bring this cost in closer to the budget we have; he said that other portion is still five wide lanes wide, so the cost will be greater but he would have to examine that cost based on square footage. At approximately 9:00 p.m., it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to extend the meeting for one hour. Councilmember Hafner suggested going with Phase 1 bid and look at Sprague to see what the cost will be. Deputy Mayor Schimmels said that this is just the start of the paving season; that the pavers didn't have any work at this point, and if they have a road construction job, that's something else, but they're not competing; there's four major paving companies in this area and they don't have much work as the County and the City hasn't let much work; and the longer work is put off, the higher will be the price. Mayor Towey said he feels we should move forward with this and Phase 1 should occur as soon as possible; and that for Phase 2, we need more information about Sprague and the switching of 32nd with Sprague; and said he feels it is a good idea. Councilmember Grafos said if we move forward with all the Phase 1 bids there won't be any funds to do anything else. Mr. Jackson said you'd probably have the Council Study Session Minutes 05 -15 -12 Page 9 of 11 Approved by Council: DRAFT funds to go from Park Road to the overpass, but we're not sure about the section from Argonne or the overpass to the end of the city; as we'd mostly exchange the 32"d Avenue project for the project in conjunction with the storm swales. Councilmember Grafos asked if that would be the case even with the $640,000 we're saving on the other project because we got the grant? Mr. Jackson reminded Council that those funds must be used for stormwater improvement only, as they were from the APA funds from the County; and they cannot be used for grind and overlay; but could potentially be used for the stormwater on Appleway. Councilmember Wick added that these are all estimates so we might have more funds left than anticipated. Mr. Worley said he would recommend if we are able, to move forward with the Phase 1 bid, and that by the time the bids come in, we'll have time to evaluate the Sprague projects and get more information on the Poe projects that have been done to -date; and bring that all back to Council with another update and move forward then for the Phase 2 bid based on those factors. Mayor Towey asked if there were any objections and none were voiced. 5. Splash Down — Mike Stone, Mark Calhoun, Cary Driskell As noted in his Request for Council Action form, Parks and Recreation Director Stone explained the background of the contract with Splashdown, and said he seeks consensus from council for staff to consider a methodology for reduced future lease payments and payment of past due 2011 payments; and then to return to Council next week with recommendations; adding that Splashdown intends to open for the season over Memorial Day weekend. There was brief discussion about the positive aspect of keeping Splashdown here and of us trying to assist them during this economy. Councilmember Grassel questioned why they would want to move away from paying a percentage of their gross revenues and Mr. Jackson said it puts the City in a position of requiring the reports since we have to answer to the State Auditor; and said this methodology of payments was mutually agreed to by both entities. Mayor Towey said he feels we should work with them as they are beneficial to our city, and there were no objections from Council to pursue as noted. 6. Refinancing (Refunding) 2003 Limited Tax General Obligation ( LTGO) Bonds — Mark Calhoun Finance Director Calhoun explained how the City issued Limited Tax General Obligation (LTGO) Bonds in 2003 for the purpose of constructing CenterPlace and that since then, market rates have fluctuated dramatically and rates are very favorable now for an advance refunding where the City can issue new 2012 LTGO Bonds at a lower interest rate; and he likened the procedure to taking advantage of lower interest rates for someone refinancing their home to reduce monthly payments. Mr. Calhoun discussed several of the figures in the data provided by our bond underwriter D.A. Davidson. There were no objections from Council to moving forward as explained. 7. Advance Agenda — Mayor ToweX Councilmember Woodard noted the May 29b upcoming council meeting includes a report on a franchise with the Coeur d'Alene Tribe and Mr. Driskell explained that this is to allow them to run fiber through a small portion of our city. Councilmember Grafos asked about the decant facility and the grant and Mr. Jackson said public works will be discussing that issue with WSDOT (Washington State Department of Transportation) and determine the status of that project. 8. Council Check -in — Mayor ToweX There were no comments from Council. 9. City Manager Comments — Mike Jackson City Manager Jackson explained that we applied to the Department of Ecology for additional funding to do shoreline program work; that we have a contract for that work and before he signs the contract, he wanted to let council know that we will have to come back for a future budget appropriation; that although the funds are grant funds, we would still need to appropriate those funds in a budget amendment; and he asked if Council had any objections to him signing the contract and there were no objections to Mr. Jackson moving forward. Council Study Session Minutes 05 -15 -12 Page 10 of 11 Approved by Council: DRAFT 10. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pending /Potential Litigation [RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)1 It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into Executive Session for approximately thirty minutes to discuss pending /potential litigation, and that no action would be taken upon return to open session. Council adjourned into executive session at 9:34 p.m. At 10:00 p.m., Mayor Towey declared Council out of Executive Session, and immediately thereafter, it was moved by Councilmember Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. ATTEST: Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Study Session Minutes 05 -15 -12 Page 11 of 11 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meetings Formal Meeting Format Tuesday, May 22, 2012 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, City Attorney Dean Grafos, Councilmember Mark Calhoun, Finance Director Brenda Grassel, Councilmember John Hohman, Community Dev. Director Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director Ben Wick, Councilmember Mike Basinger, Senior Planner Arne Woodard, Councilmember Kelly Konkright, Deputy City Attorney Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION: Pastor Ben Orchard of Valley Bible 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 amended agenda. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: N/A COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Councilmember Woodard: reported he attended the BN Builder's Ribbon Cutting; attended the City Forum with speaker Ken Melrose, President and CEO of Toro Corporation, who spoke about his leading by serving; went to the Garden Expo; attended the RedCon, which is the real estate development conference, along with Councilmember Grafos and Community Development Director Hohman representing the City; went to the Chamber biz meeting; and went to the Oregon Tile and Marble ribbon cutting at the Industrial Park. Councilmember Wick: reported he attended the Valleyfest Gala dinner; went to the Visit Spokane Tourism Awards for the Region; went to the Garden Expo; and today met with Spokane Valley Kiwanis Group where they distributed five scholarships to graduating seniors; and participated in the Economic Development Ad -Hoc committee meeting last week. Councilmember Grafos: said he was a panelist representing the City of Spokane Valley at the Real Estate Developer's Conference downtown where they discussed what can local government do during this down economy to stimulate the real estate industry, and said the consensus of the group was that infrastructure is a key component, and to also have planning agencies act as growth agencies, and said they also discussed the value of certified sites and said Community Development Director Hohman gave a wonderful presentation on what we are doing to encourage growth; and said he attended the Heritage Museum Farm Heritage event. Deputy Mayor Schimmels: reported that unfortunately he missed the STA (Spokane Transit Authority) Board meeting; but he did go to the SRTC (Spokane Regional Transportation Council) meeting where they heard a lot of good information concerning researching grant money; and went to the East Spokane Water District Open house in the Edgecliff area. Councilmember Grassel: said she attended the tourists awards hosted at the Mirabeau Hotel with a number of employees who work in Spokane Valley as recipients of awards; went to the Regional Visitor's Council Regular Meeting 05 -22 -2012 Page 1 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT Center downtown for a tourist week activity where they greet people as they come into the city; attended the musical put on by the Adams Elementary School; and also participated in the first meeting of the Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee meeting, where all members were in attendance except for one individual who was out of town. Councilmember Hafner: said he attended the STA Board meeting and they continue to work through a re- organization with different board members involved in the administration, and are looking at paying contractors to paint the buses, which he said is a large endeavor; and with Community Development Director Hohman, he looked at two high schools going to be involved in the Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Towey reported he also attended the BN Builder's ribbon cutting ceremony; went to the Valleyfest gala; the criminal justice council meeting where they discussed moving the inmates to Benton County and the impact of such a move; participated in the Mayor's Exchange, which is a meeting of mayors throughout Washington that get together about once a quarter, and said this meeting was in Cheney and they discussed what the mayors thought their cities would look like in 2035; he said they also discussed public safety, finance, and other services provided by municipalities; attended the tourist awards; visited the Visitor's Center; went to the Water Reclamation Plant in Airway Heights; represented Spokane Valley in the Armed Forces Lilac Parade; and yesterday went to the Wohelo Awards, which is the highest achievement of camp fire youth, which is a four -year commitment; and said he also attended the Adams Elementary musical. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited public comments. No comments were offered. 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. ADDroval of the followina claim vouchers: VOUCHER LIST DATE VOUCHER NUMBERS; TOTAL AMOUNT 05/03/2012 5411 -5417 $2,234.00 05/04/2012 25835 -25857 $19,773.76 05/04/2012 25858- 25915; 430120020 $1,606,473.94 05/09/2012 3913 -3916; 3927; 25917 -25921 $238,069.61 05/11/2012 25974 -25999 (- 25985) $181,724.12 GRAND TOTAL $2,048,275.43 b. Approval of Payroll for period ending May 15, 2012: $280,979.04 c. Approval of Minutes of May 8, 2012 Council Formal Format Meeting It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the consent agenda. NEW BUSINESS: 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 12 -014 Amending Comprehensive Plan —Mike Basinger After City Clerk Bainbridge read the title of the ordinance, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to adopt Ordinance 12 -014, Comprehensive Plan amendments. Senior Planner Basinger explained that this year the City received seven privately initiated site - specific map amendments, and he provided a brief overview of each amendment; and concerning CPA 05 -12, for a change from medium density residential to high density residential, he mentioned the rationale behind the Planning Commission's proposed developer agreement which was to include expanding stipulations for a landscape buffer and restrictions on density and height; which agreement was mainly to address neighbor's concerns about bulk and scale of the proposed development; and said at the ordinance's first reading, Council ultimately agreed the current standards would adequately address the impacts on adjacent properties at the time of development, and that there was good cause to deviate from the Planning Commission's recommendation of requiring a developer agreement. Mayor Towey invited public comments. Council Regular Meeting 05 -22 -2012 Page 2 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT The followine individuals spoke in opposition to Comprehensive Plan Proposed Amendment CPA 05 -12: 1. Jan Wold, 503 N Conklin Road: she first read a letter from her neighbors Anthony and Linda Rockhold, at 423 N Conklin Road, who oppose the change, which letter stated that the streets are not equipped to handle the amount of traffic. Ms. Wold then expressed opposition to the proposed amendment as wheelchairs travel the street and she feels it would be dangerous as the road is narrow. 2. Richard Wilcox, 16201 E. Broadway: expressed concern about any emergency equipment getting into the area; voiced his concern with having an apartment complex in the area; and said that he doesn't even try to cross the street. 3. Tony Lazanis, 10626 E Empire: said people like space between each other; putting people too close together will cause people to get on each other's nerves. 4. Delbert Liljigren, 418 N Moore Road: he first read a letter from neighbor Tim and Andrea Severns which letter explained that the change will "choke our neighborhood" due to increased traffic and a high rise development will block people's view. Mr. Liljegren then expressed his opposition, and said they have traffic problems now and it will only increase; and will affect the over - crowding to the schools; and said a high structure is not in character with the neighborhood. 5. Gerry Combs, 405 N Sonora Land: said traffic is his main concern; and feels a 5' buffer would not be adequate. 6. Douglas Florence, 415 N Moore Road: said he didn't know about this meeting until about 5:40 tonight; said safety is a concern when going to Broadway and trying to make a left they have to cross two roads; and said 400 people in an apartment complex, plus friends and relatives visiting, will make for more congestion. 7. Vicki Endicott, 613 N Conklin: said her property has two sides to this proposal; that she likes animals and feels with the added traffic it will cause the wildlife to go away; also said it is difficult to get out of her driveway now due to traffic. 8. Tim Cook, said he is representing his brother -in -law Jason Kamp, who lives on the 600 block of Conklin; said he personally has a big truck, and expressed concern with the current traffic and the difficulty in trying to back his truck into his area; he said people bring shopping carts down the road; he said he parked his vehicle half -way in the middle of the road on purpose to slow down the traffic; and went he went to pick up his son at school, he purposely went into the oncoming traffic lane to slow them down; and said he will continue to do that. 9. Monte Daley, 718 N Moore Rd: said she is on the corner of Moore and Broadway; said she hopes council will consider all aspects and not just for the best interest of the developer; said the traffic can't handle it. 10. Jeoff Potter, 622 N Moore: said most of the apartments are only at 60% capacity; said he talked to local schools and found they are over - crowded and they are busing their kids away; said he supports low - density residential homes as that increases property value. 11. Becky Blythe, 11823 Lenora Drive: said she owns 16109 Valleyway and they were not contacted and wants to make sure they are contacted about any future development. Mr. Jackson said staff will review the list to see if Jim and Becky Blythe were on the list to be contacted. 12. Richard Wilcox, 16201 E. Broadway: said he wanted to see how many people were not contacted about tonight's meeting. His remarks prompted City Manager Jackson to explain that notices went out for the Planning Commission Public Hearing, but notices do not go out for city council meetings. Councilmember Grassel asked Mr. Jackson if there is a sign on the property concerning the hearings; and Mr. Jackson explained there is a sign giving the hearing date for the Planning Commission hearing. 13. Makila Morhead, 709 N Moore Road: said she is a student from North Greenacres Middle School; and said her school is already overcrowded and new apartments will add to that overcrowding. 14. Bob Endicott, 613 N Conklin: said the impact from this proposal will affect them on two sides of their property, with 260 units on one side and a daycare on the side; and said traffic is already horrible. 15. Luke Davis 16323 E Valleyway: said he can't walk on Valleyway now; is concerned more traffic would have an even greater impact; and expressed concerns about increased crime. Council Regular Meeting 05 -22 -2012 Page 3 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT 16. Sheryl McManamon, 504 N Conklin: said it is impossible to back into her driveway due to traffic and said the street is not wide enough for the current traffic; said the people moving to the apartments won't be as neighborly as the people in the community now; and said it will not be good for the neighborhood. Speaking for the proposal: Dwight Hume, 9101 N Mount View Lane; said he is here on behalf of the applicant; said most of tonight's comments address existing conditions; he said the area is regional commercial with I -90; that this is a fundamental land use principel to put high density close to shopping, transit, and work; he said the traffic issues today won't be solved with a development agreement but they will be mitigated with a traffic analysis at the time of the project; and said approval of this change simply gives them the opportunity of a high density use, and they later quantify that use with a project, which will be assessed on the basis of its impacts; and said those things will be addressed; said the character of the neighborhood is already threatened by the existing zoning of medium - density residential; the current zoning allows a 40' building, and the proposed zoning would allow a 50' building. He said on these types of projects, they put the garages around the perimeter and the buildings on the inside of the site; he said staff said there is an obligation to obtain additional population of about 2,000 above what the current zoning allows, in the next twenty years and this is a perfect opportunity for a "shovel- ready" site to be used next to regional commercial; and he urged approval without a development agreement as the current regulatory procedures will ensure their impacts; and said schools are a matter of indirect concurrency and is not something to prevent the application from moving forward. Councilmember Woodard asked about a past project of Evergreen Meadows, similar to this where the garages were put around the perimeter; and he asked how far away the building will be from the residential property. Greg Arger, 300 N Mullan, said the Evergreen Fountains Senior Housing Project is what Mr. Woodard is referencing; and said for security purposes, they like to have the single story garages surrounding the properties and there is about 50 to 60 feet and provides a good buffering. He said there is a good market for luxury apartments which will benefit the community and any project of theirs would be in harmony with the neighbors; said they have high standards; that the city has a good check and balance system and said he has had good success working with the City and the building department to make sure things are developed within the code regulations. Bob Endicott, 613 N Conklin, spoke again and asked Mr. Arger what he is planning to building, and what will the lighting be like as they don't want lights infringing upon their property. Mr. Arger said they have not done a specific project design, but normally have lighting that shines in the interior of the area and not into other people's areas; and said they do their best to be sensitive to the community. Luke Davis, 16323 E Valle3L)y spoke again and asked if that property, five years ago when owned by Hospice, if they were pushing for a zoning change? Mayor Towey said he did not know. Mr. Davis said if it was originally zoned to light then got moved to medium, that's fine but nothing was ever built there as medium, and now if it's going to heavy, and said he wanted clarification of the original zone. Councilmember Hafner asked for an explanation of what is considering to be built. Mr. Arger said the difference between affordable housing which is currently allowed there, and when doing a luxury apartment, there are generally more amenities like recreation centers, sports parks, and those units generally achieve higher rent. Councilmember Hafner asked Mr. Hohman to explain the difference between what is allowed in medium density and what is allowed in high density. Mr. Hohman explained that medium has 12 units per acres, and high is 22 units per acre, with a height difference of 10 feet more allowed in the high density residential area. Councilmember Grassel said she examines these types of issues by starting with the current zoning and how that affects the neighborhood; and said this proposal is in the middle of single family residences and so her concern is the location; she said this project was also originally slated for affordable housing and she said there is no guarantee that affordable housing couldn't come in later; and shared her concerns with traffic with those of the neighbors; and said she asks if it is fair to the neighborhood to change the zoning for one individual; and said she feels there is a movement Council Regular Meeting 05 -22 -2012 Page 4 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT in this country toward "stack and pack" housing and she is opposed to it; said she is not opposed to the developer, but feels the proposal is out of place and said she would not support the project. Councilmember Woodard said the real estate principle is the highest and best use, which normally means zoning so that the maximum efficiency of the property is realized; and he expressed his concerns as well about the affects this would have on the neighbors. Councilmember Grafos said he too appreciates the concerns of the neighbors; and said even if the zone wasn't changed, with the bonus density, affordable housing with 240 units would still be permitted; that it wouldn't be luxury housing as proposed by Mr. Arger, but rather would be a low income project; so therefore, the area would get that 240 units either way; he said there is regional commercial zoning with major stores, transit, I -90, and a stop light on Conklin with a turn lane; and said the neighborhood has changed; and if we need the capacity for 2,000 citizens, where would we put that; and said the problem is the traffic; that council should approve this project for this developer and allow the public works department to mitigate the traffic problems; and said he is in favor of the project. Councilmember Wick agreed this is an unusual situation, but also said he sees the perspective of having this next to regional commercial; and if we were to look a spot where an apartment complex would be built, he said it would go next to regional commercial; and agreed that if we were to look at affordable low income housing with a density bonus, we would be right back at the high density. It was moved by Councilmember Woodard and seconded to amend the motion to remove this amendment CPA 5 -12 from the vote and decide what to do with this separately. There was a vote by acclamation then point of order called by Councilmember Woodard who asked about a lack of discussion. City Clerk Bainbridge explained that the vote has already been taken; and reminded Council that it was simply a vote on whether to amend the motion, not on the fully amended motion itself. Because it was difficult to determine by voice who voted for and who voted against, but was determined the outcome was Mayor Towey, Councilmember Woodard, Grafos, and Wick voting for, and Deputy Mayor Schimmels and Councilmembers Grassel and Hafner voting against the motion, with the notation from City Clerk Bainbridge that a "non- vote" is a no vote as Councilmembers cannot abstain from voting unless they state they have a conflict of interest. Motion carried four to three to amend the motion. Mayor Towey then called for discussion on the amended motion to approve Ordinance 12 -014, Comprehensive Plan amendments, but to withdraw the proposal CPA 05 -12 to discuss separately. Councilmember Woodard explained that his rationale for his amended motion was that it appeared there was unanimous approval of all the proposals except CPA 05 -12 and felt it might be more expeditious to take care of the easier, noncontroversial proposals first. Mayor Towey invited public comment on the amended motion. Delbert Lillegren, 418 N Moore Road: said in looking at the small split out of the property on Broadway bordering the section 05, that there has been no discussion about the added traffic that proposal will add to Broadway, and said it affects the character of the area; that although it is separate from CPA 05, it is close enough to have an impact and intensify the problem. Mayor Towey clarified that Mr. Liljegren was referring to CPA 03. During Council discussion, Councilmember Woodard said he felt the other proposals were a natural progression, while CPA 05 is different. Councilmember Grassel noted Mr. Liljegren's comments and she said that the difference is what it is getting changed to, and that it fronts Broadway. Vote on the amended motion to adopt Ordinance 12 -014, Comprehensive Plan Amendments, with the removal of CPA 05 -12 to be discussed separately. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed. None. Motion carried. Discussion then moved to amendment proposal CPA 05 -12. It was moved by Councilmember Woodard and seconded to leave CPA 05 -12 at its current residential designation. Councilmember Grassel asked about the assumption that it could go to high density at some point; it still allow the developer to put 12 units per acre and allows for 40' height; and said considering the surrounding neighborhood, she feels those are fair and reasonable standards; so therefore she doesn't feel that means it will move to high density later; and if it warrants it later, a developer agreement could be discussed but as it is now, there is nothing to preclude a developer from putting apartments that are not Council Regular Meeting 05 -22 -2012 Page 5 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT luxury apartments. Councilmember Wick said the whole concept of high density came about because doing a project that is low- income affordable housing, enables the addition of a density bonus, which would move it from the medium to the high residential density; so as it stands now, that could occur without a change in zoning, and either with HUD funds or by the developer paying the cost. Councilmember Grafos said currently it is eligible for 240 units but is just a question of financing, and with the economy moving, said he feels it would be unlikely to have such an opportunity sit there very long as a low- income project; and he said that we are in competition with our neighbors for projects, and that he would like to see our developers get a fair shot at these types of projects; and again said the real problem is the road, and if this project is approved, he's sure the developer will work with the city and the developer will be required to address mitigation for that road. Mayor Towey invited public comments. Delbert Lille -rg_en, 418 N Moore Road: said he supports the motion and feels the project would be more appropriate to keep it at the lower height, with the luxury standard as it fits the character more than a 50' height; and he expressed concern about the Council's conflict of the luxury housing versus the affordable housing; and he asked for clarification on the project prior to approval. Councilmember Woodard said without the elevator capacity, the structure would be at 40' or lower; and said the issue is not luxury or affordable housing, the issue is whether we want the density changed. Delbert Liljegren, 418 N Moore Road also said the other issue not discussed is that there is an access, or easement, or designated street onto Moore Road, and he asked if that is also being considered as an access into that property. Council asked for Mr. Arger's response. Mr. Arger said they acquired additional property on Broadway to provide the primary access into the project; and also have secondary access to the project on Conklin; he said it is not necessary to have access from Alki adjoining Moore; and said they spent the money to have the new access so having an access from Alki adjoining Moore would not be necessary. He said there is also access on the south end, Sonora Road, and said they don't need to access that either; and said in conversations with the Fire Department, they were satisfied with the two primary accesses. Richard Wilcox, 16201 E. Broadway: said regarding the traffic problem on Conklin, and talking about 40' right of way, he asked what that would leave for parking in front of their house, or for people trying to back their cars out into the street. Mayor Towey explained that the motion before Council now is to leave the zoning as it currently is. There were no other public comments. City Manager Jackson said a point that has come up, is a comparison between the medium density with the bonus versus the high density, and a question come up with staff that the bonus might also apply to the higher density housing; and with all of the questions and requests for information, and said if council is comfortable in moving forward, then that would be his recommendation, but if council feels more comfortable in postponing this or perhaps to send this back to the Planning Commission for additional hearing, that can also be considered. After discussion concerning tabling this issue or postponing to a date certain, Councilmember Woodard said he doesn't want this to go back to the Planning Commission; but agreed, as did Councilmember Hafner, that there are more questions to be answered. Councilmember Hafner said he wondered what a traffic study would show and said after all this discussion, he feels more confused now than he was two weeks ago; and feels more facts are warranted. Councilmember Woodard withdrew his motion. It was noted that this particular amendment proposal will be brought back at a future council meeting. Councilmember Woodard asked about a traffic study and Mr. Jackson said that can be discussed as well as having Traffic Engineer Note available for questions when this comes back to council. Councilmember Grafos said when this comes back, that the main issue is the traffic; and it would be helpful if staff would come back and explain that it is defined as a minor arterial, that there is a traffic light, a left -turn lane, a certain traffic count, and that that road as a minor arterial will not remain at 40 feet regardless of this project; and it would be helpful if staff would explain what the ramifications of that designation. City Manager Jackson said regarding the traffic study, since we don't know exactly what the project will be, that will be a general discussion about what traffic studies accomplish. Several people in the audience began talking and raising their hands, and in response to that. Councilmember Hafner asked if those people were concerned about being notified of the next meeting. City Manager Jackson said the surest way to get notification of council meetings is to consult the City's webpage as the agenda is always posted there as well as in the newspaper as we don't normally send notices for city council meetings. Mayor Towey thanked all the citizens for their comments. It was Council Regular Meeting 05 -22 -2012 Page 6 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to extend the meeting for an hour. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Towey, Deputy Mayor Schimmels, and Councilmembers Grassel, Grafos, Wick and Woodard. Opposed. Councilmember Hafner. Motion Carried. Mayor Towey called for a brief recess at 8:50, and reconvened the meeting at 9:05 p.m. 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 12 -015, Zoning Map Amendments — Mike Basinger After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to adopt Ordinance 12 -015 official zoning map amendments, with the exception of CPA 05 -12, which will be removed and discussed separately. Senior Planner Basinger explained that this amends the map to coincide with all the previous amendments changed tonight, except CPA 05 -012, and implementing that into the zoning map. Mayor Towey invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed.- None. Motion carried. 4. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 12 -016 Amending Spokane Valley Municipal Code Title 24 — John Hohman After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to advance ordinance 12 -016 amending Spokane Valley Municipal Title 24, to a second reading. Community Development Director Hohman said Title 24 adopts the state building code and defines the city's local amendments; he said this has not been updated in many years, and said that the proposed amendments discussed several weeks ago mentioned lengthening the building code permit cycles and application cycles and tying them to the International Building Code cycles; he said there was a slight typographical on the last presentation and that is corrected tonight and will be discussed by Acting Building Official Doug Powell, and that he will discuss the sections of the International Building Code that addresses how applications and permits currently expire. Acting Building Official Powell said the correction to be noted is that the current application does not expire in three months, but rather expires six months from date of application. Mr. Powell also noted the accompanying materials from the section in the International Building Code and from the International Resident Codes addressing time limitations of application; and said that has been added to the revised draft for inclusion in title 24. Mayor Towey invited public comments; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed. None. Motion carried. 5. Motion Consideration: Splash Down Agreement — Mike Stone It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the Splashdown lease amendment consistent with the signed letter agreement. Parks and Recreation Director Stone explained that this proposed amendment letter is as noted in previous council meetings concerning the City's lease with Splashdown; that Melissa Kellogg is here tonight as well; and he gave the history of our contractual agreement with Splashdown, and of their wonderful service to this city. Mr. Stone briefly went over the changes in the lease amounts as noted in the May 16, 2012 draft letter, as well as the agreement concerning Splashdown's arrearages; and said staff feels this will allow Splashdown a realistic opportunity to continue to provide the services the citizens have enjoyed in the past. Councilmember Grassel asked why we would have the annual lease payment for 2014 -2018, which she said is a long period into the future; and said market conditions can change and she feels that is a fairly long extension and that it should not go beyond the year 2013; and because it is such a large reduction. City Attorney Driskell said the remaining first term of the lease goes through 2018 so we were trying to account for this portion of the lease, and said there is the renewal option and we would have the opportunity to renegotiate any amount; he said we were trying to come up with something that would cover that first portion of the lease so we don't have to keep coming back to this every couple of years as it does require a fair amount of time for legal and for the Kelloggs; and he added that they are anticipating opening their facility this weekend. Mayor Towey invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Towey, Deputy Mayor Schimmels, and Councilmembers Hafner; Grafos, Wick, and Woodard. Opposed. Councilmember Grassel. Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited public comments; no comments were offered. Council Regular Meeting 05 -22 -2012 Page 7 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 6. Advance Agenda — Mayor Towey Councilmember Grafos said he looked at our website today and went to the economic development section; he said he went from our home page to economic development to zoning regulations and then to permitted and accessory uses; and he said he wanted to print a copy of the zoning matrix to see what the changes were from 2009 to 2012; and said that matrix is identical to 2009; he said he went to the building code department and asked the staff member for a current copy of the zoning matrix and what is allowed in each zone; he said prior to this you could just go to the computer and print it off the Internet; and he said she had to copy and paste that and that's why he ended up with 11 x 17 pages; and said he asked the person at the counter if the zoning matrix includes all of the code text amendments that we have made as a council and said he was assured it did; yet those changes are clearly not there. Councilmember Grafos said citizens would likely face the same situation, and said he doesn't know who is in charge of that, but clearly somebody is not doing what they should be doing. Mr. Jackson agreed that is a concern and said he will look into that and get back to council and get that straightened out right away. Mayor Towey suggested that the June 5 Council meeting could be cancelled if Councilmembers agreed. There were no objections to cancelling the June 5 council meeting. City Clerk Bainbridge asked if Council would like to schedule the appointments of the students to the Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee; and Mayor Towey agreed they need to be officially appointed; and Councilmember Wick noted the two students are Ben Baker from East Valley High School, and Josh Ramsey from University High School. 7. Department Reports and 7a Solid Waste Update were for information only and were not reported or discussed. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS City Manager Jackson brought Council's attention to the information item concerning the Solid Waste Governance Task Force, and said staff would like to come back next week and give Council an update and get concurrence from Council on the scope of work. 8. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Labor Relations (RCW 42.30.140(4)] It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded, and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive session for approximately forty-five minutes to discuss labor relations, and that no action will be taken upon return to open session. Council adjourned into executive session at 9:36 p.m. At approximately 10:21 p.m. Mayor Towey declared council out of executive session; and immediately thereafter it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. Thomas E. Towey, Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Regular Meeting 05 -22 -2012 Page 8 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STUDY SESSION FORMAT Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley, Washington May 29, 2012 Attendance: 6:00 p.m. Councilmembers Staff Tom Towey, Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager Gary Schimmels, Deputy Mayor Kelly Konkright, Deputy City Attorney Dean Grafos, Councilmember John Hohman, Community Development Dir. Brenda Grassel, Councilmember Mark Calhoun, Finance Director Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director Ben Wick, Councilmember Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief Arne Woodard, Councilmember Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Carrie Koudelka, Deputy City Clerk Mayor Towey called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Deputy City Clerk Koudelka called the roll. All Councilmembers were present. ACTION ITEM: 1. Mavoral Appointment of Students to Economic Development Committee — Mavor Towev It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to confirm the Mayoral appointments of Ben Baker and Josh Ramsey to the Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee. Mayor Towey said Council previously decided to add two students to the Ad Hoc committee and Councilmember Hafner went to high school principals seeking volunteers. Ben Baker and Josh Ramsey volunteered. Mayor Towey invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed. None. Motion carried. NON - ACTION ITEMS: 2. Draft 2013 -2018 Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) — Steve Worle Senior Engineer Worley began his presentation of the 2013 -2018 TIP and reminded Council that the TIP is a planning document that they can change; however, RCW 35.77.010 requires we adopt a revised and extended transportation program for the ensuing six calendar years. He said this year they focused on adding pavement improvement projects. He said they have scheduled a public hearing for June 12, 2012, to review the plan. Mr. Worley went through the reports in the packet and told Council "Secured Funds" are funds we already have including grants we already received; "Grant Funded Projects" listed are funds we are trying to get. He said the "S" notations mean the funds are secured and the "P" notations means we are planning to get those funds. Projects on the "Unfunded" list are projects staff thinks need to be done, but for which we do not currently have funding. He said our TIP has to be fiscally constrained based on how much we can afford to do. He said we estimate revenue and the grant funds we receive in a typical year and then pick the projects that fit within the revenue sources. The projects listed in black on the summary report are unfunded projects that were in the previous TIP for this year that were not removed from the draft TIP for 2013 -2018. Mr. Worley explained they listed projects by category rather than by year as had been done in previous years. The categories include arterial improvements, bridges, congestion improvements, street preservation projects, pedestrian/bicycle improvements, and street reconstruction projects and that they come straight from the pavement management program adopted by Council. He said from that plan, staff Council Study Session Minutes 05 -29 -12 Page 1 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT identified projects for which they felt we could receive grant funding and said they added the street reconstruction category based on Council recommendation. Mr. Worley said they added concrete intersections and concrete corridors under reconstruction projects because once we get down into rock it becomes more than preservation. Councilmember Grassel asked for the price difference between concrete intersections and asphalt. Mr. Worley said he does not know the actual difference. He said based on recent projects a concrete intersection typically runs $1,000,000 and could cost 30 -40 percent more than asphalt. He said they have not done full concrete corridors before but they typically last about three times longer than asphalt. Mayor Towey asked when we will know if we get TIGER grant funding for the Sullivan West Bridge project. Mr. Worley said we should find out next week. Councilmember Woodard asked where we are on the resurfacing of Sprague Avenue from Thierman to Park project. City Manager Jackson said regarding the preservation component of this project, Council will have the option of repaving Sprague from Park to the overpass. He said bids come in this Friday on Phase I and once we review those we will know how much money we have available. Councilmember Wick asked if improvements to roads with gravel walkways are included in the plan. Mr. Worley said the Mission and Park projects are included but they would require a local match and his understanding is that Council indicated the focus should be preservation projects. Councilmember Wick asked if we are limiting ourselves to grant funding if we don't include those projects on our TIP. Mr. Worley said projects can be added to the TIP if and when we get a funding opportunity for it. Councilmember Grafos asked what funding is taken into consideration when determining projects we think we will be able to afford. Mr. Worley said state and federal grants, local grants such as Spokane Transit Authority and other local dollars. He said they average that dollar amount over the previous nine years to determine a typical funding amount for the current year. He said it does not include tax revenues and said the City's match dollars come from REET funds and are unrelated to the Poe contract. Councilmember Grassel said the $10,000,000 per year needed for our road program as identified by the JUB report includes funding from all resources not just the City. She said her understanding is the City is funding $2,000,000 toward that $10,000,000 and said it is an important point to emphasize because it makes a difference to her as to whether Council needs to consider a second revenue source. Mr. Worley said the City- funded $2,000,000 included in the TIP is the local match for grant funded projects, including street preservation projects. He said the unfunded list includes the remaining arterial street preservation projects and we do not have an identified funding source to pay for them. Councilmember Wick said that to keep up with our Pavement Management Plan (PMP), we would need the City's $2,000,000 match plus the additional pavement preservation money of another $4,000,000, plus another $2,000,000 that would be the local access street funds. He said we would need another $6,000,000 on top of the $2,000,000 match if we were to do everything recommended in the PMP, so the $10,000,000 didn't just shrink down to $2,000,000. Mr. Worley said we need to add the reconstruction projects as well. Councilmember Grassel said she was just referring to the City's portion. Councilmember Wick said he thinks that it would all be the City's part of it. Councilmember Grassel said the funding comes from different buckets of money, not all from the City's funds. Mr. Worley said we look at every opportunity for grant funding and he said that is good, provided we go after the grants for projects Council has identified because we have to provide the local match for them. Mr. Worley said he understands there is $24,000,000 in federal funding and federal funding is the only grant source that can be used for preservation projects. He said of that, about 60 -75 percent will go toward preservation projects and a small percentage will go to improvement projects. He said he thinks there is opportunity to get a good portion of federal preservation grant funding. Councilmember Hafner said we need to start fixing the streets regardless of whether we get grant funding or we will never catch up. Mr. Worley said sometimes we can get federal match dollars for state grants, or vice versa, that can reduce the local funds but typically, granting agencies like to see local funds allocated. Councilmember Grafos said we should do the projects that we identify as important without Council Study Session Minutes 05 -29 -12 Page 2 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT waiting for grants because they may never come through. Mayor Towey said he thinks many cities have fallen behind because they were waiting for grant funding and he thinks we need to recognize there are two phases: the grant phase and identifying preservation roads that can't wait for grants and need to be done now. Councilmember Hafner said he would like to address the problem at the retreat so we can move forward as soon as possible. City Manager Jackson said the conflict is the lack of resources. He said there is one pot of money and we are not just waiting for grants; we are allocating the money we have to preservation and road repair. He said the emphasis for the budget this year is to free up as much available funding as possible to allocate to preservation projects. He said the fact is the resources are not there. He said they are looking at $10,000,000 - $11,000,000 per year for arterials, local access streets and reconstruction. He said recently they have been focusing on arterials but Council has also brought up the need for preservation of local access streets. He said as we prepare the budget this year we will work to free up money for repair and preservation, then decide what the lack of resources are and what the revenue shortage is and how we will make that up to get where we need to be. 3. Truck Traffic /Parking — Kelly Konkright Deputy City Attorney Konkright said Council asked staff to look at the issue of trucks parking in residential areas. He said there are no provisions in our current code to limit or restrict parking of trucks in neighborhood residential areas and home - owners have limited options such as if the truck is in violation of law or poses a safety hazard or traffic obstruction. He said other jurisdictions such as Spokane and Liberty Lake have ordinances to restrict trucks in residential zones. After he presents the information to Council, he asks they provide direction as to what to do next. Mr. Konkright said Spokane identified specific vehicles restricted from parking on residential streets at any time. He said other jurisdictions have identified specific length or weight restrictions; however, he said that can be difficult to enforce. Some have imposed time restrictions and some prohibit street parking but allow parking in the driveway or on the property. He said he recommends that if Council considers restricting parking, they include a provision that allows for temporary loading and unloading so as not to prohibit commercial activity such as landscape workers or movers. Mayor Towey asked if the fourteen city examples he included in the packet is for all the cities in Washington or a representation of all the cities. Mr. Konkright said he just did a cross section of a few cities that address this issue but in somewhat different ways. Councilmember Grassel asked how our current code addresses the homeowner who is also the driver of the truck parking on the street. Mr. Konkright reiterated there is nothing in our current code addressing commercial vehicles parking on residential streets. Councilmember Woodard said he doesn't want to restrict trucks from parking in residential areas because there could be subsequent repercussions and he doesn't want to burden police with enforcement when higher priority crimes are taking place. He said he thinks we should address the truck idling and parking of a vehicle extending into the right of way. Mr. Konkright said if we make code provisions in our ordinance, it would be enforced by our code enforcement officers and we would set policy whether it is complaint driven or if we can write it up as a nuisance. Mr. Konkright said it is up to Council to consider the scope of vehicles and the type of activity that could be harmful to the community to avoid collateral damage. Councilmember Woodard said he also wants Council to consider the duration of time the equipment is parked and idling. Councilmember Wick asked if code enforcement did a survey to see how widespread this problem is. Mr. Konkright said we do not have a count of citywide incidents or a survey. He said the pictures provided in the packet came from code enforcement while out on other duties. City Manager Jackson said the real question is whether Council wants to legislate the parking of trucks or other vehicles. He said once they answer that question they can approach how to go about it. Community Development Director Hohman said code enforcement officers located six areas where truck parking is more prevalent and somewhat constant so they provided the photos for Council. He said they did this over a two -week period and found approximately six locations and some of those locations had multiple trucks. Councilmember Hafner said he wouldn't want a big truck parked on his street with the noise and the diesel smell. He said there are other locations to park and he doesn't like them in the neighborhoods obstructing views unless it is on a temporary basis. Councilmember Grafos said those trucks represent jobs in our city and he suggests we Council Study Session Minutes 05 -29 -12 Page 3 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT talk about imposing weight restrictions on commercially licensed vehicles. He proposed "Parking or storing of a commercially licensed vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating of 12,000 pounds or greater shall be prohibited from parking on public right of ways and residential zoned areas." He said the gross vehicle weight (GVW) rating is labeled on the truck so you don't need a scale for enforcement and that will eliminate recreational vehicles. He said the exception would be vehicles working on construction projects, loading and unloading and "casual parking of commercial vehicles continuously for a period up to three days per month" to allow them to park at home for a weekend. He said if a person can get the truck onto their property, they should be allowed to do so and if they are idling and noisy, that becomes a noise problem to address differently. Mayor Towey said Councilmember Grafos brought up good points and his concern is they are talking about the small business man on the road who comes home for a few days a week and he said he doesn't know where they will park if they can't park their trucks at home. He said if we draft an ordinance, we should include an exemption for a specified time for leeway to come into town to be with their family. Councilmember Hafner said he is not arguing whether they can park on their own property. He said he thinks the noise is a concern for neighbors. Mayor Towey said we can go forward with an ordinance that takes into consideration the small business man and still relieves the neighborhood of the problem of parking. Councilmember Wick said he is leaning toward not needing regulation or an ordinance at this time. He said we are already financially burdened and staff time is stretched and he doesn't think we need an ordinance at this time. Councilmember Grassel asked staff to identify what a semi -truck driver does in jurisdictions that don't allow them to park on residential streets and what the hardship to the business owner is if parking is not allowed. She said she would like to limit the ordinance to noise and view obstruction. Mayor Towey said Council was given information as to the impact on neighbors, but not the impact on the truck owner and he said he would like that information before drafting an ordinance. Mr. Konkright said before staff begins drafting an ordinance he will provide Council with the impact to truck drivers if they can't park on the street and what impact other cities experienced when they implemented their ordinances, and where the truckers will park their trucks if not at home. Mayor Towey called for a recess at 7: 20 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7: 35 p.m. 4. Proposed Franchise for Coeur d'Alene Indian Tribe Use of Right -of -way — Kelly Konkright Deputy City Attorney Konkright said the Coeur d'Alene tribe asked to access part of our right of way to install fiber optic cable for internet usage using Avista's overhead power lines on a route that goes through the southeast corner of the city starting at 11th Avenue and Barker Road to 8"' Avenue, then east to Hodges Road. He said negotiations with the tribe were simple utilizing a standard agreement. The City would give the tribe a nonexclusive franchise to use right of way for a ten -year term and requires the tribe install and maintain the line, and maintain appropriate insurance. It also requires the tribe seek City permission before they can abandon the cable line and it allows the City to set a condition that the line be removed if abandoned; thereby putting the cost burden on the tribe rather than the City. Mayor Towey asked if ten years is standard. Mr. Konkright confirmed it is and said that after ten years we negotiate a new franchise. Councilmember Grassel asked Mr. Konkright to explain the cost to the City specified in section 4, number 2. Mr. Konkright said the agreement requires the tribe to lay dark line for City use so we would pay a monthly charge if the City wants to use that line for our own purposes. He said we only pay if we want to use the line and it is beneficial to the City because it is at a good price. He also said federal law requires that any franchise we grant be non - exclusive. It was consensus of Council to bring forward to a future meeting for consideration. 5. Lodging Tax Sunset Provisions — Kelly Konkright Deputy City Attorney Konkright said the sunset provision in the lodging tax is set to expire June 30, 2013. He said AWC (Association of Washington Cities) will try to get it extended but if they are unsuccessful, the City will only be able to spend lodging tax funds on marketing special events and festivals designed to attract tourists, and acquisition and operation of tourism related facilities in which the City has ownership interest, and other costs of tourism promotion. In 2007 legislation amended Council Study Session Minutes 05 -29 -12 Page 4 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT provisions in the lodging tax that changed some definitions and added a new section, RCW 67.28.1816, allowing jurisdictions to disburse lodging tax funds for the marketing and operations of special events and festivals and to support the operations and capital expenditures of tourism - related facilities owned by nonprofit organizations. He said those provisions are set to expire. Mayor Towey asked if agencies that we grant funds to, such as Valleyfest and HUB, would be required to give the unspent funds back to the City if they do not spend the money by the time the sunset clause expires. Finance Director Calhoun said it sunsets at midnight June 30, 2013. He said if the Lodging Tax committee awarded funds to HUB, they could not use funds after that date so the funds would support the first six months of operation and then only used for marketing after that. Mayor Towey said he would not like to eliminate any applicants based on what may or may not happen. He said he thinks it would be hard for agencies to spend all their money for marketing by June 30th. Mr. Calhoun said we don't give the funds up front, we reimburse costs incurred so they would need to submit invoices for costs up to June 30, 2013. Councilmember Woodard asked if we can use the funds for freeway signage. Mr. Konkright said he will research that and bring information back to Council. He said signage could be included for City owned facilities. Councilmember Grassel said Valleyfest can use the money for marketing without issue. She said she also thinks that agencies such as Visit Spokane can use the funds we issue them to turn around and give as grants to other agencies so the sunset clause would not prohibit them from doing things such as that. Mr. Konkright and Mr. Calhoun said they would be very surprised if agencies can use lodging tax revenue from our City to give to another agency such as the HUB and if we received an invoice from them requesting reimbursement after June 30, 2013 we would not pay it. Mr. Calhoun added an auditor would likely write us up if we did pay it. 6. Solid Waste Update — Deputy Mayor Schimmels/ Mike Jackson City Manager Jackson said the Solid Waste Committee was created to develop a scope of work to define for a consultant the information that all the participating cities felt they need to help make a future decision regarding solid waste. He said they created a technical committee to determine the scope of work and another committee to review the submitted RFP proposals. He said he is looking for consensus to have the County develop an RFP based on this information. He said the scope has been refined and divided into three major components: the Waste to Energy Plant, transfer stations, and the long haul system. He said each scenario develops five, ten, fifteen and twenty -year periods to determine the operating costs and he said whoever provides the service needs to provide all elements of the service. The Waste to Energy facility needs to be kept running at all times so they are looking at other means of burning fuel such as wood and whether that is feasible. He said currently Spokane Valley does not provide collection so that is something we might need to look at, whether providing collection service or contracting for collection service, or continuing to have a franchise agreement for collection. He said currently we don't have a line item in our budget for solid waste so it does not cost us any money or resources; therefore, any increase would be an increase in cost to Spokane Valley and to the customer. He said the agreement covers whether the transfer station could be acquired privately or publicly and the cost if we wanted to construct a transfer station. He encouraged Council to start thinking about what we will do with the results as they come in to help determine the direction they would like to take. Councilmember Woodard asked if the RFP is directed more toward a public type answer rather than private. City Manager Jackson said they had private haulers on the committee and it is designed to be either public or private. Councilmember Woodard asked if long haul is for trucking or train and said the transfer station should be given to Spokane Valley or sold to us for $1.00 because our taxpayers helped pay for it over the last twenty years. City Manager Jackson said it would likely be both truck and train but it needs to be determined based on cost. Mayor Towey said this will give us information to use to make a decision. The only thing outside of the document is the collection part of it and the three things connected to it: if we own it ourselves, franchise, or contract and said he would like more information on the different aspects of all three. City Manager Jackson said they haven't set the time frame but he will report back with more information as it becomes available. It was consensus of Council for City Manager Jackson to notes Commissioner French to move forward. Council Study Session Minutes 05 -29 -12 Page 5 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT 7. Advance Agenda — Mayor Towey Deputy City Attorney Konkright said he will bring the truck parking information back to Council the meeting after the retreat. Councilmember Grafos asked what the limitations are for the City putting signs on the interstate for businesses. City Manager Jackson said we will look into it but we are generally limited to directional signs for landmarks or City facilities and government related signs. Councilmember Woodard said the Department of Transportation regulates the signs and businesses pay to be on them. Councilmember Grassel said she would like Council to be provided with the agendas and minutes from the Economic Development meetings. 8. Information Only: The Finance Monthly &port was not discussed. 9. Council Check -in — Mayor Towey Mayor Towey said he had a meeting with Dr. Harken two weeks ago to discuss different aspects of his presentation and he mentioned one concern he had was that while Council all thought the proposed statue was beautiful, the location may not be right. He said his concern is that particular location needs a "message" statue rather than an "art form" and we could use that piece of art elsewhere in the Valley where citizens can get up close to view it rather than drive by it. He asked to open it up for discussion so he can get back with Dr. Harken regarding the art and the location. Deputy Mayor Schimmels and Councilmembers Woodard, Hafner, Wick and Grafos spoke in agreement with Mayor Towey. Mayor Towey said he would like the Arts Council to use our gateway sign to come up with art that complements the sign and theme of Spokane Valley. He will contact Dr. Harken to see if they can come up with an agreement for the sculpture he presented and location of future arts. 10. City Manager Comments — Mike Jackson City Manager Jackson said we received a grant from the state through the Department of Ecology to construct stormwater improvements on Sprague Avenue from Park Road to the overpass. He said we are moving forward with the landscape architect and will need to move full steam ahead if we want to finish this year. He said if we slow down to look at alternatives, his guess is the project will get designed but not constructed this year; however, he said there is no guarantee it will get constructed this year anyway, but if we pause now it will not get constructed. He said that if Council wants to change direction, he needs to know. It was consensus of Council to continue moving forward. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to extend the meeting fifteen minutes to 9:15 pm. City Manager Jackson said in the next couple of weeks he will come forward with one design and they can talk a little more about the parking. He said if Council wants to move in a different direction at that time, we can. He said the preliminary discussion he has had with public works is that parking along that section would require quite a bit of engineering and a lot more time to develop that plan. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. ATTEST: Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Study Session Minutes 05 -29 -12 Page 6 of 6 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 12, 2012 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ® pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 12 -016, Title 24, Building Code proposed amendments GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 19.27.031, State Building Code Adoption PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council received an administrative report in October of 2011, another in May of 2012, and the first reading of the ordinance to adopt the changes to Title 24 occurred at the May 22, 2012 Council meeting. BACKGROUND: The local adoption of the State Building Code is required by RCW 19.27.031. Title 24.40 is the City's code that adopts the State Building Codes and defines the City's local amendments. Title 24.40 has not been updated in many years. The proposed amendments will help reduce staff administration time by: • Adding proposed language to lengthen the time building applications and permits are valid • Eliminating the need for future SVMC amendments when State adopts new codes at three year code cycles • Locating all administrative provisions to the beginning of Chapter 24.40, • Correcting wrong code editions • Removing fee references that conflict with the current Master Fee Schedule OPTIONS: Approve the ordinance, with or without modifications. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move to adopt ordinance 12 -016, amending Spokane Valley Municipal Code Title 24, Building Code. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: John Hohman, Community Development Director, Doug Powell, Acting Building Official ATTACHMENTS: Title 24 Draft Ordinance with Track Changes Title 24 Clean Version DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 12 -016 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON AMENDING SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 24.40 BUILDING CODES ADOPTED, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley (City) adopted Title 24 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) pursuant to Ordinance 07 -010, on June 5, 2007; and WHEREAS, Chapter 24.40 became effective July 15, 2007; and WHEREAS, the amendment, as is set forth below, bears a substantial relation to the public health, safety and welfare and protection of the environment; and WHEREAS, amendments to the City of Spokane Valley Municipal Code may be initiated by the Planning Commission (Commission), the City Council (Council), citizens, or by the Community Development Director based on citizen requests or when changed conditions warrant adjustments; and WHEREAS, on October 4, 2011 and May 1, 2012, City Council reviewed the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on May 22, 2011, City Council considered a first ordinance reading to adopt the proposed amendment. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as follows: Section One: SVMC Title 24 shall be amended as follows: Chapter 24.40 CODES ADOPTED • Sections: 42 40.010 General. ;4.40.020, Specific. 2 4 40.030 Local to the adopted eedesadministrative provisions 24.40.040 Local amendments to the adopted codes. 24.40.010 General. A. These regulations apply to any structure, equipment, or activity regulated by the herein adopted codes. All referenced codes are available for viewing at the City permit center. IC .. �fra! s�a�ee! �Ress! �re�! e�eeyats�r��riea��eTweeri�r�` r��s !r.�r��e!�e�rx�as.e!�weeee!srr� Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 1 of 19 Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt DRAFT A44 *41e. Af4ef haly 1, , projects submitted for review and approval must conform to the requirements of this title. (Ord. 07 -010 § 1, 2007). 24.40.020 Specific. The following codes, as presently constituted or subsequently amended by the state of Washington, all as amended, added to, or excluded in this chapter, together with all amendments and additions provided in this title, are adopted and shall be applicable within the City: A. Chapter 5 1 -11 WAC — Washington State Energy Code. B. chapter 51 13 *44-C IAITA-q)AiI4&481+ State 3,1eff4hAiR44 A44d 144d ARC Aif Qiifflitry GOde. CB.- Chapter 51 -19 WAC — Washington State Historic Building Code. I3C.- Chapter 51 -50 WAC — State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the International Building Code; including Appendix Chapters E F, G, I, and J and ICC ANSI A117.1 and the International Existing Building Code- BD. Chapter 51 -51 WAC — State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the International Residential Code; including Appendix Chapters F, H, and J. EE. Chapter 51 -52 WAC — State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the International Mechanical Code -ate the International Fuel Gas Code, NFPA 58 and NFPA 54. 44F. Chapter 51 -54 WAC — State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the International Fire Code. FIG. Chapter 51 -56 WAC — State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the 2006E di*iR-4-4 R4 Uniform Plumbing Code. IH. Chapter 51 -57 WAC — State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of Appendices A, B and I of the 2006 :a:.:,... e f 4w-Uniform Plumbing Code. 3I. The 2OW2009 International Plumbing Cod atxe , that in the event of conflicts with the State Plumbing Code adoption of the Uniform Plumbing Code, the state code will prevail. Such conflicts will be reviewed and a determination issued by the building official or their designee. Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 2 of 19 DRAFT LJ. The 290E-2009 Edition of the International Property Maintenance Code, except Sections 106, 111, 302.3, 302.4, 302.8, 303, 304.2, 304.8, 304.13 through 304.18, 305.3, 305.6,40-7308, 305309.2 through 399309.5, 404.1, 506.3, 507, and 606 are not adopted. (Ord. 07 -010 § 1, 2007). 24.40.030 Local to the adopted eodesadministrative provisions. �} Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 3 of 19 Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 12 pt, Underline Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt DRAFT Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 4 of 19 Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.55 ", Right: 0.55 ", Space Before: 12 pt DRAFT Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 5 of 19 DRAFT h it Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New * r ,r :..:..................F,...AW IRA& �O IhH/42 Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New ( Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New All developffiefit iff whole or iff pa-14 withiff a desigfta4ed fleadplaiff shall eamply with Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 12 Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Strikethrough 010N'ff ^^, Siieh *t-° * *t-^ qR04iffl-4 FOR& ^^ F^II^ --- Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman. 12 Dt Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 6 of 19 Roman, 12 pt 3AT-ind Seisatie oUBjEGT T^ DAMAGE FROA 3ATif4e Floe d Aif Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", Space After: 0 Sasw' SHeed l3esig-a F,ategeiy �T Frest line Beeay l3esiga � Ids Free�g Tea pt, Line spacing: single, Font Alignment: Auto I ead** (�ast� tes tamed I-xde� Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 9 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 9 pt 83 xagk G Savers 2-4 Sli& Noll, to �1 Yes '�2 to Me& slighi FIRM gate * r ,r :..:..................F,...AW IRA& �O IhH/42 Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New ( Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New All developffiefit iff whole or iff pa-14 withiff a desigfta4ed fleadplaiff shall eamply with Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: Times New Roman, 12 Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Strikethrough 010N'ff ^^, Siieh *t-° * *t-^ qR04iffl-4 FOR& ^^ F^II^ --- Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman. 12 Dt Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 6 of 19 DRAFT El. Delete 40ffl� x e R,324.3.6322.3.6, ,,,. F 11 Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 7 of 19 Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Not Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt DRAFT Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 8 of 19 DRAFT ...... ......... r•tr�ars�s�ue:ase...... es�e�ee�:se!� �e�nee�sete: i" IN PMMM DIM N • •� 0 Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 9 of 19 DRAFT Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 10 of 19 DRAFT Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 11 of 19 DRAFT A. The administrative provisions contained in the codes adopted in SVMC 24.40.020 shall apply unless specifically amended by this section or SVMC 24.40.040. B. The following provisions amend all codes adopted by SVMC 24.40.020. Any provisions related to fees, time limitation of application and permit expiration in any of the codes adopted in SVMC 24.40.020 are not adopted — including but not limited to, International Building Code subsections 105.3.2 and 105.5 as adopted by WAC 51 -50: and International Residential Code subsections RI 05.3.2 and R105.5 as adopted by WAC 51 -51. C. Projects subject to regulation under this chapter vest to the State code edition under which a complete application was accepted. 1. Time limitation of application. Applications are valid for a minimum of one year. One extension of time may be granted for a term of at least 180 days but shall not exceed the time remaining in the code cycle to which the application is vested. Any request for extension shall be made in writing. All permit applications regulated by this title shall be deemed to be abandoned and become null and void if a permit is not issued within the limitations described herein. Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 12 of 19 DRAFT a. Applications that have expired subject to this section have no vested right to review under the State code or Spokane Valley Municipal Code in effect at the time of original complete application. b. For review to continue on a project for which the application has expired, a new permit application must be submitted and a new fee paid. The application is subject to the processes and requirements of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code as constituted at the time of the new application. The scope of application submittal requirements and review process shall be determined by the Community Development Director. 2. Expiration of permits. Every permit issued subject to this section shall expire and become invalid unless the work authorized by such permit is commenced within two years of issuance. One extension of time may be granted for a term of at least 180 days but shall not exceed the time remaining in the first full code cycle after the code cycle to which the permit is vested. Any such extension shall be requested in writing. A permit issued subject to this section shall expire and become invalid if the work authorized by the permit is not completed within two years after the first required inspection has been made. a. Permits that have expired subject to this section have no vested right to review under the Spokane Valley Municipal Code in effect at the time of original complete application acceptance. b. When a permit expires and the work authorized by the expired permit is not completed, the remaining work may continue only after a new permit application for the remaining work has been submitted, approved, and new fees paid. The scope of permit review and fee amount shall be determined by the Community Development Director, the fees shall be set to cover actual City costs for services. C. Compliance actions. If a permit issued to resolve a code violation expires subject to this section, the property owner may be subject to the immediate imposition of remedies authorized by the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. 3. Permit ownership. Ownership of a permit issued pursuant to this title inures to the property owner. If the permit applicant is not the property owner, the applicant shall be held to be an agent of, and acting on behalf of, the property owner. 4. Fees and fee refixnds. Application and permit fees shall be collected or refixnded subject to the provisions of the currently adopted Spokane Valley Master Fee Schedule. A permit shall not be valid until the fees prescribed by the Spokane Valley Master Fee Schedule have been paid in full. The Building Official may authorize the refunding of fees in the manner and for the amounts set forth in the currently adopted Spokane Valley Master Fee Schedule. Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 13 of 19 DRAFT 5. Work commencing before permit issuance. Any person who commences any work on a building structure, electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, before obtaining necessM permits, shall be subject to an investigation fee in accordance with the schedule established by the governing authority for such work. The investigation fee shall be equal to and additional to the permit fee that would have been required had a permit been issued and is owed whether or not a permit is subsequently issued. Payment of the investigation fee does not vest illegal work or establish any right to a permit. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New - 24.40.040 Local amendments to the adopted codes Roman, 12 pt A. The International Building Code. 1. Amend Section 105, Permits, as follows: a. Section 105.2, Work exempt from permit, Building: 1. to read as follows: One -story detached accessory structures used as tool and storage sheds, playhouses and similar uses provided the floor area does not exceed 200 square feet (11.15 mz). b. Section 105.2 Work exempt from permit, Building: Item 6. To read as follows: 6. Decks, sidewalks and driveways not more than 30 inches (762) mm) above the lowest adjacent ground level within six feet horizontally of the edge of the deck, sidewalk or driveway and where a guardrail is not required by other sections of this code, and not over any basement or story below and are not part of an accessible route. B. The International Residential Code. 1. Replace Table R301.2(1), Climatic and Geographic Design Criteria, with the following: Ground Wind Seismic Design Category SUBJECT TO DAMAGE FROM Winter Design Temp Ice Barrier Flood Hazards Air Freezing Mean Annual Snow Speed Weatheri M Frost line Termi Les Decay Underlayrn Temp Load* Gust depth tReguired Index 39 lbs /ft 85 mph C Severe 24" Slight LO Mode None to slight 10oF Yes 2010 FIRM 1232 47 2o rate *Minimum roof snow load: 30 lbs /fe 2. Add a subsection to Section R310, Emergency escape and rescue openings, as follows: Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 14 of 19 DRAFT R310.6 Replacement of emergency escape and rescue openings except for replacement of 9jazing only in such windows shall be of the size required by this section. 3. Amend Section R322, Flood- resistant construction, as follows: a. Modify R322.1, General, to add municipal code reference and read as follows: All development in whole or in part within a designated floodplain shall comply with SVMC 21.30 and be designed and constructed in accordance with the provisions contained in this section. b. Add a sentence to subsection R322.1.4, Establishing the design flood elevation, such that the section reads as follows: The desim flood elevation is eaual to base flood elevation plus one (1) foot. The design flood elevation shall be used to define areas prone to flooding, and shall describe, at a minimum, the base flood elevation at the depth of peak elevation of flooding (including wave height) which has a 1 percent (100 -year flood) or greater chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. c. Delete item 1 in subsection R322.2.1, Elevation requirements, as amended by Washington State and replace with a new item 1 to read as follows: 1. Buildings and structures in flood hazard areas not designated as Coastal A Zones shall have the lowest floors elevated to or above base flood elevation plus one foot. d. Delete item 4 in subsection R322.2.1, Elevation requirements, as amended by Washington State and replace with a new item 4 to read as follows: 4 Basement floors that are below grade on all sides shall be elevated to or above base flood elevation plus one foot. e. Add a second paragraph to Section R322.3.6, Construction documents, to read as follows: The documents shall include a verification of foundation elevation prior to footing inspection approval and a verification of lowest floor elevation to be base flood elevation plus one foot prior to framing inspection approval. C. The International Mechanical Code and the International Fuel Gas Code. Reserved D. The International Fire Code Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 15 of 19 Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.75', Tab stops: 0.75', Left Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.75' DRAFT 1. Amend Appendix C to add an exception after the last paragraph in Section C105.1, Hydrant spacing, as follows: Exception: The fire chief is authorized to reduce the number of required hydrants by up to 50% when the building is equipped with an approved, automatic fire sprinkler system and the fire chief has approved the location of those required fire hydrants. 2. Amend Appendix D, Section D101.1, to read as follows: D101.1 Scope. Fire apparatus access roads shall be in accordance with this appendix and all other applicable requirements of the International Fire Code including the provisions of Section 503 Fire Apparatus Access Roads. E44. The Uniform Plumbing Code. Reserved F. The 2009 International Plumbing Code. Reserved G. The International Existing Building Code. Reserved. H. The 2009 International Property Maintenance Code. 1. Amend Section 202, General defmitions, by adding the following definitions: i. Drug properties and structures. Any building, structure and /or associated property, identified by the Chief of Police, wherein or upon which the manufacture, distribution, production or storage of illegal drugs or the precursors to create illegal drugs has taken place in a manner which could endanger the public. ii. Blighted property. A property, dwelling, building, or structure which constitutes blight on the surrounding neighborhood. `Blight on the surrounding neighborhood" is any property, dwelling, building, or structure that meets any two of the following factors: 1. A dwelling, building, or structure exists on the property that has not been lawfully occupied for a period of one year or more, 2. The property, dwelling, building, or structure constitutes a threat to the public health, safety, or welfare as determined by the executive authority of the City or designee; 3. The property, dwelling, building, or structure is or has been associated with illegal drug activity during the previous twelve months. Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 16 of 19 DRAFT 2. Amend Section 202, General definitions, by deleting the following definitions: a. Garbage; b. Housekeeping unit; c. Inoperable motor vehicle. 3. Amend Section 108, Unsafe structures and equipment, as follows: a. Add a new subsection 108.6, Drug properties and structures, to read as follows: Drug properties and /or structures are declared to be unsafe properties or structures and are a classification of property subject to the special procedures set forth in Section 108.6. The Building Official is authorized to abate such unsafe buildings, structures, and /or associated properties in accordance with the procedures set forth in this code and Washington statute, RCW 64.44.010, with the following additional actions: 1. Due to public safety hazard in drug production facilities, all public and private utilities shall be disconnected. 2. Building(s) and structures shall be inspected to determine compliance with all City ordinances and codes. 3. Building(s) and any entry gates to the property shall be secured against entry in the manner set forth in this code; 4. Reconnection of utilities or occupancy of the building(s), structures or property shall not be allowed until all violations have been addressed, all dangerous conditions abated and a notice of release for re- occupancy has been received from the health department and sheriffs office. 5. If dangerous conditions cannot be abated, occupancy shall be prohibited and the structure and /or property may be subject to condemnation pursuant to RCW 35.80A.010, Condemnation of blighted property b. Add a new subsection 108.7, Blighted properties, to read as follows: In conformance with RCW 35.80A.010, the City may acquire by condemnation, in accordance with the notice requirements and other procedures for condemnation provided in Title 8 RCW, any property, Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 17 of 19 DRAFT dwelling, building, or structure which constitutes a blight on the surrounding neighborhood. Prior to such condemnation, the City Council shall adopt a resolution declaring that the acquisition of the real property described therein is necessary to eliminate neighborhood blight. Condemnation of property, dwellings, buildings, and structures for the purposes described in this chapter is declared to be for a public use. 4. Replace the code reference, International Plumbing Code, in Section 505.1, General, with the following: The State adoption of the Uniform Plumbing Code. 5. Delete the text of Section 602.2, Residential occupancies, and replace with the following_ Dwellings shall be provided with heating facilities capable of maintaining a room temperature of 68° F (20° C) in all habitable rooms, bathrooms, and toilet rooms. Cooking appliances shall not be used to provide space heating to meet the requirements of this section. 6. Delete the text of Section 602.3, Heat supply, and replace with the following: Every owner and operator of any building who rents, leases or lets one or more dwelling units or sleeping units on terms, either expressed or implied, to supply heat to occupants thereof shall provide heat to maintain a temperature of 68° F (20° C) in all habitable rooms, bathrooms, and toilet rooms. 7. Replace paragraph one of Section 602.4, Occupiable work spaces, with the following: Indoor occupiable work spaces shall be supplied with heat to maintain a temperature of 65° F (18° C) during the period the spaces are occupied. 8. Replace the code reference, ICC Electrical Code, in Section 604.2, Service, with the following: The State adoption of the NEC. Section Two: All other provisions of SVMC Title 24 not specifically referenced hereto shall remain in full force and effect. Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 18 of 19 Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.26" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.75" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.75" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.75" Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New ( Roman, 12 pt I DRAFT Section Three: Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrases of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Section Four: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after the publication of the Ordinance, or a summary thereof, occurs in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. Passed by the City Council this ATTEST: City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: day of June, 2012. Mayor, Thomas E. Towey Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 19 of 19 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 12 -016 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON AMENDING SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 24.40 BUILDING CODES ADOPTED, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley (City) adopted Title 24 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) pursuant to Ordinance 07 -010, on June 5, 2007; and WHEREAS, Chapter 24.40 became effective July 15, 2007; and WHEREAS, the amendment, as is set forth below, bears a substantial relation to the public health, safety and welfare and protection of the environment; and WHEREAS, amendments to the City of Spokane Valley Municipal Code may be initiated by the Planning Commission (Commission), the City Council (Council), citizens, or by the Community Development Director based on citizen requests or when changed conditions warrant adjustments; and WHEREAS, on October 4, 2011 and May 1, 2012, City Council reviewed the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on May 22, 2011, City Council considered a first ordinance reading to adopt the proposed amendment. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as follows: Section One: SVMC Title 24 shall be amended as follows: Chapter 24.40 CODES ADOPTED Sections: 24.40.010 General. 24.40.020 Specific. 24.40.030 Local administrative provisions 24.40.040 Local amendments to the adopted codes. 24.40.010 General. A. These regulations apply to any structure, equipment, or activity regulated by the herein adopted codes. All referenced codes are available for viewing at the City permit center. B. All projects submitted for review and approval must conform to the requirements of this title. (Ord. 07 -010 § 1, 2007). Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 1 of 9 DRAFT 24.40.020 Specific. The following codes, as presently constituted or subsequently amended by the state of Washington, all as amended, added to, or excluded in this chapter, together with all amendments and additions provided in this title, are adopted and shall be applicable within the City: A. Chapter 5 1 -11 WAC — Washington State Energy Code. B. Chapter 51 -19 WAC — Washington State Historic Building Code. C. Chapter 51 -50 WAC — State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the International Building Code; including Appendix Chapters E, F, G, I, and J and ICC ANSI A117.1 and the International Existing Building Code D. Chapter 51 -51 WAC — State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the International Residential Code; including Appendix Chapters F, G, H, and J. E. Chapter 51 -52 WAC — State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the International Mechanical Code, the International Fuel Gas Code, NFPA 58 and NFPA 54. F. Chapter 51 -54 WAC — State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the International Fire Code. G. Chapter 51 -56 WAC — State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of the Uniform Plumbing Code. H. Chapter 51 -57 WAC — State Building Code Adoption and Amendment of Appendices A, B and I of the Uniform Plumbing Code. I. The 2009 International Plumbing Code, that in the event of conflicts with the State Plumbing Code adoption of the Uniform Plumbing Code, the state code will prevail. Such conflicts will be reviewed and a determination issued by the building official or their designee. J. The 2009 Edition of the International Property Maintenance Code, except Sections 106, 111, 302.3, 302.4, 302.8, 303, 304.2, 304.8, 304.13 through 304.18, 305.3, 305.6, 308, 309.2 through 309.5, 404.1, 506.3, 507, and 606 are not adopted. (Ord. 07 -010 § 1, 2007). 24.40.030 Local administrative provisions A. The administrative provisions contained in the codes adopted in SVMC 24.40.020 shall apply unless specifically amended by this section or SVMC 24.40.040. B. The following provisions amend all codes adopted by SVMC 24.40.020. Any provisions related to fees, time limitation of application and permit expiration in any of the codes adopted in SVMC 24.40.020 are not adopted — including but not limited to, International Building Code subsections Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 2 of 9 DRAFT 105.3.2 and 105.5 as adopted by WAC 51 -50; and International Residential Code subsections R105.3.2 and R105.5 as adopted by WAC 51 -51. C. Projects subject to regulation under this chapter vest to the State code edition under which a complete application was accepted. 1. Time limitation of application. Applications are valid for a minimum of one year. One extension of time may be granted for a term of at least 180 days but shall not exceed the time remaining in the code cycle to which the application is vested. Any request for extension shall be made in writing. All permit applications regulated by this title shall be deemed to be abandoned and become null and void if a permit is not issued within the limitations described herein. Applications that have expired subject to this section have no vested right to review under the State code or Spokane Valley Municipal Code in effect at the time of original complete application. b. For review to continue on a project for which the application has expired, a new permit application must be submitted and a new fee paid. The application is subject to the processes and requirements of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code as constituted at the time of the new application. The scope of application submittal requirements and review process shall be determined by the Community Development Director. 2. Expiration of permits. Every permit issued subject to this section shall expire and become invalid unless the work authorized by such permit is commenced within two years of issuance. One extension of time may be granted for a term of at least 180 days but shall not exceed the time remaining in the first full code cycle after the code cycle to which the permit is vested. Any such extension shall be requested in writing. A permit issued subject to this section shall expire and become invalid if the work authorized by the permit is not completed within two years after the first required inspection has been made. a. Permits that have expired subject to this section have no vested right to review under the Spokane Valley Municipal Code in effect at the time of original complete application acceptance. b. When a permit expires and the work authorized by the expired permit is not completed, the remaining work may continue only after a new permit application for the remaining work has been submitted, approved, and new fees paid. The scope of permit review and fee amount shall be determined by the Community Development Director, the fees shall be set to cover actual City costs for services. c. Compliance actions. If a permit issued to resolve a code violation expires subject to this section, the property owner may be subject to the immediate imposition of remedies authorized by the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 3 of 9 DRAFT 3. Permit ownership. Ownership of a permit issued pursuant to this title inures to the property owner. If the permit applicant is not the property owner, the applicant shall be held to be an agent of, and acting on behalf of, the property owner. 4. Fees and fee refunds. Application and permit fees shall be collected or refunded subject to the provisions of the currently adopted Spokane Valley Master Fee Schedule. A permit shall not be valid until the fees prescribed by the Spokane Valley Master Fee Schedule have been paid in full. The Building Official may authorize the refunding of fees in the manner and for the amounts set forth in the currently adopted Spokane Valley Master Fee Schedule. 5. Work commencing before permit issuance. Any person who commences any work on a building structure, electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, before obtaining necessary permits, shall be subject to an investigation fee in accordance with the schedule established by the governing authority for such work. The investigation fee shall be equal to and additional to the permit fee that would have been required had a permit been issued and is owed whether or not a permit is subsequently issued. Payment of the investigation fee does not vest illegal work or establish any right to a permit. 24.40.040 Local amendments to the adopted codes A. The International Building Code. 1. Amend Section 105, Permits, as follows: a. Section 105.2, Work exempt from permit, Building: 1. to read as follows: One -story detached accessory structures used as tool and storage sheds, playhouses and similar uses provided the floor area does not exceed 200 square feet (11.15 m2) b. Section 105.2 Work exempt from permit, Building: Item 6. To read as follows: 6. Decks, sidewalks and driveways not more than 30 inches (762) mm) above the lowest adjacent ground level within six feet horizontally of the edge of the deck, sidewalk or driveway and where a guardrail is not required by other sections of this code, and not over any basement or story below and are not part of an accessible route. Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 4 of 9 DRAFT B. The International Residential Code. Replace Table R301.2(1), Climatic and Geographic Design Criteria, with the following: Ground Snow Wind Speed Seismic Design SUBJECT TO DAMAGE FROM Winter Design Ice Barrier Underlaymen Flood Hazards Air Freezing Mean Annual Temp Weatheri Frost line Termi Decay Load* (Gust) Category ng depth tes Temp t Required Index 39 lbs /ft 85 mph C Severe 24" Slight None to 10 °F Yes 2010 FIRM 1232 47.2 °F to slight Mode rate *Minimum roof snow load: 30 lbs 1ft2 2. Add a subsection to Section R310, Emergency escape and rescue openings, as follows: R310.6 Replacement of emergency escape and rescue openings except for replacement of glazing only in such windows shall be of the size required by this section. 3. Amend Section R322, Flood- resistant construction, as follows: a. Modify R322.1, General, to add municipal code reference and read as follows: All development in whole or in part within a designated floodplain shall comply with SVMC 21.30 and be designed and constructed in accordance with the provisions contained in this section. b. Add a sentence to subsection R322.1.4, Establishing the design flood elevation, such that the section reads as follows: The design flood elevation is equal to base flood elevation plus one (1) foot. The design flood elevation shall be used to define areas prone to flooding, and shall describe, at a minimum, the base flood elevation at the depth of peak elevation of flooding (including wave height) which has a 1 percent (100 -year flood) or greater chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. c. Delete item 1 in subsection R322.2.1, Elevation requirements, as amended by Washington State and replace with a new item 1 to read as follows: 1. Buildings and structures in flood hazard areas not designated as Coastal A Zones shall have the lowest floors elevated to or above base flood elevation plus one foot. Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 5 of 9 DRAFT d. Delete item 4 in subsection R322.2.1, Elevation requirements, as amended by Washington State and replace with a new item 4 to read as follows: 4 Basement floors that are below grade on all sides shall be elevated to or above base flood elevation plus one foot. e. Add a second paragraph to Section R322.3.6, Construction documents, to read as follows: The documents shall include a verification of foundation elevation prior to footing inspection approval and a verification of lowest floor elevation to be base flood elevation plus one foot prior to framing inspection approval. C. The International Mechanical Code and the International Fuel Gas Code. Reserved D. The International Fire Code 1. Amend Appendix C to add an exception after the last paragraph in Section C 105. 1, Hydrant spacing, as follows: Exception: The fire chief is authorized to reduce the number of required hydrants by up to 50% when the building is equipped with an approved, automatic fire sprinkler system and the fire chief has approved the location of those required fire hydrants. 2. Amend Appendix D, Section D101.1, to read as follows: D 10 1. 1 Scope. Fire apparatus access roads shall be in accordance with this appendix and all other applicable requirements of the International Fire Code including the provisions of Section 503 Fire Apparatus Access Roads. E. The Uniform Plumbing Code. Reserved F. The 2009 International Plumbing Code. Reserved G. The International Existing Building Code. Reserved. H. The 2009 International Property Maintenance Code. 1. Amend Section 202, General definitions, by adding the following definitions: i. Drug properties and structures. Any building, structure and /or associated property, identified by the Chief of Police, wherein or upon which the manufacture, distribution, production or storage of illegal drugs or the precursors Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 6 of 9 DRAFT to create illegal drugs has taken place in a manner which could endanger the public. ii. Blighted property. A property, dwelling, building, or structure which constitutes blight on the surrounding neighborhood. "Blight on the surrounding neighborhood" is any property, dwelling, building, or structure that meets any two of the following factors: 1. A dwelling, building, or structure exists on the property that has not been lawfully occupied for a period of one year or more; 2. The property, dwelling, building, or structure constitutes a threat to the public health, safety, or welfare as determined by the executive authority of the City or designee; 3. The property, dwelling, building, or structure is or has been associated with illegal drug activity during the previous twelve months. 2. Amend Section 202, General definitions, by deleting the following definitions: a. Garbage; b. Housekeeping unit; c. Inoperable motor vehicle. 3. Amend Section 108, Unsafe structures and equipment, as follows: a. Add a new subsection 108.6, Drug properties and structures, to read as follows: Drug properties and /or structures are declared to be unsafe properties or structures and are a classification of property subject to the special procedures set forth in Section 108.6. The Building Official is authorized to abate such unsafe buildings, structures, and /or associated properties in accordance with the procedures set forth in this code and Washington statute, RCW 64.44.010, with the following additional actions: 1. Due to public safety hazard in drug production facilities, all public and private utilities shall be disconnected. 2. Building(s) and structures shall be inspected to determine compliance with all City ordinances and codes. Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 7 of 9 DRAFT 3. Building(s) and any entry gates to the property shall be secured against entry in the manner set forth in this code; 4. Reconnection of utilities or occupancy of the building(s), structures or property shall not be allowed until all violations have been addressed, all dangerous conditions abated and a notice of release for re- occupancy has been received from the health department and sheriff's office. 5. If dangerous conditions cannot be abated, occupancy shall be prohibited and the structure and /or property may be subject to condemnation pursuant to RCW 35.80A.010, Condemnation of blighted property. b. Add a new subsection 108.7, Blighted properties, to read as follows: In conformance with RCW 35.80A.010, the City may acquire by condemnation, in accordance with the notice requirements and other procedures for condemnation provided in Title 8 RCW, any property, dwelling, building, or structure which constitutes a blight on the surrounding neighborhood. Prior to such condemnation, the City Council shall adopt a resolution declaring that the acquisition of the real property described therein is necessary to eliminate neighborhood blight. Condemnation of property, dwellings, buildings, and structures for the purposes described in this chapter is declared to be for a public use. 4. Replace the code reference, International Plumbing Code, in Section 505. 1, General, with the following: The State adoption of the Uniform Plumbing Code. 5. Delete the text of Section 602.2, Residential occupancies, and replace with the following: Dwellings shall be provided with heating facilities capable of maintaining a room temperature of 68° F (20° C) in all habitable rooms, bathrooms, and toilet rooms. Cooking appliances shall not be used to provide space heating to meet the requirements of this section. 6. Delete the text of Section 602.3, Heat supply, and replace with the following: Every owner and operator of any building who rents, leases or lets one or more dwelling units or sleeping units on terms, either expressed or implied, to supply Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 8 of 9 DRAFT heat to occupants thereof shall provide heat to maintain a temperature of 68° F (20° C) in all habitable rooms, bathrooms, and toilet rooms. 7. Replace paragraph one of Section 602.4, Occupiable work spaces, with the following: Indoor occupiable work spaces shall be supplied with heat to maintain a temperature of 65° F (18° C) during the period the spaces are occupied. 8. Replace the code reference, ICC Electrical Code, in Section 604.2, Service, with the following: The State adoption of the NEC. Section Two: All other provisions of SVMC Title 24 not specifically referenced hereto shall remain in full force and effect. Section Three: Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrases of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Section Four: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after the publication of the Ordinance, or a summary thereof, occurs in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. Passed by the City Council this ATTEST: City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: day of June, 2012. Mayor, Thomas E. Towey Ordinance 12 -016 Title 24 Page 9 of 9 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 12, 2012 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2012 Street Preservation Projects Update GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: March 27, 2012 council approved the Pavement Management Plan Update for 2011; April 10, 2012 council approved $2.8 million dollars for street preservation projects in 2012; May 15, 2012 Admin Report on status of the 2012 Street Preservation Projects. BACKGROUND: Council approved the Pavement Management Plan Update for 2011 which included a list of recommended street preservation projects for 2012. Council also approved $2.8 million to pay for street preservation projects in 2012. There is also $1.145 million available in the Poe Street Maintenance Contract for street preservation work. Council also approved the use of $500,000 from the Street Fund #101, designated for Street Preservation work, along with $111,000 from Fund 311 for the Evergreen Road Project. Therefore, there is approximately $4.5 million available for 2012 Street Preservation projects. Within our street maintenance contract, Poe Asphalt recently completed several preservation projects including: Appleway Ave — Argonne to University, University Road — Sprague to Appleway, University Road — 4th to 16th, Farr Road — Sprague to Appleway, and Barker Road — Spokane River to Trent. Staff also recently prepared plans /specifications and bid the 2012 Street Preservation Project — Phase 1, which included: Vista Road — Mission to Nora, 4th Ave — Dishman Mica to Farr, and Dishman -Mica — 16th to Schafer. Staff will present an update on the work completed so far and a summary of the work proposed to be completed, along with associated costs. Consensus is needed to move ahead with the Phase 2 Street Preservation Project bid as presented. A delay in moving ahead will jeopardize the ability to compete the phase 2 projects within this construction season. Please also note that the costs presented are preliminary based on the most current information available. They are subject to change as more information becomes available through 1) invoices from Poe Asphalt, 2) the design process, and 3) the Phase 2 bid results. Staff will continue to update these figures and adjust the number of projects and /or the scope of the projects as necessary to fit within the budget provided. OPTIONS: 1) Consensus to move ahead with the 2012 Street Preservation Project — Phase 2 Bid as proposed, 2) Revise the list of projects to be included in the 2012 Street Preservation Project — Phase 2 bid, or 3) provide additional direction to staff. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to move ahead with the 2012 Street Preservation Project — Phase 2 Bid as presented. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: There is a total of $4.445 million available for 2012 Street Preservation projects. The proposed projects to be completed fit within the available budget. STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, Senior Capital Projects Engineer ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint presentation on the 2012 Pavement Preservation Projects Update. 2012 Street Preservation Projects Update - June 12, 2012 2012 Street Preservation Projects _Budget Fund 311 Reserves (Evergreen Rd) $ 1 1 1,000 Street Fund 101 (Evergreen Rd) 500,000 Subtotal $ 6119000 Fund 311 Balance 2011 General Fund carry -over Subtotal Street Fund 101 (Poe Contract) Total 2 $ 773,681 2.045.202 $298189883 $191459000 $4,574,883 2012 Street Preservation Projects Completed to Date Poe Asphalt Appleway — Argonne to University Farr — Appleway to Sprague ► University — 4th to 16th University — Sprague to Appleway Barker — Spokane River to Trent $478,978 619753 3579441 52,348 79,667 ► Boone Ave —Long to Barker 479194 Total $1,077,381 2012 Street Preservation Projects Bid Results Phase I Bid Vista — Mission to Nora $ 96,332 ► 4thAve — Dishman Mica to Farr 719196 ► Dishman Mica — 16t" to Schafer 463,271 Design &Contract Management 1 30,800 Total $761 ,599 ► Evergreen Rd Reconstruction (Shamrock Paving) $717,402 Design &Contract Management $120,000 Total $837,402 2012 Street Preservation Projects Total Expenditures/ Bids to date Summary: Poe Asphalt $ 1,077,381 Phase I Bid/Estimate 761,599 Evergreen Road Bid 837.402 Total Expenditures /Bids to date 5 $2,676,382 2012 Street Preservation Projects Proposed Projects to be Completed Poe Asphalt Appleway — Argonne to University Farr — Appleway to Sprague ► University — 4th to 16th University — Sprague to Appleway $ 3,500 i 246,000 33,000 Boone Ave —Long to Barker I Total $ 284,500 2012 Street Preservation Projects Proposed Projects to be Completed Proposed Phase 2 Bid Fancher — Sprague to Broadway $ Mission —Union to Pines ► Argonne — Mullan to Montgomery (patching) Sprague — Park to I -90 O/P 507,560` 1049544 1009000 623,340' Design &Contract Management 150,1000 Total ► Pines Rd — 24th to 1 6th (to be Bid with Sidewalk Infill Project) 7 *Estimates updated based on Phase I Bids $194859444 $ 87,000 2012 Street Preservation Projects Proposed Projects to be Completed Summary: Poe Asphalt $2849500 Phase 2 Bid Estimate 1,485,444 Pines — 24th to 1 6th (Sidewalk Infill) 87,000 Total Estimate to Complete $198569944 2012 Street Preservation Projects Summary 2012 Street Preservation Budget Proposed Expenditures Total Expenditures /Bids to date Total Estimate to Complete 2012Total Proposed Expenditures 9 $ 4,574,883 $296769382 1.856.944 $ 4,533,326 2012 Street Preservation Projects Delayed Projects University — Sprague to Main $ Herald —Main to End Adams — 241" to End 32nd —University to Bowdish ► 32nd —Pines to SR27 ► Barker -Spokane River toTren Total IN 92,459 22,705 3405 316,500 475,345 $190069704 2012 Street Preservation Projects Questions? 91- or l CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 12, 2012 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: 2012 Street Preservation Projects — Phase 1 Bid Award GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: March 27, 2012 council approved the Pavement Management Plan Update for 2011; April 10, 2012 council approved $2.8 million dollars for street preservation projects in 2012; May 15, 2012 Admin Report on the 2012 Street Preservation Projects Update. BACKGROUND: Council approved the Pavement Management Plan Update for 2011 which included a list of recommended street preservation projects for 2012. Council also approved $2.8 million to pay for street preservation projects in 2012. Staff prepared plans, specifications and a bid package for Phase 1 of these projects, which includes: 1) Vista Rd — Nora to Mission, 2) 4th Ave — Dishman -Mica to Farr, and 3) Dishman- Mica — 16th to Schafer. Bids were advertised on May 18 & 25 and bids were opened on June 1. Of the five bidders, Spokane Rock Products, Inc. is the apparent low bidder with a total bid of $630,799.53. OPTIONS: 1) Award the contract to Spokane Rock Products, Inc. 2) not award the contract to Spokane Rock Products, Inc. or 3) provide additional direction to staff. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to award the 2012 Street Preservation Project — Phase 1 to Spokane Rock Products, Inc., in the amount of $630,799.53 and to authorize the City Manger to finalize and execute the construction contract. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Council approved a total of $2.8 million in for Street Preservation projects in 2012. This bid is within the funds available. STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, Senior Capital Projects Engineer ATTACHMENTS: Bid Tabulations — 2012 Street Preservation Project — Phase 1 YAN BID TABULATIONS �gLL Q. eS WAgy''!f 2012 Sreet Preservation Project -Phase 1 Spokane Project CIP No. 0162 ;0OUalley. BID OPENING DATE - June 1, 2012, 10:00 A.M. Engineer's Estimate Spokane Rock Inc Products, Inland Asphalt Company Shamrock Paving, Inc. Poe Asphalt Paving, Inc. Knife River Corporation ITEM ITEM Unit QUANTITY Unit Price Tolel Ccet Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Coat Unit Price I Total Cost Unit Price Total Coat A (Vista. Mission to Nora) 8 PLANING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT, 1f2" DEPTH 3.Y. 2,400 $ 7,200.00 $ 1.11 $ 2,664.00 § 1.30 $ 3,120.00 § 1.50 $ 3,800.00 $ 1.09 $ 2,61 B.00 $ 1.70 4,080.00 9 SHIM PLANNING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT S.Y. 80 $ 160.00 $ 11.55 $ 924.00 $ 2.90 $ 232.00 $ 7.00 S 580.00 $ 0.69 $ 55.20 $ 170 $ 136.00 10 HMA CL. 1/2" PG 64 -28, .17 FT. DEPTH, PATCH S.Y. 700 $ 5,600.00 $ 15.92 $ 11.,144.00 $ 8.00 $ 5,600.00 $ 8.50 $ 5,950.00 $ 10.13 $ 7,09100 $ 7.85 $ 5,495.00 11 HMA CL. 1/2" PG 64-28 ,17 FT. DEPTH S.Y. 3,200 $ 32,000.00 $ 8.74 $ 27,968.00 $ 7.50 24,000.00 $ 8.50 $ 27,200.00 $ 8.51 $ 27,232.00 $ 8.00 $ 25,600.00 12 SAWCUT ACP PAVEMENT LF - IN 2 600 $ 2,080.00 $ 0.30 $ 780.00 $ 0.25 $ 650.00 $ 0.30 $ 780.00 0.27 $ 702.00 $ 0.27 $ 702.00 13 CRACK SEALING Est 1 ffi$7,200.00 $ 5 000.00 Est $ 5,000.00 Est $ 5 000.00 Est $ 5,000.00 Est $ 5,000.00 Est $ 5 014 JOINT ADHESIVE LF 1,255 $ 1,255.00 $ 0.50 $ 627.50 $ 0.85 $ 1066.75 S 1.25 $ 1,568.75 $ 0.83 $ 1,041,65 $ 1.25 $ 1568.75 15 ANTI - STRIPPING ADDITIVE CALC 1 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 S 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 16 JOB MIX COMPLIANCE PRICE ADJUSTMENT CALC 1 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 § 1.00 COMPACTION PRICE ADJUSTMENT CALC 1 $ 1.00 S 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.OD $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 18 ADJUST EXISTING MANHOLE EA 3 500.00 $ 1,500.00 $ 350.110 $ 1,050.00 $ 340.00 $ 1,020.00 $ 405.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 340.00 $ 1,020.00 $ 355.00 $ 1,065.00 19 ADJUST VALVE BOX EA 4 $ 250.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 175.00 $ 700.00 $ 290.00 $ 1,160.00 $ 300.00 $ 1,200.00 $ 290,00 $ 1,160.00 $ 300.00 $ 1,200.00 20 TEIAPORARY PAVEMENT MARKING LF 4,200 S 0.40 S 1,680.00 S 0.18 $ 756.00 S 0.19 S 798.00 $ 0.25 $ 1,050.00 $ 0,19 $ 798.00 $ 0.20 $ 840.00 Total Schedule A _ $79,637.80 - $96,332.00 $66,814.05 $73,695.25 W$83,197.71 $88,630.75 'Addendum 2 Revision; Engineer's Estimate I Spokane Rock Products, Inc I Inland Asphalt Company I Shamrock Paving, Inc. I Poe Asphalt Paving, Inc. I Knife River Corporation ITEM ITEM Unit TOTAL Unit Price I Total Coat Unit Price Total Cost Unit Prloe I Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price I Total Cost Unit Price I Total Coat B (4th - Dishman -Mica to Farr) _ Schedule B 1 $106,463.90 1 $71,196.30 Engineer's Estimate Spokane Rock Products, Inc Inland Asphalt Company Shamrock Paving, Inc. Poo Asphalt Paving, Inc. Knife River Corporation ITEM ITEM Unit OUAN7 N Unit Price Total Cast Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost Unit Price Total Cost SCHEDULE C (Dishman -Mica -16th to Schafer) MP SCHEDULE C MOBILIZA TION L.S. 1 L.S. $76,452.20 L.S. $4,510.00 L.S. $20,900.85 L.S. $25,000.00 L.S. $30,889.21 L.S. $10,740.00 CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING L.S. 1 L.S. $2,000.00 L.S. $5,610.00 L.S. $5,610.00 L.S. $6,000.00 L.S. 55,610.00 L.S. 56,00000 SCHEDULE CSPCC PLAN L.S. 1 L.S. $1,333.00 L.S. $500.00 L.S. $255.00 L.S. $500.00 L.S. $159.50 L.S. $200.00 SCHEDULE C TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL L.S. 1 L.S. $7,200.00 L.S. $2,800.00 L.S. $14,900.00 L.S. $21,000.00 L.S. $14,900.00 L.S. $19,600.00 SCHEDULECFLAGGERB AND SPOTTERS HR 128 $ 50.00 $6400.00 $ 4250 $5,440.00 $ 42.15 $5,395.20 $ 45.00 $5,760.00 $ 42.15 $5,395.20 $ 44.25 $5,664.00 rl�g REMOVE PCC CURB AND GUTTER LF 400 $ 4.50 $1,800.00 $ 3.50 $1,400,00 $ 4.00 $1,600.00 $ 8.50 $3,400.00 $ 4.00 $1,600.00 $ 7.00 $2,800.00 REMOVE PCC SIDEWALK S.Y. 180 $ 7.00 $1,260.00 $ 6.00 $1,080.00 $ 6.00 $1 080.00 $ 14.00 $2,520.00 $ 6.00 $1,080.00 $ 9.00 $1,620,00 REMOVE JUNCTION BOX FA 3 $ 200.00 $600.00 $ 100.00 $30000 300.00 $900.00 $ 105.00 $315,00 $ 100.00 $300.00 $ 310.00 $930.00 PLANING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT, 2 IN. DEPTH S.Y. 42,000 $ 5.00 $210,000.00 $ 0.84 $35,280.00 $ 0.83 S34 860.00 $ 1.25 $52,500.00 $ 1.28 $53,760.00 $ 1.95 $81,900.00 HMA CL. 112" PG 64-28,17 FT. DEPTH S.Y. 42,000 $ 10.00 $420,000.00 $ 7.40 $310,800.00 $ 7.55 $317,100.00 $ 7.00 $294,000.00 $ 7.53 $316,260.00 $ 7.30 $306,600.00 HMA CURB PATCH S.Y. 100 $ 30,00 $3,000.00 $ 36.31 $3,631.00 $ 81.80 $8,180.00 $ 75.00 $7,500.00 $ 41.91 $4,191.00 $ 74,00 $7,400.00 HMASIGNALPATCH S.Y. 380 $ 30.00 $11,400.00 $ 54.63 $20,835.40 $ 43.90 $161682.00 $ 45.00 17,100.00 $ 51.61 $19,611.80 $ 56.00 $21,280.00 SAWCUT ACP PAVEMENT LF - IN 4,200 $ 0.80 $3,360.00 $ 0.30 $1,260.00 $ 0.25 $1050.00 $ 0.30 $1,260.00 $ 0.27 $1,134.00 $ 0.27 $1,134.00 JOINTADHESIVE LF 4,900 $ 1.00 $4,900.00 $ 0.50 $2,450.00 $ 0.85 $4,165.00 $ 0.90 $4,410.00 $ 0.60 $2,940.00 $ 1.00 $4,90000 r14 ANTI - STRIPPING ADDITIVE CALC 1 $ 1.00 $1.00 $ 1.00 $1.00 $ 1.00 $1.00 $ 1.00 $1.00 1.00 $1.00 $ 1.00 $1.00 JOB M IX COMPLIANCE PRICE ADJUSTMENT CALC 1 $ 1.00 $1.00 $ 1,00 $1.00 $ 1.00 $1.00 $ 1.00 $1.00 $ 1.00 $1.00 $ 1.00 $1.00 COMPACTION PRICE ADJUSTMENT CALC 1 $ 1.00 $1.00 $ 1.00 $1.00 $ 1.00 $1.00 $ 1.00 $1.00 $ 1.00 $1.00 $ 1.00 $1.00 ADJUST EXISTING MANHOLE EA 19 $ 500.00 $9,500.00 $ 350.00 $6,650,00 $ 340.00 $6,460.00 $ 400.00 $7,600.00 $ 340.00 $6,460.00 $ 355.00 $6,74500 ADJUST EXISTING CATHCBASIN OR DRYWELL EA 12 $ 500.00 $6,000.00 $ 350.00 $4,200.00. $ 340.00 $4,080.00 400.00 $4,800.00 $ 340,00 $4,080.00 $ 355.00 $4260.00 20 SEEDING, FERTILIZING AND MULCHING S.Y. 70 $ 1.00 $70.00 $ 10.00 $700.00 $ 10.00 $700.00 $ 10.00 $700.00 $ 10.00 $700.00 $ 12.00 $640.00 21 RIVER ROCK S.Y. 8 $ 50.00 $400.00 $ 10.00 $80.00 $ 10.00 $80.00 $ 10.00 $80.00 $ 10.001 $80.00 $ 12.00 $96.00 22 TOP SOIL TYPE'B' S.Y. 70 $ 6.00 $420.00 $ 10,00 $700.00 $ 10.00 $700.00 $ 10.00 $700.00 $ 10.00 $700.00 $ 12.00 $84C.00 23 CEMENT CONCRETE TRAFFIC CURB AND GUTTER LF 400 $ 18.00 §7,200.00 $ 27.43 §10,972.00 $ 28.25 $11,300.00 $ 213.00 $10,400.00 $ 23.00 $9,200.00 $ 28.00 $11,200.00 24 CEMENT CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN CURB LF 130 $ 25.00 $3,250.00 $ 35.20 $4,576.00 $ 21.00 $2,730.00 $ 23.00 $2,990.00 $ 21.00 $2,730.00 $ 26.20 $3,406.00 25 ADJUST MONUMENT CASE AND COVER EA 4 $ 350.00 $1,400.00 $ 125.00 $500.00 $ 300.00 $1,200.00 $ 300.00 $1,200.00 $ 300.00 $1,200.00 $ 310.00 $1,240.00 26 CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK S.Y. 130 $ 45.00 $5,850.00 $ 48.69 $6,329.70 $ 30.00 $3,900.00 $ 45.00 $5,650.00 $ 39.00 $6,070.00 $ 51.25 6662.50 27 CEMENT CONC. CURB RAMP TYPE, PARALLEL A EA 9 $ 700.00 $6,300.00 $ 964.07 $8,676.63 $ 1,090.00 $9,810.00 $ 1,750.00 $15,750.00 $ 700.00 $6,300.00 $ 885.00 $7,965.00 25 CEMENT CONG. CURB RAMP TYPE, PERPENDICULAR A FA 5 $ 600.00 $4,000.00 $ 878.30 $4,391.50 $ 1,020.00 $5,100.00 $ 1,750.00 $8,750,00 $ 660.00 $3,250.00 $ 640.00 $4,200.00 29 DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE SF 8 $ 50.00 $400.00 $ 25.00 $200.00 $ 40.00 $320.00 $ 25.00 $200.00 $ 25.00 $200.00 $ 26.20 $209.60 3D INDUCTION LOOP TYPE EA 20 L53,200 $ 500.00 $10000.00 5 435.00 $8,700.00 $ 400.00 $8,000.00 $ 450.00 $9,000.00 $ 435.00 $8,700.00 $ 450.00 9000.00 31 JUNCTION BOX, TYPE 2 EA 4 $ 800.00 $3,200.00 $ 595.00 52,380.00 S 500.00 $2,000.00 5 600.00 52,400.00 $ 595.00 $2,380.00 $ 620.00 $2,480.00 32 !TEMPO RAR PAVEMENT MARKING LF $ 0.40 $33,200.00 $ 0.10 $8,320.00 $ 0.19 $15,608.00 $ 0.26 $16,640.00 $ 0.19 $15,801{.00 $ 0.20 516,640.00 Total Schedule C aw $840,974.20 $463,271.23 $504,865,05 $528,324.00 IN $524,687.71 $546,451.10 Total of COMBINED Extended Amount for Schedules A, B, and C $1,026,075.90 $630,799.53 $647,725.00 $687,863.25 $704,089.67 $732,824.35 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 12, 2012 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Project Access Update GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Project Access Operations Manager Sarah Bates will give Council an update on their organization. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: ' I I Project Access Spokane ANNUAL REPORT 2011 Lee Taylor Project Access Director Brad Pope, MD 2012 President, Spokane County Medical Society Foundation ooking back at our eighth year of operation, we are grateful to the more than 600 physicians, hospitals and allied health care providers who donated their services in 2011. These community partnerships enabled Spokane Project Access to provide medical services for more than 651 clients In 2011. Together, this network of volunteers donated more than $7 million in medical services for low- income uninsured people in Spokane County. Project Access continues to be the only organization in Spokane that coordinates donated health care services for qualified residents who have no access to private health insurance or other public programs. If we measure the value of Since Spokane Project Access began in 2003, 5,500 patients have received $44 million of donated medical services, our program as a return on community investment (ROCI), a ratio of the value of services provided and the operating expenses, Spokane Project Access returns nearly $15 of services for every dollar invested. In 2010, the ROCI was $12. Simply put, we increased the value of the community dollars invested by lowering expenses and increasing the number of clients we served. Over the past year, Project Access has been working very hard to trim unnecessary expenses, improve efficiency and develop an aggressive fundraising plan. The fundraising plan includes demonstrating the efficiency of our operation, demonstrating patient outcomes, demonstrating the community value of our services, and building relationships with key medical community and business community partners. This year we also began working on a collaborative project with the medical directors of four emergency departments in Spokane. This project has established a strong community network of clinic and medical services providers who can manage the care of people who frequently visit our community's emergency rooms. We believe this work will lead to new opportunities to add value in the community and new sources of funding. To sustain our growth, we rely on the generous community donors who help fund the operating expenses of Project Access who are listed in this report. We are also grateful to the medical leaders in our community who gave us their time and endorsements for this report, Their support is critical for our success. We know challenges remain before us, but each year hundreds of providers step up to volunteer, and more patients get the care they desperately need. And that's the bottom line we're all aiming for. Sincerely, Brad Pope, MD 2012 President Spokane County Medical Society Foundation Lee Taylor Project Access Director fffflm 1=1 Statement of Income and Expenses ■ Other Contributions 1 % Other 3 °lo Insurance 1 Vila Cam munlcations & PR 2'lo Professional Services — 2 %e Supplies & Maintenance - 3% City, County and Other Governments $185,500 Healthcare Organizations $121,500 Corporate Donations $34,000 Other contributions $1,865 Total Revenue $342,865 .640- ? _ _ Salary, Wages and Benefits $284,974 Facility and Administration $103,952 Supplies and Maintenance $15,269 Professional Services $10,435 Communications and PR $8,255 Insurance $6,141 Other $11,482 Total Expenses — $440,508 i Estimated Value of Healthcare Services Provided by Type Hospital Services $5,004,505 Specialty Medical Services $2,142,777 Prescription Assistance, Durable Medical Equipment, $64,409 Interpreter Services Total $7,211,691 NOTE: The total value of healthcare services provided based on actual claims reports is $5,536,101. Previous reports have shown that approximately 74 percent of the services provided are reported through the Project Access claims process. Approximately 26 percent of the services delivered are not reported. The total for estimated services shown above is calculated using this factor. Prescription Assistance, Durable Medical Equipment, Interpreter Services <1% Radiology Cardiology Gynecology General Surgery Orthopedics Dermatology Physicial Therapy Pulmonology Urology Gastroenterology Opthamology ENT Oncology Vascular Surgery Endocrinology Nephrology Physlatry Podiatry Primary Care Other 22.2% 11.9% 10.9% 7,3% 6.5% 5.0% 4.6% 4.3% 4.0% 3.9% 3.7% 2.9% 2,4% 2.0% 0.7% 1.1% 0.7% 1,3% 1.0% 1.2% — - - All no day I had to walk in and tell my boss that I can't go on that call. I couldn't see." For Mitch Decker, the number one technician at ColorMaster Carpet Cleaning, it meant he couldn't work. He didn't have health insurance, and he knew he couldn't afford specialty medical treatment for his eyes. Then Decker met Dr. Michael Cunningham, an ophthalmologist who volunteers with Project Access. Dr. Cunningham examined Decker and thought he could help. "Being able to perform cataract surgery on someone who is bilaterally blind from cataracts is especially rewarding, even more so in a relatively young person who wants to work and is trying to get his life back," explains Dr, Cunningham. "Blindness takes him out of the loop." Ophthalmologist Ur. Michael Cunningham shares his time and talent to help restore sight to Project Access patients. Dr. Cunningham felt that Decker was an excellent candidate for cataract surgery. The surgery was a success. "Seven days of recovery and I was back at work," says Decker. "I've been working like crazy since then." For patients referred through Project Access, physicians like Dr. Cunningham can change their life. Patients got the specialty care they need because these physicians volunteer to help. "All physicians that I know are altruistic," says Dr. Cunningham. "Most of us chose the medical field because we want to help people, Project Access is a great way for us to get together and help people with no strings attached," Dr. Cunningham has been a volunteer with Project Access since it began eight years ago and believes that the program has a number of advantages for physicians who want to support the uninsured in the community. "It's great to be involved in providing charity care, but it's even better when we can share it among providers and organizations so the need doesn't just fall on a few people," explains Dr. Cunningham. He also cites the network of providers working with Project Access as a real advantage for patient care. "Before Project Access, if I had a patient who had a problem that is within my skill set, could take care of him. But if I discovered that a patient had a retinal problem, I had nowhere to send him," he recalls. "With Project Access, it's very easy for me to call another specialist and say, 'I have a patient with a problem that I can't handle, can you help ?' I don't think there's a better way to spend time than helping people who really need It." Mitch Decker puts things pretty simply; "Project Access helps people like me, people who are working hard to get by, but can't afford medical insurance. I want to say thank you to all the physicians who volunteer," he says. `Because of Project Access, I got my life back," Dr. Michael Cunningham and his staff have worked with Project Access since the organization began, Pictured from L -R: JoAnn P, LaVonne 5,, Lynn L., Dr. Cunningham, Toni B. - L ' he Yakima Valley Farm Workers Clinic operates two clinics in the Spokane area; Spokane Falls Family Clinic and Riverstone Family Health Clinic. Ten providers offer primary care services to patients at these two community pity clinics. Many of these patients are without insurance and do not qualify for other public programs Spokane Falls Family Clinic and Riverstone Family Health Clinic offer a sliding fee scale to see a primary care provider for preventive care and to diagnose medical conditions. When these uninsured patients are in need of specialty care, the providers at Spokane Falls Family Clinic and Riverstone Family Health Clinic refer them to Project Access. The Yakima Valley Farm Workers Clinic and Project Access have been partners since the beginning of the program. This strong partnership connects low- income, uninsured patients in need of care with area specialists who are willing to donate their care. An estimated 450 patients of Spokane Falls Family Clinic and Riverstone have received specialty appointments through Project Access. ockwood is multi - specialty clinic, with locations including Spokane, Medical lake, Rockwood has been donating specialty medical services to Project Access patients since the program began in 2003. The services donated by the Rockwood Clinic Include: Cardiology • Dermatology • Endocrinology • Gastroenterology • General Surgery • Gynecology • Neurology • Oncology • Otolaryngology (ENT) • Plastic Surgery • Radiology • Urology • Vascular Surgery The Project Access partnership with Rockwood is truly a partnership that delivers tremendous value to our community and helps enable hundreds of low- income uninsured people to return to good health and to a productive life. The Rockwood Clinic providers offer the unique benefit of being part of a well - established, integrated system of care. Project Access patients with complex conditions are often treated by multiple Rockwood providers. These treatment transitions work smoothly because the Project Access patients are prequalified for donated care for the full treatment of their condition, and because of the strong connections between Rockwood Clinic providers. rovidence Medical Group (PMG) has more than 40 medical clinics serving Spokane and Stevens counties, with more than 200 qualified doctors and providers offering expertise in family medicine, internal medicine, pediatrics, obstetrics /gynecology, dermatology and other specialties. The services donated by PMG include: Cardiology • Neurology • Gastroenterology • Orthopedics • Nephrology • Gynecology • Vascular Surgery Providence Medical Group providers have been strong supporters of Project Access since the inception of the organization. The Providence ministries' guiding principles of providing compassionate service, with special attention to the poor and underserved are profoundly evident in their donation of services to Project Access clients. The value of the services donated by the PMG providers is often combined with the donated services from the Providence hospitals, Sacred Heart and holy Family, These combined services provide Project Access clients with full treatment of their condition, giving them the best chance to return to work, school and a productive life. HOSPITALS Deaconess Medical Center Providence Sacred Heart Providence Holy Family Valley Hospital and Medical Center CARDIOLOGY Heart Clinics Northwest Bennett, William R, MD Byazrova, Eteri, MD Chilson, Donald A., MD Cohen, Jeffrey, PA -C Cooke, Dennis B.,MD Everett, John P., MD Ferraro, Angelo S., MD Fritz, Ronald M., 00 Glavin, Christina, PA -C Hanson, Carl L , MD Hit), R. Dean, MD Hosteller, Michael 0., MD Janout, Marek, PAD Jenkins, Ronald D., FAD Kadel, Keith A., NO Kavanaugh, Kevin M , MD Keyser, Larry, PA -C Lessmeier, Timothy J., MD Miklos, Erika, PA -C Murphrae, Taffie L., ARNP Orme, Eric C., MD Spyra, Wolfgang J.T, MD Stucky, Eric D., PAD Thew, Stephen T, MD Waggoner, L. Douglas, MD Williams, Michael R, MD Wolf, Gretchen Rose, PA -C Inland Cardiology Associates Canaday, Donald, MD Galloway, Joel, MD Kelley, Michael, MD Kunkel, Ralph, MD Murphy, William, MD Rath, Jason, MD West, Doug, PA -C Rockwood Cardiology Wyrick, Jarad, MD Providence Spokane Cardiology Alexander, Susan, PAD Batkoff, Braden, MD Bishop, Timothy, NO Bitailo, Nancy, PA -C Boulat, Andrew, MD Chr#stensen, Janice, MD Dickey, Sandra, PA -C Fuhs, Bryan, MD Goldberg, Harold, MD Hollanbaugh, Darren, NO Huber, Philip, MD Katz, Guy, MD Kwasman, Michael, MD Lelmgruber, Pierre, MD Lubbe, Dialer, MD Mulheims, Gerhard, MD Peterson, John, FAO Ring, Michael, MD Wales, R. Alan, MD Whisenanl, Michael, MD Northwest Center For Congenital Heart Disease Anderson, Christian, MD Burg, Pamela, NO Garabedian, Carl, MD Garabedian, Hrair, MD Jensen, Richard, MD CHIROPRACTIC Alder Family Chiropractic Alder, Paul, OC Valente Chiropractic Valente, Michael, DC Wolf Chiropractic Melich, Christopher, DC Zografos Chiropractic Zografos, Peter, DC DERMATOLOGY Advanced Dermatology of Spokane Ahrnt, Scott, PA -C Cvancara, Joseph, MO Daminey, Andrea, NO Dunn, Paul, PAD Hestdalen, Slant, MD Jacobsen, Elizabeth, PA -C Lejameyer, Kathy, AHNP Sears, Joel, MD Sukut, Chad, NO Dermatology Associates of Spokane Ryan, Michael, MD Dermatology Specialists of Spokane Dudenhofer, Eric ARNP Hardener, Richard, MD Lengl, Trent, PA -C Marino, Christina, MD Reed, Katherina, MD Rockwood Dermatology Ellarn, Jeannie, PA -C Spokane Dermatology Clinic Garcia, James, PA -C Taylor, Julie, PA -C Werschlcr, Philip, MD OTOLARYNGOLOGY Rockwocd ENT Bassett, Mark, MD Spokane ENT Ahlstrom, Karen K., NO Bunn, Jeffrey, MD Connelly, Jan, MD Cruz, Michael, MD Giddings, Neil, MD Herbach- Nader, Barbara, ARNP Hoffman, John, NO Lebedoer, Karoo, ARNP Malone, David, MD Mitchell, Brian, 00 Olds, Michael, MD Pokorny, Alan, MD Roller, Cairie, MD Spokane Valley ENT Benage, Charles, NO Hussein, Omar, MD Julian, Geoffrey, MD Leavitt, Eric, NO McClelland, Bruce, NO FAMILY PRACTICE Bogarosh, Christopher, MD Brennan, Heather, MD Dooley, Phillip, MD Friesen, Susan, ARNP Goodman, Francis, FAD Gore, Debra, MD Graham, 18nlce, MD Hideg, Alisa, MD Holmquist, Gunnar, MD II Tommy, MJ Maddox, James, NO Margret, Robert, MD Meyer, Timothy, MD Mueller, Jan, MD Nesse, Rolf, MD Higgs, Robert, MD Ritchey, Timothy, MD Robinson, Kirsten, MO Sayres, Ulliam, NO Schimpf, Mariah, MD Schreote , Rosemary, MD Shepard, Frcdre, MD Sikora, Michael, NO Skrei, Richard, NO Smith, Nanette, NO Tubbs, Eric, MD White, Jeffrey, MD Group Health Alcaroz, Vera niq u a. M D GASTROENTEROLOGY Batcholde ; Andrew. NO Inland Empire Bell, Gina, MD Gastroenterology Bingham, James, MD Doyle, James, MD Fritterer, J.D., MB Pena, Holly, ARNP Providence Adult Gastroenterology Anderson, Stacea, PA -C Goff, Philip, MO Srikueokureja, Wichit, FAD Rockwood Gastroenterology Bocek, Zdenek, MD Brophy, Michael, MD Hedges, Clinton, MSPAS Cook, Caron, PA -G Delich, Philip, MD Feld, Andrew, MD Preiksaitis, Harold, NO Shabaneh AlTamimi, Hamed A., MD Stumm, Robert, PA -G Spokane Digestive Disease Cohen, Arnold N., MD Durnford, Robert K, MD Goff, James S., NO Goodell, Steven E., MD Hong, Steven W., MD Houglum, Karl P., MD Kestell, Michael F, NO Maccini, David M., MD Schlepp, Gregory E, NO GYNECOLOGY Associates For Women's Health Brasch, James, MD Fine, Kurt, MD Milligan, Robert, MD Providence Center for Gyneeolagy, Rohotics, and Minimally Invasive Surgery Brisl is, H. Steven, MD North Spokane Women's Health Anderson, Debra, ARNP Cathcart, Sharon, DO Edge, Sara, ARNP Hardy, Ron, MD Havin, Derrick, MD McKenna, John I., MD Northwest OB /GYN Barko, Natalia ARNP Barrong, Shawn, MD Colby, Jessica, ARNP Ferri, Peter, MD Hammli, Sara, MD Hilton, Jeffrey, MD Hiss, Gien, MD Holt, Sara, ARNP CNM Kahl, Kdsta PA -C McFadden, Sue, ARNP Mlles, Katherine M., MD Northern, Shelly, ARNP CNM Partoll, Linda, MD Zwlesler, Daniel, MD OB -Gyn Associates of Spokane Gray, Bdeanna, ARNP Hachtman, Jody, MD McCaffree, F.M., MD McClatchey, Lynn, ARtIP Messinger, Rabin, MD Reinhardt, Susan, ARNP Richards, Steven, MD Satterfield, Traci, MD Smetana, Lori, MD Wills, Laura Jan, ARNP Rockwood OB- GYN Center Siivarsteln, Pamela, MD Spokane OB /GYN Baker, Amery PA -C Grant, Dominique, MD Malhia, Kelley, MD Meyer, Marynell, MD Reuter, Jason, MD Scheme Mark, PAD Stovall, V illlani, MD Valley obstetrics And Gynecology Brown, Douglas, MD Freeland, Lisa, ARNP CNM Joy, Lori, Mil Keuhn, Karen, PA -G Meltzer, Nathan, MD Sementi, Olivia, MD Smenlek, Craig, MD 4Vimberlsy, Genevieve, PA -C INFECTIOUS DISEASE The infectious Disease Clinic of Spokane Arguinchona, Henry, MD Gillum, Michael, MD Maughan, Timothy, MD INTERNAL MEDICINE Internal Medicine Residency Spokane Northside Internal Medicine Oskin, Terri, MD Rockwood Clinic Internal Medicine 1Yukelic, Michael, MD The Physicians Clinic of Spokane Ahmed, Saima, MD Bender, Berdine, MD Chow, Ward, MD Clodo, Jeffrey, MD Cox, Svetlana, MD Dionne, Daniel, MD Dutta, Sanjit, MD Edvrards, Kathy ARNP Floyd, John, MD He, Elizabeth, MD AR Hunt, Donna, NP Johnson, Mark, N40 Johnson, Stephen, MD Lefcart, Donna, MD Me'aku, Habtamua, ARNP Parisat, Michael, MD Rowbotham, Kirk, PAD Schigious, Terry, ARNP Si Brian, MD Sledge, James PA -C Snow, Rita, MO Ulloa- Michaelis, Julie, MD Weaver, Victoria, MD Nlgert, Robert, MD Was- Eliedge, Barbara,ARNP INTERNAL MEDICINE — ENDOCRINOLOGY Endocrine Associates of Spokane Kohlmaler, Lynn, MD Northside Internal Medicine Cathcart, Ken, DO NEPHROLOGY Providence Kidney Care Chow, Nelson, MD Groza, Pairu, MD Malireddi, Krishna, MD Mrach, Henry, MD Reddy, Vijayakumar MD Providence Kidney Disease Tuttle, Katherine, MO NEUROLOGY Bender & Worst Neurology Bender, William, MD Worst, John, h1D Northwest Neurological Greeley, Javid, MD Judah, Dwain, PA -C Mark, Jamie, ARNP Providence MS Center Cooke, Roger,MD Providence Epilepsy Center Gregg, Amy PA -C Powell, Timothy, MD Providence Neurology Matei, Cristina, MD NEUROSURGERY Inland Neurosurgery & Spine Campbell, Julie PA -C Carlson, Jonathan, MD Gruber, David, MD Hirschauer, Jeffrey, MD King, Kathy, PA -C Ling, Benjamin, MD Martz, Dean, MD McLeod, Pam, PA -C Quinlan, Linda, PA -C Sardhu, Neelwanl, MD 1'letel, Vidliam, MD ONCOLOGY Cancer Care Northwest Balazs, Andrea, ARNP Bergman,Melanle K., MD Carey, Coleen R., MD Fairbanks, Robert K., MD Fairfax, Robert PA -C Fletcher, Stephanie A.,ARNP Foutz, Mary S., ARNP Gersh, Robert H., MD Grosan, ElizatethA., MO Grath, Karen E., ARNP Holbrook, Ryan F„ MD Jawed, lifan, MD Jonas, Christina L„ PA -C Kaya, Hakan, f.1D Lamoreaux, Wayne T., MD Laugen, Robert H., MD Leo, Christopher M., MD Locum, Khoury, MD Martinicic, Danko, MD Moline, Stephanie R., MD Nichols, Joni C., MD Njuguna, Ndegwa M., MD Parviz, Maryam, LMD Pietro, Anna I., ARNP Sianko, Mark E., MD Smolinski, Ann PA-C Thumma, Sadtha C., MD Wright, Byron E., MD Medical Oncology Associates Chaudry, Arvind, MD Schlegel, Peter, MD Taylor, Jessica, ARNP Tupper, Teri, ARNP Rockwood Oncology Aberle, Marie, ARNP Klarnet, Jay, MD LaValle, Granary, MD Lund, Kirk, MD Martinez, Deborah, MD Newman, GorLss, MD Pfeffer, Robert, MO Richardson, Heidi, MD Robison, Jeanne, ARNP Wittenkeller, Jay, MD Webb, Joel, MD OPHTHALMOLOGY Inland Eye Center Cunningham, Michael, MD Haymore, Jonathan, MO Kordish, David, OD Northwest Eyelid & Orbital Specialists Michels, Kevin, MO Retinal Specialists Associates MiEsow, Larry, MD Spokane Eye Clinic Brandt, Nicole K., MD Colburn, Jeffrey D., MD Day, Steven E., MD Durcan, F. Jane, MD Guglialmo, Eric S., MD Jacobson, Randall K., MD Johnson, Alan M., DO Janes, Jason H., MO LeCialre, Jerry E., MO Maher, Stephen C., MD Maler, Mitchell J.V., OD Moffa$, Kelly M., 03 Pine, Jennifer J., OD Ranson, Nicholas T., MD Skoog, Erik D., MD Smit, Barbara A., MO Ph.d Stolp, Janine N., DO Wadhwa, Shall, A., OD Wirthlin, Robert S., MD ORTHOPEDICS Northwest Orthopedic Specialists Anderson, Christopher, MD Bozzone, Robert, PA -C Beuscher, Mark, PA -C Boyd, John, PA -C Danielson, Alan, MD Dieter, Michael, PA -C Ellingson, Donald, MD Fleming, Tod, PA -C Horn, Paul, MD Janout, Martin, MD Keeve, Jonathan, MD Kerste n, Tycho, M D Kody, Michael, MO Lln, Harry, MD Lynch, Patrick, MD McDonald, Michael, MD Norquist, Douglas G., MD Olson, Mark, MD Olson, Soren, MD OstIle,Todd, PA -C Padrtra, Brian, MD Powers, Timothy, MD Reichard, A. Kirk, MD Sestero, Anthony, MD Shtrzad, Khalid, MO Shuster, John, MD Smilden, Rhaejon, PA -C Desaveur, Brand!, PA -C Tomah, Antoine, MD Dunlap, James N, MD Treloar, Richard, MD Hogberge, Trappy, PA -C Vanderwllde, Russell, MD Howlett, Andrevr, MO Wallace, Matthew, MD Jacksan, Scott, PA-C V ood, Robert A Lovell, Tim, MO Orthopedic Smith, Carla, MD Specialty Clinic Rockwood Orthopedics Anderson, Kurt, MD French, Dennis, PA -C Barrow, Craig, MD Belanger, Erlc PA -C PHYSICAL THERAPY Kellogg, Kevin PA -C Acceleration Mitchell, Bryan, MO Physical Therapy Page, William, NIB Reigh, Rhoda PA -C Jeter, David, PT Scott, Amaryllis, MD Four Seasons Scott, David, MD Physical Therapy Providence Inland Aspinwall, Patricia, PT Orthopedics Johnson, Jerry, PT Atkinson, Leonard, PA -C McKinnon, Jahn PT, OCS Bawler, Eric, MD Taylor, Susan, PT Burns, Erica, MD Group Health Jackson, Scott, PA -C Physicial Therapy Lovell, Timothy, MD Mle, Steve, PT Oakley, Russell, MD Donahue, Anne, MD Paterson, Arnold, MO Eldridge, Nancy, OT Redman, Scott, FAD McInnis, Brad, PT Providence Orthopedic Mulvihill, Susan, PT Specialty Reisman, Ed, MD Brawn, Anthony, MD Smith, Craig, PT Brunck, Brian PA -C Snow, Judy, PT Larry Ham & Associates PT Bean, Jami, OPT Ham, Larry, MSPT Pagctel €s, Alex, MSPT Northside Physical Therapy & Sports Rehab Baker, Jane, PT Gray, Susan, PT Peterson, Deborah, OPT Roland, Megan, PT Paula Dillon Mays Therapy Physical Therapy Associates Fenton, Jeff, PT Henneberry, Craig, DPT Hook, Jonathan, DPT Ota, Stephanie, MSPT Risse, KeEy, MSPT Spine Team Spokane Moehring, Shawn, MO Spokane Occupational & Hand Therapy Bailey, Kimberly, OT CHT Bowten, Karl, OT Bristow, Megan, OT CHT Gondar, Elizabeth, OT Hatcher, John, OT CHT Hatcher, Kathleen, OT Hubbard, Clinton, OT CHT Janes, Cheryl, OT CHT Lenz, Kad, OTR Mock, Jennifer, OT Smith, Becky, OTR1L St. Luke's Physiatry Goodman, Steven, MD Gordon, Markr MD Mcise,Vivian, MD Swartz, Robert, MD St. Luke's Rehabilitation Institute Summit Rehabilitation Associates Bostick, Mark, PT Kim, Michael, DPT Nixon, Chris PT Pagotells, Rebecca, MSPT Strandy, James, PT Strandy, Zach, DPT PLASTIC SURGERY Peterson, Elizabeth, MO Cowley Center for Plastic Surgery Oliva, Alfonso, MO Rockwood Plastic Surgery Center Janes, D. J., PA -C Modmoto, Kaiulani, MD PODIATRY Home of Happy Feet Douglas, Ronald, DPM Medical Foot Center Brim, Stewart, OPM Woolley, Darron, OPM Spokane Foot Clinic Brockbank, Greg, DPM Porter, James, OPM Romney, Douglas, OPM Swanstrom, Katie, DPM PULMONOLOGY Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine Coulstun, Daniel, MD Elghannam, Hesham, MD Naylor, Jahn, MD Pates, Jiten, MD Swiggum, Joseph, MD Providence Lung and Steep Disorder Clinic Green, Todd, MD Spokane Respiratory Consultants Elmer, Jeffrey, MO Howard, Donald, MD Joseph, Samuel, DO Lambert, Richard, MO Richardson, Steven, MD RADIOLOGY Inland Imaging RHEUMATOLOGY Rockwood Clinic Rheumatofogy Leo, Catherine, MD SURGERY — BREAST Spokane Breast Center Guthrie, Carol, MD SURGERY — GENERAL Rockwood Surgery Bright, Andrew, MO Horne, Landon, MD Lavelle, Gregory, MO Martinez, Debra, MD Myers, Paul, MD Olson, Stephen, MD Rawlins, Mathew, MD Reese, Stephen, MD Richardson, Heidi, MD Sheneman, Damon, MD Sinha, Renu, MD Spitz, Jonathon, MD Vulcan, Meagan, AIR NP Surgical Specialists of Spokane Abadir, Janet S., MO Ahmed, Rana, MD Bax, Timothy, MD Beyersdarf, Steven, MO Clyde, J. Courtney, MD Hartnett, Kimberly, MD Juvilor, Adam, Mo Lin, Paul, MD MacFarlane, Mark, MD McNevin, Shane, MD Mildef, Emily, ARNP Moore, Michael, MD Nickoloff, Jonathon, MD SURGERY — GENERAL VASCULAR Berg, Tracy MD Gardner, Glenn, MD Providence Inland Vascular Institute Davis, Joseph, MD Fay, Michael, PA -C Hoofer, Megan, MO Luna, Greg, MD Murray, Stephen, MD Nachreiner, Ryan, MD Pollow,Thomas, MD Rellly, Kathleen, MD Tidwell, Sandy, ARNP SURGERY - THORACIC Northwest Cardiothorecic & Transplant Surgeons lcenogle, Timothy, MD Martin, Jennifer PA -C Sandler, David, MD Providence Northwest Heart & Lung Surgical Associates Coleman, Willlam, MD Holbert, D. Vernon, MD Leonard, Jack, MO Nisco, Steven J., MO Reynolds, Brandon, MD Siwek, Leland, MD Vishwartath, Mandya, MD 14errall, Neil, MD UROLOGY Golden, Robert, MD Rockwood Urology Adams, Jessica, PA -C Louis, Koncz, PA -C Nair, Giju, MD Nelson, Brad, MD Sypherd, Dlrk, MO Spokane Urology Alexianu, Mlhal, MD Coln, Sue, ARNP Fairchild, Thomas, MD Herneberry, Michael, MD Kruger, Trisha, MD Mlkkoison, David, MD PLEASE NOTE: This list of donors includes all the physicians, other providers and organizations that were actively participating with Project Access in 2011. Our ability to track every donation Is Imperfect because sonic donated services are performed outside our claim system. We sincerely apologize If any donors of services to Project Access patients are missing from this list. Please call 509- 532 -8877, exl, 30 If you have corrections. Medical Clinics and Organizations Referring to Project Access Provider Network Benerrah Medical & Wellness Center Breast and Cervical Health Program Christ Clinic Community Health Association of Spokane Country Homes Deaconess Medical Center Deer Park Urgent Care Family dome Care Family Medicine Spokane Gonzaga University Health Care Health For Ali House of Charity Internal Medicine Reskdency Spokane NATIVE Health of Spokane Physicians Clinic of Spokane Planned Parenthood of the Inland Northwest Providence Holy Family Hospital Providence Sacred Heart Medical Center Riverstona Family Medicine Rockwood Clinic Spokane Community College Health Center Spokane Falls Family Clinic Spokane Regional Health District St. Luke's Rehabilitation Institute Union Gospel Mission US Healthworks Valley Hospital and Medical Center Organizations, Municipalities, Foundations, Groups and Individuals Providing Financial or fn -kind Support to Project Access in 2014 Astra Zoneca City of Airway Heights City of Cheney City of Deer Park City of Liberty Lake City of Medical Lake City of Millwood City of Spokare City of Spokane Valley First Choice Health Health Sciences & Services Authority of Spokane County Mike and Muffy Murphy Foundation (The Seattle Foundation) Premera Blue Cross Health and Wellness Fund Physicians Insurance Providence Health and Services — Sacred Heart Medical Center, Holy Family Hospital Spokane County Community Development Block Grant Susan G, Kamen Breast Cancer Foundation The Spokesman Review United Way Designated Funds Current Staff Members Director Lee Taylor Medical Director Valerie K. Logsdon, MD Operations Manager Sarah Bates Patient Care Coordinator Margie Locher Clinical Coordinator Margo Cockey, ARNP Program Assistant Sue Lutz Therapeutics Committee i The therapeutics committee Is a group physicians who volunteer their time to provide Spokane County Medical medical review and authorization services for patients referred to specialty physicians. Society Foundation Chairperson /PA Medical Director Valerie K. Logsdon, MD Family Medicine David Bare, MD Brad Pope, MD Family Medicine /Goriatric Jeff O'Connor, MD Internal Medicine Terri Oskin, MD Brian Seppi, MD Radiology Don Cubberley, MD Dermatology Michael Ryan, MD Gastroenterology Dave Maccini, MD General Surgery J. Courtney Clyde, MD Gynecology Robert Milligan, MD Orthopedic Surgery Robert Rutherford, MD Otolaryngology Dave Malone, MD Neurology Steven Pugh, MD Urology (Thomas) Nick Fairchild, MD Clinic Representatives Carolyn Hendrikson, ARNP, SFFC Venetia McPherson, ARNP, Native Project j2011 Board of Directors PRESIDENT: Brad Pape, MD Group Health Permanents VICE PRESIDENT: Terri Oskin, M.D. Northsfde Internal Medicine SECRETARY TREASURER: Keith Baldwin, MHA j Spokane County Medical Society MEMBERS: Anne Oakley, MD Physician An esthesia Group, PS David Bare, MO Community Health Association of Spokane William Keyes, MD Inland Imaging Associates, PS Project Access is a program of the Spokane County Medical Society Foundation. CREDITS: Photography: Cover, page 6 & 7, Rick Singer, Rick Singer Photography Graphic Design: Kimberley Lambert, Desktop Creations; Writing & Project Management: Martha Rhodes, Rhodes Communication � Project Access Spokane 104 South Freya Street Orange Flag Building, Suite 114 Spokane, WA 99202 Tel: 509 -532 -8877 Fax: 509 -532 -1375 www.speros.org /projertaccess 1 Project Access is a nonprofit organization affiliated with the Spokane County Medical Society and a program of the Spokane County Medical Society Foundation. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Review Meeting Date: June 12, 2012 Department Director Approval ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -05 -12 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A, SVMC 17.80.140 and 19.30.010 PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: Staff presented CPA -05 -12 to the Planning Commission at a study session on February 9, 2012. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the amendment on February 23, 2012. The Planning Commission continued the public hearing to March 8, 2012 for further deliberations. Staff presented the proposed amendment to the City Council on April 24, 2012. On May 8, 2012, City Council deliberated on the comprehensive plan amendment. The findings in Ordinance 12 -014 and 12 -015 reflect City Council's decision to deviate from the Planning Commission's recommendation relating to CPA- 05 -12. On May 22, 2012, Council considered a second ordinance reading at which time Council approved written findings of fact setting forth their basis for recommending approval of the proposed amendments, with the exception of CPA - 05-12, which will be considered separately later. City Council determined that more information would be necessary to ensure an informed decision could be made relating to CPA- 05 -12. PUBLIC NOTICE: Notice for the proposed amendments was placed in the Spokane Valley News Herald on February 8, 2012 and each site was posted with a "Notice of Public Hearing" sign, with a description of the proposal. Individual notices of the proposals were mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of each amendment. On May 24, 2012, CPA -05 -12 was posted directing the public to the City's website for future meetings. OPTIONS: Consensus to proceed to a first reading at a future council meeting considering one of the following actions: (1) Approve amendment as proposed; (2) Direct staff to work on a development agreement with applicant; (3) Refer back to Planning Commission; or (4) Deny the amendment RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to proceed to a first reading at a future council meeting to consider approval of CPA 05 -12 amendment as proposed STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger, AICP, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: CPA -05 -12 Staff Report and supporting materials Note: Planning Commission Meeting Transcripts for CPA -05 -12 can be found on the City's website in Laserfiche, under the 5 -22 -12 council packet. Meeting transcripts for 2 -16 -2012 meeting starts on page 221, meeting transcripts for 3 -8 -12 meeting starts on page 237, and meeting transcripts for 2 -23 -12 meeting starts on page 243. I&I Department of Community Development alle Planning Division 2012 Comprehensive Plan Administrative Report CPA -05 -12 June 12, 2012 pkanc Department of Community Development Valle Planning Division Aim Privately initiated map amendment Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential Land Use Solutions & Entitlement 9101 Mt. View Lane Spokane, WA 99218 Change CP to HDR and Zone MF -2 subject to conditions (Dev. Agree.) 2 Department of Community Development valle Planning Division SVMC 17.80.140 - Approval Criteria Findings (must make a least one finding): 1 a. Public health, safety, welfare, and protection of environment lb. Consistent with RCW 36.70A (GNIA) 1 c. Responds to a substantial change in conditions 1 d. Corrects an obvious mapping error 1 e. Addresses an identified deficiency in Comp Plan Factors (must consider all factors): 2a. Effect on physical environment 2b. Effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes 2c. Capability /impact on adjacent land uses 2d. Impact on community facilities 2e. Benefit to neighborhood, City, and region 2f. Quantity and location of land for proposed use 2g. Current and projected population density 2h. Effect on other aspects of Comp Plan pkanc Department of Community Development alle - Planning Division 60, b C� 7� n 0 c� a 0 Department of Community Development alle Planning Division MF -2 Existing Code Requirements • Side Yard Setback 5 — Type 1 —Full Screening • 6 'high site obscuring fence • 5 'buffer Immediate 2 -3 foot dense sight obscuring buffer — Selected to reach 6 feet in height at maturity • Max Building Height 50'(MF-I height 40') • Density 22 units /acre (MF-1 12 units/acre) pkanc Department of Community Development alle Planning Division 60, Department of Community Development alle Planning Division Bonus Density • SVMC 19.35 (Residential Bonus Density) — Applies to MF -1, MF -2, CMU, & MU — Allows for a max density increase of 60% • MF -1 = 204 units (127 units w /out bonus) • MF -2 = 373 units (233 units w /out bonus) — Requires • Affordable units (lower income =more units) • Increased site amenities (playgrounds, sport courts, etc.) • LEED certification pkanc r'T" " }r "`rt "E Department of Community Development alle Planning Division Noticing • 17.80. 120 Notice of PC Public Hearing — Notice by mail (all properties within 400 feet of CPA) — Notice by sign (posted by applicant) — Notice by publication (Valley News Herald) n_ Broadway Ave. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT MEDIUM TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FILE 4: CPA -95-12 APPLICANT,'��MEEBSG E G C[�51� HEANI �� sa4aulP Q;QQRm LOCATIOn:City Of Spekanc Valley CiIY Hall CiIY Council Chambers, Ste. IQI 11707 E Sprague Ave . - ��f" � flEYlE1Y Conklin Road NOTICE Of PUBLIC HEARING J ICOMPREHENS!VE PLAN AMENDMENT MED1111N TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FIST 4) . M11-12 NEAflIH6:�februR;'�eQoNF pm 10CA110H CiIY a Spokane ra..y City Halt 1i Caunstl Chambers, Sle. 101 11707 E. Sprague Ave. 9E4IEW ABTHOHITY: City of Spebaue galley Care", ity 01 meel OepL Mike Basinger Is001710- _-jr Department of Community Development alle Planning Division Concurrency • RCW 36.70A.070 — Requires that adequate transportation facilities are provided "concurrent with development ". • SVMC 22.20.020 —All project permits /project applications ... shall be subject to concurrency review at the time an application is submitted. Department of Community Development alle - Planning Division Traffic Analysis • Required with Building Permit — Small projects exempt — Trip Generation letter • Estimates traffic increase and distribution — Traffic Impact Analysis • Studies intersection capacity • Sometimes public meeting Conklin Road �j �4 Department of Community Development alle Planning Division Options for 1St Reading • Recommended Option — Approve as submitted by applicant • Other Options — Direct staff to work with applicant on a development agreement — Refer back to Planning Commission — Deny pkanc Department of Community Development alle Planning Division Ain Questions 12 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION Spokane ValleSTAFF REPORT TO THE Y PLANNING COMMISSION CPA -05 -12 STAFF REPORT DATE: January 18, 2012 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: February 23, 2012, beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, Valley Redwood Plaza Building, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 101, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206. Project Number: CPA -05 -12 Application Description: The application is a privately initiated site - specific Comprehensive Exhibit 3: Plan map amendment requesting to change the designation from Medium Density Residential (MDR) with a Medium Density Multifamily Residential (MF-1) zoning classification to High Density Residential (HDR) designation with a High Density Multifamily Residential (MF-2) zoning classification. Location: Parcel number(s) 45133.0109, 45133.0118 & the northern 68 feet of 45133.0846; generally located south of Broadway Avenue west of Conklin Road; further located in the NE %4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 13, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington. Applicant(s): Land Use Solutions & Entitlement 9101 Mt. View Lane Spokane, WA 99218 Owner(s): Arger Conklin, LLC 300 N Mullan Road Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Date of Application: November 1, 2011 Date Determined Complete November 23, 2011 Staff Contact: Mike Basinger, AICP, Senior Planner (509) 720 -5331 mbasingerkspokanevalley.org APPROVAL CRITERIA: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Title 17 General Provisions, Title 19 Zoning Regulations, and Title 21 Environmental Controls. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Division, after review and consideration of the submitted application and applicable approval criteria, recommends that the Planning Commission approve CPA- 05 -12. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Vicinity Map Exhibit 2 Comprehensive Plan Map Exhibit 3: Zoning Map Staff Report A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1. PROPERTY INFORMATION: CPA -05 -12 Size and The site is approximately 10.64 acres in size. The SEPA checklist Characteristics: states the site is generally flat and consists of rocky soil. Comprehensive Plan: Medium Density Residential (MDR) and Low Density Residential (LDR) Zoning: Medium Density Multifamily Residential District (MF -1) and Single-Family Residential District (R -3) Existing Land Use: Currently, the property is undeveloped Land 2. SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ZONING, AND LAND USES: North Comprehensive Plan — Regional Commercial (RC), Office (0), and Low Density Residential (LDR) Zoning — Regional Commercial (RC), Garden Office (GO), and Single - Family Residential District (R-3) Existing Land Uses — Big -box retail establishments, vacant land, and single - family residential South Comprehensive Plan — Low Density Residential (LDR) Zoning — Single - Family Residential District (R -3) Existing Land Uses — Single-family residential East Comprehensive Plan — Low Density Residential (LDR) Zoning — Single - Family Residential District (R -3) Existing Land Uses — Single - family residential West Comprehensive Plan — Low Density Residential (LDR) Zoning — Single - Family Residential Urban District (R -4) Existing Land Uses — Single - family residential B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO SEPA 1. Findings: Pursuant to SVMC Title 21 (Environmental Controls), the lead agency has determined that this proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). The Planning Division issued a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) for the proposal. This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. 2. Conclusion(s): The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and SVMC Title 21 have been fulfilled. C. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 1. Compliance with Title 17 (General Provisions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code a. Findings: SVMC 17.80.140(H). Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approval Criteria Page 2 of 6 Staff Report CPA -05 -12 i. The City may approve Comprehensive Plan amendments and area -wide zone map amendments if it finds that (analysis is italicized): (1) The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; Analysis: The High Density Multifamily Residential (MF -2) designation represents an opportunity to provide a range of housing types to accommodate anticipated residential growth with densities not to exceed 22 units per acre. Multifamily residential zones should be used as transitional zoning between higher intensity land uses, such as commercial and office, to medium and lower density single-family neighborhoods. High density residential areas should be located near services and high capacity transit facilities or transit routes. The amendment is generally consistent with the long -term objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and should have merit and value for the community as a whole. The current medium density residential designation has not been marketable to date. The Multifamily residential zone is located near services and a designated Spokane Transit Authority (STA) bus route. The public health, safety, and general welfare should be promoted by standards established by the state and the City's regulations. (2) The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; Analysis: The Growth Management Act (GMA) stipulates that the comprehensive land use plan and development regulations shall be subject to continuing review and evaluation by the City. The proposed site - specific map amendment provides a more suitable land use designation consistent with the City's GMA compliant Comprehensive Plan. (3) The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; Analysis: Development in the area over time has created a situation where the property designation is no longer appropriate. The proposed amendment is more appropriate for the area considering the large -box retail uses located directly north of the property. The regional commercial uses located to the north are complimentary to the proposed high density residential designation. Currently, there is a Walmart Supercenter and a Lowes Home Improvement center located north of the proposed designation change. The Walmart Supercenter could provide retail, groceries, and pharmaceuticals to the potential multifamily development. (4) The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or Analysis: The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. (5) The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: The amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. ii. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: (1) The effect upon the physical environment; Page 3 of 6 Staff Report CPA -05 -12 Analysis: There are no known physical characteristics that could create difficulties in developing the property under the proposed designation. This is a non project action and future development will be evaluated for compliance with all environmental requirements. (2) The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes; Analysis: There are no known critical areas associated with the site, such as wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat areas, frequently flooded areas or geologically hazardous areas. The site is not located within the shoreline jurisdiction and there are no known surface water quality or quantity issues. (3) The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; Analysis: Development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations will ensure compatibility with the existing neighborhood. The use of fencing and screening will provide visual separation and physical buffers between land uses. (4) The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools; Analysis: The City of Spokane Valley addresses adequacy of community facilities on a citywide basis through capital facilities planning. Policy CTP -9.1 of the Comprehensive Plan recommends a concurrency management system for transportation, sewer, and water facilities. The City of Spokane Valley's Parks and Recreation Plan outlines an implementation strategy including a capital facilities plan, which identifies costs and revenue sources for new parks. At the time of development, the site - specific amendment may have an impact on transportation. At the time of the submittal of any building permit applications, an additional SEPA review may be required to evaluate the impacts of the use(s) and proposed structure(s) on the physical environment in regards to transportation. (5) The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; Analysis: The proposed site - specific map amendment should not affect the existing character of the surrounding neighborhood and will likely promote the most appropriate use of property. The amendment will assist the City in providing housing needs for all economic segments of community. The existing neighborhood character has changed dramatically over the years, primarily due to the regional commercial development to the north. Currently, the neighborhood is in a transitional state that has required the property owner to reconsider the use of the land. The property is a large vacant property capable of accommodating a multifamily development. The GMA encourages appropriate use of undeveloped land and promotes providing a variety of residential densities and housing types. Providing a variety of residential densities and housing types should benefit the neighborhood, City and region. (6) The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; Analysis: The property's current land use designation is not desirable or marketable. The property is a large vacant property capable of accommodating a multifamily development without the removal of existing housing stock. (7) The current and projected population density in the area; and Page 4 of 6 Staff Report CPA -05 -12 Analysis: The amendment will have little impact on population density and does not demand population analysis. (8) The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis: The site - specific amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the plan. 2. Compliance with SVMC Title 19 Zoning Regulations a. Findings: The proposed privately initiated site - specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment is requesting to change the designation from Medium Density Residential (MDR) with a Medium Density Multifamily Residential (MF -1) zoning classification to High Density Residential (HDR) designation with a High Density Multifamily Residential (MV-2) zoning classification. The High Density Multifamily Residential (MV 2) designation represents an opportunity to provide a range of housing types to accommodate anticipated residential growth with densities not to exceed 22 units per acre. Multifamily residential zones should be used as transitional zoning between higher intensity land uses, such as commercial and office, to medium and lower density single-family neighborhoods. High density residential areas should be located near services and high capacity transit facilities or transit routes. b. Conclusion(s): Pursuant to RCW 36.70.130(2)(a), proposed updates to the Comprehensive Plan will be processed only once a year except for the adoption of original subarea plans, amendments to the shoreline master program, the amendment of the capital facilities chapter concurrent with the adoption of the City budget, in the event of an emergency or to resolve an appeal of the Comprehensive Plan filed with the Growth Management Hearings Board. The proposed amendment is consistent SVMC Title 19 and state law regarding Comprehensive Plan amendments. 3. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan a. Findings: The High Density Residential (HDR) designation provides for existing multi family residential development developed at a density in excess of 12 units per acre. Additionally, HDR designated areas are also located in areas near higher intensity development, such as a City Center. HDR provides housing opportunities for younger, lower income households in the City who may not yet be able to afford a home of their own. Moreover, this designation provides housing options for people looking to "downsize" from a single family dwelling on an individual lot, or for those known as "empty- nesters" whose children have moved out of the household and a large single family home is no longer needed. Generally, this designation is appropriate for land which is located adjacent to the arterial street system served by public transit, and is in close proximity to business and commercial centers. The proposed site - specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment will complement the existing commercial development to the north and the commercial node located at the intersection of Broadway Avenue and Sullivan Road. Page 5 of 6 Staff Report CPA -05 -12 The proposed site - specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment is generally consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. Goal LUG -2: Encourage a wide range of housing types and densities commensurate with the community's needs and preferences. HP -1.6: Encourage the development of housing for seniors and other special populations along transit corridors and within walking distance ofshopping and medical facilities. b. Conclusion(s): The proposed site - specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment is generally consistent with the City's Adopted Comprehensive Plan. 4. Adequate Public Facilities a. Findings: The Growth Management Act (GALA) and the City's Comprehensive Plan requires that public facilities and services be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy. The proposed site - specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment is currently served with public water and sewer. Broadway Avenue and Conklin Road will provide transportation access. Broadway Avenue is designated a collector and Conklin Road is designated a minor arterial on Map 3.1 Arterial Street Plan. Spokane County Fire District No. I will provide fire protection service, the City of Spokane Valley Police Department will provide police service and Spokane Transit Authority (STA) will provide public transit service. b. Conclusion(s): The proposed site - specific Comprehensive Plan map amendment will have adequate urban services at the time of development. D. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Findings: Staff has received several public comments to date. Public comments relate to increased density and traffic. 2. Conclusion(s): The proposal is a non project action. At the time of development, traffic will be reviewed by the City's traffic engineer. The GMA encourages appropriate use of undeveloped land and promotes providing a variety of residential densities and housing types. E. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS 1. Findings: The Department of Ecology (DOE) sent confirmation that materials were received and provided comments in relation to the anticipated Determination ofNon- Significance. 2. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted. Page 6 of 6 2011 Aerial Map CPA -05 -12 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map City of Spokane Valley designation from MDR to HDR; subsequent zoning Community Development Department change from MF -1 to MF -2. RC DI: Transportation Map Igo diana 190 Desmet Issiou Igo 0 Broadway rin Held Pioneer and U p g Rainbow' r CPA -05 -12 O U AM U AM Y�i F Ualley�way 0 LEE L-L x U O Nixon �MainJ E 6 Riverside Sprague Sprague Legend is Current Classification State or Federal Principal Arterial Minor Arterial — Collector Riceland Proposed Principal Arterial a> Birch Proposed Minor Arterial o •Proposed Collector Spruce th � 4th sow °`� o Shelley ti CPA -05 -12 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map City of Spokane Valley designation from MDR to HDR; subsequent zoning Community Development Department change from MF -1 to MF -2. Vicinity Map CPA -05 -12 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map City of Spokane Valley designation from MDR to HDR; subsequent zoning Community Development Department change from MF -1 to MF -2. I. 9. �- - eo s II I1,,,, • ,� ■■ � 1111,■ ' � ■� INN - _ ■ i � e - e J I �■ ■ ■ _.111■ ■ II ..111.. ■ . 1 FT =Lifslra meL L • e, ■ c ■ ■■� I, 11 1 �� ■ II,,,,11■ • e • r e e �... a:-=4 �e . .. e , , ._..• CPA -05 -12 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map City of Spokane Valley designation from MDR to HDR; subsequent zoning Community Development Department change from MF -1 to MF -2. RC ��n- ......... CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 12, 2012 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Old Milwaukee Trail, Draft Interlocal Agreement GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 39.34 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: Staff for the City and Spokane County have recently been discussing a potential interlocal agreement whereby the two jurisdictions would cooperate on the location, construction, and maintenance of a multi -use trail along the former Milwaukee railroad right -of- way (ROW). This corridor was purchased by Spokane County in 1980, primarily for the purpose of locating utility infrastructure such as the sewer interceptor, which is essentially the main line for collecting sewer for transportation to the treatment facilities. Spokane County continues to utilize the property for utility purposes, all of which is currently underground. The property was formerly considered for extension of Appleway Boulevard east of University Road, but as Council is aware, those plans were put on hold indefinitely. The property has also been discussed for potential use by Spokane Transit Authority for mass transit purposes, although such discussions have been inactive for at least five years. There is currently a rough dirt path along most of the corridor, indicating its appropriateness for use as a multi -use trail. Staff sees this as a potential project that could be developed to whatever level the Council is comfortable with. For example, it could simply be a paved trail with minor meandering with no associated greenspace. This would represent the lowest construction and maintenance cost. Another option could be that the City treats it as not only a multi -use trail, but also as a linear park running through the center of the City, and would at least have pockets of green space. Under this type of concept, adjoining property owners could be given permission to have limited access onto the ROW for purposes such as coffee stands or restaurants with facilities oriented toward trail. Any such consideration of the extent of development of the corridor should come at a later date in coniunction with public input, and after having given due consideration to the costs the different concepts may have for maintenance and operation. The following are the essential points of the draft proposed interlocal agreement: - a commitment to cooperatively working on this project for our mutual benefit; - the County would continue to own the property; - the City would have the right to construct the multi -use trail in a location to be agreed on, taking into consideration the location of the County's utilities underground; - the agreement would be for at least 30 years, with automatic 5 or 10 year extensions (not sure which yet); - the parties would jointly apply for grants for the design, construction and maintenance of the multi -use trail, which would occur in two phases; - the City would be the lead jurisdiction for the design and construction of the trail; - the City would be responsible for maintenance and care of the entire surface of the ROW, including removal of trash and appropriate vegetation management; - it would connect on the east with the existing trail on Appleway Boulevard, which terminates at the intersection of Tschirley, Appleway, Sprague and Corbin. The existing trail already connects with the trail system in Liberty Lake; - the County would grant appropriate access to adjoining property owners for linking to the trail for purposes that are consistent with the trail and /or linear park (eating patios, trail access, coffee bars, etc); - the parties recognize that the County will need unrestricted access to the surface to maintain or potentially expand its utilities that are underground. The agreement would allow the County access to its facilities. If the trail needs to be removed in any area to access the County's facilities, the City would be responsible for repairing the trail at the City's cost. The agreement also contemplates that it may be appropriate in the future to use for road or mass transit purposes; - the parties would split responsibility for any hazardous materials on the ROW. Specifically, the City would be responsible for abatement of any such materials discovered as a result of construction of the trail, but only to the extent necessary to construct the trail. The County, as the owner, would continue to be responsible for any other contamination; - the County would revoke licenses (permission to use) granted to adjoining property owners to the extent necessary to build and maintain the trail, as well as any related trail facilities as outlined above. OPTIONS: (1) place on June 26, 2012 agenda for motion consideration; (2) request that staff negotiate changes to the proposed interlocal agreement. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to place on the June 26, 2012 agenda for motion consideration. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The costs are unknown at this time because they would largely depend on the extent and type of development of the trail and /or linear park. There is not anticipated to be any cost for the agreement to locate the trail on the County property. There would be substantial costs related to construction and maintenance of the trail. STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney; Inga Note, Senior Traffic Engineer; Steve Worley, Senior Engineer — Capital Projects ATTACHMENTS: Proposed draft interlocal agreement with Spokane County DRAFT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN SPOKANE COUNTY AND CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY REGARDING MULTI -USE TRAIL ALONG A PORTION OF FORMER MILWAUKEE RAIL RIGHT -OF WAY THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between Spokane County, a political subdivision of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 1116 West Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY" and the City of Spokane Valley, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206, hereinafter referred to as "CITY," jointly hereinafter referred to as the "PARTIES." The COUNTY and CITY agree as follows. SECTION NO. 1: RECITALS AND FINDINGS (a) Pursuant to 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. (b) Pursuant to RCW 36.68.090, counties acting through its board of county commissioners, are empowered to build, construct, care for, control, supervise, improve, operate and maintain parks, playgrounds, bicycle and bridle paths and other recreational areas. (c) Pursuant to RCW 36.34.340, any county or city may acquire by purchase, gift, devise, bequest, grant or exchange title or any interest or rights in real property for park or recreational purposes. (d) Pursuant to chapter 39.34 RCW ( Interlocal Cooperation Act) counties and cities may contract with each other to perform certain functions which each may legally perform. (e) Spokane County acquired a parcel of property by a quitclaim deed from Richard B. Oglivie as Trustee of the property of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company, dated December 17, 1980, and recorded in Auditor's File Number 8012230081, records of Spokane County, commonly referred to as the "Milwaukee Right -of- Way ". (f) Spokane County and City of Spokane Valley desire to enter into an interlocal agreement to use a portion of the Milwaukee Right -of —Way located within the City of Spokane Valley, namely from University Road to where the Milwaukee Right -of -Way intersects with Corbin Road for a multi -use trail and potential linear park, acknowledging and recognizing the County's use of the Milwaukee Right -of -Way for the purpose of constructing, operating, repairing and maintaining public utility infrastructure and appurtenances thereto owned or controlled by the County as well as other potential uses of the right -of way. (g) Spokane County and City of Spokane Valley both recognize that having a multi -use trail along a portion of the Milwaukee Right -of -Way will provide an important regional alternative transportation and recreation amenity to the residents of Spokane County, including City of Spokane Valley. The multi -use trail is included in the CITY's adopted Bicycle and Pedestrian Maser Program. The multi -use trail would be a major link in providing an alternative transportation network through the central portion of the City of Spokane Valley to the City of Liberty Lake. Interlocal, Milwaukee Trail Page 1 of 11 DRAFT SECTION NO. 2: DEFINITIONS (a) Agreement: "Agreement" means this Interlocal Agreement between the CITY and COUNTY regarding the joint use of a portion of the Milwaukee Right -of -Way for a multi- use trail and other potential linear park. (b) Cam: "CITY" means the City of Spokane Valley. (c) County: "COUNTY" means Spokane County. (h) Milwaukee Right-of-Way. "Milwaukee Right -of- Way ", and also referred to as the "Milwaukee ROW ", means that parcel of property owned by Spokane County and acquired by quitclaim deed from Richard B. Oglivie as Trustee of the property of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company, dated December 17, 1980, and recorded in Auditor's File Number 8012230081, records of Spokane County. (i) Portion of Milwaukee Right-of-Way. Portion of Milwaukee Right -of -Way means that portion of the Milwaukee Right -of -Way located within the City of Spokane Valley, namely from University Road to where the Milwaukee Right -of -Way intersects Corbin Road as more particularly depicted in Attachment "A ", attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. (j) Multi Use Trail. "Multi Use Trail" means an improved non - motorized thoroughfare designed by mutual agreement of the PARTIES to be used by bicycles, walkers and pedestrians. The PARTIES contemplate that the Multi Use Trail will be a Type 2 Pathway (asphalt paving 12 feet wide with a 1 to 2 foot gravel shoulder) -I (k) Potential Linear Park. "Potential Linear Park" means that open space concept which the PARTIES will hereinafter mutually agree upon. SECTION NO. 3: PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to reduce to writing the PARTIES' understandings and responsibilities regarding the use of the Portion of Milwaukee ROW for a Multi -Use Trail and Potential Linear Park. SECTION NO. 4: DURATIONIWITHDRAWAL This Agreement shall commence JULY 1, 2012, and run through May 31, 2042. This shall be referred to as the 'Initial Tetra" At the conclusion of the Initial Tetra, this Agreement shall automatically be renewed for successive ten terms. All renewals shall be subject to all terms and conditions set forth herein. This Agreement may not be terminated during the Initial Tetra except upon mutual agreement of the PARTIES. Subsequent to the Initial Tetra, either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason whatsoever upon a minimum of one (1) years advance notice as provided for in Section No. 8 to the other party- Interlocal, Milwaukee Trail Page 2 of 11 Comment [CD1]: This is covered under 5C2, where it discusses that that parties will coordinate on the location. DRAFT SECTION NO. 5: PARTIES RESPONSIBILITIES / COMMITMENTS A. COUNTY'S RESPONSIBILITIES/ COMMITMENTS 1. Allow the use of the Portion of the Milwaukee ROW for a Multi -Use Trail and Potential Linear Park for the term of this Agreement. Such use shall be subject to any easements, encumbrances, exceptions and reservations of record on the Milwaukee ROW. 2. Consult with the CITY with regard to all fixture uses of that Portion of Milwaukee ROW. Provided, the PARTIES acknowledge and agree that COUNTY owns the Milwaukee ROW and that its determination as to any use shall be controlling. 3. Jointly with the CITY submit grant applications and accept awards for the design, construction and/or maintenance of the Multi Use Trail wherein the CITY would be the lead agency jurisdiction. Provided, such obligation does not commit nor prohibit the COUNTY from providing funding and or in -kind services in conjunction with the grant applications or awards. 4. Grant limited non - motorized access through appropriate documents such as license agreements to property owners adjoining the north and south Portions of the Milwaukee Right -of -Way so they can access the Multi Use Trail once it is constructed. 5. Revoke any licenses previously granted on the Portion of the Milwaukee Right -of -Way to the extent the COUNTY, after consultation with the CITY, determines the licenses would negatively impact the construction, operation or maintenance of the Multi Use Trail. 6. Allow the CITY to adopt and enforce regulations regarding the use of the Multi Use Trail so long as they are not inconsistent with the COUNTY's ownership or use interests. B. CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES/ COMMITMENTS 1. Assume lead agency jurisdiction in conjunction with all grant applications and grant awards for the design, construction and/or maintenance of the Multi Use Trail. This shall include but not be limited to administration of all grants as well as employment of architects, engineers, planners, preparation of bid specifications, award of public works, and other contracts. Provided, however, this obligation does not prohibit the COUNTY from voluntarily assisting the CITY upon request in meeting these obligations. 2. Work with property owners adjoining the Multi Use Trail to relocate any of their improvements including but not limited to landscaping, sprinklers, and fences which have been placed in that Portion of the Milwaukee Right -of Way. 3. Install removable bollards or other acceptable similarly removable obstructions at all road access points to the Multi Use Trail to protect property owners adjacent to the Multi Use Trail. 4. Assume the sole responsibility and expense for all maintenance and operation of the Multi -Use Trail subsequent to its construction, to include associated landscaping. Additionally, the CITY will be responsible for weed control, garbage abatement, and similar light maintenance for the Portion of the Milwaukee Right -of -Way adjacent to the Multi -Use Trail. The COUNTY grants the CITY a license or express permission for such purpose. PARTIES recognize the necessity of maintaining not only the Multi -Use Trail but the adjoining right -of -way in good condition so it is an asset to the entire community. C. PARTIES JOINT RESPONSIBILITIES / COMMITMENTS 1. PARTIES acknowledge that the Milwaukee ROW is presently used by the COUNTY for the construction, operation, repair and maintenance of public utility infrastructure and appurtenances thereto owned or controlled by the COUNTY and may be used in the fixture for the purpose of Interlocal, Milwaukee Trail Page 3 of 11 DRAFT transmitting reclaimed water. PARTIES also acknowledge that the Milwaukee ROW may have other uses during the term of the Agreement including mass transit. The COUNTY's right to use the Milwaukee ROW for public utility infrastructure and appurtenances as they may presently exist or as they may be constructed, operated, repaired or maintained in the fixture to include transmitting reclaimed water as well as mass transit shall be paramount to the use of that Portion of the Milwaukee ROW under the terms of this Agreement. 2. PARTIES agree to coordinate the location of the Multi Use Trail and all aspects thereof such as landscaping to best fit with current and fixture uses of the Portion of the Milwaukee ROW. In the event of a disagreement as to the location, COUNTY's determination as to location shall control. All improvements in conjunction with the Multi Use Trail must allow for continuous, uninterrupted equipment access by COUNTY to the sewer manholes for maintenance and cleaning. If the constructed Multi Use Trail needs to be removed or relocated for the COUNTY to operate, repair, or maintain its public utility infrastructure and appurtenances as they presently exist or as they may be expanded or improved in the fixture to include transmitting reclaimed water, the CITY will be responsible at its sole expense for reconstructing or relocating the Multi Use Trail to include paved pathway, gravel sub grade, and any landscaping disturbed by the COUNTY or its contractors or other public agency. In the event the corridor is needed for location of mass transit facilities, the COUNTY will not be responsible for the cost of relocating the Multi Use Trail. COUNTY commits to working in good faith to attempt to minimize damage to the Multi Use Trail during the COUNTY's operation, repair, or maintenance of its public utility infrastructure and appurtenances as they presently exist or as they may be expanded or improved in the fixture to include transmitting reclaimed water. SECTION NO. 6: LIABILITY WITH RESPECT TO HAZARDOUS WASTE COUNTY makes no representation whatsoever regarding the condition of the Portion of the Milwaukee Right -of Way including but not limited to its environmental condition as that term is defined in any applicable federal, state or local ordinance, code, regulation or court order, without limitation. CITY acknowledges that use of the Portion of the Milwaukee Right -of- Way for a Multi Use Trail is on an "as- is" condition, with any and all patent and latent conditions. It is understood and agreed that the CITY will excavate and perform earth- disturbing activities in conjunction with building the Multi Use Trail. If CITY encounters any hazardous substance defined in RCW 70.105.010, or any substance that is listed as a hazardous substance under federal law, in conjunction with excavating or performing other earth - disturbing activities while building the Multi Use Trail, CITY shall immediately; (i) secure or isolate such condition; (ii) stop all activity identified in connection with such condition, and (iii) notify County's representative as soon as feasible. CITY shall be solely responsible for performing evaluation and necessary corrective action only in regard to earth - disturbing activities in conjunction with building the Multi Use Trail. COUNTY shall be solely responsible for performing evaluation and necessary corrective action only for the area adjoining the Multi Use Trail located within the Portion of the Milwaukee Right -of —Way as required by state or federal law. CITY shall be responsible for the proper identification (as required by law and applicable federal, state and local regulations) of all chemicals, compounds, or hazardous substances CITY and its subcontractors bring on to the Portion of the Milwaukee Right -of -Way. Such identification must include identification of health hazards, flammability, reactivity, and personal protection requirements. Identification labels and documents must be in the English language. Interlocal, Milwaukee Trail Page 4 of 11 DRAFT CITY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the COUNTY from and against any and all claims, causes of action, demands and liability associated with the existence, removal or remediation of any Hazardous Substances that are located on the Multi Use Trail in conjunction with earth- disturbing activities by CITY when building the Multi Use Trail, but only as to the area encompassed by the Multi Use Trail. COUNTY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the CITY from and against any and all claims, causes of action, demands and liability associated with the existence, removal or remediation of any Hazardous Substances that are located on the Portion of the Milwaukee Right -of -Way except in conjunction with earth - disturbing activities by CITY when building the Multi Use Trail which shall be the CITY's sole responsibility as provided for herein above. SECTION NO.7 LIABILITY OTHER THAN HAZARDOUS WASTE NOTE: This provision shall govern all liability other than Hazardous Waste which is addressed in Section No. 6. The CITY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the COUNTY, its officers and employees from all claims, demands, or suits in law or equity arising from the CITY's intentional or negligent acts or breach of its obligations under this Agreement with regard to constructing, operating, and maintaining the Multi Use Trail. The CITY's duty to indemnify shall not apply to loss or liability caused by the intentional or negligent acts of the COUNTY, its officers and employees. The COUNTY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the CITY, its officers and employees from all claims, demands, or suits in law or equity arising from the COUNTY's intentional or negligent acts or breach of its obligations under the Agreement including, but not limited to its responsibilities for the area adjacent to the Multi Use Trail within the Portion of the Milwaukee Right -of Way. The COUNTY's duty to indemnify shall not apply to loss or liability caused by the intentional or negligent acts of the CITY, its officers and employees. If the comparative negligence of the PARTIES and their officers and employees is a cause of such damage or injury, the liability, loss, cost, or expense shall be shared between the PARTIES in proportion to their relative degree of negligence and the right of indemnity shall apply to such proportion. Where an officer or employee of a party is acting under the direction and control of the other party, the party directing and controlling the officer or employee in the activity and/or omission giving rise to liability shall accept all liability for the other party's officer or employee's negligence. Each party's duty to indemnify shall survive the termination or expiration of the Agreement. Each party waives, with respect to the other party only, its immunity under RCW Title 51, Industrial Insurance and only as necessary to make this indemnity provision enforceable with respect to claims relating to the death or injury of CITY and /or COUNTY employees acting within the scope of this Agreement. The PARTIES have specifically negotiated this provision. COUNTY initials CITY initials Interlocal, Milwaukee Trail Page 5 of 11 DRAFT SECTION NO. 8: NOTICE All notices or other communications given hereunder shall be deemed given on: (1) the day such notices or other communications are received when sent by personal delivery; or (ii) the third day following the day on which the same have been mailed by first class delivery, postage prepaid addressed to the COUNTY or the CITY at the address set forth below for such party, or at such other address as either Party shall from time - to -time designate by notice in writing to the other party: COUNTY: Spokane County Chief Executive Officer or his/her authorized representative 1116 West Broadway Avenue Spokane, Washington 99260 CITY: City of Spokane Valley City Manager or his /her authorized representative 11707 East Sprague, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 SECTION NO. 9: COUNTERPARTS This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when so executed and delivered, shall be an original, but such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same. SECTION NO. 10: ASSIGNMENT No party may assign in whole or part its interest in this Agreement without the written approval of the other party - SECTION NO. 13: RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES The PARTIES intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. No agent, employee, servant or representative of the either party shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant or representative of the other party for any purpose. SECTION NO. 14: MODIFICATION This Agreement may be modified in writing by mutual written agreement of the PARTIES. SECTION NO. 15: PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT PARTIES acknowledge that COUNTY owns the Milwaukee ROW. All improvements make under this Agreement in conjunction with the Multi Use Trail shall remain the property of the CITY until termination of the Agreement. Upon the termination of the Agreement, CITY shall remove all removable fixtures and all other improvements shall revert to the ownership of the COUNTY and the execution of this Agreement shall act as a Bill of Sale for such improvements at such time. Interlocal, Milwaukee Trail Page 6 of 11 DRAFT SECTION NO. 16: ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREIN/BINDING EFFECT This Agreement contains terms and conditions agreed upon by the PARTIES. The PARTIES agree that there are no other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement. No changes or additions to this Agreement shall be valid or binding upon the PARTIES unless such change or addition is in writing, executed by the PARTIES. This Agreement shall be binding upon the PARTIES hereto, their successors and assigns. SECTION NO. 17: DISPUTE RESOLUTION Any dispute between the PARTIES which cannot be resolved between the PARTIES shall be subject to arbitration. Except as provided for to the contrary herein, such dispute shall first be reduced to writing. If the COUNTY CEO and the City Manager for the CITY cannot resolve the dispute it will be submitted to arbitration. The provisions of chapter 7.04A RCW shall be applicable to any arbitration proceeding. The COUNTY and the CITY shall have the right to designate one person each to act as an arbitrator. The two selected arbitrators shall then jointly select a third arbitrator. The decision of the arbitration panel shall be binding on the PARTIES and shall be subject to judicial review as provided for in chapter 7.04A RCW. The costs of the arbitration panel shall be equally split between the PARTIES. SECTION NO. 18: VENUE STIPULATION This Agreement has been and shall be construed as having been made and delivered within the State of Washington and it is mutually understood and agreed by each party that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington both as to interpretation and performance. Any action at law, suit in equity, or other judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement, or any provision hereto, shall be instituted only in courts of competent jurisdiction within Spokane County, Washington. SECTION NO. 19: SEVERABILITY The PARTIES agree that if any parts, terms or provisions of this Agreement are held by the courts to be illegal, the validity of the remaining portions or provisions shall not be affected and the rights and obligations of the PARTIES shall not be affected in regard to the remainder of the Agreement. If it should appear that any part, term or provision of this Agreement is in conflict with any statutory provision of the State of Washington, then the part, term or provision thereof that may be in conflict shall be deemed inoperative and null and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith and this Agreement shall be deemed to modify to conform to such statutory provision. SECTION NO. 20: RECORDS All public records prepared, owned, used or retained by the either party in conjunction with meeting its responsibilities under this Agreement shall be made available to the other party upon written requests subject to the attorney client and attorney work product privileges set forth in statute, court rule or case law. SECTION NO. 21: HEADINGS Interlocal, Milwaukee Trail Page 7 of 11 DRAFT The section headings appearing in this Agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of convenience and ready reference. In no way do they purport to, and shall not be deemed to define, limit or extend the scope or intent of the sections to which they pertain. SECTION NO. 22: TIME OF ESSENCE OF AGREEMENT Time is of the essence of this Agreement and in case either Party fails to perform the obligations on its part to be performed at the time fixed for the performance of the respective obligation by the terms of this Agreement, the other Party may, at its election, hold the other Party liable for all costs and damages caused by such delay. SECTION NO. 23: UNCONTROLLABLE CIRCUMSTANCES /IMPOSSIBILITY A delay or interruption in or failure of performance of all or any part of this Agreement resulting from Uncontrollable Circumstances shall be deemed not a default under this Agreement. A delay or interruption in or failure of performance of all or any part of this Agreement resulting from any change in or new law, order, rule or regulation of any nature which renders either party meeting its obligations under the terms of this Agreement legally impossible, and any other circumstances beyond the control of the either party which render legally impossible the performance by that party its obligations under this Agreement, shall be deemed not a default under this Agreement. SECTION NO. 24: EXECUTION AND APPROVAL The PARTIES warrant that the officers executing below have been duly authorized to act for and on behalf of the party for purposes of confirming this Agreement. SECTION NO. 25: COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS The PARTIES shall observe all federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, to the extent that they may be applicable to the terms of this Agreement. SECTION NO. 26: DISCLAIMER Except as otherwise provided, this Agreement shall not be construed in any manner that would limit either party's authority or powers under law. SECTION NO. 27: ANTI- KICKBACK No officer or employee of the CITY, having the power or duty to perform an official act or action related to this Agreement shall have or acquire any interest in the Agreement, or have solicited, accepted or granted a present or fixture gift, favor, service or other thing of value from or to any person involved in the Agreement. SECTION NO. 28: NON - DISCRIMINATION No individual shall be excluded from participation in, denied the benefit of, subjected to discrimination under, or denied employment in the administration of or in connection with this Agreement in violation of local, state or federal law. Interlocal, Milwaukee Trail Page 8 of 11 DRAFT SECTION NO. 29: NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES Nothing in this Agreement is intended to give, or shall give, whether directly or indirectly, any benefit or right, greater than that enjoyed by the general public, to third persons. SECTION NO. 30: THIRD PARTY CLAIMS CITY and COUNTY agree to support each other in defending their respective rights with regard to this Agreement. Neither party shall file a claim against the other party for damages pertaining to the rights granted herein that may arise from alleged defects of title, provided that claims based on eminent domain, adverse possession or prescription asserted by either Party against third parties may be made. SECTION NO. 31: WAIVER No officer, employee, agent or otherwise of either party, has the power, right or authority to waive any of the conditions or provisions to this Agreement. No waiver of any breach of this Agreement shall be held to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach. All remedies afforded in this Agreement or at law shall be taken and constructed as cumulative, that is, in addition to every other remedy provided herein or by law. Failure of either party to enforce at any time any of the provisions of this Agreement or to require at any time performance by the other party of any provision hereof, shall in no way be construed to be a waiver of such provisions, nor in any way affect the validity of this Agreement or any part hereof, or the right of either party to hereafter enforce each and every such provision. SECTION NO. 31: RCW 39.34 REQUIRED CLAUSES A. PURPOSE: See Section No. 3 above. B. DURATION: See Section No. 4 above. C. ORGANIZATION OF SEPARATE ENTITY AND ITS POWERS: No new or separate legal or administrative entity is created to administer the provisions of this Agreement. D. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PARTIES: See provisions above. E. AGREEMENT TO BE FILED: The CITY shall file this Agreement with its City Clerk or place it on its website. The COUNTY shall file this Agreement with its County Auditor or place it on its web site or other electronically retrievable public source. F. FINANCING: Each Party shall be responsible for the financing of its contractual obligations under its normal budgetary process. G. TERMINATION: See Section No. 4 above. H. PROPERTY UPON TERMINATION: See provisions above. I. REPRESENTATIVES: The PARTIES hereby appoint those individuals set forth in Section No. 8 as their respective representatives for the purpose of administering this Agreement. Interlocal, Milwaukee Trail Page 9 of 11 DRAFT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this Agreement to be executed on date and year opposite their respective signatures. DATED: ATTEST Clerk of the Board BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON TODD MIELKE, Chairperson MARK RICHARD, Vice - Chairman Daniela Erickson AL FRENCH, Commissioner DATED: Attest: City Clerk Approved as to form: Office of the City Attorney By: Title: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Interlocal, Milwaukee Trail Page 10 of 11 DRAFT ATTACFHVIENT "A„ (Map depicting Portion of Milwaukee Right -of -Way is on the following page) Interlocal, Milwaukee Trail Page 11 of 11 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 12, 2012 Department Director Approval: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Washington State Department Of Transportation 2012 Pedestrian & Bicycle Program - Call for Projects GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Info Memo at March 27, 2012 Council Meeting BACKGROUND: Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) issued a 2012 Call for Projects for the Pedestrian and Bicycle Program in March 2012. This program has been offered in years past, however, this year the scoring criteria have been modified to match the intent of the Complete Streets Bill (ESHB 1071). Applications are due June 30th, 2012. The amount of funding for these projects will be determined by the legislature in 2013, but is expected to be $8 -10 million statewide. The goals of this program are to improve conditions for biking and walking and encourage "complete street" type projects that safely meet the needs of bicyclists, pedestrians, public transportation users, and motorists. Preservation of community environment and character, support of infill development, connection of housing and employment, citizen engagement, and enhancing economic competitiveness are also considerations. This grant program is not intended to be a resurfacing program or to add vehicle capacity. Staff has been evaluating the Pedestrian & Bicycle grant criteria to identify projects that will have the highest benefits and potential to receive funding. We have also reviewed the City's Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan to identify potential projects. Based on this review, staff has identified the Appleway Trail Project (University to Evergreen) as the most suitable project for this grant application. The project would develop a shared -use pathway along the Milwaukee Railroad right -of -way (ROW) that is one block south and runs parallel to Sprague Avenue. The project could be paired with north -south connections to Sprague Avenue and the residential neighborhoods to the south. Improvements could be made on Sprague to widen the sidewalk where feasible, install street trees or other landscaping, make ADA accessibility improvements, improve bus stops and add bicycle parking at some destinations. The trail could eventually be extended to connect to the Appleway Avenue pathway in Greenacres and provide a complete trail across most of the City. Spokane County still owns the ROW. The City is negotiating with Spokane County for an interlocal agreement to develop the trail. The grant will be submitted jointly between Spokane Valley and Spokane County. A plan sheet showing project details is required with the submittal. Staff is working with a consultant on its development. OPTIONS: 1) Consensus to move ahead with the Appleway Trail Project for the Pedestrian & Bicycle Program grant application; 2) Provide additional direction to staff RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to move ahead with the Appleway Trail project for Pedestrian & Bicycle Program grant application as presented. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: There is no required local match on Pedestrian & Bicycle Program funded projects. However during the ranking of projects, preference will be given to projects where the local agency is providing matching funds. STAFF CONTACT: Inga Note, PE —Senior Traffic Engineer Steve M. Worley, PE — Senior Capital Projects Engineer ATTACHMENTS: Summary of program guidelines and scoring criteria WSDOT - Call for Projects - Pedestrian and Bicycle Program VVWashington State Y D partrn.nt of Transportation Call for Projects - Pedestrian and Bicycle Program Call for projects Is now Open. Purpose Page 1 of 4 On This Page • Eligible Applicants • Application and Submittal • Program Contacts • Criteria and Requirements • Evaluation The purpose of this program is to Improve conditions for biking and walking and encourage "complete street" type projects that safely meet the needs of bicyclists, pedestrians, public transportation users and motorists, and also protect and preserve community environment and character. Recognizing that Improvements to these streets and roads are critical to communities across the state, this program provides funds for transportation improvements that support infill and redevelopment, Intensify land uses, and connect housing and employment In order to improve the health and safety of Washington residents This grant program is intended to help reach the state's goal of doubling the number of biking and walking trips, while simultaneously reducing the number of pedestrians and bicyclists killed or injured in traffic collisions. Eligible Applicants All public agencies are eligible to apply and projects will be evaluated based on criteria as defined through this process. Application and Submittal Process Application The application shall be submitted online, or as a Microsoft Word document, or an Adobe Acrobat pdf file and Include the following to be considered; • Online Application Form or • Download: Pedestrian and Bicycle Program Application Form (doc 69kb) 1. A completed and signed Pedestrian and Bicycle Program 2012 Grant Application Form, 2. A map sheet showing the project vicinity and project limits (can be the same or separate maps) 3. A plan sheet showing project design detail in either plan view or as a typical section Please do not include pictures, letters of support, or other unsolicited supporting detail. Submittal Process Applications must be received by midnight 3une 30, 2012. Submittals must either be sent via the website or by e-mail (paper submittals will not be accepted). Online Application Form (required attachments must be e- mailed) or E -mail with completed application as a PDF or Word Doc attached (paper submittals will not be accepted) Send to hlpgrants @wsdot.wa.gov Program Contacts • Ian Macek, State Bicycle & Pedestrian Coordinator, WSDOT 360 - 705 -7596 or maceki @wsdot.wa.gov http:/ /www.wsdot.wa.govlbike /call.htm 3/2712012 WSDOT - Call for Projects - Pedestrian and Bicycle Program Page 2 of 4 Criteria and Requirements Funding A prioritized list of projects will be submitted to the Governor's office and the legislature by December 15, 2012 who will make final decisions on projects and grant awards. Award announcements are expected by June of the following year. Grant Terms Terms of the Pedestrian and Bicycle Program projects should be three years in length maximum, with the possibility of an administratively - approved two year extension with the submission of adequate proof of progress. Match requirement While a match Is not a requirement, preference shall be given to projects that provide a match. Projects are to be submitted as complete projects and fully funded. Examples of Eligible Projects Engineering and education projects that help reduce the nearly 400 fatal and Injury collisions involving pedestrians and bicyclists that occur each year In Washington and /or projects that significantly increase mobility and encourage more people to bicycle and walk are eligible to apply for a grant through the Pedestrian and Bicycle Program. The following are examples of eligible projects and programs. Project Development — a maximum of 30 percent of project cost • Community design that Includes public engagement In planning and design decisions. Right of Way Acquisition Engineering Improvements -- grant applications may include a combination of construction elements. Projects may include items such as; • Crossing /Intersection treatments /roundabouts • Pedestrian and bicycle safety Improvements for at risk groups (the young, the aging and people with disabilities). • Signage, striping, markings • Sidewalks • Pedestrian -scale lighting • Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodations • Bike lanes, bike boulevards, and cycle tracks • Shared -use paths /trails and path crossings • Bicycle parking and stations • Traffic calming (medians, refuge Islands, curb extensions) • Providing safe routes to transit • Streetscape and frontage improvements Education and enforcement efforts are also eligible as part of capital improvement projects. Projects may Include items such as: • Videos of project development • Implementation of educational curricula • Bicycle and pedestrian counters • Enhanced enforcement (i.e. speed feedback signs, crosswalk patrols) This program Is not intended to Increase motor vehicle capacity or fund pavement resurfacing and pavement preservation elements. However, projects that leverage paving investments will be considered higher priority. Eligible projects should be part of community, regional or state plans. httpa /www.wsdot.wa.govibike /call.htm 3/27/2012 WSDOT - Call for Projects - Pedestrian and Bicycle Program Page 3 of 4 Project Evaluation All proposals will be reviewed to ensure that they are complete and eligible for funding. A grant review committee will evaluate the proposals and make recommendations. WSDOT staff will conduct site visits for priority projects prior to developing the list of priorities. The following criteria will be used to evaluate the project proposals. Projects providing match shall be given preference. (a) Promoting healthy communities by encouraging walking, bicycling and using c transpgrtation, • How well will the project Improve connections and /or establish safer and fully accessible crossings, sidewalks, trails, bike facilities, and transit connections consistent with AASHTO, ITE or other peer reviewed, context sensitive solutions guides, reports and publications? 5 Pts = Substantial long term connectivity solution. 3 Pts = Moderate improvement to connectivity. 1 Pt = Little or no Improvement to connectivity will be derived from the project. (b) Improving safety by esi nin major arterials to include features such as wider sidewalks, dedicated €c cle facilities medians, and pedestrian streetsca a features, Including trees where appropriate. Based on recent state and national research, arterial streets in urban areas with higher speeds, higher motor vehicle volumes, and housing mixed with commercial attractions, transit service, and other pedestrian and bicycle generators are the locations with the most transportation conflicts, collisions and risk. • How will the project improve safety, while expanding mobility for all users, especially at -risk populations? 5 Pts = Substantial long term safety solution. 3 Pts = Moderate improvements. 1 Pt = Little or no Improvement to safety will be derived from the project or safety Improvement Is Incomplete or short term. (c) .Protecting the environment by_providing safe alternatives to single occupancy driving. In order to make alternatives to single occupancy driving safe and viable, connections are needed between and among existing housing, employment, education, retail and recreation destinations. • How well will this project support infill, encourage redevelopment and reuse of existing building stock, Intensify land uses, and connect housing and employment 5 Pts = Substantial impacts by Improving connections between housing, centers of employment, education, retail and recreation. 3 Pts = Moderate impacts. I. Pt = Little or no impacts to congestion will be derived from the project. (d) Preserving_ community character by Involving local citizens and stakeholders to participate in planning and design decisions. Recent research has shown that transportation projects on urban arterials and main street highways have a greater likelihood of scope, schedule and budget changes that often result in additional costs. This is primarily due to the complexity of the setting and level of Interest by area residents and stakeholders. Research has demonstrated that more and better up front coordination and communication and engagement of local citizens and stakeholders in design sometimes called `Community Design', can reduce the potential for project delay or cost over -runs. • How has or how will this project ensure community engagement in planning and design decisions that will help to preserve community character? 5 Pts = Substantial commitment to community involvement in planning and design. 3 Pts = Moderate commitment. 1 Pt = Little or no consideration of citizen and stakeholder participation in planning and design decisions. http:/ /www.wsdot.wa.gov/bike /call.htm 3/27/2012 WSDOT - Call for Projects _ Pedestrian and Bicycle Program Other consideration will be given to the following: Page 4 of 4 • Project delivery status (planning, environmental review, right of way acquisition, construction plans), a Overlap with nationally designated Main Street communities, Main Street affiliates, or National Historic Districts that are also community main streets. • Consistency with community plans • Consistency with the federal principles of livability (EPA -HUD -DOT partnership) Including: • Providing more transportation choices • Promoting equitable, affordable housing • Enhancing economic competitiveness • Supporting existing communities • Coordinating policies and leverage investment • Valuing communities and neighborhoods Copyright wSDOT © 2012 h4:/ /www.wsdot.wa.govlbike /call.htm 3/27/2012 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 12, 2012 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA TITLE: Sprague Avenue Swale Upgrade (UIC Elimination) Project Park Road to 1 -90 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 90.48, Chapter 173 -200 WAC, Title 33 U.S.C. 1251 -1376; Storm and Surface Water Utility: SVMC 3.80; Aquifer Protection Area Fund: RCW 36.36. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Ordinance 12 -002, approved budget expenditure from Fund 403 Aquifer Protection Area for the Sprague Swale Upgrade Project - February 28, 2012. BACKGROUND: In November 2011 Stormwater Utility staff applied for a grant from the Department of Ecology to eliminate existing problem drywells and improve a section of Sprague Ave between Park Rd and the I -90 interchange with landscaped stormwater bio- infiltration swales. The project cost estimate was $888,829 with design scheduled for 2012 and construction in 2013. In February 2012 Council approved $630,000 in Aquifer Protection Funds for the project through Ordinance 12 -002. In March 2012 staff contracted with a survey consultant to begin the topographic survey of Sprague Ave. In April 2012 staff received notice that Ecology would provide the requested grant funds. By May 2012 HDR Engineering, Inc. is under contract to do design work for the project. Preliminary design drawings and sketches are scheduled to be presented at a Public Open House on June 13, 2012. Staff has made personal contact with most of the businesses along the project route to inform them about the project and answer any questions. The current project schedule is as follows • June 13, 2012, 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. Public Meeting at Park Place Assisted Living Center • July 2012 Finalization of design drawings and bid package • August 31, 2012 Bid opening • Fall 2012 /Spring 2013 Construction OPTIONS: Discussion only. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion only. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This project is being paid for with a grant from the Department of Ecology and city matching funds from Fund 403 (Aquifer Projection Area (APA) fee revenues). Grant funds will be negotiated based on final project cost but are currently estimated to be $666,622, which is 75% of the total estimated $888,829 cost. STAFF CONTACT: Steve Worley— Senior Engineer Capital Projects ATTACHMENTS: Example Cross Sections and Plans SPRAGUE AVE. AND PARK IUD. EXISTING SPRAGUE AVE. AND PARK IUD. GLASS SWALES DRIVERS PERSPECTIVE DRIVERS PERSPECTIVE ELEVATED PERSPECTIVE ELEVATED PERSPECTIVE W c� � O N �w CL- z W Q w J Q W w � z Q �lz W 0 Oil O CL- U n .i�lley SPVV--W� uausenreneemm�s i � I 66053513PRA6GU5 AVE 6607 3E51 SPRAGUE AVE 6901 3510P4909E AVE 6901 1 SPRAGUE AVE 6901 1 SPRAGUE AVE 33 2601 SAN A �°' s o II I II II I I I II I rL w ---- �------ ° - - - - -- @6 0 O O a ip dl owl 0 OUw PPS ill------ - - -, .I v W l � I O m 1 01 I 6530 E SPRAGUE AVE 6� E SPRAGUE AVE16712 E SPRAGUE'! AVE16310 E SPRAGUE AVEI SPRAGUE AVE N 6515 E SPRAGUE AVE 35242.0102 35241.1204 35241.120 35241 1203 E 35241.1209 J 35241.1'101 W GENERAL PLANTING NOTES: PLANT SCHEDULE SITE DEVELOPMENT AErEATO TR�ESTEdr1�TloNS��oN��oE POPEO wR;,sTTAaEU, AoA A",aueauM DIDMASLE D<D GIAL UrMDOL LID SALE TUNTINA s °o °Ur 111 Iz4sls 1 111 LIT 11 11 ILL ",Till AD oNAL wrow11 IT 0 TrrEDSnwe TUCe..nENT. runs e�E ewc -nTloN eoulPtilev; AUTO Aee AIIIIIcnnreuM DAVVI IILE APOLI_o MAPLE III DIAL sID—LI I III.I D� e,evv11 1 1 ze,esz ToIreANSES PMORTO UE °wN1 T y oUEEN `°MPETSO TOA IAUI DUI DAVUINUSUSTUws LAILIATA 11SAMIEAL EUROPEAN now DRAM D<D 3UAL do sTANDAID 3o 14zT�sr 4.TS 6T,T� A wAUDSnwe TYU n�U Arvn o TrcovEU, oTSO�wuwN AreEAS ANDT Ta TvausILLI AA I1ANTICLILa I1ANTICLILa'EVE ese DIAL II- ILANDAID ADA SAMT zzo3sr 4.11 Io,ass sL LA -sE SAE I. A DE ISAAAEU 11A A I�A,DON ENSTINA SID�AAL 14zes sr 11 ALL U1111 ISAII ARGAI IIALL 11 111AIR Al III 30 63 90 !e4 1 ^ –30 NORTH CILL BEFORE YOU DIG 1 800-024555 %� c o1 spok �e y 9 va ms m SPRAGUE SWALE UPGRADE PROJECT AY 1l, n µ On s° % .. smi. M Aso u z 1000s92A6 xo. ,M a� E AVE 6901 E SPRAGUE AVE 6915 E SPRAGUE AVE 7013 E SPRAGUE AVE 3 35134.9093 35134.9087 35134.9041 I C°ow j I D 0 EP Da o o ° ow —_tt -- ttwwwu_ tt ------- ;� - - -- tt - - - -- — —-- - - - --n - - -- -- go - -- --- - - - - -- - - -- - -- — �� - - - -- — — — — - - -g - -� - -- °- - - -° - e U O O O — — UiI tt — -- - -- - - - -— �P - -- Io Dwo 'I I � , ° HLj Ll z' 6819 E SPRAGUE AVE 6904 E $PRAGUE AVE E SPRAGUE AVE E SPRAGUE AVE Iy; '� 7004 E SPRAGUE AVE 018-€ AGUE AVE z 7102 35241.1101 im 3541.1006 Poved 35241.1002 35241.1001 I^ ' 35241.0902 35114 .0905 O n � z ° GENERAL PLANTING NOTES: PLANT SCHEDULE SITE DEVELOPMENT DEPrRTOT1 .1E1PEdcoAT�o21 POR ANPIxo DALD1.s wRIs °P "aa °�;TM AoR AoERwowM REO MAPS o<o IL srMOO� LID A�PwITII1 4s,000 sF 151 111s11 T ADIT o2� wwRMATioN `o°— E °R� RT.E D AArwoRK. 1 .. A-" I TEALSnwe PUEl.neNr coNFUCrse e�iRwc -nTioN eouiPnne�TnNO O nee AIIIIAIIIADLM DAIDE 1— A—LE MAILe III 3wL IIDVALI I unoe4 DEEP e,evv sF 115 11.151 TD" "OA l'wK1x oMPTxTO 1 A1 i4z1eP 4.15 6a1 L� "VIeE a III w1Pw1e1ETULDe- Ae1AA 111MIDAL 11 -IIAI no121EAM III 11L do eTA2 �1 M1P T�I�A1� o�P O�,oP1DIL"ll A22, \<11 III P SIALLI —A ��T� Ee ��T�o��III III 10,E � 11- -lDAaoADAIAMP 1zo 11 115 11.115 ALL 1111 11ALEA1 I LL 1E �1a-11 AD ADTOMAT�o�1a�AAT� 1 o2 A'eTwAe�DOAA� i4z11 eP ILEA ED 1111 1-1 Il MILII IIALL I,- 0 3c 60 9c teat 1 ^ –30 NORTH CALL BEFORE YOU OIG 1800 424 -5151 mry o1 spaka'e vaxax SPRAGUE SWALE UPGRADE PROJECT A�8L2012 wixa xo. so�ag�a n�a��a, sine 1os ay° VaL�_wa. 991 °x ,a °9 921 1 °1 DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of June 7, 2012; 2:30 p.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 June 19 22, 2012: Association of Washington Cities Annual Conference, Vancouver, Wa. June 19, 2012 (CONFIRMED no meeting) June 26, 2012, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. Proclamation: Parks and Recreation Month [due Mon, June 18] 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance, Coeur d' Alene Tribe Franchise — Kelly Konkright (10 minutes) 3. Proposed Resolution: Adoption of Draft 2013 -2018 Six -Year TIP — Steve Worley (10 minutes) 4. Admin Report: City's Ten Year Anniversary — Carolbelle Branch (15 minutes) 5. Admin Report: Truck Parking — Kelly Konkright (20 minutes) 6. Admin Report SRTC Call for projects — Steve Worley (10 minutes) 7. Animal Control — Morgan Koudelka (30 minutes) 8. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 9. Info Only: (a) Department Reports; (b) TIB Call for Projects [ *estimated meeting: 105 minutes] July 3, 2012, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, June 251 1. Advance Agenda July 10, 2012, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, July 21 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance, Coeur d' Alene Tribe Franchise — Kelly Konkright (10 minutes) 3. Motion Consideration: SRTC Call for Projects — Steve Worley (10 minutes) 4. Admin Report: Street Standards — John Hohman, Gabe Gallinger (20 minutes) 5. Admin Report: Street Illumination — John Hohman, Gabe Gallinger (15 minutes) 6. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: 60 minutes] July 17, 2012, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, July 91 1. Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Goals and Policies — Lori Barlow (30 minutes) 2. Graffiti Policy — Cary Driskell (20 minutes) 3. Code Enforcement — John Hohman, Cary Driskell (30 minutes) 4. Interstate Signage — Kelly Konkright (20 minutes) 5. TIB Call for projects — Steve Worley (20 minutes) 6. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: 125 minutes] July 24, 2012, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Motion Consideration: TIB Call for Projects 3. Admin Report: Shoreline Master Program (S 4. Admin Report: Advance Agenda 5. Info Only: Department Reports p.m. [due Mon, July 161 (5 minutes) — Steve Worley (10 minutes) MP) Goals and Policies — Lori Barlow (30 minutes) (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: 50 minutes] Draft Advance Agenda 6/7/2012 3:16:59 PM Page 1 of 3 July 31, 2012, Studv Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda [due Mon, July 231 (5 minutes) August 7, 2012, Study Session Format (CONFIRMED no meeting — National Night Out) August 14, 2012, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Aug 61 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Proposed Resolution: Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Goals and Policies — Lori Barlow (20 minutes) 3. Admin Report: 2013 Budget- Estimated Revenues & Expenditures (20 minutes) 4. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: 50 minutes] August 21, 2012, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Aug 13]] 1. Donation Policy — Mike Stone (25 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: 30 minutes] August 28, 2012, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Aug 201 1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2013 Budget (estimated revenues & expenditures) (10 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 3. Admin Report: Proposed 2013 Budget Ordinances — Mark Calhoun (20 minutes) 4. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 5. Info Only: Department Reports [ *estimated meeting: 40 minutes] September 4, 2012, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Aug 271 1. Outside Agencies: Presentations from Economic Development Orgs — Mark Calhoun ( -30 min) 2. Sprague Appleway Corridor Environmental Assessment — Public Works (30 minutes) 3. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: 60 minutes] September 11, 2012, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tues, Sept 41 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Outside Agencies: Presentations from Social Service Agencies — M.Calhoun ( -60 min) 3. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: 65 minutes] September 18, 2012, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda [due Mon, Sept 101 (5 minutes) September 25, 2012, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tues, Sept 171 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2013 Budget — Mark Calhoun (20 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 3. Motion Consideration: Allocation of Funds to Outside Agencies — Mark Calhoun (20 minutes) 4. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 5. Info Only: Department Reports [ *estimated meeting: 50 minutes] October 2, 2012, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Sept 241 1. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) Draft Advance Agenda 6/7/2012 3:16:59 PM Page 2 of 3 October 9, 2012, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tues, Oct 1]] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2013 Budget — Mark Calhoun (20 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance for Property Tax — Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 4. First Reading Proposed Ordinance Adopting 2013 Budget — Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 5. Motion Consideration: Allocation of Funds to Outside Agencies — Mark Calhoun (20 minutes) 6. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 7. Info Only: Department Reports [ *estimated meeting: 80 minutes] October 16, 2012, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Oct 81 1. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) October 23, 2012, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tues, Oct 15]] 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Ordinance Proposed Property Tax — Mark Calhoun (10 minutes) 3. Second Reading Ordinance Adopting 2013 Budget — Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 4. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: 35 minutes] October 30, 2012, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Oct 221 1. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) OTHER PENDING AND /OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: ADA Transition Plan Bidding Contracts (SVMC 3. — bidding exceptions) Budget Amendment, 2012 Centennial Trail Agreement City Hall Renovation Contracts, Annual Renewals, histories, etc. Decant Discussion Emergency Management Interlocal Greenacres Trail Grant Investment Accounts Lodging Tax Funding Manufactured Homes Pedestrian/Bicycle Grant Program Planning Commission Rules of Procedure Prosecution Services Revenue Policy, Cost Recovery Speed Limits (overall system) Spokane Valley Municipal Code 8.25.025(F) Stormwater Projects *time for public or council comments not included Draft Advance Agenda 6/7/2012 3:16:59 PM Page 3 of 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 12, 2012 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ® information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2012 SRTC Call for Projects GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Resolution 11 -005 adopting the 2012 -2017 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) on June 28, 2011; Admin Report on the Draft 2013- 2018 Six Year TIP on May 29, 2012 BACKGROUND: As required by state law, staff prepares a Six Year TIP each year for public review and adoption by council. The Six Year TIP plans for the improvement of the city's transportation network as grant funding opportunities become available. The Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) will be issuing a 2012 Call for Projects on July 2nd, 2012 for allocation of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funding for the years 2013 -2016. This call for projects is based on the current direction by Congress to pass a 24 month extension to the federal transportation bill SAFETEA -LU. Approximately $24 million in STP funding is expected to be available for the Spokane region. However, if a shorter extension of the federal transportation bill is approved, the amount available may be reduced proportionally. Project applications are anticipated to be due Friday, August 3rd, 2012. The available funds will be divided into two regional categories: Urban and Rural projects. The Urban category of projects will receive 80% of the total funds available (currently estimated to be $19.2 million); while the Rural category will receive 20% of the total available funds ($4.8 million). Spokane Valley is eligible for Urban funding only. The federal STP(U) funds will be further divided into four project categories as shown below. Improvement Reconstruction A.. 20% 30% .. - .. $3.84 Million $5.76 Million Preservation 40% $7.68 Million Other* 10% $1.92 Million Total $19.2 Million * `Other' includes Bike /Ped, ITS, Studies and Transit projects Due to the short application cycle, staff began evaluating the proposed STP grant criteria and has identified a draft list of projects to review with council. Information used to develop this draft list of projects includes: • The draft 2013 -2018 Six Year TIP • The adopted Pavement Management Program (PMP) • Council's expressed priorities including the Sullivan Road W Bridge Replacement Project and Street Preservation Here are some comments relative to the development of this list of projects. 1. There are more projects on the attached list than there are STP(U) funds available to pay for them. This is to provide council an opportunity to weigh in on which projects get selected for grant applications to be submitted to SRTC. 2. The projects listed in Bold are the ones staff currently recommends submitting grant applications for. 3. The Start Year shown for each project is flexible and will likely be adjusted as the list is finalized. 4. IMPROVEMENT CATEGORY: These are the only three improvement projects in the current draft of the 2013 -2018 Six Year TIP. 5. RECONSTRUCTION CATEGORY: The first two projects have been in past Six Year TIPs and currently have federal STP(U) funds for the design phase. Having federal funds for the design phase increases the potential to receive federal funds for the construction phase. The Sullivan Rd PCC project begins to address a portion of the Sullivan Road Corridor Project by replacing the deteriorating asphalt pavement with concrete because of the high truck traffic in this corridor. The last two projects in this category come directly from the PMP. 6. PRESERVATION CATEGORY: All projects listed come directly from the PMP. 7. OTHER CATEGORY: The Sullivan Rd Corridor Traffic Study is proposed to help determine if Sullivan Road needs to be widened to three lanes each direction due to the future completion of Spokane County's Bigelow Gulch project (and prior to the completion of the last phase of the North Spokane Corridor project). OPTIONS: Information only. An Admin Report on this item is scheduled for June 26, 2012. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Information only. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Project costs are currently being developed in more detail for each project. The city's match on federally funded projects is typically 13.5% of the total project cost. An initial review of the projected REET funds through 2016 appears to indicate sufficient funds to provide the city's match for the recommended projects. STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, PE — Senior Capital Projects Engineer ATTACHMENTS: 2012 SRTC Call for Projects — Proposed Projects List City of Spokane Valley - 2012 SRTC Call for Projects - Proposed Projects List Improvement Category # Project Name Limits Start PE RW CN City Match STP funds 4,439 Flora Barker 2014 Start End I Year I (Dollars in Thousands) (13.5 %) (86.5 %) 1 Total 1 Sullivan Road West Bridge (CN) 2 Mission Ave Improvement (CN) 3 Park Rd Improvement (RW /CN) 4 Reconstruction Category @ Spokane River 2013 $ 4,439 $ 599 $ 3,840 $ 4,439 Flora Barker 2014 $ 4,050 $ 547 $ 3,503 $ 4,050 Broadway Indiana 2015 $ 20 $ 150 $ 2,877 $ 411 $ 2,636 $ 3,047 Sub - Totals 2 Broadway @ Argonne /Mullan PCC (CN) Broadway Argonne /Mullan 2014 $ 1,557 $ 9,979 $ 11,536 # Project Name Start Limits End Start Year PE RW CN (Dollars in Thousands) City Match (13.5 %) City Match (13.5 %) STP funds (86.5/) STP funds (86.5/) Total 1 Sullivan /Euclid Intersection PCC (CN) Sullivan Euclid 2013 2013 $ 1,562 $ 211 $ 1,351 $ 1,562 2 Broadway @ Argonne /Mullan PCC (CN) Broadway Argonne /Mullan 2014 Fancher $ 2,110 $ 285 $ 1,825 $ 2,110 3 Sullivan Rd PCC Marietta Euclid 2014 $ 338 $ 2,595 $ 396 $ 2,537 $ 2,933 4 Euclid Ave Flora Barker 2015 $ 30 $ 1,500 $ 207 $ 1,323 $ 1,530 5 Flora Rd Euclid Trent 2016 $ 25 $ 1,300 1 $ 179 1 $ 1,146 1 $ 1,325 2015 $ 30 $ 680 $ Sub-Totalsl $ 1,277 1 $ 8,183 1 $ 9,460 Preservation Cateeory # Project Name Start Limits End Start Year PE RW CN (Dollars in Thousands) City Match (13.5 %) STP funds (86.5/) Total 1 Sprague Ave Resurfacing (EB Lanes) Havana Fancher 2013 $ 50 $ 450 $ 68 $ 433 $ 500 2 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Fancher Dollar 2013 $ 24 $ 225 $ 34 $ 215 $ 249 3 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Herald University 2014 $ 30 $ 375 $ 55 $ 350 $ 405 4 Argonne Rd Resurfacing Sprague Broadway 2014 $ 30 $ 265 $ 40 $ 255 $ 295 5 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Argonne Herald 2015 $ 30 $ 680 $ 96 $ 614 $ 710 6 Sullivan Ave Resurfacing Broadway Mission 2015 $ 30 $ 286 $ 43 $ 273 $ 316 7 Sprague Ave Resurfacing Vista Argonne 2016 $ 30 $ 640 $ 90 $ 580 $ 670 8 Sullivan Ave Resurfacing Sprague Broadway 2016 $ 40 $ 800 $ 113 $ 727 $ 840 Sub - Totals $ 538 1 $ 3,447 1 $ 3,985 Other Category (Bike /Ped, ITS, Studies, Transit, etc.) # Project Name Limits Sta rt End 1 Sullivan Rd Corridor Traffic Study Indiana Wellesley 2 ApplewayTrail Evergreen Tshirley 3 Start PE RW CN City Match STP funds Year (Dollars in Thousands) (13.5 %) (86.5 %) 2013 $ 200 $ 27 $ 173 $ 2014 $ 200 $ 1,500 $ 230 $ 1,471 $ Total 200 1,700 Sub - Totals) $ 257 1 $ 1,644 1 $ 1,900 RQ% n,;,, STD pr ;e , , Totalsl $ 3,629 1 $ 23,252 1 $ 26,881 P: \Public Works \Capital Projects \Project Funding Applications \2012 Applications \STP(U) Apps \STP Potential Project List.xlsxSTP Potential Project List.xlsx 6/6/2012 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 12, 2012 Department Director Approval Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ® executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pending /Potential Litigation GOVERNING LEGISLATION: [(RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)] PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: "I Move that Council adjourn into executive session for approximately thirty minutes to discuss pending /potential litigation, and that no action will be taken upon return to open session." BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: