2012, 07-17 Study Session AGENDA
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION FORMAT
Tuesday,July 17,2012 6:00 p.m.
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11707 East Sprague Avenue,First Floor
(Please Silence Your Cell Phones During the Meeting)
DISCUSSION LEADER SUBJECT/ACTIVITY GOAL
ROLL CALL
1.Mike Basinger Draft Development Agreement for Discussion/Information
Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA 05-12
2. Steve Worley Transportation Improvement Board Call for Discussion/Information
Projects
3. Cary Driskell Graffiti Update Discussion/Information
4. Lori Barlow Shoreline Master Program(SMP)Goals and Discussion/Information
Policies
5.Mayor Towey Advance Agenda Discussion/Information
6.Mayor Towey Council Check-in Discussion/Information
7.Mike Jackson City Manager Comments Discussion/Information
ADJOURN
Note: Unless otherwise noted above, there will be no public comments at Council Study Sessions. However, Council always
reserves the right to request information from the public and staff as appropriate. During meetings held by the City of Spokane
Valley Council,the Council reserves the right to take"action"on any item listed or subsequently added to the agenda. The term"action"
means to deliberate,discuss,review,consider,evaluate,or make a collective positive or negative decision.
NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other
impairments,please contact the City Clerk at(509)921-1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made.
Study Session Agenda,July 17,2012 Page 1 of 1
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Review
Meeting Date: July 17, 2012 Department Director Approval ❑
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑old business ®new business ❑public hearing
❑ information ® admin.report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-05-12 and associated
development agreement.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A, RCW 36.70B.170-210 and SVMC 19.30.015
PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: On July 3, 2012, no action was taken by City Council.
BACKGROUND:
CPA-05-12 is a privately initiated site-specific comprehensive 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.
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 was to 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. On June 12, 2012, staff provided more information to City Council. City Council
concurred to proceed to an ordinance first reading, without a development agreement, for the
June 26, council meeting. On June 26, 2012, City Council passed a motion to amend Ordinance
12-018 to include a development agreement and advance to a second reading. On July 3, 2012,
staff provided an administrative report regarding Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-05-12
and the terms of the negotiated development agreement.
OPTIONS: Discussion only.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None needed. Public Hearing set for July 24,
2012
STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger,AICP, Senior Planner
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Development Agreement and Exhibit A
1of1
pkanc }�r KA"E Department of Community Development
alle Planning Division
CPA-05-12
Development Agreement
Review Session
July 17, 2012
pkanc t'TY" " }�r"KA"E Department of Community Development
Valle golliwog Planning Division
Project Number
CPA-05-12
Application Description:
Privately initiated map amendment
Proposed Amendment:
Medium Density Residential to High
Density Residential
iiApplicant(s):
Land Use Solutions & Entitlement
9101 Mt. View Lane
Spokane, WA 99218
p kanc, " 'Ey Department of Community Development
Valle Planning Division
Pioneer and
RailbOW
I •! r
KANE/
Department of Community Development
.000
Valle . Planning Division
Comprehensive Plan
Broadway
('ITVHAI I«15PKANEV
Spkanc Department of Community Development Planning Division
Development Agreement Negotiated Terms
• Limit density to 22 units/acre
• Main access Broadway Ave.
• Alki Rd. will not be improved
• Shared Use Path from Moore Rd. to Sonora Rd.
— 10' wide
— Bollards at each end to prevent vehicle access
• 40' wide area of restriction (surrounding the property)
— which will restrict the building height to 35 '
Zone
LE T
.L1
Main access will be limited to
Broadway Avenue
Area of restriction is the
shaded area surrounding ..m■
the property limiting the
height to 35'
LZ T
w as �x•�ti�/:
•
�.;-C'M1 Jam"
•-
Lf
RL Ip F.
The developer will build a
Shared Use Path connecting
Moore Rd. to Senora Rd. for
pedestrian circulation
•
tr
BROAD AY APARTMENTS
B --
Pi PLAN
Dl
Spokane
Valle
Department of Community Development
Planning Division
Upcoming Meetings
• Public Hearing
- July 24, 2012
• 2"a Reading Ordinance 12 - 018 & 12-019
- July 31 , 2012
■
DRAFT
,
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This Development Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into by and between Arger
Conklin LLC, C/O Greg Arger ("Developer"), a limited liability company of the State of
Washington, having offices at 300 North Mullan Road, Spokane Valley, and the City of
Spokane Valley ("City"), a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, hereinafter
jointly referred to as "Parties":
RECITALS:
1. Developer owns property located in Spokane Valley, Washington more specifically
described as:
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 1/4 of
the SW 1/4 of Section 13, Township 25 North, Range 44 East,
Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington.
2. The Developer has proposed to amend the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan
(the "Comprehensive Plan") and Official Zoning Map as part of the annual
Comprehensive Plan amendment process occurring in 2012, 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 to allow the construction of an apartment complex on approximately
10.86 acres of land.
3. To integrate the Project into the neighborhood and provide for a compatible
development, the Project shall be constructed according to the laws and regulations
governing land use in the City of Spokane Valley and the additional conditions
agreed to by the Developer and set forth below.
4. Development Agreements are specifically authorized by RCW 36.70B.170-210 and
Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 19.30.050 as a proper exercise of the
City's police power to include standards that apply to and vest the development,use
and mitigation. The development standards in such agreements may include
residential densities, building sizes, mitigation measures, conditions, maximum
height, setbacks, drainage and other land use matters.
5. The parties agree that the conditions set forth below are intended to mitigate
specific direct impacts resulting from the re-zoning and re-classification of the
Property.
6. A public hearing has been held before the City Council, and the City Council finds
pursuant to Ordinance No. that the proposed project conforms to the
Comprehensive Plan. Notice for the above-mentioned hearing was provided in a
manner consistent with the Municipal Code.
7. This agreement is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Municipal Code.
8. The Developer agrees, after conferring with its legal counsel, that all requirements
of this Agreement have a nexus to the development and that nothing herein or the
Municipal code constitutes a violation of RCW 82.02.020 as applied to this Project.
AGREEMENT
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, the
City and the Developer stipulate and agree to the following:
I. DEFINITIONS
For all purposes of this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided or unless the
context otherwise requires:
1.1 "City"means the City of Spokane Valley
1.2 "Developer" means Arger Conklin LLC or their successors or assigns, partners or
joint ventures including any participating contractor.
1.3 "Project" means an apartment complex to be on the Property located south of
Broadway Avenue west of Conklin Road.
1.4 "Property"means the property described in Recital 1 above.
1.5 "Subsequent Project Approvals" means all Project approvals required by state law
or Municipal Code after approval of this Agreement to construct the Project
including, but not limited to, zoning changes, clearing and grading permits,
Boundary Line Adjustment(BLA), building permits and occupancy permits.
II. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY
2.1 Compliance with Existing Rules and Regulations. This Agreement shall not relieve
Developer from Developer's obligations to comply with state or local law
applicable to the Property and Development and use of the same, and to secure such
authorizations and permits as may be imposed as a condition of any work being
performed on the Property.
2.2 Developer Covenants and Agreements. In addition to the requirements set forth in
paragraph 2.1 above, Developer further covenants and agrees to the following:
-2-
2.2.1 The number of units shall not exceed 22 units per acre, and no bonus density
shall be applied.
2.2.2 The main access to the Project will be located on Broadway Avenue and
secondary access will be located on Conklin Road.
2.2.3 The Local Access Street Plan identifies the connection of Alki Road from
Moore Road to Conklin Road. The Project currently has access to
Broadway Avenue (Minor Arterial) and Conklin Road (Collector).
Additional access from Alki Road is not required for ingress, egress or
emergency access. The Developer will not be required to dedicate right-of-
way or construct Alki Road from Moore Road to Conklin Road.
2.2.4 The Developer shall provide a shared use path providing pedestrian access
from Moore Road to Sonora Road. The shared use path shall be located in
the current right-of-way and shall be 10 feet wide with bollards at each end
restricting vehicular access. Access from the Project to the shared use path
shall be provided, however the Developer may restrict public access from
the shared use path into the Project.
2.2.5 The Project shall establish a 40 foot wide area of restriction ("Limited
Density Area") surrounding the development as depicted on Exhibit A.
Development in the Limited Density Area shall be consistent with the
Municipal Code, and further be limited as follows:
2.2.5.1 Building height shall not exceed an R-3 building height of thirty-
five (35) feet;
III. MISCELLANEOUS
3.1 Commencement Date. This Agreement shall commence on the date that it is fully
executed by the Developer and the City following consideration and approval of the
same by the City Council (the "Commencement Date") and is recorded with the
Spokane County Auditor. The Developer acknowledges that an appeal could be
filed related to the Project, which could include a stay of proceedings. Any
construction activity by Developer prior to full resolution of any such appeal is at
Developer's own risk.
3.2 Indemnification and Hold Harmless Agreement. Developer agrees to defend, hold
harmless and indemnify the City from and against any and all liability, damages,
costs, or expenses to Developer, including attorney's fees, arising from Developer
undertaking any construction activities during such appeal, from any delay resulting
from such an appeal or from a finding that the agreement in part or in whole is
unlawful.
-3-
3.3 Conditions Shall Run With the Land. All of the provisions, agreements, rights,
powers, standards, terms, covenants and obligations contained in this Agreement
shall be binding upon the parties and their respective heirs, devisees, administrators,
representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring the Property, or any portion
thereof, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner
whatsoever, and shall inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective heirs.
All of the provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes
and constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable law. Each
covenant to do or refrain from doing some act on the Property hereunder, (a) is for
the benefit of such properties and is a burden upon the Property, (b) runs with the
Property, and (c) is binding upon each successive owner during its ownership of
Property or any portion thereof, and each person having any interest therein derived
in any manner through any owner of the property or any portion thereof, and shall
benefit such party and the Property hereunder, and each other person succeeding to
an interest in such Property.
3.4 Notices. All notices under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective
when personally delivered 48 hours after deposit in the United States mail first
class, as registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the
following representatives of the parties at the addresses indicated below:
To Developer: Greg Arger
300 North Mullan Road
Spokane Valley,WA 99206
To City: Community Development Director
City of Spokane Valley
11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106
Spokane Valley,WA 99206
And to: Office of the City Attorney
City of Spokane Valley
11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 103
Spokane Valley,WA 99206
And to: F. J. Dullanty, JR.
Witherspoon,Kelley, Davenport & Toole
422 West Riverside Avenue, Suite 1100
Spokane,WA 99201
Either party may change its address by giving notice in writing to the other party.
3.5 Entire Agreement. This Agreement is complete and sets forth and contains the
entire understanding and agreement of the parties, and there are no oral or written
representations, understandings or ancillary covenants, undertakings or agreements
which are not contained or expressly referred to herein. No testimony or evidence
-4-
of any such representations, understandings or covenants shall be admissible in any
proceeding of any kind or nature to interpret or determine the terms or conditions of
this Agreement.
3.6 Amendments. This Agreement may only be amended in writing signed by the City
and the Developer. Conditions of development imposed by the City Council of the
City of Spokane Valley, after public hearing on this matter, shall not be altered
without appropriate notice and public hearing.
3.7 Recordation of Agreement. This Agreement and any amendment or termination to
it shall be recorded with the Spokane County Auditor.
3.8 Severability. If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall
be determined invalid, void or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction,
the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby to the extent such
remaining provisions are not rendered impractical to perform taking into
consideration the purposes of this Agreement or the rights and obligations of the
parties have been materially altered or abridged.
3.9 Interpretation and Governing Law. This Agreement and any dispute arising
hereunder shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State
of Washington. Any action for enforcement of the Agreement shall be brought in a
court of competent jurisdiction in Spokane County, Washington or as otherwise
provided by statute.
3.10 Assignment. Any sale by the Developer (or its successor in interest) of all or any
portion of the Property to any person, entity, or organization shall be conditioned on
the purchaser accepting assignment of this agreement. Such assignment shall be
recorded with the Spokane County Auditor. If the Property is sold without an
express assignment of this agreement, then an assignment shall be implied.
3.11 No Third Party Beneficiary. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole
protection and benefit of the parties. No other person shall have any right of action
based upon any provision of this Agreement.
3.12 Further Actions and Instruments. Each of the parties shall cooperate with and
provide reasonable assistance to the other to the extent contemplated hereunder in
the performance of all obligations under this Agreement and the satisfaction of the
conditions of this Agreement. Upon the request of either party at any time, the
other party shall promptly execute,with acknowledgement of affidavit if reasonably
required, and file or record such required instruments and writings and take any
actions as may be reasonably necessary under the terms of this Agreement to carry
out the intent and to fulfill the provisions of this Agreement or to evidence or
consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement
-5-
3.13 Voluntary Agreement. The Parties hereby represent and acknowledge that this
Agreement is given and executed voluntarily and is not based upon any
representation by any of the Parties to another Party as to the merits, legal liability,
or value of any claims of the Parties or any matters related thereto.
3.14 Reservation of Authority. Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.170 the City reserves the
authority to impose new or different regulations to the extent required by a serious
threat to public health and safety.
3.15 Authority. The undersigned covenant and represent that they are fully authorized to
enter into and execute this Agreement.
This Agreement is executed by the Parties as set forth below.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY:
By: Date:
City Manager
ATTEST: [DRAFT
By: Date:
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
By: Date:
City Attorney
DEVELOPER:
By: Date:
Greg Arger
Arger Conklin, LLC
-6-
NOTARY PUBLIC PAGE HERE
-7-
0516-6176(6051.13L
VP 4'/011VAENV)1OdS'AVNIOVOd9.1AOl9l
337 POW NO1 MSM A3TA3YXOd4 W Hroaa
ELLL•L X09 Od z - o
S31VIOOSSV QNb IN3G "VdVA� �V0"8 g = ;° a
S1o3L/H3h' 11 b,1M ,`� HOB 2ONVHO 3NOZ 03SOdOHd EL 2 o HE a H4 EH
d o
aITaaoo ° ■
U
co
H
Z
W
HZ
ova ;,2
J
0-- E-
Qo[ ; (■ 1
lij Q
IL U
w G 3, 0r
0m a_2,
Z. .27.99£ M Q
w 0
a oe m a
6.33'
° y
017
L\.°A O
0
.7.06'
m
Co \
'7,'
da 0-17
AINO 1,015 TIONIS
Ob ,5Z
Em o
m
zo
' 276.5 '
n
0
o
w
Q.
2 i-
w r d a o N O S ,e o
a 1N
� 2
o
a o�
m v
LS zab
I
avoa
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: July 17, 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 TIB Call for Projects
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: June 12, 2012; Public Hearing on the Draft 2013-2018 Six
Year TIP; June 26,2012 Info RCA
BACKGROUND: At their March 2012 Board meeting, the Washington State Transportation
Improvement Board (TIB) approved a 2012 Call for Projects for allocation of Urban Corridor (UCP),
Urban Arterial Program (UAP) and Urban Sidewalk Program (SP) funding. The anticipated funding
levels are: $6.9M in combined UAP/UCP funds for the Northeast Region; and$740K for the East Region
SP program. While the total amount of urban funding available statewide only decreased about 11% in
2012,the amount of Urban road funding available for the Northeast region is down about 41%from 2011.
Sidewalk funding for the East region has increased about 350%.
The decrease in funding available for this region is primarily due to the realignment of the Urban regional
boundaries, TIB combining the UAP/UCP funding, and a larger portion of funding being dedicated to
sidewalk projects and pavement preservation projects for medium sized cities. Project applications are
due Friday,August 24,2012.
TIB has made some minor changes to the program this year that include the following:
1. TIB will no longer rank UCP and UAP projects separately or have dedicated funding amounts for
each program. The top scoring projects will be selected regardless of whether UCP or UAP
criteria are used to rank the project.
2. For Urban projects, TIB is placing greater emphasis on major corridor related projects versus
"spot"projects. Approximately 70%of urban funding will be directed towards corridor projects.
Staff has been evaluating the TIB grant criteria and working to identify projects that will have the
highest potential to receive funding. We have also reviewed the adopted 2013-2018 Six Year
TIP, the Pavement Management Program, accident hot-spots, and several other elements of the
city's transportation network.
Based on this review, staff has identified the Sullivan Road W Bridge Project as the most suitable
Urban project for the 2012 Call for Projects. The Sullivan bridge project will replace the existing 2-lane
Sullivan Rd W Bridge that carries southbound traffic with a new 4-lane bridge. The project is needed to
address the inadequate structural condition of the existing bridge. This request to TIB would be for
construction funding only since design, right-of-way, and partial construction funding has already been
received through a state FMSIB grant($2M)and a federal Bridge Program Grant($8M).
Due to the small amount of funding available,no suitable sidewalk projects were identified at this time.
OPTIONS: Discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The city's match on TIB funded projects is typically 20% of the
total project cost. The federal grant funds previously received for the Sullivan West Bridge Project count
towards the required TIB match. As the proposed TIB applications are developed, staff will coordinate
with the Finance Department to ensure there are sufficient city funds to provide the needed match for the
proposed TIB projects.
STAFF CONTACT: Steve M.Worley,PE—Senior Capital Projects Engineer
ATTACHMENTS: TIB Project Application
a. 2012 Urban Funding Application
6'
* for Urban Arterial Program (UAP) & Urban Corridor Program (UCP)
Mail your signed application and required attachments to the TIB Office no later than August 24, 2012.
The mailing address for the TIB Office: Post Office Box 40901 • Olympia WA 98504-0901
Legislative
Agency Name District(s)
Congressional
Arterial Name District(s)
Project Limits Find Legislative or Congressional
District
Length in Miles
Federal Route Functional Class
Agency Contact Phone Number
Email Address
APPLICATION ATTACHMENTS
Include the following attachments with all applications
Excerpt from adopted Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program showing project
Detailed vicinity map clearly showing project limits
Detailed project cost estimate signed by a professional engineer registered in Washington State
Typical roadway section(s)
Funding commitment letters from all funding partners Number Attached
Accident analysis worksheet Link to Request Accident Data from WSDOT
Intersection configuration (if applicable)
Excerpt from current agency Comprehensive Plan defining agency CBD & Urban Activity Center(s)
Written concurrence from WSDOT if project is on or connects to a state highway
Adopted Bicycle Plan if project includes bicycle facilities
Development map showing Permits Issued and Permits Pending areas (if applicable)
Annexation agreement (if applicable)
Map showing potential annexation area (if applicable)
Include only if project is Construction Ready
I Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) documentation
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Enter target dates Date
Start Design Engineering
Environmental Documentation Complete&Permits Approved
Right of Way Acquisition Complete
PS&E Complete
Contract Advertisement
Contract Completion
Do you plan to close the road during construction?
Urban Funding Application
Revised 4 June 2012 Page 1 of 13
PROJECT FUNDING
Enter Requested Total TIB Funds Max TIB Ratio
Is this a construction ready project?
Are TIB funds distributed proportionally through the project phases?
Enter the Total Project Costs to the nearest dollar in cells F47 to F51
Phase Total Cost TIB Funds Local Funds
Design Engineering
Right of Way
Construction Engineering
Construction Other
Construction Contract
TOTAL
Noneligible Engineering
Engineering exceeding 30% of eligible construction costs is not eligible for TIB reimbursement
Other Noneligible Costs
(for example,landscaping greater than 5%of eligible construction costs,utility undergrounding,sound walls)
TOTAL ELIGIBLE COST
TIB Matching Ratio
Total TIB Funds/Total Eligible Cost
FUNDING PARTNERS
Source Public or Private Commitment Amount
Letter
Public
TOTAL
Local funds are correct
CERTIFICATION
Certification is hereby given that the information provided is accurate and the applicable attachments are complete and included
as part of the application package
Agency Official Signature Date Signed
Printed or Typed Name&Title
Urban Funding Application
Revised 4 June 2012 Page 2 of 13
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Describe the existing conditions
Describe the proposed improvements
Describe the project benefits
Are any federal permits required for this project?
PHYSICAL CONDITION
Does the roadway have any of the following structural failures?
If yes, briefly
Base describe:
If yes, briefly
Walls describe:
If yes, briefly
Culverts describe:
If yes, briefly
Bridges describe:
If yes, briefly
Slope Stability describe:
Urban Funding Application
Revised 4 June 2012 Page 3 of 13
Does the roadway have any of the following significant flaws?
Intersection Control I Radius
Sight Distance I Channelization
Does the project relieve any bottlenecks? (if so,
describe the bottleneck and the solution below)
PROJECT COMPONENTS
PROJECT TYPE
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Enter number of improvements
Add Traffic Signal Add Roundabout
Modify Traffic Signal Add Right Turn Pocket
Interconnect Signal Add Left Turn Pocket
Remove Signal
DESCRIBE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
ARE ANY OVERHEAD UTILITIES BEING MOVED
UNDERGROUND?
DESCRIBE UTILITY WORK
DESCRIBE ILLUMINATION, LANDSCAPING&AESTHETIC ELEMENTS
DESCRIBE OTHER WORK
Urban Funding Application
Revised 4 June 2012 Page 4 of 13
ROADWAY GEOMETRICS & FEATURES
Is this an intersection only project?
0 Yes 0 No Fill out the segment and intersection details in rows 115 to 141 and rows 156 to 165
Significant difference in cross section or ADT constitue a segment. Additional segments can be added on the "Additional
Segments" tab. If the project is an intersection only, skip this section
SEGMENT ONE SEGMENT TWO
Segment Termini
Length (in feet)
Average Daily Traffic Volume
Existing Proposed Existing Proposed
Pavement Width
Curb to Curb or Edge to Edge
Number of General Purpose Lanes
Do not include Transit/HOV or Continuous Lt Turn Lane
Number of HOV/Transit Lanes
Do not include Continuous Left Turn Lane
Continuous Left Turn Lane Width
Is there a median?
Shoulder or Parking Width
Enter average width (feet) per side
Shoulder or Parking Placement
Shoulder or Parking Surfacing
Parking Type
Percentage of the segment that has on street
parking (e.g. parking one side is 50%)
Curb Placement
Bicycle Lane Type
Bicycle Lane Width
Pedestrian Buffer
Width between Curb and Sidewalk
Sidewalk Placement
Urban Funding Application
Revised 4 June 2012 Page 5 of 13
SEGMENT ONE (cont'd) SEGMENT TWO (cont'd)
Segment Termini
Existing Proposed Existing Proposed
Sidewalk Width'
Is there any street lighting present?
How many driveways are present?
How many fixed objects are present?
What is the average distance (in feet)from the curb
to the fixed objects?
' Sidewalk with curb separation on both sides is required by TIB policy
Minimum width is five feet with no obstructions
Please attach justification if the sidewalk does not meet these standards
Accident Information
(Information automatically generated from Accident Analysis worksheet)
Multiple vehicle Fatal and Injury 0 0
driveway crashes Property damage only 0 0
Multiple-vehicle Fatal and Injury 0 0
nondriveway
crashes Property damage only 0 0
Single vehicle Fatal and Injury 0 0
crashes Property damage only 0 0
Pedestrian or Pedestrian 0 0
Bicyle related
crashes Bicycle I 0 0
Additional segments can be entered on tab 4 "Additional Segments".
Urban Funding Application
Revised 4 June 2012 Page 6 of 13
INTERSECTION GEOMETRICS & FEATURES
Enter the existing and proposed geometrics for each intersection
INTERSECTION ONE INTERSECTION TWO
Intersection location
Major Approach Average Daily Volume
Minor Approach Average Daily Traffic Volume
Existing Proposed Existing Proposed
Intersection Control
Intersection type
Is there any intersection lighting present?
Is there a dedicated left turn lane
Is there a dedicated right turn lane
Is there protected only left turn phasing?
Accident Information
_ (Information automatically generated from Accident Analysis worksheet)
Multiple vehicle I Fatal and Injury 0 0
crashes Property damage only 0 0
Single vehicle Fatal and Injury 0 0
crashes Property damage only 0 0
Pedestrian or Pedestrian 0 0
Bicyle related
crashes Bicycle 0 0
Additional intersections can be entered on tab 5 "Additional Intersections".
Urban Funding Application
Revised 4 June 2012 Page 7 of 13
SAFETY
Annual Benefit from Urban Accident Analysis Worksheet
PROJECT DEFICIENCIES
Select Deficiency Type from the dropdown menu. Describe the existing deficiency within the project limits
Describe the corrective measure(s)that eliminates or mitigates the deficiency.
DEFICIENCY 1
Describe:
Corrective
Measure(s)
DEFICIENCY 2
Describe:
Corrective
Measure(s)
DEFICIENCY 3
Describe:
Corrective
Measure(s)
DEFICIENCY 4
Describe:
Corrective
Measure(s)
DEFICIENCY 5
Describe:
Corrective
Measure(s)
Urban Funding Application
Revised 4 June 2012 Page 8 of 13
MOBILITY
Select Truck Route Classification from dropdown list
NETWORK DEVELOPMENT
Select the appropriate option from the following list
Completes Corridor
Enter termini of corridor being completed
Project must meet ALL of the following criteria to qualify as COMPLETES CORRIDOR
► Project is last stage of corridor between logical limits
► Corridor is a minimum of 2 miles in length
► The entire corridor is constructed to urban standards
Completes Gap Along Federal Route
Existing route must meet urban standards
Extends Improvements Along Federal Route
Existing route must meet urban standards
Project does not complete or extend improvements and is not a new route
FREIGHT FACILITY ACCESS
Select Freight Facility Access provided by project
Mark ALL freight-carrying modes accessing the facility
Airplane Rail Ship Truck
Enter Trucks per Day
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT/URBAN ACTIVITY CENTER ACCESS
Select CBD/Urban Activity Center Access provided by project
Briefly describe the CBD/Activity Center access improvement
Urban Funding Application
Revised 4 June 2012 Page 9 of 13
SUSTAINABILITY
Agency has Adopted Greenhouse Gas Emissions Policy
Enter Policy Number Adoption Date
MODAL MEASURES
Select modal measures within the project limits
I Completes gap in HOV system Enter Gap Location
Adds HOV lanes in each direction
Adds Queue Jump or Transit Only Lane Enter Location(s)
Peak Hour Transit Buses
Enter Number
Bicycle Facility
Select option that applies
ENERGY MEASURES
Select energy measures within the project limits
Replace or install Low Energy Lighting
I Add Solar-powered Signage
Describe the measures below
ENVIRONMENTAL MEASURES
Select environmental measures within the project limits
I Incorporates Hardscaping or Climate-appropriate Plantings
Describe the measures below
I Incorporates Low Impact Drainage Practices
Describe the measures below
RECYCLING MEASURES
Select recycling measures within the project limits
I On-site Grinding & Re-use of Pavement
I Use of Base Treatment to avoid overexcavation
I Project uses Stockpiled Recycle Materials
Describe the measures below
OTHER MEASURES
I Incorporates other sustanability measures
Describe the measures below
Urban Funding Application
Revised 4 June 2012 Page 10 of 13
GROWTH & DEVELOPMENT
Fill out this section if your project supports a specific development or economic growth activity
Describe the development that this project supports.
Please provide the following information regarding the development this project supports
Number of dwelling units Total development acreage
Commercial building square footage Number of jobs created
If there has been private investment in public
infrustructure, choose the description that best
describes the status of this investment
Choose the description that best describes where the
development is located.
Choose the description that best describes the
proximity of the project to the development.
Choose the description that best describes the status
of the development agreement.
Choose the description that best describes the status
of the permits for the development.
Choose the description that best describes the status
of the zoning for the development.
Choose the description that best describes how this
project affects the comprehensive plan.
Choose the description that best describes the status of the public infrastructure tied to this development?
Water Sewer Power
Supports Annexation Agreement
Select from the options below
Project required by Annexation Agreement
Joint city/county application for project within Potential Annexation Area
Project lies within Potential Annexation Area
Urban Funding Application
Revised 4 June 2012 Page 11 of 13
GROWTH MANAGEMENT INFORMATION
Complete the questions below to address Land Use Implications as directed by Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 47.26.282.
Describe how the project supports or revitalizes existing urban development in the downtown
Describe how the project includes or encourages infill/densification of residential or commercial development consistent with your
local comprehensive plan?
Describe how the project promotes the use of transit and other multimodal transportation
Indicate the project's multimodal transportation components
Mark ALL existing or planned components
Sidewalk Bicycle Lanes HOV Lanes Access to Transit Center or Passenger Terminal
Other- Explain in space below
Urban Funding Application
Revised 4 June 2012 Page 12 of 13
Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) Commerce Copy
Growth Management Information
Funding Program Urban Arterial Program (UAP) & Urban Corridor Program (UCP)
Agency Name
Project Name
Project Intent
Describe how the project supports or revitalizes existing urban development in the downtown
Describe how the project promotes the use of transit and other multimodal transportation
The project adds the following multimodal components:
Indicate the project's multimodal transportation components
Other Multimodal Components:
Urban Funding Application
Revised 4 June 2012 Page 13 of 13
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: July 17, 2012 Department Director Approval
Check all that apply: [' consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Graffiti Update: Graffiti laws and the City's process for abating graffiti
nuisances
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 7.05.040Q
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of Ordinance 08-024 in 2008 included graffiti
as a nuisance under SVMC 7.05.040Q.
BACKGROUND: The staff wanted to provide the City Council with information on the City's
Municipal Code regarding graffiti provisions, and the process in which the City engages
participants for abating such nuisances. The following outlines the program the City adopted,
and an update on how the City and its partners at SCOPE and the Spokane County juvenile
court work toward abating graffiti.
There are two broad purposes in applying graffiti to a property. The first is related to
communicating gang information (territory, etc.), and the second is related to somebody wanting
to make their mark by vandalizing somebody's property. Although this second form of graffiti
("tagging") is referred to as an art form in some places, most of the tagging seen in Spokane
Valley has no artistic value.
Traditionally the City's response to graffiti was handled primarily by SCOPE, until the Council
adopted new Code provisions in 2008. A standard response when graffiti is found is to
photograph and analyze it to determine if there are gang-related components to it. If so, then
the photos are turned over to the gang unit. If it is not gang-related, SCOPE provides the
property owner or tenant with information on how to remove it. When graffiti is spotted on
somebody's property, SCOPE will leave a notice on their door. The City Police Department
tracks the number of graffiti incidents each year, with a dollar estimate of the damage caused.
Until 2008, the City had limited legal means to respond to graffiti, relying on catching people in
the act of tagging. If we were able to do so, that person could be charged with Malicious
Mischief in the third degree, which is a gross misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail and
a $5,000 fine. Having that as the primary weapon against graffiti was not effective because it
was so hard to catch someone "in the act." Other cities have experienced the same lack of
effectiveness in trying to catch taggers.
Given these experiences, other cities have geared programs to removing the graffiti as soon as
possible, the theory being that quick removal will deny the taggers any time to admire their
work, and thus, reduce the incentive to do it in the first place. Components of successful
abatement programs include the following:
- immediate notification to the city;
- immediate notification to property owners; and
- immediate removal of the graffiti.
Page 1 of 3
Ways these steps can be accomplished include the following:
- encourage neighbors to notify each other when graffiti is spotted;
- provide the public with a phone number and website at the City to report graffiti;
- work with impacted property owners on effective means of removing graffiti;
- have the City purchase products that have been proven effective in removing graffiti;
- encourage volunteer groups to assist in graffiti abatement with permission of owner/tenant;
- seek donations of various colors of paint and painting supplies from paint stores;
- encourage residents in graffiti prone areas to keep extra matching paint on hand; and
- educate citizens about paint products that are graffiti-resistant.
In 2008, the Council adopted a Code revision which made having graffiti on one's property a
nuisance under SVMC 7.05.040, subject to the enforcement provisions contained in SVMC
17.100. However, staff and the Council wanted to put together a graffiti abatement program that
did not re-victimize property owners who were unfortunate enough to have their property
vandalized. The question then became how to best get abatement of such nuisances without re-
victimizing property owners.
In searching for a solution, staff became aware of a Juvenile Court community service program
that already has an established graffiti abatement program. Juveniles are assigned community
service hours as a means of accountability through various Juvenile Court processes, and a
number of these juveniles are referred into this community service program through Juvenile
Court. The Juvenile Court program is operated by Spokane County, and already operates a
graffiti abatement program in the City of Spokane through the COPS offices. They have all of
the equipment and paint (donated), as well as supervision by Juvenile Court staff. They
apparently have 5 or 6 different colors to choose from.
In an effort to best utilize the services offered by Juvenile Court, to minimize the work load for
our staff, and to avoid re-victimizing property owners, staff utilizes the following process for
graffiti abatement:
1. SCOPE finds out about graffiti either through proactive means or by referral (from
private citizens to SCOPE or to Crime Check, or directly to City staff). This allows the
police to document the nature of the graffiti to determine if it is tagging, or whether it is
gang related.
2. SCOPE will be the primary contact for all graffiti and will contact the property owner to
discuss abatement with them, first seeking to have the property owner abate it
themselves. If so, the problem is solved.
3. If the property owner will not abate the graffiti, or cannot due to age or physical
limitations, the SCOPE volunteer would ask them to review and sign a release/waiver
form authorizing the Juvenile Court community service program to enter their property
and paint it over. If so, scheduling may be made by SCOPE with Juvenile Court to abate
it.
4. If they do not agree to either abate it themselves or to allow Juvenile Court to do it,
then it would be referred by SCOPE to our Code Enforcement officers, at which time it
would be treated as any other nuisance violation. This process would allow ample
opportunity for a property owner to either abate the graffiti themselves, or have Juvenile
Page 2 of 3
Court do it for free. The refusal to engage in one of these would result in the City taking
action.
5. If public property has been tagged, SCOPE will contact COSV Public Works or Parks
Department.
6. If we receive a citizen complaint, the staff member will encourage the complainant to
contact and report to Crime Check or do so ourselves.
7. SCOPE will provide the City with a periodic report outlining the status of graffiti
abatement.
Staff has drafted a flow chart for internal purposes, but wanted to share it so the Council would
have a clearer understanding of how graffiti is addressed in our process.
OPTIONS: NA
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: NA
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Graffiti informational brochure handed out by the City, our Police Department, and SCOPE
2. Flow chart of graffiti abatement process
Page 3 of 3
PUBLIC PUBLIC
PRIVATE
(Park) (Non-Park)
I.D. • I.D.
Photo to Photo to
Code Enforcement SCOPE—I.D's Code Enforcement
1st Touch
(3 Attempts)
Contact Waiver of Contact
Unsuccessful Liability Successful
ABATE Refer to Y Obtains Waiver ABATE
(Internal) COSY &Files (Internal)
• No Agreement to
Code Enforcement Abate
process
Court Process
•
Obtain Waiver
•
Refer to Refer to
SCJC SCJC
•
ABATEMENT
•
REPORT
GRAFFITI
Abatement Process
T M'1'1'
SV 01i0 VA Vli.l l
(,1
Prevent itl
• Learn more about graffiti and
its negative effects.
• Contact your local S.C.O.P.E. station
for tips on how to keep your
neighborhood graffiti-free.
• Arrange a special presentation on
graffiti for your classroom or
community organization.
(see the back of this brochure
for a list of resources)
Report itl
morowitimemnia
• Report graffiti by calling
Crime Check at 456-2233
Remove it!
• Don't let graffiti attract more graffiti,
vandalism or crime.
• Remove or paint over it after it's
been reported and photographed.
• Contact your local S.C.O.P.E. station
for tips on removing graffiti.
• Search the internet for "graffiti
removal tips."
• Keep Spokane Valley graffiti-freel
Under Spokane Valley Municipal Code
7.05.040,graffiti is defined as a nuisance.
Failure to remove graffiti is a violation of the
Municipal Code and may result in a $500 fine.
To report graffiti, call
Crime Check 456-2233
For more information on
graffiti and graffiti removal,
call your local S.C.O.P.E. station.
Central Valley 928-3807
Edgecliff 477-6345
Trentwood 927-9490
University 477-2582
For presentations on graffiti
for your classroom or
community organization, call
your area S.C.O.P.E. Office.
Spokane
jValley
City of Spokane Valley
11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 101
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
PH 509-921-1000
FAX 509-921-1008
www.spokanevalley.org
June 2011
A community guide
to keeping
Spokane Valley
graffiti-free.
Spokane
Valley
What is graffiti?
Graffiti is any type of unauthorized
marking on public or private property. It
may include words, figures, designs or
other inscriptions on any type of property
that can be seen by the public.
It may be applied using paint, ink, dye
or other substances that can be used to
mark property.
Isn't graffiti illegal?
Yes. Those who are responsible for
applying graffiti can be convicted of
malicious mischief, a crime that is
punishable by a fine up to $5000 and/or
up to one year in jail.
And, because we are determined to
defeat graffiti's negative effects, it has
been added to Spokane Valley's list of
prohibited nuisances* so that our
community can be graffiti-free.
*SVMC 7.05.040
Why be graffiti-free?
A scourge in communities across the
nation, graffiti mars public and private
property. It can lower property value and
discourage investment in the community.
Graffiti negatively affects people's
feelings of safety, and can encourage
more vandalism and gang activity.
Uncontrolled graffiti projects a poor
image of our community, and worst of all,
destroys community pride.
Report graffiti
Crime Check 456-2233
You can help keep Spokane Valley free
of graffiti and its harmful effects. Call
Crime Check at 456-2233.
Be ready to provide:
• Your name,
• A phone number where you can
be reached, and
• A description and location of the
graffiti.
You may also be asked to submit a
photograph of the graffiti if you can do so.
How can I
be graffiti-free?
If graffiti shows up on your property,
report it right away by calling Crime
Check at 456-2233.
After it has been reported and
photographed, remove graffiti promptly
and completely; otherwise it can attract
vandalism, crime and more graffiti.
How do I remove graffiti?
Most graffiti can be removed with
common products found at your local
hardware store. Some community
members keep extra paint handy just for
this purpose.
Ask for graffiti removal information
when you call Crime Check to report it,
contact your local S.C.O.P.E station, or
search the internet for"graffiti removal
tips."
Regardless of the removal method
you choose, be sure to remove graffiti as
soon as possible and help keep Spokane
Valley graffiti-free.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: July 17, 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: Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Update
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Shoreline Management Act (SMA) RCW 90.58
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Numerous discussions regarding local implementation
of the Shoreline Management Act under RCW 90.58.
BACKGROUND: City staff, with the assistance of a Shoreline Advisory Group (SAG),
completed the draft Goals and Policies for the Shoreline Master Program Update in July 2011.
The Planning Commission review was completed over 6 meetings beginning on March 22,
2012. A public hearing was conducted on April 12, 2012, and deliberations were completed on
June 28, 2012. The Commission voted 5-0 to recommend acceptance of the draft as modified.
Attorney Tadas Kisielius, VanNess Feldman GordonDerr, assisted the Commission with their
deliberations. On May 10, 2012 Mr. Kisielius highlighted draft goals and policies that may be
more restrictive than what the DOE (Department of Ecology) Guidelines require, and areas
where policy decisions are appropriate based on local circumstances. He also discussed
language changes to numerous policies to reflect the statutory standard regarding key SMA
concepts of no net loss and critical areas and remarked on the written comments received. A
Comment Table was developed to track public comments, Mr. Kisielius's comments, and the
Commission's final action. The table (included in the separate binder) is attached for your
information. Mr. Kisielius will be present at the July 24th Council meeting to discuss the draft
document.
Staff will present an overview of the process completed, explain the materials provided, and
highlight issues covered by the Planning Commission.
OPTIONS: N/A
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: N/A
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None
STAFF CONTACT: Lori Barlow, AICP, Senior Planner
ATTACHMENTS (provided in a separate binder):
Planning Commission Draft Goals and Policies
Table of Comments
Comments
Planning Commission Minutes
Power Point Presentation
City of Spokane Valley
Shoreline Master Program
drift Goals & Policies
Administrative Rupert
City Council Meeting
July 17 , 2012
e GoaLs
Provide an overview of the process to develop
the Goals and Policies with the SAG
Provide overview of Planning Commission
Process
Prepare the Council for discussion with
Special Legal Counsel
Discuss the materials Provided
Identify what ' s been completed and Next
Steps
Draft Goals and Policies Review
Process Overview
i
Staff and Consultant Role / Process
r ti
Develop
Preliminary
Draft Goals
and Policies
J
r ti
Coordinate
Shoreline
Advisory
Group Review
J
Conduct Open
IIHouses
Planning Commission Review
Study Session
Public Hearing
Recommend to
Council
Council Review
Public Comment
l
Accept by Resolution
3
development of foals and policies
- A Micro Look ! ! !
Review Law and
Guidelines
Review Inventory
Reviewed and
Modified by SAG
Draft Goals and
Policies
Completed
Preliminary Draft
Goals and Policies
Completed
Planning
Commission
Review Begins
4
Planning Commission Review Process
Study Session
• Review of Goals
and Policies
• Legal Review
Provided
• No Net Loss
• Constitutional
Protections on
Private
Property
Rights
Public Hearing
• Comments from:
• Property Owners
• Environmental
Groups
• User Groups
• Citizens
• Business
Operators
• SAG Members
Deliberations
• Property Rights
• Consistency with
the Law
• Issues for
Utilities
• Public Access
• Gravel Pits
• Shoreline
Stabilization
• Docks
Recommend to
Council:
Accept Draft as
Modified
C review was
completed in 6
meetings
5
Reviewing the Document . . .
Key concepts of SMA
Shoreline .Jurisdiction
Relationship of the Goals and Policies to
Development Regulations
Using the Materials Provided
Upcoming discussion with Legal Counsel
Shoreline Management Act (SMA)
SMA - passed in 1971
Three basic policies :
1 . Protect the
e nvironmental
resources of state
shorelines .
2 . Promote public
access and
e njoyment
opportunities .
3 . Give priority to
water dependant
u ses .
2003 - New Rules
Required SMP's be
updated
New Key Standards :
1 . "No Net Loss" of
ecological functions
2 . Restoration planning
3 . Assessment of
"reasonably
foreseeable"
cumulative impacts
Shoreline Jurisdiction - Areas Regulated by
t,„„ ?
SMP
All rivers / streams
with average flows
> than 20 cfs
■ All lakes > than
20 acres in size
Determined by the
Ordinary High Water Mark
■ Includes area 200 ' landward from the OHWM
■ Also includes the waterbod
Shoreline Jurisdiction
identifies the area
regulated by the SMP. It
of a setback or bu
8
1111111r
jaHiEgMm
--111111
IIII.L�!! �11
Iv � �011
1r in■■1�r1�� ■�■i 'k
111■-■w�i���
ae=C■1211111�� Idippi l n.
1
V
JR'F...EN
r
MUM=
jh 1- -mow — -
I
M_
UNL
==lbitd
311IIMIMEZIMIDIMMIN
MEI IMAM
ImIr■■tiiu■'
iNgPorp
dri a==-491smian
iifu=
— —
--
I�1i;_ialIii
ml lismffuff-
Lm11_I1_= -
mm so IS
=Es
PM=
-- --_
I
" MIMM.M■13.11.111116=j111511
•
Lli
husimmigdgmair inmarr-4
Wag 111F
Spokane Valley ' s Shorelines
I Note: The map is provided solely to
illustrate the location of the shorelines
within Spokane Valley jurisdiction.
9
Relationship Between Goals , Policies and
Regulations
Goals are broad expression
of community desires
i . e . Provide safe and convenient
access to the shoreline
A policy is a commitment to
act in a prescribed manner
i . e . development must maintain
existing habitat.
requires interpretive judgment
in applying it to a specific case .
Regulations are the specific
rules applied to a use or
hysical standard �
t ..s.etbac k
G oals
Policies
I
Re g ulatiofhs
General Program Goal and Policies
Goal: Enhance the City 's
shorelines by establishing
and implementing goals,
policies, and regulations
which promote a mixture of
reasonable and appropriate
shoreline uses that improve
the City 's character,foster its
historic and cultural identify,
and conserve environmental
resources.
Policies
Encourage :
Coordinated Planning
Consistency with other Plans
and Programs
Ensures No Net Loss of
Ecological Fx' s
Recognizes Private Property Rights
stablishes the foundation
for the development of the
Shoreline Master Program
1
Elements - Goals and Policies
Elements:
Historical , Cultural ,
Scientific & Educational
Utilities
■ Circulation
Economic Developm ' t
Conservation
■ Restoration
Critical Areas
Flood Haz . Reduction
Public Access
■ Recreation
■ Shoreline Use
General policies that apply
to shoreline uses and
modification activities
irrespective of
environment designation
Red Text = Optional Element
12
Policies for Shoreline Uses
Goal: Consider the use and
development of shorelines and
adjacent land areas for housing,
business, industry,
transportation, recreation,
education, public buildings and
grounds, utilities and other
categories of public and private
land uses in relation to the
natural environment and
ensuring no net loss of ecological
function
Uses
Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Piers and Docks
Boat Ramps / Boating
Facilities
Gravel Pit Operations
A shoreline
defined as the "end" to
which a land or water area
is ultimately employed.
3
Policies for Shoreline Modification Activities
Activities
Structural Shoreline
Modification (Bulkheads)
Shoreline Fill
Streambank Protection
Dredging
In -Stream Structures
Policies and regulations for
shoreline modification
activities or actions
undertaken in preparation
for, or in support of, a
shoreline use.
Attachments 4
■ PC Recommended Draft
■ Comment Table
■ Comments
■ PC Minutes
Drgf2 Goals and Poll -Coirmeait Tabs
PI'52 a red farthe 39gti:l R 2012 Planning Canmeiu
PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
SAE 3-3 Existing Eiglris-of way
1?equine Deaf'utilities and facilities to be located in'Dating Lights-of-way R ,er possible.
Sitir 4.04,jklmw and Oparaiioi Design
Wimp esisting utilitiea.facilitie and iiats ofw'ays �,. .a _;___ se lox ad within shoimlime
juaisdictionarid uequim maintenance or other impmav,er>aeotn,the illgilltenaace.inapiovialt should be
designed and implemented to niin'P additional impacts on the shousline a iionment
eacousaPed to coma past impacts caused by the utility. Vegetation Manag>ment Plans should be
moognized as maintismra activities.
SAP 3-6 Prefer-nice to Existing Facilities and Etilities
ve pmfenanrce to established Ltilit deems and iiatta efw•ay forupgiaees. maiLt�ce
traction of mi sting utilities and facilities,unless a location with less potential to in.
t is av'etlabl?.
1lttachirestit a 14
fadi6Pd car.the.1h 2d.2012 au Jrerie2 ?±52 2PC-t%errie
Goal/Policy
SAG i .
Centennial Comments
Dou Comments
Additional Public Comments
Received
Legal Counsel Review
Comments
Staff
Recommendation
----`ng Commission
action
Maintenance••-.eration
zy.,'
When �•"gutiIttiesand+or
�rridorslocatedwithin
o elinejurisdictionrequire
maintenance or other
improvements,the
maintenancelmprovemerrt
should be designed and
implementedto minim¢e
additional impacts onthe
shoreline environment and,if
possible,to correct past
impacts caused by the utility.
Vegetation Management Plans
should be recognized as
maintenance activities.
When existing Lai Irtieslocated
withinshorelinejurisdidion
require maintenance orother
improvements,the
maintenance/Improvement
should be designed and
implementedto minimize
additional impacts onthe
shoreline environmentaw4-f
to correct
The concept of correct ng
(restoring,rehabilitating(past
impacts is at the core of,and
imbuedthroughouttheSMA
and its implementing rules.
READ WAG 173-26-201(2M
Avista changes requested:
See Memo SectionC regarding
the language addressing
requi rem entstorestore.
Change:Theintentwasto
address the maintenance and
operation needs of the Utility.
The languageclarifiesthe
intent.
0 The PC Aft,rd.ddiscuss
ntketkonto remove ike
,esm,etiaalengnege-
The Utility poiicios
apply toprdhiicw,tit«
end per the memo,the
teikinrgsissaedoesnot
eppiy-
Maintenance and Operation
Maintenance and Operation Design
Design
When existingutilitiesfa ••
When existing utilitiesfaciItiesand
rights of waysand+orutilitycorridor
and rightsofways:--'- - 'R
are located withinshoreline
jurisdiction and require
maintenance or other
improvements,the
maintenancelmprovementshould
be designedandimplementedto
minimize additional impactsonthe
shoreline environmentai4-i4
caused by the utility. Vegetation
rarridors are locatedwithin
shoreline jurisdiction-and
require maintenance or other
improvements,the
maintenancefimpravement
should be designed and
implemenitedtominimize
additional impacts on the
shoreline environment and,if
pas le en courage.,,
possible. past
[Should alsoshow
=Vegetation"anagement
°i^tsnsna °^ti itie 'as
deleted,but doesn't.]
Management Plansshould be
recognized as maintenance
activities
KAnderson comments:
correct past impacts caused by
the utility. Vegetation
Management Plans should be
recognized as maintenance
activities
Design
When existing utilities
facilities and rights of ways
andlorutility corridors are
When existing utilities and+or Lai l Sty
corridors located within shoreline
jurisdiction require maintenance or
other improvements,the
maintenancelimprovementshould
be designed and implemented to
minimize additional impacts onthe
shoreline gavtrgrpa ,-f
to correct impacts
located withinshoreline
jurisdiction and require
maintenance or other
improvements,the
maintenancefiimprovement
should be designed and
implementedto minimize
additional impacts onthe
shoreline environment and if
possible,to correct past
possible, past
by the Vegetation
caused utility.
Management Plansshould be
recognized as maintenance
activities
impacts caused by th ,:
Vegetation M:s•.:•_ .
P:• ..--°�-recognized
.. aintenanceactivities
Next Steps . . . .
• Legal
Counsel
Discussion
with Tadas
Kisielius
• Discuss
Council
Comments
u . 4 Meeting
a-••
Aug . 14
Meeting
• Council
Action :
Accept by
Resolution
__)
r
• Next Phase
Environment
Designations
TBD
16
June 28,2012 _PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
General Goals and Policies
Goal SMP 1:Enhance the City's shorelines by establishing and implementing goals,policies,and
regulations which promote a mixture of reasonable and appropriate shoreline uses that improve the
City's character,foster its historic and cultural identity,and conserve environmental resources.
Policies
SMP 1.1 Coordinated Planning
Coordinate shoreline planning between the City of Spokane Valley,agencies with jurisdiction,adjoining
jurisdictions, the State of Washington, and the State of Idaho into which the river basin extends, and
consider the plans of non-government organizations(NGO's)and/or special interest groups.
SMP 1.2 Consistency with Other Plans and Programs
Ensure that the City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program is consistent with the Washington State
Shoreline Management Act and Growth Management Act,and to the extent practical the basic concepts,
goals, policies of the the following documents;: a--1Land use plan of the City of Spokane Valley
Comprehensive Plan a4 development regulations,the City of Spokane Valley Critical Areas Ordinances,
and the Shoreline Master Programs of adjacent jurisdictions.
SMP 1.3 No Net Loss of Ecological Functions
Ensure that all shoreline uses and development are regulated in a manner that goafantees assures no net
loss of shoreline ecological functions
SMP 1.4 Public Interest and Property Rights
IProtectBalance the interests of the community of the public in attaining the goals of the Shoreline Master
Program, in a manner consistent with all relevant constitutional and other legal limitations on the
regulation of private property.
SMP 1.5 Shoreline Designated Environments
Designate shoreline environments for the City of Spokane Valley shorelines that are consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan land uses, shoreline management practices, and shoreline inventory within each
designated area.
SMP 1.6 Use preferences for all Shorelines
Give preference to those shoreline activities which fulfill long range Comprehensive Plan goals and the
Shoreline Management Act policy priorities,as listed and discussed below:
It is the policy of the City to provide for the management of its shorelines by planning for and fostering
all reasonable and appropriate uses. Policies are designed to ensure the development of the City's
shorelines in a manner which will promote and enhance the public interest. These policies will protect
against adverse effects to the public health,the land,its vegetation and aquatic life and wildlife,and the
waters of the Spokane River, Shelly Lake and the Sullivan Road and Park Road Gravel Pits and their
aquatic life.
SMP 1.7 Use preferences for Shorelines of State-wide Significance
The State Legislature has declared that the interest and benefit of all of the people shall be paramount in
the management of shorelines of state-wide significance,and therefore preference shall be given to uses
in the following order of preference which:
1. Recognize and protect statewide interest over local interest
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 1
June 28,2012 _PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
2. Preserve the natural character of the shoreline
3. Allow uses that result in long-term over short-term benefits
4. Protect the resources and ecology of shorelines
5. Provide Increase public access to publicly owned areas of shorelines
6. Increase recreational opportunities for the public on the shorelines.
1SMP 1.8 Priority Uses and Shoreline Alterations Formatted:Font:(Default)Times New Roman,
Uses shall be preferred which are consistent with control of pollution and prevention of damage to the 11 pt,Bold
natural environment,or are unique to or dependent upon use of the state's shoreline.Alterations of the (Formatted:Normal
natural condition of the shorelines of the state,in those limited instances when authorized,shall be given Formatted:Font:(Default)Times New Roman,
priority for single-family residences and their appurtenant structures, shoreline recreational uses and 11 pt
other improvements facilitating public access,industrial and commercial developments which are
particularly dependent on their location on or use of the shorelines,and other development, (Formatted:Font:Bold,Italic
Formatted:Font:(Default)Times New Roman,
Historical,Cultural,Scientific&Educational Element Bold,Italic
Formatted:Space After: 0 pt,Line spacing:
Goal SMP 2: Goal:Protect the historic,cultural,scientific or educational sites within the single
shoreline that reflect our community's unique heritage and create or contribute to our collective
sense of place.
Policies
SMP 2.1 Sites and Structures
Identify,preserve,and manage shoreline sites and structures having historical,cultural,scientific or
educational value,and develop regulations that avoid,minimize,or mitigate any adverse impacts to
these resources.
SMP 2.2 Sites and Building Acquisition
Public acquisition through gifts,bequests,grants,or donations of buildings or sites having cultural,
scientific,educational,or historical value should be encouraged.
Discourage public or private development and redevelopment activities on any site,area,or building
identified as having historical,cultural,educational or scientific value.
SMP 2.43 Cooperation and Consultation
Ensure constant cooperation and consultation with affected agencies and tribes for projects that could
potentially impact cultural and historical resources.
I SMP 2M Inventory of Sites
Work with tribal,state,federal and local governments as appropriate to maintain an inventory of all
known significant local historic,cultural,and archaeological sites in observance of applicable state and
federal laws protecting such information from public disclosure.
I SMP 2.65 Site Inspection and Evaluation
Ensure early and continuous site inspection,consultation or evaluation by a professional archaeologist in
coordination with affected tribes for all permits issued in areas documented to contain archaeological
resources.
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 2
June 28,2012 PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
Utilities Element
Goal SMP 3: Maintain and provide adequate utility services within the shoreline environment
while preserving and enhancing the natural environment and ecology of the shoreline.
Policies
SMP 3.1 Location
Locate new public facilities and utilities,including,but not limited to,utility production,processing,
distribution,and transmission facilities outside of the shoreline jurisdiction whenever feasible.
SMP 3.2 Place Underground
Require new utilities and facilities that must be located within the shoreline to be built underground,if
feasible,and utilize low impact,low profile design and construction methods to the maximum extent
I possible. Undergrounding shall not be required if it results in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
SMP 3.3 Existing Rights-of-way
Require new utilities and facilities to be located in existing rights-of-way whenever possible.
SMP 3.4 Maintenance and Operation Design
When existing utilities,facilities and rights of ways and/or utility corridors are located within shoreline
jurisdiction and require maintenance or other improvements,the maintenance/improvement should be
designed and implemented to minimize additional impacts on the shoreline environment and,if possible,
encouraged to correct past impacts caused by the utility. Vegetation Management Plans should be
recognized as maintenance activities.
SMP 3.5 Preference to Existing Facilities and Utilities
I Give preference to established utility corridors and rights-of-way for upgrades,maintenance and
reconstruction of existing utilities and facilities,unless a location with less potential to impact the
shoreline environment is available.
SMP 3.6 Stormwater Facilities
Stormwater utilities will be designed and located as to minimize environmental impacts within the
shoreline jurisdiction.If located within the shoreline jurisdiction they shall require the use€ best
management practices(e.g.biofiltration measures)and landscaping with native vegetation to provide
habitat,ecological restoration,and aesthetic improvements.All stormwater facilities must protect water
quality,manage runoff and address erosion control and sedimentation.
Circulation Element
Goal SMP 4:Provide a safe,convenient,and multimodal circulation system which will minimize
disruption-negative impacts to the shoreline environment
Policies
SMP 4.1 Transportation Access
Ensure that a system of arterials,scenic drives,pathways,public transit routes,and bikeways adjacent to
and within the shoreline areas provide appropriate access to the Spokane River in a way that meets the
needs and desires of the community as reflected in the Comprehensive Plan,while also preserving
assuring no net loss of ecological function of the shorelines.
SMP 4.2 Location of New Streets or Street Expansions
Locate new streets or street expansions outside of the shoreline jurisdiction,unless no other options are
available or feasible.In all cases,streets should be on the landward side of development.
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 3
June 28,2012 PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
SMP 4.3 Consolidation of Corridors
Encourage the consolidation of transportation and utility corridors crossing the shoreline environment in
order to minimize the number of crossings,and encourage the collocation of utilities on bridges or in
transportation rights of way whenever possible by considering the needs during the design of bridge and
corridor upgrades.
SMP 4.4 Transportation Facilities
Plan,locate,and design proposed transportation facilities where routes will have the least possible
adverse effect on shoreline ecological functions,will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological
functions,or adversely impact existing or planned water dependent uses.
SMP 4.5 Stormwater Treatment
All development within the shoreline jurisdiction area shall provide stormwater treatment for all new and
redeveloped pollution generating impervious surfaces.
SMP 4.6 Parking Facilities for Public Access
Parking facilities for public access to the shoreline and water should be kept as far from the shorelines as
feasible
SMP 4.7 Parking Facilities not a Primary Use.
Parking facilities should only be allowed as necessary to support permitted shoreline uses,and not as a
primary use,and must be located outside of the shoreline jurisdiction area if other options are available
and feasible.
SMP 4.8 Impacts of Parking Facilities
Minimize the environmental and visual impacts of parking facilities where allowed.
SMP 4.9 Retain Unused Public Rights-of-way for Visual and Physical Access
Retain unused public rights-of-way within the shoreline area to provide visual and physical access to the
shoreline unless:
• The street vacation enables the City to acquire the property for beach or water access
purposes,boat moorage or launching sites, park,public view,recreation,or educational
purposes,or other public uses or the City declares that the street or alley is not presently
being used and is not suitable for the above purposes;or
• The street vacation enables the City to implement a plan,that provides comparable or
improved public access to the same shoreline area to which the streets or alleys sought to be
vacated,had the properties included in the plan not been vacated.
SMP 4.10 Improve Non-Motorized Access to Shoreline
Improve non-motorized access to the shoreline by developing,where appropriate,pathways,trails and
bikeways along and adjacent to the shoreline.Connectivity between non-motorized access points is
encouraged.
SMP 4.11 Recognition of Centennial Trail
Recognize the importance and uniqueness of the Spokane River Centennial Trail to the City of Spokane
Valley,the region,and the state, Future trail development on private property including trail extensions,
new access points,whether public or private,shall be designed to have the least adverse impact. Future
trail development on public property shall meet the same objective,but should also incorporate
enhancement and restoration measures where appropriate.
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 4
June 28,2012 PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
SMP 4.12 New Rail Lines
Allow new rail lines and the expansion of existing rail corridors within the shoreline jurisdiction only for
the purpose of connecting to existing rail lines or rights-of-way.Construct new rail lines within an
existing rail corridor where possible.
SMP 4.13 Rail Lines affecting Public Access
Construct,where feasible,all new rail lines so that they do not compromise the public's ability to access
the shoreline safely.
Economic Development Element
Goal SMP 5: Encourage and support water dependent,water oriented,and water related economic
activities within the shorelands of the City of Spokane Valley that will be an asset to the economy of
the area and that will protect and maintain the ecological functions of the shoreline environment
Policies
SMP 5.1 Location of Economic Development
Give preference to economic development within the shoreline jurisdiction that is particularly dependent
on their location on or use of the shoreline.Encourage new development to locate in areas that have
intensive prior use and can be upgraded or redeveloped.Encourage new economic development to cluster
into areas of the shoreline whose current use is compatible.
SMP 5.2 Design of Economic Development
Development should be designed to minimize the impacts to the shoreline aesthetic through architectural,
landscape,and other design features.Give preference to water-oriented economic development,while
limiting location of All non-Ghorelinewater-oriented dependent elements of the development should be
plased outside of the shoreline jurisdiction unless the site is inappropriate for water-oriented uses or the
development demonstrably contributes to the objectives of the Shoreline Management Act inland.
Encourage design that seeks to restore damaged or compromised shoreline through incentives.
SMP 5.3 Provisions for Physical and Visual Availability to Water
When public access is required under this SMP 14historic areas,overlook points,structures,and points of
public access to the waterfront should be incorporated in economic development site-planning.
SMP 5.4 Encourage Regional Tourism
Strengthen regional tourism by expanding and developing neighborhood and regional linkages and
improvements that use the shoreline areas.
SMP 5.5 Consistency with Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations
Proposed economic development in the shoreline should be consistent with the City of Spokane Valley
Comprehensive Plan and development regulations.Upland uses on adjacent lands outside of immediate
SMA jurisdiction(in accordance with RCW 90.58.340)should protect the preferred shoreline uses from
being impacted by incompatible uses.
Require that the short term economic gain or convenience of development be evaluated against the long
term and potentially costly impairments to the natural environments and state wide interest that may
result.
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 5
June 28,2012 PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
I SMP Provisions for Shoreline Protection
Require that development provide adequate provisions for the protection of water quality,erosion control,
landscaping,aesthetic characteristics,stormwater systems, fish and wildlife habitat,views,
archaeological sites,and normal public use of the water.
I SMP 5.87 Promote Recreational Uses
Promote recreational uses of the shorelines to contribute to the economic attractiveness of the city. Seek
opportunities to partner with public and private property owners to increase public recreational
opportunities in the shoreline.
I SMP 5.38 Water-Enjoyment Areas
Promote the identification and establishment of water-enjoyment areas,such as parks,view points,
beaches and pathways as attractions.
SMP 5d09 Business and Industry Operations
Encourage shoreline industries and businesses to maintain a well kept appearance and to operate in a
manner that will not cause negative environmental aesthetic impacts to the community.
SMP 5.140 Redevelopment
Encourage and provide incentives for redevelopment of existing sites that includes points of public
access,areas designed for public enjoyment,and improve fish and wildlife habitat,or improve fish
passage.
SMP 5.11 Building Orientation
New public and private shoreline uses and developments should be planned and designed to attract the
public to the waterfront; new private shoreline uses and development should be planned and designed to
attract the public to the waterfront with exceptions as allowed by WAC 173-26-221(4)(d).
SMP 5.132 Design Feature Incentives
Incentives should be created to encourage developers to incorporate design features into the waterside of
the building.
SMP 5.143
Support and maintain the existing aggregate mining industry as a significant component of the area
economy.
Conservation
Goal SMP 6: Preserve for the future those natural resources,including the unique,fragile and
scenic qualities of the shoreline,which cannot be replaced.Achieve no net loss of ecological
functions of the shoreline.
Policies:
SMP 6.1. Areas to be Preserved
Areas that provide open spaces,scenic vistas,contribute to shoreline aesthetics,natural vegetation and,
fish and wildlife habitat should be preserved
SMP 6.31 Protect Vegetative Buffers and Setbacks
Protect existing vegetation and shoreline ecological function by designating buffers and setbacks that are
supported by the 2010 Shoreline Inventory and allow for the use of innovative techniques and strategies
while ensuring no net loss of ecological functions..
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 6
June 28,2012 PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
SMP 6.32 Acquisition of Unique Shoreline Areas
Acquire and maintain,through conservation futures,donations,grants,general funds,or other sources,
shoreline areas containing natural elements especially worthy of preservation or especially attractive to
the public,such as beaches,forest covers,trees,wildlife populations,vistas and other scenic features.
SMP 6.3
Utilize 2010 shoreline inventory to establish baselines for the functions and values of shoreline. Property
owners may provide additional information to supplement the inventory in preparation of a development
proposal
SMP 6.4 Preserve Ecological Connectivity
Protect and prescrvoAssure no net loss of ecological viability and connectivity through use of habitat
islands and corridors within the shoreline area.
SMP 6.5 Incentives for Retention of Critical Areas and Open Space
Retain existing open space and environmentally sensitive areas on private property through the use of
incentives.
SMP 6.6 Mitigation of Negative Impacts
Development shall avoid and if avoidance is not possible,mitigate negative impacts to steep banks,
surface and ground water quality,ecological functions,fish and wildlife habitat,vegetative cover,and
erosion of the soil.
SMP 6.7 Cumulative Impacts
Regulations shall assure that the commonly occurring and foreseeable cumulative impacts of development
do not cause a net loss of ecological functions of the shoreline.
Restoration
Goal SMP 7: Restore habitat and the natural systems to improve shoreline ecological functions.
SMP 7.1 Restoration Plan
Develop a Restoration Plan that will identify degraded areas and provide a framework for restoration
efforts to improve the existing ecological function and provide a mechanism for mitigation of unavoidable
and unforeseeable future development
SMP 7.2 City Stewardship
Ensure that the City of Spokane Valley assumes a primary stewardship role through restoration efforts on
city-owned and controlled land.Manage the City's programs,services,and operational infrastructure in a
manner that achieves no net loss of ecological or shoreline functions.
SMP 7.3 Incentives for Restoration and Enhancement Projects
Provide incentives for projects that include restoration and enhancement components by implementing
tools which may include but are not limited to:modifying the shoreline setback area that would apply to
the restored areas or allowing a greater range of uses or flexible development standards(e.g.,setbacks)on
I properties providing restoration and or enhancement that may result in a net gain of ecological function.
SMP 7.4 Gravel Pit Restoration Plans
Assist the Gravel Pits in the development and implementation of restoration plans for pits that are
consistent with the Shoreline Master Program and the Department of Natural Resources.
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 7
June 28,2012 _PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
SMP 7.5 Cooperative Restoration Programs
Encourage cooperative restoration programs between local,state,and federal public agencies,tribes,non-
profit organizations,and landowners.
Critical Areas Element
IGoal SMP 8: Assure no net loss of ecological functions and
ecosystem-wide processes within wetlands,critical aquifer recharge areas,fish and wildlife habitat
Iconservation areas,geologically hazardous areas and frequently flooded areas. FasurcAssure no
net loss of ecological function within these critical areas.
Policies
SMP 8.1 Consistency with Critical Areas Goals and Policies
I To the extent practicable and consistent with RCW 36.70A.480 Eensure the critical area goals and
policies for the Shoreline Master Plan are consistent with the critical areas goals and policies contained in
the Comprehensive Plan.
SMP 8.2 No net loss of ecological function
Ensure regulatory protection measures developed for the shoreline area assure no net loss of shoreline
ecological functions necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources as defined by Washington State
Department of Ecology guidelines adopted pursuant to RCW 90.58.060
SMP 8.3 Preserve and protect critical areas defined as Wetlands through protective measures.
Rate wetlands based on the quality of the wetland and the ecological function they serve. Develop
protective measures tailored to the wetland quality and function and that consider the characteristics and
setting of the buffer and the impacts on adjacent land use.
SMP 8.4 Preserve and protect critical areas defined as Wetlands through mitigation measures.
Base wetland mitigation on the wetland rating and require mitigation sequencing. Only allow
compensatory mitigation after mitigation sequencing has been applied and higher priority means of
mitigation have avoidance has been deemed infeasible.
SMP 8.5 Protect people and property from risk associated with critical areas defined as
Geologically Hazardous Areas.
Limit development that would cause foreseeable risk from geological conditions to people or property.
Do not allow development that will require structural shoreline stabilization except in the limited cases
where it is necessary to protect an allowed use and no alternative location is available. Allow structural
I shoreline stabilization to protect existing structures only when relocation or reconstruction is
infeasible. Do not allow structural shoreline stabilization that will result in a net loss of ecological
function.
SMP 8.6 Preserve and protect critical areas defined as Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation
areas
Develop measures that assure no net loss of ecological functions of river,lake and stream corridors
associated with fish and wildlife habitat. Integrate the protection of fish and wildlife habitat with flood
hazard reduction and other fish and wildlife management provisions. Develop measures that authorize
and facilitate habitat restoration projects.
SMP 8.7 Preserve and protect critical areas defined as Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas.
Protect the hydrologic connections between water bodies,water courses,and associated wetlands.
Integrate the protection of critical aquifer recharge areas with jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional aquifer
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 8
June 28,2012 PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
protection measures such as Watershed Management Plans,Wellhead Protection Plans,Department of
Natural Resources Forest Practices,and others as appropriate.
SMP 8.8 Protect people and property from risk associated with critical areas defined as Frequently
Flooded Areas
Limit development that would cause foreseeable risk to people and property from frequent flooding.
Ensure frequently flooded areas are fully addressed in the goals and policies of the Flood Hazard
Reduction element of this plan.
Flood Hazard Reduction Element
Goal SMP 9: Prevent and reduce flood damage in shoreline areas to protect ecological functions,
shoreline habitat,lives,and public and private property.
Policies
SMP 9.1 Development within the Shoreline
Prohibit development within the shorelines that would intensify flood hazards or result in cumulative
significant adverse effects to other properties,as regulated by Chapter 21.30,Floodplain Regulations,of
the Spokane Valley Municipal Code.
SMP 9.2 Coordination among agencies
Coordinate flood hazard reduction planning among the applicable agencies.
SMP 9.3 Structural Flood Hazard Reduction
Allow new structural flood hazard reduction measures only:
• Where scientific and engineering analysis has demonstrated it to be necessary,and when non-
structural methods are infeasible and mitigation is accomplished;and
• Landward of associated wetlands and buffer areas except where no alternative exists,as
documented in an engineering analysis;and
• When consistent with current best management practices,using natural native materials
whenever feasible.
Note: An example of a structural flood hazard reduction measure is a structure placed by humans within
a stream or river waterward of the ordinary high mark such as,but not limited to a diversion or
modification of water flow to control flooding.
SMP 9.4 Removal of Gravel
Allow removal of gravel for flood control only if biological and geomorphological study demonstrates
that extraction has a long-term benefit to flood hazard reduction,does not result-and-nein a net loss of
ecological functions,and is part of a comprehensive flood management solution. This does not apply to
the permitted gravel mining operations underway at the time of SMP adoption and approval.
SMP 9.5 Natural Vegetative Buffers
Maintain,protect,and restore natural vegetative buffers that are within the floodplain of the Spokane
River that function to reduce flood hazards.
SMP 9.6 Alternate Flood Control Measures
When evaluating alternate flood control measures,consider the removal or relocation of structures in
floodplain areas.
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 9
June 28,2012 PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
Public Access Element
Goal SMP 10:Provide diverse,reasonable,and adequate public access to the shorelines of the state
consistent with the natural shoreline character,private property rights,public rights under the
Public Trust Doctrine,and public safety while maintaining no net loss of ecological function.
SMP 10.1 Public Interest and Private Property
Promote and enhance the public interest with regard to rights to access waters held in public trust by the
state,while protecting private property rights and public safety.
SMP 10.2 Shoreline Development by Public Entities
Require public entities,including local governments,state agencies and public utility districts,to include
public access as part of each development project unless such access is incompatible due to reasons of
safety,security or impact to the shoreline environment.
SMP 10.3 Shoreline Development
Require the dedication and improvement of public access in developments for water-enjoyment,water-
related and non water-dependent uses and for the subdivision of land into more than four parcels,with
exceptions as allowed by WAC 173-26-221(4)(d)(iii).
SMP 10.4 Public Access Maintenance and Improvements
When improving and maintaining existing public access points,minimize additional impacts on the
shoreline environment and,if possible,so long as it is consistent with constitutional protections,correct
past adverse environmental impacts caused by the public access.
SMP 10.5 Access Plan
Develop a formal Public Access Plan for an integrated shoreline area public access system that identifies
specific public needs and opportunities to provide public access that includes visual and physical access.
The plan should identify access opportunities and circulation for pedestrians(including disabled persons),
bicycles,and vehicles between shoreline access points.
SMP 10.6 Design of Access Measures
Require that public access measures have a design appropriate to the site,adjacent property,and general
nature of the proposed development,while protecting and providing views. Public access facilities
should be designed with provisions for persons with disabilities,where appropriate.
SMP 10.7 Motor Vehicle Access
Where access to the water's edge by motor vehicles is necessary,parking areas should be kept as far from
the shorelines as possible. Parking facilities shall implement a design appropriate for the shoreline
environment.
SMP 10.8 Access Design and Spacing
Access design and spacing of access points should be based on the biophysical capabilities of the
shoreline features and should protect fragile shoreline environment.
SMP 10.9 Impacts on Views
Minimize the impacts to existing views where the view is taken from the water or shoreline,public
property or substantial numbers of residences. Water-dependent shoreline uses and physical public access
shall have priority over maintaining a view when a conflict between them is irreconcilable provided that
the water dependent use is consistent with height restrictions in RCW 90.58.320.
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 10
June 28,2012 PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
SMP 10.10 Permitted Uses
Regulate the design,construction,and operation of permitted uses in the shorelines of the state to
minimize,insofar as practical,interference with the public's use of the water.
SMP 10.11 Incentives
Incentives such as density or bulk and dimensional bonuses should be considered if development
proposals include additional public access beyond that required by this SMP.
SMP 10.12 Non-Motorized Access
Preference shall be given to the development,or improvement,of access for non-motorized recreational
activities.
Recreation Element
Goal SMP 11: Increase and preserve recreational opportunities on the shorelines of the City of
Spokane Valley
Policies
SMP 11.1 Preserve Shorelines for Public Recreational Use
Encourage appropriate public agencies to preserve shorelines for public use and to dedicate or transfer
appropriate shoreline land for recreational uses.
SMP 11.2 Encourage Passive and Active Recreation
Both passive and active recreation should be encouraged for appropriate shorelines.
SMP 11.3 Recreational Areas Protect Shoreline Ecological Functions
Recreational areas should be located,designed,developed,managed and maintained in a manner that
protects shoreline ecological functions and processes.
SMP 11.4 Linkages to Recreation Areas
Hiking paths,bicycle paths,easements and scenic drives should link shoreline parks,recreation areas and
public access points.
SMP 11.5 Public Access Priority
Public use and access to the water should be a priority in recreational development.
SMP 11.6 Recreational Opportunities for All
Ensure that recreational planning takes into account the differences in use groups,physical capabilities,
and interests among the public in order to provide opportunities for safe and convenient enjoyment of the
shorelines.
SMP 11.7 Adequate Support Facilities
Create adequate support facilities of uses such as parking areas,maintenance buildings,and rest rooms to
meet shoreline recreational demands.
SMP 11.8 Non-Motorized Recreation
Preference shall be given to non-motorized recreational activities.
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 11
June 28,2012 PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
Shoreline Use Element
Goal SMP 12: Consider the use and development of shorelines and adjacent land areas for
housing,business,industry,transportation,recreation,education,public buildings and grounds,
utilities and other categories of public and private land uses in relation to the natural
environment and ensuring no net loss of ecological function.
Policies
General Use Policies
SMP 12.1 Shoreline Use Priorities
Give preference to water-dependent and single family residential uses that are consistent with
preservation of shoreline ecological functions and processes.Secondary preference should be given to
water-related and water-enjoyment uses.Non-water-oriented uses should be allowed only when
substantial public benefit is provided with respect to the goals of the SMA for public access and
ecological restoration.
SMP 12.2 Protect Shoreline Ecological Functions
Ensure no net loss of ecological functions through the use of specific standards for setbacks,buffers,
density,and shoreline stabilization.
SMP 12.3 Public Access in Development
Ensure that shoreline development includes visual and physical public access to the shorelines,while
avoiding,minimizing,or mitigating negative impacts to the shoreline including views.
SMP 12.4 Preserving Fish and Wildlife Habitat
Encourage new development to contribute to the creation or preservation of open space and/or fish and
wildlife habitat along the shorelines through the use of tools such as conservation futures,conservations
easements,transferable development rights,and planned unit developments.
SMP 12.5 Nonconforming Use and Development
Legally established uses and developments that were erected and maintained in lawful condition prior to
the effective date of this Master Program,shall be allowed to continue as legal nonconforming uses
provided that future development or redevelopment does not increase the degree of nonconformity with
this program.Expansion,or replacement of pre-existing residential structures and their appurtenant
structures shall be allowed if it is consistent with the master program,including requirements for no net
loss of shoreline ecological functions.
SMP 12.6 Mitigation Sequencing
Avoid and reduce significant ecological impacts from shoreline uses and modification activities through
mitigation sequencing.
Residential Use
SMP 12.7 Subdivided Lots
Require new subdivided lots to be designed,configured,and developed to:
• Prevent the net loss of ecological functions at full build-out;
• Prevent the need for new shoreline stabilization or flood hazard reduction measures;and
• Be consistent with the applicable environment designations and standards.
SMP 12.8 Over-Water Residences
Prohibit new over-water residences and floating homes
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 12
June 28,2012 PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
Commercial Use
SMP 12.9 Priorities for Commercial Use
Give preference to commercial uses in the following order:
• First priority is given to water-dependent commercial uses,
• Second priority is given to water-related and water-enjoyment commercial uses.
SMP 12.10 Non-Water Oriented Commercial Uses
Prohibit new non-water oriented commercial uses unless they are part of a mixed-use project or the use
provides a significant public benefit,such as public access and ecological restoration.
SMP 12.11 Non-Water Dependent Commercial Uses
Prohibit non-water dependent commercial uses over the water
SMP 12.12 Mitigation of Shoreline Impacts
Public access and ecological restoration collectively should be considered as potential mitigation of
impacts to shoreline resources and values for all water-related or water-dependent commercial
development unless such improvements are demonstrated to be infeasible or inappropriate.
Industrial Uses
SMP 12.13 Priorities for Industrial Use
Give priority to industrial uses in the following order:
• First priority is given to water-dependent industrial uses
• Second priority is given to water-related industrial uses
• The existing legally permitted gravel pits are considered water dependent uses.
SMP 12.14 Non-Water Oriented Industrial Uses
Prohibit Allow new non-water oriented industrial uses only if the use includes a water dependent use or / Formatted:Font:(Default)Times New Roman,
navigability is severely limited at the site, and provides for public access and/or ecological restoration, 11 pt
or the area is physically separated from the shoreline by another public right of way.
SMP 12.15 Industrial Use in Impaired Shoreline Areas
Encourage industrial uses and redevelopment to locate where environmental cleanup and restoration is
needed and can be accomplished.
SMP 12.16 Water Dependent and Water Related Industrial Uses
Water dependent and water related industrial uses within shoreline jurisdiction should be prohibited in
areas that are susceptible to erosion and flooding and where there are impacts to ecological functions.
SMP 12.17Control Pollution and Damage
Designate and maintain appropriate areas for protecting and restoring shoreline ecological functions and
processes to control pollution and prevent damage to the shoreline environment and/or public health.
SMP 12.18 Uses Consistent with Comprehensive Plan
Ensure shoreline uses are consistent with the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan and satisfy the
economic,social,and physical needs of the city..
Shoreline Modifications
SMP 12-19 Shoreline Modifications
Allow structural shoreline modifications only where they are:
• Demonstrated to be necessary to support or protect an allowed primary structure or a legally
existing shoreline use that is in danger of loss or substantial damage;and
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 13
June 28,2012 PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
• Necessary for reconfiguration of the shoreline for mitigation or enhancement purposes.
SMP 12-20 Modification Impacts and Limitations
Reduce the adverse effects of allowed shoreline modifications and,as much as possible,limit allowed
shoreline modifications in number and extent unless they are necessary to support or protect an allowed
primary structure or a legally existing shoreline use that is in danger of loss or substantial damage or are
necessary for reconfiguration of the shoreline for mitigation or enhancement purposes. Formatted:Font:(Default)Times New Roman,
11 pt,Underline
SMP 12-21 Appropriate Modifications
Allow only shoreline modifications that are appropriate to the shoreline environment designations and
environmental conditions for which they are proposed.
SMP 12-22 Modifications and No Net Loss of Ecological Functions
Assure that shoreline modifications individually and cumulatively do not result in a net loss of ecological
functions by:
• Giving preference to those types of shoreline modifications that have the least impact on
ecological function;and
• Requiring mitigation of identified impacts resulting from shoreline modifications.
SMP 12-23 Shoreline Modifications Regulations
Base shoreline modification regulations on scientific and technical information of reach conditions for the
ISpokane River and;Shelley Lake;,Central Pre mix and Flora Pit
SMP 12-24 Restoration of Impaired Ecological Functions
Plan for the restoration of impaired ecological functions where feasible and appropriate,while
accommodating permitted uses.
SMP 12-25 Measures to Protect Ecological Functions
Incorporate all feasible measures to protect ecological shoreline functions and ecosystem-wide processes
as shoreline modifications occur.
Piers and Docks
SMP 12-26 Dock Restrictions
Allow new docks only for public water-dependent uses,single-family residences,and public access on the
Spokane River and Shelley Lake.The existing gravel pit operations are allowed docks if it is necessary
for operations and as permitted operating permits.
SMP 12-27 Dock Location
Docks shall be allowed only in locations where they will not pose a public safety hazard or adversely
impact shoreline ecological functions or process and limited as follows:
• Spokane River-only in reservoir areas,where flow conditions least resemble the natural free-
flowing river;
• Shelley Lake;
I • Gravel pits;or
• Severely ecologically impacted shoreline areas with adequate public access
SMP 12-28 Dock Size
Restrict the size of new docks to the minimum necessary to serve a proposed water-dependent use.
SMP 12-29 Demonstrate Need
Permit new docks only when specific need is demonstrated,except for single-family residences.
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 14
June 28,2012 _PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
SMP 12-30 Expansion and Multiple Use
Encourage multiple use and expansion of existing docks over the addition and/or proliferation of new
single dock facilities.
SMP 12-31 Joint Use and Community Docks
I Require Encourage residential development of more than two dwellings to provide community docks,
rather than individual docks.
SMP 12-32 Design and Construction
Design and construct all piers and docks to avoid,minimize,and mitigate impacts to ecological processes
and functions.
Shoreline Fill
SMP 12-33 Design and Location
Shoreline fills shall be designed,located,and constructed to protect shoreline ecological function and
ecosystem-wide processes,including channel migration,wildlife habitat,water quality,water currents,
surface water drainage,and flood hazard protection measures.
SMP 12-34 Limitations on Fill
Fill waterward of the Ordinary High Water Mark shall require a conditional use permit and shall only be
allowed under limited circumstances.
SMP 12-35 Fill Proposal Plan
Require a plan that addresses species removal,replanting,irrigation,erosion,and sedimentation control
and other methods of riparian corridor protection with all fill proposals.
Streambank Protection
SMP 12-36 Streambank Protection Measures
The term"streambank"shall apply to all shoreline banks within Spokane Valley. Prohibit new
streambank protection measures,except when necessity is documented through a geotechnical analysis
of the site and shoreline characteristics. When necessity is demonstrated and conditions require,only
allow streambank protection for existing primary structures,water-dependent development,new
development,and ecological restoration or toxic clean-up remediation projects.
SMP 12-37 Design and Location of New Development
Design and locate new development and lots created through subdivision,particularly those located on
steep slopes and bluffs,to prevent the need for future streambank protection measures during the life of
the structure.
SMP 12-38 Public Access
Incorporate ecological restoration and public access as part of publicly funded streambank protection
projects.
SMP-12-39 Integrated Approach to Streambank Protection
Require an integrated approach to streambank protection. Select and design streambank protection
measures using an integrated approach requiring an analysis of the reason for the erosion;fish and
wildlife habitat characteristics,needs and potential;and the current and future risks associated with
erosion and bank protection to property,infrastructure,fish and wildlife habitat and public safety.
SMP 12-40 Dredging
Site and design new development to avoid the need for new or maintenance dredging.
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 15
June 28,2012 PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT
SMP 12-41 Dredging Restrictions
Prohibit dredging except when necessary for projects that restore ecological functions and to maintain
existing structures. Dredging is allowed as part of the permitted aggregate mining operations in the
gravel pits.
SMP 12-42 Dredging Materials
Prohibit the use or disposal of dredging materials within the shoreline except for projects that benefit
shoreline resources and except for permitted aggregate mining operations in the gravel pits.
SMP 12-43 In-Stream Structures
Site in-stream structures to protect and preserve ecosystem-wide processes,ecological functions,and
cultural resources,including but not limited to fish and fish passage,wildlife and water resources,
shoreline critical areas,hydro-geological processes,and natural scenic vistas.
SMP 12-44 In-Stream Structure Location
Consider the full range of public interests,watershed functions and processes,and environmental
concerns when planning and locating in-stream structures,with special emphasis on protecting and
restoring priority habitats and species.
SMP 12-45 Boat Ramps and other Boating Facilities
Locate and design boat ramps and other boating facilities to meet health,safety,and welfare requirements
and to minimize adverse affects upon geo-hydraulic processes,fragile shoreline features,natural
wetlands,and aquatic and wildlife habitats.
SMP 12-46 Development of Boat Ramps and other Boating Facilities
Assure no net loss of ecological functions as a result of boat ramp or other boating facility development.
SMP 12-47 Aesthetic Impacts of Boat Ramps and other Boating Facilities
Avoid or mitigate impacts to shoreline aesthetics as a result boat ramp or other boating facility
development.
SMP-12-48 Habitat and Natural Systems Enhancement Projects
Advocate and foster habitat and natural system enhancement projects which restore the natural character
and function of the shoreline provided they are consistent with the Restoration Plan.
Gravel Pits
SMP12-49 Gravel Pit Operations
Allow eExisting gravel pit operations temay continue to operate and expand consistent with operational
permits. Operational uses include both above water and below water gravel extraction,processing,and
crushing. Accessory uses include,but arc not limited to,concrete batch plants,hot mix asphalt plants,
aggregate processing and recycling plants,customer service(truck dispatching)offices,maintenance
facilities,truck&equipment parking,stockpiles,scale houses,retail product stores,and quality control
facilities.Active gravel pits are not regulated as shorelines of the state until reclamation is complete and
DNR terminates the Surface Mine Reclamation Permit.
Existing Gravel Pit Operations are considered water dependent uses.
City of Spokane Valley I Draft Goals and Policies 16
DRAFT
ADVANCE AGENDA
For Planning Discussion Purposes Only
as of July 11,2012; 4:15 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
July 24,2012,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,July 16]
1. PUBLIC HEARING: CPA 05-12 Development Agreement—Mike Basinger (-45 minutes)
2.Motion Consideration: CPA 05-12 Development Agreement—Mike Basinger (20 minutes)
3. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes)
4.First Reading Proposed Ordinance 12-020 Amending SVMC 8.25.025, Solicitation Exceptions-Driskell(10 min)
5.Motion Consideration: TIB Call for Projects—Steve Worley (10 minutes)
6.Admin Report: Shoreline Master Program(SMP)Goals and Policies—Lori Barlow (30 minutes)
7.Admin Report: Amending SVMC 7.05,Nuisance—Cary Driskell (20 minutes)
8.Admin Report: Amending SVMC 17.100,Nuisance Compliance—Cary Driskell (20 minutes)
9.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
10. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: 165 minutes]
July 31,2012, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,July 23]
ACTION ITEMS:
1. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 12-018,CPA 05-12—Mike Basinger (30 minutes)
2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 12-019,CPA Zoning Map—Mike Basinger (5 minutes)
3.Motion Consideration: Bid Award,Phase 2 Preservation—Steve Worley (10 minutes)
NON-ACTION ITEMS:
4. Decant Facility—Steve Worley (20 minutes)
5.Animal Control—Morgan Koudelka (30 minutes)
6. Ipad Purchases and Use—Greg Bingaman (25 minutes)
7.Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 125 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 6]
1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes)
2. Second Read Proposed Ordinance 12-020 Amending SVMC 8.25.025, Solicitation Exceptions-Driskell(15 min)
3. Proposed Resolution: Shoreline Master Program(SMP)Goals and Policies—Lori Barlow (20 minutes)
4.Motion Consideration: Award of Animal Control Contract—Morgan Koudelka (15 minutes)
5.Admin Report: 2013 Budget-Estimated Revenues&Expenditures (20 minutes)
6.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 80 minutes]
August 21,2012, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Aug 13]]
1.Animal Shelters, SVMC Title 19.120 Amendment,(to permit in CMU zones) -Karen Kendall(20 min)
2. Donation Policy—Mike Stone (25 minutes)
3.Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 50 minutes]
August 28,2012,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Aug 20]
1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2013 Budget(estimated revenues&expenditures) (10 minutes)
2. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes)
3.First Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending SVMC 19.120,Animal Shelters—K.Kendall(15 min)
4.Admin Report: Proposed 2013 Budget Ordinances—Mark Calhoun (20 minutes)
Draft Advance Agenda 7/12/2012 1:52:19 PM Page 1 of 3
5.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
6. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: 55 minutes]
September 4,2012, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Aug 27]
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: 65 minutes]
September 11,2012,Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tues,Sept 4]
1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes)
2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending SVMC 19.120,Animal Shelters—K.Kendall(15 min)
3.Admin Report: Presentation of City Manager's Preliminary 2013 budget—Mike Jackson (15 minutes)
4.Admin Report: Outside Agencies: Presentations from Social Service Agencies—M.Calhoun(-60 min)
5.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 95 minutes]
September 18,2012, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Sept 10]
1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
September 25,2012,Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Sept 17]
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 24]
1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
October 9,2012,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon 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)
[*estimated meeting: 80 minutes]
October 16,2012, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Oct 8]
1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
October 23,2012,Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, 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)
5. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: 35 minutes]
October 30,2012, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Oct 22]
1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
Draft Advance Agenda 7/12/2012 1:52:19 PM Page 2 of 3
November 6,2012, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Oct 29]
1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
November 13,2012,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Nov 5]
November 20,2012—No Meeting. Thanksgiving Week
November 27,2012,Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Nov 19]
1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes)
2.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
3. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: minutes]
December 4,2012, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Nov 26]
1.Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
December 11,2012,Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Dec 3]
1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes)
2.Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
3. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: minutes]
December 18,2012, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Dec 101
December 25,2012.No meeting. Christmas week
January 1,2013.No meeting. New Year's Day
OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS:
ADA Transition Plan *time for public or council comments not included
Arts Council
Bidding Contracts(SVMC 3.—bidding exceptions)
Budget Amendment,2012
Centennial Trail Agreement
City Hall Analysis
Code Text Amendments(Permitted Use Matrix)
Comprehensive Plan Process
Contracts,Annual Renewals,histories,etc.
Future Acquisition Areas
Greenacres Trail Grant
Interstate Signage
Investment Accounts
Lodging Tax Funding
Manufactured Homes
Pedestrian/Bicycle Grant Program
Planning Commission Rules of Procedure
Prosecution Services
Revenue Policy,Cost Recovery
Snow Plows,Discussion of
Speed Limits(overall system)
Stormwater Projects
Truck Traffic;Truck Parking in Residential Areas
Draft Advance Agenda 7/12/2012 1:52:19 PM Page 3 of 3