The URL can be used to link to this page

2012, 10-02 Study Session AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION FORMAT Tuesday,October 2,2012 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 ACTION ITEM: 1. Steve Worley 24`''Avenue Sidewalk Project Bid Award Motion Consideration [public comment] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NON-ACTION ITEMS: 2. Mike Basinger Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment Discussion/Information (CPA)Process for 2013 3. Scott Kuhta Community Development Block Grant Discussion/Information Report(CDBG) 4. Eric Guth Pavement Preservation Plan Discussion/Information 5. Mayor Towey Advance Agenda Discussion/Information 6. Information Only (will not be discussed or reported): (a)Finance Monthly Report,� (b) Sprague/Sullivan ITS Project,� (c)Sullivan Road Pedestrian Bridge 7. Mayor Towey Council Check-in Discussion/Information 8. 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 rig�t 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,Oct 2,2012 Page 1 of 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 2, 2012 Department Director Approval: � Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business � new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: 24th Ave Sidewalk — Adams Rd to Sullivan Rd Project (#0146) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 3.35.10 —Contract Authority PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: 1) Information RCA on the 2011 Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) Call for Projects which included the 24th Ave Sidewalk Project, July 13, 2010; 2) Admin Report on the 2011 TIB Call for Projects, July 20, 2010; 3) Approval to apply for grant funding in response to the 2011 TIB Call for Projects, July 27, 2010; 4) Approval to execute a Fuel Tax Distribution Grant Agreement with TIB, February 22, 2011; 5) Adoption of the 2012-2017 Transportation Improvement Plan, which included the 24th Ave Sidewalk Project, June 28, 2011; 6) Informational RCA on September 25, 2012 BACKGROUND: The 24th Ave Sidewalk Project fills gaps in the sidewalk system along 24th Ave to provide an ADA-accessible facility between Adams and Sullivan. A six-foot sidewalk will be constructed on the north side of the road and tie into existing sidewalks on each end of the project. This will provide a complete sidewalk on the north side for students attending Sunrise Elementary School. The project was advertised for bids on September 14, and bids were scheduled to be opened Friday, September 28. After opening bids and tabulating the results, staff will present the results at the Tuesday, October 2, 2012 Council meeting to award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. OPTIONS: 1) Award the 24th Ave Sidewalk —Adams Rd to Sullivan Rd Project to the lowest responsible bidder, or 2) Provide additional direction to staff. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to award the 24th. Ave Sidewalk — Adams Rd to Sullivan Rd Project to the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of$ and authorize the City Manager to execute the construction contract. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The current project estimate is $308,783. This is higher than the $280,750 estimated cost at the time the grant application was submitted. The increased estimate is due to further design refinement and sustainability requirements. This included 1) costs for the asphalt patch between the new curb and the existing roadway as part of the design refinements and 2) the increased cost of using pervious concrete versus regular concrete to meet the sustainability requirements. The TIB grant will cover 50% of the project cost up to a maximum of $140,600. The City will cover the remaining cost from the Street Capital Projects Fund 303. STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, P.E., Senior Capital Projects Engineer Eric Guth, P.E., Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: Bid tabulations will be provided after the bid opening. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 2, 2012 Department Director Approval: � Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ Old business ❑ New business ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Information �Admin. Report❑ Pending Legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2013 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) Process GOVERNING LEGISLATION: The Growth Management Act (GMA) RCW 36.70A. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None. BACKGROUND: The Growth Management Act (GMA) allows local jurisdictions to update comprehensive plans no more than once each year. The City codified this process in Section 17.80.140 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). Consistent with state law and the SVMC, staff published notices at the end of August advising the public of the annual amendment process and that the City would be accepting applications for the 2013 cycle through November 1, 2012. Notice was also posted in the main reception area of City Hall, the Permit Center and at the Valley Library. Comprehensive Plan Amendments are divided into two categories - map amendments and text amendments (including charts, tables and graphics). Comprehensive Plan amendments may be privately initiated or proposed by City staff. Most privately initiated amendments deal with land use changes. City initiated text amendments for 2013 will be limited to changes to Chapter 3: Transportation, Chapter 4: Capital Facilities, Chapter 6: Parks and Recreation, and Chapter 7: Economic Development. It is critical to update the Transportation and Capital Facilities elements annually due to GMA requirements for concurrency and for certain funding sources, such as Real Estate Excise Tax (REET). REET money can only be used for capital projects that are identified in the City's Comprehensive Plan. City initiated map amendment for 2013 include evaluating the split zoning classifications north of Trent Avenue between McDonald Road and Blake Road. The City will also consider reclassifying property located east of Eastern Road, north of Park Road, and south of Interstate 90 from Office to Community Commercial. To date, staff has conducted several preliminary meetings for privately initiated amendment requests. No applications have been received to date. OPTIONS: Identify other amendments to add to the 2013 CPA Docket RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: N/A. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A. STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger, AICP, Senior Planner Attachment: 2013 CPA Docket & map identifying city initiated map amendments Exhibit 1 City of Spokane Valley 2013 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket PRIVATELY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS File Number Ma or Text Summar of Amendment CPA-XX-XX N/A No formal applications received to date CITY INITIATED COMPRENSIVE PLAN SITE SPECIFIC MAP AMENDMENTS File Number Map Summary of Amendment CPA-01-13 Land Use Map Parcels 35231.0603, 35231.9106, 35242.9010, 35242.9011, & 35242.9012, Office to CC CPA-02-13 Land Use Map Reevaluate the split zoning north of Trent Avenue between McDonald Road and Blake Road CITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AND MAP AMENDMENTS File Number Map or Text Summary of Amendment CPA-XX-XX Text Chapter 3 —Transportation: include transportation Map 3.1 improvements developed in the 2012 development Map 11.1-11.4 cycle. CPA-XX-XX Text Chapter 4 —Capital Facilities and Public Services: update 6-year TIP; ensure City capital projects, such as parks and other public facilities are included to utilize REET funding; update Table 4.36 Intersection LOS Anal sis. CPA-XX-XX Text Chapter 6 — Parks and Recreation: coordinate with Parks Department to update chapter to reflect the Parks Master Plan update; update Table 9.3, Future Park and Recreation Demand. CPA-XX-XX Text Chapter 7 — Economic Development: update text and Map 7.1 Map 7.1 to reflect the latest Development Activity. CPA-XX-XX Map 11.1-11.4 Chapter 11 — Bike and Pedestrian: include bike and pedestrian improvements developed in the 2012 development cycle. Updated 09/26/12 + - J �~Y- w G� �f �" / �/ :� ' 1$t ;�� . �� CPA - 01 - 1 3 �� _ � f _�.�iii• �..� J:� � � r` -�0�� • � - � r �� jlr� . _ ,�� _ .� �;, ' f ` •>ti�� I 90'W285 OFF //,�i✓� . s��-►� ,;�� O �1 � ��✓;' ii�o��C �� ;;;� � ,�. � �. � "�.• �' , 2nd cc .. o�� '`��`b� _ ,, - � b.' � ��Ot�,`1� � � � _ �r� �. � _ ' �'� :.-' : �� J-�..-'`/",.fl�..•��f � r �� d,- " . . , - ,,j�.i . ..- - f; �� rt.-,�'r . . � ° ' '.1 ��/�J� : � � ��F� � r� .� � , , 1 .� �,- �� :i� � .� �`f�� i � ;. ,;- j��' �'� �, �'- ::= ��._� � � �W 3rd - � �~�r •' � -*� "' � .� � f'' � !� � �� ' � _ �� ..� - � _��r.y� x .� , r � �-/ �. - � - " � � � f� =. -. �^��_ � - <,<• � ,, -r � � � � r ;� _ .'• f`� ,--�/'� ' � :. _ - �!� �, . J-::�.� ��- „� �. � � �� •1 �-J' �� .�-� � _�-�"�� " ; �'�� ,��''� " �. �� ! �� rf f � Y ,� r.� �� •'u� _, - F � � � --' . � ___ _ � ' _- ti�, _. � - . .,�` �_''�� - , - • � ,r- , , �,r� � .�. �'I .-�� = � .-:� � � �,,, � ,,�.�` .�'" .- -- / .-.� .�.�• :-�/ . ��. .� _:.,�'�.I .-� ,,. � � � . �,. . _ .� : - .-:�..-..- ,_ .: . �_.. .-.� _ •%-..''_. - -/-'� _ ,� . . _ _ . :. �I . - ,_ .� ��,- .� ': i� - . . �. . . _ �--Y 4th -� - .� _ . - . .. _ _ . � _ -. . . : ' � - �� _ . "' +� � ,�,�� ..F - . s�� - •r + • t. '�--° . " — � � r � — � — z �� _� . . ..� . 1 L _ �-z:�. . . . _ — — i ' ,� d � s � G,; e..y � r `�' /' �V � � 9� � , C �'' � ' ` li ;� �� T �. �. CPA - 02 - 13 � �, � � _ -. -_ R� �� - __ � __ '�1.' Y - -_ _ 4 � .� �'. - _ � �� N� �� :- ``~` !e=`�.'•`�� ; � � � �� ; �� `Rockwell -.; Rockvirell ��; `=� . . , _,_ - :� ``-:�` o � -,� . . � �,,,�-., _ _ � , ` �. -,��. � . : , - ,., � ;�-:�p - - - -�.�- ``�• ~ .� �. , , . . � � -`..�t,� i �-'*-�� ... �� 1`� �: �� .:. . �•,�� `.,, � �' �`.��`+.�„ ��,� � �d � � a.. , , _ �`*',:; ,, ��`�,,_:..�, _ y �, �.• � �.. , � A,:. ` _. ` R\'�''.,� `' ,` - -.t�. �.� � � ,., ,. . � =-_�� ,..• -: ``-.'�t.i .'�. '!'�..''�.,. �., :-� � - �. `~ �.�-,� � ��.x , � 4 ' ,. ,,`,}`��.� ,. ,� .,.,, � .`� -.. F.ti - ' \1�;��` :•� `':�� !�`�:,ti�`� � ,, ' ,` '�_ �' '.q �"`��^`- _ `'��:�� .. `. �. `' � �t`Y � . ! :.Rt'�r�. �� "-�`'y �.Y_ ��`�•,,��`'� -,"�.. � ��-`A� `~'t� �� - y<.�� y� ''~t``.. . ._ � � �� Y � -. . -. ♦ -.. `�, .�� v� �� `. y� . +�'` ��\� `�.. 1 . i� \,�.."�. z! �'�i �1 S�r� � • . . . . '., . 4 . , 4 � � ... y ...-.. �� ,\� �,` . � -``•.\ , .`� ' � . yy' \ i ... . - . M -. - � .. -�.. . , .. . ` � ' �; .; .'�* �� .-": Rr. �.'• ., , � �,.� � � - �� .,.. i��.'\�. . ' ..�: W �� . .�"�.�°- �'a.� _ .�'� ''•� ! .�� . , . ��*4 �,``�� .��, `'``.o`! � -..e' ' � �`� . -. � � l ` , - , ,; � `��y. �� ! �, ;�, �� t ! ``� � ` :�.,`'. , y �,, �.� � .�� a ; \�,��.,, ��i`e''+�•. � � i�� 1^r .� �t..��.. _ `�`.. � , ti �� . '� � �.,� � ' r�. ` � __ �-1�� .- -�''�• 1 Trent. � � � �-ti��- ., ,,� CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 2, 2012 Department Director Approval: � Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information � admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2013 Community Development Block Grant Program — Potential CDBG Projects GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: In May, 2011, Spokane Valley entered into a three- year agreement (2012-2014) to continue participation as a member of the Spokane County CDBG/HOME Consortium. BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane Valley is a member of the Spokane County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Consortium. Each year the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development provides CDBG entitlement funding to Spokane County, with last year's funding totaling $1.295 million. In 2008, Spokane County amended the CDBG funding policies to establish a 20% set-aside of the County's annual federal appropriation for City of Spokane Valley infrastructure projects. The County anticipates that Spokane Valley's 2013 share will be approximately $259,000 for eligible, high priority infrastructure projects. Although Spokane Valley has a guaranteed set aside, the City must participate in the same application process as all other agencies requesting CDBG funding. The application deadline is November 10, 2012. A public hearing on the City's potential projects is scheduled for October 23, 2012. To be eligible for CDBG funding, projects must be located in residential, low to moderate income target areas (see attached map). Proposed projects must also be ranked as a "high priority" in the Spokane County 2010-2014 Consolidated Plan, the guiding document for Spokane County's CDBG program. High priority infrastructure projects include water, sewer and street improvements. Since the City is not a sewer or water provider, only street improvement projects are proposed for the 2013 program year. The following preliminary projects have been identified by City staff based on an evaluation of CDBG eligible projects: Proposed CDBG Proiects: Estimated Costs 1. Adams Rd. Resurfacing, Sprague to 4`h (Street Preservation) $213,000 2. 4th Ave. Resurfacing, Park to Thierman, (Street Preservation) $184,000 3. Farr Rd., Appleway to 8th (Reconstruction) $610,000 These projects are listed in the adopted Pavement Management Program. The Adams Road project is currently scheduled for 2013. The 4th Avenue Project is currently scheduled for 2016, and the Farr Road project from 4`h to 8th is currently scheduled for 2016, while the Farr Road project from Appleway to 4`h is scheduled for 2017. OPTIONS: Identify other potential projects for consideration. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Administrative Report for Council Information BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Undetermined at this time. STAFF CONTACT: Scott Kuhta, Planning Division Manager Steve Worley, Senior Engineer ATTACHMENTS: - CDBG Target Areas Map A 8 C D E F ' I _ : 2010-2014 �� i ; � ' Consolidaiora Plan ,;� s � � � � s�� $ � o„aoo i � � � . a � - � . � � s . ?...............: z � s oioioo 0 _ � � � \ � ' _I� I' � 1 d�. �- / � , .....�.< �� T16.N l i� _'I . � T26\ T.,.....-'"` «,� � � ' y. __- 1 1� E -� _ �' : 3 a..2 , �-.� : g .v " � � 'i I '� .>"' 33 a 3 Y�aJ �r �.- u ` # ti � r. ''' o ,�......::•,,. i i - � � - � � r a .'-.� . '^- , 3 � ._.- ,. �. ..�..�'°a-^"""� , ', , 0 ... . 1 � ...�. w ..., .� . �. ' • : o .., a : - . E � � ,.,... .� ,"' l . .�,_ .,. " . � 1 , a � I 3 '< j, ° - .� . q£ �..g I F � � .E. 2 :` � =t� � �„s�i . .. � is � ---� ��M ( � ��1 ° �i �w �. - 2 = ,�, . 3.,.-~� `a�_ F .. __J; :. : � . . ` � t.$ �, �r�, � � ° ;. qJs �Pa4° k ,.. ., � y � _ I .: I �� q {'. q Y�` +� a , s � �.r �,�4� � ; ' � ... �—� „y F � �, q _. �S� :�r �q ,.. ��gi� f � J— �g. � ��a''�.r�` _t <�`� , � : F .3 � —� ' d �.. a i� .+� p �° y m ��5 .�. Y �r � S,,op ' �£�' " � 7 . .: i ' i E��a'^' � �.'��.s. . \ , E 160 �":.nn`.. . 3.. ;- / ,�. 1 : �_ +1 . �,��s � , \ _ '�'a . . . 3 �; �a `�'� In,�� E...�� !r� � ..-`�;� �� #�f ��,I��I!... �o`I, 9,.• -�.,,^�c,€.��,�' ..f 4•a• ,^��`°'..,_..... �; '� t �5..:...s.,—��v.. �- �.: � a _ �` I .Lake :__ ��1L� � � � I � _ ��.,., -— j � '�r ; , � — f" W � °� — 3 — y � I ' I � �a I — � � � >>> _ ��' J �,�� s � � �;�; I a� ' &. �` � >u�-�� # � � � � �� _, . � � ,�, ,� ,�:;; a....... s _. � ,�� .� � . ..,� l�:�L,.�_ - i..... 7�� _. ��. ��. ��5��u�r i�. '`' 'SL�I I ,..E � ,..! � I.....�a�, �� .._Y-�" ��i3. � ., ' ' .' � . �� ^ � � � F ; J .... �� .�x °�� _�o E b.t, ; ; � � - ��,} ..x.�,Yy�� p� ; �'s a'�. � } .�:L s++w.'I � 1_ ' �� '�e 1.- � v.. .W � 3��i . 1� � � I,'....._"""""'_�3� �... .�� da _E { . S �� .�:�1 � ��, } _ _�d a } € �.� �a .:;:: �� .. : 1 ` �� €ts q a � ��'I:a 'S v l J g.�F �� r' �� ., b � � 4 �., „t� :d �a a.�� .. .� � .,., y��`t -. 7 � '� i � — . I aF.:� 3 `^.. � 3n;_ ✓�9 3_ � 31 i� � � � � 7 ` �. -� �"�. �� ' � �°L, 5�na:,y ^ ""t �- I� 1 �� s \, �r�� . ' #� �t •.�i '�� i , : t�.t�_s:�x.� .�.. �'?p�,`d.`` 0 ,. ,`t � `'�v.'r°' . a i� Y.�Q1 BS "01 � y.' . . � � 803 � " 01 902 013000 : 1 3 ] � : ^. 5 k, . 012A01 ��n . .�I ..i �yj 1�t.� #�',.�'� 'Y@T .`,, e " 5 ., . .. � � . f�� ; .: ......_..... � 5 [ tq� ' M�i _ . � � � I � °;� _ � . � : ...� 4'^••t . �...� r"'�,, y�� , �J �� - W " �t T15N � C C �/.';i��d 1- a { c� C d..l � ` ' "'+��:.. '�� , . y�, [ 1 ) J T19N :' '. °_ � � i� ,,. L ......�..r` F i, ° ,. � w. ��o�t ....� �I'� 4 .: i I_— ar�� °• ' o,3ao, ` . -- + , ;' o;z _, z : � � 6 ...... :: �� . 6 .�='� � � n �� . � � 3 ,� � . � � . � � � �:_;; f � : ! � � ��/� A ��.8 C D E F �,_xe.�.,.P.�_9_..,. ^�. ��a11e3'. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 2, 2012 Department Director Approval: � Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information � admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2013 Pavement Preservation Project List GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Pavement Management Plan (PMP); Update 2011, adopted by Council on March 27, 2012 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: In March, 2012, City Council adopted the 2011 update to the PMP. In April, 2012 Council also approved $2.8 million to be spent on 2012 Pavement Preservation projects in accordance with the adopted plan. BACKGROUND: Public Works staff has been developing a list of pavement preservation projects to be included in the 2013 budget. Staff reviewed the recommended 2013 projects identified in the Pavement Management Plan (PMP) and carryover projects that were not constructed in 2012. We performed field investigations to verify these projects and to determine if we agreed with the plan recommendations. Ifs important to note that the PMP is a great tool for developing a long term strategy and providing guidance on which streets should be evaluated further for preservation or maintenance treatments to preserve the life of the pavement. However, in many cases there needs to be additional evaluation and possible testing to confirm whether or not the proposed treatment is necessary as well as to confirm the urgency of that improvement. Part of the annual evaluation is to inspect each of the proposed projects to confirm whether or not these are projects we want to pursue, change the treatment recommendation, or delay to a later year. What we found through our field evaluation was that five of the identified priority projects in the PMP could in fact wait until a later year due to less or slower than anticipated deterioration of the street surface. Also, we found that the recommended treatment for four others was too aggressive, and those projects could be addressed with a lesser maintenance treatment. Additionally, we discovered that some projects scheduled for later years had deteriorated faster than expected, so we moved those projects up in priority, and are recommending that we improve those in 2013. Lastly, we had two projects that were remaining from 2012. One was confirmed as a priority for overlay and the other was downgraded to a maintenance project for 2013. Attached is a spreadsheet highlighting these various changes and recommendations. This is a preliminary list based upon the PMP recommendations and field investigations. We may recommend further testing and evaluation be performed on some of these projects to confirm the appropriate treatment. This further evaluation will consist of some or a combination of coring, and structure testing and evaluation. OPTIONS: The attached list is preliminary and could change due to further testing, evaluation, grant funding opportunities, contractor bid pricing, or budget constraints. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Pavement Preservation Funding proposed in 2013 Budget. STAFF CONTACT: Eric Guth, Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: - Pavement Preservation Project Evaluation Summary Summary of Pavement Preservation Projects for 2013 Project Number Improved PMP Proposed No. OCI Route From To Plan Activity of Lanes OCI Plan Costs Budget Estimate Comments Plan Year 2013 Overlay Projects: 30 38.53 Sprague Av Carnahan Fancher Mill and Overlay Art 5 9726 $408,221.37 $285,754.96 31 35.83 Sprague Av Fancher pollar Mill and Overlay Art 5 95.73 $224,201.66 $156,941.16 32 38.8 Appleway BI Thierman Park Mill and Overlay Art 4 95.45 $395,226.63 $276,658.64 34 36.19 24th Av Pines McDonald Mill&Overlay-Col 2 86.65 $316,027.76 $221,219.43 35 37.05 Carnahan 8th End Mill and Overlay Art 2 9726 $163,328.64 $114,330.05 Overlay 38 38.08 Saltese Rd 16th McDonald Mill&Overlay-Col 2 84.18 $121,026.44 $84,718.51 Overlay 39 36.75 Blake Rd Saltese 24th Mill&Overlay-Col 2 86.65 $132,396.12 $92,67728 Overlay 40 37.45 Sullivan Rd Euclid Trent Mill and Overlay Art 5 942 $449,058.67 $314,341.07 41 3728 Sullivan Rd Indiana Euclid Mill and Overlay Art 6 95.34 $837,07727 $585,954.09 43 38.45 Adams Rd 2nd 4th Mill and Overlay Art 2 93.02 $73,545.69 $51,481.98 44 42.19 Adams Rd Sprague 2nd Mill and Overlay Art 2 91.66 $35,350.35 $24,74525 Overlay 50 34.64 Park Rd Valleyway Broadway Mill and Overlay Art 2 95.45 $243,872.44 $170,710.71 Sub-total $3,399,333.04 $2,379,533.13 Add to Year 2013 5 30.13 32nd Av University Bowdish Mill and Overlay Art 3 94.53 $316,500.73 $221,550.51 Plan Year 2012 57 35.01 Sprague Av Herald University Mill and Overlay Art 5 91.84 $374,174.37 $261,922.06 Plan Year 2014 67 35.63 Argonne Rd Sprague Broadway Mill and Overlay Art 3 96.61 $263,665.66 $184,565.96 Plan Year 2014 83 33.32 Sprague Av Farr Herald Mill and Overlay Art 5 91.5 $270,648.00 $189,453.60 Plan Year 2015 6ar�abarr Biel�ey- 84 342 8th Av McKinnon Fancher Mill and Overlay Art 2 97.19 $197,001.00 $137,900.70 Plan Year 2015 Sub-total $1,421,989.76 $995,392.83 Street Maintenance Activities 6 40.19 32nd Av Pines SR 27 Maintenance Treatment 3 95.75 $475,345.50 TBD Crack Seal/Patch 23 48.44 Herald Rd Main End Maintenance Treatment 2 84.18 $22,70520 TBD Patch/Ditch 37 38.92 University Rd 16th 24th Maintenance Treatment 5 93.02 $393,73428 TBD Crack Seal/Patch 42 3828 Sullivan Rd Sprague 4th Maintenance Treatment 4 95.73 $198,699.96 TBD Crack Seal/Patch 45 38.64 Park Rd Mission Trent Maintenance Treatment 2 97.15 $183,708.64 TBD Crack Seal/Patch 49 3924 24th Av Adams Sullivan Maintenance Treatment 2 86.12 $246,313.94 TBD Crack Seal/Patch Sub-total $1,520,507.52 Total $6,341,830.32 $3,374,925.96 Projects to Delay 28 36.89 Broadway Av Yardley Fancher Mill and Overlay Art 4 96.61 $254,07020 33 43.19 16th Av Pines Saltese Mill and Overlay Art 2 95.09 $28,611.81 36 3929 Argonne Rd Broadway Mission Mill and Overlay Art 3 96.9 $244,60623 46 3725 Broadway Av Argonne Farr Mill and Overlay Art 4 96.9 $224,715.66 47 36.67 24th Av University Bowdish Mill&Overlay-Col 2 84.95 $239,246.44 Sub-total $991,250.34 DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of September 27, 2012; 9:30 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative To: Council & Staff From: City Clerk, by direction of City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings October 9,2012,Formal Meetin�Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon Oct 1] Proclamation:AdultLiteracy Week 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2013 Budget—Mark Calhoun (20 minutes) 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed Amended 2012 Budget—Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 3. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 4. Second Reading Ordinance 12-023 Proposed Property Tax—Mark Calhoun (10 minutes) 5. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 12-024 Adopting 2013 Budget—Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 6.First Reading Proposed Ordinance 12-025 Amending 2012 Budget—Mark Calhoun (10 minutes) 7. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 12-026 Amending SVMC 7.05 —Cary Driskell (15 minutes) 8. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 12-027 Amending SVMC 17100—Cary Driskell (15 minutes) 9. Motion Consideration: Sprague/Sullivan ITS Project Bid Award—Steve Worley (10 minutes) 10. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 120 minutes] October 16,2012, Studv Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Oct 8] 1. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) October 23,2012,Formal Meetin�Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Oct 15] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: CDBG Projects—Scott Kuhta (10 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending SVMC 7.05 —Cary Driskell (15 minutes) 4. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending SVMC 17100—Cary Driskell (15 minutes) 5. Admin Report: Code Text Amendment, Multi-Family Regulations—Mike Basinger (25 minutes) 6. Truck Traffic—Cary Driskell (20 minutes) 7.Planning Commission Rules of Procedure—Cary Driskell (20 minutes) 8. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 9. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: 115 minutes] October 30, 2012, Studv Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, Oct 22] ACTION ITEMS: 1. Second Reading Ordinance Adopting 2013 Budget—Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending 2012 Budget—Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) NON-ACTION ITEMS: 3. Snow Removal Plan—Eric Guth (20 minutes) 4. Drainage Easements—Gabe Gallinger (20 minutes) 5. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 75 minutes] November 6,2012, Studv Session Format, 6:00 n.m. [due Mon, Oct 29] 1. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) Draft Advance Agenda 9/27/2012 3:02:28 PM Page 1 of 2 November 13,2012,Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 n.m. [due Mon,Nov 5] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance re Multi-Family Regulations—Mike Basinger (15 minutes) 3. Admin Report: 2013 Fees—Mark Calhoun (20 minutes) 4. Admin Report: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Recommendation to Council—M.Calhoun(20 min) 5. Advance Agenda [*estimated meeting: 60 minutes] November 20,2012—No Meetin�.Thanks�ivin�Week November 27,2012—Possible no meeting, (NLC Conference in Boston, Nov 27—Dec 1) December 4,2012, Studv Session Format, 6:00 n.m. [due Mon,Nov 26] 1. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 2. Info Only: Department Reports (normally due for the Nov 27 meeting) December 11,2012,Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 n.m. [due Mon,Dec 3] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance re Multi-Family Regulations—Mike Basinger (15 minutes) 3.Proposed Resolution: Amending Fees for 2013 —Mark Calhoun (15 minutes) 4. Motion Consideration: Lodging Tax Allocation of Funds—Mark Calhoun (30 minutes) 5. Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointments to Planning Commission, Committees, etc. (15 minutes) 6. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 85 minutes] December 18,2012, Studv Session Format, 6:00 n.m. [due Mon,Dec 10] 1. Advance Agenda 2. Info Only: Department Reports December 25,2012.No meetin�. Christmas week January 1,2013.No meetin�. New Year's Dav January 8,2013,Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Dec 31] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: ADA Transition Plan Preservation Projects Arts Council Prosecution Services Bidding Contracts (SVMC 3. —bidding exceptions) Public Safety Contract,Proposed Amendment Centennial Trail Agreement Revenue Policy, Cost Recovery City Hall Analysis Senior Housing Contracts, Annual Renewals, histories, etc.(Oct/Nov) Signage (business loop, etc.) Donation Policy Snow Plows, Discussion of Econ. Dev Ad Hoc Committee Rpt(deadline Nov 30) Solid Waste Analysis Future Acquisition Areas Speed Limit(Appleway) Gateway, Regional MOU Speed Limits (overall system) Greenacres Trail Grant Stormwater Projects IPad Cost Analysis Regional Transportation Issues Investment Accounts Manufactured Homes *time for public or council comments not included Pedestrian/Bicycle Grant Program PEG Funds (Education) Draft Advance Agenda 9/27/2012 3:02:28 PM Page 2 of 2 �`p��l�ane � V�.�ley i 1707 £Sprague Ave 5uite 10b ♦ Spokane Walley WA 99306 509.921.10�Q ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 � cityhallC�spokanevalley.org Memt� r� ndum To: Mike Jackso�n, City Manager From: Mark Calhoun, Fir�anc� Dir�ctor `�ti1_�: Date: Septem�er 21, 2{}12 Re Finance aepart�ment Ac#ivity Report—August 2012 2012 Audit of 201'f Financial R�corcis and Annual Finar�cial R�port The 2012 audit of the 2011 financial rec�rds and Annual Financial Report cantinued with an anticipated complekion of auditor fieldwork in the middle of September 2012. 2013 Budaet Qewelopment Process The 2013 Budget develapment process cantinued with Go�ncil budget discussi�ns taking piace ar� August 14t� and 28th. By �he time tFte budget is advpted on Oetober 30'h the Council will have had an a�portunity to discuss t�e budget on e9ght oecasions including three pu�lic hearings. June 'l2 Councif budget worlcshop August 14 Admin repork on 2013 reuenues and �xpenditures August 28 Public nearing #1 on 2013 revenues and expenditures September 11 City Manager's presenta#ion af preliminary 2013 Bu�g�t 5eptember 25 Public i�earing �`2 on 2013 8udget Dctaber 9 Public hearing #3 on 2Q13 8udg�t �Dctober 9 First reading on proposed oTdinance ad�pting the 2013 Buc[get C7ctober 3(7 Second reading on proposed ordinanc� adopting the 2013 Budget 20�3 PrQpertv Tax Levx A significant part of t�e budge# development process includes the annual levy of pro�erty taxes which in 2013 are expec#ed ta account far approximately 31% vf recurring General Fur�d revenues. Council discussions specifically related to this topic will take place at the following meetings: August 28 Review of ordinances levying 2013 properky taxes and cor�firming tax levy September 25 First reading of ordinances [evying 2013 proper�y taxes and confirming � kax levy, Gctober 9 Secand reading of ordinanees levying 2013 properky taxes and confirming #ax levy, Outside Aaencv Fundirtq in the 2013 Budget The City has historically provided fundir�g for local organizations invo�ved in either social services or economic development �ctivikies and the preliminary 2013 Budget ct�rrerttly has $15a,000 collectively avai[abfe for tt�is, The schedule leading to awardi�g funds is as folfaws; 5�pt�mber 4 Economic dev�lopment agency presentations to Council IISV FS24UserslmcalhounlFinance Acfivity Reports1209212012 0&,docx Page 4 i September 11 5ocial service agency presentatioris to Council September 25 Council makes final determir�ation of awards Staffinp After working short staffed by tvuo positions sinc� t�e end of May we are 'finally fully staffed again with the return af an accountant who had been on maternity leave and the successfui �iring of an accaunting techniciar� pasikian that was vacated due to an employee finding work elsewhere. Bond Refinancin� Min'�maf work has been accomplished an this to dat� as we've taeen focused an the 2013 Budget development and wark�ng w�th the �tate Auditors on the audit of our 2p1� financial records. As each af these projects winds down we will begin preparing the necessary ir�formation in order t� advance this process. Budaet te Actual Cornparison Repar� (pages 5— 17) A repart reflectin� 2012 Budget ta Actual Reven�es and Expenditures for thos� funds far which a 20�2 8udg�t was adopted and subsequently amended is located on pages 5 through �7. Because we attempt ta �rovide this �nformation En a timely manner tnis re�art is prepare� frorr� records that are not formaFly clos�d by #he Finar�ce Depar�ment at month end ar reconciled to bank records. Although ik is realistic to expect the figures wilf change over subsequent weeks, I believe the repork �s ma#erially accurate. Yau wi11 note that the format of th� reporf is identical to pages 20 through 32 of the 2012 Budget da�ument, Vlle've included the follnwing informatior� in the re�ort; + Rever�ues by Source for all funds, and exp�nditures by department in the General Fund and by type ir� all okher funds. • A breakdown between recurring ar�d nonrecurring revenu�s an� exper�ditures in the General I Fund, Stre�t O&M �und and Stormwater Fund. � Tt�e change i� fund ba[ance including beginning and ending figures. The beginning fund balance fig�res are thase that are reflected in our 2011 Annual Financ9al Report. � Columns of information include: o The 2012 Bu�get as ado�ted an� su�sequentiy amended on February 28, 2092. o August 2Q12 activity, o Gumulative 2012 activity through Augusk 2012. a Budget remair�ing in terms of dollars. o The percen# of budg�ted revenue collected or budgeted expenditures disbursed. A few poin�s related to khe Gen�ral Fund #OQ1 (page 5): Recurrina revenues colEectio�s are currenily at 57.9% of the amoun� budgeted wi#h 66.7% of t�� + year elapsed, This is #ypicaf and reflective 4f the nature of th� timing of wf�en revenues are 4 callected. � Propert�tax collections have reached �5,84 million or�4.1% of the amount hu�geted. This is because properfy taxes are paid to Spokane County in twfl installments �ach year on April 30 and Octaber 31. Th�se rnoni�s are then remitted to the City in May and November. • Sales tax collections are cr�rrently $8,713,275 or 61.3°l0 of the amount budget�d. This is because taxes collected in August are not remitted to the Caty by the State until the la#ter par# of September. + Gambl��.. tq axes are at $312,467 or 48.8% of the arr�ount budgeted. Because they are �aEd guarteriy this �epresents receipts through the first half of the year. The ti�ird q�ar�er paymenks are due by Oc#ober 31, We anticip�te th6rd quarter r�c�ipts will bring us close to 75% of the budgeted figure. 11SV-FS21UserslmcalhaunlFinance Activi(y Reportsl207212012 08.docx P�ge 2 + Franchise Fee and Business Reqiskration revenues are received in the manth fol�owing a calendar year quarter. �'nrough Augusk we have reeeived first and second quarter paymer�ts of$6�2,342 or 48.4% of the amoun# budgeted, • State shar�d revenues are camposed of State of Washington dfstribukior�s that include rtems such as liquor board pro#its, liquor excise tax, streamlin�d sales tax mitigation and criminal justice moni�s. Most of these revenues are p�id �y the State in the mor�th fallowing a calendar quarter. Throug� August we've r�ceived remittances totaling $1,168,341 or 63.7% of#he amount budgate�. • Seruice revenues are fargefy composed of buildir�g permit and plan review fees as weli as fals� a�arm fees and right af way permits. Reven�aes are currently $9,049,968 or 8Q.8% of the amount bu�geted. � Fines and forfeitures revenues are cornposed o�monti�ly remittances feam S�akar�e County weth paymenfs made in the manth fallawi�g the act�al assessment af a fine. Thraugh Augusk 2a12 we'v� received remittances for tl�e period January through July with receipts of �ust $753,206 or 39.6% of#he amount budgeted. • Recreation proqram fees are com�osed of revenues genera�ed by tn� variety of par�s and recreation �ragrams includir�g classes, swimming pools (in-seasor�}, and CenterPlace. Currently, revenu�s tatal $497,475 ar 87.2% of the arnount budgeted. Recurrinq �xpenditures are currently at 56.3% af the amount budgeted wi#h 66.7% af the year e�apsed. Departments experience seasanal fluctuations fn activiky so they �on't necessarily exp�nd their budget in twelve equal monthly installments. Investments (page 18) Investmer�#s at August 31 total $48,486,883 and a�� composed of$43,455,251 in the Wasf�in�ton State Local G�vernment Investm�nt poo[ and $5,Q3�,�32 in bar�k GDs. Total Sales Tax Receiqts {page �9) � + Tatal sales kax receipts are $9,853,147 including general, criminal justi�ce and public safety tax�s. This figure is $180,632 (�.87°/a} greater than for the sarne 7-month perio� i� 201�. It�cluding tt�e latter haif of 2Q1�, sales taxes I�ave s�own an impressive i�c�eas� but an increase of just 1.�1% in the March 2012 remittartce and a decr�ase of 2.49% in the August remittance is a reminder that the econamic recovery may stilC be tenuous. • When com�aring 2011 and 2012 receipts for the months of May through July you'il r�ot� that 2 of the 3 months reflect reduc�ions from t'�e �revious year. The d�creases were expected and are ti�e result of a 2011 Department of Revenu� tax amnesty program that was in place for the threa-manth p�riod ending April 30, 2411, in which nearly 8,900 business (state-wide} paid $320.7 million in stake and lacal back taxes. �Jf the total, $56.8 millian was local tax that vuas farwarded to counties and cities begin�ing wikh the May 2091 sales tax distribut�on and cancfuding with th� July 2011 distribution. Urtfortunately the Depar�ment of Revenue was unable to provide information on how much this actually generaked for the cities or from which busi�esses. Cans�qu�ntly we have no way of determining how much the City of Spokane Valley benefited fram the program. � Economic Indicatc�rs (pages 20 —22) The following econornic indica#ors �rovide �nformatior� pertainit�g to three different sources of tax revenue #hat pravide a goo� gauge of the health and direction of the overail ecanamy. 1. Sales taxes (page 2{}) provide a sense of how much i�adividuals and businesses are spending an the purchase of goods. 113V-FS21Users4mcalhaun�Finartce Activity R�parts1201217012 QB.docx Page 3 2. Hotel 1 Motek taxes (page 21) pravide us with a sense of overni�ht stays a�d visits to our area by tourists or business travel�rs. 3. Real Estate Excise tax�s (�age 22} provide us with a sense of real �state sales. Page 20 proVides a m�nthly history of general sales #ax r�ceipts (r�o# ir�c�uding pubsic safety or criminal justice) beginning with the first remitta�ce received in May 2003. • Compared with calendar year 201'l, 2012 collections have increas�d by $193,83$ or 2.28%. • Tax receipts peaked in 2007 at $17.4 million and dropped aff dramatically in the su'�sequent three years. Pag� 21 pra�ides a manthly history of hotellmote! tax receipts beginning with the fi�sk remittance [n Nlay 2003. • Compared with calet��ar year 20'f�, 2012 collectians have increased by $22,692 or 9e77%. � Collections pealced in 2007 and 2008, drop,�ed off in 2009 (alti�ough signif�cantly less than the drop in sales taxes) and are currently again near the highs of 20�8. Page 22 provides a monthly histc�ry af r�ai estate excise tax receE�ts beginning witi� #he first remittanc� in March 2003. � Compared with calendaryear 2Q11, 2Q12 cvflectians have increased by $30,�94 or 5.38%0. • Tax receipts peaked in 2007 at nearly $2.6 mill`ron, decr�ased precipitausly it� 2008 and �009, and appear to hav� leveled off in 20�0 and 2011. Debt Canacitv and Bands �utstanding {�age 23) T�is page provides information an the City's debt capacity, or the dallar amount of Generaf Obligation (G.O.) Bonds the City may issue, as well as an amortizatian schedufe of the bonds the City currently t�as outstar�ding. • The maxirnum amount of G.U. bonds the City may issue is determine� by the assessed value and the 2011 assesse� valu� for 2012 property taxes is $7,087,523,395. Following the City's December 1, 2011 bo�d �ayment, the City current�y has $7,9�O,a00 of nanvoted G.O. bands outstanding which repres�nts 7.46°l0 of our r�onvoted bond cap�city, and 1.49% of aur toxal debt capacity for all ty�es of bonds. * The $7,930,000 of bonds the City currerrtly has autstanding is part of the 2�03 non�oted (LTG�) band issue. Of this amount: � $6,26�,000 remains on bon�s issued for t�he construction of CenterPlace. These bonds are repaid with a pa�tian af �he 1110 of 1% sales tax that ds collacted by the Spokane Pubbic Faciliti�s District. � $�,67�,000 remains an be�nds issueci far road and street improvemenfs around CenterPlace. �'he bonds are repaid with a portivn of the real estate excise �ax collected by the City. � IISV-FS21UserslmcalhounlFinance Activity Reports{201212012 OS.docx Page 4 P:IFinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reports1Fq1212p12(78 31 report CITY OF SPOKAI�E VALL�EY,WA Budget Year Budget to Actual Comparisan af Revenues and Expenditures Elapsed= s6.7% For the Eight-Month Perio�Ended August 3i,2072 �oaz Actual Actual thru Budget %of �udget August Aug 31 Ftemaining Budget #�01 -GEN�RAL'FUN� RECIlRR�NG ACTIVITY Revenues PropertyTax 10,8Q8,9D0 39,148 5,843,467 (4,965,433} 54.06% SalesTax 14,210,000 1,302,706 8,713,275 {5,496,725} 51.32%0 Criminal Justice 7ax 1,200,000 1�5,009 727,876 (472,124} 60.66°/o Public safety Sales Tax 790,000 65,18d A11,996 (378,044} 52.15% Gambling Tax and Leasehold Excise Tax fi40,000 125,1�4 312,467 (327,533) 48.82% Franchise FeeslBusiness Registration 1,266,000 7,835 612,342 (853,658) 98.37% Si�te Shared Revenues 1,834,300 4 1,168,341 (&65,959) 63.69% Service Revenues 1,300,000 114,288 1,049,968 (250,032) 8Q.77% Fines and Forfeitures 1,900,404 109,05f 753,206 (1,146,794) 39.64% Recreafien Pcogram Fees 570,000 70,072 497,075 (72,925) 87.21°/a hliiscellaneous&Investment Interest 305,Od0 1,262 99,912 (2fl5,0$$j 32.76% Transfer-in -#101 (street admin) 39,600 3,3p0 26,400 (13,200) 66.67% Transfer-in -#105(h/m tax-CP advertising) 30,000 0 0 (30,6�0) 0.00% Transfer-in -#962(stoma admin) 15,400 1,250 10,b00 (6,Q00) 68.67% Total Recurring Reue�ues 34,9�8,800 1,964,235 20,226,325 (i4,682,475) 57.94% Exs�enditures City GounG�l 3Bf,249 25,720 245,943 140,306 83.67% City iNanayer 831,667 48,297 388,7fl3 242,984 61.54% Legal 434,798 48,277 284,77B 150,420 65.50% �u�lic Sateiy 22.00{1,�Q0 388,5�9 12,273,775 9,726,22g 55.79% Depuiy City Manager 658,884 36,226 291,059 367,825 44,17% Finance 3,047,147 71,279 59g,014 449,093 57.11°10 Human Resources 230,231 18,158 1�33,321 86,910 62.25% Public Works 901,519 42,886 459,972 441,547 51.02°fc Community bevelopment-Administration 323,743 25,307 205,757 1 i7,986 63.56% Community Develapmeni-Eagine�ring 680,796 58,555 443,14A 237,652 65.(}9% Community�evelopmeni-Planning 994,245 72,799 554,&45 439,440 55.84% Community aevelapment-Building 1,260,454 2�2,117 847,848 412,606 67.27°fo Parics&Rec-Administration 263,128 19,102 163,216 99,912 6Z.03°10 Parks&Rec-Mainkenance 803,700 6d,413 434,564 369,140 54.07% Parks&Rec-Recreation 229,811 31,195 143,265 86,546 62.3�% Parks&Ftec-Aquatics 442,256 i40,035 259,866 182,392 58,76% Par'ks&Rec-SeRior Centes 92,961 72,877 64,5�9 2$,452 69.39% ParksB�Rec-GenierPlace 1,119,357 i01,209 711,848 a�7,509 63.59°fo GeneralGovernment 1,840,5fl0 1�4,17d 789,46Q 1,051,04D 42.89°to Transfers out-#502(insurance premium) 319,OOb 26,583 212,667 106,333 66.67°10 Toial ftecurring Expenditures 34,660,444 1,446,757 19,516,500 15,143,90D 56.31°/a Recurring Reuen�es Over{Under) Reourring Expenditures 248,406 507,478 709,825 461,425 iVONRECURRING ACTNITY Reuenues nla 4 0 0 0 #aIVlO! Total Nonrecurring Revenues 6 0 0 0 #�IVIO! Expenditures Contingency I Emergency(1°lo of recur exp) 346,60@ 0 0 346,6Q0 0.00% Transfers out-#3�3 89,500 0 0 89,500 0.00% Transfers out-#309{park grant match} 100,00a 8,333 fi6,667 33,333 66.67°/a ,I i'rar�sfers out-#313 (100%>�26mil�ion) i} 0 0 0 #�]�UIO! Suilding permit spftware purchase Q 0 0 0 #�1�V10! Tatal Nonreeurring Expend�tures 53B,10p 8,333 66,667 4B9,a33 12.44%0 Nonrecurrirog aeuenues Over(Under} Nonrecurring Expenditures (536,100)_ (8,333)_ _ (fifi,667) 469,433 Exeess(Defici#)ofTotal Revenues Over(Under)Total Expenditures �287,700) 499,145 643,158 930,858 Beginr�ing fund balance 28,045,203 2$,045,243 Ending fund balance 27,757,5�3 28,688,361 Page 5 P:IFinancelFor Ciiy CouncillCouncil Monlhly Repor�s120121201 2 08 31 report CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year � Sudget t�Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Ela sed= 66.7% For the Eight-Month Per+od Ended August 3�,2U12 21�12 Actual Actual thru Budget °J4 of Budget August Aug 31 Remaining Budget SPECIAL F2EVENUE FUN[7S #101 -STREET FUND REGURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Motor Vehicle Fuel(Gas}7ax 1,897,800 160,565 1,057,720 (84D,080) 55.7�% Investment Interest 5,000 2B6 2,658 (2,342) 53.16% Insurance Premiums&Recoveries 0 Q 40,261 1D,261 #DIVID! UtilityTax 3,000,000 226,118 1,606,70f3 (1,393,3Q0) 53.56% Miscellaneous Ftevenue 0 0 0 0 #D1V10! Toial Reeurring Revenues 4,902,aoa 386,948 2,6i7,338 {2,225,46�) 54.61% Expend�tures Wages 1 Benefits 1 Payroll"faxes 522,142 46,686 381,772 740,37d 73.12% SilppliES 72,200 12,846 41$,222 (34$,422) 579.25% 5er�ices&Charges 3,350,321 BO,935 2,143,673 1,i66,648 64,76% Ink�rgovemmentaP Payments 847,000 51,732 410,733 436,267 48.49°/a InterFund TransFers-out-#001 39,600 3,3b0 26,400 �3,200 66.87°/o Intz�Fund Transfers-out-#103{MVFT) Q Q 0 0 #DlVIQ! InterFundTransfers-out-#50't {plowreplace.} 1d0,000 8,333 66,667 33,333 66.67% Inkerfund Trar�sfers 0 0 0 0 #DIV14! 5treets Misc.projects 0 0 0 0 #�IVIt}! Tatal Recurri�g Expenditures 4,891,263 183,833 3,447,467 1,443,796 7Q.48% Recurring Revenues Over(Under) Recurring Expand°stures 11,537 203,195 (770,128� (78i,665) NpNRECURRING ACTIVITY �evenues Gr�nts 0 0 943,3B8 143,388 #dIV10! UN��ty Taxes 0 0 0 0 #pIV10! Interfund Transfers in-#001 0 0 Q D #DNlO! Interfund Transfers in-#122 0 � 0 0 #�IVlO! I�terfund Transfers in-#302 0 Q 0 0 #DIVI01 interfund"fransfers in-#402 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! Miscellaneous 0 {10,&55) (8,821) (B,821} #DIVIO! 7otal Nanrecurring Revenues 0 {10,855) �34,587 134,567 #DIVID! Expenditures BridgelStreet Maintenance 0 0 1,442 (1,402) #DIVIO! Inierfund Transfers-out-#303(Fvergreen Rd) 50p,ppp 0 {�9,205) 511,205 -2.24% Grant financed capital 0 1,086 i1,71fl (11,710) #DIVlO! Capital0utlay 40,OQ0 0 4 44,OQ0 0.00°!0 Snow P�ow purcitase{6udgeted rn 20i0 delivered i� 0 0 0 0 #DIV10! Total Nonrecurrin�Expendiiur�s 540,Q00 1,086 1,9Q7 598,693 0.35°la iVonrecurring Revenues Over(Under) iVonrecurr9ngExpenditures (54fl00D) (11,941� 132,659 672,659 Excess(C9eficit)o�Total Revenues Over{Under)Toial Expenditures (52&,A63J 191>175 {637,469) (�09,006) Beginning fund balance 2,489,734 2,489,734 Ending fund balance 'i,961,271 1,852,255 Page 6 P:IFinancelFor City CouncillCauncil�Aonthly Reporis12012120i2 4B 31 repo�t �ITY O� SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year eudget to Actual Camparison of Revenues and�xpendikures Elapsed� ss,7s/o For fhe Eight•Month Period End�d August 31, 2012 2092 Actual Actual thru Bu�get %of 8udget August Aug 31 Remaining Budget SP�CIAL REVENUE FUNdS-co�kinued #1Q3-PATHS&TRAILS Revenues Molor Vehicle Fue9(Gas)Tax 8,00� Q 0 (8,Ofl0} 0.00% Interfund Transfer-in#101 (MllFT} 0 p Q Q #D1V10! Invesiment Inierest 0 5 40 40 #�IUIO! Tota1 revenues 8,000 5 AO (7,960) fl.50% Expenditures IF Tra�rsfer for 7railslpaths Cap Prj 0 0 Q 0 #DIUIO? Miscellaneous 0 0 0 D #DIVIO? CapitalOutlay 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO? Total expend�tures 0 Q 4 0 #D[UlOi F2evenues over(under}expenditures 8,000 5 40 {7,960) 8eginning f�ond balance 5B,d84 56,084 Ertding fund bafance fi4,084 56,124 #105-HOTEL 1 MOTEL TAX Fl1ND Revenues Ho#ellMotel Tax 430,fl00 52,8�9 255,044 (17�,956) 59.31% Investmeni Interest 700 40 338 (362) 48.33°Jo Total revenues 430,740 52,858 255,382 (175,318) 59,29% Expenditures InterFund Transfers-#401 30,000 a a 30,U00 0.00°10 Tourism Promation 400,7�0 49,032 229,112 '171,588 57.18%a Tota9 expenditares 430,706 49,032 229,1 i2 201,588 53.20% Revenues ove�(underJ expenditures 4 3,826 26,270 (376,905) Beginn'rng fund balance 257,932 25r,932 Endin�fun8 balance 257,932 284,202 Page 7 P�IFrnancalFor Gity CouncillCouncil A+Ianthly Repbrts1201212d1�0$31 report CI7Y 0�' SPUKANE VALL�Y, WA BudgetYear Budget to Aetual Comparison of Re�enues and Expenditures EI� Sed= 66.7% For the Eight-Month Period�nded August 37,2012 2fl12 Actual Aetual thru Budget %of 8udget Augusf Aug 31 Remaining Budgei SPECPAL R�VENUE FUNDS-conttnued #i2D-CENTER PLACE OPERATING RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interesl 7p0 �i7 351 {349) 5�.21°16 Interfund Transfer 0 0 4 0 #fl�V10! Toial revenues 7013 47 351 (399) 50.21% Expenditures Operaiions 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! Total expendi(ures 0 0 0 0 #dlV14! Revenues aver(under}expenditures 70a 47 351 (349) Beginning tund balance 350,787 350,787 �nding fund balance 351,487 351,138 #121 -SERVICE L�VEL 57A81LIZA710N R�SERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 10,000 738 5,462 (4,538} 54.62°/a Intertund�ransfer � 4 0 0 #RIVIO! Total revenues 10,000 738 5,462 (4,538) 54.62% Expenditur�s Operations 0 a 0 Q #DIV10! Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 #DIV10! Revenues over(under}expenditures 1i�,044 73� 5,q62 (4,538} �eginning fund balar�ce 5,432,428 5,432,428 Ending fund ioalance 5,442,428 5,437,89Q #122-WIN��R W�ATH�R R�S�RVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 7a0 72 530 {170) 75.68°10 Inlerfund Transfer 0 0 d 0 #DIVIO! Subtotal revenues 700 72 530 (170) 75.68% �xpenditures Reserve for Win#er Weather Q 0 0 0 #D1V10! Total expenditures d 0 0 Q #DIVIO! Revenues over{under}Expendituras 700 72 53fl (170) Beginning fund balance 502,605 502,005 Ending fund�alance 5D2,705 502,535 #123-CIUIC FACILITIES R�PLACEMENT FUNd Ftavenues Inveskment Interest 2,000 170 i,259 (741) 62.97%4 Interfund Fransier-#0�1 397,400 33,083 264,667 (i32,333) 66.67% Totalrevenues 399,Q60 33,253 265,926 133,074 66,fi5% Exaenditu res Ca�ital0utlay 0 0 0 @ #DNIOf Total expenditures D 0 0 0 #biV10! Revenues over(under)expenditures 399,000 33,253 265,926 (133,074) Beginning fund balance 2,QQ4,848 2,004,$48 EndEng fund balante 2,403,848 2,27D,774 Page 8 R:1FinancelFor City Counci�lCouncif hl�onth{y Reporls1201 2120 7 2 QB 31 report CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year Budge!ta Actual�omparison of Re�enues and Exper�dikr�res Ela sed� ss 7�/4 For the�tght-Monfh Period Ended August 3'1,20i2 2a�2 Actual Actual thru Budget %of 8udget August Aug 31 Remaining 8udget DE6T SERVECE FUNDS #204-�EBT SERVICE FUND Revenues 5pokane Pu81ic Faeilities District 432,320 0 151,'i60 (281,160} 34.96°/a Interfund7ransfer-in-#301 92,652 0 1$,826 (73,$26) 20.32% fnteri�nd TransFer-in-#3Q2 92,651 0 18,826 (73,825} 20.32°10 Totalrevenues 617,623 0 188,811 (428,812) 30.57% Expenditures �ebt Service Payments-CenterPlace 432,32p 0 115,p60 317,260 26.61°l0 Debt Service Payments-Roads 185,303 0 22,209 163,094 4�E.99% Total expenditures 617,623 0 137,269 480,354 22.23% Fte�enuss over(under)expenditures 0 0 51,542 (909,185) Beginning fund balance 0 0 �nding fund balance 0 51,542 Page 9 P:1Finan�elFor City CouncitilCouncil Month4y Reparts12 0 9 212 01 2 OS 31 report CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year Budget to Ackual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Ela sed� es.7°/o For the Eight-Monfh Period Ended August 31,2DiZ 2012 Actua! Actual thru Budgei %of Budget August Aug 3i Remeining Budget CAPETAL PR09ECTS FUN�5 #3a� -CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNQ Revenues REE71 -7�xes 475,fl00 50,824 302,558 (172,442) 63.70°fo Investment Interest �400 94 fi91 291 172.83% Interfund Transfer-i�-#303 0 4 0 0 #DIVIQ! Total revenues 475,4D0 5�,618 303,249 (172,151) 63.79% Ex�endituaes Inter�und Transfer-out-#204 92,652 0 98,826 73,82� 20.32% Interfund Transfer-out-#303 363,627 0 203,902 159,725 56.07% Total expenditures 456,279 0 222,728 233,551 AB.84°/a Revenues over(underj expenditures i9,121 50,618 80,521 (405,702) Baginning fund balance 772,072 772,072 Ending fiund balance 799,183 85F,593 #802 SPECIAI.CAP!'fAL PRaJECTS FUND Revenues REET 2-Taxes 475,000 5�,524 295,655 (179,345) 62.24% Inveskment Inferest 2,OOfl 143 1,057 (943) 52.84°!0 Interfund Transfer-in-#3fl7 4 0 4,393 4,393 #DIVIO! Total revenues 477,OQ0 54,867 301,904 {175,896) 63.12% Expenditures InterfundTransfer-ouk-#i01 0 0 0 0 #QIVlQf Interfund Transfer-out-#204 92,fi51 0 18,826 73,825 20.32°!0 Interfund Transfer-out-#3Q3 1,448,059 0 192,493 1,255,566 13.29% Interfund Transfer-ouk-#307 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! Interfund Transfer-out-#308 0 0 0 0 #DIV/O! Total expenditures 1,540,710 0 211,3i8 1,329,392 13.72% Revenues over(under}expenditures (1,063,7i0) 50,657 89,786 (1,505,287) Beginning fund balance 1,630,303 1,630,303 Ending(und balance 566,593 1,720,089 Page 10 P:1FinancelFer City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reporls120121201 2 08 31 report CITY 0�S��KAN�VA�C�Y, WA Budget Year Budget to Actual Comparison af Re�enues and Expendilures Ela sed= 66 7% Far the Eighk-Month Period Ended August 31,2012 �o�a Aeival Actual ihru Budget %af Budget August Aug 31 Remaining Budget CAPITAL PR�,lECTS FUNDS-aontinusd #303 STREET CAPITAI.PRQJECTS fUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 7,828,118 424,571 �,212,327 (6,615,751) �5.49% beveloper Contribution 275,004 0 0 (275,OOfl) 0.40°/a Miscellaneous 0 0 1,500 t,50a #DIVlO! Intarfund Transfer-in-#OD1 89,000 0 50,B15 (38,185) 57.10% Interfund 7ransfer-in-#101 Q 0 (11,205) {11,205� #DIVl4! Inkerfund Transfer-in-#301 363,627 0 203,902 (159,725) 56.07% Intertund Transfer-in-#342 1,445,059 0 i92,493 (1,255,566) �[3.29°!a Interfund Transfer-ia�-#311 811,000 4 289,290 (521,760} 35.66% Interfund Transfer-in-#401 Q (D 0 0 #DIVIO! lnterfund Transfer-in 0 0 0 0 #DIVf01 Totalrevenues 'f0,814,804 424,571 1,939,071 {8,875,733� 17.93% Expenditures 005 PinaslMansfield,Wilbur Rd.10 Pines A63,312 243 10,1a2 453,170 2.59% 060 Argonne Rd Corr'tdor Upgrade SRTC 06-31 802,792 732 99,254 7Q3,538 92.36% 069 Pines(SR27) ITS Imponrement SRTC 06-26 1,76fi,2D1 52,598 156„149 1,61fl,052 6.84°ta 063 Broadway Ave Safety Projecl-Pines 0 0 1,747 (1,747) #DIVlO! R65 5prague/Sullivan 0 0 (7,2d0) 7,2d0 #DIVIO! 069 Park Raad�:econstruckion#2 fl 662 1,Oi9 (1,019) #aIVIO! 112 IndianaAvenue Extension 4 237 11,024 (11,�24) #DIVIO! 113 IndianalSullivan PCC lnterse�.tion 0 D 2,�39 (2,039) #bIV/Q! 115 Sprague Ave Resurfacing-Euergreen to 5u11ivan 1,582,00� 574,539 1,486,453 95,547 93.96% 123 Mias'son Ave-Flora to Barker 300,000 0 109 299,891 0.04% 141 Sullivan&Euclid PCC 26,289 0 6,735 99,554 25.62% 142 Broadway @ ArgonnelMuilan 138,15� 0 965 137,185 0.70% 145 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trail 447,OOfl 0 3,686 443,314 fl,B2% 146 241h Ave Sidewalk-Adams ko Sullivan 278,524 9,373 33,216 245,344 11.93% 1a8 Greenacres'Trail-pesign 60,000 0 2,816 57,185 4.&9% 149 Sidewalk Infill 398,25Q 5,851 82,707 3ti5,543 20.77% 151 Green Haven S7EP 0 0 1,160 (1,18�) #DIV10? 154 5i�ewalk 8�Tansit Stop Accessibility 1$2,294 7,077 29,257 153,003 16.07% 155 Sullivan�2d W Bridge Replacement 6Q0,000 64,693 429,414 170,58fi 71.57% 156 Mansfield Ave. Connection 738,040 1,ifia5 3,621 734,379 0.49% 157 Tempprary Sulli�an Bridge Repairs 200,Op0 0 192,008 7,992 96.fl0% 159 University Rd/I-90 C7verpass Study 284,Q00 Q 751 283,249 0.26°!0 160 Evergreen Rd Pres. ibth-32nd 959,000 354,234 747,705 211,295 77..Q�9IP 1S8 Wellesley Ave 5idewalk&Adams Rd Sidewalk 0 923 923 (923) #C3fU14! 171 Sprague Ave ADA Curb Ramp Project 0 160 160 (164� #DIVIO! Contingency 1,500,000 0 0 1,500,000 0.00% Total expenditures 1Q,725,804 1,112,488 3,295,852 7,429,952 30.73% Rever�ue5 over(under)expenditures 89,000 (687,917) {1,356,781) (i6,305,685) Beginning fund�ralance 73,646 73,Fs46 Ending fund balance 162,646 {1,283,135) Page 11 P.IFinancelfor�City Ca�nciilCouncil Nlonthly Reports1201 212012 08 31 report CITY OF SPOKA�+lE VAL�LEY,LM1�A Bs�dge#Year Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Efa sed= ss.7% Far the Eight-Month Period Ended Aug�ust 31,2U12 2012 Aclual Aekual t�ru Budget °/a of Budge! August Aug 31 Remaining 8udget CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNd3-cantanued #304-MIRABEAU PROJECTS FUND Re�enues Ot�rer Miscellaneous Revenue 0 0 0 0 #DIV102 Investment Interest 0 a 28 28 #DIVJO? 7oialrevenues 0 4 2$ 28 #DIUID? Expendits�res CapitalOullays 0 0 0 0 #DIUIO! Transfers 0 0 0 0 #R6VIOI Tofal expenditures 0 0 0 0 #DfVlfl! Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 4 28 28 Beginning fund balanee 44,347 44,347 Ending fund balance 44,347 44,375 #307-CAPITAL GFtANTS FU�lD Revenues Grant Proceeds fl 0 182,332 182,332 #DIVId� Miscellaneous 0 0 4 0 #DIWO! InterFund Transfer-in-#342 €} 0 4 0 #�IVIa! InterFund Transfer-in Q 0 Q 0 #DI'U14! Totalrevenues 0 0 182,332 182,332 #bIV10! ��enditures 068 Broadway-190 io Park Road(Trans to#3D2) G 0 4,393 (4,393) #DIVIO! OS8 Broadway-Moore to Flara 4 � 4,469 (4,469) #DIV/O! Total expenditures 0 0 8,862 (8,862) #DI�/1Q! Revenues over(under)ex,penditures b 0 173,470 191,'i94 Beginning fund�aalance 147 147 Ending fund balance 147 173,617 Page 92 P:IFinancelFor Csty CouncillCouncil Monthly Reparts12012120i2 08 31 report CITY OF SPOKA�IE VALLEY,WA Budget Year Budget to Actua!Compar�son of Revenues and Ex{fendifures Elapsed= 86.7% For the Eight•Manth Per]od Ended August 31,2012 2012 Actual Actusl thru Budget %of Budgat August Aug 31 Remaining Sudget CAPITAL PRQJECTS FU�fDS-cantinued #308-BARKER BRIDGE FUND Revenues Grank Proceeds 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! Deve�oper Contribufiion 0 0 4 0 #�IV/fl! Interfund 7ransfer-in-#342 a 0 0 0 #DIVIfl! Total re��enues 0 0 p 0 #DIVIO! Ex�endi4ures #�IUIfl! Bridge Reconstruction 0 0 0 0 #DIUI�! 7atal expenditures 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! Revenues over(under)expendifures 0 0 0 0 Beginning fund balance 0 0 Ending fund balance 0 0 #309-PARKS CAPITAI.P�t4JECTS FUND �2evenues Grant Proceeds 0 a d 0 #aIV10! In4erfund Transfer-ir�-#009 100,0�0 8,333 66,fi67 (33,333} 66.67% Invesiment Interest 0 66 519 519 #DIV1Q! Total revenues 1Q0,000 8,393 67,186 (32,814} 67.18% Expenditures Terrace View Park 5helter 0 � 0 0 #DIVIO! Terrace View Park P�ay Equipment 120,p00 4 6,72B 113,273 5.61% Gpnkingency 50,OOD 0 0 50,Q00 0.00% Greenaeres Park 0 4,316 10,567 (10,567} #DIVIQ! Vallay Mission Park 0 Q D 0 #bIWO! Clisct�very(UniversalJ Park 0 4 Q 0 #DIVIO! Total expenditures 170,OD0 4,316 17,295 152,705 10.17% Rev€nues over(under}expenditures (70,Q00) 4,�83 49,891 {185,520} Beginning fund bafance 411,151 411,151 Ending fund balance 341,151 461,Q42 Page 13 P:IFI'nancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reporls1201212012 08 31 repart CfTY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year Budgek to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Ela sed= 66 7% For t�e Elght•Month Period Ended August 31,2012 ' 20�2 Actual Actual thru eudget %of Sud et Au ust Aug 31 Remainin Bud et CAPiTAL PR�JECTS FU�lDS-eantlnued #31d-CIVIC FACILITIES CAPITAL ARdJECTS FUND Fteaenues Inierfund Transfers 0 � 0 0 #DIVIO! Invesiment Interest 6,400 547 4,077 (1,923y 67.95°/a Total rev�nues 6,000 547 4,077 (1,923) 67.95% Expenditures Inkeriund Transfers-out-#fl01 0 4 Q 0 #DIV10! Capital-West Gateway at TMierman 120,004 0 0 120,000 0.00% Baffour Park Purchase Q 14,161 28,299 (28,291) #DIVIO! Wesi Gateway at Thierman Q 0 5,583 (5,5$3) #D11fl0! Facilitiss 0 q 0 0 #DIV/O! Tokaf expenditures 12Q,000 14,161 33,�7a 86,926 28.23°fo Revenu�s aver(under}exgenditures (114,Oq0) (13,614) (29,797} (88,045) Beginning fund balance 3,856,624 3,856,624 Ending Fund balance 3,742,624 3,826,627 #311 -STREET CAPITAL IMPROVEMEN7S 2011+ Revenues Miseeflaneous 0 0 300 304 #p9U10? lntertund Transfers in-#001 (xx%>$26mm) 0 0 0 0 #DIUIO? lnvestmen#Interes! 2,20Q 0 0 {2,200) Q.Od% Totalrevenues 2,200 � 300 _(1,900} 13.&4% Expenditures Facilities 0 0 0 0 #�bIU10! 2012 Streef Preservafion 0 236,258 278,407 (278,4Q7} #DfV10!. Interfund TransFers-auk-#303-Sullivar� 2£}O,OOQ 0 192,008 7,992 9S.OD°/'o InierfundTransfers-QUt-#303-Evergreen 111,�00 0 97,232 13,768 $7.60% Total expenditures 311,000 236,258 567,647 256,647 182.52% Revenues over(under)expenditures {3fl8,800} (236,258) {567,347) 254,747 Beginning func#balance i,a84,681 1,084,681 Ending fund�alance 775,881 517,334 Page 14 P:1FinaneelFor City CouncillCouncil Monihly Reports12�1212012 08 31 repart C1TY QF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budqet Ysar Budgef to Actual ComparESan of Revenues and Expenditures �la sed= ss.7% For the Eight-Monkh Period Ended August 31,2412 2032 Actual Actual thru Budget %af Budget Aug�st Aug 31 Remaining Budget E�tTERPRISE FUNDS #402-STORMWATER FUND RECURf21NG ACTlVITY Revenu�s StormwaterManagementFees 1,�5Q,000 fi,077 1,008,622 (741,378) 57,64% {nvastm�nt Interest 5,OOQ 211 1,561 (3,439) 31.21% Miscelfaneous 0 0 57 57 #DIVJO! Tata9 Recurring Revenues 1,755,000 6,2$8 1,010,240 (744,764) 57.58°ln �xpefldltUftS Wages!Benefits f Payroll Taxes 438,614 38,7$3 251,535 '�87,t779 57.35°/a Supplies 32,540 1,173 9,445 23,096 29.02°/4 SeNiCes$�Ch3rgeS 1,244,287 120,059 566,277 678,O1Q 45.51°/a Intergovernmental Payments 23,000 12,60Q 24,426 (1,428) 106.2p°10 InterFundTrar�sfers-out-#0�1 15,000 1,250 1Q0�0 5,400 66.67% InterfundTransfers-ouk-#502 0 13i 1,045 (1,Q45) #DIUIQ! Totaf Recurring Expenditures 1,753,441 17a,895 9G2,728 890,713 49.20% Recurring Revenues Over(Under) Rect�rring Expenditures 1,559 (167,607} 1q7,512 745,953 NONRECURF3ING ACTIVITY Revenues GrentPraceeds 153,667 0 64,086 (89,581} 41.70% InterFund'Transfers-in-#101 (sr,op facr't;ry} 0 D 0 0 #�IVIO? Total Nonrecurring Revenu�s 153,667 0 64,086 (89,581) 41.70°!0 Expenditures Interfund Transfiers-out 0 0 0 4 #DIVIO? Cantracted maintenance 4 0 Q Q #DIVIO? Div. 055 iVPDES-Phase II program dev. 0 0 Q 0 #DfU10? Capital-variaus projeats 400,000 234 19,191 38D,809 4.80% Sho,�Facility Q 0 d 4 #D9V10? InterfundTransfers-out-€1i01 Q 0 0 4 #�D9V10? Tota1 Nonrecurring Expenditures a00,afl0 234 '[9,191 38fl,8b9 4.SD°/fl �lonrecurring Revenues Over(Under) Nonrecurring �xpenditures (246,333) {234) 44,895 291,228 Excess(�eficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Total Expendiiures (244,774) (1fi7,841) 192,407 437,181 Beginning working capiial 2,382,660 2,382,&6b Ending working capital 2,137,886 2,575,087 Page 15 P:IFinancelFor City CouncillCounc�l Monthly Reporls120121201 2 08 31 repart CITY QF SPO�CA,NE VALL�Y,WA Sudgef Year 8udget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and ExpendiEures Ela sed= 66.7% For khe Eight-Month Period Ended August 31, 2012 204 2 Actual Acival thru Budget °lo of Budget August Aug 31 Remaining Bvd-�et ENTER�RISE FUN�S-continued #403-A�UIFER PROTECTION AREA Re�enuss Spokane County 500,OOQ 0 273,341 (226,659) 54.67% Investment Interest 2,50Q Q 0 (2,500) 0.00% 7atal reuenues 502,500 0 273,341 (229,159) 54.40% Expendit�res F�CIII�'(E5 $30,000 52,784 93,350 535,65� 14.82°1a Totalexpend`ntures 630,000 52,78Q 93,350 536,650 14.B2% Revenues over{under)expenditure� (127,50b) {52,780) 179,�91 (765,808) Beginning working capital 417,326 At7,32� Ending working capital 289,826 597,317 Page 16 P:IFinancelFor City CouncillGouncil Monlhly Repor1s1201 212012 08 3i report CITY O�F SPO�(ANE VALL�Y,WA Budget Year BudgeE to Actual Comparison of Revenues and�xpenditures Elapsed= &67°Io �or the Eighk-Nlonth Period Ended August 31,2012 2412 Ackual Ackuaf thru Budget %of Bud et Au ust Au 31 Remairrin Bud et IN7ERiVaL SERVICE FUNDS #507 -�R�R FUlJD Revenues Interfurtd 7ransfer•in-#001 0 1,632 12,896 12,896 #dIV10! Interfund Transfer-in-#101 {pfow replace.} 1 bb,000 8,333 66,667 (33,333) 66.67% Investment Interest 0 124 884 884 #Q11/I0! Total revenues 1flQ,000 10,070 80,446 (19,554} 80.45% Expenditures Computer replacement lease 0 0 Q 0 #DIU101 So�twarelHardware replacement 0 0 0 D #DIU10! Uehicle Replacement 0 0 0 0 #DIV/O! GapiialOutlay fl 0 d 0 #DIUI�! Total expenditures 0 Q 0 0 #DIVlO! Revenues ova�(under)expendilures �00,000 10,070 80,446 (19,554) Beginning working capital 932,335 932,335 �nding workir�g capital 1,032,335 1,012,781 #502-RISK MANAG£MENT FUND Revenues Investment Inkerest D 1 5 5 #bIVlfl? Interfund Transter-#001 319,000 26,583 212,667 {1 Q6,333) 66.67% Totalrevenues 319,000 26,584 212,672 {106,329) 66.67% Expendikures Services&Charges 319,OD0 0 255,546 63,a5G 80.11°!a Total expendiiures 319,p40 0 255,546 63,454 $0.11°/a Reuenues over(under)expenditures d 26,584 (�F2,87a} (169,782) Beginning working eapiial 3Q,59D 30,590 �nding working capital 34,59D (12,284) Paga 17 P:1FinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reparls1201212012 08 31 reporC CITY OF SPOKAN�VALLEY,WA 9/1912012 Investment Report For the Month af Augusi 20�2 Totaf LGIP�` BB CD 2 �B CD 3 investments 8eginning $ ��,�392,726.84 $ 3,f}31,63�.91 � 2,00O,OOQ.04 � 51,524,358.75 Deposits 1,705,619.83 0,00 a.oa 1,705,619.$3 Withdrawls (4,750,00a.oaa 0,40 0.00 {4,750,000.00) fnterest 6,904.50 0.00 0,00 6,904.50 Ending $ 43,455,251.17 $ 3,031,631.91 � 2,OOa,OD0.00 $ 48,486,883.08 ma tures: 6/28/20 93 11/4/20 9 2 rate.• f�.65% p.35°fo Earnin s Balance Current Period Year to date Bud et 001 General Fund $ 30,749,011,98 � 4,378.�4 � 5�,�23.76 � 1�5,QOfl.00 101 Sfreet Fund 1,864,502.75 265.50 2,658.15 5,Q04.06 143 Trails & Paths 37,8�a.26 5.40 39.96 a,oa 105 HotellMotel 27$,135,42 39.61 33�.34 704.00 120 CentetPlace Operating Reserva 333,309.90 47,46 35�.49 704.00 121 Service Level Stab9lization Reserve 5,179,101.19 737.50 5,469,51 10,OOQ.00 122 Winter Weather Reserve 502,365,a1 71.54 �29.76 700.Ob 123 Civic Facilities Replaeement 1,�94,190.53 170.05 9,259.32 2,000.00 301 Capital Projects 658,303.57 93.74 691.32 400,0� 302 Sp�cial Capital Pr�sjecis 1,002,220.42 142.72 1,056.88 2,QC}0.00 303 Stree#Capital Projects Fund Q.00 Q.00 0.�0 0.00 3Q4 Mirabea� Point Praject 26,454.56 3.77 27.9p 0.00 307 Capital Grants Fund q.p0 Q.00 O.QO 0.00 309 Parks Capital Project 46�,579.�1 6E.01 518.9� 0.00 310 Civic Buildings Capita[ Prajects 3,839,084.72 546�68 4,Q76.78 6,400.00 311 Street Capita[ Imprav@ments 2�11+ 0.00 O.OQ 0,�0 2,2p0,OQ 402 Stormwater Management 1,480,007,12 210.75 �,56fl.7� 5,000.0� 4�3 Aquifer Pro�ection F�nd 0.00 �,QO 0.00 2,500.00 501 �qe�ipment R�ntal & Replac�rn�nt 873,637,52 124.49 883.81 0.00 502 Rislc Managemen� 5,089.02 0.72 5.37 O.qQ $ 48,486,883.08 $ 6,904.50 $ 70,884.02 � 182,zao.oa #Local Government Investment Pool Page �8 P:1F4nancelFar City CouncillCouncil Month6y Reports1201212012 p�31 report CIl`Y��' 5POiCAI��VAI�L.�Y�WA 911 912 0 1 2 Saaes Tax Receiats For the Month of August 20'!2 Monfh Difference Received Z�11 2012 � °/a February 'i,658,132.7(} 9,7'92,fl84.16 933,951.46 8.08°l0 Marcl� �,130,948.29 1,145,747.45 14,799.16 1.31% April 1,149,418.94 1,208,053.86 58,634.90 5.10% May 1,451,954.28 1,�4Q,245.0� (11,709.27) (0.81%} June 1,345,333.29 1,325,266.87 (20,066.42} (�.49%) July 1,415,961.55 1,458,84�.23 42,879.68 3.03% August 1,520,766.09 1,482,908.83 (37,85726} (2.49°ro} 9,672,515.1Q 9,$53,147.35 180,632.25 1.87% Se�ternber 1,448,728.86 O.OQ October 1,464,653.80 0.00 November 1,463,313.06 O.OQ December �,381,684.76 p.00 January 1,41�,552.03 0.00 16,84�,447.41 9,853,147.35 Sales tax receipEs reported here reflect remitEances for general safes tax, cri�ina!justice sales tax and pubfic safefy tax. The sales#ax rate for reteil sales transacted within the boundaries of the City of Spokane Vall�y is 8.7°!0. The tax thaE is paid by a purchas�r at the point of sale is remitted by the Wendor to the Washington State bepartment of Revenue who then remits the taxes back ta the various agencies that have imposed fhe tax. The allocafian of the total 8,7%tax rate to khe agenci�s is as follows: - State af Washington �.50% - City of Spokane Valley �.85% - Spokane County Q.15°l0 - Spokane Public Facilikies District 0.9b% � - Crmi�ial Justice 0.90% * - Public Safety 0.14% * - 2.20°!0 local tax - JuWeniCe,lail 0.10% * - Mental Heai#h 0.96°l0 " - Law�nforcement Communications 0.10°l0 � - Spokane Transit Authority 0.60% *_ 8.76°!0 * Indicates voter approved sales taxes In additian to the .85% repor#ed above that the City receives, we alsa recei�e a portion of the Criminal Justiee and Public Safety sales taxes. The distributPon of t�ose taxes is computeti as follows: Grimir�al J�stice: The tax is assessed county-wide and of the total colleet�d, the State dislributes 10%of the receipts to �pakane County, with the remainder al�ocated on a per capi#a basis fo tha Caunty and the cities within the County. P�blic Safetv: Th�tax is assessed county-wid�and of the total callected, the State distributes 60°l0 of t�e rece`pks to Spakane County, with the remainder allocated on a per ca,�ita basis to the eities within the Counfy, Page 19 O N N � f9 CJ o a c .?.o o � o a 0 0 0 O bp O�] � � � � N N N o a0 � �f) Q � p7 N N � ry � �� Q � C4 � � N r U'f In W 00 60 N C3 C� ['�? f� N 1� LrJ N� C7 [1 N f�47 G�- I� R7 tA O� Oi r�[D [V N O t7 cy r ui `=� V c+l f71 � .� .� f� OT Cry tV fp (p � O O O O Q � O CD� a � � � ao c0 r7 N (D h- O h 1� O N t�l a }. = a W (7 f� (fl W C�f� N N � h �'7 ? � ro �� `m � G N Q7 6� Y� h � 4 N M f7 O fD 1!5 (II f�9 -.�, � � Q � � � � l�fi O Q N r N a f� F+ N l* C � � e Il ■ I'1 01 A � rrre- � Gp CO � u� aJ h N O f� 00 (O O M h M O Ql d Qi a o o� o I _ � �f) CD CQ M � M O O r t^l N O O O � V � � N �-- �fl � hrfdNcQ V u7 �N0? Q1 '�YC!� � C'l ff? M "'{ O O In�' f� 90 CV �'i� O)[$ �-- I� I� O b Q V �1] 6f �+ N� N � fB 6l CO W � R7 f� R� Q? r V' li1 r � O � � . - � N �� dNfN M � NNN (V Na6NfO *' � r T Y Y Y (A r T P r Y" � b" v � Y � Ql � � l� C7 I'� C7 C4 O 86 lf'! d? N � O e- o ti o 0 � Ln V CO C�J N O h � 47 �l? Q v17 Q7 C� d M ° N i�0 . N V p O 1� � r l!7 a'i 40 I� V cfD ll7 O O N O f� Sd Q l('J d� � � C+i 00 �' CV C+7 O � �m W I�O N I� i0 �+ (� O � Q7 f0 �- 00 O N SO � OD f0 M V Ql � � � tf7 �Ifi U1 N V 61 4 � � (V N r iV r � O '�' C] � �-- � �r � � CO r r � � r� V' ro � � � �v o �n � cv v cv �n c*s m s� �n o ca e • o a Lt7 I� t-' 1n lTJ f�- O r' SY3 T Ql tS tF � C] U) tO ° �*l. � O Q ��C�? N a0 +[3 4 I� � �+�7 u"1 aO � cC) N N O I` i� � 1� u7 � � � � O �[O a0 W�r � �F? N h fD it7 G7 GD O � O5 RO 00 ! N N O t0 O� �D � � u? O V � N c7 uT f� V iO � � � V u� - Q N �} pOr Oriry Cry NCV NriPN �O� CA � r r r � r r '- CO r r r � r C h M r T M � �ON �r � C,� N (fl [O i+7MI� i� Ot00N o 0 o c Cp fD tl] 4!') Q V (y V CQ r- N N N O h N O [h O� � pp�CO �CD sf CV Ol CQ � C77 C� N CrJ 4 4 W f� <t M � ?`; o � � Oi� W M C�'S tA O] N f� s# � CV C.�� 417 rfl V � (D � ry � N N CV V G) � 1� Sfl fn N (D r U� � 47 tf] � � � fe r N '['C N M �S°S [fl M E'rF P'Y hi r r Qi = r �-- r r � r (n r- r � r r (fl � v C > f� u� h7 M 40 CD h� V � QO S7 V M1 O M o 0 0 0 N C7 H' t� O (D [6 N N 4 [*1 S*7 CO � M M (O 0.1 C�0 � � cO � h Sf7 (3) tn (O O N �S'7 � M i� b � � � CO C�') CO M 6) O 4 x � O) �Il tD Ol ch � t7? t7 cD ci3 � M cD I� c41 4) Qi �fl (O 1� � � N I� N � V M V_tf � �!1 4�'J (D f� S'7 60 N O� � N � � N �M '�t �f `-' e � � rr � � m r � rr � l+l� � o � r t p� C�} Oprh � P"71t7C? O MOM a c a �o m O o � ri r7 � M cV � oD � V a0 u) O � Cn 'C`f r C�7 ' � �'� n U � tD � f*? O r ti r- fD Q? � 4� m tV �Q Ch V C? h !� � G � � N� N {V N � V � h CU 03 CD 4 i�!00 M O OO CO �y r` cor� tirncou� rn 000c*icoco �nav o �rr u, an1 u7 O O C�Cri M � f'7 V �r � Cr1 u) O U'1 y � i- c- r � � r Cb � (O (O .7 � � T � � C� I� c•7 O h- M M N CV (D U7 �U 4 W o 0 o a w, � N S!' M1 t� V CO in o0 �r) td F� cD O> C C7 # c7 t�7 rn c0� O �e � rnn �rro �9cr) f� M rno ,-� in � c� oc� u) rn r c�J s 1 °o � Q f+h l[�N m N f� M 4fl CV C] �SO(h O('7 [V O a0 t[') � 1 N � (ii N u'f r- f� f�- c� R N O) t0 eF t0 cD N (4 u? C � � M 07 O (*? f N C*') C+') C7 C'i 9f7 O CV O N h� O � Y r r e- r � 00 � r � � r ��N � � ::�, � O� � C�Y � (O � � N COhO hS*lOS'? o a o ti y � GG1 h7 I'� �t t+ d` lf7 � rfl 00 40 N N O d) I� tQ I � CO �fi �!' h �- .- Crl N M t� (� P�CO (O O {fl N !�. h � � O Q lf7 CV�O (�') C�3 r CC7 LV O� �fi O ir1 O 1� 3 �y N 'ct f0 O OD C� N O W (O CD h � LO (B O C� � N h i'� � O � mQ10N � 17 f� � (\EOOIriOIn ' c'• _ r r � r f� � r r r r {� � (y y.a r e- N v000mmr ,o i. c� � r� u� mocv o o' o � v oa �f i� nt u, rn cp o,o o m c0 tfl ct� � - � st f� � V V � � �7 C�1 P (4 I'� Q1 '� �'j � o Q N p m h- r f7) f9 O N C] M �Cf O 7 KD � N (L] 41 � � � O V C�! C6 o f77 I� CO t� b7 O O tt5 C N N �N N 4'1hC4 O MC�1 � 6701t0 � (y � �� {ti! � r � f�m � � O 7 Q � � b .-. � 4 M � � � � C G9 t5 N N O .O �1 N I � N -p O � U Q .-�. � Ul N � � � � U 61 d N � O ro � C 4 � C � � y O „�, Op � U O +.+ d � f9 � •O7 U � C �J 47 7 � 7 Q7 Q O O O L] d O � � j, �, � � a`� a� `o w > > o a� � 'G r ,.},t � °o °o c °o o° °o ro pr � � j � � y � 4� EE � ay� m � m � � � � � � o °o °o °o °o 0 � � +� ` . � a: � w � z3 ro +a t m o � o � � a o 0 0 0 � � � .i� � _ � e �. o m Q.,d o � 0 5 � « �n � b o Y a� s � o 00 � a ri VU� � � �i � �� Q � OZ ❑ ~ � d 1-� � o 0 o U r CV a � ^�:�� m `� � � a c°o ° o� i a CJ � � N M � N � i� N p\° � ��i' (£i O (D h 47 r `. C') aJ O U ftI C O � N� O M M O UJ � h SV O 0 f� V �Y CJ CO' (O O 4) N hNOOItC?�t7 �f1 (b EA"r � M M� N f'I N � r N NN7i� 'd00 ih C} G440Cn Or o � M W [DM a# I�SO n0 GG400o� 4r � m �' tV N N � O c0 O c0 Cri O O O 4 Q M C'3 ffl M >. � �' 'G � � � 'r'� � 47 M !� f�-� 7 � O � � � m �9 G N a r6 G 6 ��a'1 (O � '•Y b�C.0 O O O OS C C � C -�, � Gr Q � Li � Nrr4'7N1�MN u7 NoV � f-� ! i'f ■ S N N N �I] S'°l �f�j"1 �'i � C'') I� N N � r r +cr� [Q � QI �t+ O'l Cp (OGO (DmS00 � o 0 0 o I I I N r N � CO �QI r f0 c- O M r f0 0 M M O �f � r4 � {V (�! r O O �C]� N [Q 00 m M N O h � r t7i � S�5QlOe- 47 � ONMNOO � 4� fV W O O N h CO N i� t ('�i C�7 �t OT Q M �(i � O M 01 � �? � H 6V N V W ("') r QI N 4� 44 Cn f� N f� O CV . . � N N N M C'� V � M �ll u7 M M M U] CO N N � a � Lb C �1 T N �D CO O 61 t�J [C7 CQ � t!1 O LV � o 0 0 E � a� c� +tc�icnt- co rn rn �s � oou, oin � rn r m .� � {4 (B M ('? f'� tf5 l(7 t�7 N td (V � iD � O � Y� O (D I N �C C'"J [D cG N5 c0 N N f� N f'� O c0 �f'1 �r �- � � h � N �cD T[n CO � C* f�}C] � O r CQ � L � CV C7 � Q7 V' [P R V' � �CO [O a tt3 r � CV N. N f`'? f`� f`')� N tt7 IIl V M N d � LCS 0 �Y r � Nf*700)cD Cp tDN fDP+ t7N043 0 � o e � iV C� C7 [D a0 u)(�i V � �D [+7 i� V N O h r � u'1 [d � I O � ��C] M CV P'1 W � 4 Cri tD I� V V CQ � � ry �' C' p ��ct1 tQ h ui � r � � � CO lt7 M 1� � EV N M (�i � � O N N N N �7 �41 O r CO I` O � � O O W �' V 4'i � Y fi � M M �'1 �D N O t'3 � O O (Q 'V 1` M N U3 � N N N C'7 C'') a � � I,n I!5 M C7 N �N � W � � CO (DTNMcOI� u'1G� �9Q� r- � o o a e 6> O m O �fi 00 M �N ('� a0 �' �'i � N O N M1 O) u7 00 Q� O �D CO M m CO CO �r LL'1 � � 4 fV O CP O 61 �` 0O (p I ��1 O � C1 �' N Q Q N U'i N 41 6'� 70 �+ 90 O C6 CA f`7 V , N Q rn c0 u7 �oo w et C? �Y1 R SV � N O O Cs cD ui � N CO �h O (O(O C? �"! O O CA�)CP f�O 1� � N N N 7 M d' �J N �1 C£J (�'� (*J N � � <p _ � � N (D � M h Cn M O 'ct 'Q tt CU O(D o o a o � - m 65 (6 M � d O 03 ii7 d''� M h cp � (+') e7 Gry Q7 �+ � N � � tih000 i� m 006� 01� WOW P') �A M M I O y... Q�.C7 Oi �(1 h (O b0 O 4V (O (O �t F- h O� I� N O O N � N A M � 07 M 4V L�f iC7 r N tln <*7 [r? 4A O uf) (A � f C N � �� h (C�f0 h f`� fb C � � � �CV' EV N M M �U'} � u�-�� (�? CrJ a � CL1 `J O U {� O? W N (D M fv CO M t� � ui 07 O 0Y o c a o , � [f Q � CO O f�fD N � �S � r � C�1 C C•? h �V � Q? � tL) � � M fD i70 N f0 V M f0 ffl 'd h F� G7 � � u fl L� ou� V Of� Ntn � O � n � � C� cO T i� Q1 Q Cfl QI (7 M � N fM1 CO O} . (b '�f O C G (D ln � NOOd' V CV 7Sn tfl tf70WcDC+ i'�Oh� N (�2 N M M M d N eY �CD (rJ C? N � m cD N L1- {` M r- �fi r LO �N M O OQ �f7 (D o4 O O C7 0 0 0 0 � - � ,�� O N r V SO M CO N � � N M r.Cn � � W� � � O p 3 �Y uz � � a� catio v c�ic� cbrnoo5rco ti ti `-' Q'. � ° � � OI f� N V ['1 V M u'1 'd� CO t0 C N (�i T a� f0 fA � __ rv � � cornwt�--- omoo v_ con rnotioo ma� w v sn N O O] N O� 4]�n M (b �D c} [D i� cfl W � N � N N N C'7 � �O et ef C*7 N S`'? d1 S'� V' � N C� V d d0 � r N h tD � 'Q � N O SV C a0 o a o o � F u� �ti O O 90 L*3 O N O t0 �D CO (O t�- �Cl O � 4 V ln� 'II) L I � �� i� "� (`'1 r N I� O �' O � 07 b 'd' 44 N�C'r1 4 �D LQ ('1 N� 00 i b� I O � Ji CO W 4} � 06 N i� �} Q� C� I� �7 4 �7 u7 O N ' Q Ji s- r- CO �N r O SO C�'7 C r � �4 �li 6l � ln 1!1 O � � � (f7 60 W CD (O M N N C') C7 I*7 N C'? Cr} O fD � � SV r u'?� O� � P7 (*> �'iNCO a0 � � � •- •-p � � C � N OOOONf90 dC7 � cDOu� 4 � a o o O i, ++ � O O O O M r � �, (� N � uy cry t0 4 3`- N M 'a+ � �j�� s C� O O O Q f� CV O C73 � W O a � LV C.] IL � �'. �. d i S 'Q > > a nr oo t- � v cv �t o irs m rn � � � � o �n ir�u� eD rn I� rn ca ca r o co io � .- c� � � N r CV W N� � 4 cD C"') W 1�- Oi ,r (,� � yy rMt^� ca Nn7MNNry � <A ,F, C J Q c � m �` �n � �G7 N .�7 v' tU � N O O W � �ry .O CV OI (� — ri7 . � � 61 « � G7 N U Q 7 v u �] � . . S5 `�v qp C � 'D � — C O f� C p � r� o � � � ° o t0 a�i � y, ;� �, � o 0 0 0 0 0 0 � o 0 0 o a o � � O w � � W � m� C a�i �� iG --�i � O O c] o 0 o C ls. '� �,� �y � � � a i� y o U� e� 3 c�n u m � °o °o o °o 0 0 Q � a; L qs wy � E E � m� � ro .4 � � a � °o ° °o °n °o a � C u m w � a. �� U � a¢'i �i o a�i o > > : ur c'�i o o � o t = m `rv� r� ,1 ,-i U z Q �u .°e4 � �� S [AOZ O ~ md H m o 0 0>° U N N � ° o� ° a� ° O O D.'] � N N � 00 � O N 61 M a (f) � �° N � N � (O � N � � N c V � � � � N � CO � �4ti1eGP O � N Q � f� �Cf R (O 61 N Q1 ch f6 f0 fD d} M � r �I� O! M {D W f 1 � O � � M r � N M MY (Q I� �Y f�! CO 09 r O O O Cs O r O�4�l l o b � �f+ i[3 ffl r O N W � � O O� O r O cQ N _ u � �q Ly O] � lTi i� � (O OJ CP O Q O O O 01 G.O �, ... t, � � N vl i`E f� '�fi 4 O O�[31 �9 � N N � � a sc .C] C p M � ti C"? ti T O c] M O (O C C � C � -�i � d rL u�. � N t0 r1Y r CO � +� � r O 90 � f i RI f? ■ QI v u� naoo � ° uQ1a � rnM � fp � 00 O V� (O fD M M M 4A 00 O CO o a a a CO M S^1 CJ f0 M O n � CO N GQ N M � M � � '�Y �D t- v ri ui � � rn ai v ti css co rc� r� r o r� F` r r �n ` r.i o � ao rn n c�.� n rn r r- u� a u� oi o co .�, p I`� �M (6 �LS u'1 CQ '�t �O ("7 � O CV O N r f+ �[Y I O N M c0 uh Q1 at r d1 O7 00 r M �f) i0 O 00 'r N CO t9 (A ti N 0� [� fD N SO f0 h lD 4'i 6 N r �LD � m �0 r �9 T CO 7 N ti O [� � d' V O � e o o a d c0 � e-- tf3�iV � N N � Ol N M r O � fl] � t0 �? or vr o00 .-- aniri o00 "� � `D `r �r � N O O Ol W � W ('� M N R �'1 O �'1 h H1 N p � .�- N � r- fLl M M �D a0 f� 4 a0 tt O �_ N � f� 40 � N O1 f4 01 01 �f1 Q tC7 N u'i N N O Qi O� ,H �} � 00 07 b O a7 O fd R a0 t+ CD CO (4 O � r ffl Ql 1� CV � � M (D('] CO a4 U] G1 GO r N G1 O V1 O � o � o e N �'1 a0 40 �'1 a7� M S'7 �0 �- � � '� � O r Cf� ° O h w O CA � C9 O � � � tV O 41 [O O M � O V UJ '� �W d � SO N i� M N CD fD CO f0 (`'i O GJ �G7 . � p N r M t-� � O 4'f 69 W GO � 00 ('') a0 O � � � hY � � � Q N � �I7� �fi M M � [`J 01 � S7 M N I� O tV ' o u� v � wro � � : a' TT �` o °orn M . a �' E''i c f9 h vorn �7a000 rn oo �n000 c+7or o � a a � M �D [B � tt T G� N C'� ZA O O t�3 d 1� (D N h W M M M 07 tYs c{f hl C] Qi O L!) l(1 lD O O O) � LL7 M � '� cL1 O N CD � S� V 00 Q � 47 h 90 4) O � IX] �] 4tl N � [� �'1 �t CS �CJ 1� Q7 Kt Ol SV SD PO O C�t O f� Q1 N � u'1 � fl N �f5 tn N GO CQ •7' h h N � I� CO O C4 0 � �' N M SV. �{] f6 � O M M � 'd 01 � O� N .._ � � rr � � � � .-- YN � W � fl,' f�� OGOh 4') I'� N f� NM f� NON o a a o h h fO O � O � Os a0 N O� �C? � N O (V f� CD M I� 7 �LJ 01 '�f f� f� !� u"1 I� Q3 I� CV in 1� O Q6 N QI � C r' 01 C') c8 I'� h V' �"3 M M � O lD M O C+3 00 � M - q� a o�7 L71 00 1� f0 �O1 �f5 O C] 00 4i � O V N W �D � ' pp . � �N W U1 M � N 1� C�'i 00 0.1 C�? fD 6? f� O h � � N N �D N 4'7 N M O �7 O 41 f� f� � I'^ � [V .�- N CV N N M fLJ N r N � r Vi O 117 � X N N � � � Cc7 N Y Y (i} �t O O (D M Q O} L� O� O � O a C r I� h fD f8 l0 M �O O N N O N �O G LO [+) ° tV 4=1 � �7 � �fi f0 r �D r} M C C9 Q3 lC5 t(1 O u7 `t � � � L � Q1 u] �i1 S77 r- N G O CD Q7 1� 40 'M O'M N � CV jg � W � d 1`-� o] iCl � � f� O C]OT N �Yi O��.fi�. N � (C} u7 t �. V {y fV N N M f6 (O N fD r CO r l7) '�.Sd ��'tt]i N, N � t\ � � e�-� M N N d' �L�l r r � O��I d � � r fV N � � � i0 � Of �} Q9 P� M M O � M O r p g] e o o n U'1 M O +� 4'i i0 � N h O1 M f� tY r tl oQ � � � � f!J 4i (V M N u? 00� O N W O � Qj . . l.L � a0 Sb �D LL7 c7 f+? (3') fD OQ (O � r fQ � �'! � p W C] O O 1� N [� M f0 (� �Cl QI !'� Cfl M h (O N� � (y 1��a0 £V O W �O {O�V O OS a0(1]f� . a � � OD Rn 7 � O O � � 07 � [D O C'7 + . N CV N � N CV N V O � j � � .� :j N N � r � � i�0 M r 4� CO M h M *- N �'1 O� O Q3 0 ' o 0 0 Q 1� 47 N r- O � Cs� O 7 CO O u7 � O a r t^�'S 0�0 P h � P � iV �9 T CV �C1 <11 fV O O O � CO Q7 N �O o0 O �1' O N O t0 O � O �t 4"1�� N M � - d ('!5 f� .-- r O f� G L°) 41 O S4] 4V 4'f N O N '� CO � � P u7 (� f71 M �f7 � U] 1+ h N � (D O1 I`7 ca}� O a � O � r 00 f7} T � { � P r � � .�- e~-- 6f ifl N S � N � �� Q = O O O �!Y � 00 fD C1 h �'1 f� M CO r 6� o 0 0 � O � O O O 01 (O f� '7 R Cn � CP �0 c7 CA sF ('') � � O O Q N M �D M ffl N S'7 i0 f3^ GO � M M � � N CO N M CO O M a � 00 OY h � aD O N c} 1� 67 m fO N 417 ST1 N O 3� f� � (fl � lCf V t O �N � c0 O> cD Sfl a0 O �t? �r1 � P r O C :7 0 OY � r � � u�Cl W ?+ �'1 � � M r N a Y . N � N � �^ N t �- C N iQ"7 � Q Q Q} � Qr � � � � � V � o liJ O a� c � � UM Y Qa � � J o o c, v 2` ; WN �a a N � � � � � y 1 W � i �' � � � � � � O � O O O O O O fl O _ ° � � � � > > N V O O O O O 4 4 o C] O '�e � � � � N'd C � O O O O O O O O Q a 7' �,�„ f4 C �� G a O r� C o 0 o C� O c�� t7 O O p � y 9 E V �°, o ca y w s, .�o }, � o o ci o o d � °o °o N � L �� in � @ G y �� ' � °m °w °a � °o o°o w r ri N � 47 y y N U7 7 � D 61 .,0 r �7 y .-i ,-i .-i .-i .-i LL' �,Z' Q � J7 9 O �1 �O ++ L � � +� m `° .c N y9 E E ro o�� @° w � a � A � a � m > > � ` aa � o � cu �a � rsn o o � mu � m � c�i � > j � aQ'i � o a�i }-°m � om � O °W ° � r Cl .- Q -� 1� � ¢ � � � L (/YOZ � � H a o e U ��SV-FS2'�Users�mcalhounr8on�s�debt capacity CITY �F SP�KANE VALLEY, WA 312212�12 Deb#Capacity 2011 Assesse�Value for 2012 Praperty Taxes 7,087,b23,395 Maximum Outstanding Remainfr�g �ebt as of Debf % Capacity 1213�12011 Capacity Utilized Voted {UTGO) 1.00% qf assessed Value 70,875,234 0 7i},875,234 O.OQ% f�an�oted (LTGO) 1,50%n of assessed value �06,312,851 7,93(},000 98,382,851 7.46% Voted park 2.54% of assess�d value 177,188,085 0 177,188,085 O.DO% Voted utllity 2.54°io of assessed �alue 177,188,Q85 fl 177,188,d85 0.00% 53�,564,255 7,930,000 523,634,255 1.49°/9 2003 LTGO Sonds Raad & Period Street Ending CenterPlace Improvemen s Total 121112OC14 60,OOQ 85,0 0 1�+5,00� 12I112005 75,OQ0 9�,Q 0 185,000 12/112QQ6 $5,000 90,00 �75,0(}0 Bonds 1211I2007 9a,000 �S,Ud 185,b00 Repaid _ 121112QQ8 95,000 95,0[} �90,000 12/112Q09 1fl5,000 100,00 2�5,000 121112p1Q 110,400 900,000 210,000 1211/2091 120,000 �Q5,000 225,000 740,000 764,000 1,500,400 12/112092 13�,000 11b,�Od 240,000 121112Q�3 140,000 115,000 255,a00 1211120�4 150,fl00 120,000 270,OD0 1211/2015 160,000 125,Oa0 28�,00{3 1211/2��6 170,400 430,000 300,000 12/1/2017 180,000 �35,000 315,000 121112Q18 220,Q00 14Q,400 360,��b 121112��9 250,aoa 145,400 395,Q00 12111�020 29p,0�0 150,000 �#40,000 12111�{�21 325,OOQ 16Q,000 485,Op0 Bonds 12/1/2022 360,000 165,000 525,000 Remaininc� _ 12/1/2023 445,�00 175,00� 580,OOQ 12f112024 45O,D00 0 450,000 12/1/2025 490,Q04 0 490,000 121112Q26 535,000 0 535,000 1211/2027 430,O�Q 0 430,000 121112d28 340,OOQ 0 344,000 12/112029 295,OOD 0 2�5,000 12/1/2030 280,000 0 280,000 121112a31 240,000 0 2A4,040 12/112032 190,OOQ 0 194,Q00 12/1/2033 230,000 0 230,000 8,260,000 1,670,0�0 7,930,fl00 7,000,000 2,43�,Of}0 9,430,�00 Page 23 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 2, 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: Sprague/Sullivan ITS Project Update (#0133) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: 1) Approval of Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) Project List, which included Sprague Ave ITS, June 16, 2009; 2) EECBG project status update, March 30, 2010; 3) Adoption of the 2010 Amended Transportation Improvement Plan, which included Sprague Ave ITS, April 13, 2010; 4) EECBG project status update, December 28, 2010. 5) Bid Award of Sprague Ave ITS— Phase 1, March 29, 2011. BACKGROUND: In 2009, the City of Spokane Valley applied for and received a grant of $420,000 from the U.S. Department of Energy for the design and construction of intelligent transportation system (ITS) improvements such as installing conduit and fiber optic cable connecting existing traffic signals to the Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center (SRTMC). The installation of traffic cameras along Sprague Ave and Sullivan Rd. is also included with this work. During project design, it became apparent that the $420,000 was insufficient to complete the work on the entire corridor, and the project was split into two phases. The City applied for and received an additional $244,425 in a Federal Congestion Mitigation / Air Quality (CMAQ) grant to complete the second (current) phase. Phase 1 of the project included ITS improvements on Sprague Ave between University Rd and Evergreen Rd, and was constructed in 2011. Phase 2 of the project is currently scheduled to be constructed this fall. The project was advertised for bids on September 14, and bids are scheduled to be opened Friday, October 5. After opening bids and tabulating the results, staff will present results at the Tuesday, October 9, 2012 Council meeting to award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. OPTIONS: Information only. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Information only. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The project is funded through $764,425 in federal grants: $420,000 from the US Department of Energy; $244,425 from the Federal Highway Administration. The City match is $103,696 (13.5% of the project total). STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, P.E., Senior Capital Projects Engineer Eric Guth, P.E., Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: None. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 2, 2012 Department Director Approval: � Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing � information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Sullivan Road W Bridge Replacement Project— Under-Bridge Pedestrian Walkway GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Approved Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) Applications on May 25`h, 2010; Admin Report on March 8, 2011; Admin Report on August 23, 2011; Admin Report on Temporary Repairs on September 20, 2011; Info Memo on TIGER III Grant Application on September 27, 2011; Approval of surveying and topographic mapping contract with CH2M HILL on November 1, 2011; Authorized execution of Supplemental Agreement Number 1 with CH2M HILL for a maximum amount payable of $569,411.00 for Preliminary Design services; Info RCA regarding the Final Design Scope of Work on July 24, 2012; Approved Final Design Phase Contract with CH2M HILL on July 31, 2012. BACKGROUND: The Sullivan Rd West Bridge Replacement project has received $8 million in funding from the federal Bridge Replacement (BR) program and $2 million from the state Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB). CH2M HILL was selected to provide design services for this project. During discussions with Council on July 31 regarding the Final Design Phase contract amendment, staff presented as part of CH2M HILL's scope of work, the idea of evaluating the opportunity to design a pedestrian walkway underneath the new southbound bridge. The idea was to explore the cost and feasibility of providing a bicycle and pedestrian walkway under the bridge that would connect the Centennial Trail on the south end of the bridge to Sullivan Park on the north end. CH2M HILL and City staff inet with Mike Stone and Chris Guidotti (State Parks) and discussed the concept of the walkway under the new bridge. CH2M HILL also prepared the attached Technical Memorandum which summarizes their study of this concept. Based on the information we have received regarding this walkway, staff's recommendation is to not proceed with the under bridge walkway concept and instead provide a 10-foot wide walkway on the surface of the bridge. This recommendation is based on the following reasons: 1) The estimated increased cost of over $700,000 is not currently in the project budget 2) It is assumed the City would not want to pay this additional cost itself 3) Additional effort would be needed to find more grant money to cover these costs 4) Staff is not currently aware of grant opportunities to pay for this additional amenity 5) The walkway would only be 3 to 3 '/2 feet above the 100-year flood elevation. This could be problematic during high river flows as trees and other debris that float down the river could damage the walkway causing additional repair expense 6) Routine under-bridge inspections would be more difficult with the walkway 7) Inspection costs would increase by having to inspect the walkway as well as the bridge itself 8) Access between the Centennial Trail and Sullivan Park is still provided on the top of the bridge 9) The pathway is a `nice to have' but is not `needed' as mitigation for bridge project impacts to State Parks property or Sullivan Park 10) No time to further research other options without delaying the design of the bridge itself 11) Design of the shafts and girders need to begin very soon to be prepared for a late 2013 bid Direction has been given to CH2M HILL to proceed with the bridge design without the under- bridge walkway. OPTIONS: Information only. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, P.E. - Senior Capital Projects Engineer Eric Guth, P.E. — Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement Project— Pedestrian Walkway Technical Memorandum DRAFT TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM CH2MHILL Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement Pedestrian Walkway at New Sullivan Road West Bridge PREPARE�FoR: Craig Aldworth/City of Spokane Valley Steve Worley/City of Spokane Valley PREPARE�Bv: Mark Johnson/CH2M HILL Reviewe�sv: Don Wagner/CH2M HILL �ATE: September 7,2012 Project Background Sullivan Road is a principal north-south arterial in the City of Spokane Valley and an important freight corridor. The Sullivan Road crossing over the Spokane River consists of two bridges. The southbound (west) bridge is two lanes wide and was constructed in the early 1950's and the northbound (east) bridge is also two lanes wide and was built in the early 1970's. This project is replacing the southbound bridge that has experienced significant deterioration and is classified as structurally deficient and functionally obsolete. The adjacent northbound bridge is in relatively good condition and will remain in service. The new bridge will accommodate four lanes of southbound traffic across the river, as well as a combined pedestrian/bicycle pathway. A previous technical memorandum entitled Preliminary Bridge Design Technical Memorandum dated Apri124,2012 evaluated alternatives for replacement of the southbound bridge. The City has selected a preferred alternative consisting of a prestressed concrete girder bridge. During construction of the replacement bridge, southbound vehicle traffic will be moved to the northbound bridge. To accommodate three lanes of traffic on the northbound bridge,the pedestrian walkway will be removed and a temporary traffic barrier placed at the east edge of the bridge deck. A subsequent technical memorandum entitled Pedestrian Walkway Bridge Technical Memorandum dated July 11,2012 evaluated alternatives for providing pedestrian access across the river on the northbound bridge,including temporary hung and cantilevered walkways as well as permanent walkways. It was concluded that a temporary cantilevered walkway located at the bridge deck level along the east edge of the northbound bridge would be a cost-effective way to provide pedestrian access across the river during construction. In addition,the City wanted to further explore the idea of a permanent walkway across the river that would directly connect Centennial Trail users to Sullivan Park. Placing the walkway on the new southbound bridge instead of the existing northbound bridge has several advantages: • The walkway would not be constrained by the geometry of the existing bridge. It could be made wider and have more headroom if it is placed under the new bridge. 1 PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AT NEW SULLIVAN ROAD WEST BRIDGE • The walkway would have a more direct connection to Sullivan Park without having to traverse under both bridges to access the park. • Having a walkway under the bridge would allow the 10' wide path at the bridge deck level to be narrowed to 6',reducing the cost of the bridge and the amount of park right-of-way needed. • The walkway could be built as the bridge is constructed, simplifying construction. • The walkway could be better integrated into the aesthetics of the new bridge. The purpose of this memorandum is to evaluate pedestrian walkway bridge alternatives that would be constructed as part of the new southbound bridge. This memorandum identifies and evaluates several alternatives,which are compared qualitatively on a technical and cost basis.A comparative-level preliminary cost estimate and layout is provided. Pedestrian Walkway Bridge Alternatives Alternatives were evaluated with the walkway bridge located under the proposed replacement southbound bridge,connecting to the Centennial Trail at the south end and Sullivan Park on the north side, spanning approximately 320 feet across the river. Two locations for the walkway were considered: centered under the new bridge between the bridge columns and along the west edge of the bridge adjacent to the west bridge columns. A typical section is presented in Figure 1 of Appendix A, showing the temporary walkway at the northbound bridge and a permanent walkway at the replacement southbound bridge. Providing a walkway under the new bridge requires some accommodations to be made to the bridge.To provide 10-foot vertical clearance above the walkway and maintain the required 3-foot minimum freeboard above the 100-year flood elevation of the river,the bridge pier caps need to be raised and made integral with the prestressed girder superstructure. In addition,the depth of the drilled shaft foundations needs to be increased to account for the dead and live load weight of the walkway. A qualitative evaluation of several walkway bridge types was conducted.The following alternatives were selected for further study: • Alternative 1: Walkway hung from the prestressed girders of the new bridge. • Alternative 2: Walkway suspended from suspension cables. • Alternative 3: Truss bridge walkway spanning between piers. For each alternative,two locations were considered: centered under the new bridge (Alternatives 1A,2A, and 3A) and along the west edge of the bridge (Alternatives 1B,2B, and 3B). Alternative 1 —Hung Walkway This alternative consists of a precast concrete walkway hung from the prestressed concrete girders of the bridge with steel rods, as shown in Figures 2 and 4 of Appendix A. The hanger rods are connected directly to the underside of the prestressed girders using steel hardware embedded into the girders. For Alternative 1B,in which the walkway is located on the west side of the bridge,the walkway conflicts with the preferred bridge column location. Moving the columns to the east (farther under the bridge) was considered,but increasing the overhang of bridge pier cap beams significantly increases the required depth of the drilled 2 PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AT NEW SULLIVAN ROAD WEST BRIDGE shaft foundations. Instead,the walkway was widened at the pier columns so that pedestrians can walk around both sides of the column, as shown in Figure 4. The walkway is made up of discrete precast concrete deck panels approximately 12 feet long that can be connected to the hanger rods prior to construction of the bridge deck. The walkway deck panels are connected by welding tie plates together and casting a concrete closure pour along the panel edges. The spacing of the hanger rods is about 12 feet to match the deck panellength.The walkway is laterally braced about every 40 feet at prestressed girder diaphragm locations to control lateral deflections. The walkway railing can be designed in a variety of shapes to provide a particular aesthetic. The elevation view in Figure 3 shows an arched railing profile as an example. The prestressed concrete bridge girders of the new bridge that support the walkway were evaluated to determine the effect of the walkway on the design of the girders. It was found that,while more prestressing strands are required,the required depth of the girders is not affected. Alternative 2—Suspended Walkway The second option consists of a precast concrete walkway hung from two suspension cables that are draped from the bridge piers, as shown in Figures 2 and 5 of Appendix A. At the ends of the walkway,the suspension cables are attached to concrete anchorage blocks that are held in place with ground anchors. The precast deck panels are supported by vertical suspender cables hung from the main suspension cables. For Alternative 2B,in which the walkway is located on the west side of the bridge,the walkway needs to be aligned west of the bridge columns,requiring the bridge piers to be extended about 5 feet to provide support for the exterior suspension cable. The precast deck panel construction is similar to that of Alternative 1 and consists of discrete panels that are connected together to form a continuous walkway. In addition,the walkway is laterally braced at prestressed girder diaphragm locations to control lateral deflections and uplift due to wind. The suspension cables span between piers and do not impose loads on the prestressed bridge girders. They do,however,impart vertical and horizontalloading on the bridge piers. Due to the limited headroom under the bridge,the profile of the suspension cables is relatively flat, leading to large tension forces in the cables that must be resisted at the end anchorage blocks. Alternative 3—Truss Walkway The third option consists of a prefabricated steel truss walkway spanning between bridge piers and hung from the crossbeams, as shown in Figures 3 and 6 of Appendix A. At the ends of the walkway,the trusses are supported by concrete abutments on the river bank. For Alternative 3B,in which the walkway is located on the west side of the bridge,the walkway needs to be aligned west of the bridge columns,requiring the bridge piers to be extended about 8 feet to provide support for the walkway hangers. The walkway consists of two steel trusses supporting a concrete deck that is placed after erection of the walkway. The entire assembly between support locations can be prefabricated and shipped to the project site. Installing the walkway can be done prior to erecting the prestressed bridge girders, simplifying construction.The steel trusses can be fabricated in a variety of patterns and profiles,resulting in a wide range of aesthetic appearances. 3 PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AT NEW SULLIVAN ROAD WEST BRIDGE Other Walkway Alternatives Other alternatives were considered,but were not deemed to be feasible or cost-effective. • Prestressed concrete girder walkway supported by the bridge piers. Like the truss alternative,the walkway would span between Piers 2,3, and 4 of the bridge with shorter end spans to the river embankment. The walkway would be 4 to 5 feet deep, requiring the bridge crossbeam to be raised further to provide adequate vertical clearance of the walkway. In addition,the walkway would be much heavier than the other alternatives,leading to deeper shaft foundations and higher costs. • Steel girder walkway supported by the bridge piers. The walkway deck would be positioned near the bottom of the steel girders to minimize the depth of the structure below the walkway. This option is similar in concept to the steel truss alternative, substituting the girders for trusses. It is expected to be less cost-effective than the truss walkway, due to the higher cost of the steel girders, and lacks aesthetic appeal. • Independent walkway that replaces the 6-foot wide path on the bridge. The walkway would be supported by the bridge piers but physically separated from the vehicle deck. The main disadvantage of this approach is the loss of pedestrian access across the river at the level of the roadway. Comparison of Alternatives The alternatives were evaluated and compared using several criteria,which are discussed below. Construction Cost Comparative-level construction costs were estimated for the walkway alternatives and are summarized in Table 1 below. Note that these costs are not complete project costs and do not include mobilization, sales tax,escalation,engineering, or construction engineering and were developed only to provide a relative comparison between alternatives.A detailed summary of comparative costs is included in Appendix B. Table 1 includes both the cost of the walkway itself and the additional cost of the new bridge to support the walkway.The additional bridge cost includes the following items: • Reduced cost of the bridge deck slab,which is 4' narrower (6' wide with walkway). • Higher cost of the drilled shafts due to deeper required embedment at Piers 2,3, and 4 to support the walkway. • Higher cost of the integral pier crossbeams needed to provide sufficient vertical clearance for the walkway. • Increased cost of the prestressed bridge girders to support the walkway(for Alternative 1 only). Most of the additional cost of the bridge is a result of the deeper shafts required to support the walkway. Because only a preliminary design of the shafts has been completed,it may be possible to refine the additional shaft costs during final design. 4 PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AT NEW SULLIVAN ROAD WEST BRIDGE TABLE 1 Summary of Comparative-Level Construction Costs for Walkway Alternatives Relative Cost Walkway Additional Total Cost Alternative Description Cost Bridge Cost (to Alternative 1 A) 1A Hung Walkway, centered $480,000 $250,000 $730,000 100% under bridge �B Hung Walkway,west edge $520,000 $250,000 $770,000 105% of bridge 2A Suspended Walkway, $640,000 $250,000 $890,000 122% centered under bridge 2B Suspended Walkway,west $640,000 $290,000 $930,000 127% edge of bridge 3A Truss Walkway, centered $750,000 $250,000 $1,000,000 137% under bridge 3B Truss Walkway,west edge $750,000 $320,000 $1,070,000 147% of bridge Note:Additional design cost for the walkway is estimated to be$40,000 to$50,000. As shown in Table 1,the hung walkway alternative is the most cost-effective approach and is comparable to the cost of the hung walkway alternative for the northbound bridge evaluated in an earlier study. The suspended walkway is more costly than the hung walkway, due to the more complicated construction of a suspension bridge and the need for anchorage blocks at the two walkway abutments. (Note that the cost of the suspended walkway alternative is shown to be greater than that of the suspended walkway at the northbound bridge, due to the higher cost of the suspender cable hardware that was not accounted for in the earlier study.) The prefabricated truss alternative is the most costly due to the higher cost of structural steel than precast concrete. For all the alternatives,the cost of the walkway at the center of the bridge is approximately the same as that at the west edge of the bridge. The additional cost of the bridge to support the walkway accounts for about 25 to 33% of the total cost of the walkway. Most of the additional bridge cost is a result of the deeper drilled shafts required to support the walkway. Using a lighter walkway would reduce the depth of the shafts and save in foundation costs. One option would be to use an orthotropic steel deck consisting of a steel deck plate supported by steel edge beams. The edge beams would be supported by hanger rods at 12 to 15 feet spacing and the deck plate covered with a nonskid coating or polymer concrete to provide a walking surface. This deck system would be approximately half the weight of a precast concrete walkway,which could reduce the added foundation costs by up to about 25%. This walkway would require additional sway bracing due to its light weight and would also result in higher maintenance costs for periodic recoating over the life of the structure. Other Evaluation Criteria Other criteria were considered in comparing the walkway alternatives,including constructability, aesthetics,maintenance, and impacts to the existing bridge. The evaluation is summarized in Table 2 below. 5 PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AT NEW SULLIVAN ROAD WEST BRIDGE TABLE 2 Comparison of Walkway Alternatives Alternative Description Advantages Disadvantages Walkway Type 1 Hung . Lowest cost alternative • Hanger rods make access to Walkway underside of bridge for inspection and maintenance more difficult 2 Suspended . Enhanced aesthetics of . Less redundant structure type, Walkway suspension bridge making inspection and • Can construct prior to maintenance more critical erecting bridge girders, . More difficult to construct than simplifying construction other alternatives 3 Truss . Unique aesthetics and wide • Increased maintenance required Walkway range of truss shapes and for painted steel structure profiles • Can construct prior to erecting bridge girders, simplifying construction Walkway Location A Centered . More symmetrical with • Less available light, requiring Under Bridge bridge and columns additional lighting and security measures B West Edge of . More direct connection to • Difficult to access underside of Bridge Sullivan Park bridge on west side for inspection and maintenance • Better view of downstream side of river • Interference with west bridge columns, requiring the pier • Opportunity to integrate crossbeams to be extended or the walkway railing with bridge Walkway to be widened at the railing at deck level above columns Summary All of the walkway alternatives are feasible,with the hung walkway being the most cost- effective approach. The cost of a walkway for the new southbound bridge is comparable to that of a walkway at the existing northbound bridge,which was evaluated in an earlier study. However,the additional cost of the bridge to support the walkway is significant, accounting for about 25 to 33% of the total walkway cost. (In the earlier study,it was assumed that the spread footing foundations of the existing bridge are adequate to support a new walkway without having to retrofit the footings.) A walkway located under the new southbound bridge would provide a direct connection between the Centennial Trail and Sullivan Park and allow the pedestrian path on the bridge to be narrowed by several feet,reducing the amount of right-of-way needed at Sullivan Park. However,providing a separate walkway is relatively costly, accounting for about 10 to 15% of the cost of the new bridge. Given the uncertain funding to construct the bridge,the City 6 PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AT NEW SULLIVAN ROAD WEST BRIDGE could consider different approaches to provide for a walkway but retain the flexibility to defer construction it if there is insufficient funding: • Design the new bridge and walkway,but include the walkway as a bid alternate during advertisement for construction. • Design the new bridge to accommodate a walkway that could be added at a future date. In either scenario,the width of the pedestrian path at the bridge deck level would need to be addressed. These approaches would provide the City flexibility,but would result in an increase in the bridge construction cost to accommodate the walkway. 7 PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AT NEW SULLIVAN ROAD BRIDGE APPENDIXA BRIDGE DRAWINGS DRAWINGS 1 TYPICAL SECTION OF BRIDGES AND WALKWAY 2 WALKWAY ALTERNATIVES 1 &2-ELEVATION 3 WALKWAY ALTERNATIVE 3-ELEVATION 4 WALKWAY ALTERNATIVES 1A& 1 B-TYPICAL SECTIONS 5 WALKWAY ALTERNATIVES 2A&2B-TYPICAL SECTIONS 6 WALKWAY ALTERNATIVES 3A&3B-TYPICAL SECTIONS PAiH LANE LANE LANE LANE cLR NB LANE NB LANE SIDEYVALK iR�FFlC eARRIER N�v coNCaErE rEMaoa�rzv $i TRAFFlCBAFRIER T��'��A� 2% � ________'____________________________�____�! _ _11 i �- I i _ __ _ � ______�-�______ I.. _ ' �l _ _ �'f':\_._____'�-�j�'� __-r��-r-� I�__��.i i''"__"" �4'�li�i .. I �::. � � II I'� '� � � i ��, i —_ , l '-�� ,'''i ___ ___ ,__' �_'________'________'___'____'---'________'� �ELEV 19J8.6��(PIER 2J ELEV 19J3.J��(FIER 4) vloiH �� ;%� i.n�v.�iavpealoaEl 4 rc \ 3 ALi 2� _e„�AL7.3� ELEV 1963.] (MIN F 4) 3SE�E�eOn) i i .]'�ALT.2) i i 3.P(ALT.3) � 100VVR9WAiER i i — N'�VloiHONealooE �i �i � � � � N �.� ____ _ __ ___ ___ __________________-_________________ _______ __________-___________ ////\\Y//� i______-_ ___________________-_ Z �� -----------— � -----�,✓�� ° � -� r �. � � _ o _ J , -- _ , � 0 , � � � z , 2 ,:. -------------------------------------------' Y � - ¢ TYPICAL SECTION z (�ooKiNC NoRrN) � ? J " _� Cliy fSpok /N y ^"_ �".°"""�' BRI�GE l.L� �� CN2MHILLa ,.� .. oe�arc ra ei��k � PEDESTRIaNVVALKWAYBRI�GESTUDY � � �n�v sp.ee�e n�e�ue,suna sao - ,vo�ees�s qq a��ue,sune,os '.,O�CTile a � spo��e ev�sezai saorar�EVai Ervia.sssas �� rvcica.sECrror�arsRiocESauoivau;wav � OF 6 609-]d]-2000 (SDBJB21�000 y CALL BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555-48 HOUR NOTICE REQUIRED �PIER s F vlEa a F vlEa 3 �alEa 2 �alEa i I I I I i �— � �—� \ ° 1ooYR PIATER \ / ____________________EL_'1900_______________________________________________________—_____________________________________________________________________________ ALTERNATIVE 1 — HUNG WALKWAY ELEVA710N (LOOKING EA51, WALKWAY A1 CENTER SNOWN,WALKWAY AT WEST SIDE SIMILAft) �e PIER 5 �e PIER 4 �e PIER a �e PIER 2 �e PIER 1 I I I i saaNa NsloN ING �—— O � U ——� � ° � � rvNpHORAaE, \� ` ,00.R„A,ER N . � _ ��— / E;i wccR„-—— ————— / ouHO � aNCHOa.rra. LL (a T F EacH eRiocE Enoi � Z � ^,� e�=�eoo _______ } _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ � — ALTERNATIVE 2 — SUSPENDED WALKWAY z ELEVA710N (LOOKING EASI, WALKWAY A1 CENTER SNOWN,WALKWAY AT WES"I SIDE SIMILAft) � ? J " -� Cliy fSpok /N y ^"_ �".°"""�' BRI�GE l.L� �� CN2MHILLa ,.� .. oe�arc ra ei��k � PEDESTRIaNVVALKWAYBRI�GESTUDY � � �n�v sp.ee�e n�e�ue,suna sao - ,vo�ees�s qq a��ue,sune,os "'.O�CTile a � spo��ewneezai saoranevniervia.eszas �� wau;wavaireamnrriei&ae�EVarion� 2 OF 6 609-]d]-2000 (SDBJB21�000 y CALL BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555-48 HOUR NOTICE REQUIRED �PIER s F vlEa a F vlEa 3 �alEa 2 �alEa i I I I I i 326-0" BRIC.aTEo iRUSSwAUCWAV � � \ ° 1ooYR NATER \ / ____________________EL_'1900_______________________________________________________—_____________________________________________________________________________ ALTERNATIVE 3 — PREFABRICATED 7RUSS WALKWAY ELEVA710N (LOOKING EA51, WALKWAY A1 CENTER SNOWN,WALKWAY AT WEST SIDE SIMILAft) f RER 5 F PIER 4 F PIER a �e PIER 2 f PIER 1 I I I I i sP.aN a P WPLKWAV aaI�ING � �� F _— \ — 100VF NATEF U � \ r _ _\__-- / EXI WGGRAD —— ———— ~ / _/ Z _ � a' � _ F � _. Z .:i_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _______ � � } ARCHED RAILING ALTERNATIVE � ELEVA710N � z (�ooiaNC eas1. NuNC wau<wav n1 ceN1eR sNOwN,oiNees siMiv+e) � ? J " _� Cliy fSpok /N y ^"_ �".°"""�' BRI�GE l.L� �� CN2MHILLa ,.� .. oe�arc ra ei��k � PEDESTRIaNVVALKWAYBRI�GESTUDY � � �n�v sp.ee�e n�e�ue,suna sao - ,vo�ees�s qq a��ue,sune,os '.,O�CTile a � spo��e wn eezai saoranevni er via.eszas �� wau;wavaireamnrrie3-e�evariom 3 OF 6 609-]d]-2000 (SDBJB21�000 y CALL BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555-48 HOUR NOTICE REQUIRED N � srE np rR�� j i rP I I awo�E � ��.�v i i i i. � �o��.PA�E av� � i � ��, � i Ra��N� i � i � i �� ALTERNA7IVE 1A — HUNG WALKWAY A7 CENTER I � TYPICAL SEC710N � �� I � � I � I \� I i� � \ I \ � \ ! I ,'i�� .��—I. I � / I i � / � __, ��y � , � � � �� z �o��„�NP. i � o i � I � U / � s,E � � _ RrawE ,vP. ��5� I j ,.. Z � �.��K,.A ocE I � rvP. O �� o��MN � � � U I � R wNC � I � - rvP. � � I ,vP oo, LL F � O 7 Z } ALTERNA7IVE 1 B — HUNG WALKWAY AT WES7 SIDE PLAN A � ¢ TYPICAL SEC710N — � � J �' �� ,.�"�ea..a� �. � �- Cliy fSpok /N y T' '6 BRI�GE l.L� m CN2MHILLa oe�T rp�i �p � PEDESTRIaNVVALKWAYBRI�GESTUDY � �n�vsp.ee�en�e�ue,sunasao - ,vo�ees�s qq ae�ue,sute,os '.,O�CTile a � spo��ewneezai saoranevniervia.eszas �� wau;wavaireamnmiesia&ie� 4 OF 6 — 609-]d]-2000 (SDBJB21�000 y TYPICA:SECilONS CALL BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555-48 HOUR NOTICE REQUIRED vlEa aNCHOaaoE, GnaLE,ttP. �� .nLK�/AVB ttP. � `LIG � ALTERNATIVE 2A - SUSPENDED WALKWAY AT CENTER TYPICAL SECTION i z i o � � U 7 � �aie cxoance, � �i Z susPENSioN ryp „siK ocE O i s�PPOR, �� o�.�o�� „o o �� o�A�oNa� � � ALTERNA7IVE 3A — PREFABRICATED TRUSS WALKWAY AT CEN7ER TYPICAL SEC710N i � Z � O F i � � � s�PPOR, oP�HO Z I �°—� O � VECHOao �09 oi�coNU O _ F'o ... _.. . _. ,. O Z � } � Q - ALTERNA7IVE 3B — PREFABRICATED TRUSS WALKWAY AT WEST SIDE ? TYPICAL SECTION � ? J ..�"�D�,.,�M . � �- CIIy fSpok /Ny " '6- BRI�GE l.L� -m CN2MHILLa ,.� oe�arc ra ei��rks � PEDESTRIaNVVALKWAYBRI�GESTUDY � �n�vsp.ee�en�e�ue,sunasao - ,vo�ees�s qq a� ue,sw�e,os '•,O�CTile a � spo��e wn eezoi saoranevni ervia.eszos �� wau;wavaireamnrriesaa&ae� 6 OF 6 609-]d]-2000 (SDBJB21�000 y TYPICA:SECilONS CALL BEFORE YOU DIG 1-800-424-5555-48 HOUR NOTICE REQUIRED PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AT NEW SULLIVAN ROAD BRIDGE APPENDIX B COMPARATIVE COST ESTIMATES OF ALTERNATIVES City of Spokane Valley Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement Comparative Cost Comparison-Walkway Bridge Alternatives at New Sullivan Road West Bridge Date:September 4,2012 SUMMARY Add'I Bridge Alt No. Description Walkway Cost Cost Total Cost %of Alt 1A 1A Hung Walkway,centered under bridge $480,000 $250,000 $730,000 100% 1B Hung Walkway,west edge of bridge $520,000 $250,000 $770,000 105% 2A Suspended Walkway,centered under bridge $640,000 $250,000 $890,000 122% 2B Suspended Walkway,west edge of bridge $640,000 $290,000 $930,000 127% 3A Truss Walkway,centered under bridge $750,000 $250,000 $1,000,000 137% 3B Truss Walkway,west edge of bridge $750,000 $320,000 $1,070,000 147% Walkway Cost Construction Alt No. Description Direct Cost 1 Cost Z 1A Hung Walkway,centered under bridge $338,040 $480,000 1B Hung Walkway,west edge of bridge $368,624 $520,000 2A Suspended Walkway,centered under bridge $452,273 $640,000 2B Suspended Walkway,west edge of bridge $452,168 $640,000 3A Truss Walkway,centered under bridge $533,251 $750,000 3B Truss Walkway,west edge of bridge $533,251 $750,000 Notes: 1.Direct Cost with no general contractor mark-up or design contingency. 2.Comparative cost estimate with 15%mark-up and 25%design contingency. Additional Bridge Cost Item No. Description Quantity Unit Unit Cost Cost ALTERNATIVES 1A&1B 1 Bridge Deck(4'narrower)-Conc Class 4000D -41 CY $800 -$32,800 2 Bridge Deck(4'narrower)-Epoxy-Ctd Rebar -10,200 LB $1.50 -$15,300 3 Shafts(shallower due to 4'narrower SW) -15 FT $5,000 -$75,000 4 Interior Pier(integral)-Conc Class 4000 135 CY $650 $87,750 5 Interior Pier(integral)-Rebar 26,900 LB $1.20 $32,280 6 Shafts(deeper)-Excav,Conc,and Rebar 49 FT $5,000 $245,000 7 PS Conc Girders(add'I strands) 8,210 FT $0.90 $7,389 TOTAL $250,000 ALTERNATIVE 2A 1 Bridge Deck(4'narrower)-Conc Class 4000D -41 CY $800 -$32,800 2 Bridge Deck(4'narrower)-Epoxy-Ctd Rebar -10,200 LB $1.50 -$15,300 3 Shafts(shallower due to 4'narrower SW) -15 FT $5,000 -$75,000 4 Interior Pier(integral)-Conc Class 4000 135 CY $650 $87,750 5 Interior Pier(integral)-Rebar 26,900 LB $1.20 $32,280 6 Shafts(deeper)-Excav,Conc,and Rebar 49 FT $5,000 $245,000 TOTAL $250,000 ALTERNATIVE 2B 1 Bridge Deck(4'narrower)-Conc Class 4000D -41 CY $800 -$32,800 2 Bridge Deck(4'narrower)-Epoxy-Ctd Rebar -10,200 LB $1.50 -$15,300 3 Shafts(shallower due to 4'narrower SW) -15 FT $5,000 -$75,000 4 Interior Pier(integral)-Conc Class 4000 187 CY $650 $121,550 1of2 City of Spokane Valley Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement Comparative Cost Comparison-Walkway Bridge Alternatives at New Sullivan Road West Bridge Date:September 4,2012 5 Interior Pier(integral)-Rebar 37,400 LB $1.20 $44,880 6 Shafts(deeper)-Excav,Conc,and Rebar 49 FT $5,000 $245,000 TOTAL $290,000 ALTERNATIVE 3A 1 Bridge Deck(4'narrower)-Conc Class 4000D -41 CY $800 -$32,800 2 Bridge Deck(4'narrower)-Epoxy-Ctd Rebar -10,200 LB $1.50 -$15,300 3 Shafts(shallower due to 4'narrower SW) -15 FT $5,000 -$75,000 4 Interior Pier(integral)-Conc Class 4000 135 CY $650 $87,750 5 Interior Pier(integral)-Rebar 26,900 LB $1.20 $32,280 6 Shafts(deeper)-Excav,Conc,and Rebar 49 FT $5,000 $245,000 TOTAL $250,000 ALTERNATIVE 3B 1 Bridge Deck(4'narrower)-Conc Class 4000D -41 CY $800 -$32,800 2 Bridge Deck(4'narrower)-Epoxy-Ctd Rebar -10,200 LB $1.50 -$15,300 3 Shafts(shallower due to 4'narrower SW) -15 FT $5,000 -$75,000 4 Interior Pier(integral)-Conc Class 4000 218 CY $650 $141,700 5 Interior Pier(integral)-Rebar 43,600 LB $1.20 $52,320 6 Shafts(deeper)-Excav,Conc,and Rebar 49 FT $5,000 $245,000 TOTAL $320,000 Notes: 1. This estimate is in August 2012 dollars and does not include mobilization,sales tax,escalation, or owner costs such as engineering,administrative,construction management,or permitting. 2of2 Sullivan Road Walkway Study Ott Construction Consultants Estimated Cost of Alternates 1-3 cmc 9/2/12 Rev Alt 2A&2B Biditem Activity Description Quantity Units Labor Materials Subcontractors Equipment DirectTotal Unit/Price Alternate 1A A Buy Permanent Materials 1 LS - 260,262 - - 260,262 $ 80.08 /SF B Precast Supplier Install Hanger Embeds 50 EA - 8,153 - - 8,153 C Bolt Hanger Brackets on PC Girders 50 LOC 3,764 1,834 - 668 6,267 D Install Hanger Rods 50 EA 3,777 109 - 1,980 5,866 E Install Precast Deck Panels 25 EA 7,555 3,478 - 4,250 15,283 F Form/Strip Closures 24 CLOS 5,817 495 - 2,528 8,840 G PourConcrete Closures 25 PNL 2,120 1,744 - 813 4,677 H Cure Concrete CLosures 1 LS 1,020 109 - - 1,129 H1 Dry Finish Closures 48 LOC 5,923 - - 1,796 7,719 I Install Hand Rail 651 LF 7,846 - - - 7,846 1 Build abutments/Wing walls 1 LS - - 12,000 - 12,000 300 la Hung Walkway -Center 3250 SF 37,822 276,183 12,000 12,036 338,040 $304.01 /SF Activity Cost Summary 9-2-12.x1s 9/2/2012 Cost Summary 1 of 4 1:10 PM Sullivan Road Walkway Study Ott Construction Consultants Estimated Cost of Alternates 1-3 cmc 9/2/12 Rev Alt 2A&2B Biditem Activity Description Quantity Units Labor Materials Subcontractors Equipment DirectTotal Unit/Price Alternate 1B A Buy Permanent Materials 1 LS - 283,420 - - 283,420 $ 87.21 /SF B Precast Supplier Install Hanger Embeds 50 EA - 8,153 - - 8,153 B1 Install Hanger Embed in Caps 6 EA 711 - - - 711 C Hang Brackets on PC Girders 56 LOC 4,216 2,054 - 748 7,019 D Install Hanger Rods 56 EA 4,231 122 - 2,217 6,570 E Install Precast Deck Panels 25 EA 7,555 3,478 - 4,250 15,283 F Form/Strip Closures 24 CLOS 5,817 495 - 2,528 8,840 F1 Extra work Setting Precast @ Columns 3 LOC 3,626 - - 1,452 5,078 G PourConcrete Closures 25 PNL 2,120 1,744 - 813 4,677 H Cure Concrete CLosures 1 LS 1,020 109 - - 1,129 H1 Dry Finish Closures 48 LOC 5,923 - - 1,796 7,719 I Install Hand Rail 666 LF 8,026 - - - 8,026 1 Build abutments/Wing walls 1 LS - - 12,000 - 12,000 120 lb Hung Walkway -Side(no spreader beam) 3250 SF 43,244 299,575 12,000 13,805 368,624 $113.42 /SF Activity Cost Summary 9-2-12.x1s 9/2/2012 Cost Summary 2 of 4 1:10 PM Sullivan Road Walkway Study Ott Construction Consultants Estimated Cost of Alternates 1-3 cmc 9/2/12 Rev Alt 2A&2B Biditem Activity Description Quantity Units Labor Materials Subcontractors Equipment DirectTotal Unit/Price Alternate 2A A Buy Permanent Materials 1 LS - 333,219 - - 333,219 $102.53 /SF B1 Inst Blockouts-Cap Pour for Anchor Rods 24 EA 1,699 781 - - 3,624 B2 Install Cable Anchorages Piers 2-3-4 6 EA 4,328 1,348 - 3,801 12,402 B3 Install cable Anchorages @ Abutments 4 EA 2,372 139 - 1,532 5,813 B4 Grout Pt bars 24 EA 1,779 952 - 1,149 5,208 C Hang 2"Supension Cables 8 EA 2,372 139 - 2,131 6,412 C1 Adjust Cable Tension 8 EA 2,372 278 - 2,730 7,150 D Hang Suspender Cables 72 EA 1,779 104 - 1,598 4,809 D1 Adjust Suspender Adjust Cables 1 LS 2,372 209 - 1,532 5,882 E Install Precast Deck Panels 37 EA 3,336 3,462 - 3,357 12,409 I Install Hand Rail 651 LF 4,723 - - - 7,846 J Build abutments/Wing walls 1 LS - - 16,500 - 16,500 J1 Install Ground Anchors 8 EA - - 31,000 - 31,000 200 2a Suspended Walkway-Center 3250 SF 27,132 340,631 47,500 17,832 452,273 $139.16 /SF Alternate 2B A Buy Permanent Materials 1 LS - 333,219 - - 333,219 $102.53 /SF B1 Inst Blockouts-Cap Pour for Anchor Rods 24 EA 2,844 676 - - 3,520 B2 Install Cable Anchorages Piers 2-3-4 6 EA 7,252 1,348 - 3,801 12,402 B3 Install cable Anchorages @ Abutments 4 EA 4,141 139 - 1,532 5,813 B4 Grout Pt bars 24 EA 3,106 952 - 1,149 5,208 C Hang 2"Supension Cables 8 EA 4,141 139 - 2,131 6,412 C1 AdjustCableTension 8 EA 4,141 278 - 2,730 7,150 D Hang Suspender Cables 72 EA 3,106 104 - 1,598 4,809 D1 Adjust Suspender Adjust Cables 1 LS 4,141 209 - 1,532 5,882 E Install Precast Deck Panels 37 EA 5,590 3,462 - 3,357 12,409 I Install Hand Rail 651 LF 7,846 - - - 7,846 J Build abutments/Wing walls 1 LS - - 16,500 - 16,500 J1 Install Ground Anchors 8 EA - - 31,000 - 31,000 230 2b SuspendedWalkway-Side 3250SF 46,309 340,527 16,500 17,832 452,168 $139.13 /SF Activity Cost Summary 9-2-12.x1s 9/2/2012 Cost Summary 3 of 4 1:10 PM Sullivan Road Walkway Study Ott Construction Consultants Estimated Cost of Alternates 1-3 cmc 9/2/12 Rev Alt 2A&2B Biditem Activity Description Quantity Units Labor Materials Subcontractors Equipment DirectTotal Unit/Price Alternate 3A A Buy Permanent Materials 1 LS - 468,478 6,750 - 475,228 $146.22 /SF B1 Install Hanger Embeds in-Cap Pours 12 EA 1,422 390 - - 1,812 C HangTubularSupensionBrackets 3EA 3,106 1,735 - 1,598 6,439 D Unload Bridge Sections 6 LDS 1,940 1,152 - 727 3,819 D1 Boltup 114'Spans 2 EA 2,587 87 - 969 3,643 D2 Load&TransportTrussto Workbridge 4 EA 1,293 2,217 - 485 3,996 E SetTrusses 4 EA 2,097 70 - 10,768 12,935 F Form Closures/Prepare for Deck Pour 1 LS 2,417 87 - 968 3,472 G Pour Concrete Deck 45 CY 2,124 166 994 176 3,460 H Cure Concrete Ceck 3250 SF 1,020 927 - - 1,947 J Build abutments/Wing walls 1 LS - - 16,500 - 16,500 300 3a Prefabricated Truss Walkway-Center 3250 SF 18,007 475,309 7,744 15,692 533,251 $164.08 /SF Alternate 3B A Buy Permanent Materials 1 LS - 468,478 6,750 - 475,228 $146.22 /SF B1 Install Hanger Embeds in-Cap Pours 12 EA 1,422 390 - - 1,812 C HangTubularSupensionBrackets 3EA 3,106 1,735 - 1,598 6,439 D Unload Bridge Sections 6 LDS 1,940 1,152 - 727 3,819 D1 Boltup 114'Spans 2 EA 2,587 87 - 969 3,643 D2 Load&TransportTrussto Workbridge 4 EA 1,293 2,217 - 485 3,996 E SetTrusses 4 EA 2,097 70 - 10,768 12,935 F Form Closures/Prepare for Deck Pour 1 LS 2,417 87 - 968 3,472 G Pour Concrete Deck 45 CY 2,124 166 994 176 3,460 H Cure Concrete Ceck 3250 SF 1,020 927 - - 1,947 J Build abutments/Wing walls 1 LS - - 16,500 - 16,500 330 3b Prefabricated Truss Walkway-Side 3250 SF 18,007 475,309 7,744 15,692 533,251 $164.08 /SF Activity Cost Summary 9-2-12.x1s 9/2/2012 Cost Summary 4 of 4 1:10 PM