The URL can be used to link to this page

2012, 12-04 Study Session AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION FORMAT Tuesday,December 4,2012 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 ITEMS: 1. Gabe Gallinger Proposed Resolution 12-009 Extinguishing Approve Resolution Easement, East Indiana [public comment] 2. Gabe Gallinger Proposed Resolution 12-010 Extinguishing Approve Resolution Easement, Mission Avenue [public comment] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NON-ACTION ITEMS 3. Lori Barlow Restoration Plan Report, Shoreline Discussion/Information Master Plan 4. Mark Calhoun 2013 Fee Schedule Discussion/Information 5. Eric Guth Street Maintenance Contract Renewal Discussion/Information 6. Eric Guth Street Sweeping Contract Renewal Discussion/Information 7. Inga Note Argonne Road Safety Project, Discussion/Information Memorandum of Understanding 8. John Whitehead Position Classi�cations Discussion/Information 9.Morgan Koudelka Animal Control Discussion/Information 10. Deputy Mayor Schimmels Advance Agenda Discussion/Information 11. Information Only: (will not be discussed or reported): a. Department Monthly Reports b. Decant Feasibility Study c. Planning Commission Minutes, October 11 and October 25,2012 12. Deputy Mayor Schimmels Council Check-in Discussion/Information 13. Mike Jackson City Manager Comments Discussion/Information ADJOURN Note: Unless otherwise noted above,there will be no public comments at Council Study Sessions. However,Council always reserves the right to request information from the public and staff as appropriate. During meetings held by the City of Spokane Valley Council,the Council reserves the right to take"action"on any item listed or subsequently added to the agenda. The term"action"means to deliberate,discuss,review,consider,evaluate, or make a collective positive or negative decision. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical,hearing,or other impairments,please contact the City Clerk at(509)921-1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. Study Session Agenda,Dec 4,2012 Page 1 of 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 4, 2012 Department Director Approval ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business � new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed Resolution 12-009, Extinguishment of Drainage Easement — Beach House Apartments, Indiana Avenue, Parcel number 45131.0112 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: In 2011, a drainage easement was granted to Spokane Valley as part of the Indiana Avenue Extension Project, #0112 (See Attachment 1). The road project was completed and a portion of the storm water runoff was discharged into a bio-infiltration swale, located within the easement area, for treatment and disposal. In 2012, a local developer purchased the property and proposed an apartment complex (Beach House Apartments) on the parcel. The developer requested to relocate the existing swale at his expense to better facilitate the proposed project. Detailed plans were submitted, reviewed, and approved by Development Engineering and Public Works to confirm that the proposed swale provides adequate capacity for treatment and disposal of the contributing runoff generated by the Indiana Avenue Extension Project. The current property owner has requested that the City extinguish the existing easement and accept the dedication of a new drainage easement for the relocated bio-infiltration swale. Council heard an administrative report at the November 13 council meeting, at which time there were no objections that staff bring forth a Resolution Extinguishing Stormwater Easement at 16621 East Indiana Avenue. OPTIONS: Approve resolution, with or without modifications; or take other appropriate action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Resolution 12-009, Extinguishing the Stormwater Easement at 16621 East Indiana Avenue. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: NA STAFF CONTACT: Gabe Gallinger, Development Engineering Senior Engineer ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Resolution Extinguishing Stormwater Easement at 16621 East Indiana Avenue. 2. Map of area that includes easement. 3. Copy of recorded drainage easement #5975650 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 12-009 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON, EXTINGUISHING DRAINAGE EASEMENT AT 16621 EAST INDIANA AVENUE, SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, Washington was granted a stormwater drainage easement as part of the Indiana Avenue Extension Project #0122, which burdens property owned by ENJOY! THE RIVER, LLC ETAL; and WHEREAS, the easement in question is located on Spokane County Assessor's parcel number 45131.0112, at 16621 East Indiana Avenue. The easement was recorded on February 1, 2011, Spokane County Auditor's recording number 5975650; and WHEREAS, the easement was granted to accommodate stormwater treatment and disposal facilities for a portion of the Indiana Avenue Extension Project#0122, but the development plan for the property requires that the swale be relocated; and WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley approved a grading and drainage plan for the Beach House Apartments and it was determined that the relocated stormwater swale provided the required treatment and disposal capacity to replace the e�sting facility; and WHEREAS, City staff has analyzed the request in terms of future need for stormwater treatment and disposal facilities and determined that the easement is not necessary at its current location, for public health, safety or welfare. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, as follows: Section 1. Relinquishment of Easement Burdenin� Snokane Countv Assessor's narcel number 45131.0112. The City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, as the successor in interest, hereby relinquishes the easement granted for stormwater treatment and disposal purposes, Spokane County Auditor's recording number 5975650. Section 2. Authorization for Citv Mana�er to Execute Easement Extin�uishment Document. The City Council of the City of Spokane Valley authorizes the City Manager to execute the Easement Relinquishment, attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution, and all other documents necessary thereto. Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect upon adoption. Adopted this day of December, 2012. ATTEST: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Resolution 12--009 Relinquishment of Easement—Beach House Apartments,Indiana Avenue Page 1 of 2 r i � EXHIBIT #1 ' I DRAINAGE EASEMENT �1 ALONG INDIANA AVE RIGHT OF WAY PORTION OF THE NORTH HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, TOWNSHIP 25 NORTH, RANGE 44 EAST, W.M., CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON . ` ��I��7._a__ ,--� ��-- — ' r� � i ,_ ��.i ___ M _ FLORA ROAQ,�,__ ~ � CURVE 7A8LE rr— POIN�j OF �� WRVE RADIUS LENGTH 7ANGENT CH�RD DELTA i COI,�I�ENCEAIENT i I � C1 467.50' 175.75' 88.93' 174.72' 2132'24 � i � �� 1 1 � � I . utie rae�e � ; � F_________t �. UNE IENGTH BEARING 1 � I � � � U 101.83 S72`I5'S6'E j � � I � L2 21.52 N47'33'07'E I � i � � � L3 34.30 St7'44'04'W i � � L4 83.61 N89'52'22hY I 1 I I '` L5 77.90 N00'00'00'E j i j � i_ ;� ; L& 140.35 N27'23'28"E j I �---------- �� • i � � I'�,� `�. I ,� � i ' i^ �` ;\ ;___ I ' j � Zi�, ti I � � _ � i � I �°� �� { •----�---------{ � ��, � , ��. � �. I I � � �� \ � � i crei F � � � ` • i . 1"=200' I i \ � I.=�• �� i I �a I ; TAX n� � --- Z, \ PARCEL � �"'-'- i _ �ORTH IJNE ; � 45131.0112 �� ; � OF LOT 36 1I r�\ � BACON ..� ` i ADDITION TO I ( ! �� DRAINAG� EASElAENT .�1 i � � `. i GREENACRES � � � `� \REA 22��841 S.F. � I � � I � ��ti �� i � `\e� I - .� , � �;�. 1 ! I `t,� ` i POINT OF . � _ BEGINNING !� ' �� S00'02'16'P/ � 453.86' _•�•_. � i ��`. � � ; `gt s.� e�t,qssae�w��a �4��o4a 'I �e�ao c wiawouu acwr. � �ulTe 100 •IOItAN[VAL�EY wA�HINUTOH 9G21• �SOf�3��0�0 - f 301 46�{Oa� i OW9YOO.00M sYt 'i ARCHIT[CTURf � �,�}(� I - CNOINC[IIIH�PUMNINO yµ� . NNOLOAP[ARONIttCfUR[ L.�ND�VRVCYINO &�2W9\09-0361 WSV IImIANA EXTEt�SO1�dPo�1�IT FOR GRF7NAGE ESMT/t.dvp 3LB/2010 1TIW5 PM PST 1 �! i il i � STOR�I ORAIN PER �3� THE BEACH HOUSE AT FASB�RDFR TRAILHEAD GRADING PLANS. FMENr _ �/ ��'� � _ - +.r I � T�i�B��x HfliT�� _ .� 1� `�,�,`__ _ ��A,�IL�AD#1PTS-_ d',� _ � .f'1 jr'3S;S � _ _ _ _ = New Storm Drainage _ - �. `"j#'R� I _ - Easement - rr��,�� I; .J� - �? - _�.�-� � � _ _ _ _ �= _ � l 1r`,�� - _ _ = -: _ - = �s - - - _ � � �� /7�f��. � ,. , . � � - _ �.r�� L� - :...: ��,.f'�' C .. ..:::..................... ` .........:.............. ....:::................ - ......................... ......................... y� ...::::..:::::::�::�:::. _ 4 ;_ °—�,,," � `� j ,� �;i�5 ,_� - _ - , , - � rr:r::°r::ri�f:t.�.::'.;;:;;.cc�'.'r.�;:;+:rr`i:'::�irc`.;r;`ir.;;:f::. ��. .......... ...:..::•'. .::. ��. _ �r�.< . � r , _ = 1 : t '� r �S f; � � .` _ ° -� �' /' Lt4 �.. I .. ....:::;;;::�::�:�;:. .::........ ...:::.:: . ....... ......:: _ � ' {1 '^ ' '_' '_-rt'" _ f L10 = - - _-- _ -.; j� ...::. ....::::::::: �-:� __ ,..... .:::::�:.°:��:::::�::::::: ..:� .. .....................:::. ... ..... .............. ::::. ::...................... ... .............::...::�... ...........::::.... ........ .... .......... ..:::... � �f :.. ........::..... ....... - , y L9 - f��; �� l. �� ! LS.. _ ,� �"°`°� � ' .� F�� 4; _ _- . /%,� ! . ��' �-`��„, , .. ��, - _ -_ �: 1,.. �°� �.� ,r.. , � �r'�� - _ � ✓� % ��..., _ ' �., i f ' . _ �P°p�.'"�f,/ _ __ _ .� x�� „!�'�� ✓ � °'6,./�+ � .. f>r.' � `ff;/ _ _ �`��f� r . � / s�i . ,.,.....,.., �,,,� '/. _ !�t'' .�✓ � J�s" ,:',,,�°�/'' — . �,,�� i�., ;� °'"f`°i'' __ �'�'`�''• :�,,.�� , � '.,.r"° �,,�`i, _ _ � /'/,:'` F`y o ��'"`` �-�'�`` �°',.r� DRAINAGE EASEMENT = - �''� F��p , {��`��'°� GRANTEO TO CITY Of ; - � f 'F2 F?� ��'.°��,�°/ SPOKANE VALLEY. F ��` P � fA�� ( „�' /.��.��'Q.4''' ��;� ,%°�'�.i'� j � ./y�Jn �� ,Y�. F f�^n J�, / F �7 - - �.,r�r"� ,�,,, r;�, �,e�,/ - - �.�� .� {� . f .�.,, ------------- ��t�a�`-��_�„a ;;, .,�.. �� -� r y _��';;��;;��`_;s�..� L1NE TABLE � �:��'��-�� _-� L_i'lt'+±`i;Vr ��=i'`,d"��_i; LINE DISTANCE BEARING LINE DISTANCE BEARING L1 50.07' S81'24'35"W L9 58.00� N43'19'11"E � ��a�� ? ,} ,"'6%�`t ; ,,.,„� L2 57.33' S26'58'14"W L10 59J2� N75'19'11"E `Projcct�;=_ i L3 101.07� S76'26'23"W U1 85.27' S82'49'53"E i -_�^T�_�_____—� � lV;:rn�_�---- L4 89.98' N82'49'S3°W Lt2 98.52' N76'26'23°E � — -- L5 47.17' N48'31'22"W L13 54.15' S14'41'28"E L�"''T'" ' , �` D 1i——�L—____ ' L6 121.00� S76'19'11"W L14 43.90� Nt4'41'28°W ��D�� 1—� � i L7 80.00' S13'40'49"E U5 52.32' N26'S8'14"E � L8 42.00' N87'19'11"E L16 34.55� N81'24'35"E SCALE 1"=so' J.R.. �ONNETT ENGINEERING THE BEACH HOUSE AT TRAILHEAD DRAINAGE EASEMENT CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL CONSULTING AND DESIGN AFFECTSPARCELN0.45131.0112&�51��1��`� �� 803 E.3R0 AVENUE 7RBEJOB#:11-139.10 ��velo��Pnfi _ngitl��r�Cig � SPOKANE,WASHINCTON 99202 I (509)534-3929/FAX(509)534-4014 DATE:MARCH 22,2012 � � Fi o12 j i ' Pf-oject# � �'�2-'�2-'�� Uame.e��-� � � � Submittal # ?=-- I I �4� � �� a� � o . ,� . �# ' �}-: ;�: � .� : � �,� �'-Y 45125.9157 �� ° � „�;� �� tFld ��-° � 4512�5.9020�"� F�ora P � ' F ;.� '�. �'�,, , 1 fA. �r ��/ �� ''" �'"�'i�, ��;� � � � . H 'f� �rt YM � :� �.+ ��.,.�° � y �451'S 90�7 ��'� � : ��`� �;w � .�g008 ; , �� i�' A5135 ��. r � �"`�,�. x .. ` . �' �. ��: 16621 E. Indiana � `a� � _, �` y � • _� i, .��<�;.� �� h�------�, �' +'' � j 45124.0138 4512� _3 . . � 45124.0138 �, 1� N 45124.0140� , �:, � � „�:�:� '��'��"�� ;; ��, - , _, - � Mission Pk �` �� Old Mission Av ,,, �,.. .. � �, �,..� .!�. �� - -,� - .�� ,i.+F� c,� �� 3�^� ��3 y". ��.R � �. � � g � Y�� Y' _ . � , � ,. �s �'� Py�s Q� . .� ; � . ., = � ��'�' � �`�� : ,�I �.�� ,k. �, ' � :- _i� ' � �� r7�- �� ,�., ��, = � � .� � � _ �xisting Drauinage �,m�� , ;. ,�., II�'iili 45131 0117�° il �. � `�:, ,�,,�. ��'y "K�,�a "�"e.� -� rr . �y �'y� �`� :... �C�. '*'+� �. "i-3r �..r�,. a� �,��k� �� K � t � �� - Easement ��.��o . �,.� �:�c � �� ,� �� . '4 � � d f' !�s � � i.� . . � �, f^ 1 �xYy. ��t `� �,� �# � t � r" -��`g f� ��'�, �. '� � r �,` ry � �'� � _ -' � �� , 4�131.0114 �� ,�t ,,Q a, �,4� .+ , �'��f' ° � ' 31.011 � ,�t � ` °'451 7' o,�;�` '�� '✓ ,�'� � .,�� °�,. '�` � �• .• . =' '� '� � �o � �~�� +�!'� �� F`�`#+�� s,�' 45131.�116 ��'' ':+�_�k ,�� t' ,� � ,: � � � g r �, "�'� ,�°` dliw � � a� ��, �t�` ♦ � ,,,�"', '�^ »� �� ' � ' ,' aQ�` SPOI<�ANE UAL- LEY -�� ,,� �' � r'�, ��, L' � ��' ��.:� � � �� ' ��\'(�d�ar !� .�t � �.,�a� 'r6, e �R.. - � �� ` .�� X�y,�� r� � �'k, �r � : ;�° ��,,;�, *�.-,� � ;,' ry � 45131.0104. � - ,� . � - � �:� �r� +� � � ��s� �' �� `�� W�[ , �: a - , � �� r ,�. x �. �r A� s Y �� .. �"� c�� 451�1.0103 � ,�^�: . < . �� .. g ?� 'k � ��'r� � �_ �' ` �r�� rt� . �. ,. �.a . "� � ,�' :. . .. �., �F ._ ` �. s jq "_ '. �� '�' L;� _� z��' , _' .- , 6� u-. � � "45131.0117 �- � . ,- x � , r ,;, �' q.:�.. .. � � . _ .fi � . ' '. , �� , � .� � ..k. - � . . . - A -..._. .. i . � . " ' ��,.� . . � .. _ .S � ' ... .s,.,... � � : ��_ 451310315`�-,,^?��' ��""�; � 45131.0107 ^ �' �. 1 , 45135.0314 ,�� ; .. ,.�., :/ , . . ' ,yr.. ` � .> - .�. - s. : �''�^� , �,�� y � �_ �,+�,e s , � � �°.�---�.e - r.,r �/ � � � � ��`��- � � � :>a, .., a Pv .�+/"/ � 45131.0501 "_'..-�-,�-._.__-� ,: .. �r�� , Y��a?�i�q � . ::� ;! _ d��ar 3 -._- _ , �,� ;F-s-'°` �� ; �,� R. ... ° .� �a a�� .,�rµ� <<� �,�.- J ` � 45131.0520 � � � � � ;% „ ��-�``` ��` , W �, 'i �, ° ' _= � _ •,� :. _._-- � „�..,. �� 45131.0519 ' �, '� � � ��w � t.N+ � .,5�_w � -, ' � ""-,- ,.-�,i � .� • o o� � w � � y w . 45131.05�1) : - �;�� ..��:. �� 45131�.0502 � o M�:a � � i ;v .r - "��- .�; ` � _=� �� „45131.0428� '� �� ,>`� , � A �.� ;�fj,° `n �� - �- _ . . 3 ` ��' �Y d$U� y _ 61 L .Y,',� _ —s"d � ,euu � �. �,'� 45131.0517 � ��. � � fi�-t4 1+4�+� �� 45135.0418 45131.0419 � ;� 0518 �` . `' '''� rv 1 I-- ' ,� � �� ,�� . 45131. �� V�� ,�+�+�,_-m � �'«,� �;� ' 45131.0213 . �a_._ r�t"!. �� , . . � k �� .. �s , . �;:� ."', '�W,.�,� .. 495.3 0 247.64 495.3 Feet O This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only.Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate,current,or otherwise reliable. AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: City of Spokane Valley City Clerk 11707 E. Sprague, Suite 106 Spokane Valley,WA 99206 REFERENCE#: 5975650 GRANTOR: Centennial Properties,Inc. GRANTEE: Government, City of Spokane Valley SHORT LEGAL: BACON'S ADDITION TO GREENACRES;PTN OF BLKS 33,34&35 LYG ELY OF LN DAF;BEG AT PT ON SLY R/W LN OF MISSION AVE 1473.6FT M/L FR NE COR SEC 13-25-44;TH S40DEG35MIN35SDSW 382.89FT;TH S 54DEG53MIN30SDSW 250.74FT;TH S61DEG18MIN26SDSW 179.63FT;TH S7DEG47MIN31SDSW 112.3FT M/L TO INTER WITH S LN SD BLK 35 AND TERM LN DESC.; exc row for Indiana& Steen Parkway ASSESSOR'S PROPERTY TAX PARCEL: 45131.0112 RELEASE OF EASEMENT KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that the City of Spokane Valley is the owner of an easement acquired from Centennial Properties,Inc. (grantor)dated February 2,20ll and recorded,under Auditor's File No. 5975650,records of Spokane County,Washington,over the real property desaribed therein as follows: See attached Legal Description and Exhibit for Drainage Easement#1 The City of Spokane Valley does hereby abandon and release all rights acquired under said easement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said corporation has caused this instrument to be executed this day of ,20 BY: Mike Jackson, City Manager STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) On this day of ,20 ,before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington,duly commissioned and sworn,personally appeared MIKE JACKSON to me know to be the person who signed as City Manager of the municipal corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be hislher free and voluntary act and deed and the free and voluntary act and deed of the City of Spokane Valley for the uses and purposes therein mentioned; and on oath stated that she/he authorized to execute the said instruction on behalf of said City of Spokane Valley. IN WITNESS WHERE OF I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year first above written. (Signature of Notary) (Print or stamp name of Notary) NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at (City) My Appointment Expires: 02/01/2011 11:34:44 AM 5975650 Recordin9 Fee $65.�0 Paee 1 of 4 F Easement GOVERNMENT, CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY � Spokane County Washington I IIIIIII(I III III�I'I I IIIII I'II�I I�II I)(III I I'II I II�I III I II)I III IIII�III(III � r � �her re�orded �eturn 4�: ; City of Spokane Valley j Public Works Department ! 11707 E.Sprague Ave.,Ste 304 � Spokane Valley,WA 99206 ( i � I Document Title: Drainaae Easement Grantor(s): Centennial Properties,Inc. - Grantee: Government Citv of Spokane Valley Location: NE% Section 13 T25N R44E � Legal Description: j BACON'S ADDITION TO GREENACRES; PTN OF BLKS 33,34&35 LYG ELY OF LN DAF; BEG AT PT i ON SLY R/W LN OF MISSION AVE 1473.6FT M/L FR NE COR SEC 13-25-44;TH � S40DEG35MIN35SDSW 382.89FT; TH S 54DEG53MIN30SDSW 250.74FT;TH S61DEG18MIN26SDSW I 179.63FT;TH S7DEG47MIN31SDSW 112.3FT M/L TO INTER WITH S LN SD BLK 35 AND TERM LN �' DESC. I Assessor's Property Tax Parcel Number or Account Numbec 45131.0112 � I PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT I Spokane Valley,Washington DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN THE MATTER OF Indiana Avenue Extension Proiect,#0112. KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the Grantor, Centennial Properties, Inc. for and in � consideration of Mutuai Benefits, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, grant(s) to the City of ' Spokane Valley(Grantee), a municipai corporation in the State of Washington, an Easement over, under, � upon and across the hereinafter described lands situated in the City of Spokane Valley, County of � Spokane, State of Washington: � See attached Drainaqe Easement#1 Lepal Description and Exhibit i AFFECTS ASSESSORS PARCEL NO(S): 45131.0112 � I ; The Drainage Easement granted to the City of Spokane Valley and its authorized agents is for the sole ; purpose of allowing construction, operation, and maintenance of a stormwater treatment swale inciuding ; stormdrain piping and outfall; catchbasins and dryweils; future underground irrigation waterline; and , ; electrical power and controi wiring in underground conduit. The Grantor(s) hereby agree not to obstruct ! access to the storm drain pipe, irrigation line and wiring to the above-described lands. The Grantor(s) � Page 1 of 2 I� R.E.Excise Tax Exempt Date a - I 20 I f i Spokane County Treas. � � � � � gy � ��l� � ; � �.; � ��ti ;��j " � I� �� " .,�� j � hereby agrees to limit the improvements within the easement to landscaping consisting of grasses, shallow-rooted shrubs, but not trees or deeply rooted plants. The Grantee will not be responsible for � replacement or repair of any improvements that the Grantor may place within the drainage easement, nor ��, shall the Grantee be responsible to repair, maintain, or replace any damage to improvements, other than replacement of grasses and shallow-rooted shrubs that are damaged by work of Grantee in the easement area, that the Grantor(s) or assignees may plaee ir� the drainage easer�ert if the Gr��#ee, �t it'� �al� discretion, replaces or repairs the stormdrain piping and outfall; stormwater treatment swale including ; catchbasins and drywells; future installation or maintenance of underground irrigation waterline; and ; electrical power and controi wiring in underground wiring. The City of Spokane Valley accepts compiete and total responsibility for the construction and perpetual ` � maintenance of the public drainage facilities located within said Easement per Project#0112 plans on file in the office of the City of Spokane Valley Public Works Department and as amended by the Director of Pubiic Works. The Grantee shall not be responsible to replace, repair, or maintain any other improvements. The Easement and the agreements and duties provided for herein shall run with the land and shail be ' binding on, and shali inure to the benefit of the parties referenced herein, their heirs, successors and assigns. - IN WITNESS WHEREOF,_ �2 t,1,�P.1/'�t�v�e�.� have hereunto set ��l�c.r- hand(s)and seal(s)this�day of c�b-+�w�A..►�t a , 20 l( . I By: By: � I� Titl Title: u.�:i.�c 1.�:��,r v�- I STATE OF WASHINGTON ) j ss ' COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that �-1G � � (is/are) the individual(s)who appeared before me, an said individuai(s) acknowledged that(helshe/they) � signed this instrument, and acknowledged it to be (his/her/their) free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument. Dated this 2� day of ��i ,20��. I � �. -� , � :,�-� i . ��,o��i -�� I �� M�BA� ,Q��j� OTARY PUBLIC I and the Sta o� ' on, i � ��••�� '''r Q �i Residing at �`�> i _ �� -y��" x,o;,,�c ,, ;�_� o �y '��%�c� ; My appointmenf ex ires: � � rso = : : : V%� � �^v � Z � %� AJB�, ��'�� _ ��\\\��\\II�� I %,. N �,��, 8-29' �'',�^ �..��°��`1E WI.�'��//��/�� , �� •��I11\\\��a��_ ��SA�C/�/�f��"'/ l�� I �r f ' �.,�= �r.;:. _ �.;�� i��.� �/ � �t � � V_ p �OTq y�� o / �,'`�,`�`'��'•' a %V R� m%�j , : cn ; ' ` - �=m % � ; ', �e �o = Page 2 of 2 � ` ;_ ; ' t<`�'��29��.. '� O ��n��...• '��` ; ��1��ASH��G�`� � ��t�►��>��°� ' i C , lGegal Description Drainage Easement#1 For ( Tax Parcel No.45131.0112 A portion the North Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 13, Township 25 North,Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, City of Spokane Valley, Spokane Caunty, Washingtan, more particularly described as follows; � COMMENCIlVG at the Northeast corner of said Section 13; thence N89°57'44'W along the North line of said Section 13 a distance of 1421.20 feet; thence S00°02'16'W a distance of 453.86 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, from which point the Nartheast corner of said Section 13 bears N72°19'37"E a distance of 1491.91 feet; thence S72°15'S6"E a distance of 101.83 feet; thence N47°33'07"E a distance of 21.52 feet; thence S17°44'04'W a distance of 34.30 feet to the beginning of a tangent curve concave to the Northwest and hav,ing a radius of 467.50 feet; thence Southwesterly along said curve through a central angle of 21°32'24"an arc distance of 175.75 to the intersectian with the North line of Lot 36 of Bacon's Additiot� to Greenacres,recorded in Book"J"of Plats, Page 15; thence N89°52'22"W along said North line � a distance of 83.61 feet; thence Np0°04'00"E a distance of 77.90 feet; thence N27°23'28"E a distance of 144.35 feet to the P4INT 4F BEGINNING. � I Containing 22,481 square feet rnore or less i �EL E. �, $ oFx4s o ,�G�w �Y � �� _ , o ' ��'�� °N�az�r�� ' ��,r� _� _ � 'I ; CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 4, 2012 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business � new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed Resolution 12-010, Extinguishment of Stormwater Easement located on parcel number 45151.9031 in connection with the Spokane Valley Cancer Care project, Mission Avenue. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: In 1992 the subject drainage easement was granted to Spokane County which became the City's easement at incorporation. Up until this year the parcel was a vacant lot. The Developer of the project on this lot would like to reconfigure the easement so the new easement and the pond contained within the easement can be shaped to integrate into the site design. The new pond will fulfill the purposes for which the initial drainage easement was created. To reconfigure the easement, the current easement needs to be extinguished and a new easement granted to the City. The latter easement is in process. Council heard an administrative report at the November 13 council meeting, at which time there were no objections that staff bring forth a Resolution Extinguishing Stormwater Easement at the Spokane Valley Cancer Care Project on Mission Avenue. OPTIONS: Approve resolution, with or without modifications, or take other appropriate action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Resolution 12-010, extinguishing the Stormwater Easement at the Spokane Valley Cancer Care Project on Mission Avenue. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: NA STAFF CONTACT: Gabe Gallinger, Development Engineering Senior Engineer ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Resolution Extinguishing Stormwater Easement at 13424 E. Mission Avenue. 2. Maps of area that include existing and proposed easement. 3. Copy of recorded drainage easement #9208310257 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 12-010 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON, EXTINGUISHING DRAINAGE EASEMENT AT 13424 EAST MISSION AVENUE, SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON; AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, Washington is the successor in interest to a stormwater drainage easement that was granted to Spokane County prior to the City's incorporation, which burdens property owned by AC Investments, LLC; and WHEREAS, the easement in question is located on Spokane County Assessor's parcel number 45151.9031, at 13424 East Mission Avenue. The easement was recorded on August 31, 1992, Spokane County Auditor's recording number 9208310257; and WHEREAS, the easement was granted on a vacant parcel to accommodate stormwater runoff for a portion of Blake Road, but the development plan for the property requires that the stormwater swale be relocated; and WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley approved a grading and drainage plan for the Spokane Valley Cancer Center and it was determined that the relocated stormwater swale provided the required treatment and disposal capacity to replace the e�sting facility; and WHEREAS, City staff analyzed the request in terms of future need for stormwater treatment and disposal facilities and determined that the easement is not necessary at its current location, for public health, safety or welfare. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, as follows: Section 1. Relinquishment of Easement Burdenin� Snokane Countv Assessor's narcel number 45151.9031. The City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, as the successor in interest, hereby relinquishes the easement granted for stormwater treatment and disposal purposes, Spokane County Auditor's recording number 9208310257. Section 2. Authorization for Citv Mana�er to Execute Easement Extin�uishment Document. The City Council of the City of Spokane Valley authorizes the City Manager to execute the Easement Relinquishment, attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution, and all other documents necessary thereto. Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect upon adoption. Adopted this day of December, 2012. ATTEST: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Resolution 12-010 Relinquishment of Easement—Spokane Valley Cancer Center Page 1 of 2 AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: City of Spokane Valley City Clerk 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley,WA 99206 REFERENCE#: GRANTOR: Gregory D. and Kimberly R. Jeffreys GRANTEE: Government, City of Spokane Valley SHORT LEGAL: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY BSP 04-08-MISSION MEDICAL CENTER PARCEL "2" AUDITORS #5749346 BK 3 PG 13 & 14 BEING A PTN OF NEl/4 ASSESSOR'S PROPERTY TAX PARCEL: 45151.9031 RELEASE OF EASEMENT KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that the City of Spokane Valley is the owner of an easement acquired from Gregory D. and Kimberly R. Jeffreys(Grantor)dated August 28, 1992 and recorded under Auditor's File No. 9208310257,records of Spokane County,Washington,over the real property described therein as follows: See attached copy of recorded drainage easement for legal description of drainage easement The City of Spokane Valley does hereby abandon and release all rights acquired under said easement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said corporation has caused this instrument to be executed this day of ,20 BY: Mike Jackson, City Manager STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) On this day of , 20 , befare me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared MIKE JACKSON,to me know to be the person who signed as City Manager of the municipal corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be his/her free and voluntary act and deed and the free and voluntary act and deed of the City of Spokane Valley for the uses and purposes therein mentioned; and on oath stated that she/he authorized to execute the said instruction on behalf of said City of Spokane Valley. IN WITNESS WHERE OF I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year first above written. (Signature of Notary) (Print or stamp name of Notary) NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at (City) My Appointment Expires: 9�083�025� � � Aaseseora Parcel No. 45151.9018 SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Spokane County, Washington o f, YD1. ��ruGr �t �l bRAINAGE EASSMENT The Grantora Gregory D. and Kimberly R. Jeffreys, Husband and Wife of tihe County oE Spokane, State of washington, for and in consideration of Mutual Benefite, the receipt oE which ie hereby acknowledged, grante to Spokane County, a political subdivieion of the State of Waehington, an Easement over, under, upon and acroea the hereinafter described landa aituated in the County of Spokane, State oE Waehington: Begin at the northeast corner of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 15, T. 25 N. , R. 44 E.W.M. in Spokane County, Washington; tnence S 00°06`40"E al.ong the east line of said NW 1/4 a distance of 198 teet, thence S 89°53'20"W a distance of 30 feet to the True P.O.B. ; thence continue S 89°53�20��W a distance of 40 feet, thence N 00°06'�!0"W a distance of 50 feet, thence N 89°53'20"E a distance of 40• feet, thence S 00°06'40"E a distance of 50 feet to the True P.O.B. The Easement graated to Spokane County and its authorized agenta 3.s for the sole purpoaes of allowing natuza� drainage and/or runoEf over and acrosa the above deacribed lande. The Grantor(s) hereby agree not to obatruct, artificially collect or diacharge the flow acroas or adjacen� to the above deecribed lande. The Grantor(s) agree thatf° Spokane �COUnty, accepts, no responsibility for maintaining the drainage Easement. The Grantos(s):saccept,r`oompl�te and total reaponsibilitg for the conetructian and perpetualt�maintie"nanCe' of �he facilities located within this drainage Easement per platne�on`�fi'le'�tnt`�t h'�`�vffice of the Spokane Covnty Engineer. �;�l. ' �,�tw,4C •t ►t�- . . . e . . . � � The Grantor(s� hereby releases Spokane county, and all its off3.cers, smployess, and agents from any reeponsibility or liability for any damage rrhatsoever including ir.veree condemnation by or to any and all peraons or property arising out of or in any way incident to or attiibutable to the atorm drainege within said Eaeement. 5pokane -County is hereby granted the right to ingrese and egress to, over and from the above deecribed property. Whenever the Cedar Chateau Eatatee "B" or their aucceasora in intereat fail to maintain the drainage facilities in con£ormanca wit1� the approved Drainage Plan, a notice will be given to the same as above or their eucceseore in interest by the County. If not corrected after ten (10} days, the County has the right to correct the maintenance Eailure or have it corrected at the expenae of the Cedar Chateau Eetates "B" or their aucceaeors in interesti. The Eaeement described hereinabove ia to and shall run with thZ land. No modification of the boundariee of aaid Easement can be made without the prior approval of Spokane County. R.E. 7ax Exompt �r lI::C p,�� / i9 �� Fit:EU {, r ..�0fi'�Ep Spoka C d u n tyTraas, RF^�;; : ,�- C Q � ��'�� uc ,�I it �� i'�1 `9[ � a�: - ��L Ji'iii:, .,�.-lii� , ::_r;��r+rt,y�as�i. rjNTEROFFIC:E L h}' yoE. � 3��.�b�� '7�� IN WZTNESS WHEitEOF, we have here�nto set our hands and ae a t ' th d o� August, �992. � ✓ gory Jeffreys t ' � mb rly R. Jeff e s � STATE OF WASHINGTON ) � COUNTY OF SPOKANE ). ae On thi.s day peraonally appeared before me Gregory D, and Kimberly R. Jeffreys peraonally known to me to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged the eaid inatrument to be the £ree and voluntary act and deed of said individual, for the uees and purposea therein mentioned. Given under my hand and aeal thie ?8th day of August, 19S2. �e•�•�•w+s�� a•� ./`r-s/� . r�orn�Y Pusuc � f�R THE STAI'E OF WA$y�pu,'FpN � ary Public , � RAYMONDT.MODM � In and for the state of Washington, � MYCOMMISSIONEXPiRES: � resi.ding at Spokane, waehington. •��ss�i�Niii��i*��• notcedar/sample/jp 1 BSP 04-08 LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 25 NORTH, RANGE 44 EAST, W.M. CITY OF SPOKANE �ALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON UNPLATTED 0 � I i RP` I t �F� i P�' 0 M . . � � � . . . —_ � �� __.. � • _._ ' � . � . � � � � 2658.70 58T21'36�YY 2658.�2 PO58T21 36"W. GPS SURVEY 10-07-99 — — — _ ' 1 . . � . � . _ � . . � _ _ - -. — 419.06 . � - � . i 10 , i,7�_ . . Z � � Mtsseo►v av�r�u� �"� ' � � 910.00 . . . � � I 15 0l Z 368.96' (R7) NORTH QUAR7ER CORNER . � � M• n � .369.13 . S8T21�36"W --- -- , I . FOUND 3�BRASS C4P � � _ _ . ---- 198J3 ------ WIIH '('AS PER ROS 125/6 � . . 17L00 ---------- ---- . R 20.00 � -___ � � � ------------- . -�10' UTlL11YEASEMENT . L=31.40 �. - � � - ' � . ------ � D=89'57'09' 1 , - :. . . . .. . �30' . I 30� . F W��'`i � � � yIN FD REBM ANU GP I 1.00'R/W DID/GlION -"� n ' � W , ' �61 w I ois•�o�.oscs�i�, ae9.is' � PARCEL1 .,�� E'A�CEL2 T �i o o�tdwu-R Y � I . �'369 ^}�.$'17$Q � � . . ��R�, !" . •"� 51.661 SQ FT -- N� m °' u� 13414 E. Mis'sion Avenue a y 13424 E Mlssion Avanue �- 40• � �°n N w �„w� . � I �N o . °o� ° �+ o ° °° I � cC iF � . y � . - � . O . . . . � n 0 N _ N O N , �. N ' N . , . ' i�� . N N I. �A . ' N$ . � - . . . � NORTHWES7'CORNE92 DETAiL N I � I NOT TO SQAL.E UNPIATlED t; � SEE RECORD OF SURVEY BOOK 69, PAGE 20 389.57 SST21'36°W � 389.49 (R7) UNPLATlED L— — -- 40� X 50' DRAINAGE . EASEMEM'� � � AFN 9208310257 � � . I I I I I I I 30' � 3� � I �� j I �� ^ � � � � � � � � - � �! � �'-� �..I..I �� r � � � �. r-- I-- � �' � � � � � � � ti. , � �H�1N�� '� ��E�1�I��' �v �oo� e�E�r. �o�.u: � i��l�T FL�@dq EUl4. �G�#.�� ;'� �� .� �� 4,C�F � �, ��' r `� � � � � � E��'f�!�'Cl� '�o� �— i �l�� '�� '�5'�1 ��',� ' L�� l�� '��°4�' :��,�[� ' a L—� �� '�1 'S�"k� �,��' r_-� r� ��e �a�°� ��.�� .,�- . -- � �� i �e°� ��.�� - �� .�� . .- �w �IE�T�,= i��'�� " �,I� L��7H�� ' I-�1��I�h�: f�'��l� ��1�IT�� ',��i �� -�� , , a � �� ' � �� , _.,� �I�� I�l� � � ��E�1�f�� L��.�.TE� k�,iT�1�N . � �,�'� ��T I� f�, � - `�`��1�1. FI�� I' ,I�i , �IT� �I� ��I�.�I� �� '�- ��'� �. ��a�+G ��!I��IV� �!�I�I�T'�� '� '��H��!��f� � ��,+��. K��ur� �� CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 4, 2012 Department Director Approval: � Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information � admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Update GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Shoreline Management Act (SMA) RCW 90.58 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Numerous discussions regarding local implementation of the Shoreline Management Act under RCW 90.58. BACKGROUND: The URS Corporation Consultants, assisted by City staff, have completed a Draft Restoration Plan for the Shoreline Master Program Update. The Restoration Plan is the fourth phase of the Shoreline Update Process, and is required by the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) and the Washington Administrative Code (WAC 173-26-201(2)(f)) identifies the required elements for the plan. The Restoration Plan establishes overall goals and objectives for citywide shoreline restoration efforts. It addresses degraded areas and impaired ecological functions identified in the inventory and analysis report, identifies and prioritizes restoration opportunities, and prescribes generalized treatment options for various restoration scenarios. The Plan also identifies current and ongoing programs that contribute to achieving these goals as well as additional projects or programs necessary for success. Lastly, this plan seeks to develop a draft implementation strategy, including funding options, proposed timelines, and adaptive management strategy, and benchmarks. The plan is based on the inventory and analysis report and a review of other plans and assessments aimed at improving the ecological health of the Spokane River and Shelley Lake. Staff will discuss the Draft Restoration Plan, and the WAC requirements to develop the Plan. The Planning Commission review was completed over three meetings beginning October 11, 2012. A public hearing was conducted on October 25, 2012, and deliberations were completed November 8, 2012. The Commission voted 5-0 to recommend acceptance of the draft Restoration Plan. Attorney Tadas Kisielius also completed a review of the Draft Restoration Plan to identify areas where the draft plan may exceed, meet, or fall below the state guidelines. He provided input that was incorporated into the draft during the development stage. At this time no written comments have been provided. Mr. Kisielius will be present at the meeting to discuss his review of the document and answer questions. Staff will present an overview of the process completed, discuss the Draft Restoration Plan, and highlight issues covered by the Planning Commission. OPTIONS: N/A RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: N/A BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: Lori Barlow, AICP, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Draft Restoration Plan Jeremy Sikes, DOE, email dated October 1, 2012 Robin Bekkedahl, Avista, email dated September 28, 2012 Planning Commission Minutes Power Point Presentation SHORELINE RESTORATION PLAN (Planning Commission Recommended DRAFT) City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program Update September 17, 2012 �or�g�nat�Nafi� NOVe111beP g, 2�I Z (Planning Commission Recommendation) � ��'�,� ��. � � � :: �� ;�- �,�; ��.� �� `�� ,�_, � �F � �'�'` �� ; ._�"`.��,,,� ��a� �.s�� - - -�' . '.�. mvi 3''. .l """"�'ti[.�CY.. w z :, . ., .� '�? ' �°1+t� ,.'�:�� . .. r.!',a'� �} ,*gr�-. . .. . . ;:t_ � 'il`.� �'� ' � � � � #-.��'� ..� �".'�� i, x."1 �t _ ��_;-�'�.. % 'y.- � � � _ �� ;.,i� - +�',_ . �,. Prepared for: City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department Spokane Valley Ciry Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave., Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 Prepared bv: Noah Herlocker, PWS URS Corporation 111 S.W. Columbia, Suite 1500 Portland, Oregon 97201-5814 URS Project Number 36298174 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section1 Introduction........................................................................................................................1 1.1 Shoreline Restoration in the SMP Update Process (Overview)............... 1-1 1.2 Context for the City of Spokane Valley................................................... 1-1 1.3 Required Elements of Restoration Planning for SMP Updates ............... 1-3 Section 2 Restoration Goals and Supporting Policies....................................................................2 Section 3 Existing and Ongoing Projects and Programs ...............................................................3 3.1 Summary of Limiting Factors..................................................................3-1 3.2 Existing and Ongoing Projects and Programs .........................................3-2 3.3 Additional Projects and Programs Needed to Achieve Shoreline RestorationGoals.....................................................................................3-6 Section 4 Prioritization Methodology...............................................................................................4 Section 5 Restoration Opportunities................................................................................................5 5.1 Programmatic Restoration Opportunities ................................................ 5-1 5.2 Site-specific Restoration Opportunities...................................................5-2 5.3 Conceptual Restoration Approaches........................................................ 5-8 Section 6 Implementation Plan .........................................................................................................6 6.1 Potential Restoration Partners..................................................................6-1 6.2 Potential Sources of Funding...................................................................6-3 6.3 Timeline and Benchmarks for Implementing Restoration Plan...............6-5 Section 7 Monitoring, Maintenance, and Adaptive Management...................................................7 7.1 Monitoring Plan.......................................................................................7-1 7.2 Maintenance................................................................................................... Section8 References.........................................................................................................................9 Planning Commission Recommended Draft COS V Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8, :ets for Web\agendapacket 12-04-12\Item 4 PC DRAFT COSV_SMP_Restoration_Plan_Nov 8 2012.doc 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Tables Table 1: Required Elements of Restoration Planning for SMP Updates Table 2: Summary of Factors Limiting the Proper Functioning Condition of the COSV's SMA-Regulated Waters. Table 3: Restoration Priority Scoring Criteria Table 4: Shoreline Restoration Opportunities Table 5: Existing Partnership Opportunities Table 6: Timeline and Benchmarks Figures Figure 1: Proj ect Vicinity Figure 2: Shoreline Restoration Opportunity Index Map Figure 3a-3c Shoreline Restoration Opportunities Appendices Appendix A: Representative Photographs Planning Commission Recommended Draft COS V Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8, :ets for Web\agendapacket 12-04-12\Item 4 PC DRAFT COSV_SMP_Restoration_Plan_Nov 8 2012.doc 11 Acronyms ALEA Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account CIP Capital Improvement Project COSV Ciry of Spokane Valley DIP Detailed Implementation Plan DNR Washington Department of Natural Resources Ecology Washington Department of Ecology GIS Geographical Information Systems INLT Inland Northwest Land Trust IPM Integrated Pest Management LWD Large Woody Debris NPCC Northwest Power and Conservation Council OHWM Ordinary High Water Mark REI Recreational Equipment Incorporated ROW Right-of-Way SCD Spokane Conservation District SMA Shoreline Management Act SMP Shoreline Master Program SSP Spokane Subbasin Plan State Parks Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission TMDL Total MaYimum Daily Load URS URS Corporation (author) WAC Washington Administrative Code WDFW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife WRIA Water Resource Inventory Area Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8, 2012 111 SECTIONONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 SHORELINE RESTORATION IN THE SMP UPDATE PROCESS (OVERVIEW) Under the Washington State Shoreline Management Act (SMA), each city and county with "shorelines of the state" must adopt a Shoreline Master Program (SMP) based on state laws and rules but tailored to the specific geographic, economic, and environmental needs of the community. The primary goal that must be addressed in an SMP update is how to achieve "no net loss of ecological shoreline functions necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources" (Ecology 2004). This shoreline restoration plan describes actions intended to compensate for anticipated future shoreline habitat degradation associated with development and increased land use pressure. Incorporating shoreline restoration planning into the SMP update process allows the City of Spokane Valley (COSV) to balance anticipated shoreline habitat degradation and enhancement in a manner that maintains the overall existing ecological condition of shorelines. Within the COSV, only the Spokane River shorelines meet the definition of "shorelines of statewide significance." Additionally, all waters over 20 acres in area fall under the jurisdiction of the SMA as "waters of the state." As such, all areas within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark(OHWM) of Shelley Lake are also regulated under the SMA and considered in the COSV's SMP updates. Two active gravel mine pits have exposed the aquifer resulting in areas of water greater than 20 acres. However, as active mine pits are regulated under the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR), these features are not addressed in this plan. Updating the SMP involves several elements, including a baseline inventory of regulated shoreline areas, an assessment of key issues and opportunities for improvement within such areas, and a restoration plan to provide guidance for carrying out restoration in a comprehensive manner. The baseline characterization and the assessment of key issues and opportunities have been completed by URS Corporation (URS) in coordination with the COSV's Planning Department. These efforts were documented in a report titled City of Spokane T�alley Shoreline Master Program Update, Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report(URS 2010). This restoration plan establishes overall goals and objectives for citywide shoreline restoration efforts. It addresses degraded areas and impaired ecological functions identified in the inventory and analysis report, identifies and prioritizes restoration opportunities, and prescribes generalized treatment options for various restoration scenarios. The plan also identifies current and ongoing programs that contribute to achieving these goals, as well as additional projects or programs necessary for success. Lastly, this plan seeks to develop a draft implementation strategy, including funding options, proposed timelines, an adaptive management strategy, and benchmarks. The plan is based on the inventory and analysis report and a review of other plans and assessments aimed at improving the ecological health of the Spokane River and Shelley Lake. The term "restoration" has many definitions, both scientific and regulatory. For the purpose of this plan, restoration is defined as: The reestablishment or upgrading of impaired ecological shoreline processes or functions. This may be accomplished through measures including, but not limited to, revegetation, removal of intrusive shoreline structures and removal or treatment of toxic materials. Restoration does not imply a requirement for returning the shoreline Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 1-1 SECTIONONE INTRODUCTION area to aboriginal or pre-European settlement conditions. (Washington Administrative Code [WAC] 173-26-020(27)) Under the SMP, the COSV's role in shoreline restoration includes collaborative planning, regulation, preservation of high qualiry shoreline areas, and aiding community efforts to restore degraded portions of COSV's shorelines. A well-designed restoration plan can help local governments meet the "no net loss" standard of the SMP Guidelines. Restoration planning must, therefore, include some form of monitoring to ensure that intended restoration actions are offsetting the expected loss of function that will occur from incremental impacts sustained over time (Ecology 2010a). 1.2 CONTEXT FOR THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY This plan provides a framework for restoration of the COSV's SMA-regulated shorelines. Specifically, it describes how the COSV plans to develop and monitor a restoration program as part of its SMP. Upon acceptance by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), the COSV will oversee the implementation,progress, and monitoring of this restoration plan. The COSV's role in the restoration of shorelines will focus on the fostering, coordinating, and documenting of restoration partnerships as described in Sections 6.1 and 6.3. Upon forming these partnerships, the COSV and its restoration partners would work together on securing restoration funding, as per Section 62. The COSV realizes the importance of implementing this plan and will strive to attain the timelines and benchmarks described herein as funding allows. Per WAC 173-26-201(2)(�, the process to prepare a restoration plan may vary significantly among local jurisdictions depending on a variety of factors including size of the jurisdiction; extent and condition of shorelines; the availability of grants, volunteer programs, or other tools for restoration; and the nature of the ecological functions to be addressed. The COSV is unique in that most of the near-shore riparian habitat along the Spokane River within the ciry limits is managed as natural area by the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission (State Parks). Due to this designation, the shoreline condition is in a relatively natural and stable state compared with other urban environments. However, recreational use is projected to increase and future developments are anticipated within the shoreline jurisdiction. To balance this increased land use pressure, which has the potential to negatively affect shoreline ecological functions, implementing the restoration actions described in this plan will help the COSV meet the goal of "no net loss of shoreline ecological functions." A limitation to Spokane River aquatic habitat quality is the presence of dams above and below the city. The dams limit summer flows and also create slack water at the west end of the city. Operation of the dams is a factor that is mostly beyond the control of the COSV. The restoration element of the COSV's SMP update is focused on the identification of restoration opportunities, ranking of those opportunities, and identifying partnerships, planning elements, and grant options to implement these opportunities. It should be noted that coordination between the COSV and State Parks will be required to further many of the restoration opportunities identified in this plan. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 1-2 SECTIONONE INTRODUCTION 1.3 REQUIRED ELEMENTS OF RESTORATION PLANNING FOR SMP UPDATES The state guidelines (WAC 173-26-201(2)(�) provide six necessary elements for a complete shoreline restoration plan. These elements are summarized in Table 1 with reference to the section of this report in which that element is addressed. Table 1. Required Elements of Restoration Planning for SMP Updates Shoreline Restoration Plan Elements for SMP Updates Section in this Report Identify degraded areas,impaired ecological functions, and sites with potential Section 3: Existing and Ongoing far ecological restoration. Projects and Programs -and- Section 5: Restoration Opportunities Establish overall goals and priorities far restaration of degraded areas and Section 2: Restoration Goals and impaired ecological functions. Supporting Policies -and- Section 4: Priaritization Methodology Identify existing and ongoing projects and programs currently being Section 3: Existing and Ongoing implemented that are designed to contribute to local restoration goals(such as Projects and Programs capital improvement programs [CIPs] and watershed planning efforts). Identify additional projects and programs needed to achieve local restaration Section 3: Existing and Ongoing goals and implementation strategies,including identifying prospective funding Projects and Programs sources far those projects and programs. -and- Section 6: Implementation Plan Identify timelines and benchmarks for implementing restoration projects and Section 6: Implementation Plan programs, and achieving local restoration goals. Provide for mechanisms or strategies to ensure that restaration projects and Section 7: Monitoring and programs will be implemented according to plans and to appropriately review Maintenance the effectiveness of the projects and programs in meeting the overall restoration goals(e.g.,monitoring of restoration project sites). Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 1-3 SECTIONTWO RESTORATION GOALSAND SUPPORTING POLICIES The goals and policies of this plan direct the course of the COSV's shoreline restoration efforts. This plan's goals and policies are an expansion of the proposed SMP Restoration Element goals and policies and are tailored to address the findings and recommendations of relevant plans and assessments reviewed for this plan. Goal SMP 6: Conservation : Preserve for the future those natural resources,including the unique,fragile and scenic qualities of the shoreline,which cannot be replaced. Achieve no net loss of ecological functions of the shoreline. Goal SMP 7: Restoration: Restore habitat and the natural systems to improve shoreline ecological functions. Restoration Plan Policy 1: Summarize degraded shoreline areas and functions documented by previous assessments. This plan documents areas identified as restoration opportunities by the City of Spokane T�alley Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report (URS 2010). For each restoration opporiunity identified by the Inventory and Characterization Report, the plan documents the apparent impairment (cause of degradation to shoreline ecological functions) and a conceptual restoration approach. Restoration Plan Policy 2: Prioritize restoration opportunities to identify projects with greatest benefit to shoreline areas. In order to most effectively proceed with restoration efforts, this plan prioritizes restoration opportunities in terms of overall benefit to the waterway. Restoration priorities are based on an assessment of limiting factors (as summarized in Section 3.1, below) in combination with the ease of project implementation (e.g., on public land), and project size. Prioritization methods are described in Section 4. Restoration Plan Policy 3: Establish an implementation strategy. As directed by WAC 173-26-201(2)(�(iii-iv), an adequate restoration plan must identify potential restoration partners, potential funding mechanisms, timelines, and benchmarks. Together, these elements comprise an implementation strategy. This plan includes these elements and organizes them to facilitate a workable implementation strategy. Restoration Plan Policy 4: Identify existing and prospective projects and programs that are contributing or likely to contribute towards local shoreline restoration efforts. An assortment of existing project and programs are in effect to support shoreline restoration efforts. Some are located within the COSV while others are regional. This plan includes an assessment of the existing project and programs to determine where gaps exist with regard to achieving the goal of this plan. This plan then describes additional projects and/or programs that have the potential to fill in those gaps. Restoration Plan Policy 5: Work with public and private partners to encourage restoration and enhancement of Spokane T�alley's shoreline areas Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8, 2012 2-1 SECTIONTWO RESTORATION GOALSAND SUPPORTING POLICIES The COSV will work to establish parmerships with public and private groups on specific restoration projects and/or programs, as funding allows. Special emphasis will be placed on creating partnerships with State Parks as they own a majority of the land within the COSV's shoreline jurisdiction. Restoration Plan Policy 6: Monitor success of restoration activities and adapt strategies based on monitoring results. This plan establishes a monitoring protocol to evaluate the effectiveness of the COSV's efforts to implement the restoration plan and meet the overall restoration goaL Monitoring data may be used to identify successful project designs that serve as examples for future restoration projects. In addition, where monitoring data documents failed designs, the data will be used to modify the strategy for subsequent restoration design projects. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8, 2012 2-2 SECTIONTHREE Existing and Ongoing Prolects and Programs This section summarizes existing factors limiting the functionality of the shoreline ecosystem within the COSV. It then identifies existing ongoing projects and programs that are contributing or likely to contribute towards local shoreline restoration efforts. Lastly, this section identifies additional projects and programs that, in combination with existing projects and programs, would meet the goals of this plan and address the limiting factors. 3.1 SUMMARY OF LIMITING FACTORS Based on shoreline observations and existing natural resource assessments and watershed plans reviewed while preparing the City of Spokane i�alley Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report (URS 2010), the following table provides a summary of limiting factors for the Spokane River and Shelley Lake shoreline ecosystems. Limiting factors are environmental variables whose presence, absence, or abundance restricts the distribution, numbers, or condition of one or more organisms (Webster 2007). These factors impair ecosystem processes and limit the capaciry of ecological functions. Restoration activities should be developed to address the cause of these limiting factors, where possible. Table 2. Summary of Factors Limiting the Proper Functioning Condition of the COSV's SMA-Regulated Waters LIMTTING FACTOR ASSUMED CAUSE(S) AFFECTED WATER Dissolved metals(toxics) Past industrial practices Spokane River High summer water temperature Lack of riparian cover,low/restricted Spokane River, Shelley Lake flows Lack of riparian cover Adjacent land management Spokane River (transportation/utility corridor right- of-way [ROW] maintenance), pedestrian degradation,non-native species establishment,urban land use (turf,concrete, etc.) Lack of lake fringe vegetation Dramatic drawdown zone on steep Shelley Lake lacustrine banks inhibits natural recruitment of permanent lakeside vegetation. Presence/spread of noxious vegetation Prior introductions,funding Spokane River that displaces higher functioning insufficient to treat cause ar contain native habitat existing populations,continued transport along Centennial Trail. Low dissolved oxygen Eutrophication due to high nutrient Spokane River, Shelley Lake inputs from non-point sources in WA and ID,low flow in slack water portions of river. Lack of fish passage Multiple hydroelectric dams and Spokane River Spokane Falls. Low summer flows Dams hold back water in Lake Coeur Spokane River, Shelley Lake d'Alene and Saltese Creek,which results in low summer flows to the river and lake,respectively Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov.B, 2012 3-1 SECTIONTHREE Existing and Ongoing Prolects and Programs 3.2 EXISTING AND ONGOING PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS 3.2.1 Spokane Subbasin Plan The Spokane Subbasin Plan (SSP), contained within the larger Intermountain Subbasin Plan, was prepared by GEI Consultants Inc. for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NPCC) in 2004 (GEI Consultants Inc. 2004). The NPCC is responsible for developing a fish and wildlife program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by hydroelectric development in the Columbia River Basin, and make annual funding recommendations to the Bonneville Power Administration for projects to implement the program. The SSP assessed existing conditions within the subbasin and was developed in an open public process, incorporating feedback from a wide range of state, federal, tribal and local managers, experts, landowners, local governments, and stakeholders. The primary purpose of the plan is to guide the design and funding of projects that protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife that have been adversely impacted by the development and operation of the Columbia River hydropower system. The construction and maintenance of dams, habitat degradation caused by agriculture and timber harvest, pollutants from point and non-point sources, sedimentation, declining stream flows, urbanization, fish barriers, and nonnative fish have all contributed to the decline of native species in the Intermountain Subbasin. The SSP contains a management plan that outlines goals and objectives which prioritize implementation strategies to address the degraded fish habitat specifically within the Spokane Subbasin. The SSP evaluates the health of the major water bodies included within the Spokane Subbasin, including the Spokane River. The SSP provides province level objectives as well as specific objectives and strategies for effectively managing priority fish species within the Spokane Subbasin. Objectives and strategies within the SSP include the following: • Complete assessments of resident fish losses throughout the Spokane Subbasin resulting from dam construction and operation by year 2020. • Develop and implement projects directed at protecting, restoring, and enhancing fish habitat for both native and nonnative resident fish through improvements in riparian conditions, fish passage, and aquatic conditions. • Develop and meet recovery plan goals for sensitive native resident fish species. • Conduct baseline investigations to determine native resident and resident fish stock composition, distribution, and relative abundance in the Subbasin. • Protect, restore, and enhance existing terrestrial and aquatic resources in order to meet the increased demands (cultural, subsistence, and recreational) on these resources associated with the extirpation of anadromous fisheries. • Where possible, acquire priority properties that can be protected or restored to support native ecosystem/watershed function through title acquisition, conservation easements, and/or long-term leases. • Create or use existing incentive programs for private landowners to protect and/or restore habitats to support native ecosystem/watershed function. . Enhance populations of sensitive native resident fish through habitat improvements and artificial production in concert with recovery plans. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov.B, 2012 3-2 SECTIONTHREE Existing and Ongoing Prolects and Programs 3.2.2 Spokane River Water Quality Managed Implementation Plan for Water Resource Inventory Area (VIIRIA) 57 Watershed planning is being conducted in the Middle Spokane River Basin (WRIA 57) through grants from Ecology. WRIA 57 comprises the portions of the drainage basin of the Spokane River upstream of the confluence with Latah Creek to Washington State's eastern boundary, including all portions of the river within the COSV. Spokane County is the lead agency of a planning unit that was formed in 1999 and includes broad representation of local agencies and various interest groups in the basin. The Planning Unit holds monthly meetings that are open to the public. The WRIA 55 & 57 Watershed Management Plan was adopted by the Pend Oreille, Spokane, and Stevens County Commissioners on January 31, 2006. The WRIA 55 & 57 Watershed Detailed Implementation Plan (DIl') was approved by the Watershed Implementation Team on February 20, 2008. The DIP is a blueprint for coordinating and implementing 107 recommendations outlined in the Watershed Management Plan for the Little and Middle Spokane River Basins. The watershed planning effort has identified a variety of water management challenges. The recommendations fall into the following categories: • Instream flow needs . Water conservation, reclamation, and reuse • Domestic exempt wells . Water rights and claims • Strategies for base flow augmentation • Strategies for ground water recharge augmentation • Approaches to plan implementation The watershed plan and associated DIP have resulted in the various key projects being implemented within the watershed. Some future projects may occur within the COSV. Coordination and participation in the watershed planning unit can help implement shoreline restoration projects within the COSV that can help support the SOSV's shoreline restoration goal. 3.2.3 Spokane River TMDL Management Plan The total maximum daily load (TMDL) water quality improvement report was prepared by Ecology in 2007 and revised in 2010 (Ecology 2010b). The report establishes a management plan to address the problem of low dissolved oxygen occurring in the river due to eutrophication in the Spokane River and Lake Spokane. Eutrophication is a process where excess aquatic plant growth and algal blooms occur in water due to high levels of nutrients such as phosphorus. The excessive plant growth consumes large amounts of dissolved oxygen in the water, reducing it to levels that are harmful for fish and other aquatic species. The report includes a Managed Implementation Plan. The goals of the Managed Implementation Plan are to reduce significant amounts of phosphorus in the Spokane River during the April through October season and achieve water qualiry standards for dissolved oxygen. The plan Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov.B, 2012 3-3 SECTIONTHREE Existing and Ongoing Prolects and Programs establishes limits for ammonia, total phosphorus, and carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand. The plan focuses on strategies to reduce phosphorus because the strategies will likely result in reductions of these and other important pollutants. The plan sets limits on point sources, including the Kaiser industrial facility in the COSV. In addition, the plan must also assign pollutant loads to non-point sources in the watershed. Non- point sources are addressed by a Regional Non-Point Source Reduction Program and a Septic Tank Elimination Program. 3.2.4 Spokane River Hazardous Metals Cleanup Efforts As part of the Eastern Washington Clean Sites Initiative, Ecology is engaged in an effort that involves communities and other partners in shaping cleanup projects, including sites within the COSV. Through the initiative, Ecology is attempting to reduce toxic threats to people and the environment associated with historical mining practices in the Coeur d'Alene Basin. These historical mining practices resulted in contaminants known as heavy metals washing downstream from Idaho. The metals include lead, arsenic, zinc, and cadmium, and they have settled in soil and river sediments at certain shoreline areas along the Spokane River. Within the COSV, cleanup efforts are planned at four sites. In 2012, cleanup efforts will commence at the Barker Road North beach, which lies on the north side of the Spokane River east of the Barker Road Bridge. The other three beaches proposed for cleanup within the COSV are Islands Lagoon, Myrtle Point and Flora Road, which are all on the south side of the Spokane River. Initial cleanup work was done at the Flora Road beach in 2009. However, heavy spring runoff in 2011 damaged portions of the protective soil cap. The new cap will be designed to minimize future erosion. Ecology and local river groups intend to plant native vegetation on the soil caps to help stabilize the banks, thus reducing future erosion concerns at cleanup sites. COSV coordination in these projects may help ensure that revegetation efforts are successful. 3.2.5 Riverside State ParklCentennial Trail Management Activities Through State Parks' Classification and Management Planning Project, the Riverside State Park Management Plan was created in 2005 to establish a management plan for the park that is consistent with the agency's goal to identify appropriate recreational experiences that meet the needs of the public while protecting natural, cultural, and recreational resources for future generations (State Parks 2005). The park includes several subareas. The Centennial Trail subarea is the park area found along the Spokane River in a narrow band along much of both shorelines through the COSV. According to the plan, there are two relevant natural resource management issues for the Centennial Trail subarea. These include noxious weed control and protection of wildlife habitat/natural ecosystems. As part of the park-wide vegetation management program, the plan directs park staff to coordinate with their Regional Stewardship Manager to solicit cooperation from local governments to enhance noxious weed control efforts along segments of the Centennial Trail for which they have management responsibility. To achieve this, park staff is expected to actively solicit volunteer participation in manual removal of noxious weeds along the Centennial Trail. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov.B, 2012 3-4 SECTIONTHREE Existing and Ongoing Prolects and Programs The plan directs wildlife habitat and natural ecosystem protection efforts to focus on riparian planting projects. Specifically, the plans' maintenance program includes planting of appropriate native vegetation along the shoulders of the Centennial Trail to reduce noxious weed invasion and enhance slope stability. 3.2.6 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Habitat Mitigation Fund The WDFW issues Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) permits to projects proposing construction within flowing waters. In order to issue an HPA, the WDFW must ensure that project-related impacts to fish habitat are mitigated. Using money collected through past permit violations as well as payments made in lieu of onsite compensatory mitigation from various bridge projects along the Spokane River, the WDFW created a habitat mitigation fund. The purpose of this fund is to provide dollars for fish enhancement projects within the river that offset past habitat impacts associated with the permitted projects and violations. Typically, the fund is passed on to local conservation organizations that implement specific shoreline restoration projects. Use of the fund is discontinuing as the agency is moving away from the current process, which often makes the link between project impacts and future restoration projects difficult to follow. Future bridge projects, like the Sullivan Road Bridge repair project proposed by the COSV, will likely need to prepare project-specific mitigation plans in order to obtain an HPA. However, remaining money in the fund may be available for shoreline restoration projects within the COSV. To be eligible, the restoration project must benefit fish habitat. As riparian restoration projects and shoreline stabilization/erosion control project benefit fish habitat, it is possible that these projects would be eligible for use of any remaining funds. 3.2.7 Local Volunteer Groups The COSV is fortunate to receive help from a variery of volunteer groups that engage in habitat restoration, often in shoreline areas. These groups include the Spokane River Forum, Friends of the Falls, the Spokane Canoe and Kayak Club, the Northwest Whitewater Association, Trout Unlimited, and the Veterans Conservation Corps among others. Recent shoreline restoration projects implemented by such groups include riparian plantings and the restoration of Mirabeau Park This project involved debris and weed removal, a drain system to remedy shoreline erosion from stormwater runoff, and hydro-seeding with native plants to stabilize the affected shoreline area and provide native plant community support. Other recent volunteer efforts in the COSV include the 2012 Spokane River Clean-Up. This year's event is planned to cover the University District, Sullivan Park, Barker Road, and Harvard Road in Spokane Valley. Each year, the amount of litter removed from the Spokane River's shorelines grows as more volunteers show up and cover more area. A growing list of groups and organizations participate each year, including high schools, churches, whitewater groups, service clubs, and others. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov.B, 2012 3-5 SECTIONTHREE Existing and Ongoing Prolects and Programs In addition, the Lands Council planted a mix of about 50 native shrubs at the Barker Road trailhead during the Spokane River Cleanup in 2011 and about 1,200 ponderosa pines along the Spokane River near Sullivan Park during Reforest Spokane Day in 2011. The Lands Council plans to continue these efforts in Spokane Valley during future Reforest Spokane Days and has identified high schools that may be interested in assisting with volunteer efforts. Shoreline restoration opportunities described in this plan would be of assistance to the council as they plan for future shoreline planting projects. 3.3 ADDITIONAL PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS NEEDED TO ACHIEVE SHORELINE RESTORATION GOALS The following proposed additional projects and programs may augment the existing, ongoing projects and programs in a manner that addresses the limiting factors and, thereby, meets the shoreline restoration goal (Section 2.1): • Support volunteer groups engaged in shoreline restoration activities • Coordinate with WDFW to direct wildlife mitigation funds towards shoreline enhancement projects within COSV and/or develop habitat enhancement strategies to offset impacts associated with proposed bridge projects • Work with the Ecology to incorporate revegetation into future hazardous materials cleanup activities located along the river • Work with project managers within COSV government to incorporate shoreline restoration into proposed capital improvement projects located near Shoreline of the State • Generate funding through fees to support staff availability for shoreline restoration coordination The existing level of local interest in shoreline habitat enhancements is promising but, as a volunteer and grant funding-dependent venture, it cannot be relied upon alone to realize the goal of no net loss of ecological functions within the SMP planning area. However, grant-funded volunteer efforts have contributed greatly towards shoreline restoration efforts, as noted above, and the COSV should periodically check in with these volunteer organizations to see how the COSV can assist with planning for future shoreline restoration efforts. Regional WDFW mitigation funds have been and will continue to be provided to either the Spokane Conservation District (SCD) or Trout Unlimited to be used for implementing habitat enhancements. To tap into these, the COSV will need to coordinate with the SCD, Trout Unlimited, and the WDFW to create agreements for the design, permitting (as necessary), implementation, and maintenance of shoreline enhancement projects. Therefore, the COSV planning staff should begin to regularly coordinate with these groups to steer funds towards identified restoration priorities. Ecology's river cleanup plans currently lack robust vegetation enhancement components. Cleanup sites noted near Sullivan appear to involve a gravel cap with no vegetation. These Ecology cleanup efforts should be encouraged to incorporate a vegetative restoration component, preferably with input from State Parks and the COSV, to ensure that the projects are consistent with the Shoreline Restoration Goals of the SMP. Capital improvement projects slated within the shoreline areas have the potential to be planned and funded so as to include an element of shoreline restoration. This includes the Sullivan Road Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov.B, 2012 3-6 SECTIONTHREE Existing and Ongoing Prolects and Programs Bridge repair project and enhanced formal river access developments described in the access management plan element of the COSV SMP update. When discussing justification for the spending of tax dollars on shoreline restoration elements of future capital improvement projects, this plan may be referenced as it describes the role of shoreline restoration under the SMP. Lastly, the COSV may modify shoreline development permit fees so that they generate sufficient income to cover the cost of staff involvement in shoreline restoration coordination. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov.B, 2012 3-7 SECTIONFOUR Prioritization Methodology The prioritization methodology described in this plan was created specifically for the shoreline conditions along the Spokane River and Shelley Lake. Prioritization of restoration areas was based on five factors that are simple to measure and greatly influence the value of shoreline enhancements. Geographical Information Systems (GIS) technology was utilized to measure and score each site. Each site is scored on a scale of 1 to 5 for each of the five factors. The sum of the scores for these five factors provided an overall priority score for each site. This score illuminates restoration opportunities that are both practical to develop and result in the greatest benefit to shoreline functions. Table 3. Restoration Priorit Scorin Criteria Factor Measurement Scoring Criteria Ease of property Public ownership Public(5)ar private(1) acquisition Shade benefit Aspect along stream South bank(5),west bank(3), east bank(2),or north (thermoregulation) corridar(far planting of bank(1). Sites with more than one aspect receive the woody vegetation) highest aspect score. Sites that would not produce shade are scored as 0. Scale of restoration Size(acreage) Area>2 acres(5),> 1 but<2 acres(3),>0.5 but <1 activity acre (2),and area smaller than 0.5 acres(1) Role within context of Habitat connectivity Creates or fills gaps in wildlife habitat corridor surrounding habitat matrix (continuous woody vegetation cover)to produce a corridor that is greater than 10001inear feet(5), 500 to 9991inear feet(3), 100 to 4991inear feet(2),or under 1001inear feet(1). Restoration opportunities that would not create shade within 100 feet of the shoreline are not applicable and receive a scare of 0. Consistency with other Supports at least one other This plan addresses SMP Goal#7 (Restore habitat and SMP goals SMP goal the natural systems to improve shoreline ecological functions). Far shoreline restoration actions that have the additional merit of supporting other SMP goals, such as flood hazard reduction(Goal#9)or safe public access (Goal#10),those actions will receive a score of 5 far this factar. Natural Heritage Data and Prioriry Habitat & Species data were also factored in the prioritization analysis but these data did not affect any one site more than the others based on a lack of known populations within the COSV's shoreline areas. The priority scores are ranked from highest to lowest in Table 4 of this report. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 4-1 SECTIONFIVE Restoration Opportunities Restoration opportunities are discussed below as either a programmatic opportunity or as a site- specific opportunity. Site-specific opportunities draw directly from physical shoreline assessments that identified sites where degraded conditions could be restored to a properly functioning condition. These are opportunities for shoreline restoration for the COSV's consideration as the plan is implemented. As restoration opportunities identified in this plan are voluntary and subject to available funding, the COSV is not obligated to implement these opportunities directly. However, the COSV should reference these projects when reviewing shoreline development proposals or discussing shoreline projects with public agencies or interested volunteer groups. Where possible, the COSV should attempt to incorporate shoreline restoration into prospective projects, and track such progress, to document compliance with the shoreline restoration element of the SMP. 5.1 PROGRAMMATIC RESTORATION OPPORTUNITIES Programmatic opportunities are those that can be incorporated into existing or proposed programs with the goal of restoring ecological functions to the waterways without focusing on specific sites. Programmatic opportunities include approaches like public education or regulatory policy changes. These changes do not address specific sites, but rather, modify the way in which the public generally uses and views the shoreline areas in Spokane. OPPORTUNITY STRATEGY 1. Public Education Examples include incorporation of stream restoration practices (planting) and stewardship opportunities (minimal water use, litter removal) into environmental education curriculum at Spokane Valley Public Schools and colleges. Also, schools can be assigned to specific shoreline reaches to foster a conservation relationship between students and their local environment. 2. Shoreline Regulations The COSV manages development by regulating use, setbacks, height, and Enforcement design, and other standards to reduce impacts to ecological functions. 3. Shoreline Maintenance The following are examples of ways in which the COSV can restore shoreline areas through COSV maintenance programs: a. Identify potential funding sources to support the development and implementation of shoreline maintenance and enhancement strategies and low impact development strategies for COSV parks located in shoreline areas. This would apply to the following parks managed or maintained by the Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Department (within SMA jurisdiction): Sullivan Park, Mirabeau Park, the Myrtle Point Natural Area, and any portions of the Centennial Trail maintained by the COSV. b. Develop roadside maintenance and enhancement strategies with the City of Spokane Valley Public Works Department for road ROW areas within SMA jurisdiction. Maintenance strategies can include slope stabilization (seeding/planting of bare soil areas), noxious weed control, and protection of native vegetation. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov.B, 2012 $-1 SECTIONFIVE Restoration Opportunities Representative streets include North Barker Road, North Flora Road, North Sullivan Road, South Mirabeau Parkway, and East Coyote Rock Drive. 4. Conservation Futures The COSV may utilize conservation futures funding to purchase private properties with high restoration potential or developments within a flood zone to enhance shoreline areas. 5. Stormwater Plan/ The COSV's stormwater master planning may identify ways to Development Standards reduce non-treated runoff from entering aquatic habitats. Additionally, development standards may be reviewed to determine whether updated standards would provide opportunities for reducing pollution associated with stormwater. 5.2. SITE-SPECIFIC RESTORATION OPPORTUNITIES Table 4 summarizes the site-specific restoration opportunities that were identified during detailed stream assessments that occurred in 2010 as summarized in the City of Spokane T�alley Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report (URS 2010). For each opportunity, the cause of degradation (impairment), functions affected, conceptual restoration strategy, and restoration priority are provided. Photographs representative of the general impairments encountered at the restoration opportunity sites are contained in Appendix B. Opportunities are arranged by their prioriry score. Spokane River restoration opportunities can be seen on Figures 3a, 3b, and 3c. Shelley Lake restoration opportunities can also be seen in an inset on Figure 3c. Sites are generally numbered progressively along the waterway, beginning at the downstream extent and continuing progressively up river to the east. It should be noted that opportunities for enhancing the drawdown zone (shorelines between seasonal high and low water levels) around Shelley Lake were investigated. Little research exists on successful revegetation practices for drawdown environments. A review of historical photography indicates that vegetation did not naturally establish along the north, west, and south sides of the lake. Therefore, efforts to establish vegetation there would be better described as enhancement rather than restoration. Recent past efforts to establish vegetation were unsuccessful according to local residents. Vegetation establishment along the lake's northern, western, and southern drawdown zones would likely require either stabilizing lake water levels, benching/terracing the shoreline, or irrigation. Due to the proximity of the lake's shorelines to adjacent, developed residential properties and the frequency of human visitors on and around the lake, enhancement of the lake's steep shorelines would seem to be a low priority within the greater COSV. This is especially true with regard to ensuring no-net-loss of shoreline ecological functions when considering the degree of difficulty associated with water level management and/or shoreline grading around Shelley Lake. As such, the shoreline restoration opportunities identified around Shelley Lake (see Table 4) focus on the restoration of habitat along the east end of the lake and a wetland area just southeast of the lake where shorelines are more likely to support successful plantings. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov.B, 2012 $-2 SECTIONFIVE Table 4. Shoreline Restoration Opportunities Site Site Priority ID Waterway Impairment Conceptual Restoration Approach Score Area of bank erosion due to high A combination of slope bioengineering 22 30 Spokane winter flow energy directed against combined with potenrial upstream fluvial 20 18 18 17 17 17 16 16 River bank.Heavily rip-rapped modifications to decrease flow energy Managed access and noxious weed 31 Degraded l�abitat with large control. If off-road driving is curtailed, Spokane concentrarion of no�ous weeds and several pine saplings will develop into River off-road vehicle traffic producrive riparian forest habitat 11 Spokane Fence along access road creates Create wildlife undercrossing beneath River impasse for wildlife fenced roadway 24 Spokane Remnant patches of narive prairie Weed control and seeding with narive River habitat competing with weeds prairie species 13 Spokane Break in corridor full of spotted River knapweed Riparian plantings 23 Spokane Degraded l�abitat clearing River associated with old road. Riparian forest plantings Managed access and noxious weed 33 Degraded l�abitat with large control. If off-road driving is curtailed, Spokane concentrarion of no�ous weeds and several pine saplings will develop into River off-road vehicle traffic producrive riparian forest habitat Signage indicating riparian rel�abilitation 6 Spokane Break in high quality riparian shrub to allow for passive restorarion.Many River corridor saplings here Formal trail establishment between 10 Spokane Habitat degradation due to parking areas and rock outcropping along River ��aged pedestrian traffic shoreline. Signage,plantings, and RESTORATION OPPORTUNITIES Acres Public Nop Photo' 0.65 YES 3-C 1 2.88 YES 3-C 0.03 YES 3-B 3-B,3- 3.63 YES C 0.75 YES 3-B 0.44 YES 3-B 0.60 YES 3-C 2 0.30 YES 3-A 8.47 I YES I 3-B Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8, 2012 $-3 SECTIONFIVE Site Site Priority ID Waterway Impairment Conceptual Restoration Approach Score 16 16 16 16 16 16 15 15 15 15 between parking areas and shoreline. strategic fencing to limit dispersed travel ig Spokane Remnant patches of narive prairie Riparian forest plantings along banks and River habitat compering with weeds prairie restorarion on terrace above 20 Spokane Disturbed/cleared area with large River spotted knapweed infestation Riparian forest plantings 21 Spokane Disturbed/cleared area with large River spotted knapweed infestation Riparian forest plantings 29 Spokane Ecology clean up area resulting in Riparian plantings and habitat features River bare gravel fill (woody debris) 36 Spokane Slope bioengineering and riparian River Erosive gully plantings Formal access combined with native 3 g Recently burnt area with heavy foot planrings and weed control to deter Spokane traffic associated with recrearion transirion to post-fire cheat-grass River access community Remnants of native Rathdrum Prairie 5 Spokane habitat compering with noxious River weeds Weed control � Spokane Degraded riparian slope area with River heavy foot traffic Riparian plantings Plant height appropriate shrubs along 16 Spokane Eroding area beneath transmission slope beneath powerline to create cover River line,break in riparian corridor for wildlife and slope stabilization Spokane 26 Eroding, steep streambank beneath River ��1. Support for trail and bench Slope bioengineering Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8, 2012 RESTORATION OPPORTUNITIES Acres Public Nop Photo' 2.57 YES 3-B 0.11 YES 3-B 0.13 I YES I 3-B 0.28 I YES I 3-C 0.09 � YES � 3-C 2.07 � YES � 3-C 3.94 � YES � 3-A 1.36 I YES I 3-A 1.77 I YES I 3-B 0.61 I YES I 3-C 3 4 5 6 7 5-4 SECTIONFIVE Site Site Priority ID Waterway Impairment Conceptual Restoration Approach Acres Score feature are failing Wetland functions including water filtration,temperature regulation,and 15 40 habitat comple�ty would be enhanced by Shelley Wetland along tributaty to lake lacks planring narive shrubs in upper fringe of Lake cover/shade wetland and trees along wetland buffer 14 12 Spokane Sparse riparian vegetarion lacks River cover/shade Riparian plantings/underplanrings Opporiunity for narive plant 14 32 Spokane Area historically culrivated for apple establishment and/or upland native prairie River trees seeding 13 19 Spokane Remnant patches of narive prairie Controlled burn combined with native River habitat competing with weeds seeding and knapweed control 12 4 Spokane Area full of construction debris and Debris removal, managed access,and River disturbed by random trails riparian plantings 12 g Spokane Sparse riparian vegetarion lacks Riparian shrub plantings and narive River cover/shade prairie enhancement 12 17 Spokane Slope erosion due to heavy foot Controlled access/stairs would allow for River traffic passive restorarion 11 3 Spokane River Erosion/break in corridor Slope stabilization/plantings 11 9 Spokane River Degraded riparian habitat Shoreline stabilization/riparian plantings 11 14 Spokane Erosion associated with heavy foot Bioengineered slope stabilizarion and River traffic managed/formal access RESTORATION OPPORTUNITIES Public Nop Photo' 2.25 NO 3-C 1.41 YES 3-B 1.48 YES 3-C 0.65 YES 3-B 0.55 NO 3-A 4.59 NO 3-B 0.28 YES 3-B 0.14 NO 3-A 0.30 YES 3-B 0.04 YES 3-B 8 9 10 Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8, 2012 $-$ SECTIONFIVE Site Site Priority ID Waterway Impairment Score 11 15 Spokane Remnant patches of narive prairie River l�abitat compering with weeds 11 22 Spokane Disturbed/cleared area with large River spotted knapweed infestation Conceptual Restoration Approach Weed control and seeding with native prairie species Riparian forest plantings Provide a return flow culvert to drain 11 34 Spokane flood waters tl�at otherwise erode trail River Flood erosion undercutting trail and adjacent habitat areas 11 37 Spokane Degraded shoreline habitat with high River spotted knapweed concentrarion Riparian plantings 9 1 Spokane Habitat degraded by old road River resulting in break in riparian corridor Riparian plantings 9 35 Spokane Degraded shoreline habitat with high River spotted knapweed concentrarion Riparian plantings 8 39 Shelley Reed canarygrass removal;narive plant Lake Noxious weeds establishment � 2 Spokane River Eroded gully Slope stabilization/plantings � 28 Spokane Break in vegetation corridor on steep River slope Riparian forest plantings Degraded grassland habitat 6 25 Spokane dominated by non-native vegetarion, River break in riparian forest corridor Riparian plantings 3 27 Spokane Remnant patches of narive prairie Selective weed control and passive River habitat compering with weeds restorarion 1Photo Numbers Refer to Appendix A. RESTORATION OPPORTUNITIES Acres Public Map No. 0.50 NO 3-B 0.12 � YES � 3-B 0.02 � YES � 3-C 1.87 I NO I 3-C 0.33 I NO I 3-A 025 � YES � 3-C 0.27 I NO I 3-C 0.01 I NO I 3-A 0.10 � NO I 3-C 0.49 I NO I 3-C 0.67 I NO I 3-C Photo' 11 12 13 Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8, 2012 $-6 SECTIONFIVE RESTORATION OPPORTUNITIES 5.3 CONCEPTUAL RESTORATION APPROACHES Restoration opportunities listed in Table 4 of this plan include conceptual restoration approaches. These approaches address the specific impairments at each restoration opportuniry site. Where possible, they attempt to address the cause of the impairment to achieve long-term gains in shoreline ecological functions. The majority of the recommended restoration approaches have to do with riparian forest or scrub-shrub plantings. This is because these types of restoration projects tend to provide multiple ecological benefits that enhance various shoreline functions. According to research conducted while preparing the City of Spokane T�alley Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report (URS 2010), riparian plantings tend to provide the greatest return on investment along the Spokane River, considering the options available to the COSV. Plantings within areas of active river flow tend to require greater planning; these areas often require additional restoration factors to ensure that plantings are not washed out with the first high water of the season. Riparian planting projects located above the area of seasonally high water are generally much simpler to establish. This section provides generalized restoration information associated with the conceptual approaches noted in Table 4 to aid in developing site specific restoration plans. 5.3.1 Riparian Plantings Native riparian plantings almost always enhance quality of riparian habitats. The qualiry of riparian habitat promotes several beneficial functions to both the terrestrial and aquatic habitat components. These include pollutant filtering, wildlife habitat (cover, food, roosting), habitat connectivity, shading/temperature control of water, and input of organic matter (e.g., leaf litter) that provides food web support to aquatic species, including support for benthic invertebrates (Covitch et. al. 1999). Benthic invertebrates, or insects that live in the river soils, are a primary food source for native fish but heavy concentrations of inetals in the river substrate have negatively affected the invertebrates, thus affecting the overall food web (Ecology 2005). Planning for riparian planting projects must address the physical and ecological site conditions such as soil stabiliry, moisture a�ailabiliry, and aspect (amount of sun). Successful riparian plantings require appropriate species selection for a given set of local site conditions. Some species are found more commonly on the north, dry banks of the Spokane River, while others prefer the less-exposed southern banks. Certain species grow near the river edge while others prefer the elevations slightly above the water but where roots can reach the seasonally low water table. For these reasons, a qualified ecologist with riparian planting experience should assist with developing planting plans for specific areas whenever possible. Appendix C of the City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report (URS 2010) includes a list of vegetation inventoried along the shoreline. Native species contained in this list provide a good starting point for the development of a restoration project plant list. 5.3.2 Streambank Stabilization Streambanks often become unstable as a result of natural forces, such as increased water velocity. Where vegetation is present, the water scour energy is dissipated by the vegetation and Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 $-7 SECTIONFIVE RESTORATION OPPORTUNITIES the soils are bound by the roots, thus resulting in less erosion. However, where vegetation is absent or degraded, often in association with pedestrian foot traffic or historical clearing, soils become less stable and prone to erosion. Erosion, although a natural process, can be detrimental to aquatic organisms when the amount of loose sediments in the river (turbidity) exceeds low densities. In addition to protecting human infrastructure, such as the Centennial Trail, streambank stabilization reduces the potential for shoreline erosion. Depending on site-specific conditions, one or more actions may be appropriate to stabilize an eroding shoreline area. Riparian plantings contribute greatly to bank stabilization by binding soil in roots and acting as a buffer to water velociry and abrasive materials transported in water. Based on existing streambank conditions, stabilization may also require engineering techniques such as slope set-back, terracing, soil wraps, or placement of large woody debris (LWD), to promote long-term stability. The term "bioengineering" used in Table 4 refers to the use of both engineering materials and biological materials that can grow within an engineered structure to provide structural support as well as habitat and shade functions. Examples include large rock or soil wrapped in geotextile fabric and secured with willow stakes. Streambank bioengineering in low precipitation areas often include live-stake plantings, brush or tree revetments, erosion control straw blankets, and willow fascines (Hoag and Fripp 2002). In certain situations, more durabiliry is needed to secure banks against high water velociry, to protect property and stabilize eroding riparian habitat. Hard devices such as rip-rap should be specifically sized and configured to the situation by a qualified person or team. Where possible, they should incorporate plantings. Geotechnical and hydraulic considerations are important to assess on a site-specific basis. 5.3.3 Noxious Weed Control Noxious weed control is an essential component of riparian vegetation maintenance and restoration. Native vegetation,in many areas throughout Spokane Valley,has the potential to re-establish through passive means (i.e., by itsel�but competition from non-native and noxious vegetation in many areas is sufficient to prevent its successful growth. The installation of native vegetation in areas where weeds are prevalent requires careful site preparation and noxious weed maintenance. Given realistic constraints on long-term site maintenance, the best opportuniry to control weeds is to select plants to install that can compete against the weed(s), and in the best case scenario outcompete(i.e., shade out)weeds. The goal should be to establish a"weed-resistant"plant community to the extent possible. An Integrated Pest Management(Il'M)approach to establishing fa�orable conditions for native plants and controlling invasive plants should be used. Several references are available on weed control and specialists with the County Noxious Weed Control Board are very knowledgeable of current control strategies. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 $-g SECTIONSIX IMPLEMENTATION PLAN This section addresses an implementation framework for the COSV's shoreline restoration planning as per WAC 173-26-201 (2)(�(vi). An implementation plan must include identified partners,potential funding sources, timelines, and benchmarks. 6.1 POTENTIAL RESTORATION PARTNERS The following organizations have demonstrated an interest in shoreline protection or restoration in the vicinity of Spokane Valley. These organizations may be contacted when seeking partners for restoration project funding, construction, and/or maintenance and monitoring. Table 5: Existing Partnership Opportunities Organization Summary Washington The WCC is an affiliate of the Americorps program administered by Ecology. The Conservation Corps WCC provides members the opportunity to develop skills in environmental (WCC) restoration,trail work, environmental education, and disaster response. City of Spokane Valley Water districts are involved in planning far water use within the COSV. They may be Water Districts interested in partnering on projects that conserve water ar enhance habitat. Friends of the Falls Friends of the Falls is a non-profit arganization warking to implement projects identified in the Strategic Master Plan far the Spokane River area. Inland Northwest Land INLT is a local,non-profit,non-political organization with over 450 members. Trust(INLT) Through easements, acquisitions, and by working with other conservation partners, INLT warks to preserve wetlands, shorelines,farmlands, and forests in eastern Washington and northern Idaho. Local Academia Three local colleges have biology programs that include riparian ecology studies. By coardinating with biology professors,the COSV may be able to areate mutually beneficial relationships with their biology studies,particularly with graduate students studying riparian ecology. Gonzaga and Whitworth college have undergraduate biology programs. Eastem Washington University has undergraduate and graduate biology programs. Riverside State Park The foundation is a volunteer group that assists the efforts of State Parks staff by Foundation raising funds far the park, accomplishing specific projects, and being a helpful source for working with the community in many ways. The mission of the foundation is to preserve and protect the natural resources and inherent beauty of Riverside State Park. Sierra Club Upper The Sierra Club is a non-profit volunteer arganization that has been working to protect Columbia River Group the natural environment and communities.The club is one of the largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization in the United States. Spokane Audubon The mission of the Spokane Audubon Society is to provide services to the Spokane Society region that allow natural ecosystems to become more healthy,thriving, and restarative, to nurture and protect birds and other wildlife and their habitats, and to encourage biological diversity for the benefit of people and nature in the Spokane region and the world. Spokane Canoe and The Spokane Canoe and Kayak Club is an organization of individuals who are Kayak Club enthusiastic about human-powered watercraft. In recent years the club has participated Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 6-1 SECTIONSIX IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Organization Summary in joint habitat restoration projects,including the Spokane River Cleanup and tree plantings at Mirabeau Park. Spokane Conservation The Washington Conservation District Law(RCW 89.08)describes the responsibilities District(SCCD) and purpose of conservation districts,which include: •Conducting education and demonstration projects. •Carrying out improvements to conserve natural resources. •Cooperating ar entering into agreements with others,including other districts. •Making equipment and materials available to landowners to assist them in conserving natural resources. The mission of the SCD is to promote the sustainable use of natural resources within Spokane County. The district provides information on their available programs and services, as well as potential funding sources from outside agencies. Spokane River Forum The forum is a non-profit arganization that creates materials, events, and activities that promote regional dialogs far sustaining a healthy river system while meeting the needs of a growing population. The forum has been involved in various shareline restaration projects,including tree plantings at Mirabeau Park The Lands Council The Lands Council is a Spokane-area grassroots,non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the quality of life in the Inland Northwest. The Lands Council has protected thousands of aares of public land, and in the process worked to preserve farests,water, and wildlife. Trout Unlimited, The mission of Trout Unlimited is to conserve,protect, and restore cold water fisheries, Spokane Falls Chapter their watersheds, and ecosystems as a means of maintaining our quality of life. The Spokane Falls Chapter of Trout Unlimited does this by promoting effective fish management decisions, and by taking an active part in habitat restoration and fish production projects. Veterans Conservation The mission of the Veterans Conservation Corps is to assist veterans by providing Corps training and volunteer opportunities that help to restore and protect Washington state's natural resources. Volunteer and internship opportunities include: •Stream restoration and monitoring •Revegetation of native plants •Restaration of watersheds,forests,prairies or native grasslands •Environmental or community education •Other protection or restaration activities WDFW's Habitat The Restoration Division leads WDFW's efforts to restare and protect aquatic Program,Restoration ecosystems by providing scientific, engineering, and planning expertise through Division cooperative partnerships.The division's focus areas include: •Providing near shore ecosystem assessment, strategic planning, and funding assistance to local communities. •Identifying and prioritizing needed projects to remove fish passage barriers. •Providing training and guidance to local restaration project proponents to help communities inventory fish passage and successfully restore habitat. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 6-2 SECTIONSIX IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Organization Summary • Supporting aquatic habitat restoration by providing environmental engineering review,design, and technical guidance to public and private landowners and restoration entities. In addition to the partnership opportunities listed above, many others are likely. For example, local schools may be interested in supporting shoreline restoration projects. 6.2 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF FUNDING There are several sources of potential funding available to the COSV and potential restoration partners for shoreline restoration projects. This section summarizes the most likely and available funding sources. Potential restoration partners in the Spokane Valley area have indicated that the following grants have been, or are likely to be, used to fund previous shoreline restoration projects. Environmental Protection Agency: • Five-Star Restoration Pro�ram - This grant funds community-based wetland restoration having a strong "on-the-ground" component, with long-term ecological, educational, and/or socio-economic benefits to the community. This grant is available to citizen volunteer organizations, corporations, landowners, federal, state, tribal agencies, local government, charitable foundations, and youth groups. The grant provides $5,000- $20,000 on average. A $10,000 grant requires in-kind or cash match at l:l. Each project ideally involves five partners. Apply in March - awards in May. For further information contact John Pai, US EPA, Wetlands Division, 202-260-8076,pai.john@epa.gov. http://www.epa.�ov/owow/wetlands/restore/5 star/ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: • Habitat Conservation - Partners for Fish and Wildlife Pro�ram - This program provides expert technical assistance and cost-share incentives to private landowners to restore fish and wildlife habitats. Any privately owned land is potentially eligible. After signing a cooperative agreement with a minimum duration of 10 years, the landowner works one- on-one with a local Service biologist to develop a project plan addressing the goals and objectives of the landowner and the Service to benefit fish and wildlife species on his/her land. The landowner is reimbursed after project completion, based on the cost-sharing formula in the agreement. For further information contact Juliet Barenti, Eastern Washington Coordinator, 11103 East Montgomery #2, Spokane, WA 99206, 509-893- 8005, Juliet_Barenti@fws.gov. • Upper Columbia Fish and Wildlife Office Recoverv Pro�ram - Recovery grants are available to fund restoration, recovery, assessment, or research projects with an emphasis on well-planned "on-the-ground" projects that restore or enhance fish and wildlife and/or their habitats, benefit federally listed/candidate species and their habitats, or improve listed species numbers. Non-profits and private landowners are eligible. There is no Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 6-3 SECTIONSIX IMPLEMENTATION PLAN match requirement; however, projects with some cost share or in-kind support may be prioritized. Proposals are accepted near the beginning of each fiscal year for restoration or recovery projects to be funded during that fiscal year. For further information contact Suzanne Audet at (509) 893-8002, Juliet Barenti at (509) 893-8005, or Greg Van Stralen at (509) 665-3508 ext. 20, or by email at: suzanne_audet@fws.gov, juliet_barenti@fws.gov, or greg_vanstralen@fws.gov. Washington State Department of Ecology: • Centennial Clean Water Fund - Provides funding for activities to reduce nonpoint pollution, comprehensive planning (sewer, storm water, watershed), and/or construction point source facilities. Available to local governments, tribes, and special purpose districts such as sewer, health, conservation districts. The funding is capped at $250,000 for up to four years and requires a 25 percent match except for construction projects, which require a 50 percent match. Funding is awarded annually. Notice and workshops occurs in December and January. Applications are due late February. For further information contact Tim Hilliard at Ecology, (360) 407-6429, thi1461(a�ecv.wa._gov. http://www.ecv.wa.�ov/fap.html • Flood Control Assistance Account Pro_rg am _ This statewide financial assistance program funds proposals that can demonstrate a propensity for preservation, restoration, or enhancement of Endangered Species Act-listed fishery resources through planning or flood damage reduction projects. Any public entity that belongs to the National Flood Insurance Program, including towns, cities, counties, and eligible Native American tribes throughout the state are eligible. Funding is capped at $500,000 per county per biennium and requires a 25-50 percent match, depending on the project. Applications are due in May, with funds available in September. For further information contact Ted Olson at Ecology, (509) 329-3413, to1s461(a�ecv.wa._gov. • Nonpoint Source Implementation Grant (319) Pro�ram - This fund provides grants to local governments, Native American tribes, state agencies, and nonprofit organizations to address identified non-point source pollution and to improve and protect water quality. Grant funds available for each state are determined by an Environmental Protection Agency-developed allocation formula. Grants are awarded annually. For further information contact Helen Bresler at Ecology, (360) 407-6180, hbre461@ecy.wa.gov. • Watershed Plannin� Grant Pro�ram - This program provides funds for the organizational, assessment, and planning phases of watershed related projects. The program requires a 10 percent match for Phase 4 watershed planning implementation. Eligible candidates include government agencies or tribes who wish to apply for grant funds for watershed related projects. To be eligible for Phase 4 funding, the Watershed Plan must have received approval from the planning unit and the county government(s). Grant amounts vary depending on which phase of planning is to be funded and whether projects involve one or more than one WRIA. Grants are funded on a fiscal year basis. Applications are due in June and awards are announced in July. For further information contact Cathy Hubbard, Grants Administrator, at Ecology, (360) 407-6491, cahu461 @ecy.wa.gov. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 6-4 SECTIONSIX IMPLEMENTATION PLAN • Washington Coastal Protection Fund — Terry Husseman Water Qualitv Account - This account is used to fund environmental, recreational, and aesthetic restoration and enhancement projects. Funding is available to local governments, tribes, watershed planning units, nonprofits, and state agencies. Priority is given to projects that involve partnerships with local resources/ volunteers. Requires Ecology partner. Total available funding is $200,000 for all projects. Match not required but given points. Applications are accepted year-round. For further information contact Melissa Gildersleeve, Watershed Coordinator, (360) 407-6548, m�i1461(a�ecv.wa.�ov. Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office: • Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account (ALEA) - This grant supports the purchase, improvement, or protection of aquatic lands for public purposes, including improved accessibiliry. The grant is available to local governments, state agencies, and tribes. Applicants must provide at least 50 percent in matching resources. Projects must be consistent with the local shoreline master program and must be located on lands adjoining a water body that meets the definition of"navigable." For further information contact Kim Sellers, Outdoor Grant Manager, (360)902-3082, kims(a�rco.wa.�ov. Washington State Department of Natural Resources: • Restoration Fundin�Pro�ram — The DNR funds projects associated with its aquatic lands lease program. Funding typically comes from the ALEA, as described above under the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office. Under the ALEA, the DNR is instructed to ensure that revenue generated from state-owned aquatic land leases goes back to helping restore aquatic environments. Recently, the DNR funded a riparian restoration project at Riverwalk Park in the Ciry of Spokane. For further information contact Monica Shoemaker at(206)799-2949, monica.shoemaker(c(�dnr.wa.�ov. Recreational Equipment Incorporated(REI): • Stewardship Grants - Every year, REI gives 3 percent of its previous year's operating profit to organizations that employees have identified as important players in local conservation activities. In 2010, the company gave $3.7 million in grants to more than 330 groups across the country. The Spokane River Forum is one of three Spokane-area groups to receive an REI grant in 2011. The grant was used to provide improved river access and signage as well as habitat restoration at Mirabeau Park. 6.3 TIMELINE AND BENCHMARKS FOR IMPLEMENTING RESTORATION PLAN Restoration plans involve long-term goals and efforts with major developments generally occurring as funding becomes available. As per WAC 173-26-201(c), master programs must "include planning elements that, when implemented, serve to improve the overall condition of habitat and resources within the shoreline area." To facilitate this policy, this plan outlines five steps that the COSV may pursue to implement the restoration element of the updated SMP and the policies in this plan. The first step will be to establish a restoration program within a department of city government. Within one year of the SMP's formal adoption by the COSV and the state of Washington, the COSV will begin implementing this plan. Implementation Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 6-5 SECTIONSIX IMPLEMENTATION PLAN includes the dedication of staff resources and the formation of a central shoreline restoration file that will contain all documents associated with efforts to coordinate, implement, or otherwise support shoreline restoration activities. Once familiar with the goals, policies, and opportunities contained in this plan, COSV staff would begin the second step, outreach activities. Outreach is likely to include efforts to form partnerships on site-specific restoration opportunities, meetings with potential restoration partners to develop inter-agency/department plans for shoreline restoration, and/or efforts to meet with public and private schools to foster shoreline education and volunteer opportunities. Once the COSV has identified potential restoration partners and specific programmatic or site- specific projects, the third step would involve supporting requests for funding. This would likely happen as a parmership with one of the organizations identified in Section 6.1. Applications for funding will likely target one of the sources identified in Section 62. The fourth step involves support throughout the construction phase of a restoration activity. Examples of COSV support may include, but are not limited to, provision of city resources such as material transport, site preparation, signage, or public outreach. The fifth and final step would monitor the success of the restoration program, as measured by meeting the benchmarks of this plan, and assess the existing program based on monitoring results. The results of this assessment will document progress in implementing the restoration element of the SMP and aid in determining whether a subsequent update is necessary to the SMP, as required under RCW 90.58.080(4). While exact dates cannot be specified for these five steps due to uncertainties in the SMP update adoption schedule and funding availability, Table 6 provides a target timeline to aid in conceptualizing the process. Benchmarks associated with each implementation step were developed to provide a means of demonstrating progress and compliance with SMP restoration goals. Because of uncertain external funding sources and partnership opportunities, benchmarks for site-specific restoration projects are not the focus of this plan. Dates associated with each benchmark are based on an estimated formal SMP update adoption date on or before December 31, 2012. A later adoption date would affect the timeline relative to the period of delay. Benchmark dates are not meant to impede any progress that might occur prior to the date given; any early shoreline restoration progress should be documented and stored in the COSV's files. Table 6: Timeline and Benchmarks Year Step Description Benchmark Ending 1 2013 COSV allocates resources for portion of COSV verifies that sufficient resources have been one full time employee(10-25%) as per allocated by 12/31/2013. COSV will create a this plan. shareline restoration project file to store and track progress. 2 2014 COSV restaration staff has met with COSV will have met with potential restoration several key groups to create partnerships partners. Meetings minutes will be documented on specific shoreline restaration projects. and stared in restaration project file. COSV restaration staffhas met with other COSV departments to look for shoreline restoration opportunities associated with Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 6-6 SECTIONSIX IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Year Step Description Benchmark Ending proposed CIPs within SMP jurisdiction. 3 2016 COSV,in partnership with others,will COSV will participate in one ar mare apply for restaration funding. applications for restaration funding in partnership with arganizations identified through outreach activities by 12/31/2016. 4 2018 COSV supports funded restoration COSV will provide support(as described in proj ects, as able,with materials, Section 6.3,above)for at least one restoration transportation, site preparation, signage, project by 12/31/2018. engineering, etc. 5 2020 COSV monitors progress of program and COSV will monitar the progress and success of specific opportunities. COSV assesses the COSV's restaration program,as per Section progress,determines need far additional 71 of this report by 12/31/2020. SMP updates. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 6-7 SECTIONSEVEN MONITORING,MAINTENANCE,ANDADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT 7.1 MONITORING PLAN This section provides steps for monitoring the successful implementation of this plan as well as a process for monitoring site-specific restoration projects. Monitoring data will be utilized for ongoing maintenance strategies, adaptive management, future grant applications, and subsequent SMP updates. 7.1.1 Monitoring of Plan Benchmarks The following monitoring methods are designed to document progress with the implementation of this restoration plan. Proposed monitoring activities are tied to the benchmarks established in Table 6, above. Future SMP updates will benefit from data collected in this regard. Monitoring will highlight where the COSV's plan is most successful and where it may need improvement prior to the next round of SMP updates. Benchmark 1: Allocate staff resources by 2013. Monitorin� Method: Review and evaluate annual restoration budget to determine if existing funding is sufficient to support implementation of restoration goals. Contin�ency: Request budget summary for projects with restoration element. Ada�tive Mana_eg ment: If the COSV cannot allocate financing for staff to implement a restoration program, the responsibiliry may need to be parsed out and delegated to a variety of departments. If this is the case, it will be important to ha�e a central shoreline restoration file to track overall progress. Benchmark 2: Meet with potential restoration partners by the end of 2014. Monitorin� Method: Document that meetings have occurred or that an attempt was made to schedule meetings. Contin�ency: Document internal COSV meetings where restoration concepts were incorporated into shoreline development projects, such as new bridge work. Adaptive Mana�ement: If the COSV is unsuccessful at organizing a meeting with potential restoration partners, the COSV may delegate COSV's position to a restoration partner with demonstrated restoration goals that complement those of the COSV. Benchmark 3: Apply for funding by 2016 (with partners). Monitorin�Method: Document application for restoration funding. Contin_gencX: Document why no action was made (e.g., lack of partners, staff una�ailable, etc.) and how to ensure future action. Ada�tive Mana_eg ment: If the COSV is unable to partner on restoration funding applications for any reason, the COSV may alternately seek funding through council for programmatic restoration opportunities within the COSV, examples of which are provided in Section 5.1. Benchmark 4: COSV will participate in and provide support for a restoration project by the end of 2018. Monitorin�Method: Document participation in a restoration project. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 SECTIONSEVEN MONITORING,MAINTENANCE,ANDADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT Contin_gencX: Summarize attempts made to assist restoration projects and revise strategy to a method more capable of yielding results. Ada�tive Mana_eg ment: If the COSV is unable for any reason to support a restoration project, the COSV may revise its strategy for obtaining restoration partners and implementing restoration projects. Benchmark 5: Monitor and summarize success of implementing restoration plan by 2020. Monitoring Method: COSV may prepare status reports documenting the COSV's progress toward achieving the goal and policies of this plan, recommended adaptive management strategies, and the need for updating the restoration plan during the next cycle of SMP updates. Contin�ency: Document cause of noncompliance with SMP/failure to implement. Ada�tive Mana_eg ment: COSV will revise strategy based on experience over the first five years since restoration plan was implemented. 7.1.2 Restoration Site Monitoring Several of the site-specific restoration activities are similar in nature. Due to this fact, it is especially important to monitor the success of individual restoration activities so that subsequent restoration projects can be modified based on the particular successes and failures of each completed project. In addition to monitoring new shoreline restoration projects, it is advisable that the COSV or their parmer contact existing shoreline restoration project proponents to see if they are monitoring their restoration projects and, if so, if they will share their monitoring data. When applying for restoration project funding, the COSV and partners should include funding for follow up monitoring in the funding application. Monitoring data can be used to direct maintenance activities and demonstrate that the COSV is following through on the grant-funded projects. In addition, it can ensure grantors that future grant-funded restoration projects will have the benefit of lessons learned from past projects. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Ecosystem Management and Restoration Research Program provides the following description of the process for implementing monitoring for riparian restoration projects: The general process for implementing riparian restoration and monitoring is outlined in five basic steps. These include: (1) setting goals and objectives, (2) developing a monitoring protocol, (3) designing and implementing data collection, (4) analyzing and interpreting monitoring data, and(5) assessing restoration efforts. This process is helpful for monitoring all shoreline projects described by this plan. Additional detail for each of the five steps is provided in the literature (Guilfoyle and Fischer 2006). 7.2 MAINTENANCE Maintenance responsibilities will depend on the specific project and the dynamics of the partnership between the COSV and its restoration partner(s). Maintenance is an important aspect of project completion. The COSV is already committed to maintaining various areas under its park maintenance responsibilities. Often these overlap with State Parks' maintenance responsibilities throughout Riverside Park. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 SECTIONSEVEN MONITORING,MAINTENANCE,ANDADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT Specific maintenance activities will depend on site conditions and monitoring results. For example, restoration projects proposed at sites with identified noxious vegetation will need to maintain weed population reductions. Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 SECTIONEIGHT REFERENCES Covich et. al. 1999. The Role of Benthic Invertebrate Species in Freshwater Ecosystems. Bioscience. Vol. 49, No. 2. February 1999. Ecology (Washington State Department of Ecology ). 2002. Washington State Wetland Evaluation Study, Phase 2: Evaluating Success. Ecology publication #02-06-009. Lacey, W ashington. Ecology. 2003. Introduction to Washington's Shoreline Management Act(RCW 90.58). Ecology Publication 99-113 (2003). Lacey, Washington 2 pp. Ecology. 2004 Restoration Planning and the 2003 Shoreline Management Guidelines. Ecology Publication#04-06-022. Lacey, Washington. 7pp. Ecology. 2005. Draft Cleanup Action Plan, Spokane River Upriver Dam PCB Site, Spokane, WA. Toxics Cleanup Program, Eastern Regional Office. Spokane, WA. Ecology. 2006. Spokane River Water Quality Managed Implementation Plan. Spokane, WA. Ecology. 2010a. Shoreline Master Program Handbook. Ecology Publication #11-06-010. Lacey, W ashington. Ecology. 2010b. Spokane River and Lake Spokane Dissolved Oxygen Total Maximum Daily Load: Water Quality Improvement Report. Ecology Publication#07-10-073. Lacey, WA. GEI Consultants. 2004. Intermountain Province Subbasin Plan. Prepared for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council. Spokane, Washington Hoag, C. and J. Fripp (Prepared by), for Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2002. Streambank Soil Bioengineering Field Guide for Low Precipitation Areas. USDA NRCS Plant Material Center, Aberdeen, ID. Guilfoyle and Fischer. 2006. Guidelines for establishing monitoring programs to assess the success of riparian restoration efforts in arid and semi-arid landscapes. US Army Corps of Engineers Ecosystem Management and Restoration Research Program. Technical Note ERDC TN-EMRRP-SR-50 Spokane County Conservation District (SCCD). 2005. Spokane County Proper Functioning Condition Stream Inventory & Assessment. Spokane, WA. State Parks (Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission). 2005. Riverside State Park Management Plan. Olympia, WA. URS Corporation. 2010. City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program Update, Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report. Spokane Valley, WA. Webster.2007. New MillenniumTM Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.7) Copyright �2003-2007 Lexico Publishing Group, LLC Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8,2012 FIGURES Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8, 2012 APPENDIK A Planning Commission Recommended Draft COSV Shoreline Restoration Plan, Nov. 8, 2012 , , � Chris Bainbrid e From: Sikes, Jeremy(ECY) [JSlK461@£GY.WA.GQV] Sent: Manday, October b1, 2012 11;40 AM To. Lari Barlow Cc: Short, Jaime (ECY); Hun�, Sara {�CY} Sulaject: Restoration Plan Review He�lo Lari, We have camplete our re�iew of the Technical Review Draft Shoreline Restoration Plan dated Septernber 17. We ha�e found the document to be Very we11-crafted and thorough. We especially appreciate the well- thought-out Restoratian Priority Scoring Criteria desc�-ibed in Section 4 and Table 3, and the clear ilCustrati�e figures. Please forward our congratulations to URS and Mr. Herlocker on an excellent restoration plan. ,Ier�rn�S11ces Wetland Specialist 5horefands and Environmental Assistance �rogram Department af Ecalagy- EaStern Region 4601 N Monroe Spokane, Washington 99205 (5�9j 329-3426 Flex Schedule: 7am-4:3Qpm; 2nd and 4th Mondays aff. htt�p://www.ecv.wa.�o�+/pro�rams/sea/wetlandslindex.himl �Piease consider the environment beFore printing this e�mail i �:��"y�y��• w.'�~``-�� . � ` � R 4"•, �'ti'� �,�� _.; ��. , { ._ . li � ��' ,� ��":�,� ��sv�Nem �, d�nr 7� r? � r i i �„� � 'q . � �- .. ... �ci�� F�;'tA`°i � ' ' _ ' �� Y � � r ti .�, y,,, • �;e�"�} ,� o:'�!�`� y �, ^�4a;�'. '� i✓ � �',^ � , `:� � ; a�. ,ti ,�;,��„�r:: ��, f,� 3 a��"'. • : ' . .,,a ±� 4 � � ��h�� 7 ��y �R� i��."�'�p�;�'��k �' a.' a �ir`w,�s�''°'� �.x. .�'� •I�n'i�� ari^`�� '� �Y4 j;' 9a+t.- ; r� � �a' '. 3� ' .. � �'S�'�^ `�i:" y .,� 5 E , a� �' . l . . ..�. `�.� .. �_4,y } �. � �w i Y�w -. �s�.. �:;qCse� � l 'r R��, � .. , ' A.: ti t �:t � �^ + �w � � ` � .• . .` �,F� 1 �.a'°1 2+r' K � ... L . ��" '' �, .�'t . � d .. � y�.w� R �'4'- �7�€�� 3,v,�'t° _ ! �,s�i � .�! g ' � ..fi'r rt.�{�Y��.r. . 1 � ' � f ��; _ s� v� �� . . �.' r � ' �- , _�� .. .rr ,p�{� � . . . � - u� p-, x.`.e��r7J°�'"� '�`- �� :�3� 'w �5 ��' �k;. �� 'r' -�",�i ` �+�y .." ��,:�g �€ �;:�y,1" x� d �� y. f �n t . ,� 'p ` �, �F��'�`�.,�.ro "� o� ��i r , . I� r �° c�_T J . a + �, . t� ��4a � �� .r�g ":, r o s�: ;�4� '�� s aYE ��. ', n , . E . ��' � � �. �[��,-,. � '� ' j-m i +�� ,i.i : "�.` ,_ •,�j - y/ � ' i ° 1�' t f�'�` - � ��s i 4- I , �{4:�f1'�''�,-o,. . ; � �` ar , _�r a � m I— � . ,�'� �:��r •.�.- � � ti$ ♦ �s :r� I�,` .. . r ��• . .� ! {,�}i. � � \ �� : � n�u,* s '�- _ , � � `^ .� � ,� � ..r"�- ��.. _ �\ ��6 . . � %..; �.a�� ..� d'^ ��ppp 5 � ;.. 9 , �N 4 �, , �� ' � n. � °� '� � � � � ;1 , _ .� L � � *" �/— _ / �� '�.' "`� ` `s" �,�� OPP #6 � - ----- - ---- - 4..i t.._. .._' f� % . �i �a. � ____ �+9'.'ti`ii' . � .S' / ��, .. �� T / Q g� � � ��'� � ,o�� Opp #7 � , �, : ��.. ,, � ° , � � � � � � � � � , OPP:�#4 ��a � _ -- _ o� . �a-�r�� ., ',` . .;�. ..y�f!"' � �`�,'�� ,,A_ `,�� - j�PP��#3 �� 4 �a . T�� .''�� l�l` _ - - �,•,�� '.. �s��Opp?K#211� � �,� � �OPP.#8 � I .' \ .s. , t . ' � . \ ` ' . � � � � � ' � ...., ". . ��/,r I� �`' �o �' � � , �, �� ` � a �— �� '�E �A� � � � � �r� t � �� . � � � ?'� . . . � ��;� �:�_. e_ �, _ , �,4 � � J y , �� 1..4...�� u,,..,,�„E �..., -- ,;} % ,_, � ; ; t �f ` �i ,,.r�;` . / I T* f T� t' f I 1 i �,�' S �i �� v;r "`'� ' ' I�f , . , y ` > . , � - 1 . � w"x, ' r4 a � � e, . � _:..4 � .s � a�s! :. � � q �� .��:,� � . w ..- ,; . � �'�,y,.a � J �' y�' ... � � r +9 I I �I I 1 1 �iL�.-� � � P'��"� ��'b�� 't�;�`�g,� ��' �"" , , .. ;' y. �",AS�a�� `�'r�"�T,i 1. .r?,� � � � . , ;,��'� �s�.�.r�+e�� Opp.'#9 ' r� ' ,� � k��a��k_�'�`'T��s_ �' Opp.#10 `� g � �'� � q � '��"� � � Le end �`;; _ � �k .;'� ,� ., � ; �� q"�t� a*,�,'�" , +'• , � :�' �q I i,Y ��. i� �i�x � µ� Opp�#1s1 �u�i. •OPPo#Spokane Valley '+��. , �r}.'_ � '.� � '��_� `k e�r � „� ��a a'i�� K,,��k�� i �■�■. ..�,.. „ r ,. . JY',`,��,r, „ � ..':.' �� L� �. _��% � ,�. ��•. t +.- #, i a �; e . � , i, i a�:. .: , "w-, . � . .w.. .. ,_��,�... � ° 3�`,'J'�� ,*�S. n . - _=Centennial Trail N �Parcels at river inside city limits Draft Environment Designation Ma� W�E 0 0.2 0.4 City of Spokane Valley Miles Figure 2-A Shoreline Master Program Updates g Sept.19,2012 � � .��., � � �� , � C � �� N �' � I I . I I i s i I � � I I i I I � � '. - �' : 1 - — z° i : ; .t „S _Y __ . 8 m f' � �an�� r � F` '�"' ° ' ' 1 c o � n ,�, a>. ' .�, � I+ ., �' 8 .,,' : ' :?.r; , i y �. .,i � : �5'�� .. _ .. � .�� . . . .. .� I _ . ` `O #8 ��- �� i � � .��_ � �. � . �r,:, - .PP -7Ir�`- � � - _�� d ' , 1 ' �I � �—� .�.r...-�� '_: � u Y341.4� � � �,.y � ,�.�'•�r`� '� ' �,; l. _ _"'g"- �`.ryc+�e - +'�_ _ � ' + Ar� . � � �. � "' s � _. � ' [ `s3a'�_�RI� , � a E �� i Y .� . � � ,_,. � a -_ n ,. �.�. �� i�" . � �ar � �°�. �.� �. �i �� t�� 1�� <i� I . . . ,� .:... �.:� . - - .�;� r { I -� r" �� iT I � .. S ' t�� _ �I� � .� � � �-...�� '.... �{��✓f !" f"`3 � . ._ � t .� iIl I V .-�3 Y : � _ }i4� "1 �Sj 1 - �'. � ry �• 1 ��,_ _ _ V;::,,,� . � +� � � il��, -,I x... ��..� ��,� --��. ��[,�_� � .�;. . �� , , r� . ; :, r" : � � � � � =1E3 � � �_ c.t - �. ` 9 � � . �al. . ., � ��` '�' �•�, -,- - " �' .�.,� �� y � 1'i ` `a—� , � OPP.�#9 �.� ; f � . � �, s r.; � ` } 1 ,._.,� ...- , , � �, _.� � � 'r `�' ,: —:- a � - . � �� - _ - � . , , �.,. y;, ti � Opp.#10 Opp #1�1 �' t .� +�.=�'� ":--�� ., f — " � `� � I �.�.-� �1'�-�-` ' I`.�_ � ��',y�E� 03. +��'�,.. . - " ' � �� . �n,��`r. �i .�-. O #12 . �\_ �V.'� .- . . , �. . � � �� ` pp , „ °''�� °' ' ' �, i �� Opp.#29� ,�I � � � pPP #�'4 �� w� t � �z:r�� OPp#8 � _ - _ Opp #13_. _ _ _ i �� , , I �j�� °`„� �, �a� ;.., � ;% �.I.�1�J—j Opp #1;5 P ' , f � '� �� OPP;#26 �v . , . � Opp.#16` � �� , � ^� _ � , , �� , ; �,';::: j� , ,., � f _.._- , , , r� - —O . ,. -�. �,� � �, _- — � ,°•� � � f ,,�! I Opp.#25 T.. -f'•�.�`��'�� w � �i , i �-! � wPP n ��'' -_�� a��pe`l� � � � ^°t " __� o n O #17 O #24 _ mw� ��^ � -� PP� i 1 ��I ` � o� . � �. , '� �t i .i -.. � ' ' �o', \� 'x>� Opp.#18\v ��' �. _ � _ -�' . � � �_ � � d �� - Opp.#19 � - � <.. x , � _ _, � _ � � � ,, _ � .,� , T -' � �`__ �_ ,i L2 j211d `' , � � i ""a�� iqOpp.#20 Opp.#23�� ■�■. .^ _ -. a�^ 'kAp, - Opp #22 !' � �City of Spokane Valley :� � +T °� � ��`' ik _-�� _`��. ,�,. Opp:#23 �/� ■■■ �. . . w � _ i °'�; a{ , o # ��`� �*; '-�� '�� . �:, �i� '�;r +� � - , . , �, �._ - __ P P "?'� � _=Centennial Trail N �Parcels at river inside city limits Draft Environment Designation Map W�E 0 0.2 0.4 City of Spokane Valley Miles Figure 2-B Shoreline Master Program Updates g Sept.19,2012 . .� � . r „_� � � � � > �. ;� I I �� . , � `v . ' � � g' r f � � � �� L.L' ,,� �,,� .�i'�,�� :` � I �� I�I �� ,� 'a .. � 4 -� , .�'�' . �"�� , i= � � � .�� .:. �� , � � � � �i 23 '� � � . ia , � � __ , .. ',�_ � , . � � I.� 1 �y�'y"` a, � F _�� o . i� .f ' 1�_ I i� � - ' O b � six� � i � '. Yr�� ;F , yr��; �•' ` r� .i �� , -. o . ,� .�r'r F ,. � . '!� '� �i � ; � _� 1 � ,�5� �,�'a._:, e� �.�.',- .. 1 � , �I 1 _ �.' p � � � .�. � �� 'w � � . "_--I ,ry .:. , . .� �+..�..x� .-.� � , ... �,'i�� "�"�� '. .�� #Yik'�;I� '. i k ". �i@ '"i _ � Boulder-06sOrchards#1 _ � ' ( . r '�1. I i ",. + , 'd.—r < 'I �m..: «' ,{� � ._ . ` r "s ., r— - M � - { � � � �1�1 � �� — `� �� I , � . _ -. �- ___ °^�^ 4 .� _ � --�' f• __ �� ,ry�� -. - F�_ � � �� ,� e� x ,•u 9 c � _ � �-� � �if_ � �I 5,. � � 4 w � . , �i � � � i' i I r�. r _ �Opp.,#32 � � a I � �'� Q °� :� _.,"�`,�' ;'-�a.1.,a �„,1�� ,� ah � ` � . � ��i_; � '�A �� ` �-�„"'� �, !�" IFA ' e�ae � � ' _ ��:� a:�,. � ". u . . _ � : .-��.�+�� T.�r.:J - z �=3- �o� Opp.#390 \, `+# �� '''.�t, � . � -_ � �r' I �(; � (/� `� ��: � �� ,�� / ��y��{ '�i LL r � . _ ' . . � ��. ! i� � ... i� d' yu � �.. . �. ' " , £ 0. � �r '� _ �r � a �. � �,,,� � !b ;�51` 4 �`� . v '4� � �'' '.- ��r;�y.l� �"r,_ i 3 �'� ��t. �{ r�"I._ � � �. �� ,��•� .. _ �. 'tlrjr� n: �.t �� _� _� � � � � �� A� � �y !<O !#36� n n� �, �PP� � °! ' `�' � p—�y.,�� ,� �r- P � � , �� f jOpp#30 � g ,�� ,`\ �/ ,�. �� . ,' � �� o''; � �� Opp #�37�`/ << I �, i6� �' � �� \, �,, a �, � .�, r � I �52 ��.f�� ,� ` — __ � � ��s,� �pp.#33� Opp:_#35 �� .. �� ,� � i�� .�` ,� �OPP.'#34 - ��(([''� � � o �� ' _ ��"` Opp.#2'9 OPP #29-Y' s R J� \ I _ �� - � ZC. 1 �I � � i `�-:y�r��y�i. � � � ,�� f—�^ � j ; � � � l�. #- y��- . �, • _ �� , = x _ ,-� - � opp�zs , o >' '�a_ �,r "f . ��.�"1i i� �� , a •.�-,q„r��,�i„�lal� �' e: . r �r � � � r ti� � .� ��'�If v� lv'�� g,I i�� /. � � �� ,' i� ' � - � �� sd ,�.ze�, �IR� �� i, i� '(r ��'1��,. �T�ls�� ri � � r � � � 4� .� �• '�i3�ir �f�� y � �,` r'r r.�,x��i.�r�ki�{I ��$ � ,�_ " �' 1'� + '� '� ��a .n �'�.�. � �-� �� . `� l, ry c a r + � � �, I '� � .c�.�� _ r <r •G �:�k,� � �f"�- � �" r-�� ` � � � .- � ,{ �,I`�"� Opp.#26 �$II ..� I ; ��f,. +.� �. � r �, ,;:.� � �,�"� � -� ��, T '� � �1;. � � �i T � �'�1 � 1 i�t'ri"[l - �� i ��C .W4'.. �f�`!d r �� r , l�� '.' � �A°,, f�' � � „s {� i r 6 I ��. j � � - . r�� # �`j {.�'' �'±iS.e'�f3'��'"° .. '!n4��_°��r_�� w- ._,�� . �"i`��$�a i.'�5��'TI � :� , r�' �� `"i- ��i. '�..I �.��. � � � �,�a.�� 7 �� ".� �{,\ ''f -�, ,yf 1. ,�i �'�7 Opp.#25 �! � t k� '�� fd��a�± � , �. i�b� ��Y�� {E '-a %/X Y�i�!If �{ '�S+ Y��;. j r5 nl � .. u ��—� �� • 1'rll. i � �� C�'. ' a '��; �f��.�f�i�� {i1a�'�`� � r. r�y�Nm fl � t� � � k f � I A p� . .., r� .��.� s !rY'f F- � ".v . � q+° � =ir� .�' {��S I �7� s�.; s'� _�� k,�..:�.� -_ lAk • OPP #24 �I ��-7' � b .a r �� { +A ;"� -# r= �[� R. �,f.69r r ' � n 1 '�' s • � � i� r .. �� +��'�, �W�;wk 1�-; .,�"� �. '3'• �" "�� tR i. � �� N. � `��;�� '�� r��g . � �,' � ��: y��"� �. fN V {' � '• t ��F � " i .p . .. _ ;.I:�.�� }"" . �N��.�.�7 .y' : C [ ��).�.i-"�t:��, i~'� �� k�� . — �.; -� '' z ;:r�s Ig; ��`��r ,` :� f�✓� _ �' � � s +.�; j j �1l �" � 1 t�' '� �" � �t�,�' � " r Y� v � "° d „n_� i_�� 3. �x"�*a�s� � Legend : �� ffi?�, � ,,,� *� C r � � �,�:. ,._.. � ,�� .�-t;� , .,r,��. . t 3.�� r ��:g� ,� .�� City of Spokane Valley ,a � � � g i * : �...i � � I��,� � ,� ��: { #,��, ,� J 4 -`�� . m,.. � 4; .�,.. , ;1 u: �� : Opp.# I i I R � � M+ « 1 ' �I � �Y 9- �. � �.. I _�. -•� T ,° .,a '_ ,�P ` �: v* . ,•3� I''.. _v .: .. ..-, - .. .� .. .. ., .. r li � �. .... .: __°=Centennial Trail N �Parcels at river inside city limits Draft Environment Designation Map W�E 0 0.2 0.4 City of Spokane Valley Miles Figure 2-C Shoreline Master Program Updates g Sept.19,2012 i l i I . i Chr�s Bainbrid e Frnm: Bekkedahl, Rabin [Robin.6ekkedahl@aviskacorp.com� Sent; Friday, 5eptember 28, �012 9:51 ANi Ta; Lari 8arlow Cc: BelCkedahl, Robir� Subj�ect: RE; City of Spokane Valley Shoreline Mas#er Pr�gram Update-TecMnical Review Group Attachments: fig^2C_city�f spakane valley shareline urbar� conservancy.pdF; Fig_2A_city of spakane vall�y s�oreline �rban conservancy.pdf; fig_2B_ciky of spokane valley shareline urba� canservancy.p�f Hi Lori: 7hank you for th�e opportunity to re�+ietiv t�e rnaterials, I arn attachi�g the rnaps with our utility facilities and o�ly request when the City do�s restaration within these utility cross��g areas fhat the vegetation is compatible with aur utility f�cilities and Avista wo�rld be a�l�ta review those plans t�at ca�ld potentially im,pact our rights of way. '��fe neecf to be able to maintain aur existing rights of way a5 a ��tility right vf tiva�+far-our facilitie�, Thank ya�for your assis�ance�. Robin L. Bekdcedahl Sr. Enviranmenta9 Scientlsk Cultural Resources, Natural Resourc�s, Praject Perrraitlin� Avista Lltilities P.O. Box 3727 Spokane, VhfA 99220-3727 Tel�phone: 50�-495-BE57 Fax; 509-495-4852 Email: rabin.bekkedal�l cC7.aviskacorp.cam This message and any attached files or documents may contain informat�an ihat is coniiclential and considere�praprietary fo Avista Corporation. Any unauthorized use,transfer,ar tliscl�stire af lhe infarma�ion contained herein is stri;,lly forbitlden, If you bel�eve ihat this message has 6�en sent#a yo�in error,please reply ta the sentler that you t�aue received the message in errar antl del�te Ihe messac�e. Fram: �ori Barlaw [maifta�Ibarlov�rC�spokanewall�y,org� Sent: Manday, September 17, Z0�2 3:24 PM To: 'jsho451@ecy.wa,gow'; '�Lindsay@spolcanecoun�y.�rg', 'divenkad@�FIN.WA,GOV'; 'Jacob.McCann@d�r.wa.g�ov'; Mike Stone; 8ekkedahl, Robir�; 'randya@spokanetribe.c�mr, 'dlamb@cdatrib�.org'; 'Walt �dePen/Spokane Cour�ty Conservation Diskrict'; Guidotti, Chris (PA#tK5)� 'greg,griffith@dahp,wa.go�'; Steve Worfey; 'kcook��spakane�ounty,org; 'khall�ia lands�ouncil.arg'; 'atainioCalibertylalc�wa.gov'! 'jtivright@spakaneeity.org'� 'Ray,Oligher@cityofmillwood,arg'; 'j pederso n@s poka n eco u n ty.a rg' Cc; Patrouc�, John Subject: City of Spokane Valley Shareline Masker Pragram Update -Technical Re�ietiv Group �The Cit�r of 5pokane Valley is in the pracess�f updat�n�the Shareline Master Program. At ti�9s time the Draft Re�tora#ian Plan has been campleted by our cansultant, URS Corparatian. 5ince you,or yaur agency, have jurisdiction or teehnical expertise in ti�is area,the document is beir�g submrtted to you for revieur, 7he attachments cvntain the ❑raft Restoration Pfan, Appendix and Figures. Plsase revfew the �ocumen#s and prov�de writken comments not later than October 1, 2Q�.2. Coinments may be mailed to r�e @ 11707 E Sprague Ave., Suite 106,5pokane Valley WA 99206 or ernailed to LbarlourC�s�akar�evalley.or�,. If you xn+ould like to camment, bu�feel that you need mare#ime ta do so, please I�t rne know yoUr exp�cted target date, If you wauld like a hard capy of the material, ane wiil be pravided upan r�quest, The�City's p�blic participation plan rea�iresthat eaeh component developed for t�e �lan be reviewed by the Technical Re�riew Group, presen#ed to the public at an apen house, reviewed l�y th� Planning Commission, including a pub�ic hearing, and accepted by resolution by the City Council. Once ail ti�e components Qf th�SiVIP ar'2 co�pleted, the i � � < < 4 i individual dacuments will E�e pacEcaged t�oget�er an� the formal adoption �roce�s wil! begin with Planning Commission review, public hearing ant�Council Review. It is our goal to identify and wflric tEir�ough issues as each camponent is develaped, rather than at the end af th� process, If you have any questions about the materials, or process, I may be reae�ned at tt�e cantact infarmation below. �hank you for your participation! �.of�i �a��ow, P,ICP Senior Planner-Community Developrnenf Giiy af Spokar�e Valley �9707 �. Sprague Ave., Suite 9�6 Spakane Valley, lNA 99206 509-72D-5835, Direct 509-92�-90�OB, FAX wvrw.spokar�evalley.orq (Content�of khis emaiC and any reply �re subject to public disc�osure) z Spokane Valley Planning Commission APPROVED Minutes (Resto�c�tion Plcin Exce�pt Onlv) Council Chambers — City Hall, 11707 E. Sprague Ave. October 11, 2012 COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. Study session Shoreline Master Program—Restoration Plan. Sr. Planner Lori Barlow made a presentation regarding the Shoreline Master Program Restoration Plan. Ms. Barlow stated that the SMP Restoration Plan provides a framework for restoration based on the inventory and characterization report, identifies potential sites and opportunities for restoration and protection and provides guidance for carrying out restoration in a comprehensive manner. Ms. Barlow stated the Restoration Plan is a required element of the WAC. Jurisdictions which have impaired shorelines must prepare a plan. Based on the City's inventory we know we have impaired sites. Some examples are bank erosion, degraded habitat with large concentrations of noxious weeds, cleared and disturbed areas, eroding gully slopes, erosion from heavy foot traffic, DOE metals clean-up sites. Ms. Barlow said the WAC identifies items the Restoration Plan must address, which include the following. Identify degraded areas, impaired functions and sites with potential for ecological restoration. Establish overall goals and priorities for restoration of degraded areas and impaired ecological functions. Identify existing and ongoing projects and programs. Identify additional projects and programs to meet restoration goals. Identify timelines and benchmarks for implementing restoration projects and programs and achieving local restoration goals. Provide for mechanisms or strategies Ms. Barlow then went on to explain each of the elements of the Plan. Section 1 —Introduction: It is an overview of the requirements and how the plan is intended to work in the SMP update process. It provides the City context for the plan which includes collaborative planning, regulation, preservation of high quality shoreline areas, and aiding community efforts to restore degraded portions of the City's shorelines. The City and restoration partners are intended to work together on securing funding to implement the plan and attain the timelines and benchmarks in the plan as funding allows. In this section there is also an overview of the requirements, and how the plan is intended to work. Section 2 Restoration Goals and Su�orting Policies: This section identifies the restoration goals and policies and refers back to the goals and policies in the overall SMP. It summarizes degraded shoreline areas and functions, prioritizes restoration opportunities, prioritizes restoration possibilities with the greatest benefit, establishes Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes 10-ll-12 Page 1 of 3 a implementation strategy, helps to identify opportunities which contribute towards shoreline restoration efforts, and monitor restoration activities. Section 3, Existing and On-_goin_g Projects and Pro_rg ams: Summarizes existing factors limiting the functionality of the shoreline ecosystem. Limiting Factors are things which impair the ecosystem processes and limit the capacity of the functions. They are environmental variables whose presence, absence or abundance restricts the conditions. They could be things present like no�ous weeds, or adding shade trees. This section identifies the limiting factors and causes and highlights e�sting and ongoing projects and programs that may address those issues. Last, it identifies additional projects and programs needed to achieve shoreline restoration goals. It addresses where the gaps are and what can the City do about them. For example, even though we know there is a program to clean up the toxic metals sites, often the projects do not include vegetation. This will allow us to�gure out where the gaps are and how we �11 them. Section 4 Prioritization Methodolo�v: This strategy was put in place to address how to prioritize projects for restoration when it became possible to complete them. The scoring factors are: Ease of property acquisition, shade benefit, scale of restoration activity, role within the context of surrounding habitat matrix and consistency with other SMP goals. Section 5 Restoration O�ortunities: There are two types of restoration opportunities. One is programmatic opportunities (which are not site specific) such as public education programs, shoreline regulations and enforcement, shoreline maintenance, conservation futures and stormwater standards. The second opportunity is site specific opportunities: Where the site could be restored to a properly functioning condition. The opportunities are voluntary. Neither of the opportunities are a requirement. The city is not obligated to fund any of the restoration opportunities. However, the city is required to proactively identify restoration partners and pursue funding opportunities — this requires staff involvement. Ms. Barlow gave an example of how the program could work The City is currently working with State Parks Dept. to stabilize the river bank east of Flora Road. The Ciry would look at what is impaired based on the plan and then look at what is possible in some of the conceptual approaches. The City has partnered with the State and has designed the repair project for the state to implement. Section 6 Im�lementation Plan: This section address an implementation plan which identifies partners,potential funding sources, timelines and benchmarks. This section has a list of organizations who have in the past demonstrated an interest in protecting the City's shorelines. There is also a list of possible funding sources which are possible if a project should become available for restoration. Timeline and benchmarks for implementing restoration plan are also in this section. Section 7 Monitoring, Maintenance and Ada�tive Mana_eg ment: The purpose of this section is to provide steps for monitoring the successful implementation of this plan and to have a process for monitoring site specific projects. This section also identifies an alternative strategy if restoration benchmarks are not met. Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes 10-ll-12 Page 2 of 3 Ms. Barlow said the public hearing for the Restoration Plan is scheduled for October 25th 2012. She told the Commissioners the next elements of the SMP to come before them would be the Public Access Plan, then the regulations. Commissioner Beaulac asked how successful could a restoration plan be in an urban jurisdiction, especially when surrounding jurisdictions do not take care of their issues as the City is doing. Ms. Barlow responded each jurisdiction in the state of Washington who have shorelines of the state are required to have a restoration plan, and each of the other jurisdictions are sharing a piece of the river. The City can only assume they are sharing similar issues. Mr. Kuhta also indicated the City's situation provides more opportunity for restoration because most of the shoreline along the river is publically owned land, so partnership is easier. Private groups also help out, for instance there is a group who just helped around the Mirabeau Park area, helping to define foot paths and cleaning up the area. Ms. Barlow and Mr. Kuhta named examples of other cities where shoreline restoration has occurred in highly industrialized, urban areas. Mr. John Patrouch, with URS Corporation shared with the Commission the City has good shoreline here, but it still needs to track no net loss of ecological functions. Mr. Patrouch said the base line is the inventory, if nothing changed the simple wear and tear along the trail would require restoration efforts. Commissioner Beaulac asked if the City can't get the funding, would we would revert to public education. Mr. Patrouch responded the City would do the site specific restoration at same time as programmatic opportunities. Both efforts would be done at the same time. Commissioner Neill asked if a benchmark were approaching and the City was not going to achieve it would it put the city in a position to have to fund a shoreline project over another dedicated project, like street preservation. Ms. Barlow said no, the city would not be required to fund shoreline restoration. She further commented the biologist, Noah Herlocker, who wrote the Ciry's restoration plan, has been recognized as having written some of the best restoration plans around the state. The Plan as written does not obligate funds above and beyond another priority project. The restoration plan will not force the city to hire someone to keep track of the shoreline restoration projects. Staff will keep track and document projects and incorporate when possible restoration concepts identified in the plan. Commissioner Hall asked if staff could foresee any possible conflicts in potential partners. Staff responded there could be some — every group has an agenda and there could be a conflict, in that case they may not be a good partner for that particular project. However, with most potential partners there are commonalities. Staff discussed how projects would come into the Ciry and be reviewed to determine if it requires an environmental review and if these would be a potential for restoration in the project and partnering possibilities. Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes 10-ll-12 Page 3 of 3 Spokane Valley Planning Commission APPROVED Minutes (Resto�c�tion Plcin Exce�pt Onlv) Council Chambers — City Hall, 11707 E. Sprague Ave. October 25, 2012 COMMISSION BUSINESS 1. Public Hearing— Shoreline Master Program—Daft Restoration Plan Chair Bates opened the public hearing at 6:07 p.m. Senior Planner, Lori Barlow, gave a presentation regarding the draft Shoreline Master Program Restoration Plan explaining the Plan and its elements. Commissioner Bates asked who set the Plan's timeline and benchmarks. Ms. Barlow replied the City set the timeline. The timeline is set as a long term work plan. The Plan is also required to be reviewed at regular intervals and the timelines can be adjusted if they are not being met. Commissioner Stoy asked who would be responsible for monitoring restoration Ms. Barlow and Mr. Hohman explained the City would issue permits and follow up and monitor the work. Commissioner Beaulac asked if the Plan would apply to the Centennial TraiL Ms. Barlow stated the Centennial Trail is on state owned property which is currently maintained by the Ciry; capital improvements are the responsibiliry of State Parks. The Plan does include some restoration projects that indirectly affect the trail. She describe a shoreline stabilization project, currently under review, that stabilized the shoreline in order to preserve the Centennial Trail. Commissioner Beaulac also asked if matching funds would be required to in order do a restoration project. Ms. Barlow discussed how the funding partners and funding would be approached and stated that matching funds would not be pursued without Council approval. . Seeing no one who wished to testify, Chair Bates closed the public hearing at 6:37 p.m. Commissioner Stoy moved to continue the deliberations of the Restoration Plan to Nov. 8, 2012. This motion passed unanimously. Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes 10-25-12 Page 1 of 1 Spokane Valley Planning Commission DRAFT Minutes ( Resto�cation Plcin Exce�pt Onlv) Council Chambers — City Hall, 11707 E. Sprague Ave. November 8, 2012 I. COMMISSION BUSINESS A. Unfinished Business: 1. Deliberations on the Shoreline Master Program Restoration Plan — Senior Planner Lori Barlow refreshed the Commission on the process to-date regarding the Shoreline Master Program's Restoration Plan. Commissioners Bates and Carroll asked questions regarding how restoration opportunities were added and subtracted from the plan and the dates in the timeline. Ms. Barlow explained: • The restoration opportunities were gleaned from the Inventory Report. • Items will be subtracted from the Plan when the opportunities to fulfill a restoration project become available. • The timeline dates will be adjusted to fit at the final adoption of the Plan • Items cannot be added to the Plan without doing an additional Inventory report, which would not be done any time in the near future. Ms. Barlow also explained restoration projects would be handled differently than a project which would happen because of an emergency based on a natural disaster. Commissioner Beaulac moved the Shoreline Master Program Restoration Plan be accepted as presented and forwarded to City Council for approvaL This motion was passed unanimously. � Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes ll-8-12 Page 1 of 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM D RAFT R ESTO RAT I O N P LAN ADMIN REPORT City Council Meeting December 4, 2012 0 P resentation Goa Is Provide overview of the SMA rules to develop a Restoration Plan Provide Overview of the Plan Rev i ew H i sto r y 0 SHORELINE RESTORATIDN PLAN �Technical Review Group DRAFT} City nf Spokane Valley 5horeline Master Prngram Update ScprcmUcr 17.?al' �� 3 r� ,,} � �lw��: - . _ .�"�� -�'-�.�Y&t�F��:.� ��:.� ��' . _ m.,..,,e�.aBNhS,.-.ey,��Y� .;:.a,r " — y. _ .:,.: $ -�� ..__ ` „ r��t...a:;-�_ Prepa,�d far: City of Spokane Valley Community�evelvpment Department Spokc.we�'alle�Cith H:ill 117�7 L.Spng�u.�ti�r..Snite 106 5pokc.we i'alley.L�'ashvigtau 99206 Pre�ared bv: ':�nah Hrr]nrkrr P�['S URS Corporation iti s.t��.coi,��.suae�sao Ponlaud,[?regav 97'O1-5814 LTLS RujeclNiu�iUn 3G?�Sl?� City of Spokane Valley Planning Commission Notice of Public Hearing Thursday, October 25, 6:00 p.m. VVhat is a Restoration Plan? Provides the framework for restoration based on the shoreline inventory and �� , �,. r.�.� ��.__ � , ts ! �,�� ;9�- _ � cha racterization �� ;� �� , �, _ �.�.�� , � ' � �: �<_. •��, Identifies otential sites and ��jk - � �J�,�y - �� " �� p �`� � 9 _ ._ ..�,�. • • • ` � ��'�` � - h .�".: �� ra opportunities for restoration ��:�� :� ti:��.�-� - � �r:� �t�� _} i� � ,*ti r -,�� :-- .�-� �,: � � � �� + �,J�" and rotection. �� ._ '��,��, t,�.�� f.�. _ �� , � p � �� -�� .� - �� .�� 1 y ; , •� • • • y f'��.� .�k�e — � —� �$� ,�. : i. Provides guidance for carrying �F � _ ��:�, ; f �� , ��i;� : ,�� r� � -��r; . . . t i,e;.: out restoration in a � e �� ' f _ � *�Y . • �.�� . , comprehensive manner. � - ,�� .. �,� - � .-�: , _ � i- - �-� ?�.�, _. _ -- .� -.�' ._� Restoration Defined WAC 173 - 26 -020 31 c � " Restore," " restoration" or "ecolog ica I restoration" means the reestablishment or upgrading of impaired ecological shoreline processes or functions. This may be accomplished through measures including, but not limited to, revegetation, removal of intrusive shoreline structures and removal or treatment of toxic materials. Restoration does not impl�r a reqvirement for returninq the shoreline area to aboriqinal or pre-Evropean settlement conditions. . ��. �„`'!� �,. , - � , k'�!� ,� ��: � . 'A� �a:l i� � ! � �;:� '�.� �� ;:y ��?��irr . �k.-_ � ,. � ��''". . � � �� _ ��4 � � ��:. r t. 4 , � �� '''�� _ _ - �;��, '`;� ;� _: � ,�: Is a Restoration Plan Re uired ? a Restoration Plans o � � � WAC 173-26- , 86� 8�� Jurisdictions that contain any shorelines with impaired ecolog ica I functions sha I I include goa Is and pol icies that provide for restoration of such impaired ecological functions. Bank Erosion � , S,'�a�-. Fk_ , �� `� ` �+P-'4 � ��J �. �� Y` �8 � ..Fgr .� � �'v �S��y;" }.. P L.. 4`'r _M .' i`�.F..ys,.. �:�.it' ,�� . , . i1 - �f "�,.* ��fi As' ' �� . .. _s �fE� ('�`R�`�� .� �, y� .�k -k ' ... .¢r � y ' ,y�y^f�` �''j�- l` . '_ . . _ +_+�'-°�'� !�, »y °. � y� - .v. y "..� M� 1��:�'4, ,' vl��r# \ •k � � +r��'� .� . .J` �. � '�.�� . .-,�`.� ' k ^. '•'� - +�a!��'�' . ' � l f-,.�a� - ��"�y � ��`.Y �-4��'?Y`�.: , �� . ° .`�„ R. 4�� .�ia�. '.� �".-:l�/ '�� ,; � � _ `` •.�`��S� .�, ��`�. ;,� �-- �J� � i � 'k .$ �, 4 ��. - _ ;r_..1, +i_•.. . � '� !�+ ��rM � ��f��•, '�.��4�'9� _ �..� � •. ti � _ . , .. � Y � F 'r�� r 4 },y�' `� � . - _ �r �" �� r,�a ' �� - . �` , ' �l��y�� . � r �` � •. - .y. - � �� -�� :��-�� -- - - _,�t� . t .. . rw+-'-ie „ � f k � � -�� „ r "` �r° � -.� " �� . . . rS ° , � y - . q �, ��" y�F �r�CFi'� �' ... �j'�.�,d {1�4 " �j ' .a i .�'4 i' �'.� � .: li,t'ii ,�,� �tl �� ._i. , `?. ' .r, .r?' : i'{ ��i �� 6�y� � „�' ``�#� �# � ' `%� r`R -M. �' � �, ° � a-�' .'�f�.,��'-�'1�i .� +'� „ �:, �. � , � vi � � e � r ' s i '�r�Y'-.� I ` �f. r� i � ��1 � � FS�� G� �1 '�� g �. ` . fr . i�� • . ° ,,..�;� i� r' '��!'' � . . Y ��1� ` _a r�Fi F {� f �''#°!��. � , , :. �P :�� g..t :��.I � 4� �� T' � A - V'� e, � . . _. . � lA [-4YW �'� �. , . ., .P . . I' :u � ��. � . � �'� :�h�' � � s ', �� °-'�� 1 � •� � �`�4� �` �.p y� .a.* � �M�� °;�� ^. �'.� y`�. �. �f s�,�'� y�'• ��i. ,�. _.F '�S. �,i� i?r�^ h :i.� �Y +;� ti� I y � {'�� 5�• a±-�� , Y �'��'' . . E��;4 .� ��_ u_5'�. . . ��.... � ��.t.+d�,�'±i��F,�. , _� . . � �4�, ��4y�!ir��: -++ �4�$• a.r� ..��_i�d`iF�l,f r�'!,_�� A��M .�•�,' .a�"i '�1`��... ��:] i De raded habitat with Lar e g g 0 Concentration of Noxious VVeeds � �� .��. g'�i�.� �+�IM�� {�° � ��{� a�R ♦ `9 f �, � � �. . ^!1 ' . 1F•� I..*i. �� . "'�-�.d��'.�� /' -��'a �� i"i ��'� �• �� '/�I� ' �, �/{ t � i�, a '��' � �4�1 � . " �- I I �IY}�'�� l5� ,,��E �� ,`r� � i�.��' �'.��F'��'� � t�5 I�.�I-�I �y'� �,�i �� ,;"m i��l',,�+� " " r � 6! � ' � . � � � i Y � � q i.� I 1 � � d � . �i 6 �� ,t . J) { , � �. , !i .t`! 4 . 4,.{ � %"E � I"�� Y S r� i b Mt y fl5' � �" P'�e� ' �' �� `�.t�I i h'16' �� S�+�i� °�w�•t�.�_: � �t� ` � �.a n.1. +Y ��4 �j � ��k %t�g + ,�y"��i � ��1�'�r�*_ A�"+ �h 'C I i° �� ,. �i �� i �,. � t+ `5 � ��,� s . . �� .�,. �'�li 4�I+� � E •"��Y��+�4#i �I �.l I��T,�.��P�I� r.' � 'i"P.+ , � a�r��fi r �� 1 ,� ��i k�,, � " ,�� ' �yf �' i� � � I ,��P�T,�r r;� Ir��ffl4� 1 �� 'nl�.'�x �� i. k� � � ��° +R ��,`�F,�'Fy ��1' ��I�ti�1i ii� I� a � 7w.. � jl., i�� d Y." �e�i« b�'k�� i��:� ��+W .�'�� .�d I yT,R ��y, {}{ aa� .�{� 1� �t 4 L�, �i°�y y� � ?.. � i . .�{��4'11�'. �"W �5"�i ,�Y'�y}� y,_ Y� I 41f �'l. ��a . 9 � �1 1-�4 '� " ��. i �4 �i . �� _ { ,�.��r `� �+; } ' �A �:„ , , , �;� �,, �� ,� ��, , �. .� � - � j��.�., � �.,V 1 �� '.��g4� �� !,� q �. M } k;�?1f 4"��.�!lk4ir..5�l`.�4i'kij�` .t�i,;,�7��°�y'�'}'+,r`�;[. y e. Cleared and Disturbed Area o � �A � - �� .F , . �� . .'�`..�s`��' -- - .� — �- � � �� _aiy,i�. ._ .. ._.y. +a 4� ..-". "-�.. .- ' '� '. - ' . � � ,o Erod in Gul I Slo es g y p ��.' �.. r • . �, �� , . ;,r�;� •,;' j�1.�.JJI �T�i�� ;•� _� =D 1 � . .._ .'�` �, .e"�{�i� . �'^�`�� ';*��?�" " ' °� r .— ' v.� r �w ,� '��'�k.- �1 �.� �. ��., '" ' ,.�? .�•y._. i� y� �� a �. � ¢?- 'Si ��, � r''—�'h. t�fi�� ::�.- P.- a�" i '" - �.,-' � ', 9�i ;.> •'�'i�. .af. ,�,s,�. � -� �' �i;��.'�'�. .�c�5.. - + . '. ,�r4A _ �.. �*� ��=' ` ��4�1�- _� �` ; :� '�� Ft++e � -;:`�Y�_ - - �'r ;�: A1 4F 1_'z° .. ��*� ��' 1�� <� , 'a�.,. A�.,� � . . Yw. � ic��.. . . 9 ��+P, �n �� , t ��` r��,a :� r.� -.� k�' •� � ; � t �" ; r,. , _ n ��. �r „ ri� `.-�h��E4 �� . #5'S 'N��-yy�� ' iit ,_ ka� h� ,'�� °. �r� v - . sni��Ml�ti.�� i- � _ Erosion From Heav Foot Traffic y � ��= x�i �� , � ; � w y'�;r�' i+'k�. � +�#.+ r�°'� - 't�.;di��,�,'u �".., _ ��.. . .'I .. . � ;:#:� ' "s+V'•." . .�. . '"�`•�l ;i�.' ''�r, -,,--� �,• - � -f--�--- ,� DOE Metals Cleanu Site p �. �� . k' �� • �}E . ^� .�� ¢�d,�� 1 tl'� 'e 4 }:,• � �' �:�� F 1L�}:i eF �� :�� ,� � i yw1 .Y . �^_ _� � �r R I• .��yY.M1 �3, r P °.�'i.�4.i'4��. � �:� . 4 .�,�- - _ eM t �—, ��iP . � ��' *��f ' _ + � �'�, �� +} � � � � s . � �[` � 6'�� 3 !' �� . . �'',�`_�'� �.. , ,�,.�_:�e �r��y� , . _., • _ P* � f ,��'� �M� � � 4��f��$t� � � ,�� . � . � � .,,� �. . � °t?. � I ��`y I ., �F,'�.�'' � ' � . s r 1 L' + �#�`, �' ��.' '�:�.�,� ,�� "P. [�' i �'� i. L w� a r i� � y , . .� � � :14�k �4 �4 � ��; }�d °��1 � i.�� Y��I • y, � � !. �S F '�� . Y �� ry� �� . �' � ,� � ��q ; i.�' � . { i N � °� �,gp 511 df ,�. -�� h., .�_ ! g.�; � i 'h� ��:J, 3'�,t.�.1,� ,. — r�'b�„a'` d��li1��'R .''� ��i^:1t �!n".��.� . aei4 `. � � � ' �, ' �' _� ki„s?T � .�,s � 4 �. I � { 4 -`ki'yaF"" .a ��'' � - � ��.'�� . � b {d�� 'K�� . I4`. . ��%.'I�.��' ' .� f�y'k.�' i�� l_ � , 1q ��tij j.l r'� ir;� { t� ,, �,�' � y, s e, a , �`, ;; +:�� ' �:r� ., k � � � �� y l`h.�� :k��i a f�'- !� ,1 "1�.:k+ �y�i� �.sY� � �;�'�'S}�Y� 9 r. �' ' -� .44� i�+� �(�s. � h �, ➢ �� ., :� -�: � ��"�°'�k � , � ��: . �,,_�,��t� �rd:� ti ' . �*� „ �� .�ti� { � _. .7 ' a a�R` . 't n, i� " ''4' d . I'i�1��F�w,� �� {. � � ' iM1�. r �� . /��y �n�. � �� '� al� s. � i. 1 5��,� � ' ��,�1131.� a.. r - . a !� 4i� � a y'..'. t � 5 � ,Y �' i' ��^F��S �,'f�� •i di _: e�}�I� '�� l a r'�, x +�J.e:�- �Y � ��j ��- 4 �, a� ! �� l 3' �iTy �'=� �" �� ,,ir�+'� � ��a ' '�" r x�V, y �a'� , ,�;r� j �% i I . ,'.��.7�'��W� '�'fiec F ' r� ,]!�P".��'�4�_ �.�_�� "�.�il,..' .x'��F`.d'��r�^��'ir4:, ��,5, '��'i.'� VVhat's Re ui red . . . Shorel ine Restoration a Plannin - VVAC 173 - 26 - 201 2 f g � � � � Restoration plans must address the following: Identify degraded areas, impaired functions and sites with potentia l for ecolog ica I restoration. Esta bl ish overa I I goa Is and priorities for restoration of degraded areas and impaired ecological functions. Identify existing and ongoing projects and programs. Identify additional projects and programs to meet restoration goa Is. Identify timelines and benchmarks for implementing restoration projects and programs and achieving local restoration goa Is. Provide for mechanisms or strategies 14 Restoration Plan Overview I ntrod ucti on � Restoration Goals and Policies � Existing and Ongoing Projects and Prog rams Prioritization Methodology Restoration Opportunities Implementation Plan � Monitoring Plan Section 3- Existing and ongoing projects and programs � � � • Dissolved Metals/past industrial practices • High Summer Water Temps/lack of riparian cover • Lack of Riparian Cover/adjacent land management • Spokane Subbasin Plan • Spokane River Hazardous Metals Cleanup Efforts • Riverside State Park/Centennial Trail Management Activities • Work w/DOE to include vegetation into haz materials cleanup proj. • Support volunteer groups engaged in shoreline restoration activities • COSV project managers sh� incorporate restoration into projects near shoreline � Section Four — Prioritization Methodolog y Ease of property Public Ownership Public �5� or acquisition Private � 1 � Shade Benefit Aspect along stream corridor Scale of restoration Size activity Role w/in surrounding Habitat Connectivity habitat matrix Consistency w/other Supports at least one SMP Goa Is other SMP Goa I „ Section Five — Restoration O ortunities pp r r mm ti o a a c Public Education Shoreline Regulation and Enforcement Shoreline Maintenance Conservation Futures Stormwater PIan�Development Standards it i i e ec c Sites Identified in the Inventory Voluntary and Subject ` to Available Funding City not obligated to implement opportunities directly � � � � Resto ra ti o n • • � � �� Table of Restoration Opportunities Conceptual Restoration Approaches Riparian Plantings Strea m ba n k Stabilization N oxi Maps and eed Control representative photos 5ire �riorin- � ��-�ten3�ar 5e o re __ �D 5pokane Ri�•er _a �� Spokane Ri�•er 18 11 ��°kane ��r 1� }� Spokane Table 4. Shoreliae Restnratio� Qpport-u�it�es Impairu�ent C'onceptu�l Restoraaon�ippraach ?4rea ofbarilc erosion duetd kng� �cornhinationof�lope bioengineering ■�interflo��ener�C� directedagainst cambinednitkipotentialupstreamfluE�ial bank.Heai�il�,�rip-rapped modificationsto decrease flo�ener�� h�fanaged access andnoxious��eed Degradedhabitatti�ithlarge cantrol. Ifoff-roaddri�•in�iscunailed, concentrationofnoxious�eedsand se�•eralpinesaplings�ill de�•elopinto off-roadz�ehicle traffic productiz�e riparian fore3t habitat Fencealongaccessroadcreates Create�ilsilife undercrossin�beneatYi impasse for�ildlife fencedroadn a�,• Remnantpatckves�fnatiE�epraitie �T,`eedcontrolandseedingnitYinatiE�e Table 4 Restoration O ortunities pp Area of bank erosion due to A combination of slope bioengineering high winter flow energy directed against bank. Heavily rip-rapped ��~��---�•, �� •4#�.°,. - �c.., �ww ,i:.. . r.�"y. .... combined with potential upstream fluvial modifications to decrease flow energy � `� . - . . �,� -. .. ,:�_� �'��.:, . re- - - _`,�„" 'S�a , w.4 .�,.-,. �.; -��` '[� ' � �,�; � ' ��!�' � ' d +'F y Y^_ .e� ._.. . �° �R .+a4--.� , � � s t. "vi�,, y �� y.7ir �.x �,�� :�.,t�".�� - ,<�,. x.�� '�_�i(,Y�` '�, , d. �_�.` .�'.'� �.. � � .�'� �`" +" " '!._�1� . � + s� ��si , �," � �• , . ,r�� ,�.� . t. - !�-. +- .� ��''�'"��-�^'� . ��r � ' � ar `� t �4 ��. - � _ '�r,� _ �`r,� '�'�,�+�I y. 1'.�� . -- .a �'. �. � . � �. * '.�,� T.��I�M� � � ' T�. � - y�� '�_ �.� � •_� ' �� j ��. � • " �.1.�� YFkr i� — ,�� *�d ��,i� � � �s��`r � �-�ri�,i^a w�� dt�^!+��+� ��'ts�f�*� �a��f �.,._r��--�� ¢�. ��{ � ` �r fi 9� r ' �► '��i�f+� [,�l�+Tt� i+"ir�s y'+��3 � ��fJ�+ �,i � ��}"'.�•�� r�'. r' 3$� �.��, ��'+�71[#"i'1�+'� W9VrwL! �1`�� ,+,�4+r°w✓1�st+s:s r��.�{ ��''Y','1.�,r7 Yr{N 1 �f�1�� Section Six — Im lementation Plan p �� Potential Restoration Partners Potenti a l So u rces of Funding Timeline and Benchmarks for Implementation • Trouts Unlimited • La nd s Counci I • Spokane Canoe and Kayak Club • E PA • DOE • DN R • 5 Steps for Implementation �, ❑ Timeline and Benchmarks for Implementina Restoration Plan Steps to be ca rried out by COSV 5 - Monitor progress of program and opportunities 2020 I 1 - Establish a Restoration Program 2013 � � 4 - Support Funded Restoration projects as able (Design, public outreach etc.,� 2018 2 - Meet with Potential Restoration Pa rtners� Identify Opportunities and Projects . 2014 � 3 - Apply in partnership for restoration fund ing 2016 � Secti o n 7 — Mo n itori ng Ma i ntena nce a nd Ada ptive Ma na � ement . . a n estorat � on � te . . on � tor � n ' Monitoring Method Contingency Ad a ptive Management � ��: . . on � tor � n 5-step program 1 Setting goals and objectives 2 Developing monitoring p rotoco I 3 Data collection 4 Analyzing monitoring data 5 Assessing restoration efforts Benchma rk # 3 — A I For Fund in with pp y g Pa rtn e rs 2 O 16 � � s. Monitoring Method Contingency Ad a ptive Management Document Application Document why Document how to no action was ensure future made action � Una ble to pa rtner for fund ing for any reason, develop programmatic opportunities. Draft Restoration Plan Develo ment and p Review Process � �_ � Sta ff a n d Consu Ita nt Ro I e P rocess Develop t� " °raft Plannin Commission Review Restoration g ¢ Plan � Develop D raft Restoration S ite Ma p Study Session Public Hearing (October 25) Recommend to Council � Council Review Public Comment Accept by Resolution � � SMP U date Process - ste s com leted p p p �� I Adoption rocess Develop Pub Plan � CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 4, 2012 Department Director Approval: 0 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information Q admin. report Q pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed resolution amending the Master Fee Schedule for 2013. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: The Master Fee Schedule setting 2012 fees was established via Resolution #11-008 and was adopted by the City Council on October 25, 2011. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Although the revenue impact of City fees is included in the 2013 Budget, no previous Council action has been taken nor have discussions taken place regarding changes to Resolution #11-008. Revenues generated by the fee resolution in 2012 account for: • $1,896,800, or 5.43% of total General Fund recurring revenues of$34,908,800. • $1,750,000 or 99.72% of total Stormwater Management Fund revenues of$1,755,000. BACKGROUND: Part of the annual operating budget development process involves City Departments reviewing the Master Fee Schedule that is currently in place, and determining whether changes in the fees charged and/or language used in the governing resolution should be altered. Recommended changes to the fee resolution include: • Removal of Schedule C pertaining to the Fire Code and fees assessed by the Spokane Valley Fire Department as a result of the revised Interlocal Agreement with that body that was approved by the City Council on February 28, 2012. The new interlocal agreement specifies that the City will collect on behalf of the Fire Department fees that are set and periodically updated by the Fire Department. • The Parks and Recreation Department is proposing changes to the fee resolution for some new programs/fees to consider as well as the elimination of fees that do not apply. Additionally, they are suggesting the fee structure listing be re-formatted to make it easier to read. Lastly they are proposing to formalize language providing authorization for the Director to implement a business incentive policy that has been tested in 2012. The policy involves a rental rate reduction for groups that meet certain criteria per reservation which includes a minimum number of participants, frequent use of classroom at CenterPlace in a calendar year, and the use of our in-house caterer for meals at all reservations. Proposed Changes Include: o Add a Children's Birthday Party Package to CenterPlace rentals. This would include a 2 hr. rental for up to 12 children, themed decorations, games & activities and a host— Cost to be $175 o Increase Swimming Lessons fee from $30 to $35 o Increase Swim Team Fee from $35 to $45 o Add Discovery Playground Shelter reservations - $35 for up to 2 hrs. o Eliminate the Indoor Use Fees—they do not apply o Add a Business Incentive Policy Category under CenterPlace— Language would read as follows: The Parks & Recreation Director has the authority to reduce the room rental rate by 1 hr. when the rental meets the following criteria: minimum of 25 participants, use of a classroom 8 or more times in a calendar year and use of our in-house caterer for a meal at each reservation. o Re-format the Parks & Recreation section for easier reading. P:ICIerklAgendaPackets for Weblagendapacket 12-04-1211tem 5 RCA for Fee Resolution for 2013 fees.docx OPTIONS: Proceed with the updated fee resolution changes as presented this evening, with or without further modifications. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Staff recommends the proposed Master Fee Schedule be placed on the December 11, 2012 Council agenda for approval consideration. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The proposed changes are not expected to have a significant impact on 2013 revenues. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: A strike-through/underlined copy of the proposed 2013 Fee Resolution showing recommended changes. P:ICIerklAgendaPackets for Weblagendapacket 12-04-1211tem 5 RCA for Fee Resolution for 2013 fees.docx DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 12- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING RESOLUTION 11-008 AND APPROVING AN AMENDED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE. WHEREAS, it is the general policy of the City to establish fees that are reflective of the cost of services provided by the City; and WHEREAS, the City uses a resolution to establish fees for City programs, permits and services, and periodically the fee resolution must be amended to incorporate new or modified services; and WHEREAS, Council desires to amend the Resolution and accompanying Fee Schedule. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, as follows: Section 1. The amendments needed at this time are incorporated into the attached schedules and include new fees and changes to e�sting fees. Section 2. Repeal. To the extent that previous fee schedules are inconsistent with those set forth herein,they are repealed in their entirety. Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect January 1, 2013. Approved this day of ,2012. ATTEST: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Approved as to form: Of�ce of the City Attorney Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 1 of 17 DRAFT MASTER FEE SCHEDULE Fee Schedule Pa�e No. Schedule A: Planning 3 Schedule B: Building 5 I �e��€�,.o r-�„ao �g � Schedule C�: Parks and Recreation 10� � Schedule D€: Administrative 13� � Schedule E�: Other Fees 13�� I Schedule FFt: Police Fees 14�§ Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 2 of 17 DRAFT MASTER FEE SCHEDULE Schedule A — Planning FEE AMOUNT AMENDMENTS Comprehensive Plan Amendment $1,500.00 Zoning or other code text amendment $1,500.00 APPEALS Appeal of Administrative Decision $1,050.00 Appeal of Hearing Examiner Findings $315.00 Transcript/record deposit on Appeals of Hearing Examiner Decisions $157.00 Appeal of Administrative Decision - Code Compliance Notice and Order 500.00 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT(SEPA) Single Dwelling (when required) $100.00 All other developments $350.00 Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) Review,minimum deposit $2,200.00 Addenda of existing EIS Review $350.00 SHORELINE Substantial Development Permit $840.00 CRITICAL AREAS Floodplain Permit $315.00+ $52.00 per lot OTHER PERMITS Home Occupation Permit and Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) $84.00 Conditional Use Permit $840.00 Temporary Use Permit $157.00 LAND USE ACTIONS Subdivisions Preliminary plat $2,324.00+$40.00 per lot Final Plat $1,424.00+ $10.00 per lot Time extensions—�le review and letter $80.00 Short Plats Preliminary 2 to 41ots $1,224.00 Final plat 2 to 4 lots $924.00 Preliminary plat 5 to 9 lots $1,424.00+ $25.00 per lot Final plat 5 to 9 lots $1,224.00+ $10.00 per lot Time extensions—�le review and letter $80.00 Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 3 of 17 DRAFT Plat Alteration Subdivision plat $682.00 Short plat $278.00 Binding Site Plan Binding site plan alteration $278.00. Change of Conditions $650.00 Preliminary binding site plan $1,674.00 Final Binding Site Plan $924.00 Aggregation/Segregation Lot line adjustment $105.00 Lot line elimination $105.00 Zero lot line $105.00+ $10.00 per lot Plat Vacation $1,474.00 SIGNS Review of permanent sign $50.00 + $25.00 if public works review needed Review of temporary sign $50.00 NEW RESIDENTIAL SITE PLAN REVIEW $50 SITE PLAN REVIEW -PER DNISION REVIEW $275 STREET VACATION APPLICATION $1,365.00 OTHER Administrative Exception $315.00 Variance $1,575.00 Administrative Interpretations $100.00 Pre-application Meetings $250.00 Fee will be deducted from land use application, building permit or commercial permit application fee when application is filed within one year of pre-application meeting ZONING Zoning map amendments (rezone)* $1,650.00 Planned residential development plan $1,575.00+$26.00 per lot Planned residential development modification $525.00 Zoning letter $210.00 *If rezone is combined with other action(s), cost of other action(s)is additional Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 4 of 17 DRAFT Schedule B — Building Fee Payment Plan review fees are collected at the time of application. Such fees may be adjusted during plan review. Overages or under payments will be appropriately adjusted at the time of permit issuance. Plan review fees are separate from and additional to building permit fees. Permit fees and any other unpaid fees are collected prior to issuance of the permit. Fees for outside professional services required during the permit process will be paid by the applicant. Examples of outside professional services include review by contract reviewers, special inspection or construction services, consultant services for special topics, surveying or other services required to determine compliance with applicable codes. Fee Refund Policy. Refunds authorized under this policy apply only to Schedule B. PLAN REVIEW FEES • Plan review fees are non-refundable once any plan review work has been started. • Paid plan review fees will be refunded when an eligible request is received in writing. • As a minimum, a$35.00 administrative fee will be retained. • If the paid plan review fee is less than $35.00,no refund is authorized. • If the paid plan review fee is more than $35.00, the amount for refund will be calculated at the rate of 100% of the paid plan review fee minus $35.00. PERMIT FEES • Permit fees are non-refundable once work authorized by the permit has begun. • Paid permit fees will be refunded when an eligible request is received in writing. • As a minimum, a$35.00 administrative fee will be retained. • If the paid permit fee is less than $35.00,no refund is authorized. • If the paid permit fee is more than $35.00, the refund will be calculated at the rate of 95% of the paid permit fee minus $35.00. For any application taken or permit issued in error, a full refund of fees paid will be made. No portion of the paid fees will be retained. FEES GENERAL Hourly Rate for City Employees $61.00 Overtime rate for City Employees (1.5 times regular rate) $92.00 Investigation fee: Work commenced without required permits Equal to permit fee Replacement of lost permit documents Hourly rate; 1 hour minimum Revisions to plans requested by the applicant or permit holder will be charged the hourly rate with a minimum of one hour. Revised plans submitted in response to reviewer correction letters are not subject to the hourly assessment. Washington State Building Code Council Surcharge (WSBCC) $4.50 per permit WSBCC Surcharge (Multi-Family) $4.50 lst dwelling unit+ $2.00 each additional unit Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 5 of 17 DRAFT BUILDING PERMIT: Building permit fees for each project are set by the following fees. The figures below are to be used to determine the building permit fees and plans check fees based on the value of the construction work as stated by the applicant or the value calculated by the Building Official using the latest valuation data published in the Building Safety.Iournal by the International Code Council,whichever value is greater. Valuations not listed in the Building Safety Journal: Buildin� Type Valuation Per Square Foot Residential garages/storage buildings (wood frame) $19.00 Residential garages (masonry) $22.00 Miscellaneous residential pole buildings $19.00 Residential carports, decks,porches $15.00 Building Permit Fee Calculation Total Valuation Buildin�Permit Fee $1.00 to $25,000.00 $6925 for�rst$2,000.00 + $14.00 for each additional$1,000.00 (or fraction thereo� Up to and including $25,000.00 $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 $39125 for�rst$25,000+ $10.10 for each additional$1,000.00 (or fraction thereo� Up to and including $50,000.00 $50,001.00 to $100,000.00 $643.75 for�rst$50,000.00+ $7.00 for each additional$1,000.00 (or fraction thereo� Up to and including $100,000.00 $100,001.00 to $500,000.00 $993.75 for first$100,000+ $5.60 for each additional$1,000.00 (or fraction thereo� Up to and including $500,000.00 $500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00 $3,233.75 for first$500,000.00 + $4.75 for each additional$1,000.00 (or fraction thereo� Up to and including $1,000,000.00 $1,000,001 and up $5,608.75 for first$1,000,000.00+ $3.15 for each additional$1,000.00 (or fraction thereo� Plan Review Fee Calculation %of Buildin�Permit Fee Plans review fee (general) 65% Plans review fee—Group R-3 occupancies (single family less than 7,999 sq ft) 40% Plans review fee—Group R-3 occupancies (single family 8,000 sq ft or more) 65% Plans review fee—Group U occupancies (sheds,barns, et.) 25% Initial Plan Review Fees are capped at$35,000 not including pass-through expenses for outside review as noted in the "Fee Payment"section of this schedule. Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 6 of 17 DRAFT OTHER BUILDING PERMITS: Over-the-Counter Service $61.00 flat fee Demolition Permit Single Family Residence $46.00 flat fee Commercial Buildings $131.00 flat fee Garage or accessory building associated with residence or commercial building $21.00 flat fee Foundation Only: 25% of building permit fee Swimming Pools, over 5,000 gallons $52.00+ plumbing fees Re-roof(no plan review charge unless submitted for review) Based on Project Valuation Change of Use or Occupancy Classification Permit Hourly Towers, elevated tanks, antennas Hourly GRADING PERMIT: 100 cubic yards (cu yd) or less $21.00 101 to 1,000 cubic yards $21.00 for�rst 100 cu yd. + $7.00 each additional 100 cu yd 1,001 to 10,000 cubic yards $88.00 for first 1,000 cu yd+ $6.00 each additional 1,000 cu yd 10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards $154.00 for�rst 10,000 cu yd+ $15.00 each additional 10,000 cu yd 100,001 to 200,000 cubic yards $386.00 for�rst 100,000 cu yd+ $15.00 each additional 100,000 cu yd 200,000 or more cubic yards $528.00 for first 200,000 cu yd+ $15.00 for each additional 200,000 cu yd GRADING PLAN REVIEW FEE: 50 cubic yards or less No Fee 51 to 100 cubic yards $12.00 101 to 1,000 $21.00 1,001 to 10,000 $27.00 10,001 to 100,000 $27.00 for first 100,000 cu yd+ $7.00 each additional 10,000 cu yd 100,001 to 200,000 $104.00 for�rst 100,000 cu yd+ $6.00 for each additional 100,000 cu yd 200,001 or more $166.00 Land Clearing Only(without earth being moved) $68.00 Paving Permit(greater than 5,000 sq. ft. —new paving only) $263.00 Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 7 of 17 DRAFT MECHANICAL PERMIT: Plan review fees for mechanical permits will be collected at the time of application as noted in the "Fee Payment" section of this schedule. Permit fees will be collected when the permit is issued. If submitted as part of a building permit application, the unit costs are added, but not the "basic" fee for issuing the permit. Mechanical Permit Fees A. BASIC FEES 1. Basic fee for issuing each permit $37.00 2. Basic fee for each supplemental permit $8.00 B. UNIT FEES (in addition to the basic fee) 1. Installation or relocation of Furnaces and suspended heaters a.up to and including 100,000 btu $13.00 b. over 100,000 btu $16.00 2. Duct work system $ll.00 3. Heat pump and air conditioner a. 0 to 3 tons $13.00 b. over 3 tons to 15 tons $21.00 c. over 15 tons to 30 tons $26.00 d. over 30 tons to 50 tons $37.00. e. over 50 tons $63.00 4. Gas water heater $ll.00 5. Gas piping system $1.00 per outlet 6. Gas log, fireplace, and gas insert installation $11.00 7. Appliance vents installation;relocation;replacement $10.00 each 8. Boilers, compressors, and absorption systems a. 0 to 3 hp- 100,000 btu or less $13.00 b. over 3 to 15 hp- 100,001 to 500,000 btu $21.00 c. over 15-30 hp-500,001 to 1,000,000 btu $26.00 d. over 30 ph-1,000,001 to 1,750,000 btu $37.00 e. over 50 hp-over 1,750,000 btu $63.00 9. Air Handlers a. each unit up to 10,000 cfm,including ducts $13.00 b. each unit over 10,000 cfm $16.00 10. Evaporative Coolers (other than portable) $11.00 ll.Ventilation and Exhausts a. each fan connected to a single duct $ll.00 b. each ventilation system $13.00 c. each hood served by mechanical exhaust $13.00 12. Incinerators a.residential installation or relocation $21.00 b. commercial installation or relocation $23.00 13.Unlisted appliances a.under 400,000 btu $52.00 b. 400,000 btu or over $105.00 14. Hood a. Type I $52.00 b. Type II $ll.00 15. LP Storage Tank $ll.00 16. Wood or Pellet Stove insert $11.00 17. Wood stove system-free standing $26.00 Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 8 of 17 DRAFT PLUMBING PERMIT: Plan review fees for mechanical permits will be collected at the time of application as noted in the "Fee Payment" section of this schedule. Permit fees will be collected when the permit is issued. If submitted as part of a building permit application, the unit costs are added, but not the "basic" fee for issuing the permit. A. BASIC FEES 1. Basic fee for issuing each permit $37.00 2. Basic fee for each supplemental permit $8.00 B. UNIT FEES (in addition to the basic fee) 1. Each plumbing�xture on a trap $6.00 each (includes garbage disposals, dishwashers, backflow device, drainage, hot tubs, built-in water softener, water closets,lavatories, sinks, drains, etc.) 2. Water Heater $6.00 each 3. Industrial waste pretreatment interceptor $16.00 (includes its trap and vent, except kitchen type grease interceptors functioning as fixture traps.) 4. Repair or alteration of water piping, drainage or vent piping $6.00 each fixture 5. Atmospheric type vacuum breaker $6.00 each 6. Backflow protective device other than atmospheric type vacuum breakers $6.00 each 7. Medical gas $6.00 per outlet 8. Interceptors $6.00 each RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT: A traffic plan and traffic plan review is required if more than 50% of the width of any street is closed or if a single arterial lane is closed. A minimum plan review fee of $61.00 (hourly rate for city employees) applies to all right-of-way permits that require a traffic plan. If additional staff time is required, it will be charged at the hourly rate. Cate�orv 1.Non-cut obstruction without clean up $73.00 2.Non-cut obstruction with clean up $ll0.00 3.Pavement cut obstruction, non-winter $168.00 4.Pavement cut obstruction,winter $210.00 5. Approach Permit $52.00 SIGN PERMIT: Sign permits are subject to assessment of planning division review fees as found in Schedule A. Sign Permits are also subject to the assessment of the WSBCC fee as noted in Schedule B "General" section. Signs mounted on buildings $48.00 per sign (flat fee) Sign and pole mounting $68.00 per sign (flat fee) Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 9 of 17 DRAFT �c�,.a,.�,, r �;,.,, r,,,�,. , rV,�crc�rvecs�''siix�icc-c�c i°c-r�e �L,o�o�';,-o rl;��,«..�i o� Q 2'7 n n � > • evirt�e�r�iaie�,T;��e�cre a'iC� Q�4 4 n n cvirt�e�r�rc�ar6i�diar�t� ��c�r�o'i••�� Q�� n n _€�'^-«t�e�r „�i nn ae a�� etiz nn D�.��.�� ecn nn De�-��ie�� ,,.,... a��.� n aa: , ti �ewb�e�a�^^ �4�0 ��ie��e 2-9 �n��.r„�.,r�„�,;,.,,,,n„�..�„1.r„�.,r�,.�,.ii,.�:,,� cvir�6�rDrc�cixE tzp-c�iuc��-Eiiv-ci�'t'ic��'a;�;••,�•�\ Q 1 4 4 (1(1 �priix�i'c�re�'C�cc""p€�^rire�z�-ce�iuEe�e��-Ei}^v-ie a'iee�'e a;";"""� Q o c n n n,... C..,.;.,vl.,,. C.:r��Ci'�t-9�tS�t�g ? t��'' etiti nn � � n�s�. Q�n� nn 5�� i�s��. Q�n c n n ��z�� e n n Q n n Z�r�e �9�€-a�' e n�o n n �� n��, e n�i n n 49T�e �9�e�E�', e c�n n n ��e�'�9n eti�� nn�e n i ro..i.o.,a r,,,.i.. a,..,,,i:,..,ii. ao�;,.�oa � ��eri.� „i�;�i. �i.o .,i.,,. o �e i.. � > ""' ,�T��s.�o�;��e-�}s �e��ta-l�t�e-:� r'�cicc:r:ri L•,,,,�v�ci°c-cnr-cr�€�3�i�P•-•,•,1�,,,,�L.� �a7°v�-6"rvr�C�€�ii,••,1�czcr-cv��P�E �itrtc�i�9"�imrvv�tt€{`�l ��.�v Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 10 of 17 DRAFT , � , , � � � �e �e ab �`��z�€-�(�ae��t�°` �4�0 � �e �e� '`�� a�e��t�°` �� t n"`��s�iia�6". Da-rii�rrT�'a'i��cc�6iri° �i7z-i�.�v r�i.,�� r., a rr cr�,ra„;„o i„.,,. i�i c.u. ,� �� nn crcrs.n-ccncrzr-c�cas�pr�c-�rcr�-6�-c'F-�prrixar€�'vy.r�°c�i r�Tv rcicrs:nTs�+""cr�cr�-6��hisr€�'vy'3's�°czi� �e�-vv > > • �� rt�6�.,i�T ;� QQn nn ze��T ;� eQn nn Te��—�arop�zn ;, QQn nn ��€�i� ;� -r,, uo r�o�o,w,.;roa n��vr�ina€�C'^zcn-prc�a�C�eE�E�cc�i6"�r�irvna€��i6ac-r€�€�'i€�e� Q4n nn T A N�� C„l..a:�,:�:,..,./DTTTI/a:,,.,a;.,.,. C;r„ Dl...,. ��,.i Qon nn c�^v"rrrrai �,�..1 ��-.v�v Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 11 of 17 DRAFT I Schedule C�- Parks and Recreation ADMINISTRATIVE FEES Basic fees to be considered when applying rates Administrative Fee $32.00 Refuse Fee $52.00 AOUATICS Pool admission(age 5 and under) free Pool admission(age older than 5) $1.00 Pool punch pass(25 swims) $20.00 Weekend family discount-1 child under 13 free with paying adult ISwimming Lessons $�9,-9935.00 Swim Team Fee $�9�45.00 Reservation(less than 50 people) $105.00 per hour** Food fee (less than 50 people,if applicable) $25.00 Reservation(50-100 people) $131.00 per hour** Food fee (50-100 people,if applicable) $52.00 Reservation(101-150 people) $157.00 per hour** Food fee (101-150 people,if applicable) $79.00 **Minimum 2 h�ours ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE PERMIT $10.00 CENTERPLACE Conference Center Wing Auditorium $79.00 per hour Auditorium $475.00 per day Auditorium $236.00 per half day Auditorium w/Presentation System $52.00 per hour*** Auditorium w/Presentation System $315.00 per day*** Auditorium w/Presentation System $158.00 per half day*** Auditorium Deposit $52.00 Executive Conference Room $52.00 per hour Executive Conference Room Deposit $52.00 Meeting Room (day and evening use) $42.00 per hour Meeting Room $263.00 per day Large Meeting Room $75.00 per hour Large Meeting Room $225.00 per half day Large Meeting Room $450.00 per 9 hr. day Meeting Room $131.00 per half day Meeting Room Deposit $52.00 Patio Event Package $500.00 per event Portable Sound System $150.00 per event Platinum Package $500.00 per event ***Requires rental ofpresentation system, see nextpage Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 12 of 17 DRAFT Great Room Kitchen with dining room rental $105.00 per use Kitchen Commercial use (2 hour minimum) $52.00 per hour Kitchen deposit 452.00 Multi-use/Banquet Hall $105.00 per hour Multi-use/Banquet Hall $840.00 per 9 hr session Multi-use/Banquet Hall $1,575.00 all day(6 a.m.-1 a.m.) Small Dining Area $52.00 per hour Deposit $210.00 Stage $21.00 per section per day Stage Removal $150.00 Table Settings (linens and tableware) $3.00 per place setting Pipe &Drape rental $100/day Chair Cover rental $3/chair per day Senior Center Wing Lounge with Dance Floor $105.00 per hour Lounge with Dance Floor $850.00 per 6 hours Lounge deposit $210.00 Meeting room (evening use) $42.00 per hour Meeting room (evening use) $131.00 per 4 hr session Meeting room (weekend use) $262.00 per day Meeting room (weekend use) $131.00 per half day Meeting room deposit $52.00 Private Dining Room $52.00 per hour Private dining room deposit $52.00 Wellness Center $105.00 per hour Miscellaneous Cleanup fee $52 to $315.00 per event Host/Hostess (after hours) $16.00 per hour Presentation System *** $262.00 per day (includes projector,podium, DVD/VCR sound system, camera system) Room Setup $26.00 per hour Satellite Video Conferencing $262.00 per hour Sound System $42.00 per day Technical Support $42.00 per hour Television/VCR $79.00 per day Touch Pad Voting System $121.00 base station per day+ $16.00 per keypad per day per hour LCD Proj ector $25.00 per hour LCD Proj ector $100.00 per day Coffee Service $25.00 service Linens Only $5.00 per table Wine glass only rental $.50 per glass Children's Birthday Packa�e $175.00 per packa�e Business Incentive Rental Policv - The Parks & Recreation Director has the authoritv to reduce the room rental rate bv 1 hr. when the rental meets the followin� criteria: minimum of 25 participants; utilize a classroom at CenterPlace 8 or more times per calendar year; and use in-house caterer for a meal each reservation. Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 13 of 17 DRAFT �v��c-�Huc�P^`�"��'�v^n > > �� e i c� nn ��'p^Pn�t�en� Q4� nn ,,,.�;.vo. ;�i. � .��;,. r��r,.�� n,.� a�vv nTJ r il D TJ 1�T A r /T T�� v.�r�� c i c nn o ,.� .,aa;�;,,�.,i �,,,,.. =�mr,-�Q� D��S��e�� c�i.n n �"�n��e�'��e�f^ii ��.nn,,. ,,. �� nRrn�u��rr nR��r�n�z�� m��r r�v nRrc�v� air��€�'/Zi°c3rr�3�z��i6�� ao �.nv xcEt""�raaoi�E�r�vsr�'�(l�rvnirvre�@6�1 ��v Di!`�� Ti T TTi D�` �gsj.,r�?�p@e�io �cn nn �€�;'�mia vic-a€�3a�i�7 n�n�=�� Q 7 c 7,n n iD__1D�r�`CTl11�T A T DIIl1Tl1!''D A DIIV rL�,�i,.,. Q'lti !1!1 .. ,..1 PICNIC SHELTER RESERVATION (For groups fewer than 200 people) Browns (up to five hours) $50.00 Ed ec� liff(�t to five hoursl $50.00 Discovery Playpround#1 (up to two hours) $35.00 Discovery Playpround#2(up to two hours) $35.00 Greenacres—lar e�(u�to five hoursl $84.00 Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 14 of 17 DRAFT Mirabeau Meadows—shelter and sta�e (up to five hours) $84.00 Mirabeau Sprin�s—shelter and dock(�to two hours) $250.00 Sullivan(�to five hours) $50.00 Terrace View(up to five hours) $84.00 Valley Mission(up to five hours) $84.00 EVENT RESERVATION—include shelter (For groups of 200 or more people) Events include but are not limited to activities such as car shows, tournaments, or hi�h-risk activities. The Parks and Recreation Director will make the final determination. General fee (up to five hours): $157.00 Non-�rofit a�lications with�roof of 501(cl(3�fee (u�to five hoursl: $84.00 VALLEY MISSION HORSE ARENA Rental is for Fri-Sun $105.00 per weekend EVENT PHOTOS Mirabeau Sprin�s shelter and dock $150.00 per hour BALL FIELD RENTAL/USE $26.00 15`hour+ $15.00 each additional hour REFUNDABLE DAMAGE DEPOSIT Fewer than 200 people $52.00 200 or more people $257.00 SPECIAL EVENTS: (See S�okane Vallev Munici�al Code 5.15) Application Fee $5.00 PROFESSIONAL PHOTOGRAPHY—Permit fee $26.00 annual RECREATION Recreation program fees are set to recover costs as specified in the Parks and Recreation revenue policy. Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 15 of 17 DRAFT I Schedule D� — Administration COPY FEE: Copy of audio tapes,video tapes, DVD, CD's, etc. At Cost Copy of written documents in excess of 6 pages $.15 per page Copy large format documents (24"x 36" or greater) $3.00 per page Hourly rate to transfer scanned records to electronic disc $19.00 per hour A deposit of 10% may be required on public record requests NSF Check return fee $26.00 I Schedule E� — Other Fees BUSINESS REGISTRATION Business Registration $13.00 annual Nonprofit Registration $3.00 annual Late Business Registration Fee: (charged in addition to the business registration fee) (SVMC 5.05.050) Failure to pay the registration fee by the applicable date shall result in a late fee of 50% of the annual registration fee. Failure to pay the annual fee may result in non-issuance of a Washington State license, as determined by the Washington State Department of Licensing. Adult Entertainment Establishment License, Live Adult Entertainment $1,575.00 Establishment License, Adult Arcade $1,575.00 Adult Arcade Device License $157.00 Manager License $157.00 Entertainer License $157.00 Late Adult Entertainment License Fee: (charged in addition to the license fee) 7 to 30 calendar days past due 25% of license fee 31 to 60 calendar days past due 50% of license fee 61 and more calendar days past due 75% of license fee Appeal of Administrative Determination—Adult Entertainment License: Adult Entertainment License denial, suspension or revocation pursuant to SVMC 5.10 $1,050.00 TOW OPERATOR REGISTRATION FEE $105.00 annual OVERSIZED LOAD PERMIT FEE $26.00 STORMWATER UTILITY CHARGE ON DEVELOPED PARCELS: Each single-family unit $21.00 annual All other properties each $21.00 per 3,160 sq. ft impervious surface Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 16 of 17 DRAFT I Schedule F� — Police Fees Alarm svstem registration Residential alarm systems $25.00 annual Commercial alarm systems $35.00 annual [If the alarm site has no false alarms during the registration year, the following year's registration fee will be reduced to $15.00 per year for residential, and $25.00 per year for commercial.] Discounted alarm re�istration fees The annual registration fees and false alarm cost recovery fees are reduced by 50% for eligible citizens. To qualify for the fee reduction, an eligible person a. has a gross annual income of less than $19,100 for a one-person household or b.has a gross annual income of less than $21,850 for households of two or more persons or c. is substantially disabled, meaning that the person has a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more major life activities or functions, such as caring for oneself, performing manual tasks such as walking, seeing,hearing, speaking,breathing and learning. Appeal regarding a false alarm $25.00 Service fees for resnonse to a false alarm: Residential false alarm incident $85.00 per incident Commercial false alarm incident $165.00 per incident Resolution Amending Fee Schedule for 2013 Page 17 of 17 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 4th, 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: Street and Stormwater Maintenance Contract Renewal — Poe Asphalt Inc. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Street and Stormwater Maintenance Contract Approval on April 24, 2007, Contract Renewals in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 BACKGROUND: The City conducted an RFP process in March 2007 for street and stormwater maintenance and repair services. In April 2007, the Council unanimously agreed to award the contract to Poe Asphalt Paving, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $1,175,119 and also authorized the City Manager to sign the contract and future, seven-year renewal options as provided in the RFP. This contract is a Cost Plus contract, meaning the City pays all direct costs plus a pre-negotiated overhead and profit percentage. This negotiated overhead and profit (OH & P) percentage is 22% for Direct Costs and 8% for Subcontractors work. These percentages have remained the same throughout this contract. Public Works staff met with Poe Asphalt to discuss the contractor's 2012 overall performance, and any changes either party would like to make to the program. Poe Asphalt has provided a satisfactory level of service during all previous contract years. In light of their performance, staff discussed renewal of the contract and negotiated the 2013 option year. The outcome of that negotiation process was a request for a 2.22% increase adjustment to the labor rates, due to union contracts that represent Poe AsphalYs employees. Poe Asphalt is not proposing any changes from the 2012 equipment rates, and Poe Asphalt was successful in providing a modest decrease in material costs for 2013. The impact of the proposed increase in labor rates versus the decrease in material costs to the 2013 contract renewal as compared to 2012 actual expenditures results in a net increase to the contract costs of $160.21 or a 0.002% overall costs increase. This very modest increase is due largely to the fact that the service contract is essentially comprised of 26% labor, 22% equipment and 52% for materials. Staff does not believe this very modest increase will affect service levels or the scope of work of the contract. Additionally, staff made changes to the 2013 Contract amount reducing it from $1,545,119 to $1,366,663 for Street Maintenance (reduction of $178,456 from 2012), and the $140,000 for snow plowing remains the same. This reduction in contract amount is due to a change in the scope of work. This contract will no longer construct mill and overlays. This contract adjustment is provided for within the contract under section 1.11.3 Compensation, which allows the contractor to request an adjustment in unit rates annually for the following 12 months, and these price adjustments, shall be negotiated with city staff. Staff reviewed and discussed these changes with Poe Asphalt, and is recommending renewal of their contract for 2013 with these requested changes. OPTIONS: Place this contract on the December 11th meeting as a Motion consideration. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The contract will be funded by the approved 2013 budget. STAFF CONTACT: Eric Guth ATTACHMENTS: 2013 Draft Option Year Contract OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY S{�pokane CARY P. DRISKELL- CITY ATTORNEY Va114V ERIK J. LAMB - DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY aI 11707 East Sprague Ave., Suite 103 ♦ Spokane Valley, WA 99206 509.720.5105 ♦ Fax: 509.688.0299 ♦ cityattorneyC�spokanevalley.org December 20, 2012 Poe Asphalt Paving, Inc. 2732 North Beck Road Post Falls, ID 83854 Re: Implementation of 2013 option year-Agreement for Street and Stormwater Maintenance and Repair Services, executed May 11, 2007 Dear Mr. Griffith: The City executed a contract for provision of Street and Stormwater Maintenance and Repair Services on May 11, 2007 by and between the City of Spokane Valley, hereinafter "City" and Poe Asphalt Paving, Inc., hereinafter "Contractor" and jointly referred to as "Parties." The Request for Proposal states that it was for one year, with seven optional one-year terms possible if the parties mutually agree to exercise the options each year. This is the sixth of seven possible option years that can be exercised and runs through December 31, 2013. The City would like to exercise the 2013 option year of the Agreement. The Compensation as outlined in Exhibit A, 2013 Cost Proposal, includes the labor and material cost negotiated and shall not exceed $1,506,663. The contract includes $1,366,663 for Street & Stormwater Maintenance and $140,000 for snow removal operations. The history of the annual renewals is set forth as follows: Original contract amount .........................................$ 1,175,119.00 2008 Renewal ......................................................$ 1,475,119.00 2009 Renewal ..... ................................................$ 1,175,ll 9.00 2010 Renewal......................................................$ 1,375,119.00 2011 Renewal......................................................$ 1,545,119.00 2012 Renewal ......................................................$ 1,685,119.00 2013 Renewal......................................................$ 1,506,663.00 This contract option year will use the Asphalt Cost Price Adjustment per WSDOT Spec 5-04.5. The Contractor shall provide the cost adjustment for asphalt prices monthly and include this information with each monthly invoice. All of the other contract provisions contained in the original agreement are in place and will remain unchanged in exercising this option year. If you are in agreement with exercising the 2013 option year, please sign below to acknowledge the receipt and concurrence to perform the 2013 option year. Please return two copies to the City for execution, along with current insurance information. A fully executed original copy will be mailed to you for your files. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY POE ASPHALT PAVING, 1NC. Mike Jackson, City Manager Name Title ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the Ciry Attorney Exhibit "A" 2013 Cost Proposal 2013 2013 Street Maintenance 100 % wages Labor hourly overtime Material Costs Superintendent $ 47.20 $ 61.32 1/2" PG 64-28 50 gyro $ 52.00 Foreman $ 47.20 $ 61.32 1/2" PG 70-28 75 gyro $ 52.50 Operator $ 45.50 $ 58.87 1/2" PG 70-28 100 gyro $ 51.50 Teamster $ 43.52 $ 55.21 Top Course 5/8" $ 6.30 Laborer $ 40.14 $ 52.17 ' Price adjustment based on ESDOT 5-04.4.OPT2.GR5 2013 2013 Snow Operations -90% wages Overhead & Profit fee Costs Labor hourly overtime Direct costs 22% Superintendent $ 47.20 $ 61.32 Subcontractors 8% Foreman $ 47.20 $ 61.32 Operator $ 42.16 $ 54.06 Teamster $ 41.18 $ 51.70 Laborer $ 37.41 $ 48.24 2013 2013 Equipment costs Equipment costs 20 super dump $ 81.47 247 f550 1 ton $ 27.07 22 end dump $ 60.72 253 water truck 220 gal $ 50.00 23 super dump $ 81.47 259 water truck 4000 gal $ 60.72 24 super dump $ 81.47 273 service truck $ 39.47 25 super dump $ 81.47 275 service truck $ 39.47 26 super dump $ 81.47 316 pickup $ 16.19 27 super dump $ 81.47 319 pickup $ 16.19 28 super dump $ 81.47 402 dd34 roller $ 44.78 29 end dump $ 60.72 406 dd34 roller $ 44.78 40 end dump $ 60.72 410 dd110 roller $ 75.00 43 Tractor $ 60.72 413 dd110 roller $ 75.00 70 utility trailer $ 15.94 420 hahm roller $ 75.00 75 Lowbed trailer $ 37.44 421 plate wacker $ 5.36 132 trailer $ 15.94 461 grade roller $ 55.15 134 trailer $ 15.94 512 roadtec paver $ 185.00 135 trailer $ 15.94 524 blawknox 5510 paver $ 185.00 145 tilt trailer $ 26.57 713 cat 160 blade $ 86.53 149 trailer $ 15.94 718 huber $ 55.66 115 4 axle pup $ 21.25 722 skiploader $ 50.60 187 4 axle pup $ 21.25 926 tack trailer $ 16.19 188 4 axle pup $ 21.25 930 cimline crack/joint sealer $ 85.00 189 4 axle pup $ 21.25 947 20" saw $ 26.57 202 f450 1 ton $ 27.07 205 f550 tack truck $ 50.00 225 f450 dump truck $ 50.00 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 4th, 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: Street Sweeping Contract Renewal —AAA Sweeping GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Street Sweeping Contract Approval on March 3, 2007 and Contract renewal in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012. BACKGROUND: The City conducted an RFP process in March 2007 for street sweeping. In April 2007, the Council unanimously agreed to award the contract to AAA Sweeping in an amount not to exceed $473,687, and authorized the City Manager to sign the contract and future, seven-year renewal options as provided in the RFP. AAA Sweeping provided a satisfactory level of service during 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012. The 2012 contract amount was approved at $490,199.94. The 2013 contract will be the sixth of seven possible option years, and the amount will stay the same at $490,199.94, which has remained the same amount since 2009. Public Works staff inet with AAA Sweeping as a matter of course to discuss the contractor's 2012 overall performance, and any changes we would like to make to the program, and discussed the renewal of the contract and negotiated the 2013 option year. The outcome of that negotiation process was a request for a 1% increase adjustment to the contract hourly rates. This adjustment is provided for within the contract as long as the Contractor's request does not exceed the CPI-U or a maximum of 3% annually, whichever is less. The CPI-U for October (released 11/15/12) was 2.2%. In this case, staff was able to negotiate a far less increase, which only pertains to the hourly rates. Staff is comfortable with keeping the contract amount the same as the past four years. OPTIONS: Place this contract on the December 11 th meeting as a Motion Consideration, or provide staff with further direction. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to place this item on the December 11 agenda as a motion consideration. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The contract will be funded by the approved 2013 budget. STAFF CONTACT: Eric Guth ATTACHMENTS: 2013 option year contract, October 2012 CPI-U OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY SCp�akane CARY P. DRISKELL - CITY ATTORNEY �� ERIK J. LAMB- DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY �x 11707 East Sprague Ave., Suite 103 ♦ Spokane Valley, WA 99206 509.720.5105 ♦ Fax: 509.688.0299 ♦ cityattorneyC�spokanevalley.org December 20, 2012 AAA Sweeping, LLC PO Box 624 Veradale, WA 99037 Re: Implementation of 2013 option year, Agreement for Street Sweeping Services, 07- 021, executed March 13, 2007 Dear Mr. Sargent: The Ciry executed a contract for provision of Street Sweeping Services on March 13, 2007 by and between the City of Spokane Valley, hereinafter "City", and AAA Sweeping, LLC, hereinafter"Contractor" and jointly referred to as "Parties." The Request for Proposal states that it was for one year, with seven optional one-year terms possible if the parties mutually agree to exercise the options each year. This is the sixth of seven possible option years that can be exercised and runs through December 31, 2013. The City would like to exercise the 2013 option year of the Agreement. The Compensation as outlined in Exhibit A, 2013 Cost Proposal, includes the labor and material cost negotiated and shall not exceed $490,199.94. The history of the annual renewals is set forth as follows: Original contract amount .........................................$ 473,687.00 2008 Renewal ......................................................$ 479,717.02 2009 Renewal ..... ...... ..........................................$ 490,199.94 2010 Renewal............ ..........................................$ 490,199.94 2011 Renewal............ ..........................................$ 490,199.94 2012 Renewal ............ ..........................................$ 490,199.94 2013 Renewal....................................... ...............$ 490,199.94 The Parties further agree to various specification changes, which are set forth in Exhibit B — Specification Changes. All of the other contract provisions contained in the original agreement are in place and will remain unchanged in exercising this option year. If you are in agreement with exercising the 2013 option year, please sign below to acknowledge the receipt and concurrence to perform the 2013 option year. Please return two copies to the City for execution, along with current insurance information. A fully executed original copy will be mailed to you for your files. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY AAA SWEEPING, LLC Mike Jackson, Ciry Manager Name Title ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney Exhibit A - 2013 Cost Proposal 2013 Street Sweeping Contract Contractor : AAA Sweeping Item Task Unit Price 1 Mechanical Sweeper Hours $150.23 2 Kick/Angle Brooms Hours $110.02 3 Regenerative Air Sweeper Hours $150.23 4 Water Truck Hours $111.66 5 Dump Truck/End Truck Hours $111.66 6 Loader Hours $110.02 EXHIBIT B SPECIFICATION ADDENDA (RFP No. 07-001) Street Sweeping Services —2013 Option Year The following addenda are included to update Specifications listed as part of the Agreement for Street Sweeping Services, No. 07-001, executed March 13, 2007: Section 1.11 - CONTRACT 0 1.11.3—Compensation ■ REPLACE the 3rd Paragraph with the following: "Prices shall remain firm for the duration of the contract. If annual contract renewal options are exercised, the Contractor may request an adjustment of the contract prices annually by November 15Y for the following calendar year. Such prices shall be negotiated by the City and the Contractor, and shall not be increased or decreased by more than the percent change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) or 3%whichever is smaller. The reference point will be the CPI-U for September (which normally is published mid-October) and the index base period is 1982-1984=100. The source of this percent change shall be the "United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics." Section 3.3 DISPOSAL OF REFUSE o REPLACE the last paragraph with the following: "If applicable,the Contractor shall keep the transfer points neat, clean, and free of excess litter. This includes cleanup of litter, refuse, and discarded materials from the site pads, access road, fence lines, and tree or brush lines. Under no circumstances shall the collected debris be stored at a temporary storage site for a period in excess of forty-five calendar days. All collected material posing a public health or safety hazard or having the potential to create a public nuisance shall be immediately disposed of at an appropriate landfill." CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 4, 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: Memorandum of Understanding between Cities of Spokane Valley and Millwood for the design and construction of the Argonne Rd (Empire to Knox) Safety Project. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: 8/9/11 Presentation on HSIP projects. BACKGROUND: With over 32,000 vehicle trips daily, the Argonne Road corridor is the busiest street in the valley. Traffic delays on Argonne Road within Millwood quickly impact the section of Argonne Road within Spokane Valley. It is mutually advantageous for the Cities of Millwood and Spokane Valley to improve safety and traffic flow on the Argonne Road Corridor. In 2011 the City of Millwood and Spokane Valley applied for and received a $180,640 federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant for the Argonne Road (Empire to Knox) Safety Project. This was an "invitational only" call for projects, where the corridors were pre- selected by WSDOT (Washington State Department of Transportation). The project will focus on reducing red-light running, rear-end, pedestrian and bicycle collisions. Spokane Valley and Millwood will do this by upgrading signal equipment allowing for corridor wide signal coordination, development of new signal timing plans, installation of countdown pedestrian timers, and signing of alternate bike routes. Spokane Valley Public Works Department Staff will develop new signal timing plans and design the improvements. The Spokane County Signal Shop will install the improvements. The attached MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) has been prepared to define the responsibilities of both cities during the project. It has already been reviewed by the Millwood City Council. OPTIONS: 1) Consensus to move ahead with the approval of the MOU with the City of Millwood for the design and construction of the Argonne Rd (Empire to Knox) Safety Project, or 2) Provide additional direction to staff. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to place on the December 11, 2012 Consent Agenda, the approval of the MOU with the City of Millwood for the design and construction of the Argonne Rd (Empire to Knox) Safety Project. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The $180,640 project cost is 100% funded by a HSIP grant. STAFF CONTACT: Inga Note, Senior Traffic Engineer ATTACHMENTS: MOU between Cities of Spokane Valley and Millwood for the design and construction of the Argonne Rd (Empire to Knox) Safety Project. Grant Application for Joint Corridor Project—Argonne from Empire to Knox MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE C�TY OF SPOKANE VALLEY AND CITY O� MlLLWO�D FOR THE DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION OF THE ARGONNE R� (EMPIRE TO KNOXj SAFETY PROJECT WHEREAS, the citfes of Spokane Valley (SPOKANE VALLEY} and Millwood (MILLWOOD) appl�e� for an� have been awarded a $180,640 �ederaf 2092 City Safety Program grant to design and construct various safety improvements along the A�gonne Road corridor �etween Empir� Avenue and Knox Avenue and irtstal[ bicycle rou�e signs along various nea�by streets {SAF�TY PR�JECT); and WHEREAS, SPOKANE VALL�Y and MILL.W�O� ` intend as part of their 2012 Transportation Improvement Programs, ta design a�d construct the SAFETY PROJ�CT; and WHER�AS, SPOKAN� VALLEY and MILLWDOD agree that the installation of the SAFETY PROJ�CT woul� benefif the ratepayers, taxpa`yers and the traveling public o#'�oth cities; � NOW, THEREFORE, SPOKANE VALLEY and MfL.I.WOOD do hereby agree as follaws; ARTICLE 1 — RESPONSIBILITIES OF SPOKANE VALLEY • 1, Plans and s�ecifications for the SAFETY PR�JECT wi[I be pre�ared by SPOKANE VA�.I.EY for c4nstruction in 2013. SP9KANE VALL�Y wtll purchase e�uipment ur�der WASNINGTON STATE PURCHASING CONTRACTS where.,possi�le. SPOKANE VALL�Y wil[ contract with SPOKANE COUNTY {C4UNTY) far canstruction and installafion of elements of the SAFETY PROJECT that cannof`,be:installe� by Spokane Vafley or MiUwoo� forces. 2. SPOKANE :1/AI.LEY shafl ha've fuli 'control over the construction, shall be respons�E�fe for orderir�g,and approVing materials, construcf�on testing, and shall be the administrator far the project. ' 3. SP4KANE VALLEY shall make payments to the STATE and COUNTY upon receipt of It�VOICES. 4. SPOKANE VALL�Y shall 'submit for reimbursement from WSDOT Highways and E.ocal Programs a!I elig�ble SAFETY PROJECT costs based upon invoices provided by the COUNTY, Washington State Purchasing Departmer�t, and other�endors. ARTICLE 2— R�SPONSfB�L.ITI�S OF MILLWOOD 1. MILLWO�D will �rovide SPOKANE VAL��Y wifh right-of-way information, incfuding existing raad as-built informatian ak the intersections of Arganne Road and Li�erty, Empire, Grace and Trer�t. 2. This Memorandum of Understanding, o�ce f�lly executed, shall esta�Eish a cammi#ment �y MI�.L.WOOD to cooperate and coordinate with SP�KANE VALLEY in a timefy manr�er on all �esign and construction associated wikh fhe SAFETY PRO.lECT. MlLLW00D will review 30% ; ; I Page 9 of 2 � and 90% plans ar�d spec�fications prepared by SPOKAN� VALLEY, MILLWOO� shall provide a review response for each within 10 warking days. 3. MILE.WOO� shall �esigr�ate a "responsible person" whv s�all represent MlLLWOOD's interest durir�g the construction of the SA�ETY PROJ�CT, and shall coordinate any modifications or changes needed by MI�.L,W40D in cor�junctio� with t�e work. 4. M[LLWOOD shafl idenkify the elements o#the project that it wishes to design and install prior to SPOKANE VALLEY submit�ing the 30% rev�ew p[ans. 5. MI��WOOD shall install the SA��7Y PROJECT efemer�ts ider�tified in the previous paragraph w�thin the grant timelines. ARTICLE 3 —A�LOCATION OF COSTS 1, The SAFETY project is 100% funded by a $180,640 Federal 2012 Gity Safety Program grant for all design, right-of-way and construction costs;'There is na lacal match,required. 2, SPOKANE VALLEY is authorized �o include in the reimbursernent its el[g�i��e administrative and staff costs incurred for researching, preparing design documents, grai�t and project administration, preparation of change orders, sign insta[lation, etc., for the SA�ETY PROJ�CT. , 3. MILLWOO� is aufhorized to include,in the reimbursemer�t its eligib[e a�ministrative and s#aff �', costs incurred far researehing, reviewing design dacuments, grant and �roject administration, ' sign installation, etc., for the SAFETY PROJECT 4. MILLWOOD shall issue a r�o;-cost permit to tF�e COUNTY to �erform work within MI1.�.WOOD'S right-of-way for the SAFETY PROJECT. CITY OF SPOKANE 11AL.LEY. By: Date: City Manager APPROV�D AS T0 �ORM: By: Date: Office of the City Afto.rney;;; CITY OF MILLWO�D: By: Date: Honorab[e Daniel MarK Mayor af City of Millwood 8y: Date: Office of the Ciky Attorney Page 2 af 2 i E City of Spokane Valfey and City of Millwoad �oir�t Co�°rid�� P�oject A� or��a� fro mpi�e to �� Congressiona[Distrlct: 5�� LegfsEative Dlstrict; �� Cantact: [nga Note, PE,Senior Traffic Engineer,inote spoicanevall�v.o__rg,509-72D-5011 '�om Richardson, MEI[wood City Planner,4om.ric�ardson@ci�iofmillwnad.or�,509-92�-0960 Cast�S§tir►�ate Estimated Praject Cost Ar,-iount Requested $1�0,64� $180,64Q 5ee detaifed cost estir�tate on the attached page, Pro;ec�Deseription This project wiil focus on reducing re�-[ight running, rear-end, pedestrian and bicycle collisians. Spokane Valley and Millwood intend to da this by upgrading signal equipment allowing for corridor vdide signaf coordlnation, de�elapment of new signal timin� plans, installation of cauntdown pedestrian timers,and signing of a[ternate bike rautes. These programs are detailed below. 'fhis part of Rrgonr�e carries over �0,00� vehicles ��I�� . € $o flr €� i i � �•�rs ii,::c a��_� i131 i'€1�.L3.6.E�� MSr�� er da and has enou h�reig�t#o be a T2 route. It = �� `�� p Y g ��1�1��T��t r ��' �I " � ��.�_��.�_��.�� - is very eongested during peak periods, While much � � � �. �� 3�r� � worfc has been cfone on t�e ��eak hour signaE �z��, ��F= �4 ��a�'`�^�� -� _ �ros �9-I��i�� d��-�1:� � coordfnatior�,the carridor could o�erate better wifh r��g��°r`� �., a� ��3}� °,�� 4��'0�1 �-E � i � �4��1��`1�:�; � a �, � ; .�,-� ��r� ��`� some small ehanges. �he three signa ls in Mi f iwoo d � 4 y�� E-�s-� �� -3�z&��<at A 3 l �yw= ��?1��3 Q a l t 6 i�, H � � �.��' P:�� 1 � < have old cantrolEers and are not con�eete� lnto the pi�o��-��'�� ° x�v <= ' � �f(�1�� a r- �li t L L1�t!Q Of D rs- 9[" ` �� . central s stem. This makes it almosfi imy�assible for -�, ��r� �.�f �� t�� , ��s2�=x y F' -"`� g s7.�sz�"'�l Ai,.� a:�.rc'�e�� 1- rs ��.�� ., � x� them to stay in coordination wit� the 5pokane ` $ a i� �a��_� ��:-��<�-4�.� �j;�� '`��a .+ ' :��c�T�I9 4� p'� s'3 3 s�� !i�.$etrc�, �'` � � � ��9 3 t �9 f � �ST . Valley and WSDOT signals to the socath, leading to �, �� __ '�- „ �`, F ;�a �4 ,,��,�,, , � a s' �1'; � � �r .. t� `#.a fncreased congestion, �ore �topping at red Iights, �, �� : � a�' _� �;��`�" � �� c � *� 8 4s �}��A� � ."`�a1,4��1 t� ��,-.� .r� driver frustration, and likely influ�ncir�g the co[lision ��.��. � d � �� ' ; � � �� ? illwood would �� ?�� '�" 1'�` y�` : �r: rate. Under th�s praject t�te City of M ��, ,,�t� � : � z <� �x eir three cantrollers with Ea le m52s �' �rv �°� � �� ` s �.; �: c� .. �. � ,:.�: � _.:��.�..� repfac� th g � �" � �� , a�� ,��' � � � ��a� � � . a�� . � �„� running NextPhase and woufd install radio �,.-� �, a �°� j� ��a intercannect ln the signal cabinets. The { ��M1�� a�, � �,, � � interconnect would tie ta SpoEcane Val�ey and ��'A��i�:�[��',�� ' �� * �-� � ��)v WSDOT s stems at Trent/Ar onn�. Afthou h the � � � � � ��'� :-� � � �� ! � s� �`j-g n � II- ,A, �� 3b .':; �, .�' 1 y � $ � � �" ��sPOKA�iep A€r.e�r �r�� northern end of this project was designated as � � °- � ;� � ~��q -� � r 33 ;y 1rt An'd 11Y �r � r' � gatiC � �?1��N�—�.' � 3�h i � 1��1��§�� Empire Awenue, hath cities agree it would be best � ��' �� s a � �' � , . -� - � =a'� �,�� 1 �� .� ta� ,.1: � . , -�� .. to include the Liherty Averiue signaf as we[I to 'I,�i ��; ��-�f��"� ��re i Corr�dorvlcln�ty map ��°� � - .. ..-.,�-.� u .-F.� _ _.�zr b _,.. a ensure all three Milfwoo� signals are operating the City Safety Program (2d09-2015) , E I City of Spol�ane Va[ley and City o�Mil(wood same equiprr�enfi. fn arder to replace the controlfer and fnstafl the radios, the signal cabinets must be repEaced. The project wilE also install countdown pedestrian s€gnals at�he three Millwood sfgnals (Grace, Empire, and Li�ertyJ to reduce ped collisions. All conatructior�work for the signals would be c�r-npleted by Spokane County since they maintain the signafs for Millwoad. - Fol[owing the signal eq�ipment upgrade fha City of Spokane Valfey will work wi�h WSD�7 and Spokane County to develop Empr�ved signal coordination plans for the weekend, evenings, and other times of the day as deeme� necessary. Adj�stments will be made to the existing peak hour plans. Tne �asfi par�af this project will address the bicycle eollisions, �ue to the hea�y firaffic and narraw Iane widths,Argonne is not recomm�nded for�icycle travel. 5pokane Valley and Millwood Entend to improve alternate routes to direct cyclists �o rlde on other streets as designated in the Bicyc[e and Pedestrian Master Plan. This prQject would fund the purehas�and fnstallat(an of"BicycEs Route" signs on raadways west of Argonne including Mlss�on, Vista, Knox, Sargent, Montg�mery and E.iberty Avenue(in Millwood). The Spo[cane Valfey bicycfe route ma� is attached far reference. The City of S�akane ValEey is currently designing improvements fio the Argonne/Knox and Argonne/Montgomery intersectians. These improverrtents will include ADA upgrades to curb ramps, intersection and signal irr�provements at Knox and a new f�B right turn Iane at Montgomery to reduce congestian be�ween Trent and [-90. The projeet is fur�ded with a CMAQ grant. Tiie �roposed HS1P im�rovements will �e caordinated with the CMAQ funded irr�provements ta maximize the benefits ta th� tra�elfng public. Therefore countdown pedsstrlar� signals far the intersections of Argonr�e with Montgomery and Knox are not€�c�uded in this proposal as they wil[ be part of the CMAQ project. ; Agency Ca�rdir�at�on � 7he Cfty of Spokane Va[iey wiil be #he fead ager�cy and wili handle a[I administration of the project. Spokane VaEley stafF wifl coordinate signal work with Spakane County and oversee deve�a�rnent of signal timing pfans with Spokane County, City of Mil[wood and WSDOT. Spokane County signal staff wi(I make all traffic signal irr��rovements ln Miliwood. Spokane Valley will purchase bi�e ro€�te s€gns and provide them to Mi�lwood for �nstalEation, Miqwood uvill also pravide feedback ta Spakane Va[ley and 5pokane Caunty on tf�e new signal tfm€ng �lans, See ti�e attached email fro�n the City of Millwood with their approval to move forward with a jaint application. The two agenc�es wili prepar� an interlaca! agreement if the project is selected for funding. Schedu�� Receive award notification Jan 2fl12 Design Spring 2Q12 Constructian Surrimer-�all 2012 Signal Coordinatian Work Fafl 2012 Caliislan A�alysis A surt�mary of the common collis[on typ�s is shown in the table beEow, Rlong with the collision types is a summary of the corrections that would be made to reduce the cofllsions. City Safety Program (z009-2Q15) � City of S�okane Valley and Ci�y of Mi[lwaod [t shoufd be not�ed that ano'ther praminent coElfsion patterr� has already beer� corrected in this carridor. The Argonne Road/Indiana Avenue intersectian was the site of many collisions between#hro�agh and left turning traffic, This mo�ement was e[iminated with the installatian af a median in Iate 2Q08, which eliminated that coflision �attern. For ana[ysis purpases,the foflot+�ing eollisions should be considered as already correcte�; 2031007, C7Q6742, 18726�1, 7.905957, 191�55�, 277660�., 2779882, 2903643, 29036b3, and 291Z603. Rear-enci col[isions occur at many of the signa[ized � � - ir�tersections and inbetween s�gnals�ue to cangestion. � : The �roposed irt�pro�ements wil[ �mpro�e signal - .- caordination and corr3dor ihroughput in an effort to µ _ _ _ � �. . reduce the overall cangestion and queuing af vehic[es. / = � - 7h�s should [ea��a a reduction in rear-end colEisians. ' ' - � �� - • K� Bicycle and vehlcle callis€ans are common thraughout � �.;� N the corridor. They are Qften caused by eyclists riding on ; ��`� � the side�nral�C. Cycl�sts are hifi by drivers turning from side ` `� � streets an� driveways,where they are nat accustomed ` � t � , � to iaoking for cyc[ists. One goal ofi this project is to s�gn � � a[t�rnate bicycle rautes for cyel(sts to use and to move _ '�'�"R° them off the arterial streets. � � Pedestrian collisions primarily occur at the signalized S:� - - €` '(� � �� `+ � ' interseetions. 7hey are caused by pedestrians r�ot ��*r�.�F fol[owing the pedestrian s}gna9,an� by drivers not - _-� .. � ±' - yielding the right af way. fnstaliation of pedestrian �—� � � ,� � � � - countdown signals in Miflwood wi[1 he�p reduce this - ` • coElision pattern. Countdowns wifl be installed at the �' � - � ' j � Spokane Va[ley[ocations through a separate project. "�-�,- - ;�i . , { � �� _ � r i u •f f� � 1 ' : r . 1 j{ � .j' r�•f-� --f--j`}'[r _..--J-� ��, Red-light runn�ng collisior�s occur at mast of the signals � � • �. 1 t ��,�� on the carridor. Spokane Valfey has used signal , . ' coardination to effectivefy reduce re�-[ight running in � � � ', o'ther parts ofi the City. A significanfi amo�r�t of time has � t � ' . I already been invested in signal timing in this corridor, , ---- : , ` �ut additional improvements eoufd be rr�ade once the ' � � signal controElers in Millwood are updated, In ad�ition ��,�� • . - . ; Spokane Valley staff would wor�C to develop v�eekend � � . ° and evening timing pfans to he[p reduce the red lighfi running. City Safety Program {Z009-2015} � ' City of Spokane Valley and City of Millwood The fo[iawing eolfisions occurred in this c�rridor during the 2004201.Q analysis period. We be[iev�they are all correctable with this improvement. This is nof a com �ete anai sis af all colllsions in the corrf�or, and there may be additional cal[isions that are correctabfe. Cflllisian pate Argonne Type Severity Contributin�Fac4ars Number [ntersection Correctable with lmpravement 3059996 12/3/08 Empire Angle Serious Ran red light 27fl608S 6/7/�7 Grace Angle Seriaus Ran red Eight �060535 7/�.4/10 Trent Hit pedacyclist 5erious Crassing agains�Iight 306(}23�. 11/19/07 Emplre ftear-en� Evident At signal 2708219 6/27/09 Kr�ox Rngle Evident Ran red{ight 2909439 1/4/10 Knox Angle Evfdent Ran red light 2031009 5/11/06 Knox Angle �vEdent Ran red light 1.407856 1/29/04 Indiana Nit pedaeyclist �v�dent Qn sidewa[k 3090110 9/17/09 Indiana Hft pedacyelist Evident On sidewa[k 1932527 11/22/04 Mon'tgomery Rear-en� EvIdent Stopped in traffic 2776789 8/1�./07 Mantgomery Hit pedacyclist Evident In crosswalk 2960��1 5/6/09 Montgomery fiear-er�d Evident Stop�ed in traffic 1744346 2/20/05 7rent Angfe �v€dent Ran red light 2Q31128 �6]2�6 7rent �ear-en� _ .�Vlc�ent Sfop�ed in tr�fic 2960025 10/13/07 Trent Hit pedacyc�ist Evident In crosswalk 3365211. 7/18J10 Euclld Hit�edaeyclist Evident �n sidewa[k C599417 1/26/OS Knox ftear-end Possi�[e Sto�pe� in traffic 27798�4 3/30J07 Indfana Rear-end Possib[e Stopped f�tra�ffic � �.407960 8/�.5/04 Knox Left and through possib[e Ran red [ight 17b2778 9/17/04 Knox . Rear-end . Possihfe Stopped in traffic • �.905g7Q 6/6/�6 K�ox Left and through Possihle Ran red (ight 2450635 S1/20/D6 Knox Angle Possible Ftan red light 2708076 4/3/07 Knox Angle PossiE�le Ran red light �.911377 7/6/�5 t.iberty Hit pedacyc[ist Passible On sidewalk 1407446 2/27/05 Mantgomery Angle Possihle l�an red light 1�07514 3/A�/04 Montgomery Rear-end Possible Stopped in traffic 2655543 4/4/07 Mor�tgamery Rear-end Possible Stopped��traffic 112561�# 9/3/09� Trent Rear-end Possible Stopped in traffic 2882931 4/17/�8 Knox Rear-end Possible Stopped in traffic C714g49 1/2/09 Knox Rear-end Possible Stopped fn traff(c 2450883 8/16/06 Buckeye Rear-end Posslble Stopped in traffic 1905486 2/16J06 Grace Rear-end Possib[e 5topped in traffic 245t}684 10/26/06 Dalton �ear-end Possib[e Stopped ln traffie 198a175 5/6/05 Grace Angle Possibfe Ran red light 1762287 6/2/05 Empire Rear-end � Possfble Stop�ed 9rt�raffic 2912742 10/18/09 Euclid Rear-end Possible Stopped in traffic City Safety Pragram�2009-20�.5) � Grant A Ifcatfon�osf�stimate FroJscE Nams; ACgotlne-Plotkh Jolnt ProJecE with Nllllwood �� Prepared By: Itt�2 ND#8,P.E. ��[�� Preparation Date: OCt 27,2047 �� VlSDOTS70. UNiTOP PLANNED E5TI6'iATEbUNl7 �ST[A7ATED17Ehf iTElA# SPEC. 4YSDOTSTD.# ITBhIUESCRiP710N h4EASURE QllRHT[TY PRfCE PRICE 1 1-09.7 0001 MOB[LIZATION ��S• '� $ � " 2 1-1�.3 6971 FROJECT TEMPOKARY 7RAFF[C CO�ITROL L.S. 1 $ 3,Oa0.00 $ 3,00� 3 8-2'1 6890 AERNAI�ENTSfGNING �P.CH 20 S 250.00 $ 5000 4 SIGNAL CbUN7S AKD T€14i1�2G L.S. 'i $ 10,000,60 $ � Zfl OOD 5 CRBINET FOUN[IATIOh! �P.CH 3 $ 1,000,00 S 3 OOD 6 s1G�lALCABINEi'S �ACH 3 S �5,OOO.oa S 45,o0a 7 S1GNA�CONTROL€.ERS E.4CH 3 $ 3,0OO.Od S 9,004 S RADIO REP�A3ER L.S. 1 $ 5,400.00 S 5,000 8 DMS RAbIOS EACH 3 5 5,000.00 $ 15 Qti0 19 ANT�HNAE EHCH 1 S a aoo.oa � 2,Q00 '[1 ETHERNE7SW€TCH�S ERCi4 3 S 't,600.00 $ 3,000 12 INSTALL COU�TOOWN f'�[}ESTRIAN S[GNALS EACH 24 S 50D.40 S 12 040 13 1NS7ALL�OUNDATIONS,GABINETS,RA11105 L.S. 7 S 2Q,ODD.00 $ 20,000 70TA1.GON5TRUCTIOIV ESTI]NATE $ '[32 000 Contingency{16%) � t�+B00 [nflatfon Ad usfinent�actor 4%! r 1 ears $ b,280 ConstrucflonSub•Tofal $ ��7��80 PE-P5&�(90%) S 15,790 CE,{5o/a� $ 7,$60 _ - Rlghf Of Way ,� � TOTA[.PROJECT�&T[NlA7E $ 180,640 Cost Fsttmafe Assumpfions: P� S 16 7't0 i Bike rouie signage at 0.26 mlie intervals. ROw S `= One sign each sIde of streat,so 8 p2r mila. CN 164,930 Bike routa and arrovr es�imafe aE S�Oa each Fost and(nstall estlmaied at 5'[50 each TOTAL $ 180,640 Labor far cabinet repiacement includss pouring the base, ' removing o]d and tnSfalling new cabfnef. Rewlring the nslv ' cabinet. 3 days for cab3net Added 1 a�cira day far radio install. All by Counry staff. Assume 3 people,A days of labor per Intersectlon. Rats for a iech 31s S581havr ihen add 24%markup. Signal coordination primarly fo be campleted by CIty siaff, Staff Ume Is not InGuded in this estimate. B1ke Bfvd.Route: 1�1Ies Vista from EuGid to Knvx � Knax-Mans�feld . 0.b EucElri-Margaurifs D.� PAIssIon from Park fo V�sta 0.5 2.5 P:IPublic Wor{cslCapifal FrojectslProJect Funding Applfcatlonsl2011 AppilcaBonslk�IS1P City SaFefy ProgramlF[SIP Cnst Esf.�dsx 30I27/2041 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 4, 2012 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information � admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Amendment of the 2012 Employee Position Classification Matrix GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 2.15.030, Personnel Authority, SVMC 2.15.040, Creation of departments— Offices and Positions — Council Audit PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of the 2013 Spokane Valley Budget. BACKGROUND: With the adoption of the 2013 Spokane Valley Budget, this action would amend the 2012 Employee Position Classification Matrix to reflect the position classification changes connected to the restructure of the Permitting and Plan Review functions of the City. These changes would allow for customer service improvements to the City's building permitting function. Specifically this amendment would add the classifications of "Development Services Coordinator," Grade 16, and "Permit Facilitator," Grade 12 and change the title of "Assistant Planner" to that of"Planner" Staff recommends the amendments to the Salary Schedule as outlined above. OPTIONS: Council Discussion RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to place on the Consent Agenda for the December 11, 2012 City Council Meeting, for approval of Resolution 12-011 reflecting the changes as noted. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: John Whitehead, HR Manager ATTACHMENTS: Amended 2013 Employee Position Classification Matrix Draft Resolution 12-011 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 12-011 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE 2012 EMPLOYEE POSITION CLASSIFICATION MATRIX FOR THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY. WHEREAS, the City Council from time to time must create new employee classifications and adopt conditions of employment for those newly-created classifications to adjust its workforce in response to workload demands; and WHEREAS, the City Council through Ordinance #12-024 adopted the 2013 City budget which included the staffing changes associated with enhanced permitting and Plans Review services to the customers of the City; and WHEREAS, since adoption of Spokane Valley Municipal Code provision 2.50.70, the City Council has created various new employee classifications job descriptions; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Spokane Valley Municipal Code provision 2.50.070 which, in part, provides that position classifications and job descriptions shall be developed for new positions. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, as follows: Section 1. Authorization is granted to amend the 2012 Employee Position Classification Monthly Salary Schedule modifying the title of"Assistant Planner" to "Planner," and creating the new classification of"Development Services Coordinator" Grade 16, and"Permit Facilitator" Grade 12. Section 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. Adopted this day of December, 2012 City of Spokane Valley Mayor Tom Towey ATTEST: City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Resolution 12-0ll Classification Matrix Page 1 of 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 4, 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: Regional Animal Control Services — Draft Interlocal Agreement GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On September 4, 2012, Council reviewed the two proposals for animal control services and, through consensus, asked the City Manager to pursue contract negotiations with Spokane County. BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane Valley has contracted with Spokane County Regional Animal Control Services (SCRAPS) for animal control services since the City's inception. According to the County, the current facility is not an option for the future. The County ballot measure to purchase and renovate a new facility was not approved by the voters. The County is proposing a non-ballot option of purchasing an existing building utilizing existing revenue sources and forming a regional system including Spokane Valley and the City of Spokane to help mitigate associated costs. Council authorized the City Manager to issue a Request for Proposals for animal control services. Two proposals were received: Spokane County SCRAPS and SpokAnimal. Council asked the City Manager to negotiate a contract for services with SCRAPS. City staff has been in negotiations with Spokane County. The draft agreement presented to Council is the most recent version of the negotiated agreement. There are still a few items the two are parties are working through but staff expects to be able to bring a final version to Council with the next touch. OPTIONS: Proceed to motion consideration of the Animal Control Interlocal Agreement; Request a re-worked draft; pursue another service option. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to move forward to Motion Consideration. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: 2014 Annual Cost of$287,081 STAFF/COUNCIL CONTACT: Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst ATTACHMENTS: Draft Interlocal Agreement for Animal Control Services DRAFT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between Spokane County, a political subdivision of the State of Washington, ha�ing offices for the transaction of business at 1116 West Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, hereinafter referred to as "COLTNTY" and the City of Spokane Valley, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having � offices for the transaction of business at �°�'�T�� '��, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99206, hereinafter referred to as "CTTY," jointly hereinafter referred to as the "PARTIES." The COLTNTY and CITY agree as follows. SECTION NO. 1: RECITALS AND FINDINGS (a) The Board of Counry Commissioners of Spokane Counry has the care of COLTNTY property and the management of COiJNTY funds and business under RCW 3632.120(6). (b) Counties and cities may contract with each other to perform certain functions which each may legally perform under chapter 3934 RCW (Interlocal Cooperation Act). (c) Pursuant to the provisions of 3632.120(6) and RCW 3632.120(7), Spokane County, through its Board of County Commissioners, may enact ordinances dealing with animal control within the unincorporated area of Spokane Counry. � (d) Pursuant to the�rovisions of RCW 35A.11.020, the City of Spokane Valley may enact ordinances dealing with animal control within its boundaries. (e) Spokane County intends on acquiring and improving property ("Regional Animal Control Facility") from which Spokane County will provide certain animal control services to itself, the City of Spokane Valley, and other public entities. The cost of acquiring and improving the Regional Animal Control Facility will be financed in part through the operational savings realized by the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane Counry and other public entities contracting with Spokane Counry to receive animal control services from the Regional Animal Control Faciliry. Spokane Counry desires to enter into an agreement with the City of Spokane Valley wherein the City will contract to receive animal control services from the Counry for a term of twenry (20)years thus providing the County with operational savings to finance in part the County's acquisition and improvement of the Regional Animal Control Facility. (� The City of Spokane Valley desires to utilize the services of Spokane County for the purpose of performing certain animal control services within the boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley for a term of twenry(20)years. Page 1 of 19 DRAFT SECTION NO. 2: DEFINITIONS (a) A�reement: "Agreement" means this Interlocal Agreement between the CITY and COLTNTY regarding animal control services. (b) C�: "CTTY" means the Ciry of Spokane Valley. (c) Coun : "COLTNTY"means Spokane Counry. (d) Services: "Services"means those services identified in Attachment"1"attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. (e) Annual Fee: "Annual Fee" means that annual amount of money which the CTTY will pay the COiJNTY to provide Services. The annual fee shall be comprised of debt service costs and operating costs as further addressed in Section No. 5. (f) Uncontrollable Circumstances: "Uncontrollable Circumstances" means the following events: strikes, riots, wars, civil disturbances, insurrections, acts of terrorism, fires and floods, weather conditions, volcanic eruptions, lighming or earthquakes or other acts of God at or near where the Services are performed and/or that directly affect providing of such Services. (g) Consumer Price Index: "Consumer Price Index" or "CPP' means the percentage change between the current year index and the previous year index as determined by United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, West-Size Class B/C, Consumer Price Index, All items for all urban consumers (CPI-U), Base year Annual Average. See Attachment "2". For example, as shown on Attachment "2" the CPI for calendar year 2012 is 3.0%. It was calculated by determining the difference in the CPI-U for 2010 and CPI-U for 2011, dividing this number by the CPI-U for 2010 and rounding the number to the nearest 1/10 of 1%. (LE. Difference between 133.778 and 137.748 = 3.97/133.778=2.96 rounded up to 3.) (h) Re�ional Animal Control Facilitv: "Regional Animal Control Facility" means that property acquired, improved and owned by Spokane County from which the County will provide Services. SECTION NO. 3: PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to reduce to writing the PARTIES' understandings as to the terms and conditions under which the COiJNTY will provide Services on behalf of the CITY. Page 2 of 19 DRAFT SECTION NO. 4: DURATION/WITHDRAWAL This Agreement shall commence on January l, 2014, ("Commencement Date") and run for a term of twenty (20)years. In the event the COUNTY for any reason whatsoever is unable to commence providing Services on the Commencement Date, it will provide the CITY with at least six (6) months advance written notice which shall state the date upon which the COiJNTY will provide Services. This twenty (20) year time frame shall be referred to as the "Initial Term." The PARTIES acknowledge that the Initial Term is necessary in order for the COLTNTY to realize operational savings which it will use to acquire and improve the Regional Animal Control Faciliry. At the conclusion of the Initial Term, this Agreement may be renewed upon mutual agreement of the PARTIES . All renewals shall be subject to all terms and conditions set forth herein unless otherwise mutuallv a_r� eed upon. °°�°r**'�° a°'�* �°M,;�° ��*� �T;" �a„�;,.r �,.,,, �t,,, �,.,,,.a ,.�r�;,.,,,.�,.,.,, Once effective, this Agreement can only be terminated by: (1)mutual agreement of the PARTIES; or (2) with respect to all obligations of either party except the CITY's obligation for debt service costs, the CTTY may terminate upon 6 months written notification to the COiJNTY in � advance January 1 st of any calendar year. In the event of� termination under this provision, the CTTY shall still retain responsibility for its share of the debt services costs through the remainder of the term of the Agreement. At the COLTNTY'S option this amount may be paid by the CTTY over the remaining term of the Agreement or in a lump sum amount. Subsequent to the Initial Term, either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason whatsoever upon a minimum of one (1) year advance notice as provided for in Section 7 to the other parry. If the COLTNTY terminates this A�reement prior to the expiration of the useful life of the Re�ional Animal Control Facilitv, the Countv shall refund the CITY's unused portion of debt service costs.- No de�reciation or buildin� use fees shall be char�ed to the Citv for the use of the Re�ional Animal Control Facilitv during the facilitv's usefullife. SECTION NO. 5: COST OF SERVICES AND PAYMENTS The CTTY shall pay the COiJNTY an annual fee for Services provided under this Agreement. The annual fee for Services contemplates Services commencing as of January lst of each year and running through December 31st of each year. The annual fee shall be comprised of debt service costs and operating costs. Debt service costs shall remain fixed through the life of the Agreement or until the debt service costs have been retired,whichever occurs first. Page 3 of 19 DRAFT � The annual debt service costs �r ��'°r��r � °�r ''n,^ will be FORTY-FIVE THOUSAND AND oo�loo�oLLaRS �$4s,000.00�. The operating cost for the calendar year 2014 will be TWO HUNDRED FORTY TWO THOUSAND EIGHTY ONE AND 00/100 DOLLARS ($242,081.00). For each subsequent year, the PART�S agree that the annual operating costs shall be determined by the Board of County Commissioners based on a written recommendation from the Regional Animal Control Advisory Board of Directors and process as provided for herein after, not to exceed limitations contained within Section No. 5(C)(5)- In the event the term of this Agreement commences at other than the beginning of any calendar year, the annual operating costs will be prorated on a daily basis for that year. A. Establishment of Re�ional Animal Control Advisorv Board There shall be established a Regional Animal Control Advisory Board of Directors (`Board of Directors") for the term of the Agreement. The Board of Directors shall consist of two (2) representatives to be appointed by each party. If the COLTNTY provides Services to the Ciry of Spokane, the Board of Directors shall consist of �seven (7§) representatives, two (2) representatives to be appointed by each party and one representative jointiv a_re� ed upon bv the PARTIES. The appointees shall ha�e financial or budget experience. A majority of the Board of Directors shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of any business. The number of representatives may be modified by recommendation of the Board of Directors and a�reed to bv the PARTIES- The Board of Directors shall meet at the call of the Spokane County Regional Animal Protection Service Department Director at least quarterly and more frequently, if necessary, during the adoption of the annual budget. The Spokane Counry Regional Animal Protection Service Department Director or his/her designee shall attend all Board of Director meetings as a non-voting member. B. Responsibilitv of the Board of Directors with regard to the annual budget of the Spokane Countv Regional Animal Protection Service Department Services will be provided by the COLTNTY through Spokane County Regional Animal Protection Service Department ("SCRAPS"). SCRAPS shall be operated as an enterprise fund. For the purposes of this Agreement the terminology "enterprise fund" shall mean a fund that provides goods and services for a fee which makes the entity providing the goods and services self- supporting. An "enterprise fund" complies with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). The SCRAPS Director shall prepare an annual budget for SCRAPS. Page 4 of 19 DRAFT The annual budget shall minimally include all revenues, includin� Re�ional Animal Control Facilitv revenues, by source anticipated by SCRAPS for the following calendar budget year and shall additionally include: (i) debt service to acquire and remodel the Regional Animal Control Facility, (ii) debt service/building reserve fund, (iii) cash reserve of 10% of annual budgeted operating expenditures, and (iv) operating costs for SCRAPS providing Services including, but not limited to salary/wages, benefits and other annual operating costs. The annual budget shall be submitted by the SCRAPS Director to the Board of Directors on or before September lst of each calendar year for the following year. On or before October lst each calendar year, the Board of Directors shall consider and make a written recommendation to the Board of Counry Commissioners on the annual budget for SCRAPS. On or before November lst of each calendar year the Board of County Commissioners shall in writing acknowledge and agree in writing with the written recommendation by the Board of Directors or suggest changes to the written recommendation. If the Board of County Commissioners suggests changes to the written recommendation, the Board of Counry Commissioners shall not take formal action on the adoption of the annual budget until it receives a written response from the Board of Directors on the suggested changes. The written response from the Board of Directors on the suggested changes must be received by the Board of County Commissioners on or before December lst. In the event the Board of Counry Commissioners does not receive a written recommendation from the Board of Directors on or before October lst as provided for herein or a response to suggested changes by December 1 st as provided for herein, the Board of County Commissioners shall adopt the SCRAPS � annual budget taking into consideration the financial goals set forth in subparagraph (C)hereinafter. The Board of County Commissioners' decision on the budget shall be binding on the PARTIES. C. Financial Goals In conjunction with the preparation of the annual budget by the SCRAPS Director, recommendation(s) on the annual budget by the Board of Directors and adoption of the annual budget by the Board of Counry Commissioners, every effort will be made to increase efficiencies, enhance revenues and control costs. Additionally, the SCRAPS Director, Board of Directors and Board of Counry Commissioners shall take into consideration economic conditions, revenue forecasts for the PARTIES and other participating jurisdictions as well as any state wide initiatives or legislative actions that would impact the PARTIES or other participating jurisdictions. Also, the following financial goals shall be considered: 1. Annual debt service for acquisition and remodeling of the Regional Animal Control Faciliry must be paid. 2. Maintaining a reasonable cash reserve of 10% of annual budgeted operating expenditures. � Provided in conjunction with this financial goal, the PARTIES shall identify a time-line and method for establishing the cash reserve. The time-line and method of accumulating the cash reserve shall consider, but not be limited to, utilizing special assessments, and/or Page 5 of 19 DRAFT utilizing revenue(s) from other SCRAPS programs, and/or utilizing short term borrowing. Upon termination of the Agreement, the CITY shall receive 2229% of the cash reserve balance existing at the time of termination if the Ciry of Spokane has contracted for Services with the COLTNTY by January l, 2014. The 2229% was determined as set forth in Attachment "3" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. If the Ciry of � Spokane has not contracted for Services with the COiJNTY by January l, 2014, the CTTY shall receive 46.16% of the cash reserve balance existing at the time of termination. The 46.16% was determined as set forth in Attachment "4" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Any amount due shall be refunded within thirry (30) days of termination. 3. Maintain an optimum level of Service relative to a�ailable financial resources of participating jurisdictions which is reflected in the annual budget operating costs which includes, but is not limited to, salary/wages, benefits and other operating cost items, based upon the recommendation of the SCRAPS Director. 4. Any amount in the enterprise fund in excess of funds to satisfy financial goals (1), (2) and (3) shall be placed in a debt service / building reserve fund at a targeted amount of up to Sixty Thousand Dollars ($60,000.00) a year or until the debt service / reserve fund reaches the amount of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00). The debt service /building reserve fund will be utilized as a reserve fund to pay delinquent debt service costs and/or to repair the Regional Animal Control Facility as needed. The Board of Directors will approve the use of these funds to pay delinquent debt service costs and/or repair of the Regional Animal Control Faciliry except in the case of emergency repairs, in which instance the Board of County Commissioners will authorize the use of these funds with notification to the Board of Directors as soon as possible thereafter. Upon the use of the debt service / building reserve funds, the Board of Directors will replenish the fund in the manner described at the beginning of this section. The Board of Directors may recommend an increase in the debt service / building reserve fund amount in their annual written recommendation but otherwise the balance will not exceed Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000). Upon termination of the Agreement, the CITY shall receive 2229% of the debt service / building reserve fund balance existing at the time of termination. The 2229% was determined as set forth in Attachment "3" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. If the Citv of S�okane has not contracted for Services with the COLTNTY bv Januarv 1, 2014, the CTTY shall receive 46.16% of the debt service/buildin� reserve fund balance existing at the time of termination. The 46.16%was determined as set forth in Attachment "4" attached hereto and incor�orated herein bv reference. This amount shall be refunded within thirty(30) days of termination. 5. Excess monies in the enterprise fund after financial goals (1), (2), (3) and (4) have been satisfied, may be rebated as recommended by the Board of Directors and approved by the Board of County Commissioners. 6. Under no circumstance can the proposed annual budget by the SCRAPS Director, recommendation thereon by the Board of Directors, or adopted budget by the Board of County Commissioners cause the CTTY's operating fee to exceed the previous year's annual operating fee plus the CPI. Page 6 of 19 DRAFT 7. Any jurisdiction that contracts for Services from SCRAPS shall pay at an eauitable rate .based u�on allocation of costs accordin�to consum�tion of services unless otherwise a�reed to bv the PARTIES. D. Billin_�/Pavments The COiJNTY shall advise the CTTY in writing of its annual fee for Services on or before the first Monday of December for the subsequent calendar year. The CITY's annual operating fee shall not exceed its previous year's annual operating fee plus the CPL The Ciry's annual capital fee shall remain fixed. There shall be no annual settle and adjust reconciliation with regard to any Services provided under this Agreement. However, variances between actual revenues and expenditures and the budgeted revenues and expenditures shall be taken into consideration when preparing the subsequent years' budgets. With regard to operating costs, in the first year of the Agreement, the COiJNTY will bill the CITY for the cost of Services in seven payments. The first payment shall be due on or before January Sth. The first payment will equal one-half of the annual fee for that year. The following six (6) payments shall be in equal installments of 1/12 of the annual fee. Each installment shall be due on or before the July Sth, August Sth, September Sth, October Sth, November Sth, and December Sth. In subsequent years, the COiJNTY will bill the CTTY for the annual operating costs in twelve equal payments, each due by the fifth of each month of the calendar year. The COLTNTY will bill the CTTY by the 15th of the month immediately preceding the month when the payment is due. With regard to debt service costs, the COiJNTY will bill the CTTY on April lst and October lst each year for payments of one-half of the annual debt service costs (1/2 of $45,000.00 = $22,500.00). Each payment of TWENTY TWO THOUSAND FIVE HLTNDRED AND 00/100 DOLLARS ($22,500.00) shall be due by May lst and November lst of each calendar year respectively. The COLTNTY, at its sole option, may charge interest on any late operating costs payments or debt service costs payments calculated on any lost interest earning had the amount due been invested since the date due to the date of payment in the COLTNTY's investment pool. � � SECTION NO. 6: RELATED RESPONSIBILITIES IN CONJUNCTION WITH PROVIDING SERVICES The COiJNTY or its designee agrees to attend staff ineetings as requested by the CTTY. Page 7 of 19 DRAFT The COLTNTY or its designee agrees to meet upon request by the CTTY or its designee to discuss any Service provided under the terms of this Agreement. The CITY agrees the COLTNTY may use the COLTNTY's stationery in conjunction with providing Services under the terms of this Agreement. The S�okane Countv Re�ional Animal Protection Service De�artment Director or his/her desi�nee will immediatelv notifv the CITY of anv animal caused injuries to humans, anv animal abuse and/or hoardin� cases, or anv injurv to a citizen-owned or strav animal caused bv a CountX emplovee within the CITY limits. SECTION NO. 7: NOTICE All notices or other communications given hereunder shall be deemed given on: (i) the day such notices or other communications are received when sent by personal delivery; or (ii) the third day following the day on which the same ha�e been mailed by first class delivery, postage prepaid addressed to the COLTNTY or the CITY at the address set forth below for such party, or at such other address as either party shall from time-to-time designate by notice in writing to the other parry: COUNTY: Spokane Counry Chief Executive Officer or his/her authorized representative 1116 West Broadway Avenue Spokane, Washington 99260 CITY: City of Spokane Valley Manager or his/her authorized representative I �„a..,,.,.a �,,,,,. 11707 East Sprague, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 SECTION NO. 8: RECORDS REVIEW The CTTY shall be allowed to conduct random reviews of the records generated by the COLTNTY in performance of this Agreement. The CTTY will provide the COiJNTY with reasonable advance notice of the records reviews. The PARTIES agree that they will make best efforts to achieve a resolution of any potential records confidentiality issues, including entering into confidentiality agreements or other similar mechanisms that will allow disclosure of the necessary information to accurately conduct a records review. SECTION NO. 9: COUNTERPARTS Page 8 of 19 DRAFT This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which, when so executed and delivered, shall be an original, but such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same. SECTION NO. 10: ASSIGNMENT No parry may assign in whole or part its interest in this Agreement without the written approval of the other pariy. Provided, however, this does not prohibit the COLTNTY from contracting for any euthanasia or cremation services. SECTION NO. ll: COUNTY EMPLOYEES The COiJNTY shall hire, assign, retain and discipline all employees performing Services under this Agreement according to applicable collective bargaining agreements and applicable state and federal laws. The COLTNTY agrees to meet and confer with the CITY with respect to staff that is assigned to provide Services. Issues of discipline or performance will be specifically handled according to COLTNTY policies. SECTION NO. 12: LIABILITY The COiJNTY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the CITY, its officers and employees from all claims, demands, or suits in law or equity arising from the COLTNTY's intentional or negligent acts or breach of its obligations under the Agreement. The COLTNTY's duty to indemnify shall not apply to loss or liabiliry caused by the intentional or negligent acts of the CTTY, its officers and employees. The CTTY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the COLTNTY, its officers and employees from all claims, demands, or suits in law or equity arising from the CITY's intentional or negligent acts or breach of its obligations under the Agreement. The CTTY's duty to indemnify shall not apply to loss or liabiliry caused by the intentional or negligent acts of the COiJNTY, its officers and employees. If the comparative negligence of the PARTIES and their officers and employees is a cause of such damage or injury, the liability, loss, cost, or expense shall be shared between the PARTIES in proportion to their relative degree of negligence and the right of indemnity shall apply to such proportion. Where an officer or employee of a party is acting under the direction and control of the other party, the party directing and controlling the officer or employee in the activiry and/or omission giving rise to liability shall accept all liability for the other party's officer or employee's negligence. Page 9 of 19 DRAFT Each party's duty to indemnify shall survive the termination or expiration of the Agreement. Each party waives, with respect to the other party only, its immunity under RCW Title 51, Industrial Insurance and only as necessary to make this indemnity provision enforceable with respect to claims relating to the death or injury of CTTY and/or COLTNTY employees acting within the scope of this Agreement. The PARTIES have specifically negotiated this provision. COLTNTY initials CTTY initials SECTION NO. 13: RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES The PART�S intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. The COUNTY shall be an independent contractor and not the agent or employee of the CITY. The CTTY is interested only in the results to be achieved and that the right to control the particular manner, method and means in which the Services are performed is solely within the discretion of the COiJNTY. Any and all employees who provide Services to the CTTY under this Agreement shall be deemed employees solely of the COLTNTY. The COLTNTY shall be solely responsible for the conduct and actions of all employees under this Agreement and any liabiliry that may attach thereto. Likewise, no agent, employee, servant or representative of the CTTY shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant or representative of the COLTNTY for any purpose. SECTION NO. 14: MODIFICATION This Agreement may onlv be modified in writing by mutual written agreement of the PARTIES, and a�roved bv the res�ective le�islative bodies. SECTION NO. 15: PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT The ownership of all property and equipment utilized in conjunction with providing the Services under this Agreement shall remain with the COLTNTY unless otherwise specifically and mutually agreed to by the PARTIES. SECTION NO. 16: ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREINBINDING EFFECT This Agreement contains terms and conditions agreed upon by the PART�S. The PARTIES agree that there are no other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement. No changes or additions to this Agreement shall be valid or binding upon the PARTIES unless such change or addition is in writing, executed by the PAR'T�S. This Agreement shall be binding upon the PARTIES hereto, their successors and assigns. SECTION NO. 17: DISPUTE RESOLUTION Page 10 of 19 DRAFT Any dispute between the PARTIES which cannot be resolved between the PARTIES shall be subject to arbitration. Except as provided for to the contrary herein, such dispute shall first be reduced to writing. If the COiJNTY CEO and the CITY cannot resolve the dispute it will be � submitted to arbitration. The provisions of chapter 7.04—A RCW shall be applicable to any arbitration proceeding. The COLTNTY and the CITY shall ha�e the right to designate one person each to act as an arbitrator. The two selected arbitrators shall then jointly select a third arbitrator. The decision of the arbitration panel shall be binding on the PARTIES and shall be subject to judicial review as I provided for in chapter 7.04A RCW._ The costs of the arbitration panel shall be equally split between the PART�S. SECTION NO. 18: VENUE STIPULATION This Agreement has been and shall be construed as having been made and delivered within the State of Washington and it is mutually understood and agreed by each party that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington both as to interpretation and performance. Any action at law, suit in equity or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement, or any provision hereto, shall be instituted only in courts of competent jurisdiction � within Spokane County, Washington. SECTION NO. 19: SEVERABILITY The PART�S agree that if any parts, terms or provisions of this Agreement are held by+�a court of law to be illegal, the validiry of the remaining portions or provisions shall not be affected and the rights and obligations of the PART�S shall not be affected in regard to the remainder of the Agreement. If it should appear that any part, term or provision of this Agreement is in conflict with any statutory provision of the State of Washington, then the part, term or provision thereof that may be in conflict shall be deemed inoperative and null and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith and this Agreement shall be deemed to modify to conform to such statutory provision. SECTION NO. 20: RECORDS All public records prepared, owned, used or retained by the COLTNTY in conjunction with providing Services under the terms of this Agreement shall be deemed CITY property and shall be made available to the CITY upon request by the CITY subject to the attorney client and attorney work product privileges set forth in statute, court rule or case law. SECTION NO. 21: HEADING The section headings appearing in this Agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of convenience and ready reference. In no way do they purport to, and shall not be deemed to define, limit or extend the scope or intent of the sections to which they pertain. Page 11 of 19 DRAFT SECTION NO. 22: TIME OF ESSENCE OF AGREEMENT � Time is of the essence efor this Agreement and in case either party fails to perform the obligations on its part to be performed at the time fixed for the performance of the respective obligation by the terms of this Agreement, the other party may, at its election, hold the other party liable for all costs and damages caused by such delay. SECTION NO. 23: UNCONTROLLABLE CIRCUMSTANCES/IMPOSSIBILITY A delay or interruption in or failure of performance of all or any part of this Agreement resulting from Uncontrollable Circumstances shall be deemed not a default under this Agreement. A delay or interruption in or failure of performance of all or any part of this Agreement resulting from any change in or new law, order, rule or regulation of any nature which renders providing of Services in accordance with the terms of this Agreement legally impossible, and any other circumstances beyond the control of the COiJNTY which render legally impossible the performance by the COLTNTY of its obligations under this Agreement, shall be deemed not a default under this Agreement. SECTION NO. 24: FILING The CTTY shall file this Agreement with its Ciry Clerk or, alternatively,�lace the A�reement on the CITY's website. The COLTNTY shall file this Agreement with the Counry Auditor, or, alternatively, place the Agreement on the COUNTY's web site or other electronically retrievable public source. SECTION NO. 25: EXECUTION AND APPROVAL The PARTIES warrant that the officers executing below have been duly authorized to act for and on behalf of the party for purposes of confirming this Agreement. SECTION NO. 26: COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS The PARTIES shall observe all federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, to the extent that they may be applicable to the terms of this Agreement. SECTION NO. 27: DISCLAIMER Except as otherwise provided, this Agreement shall not be construed in any manner that would limit either party's authority or powers under law. SECTION NO. 28: ANTI-HICKBACK Page 12 of 19 DRAFT No officer or employee of the CITY, ha�ing the power or duty to perform an official act or action related to this Agreement shall have or acquire any interest in the Agreement, or have solicited, accepted or granted a present or future gift, fa�or, service or other thing of value from or to any I person involved in the Agreement, or otherwise violate the requirements of RCW 4223.030- SECTION NO. 29: NON-DISCRIMINATION No individual shall be excluded from participation in, denied the benefit of, subjected to discrimination under, or denied employment in the administration of or in connection with this Agreement , , , , , , , , > > > , ' , .in violation of state or federal law. SECTION NO. 30: NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES Nothing in this Agreement is intended to give, or shall give, whether directly or indirectly, any benefit or right, greater than that enjoyed by the general public, to third persons. I SECTION NO. 31: ANNUAL REPORT The SCRAPS Director shall prepare an annual report. The annual report shall include, among other matters as may be determined by the Board of Directors,performance measurements/indicators and a twelve (12) month activiry study. Performance measurements/indicators may include, but are not limited to, annual number of licenses sold/issued and annual live release rate (animals returned to owner, adopted and/or transferred to other facilities/rescue groups). SECTION NO. 32: INSURANCE During the term of the Agreement, the COUNTY shall maintain in force at its own expense, each insurance noted below: A. Workers' Compensation Insurance in compliance with RCW 5112.020, which requires subject employers to provide workers' compensation coverage for all their subject workers and Employer's Liability or Stop Gap Insurance in the amount of$1,000,000; B. General Liabiliry Insurance on an occurrence basis, with a combined single limits of not less than $10,000,000 each occurrence for bodily injury and property damage. It shall include contractual liability coverage for the indemniry provided under this Agreement. It shall provide that the CITY, its officers and employees are additional insureds but only with respect to the COiJNTY's services to be provided under this Agreement; and Page 13 of 19 DRAFT C. Automobile Liability Insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent of not less than $15,000,000 each accident for bodily injury and property damage, including coverage for owned,hired and non-owned vehicles. D. Professional Liability Insurance with a combined single limit of not less than $5,000,000 each claim, incident or occurrence. This is to cover damages caused by the error, omission, or negligent acts related to the professional services to be provided under this Agreement. The coverage must remain in effect for two years after the Agreement is completed. There shall be no cancellation, material change, reduction of limits or intent not to renew the I insurance coverage(s) without fortX�-five (45) days written notice from the COLTNTY or its insurer(s)to the CTTY. Written evidence of insurance shall reflect that the insurance afforded therein shall be primary insurance and any insurance or self-insurance carried by the COLTNTY shall be excess and not contributory insurance to that provided by the CITY. As evidence of the insurance coverages required by this Agreement, the COiJNTY shall furnish acceptable insurance certificates to the CTTY at the time it returns the signed Agreement. The certificate shall specify all of the parties who are additional insured; and include applicable policy endorsements, the thirty (30) day cancellation clause, and the deduction or retention level. Insuring companies or entities are subject to CTTY acceptance. If requested, complete copies of insurance policies shall be provided to the CTTY. The COLTNTY shall be financially responsible for all pertinent deductibles, self-insured retentions, and/or self-insurance. SECTION NO. 33: RCW 39.34 REQUIRED CLAUSES A. PURPOSE: See Section No. 3 above. B. DURATION: See Section No. 4 above. C. ORGANIZATION OF SEPARATE ENTITY AND ITS POWERS: No new or separate legal or administrative entity is created to administer the provisions of this Agreement. D. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PARTIES: See provisions above. E. AGREEMENT TO BE FILED: See Section No. 24. F. FINANCING: Each party shall be responsible for the financing of its contractual obligations under its normal budgetary process. G. TERMINATION: See Section No. 4 above. Page 14 of 19 DRAFT H. PROPERTY UPON TERMINATION: See Section No. 15 above. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PAR'I�S ha�e caused this Agreement to be executed on date and year opposite their respective signatures. DATED: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON TODD MIELKE, Chairperson ATTEST Clerk of the Board MARK RICHARD, Vice-Chairman Daniela Erickson AL FRENCH, Commissioner DATED: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY By: Attest: Title: City Clerk Approved as to form: I �City Attorney Page 15 of 19 DRAFT ATTACHMENT "1" The COLTNTY through the Spokane County Regional Animal Protection Services (SCRAPS) will provide Animal Control Services to the CITY within the CITY's boundaries. The CITY agrees to specially commission any SCRAPS staff which may be necessary for them to carry out such Services so long as such staff ineet the requirement(s)necessary for such commission. For the purpose of this Agreement, Animal Control Services shall include: ITEM 1: Enforcement of the CITY'S Animal Control Ordinance presently in effect and/or as hereafter amended by the City consistent with this Agreement; ITEM 2: Enforcement of chapter 16.08 RCW (Dogs); ITEM 3: Enforcement of chapter 16.52 RCW (Prevention of Cruelty to Animals); and TTEM 4: Enforcement of chapter 16.54 RCW (Abandoned Animals). Enforcement includes field services, shelter services, educational services, the licensing of dogs, cats and appearing before all administrative and judicial hearings in conjunction with such duties and functions. FIELD SERVICES Field Services include those provided during normal hours of operation as well as emergency services provided only after normal hours of operation. Normal hours of operation will be determined by the COLTNTY after consultation with the Board of Directors. Field Services provided during normal hours of operation include: (1) Dog at large complaints; (2) Cat at large on private property; (3) Dog barking (4) Dog or cat —no license; (5) Dog or cat —no rabies vaccination; (6) Dog threatens person; (7) Dog threatens domestic animal; (8) Dog or cat bite; (9) Injured dog or cat; (10) Sick dog or cat; (11) Agency assist; (12) Abandoned animal; (13) Animal cruelry; (14)Dead on arrival dog or cat; (15) Confined dog or cat; (16) Trapping dog or cat; (17) Vicious dog, (18) Kennel inspections; (19) Dangerous dog inspections; and (20) Others as deemed necessary by the SCRAPS. Field Services provided after normal hours of operation, referred to as Emergency Services, include: (1) Injured or sick dog/cat; (2) Dog/cat bite—dog/cat is still at large; (3) Dog bite—severe dog bite (victim is in hospital and dog will need to be quarantined immediately in the county shelter); (4) Vicious or threatening dog — dog threatens persons or domestic animals and is still at large; (5) Animal in our humane trap that is making a disturbance or injuring itself; (6) Other law enforcement agency requests for assistance when animals are involved; (7) Other emergencies such as extreme cruelty or pet dying in a hot vehicle; and (8) Multiple calls on same problem — animal control officer on call will evaluate and make a determination on whether to respond. Page 16 of 19 DRAFT SHELTER SERVICES Shelter Services are provided Monday, Wednesday and Friday from noon to 5:30 p.m.; Tuesday and Thursday from noon to 6:30 p.m.; Saturday and Sunday from noon to 5:30 p.m. closed holidays. Shelter Services include the following (1) Housing dog/cat —occasional other animal; (2) Pet license program; (3) After hours animal receiving room; (4) Animal redemptions; (5) Adoption program; (6) Volunteer program; (7) Dog training program; (8) Trapping program; and (9) Crematorium. Shelter Services hours may be adjusted by the COLTNTY after consultation with the Board of Directors. EDUCATIONAL SERVICES Educational services include: (1) Dog bite prevention program — elementary schools and service workers; (2) School career fair participation; (3) Specialty presentations available upon request; (4) Public service announcements —newspaper, radio and television; (5) Community outreach such as fair booth,license clinics, special events; and(6)Website. The COLTNTY may conduct surveys within the CITY for unlicensed dogs and cats. ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE/LICENSES/FEES/PENALTIES In conjunction with the enforcement of the CITY'S Animal Control Ordinance, the CITY shall adopt and keep current by appropriate legislative action an Animal Control Ordinance substantially identical to that adopted by the COLTNTY as it presently exist or as it may hereinafter be modified/amended, to include all licenses/fees/penalties. This responsibiliry shall not be deemed a restriction upon the CTTY's legislative power. The City may enact ordinances dealing with animal control within its boundaries. Provided, further, the CTTY may add a surcharge to its license fee ("Ciry License Fee Surcharge".) All revenues from licenses/fees/penalties collected (not including Ciry License Fee Surcharge) shall be retained by SCRAPS and applied to the cost of providing Services. Any such City License Fee Surcharge shall not be retained by SCRAPS. The COiJNTY shall remit to the CTTY all such City License Fee Surcharges collected under the terms of this Agreement semiannually on or before or before July 31st for the time frame from January lst through June 30th of each calendar year this Agreement is in effect and January 31st for the time frame from July lst through December 31st of each year this Agreement is in effect. The COLTNTY shall provide the CTTY with a copy of its Animal Control Ordinance presently codified in Chapter 5.04 of the Spokane Counry Code and all subsequent modifications/amendments thereto. The CITY shall provide the COLTNTY with copies of its adopted/amended Animal Control Ordinance substantially identical to chapter 5.04 of the Spokane County Code. Page 17 of 19 DRAFT The CITY shall provide legal counsel to prosecute any citations/complaints issued by COiJNTY in enforcement of Items No. 1 through 4 herein above in any court of lawful jurisdiction except if the enforcement constitutes a felony. In performing the above Animal Control Services, the COLTNTY will provide such personnel; as it deems necessary,as well as any and all vehicles and materials of any kind or nature whatsoever. The COLTNTY will provide additional Animal Control Services above and beyond those set forth herein to CTTY at cost negotiated between the CITY and the COUNTY. Animal Control Services provided by the COLTNTY under the terms of this Agreement, absent subsequent negotiation and agreement will not include: 1. Picking up dead wildlife or livestock on CITY streets, roads or alleys. 2. Providing emergency service for dead animals at any time or for dead dogs/cats after normal hours of operation. 3. Providing traps to the public for wildlife. 4. Responding to calls pertaining to dead or injured wildlife threatening the safety of other animals or the public. 5. Holding licensed dogs/cats in the Regional Animal Control Facility for a period of more than five (5) business days. Provided, at sole discretion of the COiJNTY, holding periods may be extended. 6. Holding unlicensed dogs/cats in the Regional Animal Control Facility for a period more than seventy-two (72) hours. Provided, at sole discretion of the COLTNTY, holding periods may be extended. 7. Holding any wildlife at the Regional Animal Control Facility. 8. Providing Hearing Examiner Services. Page 18 of 19 DRAFT ATTACHMENT "2" Copy of U. S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS CPI (ON FOLLOWING PAGE) Page 19 of 19 DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of November 29, 2012; 9:45 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 December 11,2012,Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Dec 3] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes, Resolution 12-011 New Classifications, Argonne Road Memorandum of Understanding) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 12-028 Multi-Family Regulations-Mike Basinger (5 minutes) 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 12-029, Commercial Vehicles-Cary Driskell (5 minutes) 4.Proposed Resolution 12-012 Accepting Restoration Plan of the SMP-Lori Barlow (10 minutes) 5.Proposed Resolution 12-013: Master List Prohibited Commercial Vehicle Routes-Cary Driskell (10 min) 6.Proposed Resolution 12-014: 2013 Fee Schedule-Mark Calhoun (10 minutes) 7. Motion Consideration: Lodging Tax Allocation of Funds-Mark Calhoun (30 minutes) 8. Motion Consideration: Street Maintenance Contract Renewal-Eric Guth (10 minutes) 9. Motion Consideration: Street Sweeping Contract Renewal-Eric Guth (10 minutes) 10. Motion Consideration: Approval of Animal Control Interlocal Agreement-Morgan Koudelka(15 min) 1 L Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointments of Councilmembers to Committees (5 minutes) 12. Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointments to Lodging TaY Advisory Committee (5 minutes) 13. Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointments to Planning Commission (5 minutes) 14. Admin Report: Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee Report-Councilmember Wick (20 minutes) 15. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 16. EXECUTNE SESSION: Review Performance ofPublic Employee [RCW 4230.110(1)(g)] [*estimated meeting: 150 minutes] December 18,2012, Studv Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Dec 10] 1. CTA 04-12 Code Text Amendment-Marty Palaniuk (20 minutes) 2. Admin Report: Update on Development Projects-John Hohman (20 minutes) 3. Decant Feasibility Study-Eric Guth (20 minutes) 4. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 5. Info Only: (a) Department Reports ; (b) Senske Contract Update 6. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Review Performance of Public Employee [RCW 4230.110(1)(g)] [*estimated meeting: 65 minutes] December 25,2012.No meeting. Christmas week January 1,2013.No meetin�. New Year's Dav Januarv 8,2013,Formal Meetin�Format,6:00 n.m. [due Mon,Dec 31] Proclamation: Spokane T�alley's Tenth Anniversary;Human Ti^afficking Awareness Day 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance, CTA 04-12 Code Text Amendment-Marty Palaniuk (20 minutes) 3. Motion Consideration: Interlocal Agreement re Decant Facility-Eric Guth (15 minutes) 4. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 5. Information Only: Planning Commission Minutes [*estimated meeting: 45 minutes] Januarv 15,2013, Studv Session Format, 6:00 n.m. [due Mon,Jan 7] 1. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) Draft Advance Agenda ll/29/2012 10:52:05 AM Page 1 of 2 Januarv 22,2013,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 q.m. [due Mon,Jan 14] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance, CTA 04-12 Code Text Amendment—Marty Palaniuk (20 minutes) 3. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 4. Information Only: Dept Reports;Planning Commission Minutes [*estimated meeting: minutes] January 29,2013, Studv Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Jan 21] 1. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) February 5,2013,Studv Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Jan 28] 1. Accomplishments Report for 2012—Mike Jackson and Dept Directors (30 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) February 12,2013,Possible No MeetinQ(Citv Le�islative Action Conference fCLACI in Olympia) Februarv 19,2013, Studv Session Meeting Format,6:00 n.m. [due Mon,Feb 11] 1. Advance Agenda 2. Info Only: Department Reports;Planning Commission Minutes Feb 26,2013 Winter Workshop (Note:no evening Council meeting) 8:30a.m.—S:OOp.m. City Hall Council Chambers Tentative Topics: Manufactured Homes; Council Goals; Legislative Agenda; Council Meeting Processes Ten-Year Anniversary; Park/Library Update; City Hall; Business Route Signage Solid Waste City Funding Opportunities: Outside Agency;Lodging Ta� Thurs, Februarv, 28,2012(tentative)—Citv Hall at the Mall March 5,2013,Studv Session Format, 6:00 n.m. [due Mon,Feb 25] 1. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) March 12,2013,Formal Meetin�Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon March 4] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) March 19,2013, Studv Session Meetin�Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,March 11] 1. Advance Agenda March 26,2013,Formal Meetin�Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,March 18] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Information Only: Dept Reports;Planning Commission Minutes OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: ADA Transition Plan Snow Plows, Discussion of Animal Control Solid Waste Analysis Arts Council Speed Limits (overall system) Bidding Contracts (SVMC 3. —bidding exceptions) Stormwater Projects CDBG(spring 2013) Regional Transportation Issues Donation Policy TIP (June, 2013) Future Acquisition Areas Gateway, Regional MOU *time for public or Council comments not included PEG Funds (Education) Prosecution Services Public Safety Contract,Proposed Amendment Revenue Policy, Cost Recovery Draft Advance Agenda ll/29/2012 10:52:05 AM Page 2 of 2 G I l (N' p41z�.11e Valley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suike 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhallC�spokanevalley.org Memarandum To: MiEce Jackson, City Manager From: MarEc Calhoun, Finance Direckor a�.:�»� Date: November 26, 2012 Re Finance Department Activity Report—October 2012 20�3 Budaet Development Process On October 30, 2012 the CEty Council approved the 2013 Budget Ordinance which included total appropriations of $63,570,333 including $42,567,749 pertaining specifically to the General Fund. ]nciuded in the General Fund are $35,091,534 in recurring expenditures, and $7,876,207 of nonrecurring expenditures with $7,826,207 of this amount representing a transfer to a new Fund #312 -- Capital Reserve Fund that will be used to accumulate resources for a number of projects including the replacement of the southbound portion of the Sullivan Street Bridge; the acquisition or construction of a City Hall building; and the deve�opment of a joint ]ibrary and City parEc site. 2013 Propertv Tax Levv On October S, 20�2 the City Council approved the 2013 Property Tax Levy Ordinance which is estimated to generate $10,943,700, or 31% of recurring General Fund recurr�ng revenues, The levy did not include the 1% increase that is available by State law but does include property taxes on new construction. 2012 Budaet Amendment 7he second and final 2012 Budget Amendment Ordinance was approved on October 30, 2012. The amendment was needed primarily for adjustments to a number of capital projects. The amendment affected 8 funds resulting in total revenue increases of $3,607,950 in 4 funds and expenditurelappropriation increases of$8,773,560, in 8 funds including $6,337,049 pertaining to capital expendikures, Lodqing Tax Ad�isorv Committee and Awards of Fundina Reauests in t�e 2013 Budc�et The process to award 2013 funding of the City's 2% hotellmotel tax is underway and the Council will be asked to consider and act upon a recommendation from the Committee that is based upon their review of applicant materials and presentations. The schedule leading to awarding funds is as follows: October 17 Applicant presentations to Committee November 13 Admin report to Council regarding Committee recommendations December 11 Council makes final determination of awards 115V-F521UserslmcalhounlFinance Activity Reports1201212012 lO.doCX ii Page 1 Bond Refinancing We are in the process of updating the Preliminary Official Statement for our bond underwriter, D,A, Davidson, We anticipate a preliminary draft of this will be complete by mid-December. Once this is approved we will work with D,A. Davidson to arrange a rating presentation and ultimate sale of the bonds and our bond attorney to begin the process of draf�ing a bond ordinance. Budaet to Actual Comparison Report (pages 5 — 17) A report refiecting 2012 Budget to Actual Revenues and Expenditures for fhose funds for which a 2012 Budget was adopfed and subsequently amended is located on pages 5 through 17. Because we attempt to provide this information in a timely manner this report is prepared from records that are not formally closed by the Finance Department at month end or reconciled to bank records. Although it is realistic to expect the figures will change over subse�uent weeks, I believe the report is materially accurate. We've included the following information in the report: • Revenues by source for all funds, and expenditures by department in the General Fund and by type in all other funds. • A breakdown between recurring and nonrecurring revenues and expenditures in the General Fund #001, Street O&M Fund #101, and Stormwater Fund #402. • The change in fund balance including beginning and ending figures. The beginning fund ba�ance figures are those that are reflected in our 2011 Annual Financial Repo�t. • Columns of information include; o The 2012 Budget as adopted and subsequentay amended on October 30, 2012. o October 2012 activity. o Cumulative 2012 activity through October 2012, o Budget remaining in terms of dollars, o The percent of budgeted revenue collected or budgeted expenditures disbursed. A few points related to the General Fund #001 (page 5): Recurrinq revenues collections are currently at 71.6% of the amount budgeted with 83,3% of the year elapsed. This is typical and reflective of the nature of the timing of when revenues are collected. • Propertv tax collections have reached $6.16 million or 57.0% of the amount budgeted. "fhis is because prope�ty taxes are paid to Spokane County in two installments each year on April 30 and October 31. These monies are then remitted to the City in May and November. • Sales tax collections are currently $11,389,075 or 80,2% of the amount budgeted. This is because taxes collected in October are not remitted to the City by the State until the latter part of November. • Gamblinq taxes are at $401,445 or 62.7% of the amount budgeted. Because they are paid �uarteriy this represents receipts through the three quarters of the year, The �hird quarter payments are due by October 31. We antic3pate delinquent third quarter receipts will bring us close to 75% of the budgeted figure. • Franchise Fee and Business Reaistration revenues are received in the month following a calendar year qua�ter. Through October we have received first, second and third �ua�ter payments of$907,315 or 71.7% of the amount budgeted. • State shared revenues are compased of State of Washington distribuEions that include items such as liquor board profits, liquor excise tax, streamiined sales tax mitigation and criminal justice monies. Most of these revenues are paid by the State in the month following a . 11SV-FS2lUsersUncalhountFinance Activity Reporfsl201�.1�012 1 O.docx Page 2 calendar quarter, Throu�h October we've received remittances totalin� $1,627,152 or 88,7% of the amount budgeted. • Service revenues are largely composed of building permit and plan review fees as well as false alarm fees and right of way permits. Revenues are currently $1,300,002 or 100% of the amount budgeted, • Fines and forfeitures revenues are composed of monthly remittances from Spokane County with payments made in the month followin� the actual assessment of a fine. Through October 2012 we've received remittances for the period January through September with receipts of just $950,712 or 50.0% of the amount budgeted. • Recreation pro�ram fees are composed of revenues generated by the variety of parks and recreation programs including classes, swimming pools (in-season}, and CenterPlace. Currently, revenues total $568,098 or 99.7% of the amount budgeted. Recurrinp expenditures are currentay at 75.8% of the amount budgeted with 83.3% of the year elapsed. Departments experience seasonal ffuctuations in activity so they don't necessarily expend their budget in kwelve equal monthly installments, Investments (page 18} Investments at October 31 tota! $44,464,412 and are composed of$39,427,867 in the Washington State Local Government Investment Pool and $5,036,516 in bank CDs, Total Sales Tax Receipts (page 19} • Total sales tax receipts are $12,882,211 incauding general, criminal justice and public safety taxes. This figure is $296,314 (2.35%) greater than for the same 9-month period in 2011. Including the latter half of 2011, sales taxes have shown an impressive increase but an increase of just 1.31% in the March 2012 remittance and a decrease of 2.49% in the August remittance is a reminder that the economic recovery may still be tenuous. • When comparing 2011 and 2012 receipts for the months of May through July you'll note that 2 of the 3 months reflect reductions from the previous year. The decreases were expected and are the result of a 2011 Department of Revenue tax amnesty program that was in place for the three-month period ending April 30, 2011, in which nearly 8,900 business (state- wide} paid $320.7 miflion in state and local back taxes. Of the total, $56.8 million was iocal tax that was forwarded to counties and cities beginning with the May 2011 sales tax distribution and concluding with the July 2011 distribution, Unfortunately the Department of Revenue was unable to provide information on how much this actually generated for the cities or from which businesses. Consequently we have no way of determining how much the City of Spokane Valley benefited from the program. Economic Indicators (pages 20 –22) The following economic indicators provide information pertaining to three different sources of tax revenue that provide a good gauge of the health and direction of the overall economy. 1, Sales taxes (page 20) provide a sense of how much individuals and businesses are spending on the purchase of goods. 2. Hotel 1 Motel taxes (page 21} provide us with a sense of overnight stays and visits to our area by tourists or business travelers. 3. Real Estate Excise taxes (page 22) provide us with a sense of real estate sales. Page 20 provides a monthly history of generai sales tax receipts (not including public safety or criminal justice) beginning with the first remittance received in May 2003. • Compared with calendar year 2011, 2012 collections have increased by $302,736 or 2.73%. _ _- - i __ gi_—_ ��_ 11SV-FS21UsersUncalhounlFlnance Activify Reports12O12�.012 1 O.doCX Page 3 • Tax receipfs peaked in 2007 ak $17.4 million and dropped off dramatically in the subsequent three years. Page 21 provides a monthly history of hotellmotel tax receipts beginning with the first remittance in May 2003. • Compared with calendar year 2011, 2012 collections have increased by $27,860 or 7.99%. • Collections peaked in 2007 and 2008, dropped off in 2009 {although significantly less than the drop in sales taxes) and are currently again near the highs of 2008. Page 22 provides a monthly history of real estate excise tax receipks beg9nning with the first remittance in March 2003, • Compared with calendar year 2011, 2012 collections have increased by $2,000 or 0.26%. • Tax receipts peaked in 2007 at nearly $2.6 million, decreased precipitously in 2008 and 2009, and appear to have leveled off in 2010 and 2011. Debt Capacitv and Bonds Outstandinq (page 23) This page provides information on the City's debt capacity, or the dollar amount of General Obligation (G,O.) Bonds the City may issue, as well as an amortization schedule of the bonds the City currently has outstanding. e The maximum amount of G,O, bonds the City may issue is determined by the assessed value and the 2011 assessed value for 2012 property taxes is $7,087,523,395. Following the City's December 1, 2011 bond payment, the City currently has $7,930,000 of nonvoted G.O. bonds outstanding which represents 7.46% of our nonvoted bond capacity, and 1.49% of our total debt capacity for all types of bonds, e `rhe $7,930,000 of bonds the City currently has outstanding is part of the 2003 nonvoted (LTGO) bond issue. Of this amount� o $6,280,000 remains on bonds issued for the construction of CenterPlace. These bonds are repaid with a por�ion of the 1110 of 1% sa�es tax that is collected by the Spokane Public Facilities District. o $1,670,aoa remains on bonds issued for road and street improvements around CenterPlace. The bonds are repaid with a portion of the real estate excise tax collected by the City, 41SV-FS21UserslmcalhounLFrnance Activrty Reports1�01212(}I2 lO,dOCx � Page 4 P:1FinancelFor City CounciRCouncil Monti�ly Reports1201212012 1 0 3t report CITY OF SPO�CANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 8udget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expendltures Ela SEd= 83.3% For the Ten-Monlh Period Ended Qctober 31,2012 2012 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget October Oci.31 Remaining Budget #001 -GEN�RAL FUND R�CURRING ACTIVITY . Revenues ProperiyTa7c 10,808,900 213,385 6,159,549 (4,649,391) 56.99% Sales T2x 14,210,000 1,383,123 11,396,075 (2,813,925) 80.20% Crlminal Juslice Tax 1,200,000 113,008 950,165 (249,B35) 79.18% Public safety Sales Tax 790,000 62,717 535,971 (254,029) 67.84% Gambling Tax and Leasehold Excise Tax 640,000 75,640 401,445 (238,555) 62.73% Franchise Fees/Business Regisiralion 1,266,000 288,456 907,315 (358,685) 71.67% S1ate Shered Revenues 1,834,300 112,384 1,627,f52 (207,148) 88.71°� Ser�ice Revenues 1,300,000 106,590 1,300,002 2 100.00% Fines and Forieitures 1,900,000 81,403 950,7�2 (949,28B) 50.04% Recreallon Program Fees 570,000 42,876 568,098 (1,902) 99.67% fvliscellaneous 8 Investment Interest 305,000 25,730 154,729 (150,271) 50.73°/a Transfer-in -#101 (street admrn) 39,600 3,300 33,000 (6,600) 83.33°/a Transfer-in -#105(h/m fax-CP advertrsingJ 30,000 0 0 (30,000) 0.00% Transfer-in -#402(stormadmin) 95,000 1,250 12,500 (2,500) B3.33% Total Recurring Revenues 34,908,800 2,509,462 24,996,673 (9,9�2,127) 71.6f% Expenditures City Council 3B6,249 22,944 292,232 94,017 75.66% City Manager 631,667 48,453 485,673 145,994 76.89% Legal 434,798 35,399 367,B45 66,953 84.60% Public Safety 22,000,004 1,496,551 17,160,526 4,839,474 78.00% �eputy City Manager &58,884 32,743 356,760 302,124 54.15% Finance 1,047,107 84,142 759,271 2B7,836 72.51% Human Resources 230,231 16,844 175,582 54,669 7&.25% Public Works 901,519 56,645 587,334 314,185 65.15% Communitybevelopmeni-Administraiion 323,743 26,016 254,253 69,490 78.54% CommunityDevelopment-Engineering 880,796 57,529 552,884 127,912 81.21% Community Developmenl-Planning 994,245 77,512 700,993 293,252 70.51% Community Devefopment-Building 1,2&0,454 98,259 942,720 317,734 74.79% ParksB�Rec-Administration 283,128 24,211 244,460 48,668 81.50% Parks&Rec-Maintenance 803,700 73,325 57i,170 232,530 71.07% Parks 8�Rec-Recreaiion 229,8�1 1 B,988 182,732 47,079 79.51% Parks 8�Rec-Aquatics 442,250 7,978 388,849 53,401 87.93% Parks 8 Rec-Senlor Center 92,961 1,704 73,240 19,721 78.79% Parks 8�Rec-CenterPlace 1,119,357 90,231 897,920 221,437 80.22% General Governmenk 1,840,500 114,928 1,028,379 812,t21 55.B7% Transfers oui-#502 (rnsurance pramium) 319,000 26,583 265,833 53,167 83.33°/o Total Recurring Expenditures 34,&60,400 2,410,984 2&,258,637 8,401,763 75.76% Recurring Revenues Over(Under} Recurring Expenditures 24B,400 98,478 (1,261,984) (1,510,364) �IONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues nla 0 0 0 0 #bEV10! Total Nonrecurring Revenues 0 0 0 0 #D1V/0! �xnendiiures Contingency 1 Emergency(1%of recur exp) 346,600 0 0 346,600 0.40% Transfers out-#303 B9,500 0 4 89,500 0.00% Transfers out-#309{park granf ma(ch) 100,000 8,333 83,333 16,667 83.33% Transfers out-#311 (100%�$2&million) 2,045,203 0 4 2,445,203 0.40% Bu�lding perrnit software purchase 81,692 0 86,229 (4,537) 105.55% Total�lonrecurring Expenditures 2,862,995 8,333 169,582 2,493,433 6.37% Nonrecurring Revenues Over{Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (2,662,995) ^ (8,333) (169,562) 2,493,433 Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Tota1 Expenditures (2,414,595)� 90,'i44 (1,43�,52&) 983,069 Beginning fund balance 28,045,203 28,045,243 Ending fund balance 25,630,608 28,813,677 Page 5 P:1FinancelFor City CouncitlCouncil�Aonlhly Reports1201212012 10 31 report CITY OF SPOKAN�VALL�Y,WA Budgei Year Budget to Actua!Comparlson of Revenues and Expendltures Ela sed= es.s% For the Ten-Monlh Period Ended October 3i,2012 2012 Actua! Aclual fhru 8udget %of Budget October Oct.31 Remaining Budget 5PECIAL REVENUE FUNDS #109 -STREET FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Motor Vehide Fuel(Gas)Tax 1,B97,B00 171,651 1,393,420 (504,38d) 73.42% In�estr�ent Interesi 5,000 244 3,1B0 (1,824) 63.60% Insurance Premiur�s&Recoveries 0 0 10,261 10,261 #DIV14! Utility Ta�c 3,000,000 227,042 2,062,531 (937,469) 68.75% �+lliscellaneous Revenue 0 0 150 150 #DIVIO! Tota!Recurring Revenues 4,902,800 398,937 3,469,542 (1,433,258) 70.77°/a Expenditures Wages 1 Benefits I Payroll Taxes 522,142 45,341 464,$1 i 57,331 89.02% Supplies 72,200 22,645 451,359 (379,159) 625.15% Services&Charges 3,310,321 82,004 2,290,988 1,419,333 69.21°/a Intergovernmental Payments 847,000 138,326 573,$45 273,155 67.75% Interfund Transfers-oui-#d01 39,600 3,304 33,000 6,600 83.33% Interfund Transfers-out-#143(MVF� 0 0 0 0 #DIU/O! InterfundTransfers-out-#501 (plowreplace.) 100,000 8,333 83,333 16,667 83.33% Interfund Transiers 0 0 0 d #DIV/O! Streets Misc.projecls 0 0 0 4 #DIUIO! Toial Recurring Expendiiures 4,$91,263 299,949 3,897,336 993,927 79.68% Recurring Revsnues Over{Under) Recurring Expenditures 11,537 98,968 (427,794) (439,331) NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Grants 0 0 156,326 156,326 #DIVIO! Uiility Taxes 0 0 0 0 #DIVI01 InterFund Transfers in-#441 0 0 0 0 #DIVI01 InterFund Transfers in-#122 0 0 0 0 #DIVI01 InterFund Transfers in-#3d2 0 0 2,358 2,35$ #DIVI01 InterFund Transfers In-#442 0 0 0 0 #DIVl01 Miscellaneous 0 4 2,385 2,385 #DIVl01 Total Nonrecurring�Revenues 0 4 161,069 161,069 #DIVI01 �xpendiiures Bridge/Skreet Maintenance 0 0 1,402 (1,402) #DIVI01 InterFund Transfers-out-#303(Evergreen,4d} 500,000 0 442,638 57,362 88.53% Grant financed capital 0 3,333 19,790 (19,790) #D1V101 CapiialOutlay 40,000 0 0 40,000 0.00% SrIOW PIOW pufChase{6udgeted in 20?0 delrvered rr 0 0 0 0 #D]UI01 Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 540,000 3,333 463,$30 76,170 85.89°/a Nonsecurring Revenues Over(Under) Nonrecurring �xpenditures (540,000) (3,333} {302,76i) 237,239 �xcess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Toial Expenditures (52$,463} ; 95,654 (730,554) {202,091) Beginning fund balance 2,489,734 2,4b9,734 Ending fund balance 1,961,271 1,759,184 Page 6 P�IFinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reports1201212012 10 31 report CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and 5xperoditures Ela sed= 83.3% For lhe Ten-Month Perlod Ended Octo6er 31,2042 20t2 Actual Actual lhru Budget %of 8udget October Ocf. 31 Remaining Budget SPECfAL REVENU� FUNDS-co�tinued 1d2-Arterlal Street Fund Revenues Investmeni Interest 0 0 0 4 #DIVI01 Tofal revenues 0 0 0 4 #DIVIO! Expenditures IF Transfers-303 207,447 0 207,447 0 100.00% Mlscellaneous d 0 0 0 #DIVIO! Total expendifures 207,447 0 207,447 0 100.00% Revenues over(under)expenditures (207,447) 0 (207,447) 0 Beginning fund balance 207,447 207,447 Ending fund balance 0 4 #103-PATHS&TRAILS Revenues Mo1or Vehicle Fuel(Gas)Tax 8,000 0 0 (8,000) d.00°/a Interiund Transfer-in#101 (MVFT) 0 0 0 0 #D1V10! Invesiment Interest 0 5 50 50 #D�VId! Tofal revenues 8,400 5 50 (7,950) 0.63% Expenditures fF Transter for TrailslPaths Cap Prj 0 0 0 0 #DlVldl Mlscellaneous 0 0 0 0 #DIV14! CapitalOut2ay 0 0 0 0 #DIVI01 Tota1 expenditures 0 0 0 0 #DIVI01 Revenues over(under)expenditures 8,040 5 50 (7,950) Beginning fund balance 56,084 56,OB4 Ending fund balancs 64,084 56,134 #'i05-HQTEL 1 MQTEI.TAX FUND Revenues HotellMotel Ta�c 430,004 64,299 376,572 {53,428) 87.57% Investment Interesl 700 45 420 (28d) 60.04% Tota]revenues 430,700 64,344 376,892 (53,708) 87.53% �enditures InterFund Transfers-#Od1 30,OOd 0 0 30,OOd 0.00% Tourism Promotion 540,200 79,317 386,363 153,837 71.52% 7otal expenditures 570,200 79,317 386,363 183,837 67.76% Revenues over(under)expenditures (139,504) (14,973) (9,371) (237,545) Beginning fund bakance 257,932 257,832 Ending fund balance 118,432 248,561 Page 7 P:1FinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monihly Reporls1201212012 10 31 reporl CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 8udget Year Budget to Acfual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures �la sed� 83.3% For the Ten-Month Period Ended October 39,2012 2012 Actual Actual ihru Budget %of Budgei October Oct. 31 Remaining Budget SPECiAI.REV�NUE FUNDS-continued #920-CENTER P�ACE OPERATING RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interesl 700 {398) 0 (700) 0.00% Intertund Transfer 0 0 0 0 #DIV/O! Totalrevenues 700 (398) 0 (700) 0.00% Expenditures Operations 0 0 0 0 #DIVI01 Toial expenditures 0 0 0 0 #DIVI01 Revenues over(under)expenditures 700 (39B) 0 (700) 8eglnning fund balance 350,7B7 350,787 Ending fund balance 351,487 350,787 #121 -SERVICE LEVEL STABILIZATION RESERVE FUND Revenues Invesimeni Interest 10,000 710 6,888 (3,112) 68.8B% lnterfund TransFer 0 0 0 0 #�IVIO! Totalrevenues 10,000 710 6,888 (3,112) 68.8B% Expenditures Operations 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 #DIV/01 Revenues over(under)expenditures 10,000 710 6,888 (3,112) Beginning tund balance 5,432,42B 5,432,428 Ending fund bafance 5,442,428 5,439,316 #122-WINTER WEATHER RESERVE FUND Revenues Invesiment Interest 700 69 668 (32) 95.45% Intertund Transfer 0 0 0 0 #�IVIO! Subtotalrevenues 700 69 668 (32) 95.45% Expenditures Reserve for Winter Weaiher 0 0 0 0 #�IV/O! Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 #�IV/O! Revenues over(under)expenditures 700 69 668 (32) Beginning fund balance 502,005 502,005 Ending fund balance 502,705 502,673 #123-CIVIG FACILITIES REPLACEMENT FUND Revenues investment Interest 2,000 164 1,588 (412) 79.42% lnierfund Transfer-#001 397,000 33,083 330,833 {66,167) 83.33% Total revenues 393,000 33,247 332,422 {66,578} 83.31% Exoenditures Cap'stal0uilay 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! Toial expendiiures 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! Revenues over(under)expenditures 398,000 33,247 332,422 (66,578) Beginning fund balance 2,004,B4B 2,004,848 Ending fund balance 2,403,848 2,337,270 Page B P:1FinancelFor City CounciHCouncil Monfhly Reports1201212012 i0 31 report CI7Y OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year Budget to Actual Comparlson of Revenues and Expenditures Ela sed� 83.3% For the Ten-Nlonfh Perlod Ended October 39,2012 2012 Actual Acival thru Budget %of 8udget October Oct. 31 Remaining Budget �EBT SERVICE FUN�S #204-bEBT SERVICE FUN� Revenues Spokane Public Faciliiles District 432,320 0 151,160 (281,160) 34.96% InterFund 7ransfer-In-#301 92,652 0 18,826 (73,826} 20.32% Interfund 7ransfer-in-#302 92,651 0 1 B,B28 (73,625) 20.32% Total revenues 617,623 0 18B,B11 (426,612} 30.57% Expenditures ❑ebi Service Payments-Cer�terPlace 432,320 0 115,080 317,260 26,61% Debt Service Payments-Roads 185,303 0 22,209 183,094 11.99% 7otal exper�ditures 617,823 0 �37,289 480,354 22.23°/a Reuenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 51,542 (909,185) Baginning fund bafance Q 0 Ending fund balance 0 51,542 Page 9 P:IFinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reports1201212012 10 31 report CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures Ela sed= 93.3% For Ehe Ten-Month Perlod Ended October 39,2012 2042 Actual Actual ihru Budget %of Budget October Oct. 31 Remaining Budget CAPITAI.PROJECTS�'l1NDS #301 -CAP�TA�PROJECTS Fl1ND Revenues REET 1 -Taxes 475,000 32,216 388,123 (86,877) 81.7�% Investment Interest 400 90 873 473 218.29% InterFund Transfer-In-#303 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! Total revenues 475,400 32,307 388,995 (86,445) 81.82% Expendikures Interfund Transier-out-#2Q4 92,&52 0 18,826 73,826 20.32% Interfund Transier-out-#343 363,627 0 219,21Q 144,417 &0.28% Total expenditures 456,279 0 238,036 218,243 52.17°/a Revenues over{under)expenditures 19,121 32,307 15Q959 (304,647) Beglnning fund balance 772,072 772,072 Ending fund balance 791,193 923,031 #302 SPECIA�CAPITAL PROJ�CTS Fl1ND Revenues REET 2-Taxes 475,000 31,300 380,304 (94,696) 80.06°/a Investment Interesi 2,000 137 1,333 (667) 66.65% InterfundTransfer-in-#307 0 0 4,393 4,393 #DIV/01 Total revenues 477,000 31,438 386,Q30 (90,970) 80.93% �xpenditures lnierfund Transfer-out-#101 0 0 2,358 (2,358) #DIVI01 lntarfund Transfer-out-#244 92,651 0 18,826 73,825 20.32% lnterfund Transfer-out-#303 1,448,059 0 534,576 913,483 38.92% InterFund Transfer-out-#307 0 0 0 0 #DiV10! InterFund Transfar-out-#308 0 0 0 0 #DiV102 Tota1 expenditures 1,540,710 0 555,760 984,950 3&.07% Revenues over(under)expenditures (1,063,710} 31,438 (169,731) (1,075,920) Beginning tund balance 1,630,303 4,634,303 Ending fund balance 566,593 9,464,572 Page 10 P:1Financel�or Ciky CouncillCouncil Monihly Reports1201 21201 2 10 31 reporf CITY OF SPOKANE VALL�Y,WA BudgetYear Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures �la sed� e3.3% For the Ten�Month Period Ended Octo6er 39,2012 2012 Acival Actual thru Budget %of Budget October Oct. 3T Remaining Budget CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS-continued #303 STREET CAPITAL PRQJECTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 7,828,118 51 2,732,240 (5,095,878) 34.90°/a Develaper Contribution 275,000 666 760,768 485,768 276.64% Miscellaneous 0 0 1,650 �,650 #DIVIO! Interfund Transfer-in-#001 89,000 0 64,750 (24,250) 72.75% Interfund Transfer-in-#i01 0 0 442,63B 442,638 #DIVIO! InterFund Transfer-in-#i02 0 0 207,447 207,447 #DlVldl Inkerfund TransFer-in-#301 363,627 0 219,210 (144,417) 60.28% Interfund Transfer-In-#302 1,448,059 0 534,576 (913,483) 36.92% Interfund Transfer-in-#311 811,000 0 271,953 (539,047) 33,53% Interfund Transfer-in-#401 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! Interfund Transfer-In 0 0 0 0 #DIVI01 Totalrevenues 10,814,804 718 5,235,233 (5,579,571) 48.41% �xpendifures 005 PineslNlansfield,Wilbur Rd.to Pines 463,312 30 10,425 452,887 2.25% 060 Argonne Rd Corridor Upgrade SRTC 06-31 802,792 436 103,891 698,90� 12.94% 061 Pines(SR27)ITS Imporvement SRTC 06-26 1,766,201 12,178 182,928 1,583,273 10.36% 063 Broadway Ave Safety Project-Plnes 0 0 1,747 (1,747) #D]VI01 065 SpraguelSullNan 0 0 (7,240) 7,240 #DIVI01 069 Park Road Reconstruciion#2 0 0 1,019 (1,019) #DIVI01 106 West Ponderos STEP 0 2,748 2,938 (2,938) #DIV/O! 112 [ndianaAvenue Exkension 0 40,B66 51,890 (51,890) #DIVIO! 113 IndianalSullivan PCC Iniersection d 15b 3,435 (1,435) #DIVIO! 115 Sprague Ave Resurfacing-Evergreen ko Sullivan 1,582,000 264,881 2,796,158 (1,214,158) 176J5% 123 Mission Ave-Flora to Barker 300,000 0 109 299,B91 0.04% 141 Sullivan&Euclid PCC 26,289 1,241 7,977 1B,312 30.34% 1A2 Broadway@ArgonneliNullan 138,150 0 965 137,185 0.7d% 945 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trall 447,000 0 3,686 443,314 0.82% 146 241h Ave Sidewalk-Adams to SuIINan 278,520 2,609 A2,795 235,725 15.37% 148 Greenacres Trail-Oesign 60,000 0 2,816 57,185 4.69%a 149 Sldewask InFi11 398,250 15,077 106,614 291,636 26.77% 151 Green Haven STEP 0 75 1,235 (1,235) #�IV/01 154 Sidewalk&Tansit Stop Accessibility 182,290 9,OB9 39,b76 142>a�a 21.87% 155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement 600,000 122,858 553,124 A6,876 92.19% [56 MansField Ave.Connection 738,000 5,466 9,775 728,225 1.32% 157 Temporary Sullivan Bridge Repairs 200,000 0 192,008 7,992 96.00% 159 University Rd!I-90 Ouerpass Study 2B4,000 0 751 283,249 0.26% 160 �vergreen Rd Pres. 16th-32nd 959,000 3,501 1,562,955 (603,955) 162.98% 166 Pines Rd. (SR27)8�Grace Ave. Ink.Safety 0 1d5 105 (105) #OIVI01 16B We1lesleyAve Sidewalk&Adams Rd Sidewalk 0 265 1,476 (1,476} #DIVId! 169 ArgonnelMullan Safeiy Indiana-Broadway 0 77 77 (77) #DIV/O! 170 Argonne road: Empire Ave-Knox Ave. 0 77 77 (77) #DIV101 171 Sprague Ave ADA Curb Ramp ProJect 0 0 310 (310) #DIV/O! Conkingency 1,500,000 0 0 1,500,000 0.00% Total expenditures 10,725,804 A81,737 5,671,921 5,053,883 52.88% Revenues over(under)expenditures 89,000 � {436,688) (10,633,455) Beginning fund balance 73,646 73,646 Ending f�nd balance 162,646 (363,042) Page 11 P;IFinancelFor Ciiy CouncillCouncil Monihly Reports1201212012 10 39 report CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year Budget to Actual Comparison of Re�enues a�d Expenciikures �.la sed= 83.3% For the Ten-Month AeNod Ended Ocfober 31,2D12 2012 Actual Actual thru Budget %of � Budget October Oct.31 Remaining Budget CAPITAL ARQJECTS FUNDS-confinued #3D4-MIRABEAU PRQJECTS FUNd Revenues Other Miscellanaous Re�enue 0 0 0 0 #�IV101 Investment Interest 14 4 35 21 251.36% Total revenues 14 4 35 21 251.36% �xpenditures CapitalOufaays 44,361 0 0 44,361 0.00% Transters 0 0 0 0 #�iV10! Total expendiiures 44,361 0 0 44,361 O.flfl% �tevenues over(under)expanditures (44,347) 4 35 (44,340) Beginning fund balance 44,347 44,347 Ending fund balance 0 44,3&2 #307-CAPiTAL GRANTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 0 0 183,535 1B3,535 #�1V10! Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 #�IVIDI InterFund Tra�sier-in-#302 0 0 0 0 #�IVf01 InterFund TransFer-in 0 0 0 0 #�IV/O! Tofalrevenues 0 0 183,535 183,535 #DIV/O! �enditures O6B Broadway-190 to Park Ftoad(Trans to#302) 0 0 4,393 (4,393} #�1VIOl 08B Broadway-Moore to Flora 0 0 4,4fi9 (4,469) #�1V/01 Total expenditures 0 0 8,B62 (&,862) #�IV10! Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 174,673 192,397 Beginning tund balance 147 147 �nding fund bala�ce 147 174,B20 Page 12 P:1FinancelFor C"sty CouncillCouncil Month4y Reports120�21209 2 1 0 31 repork CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and �xpenditures �la sed= 83.3% For the Ten-Month Period Ended October 31,2012 2012 Acival Actual thru Budget %of Budget Ociober �Ci. 31 Remafning Budget CAPITAL PROJECTS�UN�S-continued #308-BARKER BRIflGE FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 0 0 0 0 #DIVI01 Developer Contribuilon 0 0 0 0 #DIVl01 Inlerfund Transfer-in-#302 0 0 0 0 #DIVlO! Total revenues 0 0 0 0 #DIVl01 Expenditures #DIVIO! Brldge Reconstr�ciion 0 0 0 0 #fl1V10! Toial expenditures 0 0 0 0 #DIVfO! Revenues over(under)expenditures 0 0 0 0 Beginning fund balance 0 0 Ending fund balance 0 0 #3U9-PARKS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 0 0 0 0 #DIV101 Interfund Transfer-in-#001 129,202 8,333 d3,333 (45,869) 64.50% InterfundTransfer-in-#304 44,361 0 0 (44,361) 0.00°/a Investment Interest 0 64 647 647 #DIVIO! Total revenues Z73,563 8,397 83,980 (89,583) 48.39% Expendiiures 076 Valley Mission Park 0 0 0 0 #DIVI01 079 Greenacres Park 0 0 10,567 (10,567) #DIVI01 086 Discovery(Uni�ersal)Paric 0 0 0 0 #DIV/O! 144 Terrace View Park 5helter 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! 165 Terrace View Park Play Equipment 120,000 97,936 104,859 15,141 87.38% 172 CenterPlace 5ouih Landsscape Development 73,563 33,083 36,890 36,673 50.15% Contingency 50,000 0 0 50,000 0.00% Toial expendiiures 243,563 131,019 152,316 91,247 62.54% Revenues over(under)expenditures (70,000) (122,622) (68,335) (180,830} Beginning fund halance 411,151 4�1,151 �nding fund balance 341,151 342,815 Page 13 P:IFinancelFor Cify CouncillCouncil Monti�ly Reports1201212012 1Q 31 repori Cli'Y OF SPOKANE V�ALLEY,W�A Budget Year Budgef to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expendifures Efa sed = e3.s°/o For the Ten•Month Period�nded October 39,2012 2012 Actual Aclual t�ru Budget %of Budget October Oct.31 Remaining Budget CAPiTAL PROJECTS FUNUS-continued #3'10-C1VIC FACILITIES CAPITAL PI�OJECTS FUND Revenues Interfund TransFers 0 0 0 0 #DIV101 Spokane County Reimb.48th&Sundown 78,500 0 0 (78,500) D.00% SAokane County Library Disl. Pring Prop. 744,048 0 0 (744,04B) 0.00% Invesimeni Interest 6,000 180 4,786 (1,214) 79.77% Totalrevenues 828,54B 180 4,786 {823,762) 0.58% Expenditures InterFund Transfers-ouf-#001 0 0 0 0 #DIVIO! 164 Capital-West Gateway ai Thierman 120,000 917 15,490 104,510 12.91% Acquisition of5prague Properiy 2,500,000 2,501,668 2,501,668 (1,66B) 100.07% Prof.Svc related to purchase of Pring Prop 30,000 0 2B,291 1,709 94.30% STEP Greenhaven 118,000 0 0 118,000 0.00% STEP-48ti�&Sundown 173,500 0 0 173,500 0.00% Facllities 0 0 0 0 #QIVIO! Total expenditures 2,941,500 2,502,585 2,545,449 396,051 86.54% Revenues over(under)expendifures (2,112,952) (2,502,404) (2,540,663} (1,219,812) Beginning fund balance 3,856,624 3,856,624 Ending fund balance 1,743,672 1,315,961 #399 -STREET CAPITAL IMPROVEIN�NTS 2011+ Revenues Miscellaneous 0 0 300 300 #DIVIO! InterFund Transfers in-#001 (xx%�$26mm) 2,045,203 0 0 (2,045,203) 0.00% Investment Interest 2,200 0 0 (2,200) 0.00% Total revenues 2,047,403 0 300 (2,047,103) 0.01% E�cpenditures Facilifies 0 0 Q 0 #DIVIO! 2012 Street Preservation 2,81B,883 239,418 540,908 2,277,975 80.81% Interfund Transfers-out-#303-Sullivan 200,000 0 192,OOB 7,992 96.00% InterfundTransfers-out-#303-Evergreen 111,000 0 79,945 31,055 72.02% Total expenditures 3,129,883 239,41B 812,862 2,317,021 25.97°/a Revenues over(under}exper�dilures (1,082,480) (239,41B) (812,562) (4,364,424} Beginning fund balance 1,OB4,681 1,084,681 Er�ding fund balance 2,201 272,119 Page 14 P:IFinancelFor City Counc'sllCouncil Monthly Reports120�212012 10 31 report CiTY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Budget Year 8udgek fo Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expendllures �la sed= as.3% For the Ten-�Aanth Perfod�nded Ockober 31,2012 2012 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget Ocfober Oct.31 Remaining Budget ENTERPRISE FUNDS #402-STORNlWATER FUhd R�CURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Stormwater Management Fees 1,754,000 21,455 1,045,410 (704,590) 59.74% Investment Inkerest 5,000 203 1,968 (3,032) 39.37% Miscellaneous 0 0 57 57 #DIV/01 Total Recurring Revenues 1,755,000 21,658 1,047,435 (747,565) 59.6B% �x e__�__nditures Wages 1 Benefits 1 Payroll Taxes 43B,614 30,151 310,066 128,54B 74.69% Supplies 32,540 99 10,467 22,073 32.17% Services&Charges 1,244,287 97,718 764,970 479,317 61.4B% Intergovernmenial Paymenis 23,000 206 24,632 (1,632) 107.09% InterFund Transfers-out-#001 15,000 1,250 12,500 2,500 83.33% InterFundTrans(ers-out-#502 0 131 1,306 (1,306) #DIUIO! Total Recurring Expendilures 1,753,441 129,555 1,123,940 629,501 64.10% Recurring Revenues Over(Under) Recurring Expenditures 1,559 (107,897) (76,505) {78,064) NONR�CURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Granf Proceeds 153,667 0 64,086 (B9,58t) 41.70% Interfund T�ansfers-in-#101 (shop lacilJty) 0 4 0 0 #DIV/01 Total Nonrecurring Revenues 153,667 4 64,086 {B9,58�) 41.70% Exoendilures Interfund Transfers-ouf 0 0 0 4 #DfV10! Coniracted maintenance 0 0 0 0 #DfU/0! Div.055 NPDES-Phase II program dev. 0 0 0 0 #DkV/01 Capital-various projecis 400,000 1,467 21,251 378,749 5.31% Shop Facility 0 0 0 0 #D{U/O! Interfund Transfers-out-#10i 0 0 0 4 #DIV/O! Total Nonrecurring E7cpenditures 400,000 1,467 21,251 378,749 5.31% Nonrecurring Revenues Over(Under) Nanrecurring Expenditures (246,333) (1,467} 42,835 289,16B Excess(Deficit)of Total Revenues Over(Under)Total Expenditures (244,774) . (109,364) (33,870) 211,704 Beginning working capltal 2,382,660 2,3B2,660 Ending working capital 2,137,8B6 2,348,990 Page 15 P:IFinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reports1204 21241 2 14 31 reporl CITY 0� SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget Year Budget to Aclual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures �la sed= a3.3% For Ehe Ten-Month Perlod Ended October 31,2012 2012 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget October Oct.31 Remalning Budget ENTERPRISE FUNDS-contln�ed #403-AQUIFER PROTECTIO�!AREA Revenues Spokane County 500,000 0 273,341 (226,659) 54.67% Sprague swa�e Upgrades-DOE Grant 666,622 0 0 {666,622) 4.00% Investmeni Interesf 2,500 0 0 (2,504) 0.00% Tofalrevenues 1,769,122 0 273,341 (895,781) 23.38% �xpenditures Fac'slities 1,171,411 317,049 449,436 72f,975 38.37% Total expenditures 1,171,411 317,049 449,436 721,975 38,37% Revenues over(under)expendiiures (2,289) (317,049} (176,094) (1,617,756) Beginning working capifal 417,326 417,326 Ending working capital 415,037 241,232 Page 16 P:1FinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reporis1201212012 10 31 repori CITY OF SPOKANE VALL�Y,WA Budget Year Budget to Actual Comparison of Re�enues and Expenditures E[a sed= 83.3% For the 7en-Monfh Period Ended OcEober 31,2092 2012 Actual Actual thru Budget %of Budget October Oct.31 Remaining Budgat IN7�RNAL S�RV1C�FliNC1S #601 -�R&R FUfJD Revenues Intarfund7ransfer-in-#001 0 1,612 16,120 16,120 #�DIV/O! Interfund Transfer-in-#701 (plow replace.) 100,000 8,333 83,333 (16,667) 83.33% Investmant intarest 0 120 9,125 1,125 #DIV/01 Total revenues 100,000 10,065 100,578 576 100.58% Ex�enditures Computer replacemani lease 0 4 0 0 #�IVI01 SoftwarelHardware replacemenl 0 0 0 0 #�IVl01 Vehicla Raplacement 0 0 0 fl #�IVI01 CapitalOUilay 0 0 0 4 #pIVl01 Total expendiiures 0 0 0 0 #�IVI01 Revenues over(under)expenditures 100,400 10,065 100,578 578 Seginning working capital 932,335 932,335 �nding working capital 1,432,335 1,032,913 #502-RISK MANAGEMEfJT FUfJd Revenues Invesimenllnterest 0 1 7 7 #�IVI01 InferFund Transfer-#001 319,000 26,583 265,633 (53,167} 83.33% Tofal ra�enues 319,400 26,584 265,840 (53,160) 83.34% Exoenditures Senrices�Charges 3i9,000 486 256,033 62,967 80.26% Toial expenditures 319,000 486 256,033 62,967 80.26% Revenues over(under)exgenditures 0 26,098 9,807 (116,127} Beginning working cagital 3fl,590 30,590 �nding working capital 30,590 40,397 Page 17 P:IFinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monfhly Reports120i212012 10 31 report CITY OF SPOKANE VAL�.EY, WA 11/20/2012 lnvestment Report For the Month of October 2012 �otal LGIP� BB CD 2 BB CD 3 lnvestments Beginning $ 40,506,416.84 $ 3,036,515.74 $ 2,000,000.00 $ 45,542,932.58 Deposits 1,915,384.28 0.00 0.00 1,915,384.28 Withdrawls (3,000,000.00) 0.00 0.00 (3,000,000.00) Inferest 6,095.52 0.00 0.00 6,095.52 Ending � 39,427,896.64 � 3,036,515.74 � 2,000,000.00 $ 44,464,412.38 matures: 6/28/2013 17/4/2012 rate: 0.65% 0.35% Earnin s Balance Current Period Year to date Bud et 001 General Fund $ 29,278,287.48 $ 4,456.72 $ 64,594.17 � 145,000.00 101 Street Fund 1,780,725,50 244.'i4 3,180.22 5,000,00 103 �'rai{s & Paths 37,900.70 5.20 50.40 0.00 105 HotellMotel 329,745.28 45,21 420.27 700.00 120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve 332,958.41 (397.61) 0.00 700.00 121 Service L.evel Stabilization Reserve 5,180,528.10 710.26 6,888.42 10,000.00 122 Winter Weather Reserve 502,503.41 68.89 668.96 700.00 123 Civic Facilifies Replacement 1,194,519.54 163.77 1,588.33 2,000.00 301 Capital Projects 659,400.94 90.41 872.82 400.00 302 Special Capital Projects 1,002,496.54 137.44 1,333.00 2,000,00 303 Sfreet Capital �rojects Fund 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 304 Mirabeau Point Project 26,461.85 3,63 35.�9 0.00 307 Capital Grants Fund 0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 309 �arks Capital �roject 463,706.84 63.58 646.69 0.00 310 Civic Buildings Capital Projects 1,315,794,27 180.40 4,786.33 6,000.00 311 Street Capital Improvements 2011+ 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,200.00 402 Stormwater Management 1,480,414.88 202,97 1,968.47 5,000.00 403 Aq�ifer Protection F�nd 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,500.00 501 �q�ipment Rental & Replacement 873,878.22 119.81 1,124.51 0.00 502 ftisk Management -5,090.42 0.70 -6.77 0.00 $ 44,464,412.38 $ 6,095.52 � 88,163.75 � 182,200.00 *L.ocal Governmen# Investment Pool Page 18 P:1FinancelFor City CouncillCouncil Monthly Reports1201212012 10 31 report CITY OF SPOKANE VA��EY, WA 11/20/2012 5ales Tax Receipts For the Month of October 2012 Month Difference Received 2011 2012 $ % February 1,658,132.70 1,792,084.16 133,951.46 8.08% March 9,130,948.29 1,145,747.45 14,799.16 1.31% April 1,149,418,90 1,208,053,80 58,634.90 5.10°/a May 1,451,954.28 1,440,245.01 (11,709.27) (0,81°/o) June 1,345,333.29 1,325,266.87 (20,066.42) (1.49%) JUIy 1,495,961.55 1,458,841.23 42,879.68 3.03% August 1,520,766,09 1,482,908.83 (37,857.26) (2.49°/a) Sepfember 1,448,728.86 1,470,215.17 21,486.31 'i,48% October 1,4fi4,653.fi0 1,558,848.71 94,195.11 6.43% 12,585,897.56 12,882,211.23 29fi,313,fi7 2.35% Novernber 1,4�3,313.06 0.00 December 1,381,684.7fi 0,00 January 1,410,552.03 0.00 16,841,447.41 12,882,211,23 Sales tax receipts reporfed here reflect remittances for general sales fax, criminal jusfice sales tax and public safety tax. The sales tax rate for retail sales transacted wilhin the boundaries of fhe City of Spokane Valley is 8.7%. The tax that is paid by a purchaser at the point of sale is remitted by the vendor to fhe Washington State Department of Revenue who then remits the taxes back to the various agencies thaf have imposed the tax. 'Fhe al�ocation of the total 8.7°/a tax rate to the agencies is as follows: - State of Washington 6.50% - City of Spoi�ane Valley 0.85°/a - - Spoi�ane County 0.15% - Spo�Cane Public Facilities District 0.10% *� - Crminial Justice 0.10% * - f'��blic Safety 0.10°/o `9� 2.20% local tax - Juvenile Jail 0,10% * - Mental Health 0.10% *! - Law Enforcement Communications 0.10% *� - Spoi�ane�'ransit Authority O.fiO% J 8.70% � Indreates voter appraved sales faxes In addit�on to the .85% tepo�ted abo�e that the City receives, we also receive a po�tion of the Crirninal Justice and Public Safety sales taxes. �'he distribuiion of those taxes is computed as follows: Criminal Justice: �'he tax is assessed county-wide and of the total collected, the State distributes 10% of the receipts to Spokane County, with the remainder allocated an a per capita basis to the County and the cities within the County. Public Safetv: The tax is assessed couniy-wide and of the total collected, the State distributes 60% of the receipts to Spokane County, with the remainder allocated on a per capita basis to the ciiies within the County. Page 19 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA Sales�ax Collections- September For the years 20Q3 through 2D12 .Ianuary Fehruary March April May June July August Septemher Collected to date IISV-FS21UsersMcalhounlTax RevenuelSales Tax1201212012 sales tax col]ections i� �, 'i 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2D0$ 2009 2010 2014 20�2 0 1,145,888 1,367,929 1,572,609 '1,759,531 1,729,680 1,484,350 1,491,059 1,4fi0,548 1,589,887 0 962,431 917,747 1,06$,743 9,155,947 1,'f29,765 1,098,575 963,749 990,157 '1,009,389 0 909,472 1,015,573 1,072,330 1,196,575 1,219,611 1,06$,8'I� '[,018,4fi8 1,015,762 9,Ofi7,733 0 1,080,745 1,322,070 1,371,030 '1,479,603 1,423,459 1,134,552 1,184,137 1,284,�80 �,277,621 519,943 1,263,17fi 1,159,647 1,392,111 1,353,093 1,243,259 1,098,054 1,102,523 1,i87,737 1,174,962 747,486 1,�23,�71 1,212,663 'f,362,737 �,428,868 1,386,908 1,151,772 1,123,907 1,248,218 1,290,976 821,741 1,301,359 1,377,753 '[,555,124 '1,579,5$6 1,5'19,846 1,309,409 1,260,873 1,332,$34 1,302,706 1,306,427 1,162,35fi 1,395,952 1,405,983 9,5'f6,324 1,377,943 1,212,539 1,21i,450 1,279,500 '1,299,678 Z,390,452 1,160,787 1,372,0$1 1,4$7,155 1,546,705 1,364,963 �,227,8']3 1,191,558 1,294,403 1,383,123 4,786,049 10,109,385 '[1,141,495 12,287,$22 13,016,152 12,395,434 10,785,859 90,547,724 11,093,339 11,396,075 Odo6er '[,172,59'1 '1,274,680 1,520,176 1,526,910 1,60'f,038 1,344,217 9,236,493 1,269,505 1,291,217 0 Novem6er 963,ifi3 1,091,721 1,095,566 1,369,940 1,443,843 1,292,327 '1,155,647 1,139,058 1,217,933 0 Decem6er 973,505 1,085,827 1,2$6,191 1,366,281 1,376,434 1,129,050 �,070,245 1,141,012 1,247,920 0 TotalCollections 7,895,308 13,561,6�t3 15,043,348 '16,550,953 17,437,467 ifi,164,028 14,248,244 �f4,097,299 14,850,409 �1,396,075 BudgeE Estimaie 9,900,000 11,000,000 12,280,000 16,002,000 17,4fi6,800 'l7,115,$00 17,$60,000 14,410,000 94,210,000 14,210,000 Actual over(under)budg (1,204,692) 2,561,613 2,763,348 548,953 (29,333) (954,772) (3,611,75fi) (312,70'1) 640,409 (2,813,925) Total actual collections as a 3'0 of total 6udget %change in annua[ total colleded 86.76% 123.293'0 122.50% 103.43% 99.$3% 94.42% 79.78% 97.83% 104.51% nla 71.77% 10.93% 10.02% 5.36% (7.32%) (11.84%) {1.06%) 5.34% n!a n!a %of budget colle�ted through September 52.59% 91.90% 90.73% 76.79% 74.52% 72.42% 60.39% 73.20% 78.07% 80.20% %of actt�al total�ollected through September fi0.62% 74,54% 74,06% 74.24% 74.64% 76.70% 75.70% 74.82°/a 74.70% n/a Chart Fteflecting History of Collections through the Month of September za,000,000 I2,000,000 zo,000,000 8,000,000 fi,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 � - ,� � � � � � � � � � T T.. � 2003 2004 2005 200fi 2007 200$ 2009 2010 2011 20I2 September � August luly Ju�e -May �April March �Fehruary �January I 11/1/2012 2092 to 2011 Difference $ % 129,339 8.86°!0 �9,232 1.94% 51,971 5.12% (6,559) (0.51%) {�2,775) (1.08%) 42,758 3.43% (30,�28) (2.26%) 20,178 1.58% 88,720 6.85% 302,736 2.73% Page 20 11SV-FS21UserslmcalhounlTax RevenuelLodging Tax120121105 hotel motel tax CfTY OF SPQKANE VALL�1',WA Hote[lMotol Tax Receipts thro�tgh- Septembe Actoal for the years 2003 through 2092 �"6 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 200$ 2009 2010 2011 2012 .lanuary 0.00 16,993.58 20,691.03 20,653.49 25,137.92 28,946.96 23,280.21 22,706.96 22,212.21 21,a42.32 February 0.00 18,161.04 19,976.81 20,946.09 25,310.66 24,623.06 23,283.95 23,416.94 22,792.14 21,548.82 hrtarch 0.00 Z8,182.01 22,828.15 24,308.48 29,190.35 27,509.99 25,272.02 24,232.35 24,611.28 25,654.64 April 0.00 26,897.82 29,748.41 34,371.$2 37,950.53 40,406.02 36,253.63 39,463.49 38,230.49 52,Z30.37 hrtay 19,527.32 16,�440.37 29,017.66 32,522.06 31,371.01 36,828.53 32,588.80 34,683.32 33,790.69 37,478.�44 June 32,5'f2.'f1 53,284.01 35,330.35 34,256.71 36,267.07 46,659.88 40,494.59 39,935.36 41,4U3.41 43,970.70 Jufy 38,580.48 42,i20.26 43,841.82 49,7A4.62 56,281.99 50,421.37 43,950.26 47,385.18 49,3�1.97 52,818.60 August 54,974.74 43,649.84 46,852.10 45,916.16 51,120.70 50,$t$.35 50,946.56 54,922.99 57,451.68 57.229.23 September 30,798.23 39,390.66 46,746.18 50,126.53 57,260.34 60,711.89 50,897.62 59,498.96 58,9U8.16 64>298.70 Col]ected to date 168,312.88 275,119.59 295,032.51 312,845.96 349,890.57 366,926.05 326,007.64 346,165.55 348,712.03 376,571.82 October 36,960.11 33,004.62 34,966.85 38,674.17 43,969.74 38,290.46 36,784.36 41,272.35 39,028.08 0.00 November 23,044.56 32,176.61 26,089.36 36,417.11 36,340.64 35,582.59 34,U54.79 34,329.78 37,339.36 0.00 December 28,825.30 23,142.70 31,740.18 29,147.15 31,377.41 26,290.11 27,131.43 26,776.84 32,523.99 0.00 7okal Collections 257,142.85 363,443.52 387,828.90 417,084.39 461,578.36 467,089.21 423,978.22 448,544.52 457,602.66 376,571.82 8udget EsFimate 419,000.00 380,000.00 436,827.00 350,000.00 400,000.00 400,000.00 512,000.00 380,OOU.00 480.000.00 430,000.00 Actual over(under)budg (161,857.15) (16,556.48} (48,998.10} 67,084.39 61,578.36 67,089.21 {88,021.78) 68,544.52 (22,397.34) (53,428.18) Total actua[collections as a%oiko#al budget 6Z.37% 95.64°/a 88.78°/a 119.17% 115.39% 916.77% 82.8�°/a i�$.04% 95.33% %change in annua[ total Co118Cted n/a 41.34% 6.71% 7.54% 10.67% 1.19°/a (9.23%) 5.79% 2.02% n!a n!a %of budget collected through Seplember 40.17% 72.40% 67.54% 89.38% 87.47% 91.73% 63.67% 91.10% 72.65°/a 87.57% %of act�al total collected lhrough September 65.46% 75.70% 76.07% 75.01% 75.80% 78.56% 76.89% 77.18% 76.20% n1a Chart Reflecting History of Collections thro�gh the Month of Sepfember 400,000.00 350,000.00 300,000,00 zso,000.oa 200,000.00 I , 150,000.00 i iao.000.00 50,000.00 0.00 .� ��- � �; �� - � 2003 20D4 2W5 2006 I � . T ��T � =�� 2007 2008 2009 ZO10 2011 2012 September August July June =May �April "Ma rch f February s January 1 111 12 0 1 2 2012 to 2011 Oifference $ a�a (770) (3.47%) (1,243) (5.46%) t,043 4.24% t3,900 36.36% 3,6$$ 10.91 R'o 2,567 620% 3,507 7.ii% (222) (0.39%) 5,391 9.15°/a 27,860 7.99% Page 2'I C[TY dF SPOKANE VALLEY,WA 1st and 2nd t14%REET Collections through Actual for the years 2003 through 20i2 September 11SV-FS21UserslmcalhounlTax RevenuelREEll20121301 and 302 REET 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2U12 January 0.00 1i9,387.05 147,819.56 232,894.�6 228,896.76 145,963.47 55.281.25 59,887.08 63,704.64 46,358.75 February 0.00 83,795.78 128,082.35 172,154.72 129,919.79 159,503.34 45,180.53 64,121.61 36,443.36 56,114.56 March U.00 195,121.93 198.013.09 182,065.71 263,834.60 132,429.60 73,306.86 86,204.41 95,385.38 71,729.67 Apri] 112,721.05 144,167.21 192,012.d4 173,796.61 2�Z,787.08 128,366.69 81,'l55.83 99,507.19 79,681.38 86,537.14 May 136,982.04 155,089.15 240,765.59 306,871.66 222,677.17 158,506.43 77,463.58 1U9,190.51 124,691.60 904,724.02 June 159,923.98 177,702.06 284,268.67 226,526.64 257,477.05 164,771.48 '105,020.98 105,680.28 81,579.34 '124,976.28 July 156,636.66 197,046.43 209,350.53 2,104.30 323,945.47 217,942.98 122,530.36 80,790.1d 79,629.06 901,U48.69 Augus! 198,506.47 171,521.07 258,631.50 451,700.06 208,039.87 132,909.28 115,829.68 72,630.27 129,472.44 106,517.19 September 190,932.75 '[76,002.43 214,738.94 188,066.23 153,037.21 't31,240.36 93,862.17 75,812.10 68,019.83 62,600.86 955,702.95 1,419,833.11 1,873,682.67 1,936,180.09 1,999,615.00 1,371,633.63 769,631.24 753,823.59 758,607.03 760,607.16 October 'I55,243.97 �[99,685.81 244,590.31 211,094.20 206,442.92 355,655.60 113,960.52 82,733.97 61,396.23 0.00 November i15,054.43 i51,219.02 190,964.73 139,979.09 191,805.53 147,875.00 132,881.49 72,021.24 73,�[76.83 o.aa December 111,788.66 �[73,502.55 159,38i.40 161,285.23 �f79,567.77 96,086.00 7�,365.60 60,871.34 65,077.29 O.UO Tota]distnbufed by Spokane County 1,337,790.01 9,944,240.49 2,468,6�9.1� 2,448,535.61 2,577,431.22 �,971,250.23 1,087,838.85 969,450.14 958,257.38 760,607.16 Budgetestimate 1,i27,112.00 1,680,000.00 4,006,36'f.OU 2.00U,000.00 2.000,000.00 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 760,000.00 800,OOU.00 950,000.00 Actual over(under)budget 210,678.01 264,240.49 (1.537,741.89) 448,535.61 577,431.22 (28,749.77) (912,161.�t5) 209,450.14 158,257.38 (189,392.84) Tota]actual collections as a%of total budget %change in annual total collected %of budget collected through September 118.69% i15.73% 61.62°/a 122.43% 128.87% 98.56% 54.39% 127.56% 119.78% nla nla 45.33% 26.97°/a (0.81%) 5.26% (23.52%} {A4.81%) (10.88%) (1.15%) nla 84.79% 84.51% 46.77°k 96.81°k 99.98% 68.58% 38.48% 99.j9% 94.83% 8U.06% %of actual total collected through September 71.44% 73.03% 75.90% 79.U8% 77.58% 69.58°/a 70.75% 77.76% 79.�7% [112 Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of Sepfem6er 2,500,000.00 2,000,000.00 1,SOO,OOD.00 1,000,000.00 500,000.00 0.00 � _�� .�T �T_�, � � 2003 2004 20D5 2006 2007 � � � ` � � 2008 2009 2010 2017. September :Augus[ July June �rsay ��april °±March - Qfebruary � a�,rorivary 2012 1 0/2 512 01 2 2012 to 2041 Difference $ % (17.346) (27.23%) 19,671 53.98% (23,656) (24.SU%) 6,856 8.60% (19.968) (96.U1%) 43,397 53.20% 21,42U 26.90% (22.955) (17.73%) {5,419) (7.97%} 2,000 0.26°/a Page 22 ��SV-FS2�Users�mcaEhoun�Bonds�debt capacity CITY OF SPOKAN� VALL�Y, WA 3/22/2012 Deht Capacity 2411 Assessed Vafue for 2092 Property Taxes 7,087,523,395 Maximum Outstanding Remaining Debt as of Debt % Capacity 12/31/2011 Ca aci LJtilized Voted (UTGO) 1.40% of assessed value 70,875,234 0 70,875,234 0.00% Nonvoted (LTGO) 1.50% of assessed value 106,312,851 7,930,000 98,382,851 7.46% Voted park 2.50% of assessed value 177,188,085 0 177,188,085 0.00% Voted utility 2.50% of assessed value 177,188,085 0 177,188,085 0.00% 531,564,255 7,930,000 523,634,255 1.49% ,�r 2003 L7G0 Bonds I, Road & �� Period Street i Ending CenterPlace lmprovemen s Total � 12/1/2004 60,400 85,0 0 145,000 12/1/2045 75,400 90,0 165,000 12/1/2046 85,000 90,00 175,000 Bonds 12/1/2047 90,000 95,00 185,000 Repaid _ 12/1/2008 95,000 95,00 190,000 12/1/2009 105,000 100,00 � 205,000 121�12010 110,004 104,OOOi 214,000 12/1/2011 120,004 105,000�� 225,000 _ 740,000 7fi0,000� 1,500,000 �a 12/1/2012 130,004 114,000 4 244,040 12/1/2013 140,004 115,000 ii 255,040 12/1/2014 150,004 124,000 i 274,000 12/1/2015 160,004 125,000 �i 285,000 12/1/2015 170,004 134,000 �i 304,000 12/1/2017 180,004 135,000 i 315,000 12/1/2018 220,004 144,000 �i 354,000 12/1/2019 250,004 145,000 �i 395,000 12/1/2020 290,004 150,000 ii 440,000 'i21'i12021 325,004 'iS0,000 i 485,000 Bonds 'i21'i12022 360,000 'iS5,000 �� 525,000 Remaining _4 'i21'i12023 405,000 'i75,000 �� 580,000 'f', 'i21'i12024 450,000 0 I 450,000 'i21'i12025 490,000 0 �� 490,000 'i21'i12026 535,000 0 � 535,000 'i21'i12027 430,000 0 �I 430,000 'i 21'i12028 340,004 0 I 344,000 12/1/2029 295,004 0 �� 295,000 12/1/2030 280,004 0 �I 280,000 12/1/2031 240,000 0 1 244,000 12/1/2032 190,004 0 j 190,000 12/1/2033 230,000 0 ��34,000 6,260,004 1,670,000 7,930,000 7,000,000 2,434,000 9,430,000 Page 23 MEMO TO: Mike Jackson, City Manager FROM: Rick VanLeuven, Chief of Police DATE: November 19, 2012 RE: Monthly Report October 2012 October 2012: October 2011: CAD incidents: 4,961 CAD incidents: 4,471 Reports taken: 2,047 Reports taken: 1,779 Traffic stops: 1,294 Traffic stops: 1,238 Traffic reports: 367 Traffic reports: 330 CAD incidents indicate calls for service as well as self-initiated officer contacts. Hot spot maps are attached showing October residential burglaries, traffic collisions, vehicle prowlings, and stolen vehicles. Also attached are trend-line graphs for 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012: Citations, Spokane Valley Dispatched Calls, Self-Initiated Calls, Collisions, Persons Crimes, Property Crimes, and Sex Crimes. Also included is the October Crimes By Cities stats report. In 2011, we switched from UCR to NIBRS classification. As a result, certain crimes were broken down to their violation parts for NIBRS and each part is now counted. Consequently, comparing certain crimes before 2011 to crimes during or after 2011 is not possible using the graphs. The crimes that are impacted by the NIBRS classification changes and should not be compared to prior graphs include: Adult Rape, Assault, Forgery and Theft. ADMINISTRATIVE: Chief VanLeuven and Lt. Lyons attended the Special Olympics Breakfast of Champions at the Davenport in early October. Chief VanLeuven attended the 2012 WA Association of County Officials (WACO) Conference in Pasco in early October. Some of the topics covered at the conference included Sheriff's Contracting Training, Jail Medical Costs Work Group Update, and Performance Measures and Staffing Level Update. Lt. Lyons attended an Active Shooter Table-top Discussion/Exercise meeting in early October. Discussions were held on how mall security would interact with first responders, law enforcement/SWAT, and Fire/EMS during an active shooter event, and the roles and responsibilities of each group. This discussion was the building block for a full-scale exercise next spring at the mall, should they be faced with a similar scenario in the future. Page 1 Chief VanLeuven attended the 30th Anniversary Open House for the Greater Spokane Substance Abuse Council (GSSAC) in early October. This event also recognized the 20th Anniversary of the Spokane County DUI Victims Panel. GSSAC's Prevention Center serves as an umbrella for several prevention programs as well as providing prevention advocacy and the dissemination of information about substance abuse and violence issues for Spokane and the surrounding communities. The Special Olympics Tip-A-Cop fundraiser was held at the Spokane Valley Red Robin in mid- October. Chief VanLeuven along with others from the Sheriff's Office and Detention Services were at the event to raise funds for this organization. � �, � �{ � ;�� r i � �� „ �"# � � . �� . �� ^ Y , '� � :..° , � a. �', �• � e � # � 5 7 Y �._ � P^ � r � , F` �� :2 •� ��•a�� B `�4 � 5.� ��, . ,3F�[� �� 5•� � � `�g a. ��..�. ��Y 5_[.. ' � � �. . ' �.•'�.. �_� �`�-_� ��- . _ - - �° -�'... d _ . i ` .�-e � �. , ; -�.._ . - 3-- �� _ _�'�..�" - � * � +� _ .� ��-'�` ,�',_� �� . �r. Chief VanLeuven provided the opening remarks at the FBI Law Enforcement Executive Development Associations class held at the Sheriff's Training Center in mid-October. FBI LEEDA provides leadership and management seminars to law enforcement agencies throughout the United States. The two-day program for mid-level managers has been well received and continues to expand. FBI - LEEDA continues to meet the demand for law enforcement training and expanded its seminars to include advanced leadership and management training. Chief VanLeuven also participated in a panel discussion with attendees of this class. The annual Crime Prevention Conference was held at Centerplace in mid-October. Chief VanLeuven gave welcome remarks at the start of the conference and discussed the importance of partnerships between law enforcement, businesses, and citizens, and how these partnerships build stronger and safer communities. A number of workshops were offered during the day-long conference including SCOPE Basic Training, Human Trafficking, and Working While on Probation, Internet Sex Crimes as well as presentations from the Forensic Unit and Detention Services. Chief VanLeuven attended the Mitigation Plan Update Kickoff Meeting in mid-October. The Disaster Mitigation Act(DMA) of 2000 is federal legislation that establishes a pre-disaster(PDM)program and requirements for the national post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. DMA 2000 encourages and rewards local and state pre-disaster planning, promotes sustainability, and seeks to integrate State and local planning with an overall goal of strengthening statewide hazard mitigation. Spokane County responded to the DMA with the development of the Spokane County Multi-Jurisdictional All Hazard Page 2 Mitigation Plan, which was adopted in 2007. The act specifies that the plans be updated at least every five years. This meeting was to provide more information on this process. The Department of Emergency Management hosted a Concept and Objectives meeting in mid- October, which Chief VanLeuven attended. They discussed the concepts and objectives for an upcoming full-scale exercise that is scheduled to take place in May of 2013. The grand opening was held at the new Wa1Mart, located at 5025 E. Sprague Avenue in Spokane Valley on October 17th, which was attended by Chief VanLeuven. Chief VanLeuven also attended a meeting to begin discussions/updates on Emergency Support Function #13 (including the Terrorism Annex, Terrorism Advisory System & Critical Infrastructure precaution measures, and Evaluation Plan). As in past years, October ends with the Annual Hope House Celebrity Fashion Show. Chief VanLeuven has participated as a model at this event for many years and did so again this year. The _ event raises a large majority of Hope House's funds for � the coming year. In the late 90's, a serial murderer preyed on � ,� �. �,� � vulnerable Spokane �' �„ �- ` ��, ,; ,�,, '�� -�,�. women, particularly �� ,�`�"� �' '� �, �� homeless women � �-� with complicated +y° � � � . mental-health and �� - substance-abuse ' S�� histories. At the - _•Y 4 � � time, there was no safe place for these women to go, until #� - = _ )�. concerned citizens �,� �: � __ � �� .�� `�°�'`� �� _ _ �� -_ ��_� � �� formed Hope ��:$_� House (then known as the Downtown Women's Shelter). Each October since then, their Fashion Show tells the story. Their star models are always local law enforcement officials, in tribute to those who stopped the murders and continue to work tirelessly on behalf of Hope House. Historically, the celebrity roster has also included media and sports personalities. COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING: S.C.O.P.E. participated in the following events during the month of October: ➢ S.C.O.P.E. attended the Spokane Valley "Haunted Pool" at Mission Park both weekends; Page 3 ➢ S.C.O.P.E. Edgecliff and University opened their stations for Halloween kids. The stations also patrolled the neighborhoods that evening; ➢ CERT (Community Emergency Response Team) meeting; and, ➢ Operation Family ID. October 2012 Volunteers Hours per station: Location #Volunteers Admin Hours L.E. Hours Total Hours Central Valley 14 170 111 281 Edgecliff 24 957 155 1112 Trentwood 5 173 107 280 University 19 63 9.5 181 820.5 TOTALS 62 1939.5 554 2493.5 Volunteer Value (�21.62 per hour) $53,909.47 for October 2012 S.C.O.P.E. Incident Response Team (SIRT)volunteers contributed 90 on-scene hours (including travel time) in October, responding to crime scenes, motor vehicle accidents and providing traffic control. Of those hours, 40 hours were for incidents in Spokane Valley. Total October volunteer hours contributed by SIRT, including training stand-by, response and special events is 543; year-to-date total is 5,497 hours. S.C.O.P.E. DISABLED PARKING ACTIVITY REPORT Cit of S okane Valle #of # of Hrs # of Disabled #of # of Non - VoL Infractions Warnings Disabled Issued Issued Infractions Issued January 7 120 13 0 p February 5 150 19 0 p March 11 194 21 0 p April 9 139 16 0 p May 7 127 13 19 p June 8 110 5 0 p July 10 134 26 0 p August 3 68 5 0 p September 7 67 16 0 p October 7 87 9 0 p Total 74 1196 143 19 p Page 4 S okane Count #of # of Hrs # of Disabled #of # of Non - VoL Infractions Warnings Disabled Issued Issued Infractions Issued January 5 24 6 0 p February 5 74 0 0 p March 5 29 1 0 p April 8 80 0 0 p May 6 67 2 2 0 June 7 21 1 0 0 July 8 45 1 0 0 August 0 0 0 0 0 September 7 30 1 0 0 October 4 12 0 0 0 Total 55 379 12 2 0 There were 34 reports of juveniles who ran away from their residence in Spokane Valley during the month of October 2012, 3 of which remain unsettled. Five of the runaways were from group homes. Abandoned vehicles tagged by S.C.O.P.E. volunteers for impoundment in Spokane Valley in September totaled 28 and in October 14 with 6 vehicles each month eventually cited and towed. Sixteen hulks were processed in September and 13 hulks processed in October. During the month of October, a total of 62 vehicles were processed; the total for 2012 to date is 650. OPERATIONS: One-Year-Old Child Left Unattended in a Vehicle — In early October around noontime, Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputies responded to a call of an infant child who had been left unattended inside a vehicle in the parking lot of Ringo's Casino. Employees of the casino reported the incident and were with the child when deputies arrived. The child was not injured, but deputies believe she was left unattended in the vehicle for possibly up to an hour or more. Deputies contacted the father of the child at the location, at which time he was arrested and transported to the Spokane County Jail. He was booked on a gross misdemeanor charge of leaving a child unattended in a parked vehicle. Deputies were able to contact with the child's mother and the child was released to her. Thieves Caught On Tape — At approximately 6 o'clock one evening in early October, Spokane Valley Sheriff s Deputy J. Karnitz responded to the 16200 block of East Sprague Avenue to a burglary call. Deputy Karnitz was advised that about 15 minutes prior, the homeowner caught two suspects inside his residence. The homeowner told Deputy Karnitz he has two rental houses on the same property. A renter from the second property contacted the homeowner and told him there were two people in the second home, which was being renovated. The homeowner told Deputy Karnitz when he arrived at the house, he saw a black Chevy Blazer backed up to the residence. It was at that time, two male suspects ran out of the house into the Blazer. The homeowner was able to record video of the Blazer with his phone before it drove off. The homeowner estimated the total damage and value of stolen items to be near $1,000. The homeowner also told Deputy Karnitz the driver was a white male, Page 5 in his mid-30's who had a beard. He said the second male was clean shaven and had heavily tattooed arms. Deputy Karnitz was able to see the front license plate from the video. The vehicle was registered to a 35-year-old male, whose driving status was suspended in Washington State. He was also able to see the word "Trust Jesus" and a "Rock 94.5" sticker on the back of the Blazer. At about 12:35 a.m. that evening, Deputy Karnitz was driving near the area of Pines and Mansfield when he saw the Blazer parked in a 7-11 parking lot. The Blazer had matching plates from the victim's video and the two bumper stickers on the back of the vehicle. Deputy Karnitz waited for the vehicle to leave, initiated a traffic stop, and placed the driver (suspect) into custody for Driving While License Suspended. Deputy Karnitz contacted the 48-year-old passenger in the back seat of the vehicle. The 48-year-old male was clean shaven with heavily tattooed arms. He denied having been at the victim's residence. The 35-year-old male suspect, however, admitted to being there and said the 48-year-old suspect told him he was "working" at the house. Both suspects were booked into the Spokane County Jail on the felony charges of Residential Burglary. Traffic Stop Results In Half-Dozen Charges— In the early morning hours of early October, Spokane Valley Sheriff s Deputy J. Rodriguez was patrolling the area of Park and Broadway when he stopped a vehicle for a traffic infraction. Deputy Rodriguez contacted the 47-year-old driver, checked his name and determined he was driving on a suspended license. He was also advised by dispatch that the suspect had a warrant for driving on a suspended license as well. After placing the male suspect under arrest, Deputy Rodriguez located a clear plastic baggie containing a white crystal substance in the suspect's pocket. He was a bit surprised as he told Deputy Rodriguez he forgot that it was there. Deputy Rodriguez field tested the substance that showed a presumptive positive result for methamphetamine. Deputy Rodriguez checked the 49-year-old passenger's name to see if he had a valid driver's license to drive the vehicle. Dispatch advised this male had two felony warrants for Delivery of a Controlled Substance, one felony warrant for Bail Jumping, and one misdemeanor warrant for driving on a suspended license. The first male suspect was booked into the Spokane County Jail on the charges of Possession of a Controlled Substance and Driving While License Suspended. The second male suspect was booked into jail on all four of his warrants. Observant Neighbor Catches Burglars - On a Sunday morning in early October, Spokane Valley Deputies J. Ebel and B. Zlateff were dispatched to the 900 block of South Walnut Road to a burglary- in-progress call. A neighbor of the victim called 9-1-1 and said he was watching two unknown male subjects breaking into his neighbor's garage across the street. The witness said he watched both subjects take property from his neighbor's garage and place it into a vehicle near 9th and Walnut. Deputy Zlateff arrived on scene and contacted the two suspects at the intersection of 9th and Walnut. Deputy Ebel saw that one of the suspects ran northbound from Deputy Zlatef£ Deputy Ebel had positioned himself on the north side of the apartment complex at 10003 E. 9th and detained the 50- year-old suspect as he ran out of the complex. Deputy Ebel contacted Deputy Zlateff, who had a 22- year-old suspect detained. The 22-year-old suspect had provided Deputy Zlateff with false names prior to Deputy N. Bohanek positively identifying him through a booking photo. Deputy Ebel located a yard trimmer and gas can in the grass where Deputy Zlateff originally contacted both suspects. The older male suspect's vehicle was also parked at the intersection where Deputy Ebel saw a Mantis brand garden tiller in the back seat that matched the yard trimmer on the grass. Deputy Ebel walked south from the intersection of 9th and Walnut and found a Troybuilt snow blower next to a row of shrubs. The snow blower was right in front of the victim's home on Walnut. Deputy Ebel was able to wake up the 85-year-old victim homeowner. They walked to Deputy Zlateff s location and the victim positively identified the snow blower, trimmer, gas can and garden tiller as his. He said he last saw all Page 6 the items in his now open shed the day prior. He said he does not leave his shed door open. Deputy Ebel spoke with both suspects about the incident. Not to his surprise both suspects accused each other of breaking into the victim's shed and stealing his belongings. Unfortunately for both suspects, Deputy Ebel was able to match both of their shoe tread to imprints left at and around the shed. Both male suspects were booked into the Spokane County Jail for the felony charge of 2nd Degree Burglary. The younger suspect also had a felony warrant through the Department of Corrections for Escape Community Custody. Traffic Stop Leads To Felony Drug Arrest — In early October, around midnight, Spokane Valley Sheriff s Deputy C. Hilton was patrolling near the area of Wilbur Road and Mansfield Avenue when he observed the driver of a vehicle talking on his cell phone. Deputy Hilton stopped the vehicle and contacted the 50-year-old male driver. While Deputy Hilton spoke with the male, Deputy T. Kullman stood next to the passenger side of the vehicle. Deputy Hilton asked the male for his vehicle information and while looking through a sack of items on the passenger side of the vehicle with his left hand, Deputy Kullman saw the male was reaching between the driver and passenger side seat with his right hand. Concerned for their safety, Deputy Hilton ordered the male out of his vehicle. The male continued to dig between the driver and passenger side seat and was assisted out of the vehicle without incident. Once the driver was out of the vehicle, Deputy Hilton began a pat search of the male for his safety and found a hidden dagger/knife under his shirt near his waistband. Dispatch advised Deputy Hilton that the driver had a valid driver's license and there were no warrants for his arrest. Due to the driver's previous behavior, Deputy Hilton completed a safety sweep inside the vehicle, prior to allowing him back into the driver's seat. Deputy Hilton located three large knives, one hand-held hatchet and a small metal bat shaped club wrapped in tape under the driver's side seat. Deputy Hilton also located two small plastic containers between the driver and passenger side seat. One contained a glass pipe with burn residue commonly used to smoke illicit drugs, the other contained residue from a green leafy substance. Deputy Hilton also located a clear plastic baggie between the seats that contained a white crystalline substance, which later field tested presumptive positive as methamphetamine. Deputy Hilton placed the driver under arrest for Possession of a Controlled Substance and removed personal items from him prior to placing him in the back seat of his patrol vehicle. Deputy Hilton located a small gray digital scale in the driver's front left coat pocket. Deputy Hilton was able to see a white residue and green leafy residue on the scale. The male suspect told Deputy Hilton the scale was for weighing jewelry. The suspect was booked into the Spokane County Jail on the felony charge of Possession of a Controlled Substance, methamphetamine. Domestic Violence Suspect Arrested For Felony Drug Possession - On a Wednesday morning in mid-October, Spokane Valley Sheriff s Deputy J. Kiehn was patrolling the area of 8th and Walnut when he saw a 46-year-old male riding his bike westbound on 8th. Deputy Kiehn had been at a domestic violence call a few days earlier in which Sherman was the suspect. Deputy Kiehn recalled from that incident that the male had two active warrants for his arrest. Deputy Kiehn stopped the male on his bike, detained him and confirmed he still had active warrants for Possession of a Stolen Motor Vehicle and a Civil Bench Warrant. Deputy Kiehn placed the male suspect under arrest for his warrants and searched him incident to arrest. Deputy Kiehn located a metal container in the male's front coat pocket along with some cash. The male suspect told Deputy Kiehn, "That's not mine. The cash is, but I don't know what that is." Deputy Kiehn opened the metal container and discovered a clear plastic baggie that contained a white crystalline substance. Deputy Kiehn field tested the substance with a presumptive positive result for methamphetamine. The male suspect was booked into Page 7 Spokane County Jail for the charge of Possession of a Controlled Substance, methamphetamine, and his two warrants. Man Claims Self Defense In Valley Shooting - Spokane Valley Sheriff s Deputies responded to the 1200 block of North Bannen on a shooting call in mid-October. When Deputies arrived on scene, they contacted a 41-year-old male and a 37-year-old male Chapman. The younger male and his wife had been separated and the older male was living in the couple's garage. The husband was not fond of the older male living in his garage as he was attempting to work things out with his wife. Angered that the older male was in his garage, the husband kicked in the back door to the garage and an altercation ensued between the two men. The men ultimately split and went their separate ways, but a short time later, the husband became enraged and walked towards the back door to the garage a second time. The older male told deputies he was in fear for his life and chose to shoot two .22 caliber rounds from a handgun at the husband's legs. The older male told deputies he intentionally shot at the husband's legs because he did not want to kill him. One round struck the husband in the left knee fracturing his knee cap. The husband was transported to a local hospital where he was treated for his injuries. There have been no formal charges forwarded at this point in the investigation. Brothers Arrested For Rape - On a Sunday in mid-October, Spokane Valley Sheriffs Deputies responded to Valley Hospital for a rape call, where they contacted the victim and her mother. The victim told deputies she and two of her friends were in Spokane Valley when they met four males in a vehicle and were invited back to an apartment. After a short time, two of the males left the apartment, leaving the girls and remaining two brothers at the apartment. The victim told deputies that sometime early Sunday morning one of the brothers convinced her to come out of the bedroom she was in with her friends and into the living room. It was at that time that one of the brothers tripped the victim on to the floor. Both brothers eventually raped the victim. After speaking with the victim at the hospital, deputies located the apartment and saw the apartment matched how the victim described it. The brothers were interviewed and each admitted they had raped the victim. Both brothers were booked into the Spokane County Jail on the charge of 2nd Degree Rape. Eluding Suspect Can't Outrun K9 Ekko - On a Wednesday morning in late October, Spokane County Sheriff's Office K9 Deputy Cook observed a blue Suzuki motorcycle driving recklessly as it travelled south on Pines near Indiana in Spokane Valley. The driver of the motorcycle was observed passing vehicles on the right shoulder of Pines and tailgating other vehicles as he weaved his way through traffic. Deputy Cook turned on his overhead emergency lights to conduct a traffic stop as the driver turned east on Desmet from Pines. The driver looked back at the fully marked patrol car and began to accelerate heavily, almost losing control on the frosty road. When he attempted to turn north onto Vercler, however, he lost control and the motorcycle slid out from under him. The male driver picked up the motorcycle and began trying to push it away as Deputy Cook pulled up. The male dropped the motorcycle and ran back past the passenger's side of the patrol car toward Desmet. He continued even after Deputy Cook ordered him to stop and informed him his K9 partner, Ekko, would be released. Ekko quickly caught the male driver and he was taken into custody without further incident. He was treated by paramedics at the scene for minor injuries. Dispatch advised his driver's license status was suspended and the motorcycle he was driving had been reported stolen in September. The male suspect was booked into the Spokane County Jail for felony charges of Attempting to Elude and Possession of a Stolen Motor Vehicle. He was also charged for Driving While License Suspended 3rd, a misdemeanor. Page 8 Burglar Caught Inside Les Schwab Tires — At 2:00 a.m. in late October, , Spokane Valley Sheriff s Deputies responded to an alarm call at Les Schwab Tires located on E. Sprague Avenue. Sgt. Lawson was the first to arrive on scene and located an unsecure door on the southwest side of the business. Sheriff s K9 Brax responded to the store with his handler and entered the business where they immediately located a 45-year-old male inside the business. The male suspect complied with K9 Brax' handler's commands and was taken into custody without incident. Deputy J. Howe escorted the male suspect to his patrol vehicle and searched the male incident to arrest. Deputy Howe located two golf ball size baggies in the male's groin area containing a white crystalline substance Deputy Howe recognized to be methamphetamine from his training and experience. When Deputy Howe placed the methamphetamine on the hood of his patrol vehicle, the male suspect told him that it was not his "groin" area and he had no idea where the methamphetamine came from. The substance was field tested presumptive positive for methamphetamine. The male suspect was booked into the Spokane County Jail for the felony charges of 2nd Degree Burglary and Possession of a Controlled Substance, methamphetamine. Hav Western Wear Robbery - Spokane Valley Sheriffs Deputy J. Kiehn responded to Hav Western Wear in Spokane Valley in late October to a robbery call. An employee told Deputy Kiehn that a white male with a scruffy beard, in his 30's, thin build, 5'11" tall, wearing a shirt with "Echo" on the front, asked to look at three pairs of cowboy boots. The suspect was very specific wanting to look at two size 9.5 and one size 10. The two size 9.5 boots were brown ostrich valued at $470 each and the size 10 was caiman valued at $550. Once the suspect had the boots, he ran towards the front door of the business. An employee attempted to stop him only to be pushed out of the way. A white female estimated to be in her 30's drove the suspect away from the store. There was another female estimated to be in her 20's in the back seat. Total value of the boots was $1,490. Anyone with information on this robbery is asked to call Crime Check at 509-456-2233. Homeowner Catches Burglar In Kitchen Window - On a Sunday morning in late October, Spokane Valley Sheriff s Deputy L. Petersen was dispatched to the 17200 block of East Cataldo Ave. to a residential burglary call. Deputy Petersen contacted the victim who told him she had been sleeping and heard a loud noise in her kitchen. When she walked into her kitchen to check, she found a 27- year-old male trying to climb through her kitchen window. The victim yelled at the male causing him to fall out of the window as he grabbed a coffee pot in an attempt to catch himsel£ The pot shattered outside the kitchen window and he ran from the scene. Deputies were not able to locate the male suspect in the area; however, about an hour later, a resident near the 18100 block of East Mission Ave. called and said there was an intoxicated male in his shed. Deputy Petersen and Deputy D. Lawhorn responded and located who they believed was the same male suspect, based on the victim's earlier description. The original victim responded to the scene and positively identified this male as the person who was trying to break into her house. The male suspect was booked into the Spokane County Jail on one count of Residential Burglary and one count of Malicious Mischief 3rd Degree. Mother Who Abandoned Children Arrested — During the morning hours in late October, a construction supervisor at the I-90 interchange project at Mile Post 1 near the state line found two boys, ages three and six, sitting in a grassy area near the construction site at about 9:00 a.m. Kootenai County Sheriff s Deputies responded to the scene and the boys told them their mother had run out of gas and went for help. The boys were eventually placed into protective custody. Later that evening, at about 8:30 p.m., an anonymous caller contacted Spokane County dispatch and provided information that the boy's 27-year-old mother was at a residence near the 300 block of South David in Spokane Page 9 Valley. Spokane Valley Sheriff s Deputies located Duval at the residence where she was arrested for a local Negligent Driving warrant. A fugitive hold was placed on Duval by the Kootenai County Sheriff s Office. Detectives Looking For Victims - Over the past couple months, employees from Vision Security Systems have been in the Spokane area. These employees have been contacting citizens without security systems and telling them the Sheriff s Office has received a grant and is paying for installation of new security systems. Employees are also contacting homeowners with existing security systems, telling them they need to make some changes to their system and having the homeowner sign a new contract through Vision Security. The homeowner is then charged a higher price than the contract stated. In some cases, the homeowner still gets charged with their original security system company as well as a new charge through Vision Security. This is a 60-month contract that the homeowner only has 3 days to cancel. The Spokane County Sheriff s Office does not have a contract for installation of home security systems with any company. Vision Security is a legitimate company; however, employees are lying to customers and allegedly forging contracts. Detective M. Stewart is asking any victims of this scam to contact him via e-mail at MAStewart(cr�,spokanesherif£or�. 5t''DEA National Prescription Drug Take-Back Event Well Attended - The Spokane Valley Police and Spokane County Sheriff's Office participation in the Sth DEA National Prescription Drug Take- Back Event was again, well attended. This year, we collected prescription medications at the Spokane Valley Police Department at 12710 E Sprague and added a second location at the North Spokane County Library located at 44 E. Hawthorne. Local citizens filled eight large boxes with a total weight of 214 pounds of inedications. That is 214 pounds of drugs that will not enter the Spokane Aquifer or be diverted to illegal and sometimes deadly use. Our partnerships with The Greater Spokane Substance Abuse Council, The Spokane Aquifer Joint Board, The Spokane County Health District, The DEA, The Spokane County Library District, and Devries Business Services were once again responsible for making this another extremely worthwhile endeavor. In addition, the shred trucks provided by Devries at both sites were a perfect marriage of services that brought appreciative citizens to the events. Sheriff s Office Marine Law Enforcement Unit Received Program of the Year 2012 Award — This award is for overall excellence in Marine Law Enforcement& Boater Safety Education Award by the Washington State Parks & Recreation Commission Boating Programs Office. The Spokane County Sheriff's Office Marine Law Enforcement Unit had the honor of hosting the Washington State 2012 Marine Law Enforcement Conference where they received this award. The Spokane County Sheriff s Office Marine Enforcement Unit currently consists of two assigned deputies working under a Patrol Sergeant. More than a dozen Spokane County Sheriff's and Spokane Valley Sheriff's Patrol Deputies have been through the Basic Marine Law Enforcement Academy and work Marine Enforcement on an interim basis throughout the boating season. Page 10 Spokane County Marine Enforcement is in year three of a revitalizing assessment of its Boat Safety Program. They, like many areas, experienced a downturn in economic vitality beginning in 2008. This was coupled with a shortage of manpower within the Sheriff s Department. Funding decreases and manpower shortages forced them to reevaluate our approach to meeting the local Recreational Boating Safety (RBS) missions. Through strategic � � � ��`�'�� '��}��'�"+*��+�� . planning, restructuring, and � . '�!��r{��`�� f� ;,� �k�';�f�" partnerships with State Parks � �;�" �. a �r�k�.��#rr:�kx��r� � and the community, they not � �,�� y�� ,��, only continued to fulfill their � ;��,� �� " RBS requirements, but actually increased their effectiveness in � �1 reaching those RBS goals. ' � � _ T` Even though manpower � � � �� - �.±�_ shortages have resulted in a � 65% decline in the number of , � deputies assigned to the unit, their stats over the last three � years have continued to .,� �� ° ' �� increase year to year. Through , a��, , '� �'' - assessment and strategic ��I� � �� ' - �, planning, their 2011 written Mti •� �.�, inspection totals reflect a 73% � '`� �� ; , � -�� TM � " � increase from the 2008 boating - - *� - - season. Great j ob! �� Page 11 2012 OCTOBER CRIME REPORT To date: Yearly totals: Oct-12 Oct-11 2012 2011 2,011 2,010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 BURGLARY 123 81 862 871 1027 936 725 753 584 714 744 FORGERY 93 57 636 418 593 341 297 354 365 334 464 MALICIOUS MISCHIEF 160 136 1483 1278 1566 1183 1245 893 1,265 1,122 904 NON-CRIMINAL 16 8 102 146 160 917 892 944 839 811 749 PROPERTY OTHER 145 92 1018 939 1126 837 933 828 890 982 1,154 RECOVERED VEHICLES 41 44 344 318 416 365 187 319 343 403 333 STOLEN VEHICLES 52 53 449 461 566 496 298 496 478 711 603 THEFT 245 192 2214 2097 2512 2365 2162 1,846 1,881 1,888 2,256 UIOBC 0 0 3 0 0 3 4 4 8 11 8 VEHICLE OTHER 30 33 237 138 195 3 5 7 3 3 5 VEHICLE PROWLING 121 136 972 1257 1491 1395 920 1069 682 937 958 TOTAL PROPERTYCRIMES 1,026 832 8,522 7,886 9,615 8,852 7,668 7,513 7,338 7,916 8,178 ASSAULT 63 79 807 810 963 895 927 869 853 846 894 DOA/SUICIDE 26 19 217 175 213 188 210 269 221 167 159 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 42 41 488 606 714 1297 1226 1063 874 736 762 HOMICIDE 0 0 2 3 3 1 3 3 1 5 1 KIDNAP 2 2 14 13 15 16 21 16 23 22 35 MENTAL 33 26 241 216 253 289 310 360 350 425 425 M P 11 6 124 101 125 128 115 95 83 88 97 PERSONS OTHER 262 272 2613 2039 2484 1692 1621 1,354 1,337 1,159 1,256 ROBBERY 8 7 70 86 98 68 75 71 60 58 56 TELEPHONE HARASSMENT 32 13 176 134 162 153 159 95 73 83 92 TOTAL MAJOR CRIMES 479 465 4752 4150 4997 4727 4,667 4,195 3,875 3,589 3,777 ADULT RAPE 7 8 73 60 67 44 35 44 43 29 39 CHILD ABUSE 4 3 23 87 89 115 159 148 104 78 101 CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE 14 4 0 160 184 206 157 86 92 105 88 SEX REGISTRATION 0 1 7 2 2 1 2 3 4 3 6 INDECENT LIBERTIES 4 4 22 16 17 8 10 11 18 15 9 CHILD MOLESTATION 0 0 0 19 19 47 35 66 46 69 67 CHILD RAPE 0 2 12 22 23 28 35 39 31 62 35 RUNAWAY 34 56 470 432 510 490 440 369 295 309 311 SEX OTHER 4 4 32 47 56 215 211 179 194 203 181 STALKING 3 4 24 17 19 18 15 21 17 17 27 SUSPICIOUS PERSON 45 19 366 275 341 215 175 142 152 177 244 TOTAL SEX CRIMES 115 105 1185 1104 1294 1387 1271 1,108 996 1,067 1,108 DRUG 60 47 367 435 519 541 670 838 807 665 891 ITF OTHER 0 0 0 2 2 2 1 0 1 0 0 TOTAL ITF 60 47 367 437 521 542 671 838 808 665 891 TOTAL TRAFFIC REPORTS 367 330 3286 2898 3569 3081 3,183 3,811 3,800 3,345 2,403 TOTAL REPORTS RECEIVED 2,047 1,779 18,112 16,475 19,996 18,589 17,460 17,465 16,817 16,582 16,357 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 C�7 Charge Count from Tickets: Spokane Valley JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■ 2009 � 2010 �2011 �2012 4000 3500 3000 2500 �� 1500 1000 500 �❑ Spokane Valley Dispatched Calls ■ � /� I I � ■ � ■ JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■ 2009 JK 2010 �2011 �2012 300 250 200 150 100 50 SPOKANE VALLEY TRAFFIC COLLISIONS JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■ 2009 ♦ 2010 �2011 ` -2012 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Spokane Valley Person Crimes JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■ 2009 )K 2010 �2011 �2012 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Spokane Valley Property Crimes JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■ 2009 )K 2010 �2011 �2012 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Spokane Valley Self Initiated Incidents JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■ 2009 JK 2010 �2011 �2012 .� 50 40 30 20 10 Spokane Valley Sex Crimes JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■ 2009 JK 2010 �2011 �2012 ,��R;x ,:��-�., —;;� - 2012 October INCIDENTS BY CITIES AH CH DP FC FF LAH LL ML MW RF SCO SPA SPK SV WAV TOTALS CAD INCIDENTS 30 163 256 15 17 0 19 232 94 18 3,401 3 552 4,961 0 9,761 SELF INITIATED INCIDENTS 26 21 140 6 8 0 13 141 25 6 1,260 1 468 2,115 0 4,230 DRUG SELF INT (PATROL) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 4 11 0 23 TRAFFIC STOPS 5 1 48 0 0 0 7 42 13 4 651 0 291 1,294 0 2,356 TRAFFIC STOPS (ARST/CIT/IN) 2 1 12 0 0 0 2 6 7 2 329 0 125 717 0 1,203 TS (WARRANTS) 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 15 0 21 CALLS FOR SERVICE 4 142 116 9 9 0 6 91 69 12 2,141 2 84 2,846 0 5,531 ALARMS 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 121 0 0 105 0 234 ACCIDENTS 0 6 9 1 1 0 3 4 6 0 202 0 17 181 0 430 ACCIDENTS (ARREST/CI� 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 18 0 27 DRUG CALLS 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 8 0 0 38 0 56 DV 7 1 5 0 2 0 6 10 2 1 156 0 12 194 0 396 DUI 1 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 5 1 87 0 5 78 0 182 DUI (ARRES� 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 6 0 2 21 0 31 PURSUITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY 0 6 18 0 0 0 1 18 18 2 347 0 37 490 0 937 VEHICLE RECOVERED 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 16 0 4 31 0 53 911 ABANDON LINE 0 48 24 3 2 0 0 3 6 2 187 0 9 256 0 540 SHOPLIFTING 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 56 0 58 ALL ARRESTS (ARREST/CIT/IN) 3 2 16 1 0 0 2 9 10 2 413 0 138 949 0 1,545 CRIME CHECK REPORTS 0 0 25 0 0 1 4 25 10 1 533 2 13 748 0 1,362 11/14/2012 � � � - 2012 OCTOBER CRIMES BY CITIES �� 0� � ' ��OmO� ' ' �� ' ' ' �� •' ' �� ' � �� •' �� • ' � ' �� .. �. � . �� . . � ��m �� '� �� :• �� • ' �� .. � �� •' �� TOTAL PROPERTY CRIMES m��Q�mm�Q�Q� I ' Q : I . . �� • � I� �� • � �� . . � . �� ' �: : ' �� TOTAL MAJOR CRIMES �pppppm�pp�p��p� ' � ' ' ' �� 0 � �� 0 . : � ��0 • . �� • � �� 0 . . . . �� TOTAL SEX CRIMES ppppppppppmpp�p� � ' �� •� �� • � � �� ToTAL iTF pppppppppp�p� , � p :' TOTAL TRAFFIC �� TOTAL REPORTS RECEIVED i� p�pppm��p�p � , �p� 11/6/2012 ;� `� �.._. sA �po°`��ne ��alley� w '��In.aC: 'I�r�N��;� l��f'�f�`1'�l�i�::��- �'I#�hl�'HL,Y f��F�f�I�T ��o'��r• ��'I � RG��M��f�T� ��]� �L�I�111�C�� k�1�ll�"f�C� Ah19� 1hi D��RA7iON Total /of Bud�et Contract Name Contractor Total Bud�et Expended as �xpended of 10 .1 12 Street Maintenance Poe Asphalt $1,545,119.00 $1,530,099,96 99.03% Street Sweeping AAA Sweeping $490,199,94 $440,528,23 89.89% Storm Drain Cleaning AAA Sweeping $199,990.00 $185,373,56 92.69% Snow Removal Poe Asphaft $140,000.00 **$11,164,44 7.97% Landscaping Ace Landscaping $69,676.56 $60,966.99 87.50% Emergency Traffic Control Senske $10,000.00 $7,477.29 74.77% Litter and Weed Control Geiger Work Crew $54,704,85 State Highway Maintenance WSDOT $215,000.00 $157,962.90 73.47% Traffic Signals, Signs,Striping Spokane County $632,000.00 $378,441.24 59.88% Qead Anirrtal Control Brad Southard $10,000.00 $7,025.00 70.25% **-The Snow Removal Contract witi� Poe Asphalt was not signed until late Jan�ary 2012, this total reflects amounis after the coniract was signed �371��h! ��7P�� I�EQUE�TS � Ci�izen Reques�s �or Public Works � 90 � gp ' - - - - _—_ _ - - - - �, 70 -- - ---- - Q 60 I --- --- _ _ - - m 50 - - - - - - � °C 40 - - - - - - „ N 30 � 20 - - --- - u 10 I � r � I ; �. � i . _! � � � . � �- � 0 - � . Total Citizen Dead Storm pothole Sign& Street Trafflc Req�ests: Anirnal Drainage/ Slgnal Maint. P�blic Remo�al Erosion Requesks Requests Requests Requesks Works ?e 5ubmikked 84 19 � $ 5 13 18 � 21 Eiln Progress 6 � 3 ` 3 Resolved 78 � 19 5 5 13 J _ 18_ � 18 'Informaiion in bold indicates updates 1 WA�T�WA11 C�# Stakus of the process can be monitored at: �#E�;�J�€ww.�pt�k�n�riv��,�s�tl ht��:fJ+�rtinr�r�.e��.w�a.�oviprc��ran7sf��r�Jtr�ic�IIs,��C�neri+�erf�isso�v��l_o�€y�enl�t��us,l�Eml htt�;J�w4±�,�r.��k�ne��n�y,�rgl��tif�ties?�1":?a'�rR�cla�n��#io,�fcc�r�#er�#.a��x?�=�2�� and C�#k�'�1�.�_��,��,��i+r�rp�r#net�_co.�r�� 2�=CIC]I��I_ �f�I.JC� VUJ��7Lr-; �Y�1"�M No action F�I�VE�I'�C�!`� �lJ11�J1�L"14f1��J'� I�i�A�J Most of the planned projects were completed in 2012 except for Pines - 16th to 24'h and Sprague Ave (Park to Thierman) which will be carried over and finished in 2013. An RFQ advertisement for qualified firms to submit proposals to perform data collection, evaluation, and update the pavement management plan went out on Qctober 19, with proposals due on November 9. [:,�I'E I'�,[_ I'F��J��I�� (See attached Capital Projects Spreadsheet) �`�°�Cr:`I° hJl�'l�IV'1`F=�l4�J�E�Y !'ti�;Tl'�I�°`r` The following is a summary of P�bl�c Works/Contractor maintenance activities in the Ciky of Spokane Valley for October 2012: • The Geiger crew continues dryland grass mowing and garbage �ickup on arterials, swales and rights of way throughout the city. � Department of Corrections and the Geiger crew com�leted cleanup of the Ap�leway right-of-way from University Road to the Liberty , , . Lake city limits. � �� '�� +� • 32"d Avenue from University Road to SR27, � ��. ,�;� Bowdish Road from 16�' Aven�e to S�rague � ' i ,''�: � Avenue and Barker Road from the Spokane River � �'��'� � �'• ` ;, r i.� + ��,, ,� ,: to �uclid Road were cracksealed. ,,��ti; ! , `�r,+.� � �� • AAA Swee m is confin�in wifh arterial swee s � � ' '' 3� y �'��`" p� g g � � ! �� a, 9 r��n 1 �� _. �.� and began fall sweep. � �. �� ' � x � ; • AAA Swee�ing cleaning stormwater structures on � �� 4k� i:'+� -`�,'� ' residential roads. � �"/l��L, �I�UL:GF'I�� Fall Sweeping in Priority 1 areas started on October � " ' 24�� after an estimate of more than 9U% of needles had dropped from healthy conifers. The majority of needles appear to fall after the windstorms with gusts greater than 30 mph. Notable Actions this period: Fall Observations � Staff posted a Fall Sweep9ng PEan and Map on the City's Street Maintenance webpage. 100�0 - - i.J : � .{rj � fVew this year is the prominent placement of ao�o - ��rth� --- advance notice signage at the entrance of 60�0 "� '' - ^��o.. some neighborhoods prior to or during ao% ,.-��'— � __ sweeping of that area. 20�0 - - �� - --�- • Stormwater Utility staff estimates weekly o°� ��- -- - - - amounts of needlelfeaf drop throughout the � � o � � � � � � City to determine the best start time to O1 °1 '� ° ° ° '� '� � sweep areas of town. F-;_3��onifer Needle DroA � : �Declduous Leaf 7urn 'Inforrnation In bold indicaies updates 2 Qeclduous DrOp • By the end of October, approximately 25% of the 209 2 Fall sweep e�ent had been accomplished, all of thES work completed in hea�y conifer areas, �'C�F�MVS!'!e�FR UTEI_I°f'C �tormwater Capifal Improvemenf Project De�elopment 1, Stormwater Decank Facilitv — An agreement was executed with KPFF Consulting Engineers to perform a type, size, and location study by the end of the year for the WSDOT site. Study work has started. 2. 20�2 Stormwafer Small Works proiects - Re�air, replace or improve problems on the storrr�water list. Staff inet with WSDOT representafives to include Pines & Alki stormdrain project wifh the WSDOT overlay project for bid and construction in spring 2013, TE��1�F1C� � S��r�gue-A�pl��r��a�r �orricior �ic�n�l Tirr�iro� Staif cleveloped new evening timing �lans (6pm -7:30pm) and im�lemented fhem on the corridor in late September. Skill observing the operations and making adjustmenks, � Pa��o��r�t �llar4�ir�� f��r��v�l This project will removed markings at six {6} separate intersections: o �dge linelbike lane markings at three (3J locations where the existing markings do not meef current MUTCD criteria; o A midblock school crosswalk on McDonald north of Broadway that a school no longer uses; o An unsafe crosswalk across Broadway at Stanley across an uncontrolled approach; o Remo�ed a portion of the crosswalk at MissionlFlora roundabout since the existing markings does not line up with the new ADA ramps; and o The southern crosswal�c at 8thlPar�c to impro�e safety. There are no ADA Ramps on that leg and it is a free flow approach. ��-�� ..E�r�ric�� fVew Call for Projeet� � �f�T� �all f�ar Pr�,jects SRTC issued a Call for Projects an July 2. Tt�is is for the federal SurFace Transportation Program -- Urban (STP(U)) funds. An estimated $25 million will be available for local projects. Staff prepared and submitted grant applications for those projects approved by Council, The project applications were scored by SRTC sfaff and a subcommittee of the TTC and TAC members, Preliminary results af the top projects within funding limits include the foilowing Spokane Valley �rojects: Preservation Cafegoiy Argonne Rd Resurfacing - Sprague to Broadway Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Fanct�er to Thierman Sprague Ave Resurfacing {EB Lanes) - Mavana to Fanct�er S�rague Ave Resurfacing - Herald to University Sprague Ave Resurfacing - Argonne to Merald Sprague Ave ResurFacing - Vista to Arganne Sullivan Ave Resurfacing - Broadway to Mission Sullivan Ave Resurfacing - Sprague to Broadway Roadway Im rovement Cateqorv Sullivan Rd Corridor Traffic Study — I-90 to Wellesley "Information In bold indicaies updates 3 A recomrnended list of projects to receive �rant funding was developed at the TTC and � TAC meetings in October and forwarded to the SRTC Board for action at the Novem�er SRTC Board meeting. The projects listed abo�e are on the recommended funding list. � TIB ��II for Prc��cts The state Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) issued a 2012 Call for Projects. Staff prepared and submitted a grant application for the Sullivan Road West Bridge Re�lacement Project per council approval. Projects selected for funding will be approved at the November �6 TIB Board meeting. � �bf�� all fo�� I�r��c�s Spolcane Gounty issued a Call for Projects for CDBG funding. Community Development presented a prelirninary list of �rojects to Council for consideration. Once Council approves the project list, staff will prepare the CDBG grant applications which are due Novernber 10, 2012, 'In(ormakion in bold indscates updates 4 �'�j'pk��@ Public Works Projects ��y� Monthly 5ummary -Design & Construction October-2012 Estimated Total Project Proposed °/a Camplete ConstrucYson Project # Design&Construction Projects Funding 81d Date PE CN Completlon Cost 5Veet Projects 0005 Pines/Manfield,Wilbur Rd to Plnes Tf8-UCP 05/23/08 100 95 04/30/13 $ 6,62b,700 014b 24th Ave 5idewalk Adams to 5ulllvan TI8-5P 09/14/12 100 0 10/31/12 $ 292,000 0155 5ullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement�4508 FHWA-BR 12/01/13 15 0 12/31/15 $ 1,000,000 015b Mansfield Ave Connectlon FHWA-CMAQ 05/01/13 5 0 12/31/13 $ 1,02b,000 Olb6 Pines Rd.{5R27)&Grace Ave,Int Safety HS1P 05/Ol/13 0 0 12/31/14 $ 671,050 5treet Preservatlon ProJects 0115 Sprague Ave Reconstruct-E'gm to S'van T18-UCP 03/16/12 100 47 12/O1/12 $ 3,933,865 Traffic Projects 0060 Argonne Road Corridor Upgrade(SRTC 06-3) FHWA-CMAQ 03/15/13 95 0 08/31/13 $ 1,290,636 0061 Pines(SR27}IT5 Improvements(SRTC 06-2} FHWA-CMAQ 09/21/12 100 4 06/15/13 $ 1,833,121 0133 Sprague Ave IT5 FHWA-CMAQ 09/14/12 100 0 04/30/13 $ 768,121 0167 CitywFde Safety Improvements H51P 05/OS/13 5 0 06/30/15 $ 474,584 5tormwater Projecks 0150 Sulllvan Rd Brldge Drain Retroflt Dept of Ecology 02/07/12 25 0 07/Ol/13 $ 237,375 0163 Sprague Ave,Swale Upgrade,Park to I-90 Dept oE Ecology 08/03/12 S00 50 06/30/13 $ 1,OOb,b22 0173 S�okane Valley Reglonal Decant Facillty Dept of Ecology 5/1/2013 0 0 12/31/13 $ 980,000 other ProJects 0149 Sidewalk Infill FHWA-CMAQ 08/10/12 50 35 12/34/13 $ 939,955 0154 Sidewafk&Transit Stop Accesslbillty 5TA-FTA/NF 08/17/12 100 80 07/01/13 $ 238,793 0168 Wellesley Ave s`walk&Adams Rd s'walk SafeRoutes-5tate 04/12/13 0 0 11/30/13 $ 639,000 0169 Argonne/Mullan Safety Indiana-Broadway H51P 12/31/13 0 0 06/30/15 $ 111,750 0170 Argonne Road:Empire Ave-Knox Ave H51P 12/31/13 0 0 06/30/15 $ 180,640 0171 Sprague Ave ADA Curb Ramp ProJect CDBG 12/31/12 5 0 09/01/13 $ 129,300 r� �`�`Ok��e Public Works Projects ��ey• Monthly 5ummary- Design only Octo�er-2012 Deslgn Estimated Tota] Pro�ect Complete °�Complete Construction Project � Design Only Projects Funding Date PE Completioro Cost 5treet Projects 0069 Park Rc!Recon.#2 8rdwy&Ind.SRTCd6-12 FHWA-STP(U) 10/03/11 90 N/A $ 352,002 4123 Misslon Ave-Flora to Barker FNWA-STP(U) 09/30/12 5 �f/A $ 517,919 4141 Sulllvan&Euclid PCC FNWA-STP[U) 11/15/13 19 N/A $ 175,260 4142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan FNWA-STP(U) 06/15/13 14 �f/A $ 276,301 Traffic Projects 0159 Unlverslty Road Overpass Study FNWA-CMAQ 12/O1/13 0 12/O1/13 $ 250,000 Other Projects 0145 Spokane Valley-Mlllwood Trail FNWA-STP[E] 02/15/13 4 �f/A $ 745,000 4148 Greenacres Trail-Design DOE-EFCBG 09/20/12 24 N/A $ 52,000 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 4, 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: Spokane Valley Regional Decant Facility Feasibility Study Update GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 90.48, Chapter 173-200 WAC, Title 33 U.S.C. 1251-1376; Storm and Surface Water Utility: SVMC 3.80; PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council approved the submittal of the Ecology Grant for a Decant Facility, November 2011; Council concurrence to draft an Interlocal Agreement with WSDOT (Washington State Department of Transportation) to build, operate, and maintain a decant facility on the WSDOT Pines location, and perform a feasibility study of the WSDOT Pines location for the decant, July 31, 2012. BACKGROUND: A Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was advertised in August this year to select an engineering consultant to determine the best type, size, and location for a decant facility at the WSDOT Pines Maintenance yard (WSDOT yard). The WSDOT yard is located on Montgomery Avenue west of Pines Road. Four consultants responded to the RFQ. A five- member selection committee formed from three WSDOT staff and two City staff. The Consultant selected by the committee was KPFF Consulting Engineers (KPFF) and they began work on the study in October. KPFF met several times with WSDOT vacuum truck operators, City contract vacuum truck operators, maintenance facility managers, engineers, and maintenance staff from both the City and WSDOT. Over the last several weeks of working with the City and WSDOT, it appears that a decant facility can be located at the WSDOT yard. KPFF is currently looking at various options at two locations at the WSDOT yard; with a final recommended location and layout plan anticipated by December 11. Staff anticipates making a presentation of the findings to City Council with the consultant at the December 18 Study Session. City and WSDOT staff have also been working on a Draft Interlocal Agreement to build, operate, and maintain the decant facility at the WSDOT yard. Staff anticipates including a copy of the latest draft agreement in the Admin Report for the December 18 Study Session to receive input from the Council at that time. OPTIONS: n/a RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: n/a BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The total estimated Decant Facility cost in the grant application is $980,000. The Ecology grant is for up to $735,000 (75%). The required local match is $245,000 (25%), which will consist of APA funds ($95,000) and WSDOT funds ($150,000). STAFF CONTACT: Eric Guth, Public Works Director Art Jenkins, Stormwater Engineer ATTACHMENTS: none. Spaka�ae V�l�ey Flanxa�a�g Commissio�x APPRaVEia Miniitc1� Council Cl�ambers — City Hall, 117�7 E. Sprague Ave. Ocf�ber �], ZOl2 T. CALL T`[) O1ZllER C:hair E3ates called t�le zneetiilg to ordez• �t G:�a p.fu. II. PLEDG� UI'ALL�GIAN�E �ommissiotzers, staff and audience staod for tl�e pledge of�llegiance III. ROLL CALL G(IMlYIISSION�RS Pi•escnt A,bsent CITY STA�'F Bill f3ates -Cliair �;; �-- ScatE I�uk�t�, Plannin� Managea• lohn G. C�rroll C;� �-- Erik Lajnb, Deputy City Aitorney Rustin Hall �;� - I,ori Rarlo�v, Sez�ioe�'lanner lZo�d Hig�ins �� -- Mikc�3�si�i�;cr; Scuiar Plan�ier Steven I�leill �,� � k�'red 13eaulac f,� ... Jac Stoy— V icc CJlair �� lleanna Griffitll, Seci�ctary� T�ie Chair•liearirig na object�an de�clared Mr. Stay's a�senee ��as excused. IV. APPRO�'A�,OF AGENll� Con�inissione�� Hi�giras ��acie a ailotian ta a,�prave ihe �cEobe�• 11, 2�12 a�cnda as �resciYted. 7��115 ]I1Dt1C3I7�VilS J}�155CC�UI1�1 111 1110 11 5jY. �. �i�rxav�� or ��r�u��s Commissioner Nei11 �i�ade a i7aatian to a��p�•n�;e the 5e��tei��bei° 27, 2012 minules as preseiited, This motion was passed iinaniizlously. vi. PuaL�c can�m�rrT '�'here ��vas no ptiblic cotnn7e�it. VII. CO�'�M1SS1(3N �t�P�R'I'S Coinmissioners Bates and ��i��ins re�orted they liad �ttended a Pla��i�in� Sltoz•t Ccrtirse offereci by t1�e Dept. of�ot��merce October 5, 2012. Plann�t�g C:omc7�ission Minutes IO-] I-]2 l'ag� l ot 8 VIII, ,�►Dl�'IINYSTRATIVE REP�ItTS Plannijjg Mana�er Kuhta eepoa•�ed the advailced age�lda would be upciated by�tl�e �Iext n�ceti�ig, He also reported dtiring next »�ectin�Deputy City Attorney T��ik L.�nl� �voulcl be cc�nducli�ig a short tra�nin�regardirig �'latulin� Commission inembers «sinb Lity enl�it a�lclrc;sses. IX. COTVII�TISSION BUSINI:�S A, iJn�ni5licd Business: �leliber�tions ,5hor•eline M:�ster Prog��am, S�vi•eli�te Envi��a�stnet�t Designation�, Sr. Planner Barlaw recap�cci tlie events to elafe following fhe puhlic ��eaf•i�� ield 5epten7ber 27, 2012, i1�Is. Barlaw sta��.d dt�rin�; t�le public heai•in� the Commission liad i•eceived verbal �ne� writte�i testimony ai7d reqti�;stcd st�ff ask thc City�'s oiitsicie le��l cot�cisel ta reuiew it arid ccamment o�� ii, iVls. Barlaiv re��orted Mr. Kisiel��s re��ier��d ihe cominents ai}cl �;ei�crally� felt the City had addi•essed a�l of tl�e �oixits whicl� had bee►t i•aised by Puhi�•ew�ise a�ld theia• �nrtners, IIowever, staff did �'eel thcre ��ere t4vo changes wl�ich cc�uld be made based on t�ie �oi7imenfs reccived, In the it�t�•oduction the st��gested �h�nge �vou(�l be t4 a�lti t��e �vords, ``rrj�d crss�irre". Fut�are��rise re�taested to c��an�c flle re�'e�•ence of`na net �oss' fi•am a �aal �a a requiz-ement. N�e. Kisielius felt the i�e�erence sl�ould �e consistent wikh t�ic 4V"AC. Ne�r��Text: "I�liis is r�ecess��y� so iha� il�e R='i�,� 'a�::3 c�a ;�E� ;l:�;��1-�,��i�.�=i�-�vi11 reasonably protect existing uses and sllorelir�e cliaracter�,.e�il �s�;��rc.� ; rr�13��r-t:lj�:�-��:r:�:�;��4� �;�:ra��-�i�: "I�Io Net Loss" �f shareline ecc�lagical fi�nciions.�;; :;� i�:� ,+3�, Ivls. Bar�aw statcd the oi��er chan�e requesteci ��s ta it�cl��c�e all of tl�e state z•equi�•ed �olicies in tlYe ac�uafic� ��iviro�imei�t sectiou of the report. Staff re��i�ew�eci the i•ec�uest, canferred with Mr. Kisielius, Mr. l�isielius h�s rccon7mendec� ttic 1'laiining Commission incltide ai�y e�tra �enei•al p�licies to ca��er sit��ations tlie City dici not anticipate. [n tlie �quatic environment t�iis wauld affect a few structures, p�•imarily docks; pie�•s, bridbes, t�tilitv carridors, Ms. Barlo;� remitadecl tfic Co�z7missian during the pt�blic lYeai•i�ig s17e liact included two maps "or discussi�n. Tl7e first n7�p had tlir�e de�i�iatia�is re#�ecied the original dr�ft. The seeond map, ideiitifiec� as tlte Aiteri�ate Draft �.i1��ironY»etit I�esignatio�� i44ap, had the staff` recon�r�iendations with the sug�est�.ci ex�an�deci erlviroru�lental design�tiot�s, Sh�reline Resicie�iii�l — Upland, Slxoz•elinc Residential — Waterf��orxt, Urban Co��servaiicy, Urban Conser�J��ncy — I3igh Qualit�T, aild Aq�iatic, ��ncl the e�ef�leci Ordinary� Hig11 W�tez� N1ar•k near C�yote Rock. `�'he Cojn►uissio��crs tl�ai�k�ci Sc, 1'launer Barlow far 1}er wot'k anci diligence and then disct�ssecl a point of arder re�,arding infai°n7atiou aud th� haiidliu�, the rzioiio�� oti tlte t�oor. Th� Cornrnissioa�ecs agreed the Alteriiatitije Niap and the draCt of the Fnw•ii•oivnei�t Desigi�ations ��resented witll t��e t�va miaior clianges was what tl7ey �va�iiecl mflved fortivard, GC3I17�111551Di1�2' Cc�T'1'OII comznented l�e was concerncd the Url�ai7 Cansecti�ancy — ��igli (��iality would be con�'usi►i� far �eaple anct #elt it shoulcl b� changed to Nattual. I�owevec, he wc��ild ga ala�� vith the Cam�z�issian vote. PEanning Commissian Mii�utes i0-I 1-12 Page 2 of 8 T��e vr•igll7flf lid[7I1(Jf7 lvcrs "�o crcce��f tl�c 5�4�]'LITi?L DL'Sl�iTClfl01�5 C[5'�1!'(117�.5'�ff". Irole i.s 0 ita .,�{ft�o�•, 6 cr�7ct��2sf, llae yllotroj�fcrils. Cola�riris.src3�7er• 13ecrarlcrc rjiovecl 1c� 1'�Cf11f71l1�1?C� UJJJJt�o��crl �r� tl�e Cit}J C'orr�acil of�tlie ��•c�! L'37vit•o��laer�! 1�es�r��j�afiara.s a�7r� tlte c�yafl rllter•nrrtii�e De.S•a�rt�ulia�a r�tcr�� cr.s p�•e.s•eiatecl. 1'l�e vrale cn� �lais �ilalratz �k�as ir��crrzitlrotr.5� irz_fcrt�r»�, tlze �arofio�t}�as,se,��. B. Nci►� 13usiness: 1. Public �iearing on CT�!ai-�3-12 pr•uposecl d�ner�[�meyrt regar•ding setbaelis fc�r �nultif'amily +�evc��ap��aent�i�hen �tclj�tccnt to single fxmily develr��nten#. Clarrrl� B�ttes cleclal•etl t1�e�zrf�lrc heu�•iaa�� vpet�ec� cit G:3b' f�.1�t. Caminissiancr Carroll read thc ruics fc�r a �tiblic hearing. Sc. Plaimer 1Vlikc B�siugez'recappecl far tl7e {sa�u�ziissia�icrs C'�'A-03-12, a City ini�iated c�de text amerid�zlent eegardii�g. thc setbacks fo�� n��iltifainily de��elc�pinent ��lien it is adjacei�t to sin�le I'amily reside�itial deveioptuent. Mr. �3asi��ger statcd co��ce�•n� in t�le ��asi have been af the bulk acici �c�le af �i�ultifan�ily c�eveioprtient s�rlien it has bcei� adj�iccnt to singie family developinenl. As a result cotulcil asked siaFf' la look into ]]05SYliI� 1111t1��lt1Dll Dj7tlilT]5. C0111x11tS51af1�CS, at tkie s#udy scssion; askcd to hav�. n�iice sct�t to tl7e �le��ela�ment comm�inity�. �ttiff did setad a r�otice t� th� Spokane Iioizie Builders �ssaciatinn, who in turn 5e�it the me5sa�e to menlber5liip. hlr. 13�siz�ger said ]�e �id receiv�e some inf�rillation from ane develo�er ancl ti��ot�ld sli�t�•e it �,vitfi tf�c Comtttissiat� iu his pres�utatian. �I�I�e ��roposcct amendt�lent �voul�l set a 1:1 relational liei�l�t sctback. Ivlr. T�asin�er explained it ;�auld be preciictable for t�evelc��►enf and easy for staff to admi�iistcr. Hc�v��eve�', a cazlcern �lad been �aised that it could crcafc a l�ardshi�� for so�ne snlaller pro�erties to de�=elop. Mr. l�a�ingec t��eal e�.plained t��e new propasal whiih �vo�ilcl alla�v a 35 foc�i l�uilc�in� �]�f��lt r`it �}�1� ld f00t [171I11T]111171 SE',t}�ilC1C, T�1� 5��3aC1CS W"Ol1�Cl 1T1GC�c`iS� fCplll t�lel'�, 1� �0 foot tall building war�ld kiave �e set 6ack 25 fect. "1'licr�: �•ere no furthei• c�uestioats ar discussioi�. The Ch��ir �:allcd fs�r tjnyotie fram the public to testif}�. Dennis C�•apa, 2GU2 N �ulliv�n �td.: i'41r, Cra�� stateci ��e �vas a devela��er a�ld he ��as not opposcd to tlte c��ange. Mr. Cra�a alsa st�fed he ciid not fecl chcrc t��is a�iythiiyg �v�•oi�g w1'i1�1 the current 1°egul��tions di�d that City �truggled to appiy the staridards C�OI751Sff;1ltl�'. M1'. Cl'c3pa recap�ed �lis rec�uest for� Cc�n7prehensiti�e 1'latt an�endt�le�7t ou ��ro�ei�t5� located on 4�i'ncar Sulliv�n. �Vlaet� lae ��Z�de his req��est far the Compreliensi�rc �'lan amendriient tt�e Shelley La�e H0137COW11C:1'S bec�ane t�pset. The Shelley Lake Ha«�c Ov�fners Assaciatian {�-IOA) gathered together �uld camc to thc Comn�issiorl and to the [;a�i��cil and camplaitied, therefore ca��si�i� the creatioii of t� cleveloper a�;reei��ent in tk�e Municip�l Code in order to �tiitigate tl�c iinpacls. Mr. Cr�po stated it clelayed iiis �rojcct, �iici uot leel it was fair when I7e h�d lried ta accc�iltil�ociatc reasot3able devela��nent witl� the ncighbors, cast lyim inoi�ey an �tiori�e�� fees and ti�e standards at tlie time �r�et�e adequate. �v1r. Crapo then remii�ded t11e C:U11llI11551U11 duriii� tl�e last year's C'oniprehensive Plan anl�.ndincl�t process lYlr. Ai��;ec came iti for a C��iprchensivc I'l�t�. aw��et�c��lent, tiret'}� si�l�ilar ta his, ai�d citizens becaiue upsef, but they ai•e nat ns ot•gan�zed as the SEi�:ll}r Lake HOA aiid IVjr. Az•ge�� vas �xot t•equire�l to l�ave a cic�•c�o�er a�reenlent. Mr, C��a�o stated he felt t��e i°u�es Sl1011ld ��pl}� tc� Plil11171f1�' C�QIlI]711S5101] MIT1LIt�5 10-I I-12 P��e 3 of 8 ev�ryo��e f�i�•1}= or tlie City wauId cantitxue to get resist�nce against de�Telop�i}ei�t a�id t�iere ��c�t�ld bc na certainty for cieve�opet•s, N1r. Cr•apo saici �vllether tlie City stayecl vdith the ct�rrei7t rGiles, or had new �-u1es, citizens were �;oing ta campl�icl when tliey� did not like new cievelo��i��ent n��i to them, a�ui a dev�fope►� ti�ill a�e`�er know ��itl� cez�l��infy wkiat riiles lie v��ill be usin� if t�ie 3•�les a�•c allo�7ed �o clia��g� ev�ry tiine de�relopmez�t is ��tet with resistance. N1r�. Crapo said h� felt staff l�ad done a good job preparing a reasonable calli�rc�i��ise. Iv1r_ Crapa s�:id �vl�eii a dcti�elape�- l�u}�s pi��perty� for �iiglt dez�sity developanent t�iey pay rnare for it, tl}ey e:��ect k�e able to �et m�re aut it. Wh�yl asked }�y a Conunissio��er, [4�c. Cra�Q said of the �wa o��tians he �uotild preCer ttie sec;oi7d anc. lt ��c��1d alla�v � 35-fc�ot builci�ng at a 10-foot sctt�dck, Hc saiti, of c�ursc lie �vould prefer not to elia�ige flie regul�tio�i at alL I Ie aIso said lie did �iat feel it u�ould cl��rage the resistatice i�i the commiu�itv. This aptian ��ra�Gld allaw latitude to the builder and tl7e cie�eloE�e�•. Ivlr. Cra��a again, st�tecl; ��ega�•dless af thc el7an�e, he still wauld likc to see the stand�rds applied e��enly anci fairly to evei•yone and predictaUility in ttYe �•eg�ilatiails is key to deti�elapers. Chcrir Bcrf�.r cfo.s€,�c�f1�e pirGlic l�ecu�itrg cr1 �:.�G Ja.��. Catnmissiot�e�•Neill tl�en ��eq�iested fo asl� UIt•. Crapo a qucsfiou. Cat�r��iis�siotae�• Ccu�j•oIl y��oy�ed to 1•ec��e�a tf7e ��trblic laecrriit�r. Tlai,s• r�totrU�7 wus.secut�cled cutcl tTae i�a�c �t1u.�� t►f�ut�i�raor�.y�l�s�ass�ecl. Tlr��r�lic ]�eerr•i��g si�r�s reapet�ecl c�t 6:56,r�.1�r. IVIi•. Crapo returned to the po�iiu�n. Coi7unissioner I�feill a�ked if ther�e catild be a thii•d bptio�� fi�r s�nallec �az•cels urliic�li r�•otil�l be difficuli to develop uticier the iiew sta��ciarc�. A�r. Cral�c� resp�ndcd lhat he fctt therc is uc�thing �vron� uTith curreilt stane�are�. Th� third a�tion �.vould t�e curretit re�ulations. Mr. C��apo Sai�i; ��ain, he feels the j�rol�len� is that rega��dl�ss cl�e si�r�d�rds siiigle fa�t�ily hatnec��ne�•s ace iiot �o�ng t� bc liappy when nn�ltifamily� de��elfl�ment liap�e��s next to them. A�r. Cra�a said �ie �vould like to be cooperative witli staff, and r,vill go along ��vith �r�l�icl� ever o��iion is �j�•a�c�seci. V��en asEce�i if� he hacl spc�kett �vith c�tl�er �iewel��ers re�ardi�}g fl�e p��oposal, hc indieatcd he li�ci. 1Ulien�skeci about those responses [ie �iad recei��ed fi��n them �v9r. G��apo stated l�e would not s�eak for any atlxer cievelopers. Mr. Cz�apo said afte�•discussian he hc��c;d thc Cc��ni�iissit�n waulci laak ak fhc pr�po��l fi•c�m differcnt ai��les. Co�tu��issioiict Bates asked Ivlr. Basit�ger if tlle Desrelopel- �greenients were i�l tl3e CQri�pz•e��ea3sive Flaxi, Mr. I3asin�er a��swer�.c� yes tl�ere �re pr�licics in tlje Coan�reliei7sive Plan which suppa�-t it, �ut t�ie h�u�zicipal Code is wl�ere the guidance far ihe develc�per agreemeni� a�•e lac�tecl. h�ir. Basin�cr �ilse� said lic liad mcutioned at the stutiy� session this proposal (15 foot option) va�ould nok work for all p�-operties, es�jecially tl}e sn�alle�• oi�es. Th� pur�os� af the j�ro�osal is io add sotne� contidcncc iii c�iar regulation5 wltic�i wauld anitigatc tlie impact� of m�iltifar�iily developtiient v��ie�� it is adjacelit ta single family de�'�I{7��[]]�Tl�. He 2�I111i1C�eC� �jl� COI111111SS1D11 t�l� C1�� Wul41C� like ta try atld i7nt entci' intc� devcic��er a�reen�ents. Staff�v��ld st�ppc��t cither o�tion. Bo�h ��raposals lla�•e a relalional setiaacl�; but �Jptio�t 2 wolalcl allo4v small�� pa•o��e��tie5 io clevelop � li�tle easieN•. Con��iiissioner Hall stated tt�e point Mr. Cca�a is n�aking is thas t��e c�f rc�,ulation woulcl n�akc dc��clopirig iliUrc prcdictabIc. I'�vlr. Hal� ask�d staft's apinian if t�iis chaii�;e ��o�ild �i�ake der�•ela�ing i�ior� predictable? V�'ould it resol�°e tlie p�•oUle��i? A9r. P��f]I11I1�C',OI711771SS1Q13 Av'Ilil{I�CS ICl-I I-12 P�tge 4 af$ B�siiiger replieti �v1t�:M� i�� c�aljtoilction w�'lI}7 COT]]�)t'�E1�TISIV� PIal7 �121eT7C�133�T7fS 1t 5}1DL11C� C�0 t�lelt. Conu7iissioiicr l�i�gius sia�eci this el�an�e alsc� makes i�7e Ciiy�'s ��osiiior7, iti stil�seqt�ent Cai��preheusive Plau he��itigs, dcfcnsible. Mr. Hi�gins }ac�inted a�rt tiepe�Y�lability is �ot�e wvilt� de��elopet• a�ree�neuts. I Ie said if ihis cl7ange I�elps avoid tl�at, Iie supparts it. Cl��air�3ates closed the p�rbiic heai•in� at 7:�5 ��.nl. COII111ll5S10I1C1' CfiPl'OII d51iC[� C(7I371111SS10I1�P' I Ia�ll iF, as �� az�chitect, tiae �a�oposals '�a�fe aily iss��es tie c�n see. Mr. �Iall stated he etoes not l�ave a�roblein with either o�tion. CO11211i15'Sl(ll?8t' HtlIT i��v3�ec4 l0 1�eccartlrrre�acl crpp�'c�val af C'TA-(J3-12, cfcr��ifj1 t�efcrlioncrl .S�JI?ftC� C15 I71C1C�l�lLC�PO 2S�Cl�f#fJt'lltd(1(f �tJ f�7� C'i1y C'oirrzc:il. C'ommissianer 1'Jcill statcd 11e s��pport�d tl7is atlicndtY��:nt. He s�id ]te be�li�;wecl it would i�el�� ti�itli sillaller prape��ties and wti�itli the �ity-'s ��espo�isibility to tlle citizens. Hc said �ic ti�c�ught it ��c�ulci hel�� to alleviate son�e o�'t}xe t7as��back to so�7ie e�f the issue� the City has had rebardin��evcIa�mciit in t�ie past. 1-lc fclt it haci �ood balancc. Cammissioi�er Carroll sharcd hc was ��rt c�f tlre Planni�� CottltY�issiou �vhcn Nlr. �`rapa's Compi•ehensive Pian was in sub�Y�itted for a��rov�l Mr. Carrall said �te t�iought �he Coaa�i�aissir�n clid z�ai I�ave tlje tools to help nliii�ate tl7e i5sue�. He said he f��t �I115 T4iliDLILC� �71'O�}65`c1I WciS tl I]1(}1'C f:l�cti w�rav t� dcal �i�itli these iss�i�s. CQIIl]711SS1QIle1' �Iall 5aICi lt L�'011l{� bC I]10E 1� �7�Op�� W4LlIC� TL'�il1ZC WIYE;11 thcy bt�}' property next to an Upen sp�ce ii is possible de�lelopn�ea�i will ve cor��i�ig ever�tually�, b«t they don't. �Iowewer, he felt tl�e �tiiendi�ient was a �oaci caznpt•ainise. Cam��is:5ianer I-Iiggiias thankeci M��. Crapa far ��is eomm�uts, fi��ciin�; them ��ery eC1LlCclt10Z7�11. Ct}IIl]I]1�Slt}I1L� �3ates als� th�El➢��C� I�1'. Cl'iit7U. CU1711271�51U11E;f 13atcs contitiueci sayin�; ��e felt this wauld not solve all o�the City's pro�le�ns. �►'e ueed t�le taols tc� make good decisio��s. We siill have � ways ta ga. M�•. Fiates ciid not �vant tc� take an}�kliing av��ay fronl the curre�it propasal; lie felt it was a good reg�zl�ttian clia��;e. Mr. I3ates statecl he felt t�je City neecled tc� imprar�e i�� the comm��nications az•ea. He saici �ic felt tlic cai��mtinication, ��vhc�l it camc to C0112�7i'€;I1f:1151VC Pl��i amentitnent�, betti�veer7 t�te C.ity�, developers arid the neighborl�dods �i�eeds ta be improved iii o3•dei• to try and �nitigate t�te ��roblems ��e are conti�itiallv �ealitig with. Mr. Bates stated he intcndcd to support thc pr�pc�scci Tl7e vote ara tlae iarutio�z ti►-c�s 6 r"ri fcrt�c�a•, t1�e tlroti�n�ass�erl�rncr►lirrrr��rsfy. Commissiarl took a t�rea�: at 7:30 ar�d returi7ed at 7:�}0 2. Study scssi�n Sha�•eline M�tstci•1'i•ogeam—Restar��iun �'l�o. 5��. P�aali�e�� J,az�� Baa•lo��• ��iade a p�•e�ezltaiion regardia�g il}e �l�oreli��e Master Prograr�l Restoration Y[an. Ms, Barlo�� st�ted tEtat ti7e �11�1Y Restoi•aticsli I�lai� pr•ovides a fi•anlewark for resto�•ation �aseci �n �he inveniary at�d ehar�e�eeiiation repc�rt, iclentiiies pa#ential sites and oppat`k�inities far res�oration a�Id �i�otection and provides guidance for c�t�rying out resto�•aiiai� in a camprel�ensive �r�ariner. Ms. F3arlow stated tlle Restoratioa� Plat7 is a requieecl element of ihe 1h'AG. .Ttrrisc�ictions «l�ich l�avc iril�aired sliarelines mt2st prcp�u�e a �l�jn. B��seci �n thc City's in�et�tory r��e Planning Comn�issian h![inulcs l0-I I-12 Pagc 5 flf� k��o�v ��e have iiu�aired sites. �ame examples ai•e baitk et�osian, degrad�d l�abi�at �vitfi lar�e co��centi�atio��s of tto�iaus r�ee�Cs, cic�ircd aiid disturbed �reas, erocling gtilly slcap�.s, �;r�sion fi`am hcav}�foot traffic; DOE �netals cIeat�-t�p sites. N9s. 13arlc�w said thc 1�AC identifies items the Restoratian Plan »IUSt acfc�ress. whicli i�zclu�ie the fo]loEVin�. Ideiitifp c�e�r'adcc!arca�, i�i�paired functions a�i�i sites ��ith pote��tiaC fa��ec�lo�i�al restaratioti. Cstablisl� a�re��al] goafs aitd �rioritics far restoration of degraded areas and itn��airec{ ecola�ical fi�nctians. Identify existin�and on�oi�ig prQjects and programs. � Id�tttify adciitiala@ pr�jects a�d pr��r��nrs to meet restoratioi� goals. Idc;ittify timelincs�nd benclunarks �c�a•imple��ie��ting i•estot'ali�i� ��rc�jects anti �rograms a�id �c1�ie��ing local ��eslax�ation ��als. Provide loz��7ecliaa�is�n5 az• stratc�ie5 Ms. �3�irlow t�ten��ent on ta explain each of tlle ele�aler�ls oF f�ie 1'lan. Scctio�� 1 — lntra�ducliofi: lt is �tn overview af il�e re�3�iir•ements �ild l�otiv thc plai7 is ir�ter�decf to work in the Sf��P u��late pi�acess. It proaides the City context for the plan ti4�l�ich inclucies coll�bort�ti��c plaiu�ing, rcgulation, �reservatio�� af Il�gh qualaty s1lc�rclitie arcas, and aiding coi��munity efforts to reslo�•e ciegr�cied poctioiis of tlie City�'s shoreli►7es. The City ar�d �•�sioa•atioi� p�rt�icrs arc intcnded to u��ork ta�etl�ec or� sect��•iii� fi�ndit�g to i�iiplenlc�t tl�e plan and att�in the titt�elir�es ancl benchi�iarks in the plari as fiulciin� allows. In this sectio�� there is als� an over��ic�v of tl�e requireinents, anci hox� tl�e �Ian is i�ifenctecl to�vork. Section 2 Rest4ra1io11 Goa�s aiid 5u�uart�iig Policies: This seciio�i ide«titie� tl�c restc�ration g�als and �olicies and refers back ta the goals anci policies ir� tlie o�erall SMF. It sun-►marizes degr�ded sl�oa•eline �reas and f�ulctions, prioritizes restot�aiio�i opporiu�aities, 1�i•ioritizes rc�storation gassibilities S�itl� the gt•e�tesi benefit, establishes a implemei�tatioil strate�y, helps tQ idenfify opportu�titie� ��hich contribute to+�vae•ds shor�e�li7le �•estorat�ar�ef7oris, d�ld monit�r restoi�atiotl ac�€vities. �ectioz� 3, �'xistin�aiid Qtt-�g l,rojects �nd Progra�zis: �tu�m7ariz�.s e�istin� factors linlitin� tlie fiinctionality of the shorelitie ecos}�steiu. Lirniting Factars �re t�ungs �i�lricl� im��air the ec�systei7� pracesses a�ld limit the ca�acity of the functions. "l�fiey �rc c;nvirarun�ntal �•ariables wltos� ��resei7ce, �bsencc or abundance resfricts the eonc�itions. Tl�ey coukd be thiu�s prescnt �ike ilo�iot�s tir�eecls, oe �dciing shade tt�ccs. �I"��is section identifies the liiriitii�g factors a�id causes �nd liighfighis eyisting and ail�;oing p�•ajects and progr��us tfiat may address thase issues. [.ast, it identifics additiatta] projects and pra��a�z�s ncedec� ta ael�ieve shareline r�stc�ration �oals. 1t addresscs lvhei•e fhe g��s are ��d ft�hat can t�7e Gity cio about tliem. E�or cYai�lple, even 117oug�7 �ve knaw there is a ��rogran� to clean u�� the totic rnetals sitcs, csften the projects dc� not i�7cl�ide ve�,etaEion. `1'tiis �vill alla�ti� t�s ta fi�ure out��°herc the g�ps�re and haw ►ve fill them. Seckioii � Yi°ioritization Metl7odola�Y: This slt•ate�}� ��as p�it iu �lace ta address I7ow #a prtociti�e p�•ojecls for resforatioii ti��ic;n it became possi�le to co�t�}�lete ihent. '1'hc scoring fact�rs �rc: �:ase of �ro�erty- ac�aiisition, sl�ade beiiefit, 5cale of r�estarrltion Pls�n�ting Conu�lission NYinutes 1Q-]1-�2 Pagc 6 of S a�ti��ity�, 1'al� 4V1tL11T1 I�le C4IlI�Yf �f SL1T'1'Oi1111CI1Tlg �lc3t?I�r�t Ill��l'l:{ cillC� ioitsistcnc��= ��it�t oihec SMP goal�. Scction 5 l�cstor��tic�� Q�port��nities: 'C��cr�are turo types of rest�catian o�aporlu�iities. �ne is programmatic opportu�litie� (��i�ich are nof site specific) sus;fl as public e�ittc�.tiatt progt'a117�, shar�line ce�ul�tt�c��1s ��nd eiifarceinent, shareline mainten�nce, cflnservatio�i futures a�id stor�n�vater staridarcis. Tl�e secot�d oppc�i'futtity is �ite s��ecific oppartut�ities: ��l�e�•e ihe �ite cUi�lc� be �•cstared to a pra}�er1V f«nGtiat�in,� CUI1C{I�IDIl. �1'hc op�r�rtunities are valnntai�y�. I�Ieither of tlte opporit�nities ��re a rec�t�irei7ie�it. The city is not obligaked to func� any af� the restc�rakio�} o��por-tu�iities. Hou��ever, i�ie city is req�iiE'eci ta prflactivclv idcritify� restorafion partners and purs��e fundirlg o�poi�tutiities — ihis reqt�ires staff inualve�a�en�. i��1s. [3az�lc�w �a�c an e�ample af hot�� the p�•ogram ca«ld wark, T17e City lS CLlI'1'E:[1kIV WUI�l{lI]� 43'lfll �tate P�rks Depl, fc� slal�ilire tl�e t•iver bai�k east c�f�lora Road. Tlle City would lpok at �Yll�t IS llll[Jaircd }�ascci an the plai� and tlieiY loak at Gvl�at is �assible in so��ie �f`the COI1C��l�ll`clI c1�7�}T'Oc1G�l�5. T�l� CitS� has pa9�tnered ��•it17 ihe Sfate anci f�as desig�ied tli� t•ep�ir project for the staie to i�nplemeiYi. Secti�n_6 1�Y�ple�7�entation 1'lat�: '1'his secfion address an im�leil�entation p�an u�hic�l identifies p��-ti�ers, poteiltial furidirlg sa�i�•ces, timeliales a�ici bcnclunarks. �1'liis sectifln �tas a lisi o1'+organiz�tic�ns ��rho ha��c in tlie past demo�ish-ated ati interest in peoiectittg the City's sIioreliues. Tlle�-e i� also � lisf of �aassiblc fiii�diii� sotirccs ��rliic�i are ��ossible if � pr�oject s�i�ulci becoine a��ailable foi• �•estoratiat�. Tiinelinc and beucli�t�arl�s for i�npl�menting restaration ��lan are alsc� ii� this se�tion. Section 7 h�Ionitorin�;, ��aintenance ai�t� r�da��iive �an� €;I11CTlt: �l�]C ]JLIT�705�E O��llS section is to provide sleps foi• �nonitoriug tlic stfccessful i�nplet7ientatioi� of tliis plati acid t� havc a �arocess fai•inonitorin� site s�3ecific ��rflje�is. This secti�n alsc� idenfifies ail alternatiwe sh•ategy ifrestora�ion b�ncl7mar�:s arc not �7ict. A�s. Barloti� said the �u�lic l7eai•iu� for tl�e ReSfo��Atia�1 Plan is sc�ieduled for Octobei• 25'�' ZQI2. S�7e la�C� 1�12 Cf117ll17iS51f}riE:l'S f�1C I1CXt �I�111E[1t5 Of tll� S��P �O CO11➢e bGfdl'C fI1f:II1 �1'ULIIC� IJC tIYC I}LLb�IC AGC�55 Pl�lIl,f�lel] t�3e i`�g1l�c`ltl{]1150 Cc�rnnlissianer Beaialac asked I7ow- successful ca�ald a restat•atic�n plan bc in ail urban jurisdictio�a, es�eciaSly ��lE.11 SLII'1'(J�llllC�lll�J11I15CI1C�l0[]S CID 1lOf taLC� Gai'� Of illel3' lSSl1E;S as thc City i� c�oiiig. 141s. Ba��la�� responded e�cta j�u•isc�ictiou i�� tllc statc of W�shi�l�ta�i v�=ho ha��e shar•elines of t�le s��tc are r�:c�turcd tc� ha��e a restoration �lan, �i�c1 eaeh of thc �il��r jurisdictic�ns are s�iari��; a piece af the ri��e�•. The Giiy c�� anly as��ulie they ai•e sh��•in�; sin�ilaa• issues. Mr. K«hta al5c� i��c[ie�2ted tlie Ciiy's situa#ion pre�vides rnore �1�1»i'tunify for restaration L�ecause most of tlie slYOrelit►e ��lang th�: ri�rcr is pii�lic�lly owized Lat�d, so pari�7ersl�ip is easiei'. 1'i'iv��te �rou��s aIsa liel�ro out, f�r insta�lce ti�e�•e is c� grou� wl�o just helpec� �tp�c�und the 3'vTirabe�tu Park area, helpirxg to deli�ae I�aat paths �ud cle��i�ig up t11e area. IVIs, Barlaw and Mr, I�uht� r�ai7ied ca�in�ales of otlicr cities where �horeline resto�'ation 17a� occurrccj it� lii�l}ly industrialized, ur�an areas. Mc. Jc�ho1 Patroiicf7, with U��S Corporatio�7 s�tared with the �omr7lissio�� ihe City llt�s good sl7�i'clinc l�ere, Uut it still i�eeds to track no riet loss oJ.�ecalo�ical fuuction�. 1V�r, 1'atrauch said the l�ase �in� is tl�e ir�ventary, if nc�thing changcd tlie simple ��ear at�d teat• along ihe tr�il uroul�i rec{uirc rc5torafian effoi�ts. Cammissioner Be�ulac askcd if the Pl�im�in�Camnlission N1i��utes ]f}-1 1-12 Pagc 7 of S City� cari't �e;t the f'undi�jg, k��oulc� we woulcl re�eri ta public eclucatiat�. N1r. Patrouch respo�idec[ tl�e [�ity watilcl da the site specific restoration at s��me tililc ��s pragranullatic opportui3iiie�. Bath efForts ��ould be done at the sam�tiiY�e. Cornanissioner h�ei11 asked if a betic��mai•k were a��ro�chi��g ai�d the Cit�'L4'cl5 llOt �(}lll�.; to achie�re it r�vould ii p��l i�� eii�y in a ��osition ta ]iave to Fiuld a sho��eliize project aver �nat�icr �icdicatcd �roje�;t, likc strcc�f �re�crvation. Ms. I3arlow said i1c�, t�ie city wau�ci not be required to fiind shareline restoratiQn. Slie fiii�kher catnn�e�lted tl�e Uiola�ist, N[l'cl�l HL'ClOC1CCI', �uho ��rc�ie tt�e City''S L'eSlOfc��laTl 1]Iit[1} has bceii reeog��i�ed as li�vii�g w�•ittei� some af the best restoratioii plans araund the state. The P1�ti1 as varitten does not c�bli�ate f�ulds �bove anci [��y�ond �rloti7�r prio�•ity �aroject. T}7e restoraiio� plan will t�oi farce the city to �ure soineor►e to keep h�ael� of tiie s�3orelii-►e restoratian prajects. Stafif ��uill keep tr�ck and dacu�Y�e�7t Y�a•aject� �nd a'��caz•�orace r��he�� ossiUle i•estaralian conccpts ideirtified in tl�e plau. [�ommissiDner �lall asked if staff �ould faresee �iny possible couflicts in pote��ial pat•t��ers. St��f��espot�dec� tlaere coulc� be satine — e��er�� group 17as an agenda au�i thez�e could bc a conflict, iri tliat ca5c they may not bc a goc�d partner for that particular pro_ject. I�owever, with most �otet�tial part�iers tl�ei°e are cammonalities. St�ff disct�ssed hovy- proje�cts wauld catne into tl�e �:ity and be re��ieu�ed to deterinine if ii req�aires ai� ea�t�ironmental rew�ie��• �nd if#��ese 4vould l�e a ��otential for x�eslo�•at�an in the pr�oject�inci ��rtncriiYg possibilitic�. X. GQOD �F'1`HL ORllI:R Commissianers Carrall and I Ii�gii�s v��il1 nat be �I�le ta attend the Octaber 2S, 2012 u�eeting, Xl. AllJUURNMEI�IT The 'being iio othe.i�bt�siness the m�;etin�, ��as�cijotu�necl at 8:37 p.m, � � _ ..��C._ -__�- Bill Bates, Chairpersan �� Deanr� ri�'fifh, PC Sccretary I)ate si�ized (� �� PlanniE�g Commission V�inutes 10-]1-12 1'abe 8 of 3 S�al�ane �alley Ylanning Catnmissi�on APPI�O�ED �Iinut�� Council Chambei•s— City Hall, l 17�7 E. �prague Ave. Octabcr 2�, 2[}12 l, c��.,�,�ra oa��R Chair Bates called the me�ting to order at G:�a p.i�l. II. NLEllGE OI'ALLEGIAiVCE Co�n�nissioners, staff�nd atidience stood foa• tl�e pleci�e af alIe�iance ��I. 1tOLL CALL COM��ISSIa�I�ItS 1'reseut Abse�Yt CITY STAFF Bill Bates -Cftair �� `" .IO�IIl HOI]1T]c�ll, C{J]]11I1Lllllf�'1)��'ElOplll�t7� D1i'�Gt{]I' Joltrt G. Carrall �- �,� C�i�� Driskell, City Aftariie�� R�istin Hall �°� �� Lori f3arfc�sv, Seriioa• �'Iatisiel• Rod Hi�;�ir�s �-- �� Vi��-tin Palaniuk, Planning TecElnician 5teven l�lei�l f� f-� f'red [3ea��lac ,�; �._ Jae Stoy— Vice Chair ;,� �;-�- De�i�na Criffid�,secp•etary� ��earin� no objcction Co�nn�issic�ners Carroll, IIiggins ar�d Hall were chcused from tiae meeiin�. IV. APPR[�VAL OF AGE:riDA Com�i�issianer Beaulac mavcd to ��pi•ove the October 25, 2�12 a�enda as p�•esetited. T�us mofion ��vas passec� un��niinously. �'. A1'PI�UVAL OF M11�UTES Cotnn7ission�r �Stay excused him�clf fi�o��i the vate oa� tf7e dpprov�l of the Octot�er 11, 20�2 ininu#es becatESe t�e was absent fram the meeting. The ap�roval of� dlc�sc minutes was �o�t��aned ta khe next �neetizig For tlie lack of a quc��•u�n. V1. PUBLIC CO1VIlVIEN'�' Tli�re was no�ublic coa�l�iieiit. �'Il. C{)MMISSIOI�r ItEP[I�RTS ."I7ie Cainmissioraers �iad no re�ort. Plamling Com[n9ssioit h�in��tes ]Q-25-12 Page 1 of 4 VIIL ADMINISTRA'['I1'E 1tCYOlZTS Diree�or Hohi�zan iilformed tlie �'l�ntiin�; Com�liissiot� an ihe �t•c�gress to ��pd�tte tlie P'la�u�in�; Camntissiola Rules of Praced�u�e. l�i. COMi�'IISSION 131,�S1NC5S A. Unfiatisk�ed �iisiness: 'I'��ere u•as ne unfinish�eci business. B. NE;W �U517YE55: 1. Public Heari«�— Shoa•eli�ie M�ster Yro�;r�rn— Daft Restor�tion Plan Cllair E3atcs apcilcd the publiG l�earing at 6:07 �.m. 5eni�t- Pl�ai�uer; Lori I3arlaw, �;ave a prese�ltatio�l reg�r�ling tlic dj•aft Sliareli�ie l�r[aster 1'ragra►n Restor�tian Pla�� explait7in�thc Ylau and its e]e�uezits. {�atnniissione�' F3ales ask�.c� «�l�a set flic Plan's timeli�ie and beticllntaz'ks. �+ls. Barla��v re�lied tl�e City sct the tin�eline. Tlie timel��7e is sel as a lo�ig tei'm �vc�rk plan. Tl�e Plati is �►lsa rccluired to be re��iewed �t reguiar inierval5 anci tkie tidnclilie� ca�l t�e adjustecl if the}r �re no� being inet. Canvliissiotier Stoy asked �vho �voulcj be responsible far �i�anitaring restnration �1s. I3at•lo��= aiid N1�•. Holiman expiained tE�e City waulci iss��c p�:rriiits a�i�d follor�� u� a�td monitor tlle work, CO11lIlY1S5lC]Cl�l' I��&L1IelG �tskeci if tlie Plau ��oi�l�i apply to th� Cel�tei�l�al `I'rail. ��s. Iiarlow stateci the Centennial T��ail is Qn statc o��ncd property� which is c�u•i�entl}� �naintained by� t}�e City; capifal intproveznents are the respa�tsibility c�f 5tate Parks. The Plail ci�� ia�cl��dc some restot•atia�� i•fljects tl�at indirectly� affect the t��aiI. S��e t�csct•ibe a shoceline staUili�ati�n ��r•ajcct, ctirre�itly utld�r re��ie��, tlla! sta�ilized thc slio�•eliiie iti Qrdei• to p�•eserae tf�e Cente�inial Trail, Cornn.��ssi�ner J3ca�ilac alsa asked if niaiehing func�s r��ould he required to in o�•der cio �� restorat�on�i•aject. Ms. Barlo�� discussed lio�ti� khe fu�lciixlg partiie�•s azid funding wo��ld be ap}�roact�ed ��nd st�tecl tflat �natcl�ii}g fi�ncis �voulci nat be p�u•sued witkiotit Cot��lcil ap�roval. . Seeiug nc� c��e ��ho wisl�ed to testify, Chair l3ates closed die �ublic liearir�� af 6:3?p.m. Com�nis�ionei� Sta}r moued io ca�tiinue the d�;libcratians ofth� Restoratio�t P�an tc� i�J�w. S, 2012. This moiiot� ��s5ed ut7a��i�nausly. j �. �fucly Sessian: CTA-D4-Z012—Yropuseil Amentiments ta Title 19. Plannin� '1'cclmician h�Iartii7 Pala�7iuk bave a�i c�vcrvic�v af tl�e �ro�osed ame��c�t�lents ta "I'itic Iy of tl�e Spo�ar�e ��allcy 1'�Ituli�i�al Cade re�ar�ling the follo��in�: • Pz-opasi�� ia allow us�ti ivanufactured kior�ies in a mr��ufacturcd hcrme subdi�,�isian. The c��rrcnt i°e�ulation anly allo�r�� for• t�ew rnanufactured homes t� be placcd ii� �n7�ii�factu►•ed IYO1�ie subdivisio�i. • Proposi►tg to alla�r hame accupatio��s to occ;ur in any i°csidence t�iat has been le�ally pe1•jiiitted regaedless of the r:ot7e. `['lle cc�cjc is unclear whetl7er a t�oi��e Plannin�Comniissian Mi�iutes 10-25-12 f'age 2 of4 occt�patiaii ��atalc� be �crmittc:ci in � resider�cc v�rhicl� l�as been le�ally established in 3 no�l-residential zone. • Pro�osiiig resit�c�itial cic��.�opmczit stancidre�s for residez3ti�1 develo�nlent i�i tlie �Zixed Usc CoiYU�7ercial (1'v14��C} and Corridor h�ixed lJse (C'�IU) zcsnes. Tlle r�7ixed use section� of tlie code allou� for resideiitial ��ses but it doe� ��at pro�•ide a�ly sta�xdai•ds for c�ewelopment. '1`jlE��f; S�'cl[lC��ll'C�5 1'VOLlIC� �7{; IQt W'1{�f�l- de�th, deiisi#y, lat ca��e�•abc, sctb�cks �nd apen s�ace requi�•ements. � Praposi��g to �llow aa� Accessory Dw'E:�11T1� Ulli� �A.T�U� 1[l �lll� 1'f:51L�C11CC tjliit has been legally pern�itte�i ir� �tae CMU anci I�'IUC zoi7es. '1'hc code c�ocs nc�t acidress if at� t1llU �,=auld be allQwed in �l 1'CS1C��T1G� 1C1 Z 11�011-1�5LCj�Tlflcll ZOII�. T�iis wotild add�•��s tlie AD�J being ��ef•mitted as in a ��esideiltia] ia�ie, bt�t w�ulci not incl«�e �carct�kcr ci��cllii�g. • Pr��osi��g to �rot��ide standarcis for tl�e ten��a�•ary usc c�f an RV, outsid�; c�f� r3lobilc; 17ame ptirk, tc� c�ccur at any �'csidence �h�af has bcen le�ally pei�l7iitted rega��dless of zone. It is ��er�nittecl itl a resider�tial •r,aGie 1'az• �r� RV lo be occupicd, for nc� me�t•e th��u 30 da}T5, to alle�w ft�r• guests c�f the reside�its. I�awever. tlle code does not address this use in a nan-res�de�7tial loi7e. C:oinn»ssio�ler Stay asked if ADUs l�ad stai�dards in and of t�Yemselves. Sfaff replied they did, aix� tl�osc standarc�s ��oulcl be t�i�intainec� in the nc�n-residc�tti�l zQnes tlie s�►me as flie}� �re in residentit3l zanes. TEie onl�= cha��ge pro�o�ed is to allow an AD[1 aii � legal residential loi �n the �nixed use zones. Cainznissia�ier l�Ieill �sked if arl RV is �llor��ed tc� be e�ccupied outside of a residec�ce, wk�o w�ou�d ri�a��itor tlae le�igili of tl�e siay�. Staf'f cliscussed cc�de C;11fC)ICG111CI1t of tllc rcgulatic�ns t�iid wheii thc City ti�-ould cespond to a co�nplaint. T�i�s proposecl amen�lment v��ouid allor�� the City� to �e able ta enforce il7e time Iimitr�tion in non- �'esicletltial zoues as is ci�rrentl�� beir��, done in res�dential zanes. The City �vould only i�espox�d a�ter a coK��laiz�t �lad beer� K7aade. Cotnttiissio�ier I3cat�lac �i�an�c;�l tc� kEto» if allow4n�, iESCd i11an��facttzt�eci t�anles in a ��lanufactured home s4�bdivlSl�QTi lhrOL1IC� Cc7lIS� 155U� Wlt�l CD��eT�e`t[1�5, o�• af tl�e co��e��nts avei•-rulecl tlie �7tiinicipal codc? Mr, f'alaniu� exl�laincci cc�veiiants are a ci�il 17iafter between tlie ho�ne o��7nei•s assac�ation and ]loine a�unets. Tlie City does iiot gei invalvec� in tl7c�se ty�jes c�f issues. ICtlie home ownc.rs ��ssc�ci�tiori hz�d an isst�e ��itl� tllc hr�inc, it wauld be tl�cir respansibilit}�ta e�lforee it tlu�augh civil me�3ns. 11�Ir. Palaniuk saici the �ublic he�ring on the proposed ainendments tiv�s scheei�aled fof• Nove�iibei° S, 2{�12. 3. 13i-ainsturrning: �Jtould used niauuf'actured I�oines be allo�ved an inclir�•itival lats? Ci�rre��1]y the S��MC onlyr allo��s ziew manufactu��ecl }iomes to 1��. �alaceci on an it7di�,�it�ual lat i�i all resic�cnti��l distiicts. St�te la;�v does iiot e�llov�� far discri��iiil�tion between a stick built hame ai�ci a manufaclu��ed ha��ie �n aNa iz�ciivic�«al l�t. '1'he City Lias li�ci rcc�uests tc� c�Ila�� LISCC� �YOl]1CS x0 be placed �n i��diviclu�! lots. Staff presented a camp�risan to ten E1f}l�l' �llt'iSC�iCtIQI1S (Chet�ey, Lllensbxirg, Libcrty Lakc, 1'ullm��n, Spc�kane, Spokane C'-outlty, Spokaiie Valley, ��Venatcliee, ��valla W�lla, and Yakima), Pla�ini�ig Co�u�uission Miirutes 10-25-IZ P�►ge 3 r��f� only ane allows used rr►�nufactured liames (Spok��e (:oui�ty�), one (Lil�erty Lake) ��ecilies " si�nilai•to surrau��din�;" The Cornmissianers and sta#'f discussed t�ie Subject. The f'olla��ir7g topics ��ere discusseci: �1�Iai�ufact�u�ed �iomes can be �ffordable �1flL15SI3�, and propert}� owtiers 5L10U�C1 t?� allowed to pt�t knrl7ate��er type o# l�o��e they rvant an t��eir own lats, as lan� as it is decc�it laoking. Klt �1D111E5 Cl0 IlOt t�llall�r as �i 1�"1c3I111f�CtL11'CC� IYQIIIC. Staff(JI'DVIC��CL tll� Sfclt� CI£flllltl011 which s��ecifie� that a manufactured home is k�uili on a permanent chassis, and tr�nspe�i-ted i�i ane c�r ntore sections. S�LOUId an allaw°�nce, sucli�s a sizc or agc liitiit bc consicfcred? Some discussio�i follc��ec� that nc�t�ci fli�t nYanufact�rce� liorncs did providc �n �ffordable ��ousing opfiosi, ��vliile atller goals i�i the Com�r�hensive Plan ciirect tl�e City tfl p3�atect ihe c�ia�•acte�• oF tl�e �leig}�barhaods. The��e cotild �e �laces i�� fl�e City `��ierc it i3�iglrt not fit ta have a uscci inal�ufactureci �i�tzic. h�Ir. Bcaulac tuc�itiazicd that 111owirig a used maniif�ctu�•ed liome on aii individual lo# could di«linish tlte pro�erty value of the stn•r•ouncling h��i�es. ��•, Neill i�oieci tl�at indi��idi�al lc�t c��vners cat�sc propei�y v�lt�e fo be climinished if tl7ey do not t�ke cai�e af thei�- lots. A 11S�C� �n�riufa�tured �io�71e wauld t�ot clecessarily din�itais�i �lie px•operty value jtESt by bciii� �lacect o�i a lot. �;verytliing becamcs �t �i�ed eventu�lly. Mr. Beaulac rnai�ltaitied the tiurong hame in a t�eighbarhood cou�d cfevastate some iieighbachaUds, �'on�a��issionea� T3eaulac sug�estecl th�t this tapie E�c bruuglit back after tlie nuw ycar•, 1V�1CI1 fl]C I1�13' C011lllll551011e1'S WCL`� ]]1'GS�IIt, and tliat inforination ve in�luded eegat•di�ig liou� Libet�y La�.e eilfoi•ced the require�zient of "similar t� s�it�•oau7cli�lg." All Cot��tnissia�icrs' agrced ��7it11 this sugbcstiaii. No rnatian vw�as inade. X. GOOI� O�F THE ORDT�R There wuas nathin� Ec�r thc �ood c�f fhe c�rcier_ XI. ADJGIURNi�7I;1'�IT Ti7e being no othcr business the meetin� was adjoutned at 7:�4 �.m. M� � �� F3i11 I3ates, Ch�irpec�ai� . llc�t a Griff th, P(� Sec�•eta � Datc sigiled�rf]�(�, �,� �� Planni��gCummissi€�n Mlin�rtes ](}-25-12 Yage4 of�l