2004, 02-10 Regular MeetingAGENDA
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday, February 10, 2004
CITE" HALL AT REDWOOD PLAZA
11707 East Sprague Avenue, First Floor
6:00 P.M.
Council Requests All Electronic Devices be Turned Off During Council Meeting
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
INVOCATION: Pastor Rick Sharkey, Spokane Christian Center
ROLL CAI.L
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS
COMMITTEE. BOARD. LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS
MAYOR'S REPORT:
PUBLIC COMMENTS For members of the Public to speak to the Council regarding matters NOT on
the Agenda. Please state your name and address for the record and limit remarks to three minutes.
PUBLIC HEARING:
1. CONSENT AGENDA Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. A
Councilmnnber may remove an item from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately.
a. Appnwal of Regular Council Meeting Minutes of January 20, 2004
b. Approval of Council Study Session Meeting Minutes of February 3, 2004
c. Approval of Claims in the amount of $1251,935.95
d. Approval of Payroll for 1/31/2004 in the amount of S141,2891.8
NEW BUSINESS
? First Reading Proposed Flood Plain Ordinance 04 -004 - Marina Sukup [public comment]
3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 04-005 Amending Ordinance 35, Planning Commission -
Marina Sukup [public comment]
4. Motion Consideration: Library Services Agreement - Nino Regor [public cornntent]
5. Motion Consideration: Tourism Promotion Area lnterlocal Agreement - Stanley Schwartz
[public comment]
6. Mayor Appomtmcnts!Council Confirmations - Mayor DcVleming
PUBLIC COMMENTS {Maximum of three minutes please; state your name and address for the record)
Council Agaula 11) -flt Regular Meiling Page t of 2
Al)1KLNISTRATIVE REPORTS: [no public comment]
7. Walgreen's Public Access Easement Discussion - Kevin Snyder
8. Considerations in Stonnwater Regulations - Stanley Schwartz
9. Sidewalk Responsibility Discussion - Stanley Schwartz
10. Proposed Franchise Ordinance for C)ne-EIGHTY Networks Discussion - Cary Driskell
11. Proposed Towing Discussion -- Cary Driskell
INFORMATION ONLY: [no public comment
12. Planning Commission Minutes of January 8, 2004, and January w 2004 (includes discussion of
building code issue)
AWOL
Ia
F1TURE SCHEDULE
Regular Council Meetings are generally held 2nd and 4I Tuesdays. beginning at 6:00 p.m.
Council Study Sessions arc generally held 1 ". 3" and 5th Tuesday :s. beginning at 6:00 p.m.
Other Cpcoming Meetings/Events:
February 17, 2004 - Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
February 24. 2004 - Regular Meeting. 6:00 p.m.
March 2. 2004 - Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m.
March 9, 2004 - No Meeting
March 16, 2004 - Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
March 27. 2004 - Mayor's Ball, Mirabeau Hotel
NOTICE: Individuals pluming tw attend the meeting who require +special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing. or other
itnpii mmnc, please centre; the City Clerk at (509) 921 -1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may he made
Council Agenda 02 -10-04 Regular Meeting
Page 2of2
Staff Present:
DRAFT
ivur4 17TT S
City of Spokane Valley
City Council Regular Meeting
Tuesday, January 20, 2004
Mayor DeVleming welcomed everyone and called the City of Spokane Valley Regular Meeting to order
at 6:00 p.m.
Attendance:
Councilmemhers:
Michael DeVleming, Mayor
Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor
Dick Denenny, Councilmember
Mike Flanigan, Councilmember
Richard Munson, Councilmember
Gary Schimmels, Councilmember
Steve Taylor, Councilmember
Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager
Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
Marina Sukup, Community Development Director
Neil Kersten, Public Works Director
Cal Walker, Police Chief
Kevin Snyder, Current Planning Manager
John Holman, Senior Development Engineer
Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor DeVleming led the Pledge of Allegiance.
INVOCATION: Pastor Brian Prior of the Episcopal Church of the Resurrection gave the invocation.
ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called roll. All councilmembers were present.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Deputy City Manager Regor asked that agenda item #2 be removed and
rescheduled for February 10, 2004 meeting. It was moved by Councilmember Denenny and seconded by
Deputy Mayor Wilhite to approve the agenda as amended. Roll Call Vote: In Favor: Unanimous.
Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS:
Councilmember Schimmels: reported that he had a very informative meeting Saturday with the
Association of Washington Cities for the new councilmembers.
Councilmember Munson: announced that councilmembers have been involved with numerous training
sessions presented by AWC, and that those sessions have been extremely beneficial in helping
councilmembers better serve this community.
Councilmember Flanigan: mentioned he attended the first meeting for America's Promise, formerly
Spokane's Promise and that the Chase Youth Commission is acting as the umbrella for this program.
Councilmember Denenny: said that the STA held public meetings last week which were very well
attended and heard numerous public comments of those who rely on the public transportation system.
MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor DeVleming brought council attention to the memo regarding two
opportunities for Council representation on boards and task forces. He mentioned the Regional A.nimal
Control Task Force is forming to evaluate the possibility of a regional animal control model; that he
would like either two Councilmemmbers or one Councilmember and one staff. Councilmembers Flanigan
Council Minutes 01.20-04 Page 1 of 4
Date Approved by Council:
DRAFT
and Schimmels indicated their interest. Mayor DeVleming said City Manager Mercier will appoint the
staff member. Additionally, the Library Capital Facilities Advisory Committee would comprise a
councilmember, a staff member, and a citizen. Mayor DeVleming reiterated that Mr. Mercier will
appoint the staff member. Mayor DeVleming also announced that we still need citizens to serve on the
Cable Advisory Board.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
1. CONSENT AGENDA: After City Clerk Bainbridge read the Consent Agenda, it was moved by
Mayor DeVleming and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Vote by Acclamation: In
Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS:
2. Second Reading Proposed Towing Ordinance 04 -001. Removed from the agenda; to be discussed
at the February 10 Council meeting.
3. Second Reading Proposed Street Vacation Ordinance 04 -002.
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance by title, it was moved by Councilmemher Munson and
seconded by Councilmenrber Flanigan to approve Ordinance 04 -002. Deputy City Attorney Driskell
explained that there have been no changes since the first reading, and that the purpose of this ordinance is
to provide a procedural mechanism for citizens to request vacation of streets rights -of -way. Mayor
DeVleming invited public comment; none was offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous.
Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
4. Second Reading Proposed Fire District Annexation Ordinance 04 -003.
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance by title, it was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded
by Councilmenrber Flanigan to approve Ordinance 04 -003. Deputy City Manager Rcgor said that no
changes have been made since the first reading, and that this ordinance would provide for the annexation
to be brought before the public at an election. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; none was
offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion
carried.
5. Proposed Resolution 04-001 Amending Fee Resolution.
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the resolution's title, it was moved by Councilmemher Munson and
seconded by Councilmenrber Denenny to approve resolution 04 -001. Deputy City Attorney Driskell
explained that the amended fee resolution incorporates two changes: changing the current: street vacation
fee from $300 to 51300, and imposing a tow operator registration fee of $100 related to tow operators
who want to be included on the police tow list. it was also mentioned that the tow operator registration
fee will not be charged until the towing ordinance is approved and effective. Mayor DeVleming invited
public comment; none was offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None.
Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
6. Motion Consideration: City Council Legislative Agenda.
Councilmenrber Taylor reviewed the draft letter to be sent to the appropriate senators and representatives.
Couneilmcmber Taylor stated that he received information from City Manager Mercier that the
Department of Community Trade and Economic Development does have the authority to expand a current
zone, and that Spokane Valley will be applying for that expansion after further information is received to
determine the appropriate geographic areas. Councilmember Munson added that this particular law is
under sunset at this session so we would like them to reestablish the law, and then CT.ED can expand the
zone. That clarification will be made on the letter. The question arose concerning the SCAPCA and if
that board represents us adequately as the City of Spokane Valley is not a small city. After further
discussion, it was decided to ask for one position on the board and not two. It was moved by Mayor
DeVleming and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite to approve the legislative agenda with the discussed
amendments. Mayor DcVlerning invited public comment; none was offered. Vote by Acclamation: In
Council Minutes 01 -20-04 Page 2 of 4
Date App7oved by Council:
DRAFT
Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: !None. Motion carried. Councilmember Denenny
said he will pick up the letter tomorrow and hand carry it to the senators and representatives Thursday.
7. Motion Consideration: Library Services Agreement.
Deputy City Manager Regor explained that the Library Board met this afternoon to consider the City's
counteroffer to the Board's December offer; that the Board approved the counteroffer and then held
discussion on how to handle the budget differences as their expenditures exceed their revenues by
approximately $200,000. Ms. Regor said the Board is examining three options: (1) to make a proposal
for how the Board would shrink the expenditures by $200,000 and spread that system -wide; (2) to take
$200,000 to bring their expenses and revenues into alignment and reflect that from the Valley Branch;
and (3) to take the difference between their December proposal and our counteroffer (S67,200) and reflect
that as a reduction in the Valley Branch. Discussion then ensued regarding the reduced level of service
and that it is currently not reflected in the agreement. It was council consensus to wait to see what this
reduced level of service means and to hold this agreement pending that information which should be
decided at the next Library Board meeting scheduled for February 17, 2004.
8. Motion Consideration: TUB Grant Funds.
Public Works Director Kersten explained that this is a housekeeping item, that the funding for the projects
has been approved, but that TIB requests that we certify all local matching funds for the Barker Road and
the Bowdish Road and 24 Avenue sidewalk projects. Director Kersten said this would also require
amending the budget. It was moved by Mayor . DeVleming and seconded, to authorize stuff' to certify the
City has committed local match funds for the .Barker Road Project and the Bowdish Road and 24 Avenue
Sidewalk Project for 2004 and 2005 and to amend our 2004 budget to reflect total project funding. Mayor
DeVleming invited public comment; none was offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous.
Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
ADMLNISTRATWE REPORTS:
9. Hotel/Motel Grant Proposals.
Councilmember Flanigan reported that the Hotel /Motel Committee met to review and discuss the grant
requests; that no consensus was reached for the funding amount for Valleyfest and Valleyfest
subsequently not requested not to be involved in this year's grant process. Therefore, the. Committee
recommends the following allocations: (1) Centennial Trail $2,000; (2) Convention Visitors Bureau
$150,000; (3) Plantes Ferry Park $20,000; (4) County Fair and Expo center $25,000; (5) Regional Sports
Commission S100,000; and (6) Winery Association Brochure Production $2,000; for a total fund award
of $299,000. After brief discussion on possible reserves, Attorney Driskell said he will research to
determine if there are additional funds remaining, it the committee should reconvene to handle those
funds. It was moved by Cottncihne,nber Munson and seconded by Councilmember Schinvnels to approve
committee recommendations. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; none was offered. Thereafter
followed brief descriptions of the projects, and brief comment from a representative from the Convention
Visitors Bureau and Regional Sports Commission. Ms. Regor also mentioned that she feels the intent of
this allocation is to reimburse expenses from the time of Council approval until the end of the calendar
year. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: !None. Abstentions: None. Motion
carried.
10. Stormwater 208 Program Discussion.
Senior Development Engineer John Hohman went over his stormwater 208 program PowerPoint
presentation. Mr. Hohman added that the ordinance which would regulate this would address
implementing regulations and not the comprehensive plan itself. Mr. Hohman also stated that he
anticipates putting together a steering corrunittee along with a technical advisory committee comprised of
engineers and members of the public.
Council Minutes 01- 20-01 I'agc 3 o1'4
Date Approved by Council:
11. Rotchford and 14 Stop Sign Report.
Public Works Director Kersten explained the background of this issue and said that the City's traffic
engineer has looked at the area and determined that a stop sign is not required at this point as that road is
designated as a local access road, and the entire length of that road has not yet been accepted as a City
street due to construction deficiencies. Mr. Kersten said that during the comprehensive plan process that
road would get upgraded to an arterial and if that were to occur, a stop sign would be required. After
discussion on the future of the road and the need for a stop sign, it was moved by Councilmember Taylor
and seconded by Councilmember Munson to install a stop sign for eastbound traffic on 14 at the
intersection of Rotchford. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; none was offered.
Councilmember Denenny mentioned he feels this is not an appropriate action as we are not deciding on
stop signs for other similar streets. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor DeVleming, Councilmembers
Schimmels, Taylor. Munson, and Flanigan: Opposed: Deputy Mayor Wilhite and Councilmember
Denenny; Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
12. Advance Agenda.
Councilmember Munson asked that a travel policy discussion be included on the February 3 agenda.
Mayor DeVleming also mentioned that he would like to reconvene the governance committee and that
former committee members included himself, Councilmembers Denenny and Flanigan and the interim
Deputy City Manager.
13. Tourism Promotion Area.
Mayor DeVleming explained that after discussions with the President of the Hotel /Motel Association, Mr.
Anderson and his attorney, Commissioner Phil Harris, and the Mayor from downtown, there were three
suggested revisions to the interlocal agreement: (1) eliminate paragraph 7C, (2) determine who would pay
for any litigation, and (3) clarification of wording. Mayor .DeVleming said the group stated that the
intention is if 40% initiate the process to disestablish, then the commissioners decided whether to take
action or not, and if they didn't disestablish, that allowed the local jurisdictions to give 90 -days notice to
terminate. Mayor DeVleming said they agreed that their group would pay for any litigation but that they
did not want to eliminate paragraph 7C. Councilmember Munson said that he would not vote for this as
written, and quoted paragraph RCW 35.101.140 "Disestablishment of the Area Hearing and Resolution.
The legislative authority may disestablish an area by ordinance after a hearing before the legislative
authority. The legislative authority shall adopt a resolution of intention to disestablish the area at least 15
days prior to the hearing required by this section. The resolution shall give the time and place of the
hearing." Councilmember Munson added that the text does not state that the hoteliers can disagree and
not. disestablish. Further discussion ensued regarding the 40 %, disestablishment, the resolution process,
and the meaning of paragraphs 7B and 7C. This matter will be taken back to those involved parties and
brought back for further council consideration at the February 10 Council meeting.
It was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed upon to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
A'FTEST:
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
DRAFT
Michael DeVleming, Mayor
Council Minutes 01 -20 -04 Page 4 of 4
Rate Approved by Council:
Attendance:
Councilmembers:
Michael DeVleming, Mayor
Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor
Dick Denenny, Councilmember
Mike Flanigan, Councilmember
Richard Munson, Councilmember
Gary Schimmels, Councilmember
Steve Taylor, Councilmember
DRAFT
MIN UTES
City, of Spokane Valley
City Council Study Session
February 3, 2004, 6:00 p.m.
Staff:
Dave Mercier City Manager
Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager
Ken Thompson, Finance Director
Neil Kersten, Public Works Director
Cal Walker, Police Chief
Mike Jackson, Parks & Recreation Director
Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
Greg McCormick, Long Range Planning Manager
Tom Scholtens, Building Official
Steve Worley, Sr. Engineer
Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
Mayor DeVleming opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m., welcomed all in attendance, reminded everyone
that this is a study session and there will be no public comments, and requested that all electronic
devices be turned off for the duration of the meeting.
1. Opportunity Town Hall Report
Parks & Recreation Director Jackson explained that the Spokane Valley Legacy Foundation is requesting
that the City of Spokane Valley deed ownership of the Opportunity Township Hall to the Foundation for
the purpose of establishing a local heritage museum for the community; that this is one of several
properties acquired from Spokane County, was built in 1912, has approximately 2500 square feet, and is
in overall good condition. Director Jackson added that the Foundation has applied for and received
preliminary approval as a 501(c)(3) non -profit organization. Director Jackson introduced Foundation
Coordinator Jayne Singleton, who also introduced several members of the Foundation Task-force. Ms.
Singleton explained about the Foundation's development to date, that the next phase is to acquire a
location, that the building is now on the Historic Register and that it would be a very appropriate facility
for the museum. Ms. Singleton further stated that the Foundation has a dedicated group of volunteers,
they have established an organizational structure with by- laws, articles of incorporation, a tax
identification number, liability insurance, and have raised over $30,000; they have hundreds of artifacts
and many volunteers to help with the building restoration. Council concurred to move this forward for a
public hearing for February 24, 2004. Council also requested that language be included in the resolution
to address use of the building as a museum or it would revert back as City property, and that the
Foundation adhere to the requirements necessary so the building will remain a national historical
building. A draft resolution will be presented to Council prior to the public hearing date.
2. Street Maintenance Agreement
Public Works Director Kersten gave some background history of the Maintenance Contract Amendment,
explained the basic terms and conditions of the contact, the implementation process of the contract in
2003, the negotiation process with the County for the 2004 budget, and the historical maintenance costs
from the County for years 2002, 2001 and 2000. Director Kersten stressed that the 2003 figures were
very rough estimates and the Valley's portion was not broken out in the budget figures. Director Kersten
also discussed the spreadsheet showing actual costs and budgeted costs. Director Kersten explained the
basic terms of the contract, that the contract can be terminated with 180 day's notice, and that the level of
services explained in the contract is that level customarily provided by the County. Director Kersten
added that the budgeted estimate for 2005 is based on historical numbers used to date, that any changes to
the budget should be made by June 1,2004; and that any substantive changes would require agreement by
Study Session Minutes 02-03-04 Page 1 of 3
Cate Approved by Council: .
DRAFT
the parties involved. Director Kersten recommended monthly monitoring of the contract and if trends
show that we will be beyond budget, to return to Council for further direction. Discussion ensued
regarding the January 23, 2004 letter from Spokane County, and City Manager Mercier stated he feels the
letter is not a letter of termination, but rather a statement that the County is not interested in accepting the
amendment. Mr. Mercier added that there is no evidence to suggest any lower level of service provided
in 2003 than what was provided in 2002. Council stated their confidence that the level of service will
continue to be provided.
3. Couplet Plannnnt;
Deputy City Manager Regor, Public Works Director Kersten, and Long Range Planning Manager
McCormick explained the results of the last joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting of January
15, 2004. Discussion turned to further refinement of categories, scheduling another joint meeting to
answer fundamental questions, development of economic criteria, community survey, community
workshops, and transportation modeling. Mr. McCormick mentioned that staff expects to have a
preliminary draft of the comprehensive plan sometime in August. The format of the next meeting and the
notion of breaking into three small groups within the council chambers, or meeting in different rooms was
briefly discussed. Councilmember Munson mentioned that he would also like to see modeling scenarios
on north/south traffic flow and connecting neighborhoods to the couplet, and to include the anticipated
impact of commuter traffic that will result from I -90 combining three lanes from downtown Spokane to
the Idaho border. Conversation turned to a request to assist SRTC with traffic modeling and alternatives.
No objections were made to the suggestions. Mayor DeVleming asked staff to propose possible meeting
dates with the objection of having 100% participation.
The Mayor called for a short recess at 7:15 p.m.; and reconvened the meeting at 7:28 p.m.
4. Planning Commission Proposed Ordinance Changing Rule
Community Development Director Sukup explained that the proposed change is as a result of election of
new officers for the coming year and that Commission members prefer an annual election rather than an
election every two years. Other items addressed in the ordinance change are housekeeping in nature. It
was Council consensus to schedule this ordinance for a first reading for February 10, 2004.
5. Wastewater Policies
Public Works Director Kcrsten mentioned that he attended a meeting this week concerning the Playfair
Site, that an amendment to the facilities plan is being drafted, and an Environmental Impact Statement
will be conducted on that site with a public meeting scheduled for February 25. The following issues
were discussed: (1) Franchise Fee: determined this issue could be decided later as Council would like to
see how that figure breaks down overall; (2) Capital Planning Fee: no decision; (3) Rate Setting:
suggestion of combining option 2 and 3; discussed having an impartial consultant oversee rate setting;
add to the interlocal agreement that the City of Spokane Valley would be involved in the rate setting
process each year; (4) STEP Program: mutual agreement has been the arrangement to date and that is the
plan to pursue; Council dedicated to the timely completion of the program; (5) DBO Procurement Process
Selection Committee: Council concurs Option C at a minimum; (6) DBO Procurement Process Contract
Approval: Council concurs with Option C; (7) Use of Reserve Funds: Council concurrence with Option
B. Director Kersten added that the County is working to meet the August deadline regarding the Playfair
site with the intent of having that become part of the loan agreement. Councilmember Taylor asked that a
breakdown on the process (a timeline) be incorporated into the decision making process.
6. Proposed Revision to Employee Classification System
Deputy City Manager Regor explained that City resolution 03 -031 calls for a periodic review and update
of all position descriptions, and with the elimination of the City Engineer position, a change is proposed
to move the two full -time Senior Engineer positions to Grade 18. Councilmember Taylor stated his
objection to changing the positions, and would like to see the monetary scale included with the next
agenda materials. The matter will be brought hack for council consideration at the February 24 Council
meeting.
Study Session Minutes 02 -03-04
Date Approved by Council:
Page 2 of 3
DRAFT
7. Council Travel Policy
Councilmcmber Munson explained that this issue came up when he was appointed to an NLC Steering
Committee, and initially thought such appointment required his presence at the NLC meeting; and that
lead to discussion on how to pay for individual council travel, (and as an aside due to other obligations,
Councilmcmber Munson will not be able to attend that meeting). After discussion concerning splitting
the council travel budget by seven, or moving funds from one member who might not be able to travel to
another councilmcmber who could, it was Council consensus to draft some guidelines (such as criteria to
consider when evaluating the travel budget) to be incorporated in a revised governance manual.
8. Advance Agenda Additions.
Suggestions for additions to the advance agenda included the discussion of vouchers for free dump days,
re- authorization of the aquifer protection area program, STA Board status report, and for the retreat to add
an item concerning keeping other councilmembers informed about upcoming activities and meetings.
9. Council Check -In.
City Manager Mercier said this is an opportunity to discuss how to better inform each other of external
communications, and that topic will be addressed more at the upcoming Saturday retreat.
10. City Manager Comments.
City Manager Mercier reminded Council and staff of this weekend's planning retreat workshop, which
will be held in the Council chambers beginning at 9 a.m., and which will adjourn not later than 4:00 p.m.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:42 p.m.
ATIBST:
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Michael DeVlemi Mayor
Study Session Minutes 02 -03-04 Page 3 or3
Date Approved by Council:
r\
Meeting Date: 2 -10 -04
Item: Check all that apply: x consent ❑ old business
❑ information ❑ admin. report
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Claims: Voucher listing total for January 23, 2004, January 30, 2004,
and February 3, 2004
OPTIONS:
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION:
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: $2,506,466.75
STAFF CONTACT: Ellen Avey
ATTACHMENTS Voucher Lists
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Approve claims
January 23, 2004
January 30, 2004
February 3, 2004
City Manager Sign -off:
❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ pending legislation
$ 1,098,853.03
1, 254, 530.80
153, 082.92
$2,506,466.75
vchlist
01/23/2004 9:44:43AM
Bank code : apbank
Voucher
Date Vendor
4125 1/21/2004 000400 AMER INSTITURE OF ARCHITECTS
4126 1/21/2004 000037 AMERICAN LINEN
4127
4128 1/21/2004 000277 ASSOC. OF WA CITIES
1/21/2004 000135 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATIOP 072351
4129 1/21/2004 000212 ATTORNEY & NOTARY SUPPLY
4130 1/20/2004 000030 AVISTA UTILITIES
4131 1/21/2004 000399 BERT'S, JIM
4132 1/20/2004 000101 CDWG
4133 1/21/2004 000109 COFFEE SYSTEMS INC
4134 1/21/2004 000035 CORPORATE EXPRESS
Invoice
315349
KCbond
11/03
Dec2003
10704
LC55928
17961
83443256
Voucher List
Spokane Valley
2000426981
PO #
7199 REGISTRATION
7200 REGISTRATION
7202 REGISTRATION
7203 REGISTRATION
7204 REGISTRATION
7205 REGISTRATION
7319 REGISTRATION
awc04 MUNICIPAL MEMBERSHIP
30176
40006
Description /Account
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIP
Total :
FLOOR MAT SERVICE
NOTARY BOND & STAMP
REFUND
COMPUTER HARDWARE
COFFEE
OFFICE SUPPLIES
Total :
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIP
Total :
Total :
Total :
STREET LIGHTING /SIGNAL POW
STREET LIGHTING & SIGNAL PO
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
Page: 1
Amount
552.00
552.00
67.47
67.47
384.00
384.00
95.00
95.00
95.00
95.00
95.00
95.00
95.00
45,799.79
46,464.79
89.71
89.71
16,700.25
892.46
17,592.71
100.00
100.00
196.00
196.00
71.27
71.27
28.07
vchlist
01/23/2004 9:44:43AM
Bank code : apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
List
Spokane Valley
4134 1/21/2004 000035 000035 CORPORATE EXPRESS (Continued)
4135 1/20/2004 000136 DEPARTMENT OF INFO SERVICES, : 2003120232
4136 1/20/2004 000014 EDEN SYSTEMS, INC.
4137 1/21/2004 000014 EDEN SYSTEMS, INC.
4138 1/20/2004 000028 FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANK 1217 -12/03
1225 -12/03
1332 -12/03
5045 -12/03
5078 -12/03
5151 -12/03
4139
4140
4141
4142
4143
4144
1/21/2004 000179 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFF ASSOC GFOA
1/21/2004 000401 INLAND NW CHAPTER OF ICC
1/20/2004 000388 IRVIN WATER DIST. #16
1/21/2004 000117 JOURNAL NEWS PUBLISHING
1/20/2004 000033 MCPC
1/21/2004 000069 MERCIER, DAVID
18723
ICC
Dec03
63125
4482065
PO #
30155
Description /Account
SOFTWARE SUPPORT
CREDIT CARD PAYMENT
CREDIT CARD PAYMENT
CREDIT CARD PAYMENT
CREDIT CARD PAYMENT
CREDIT CARD PAYMENT
CREDIT CARD PAYMENT
WATER UTILITY CHARGES
ADVERTISEMENT
OFFICE SUPPLIES
03/04 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT
NLC EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT
Total :
30166 MICROSOFT SOFTWARE W /MEC
Total :
19093 SOFTWARE TRAINING
19094 SOFTWARE CONSULTING
Total :
Total :
Total :
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIP
Total :
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
rage: 2
Amount
28.07
1,424.36
1,424.36
2,925.09
900.00
3,825.09
36,305.50
36,305.50
312.68
860.68
1,451.39
371.16
1,083.81
9.86
4,089.58
550.00
550.00
80.00
80.00
93.97
93.97
22.45
22.45
318.91
318.91
1,300.00
650.00
Page: 2
vchlist
01/23/2004 9:44:43AM
Bank code : apbank
Voucher
4144
4145
4146
4147
4148
4149
4150
4151
4152
4153
4154
4155
Date Vendor
Invoice
1/21/2004 000069 000069 MERCIER. DAVID (Continued)
1/20/2004 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER COMPA Dec2003
1/20/2004 000077
1/20/2004 000403
1/21/2004 000354
1/20/2004 000043
1/21/2004 000036
1/20/2004 000307
1/21/2004 000092
1/20/2004 000003
1/21/2004 000067
1/20/2004 000172
MORRISON, DON
MUELLER EXCAVATING
NAPM - SPOKANE
NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
OFFICE DEPOT
121103
PW03 -529
napm
Dec03
230000445
OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER dec03
PLANNING ASSOCIATION, OF WASH paw
PAW -MH
ROYAL BUSINESS SYSTEMS
SIGNS NOW
SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEER 14
181493
116 11666
15
4156 1/20/2004 000090 SPOKANE COUNTY INFORMATION, : 31695
Voucher List
Spokane Valley
PO #
40008
Description /Account
Total :
STREET LIGHTING POWER/WAT
Total :
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Total :
PERMIT REFUND
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIP
Total :
CELL PHONE PLAN CHARGES
Total :
Total :
Total :
OFFICE SUPPLIES
STATE REMITTANCES
INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERSHIP
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIP
Total :
COPY CHARGES
SIGNS
Total :
Total :
Total :
COUNTY ENGINEERING SERVIC
ROAD MAINTENANCE SERVICE
Total :
GIS SERVICES
Page: 3
Amount
1,950.00
7,135.01
7,135.01
2,360.00
2,360.00
82.00
82.00
150.00
150.00
469.91
469.91
144.52
144.52
52,431.40
52,431.40
80.00
35.00
115.00
221.67
221.67
155.02
155.02
83,622.42
187,386.46
271,008.88
5,011.69
Page: 3
vchlist
01/23/2004 9:44:43AM
Bank code : apbank
Voucher
4156
4157
4158
4159
4160
4161
4162
4163
4164
4165
4166
4167
Date Vendor
1/20/2004 000090 SPOKANE COUNTY INFORMATION, ; (Continued)
31702
1/20/2004 000308 SPOKANE COUNTY PROSECUTING, crimevic
1/20/2004 000001 SPOKANE COUNTY TREASURER Dec2003
1/20/2004 000323 SPOKANE COUNTY UTILITIES Dec03
hillview
1/21/2004 000273 SPOKANE REGIONAL, TRANSPORTF srtc04
1/21/2004 000011 SPOKANE VALLEY CHAMBER, OF C( 102151
GMc
1/21/2004 000405 SPOKANE VALLEY COMMUNITY, CEI SVCC
1/20/2004 000398 TAN MOORE ARCHITECTS
1/20/2004 000093 THE SPOKESMAN - REVIEW
1/21/2004 000025 UNISOURCE CORPORATION
1/20/2004 000167
1/21/2004 000098
VERA WATER & POWER
WA CITIES INSURANCE AUTHORITY
Invoice
Two
123103
21108060
VotLr List
Spokane Valley
PO #
40004
40004
Description /Account
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Total :
CRIME VICTIMS COMPENSATIOI
Total :
JAIL CONTRACT
SEWER UTILITY CHARGES
SEWER UTILITY MAINTENANCE
Total :
MUNICIPAL MEMBERSHIP
MEMBERSHI P
REGISTRATION
TOURISM PROMOTION
PAPER
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Total :
CLASSIFED ADVERTISEMENTS
Total :
Total :
Dec03 STREET LIGHTING & SIGNAL PO
Total :
0490 MUNICIPAL INSURANCE PREMIL
rage: 4
Amount
459.39
5,471.08
765.55
765.55
19, 386.62
19,386.62
586.99
423,729.60
424,316.59
34,300.00
34,300.00
250.00
150.00
400.00
4,000.00
4,000.00
2,939.29
2,939.29
744.22
744.22
474.91
474.91
355.13
355.13
110,988.00
Page: 4
vchlist
01/23/2004 9:44:43AM
Bank code : apbank
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice
4167 1/21/2004 000098 000098 WA CITIES INSURANCE AUTHOF (Continued)
4168 1/21/2004 000402 WA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION statebar04
4169 1/20/2004 000361 WA STATE DOT
40113079
40113080
4170 1/21/2004 000100 WABO wabo
4171 1/21/2004 000047 WASHINGTON CITY /COUNTY, MANA 2004
4172 1/20/2004 000409 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMEN1 10/11/12/03
4173 1/21/2004 000347 WORLEY, STEVE asce
4174 1/20/2004 000406 SPOKANE REGIONAL CVB SRCVB
4175 1/20/2004 000407 SPOKANE VALLEY JUNIOR, SOCCEF SCJSA
4176 1/20/2004 000404 SPOKANE VALLEY LEGACY, FOUND, SVLF
52 Vouchers for bank code : apbank
52 Vouchers in this report
Voucher List
Spokane Valley
PO #
DescriptionlAccount
Total :
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIP
Total :
STREET LIGHTING & SIGNAL MA
STATE ROADWAY MAINTENANC
Total :
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS
Total :
• PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIP
Total :
LEASEHOLD EXCISE TAX RETUF
Total :
EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
TOURISM PROMOTION
TOURISM PROMOTION
TOURISM PROMOTION
Bank total :
Total vouchers :
Page: 5
Amount
110,988.00
388.00
388.00
3,877.82
4,138.52
8,016.34
150.00
150.00
137.00
137.00
4,804.86
4,804.86
205.00
205.00
26,108.79
26,108.79
5,422.36
5,422.36
1,000.00
1,000.00
1,098,853.03
1,098,853.03
Page: 5
vchlist ` Vot.:...-r List Page: 6
01/23/2004 9:44:43AM Spokane Valley
Bank code : apbank
I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury,
that the materials have been furnished, the services
rendered, or the labor performed as described herein
and That the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation
against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am
authorized to authenticate and certify to said claim.
Finance Director Date
MAYOR
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount
APPROVED:
COUNCILMEIBER
Page: 6
vchlist •
01/30/2004 3:32:12PM
Bank code : apbank
Voucher
4178
4179
4180
4181
4182
4183
4184
4185
4186
Date Vendor
1/30/2004 000335 ALTON'S TIRE
1/30/2004 000037
1/30/2004 000135
1/30/2004 000120
1/30/2004 000144
1/30/2004 000109
1/30/2004 000227
1/30/2004 000418
1/30/2004 000035
AMERICAN LINEN
Invoice
06 -78991
06 -79000
324025
AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATIO 0- 989746
0- 990165
AWC EMPLOYEE BENEFITS TRUST AWC
CITY OF LIBERTY LAKE
COFFEE SYSTEMS INC
CONKLIN, PEGGY
CORNELL, KAREN
CORPORATE EXPRESS
012904
18143
012004
11404
48720174
Voucher List
Spokane Valley
48894983
48930094
48972716
49095329
4187 1/30/2004 000414 DAUGHERTY, ROB REZ- 23- 03NAR -04 -03
PO #
40005
40005
40009
40006
40013
40009
Description/Account
STUDDED SNOW TIRES
STUDDED SNOW TIRES
FLOOR MAT SERVICE
BOOKS
BOOKS
BENEFITS PAYMENT
DOCUMENT COPY CHARGE
Total :
COFFEE
EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT
Total :
EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT
Total :
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
PERMIT REFUND
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
Page: 1
Page: 1
Amount
149.16
172.28
321.44
68.03
68.03
386.74
28.05
414.79
1,750.88
1,750.88
176.25
176.25
147.98
147.98
21.58
21.58
9.85
9.85
451.40
184.48
1.91
468.64
175.49
1,281.92
2,550.00
2,550.00
vchlist
01/30/2004 3:32:12PM
Bank code: apbank
Voucher
4188
4189
4190
4191
4192
4193
4194
4195
4196
4197
4198
4199
Date Vendor
1/30/2004 000060
1/30/2004 000165
1/30/2004 000059
1/30/2004 000288
DENENNY, RICHARD
DEPART OF RETIREMENT SYS
DEVLEMING, MICHAEL
1/30/2004 000321 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCI 678
1/30/2004 000353
Invoice
DD12103
Pers3
11/12 -03
MD12/03
1/30/2004 000072 FLANIGAN, MIKE MF12 /03
1/30/2004 000171 GEIGER CORRECTIONS CENTER Dec03
Nov03
1130/2004 000412 GREAT NORTHERN PLUMBING 6475
1/30/2004 000421 HOHMAN, JOHN 012804
1/30/2004 000220 ICMA 21152
1/30/2004 000222 ICMA RETIREMENT CORP. 21158
INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL TSrenewal
INTERNATIONAL TRADE, ALLIANCE 1st qtr '04
Voce r List
Spokane Valley
PO #
Description /Account
MONTHLY CELL PHONE ALLOW
Total :
PERS BENEFIT PAYMENT
Total :
MILEAGE
MONTHLY CELL PHONE ALLOW
Total :
TOURISM PROMOTION
MONTHLY CELL PHONE ALLOW
Total :
GEIGER CONTRACT
GEIGER CORRECTION CENTER
Total :
INSTALL ICEMAKER
RETIREMENT PLAN FEE
RETIREMENT PLAN FEE
Total :
Total :
EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT
Total :
Total :
Total :
PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATI
Total :
AGENCY AWARD PAYMENT
Total :
rage: 2
Amount
35.00
35.00
230.88
230.88
62.50
35.00
97.50
13, 750.00
13,750.00
35.00
35.00
6,717.75
3,471.00
10,188.75
83.23
83.23
25.50
25.50
250.00
250.00
125.00
125.00
100.00
100.00
3,500.00
3,500.00
Page: 2
vchlist
01/30/2004 3:32:12PM
Bank code : apbank
Voucher List Page: 3
Spokane Valley
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount
4200 1/30/2004 000012 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS INV001902508 DISPLAY AD 210.00
INV001902525 ADVERTISEMENT 210.00
Total : 420.00
4201 1/30/2004 000275 KERSTEN, NEIL 012304 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 66.97
Total : 66.97
4202 1/30/2004 000071 LARSON, SUE 011504 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 12.36
012604 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 75.66
Total : 88.02
4203 1/30/2004 000416 MARLOW, JEFF SP -08 -03 PERMIT REFUND 163.00
Total : 163.00
4204 1/30/2004 000033 MCPC 4484360 40002 OFFICE SUPPLIES 67.03
4487199 40007 OFFICE SUPPLIES 606.53
4487993 40010 OFFICE SUPPLIES 89.90
4488663 40014 OFFICE SUPPLIES 96.56
Total : 860.02
4205 1/30/2004 000062 MUNSON, RICHARD RM12/03 MONTHLY CELL PHONE ALLOW 35.00
Total : 35.00
4206 1/30/2004 000239 NORTHWEST BUSINESS STAMP 46883 OFFICE SUPPLIES 65.72
46930 CUSTOM STAMPS 219.93
47142 NOTARY STAMP 49.13
Total : 334.78
4207 1/30/2004 000193 NORTHWEST CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS Feb2004 CITY HALL RENT; FEB 2004 20,746.93
Total : 20,746.93
4208 1/30/2004 000243 NORTHWEST SIGN SUPPLY 678884 40023 PLOTTER PAPER 115.80
Total : 115.80
4209 1/30/2004 000036 OFFICE DEPOT 229718447 40011 OFFICE SUPPLIES 113.47
40003
232139890 40018 OFFICE SUPPLIES 146.21
Page: 3
vchlist
01/30/2004 3:32:12PM
Bank code: apbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
4209 1/30/2004 000036 OFFICE DEPOT (Continued)
5106
8257
Vou ner List
Spokane Valley
PO #
Description /Account Amount
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OFFICE SUPPLIES
Total :
4
32.12
7.78
391.23
4210 1/30/2004 000016 PETROCARD SYSTEMS C402482 VEHICLE FUEL 131.34
Total : 131.34
4211 1/30/2004 000149 PIP PRINTING OF SPOKANE 1330025691 REPORT COVERS 169.74
Total : 169.74
4212 1/30/2004 000322 QWEST Jan03 TELEPHONE CHARGES 79.35
Total : 79.35
4213 1/30/2004 000024 RESOURCE COMPUTING INC. 36200 IT SUPPORT LABOR 1,891.75
Total : 1,891.75
4214 1/30/2004 000341 RICOH CORPORATION 4024169992 COPY EQUIPMENT LEASE 656.17
Total : 656.17
4215 1/30/2004 000415 ROSAUERS U -CITY 554315 MEETING PROVISIONS 11.53
Total : 11.53
4216 1/30/2004 000202 SCAPCA 2396 SCAPCA ASSESSMENT FEE 28,736.50
Total : 28,736.50
4217 1/30/2004 000064 SCHIMMELS, GARY GS12/03 MONTHLY CELL PHONE ALLOW 35.00
Total : 35.00
4218 1/30/2004 000297 SCHOLTENS, TOM 012804 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 16.00
Total : 16.00
4219 1/30/2004 000324 SCWD #3 Jan04 WATER UTILITY CHARGES 25.52
Total : 25.52
4220 1/30/2004 000001 SPOKANE COUNTY TREASURER 011404 2004 ULID 2,570.24
01142004 2004 ULID 889.29
JANO4 SHERIFF LAW ENFORCEMENT C 980,564.33
Page: 4
vchlist
01/30/2004 3:32:12PM
Bank code : apbank
Voucher
Date Vendor
4220 1/30/2004 000001 SPOKANE COUNTY TREASURER
4221 1/30/2004 000323
4222 1/30/2004 000406
4223 1/30/2004 000420
4224 1/30/2004 000011
4225 1/30/2004 000196
4226 1/30/2004 000311
4227 1/30/2004 000081
4228
4229
4230
4231
SPOKANE COUNTY UTILITIES 2
SPOKANE REGIONAL CVB
SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DIST 56 -1368
SPOKANE VALLEY CHAMBER, OF C 010704
SPOKANE - KOOTENAI RERC
SPRINT PCS
1/30/2004 000211 STATE TREASURER
1/30/2004 000419 SUMMIT LAW GROUP
1/30/2004 000063 TAYLOR, STEVE
1/30/2004 000177 U.S. POSTAL SERVICE
Invoice
(Continued)
Oct -Dec03
final 2003
Feb04
Dec -Jan
STATE OF WA, DEPART OF REVENU Dec03
23201 PROFESSIONAL LICENSE RENE
Total :
20087
ST12/03
Voucher List
Spokane Valley
012904
Jan postage
PO #
Description /Account
PROSECUTION SERVICES
SEWER MAINTENANCE
TOURISM PROMOTION
SITE PLAN REVIEW
DIRECTORY ADVERTISEMENT
Total :
REGISTRATION
CELL PHONE PLAN CHARGES
Total :
EXCISE TAX RETURN
LEGAL FEES
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
Total :
MONTHLY CELL PHONE ALLOW
Total :
NEWSLETTER POSTAGE
POSTAGE
Total :
Page: 5
Amount
2,992.88
987,016.74
105,884.24
105,884.24
67,531.21
67,531.21
180.00
180.00
480.00
480.00
120.00
120.00
54.92
54.92
230.57
230.57
116.00
116.00
1,006.50
1,006.50
35.00
35.00
160.06
500.00
660.06
Page: 5
vchlist
0113012004 3:32:12PM
Bank code: apbank
Voucher
Date Vendor
4232 1/30/2004 000038
4233 1/30/2004 000413
4234 1/30/2004 000417
4235
4236
4237
1/30/2004 000255 WFOA
1/30/2004 000061 WILHITE, DIANA
1/30/2004 000004 ZEPUBLIC
60 Vouchers for bank code :
60 Vouchers in this report
apbank
I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury,
that the materials have been furnished, the services
rendered, or the labor performed as described herein
and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation
against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am
authorized to authenticate and certify to said claim.
Finance Director Date
Invoice
011204
DW 12/03
Jan2004
Vol r'r List
Spokane Valley
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKAN 1022932 -2681
WEST COAST CASH REGISTER 1345
WESTERN DANCE ASSOCIATION 012004
PO #
Description /Account
TRASH COLLECTION SERVICE
Total :
CASH DRAWER INSTALLATION
Total :
UTILITIES REIMBURSEMENT
Total :
PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIP
Total :
MONTHLY CELL PHONE ALLOW
Total :
WEBSITE HOSTING & MAINTENF
Total :
Bank total :
Total vouchers :
rage: 6
Amount
383.82
383.82
94.05
94.05
251.96
251.96
50.00
50.00
35.00
35.00
262.50
262.50
1,254,530.80
1,254,530.80
Page: 6
vchlist
02/0312004 4:52:09PM
Bank code : apbank
Voucher List Page: 1
Spokane Valley
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount
4261 2/312004 000001 SPOKANE COUNTY TREASURER Jan04 COUNTY CONTRACT SERVICES 153,082.92
Total : 153,082.92
1 Vouchers for bank code : apbank
Bank total : 153,082.92
1 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 153,082.92
I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury,
that the materials have been furnished, the services
rendered, or the labor performed as described herein
and that the claim is Just, due and an unpaid obligation
against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am
authorized to authenticate and certify to said claim.
Finance Director Date
APPROVED:
MAYOR
COUNCIL.MRMBER
Page: 1
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
0 Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: 2- 10 - -04 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: x consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Payroll for Period Ending January 31, 2004
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
BACKGROUND:
OPTIONS:
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION:
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Payroll for period ending 01 -31 -04
Salary: $ 95,375.51
Benefits: $ 45,913.77
$141,289.28
STAFF CONTACT: Daniel Cenis
ATTACHMENTS
CITY SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: February 10, 2004
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business 0 new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of an ordinance establishing Article V — Special Zones of
the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code and providing for flood
damage prevention in accordance with the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP), designating a Floodplain Administrator, repealing
ordinances in conflict, establishing penalties for non - compliance,
providing for severability and effective date
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 86.12.210
PREVIOUS COUNCIL /COMMISSION
ACTION: City Council received an Administrative Report on participation in the NFIP
and the proposed ordinance on November 12, 2003.
Planning Commission opened a Public Hearing on December 4, 2003, and
continued the hearing until January 8, 2004. On January 22, 2004 The
Commission recommended approval.
BACKGROUND: The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) provides flood insurance for
properties located within the 100 -year floodplain designated by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency. Spokane County participates in NFIP pursuant to RCW 86.12.200 and
has developed a comprehensive flood control management plan exceeding the minimum
requirements for participation in the national flood insurance program adopted by the
Department of Ecology pursuant to RCW 86.16.031, as well as rules adopted by the
Department of Ecology (RCW 86.26.050) relating to flood plain management activities.
Approximately 80 residential structures and four non - residential structures are located within
flood hazard areas identified in Spokane Valley. Existing flood insurance policies will be
continued under the umbrella of Spokane County NFIP participation during the one -year period
prior to the City's acceptance into the program.
The proposed ordinance meets the requirements for official action required for participation in
NFIP. The standards for both residential and non - residential construction are a minimum of one
foot above base flood elevation (BFE)as has been required by Spokane County. The minimum
elevation for manufactured housing, however require that the bottom of the crawl space be
elevated one foot or more above BFE. The proposed ordinance also provides that an
engineering study be conducted in certain areas to demonstrate no impact to the ability of the
floodplain to infiltrate, store and release floodwaters. These areas include Chester Creek:
downstream of Mohawk Road, Saltese Creek: all areas of ponding and infiltration; Forker: south
of the intersection of Forker Road and Progress Road; Central Park: west of Park Road; and
Glenrose: west of Carnahan Road and south of 8 Ave.
Subsequent to the hearing and after the decision of the Planning Commission, a letter was
received from Jim Dingfield, P.E., on behalf of the American Council of Engineering Companies,
Washington Liaison (attached). His recommendations included 1) changing the language
requiring certification to "stamped ", 2) clarification of the minimum requirements for critical
facilities already addressed by the Commission, and 3) a suggestion that utilities have a
freeboard requirement (e.g. one foot above BFE). The recommendation of requiring freeboard
for utilities will be incorporated into the provisions of the Spokane Valley Building Code.' Staff
engineers recommend no change in the language requiring certification by the design engineer
that projects meet design requirements relative to adverse impacts of projects within the
floodway and structural flood - proofing.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve the ordinance.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Not applicable.
STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, AICP — Community Development Director
ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Ordinance, as recommended by Planning Commission
Jim Dingfield, P.E., American Council of Engineering Companies,
Washington Liaison
2
CH2MH ILL
January 22, 2004
City of Spokane Valley
Planning Commission
11707 E. Sprague Ave.
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Subject: Proposed Flood Hazard Ordinance
CH2M MILL
9 South Washington Street
Suite 400
Spokane, WA 99201 -3709
Tel 509.747.2000
Fax 509.623.1622
Dear : Planning Commission Members
I serve as chair of the American Council of Engineering Companies of Washington (ACEC
Washington) Spokane Area Liaison Committee. This committee is comprised of a number of
consulting engineering firms with offices in the greater Spokane area providing technical
expertise in civil, electrical, environmental, geotechnical, structural, transportation, and a
variety of other disciplines. The purpose of this letter is to provide comments, on behalf of
our membership, regarding the City of Spokane Valley's draft flood hazard ordinance.
In general, we consider this to be a good ordinance. It appears to exceed the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP) requirements stipulated in Section 60.3 of 44 CFR, and thus
would be creditable under the NFIP's Community Rating System (CRS) program. We
understand 1\NFIP policyholders in CRS participating communities can receive policy
premium discounts ranging from 5 percent to 45 percent.
However, we do have specific concerns with some provisions of the draft ordinance as
described below.
We are concerned about language throughout the draft ordinance that requires professional
engineers to "certify" or provide "certification." Generally, any time an engineer provides a
certification it implies a warranty or guarantee. Most professional liability insurance
policies do not provide insurance protection when an engineer provides a warranty or
guarantee. We doubt that it is the intent of the City of Spokane Valley to cause engineering
professionals to practice outside of the protection of normal professional liability insurance
coverage. In many cases changing the term "certified by a professional engineer" to
"stamped by a professional engineer" will adequately address this concern. When an
engineer "stamps" his or her work it indicates that the work he or she did to arrive at
conclusions and recommendations, or on which a design was based, was completed in
accordance with the standard of practice in the engineering industry in the region in which
the professional work was completed. To provide a "guarantee" for anything more than
that, in terms of flood elevation determination and design to mitigate flooding, is not
sensible. The science related to evaluating what areas will and will not flood is not exact
and there are many variables that influence flood elevations. It is unreasonable to expect
that an engineer can provide a guarantee that will be valid over the long term.
Planning Commission
Page 2
January 22, 2004
Some sections of the draft ordinance may require rewording to state a specific technical
requirement and then state that requirement that the work to be prepared and stamped by a
professional engineer to address our concern. For example, Section 5.06.11(2) of the draft
ordinance states:
This could be revised to read:
Although the differences between these two versions may be subtle, in our opinion such
revisions would satisfy the City's needs and avoid certification language that is
unacceptable to the professional engineering community.
On another topic, Section 5.06.08.2 (1) is very confusing in the way it reads "...below one
foot or more above..." We would suggest addition of the term "Flood Protection Elevation"
in the definition section of the ordinance and define that new term as: "one foot above the
base flood elevation." Then, in all portions of the ordinance where the elevation criteria is
stipulated, they refer to: "elevate or flood -proof to the flood protection elevation ". It just
reads a lot easier that way and eliminates any points of possible contention.
Also, it is our understanding that FEMA is encouraging communities to protect utilities
[(Section 5.06.04(3)] to the freeboard elevation, i.e, one foot above base flood elevation they
stipulate for the elevation standard. This eliminates any possible chances of the elevation of
these facilities dropping below base flood elevation. This is not required by 44 CFR, but is
strongly recommended since it will impact insurance rates.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments. If you have questions or concerns
please contact me at (509) 747 -2000, ext. 241.
Sincerely,
CH2M HILL
"...project design must incorporate flood - proofing certified by a professional civil
engineer ... to be capable of withstanding 100 -year flood flows and velocities. "
"...project design must incorporate flood - proofing to withstand 100 -year flood flows
and velocities, and be prepared [and stamped] by a registered professional
engineer." [Note: the "and stamped" is optional because state law (RCW 18.43.070) already
requires professional engineers to stamp their work products.
1 ✓
Jim l7ingfield, P.E.
Chair, ACEC Washington Spokane Area Liaison Committee
Cc: Liaison Com nittee Mei7►b
u
DRAFT
ORDINANCE NO. 04 -004
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON,
ESTABLISHING ARTICLE V SPECIAL ZONES AND PROVIDING FOR
FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE
NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM; DESIGNATING A
FLOODPLAIN ADiVLNISTRATOR; REPEALING ORDINANCES IN
CONFLICT; ESTABLISHING PENALTIES FOR NON - COMPLIANCE; AND
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABI[LITY AIN'T) EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Washington has delegated the responsibility to local
governmental units to adopt regulations designed to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare
of its citizenry; and
WHEREAS, flood hazard areas are subject to periodic inundation which results in loss of life
and property, health, and safety hazards, disruption of commerce and governmental services,
extraordinary public expenditures for flood protection and relief, and impairment of the tax base, all of
which adversely affects the public health, safety, and general welfare; and
WHEREAS, the regulation of construction within flood hazard areas assists in maintaining a
stable tax base, ensures that potential purchasers of real property have notice of flood hazard conditions,
and provides for the availability of flood insurance to the owners of real property; and
WHEREAS, management of floodplain hazard areas is authorized pursuant to RCW 86.12.210;
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, do
ordain as follows:
Section 1. Article V of the Spokane Valley Development Code is hereby established to read as follows:
Section 5.01. Purpose
In order to limit flood damages and associated losses, the City provides for the following:
(1) Restricting or prohibiting uses which are dangerous to health, safety, and property due to water or
erosion hazards, or which result in damaging increases in erosion or in flood heights or velocities;
(2) Requiring that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such uses, be protected
against flood damage at the time of initial construction;
(3) Controlling the alteration of natural flood plains, stream channels, and natural protective barriers
which help accommodate or channel flood waters;
(4) Controlling filling, grading, dredging, and other development which may increase flood damage;
and
(5) Preventing or regulating the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert
floodwaters or may increase flood hazards in other areas.
Ordinance re Flood Insurance Page 1 of 15
DRAFT
Section 5.02 Definitions
Unless specifically defined below, words. or phrases used in this ordinance shall be interpreted so as to
give them the meaning they have in common usage and to give this ordinance its most reasonable
application.
"APPEAL" means a request for a review of the interpretation of any provision of this ordinance or a
request for a variance.
"AREA OF SHALLOW FLOODING" means a designated AO, or AI-1 Zone on the Flood Insurance Rate
Map (FIRM) and which has the following characteristics:
(1) The base flood depths range from one to three feet;
(2) A clearly defined channel does not exist;
(3) The path of flooding is unpredictable and indeterminate; and,
(4) Velocity flow may be evident.
AO is characterized as sheet flow and AI-I indicates ponding.
"AREA OF SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD" means the land in the flood plain within a community subject
to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. Designation on maps always includes
the letters A or V.
"BASE FLOOD" means the flood having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given
year. Also referred to as the "1 OO -year flood." Designation on maps always includes the letters A or V.
"BASEMENT" means any area of the building ha ving its floor sub -grade (below ground level) on all
sides.
"BREAKAWAY WALL" means a wall that is not part of the structural support of the building and is
intended through its desigm and construction to collapse under specific lateral loading forces, without
causing damage to the elevated portion of the building or supporting foundation system.
"CRITICAL FACILITY" means a facility for which even a slight chance of flooding might be too great.
Critical facilities include, but are not limited to schools, nursing homes, hospitals, police, fire and
emergency response installations, installations which produce, use or store hazardous materials or
hazardous waste.
"DEVELOPMENT" means any man -made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but
not limited to buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or
drilling operations or storage of equipment or materials located within the area of special flood hazard.
"ELEVATED BUILDING" means for insurance purposes; a non - basement building which has its lowest
elevated floor raised above ground level by foundation walls, shear walls, post, piers, pilings, or columns.
"EXISTING MANUFACTURED HOME PARK OR SUBDIVISION" means a manufactured home park
or subdivision for which the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured
homes are to be affixed (including, at a minimum, the installation of utilities, the construction of streets,
and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads) is completed before the effective date of the
adopted floodplain management regulations.
"EXPANSION TO AN EXISTING MANUFACTURED HOME PARK OR SUBDIVISION" means the
preparation of additional sites by the construction of facilities for servicing the Tots on which the
11SV•FSIIUs A cbainbridge \chainbridgeOrdinancesNArlicle v Floodplain ordinance for 2.10- 04.doc Page 2 of 15
0
DRAFT
manufactured homes Eire to he affixed (including the installation of utilities the construction of streets,
and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads).
"FLOOD" or "FLOODING' means a general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation
of normally dry land areas from:
(1) The overflow of inland or tidal wittcrs and /or
(2) The unusual and rapid accumulation of runoff of surface waters from any source.
"FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (FIRM)" means the official map on which the Federal Insurance
Administration has delineated both the areas of special flood hazards and the risk premium zones
applicable to the community.
"FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY" means the official report provided by the Federal Insurance
Administration that includes flood profiles, the Flood Boundary - Floods +gay Map, and the water surface
elevation of the base flood.
"FLOODWAY" means the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must
he reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface
elevation more than one foot.
"LOWEST FLOOR." means the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area (including basement'). AD
unfinished or flood resistant enclosure, usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage, in
an area other than a basement area, is not considered a building's lowest floor, provided that such
enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the applicable non- elevation design
requirements of this ordinance found at Section 5.06.S.1(2).
"MANUFACTURED I-(OME" means a structure, transportable in one or more sections, which is built on
a permanent chassis and is designed for use with or without: a permanent foundation when attached to the
required utilities_ The term "manufactured Morse" does not include a ` vehicle."
"MANUFACTURED HOME PARK OR SUBDIVISION" means a parcel (or contiguous parcels) of land
divided into two or more manufactured home lots for rent or sale.
"NEW CONSTRUCTION" means structures for which the "start of construction" commenced on or after
the effective date of this ordinance.
NEW MANUFACTURED HOME PARK OR SU.BDtVISIOiI" means a manufactured home park or
subdivision for which the construction of facilities for servicing the lots on which the manufactured
horses are to be affixed (including at a minimum, the installation of utilities, the construction of streets,
and either final site grading or the pouring of concrete pads) is completed on or after the effective date of
adopted floodplain management regulations.
".RECREATIONAL VEHICLE" means a vehicle which is:
(I) Built on a single chassis;
(2) 400 square feet or less when measured at the largest horizontal projection;
(3) Designed to be self-propelled or permanently towable by a light duty truck; and
(4) Designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for
recreational, camping,, travel, or seasonal use.
"START OF CONSTRUCTION" includes substantial improvement, and means the date the building
permit was issued, provided the actual start of construction, repair, reconstruction, placement or other
NSV- F15M4Lisereiehainbrid4e lchainbricIWOrdinanorslAnicll V FIoodplain untinanix fur2- I0- 0411.pc Page3 of 15
DRAFT
improvement was within 180 days of the pennit dale. The actual start means either the first placement of
permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the pouring of slab or footings, the installation of
piles, the construction of columns, or any work beyond the stage of excavation; or the placement of a
manufactured home on a foundation. Permanent construction does not include land preparation, such as
clearing grading and filling; nor dons it include the insta[Iation of streets and/or walkways; nor does it
include excavation for a basement, footings, piers, or foundations or the erection of temporary forms: nor
does it include the installation on the property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not
occupied as dwelling units or not part of the main structure. For a substantial improvement, the actual
start of construction means the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of a
building, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the building.
"STRUCTURE" means a walled and roofed building including a gas or liquid storage tank that is
principally above ground,
"SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE" means damage of any origin sustained by a structure whereby the cost of
restoring the structure to its before damaged condition would equal or exceed 50 percent of the market
value of the structure before the damage occurred.
"SUBSTANTIAL INIPROVEI EN'T" means any repair, reconstruction, or improvement of a structure,
the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the market value of the structure either
Before the improvement or repair is started; or
If the structure has been damaged and is being restored, before the damage occurred. For
the purposes of this definition "substantial improvement" is considered to occur when the
first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of the building
commences._ whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the
structure.
The tern does not, however, include either:
(1) Any project for improvement of a structure to correct existing violations of state or local
health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which have been identified by the !oval
code enforcement official and which are the minimum necessary to assure safe living
conditions. or
( Any alteration of a structure listed on the National Register of Historic Places or a State
inventory of Historic Places
" means a grant of relief from the requirements of this ordinance which permits construction
in a manner that would otherwise be prohibited by this ordinance.
"WATER DEPENDENT" means a structure for commerce or industry which cannot exist in any other
location and is dependent on the water by reason of the intrinsic nature of its operations.
Section 5.03
5.03.01 APPLICABILITY
This ordinance shall apply to all areas of special flood hazards within the jurisdiction of Spokane Valley,
Washington.
5.03.02 BASIS FOR ESTABLISHING THE AREAS OF SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD
The areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal insurance Administration in a scientific and
engineering report entitled ' Flood Insurance Study Spokane County" dated May 17, 1988, and any
revisions thereto, v,rith an accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), and any revisions thereto.
VISY -I SllUserskbainbridgetebainbridg OrdilinncesVoLicic Y FIi odplain ordinance for 2- 10- 04-dna page 4 of 15
DRAFT
are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this ordinance. The Flood Insurance Study
and the FIRM are on file at the office of the Spokane Valley Floodplain Administrator.
5.03.03 STOP WORK ORDERS
Whenever any work is being done contrary to the provisions of this chapter, the Floodplain Administrator
may order the work stopped by notice in writing directed to the owner of record and/or taxpayer and /or to
those persons who are engaged in causing or contributing to such violation. Such persons shall forthwith
stop or shall cause to be stopped any such work until authorized to proceed.
5.03.04 PENALTIES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE
No structure or land shall hereafter be constructed, located, extended, converted, or altered without full
compliance with the terms of this ordinance and other applicable regulations. Intentional violations of the
provisions of this ordinance by failure to comply with any of its requirements (including violations of
conditions, stop work orders, and safeguards established in connection with conditions), shall constitute a
misdemeanor, with each day of continuing violation constituting a separate offense. Any person who
intentionally violates this ordinance or fails to comply with any of its requirements shall upon conviction
thereof be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than 90 days, or both, for each
violation, and in addition shall pay all costs and expenses involved in the case. Nothing herein contained
shall prevent the City of Spokane Valley from taking such other lawful action, including seeking civil
penalties, as is necessary to prevent or remedy any violation.
SECTION 5.03.05 ABROGATION AND GREATER RESTRICTIONS
This ordinance is not intended to repeal, abrogate, or impair any existing easements, covenants, or deed
restrictions. However, where this ordinance and another ordinance, easement, covenant, or deed
restriction conflict or overlap, whichever imposes the more stringent restrictions shall prevail.
5.03.06 INTERPRETATION
in the interpretation and application of this ordinance, all provisions shall be:
(1) Considered as minimum requirements;
(2) Liberally construed in favor of the governing body; and,
(3) Deemed neither to limit nor repeal any other powers granted under State statutes.
5.03.07 WARNING AND DISCLAIMER. OF LIABILITY
The degree of flood protection required by this ordinance is considered reasonable for regulatory purposes
and is based on scientific and engineering considerations. Larger floods can and will occur on rare
occasions. Flood heights may be increased by man -made or natural causes. This ordinance does not
imply that land outside the areas of special flood hazards or uses permitted within such areas will be free
from flooding or flood damages. This ordinance shall not create liability on the part of the City of
Spokane Valley, any officer or employee thereof, or the Federal Insurance Administration, for any flood
damages that result from reliance on this ordinance or any administrative decision lawfully made
hereunder.
SECTION 5.04. ADMINISTRATION
5.04.01 DEVELOPMENT PERMIT REQUIRED
A development permit shall be obtained before construction or development begins within any area of
special flood hazard established in Section 5.03.2. The permit shall be for all structures including
manufactured homes, as set forth in the "DEFINITIONS," and for all development including fill and
other activities, also as set forth in the "DEFINITIONS."
\ SV- FS11Uscrs cbainbridgc \cbainbrideelOrdinnnceslArticic V Floodplain ordinance for 2- 10- 04.doc Page 5 of 15
DRAFT
5.04.02 APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
Application for a development permit shall be made on forms furnished by the City and may include, but
not be limited to, plans in duplicate drawn to scale showing the nature, location, dimensions, and
elevations of the area in question; existing or proposed structures, fill, storage of materials, drainage
facilities, and the location of the foregoing. Specifically, the following information is required:
(I) Elevation in relation to mean sea level, of the lowest floor (including basement) of all
structures;
(2) Elevation in relation to mean sea level to which any structure has been flood - proofed;
(3) Certification by a registered professional engineer or architect that the flood - proofing methods
for any nonresidential structure meet the flood - proofing criteria in Section 5.06.8.2; and
(4) Description of the extent to which a watercourse will be altered or relocated as a result of
proposed development.
5.04.03 DESIGNATION OF THE LOCAL ADMINISTRATOR
The Community Development Director is hereby designated as Floodplain Administrator and appointed
to administer and implement this ordinance by granting or denying development permit applications in
accordance with its provisions.
5.04.04 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE LOCAL ADMINISTRATOR
Duties of the Floodplain Administrator shall include, but not be limited to:
5.04.04.1 PERMIT REVIEW
(I) Review all development permits to determine that the permit requirements of this ordinance
have been satisfied.
(2) Review all development permits to determine that all necessary permits have been obtained
from those Federal, State, or local governmental agencies from which prior approval is required.
(3) Review all development permits to determine if the proposed development is located in the
floodway. If located in the floodway, assure that the encroachment provisions of Section 5.06.10
are met.
5.04.04.2 USE OF OTHER BASE FLOOD DATA (In A and V Zones)
When base flood elevation data has not been provided (A and V Zones) in accordance with Section
5.03.02, BASIS FOR ESTABLISHING THE AREAS OF SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD, the Floodplain
Administrator shall obtain, review, and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and floodway data
available from a Federal, State or other source, in order to administer Sections 5.06.8, SPECIFIC
STANDARDS, and 5.06.10 FLOODWAYS.
5.04.04.3 INFORMATION TO 13E OBTAINED AND MAINTAINED
(1) Where base flood elevation data is provided through the Flood Insurance Study, FIRM, or
required as in Section 5.04.4.2, obtain and record the actual elevation (in relation to mean sea
level) of the lowest floor (including basement) of all new or substantially improved structures,
and whether or not the structure contains a basement.
(2) For all new or substantially improved flood- proofed structures where base flood elevation
data is provided through the Flood Insurance Study, FIRM, or as required in Section 5.04.4.2:
(i) Obtain and record the elevation (in relation to mean sea level) to which the structure
was flood - proofed and
(ii) Maintain the flood- proofing certifications required in Section 5.04.2(3).
ILSV- FSRUserslcbainbridge ebainbridge\Ordinanors\Artiele V Floodplain ordinance for 2- 10-04.doc Page 6 of 15
DRAFT
(iii) Maintain for public inspection all records pertaining to the provisions of this
ordinance.
5.04.04.4 ALTERATION OF WATERCOURSES
(1) Notify adjacent communities and the Department of Ecology prior to any alteration or
relocation of a watercourse, and submit evidence of such notification to the Federal insurance
Administration.
(2) Require that maintenance is provided within the altered or relocated portion of said
watercourse so that the flood carrying capacity is not diminished.
5.04.04.5 INTERPRETATION OF FIRM BOUNDARIES
Make interpretations where needed, as to exact location of the boundaries of the areas of special flood
hazards (for example, where there appears to be a conflict between a mapped boundary and actual field
conditions). The person contesting the interpretation of the Floodplain Administrator in relation to the
boundary shall be given a reasonable opportunity to appeal pursuant to the procedures outlined in Section
5.05.
5.05 VARIANCE PROCEDURE
5.05.01
(1) The duly appointed Hearing Examiner shall hear and decide requests for variances from the
requirements of this section pursuant to the procedural requirements of Section 2.02 of this Code, as
adopted or hereafter amended, following notice of not less than fifteen (15) days and public hearing. In
passing upon such applications, the Hearing Examiner shall consider all technical evaluations, all relevant
factors, standards specified in other sections of this ordinance, and:
(i) The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands to the injury of others;
(ii) The danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion damage;
(iii) The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect
of such damage on the individual owner;
(iv) The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community;
(v) The necessity to the facility of a waterfront: location, where applicable;
(vi) The availability of alternative locations for the proposed use which are not subject to
flooding or erosion damage;
(vii) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing and anticipated development;
(viii) The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and flood plain
management program for that area;
(ix) The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency
vehicles;
(x) The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood
waters and the effects of wave action, if applicable, expected at the site; and,
\ LSV- FSI1 Userslcbainbridgelcbainbridge \Ordinances'Article V Floodplain ordinance for 2- 10-04.dnc Page 7 of 15
DRAFT
(xi) The costs of providing governmental services during and after flood conditions, including
maintenance and repair of public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and
water systems, and streets and bridges.
(2) Upon consideration of the factors and the purposes of this ordinance, the Hearing Examiner may
attach such conditions to the granting of variances as it deems necessary to further the purposes of this
ordinance.
(3) The City shall maintain the records of all appeal actions and report any variances to the Federal
Insurance Administration upon request.
(4) The decision of the Hearing Examiner on any appeal shall be final and conclusive, subject to an
appeal filed timely pursuant to Chapter 36.7OC RC\V.
5.05.2 Conditions for Variances
(1) Generally, the only condition under which a variance from the elevation standard may be issued is for
new construction and substantial improvements to be erected on a lot of one -half acre or less in size
contiguous to and surrounded by lots with existing structures constructed below the base flood level,
providing items (i -xi) in Section 5.05.1 have been fully considered. As the lot size increases the technical
justification required for issuing the variance increases.
(2) Variances may be issued for the reconstruction, rehabilitation, or restoration of structures listed on the
National Register of Historic Places or the State Inventory of Historic Places, without regard to the
procedures set forth in this section.
(3) Variances shall not be issued within a designated floodway if any increase in flood levels during the
base flood discharge would result.
(4)Variances shall only be issued upon a determination that the variance is the minimum necessary,
considering the flood hazard, to afford relief.
(5) Variances shall only be issued upon:
(i) A showing of good and sufficient cause, pursuant to Section 5.05(1) of this chapter;
(ii) A determination that failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional
hardship to the applicant;
(iii) A determination that the granting of a variance will not result in increased flood
heights, additional threats to public safety, extraordinary public expense, create
nuisances, cause fraud on or victimization of the public, or conflict with existing local
laws or ordinances.
(6) Variances as interpreted in the National Flood Insurance Program are based on the general zoning law
principle that they pertain to a physical piece of property; they are not personal in nature and do not
pertain to the structure, its inhabitants, economic or financial circumstances.
(7) Variances may be issued for nonresidential buildings in very limited circumstances to allow a lesser
degree of flood- proofing than watertight or dry- flood - proofing, where it can be determined that such
action will have low damage potential, complies with all other variance criteria except 5.05.2(1), and
otherwise.complies with Sections 5.06.2, 5.06.4, and 5.06.5 of the GENERAL STANDARDS.
MV- FS11 Usersk; boinbridgelcbainbridge \Ordinanoes\Articic V Floodplain ordinance for 2- 10- 04.doc Page 8 of 15
0
DRAFT
(8) Any applicant to whom a variance is granted shall be given written notice that the structure will be
permitted to be built with a lowest floor elevation below the base flood elevation and that the cost of flood
insurance will be commensurate with the increased risk resulting from the reduced lowest floor elevation.
5.05.03 APPEALS
The duly appointed Hearing Examiner shall hear and decide appeals pursuant to Section 2.02 of this code,
as adopted or as hereafter amended. following notice of not less than fifteen (15) days and public hearing.
The Hearing Examiner shall hear and decide appeals when it is alleged there is an error in any
requirement, decision, or determination made by the Floodplain Administrator in the enforcement or
administration of this ordinance.
The decision of the Hearing Examiner on any appeal shall be final and conclusive, subject to an appeal
filed timely pursuant to Chapter 36.70C RCW.
SECTiON 5.06. PROVISIONS FOR FLOOD HAZARD REDUCTION
5.06.01 GENERAL STANDARDS
In all areas of special flood hazards, the following standards are required:
5.06.02 ANCHORING
(1) All new construction and substantial improvements shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or
lateral movement of the structure.
(2) All manufactured homes must likewise be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral
movement, and shall be installed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. Anchoring
methods may include, but are not limited to, use of over -the -top or frame ties to ground anchors
(Reference FEMA's "Manufactured Home installation in Flood Hazard Areas" guidebook for additional
techniques).
5.06.03 All ZONE DRAINAGE
Adequate drainage paths are required around structures on slopes to guide floodwaters around and away
from proposed structures.
5.06.04 CONSTRUCTION MATE.RiAL,S AND METHODS
(1) All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed with materials and utility
equipment resistant to flood damage.
(2) All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed using methods and practices
that minimize flood damage.
(3) Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air- conditioning equipment and other service facilities
shall be designed and/or otherwise elevated or located so as to prevent water from entering or
accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding.
5.06.05 UTILITIES
(1) All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration
of flood waters into the systems;
(2) The proposed water well shall be located on high ground that is not in the floodway (WAC 173-
160 -171);
\\SV -FS I1Uscrs\ cbainbridgelcbainbridge10rdinmtces \Article V Floodplain ordinance for 2- 1O- 04.doc Page 9 of 15
DRAFT
(3) New and replacement sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration
of flood waters into the systems and discharges from the systems into flood waters; and,
(4) Onsite waste disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or contamination from
them during flooding.
5.06.06 SUBDIVISION AND OTHER PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS
(1) All development proposals shall be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage;
(2) All subdivision proposals shall have public utilities and facilities, such as sewer, gas, electrical and
water systems located and constructed to minimize or eliminate flood damage;
(3) All subdivision proposals shall have adequate drainage provided to reduce exposure to flood damage;
and,
(4) Where base flood elevation data has not been provided or is not available from another authoritative
source, it shall be generated by a civil engineer licensed in the state of Washington for subdivision
proposals and other proposed developments.
5.06.07 REVIEW OF BUILDING PERMITS
Where elevation data is not available either through the Flood Insurance Study, FIRM, or from another
authoritative source (Section 5.04.4.2), applications for building permits shall be reviewed to assure that
proposed construction will be reasonably safe from flooding. The test of reasonableness is the Floodplain
Administrator's judgment and includes, but is not limited to use of historical data, high water marks,
photographs of past flooding, etc., where available. The Floodplain Administrator may require the
applicant to locate the lowest floor at least two feet above the highest adjacent natural ground surface.
Failure to elevate at least two feet above the highest adjacent natural ground surface in these zones may
result in higher insurance rates.
5.06.08 SPECIFIC STANDARDS
In all areas of special flood hazards where base flood elevation data has been provided (Zones A1-30,
AH, and AE) as set forth in Section 5.03.2, BASIS FOR ESTABLISHING THE AREAS OF SPECIAL
FLOOD HAZARD, or Section 5.04.4.2, Use of Other Base Flood Data, the following provisions are
required:
5.06.08.1 RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
(1) New construction and substantial improvement of any residential structure shall have the lowest floor,
including basement, elevated one foot or more above the base flood elevation. See Section 5.06.4 for
additional requirements.
(2) Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are subject to flooding are prohibited, or shall be
designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and
exit of floodwaters. Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a professional
engineer or architect licensed in the state of Washington or must meet or exceed the following minimum
criteria:
(i) A minimum of two openings having a total net arca of not Tess than one square inch
for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding shall be provided.
(ii) The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade.
(iii) Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or devices
provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of floodwaters.
11SV- FS11Userslcbainbridgelobninbridge %OrdinunceslArticle V Floodplain ordinance fur 2- 10.04.doc Page 10 of 15
DRAFT
5.06.08.2 NON RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
New construction and substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial or other nonresidential
structure shall either have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated one foot or more above the base
flood elevation; or, together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, shall:
(1) Be flood - proofed so that below one foot or more above the base flood level the structure is
watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water;
(2) Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic Toads and
effects of buoyancy;
(3) Be certified by a professional engineer or architect licensed in the state of Washington that
the design and methods of construction are in accordance with accepted standards of practice
for meeting provisions of this subsection based on their development and /or review of the
structural design, specifications and plans.
(4) Nonresidential structures that are elevated, not flood - proofed, must meet the same standards
for space below the lowest floor.
(5) Applicants flood-proofing nonresidential buildings shall be notified that flood insurance
premiums will be based on rates that are one foot below the flood - proofed level (e.g. a
building flood- proofed to the base flood level will be rated as one foot below).
5.06.08.3 MANUFACTURED HOMES
(1) All manufactured homes to be placed on substantially improved sites
(i) Outside of a manufactured home park or subdivision,
(ii) In a new manufactured home park or subdivision,
(iii) in an expansion to an existing manufactured home park or subdivision, or
(iv) In an existing manufactured home park or subdivision on which a manufactured home
has incurred "substantial damage" as the result of a flood; shall be elevated on a permanent
foundation such that the bottom of the crawl space of the manufactured home is elevated one
foot or more above the base flood elevation and be securely anchored to an adequately
designed foundation system to resist flotation, collapse and lateral movement. See also
Section 5.06.4 for additional requirements.
(2) Manufactured homes to be placed on substantially improved sites in an existing manufactured home
park or subdivision that are not subject to the. above manufactured home provisions shall be elevated so
that either:
(i) The bottom of the crawl space of the manufactured home is elevated one foot or more
above the base flood elevation, or
(ii)The manufactured home chassis is supported by reinforced piers or other foundation
elements of at least equivalent strength that are no less than 36 inches in height above grade
and be securely anchored to an adequately designed foundation system to resist flotation,
collapse., and lateral movement.
5.06.08.4 RECREATIONAL VEHICLES
Recreational vehicles placed on sites are required to either:
(i) Be on the site for fewer than 180 consecutive days,
(ii) Be fully licensed and ready for highway use, on its wheels or jacking system, is attached to
the site only by quick disconnect type utilities and security devices, and has no permanently
attached additions; or
11.SV- FSI\ Usersltbainbridoekboinbridecl0rdinancrslArticle V Floodploin ordinance for 2- 10- 04.doc Page 11 of 15
DRAFT
(iii) Meet the requirements of 5.06.8.3 above and the elevation and anchoring requirements for
manufactured homes.
5.06.09 BEFORE REGULATORY FLOODWAY
(1) In areas where a regulatory floodway has not been designated, no new construction, substantial
improvements, or other development (including fill) shall be permitted within Zones Al -30 and AE on
the community's FiRM, unless it is demonstrated that the cumulative effect of the proposed development,
when combined with all other existing and anticipated development, will not increase the water surface
elevation of the base flood more than one foot at any point within the community.
(2) in the unnumbered A and B zones, the development may not increase the water surface elevation of
the base flood by more than one (1) foot at any point.
(3) In the A zones where base flood elevations have been provided, but floodways have not been
established, the development may not increase the surface water elevation of the base flood by more than
one -tenth (1/10' of a foot at any point.
(4) In the A zones where base flood elevations have been provided and floodways have been established,
the development may not increase the surface water elevation of the base flood at any point.
(5) All adjacent or other property owners impacted by the development within the floodplain must give
their written, notarized approval for increased base flood elevations upon their property.
5.06.10 FLOODWAYS
Located within areas of special flood hazard established in Section 5.03.2 are areas designated as
floodways. Since the floodway is an extremely hazardous area due to the velocity of floodwaters which
carry debris, potential projectiles, and erosion potential, the following provisions apply:
(1) Prohibit encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements, and other
development unless certification by a registered professional engineer is provided demonstrating through
hydrologic and hydraulic analyses performed in accordance with standard engineering practice that the
proposed encroachment would not result in any increase in flood levels during the occurrence of the base
flood discharge.
(2) Construction or reconstruction of residential structures is prohibited within designated floodways,
except for (i) repairs, reconstruction, or improvements to a structure which do not increase the ground
floor area; and (ii) repairs, reconstruction or improvements to a structure, the cost of which does not
exceed 50 percent of the market value of the structure either, (A) before the repair, or reconstruction is
started, or (B) if the structure has been damaged, and is being restored, before the damage occurred. Any
project for improvement of a structure to correct existing violations of state or local health, sanitary, or
safety code specifications which have been identified by the local code enforcement official and which
are the minimum necessary to assure safe living conditions or to structures identified as historic places
shall not be included in the 50 percent.
(3) If Section 5.06.10(1) is satisfied, all new construction and substantial improvements shall comply with
all applicable flood hazard reduction provisions of Section 5.06. PROVISIONS FOR. FLOOD HAZARD
REDUCTION.
\1SV -FS 1lUserslcbainbridg etcbainbridgelOrdinanccslArticle V Flaodplain ordinance for 2- 10- 04.doc Page 12 of 15
DRAFT
5.06.1 Water-Dependent Works.
For water- dependent utilities and other installations which by their very nature must be in the flood fringe
and/or floodway (such uses as, but not limited to, roads, bridges, marinas, dams for domestic /industrial
water supply, flood control and /or hydroelectric production; water diversion structures and facilities for
water supply, irrigation, and /or fisheries enhancement; flood water and drainage pumping plants and
facilities; hydroelectric generating facilities and appurtenant structures; structural and nonstructural flood
damage reduction facilities, and stream bank stabilization structures and practices), these provisions
apply:
(1) The applicant shall supply convincing evidence that a flood fringe and /or floodway location is
necessary in view of the objectives of the proposal and provided further that the proposal is consistent.
with other provisions of this title and relevant local, state and federal regulations.
(2) In all instances of locating utilities and other installations in floodway locations, project design must
incorporate flood - proofing certified by a professional civil engineer registered as such by the State of
Washington to be capable of withstanding 100 -year flood flows and velocities.
(3) For any works that impound water, the applicant shall provide documentation of easements, flowage
rights or ownership of the impoundment area and certification by a professional civil engineer registered
as such by the State of \Washington that the works will cause no increase in the 100 -year flood elevation
outside the impoundment areas and that the works and associated impoundment area will not impair the
ability of natural drainageways to drain floodwaters adequately during a flooding event.
5.06.12 STANDARDS FOR SHALLOW FLOODING AREAS (AO ZONES)
Shallow flooding areas appear on FIRlvls as AO zones with depth designations. The base flood depths in
these zones range from 1 to 3 feet above ground where a clearly defined channel does not exist, or where
the path of flooding is unpredictable and where velocity flow may be evident. Such flooding is usually
characterized as sheet flow. In these areas, the following provisions apply:
(1) New construction and substantial improvements of residential structures and manufactured homes
within AO zones shall have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated above the highest adjacent
grade to the structure, one foot or more above the depth number specified in feet on the community's
FIRM (at least three feet above the highest adjacent grade to the structure if no depth number is
specified).
(2) New construction and substantial improvements of nonresidential structures within AO zones shall
either:
(i) Have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated above the highest adjacent grade
of the building site, one foot or more above the depth number specified on the FIRM
(at least three feet if no depth number is specified); or
(ii) Together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, be completely flood proofed to
or above that level so that any space below that level is watertight with walls
substantially impermeable to the passage of water and with structural components
having the capability of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of
buoyancy. If this method is used, compliance shall be certified by a registered
professional engineer or architect as in subsection (3) of Section 5.06.8.2.
(3) Require adequate drainage paths around structures on slopes to guide floodwaters around and away
from proposed structures.
11SV- FSIWUscrslcbainbridge \cbainbridbc \Ordinances\Artislc V Flondplain ordinance for 2- 10- O4.dnc Page 13 of 15
DRAFT
(4) Recreational vehicles placed on sites within AO Zones on the community's FIRM either:
(i) Be on the site for fewer than 180 consecutive days,
(ii)Be fully licensed and ready for highway use, on its wheels or jacking system, is
attached to the site only by quick disconnect type utilities and security devices, and
has no permanently attached additions; or
(iii)Meet the requirements of 5.06.11(1) and 5.06.11(3) above and the anchoring
requirements for manufactured homes (Section 5.06.2(2)).
5.06.13. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS — CHESTER CREEK, SAL TESE CREEK, FORKER, AND
CENTRAL PARK FLOODPLAINS.
In addition to the other requirements of this chapter, the following areas shall not be covered by
impervious surfaces or fill unless an engineering study is prepared by a professional civil engineer,
registered as such by the state of Washington, that shows no impact to the ability of the floodplain to
infiltrate, store and release floodwaters:
(1) Chester Creek: downstream of Mohawk Road,
(2) Saltese Creek: all areas of ponding and infiltration,
(3) Forker: south of the intersection of Forker Road and Progress Road,
(4) Central Park: west of Park Road.
(5) Glenrose: west of Carnahan Road and south of 8 Ave
5.06.14 CRITICAL FACILITIES
Construction of new critical facilities shall be, to the extent possible, located outside the limits of the
Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) (100 -year floodplain). Construction of new critical facilities shall be
permissible within the SFHA if no feasible alternative site is available. Critical facilities constructed
within the SFHA shall have the lowest floor elevated three feet above BFE or to the height of the 500 -
year flood, whichever is higher. Access to and from the critical facility should also be protected to the
height utilized above. Flood - proofing and sealing measures must be taken to ensure that toxic substances
will not be displaced by or released into floodwaters. Access routes elevated to or above the level of the
base flood elevation shall be provided to all critical facilities to the extent possible."
Section 2. Appendix "B" of the Spokane Valley Development Code is established to assess fees for
Floodplain Development Permits by resolution of City Council.
Section 3. Severability.
If any provision of this chapter or the application to any person or circumstances is held invalid, such
invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the chapter which can be given effect without
the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of the chapter are declared to be
severable.
4LSV -FS I1 11scrstcb3inbridge lcbainbridge'kOrdinances\Artiele V Floodplain ordinance for 2- 10- 04.doc Page 14 of 15
DRAFT
Section 4. Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after publication
of this ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law.
A TTEST :
Approved by the City Council this
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
Date of publication:
Effective date:
day of , 2004.
Michael DeVleming, Mayor
1 1SV- FSlll) yerskbainbridgekbainbridge1Ordinances1,Article V Flondplain ordinance for 2- 10- 04.doc Page 15 of 15
0
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: February 3, 2004 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: An ordinance amending Ordinance 35 relating to the election of
officers of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission and a
motion accepting proposed changes in the Planning
Commission Rules of Procedure.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: City of Spokane Valley Ordinance No. 35
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: City Council passed Ordinance establishing the
Planning Commission No. 35 on February 25, 2003
and approved the Rules of Procedure on July 8,
2003.
BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission reviewed the Rules of Procedures and the
provisions of Ordinance No. 35 on December 11, 2003. Planning Commission recommended
the following substantive change to Ordinance No. 35:
• Officers would be elected an annual basis.
They also recommended a similar change in their Rules of Procedure, as well as minor
corrections to the text. The change in the day of regular meetings which took place in July 2003
was deleted as obsolete.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Recommend placing this item on February 10,
2004 Council Agenda for first reading
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None
STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, AICP, Director of Community Development
ATTACHMENTS:
Proposed Amendment to Ordinance No. 35
Amended Planning Commission Rules of Procedure
0
DRAFT
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 04-005
AN ORDINANCE OF TIME CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 35 CREATING A PLANNING
COMMISSION AND ESTABLISHING THE DUTIES THEREOF.
WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley is a non - charter code city authorized to create a
Planning Commission which will serve in an advisory capacity to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City will adopt a Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations to
guide the reasonable and orderly development of the City; and
WHEREAS, The City Council wishes to respond to the expressed concerns of citizens
that immediately after incorporation the City begin a comprehensive planning process and
review of development regulations; and
WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley desires to encourage citizen input into the
planning process by establishing a Planning Commission which will study, receive public input
and recommend a Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations to the City Council for
review and adoption.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley Spokane County,
Washington, does hereby amend Ordinance No. 35 passed on February 25, 2003, to read as
follows:
Section 1. Establishment and Purpose. There is created the City of Spokane Valley
Planning Commission. The purpose of the Planning Commission is to study and make
recommendations to the Mayor and City Council for future planned growth through continued
review of the City's comprehensive land use plan development regulations, shoreline
management, environmental protection, public facilities, capital improvements and other matters
as directed by the City Council.
Section 2. Membership.
l . Qualifications: The membership of the Planning Commission shall
consist of individuals who have an interest in planning, land use, transportation, capital
infrastructure and building and landscape design as evidenced by training, experience or interest
in the City of Spokane Valley.
2. Appointment: Members of the Planning Commission shall be
nominated by the Mayor and confirmed by a majority vote of at least four (4) members of the
City Council. Planning Commissioners shall be selected without respect to political affiliations
and shall serve without compensation. The Mayor, when considering appointments, shall
Ordinance 04 -005 Page 1 of 4
DRAFT
attempt to select residents that represent various interests and locations within the City.
3. Number of Members/Terms: The Planning Commission shall
consist of seven (7) members. All members shall reside within the City of Spokane Valley. The
terms for the initial Commissioners shall be two (2) one (1) year terms, two (2) two (2) year
terms and three (3) three (3) year terms. The initial members and their terms shall be decided by
the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council. Subsequent terms shall be for a three (3) year
period. Terms shall expire on the thirty -first day of December.
4. Removal: Members of the Commission may be removed by the
Mayor, with the concurrence of the City Council, for neglect of duty, conflict of interest,
malfeasance in office, or other just cause, or for unexcused absence from three (3) consecutive
regular meetings. Failure to qualify as to residency shall constitute a forfeiture of office. The
decision of the City Council regarding membership on the Planning Commission shall be final
and without appeal.
5. Vacancies:. Vacancies occurring other than through the expiration
of terms shall be filled for the unexpired term in the same manner as for appointments.
6. Conflicts of Interest: Members of the Planning Commission shall
fully comply with RCW 42.23, Code of Ethics for Municipal Officers, RCW 42.36, Appearance
of Fairness, and such other rules and regulations as may be adopted from time to time by the City
Council regulating the conduct of any person holding appointive office within the City. No
elected official or City employee may be a member of the Planning Commission.
Section 3. Meetings - Rules.
1. The Planning Commission shall every __ year organize and
elect from its members a Chair, who shall preside at all meetings of the Commission and perform
such other functions as determined by rule. A Vice -Chair shall be elected to preside in the
absence of the Chair A majority of the Commission members shall constitute a quorum for the
transaction of business, and a majority vote of those present shall be necessary to carry any
proposition.
2. The Commission shall determine a regular meeting schedule (time,
place and frequency) and shall meet, at least, one time every month. All meetings shall be open
to the public.
3. The Commission shall adopt such rules and ,$ar�c`ce'
as are necessary for the conduct of business and shall keep a taped record of its proceedings.
Section 4. Staff Support. Administrative staff support to the Planning Commission
shall be provided by the City Planning and Community Development Department. In addition,
the Commission, through its Chair may request formal opinions or memorandums form the City
Attorney or Planning and Community Development Director on any pending matter.
Ordinance 04 -005 Page 2 of 4
DRAFT
Section 5. Duties and Responsibilities. The Planning Commission, as
an advisory body to the City Council, shall perform and have the following duties and
responsibilities:
1. Assist in the preparation of a Comprehensive Plan and
Development Regulations in compliance with RCW 36.07A and 35A.63 including the
establishment of procedures for early and continuous public participation in the development and
amendment of the Comprehensive Plan and the Development Regulations;
2. Review plans and regulations related to land use management,
shoreline management, environmental policy, transportation systems, public facilities and capital
infrastructure planning and development;
3. Upon request from the City Manager or City Council, review
potential annexations to the City;
4. Where design review is required by land use ordinances of the
City, perform such design review unless that review is delegated to some other appointed body
or City Staff;
including park and open space areas in the City;
5. Identify issues and recommend priorities for geographic sub -areas
6. Meet and confer with the Hearing Examiner to review the
administration of land use policies and ordinances to enhance the planning and permitting
process;
7. Make periodic written and oral reports to the City Council
addressing work in progress and other significant matters relating to the City;
8. Hold public hearings in the exercise of duties and responsibilities;
9. Perform such other duties and powers as may be conferred by
ordinance, resolution or motion of the City Council
Unless other wise assumed by the City Council, the Planning Conunission
shall hold all public hearings required to be held in the course of adoption or amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan, the development regulations, adoption or amendment of the zoning map, or
adoption or amendment of regulations for the subdivision of land, shoreline management,
environmental regulations, and other land use ordinances of the City.
Section 6. Severability. if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance
shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other
section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance.
Ordinance 04 -005 Page 3 of 4
DRAFT
Section 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5)
days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the
City as provided by law.
2004.
ATTEST:
Passed by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley this day of
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Approved As To Form:
Stanley M. Schwartz, City Attorney
Date of Publication:
Effective Date:
Michael De\'leming, Mayor
Ordinance 04 -005 Page 4 of 4
0
Meeting Date: February 10, 2004 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent
AGENDA ITEM TITLE : 2004 Library Services Agreement between the City of Spokane
Valley and the Spokane County Library District (SCLD)
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
X old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On October 21, November 12, November 25,
December 16, 2003, January 13 and January 20, 2004, Council discussed a library service
agreement with SCLD.
BACKGROUND: On January 20, the SCLD Board accepted City Council's counter -offer. At
the same meeting, the Board discussed various options for addressing the gap in their 2004
budget. At its January 20 meeting, Council decided to await the results of the Board's budget
gap decision before deciding whether to take final action on the agreement. At a January 28
special meeting, the SCLD Board voted to use its fund balance to address its 2004 budget gap.
Therefore, there is no unique impact to Spokane Valley residents.
Once an agreement is approved by City Council, the next step is to appoint a Council and
citizen participant for the library capital facilities plan advisory committee.
OPTIONS: Accept the 2004 draft agreement for library services, or propose additional
changes.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve the 2004 Library Services
Agreement between the City of Spokane Valley and the Spokane County Library District
(SCLD).
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Council's counter -offer, approved by the SCLD Board,
comes to $2,020,296, with the potential additional expense for reimbursement of Capital
Facilities Plan (CFP) costs, capped at $10,000. Expenditures for the CFP would be approved in
advance by the City. This agreement falls within the City's 2004 budgeted amount.
STAFF CONTACT: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Interlocal Agreement
-- DRAFT
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT
AND THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF LIBRARY SERVICES
This Interlocal Agreement (the "Agreement ") is entered into this day of
2004, by and between the Spokane County Library District (the "District ") and the City of Spokane
Valley, a Non Charter Code City of the State of Washington (the "City ") jointly referred to as
"parties ".
WHEREAS, the City incorporated effective March 31, 2003; and
WHEREAS, the District provided library services to the residents of the City prior to its
incorporation; and
WHEREAS, the District has the authority and agrees, pursuant to RCW 27.12.180, to enter
into a contract with the City to continue to provide library services to residents of the City for the
year 2004; and.
WHEREAS, the District has previously entered into similar contracts with other cities and
towns in Spokane County; and
WHEREAS, the City has the authority and desire to contract for and to allocate funds in its
general fund budget for the provision of library services to be provided by the District to the
residents of the City during 2004; and
WHEREAS, the District agrees to continue to provide library services to the residents of the
City from January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004 under the terms set forth in the Agreement;
and
WHEREAS, the District desires to continue providing library services to the residents of the
City after the term of this contract, and to partner with the City in developing library services and
facility plans that meet Spokane Valley residents' needs.
NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
1. District Commitment to Provide Library Services to the City. From January 1,
2004 through December 31, 2004, the District shall:
a. provide the public library services ( "Library Services ") to residents of the
City at the sane service level and upon the same terms and conditions as are
now being provided to all other residents within the District.
Page 1 of 7
J
r .
2. City's Obligation to Pay District for Provision of Library Services.
a. The City agrees to pay to the District the sum of $2,020,296 for Library
Services in 2004. The City and District agree that this amount was
determined by the District in accordance with the methodology set forth in
Exhibit "A" and that this payment amount applies only to 2004 and
understand that the method by which payments applying to any future
agreements are determined may be different.
b. The City shall pay the sum described in 2.a., above, to the District in two
equal payments: the first payment of $1,010,145 shall be made by the City to
the District by no later than May 31 of 2004; the second payment of
$1,010,148 shall be made by the City to the District by no later than
November 30 of 2004.
3. Cost Accounting. The District shall provide to the City by no later than March 31,
2005, its annual accounting of expenditures for Library Services provided by the District to the
residents of the City during its 2004 fiscal year. This accounting shall be based on a mutually
agreeable cost allocation method. The expenditures shall include but not be limited to personnel,
supplies, services, equipment, library materials, and support services involved in the provision of
Library Services by the District to the residents of the City.
4. City's Commitment to Make Future Library Services Decision. The City agrees to
make a decision regarding the provision of future Library Services to the residents of the City and to
notify the District of that decision.
a. If this decision is to continue contracting with the District for Library Service,
both parties agree to make a good faith effort to negotiate and execute a new
interlocal agreement no later than August 31, 2004.
b. If this decision is to propose that voters decide on annexation to the District
and the decision is made later than the date necessary for the annexation to be
effective in 2005, both parties agree to make a good faith effort to negotiate
and execute a one -year interlocal agreement for 2005 no later than August 31,
2004.
5. Library Capital Facilities Planning. The City and District agree to work jointly to
develop a Spokane Valley Library Capital Facilities Plan for approval by the City Council and the
District Board of Trustees. The Library Capital Facilities Plan is to be completed by June 30, 2004.
The development process and responsibilities are described in Exhibit "B."
If the City decides to neither continue contracting with the District beyond 2004 nor propose
annexation to the District, it will reimburse the District for consultant and other expenses incurred in
development of the Library Capital Facilities plan, as described in Paragraph 1.d. of Exhibit "B," to a
maximum amount of $10,000.
6. Administrative Authority. The City Manager or designee shall administer and be
Page 2 of 7
the City's primary contact with the District. The Director of the District or designee shall be the
District's primary contact with the City.
7. Relationship of the Parties. The Parties intend that an independent contractor
relationship will be created by this agreement. This agreement is not a joint venture between the
District and the City. No District or City employee shall be deemed a representative, employee or
agent of the other party for any purpose.
8. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by either the City or the District
upon six months written notice.
9. Notice. Notice shall be given in writing as follows:
TO THE CITY:
Name: Chris Bainbridge
Title: City Clerk.
Phone Number: (509) 921 -1000
Address:
11707 East Sprague Ave., Suite 106
Spokane Valley, \VA 99206
TO THE DISTRICT:
Name: Michael Wirt
Title: Secretary, Board of Trustees
Phone Number: (509) 924 -4122
Address:
4322 North Argonne Rd.
Spokane, WA 99212 -1868
10. indemnification and Hold Harmless. Each party shall indemnify and hold the
other, its officers, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from and against any and all claims,
demands, orders, decrees or judgments for injuries, death or damage to any person or property arising
or resulting from any act or omission on the part of said party or its agents, employees or volunteers
in the performance of this Agreement.
11. Waiver. No officer, employee, agent or other individual acting on behalf of other
party has the power, right or authority to waive any of the conditions or provisions of this
Agreement. No waiver in one instance shall be held to be waiver of any other subsequent breach or
nonperformance. All remedies afforded in this Agreement or by law, shall be taken and construed as
cumulative, and in addition to every other remedy provided herein or by law. Failure of either party
to enforce at any time any of the provisions of this Agreement or to require at any time performance
by the other party of any provision hereof shall in no way be construed to be a waiver of such
provisions nor shall it affect the validity of this Agreement or any part thereof.
12. Entire Agreement. This written agreement constitutes the entire and complete
agreement between the City and the District for the provision of Library Services to the residents of
the City of Spokane Valley and supercedes any prior oral or written agreements. This Agreement
may not be changed, modified or altered except in writing signed by the City and the District.
Accepted and agreed the year and date first above written.
Page3of7
i
0
C/ Ty Y OF SPOKANE ANE VALLE '
David Mercier, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
Stanley M. Schwartz
Witherspoon, Kelley, Davenport
Toole, LLP
Page 4 07
SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT
Frank Payne, Chair
Board of Trustees
APPROVED AS TO .FORM:
COUNSEL TO THE DISTRICT
James C. Sloane
Paine, Hamblen, Coffin, Brooke
&.Miller, LLP
2002 costs
Valley Library use
$1,531,743
Other branch use
370,428
Total
S1,902,171
2004 protection
S1,902,171
2002 costs
6.21% 2002 -2004 adj.
118,125
Total
$2,020,296
City of Spokane Valley 2004 Library Service Cost Projection:
Revised as Requested by City Council
Total Cost: $2,020,296
Includes: I. Spokane Valley residents' use of Valley Library.
2. Spokane Valley residents' access to the other 9 District branches.
3. Spokane Valley residents' access to all District library materials, regardless of location.
4. Spokane Valley resident's access to all District Web -based services.
5. No limit on number of library cards or amount of service use.
6. Outreach services to 44 Spokane Valley licensed nursing homes, assisted living
facilities
7. Use of all 6 Spokane Public libraries, their services and materials.
Cost Projection ":
* Projection
Assumptions:
Detail
2002 actual
expenditures
Airway Heights
Argonne
Cheney
Deer Park
Fairfield
Medical Lake
Moran Prairie
North Spokane
Otis Orchards
Valley
1. Individual branch costs are derived from SCLD's audited 2002 financial statements,
using cost allocation model developed jointly by District and City in October 2003.
2. Outreach Services costs are assigned to the branch appropriate to the facility or
homebound customer.
3. Costs attributable to Spokane Valley are based on % Spokane Valley resident
registrations in each branch, using partial results from City GIS analysis of addresses in
District registration database; assumes that ratios are consistent with full database (see
table, below).
4. To arrive at projected 2004 costs from actual 2002 actual costs, 6.21% (% increase in
the District's total budgeted expenditures between 2002 and 2004) is added.
SV
Registrations
39
4,069
88
34
14
30
161
318
708
24,274
29,735
Branch
Registrations
1,002
8,244
3,290
2,676
209
730
4,735
20,936
5,002
30,153
76,977
--DRAFT--
Page 5 of 7
% SV
Registrations
0.13%
13.68%
0.30%
0.11%
0.05%
0.10%
0.54%
1.07%
2.38%
81.63%
100.00%
SV % /Branch Branch
Registrations Expenditures
3.89%
49.36%
2.67%
1.27%
6.70%
4.11%
3.40%
1.52%
14.15%
80.50%
235,103
473,714
441,855
405,557
153,120
229,207
365,931
1,454,705
397,613
1,902,721
6,059,526
% Exp for
SV
9,151
233,812
11,819
5,153
10,257
9,419
12,442
22,096
56,279
1,531,743
1,902,171
• .
Exhibit l
1. Library Capital Facilities Plan T)evelopment:
a. The Library Capital Facilities Plan provided for in Section 5 of the Agreement shall
be developed by the District in collaboration with the City through an advisory
committee. The advisory committee shall be composed of two District staff
members, a District Trustee, one representative of City staff, one City Council
Member and one citizen selected by the City. Upon completion, the Library Capital
Facilities Plan shall be presented to the City Council and the Board for adoption.
b. The Library Capital Facilities Advisory Conunittee shall study and make
recommendations concerning the adequacy of current capital facilities (i.e. buildings,
equipment, hooks and other materials) available to serve the City of Spokane Valley
residents' library service needs and the feasibility of developing additional library
buildings to serve the City of Spokane Valley, including estimated cost of
development, of operation and maintenance, and other related matters.
c. Should the District or the City desire to retain consultants or any other professionals
for a fee to assist with the development of the Library Capital Facilities Plan, such
contracts may be issued by the Board upon mutual agreement of both parties.
d. District shall be responsible for costs to retrain consultants and other professionals
skilled in developing library facility plans, and for related costs and expenses, such as
but not limited research, publication and other incidental costs.
2. Spokane County Library District Responsibilities:
a. Carry out a City of Spokane Valley library services needs assessment.
b. Assemble current City of Spokane Valley library use information; obtain City of
Spokane Valley demographic, land use, traffic, and capital facility planning
information from City staff.
c. Assemble current and future demographic, land use, traffic, and capital facility
planning information for the portion of the Spokane Valley lying outside the City
but within the District's service area.
d. Develop at least two preliminary library service models based on City
demographics, geography, land use, and traffic patterns, taking into account
library service needs of the remainder of the Valley outside the City limits.
Include general site requirements, general construction/FF &E costs, and estimated
operational costs.
e. Present the library service models in the venue(s) determined to be most
appropriate to obtain feedback on the preferred model.
f. Further develop the preferred model including but not limited to estimates of
public and support space needs, materials shelving, seating, meeting and study
room, technology, and parking requirements for all proposed facilities.
g. Obtain an updated construction cost estimate, and estimate of related costs.
h. Determine capital funding options and projected taxpayer and debt service costs.
i. Prepare a written library capital facilities plan proposal for presentation to the City
Council and District Board of Trustees.
Page 6 of 7
3. City of Spokane Valley responsibilities:
a. Designate City staff and /or officials to serve in an advisory capacity to the
District.
b. Provide Spokane County Library District staff with current and projected
demographic, land use and traffic information, as well as information on other city
capital facilities planning.
c. Determine the desired venue(s) for presentation of preliminary library service
planning models for feedback on the preferred model.
d. Work with the District to use the feedback obtained in determining the model to
more fully develop.
e. Provide the District with other information that might be useful in the capital
facilities planning process.
Page 7 of 7
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: 2/10/04 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
x❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Tourism Promotion Area Interlocal Agreement
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.101.030 and RCW 35.101.040
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
At the January 20, 2004 City Council meeting, a couple of questions were asked about the TPA Interlocal
Agreement and the related state law. The questions primarily related to disestablishment of the TPA. 1
have presented these questions to the attorneys that have been working on this matter. The following is
the legal understanding and intent of the drafters of the Interlocal Agreement.
1. Disestablislunent Provision, Section 7 of the Interlocal Agreement.
The TPA can be modified or disestablished two ways: (1) the BOCC may modify or disestablish
through Board Resolution; or (2) if a petition requesting modification or disestablishment is presented by
the lodging operators who pay 40 percent of the assessments, the BOCC must hold a hearing and either
(a) keep the TPA in place, (b) modify or (c) disestablish. If the BOCC does not modify or disestablish,
the local governments can, upon 90 days notice, withdraw from the TPA. But, if the lodging operators
who pay 50 percent of the assessments protest disestablishment, the BOCC may not disestablish. (This
50 percent veto operates under either procedure (1) or (2) above).
2. Termination Provision, Section 8 of the lnterlocal Agreement.
Without action of any party the TPA will "sunset" on December 31, 2008.
The Council discussed whether Section 7 was in conflict with the State law authorizing the
disestablishment of TPA's. The attorneys read the statute as giving the 130CC discretion when they
consider a disestablishment. With this discretion the County can agree on how this discretion will be
exercised. Section 7 attempts to control the exercise of this discretion. From the City's perspective, I
look at paragraph 7 as a City waiver of the BOCC unilateral discretion to disestablish. if for some reason
(and 1 note this matter has not been reviewed by any court) the paragraph is found to violate state law,
then the section simply stands as a statement of intent to the BOCC regarding disestablishment.
STAFF CONTACT: Stanley Schwartz and Dave Mercier
0 , ATTACHMENTS
(1)
(
INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT AGREEMENT
FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF
SPOKANE COUNTY TOURISM PROMOTION AREA
THIS AGREEMENT ( "Agreement ") dated this day of , 2004,
is made and entered into by and among SPOKANE COUNTY, a Class A county of the State of
Washington ( "Spokane County"); the CITY OF SPOKANE, a municipal corporation of the State
of Washington ( "Spokane "); and the CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, a municipal corporation of
the State of Washington ("Spokane Valley "), pursuant to the authority of chapter 39.34 RCW
and Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 6026 authorizing the establishment of a Tourism
Promotion Area to levy Special Assessments to fund tourism promotion.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Revised Code of Washington, the Board of
County Commissioners of Spokane County has the care of county property and the management
of county funds and business; and
WHEREAS, the 2003 State Legislature of the State of Washington has recognized the
importance of tourism promotion in the State of Washington and passed Engrossed Substitute
Senate Bill No. 6026 authorizing the establishment of a Tourism Promotion Area by a county to
permit the levy of Special Assessments to find tourism promotion; and
WHEREAS, the Operators of Lodging Businesses within the County of Spokane have
presented an Initiation Petition to Spokane County seeking to have the Board of County
Conunissioners of Spokane County establish a Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area,
specifically including the areas within the jurisdiction of Spokane and Spokane Valley, pursuant
to the terms of Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 6026; and
WHEREAS, the Initiation Petition submitted to the Board of County Commissioners of
Spokane County, Exhibit "A" attached to this Agreement, included:
A description of the boundaries of the proposed Spokane County Tourism
Promotion Area, including the areas within the jurisdiction of Spokane
and Spokane Valley; and
(2) The proposed uses and projects for which the proposed revenue from the
Special Assessments levied by the Spokane County Tourism Promotion
Area would be dedicated, and the total estimated costs of such uses; and
The estimated rate for the Special Assessments to be levied on Lodging
Businesses in various Zones within the Spokane County Tourism
Promotion Area; and
C:1Documents and SettingsScbainbridge \Local Settings\Tempurary Internet FileslOLK2E \Tourism Promotion Interlocal 1- 19 -04.docl
(4) The signatures of the persons who operate Lodging Businesses in the
proposed Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area who would pay over
sixty percent (60 %) of the proposed Special Assessments levied within the
area.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County has the authority
pursuant to the terms of Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 6026, to enter into an Interlocal
Agreement with Spokane and Spokane Valley to establish a Tourism Promotion Area, pursuant
to the provisions of the initiation Petition received from the Operators of Lodging Businesses, to
include, within the boundaries of the proposed Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area, the
area within the jurisdiction of Spokane and Spokane Valley; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners of Spokane County, has adopted a "Resolution
of intention to Establish a Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area," following a hearing to be
held on the day of , 2003; pursuant to the request of an
Initiation Petition submitted by the Operators of Lodging Businesses within Spokane County;
and
WHEREAS, on the day of , 2003, the County Clerk
of the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane received an Initiation Petition authorized by
RCW 35.101.020 from the Operators of Lodging Businesses located within Spokane County
requesting the conduct of a public hearing by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane
County, pursuant to the authority of Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 6026, for the purposes
of considering the establishment of a Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area to provide funds
for tourism promotion in Spokane County; and
WHEREAS, on the day of , 2003, the Board of
County Commissioners of Spokane County adopted a resolution entitled a "Resolution of
Intention to Establish a Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area," for the promotion of tourism
promotion within Spokane County, describing the boundaries of the proposed Spokane County
Tourism Promotion Area, the proposed uses and projects to which the proposed revenues from
Special Assessments levied within the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area would be
dedicated and setting the proposed rates for the Special Assessments to be levied on Lodging
Businesses to fund the uses and projects of the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area,
estimating the total cost for the proposed activities and programs for the use of funds received by
the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area, fixing the date, time and place of a public hearing
to be held by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County to consider the
establishment of such a Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area, and directing the giving of
notice of such public hearing; and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. , entitled A Resolution of Intention to Establish
a Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area for the promotion of tourism and convention
C:IDocumcnts and Seninplebainbridgc \Local Settine,,c\Temporary 1nternefl Files\OLK2EVrourism Promotion Interlocal 1 -19-04.doc2
business within Spokane County was duly published, and copies thereof were mailed to each
Lodging Business in the proposed Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area, as provided by
law, and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Spokane and the City Council of the City of
Spokane Valley have by appropriate legislative action, authorized the execution of an Interlocal
Agreement with Spokane County to permit the establishment of a Spokane County Tourism
Promotion Area to include collection of Special Assessments from Lodging Businesses within
their respective jurisdictions,
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the promises set forth hereafter,
Spokane County, Spokane and Spokane Valley hereby agree as follows:
1. Definitions. As used in this agreement, the following terms, unless the context
otherwise dictates, shall have the following means:
1.1 "Agreement" shall mean this interlocal cooperation agreement between
Spokane County, Spokane and Spokane Valley for the establishment of a Spokane
County Tourism Promotion Area by Spokane County as authorized by Chapter
35.101.040 (2) RCW.
1.2 "Lodging Business" means a business located within the Spokane County
Tourism Promotion Area that furnishes lodging taxable by the state under chapter 82.08
RCW that has forty (40) or more lodging units.
1.3 "Operator" means the Operator of a Lodging Business, whether in the
capacity of owner, general manager, lessee, sub lessee, mortgagee in possession, license
or any other similar capacity.
1.4 "Room Revenues" means the gross per - night - charge (nights of stay)
imposed for the rental of a room or combination of rooms for Lodging.
1.5 "Special Assessment" means the levy (charge) imposed by Spokane
County on the Operators of a Lodging Business within the Spokane County Tourism
Promotion Area and subsequently passed on to the guests of the Lodging Business, under
the authority of RCW 35.101.050 for the purpose of providing for funding of tourism
promotion in Spokane County.
1.6. "Spokane Hotel -Motel Association" means the Spokane Hotel -Motel
Association, Inc., a Washington non -profit corporation.
1.7 "Spokane Hotel and Motel Commission" means the Spokane Hotel and
Motel Commission, established by Spokane County, whose members are appointed by
the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, the City Council of the City of
C:IDocuments and Settingss\cbainbridge \Local Settines\Temporary Internet Files1OLK2E1Tourism i'roniotion Interlocal 1- 19 -04.doc3
Spokane, and the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley to provide
recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County on
proposed uses and projects of the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area; pursuant to
the provisions of RCW 35.101.130 (1) as provided in this Agreement.
1.8 "Spokane Metropolitan Area" means Spokane County, including the entire
areas within the jurisdiction of Spokane and Spokane Valley and the unincorporated area
of Spokane County.
1.9 "Spokane County "Tourism Promotion Area" means the Tourism
Promotion Area created by the resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of
Spokane County pursuant to the authority of RCW 35. , as authorized by the
resolutions of the City Council of the City of Spokane and the City Council of the
Spokane Valley adopting the terms of this Agreement.
1.10 "TPA Manager" shall mean a tourism destination marking organization or
other similar organization employed by the Board of County Commissioners to
administer the operation of the Tourism Promotion Area.
1.11 "Tourism Promotion" means activities and expenditures desigmed to
increase tourism and convention business, including but not limited to, advertising,
publicizing, or otherwise distributing information for the purpose of attracting and
welcoming tourists, and operating tourism destination marketing organizations.
1.12 "Transient Basis" means the rental of a room or rooms for dwelling,
lodging, or sleeping purposes by the Operator of a Lodging Business for a period of thirty
(30) consecutive calendar days or less, counting a portion of a day as a full calendar day.
1.13 "Zone" or "Zones" means the distinct geographic subarea or subareas
within the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area as established by resolution of the
Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County and as set forth in Exhibit "B"
attached to this Agreement.
1.14 "Annual Budget" shall mean the Spokane County Tourism Promotion
Area budget for a fiscal year, as adopted or amended by the Board of County
Commissioners of Spokane County, after the receipt of a recommendation from the
Spokane Hotel and Motel Commission, identifying all estimated revenue from Special
Assessments for the fiscal year, and providing for all proposed uses of Special
Assessment revenue for the purpose of providing tourism promotion in Spokane County
for the ensuing fiscal year.
2. Tourism Promotion Area to be Established by Spokane County.
A. Jt is hereby understood and agreed by Spokane County, Spokane and Spokane
Valley that Spokane County, pursuant to the authority of Chapter 35.101.040 (2) RCW, shall
C:iDocumcnts and Setiingslcbninhridgel.Local SettingsYremporary. Internet Files1OLK2E1'rourism Promotion Interlocal i.19- 04_doc4
establish a "Tourism Promotion Area" designated the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area
to include the unincorporated area of Spokane County and the entire area within the corporate
limits of Spokane and Spokane Valley.
B. It is hereby understood and agreed by Spokane County, Spokane, and Spokane
Valley that the purpose of permitting the Board of County Commissioners and Spokane County
to form the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area under RCW 35.101.040 (2) is to provide
revenue to fund tourism promotion within Spokane County which will benefit the Operators of
Lodging Businesses in Spokane County, Spokane and Spokane Valley.
3. Levy of Special Assessments on Lodging Businesses within the Spokane County
Tourism Promotion Area.
A. The Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County will levy Special
Assessments on the Operators of Lodging Businesses within the Spokane County Tourism
Promotion Area in accordance with the zones and levels of Special Assessments as set forth in
Resolution No.
B. It is understood and agreed by and between Spokane County, Spokane and
Spokane Valley that the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area shall include the following
five (5) zones:
Zone A. Zone A encompasses those Lodging Businesses located within
the area of the incorporated city limits of the City of Spokane defined as follows:
Downtown core bordered by Interstate 90 to the south, Hamilton Street to the
east, Indiana Avenue to the north, and Monroe Street to the west.
Zone B. Zone B encompasses those Lodging Businesses located within
the area of the incorporated city limits of Spokane and the City of Spokane Valley
except those Lodging Businesses located in Zone A.
Zone C. Zone C encompasses all Lodging businesses located outside
Zones A and B, but within the unincorporated area of Spokane County.
Zone D. Zone D encompasses all Lodging Businesses with room revenue
under $500,000 per year, situated within the Spokane County Tourism Promotion
Area, regardless of their specific location.
Zone E. Zone E encompasses Lodging Businesses located within the
Tourism Promotion Area, as that term is addressed in WAC 458 -20 -166 as it
presently exists or may be hereinafter amended, other than hotels, motels, and bed
and breakfast facilities. Lodging Businesses within this zone, as addressed in
WAC 458 -20 -166, would include only (i) trailer camps and recreational vehicle
parks which charge for the rental of space to transients for locating or parking
house trailers, campers, recreational vehicles, mobile homes, and tents; (ii)
C:lpocuments and SettineskbainbridgelLacal Settings \Tcrnporary Internet Files\OLK2E\Tourism Promotion Interlacal 1 - 1'9 04.doc5
i-
educational institutions which sell overnight lodging to person other than
students; (iii) private lodging houses, dormitories and bunkhouses operated by or
on behalf of businesses and industrial firms or schools soley for the
accommodation of employees of such firms or student which are not held out to
the public as a place where sleeping accommodations may be obtained; and (iv)
guest ranches or summer camps which, in addition to supplying meals and
lodging , offer special recreational facilities and instruction in sports boating,
riding, outdoor facilities and instruction in sports, boating, riding, and outdoor
living.
The charge(s) imposed under this section are not a tax on the "sale of lodging" for the
purposes of RCW 82.14.410
C. It is understood and agreed by and between Spokane County, Spokane and
Spokane Valley that the Operators of Lodging Businesses within the Spokane County Tourism
Promotion Area operating in the above - described zones will be subject to Special Assessments to
be levied as follows:
Zone A: $1.50 per room/day
Zone 13: S1.25 per room/day
Zone C: $1.00 per room/day
Zone D: $0.50 per roomlday
Zone E: $0.00 per room or space /day
D. Any change in the Special Assessment rates for any zone as set forth hereinabove
shall be made only by amendment of the resolution by the Board of County Commissioners, with
the approval of the City Council of the City of Spokane and the City Council of the City of
Spokane Valley. No increase in the Special Assessment rates for any zone or change in the
boundaries of any zone shall be made by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane
County except upon the affirmative recommendation of the Spokane Hotel and Motel
Commission.
4. Use of Special Assessment Revenues For the Promotion of Tourism and
Convention Business in Spokane County.
A. It is understood and agreed that all of the revenues from Special Assessments
collected by Spokane County from Lodging Businesses within the jurisdiction of Spokane
County, the City of Spokane, and the City of Spokane Valley shall be allocated by the Board of
County Commissioners of Spokane County in accordance with the Annual Budget for the
Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area. The Spokane Hotel and Motel Commission shall
make a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners on all Annual Budgets. The
C:ltlocuments and SettingslcbainbridgcLocal SettingsVI'emporary Internet Files101..K2ECrourism Promotion Interlocal I- 19 -04.doeb
Board of County Commissioners shall have the ultimate authority to set and approve all Annual
Budgets.
B. The revenues from the Special Assessments levied by Spokane County on the
Operators of Lodging Businesses situated within the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area
shall be used for the following purposes only:
(1) The funding of all activities and expenditures designed to increase
tourism promotion and convention business within Spokane County as specified
in the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area Budget.
(2) The marketing of convention and business that benefit local
tourism and the Lodging Businesses in Spokane County; and
(3) The marketing of Spokane County to the travel industry in order to
benefit local tourism and the lodging businesses situated within the Spokane.
County Tourism Promotion Area; and
(4) The marketing of Spokane County to recruit major sporting events
in order to promote local tourism and to benefit the Lodging Businesses within
the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area.
5. Establishment of the Spokane Hotel and Motel Commission.
A. It is understood and agreed that the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane
County shall, pursuant to the authority ofRCW 35.101.130 (1) create an eleven (11) member
Spokane Hotel and Motel Commission to advise the Board of County Commissioners of
Spokane County on the expenditure of Special Assessment revenues by the Spokane County
Tourism Promotion Area to fund tourism promotion in Spokane County.
B. Members of the Spokane Hotel and Motel Commission shall be selected by the
Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, the City Council of Spokane and the City
Council of Spokane Valley from a list of nominees prepared by the Spokane Hotel and Motel
Association. All nominees for membership on the Spokane I-Iotel and Motel Commission must
be Operators of Lodging Businesses within Spokane County or employed by the Operator of
such a Lodging Business. One ex officio member of the Commission may be appointed from the
members of the Board of Commissioners of Spokane County; one ex officio member may be
appointed from the members of the City Council of the City of Spokane; and one ex officio
member may be appointed from the members of the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley.
Ex officio members of the Spokane Hotel -Motel Commission may participate in all discussions
regarding proposed activities and programs by the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area for
the promotion and marketing of tourism in Spokane County but shall not have voting rights.
C. The Board of County Conunissioners of Spokane County shall appoint two
members, and one ex officio member of the Spokane Hotel and Motel Commission, to represent
CADocuments and ScuingsvcbninhridgelLocal Settings\Temporary Intrmet Files \OLK2EITuurism Promotion Interlocal I- 19 -04.doc7
the County of Spokane; the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley shall appoint two
members, and one ex officio member, of the Spokane Hotel and Motel Commission to represent
the City of Spokane Valley; and the City Council of the City of Spokane shall appoint four
members, and one ex officio member, of the Spokane Hotel and Motel Commission to represent
the City of Spokane. Any vacancy, on the Spokane Hotel and Motel Commission, arising from a
resignation or other cause, shall be filled by the appointing agency, from the list of nominees
prepared by the Spokane Hotel and Motel Association, within 30 days from the date the
"vacancy occurs ".
D. It is understood and agreed that the initial members of the Spokane Hotel and
Motel Commission shall serve staggered terms, with one member serving a one -year term, two
members serving for two -year terms, and three members serving for three -year terms. The
length of the term for each individual member of the initial Spokane Hotel and Motel
Commission shall be chosen by lot at the first meeting of the Com.mission. Thereafter, all
members subsequently appointed to the Spokane hotel and Motel Commission shall serve for
three -year terms.
6. Contract For Management of Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area.
A. The Board of. County Commissioners shall contract with a TPA Manager. The
contract shall be awarded consistent with all applicable Spokane County laws, ordinances and
regulations. The contract shall require the TPA Manager to comply with all applicable
provisions of law, including RCW 35.101 et al and with all Spokane County resolutions and
ordinances as well as all regulations lawfully imposed by the state auditor or other state agencies.
B. The TPA Manager will be responsible for administering the activities and
programs of the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area and to prepare an Annual Budget for
the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area to be reviewed and approved by the Spokane
Hotel and Motel Commission and submitted to the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane
County on or before November 1 of each year. The TPA Manager shall also act as staff to the
Spokane Hotel and Motel Commission in conjunction with assisting it in determining what
activities and programs to recommend for funding from the Special Assessments.
C. The Annual Budget for the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area shall
consist of:
(1) A list of the Lodging Businesses subject to Special Assessments and an
estimate of the revenue to be received from all such Lodging Businesses; and
(2) A statement of the proposed budget for all Spokane County Tourism
Promotion Area activities and programs recommended by the Spokane Hotel and Motel
Commission to be funded from Special Assessments during the ensuing fiscal year; and
D. All Special Assessments received by Spokane County from the Washington State
Department of Revenue and any interest therein shall be deposited by Spokane County in a
C:IDocuments and Settingtkbainbridge\Local Scttings\Tcmporary Internet Filcs10LK2EVrourism Promotion Interlocal 1- 19- 04.docS
special account. .Payments to the TPA lMlanager will be made as provided for in the agreement
between the Spokane County and the TPA manager. Provided, however, no Special Assessment
shall be dispersed in any fiscal year until after the adoption of that year's fiscal Annual Budget,
Provided further, Spokane County shall not expend in any Fiscal year Special Assessments in
excess of the approved fiscal Annual Budget_
Area.
7. Modification or Disestablishrnent of the Spokane County Tourism Promotion
A. The Board of County Corn.missioners of Spokane County, by appropriate action,
may modify the provisions of the resolution establishing the Spokane County Tourism
Promotion Area or provide for the disestablishmcnt of the Spokane County Tourism Promotion
Area, after adopting a resolution of intention to such effect. Such resolution of intention shall
describe the change or changes proposed, or indicate that it is the intention to disestablish the
Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area, and shall state the time and place of a public hearing
to be held by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County to consider the proposed
action.
13. If the Operators of Lodging .Businesses which pay over forty percent (40%) of the
Special Assessments levied within the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area file a petition
with the Cleric of the Board of Spokane County Commissioners requesting the Board of County
Commissioners of Spokane County to adopt a resolution of intention to modify or disestablish
the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane
County shall adopt such resolution and act upon it as required by law- Signatures on such
petition shall be those of a duly authorized representative of the Operators of Lodging businesses
in the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area. In the event of failure on the part of the Board
of County Commissioners to modify or disestablish the TPA the participating local governments
reserve the right to withdraw from this agreement upon three (3) months notice to the other
participating local governments.
C -- In the event the resolution proposes disestablishment of the Spokane County
Tourism Promotion Area the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County shall
disestablish the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area; unless at such public hearing, protest
against diseslablishment is made by the Operators of Lodging Businesses paying over fifty
percent (50 %) of the Special Assessments in the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area.
8. Miscellaneous Provisions:
A. Duration and Termination of this A.reeinent, (1) This Agreement shall continue
in full force and effect until such time as the Spolcarie County Tourism Promotion Area is
disestablished by action of the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County as provided
in Section 7 above. (2) This agreement shall expire December 3 1, 2008, PROVIDED, it may be
extended in increments of three years by consent of Spokane County, City of Spokane, and City
of Spokane Valley, expressed either by resolution of the legislative body or written approval of
C :\Doaum.nrs ScIIin l:bainbridOlAca! 5e#iin8slrempormry Interne Filcs\OLK2E1Tourism Pjornotiori [merlon! 1- 19 -01,doc9
1
its chief executive officer. The timing of such consent should be coordinated with the needs of
the Washington State Department of Revenue. (3) Following termination of this Agreement,
Spokane County shall be responsible for utilizing any remaining unallocated revenue from
Special Assessments for use for tourism promotion in Spokane County.
B. Waiver. No officer, employee, or agent of Spokane County, Spokane, or Spokane
Valley has the power, right, or authority to waive any of the conditions or provisions of this
Agreement. No waiver of any breach of this Agreement by Spokane County, Spokane, or
Spokane Valley shall be held to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach. Failure of
Spokane County, Spokane, or Spokane Valley to enforce any of the provisions of this Agreement
or to require pet of any of the provisions herein, shall in no way be construed to be a
waiver of such conditions, nor in any way effect the validity of this Agreement or any part
hereof, or the right of Spokane County, Spokane or Spokane Valley to hereafter enforce each and
every such provision.
C. Records. All records prepared, owned, used or retained by the TPA Manager in
conjunction with operating or administering the activities and programs of the Spokane County
Tourism Promotion Area as provided for under the terms of this Agreement shall be deemed
records of Spokane County, Spokane, and Spokane Valley and shall be made available by the
TPA Manager upon request to Spokane County, Spokane, or Spokane Valley, State Auditor or
their authorized representatives..
D. Property and Equipment. Spokane County Shall be the owner of all property and
equipment purchased by the TPA Manager from Special Assessment Revenues. Provided,
however, in the event of the termination of the Agreement with the TPA Manager, Spokane
County agrees to make the property and /or equipment available to the successor TPA Manager
for its use in conjunction with providing similar services. Provided further, in the event of
disestablishment of the Spokane County Tourism Promotion Area, all property and equipment
purchased by the TPA Manager from Special Assessment Revenues shall be retained by Spokane
County and used for any lawful purpose.
E. Intearration. This Agreement contains all of the terms and conditions agreed upon
by Spokane County, Spokane, and Spokane Valley concerning the establishment of the Spokane
County Tourism Promotion Area by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County
and the collection of Special Assessments from Operators of Lodging Businesses within the
entire area, including the area within the jurisdictions of Spokane and Spokane Valley. No other
understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement shall be
deemed to exist or to bind any of the parties hereto. The parties have read and understand all of
this Agreement, and now state that no representation, promise, or agreement not expressed in this
Agreement has been made to induce the officials of Spokane County, Spokane, or Spokane
Valley to execute this Agreement.
F. Severability. In the event any provision of this Agreement shall be declared by a
Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, the validity, legality and
enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not, in any way, be effected or impaired thereby.
C:IDocwnents and SeningslcbainbridgclLocal Sc tingsVrcmporary Internet Filcsl0LK2tlTourism Promotion intcrlocal 1- 19- 04.docl0
G. Execution of Agreement. This Agreement shall become effective inunediately
after it is duly adopted by the board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, the City
Council of Spokane, and the City Council of Spokane Valley and shall be filed with the County
Auditor of Spokane County, the City Clerk of Spokane, and the City Clerk of Spokane Valley,
and the Secretary of State of the State of Washington.
H. Litigation. In the event litigation is brought against the TPA or any party to this
Agreement the TPA Manager shall cause legal counsel to be employed for the purpose of
defending or prosecuting the matter. The cost of the legal counsel shall be paid by the TPA. The
parties reserve the right to monitor and participate in any litigation as solely determined by the
partY-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Spokane, the City of Spokane Valley, and
Spokane County have executed this Agreement by their duly authorized officials pursuant to all
requirements of law.
C(\Documents and Settingkbainbridge\Local Settings\Tcmporary Internet Files\OLI:2E\Tourism Promotion lnterlocal 1- 19.04.docl 1
Attest:
Clerk of the Board
Approved as to form:
Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Attest:
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
Assistant Corporation Counsel
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
By:
By:
By:
CITY OF SPOKANE
By:
Mayor
C_1Documenis and Settingslchainbridge \Loeal SettineslTcmporary Internet Files \O1,K2E\Tourism Promotion Interlocal I- 39.404.docl2
Attest:
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
Assistant Corporation Counsel
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
By:
City Manager
C:IDocuments and SettingticbainbrideelLocal ScttingsVrcmporag Internet Files \OLK2E Tourism Promotion Interlocal 1- 19 -04.doc13
Meeting Date: 02 - 10 - 04 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
xxinformation ❑ admin. report EJ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Mayor Appointments /Council Confirmations
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
BACKGROUND:
Mayor DeVleming will propose making the following committee appointments:
SCRAPS (Animal Control ) — Gary Schimmels
Spokane County Library — Diana Wilhite
International Trade Alliance — Rich Munson
Governance Manual Review — Steve Taylor, Mike Flanigan, Mike DeVleming
and two to three citizens to the Cable Advisory Board
OPTIONS:
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION:
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
STAFF CONTACT:
ATTACHMENTS
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
El) Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: February 10, 2004 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Walgreens Public Access Easement
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.11.010 (Rights, Powers and Privileges)
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: There has been no previous Council action taken.
BACKGROUND: Walgreens is proposing to construct a 14,418 square feet store at 12306 East
Sprague Avenue located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Sprague Avenue and
Pines Road — the site is currently occupied by the vacant Chevron gasoline service station. An
existing fifteen (15) foot wide public alley is located along the southern property line of the
proposed Walgreens development site. This existing public alley currently provides access to
the proposed Walgreens development site as well as other properties south and east of this
site. Walgreens is proposing to use the public alley to provide access to the proposed on -site
drive - through and on -site parking. As part of the land use and engineering review for the
proposed project, the developer supported a staff recommendation to provide a five (5) foot
wide public access easement along the property's southern property line to increase vehicle
maneuvering area while using the public alley. The attached public access easement document
from Walgreens addresses the provision of this proposed easement.
OPTIONS: The proposed public access easement involves the use of real property. The City
Council has established a practice of considering grants of uses of real property such as a
public access easement through a resolution process.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: There is no recommended action or motion from staff
for the February 10, 2004 meeting as the purpose of this meeting is an administrative report
only. A resolution accepting the public access easement is currently proposed for City Council
consideration on February 24, 2004. Please advise staff of any questions or information needs
the Council may have regarding the proposed easement at the February 10, 2004 meeting.
Staff will provide any requested information at the February 24, 2004 meeting.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: No budget or financial impacts are anticipated with the City
Council's potential acceptance of the public access easement.
STAFF CONTACT: Kevin Snyder, AICP, Current Planning Manager
ATTACHMENT:
Attachment A: RCW 35A.11.010
Attachment B: Proposed Public Access
Agreement
ATTACHMENT A
Chapter 35A.11.010 RCW - The Washington State Legislature
s
-.ems
Ip1111
Legislature Home About Us E -Mail Lists Search
RCW TITLES » TITLE 35A » CHAPTER 35A.11 » SECTION 35A_11.010
Beginning of chapter « 35A.11.010 » 35A.11.020
RCW 35A.11.010
Rights, powers and privileges.
[1967 ex.s. c 119 § 35A.11.010.]
Help
Print Version
Each city governed under this optional municipal code, whether charter or
noncharter, shall be entitled "City of " (naming it), and by such name shall
have perpetual succession; may sue and be sued in all courts and proceedings;
use a corporate seal approved by its legislative body; and, by and through its
legislative body, such municipality may contract and be contracted with; may
purchase, lease, receive, or otherwise acquire real and personal property of every
kind, and use, enjoy, hold, lease, control, convey or otherwise dispose of it for the
common benefit.
Page 1 of 1
http: / /www.leg.wa.gov/R.CW /i.ndex.cf n ?fuseaction= section §ion= 35A.11.010 2/5/2004
ATTACHMENT B
DOCUMENT TITLE(S) (or transactions contained therein):
PU13LIC ACCESS 1 ASEMENTT
REFERENCE NUMBER(S) OF DOCUMENTS ASSIGiNTED OR RELEASED:
N/A
❑ Additional reference #s on page of document(s)
GRANTOR(S) (Last name first, then first name and initials)
Walgreens, Co, an Illinois corporation
• Additional names on page of document .
GRANTEE(S) (Last name first, then first name and initials)
THE CITY OF S.POKANE VALLEY, a Washington municipal corporation
• Additional names on page of document
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (abbreviated: i.e., lot; block, plat or section, township, range)
Attached hereto as Exhibit "A"
• Additional legal is on page of document
ASSESSOR'S PROPERTY TAX PARCEL/ACCOUNT NUMBER
Spokane County No. 45222.0408, 45222.0409, 45222.0410
• Assessor Tax # not yet assigned
RETURN ADDRESS:
Walgrecns, Co
200 Wilmot Road
Deerfield, IL 60015 •
Attn: Law Department
Michael Redstone
WASHLNGTON STATE :RECORDER'S Cover Sheet (RCW 65.04)
l
C:1D000TMENTS AND SM i IN GS\SCOTT E. GRAn' GE \1MY DOCUMENrS\WO SPOKANEPINESEASE.MENr.DOC
PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT
THIS PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT (the "Easement ") is made as of this day of
, 200, by WA.L GREEN CO., an Illinois corporation ( "Walgreens ") for the
benefit of THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, a Washington municipal corporation ( "City ").
Recitals
A. Walgreens is the owner of certain real property located in the City of Spokane
Valley, Washington, more particularly described on Exhibit A, attached hereto (the " Walgreens
Property ").
B. The City is the owner of a public right -of -way (alley), more particularly
identified on Exhibit B, which abuts the Walgreens Property immediately to the south.
C. The City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department- Current
Planning Division issued a written Determination of Non - Significance "DNS" dated July 21,
2003 for the development of certain real property. Agents of Walgreens have applied for a
building permit (File Number: BLD- 03- 03173) from the City of Spokane Valley Community
Development Department- Building Division to develop the Walgreens Property as indicated on
the site plan attached as Exhibit C (the "Permit "). The site plan as submitted under SEPA 12306
E. Sprague Avenue and File Number BLD -03 -03173 has been approved by the City of Spokane
Valley.
D. In connection with the City's review of the building permit application, the Ciry
has requested that Walgreens grant a five (5) foot access easement over that portion of the
Walgreens Property abutting the alley, as such area is more particularly described on attached
Exhibit D (the "Easement Areal), and as shown on Exhibit E to improve vehicular circulation on
the alley.
E. Walgreens is willing to grant such easement on the terms set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is
hereby acknowledged, Walgreens agrees as follows:
1. Grant of Easement. Walgreens hereby grants and conveys to the City a non-
exclusive easement across the Easement Area to provide public access for vehicles between
Pines Road and Houk Road.
2
C:1DOCuMENTS ANo SETTMOS\SCOTT E. GRAINGER\MY DOCUAfEWTS\WORD\SPOKANEPI> ESEASEEMrWr2.DOC
2. improvements to Easement Area; Maintenance. In conjunction with its
development of the Walgreens Property, Walgreens shall improve the Easement Area to the
same level of required improvements to the abutting public alley identified by the City of
Spokane Valley Public Works Department- Engineering Division during the required engineering
review process. Walgreens shall be responsible, at its sole cost and expense, for maintaining the
Easement Improvements to ensure consistency with the original level of improvement.
3. Exercise of Riehts to Easement Area. The City agrees that public use of the
Easement Area shall be limited to the purposes described herein and the City shall take such
action as is necessary to ensure the Easement Area is not used for any other purpose. The City
shall not at any time use the Easement Area for any purpose that interferes with business
operations on or access to the Walgreens Property. Notwithstanding anything contained herein
to the contrary, the easement rights granted herein shall not be available for public use until such
time as construction of the improvements on the Walgreens Property are substantially complete
and open for business.
4. Use of Easement Area by Walgreens. Walgreens hereby reserves the right to use
the Easement Area for any purpose deemed reasonably necessary by Walgreens in connection
with its ownership, development or operation of the Walgreens Property provided such use does
not substantially interfere with the easement rights granted herein.
5. Intrusions into Easement Area. Physical intrusions into the Easement Area by
Walgreens shall occur only after the City's review and issuance of written approval authorizing
such intrusion. The City acknowledges that it has authorised a three -foot wide intrusion into the
Easement Area for the screening associated with an outdoor recycler /compactor.
6. Termination. The enactment of the easement is contingent upon completion of
the development of the property inclusive of store opening and use. Failure to complete the
development shall automatically terminate the easement and the rights granted herein. The City
shall also release said easement in the following instances: (a) the building improvements
constructed pursuant to such Permit are destroyed; or (b) the City otherwise agrees by written
instrument recorded in the records of Spokane County, Washington to release its rights in the
Easement.
7. City Council Acceptance. The City of Spokane Valley City Council shall, prior
to the recording of the easement, accept said easement by resolution at a regularly scheduled
meeting.
8. Running with the Land. This Easement shall nun with the land as evidenced by
recording with the Spokane County Auditor's office and shall be binding upon the owners of the
Walgreens Property and the City and their heirs, successors and assigns until such easement is
terminated pursuant to Section 5.
3
C:DoCUMENTS AND SETnNG51Sco7T E. GRAINGERIMY DOCUMENTSIWORD \SPOKANEPINESEASEMENT2.000
By:
9. Attorney Fees. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce or interpret
the terms of this Easement shall be entitled to recover its costs and reasonable attorney fees
incurred in said action, including on appeal, whether or not suit is commmenced.
14. Breach. In the event of any breach or threatened breach of this Easement by the
owner of either the Easement Area or the alley, the non- defaulting owner shall have the right to
sue for damages and /or for specific performance and/or to enjoin such breach or threatened
breach.
GRANTOR:
WALGREEN COT an Illinois corporation
Its: � rut; 1 / , 1 9 ,
GRANTEE:
THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, a Washington municipal corporation
By:
Its:
4
C:ID000MENTS AND SETTFNGSSSCOTT E. GRAINGERMY DOCUMI: h' rSlWORD1 SPOKANEPINESFASEMENT2.D0C
t�
0
PARCEL A:
Exhibit A
(Legal Description of Walgreens Property)
THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF' THE NORTHWEST
QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 25 NORTH, RANGE 44 EAST, 1�1�,M., AND
THAT PORTION OF LOT z OF STEWART'S SUBDIVISION OF' BLOCK 164 OF
OPPORTUNITY, ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME "R" OF PLATS,
PAGE 41, IN SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECT.ION OF THE EAST LINE OF
SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NO, 3 -H ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE
NORTHWEST QUARTER OF' THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 22,
WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 2, AS THE SAME
EXISTED ON JANUARY 27, 1977 AS REFERRED TO IN AUDITOR.'S DOCUMENT
NO, 7701270130;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY
NO. 3-H, 90 FEET; THENCE EAST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID
PRINLARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 2 TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID
LOT 1;
THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 1 TO THE NORTHEAST
CORNER OF SAID LOT;
THENCE WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT, AND ALONG THE
SOUTH LINE OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 2 TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING;
EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL THAT PART OF THE HERETOFORE DESCRI BED
TRACT LYING WEST OF A LINE DESCRIBED AS BEGINNING AT A POINT ON
THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT AND 38 FEET EAST OF THE SR 27 LINE
SURVEY OF SR 27, TENTH AVENUE TO SPRAGUE AVENUE;
THENCE NORTH PARALLEL WITH SAID SR 27 LINE SURVEY TO A POINT 12
FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT;
THENCE NORTHEASTERLY TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT
THAT IS 48 -FEET EAST OF SAID SR 27 LINE SURVEY AND THE END OF THIS
LINE DESCRIPTION.
PARCEL B:
THE SOUTH 40 FEET OF LOT a. OF STEWART'S SUBDIVISION OF BLOCK 164 OF
OPPORTUNITY, ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME "R" OE PLATS,
PAGE 41, IN SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON;
7
C:1DoCUMENTS AND SETTINGSISCOTT E. G RAMNG ERN Y DOCUMEN7SlWO FLEAS PO:,ANE
AND THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST
QUARTER OF SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 25 NORTH, RANGE 44 EAST, W.M., AND
THAT PART OF LOT 1 OF STEWART'S SUBDIVISION OF BLOCK 164 OF
OPPORTUNITY, ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME "R" OF PLATS,
PAGE 41, IN SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY
NO. 3 -H ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE
NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 22, WHICH POINT IS 90 FEET
SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID HIGHWAY WITH
'T'I-IE SOUTH LINE OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 2;
THENCE EAST PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PRIMARY STATE
HIGHWAY NO. 2 TO A POINT IN THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 1;
THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT :t TO THE POINT
OF INTERSECTION OF SAID EAST LINE WITH A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH
A.ND 40 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 1;
THENCE WESTERLY PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT r TO A
POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 3-H;
THENCE NORTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID HIGHWAY, 6o FEET TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPT THAT PORTION ACQUIRED BY THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR
PINES ROAD BY DECREE OF APPROPRIATION ENTERED OCTOBER 30, 1984,
UNDER SPOKANE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 842013359.
PARCEL C:
LOT 2, EXCEPT THE EAST 10 FEET THEREOF, STEWART'S SUBDIVISION OF
BLOCK 164 OF OPPORTUNITY, ACCORDING TO PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME
"R" OF PLATS, PAGE 41, IN SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
8
C.ID000MENTS AND SETIINGSISCOTT E. GRAA"CERIMY DOCUbGENTSIw0ADISPOi :ANE,PINESEksEMEN 12.00C.
8
50.00'
N89'5554 "W
Exhibit I3
(Engineer's Map of Public Alley)
8
1
tri
0 0
m m
FOUND 5/8" RESAR
LS 67544
b
(0.09' N)
(100.3' SRI) (109' SRI)
L 4. 100.30' 100.00'
SP.F
0--
226.29'
(226.3' SRI)
15
9
C:IDOCuMENTS AND SETTrNGS1SCDTT E. GRAINGF.RIMY DOCUMENTS\ wORDLSPOKAA 'EPINESEASE,MENT2.DOC
2
0
co
w
th
4.
c�7
O
r•
L."
W
0,
O
Q
4 °
0
00
yy� '(E) CHAN
_ ..4.. _
_ — _ (E) TRAFI
_ L LIGHT
J
WALGRE
-- — — PYION N
— — — — STORMW TER
RETENTItN BASIN
LI ZATIO N
IC
0
0
NS ERB
4—
r
1\ L/S BUFFER, TYP.
SPRAGUE AVENUE
23,150 VPD / 35 MPH
P
b,
mdimmriraa ummula!
ALLEY
153 STALLS
PL 239.9
/AV__ /l I.
nem "c tux, 7u4
EESTAuRANT
eF • fiP7A
CC
5' ACCESS EASEMENT I I
DEDICATED TO THE CITY
(COMPACTOR ENCLOSUR
ENCROACHMENT APPROV D BY CITY)
.
Walgreens #01993
Spokane Valley, WA
LEASE EXHIBIT
. I AL
m.
" A II
SCALE: 1" = 60' -0" , JANUARY 207H 2004
STORMWATI
RETEN'rtON
ra,
SITE PLAN
The South 5.00 feet of Lots 1 and 2, STEWART'S SUBDIVISION OF BLOCK 164 OF
OPPORTUNITY, per plat thereof recorded in Volume "R" of Plats, Page 41, City of
Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington;
EXCEPT the East 10.00 feet thereof;
Exhibit D
(Legal Description of Easement .Area)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Proposed Non - Exclusive 5' Easement
January 23, 2004
AND EXCEPT that portion acquired by the State of Washington for Pines Road by
Decree of Appropriation entered October 30, 1984, under Spokane County Superior
Court Case No. 942013359.
C:\D000MENTS AND SE \SCOTT E. ORA1NGER\MY DOCUMENT S1WORD1$POKANEPMESEASEMENT2.DOC
L . t ; t
t
0
0
0
SS'
WA
NE
PLAY'
Igo; r H
S FASLYtll7
uruumtouunmmar[1111f11(']
PARCEL
mrn ;pm
71421 t4
wALGRt66 PAP.CG
4-
4- 27,tA VI'O 33 ..4114
C
Pt ?77S
DRAFT
PROPOSED 5 EASEMEN
SCALE: 1" 50'—Q JANUARY 5TH 200
TACO? ?N;
PARCEi
!ROTA PART)
txISTL% TACO -
nut RLSrAUxurr
t 0 REMAD4 pt
OYSTNG CUSS
ACCES
- b
v
UJ
COSTING RLTAK G W7 F
— H
I
lu
w
v
z
d
s
$TRL`E AS SHOWN
F
6
2
_8
BWA
MEMO WITJHERSPOON, KELLEY, DAVENPORT & TOOLE, P.S.
TO:
Mayor and Members of the City Council
cc: Dave Mercier, City Manager, John Holman, Senior Engineer and
Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
FROM: Stanley M. Schwartz, Attorney
DATE: February 6, 2004
RE: Summary of Proposed Stormwater Ordinance
I. INTRODUCTION
This memorandum sets forth a summary of the proposed Stormwater Drainage Ordinance that relates
to the permitting process, construction and maintenance of stormwater facilities. The Stormwater
Ordinance follows the stormwater presentation to the City Council on January 20, 2004.
II. SUMMARY OF DRAFT ORDINANCE
1. Recitals. The introductory paragraphs set forth the legal duty to control stormwater in order
to protect the public health and safety. The recitals also recognize that the Ordinance provides for
stormwater review and control with respect to the development of land.
2. Finding and Purpose. The purpose of the Ordinance is to control stormwater to protect
surface and ground water resources, reduce the impact from increased surface water flow and protect
public and private property.
3. Definitions. Key definitions are: "Best Management Practices" which provides for the most
feasible and generally accepted techniques to mitigate the impact from stormwater. "Site Drainage
Plan" is a plan that will show the stormwater facilities and "Threshold Requirements" identify the
volume or peak flow of Stormwater that must be controlled.
4. Regulated Activities. This section identifies the "regulated activities" that will require
stormwater review. The activities are: (A) grading of land in excess of five hundred cubic yards; (B)
construction or addition to a building except a single family or duplex residence; (C) placement of
impervious surface in excess of 5,000 square feet; or (D) the subdivision, short subdivision and
binding site plan process set forth in City and State law.
5. Authority to Develop and Administer Standards. The Director is given the authority to
develop and administer City standards that relate to best management practices and threshold
requirements.
The Developer also is required to follow a review process with respect to the "regulated activities."
6. Conditions of Approval. The Director may impose development requirements or Conditions
of Approval for the regulated activities. The Conditions of Approval shall be based upon the City
standards, the Site Drainage Plan or other relevant data.
7 Design Elements. The Drainage Facilities shall be designed so as to not impact adjoining
lots or parcels unless agreed otherwise between the properties. This section also sets standards with
respect to continuous swales adjacent to City streets and the location of ponds or swales that serve a
large area.
8. Design Deviations and Appeal. The Director is authorized to grant a design deviation in
order to promote flexibility with respect to theOrdinance or City standard. Deviations will be based
upon sound engineering and best management practices.
In the administration of the Ordinance a party has a right to appeal the Director's decision to a panel
of three civil engineers.
9. Stormwater Drainage Facilities. This section provides that a Certificate of Occupancy shall
not be issued until the stormwater drainage facility is certified as complete or a Performance Bond is
posted. Following completion of the project, the developer (or landowner) shall post a Warranty
Bond for a period of two years. Per City Standard the Warranty Bond is twenty percent of the
estimated cost to repair the Stormwater Facility.
10. Inspection. The Director is authorized to inspect the Stormwater Facility.
11. Property Owner Responsibilities. The property owner is responsible for repair, restoration
and maintenance of the Stormwater Facility.
12. Public Drainage Facilities. No person shall discharge "unauthorized waters" onto City
property or right -of -way without permission. Unauthorized waters are defined as: the redirection of a
natural water way, deposit of surface water containing sediment, or water discharged through
industrial purposes.
13. Failure to Comply — Nuisance. The City may declare a nuisance for the placement,
construction, or installation of any stormwater structure without permission of the Director or the
failure to construct or maintain the same. The nuisance shall be abated through the nuisance
procedures set forth in other City Ordinances.
The remainder of the Ordinance contains boiler plate language with respect to severability and the
effective date of the Ordinance. If the terms of this Ordinance are generally acceptable the City will
prepare a SEPA checklist, make a SEPA determination and bring forward the Ordinance for first
reading.
G:1C'City of Spokane Valley 14324\Memnrandumc1MemoMayo 02.06- O4.doc
i
Meeting Date:
OPTIONS:
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION:
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
STAFF CONTACT:
ATTACHMENTS
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
02 - 10 - 04 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
x information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Sidewalk Responsibility Discussion
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
BACKGROUND:
2h I3IRDSALL v. A13RAMS Feb. 2001
105 \'Jn. App. 24
There was no clear error.
In. sum, the trial court's decision to impose costs solely
because Richardson rejected the State's plea offer was
improper. For that reason, we reverse that portion of the
judgment and sentence.
KENNEDY and AE'prLw1CK, JJ., concur.
[No. 19242 -3 -III. Division Three. February 15, 2001.1
RAYMOND D. BnmSALL, Appellant, v. JERRY D. A awls, ET AL.,
Respondents.
[13 Negligence Duty ol lc Question of Law or Fact. The existence of
A duty is a qu
121 Negligence — Owner or Occupier of Land — Duty of Care —
Public Sidewalks — Snow and Ice — Removal. Absent a
statutory provision to the contrary, a real property owner has no
c
duty to clear naturally a umulated nnnowand ice from c ubl rc
sidewalks abutting the property. ' A t
p' p y
portions of the sidewalk and not others is not under a duty to alter
the naturally occurring accumulations of snow and ice on the
uncleared portions of the aidewalik.
[31 Municipal Corporations — Sidewalks — Snow and Ice
Removal — Duty Imposed on Property Owners — Private
Cause of Action. The existence of a city ordinance requiring real
property owners to remove snow and ice from public sidewalks does
not give rise to a duty of care by a property owner that would support
a private cause of action by a pedestrian. Such an ordinance is for
the benefit of the municipality in the discharge of its duties to the
public and not for the protections of individual citizens by property -
owners.
Nature of Action: A pedestrian who slipped and fell on
a public sidewalk sought damages for personal injury from
the owner of the property fronted by the sidewalk. The
section of the sidewalk where the plaintiff slipped and fell
had not been cleared of snow and ice, although other
sections had.
Feb. 2001 BIRDSALL v. ABRAMS
105 Wn. App. 24
Superior Court: The Superior Court for Benton County,
No. 98- 2- 00217 -1, Philip M. Raekes, J., entered a summary
judgment in favor of the defendants on March 31, 2000.
Court of Appeals: Holding that the defendants did not
owe a duty of care to the plaintiff to keep the sidewalk clear
of the naturally accumulated snow and ice, the court
affirms the judgment.
Eugene G. Schuster (of Critchlow, Williams & Schuster),
for appellant.
Christopher J. Kerley (of Keefe, King & Bowman, RS.), for
respondents.
LEXIS Publishing"' Research References
2001 Waah. App. LEXIS 283 •
SwEF NEY, J. —This slip -and -fall case raises two questions.
First, does a landowner who clears a portion of a public
sidewalk owe a duty of care to a pedestrian who falls on the
uncleared portion? No. Ainey v. Rialto Amusement Co., 135
Wash. 56, 68, 236 P. 801, 41 A.L.R. 263 (1925). Second, does
a city ordinance requiring landowners to clear the public
sidewalks adjacent to their land or face possible jail time
provide injured pedestrians with a tort action against
violating landowners? It does not, Gardner v. Kendrick, 7
Wn. App. 852, 853 -54, 503 P.2d 134 (1972). We therefore
affirm the summary dismissal of Raymond D. Birdsall's
damage claim. •
FACTS
25
On February 13, 1995, Raymond Birdsall slipped and fell
while walking on a public sidewalk in front of a building
owned by Jerry Abrams, Charles Kunz, and Carlsberg
Properties, Inc., doing business as Richland Office Build-
ings Partners. Jerry D. Abrams Company managed the
building. hereafter, the defendants will be referred to as
allak
BIRDSA.LL v. ABRAMS • Feb. 2001
105 Wn. App. 24
Mr. Abrams. The sidewalk had been cleared of snow and ice
in one section, but not in the section where Mr. Birdsall fell.
Mr. Birdsall filed suit against Mr. Abrams alleging he was
negligent by not clearing the sidewalk in its entirety. Mr.
Abrams moved for summary judgment. The court granted
the motion.
26
ANALYSIS
STANDARD OF RSV>BW.
We review an order granting summary judgment de novo.
We engage in the same inquiry as the trial court —is there
a genuine issue as to any material fact and is the moving
party entitled to judgment as a matter of law? We consider
the evidence and the reasonable inferences therefrom in a
light rnost favorable to the nonmoving party. Folsom u.
Burger King, 135 Wn.2d 658, 663, 958 P.2d 301 (1998).
Dun OF CARR.
11) Mr. Birdsall argues that Mr. Abrams had a duty to
keep the sidewalk clear of snow and ice. He claims Mr.
Abrams breached this duty and increased the risk by
clearing only a portion of the sidewalk. Whether a duty
exists is a question of law. Hutchins v. 1001 Fourth Ave.
Assocs., 116 Wn.2d 217, 220, 802 P.2d 1360 (1991); Hostetler
v. Ward, 41 Wn. App. 343, 349, 704 P.2d 1193 (1985).
[2] Washington law is clear. Unless there is a statutory
provision to the contrary, landowners have no duty to clear
snow and ice from public sidewalks adjacent to their
property. Bennett v. McGoldrick-Sanderson Co., 15 Wn.2d
130, 135 -36, 129 P.2d 795. (1942); Nadeau v. Roeder, 139 -. -
Wash. 648, 650, 247 P. 951 (1926); Ainey, 135 Wash. at. 58.
Mr. Birdsall argues a duty existed because the sidewalk
was a common area controlled by Mr. Abrams. The cases he
relies on, however, are readily distinguishable because they
involve privately owned land. Iwai v. State, 129 Wn.2d 84,
87, 915 P.2d 1089, 74 A.L.R:Sth 711 (1996) (fall occurred'in
parking lot owned by defendant,); Geise v. Lee, 84 Wn.2d
f
27
Feb. 2001 BIRDSALL v. ABRAMS
105 Wn. App. 24
866, 867, 529 P :2d 1054 (1975) (fall occurred in privately
owned trailer park); Sorenson u. Keith Udd.enberg, Inc., 65
Wn. App. 474, 475 -76, 828 P.2d 650 (1992) (fall occurred in
privately owned parking lot). Here, there is no dispute that
Mx. Birdsall fell while walking on a publicly owned side-
walk.
Mr. Birdsall next argues that Mr. Abrams is liable be-
cause he increased the danger by clearing only a portion of
the sidewalk. Landowners are liable for the artificial clan -
gerous conditions they cause. James v. Burch.ett, 15 Wn.2d
119, 126 -27, 129 P.2d 790 (1942) (landowner liable for
negligent placement of gravel on sidewalk); Col&is v. Buck
& Bowers Oil Co., 175 Wash. 263, 265 -67, 27 P.2d 118 (1933)
(landowner liable for allowing oil to spill on sidewalk);
Nadeau, 139 Wash. at 649 -50 (landowner liable for frozen
water on sidewalk that collected there through artificial
means).
Here, the snow and ice was accumulated naturally. Mr.
Birdsall argues, nonetheless, that this naturally occurring
danger was enhanced because Mr. Abrams cleared a portion
• of the sidewalk, but not the entire sidewalk. Mr. Birdsall
relies on Sorenson.
In Sorenson, the plaintiff slipped and fell in a privately
owned parking lot. Sorenson, 65 Wn. App. at 475 -76. Snow
and ice had been plowed in the parking lot and piled in
various locations. Id. at 476. One pile was placed in the
middle of the lot on a sloping area. Id. at 476, 479 -80. The
ice that caused the plaintiff to slip followed the melting of
this pile of snow and then the refreezing of the runoff. Id. at
480.
The court held there were facts indicating the natural
accumulation had been altered, and the ice may have been
caused through the negligent piling of the snow. Sorenson,
65 Wn. App- at 480 n_5. The court stated: "although a
business owner ordinarily may have no duty to protect his
or her invitees from the effects of a natural accumulation of
ice and snow, if a mitigation of the hazard is undertaken, a
BIRDSALL v. ABRAMS Feb. 2001
105 Wn. App. 24
duty arises to perform that mitigation in a nonnegligent
manner? Id. at 479.
We distinguish Sorenson on two grounds. First, the
plaintiff there was an invitee on privately owned land. And
second, the landowner in. that case took affirmative steps to
alter the accumulation of snow and ice. The present case is
factually similar to Ainey.
In Ainey, the plaintiff was injured when he slipped and
fell on a publicly owned sidewalk outside the defendant's
movie theater. Ainey, 135 Wash. at 56 -57. The landowner
had cleared the sidewalk adjacent to the theater's main
entrance, but did not dear the sidewalk adjacent to the
alley entrance. Id. at 57. The plaintiffs case was dismissed
on a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence. Id.
On appeal, the court held the landowner owed no duty to
the plaintiff:
If the slippery condition of the alley sidewalk had been
caused by something the respondent did, such as permitting a
stream of water to flow over it and freeze, or throwing water
upon the snow, then it would probably be liable in damages.
The distinction is that, when the dangerous condition is caused
by the elements only, there is no liability on the part of the
property owner, but where he has done something to create or
increase the danger, then he may be liable.
Ainey, 135 Wash. at 58 -59.
Additionally, the plaintiff in Ainey argued the landowner
had a duty to clear the alley sidewalk because it had
undertaken to clear the sidewalk adjacent to the front
entrance. Ainey, 135 Wash. at 59. The court rejected the
argument, stating: "(t]here was no legal duty on the (land-
owner] to remove the ice or snow from the front aidewalle;""
and the mere fact that they did remove it imposed no duty
upon them to remove it from the alley sidewalk." Id.
Mr. Abrams did not alter the snow and ice where Mr.
Birdsall fell. The snow and ice where Mr. Birdsall fell was
a natural accainulation on a public sidewalk. There was,
therefore, no duty of care,
. 28 .,
Feb. 2001 BIRDSALL v. ABRAMS
105 Wn. App. 24
29
THE RICHLAND ORDINANCE.
Mr. Birdsall next claims that Mr. Abrams owed him a
duty based on a city ordinance requiring landowners to
clear public sidewalks of snow and ice. RicaLkan MuNicJPAJ,
CODE (RMC) § 12.16.020.
131 Mr. Birdsall's argument is not novel. Every Washing-
ton court that has considered this issue has held ordinances
of this kind do not create a cause of action for injured
pedestrians against landowners. See City of Seattle v.
Shorroch, 100 Wash. 234, 245, 170 P. 690 (1918); Zellers v.
Seattle Lodge No. 92 Benevolent & Protective Order of Elhs,
94 Wash. 32, 34 -35, 1611 834 (1916); Gardner, 7 Wn. App.
at, 853 -54.
Ordinances requiring landowners to clear snow and ice
"are held to be for the benefit of the organized government,
i.e., the municipality as an entity, and not for its individual
citizens." Gardner, 7 App. at 853 -54. The Ninth Circuit
carne to the same conclusion when examining a similar
Montana ordinance. W. Auto Supply Agency v. Phelan, 104
F.2d 85, 87 (9th Cir. 1939). There, the court stated: " (ditch
an ordinance is not intended for the protection of the public
by the property owner, but as an aid to the city in discharg-
ing its duty to the public." Id. •
Mr. Birdsall attempts to distinguish the Richland ordi-
nance hecauso it provides for imprisonment, for violations.
RMC § 12.16.030. But the potential punishment does not
alter the underlying purpose. There is no reason to conclude
the Richland statute was intended to create a private cause
of action against landowners merely because Richland may
punish violators more harshly than other cities. The pur-
pose is the same —to benefit the city, not individual citizens.
Gardner, 7 Wn. App. at 853 -54. The ordinance does not
t The Richland Municipal Code (RMCI punishes any violation of its ordinances
with a potential fine of $5,000 or up to one year imprisunment.RMC § 1.30.010.
'Phis includes the failure to keep the outeide of a refuse container clean (RMC
4§ 15.12.060, 1524.0501, failure to keep a boat moorage site dean and free of
brush, weeds, and debris (RMC §§ 6.08.080, 6.08.090); and the failure to keep
signs maintained (RMC §4 27.08 - 0101x1(4), 27.12.030).
18
30
create an actionable duty.
Affirmed.
STA'T'E v. BRADLEY
1 \Vn. App. 30
SCt1tnrrHElS and XATO, JJ., concur.
Feb. 2001
(No. 44799 -8 -1. Division One. February 20, 2001.1
THE STATE OF WASm r4oTO11, Respondent, V. RAY J. BRADLEY,
'1,
Appellant.
l]] Searches and Seizures — Constitutional Provisions — State
and Federal Provisions — Different Constructions — Privacy
Interests. Const. art. I, § 7 is more protective than the Fourth
Amendmont of an individual's right to privacy.
[21 Searches and Seizures — Automobiles — Privacy Interest —
In General. The Const. art. I, § 7 freedom from governmental
intrusion into one's private affairs includes automobiles and their
centento.
[3] Searches and Seizures — Automobiles — Warrantless Search
Validity — In Cieneral, A warrantless search of an automobile is
per se unreasonable under Const. art.. 1, § 7 unless the search falls
within a narrowly drawn exception to the warrant requirement.
14] Searches and Seizures — Warrantless Search -- Validity —
Warrant Exceptions — Narrow Construction. Exceptions to the
constitutional warrant requirement are narrowly construed.
[51 Searches and Seizures — Warrantless Search — Validity —
Burden of Proof. When the validity of a warrantless search is
challenged in court, the State bears the heavy burden of proving that
it is valid under a recognized exception to the warrant. requirement.
[01 Searches and Seizures _ Automgbilee - Warrantless Search-
- investigatory Stop — Validity —Suspect llandcufed and ' •
Detained — Area Secured — No Passengers. The search of a
suspect's motor vehicle ie beyond the scope of a valid investigatory
stop if the suspect is handcuffed and detained within a police vehicle
prior to the search, the surrounding area is secured, there is no need
for the suspect to return to the vehicle, and there are no other
passengers in the vehicle.
171 Appeal — Disposition of Cause — Affirmance on Other
Grounds -- In General.. An appellate court may snnetain a trial
31
Feb. 2001 STATE v. BRADLEY
105 \Vn. App. 30
court'a ruing upon any ground supported by the record and the law.
181 Searches and Seizures — Automobiles — Warrantless Search
— Incident to Arrest of Occupant — Scope — Passenger
Compartment. Immediately utter a motor vehicle occupant is
arrested, handcuffed, and placed in 0 police patrol car, the arresting
officer tnay conduct a warrantless search of the pe senger
compartment of the vehicle for weapons or destructible evidence.
The search may include any area within the arrested person's resch
immediately prior to or at the moment of the arrest The limitations
on the search are that (1) it may not encompass a locked glovebox or
locked oonteiner found in the passenger compartment, (2) itrmustbe
contemporaneous with the arrest, and (3) it must occur while the
suspect remains at the scene of arrest.
(91 Searches and Seizures — Incident to Arrest — Probable
Cause To Arrest — Prior to Arrest. A warrantless search maybe
justified as a search incident to an arrest, even if the search is
conducted before the arrest, so long as probable cause to arrest
existed bcfaretho search began.
[101 Arrest:— Probable Cause — What Constitutes —*In General.
A police officer has probable cause to make a warrantless arrest
when the facts and circumstances within the off'icer's knowledge are
sufficiently trustworthy to cause a reasonable person to believe that
an offense has been committed by the suspect.
[111 Arrest — Probable Cause -- What Constitutes — Collective
Knowledge. When police officers conduct a joint inquiry, the
existence of probable cause to arrest is objectively determined by
considering the cumulative knowledge possessed by all the officers
involved in the investigation and arrest.
Nature of Action: Prosecution for second degree unlaw-
ful possession of a firearm and unlawful possession of a
controlled substance.
Superior Court: The Superior Court for King County,
No. 98 -1- 09359 -1, Carol A. Schapira, J., entered a judgment
of guilty on June 28, 1999.
Court of Appeals: Holding that the search of the defen-
dant's car was not a valid search incident to an investiga-
tory stop, but that the search was valid as a search incident
to arrest, the court affirms the judgment..
A. Mark Va.nderveen, for appellant.
Noun Malenl, Prosecuting Attorney, and Catherine M.
McDowall, Deputy, for respondent.
Meeting Date: February 10, 2004 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent X old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
information X admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed franchise for OneEIGHTY Networks, Inc.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
OPTIONS: Not granting the franchise.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: The Council has had several touches on this matter,
including a first reading October 28, 2003.
BACKGROUND: OneEIGHTY Networks expects to provide "last mile" fiber to houses and
businesses that do not currently have fiber access.
After the first reading, a representative from OneEighty called with concerns about the language
in Section 4, subsection 4. They asserted that the old language could substantially interfere
with their ability to enter long -term contracts with customers. After additional research and
discussion by legal staff and public works with their counterparts from the City of Spokane, new
language was arrived at. This new language is consistent with Washington law, and OneEighty
Networks has approved it as well.
The city would have access to four strands, of dark fiber under the same terms as provided for in
the Columbia and EMAN franchises. The new language in this franchise will be put into a letter
of understanding to Columbia and EMAN, in which the City would state that Section 4 sub 4 of
those franchises would be interpreted to mean the new language, and require that EMAN and
Columbia sign and return the letters. This would be in lieu of doing new franchises with those
entities.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to put the ordinance on for second reading on
February 24, 2004.
- BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None in the foreseeable future.
STAFF CONTACT: Cary P. Driskell
ATTACHMENTS: (1) Proposed Franchise (2) change page
OLD LANGUAGE
4- Subject to Subsection 1, the designation of either conduit or fiber shall be
at the sole discretion of the City Manager, PROVIDED, Grantee may submit a
written request to the City Manager asking himfher to advise of the City's election
of conduit or fiber for a specific installation or area, whereupon the City Manager
shall promptly designate a choice. In the absence of a response from the City
Manager, the designation shall be deemed the fiber option- hi the event of
expansion, upgrade, or major repair or maintenance operations affecting conduit
installation or transmission capacity, the City may change or exercise its option as
in the instance of an initial installation.
NEW PROPOSED LANGUAGE
. Consistent with Washington Ch. 83, laws of 2000, section 7, at
such time when Grantee is constructing, relocating, or placing ducts or conduits in
public rights of way, the City Manager may require Grantee to provide the City
with additional duct or conduit and related structures necessary to access the
conduit at mutually convenient locations. Any ducts or conduits provided by
Grantee under this Section shall only be used for City municipal purposes.
A. The City shall riot require that the additional duct or conduit space be
connected to the access structures and vaults of the Grantee.
B. This section shall not affect the provision of an institutional network by
a cable television provider under federal law,
C. Grantee shall notify the City Manager at least 30 days prior to opening
a trench at any location 10 allow the City to exercise its options as
provided herein- City Manager shall notify Grantee within 10 days of
notice from Grantee of the scheduled cut, or as otherwise agreed to in
writing by the parties on a case -by case basis.
0
1'roposed OneEIGHTY franchise — C. Driskcll
Draft 3 — 2 -10 -04
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 04-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY,
WASFIINGTON, GRANTING A NON - EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO
OncEIGHTY NETWORKS, INC., TO CONSTRUCT, MAINTAIN AND
OPERATE E CERTAIN FACILITIES WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY
AND PUBLIC PROPERTIES OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY.
WHEREAS, RCW 35A.47.040 authorizes the City to grant, permit, and regulate non - exclusive
franchises for the use of public streets, bridges or other public ways, structures or places above or below
the surface of the ground for railroads and other routes and facilities for public conveyances, for poles,
conduits, tunnels, towers and structures, pipes and wires and appurtenances thereof for transmission and
distribution of electrical energy, signals and other methods of communication, for gas, steam and liquid
fuels, for water, sewer and other private and publicly owned and operated facilities for public service; and
WHEREAS, the grant of such non - exclusive franchises requires the approving vote of at least a
majority of the entire City Council and publication at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in
the City; and
WHEREAS, the Council finds that the grant of the franchise contained in this Ordinance, subject
to its terms and conditions, is in the best interests of the public.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County,
Washington, does ordain as follows:
Section 1. Definitions. For the purpose of this Ordinance, the following words and terms
shall have the meaning set forth below:
1. "City Manager" shall mean the City Manager or his/her designee.
2. "construction" or "construct" shall mean constructing, digging,
excavating, laying, testing, operating, extending, upgrading, renewing, removing,
replacing, and repairing a facility.
3. "day" means a twenty -four (24) hour period beginning at 12:01 a.m. If a
thing or act is to be done in less than seven (7) days, intermediate Saturdays,
Sundays and legal holidays shall be excluded in the computation of time.
4. "distribution system, system and lines" used either in the singular or
plural shall mean and include the poles, conductor, pipe, mains, laterals,
conduits, feeders, regulators, meters, fixtures, connections, and all attachments,
appurtenances equipment and appliances necessary and incidental thereto or in
any way appertaining to the distribution of the service or product and which are
located within a right -of -way.
5. "facility" used either in the singular or plural shall mean any tangible
component of the transmission and distribution system within the right of way or
on public property, including supporting structures, located in the operation of
activities authorized by this Franchise. The abandonment by Grantee of any
facilities as defined herein shall not act to remove the same from this definition.
S:k bainbridgc \Ordinancesloneeighty franchise - draft three 2- 10- 04.doc Page 1 of 14
Proposed OneEiGHTY franchise— C. Driskell
Draft 3 — 2 -10 -04
6. "hazardous substances" shall mean any substance or material defined or
designated as hazardous or toxic waste, hazardous or toxic material, a hazardous,
toxic or radioactive substance, or other similar term, by any federal, state or local
environmental statute, regulation, or ordinance or decision of a state or federal
court or administrative agency or body, presently in effect or that may be
promulgated in the future, and as such statutes, regulations and ordinances may
be amended from time to time.
7. "maintenance, maintaining or maintain" shall mean the work involved in
the replacement and /or repair of Facilities; including constructing, relaying,
repairing, replacing, examining, testing, inspecting, removing, digging and
excavating, and restoring operations incidental thereto.
8. "Permit:tee" shall mean a person or entity who has been granted a permit
by the Permitting Authority.
9. "Permitting Authority" shall mean the City Manager or designee
authorized to process and grant permits required to perform work in the rights of
way (ie. Obstruction Permits).
10. "product" shall refer to the item, thing or use provided by the Grantee.
11. "public property" shall mean any real estate or any facility owned by the
City.
12. "right -of -way" shall refer to the surface of and the space along, above,
and below any street, road, highway, freeway, lane, sidewalk, alley, court,
boulevard, parkway, drive, Grantee easement, and/or road right —of- way now or
hereafter held or administered by the City.
13. "streets" or `highways" shall mean the surface of and the space above
and below, any public street, road, alley or highway, within the City used or
intended to be used by the general public, to the extent the City has the right to
allow the Grantee to use them.
Section 2. Grant of Franchise. The City of Spokane Valley, a Washington municipal
corporation (hereinafter the "City "), hereby grants unto OneEiGHTY Networks, Inc., a Washington for
profit corporation (hereinafter "Grantee "), a franchise for a period of ten (10) years, beginning on the
effective date of this Ordinance, to install, construct, operate, maintain replace and use all necessary
equipment and facilities to place facilities in, under, on, across, over, through, along or below the public
rights -of -way and public places located in the City of Spokane Valley, as approved under City permits
issued pursuant to this franchise (hereinafter the "Franchise ").
Section 3. Fee. No right -of -way use fee is imposed for the term of this Franchise. Any such
right -of -way use or franchise fee that may be imposed by subsequent ordinance would apply to any
subsequent franchise, if any, between the parties.
Section 4. City Use. The following provisions shall apply regarding City use.
1 Grantee agrees to grant to the City, at no cost to City, an indefeasible right of use
of four (4) dark fiber strands at every location passed by Grantee's facilities within the boundaries
S:\ cbainbridge \Ordinances\onceighty franchise - draft three 2- 10- 04.doc Page 2 of 14
Proposed Orie1;'f r rrehise C. IDriskell
Drab 3 — 2 -10 -04
of the City, for sole and exclusive municipal rise or designation with access to any building or
facility designated by the City. Said dark fiber shall be reserved For use by the City for
governmental purposes, PIt.OVIDED, that as to the fiber resources granted to the City under the
terms of this provision, the City agrees that it will not use such fiber as a public utility provider of
telecommunications business service to the public, The City reserves the right to connect its four
dark fiber strands to other fiber network providers, with the goal of achieving maximum
connectivity for City purpose.
2. The City shall have the right to access by connection to the four dark fiber strands
at any location sewed by this Franchise within the City !Units, The City shall provide at least 30
days written notice of intent to access Grantee's service.
3. The City shall pay all costs associated with constructing any City connection to
Grantee's Franchise service. The City shall pray Grantee a rectu monthly charge of .20.00 per
fiber pair per mile in use by the City unless otherwise specifically agreed by both the parties in
writing. Said monthly recurring charge shall not be imposed until such time as the fiber is put
into use by City. A fiber pair refers to two strands of cable.
4. Consistent with Washington Ch, 83, laws of 2000, section 7, at such time when
Grantee is constructing, relocating or placing ducts or conduits in public rights of way, the City
Manager may require Grantee to provide the City with additional duct or conduit and related
structures necessary to access the conduit at mutually convenient locations. Any ducts or
conduits provided by Grantee under this Section shall only be used for City municipal purposes.
A. The City shall not require that the additional duct or conduit space be connected to the
access structures and vaults of the Grantee.
B. This section shall not affect the provision of an institutional network by a cable
television provider under federal taw.
C . Grantee shall notify the City Manager at least ]4 days prior to opening a trench at any
location to allow the City to exercise its options as provided herein_
Section 5. Recover+ of Costs. Grantee shall be subject to all permit fees associated with
activities undertaken through the authority granted in this Franchise or under ordinances of the City.
Where the City incurs costs and expenses for review or inspection of activities undertaken throng the
authority Q anted in this 'Franchise or any ordinances relating to the subject for which a permit fee is not
established, Grantee shall pay such costs and expenses directly to the City. In addition to the above,
Grantee shall promptly reimburse the City for any and all costs it reasonably incurs in response to any
emergency involving Grantee's facilities.
Section 6. Non- Exclusivity. This franchise is granted upon the express condition that it
shall not in any manner prevent the City from granting other or further Franchises in, under, on, across,
over, through, along or below any rights -of -way, streets, avenues and any other public lands and
properties of every type and description. This and other franchises shall, in no way, prevent or prohibit the
City from using any of its right-of-ways, roads, streets or other public properties or affect its jurisdiction
over them or any part of them. The City hereby retains full power to make all changes, relocations,
repairs, maintenance, establishments, improvements, dedications or vacation of same as the City may
deem fit, including the dedication, establishment, maintenance, and improvement of all new rights -of-
way, streets, avenues, thoroughfares and other public properties of every type and description.
S:\cbairibridge\Ordirsarices\irneeighiy frtinchis - draft three 2- 10- 04.doc Page 3 o r 14
Proposed OncE!G1 -ITY franchise — C. Driskcll
Draft 3 — 2 -10 -04
Section 7. Non- Interference with Existing Facilities. The City shall have prior and superior
right to the use of its roads, streets, and alleys, and public properties for installation and maintenance of
its facilities and other governmental purposes, and should in the sole discretion of the City a conflict. arise
with the Grantee's facilities, the Grantee shall, at its own expense and cost, conform to the City's facilities
and other government purposes of the City.
The owners of all utilities, public or private, installed in or on such public properties prior to the
installation of the lines and facilities of the Grantee, shall have preference as to the positioning and
location of such utilities so installed with respect to the Grantee. Such preference shall continue in the
event of the necessity of relocating or changing the grade of any such public properties.
Grantee's system shall be constructed and maintained in such manner as not to interfere with any
public use, or with any other pipes, wires, conduits or other facilities that may have been laid in the rights
of way by or under the City's authority.
Section 8. Right to Roads Not Superseded. The City, in the granting of this Franchise, does
not waive any rights which it now holds or may hereafter acquire, and this Franchise shall not be
construed so as to deprive the City of any powers, rights, or privileges which it now has, or may hereafter
acquire, including the right of eminent domain, to regulate the use and control of its roads covered by this
Franchise, or to go upon any and all City roads and highways for any purpose including constructing,
repairing, or improving the same in any such manner as the City, or its representatives may elect. The
City shall retain full authoritative power in the same and like manner as though this Franchise had never
been granted.
Nothing in this Franchise shall be construed to prevent the City from constructing facilities,
grading, paving, repairing and /or altering any street, or laying down, repairing or removing facilities or
constructing or establishing any other public work or improvement. All such work shall be done, insofar
as practicable, so as to not obstruct, injure or prevent the unrestricted use and operation of the facilities of
the Grantee under this Franchise. If, however, any of the Grantee's facilities interfere with City projects,
Grantee's facilities shall be removed or replaced. Any and all such removal or replacement shall be at the
sole expense of the Grantee. Should Grantee fail to remove, adjust or relocate its facilities by the date
established by the City Engineer's written notice to Grantee, the City may cause and /or effect such
removal, adjustment or relocation, and the expense thereof shall be paid by Grantee.
Section 9. Commencement of Construction. Construction of the facilities contemplated by
this Franchise may commence within ninety (30) days of the effective date of this Ordinance, provided
that such time limit shall not apply to delays caused by acts of God, strike or other occurrences over
which Grantee has no control. Failure to begin construction of facilities within one (I) year of this
franchise shall automatically result in termination of this franchise.
Section 10. Construction Standards. All facilities shall be installed in conformity with the
plans and specifications filed with the City, except in instances in which deviation may be allowed in
writing by the City Engineer pursuant to application by the Grantee. All plans and specifications shall
specify the class and type of material and equipment to be used, manner of excavation, construction and
installation, backfill, erection of temporary structures, erection of permanent structures, and the traffic
control mitigation measures as provided by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, or similar
standards as may be applicable from time to time. The plans must meet all Federal, State, County and
City Codes and the Utility Accommodation Plan Standards.
Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, any excavations and installations by the
Grantee in any of the public properties within the corporate limits of the City shall be done in accordance
with such reasonable rules, regulations, and resolutions of general application now enacted or to be
SacbainbridgelOrdinances loneeighty franchise - draft three 2- 10- 04.doc Page 4 of 14
Proposed OneEIGFITY franchise — C. Driskell
Draft 3 — 2-10-04
enacted by City Council, relating to excavations in public properties of the City, and authorized by the
City Engineer. Said rules, regulations, authorizations, and resolutions shall be for the purposes of
fulfilling the City's public trustee role in administering the primary use and purpose of public properties,
and not for relieving the Grantee of any duty, obligation, or responsibility for the competent design,
construction, maintenance, and operation of its facilities. Grantee is responsible for the supervision,
condition, and quality of the work clone, whether it is by itself or by contractors, assignis or agencies.
Section 11. Special Construction Standards. During any period of work relating to Grantee's
facilities, all surface structures and equipment, if any, shall be erected and used in such places and
positions within or adjacent to public rights -of -way and other public properties so as to interfere as little
as possible with the free passage of vehicular and pedestrian traffic and the free use of adjoining property.
Grantee shall, at all times, post and maintain proper barricades and comply with all applicable safety
regulations during such period of construction as required by the ordinances of the City, conditions of
permits, and laws and regulations of the State of Washington, specifically including RCW 39.04.1 S0 for
the construction of trench safety systems.
If Grantee shall at any time be required, or plan, to excavate trenches in any area covered by this
Ordinance, the Grantee shall afford the City an opportunity to permit other franchisees and utilities to
share such excavated trenches. provided that: (1) such joint use shall not unreasonably delay the work of
the Grantee; and (2) such joint use shall not adversely affect Grantee's facilities or safety thereof. When
deemed appropriate by the City, joint users may be required to contribute to the costs of excavation and
filling.
Section 12. Restoration After Construction. Grantee shall, after abandonment approved
under Section 29 herein, or any other installation, construction, relocation, maintenance, or repair of
facilities within the area of this Franchise, restore the surface of the right -of -way or public property to at
least the currently adopted City standards or as required by the City Engineer through a right -of -way
permit, depending upon special circumstances. Grantee agrees to promptly complete all restoration work
and to promptly repair any damage caused by such work within the area of this Franchise or other
affected area at its sole cost and expense.
Section 13. Damage and Non - Compliance. Any and all damage, or injury, done or caused to
City right -of -way, City facilities, or any portion thereof in the construction, operation, maintenance or
repair of Grantee's facilities shall be immediately repaired and reconstructed to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. In the event the Grantee shall fail, neglect, or refuse to immediately repair and reconstruct said
damage or injury to said City right - of - way or facilities, the same may be done by the City and the cost
and expense shall be immediately paid by the Grantee to the. City.
if it is discovered by the City that Grantee has damaged, injured, or failed to restore the right -of-
way in accordance with this Franchise, the City shall provide the Grantee with written notice including a
description of actions the City believes necessary to restore the right -of -way. If the right -of -way is not
restored within ten (10) days' from written notice, the City, or its authorized agent, may restore the right -
of-way and facilities. The Grantee is responsible for all costs and expenses incurred by the City to repair
and restore the right -of -way and facilities in accordance with this Franchise. The rights granted to the
City under this section shall be in addition to those otherwise provided by this Franchise.
Section 14. Protection of Monuments. Before any work is performed under this Franchise
which may affect any existing monuments or markers of any nature relating to subdivisions, plats, roads,
and all other surveys, the Grantee shall reference all such monuments and markers. The reference points
shall be so located that they will not be disturbed during the Grantee's operations under this Franchise.
The method of referencing these monuments or other points to be referenced shall be approved by the
City Engineer. All concrete encased recorded monuments which have been disturbed or displaced by
S:\ chainbridgc \Ordinances\onecighty franchise - draft three 2- 10- 04.doc Page 5 of 14
Proposed OneIAGHTY franchise —C. Driskell
Draft 1 -- 2 -10 -04
such work sha€I be restored pursuant to State and Federal standards and specifications. The replacement
of all such monuments or markers disturbed during construction shall be made as expeditiously as the
conditions permit, and as directed by the City Engineer. The cost of monuments or other markers lost,
destroyed, or disturbed, and the expense of replacement of approved monuments and other marker tics
which have been re- established or disturbed steal€ be borne by the Grantee.
Section 15. Drainage. if the work dome under this Franchise interferes in any way with the
drainage of a City right -of -way, the Grantee shall wholly and at its own expense make such provisions
necessary to eliminate the interference to the drainage to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Section 16. Obstruction Permits Required. Whenever Grantee shall occupy or excavate in
any pubic right -of -way or other public property for the purpose of insta€€ation, construction, repair,
maintenance or relocation of its facilities, it shall apply to the City for at permit to do so, together with
detailed plans and specifications showing the position, depth, and location of all such facilities in relation
to existing rights-of-way, roads, streets, or other public property, hereinafter collectively referred to as the
"Plans." All work within any public rights -of -way or on other public property shall be pursuant to a valid
permit The facilities shall be installed or constructed in exact conformity with said Plans except in
instances in which deviation may be allowed by the City, in writing, in response to written application by
Grantee. The Plans shall specify the class and type of material and equipment to be used, manner of
excavation, construction, installation, back i[1, erection of temporary structures and facilities, erection of
permanent structures and facilities, traffic control, traffic turnouts and road obstructions, and ail other
necessary information including a schedule for the work. During the progress of the work, Grantee shall
not unnecessarily obstruct the passage or proper use of the rights-of-way. Grantee shall file as-built plans
and maps with the City showing the foal location of the facilities. All restoration of rights -o1 -way, roads,
streets, storm drainage and the surface of other public property shall be in conformance with City
standards, and conditions of the permit.
Section 17, Maintenance_ Grantee shall provide and put in use all facilities necessary to
contra€ and carry Grantee's product's so as to prevent injury to the City's property or property belonging to
any person within the City. Grantee, solely at its own expense, shall repair, renew, change, and improve
said facilities from time to time as may be necessary to maintain the same in good condition. Grantee
shall not construct its facilities in a manner that requires any customer to install cables, ducts, conduits, or
other facilities, in, under, or over the City's rights- of -way,
Section B. • Emergency Response_ The Grantee shall, within six months of the execution of
this Franchise by the Grantee, prepare and file with the City and adhere to an Emergency I'vianagement
Plan (the "Plan ") for responding to any spill, break, or other emergency condition, The PEan shall
designate responsible officials and emergency 24 -hoer on -ca]] personnel and the procedures to be
followed when responding to an emergency. When developing such Plan, the Grantee shall work . with the
City Engineer and the City's .Police: Department to determine vrrhen and how the same should be contacted
during emergencies. After being notified of an emergency, Grantee shall cooperate with the City and
make every effort to immediately respond with action to minimize damage and to protect the health and
safety of the public.
In the event the Grantee refuses to promptly take the directed action, or fails to fully comply with
such direction, or if emergency conditions exist which require immediate action to prevent imminent
injury or damages to persons or properly, the City may take such actions as it believes are necessary to
protect persons or property and the Grantee she if be responsible 1:o reimburse thc City for its costs and any
expenses.
Section 19. Emergencv Work_ In the event of any emergency in which any of Grantee's
facilities break, are damaged, or if Grantee's facilities or construction areas are otherwise in such a
S; lcbainbridge \Orrii nnn ccsloncci rrauclhi6e - draft three 2 -! 0- 04,doc Page 6 of 14
Proposed One iGHTY Franchise — C. Drisket]
I] rai i 3 —2-10-04
condition as to immediately endanger any property, life, health, or safety, Grantee shall immediately
inform the City of the location and condition and shall immediately take all necessary actions to repair its
facilities, and to cure or remedy any dangerous conditions. Such emergency work may be commenced
without first applying for and obtaining a permit as required by this Franchise_ i-lowever, this provision
shall not. relieve Grantee from the requirement of obtaining any permits necessary for this purpose, and
Grantee shall apply for all such permits not later than the next succeeding day during which the City is
open for business.
Section 2fF. One -Call System. Pursuant to RCW 19.122, Grantee is responsible for becoming
familiar with, and understanding, the provisions of Washington's One -Call statutes_ Grantee shall
comply with the terms and conditions set forth in the One. -Call statutes.
Section 2.1. Inspections and Fees. All work performed by Grantee shall be subject to
inspection by and approval of the City. The Grantee shall reimburse the City for all expenses incurred by
the City i11 the examination, inspection, and approval of Grantee's work. Such ]reimbursement shall be in
addition to any other teas or charges levied by+the City.
Section 22. Safety, The Grantee, in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local
safety rules and regulations, shall, at all times, employ ordinary care in the installation, abandonment,
relocation, construction, maintenance, and /or repair. utilizing methods and devices commonly accepted in
their industry of operation to prevent failures and accidents that are likely to cause damage, injury, or
nuisance to persons or property. All of Grantee's facilities in the right - of-way shall be constructed and
maintained in a safe and operational condition_ Grantee shall follow all safety codes and other applicable
regulations in the installation, operation, and maintenance of the facilities.
Section 23. .13ui[ding Moving_ Whenever any person shall have obtained permission from
the City to use any right —of-way for the purpose of moving any building or other oversized structure,
Grantee, upon fourteen (]4) days' written notice from the City, shall raise or remove, at the expense of the
Permittee desiring to move the building or structure, any of Grantee's facilities that may obstruct the'
movement thereof; provided, that the path for moving such building or structure is the path of least
interference to Grantee's facilities, as determined by the City. Upon good cause shown by Grantee, the
City may require more than ]4 days' notice to Grantee to move its facilities_
Section 24. Acquiring. New Facilities_ Upon Grantee's acquisition of any new facilities in
the rights -of -way, or upon any addition or annexation to the City of any area in which Grantee retains any
such Facilities in the rights - of - way, the Grantee shall submit to the. City a written statement describing all
facilities involved, whether authorized by Franchise or any other form of prior right, and speciFying the
location of all such facilities, Such facilities shad immediately be subject to the terms or this Franchise.
Section 23. Dangerous Conditions - Authority of City to Abate. Whenever excavation,
installation, eonstruction, repair, maintenance, or relocation of facilities authorized by this Franchise has
caused or contributed to a condition that appears to substantially impair the lateral support of the
adjoining right -of -way, road, street: or other public place, or endangers the public, adjoining public or
private property or street utilities, the City may direct Grantee, at Grantee's sole expense, to take all
necessary actions to protect the public and property. The City may require that such action be completed
within a prescribed time.,
In the event that Grantee fails or refuses to promptly take the actions directed by the City or fai Is
to fully comply with such directions, or if emergency conditions exist which require immediate action, the
City may enter upon the property and take such actions as are necessary to protect the public, adjacent
public or private property, or street utilities, or to maintain the lateral support thereof, and all other actions
deemed by the City to be necessary safety precautions; and Grantee shall be liable to the City for all costs
S,\ cbainbridgc \Ordinance:loneeighly franchise - draft three 2- 10- 04,doc Page 7 of 14
Proposed OneEIGHTY franchise —C. Driskell
Draft 3 — 2 -10 -04
and expenses thereof.
Section 26. Hazardous Substances. Grantee shall comply with all applicable state and
federal laws, statutes, regulations and orders concerning hazardous substances relating to Grantee's
facilities in the right —of -way. Grantee shall maintain and inspect its facilities located in the right -of -way.
Upon reasonable notice to Grantee and in the presence of an authorized representative of Grantee, the
City may inspect Grantee's facilities in the right - of-way to determine if any release of hazardous
substances has occurred, or may occur, from or related to Grantee's facilities. This inspection is not to
remove the burden of inspection from the Grantee on a periodic basis of.its facilities for hazardous
substances, nor is to remove the responsibility of the hazardous substance from the Grantee. In removing
or modifying Grantee's facilities as provided in this Franchise, Grantee shall also remove all residue of
hazardous substances in compliance with applicable environmental clean -up standards related thereto.
Grantee agrees to forever indemnify the City against any claims, costs, and expenses, of any kind,
whether direct or indirect, incurred by the City arising out of the release or threat of release of hazardous
substances caused by Grantee's ownership or operation of its facilities within the City's right -of -way.
Section 27. Environmental. Grantee shall comply with all environmental protection laws,
rules, recommendations, and regulations of the United States and the State of Washington, and their
various subdivisions and agencies as they presently exist or may hereafter be enacted, promulgated, or
amended, and shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all damages arising, or which
may arise, or be caused by, or result from the failure of Grantee fully to comply with any such laws, rules,
recommendations, or regulations, whether or not Grantee's acts or activities were intentional or
unintentional. Grantee shall further indemnify the City against all losses, costs, and expenses (including
legal expenses) which the City may incur as a result of the requirement of any government or
governmental subdivision or agency to clean and /or remove any pollution caused or permitted by
Grantee, whether said requirement is during the term of the Franchise or subsequent to its termination.
Section 28. Relocation of Facilities. Grantee agrees and covenants, at its sole cost and
expense, to protect, support, temporarily disconnect, relocate or remove from any street any of its
facilities when so required by the City by reason of traffic conditions or public safety, dedications of new
rights -of -way and the establishment and improvement thereof, freeway construction, change or
establishment of street grade, or the construction of any public improvement or structure, provided that
Grantee shall in all such cases have the privilege to temporarily bypass, in the authorized portion of the
same street upon approval by the City, any section of their facilities required to be temporarily
disconnected or removed.
If the City determines that the project necessitates the relocation of Grantee's then- existing
facilities, the City shall:
a) At least sixty (60) days prior to the commencement of such improvement project,
provide Grantee with written notice requiring such relocation; and
b) Provide Grantee with copies of pertinent portions of the plans and specifications
for such improvement project and a proposed location for Grantee's facilities so that
Grantee may relocate its facilities in other City rights-of-way in order to accommodate
such improvement project.
c) After receipt of such notice and such plans and specification, Grantee shall
complete relocation of its facilities at no charge or expense to the City so as to
accommodate the improvement project at least ten (10) days prior to commencement of
the project.
S: Ecbainbridgc \Ordinancesloneeighty franchise - draft three 2- I0- 04.doc Page 8 of 14
Proposed OncEIGHTY franchise. —C. Driskell
Draft 3 — 2 -10 -04
Grantee may, after receipt of written notice requesting a relocation of its facilities, submit to the
City written alternatives to such relocation. The City shall evaluate such alternatives and advise Grantee
in writing if one or more of the alternatives is suitable to accommodate the work which would otherwise
necessitate relocation of the facilities. If so requested by the City, Grantee shall submit additional
information to assist the City in making such evaluation. The City shall give each alternative proposed by
Grantee full and fair consideration. in the event the City ultimately determines that there is no other
reasonable alternative, Grantee shall relocate its facilities as otherwise provided in this Section.
The provisions of this Section shall in no manner preclude or restrict Grantee from making any
arrangements it may deem appropriate when responding to a request for relocation of its facilities by any
person or entity other than the City, where the facilities to be constructed by said person or entity are not
or will not become City owned, operated or maintained facilities, provided that such arrangements do not
unduly delay a City construction project.
Section 29. Abandonment of Grantee's Facilities. No facility constructed or owned by
Grantee may be abandoned without the express written consent of the City. Any plan for abandonment or
removal of Grantee's facilities must be first approved by the City, and all necessary permits must: be
obtained prior to such work.
Section 30. Records. As a condition of this Franchise, and at its sole expense, Grantee
agrees to provide the City with available as -built plans, potential improvement plans, field locates, maps,
plats, specifications, profiles, and records of its facilities within City rights—of-way upon request. Such
documents shall be provided upon request by Grantor within five business days of Grantor's request.
These records shall be in a digital electronic format acceptable to the City, unless the City Engineer
deems it to be a hardship to the Grantee, in which case a hard copy in a format acceptable to the City
Engineer shall be provided.
To the extent such requests are limited to specific facilities at a given location within the
Franchise area in connection with the construction of any City project, Grantee shall provide to the City,
upon the City's reasonable request, copies of available drawings in use by Grantee showing the location
of such facilities. Grantee shall field locate its facilities in order to facilitate design and planning of City
improvement projects.
Upon written request of the City, Grantee shall provide the City with the most recent update
available of any plan of potential improvements to its facilities within the Franchise area; provided,
however, any such plan so submitted shall be for informational purposes only, and shall not obligate
Grantee to undertake any specific improvements within the Franchise area.
The parties agree to periodically share Geographic Information System (GIS) files at the
Grantor's disposal. Any files provided to Grantee shall be restricted to information required for Grantee's
engineering needs for installation, repair or replacement of facilities that are the subject of this franchise.
Grantee is prohibited from selling any GiS information obtained from City to any third parties.
Public Disclosure Act: Grantee acknowledges that information submitted to the City may be
subject to inspection and copying under the Washington Public Disclosure Act codified in chapter 42.17
RCW. Grantee shall mark as "CONFIDENTIAL" each page or portion thereof of any
documentation /information which it submits to the City and which it believes is exempt from public
inspection or copying. The City agrees to provide the Grantee with a copy of any public disclosure
request to inspect or copy documentation /information which the Grantee has provided to the City and
marked as "CONFIDENTIAL" prior to allowing any inspection and /or copying as well as provide the
Grantee with a time frame, consistent with RCW 42.17.320, to provide the City with its written basis for
non- disclosure of the requested documentation/information. In the event the City disagrees with the
S: lcbainbridge \0rdinances\oneeighty franchise - draft three 2- 10- 04.doc Page 9 of 14
Proposed OneEIGl-tTY franchise — C. Driskell
Draft 3 — 2 -10 -04
Grantee's basis for non - disclosure, the City agrees to withhold release of the requested
documentation/information in dispute until the Grantee can file a legal action under RCW 42.17.330.
Section 31. Limitation on Future Work. in the event that the City constructs a new street
or reconstructs an existing street, the Grantee shall not be permitted to excavate such street for a period of
five (5) years absent emergency circumstances, unless otherwise agreed by the City.
Section 32. Reservation of Rights by City. The City reserves the right to refuse any request
for a permit to extend franchise facilities. Any such refusal shall be supported by a written statement
from the City Manager or his designee that extending the franchise facilities, as proposed, would interfere
with a public use, either current or future.
Section 33. Remedies to Enforce Compliance. In addition to any other remedy provided
herein, the City reserves the right to pursue any remedy to compel or force Grantee and /or its successors
and assigns to comply with the terms hereof, and the pursuit of any right or remedy by the City shall not
prevent the City from thereafter declaring a forfeiture or revocation for breach of the conditions herein.
Section 34. City Ordinances and Regulations. Nothing herein shall be deemed to direct or
restrict the City's ability to adopt and enforce all necessary and appropriate ordinances regulating the
performance of the conditions of this Franchise, including any reasonable ordinances made in the exercise
of its police powers in the interest of public safety and for the welfare of the public. The City shall have
the authority at all times to control by appropriate regulations the location, elevation, and manner of
construction and maintenance of any facilities by Grantee, and Grantee shall promptly conform with all
such regulations, unless compliance would cause Grantee to violate other requirements of law.
Section 35. Vacation. If, at any time, the City shall vacate any City road, right -of -way or
other City property which is subject to rights.granted by this Franchise and said vacation shall be for the
purpose of acquiring the fee or other property interest in said road, right -of -way or other City property for
the use of the City, in either its proprietary or governmental capacity, then the City may, at its option and
by giving thirty (30) days written notice to the grantee, terminate this Franchise with reference to such
City road, right -of -way or other City property so vacated, and the City shall not be liable for any damages
or loss to the grantee by reason of such termination.
Section 36. Indemnification. Grantee hereby releases, covenants not to bring suit and agrees
to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents and representatives from
any and all claims, costs, judgments, awards or liability to any person, including claims by Grantee's own
employees to which Grantee might otherwise be immune under Title 51 RCW, arising from injury or
death of any person or damage to property of which the negligent acts or omissions of Grantee, its agents,
servants, officers or employees in performing services under this Franchise are the proximate cause.
Grantee further releases, covenants not to bring suit and agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless
the City, its officers and employees from any and all claims, costs, judgments, awards or liability to any
person, including claims by Grantee's own employees to which Grantee might otherwise have immunity
under Title 51 RCW, arising against the City solely by virtue of the City's ownership or control of the
rights -of -way or other public properties, by virtue of Grantee's exercise of the rights granted herein, or by
virtue of the City's permitting Grantee's use of the City's rights -of -way or other public property based
upon the inspection or lack of inspection of work performed by Grantee, its agents and servants, officers
or employees in connection with work authorized on the City's property or property over which the City
has control, pursuant to this Franchise or pursuant to any other permit or approval issued in connection
with this Franchise. This covenant of indemnification shall include, but not be limited by this reference, to
claims against the City arising as a result of the negligent acts or omissions of Grantee, its agents,
servants, officers or employees in barricading, instituting trench safety systems or providing adequate
warnings of any excavation, construction, or work in any public right-of-way or other public place in
S;l cbainbridgelOrdinances \oneeighty franchise - draft three 2- 10- 44.doc Page 10 of 14
Proposed OncEIGHTY franchise — C. Driskcll
Draft 3 — 2 -10 -04
performance of work or services permitted under this Franchise.
Inspection or acceptance by the City of any work performed by Grantee at the time of completion
of construction shall not be grounds for avoidance of any of these covenants of indemnification. Said
indemnification obligations shall extend to claims which are not reduced to a suit and any claims which
may be compromised prior to the culmination of any litigation or the institution of any litigation.
In the event that Grantee refuses to accept the tender of defense in any suit or any claim, said
tender having been made pursuant to the indemnification clauses contained herein, and said refusal is
subsequently determined by a court. having jurisdiction (or such other tribunal that the parties shall agree
to decide the matter), to have been a wrongful refusal on the part of Grantee, then Grantee shall pay all of
the City's costs for defense of the action, including all reasonable expert witness fees and reasonable
attorneys' fees and the reasonable costs of the City, including reasonable attorneys' fees of recovering
under this indemnification clause.
Should a court of competent jurisdiction (or such other tribunal that the parties shall agree to
decide the matter) determine that this Franchise or work conducted under authority of this Franchise, is
subject to RCW 4.24.115, then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons
or damages to property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of Grantee and the City, its
officers, employees and agents, Grantee's liability hereunder shall be only to the extent of Grantee's
negligence. It is further specifically and expressly understood that the indemnification provided herein
constitutes Grantee's waiver of immunity under Title 51 RCW, solely for the purpose of this
indemnification. This waiver has been mutually negotiated by the parties.
The provisions of this Section 36 shall survive the expiration or termination of this Franchise
agreement, for a period of three (3) years.
Section 37. Insurance. Grantee shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Franchise,
insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in
connection with the exercise of the rights, privileges and authority granted hereunder to Grantee, its
agents, representatives or employees. Grantee shall provide a copy of such insurance certificate to the
City for its inspection prior to the adoption of this Ordinance, and such insurance shall evidence:
1. Automobile Liability insurance with limits no less than $1,000,000 Combined Single
Limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. Such liability insurance shall
only be required from Grantee for vehicles owned or controlled by Grantee. Any
contractor hired by Grantee to perform labor in the performance of this franchise shall be
required to obtain auto insurance as stated in this subsection; and
2. Commercial General Liability insurance written on an occurrence basis with limits no
less than 51,000,000 Combined Single Limit per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate
for personal injury, bodily injury and property damage. Coverage shall include but not be
limited to: blanket contractual; products /completed operations; broad form property;
explosion, collapse and underground (XCU); and Employer's Liability.
Any deductibles or self - insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. Payment
of deductible or self - insured retention shall be the sole responsibility of Grantee. Recognizing the term of
this Franchise, the City Manager may unilaterally adjust the insurance liability limits to reflect the degree
of risk and market conditions.
The insurance obtained by Grantee shall name the City, its officers, employees and volunteers as
insureds with regard to activities performed by of on behalf of Grantee. The coverage shall contain no
S:l cbainbridge \Ordinanceslonccighty franchise - draft three 2- 10- 04.doc Page 11 of 14
Proposed OneEiGF.ITY franchise — C. Driskell
Draft 3 -2 -10-04
special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or
volunteers. In addition, the insurance certificate shall contain a clause stating that coverage shall apply
separately to each insured against whom a claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the
limits of the insurer's liability. Grantee's insurance shall be the primary insurance as respects the City, its
officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials,
employees or volunteers shall be in excess of Grantee's insurance and shall not contribute to it. The
insurance certificate required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be
suspended, voided, canceled by either party, or reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30)
days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City.
Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policies required herein shall not affect
coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
Section 38. Bond. Before undertaking any of the work, installation, improvements,
construction, repair, relocation or maintenance authorized by this Franchise, Grantee, or any parties
Grantee contracts with to perform labor in the performance of this franchise, shall, upon the request of the
City, furnish a bond executed by Grantee or Grantee's contractors and a corporate surety authorized to
operate a surety business in the State of Washington, in such sum as may be set and approved by the City
as sufficient to ensure performance of Grantee's obligations under this Franchise. The bond shall be
conditioned so that Grantee shall observe all the covenants, terms and conditions and shall faithfully
perform all of the obligations of this Franchise, and to repair or replace any defective work or materials
discovered in the City's road, streets, or property.
Section 39. Modification. The City and Grantee hereby reserve the right to alter, amend or
modify the terms and conditions of this Franchise upon written agreement of both parties to such
alteration, amendment or modification.
Section 40. Compliance With New Regulations. The City reserves for itself the right to
change, amend, modify, or amplify this Franchise to conform to any state statute, or Spokane County
and /or City regulation, Utility Accommodation Plan, or right of way regulation, State and National
Codes, Standards, and Regulations as may hereafter be enacted, adopted or promulgated. if the Grantee
fails to comply with its terms and conditions, or if the Grantee fails to comply with such changes,
amendments, modifications, and /or amplifications, this Franchise may be terminated at any time upon
ninety (90) days' written notice to the Grantee to terminate this Franchise and upon termination the City
shall have a lien upon all equipment and materials erected or placed under this Franchise, which lien may
be enforced to reimburse the City for any reasonable expenses and payments incurred in terminating this
Franchise and to cure defaults by the Grantee.
Section 41. Forfeiture and Revocation. If Grantee willfully violates or fails to comply
with any of the provisions of this Franchise, or through willful or unreasonable negligence fails to heed or
comply with any notice given Grantee by the City under the provisions of this Franchise, then Grantee
shall, at the election of the City, forfeit all rights conferred hereunder and this Franchise may be revoked
or annulled by the City after a hearing held upon reasonable notice to Grantee. The City may elect, in lieu
of the above and without any prejudice to any of its other legal rights and remedies, to obtain an order
from the Spokane County Superior Court compelling Grantee to comply with the provisions of this
Franchise and to recover damages and costs incurred by the City by reason of Grantee's failure to comply.
Section 42. Assignment. This Franchise may not be assigned or transferred without the
written approval of the City. For purposes hereof, the grant of any security agreement or security interest
in the facilities of the Grantee to secure any financing or refinancing, shall constitute an assignment of
this Franchise for which written approval would he required. In the case of the transfer or assignment as
collateral for a mortgage or other security instrument in whole or in part to secure indebtedness, such
SA cbiinbridgc \Ordinanceslonceighty franchise - draft three 2- 10- 04.doc Page 12 of 14
Proposer! Oriel franchise --C_ I)riskell
Draft 3 — 2 -10 -04
consent shall not be required unless and until the secured party elects to realize upon 1:he collateral.
Grantee shall provide prompt, written notice to the City of any such assignment.
Section 43. Acceptance. Not ]ater than thirty (30) days afier passage and publication of
this Ordinance, the Grantee must accept the Franchise herein by filing with the City Clerk an
unconditional written acceptance thereof. Failure of Grantee to so accept this Franchise within said
period of time shall be deemed a rejection thereof by Grantee, and the rights and privileges herein granted
shall, after the expiration of the five day period, absolutely cease, 41n1ess the time period is extended by
ordinance duly passed for that purpose.
Section 44. Survival. A][ of the provisions, conditions and requirements of Sections: 4, 5, [3,
25, 26. 36 and 48 of this Franchise shall be in addition to any and an other obligations and liabilities
Grantee may Intvc to the City at common law, by statute, by ordinance, or by contract, and shall survive
termination of this Franchise, and any renewals or extensions hereof. All of the provisions, conditions,
regulations and requirements contained in this Franchise shall further be binding upon the heirs,
Successors, executors, administrators, legal representatives and assigns of Grantee and all privileges, as
well as all obligations and liabilities of Grantee shall inure to its heirs, successors and assigns equally as if
they i.vcre specifically mentioned wherever Grantee is named herein.
Section 45. Severabiliiy. if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should
be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or
phrase of this Ordinance. In the event that any of the provisions of the Franchise are held to be invalid by
a court of competent jurisdiction, the City reserves the right to reconsider the grant of the Franchise and
may amend, repeal, add, replace or modify any other provision of the Franchise, or may terminate the
Franchise.
Section 46. Renewal. Application for extension or renewal of the term of this Franchise
shall be made no later than one year before expiration thereof. In the event the time period granted by
this Franchise expires without being renewed by the City, the terms and conditions hereof shall continue
in effect until this Franchise is either renewed or terminated by the City.
Section 47. Notice. Any notice or information required or permitted to be given by or to
the parties under this Franchise may be sent to the following addresses unless otherwise specified, in
writing:
The City:
With a Copy to: City of Spokane Valley
Public Works Director
1 1707 F._ Sprague
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Grantee:
City of Spokane - Valley
Attu: City Clerk
11707 F_. _Sprague
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
One.Eighty Networks, [ne.
118 North Stevens
Spokane, WA 99201
Phone: (509) 688-8180
I -ax: (509) 688 -8110
5; kbainbridge \Otdinanceskeneeighty rramchise - draft three 2 -] 0- 04.doc Page 13 of 14
Proposed OneEIGHTY franchise — C. Driskell
Draft 3 — 2 -10 -04
Section 48. Choice of Law. Any litigation between the City and Grantee arising under or
regarding this Franchise shall occur, if in the state courts, in the Spokane County Superior Court, and if in
the federal courts, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington.
Section 49. Non - Waiver. The City shall be vested with the power and authority to
reasonably regulate the exercise of the privileges permitted by this Franchise in the public interest.
Grantee shall not be relieved of its obligations to comply with any of the provisions of this Franchise by
reason of any failure of the City to enforce prompt compliance, nor does the City waive or limit any of its
rights under this Franchise by reason of such failure or neglect.
Section 50. Entire Agreement. This Franchise constitutes the entire understanding and
agreement between the parties as to the subject matter herein and no other agreements or understandings,
written or otherwise, shall be binding upon the parties upon execution and acceptance hereof. This
Franchise shall also supersede and cancel any previous right or claim of Grantee to occupy the County
roads as herein described.
Section 51. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect on the official
date of incorporation provided publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof occurs in the official
newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley as provided by law.
ATTEST:
PASSED by the City Council this day of February, 2004
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
Date of Publication:
Effective Date:
Accepted by OneE1GHTY Networks, Inc.
By: . General Manager
Michael DeVleming, Mayor
The Grantee, OneEIGHTY Networks, Inc., a corporation, for itself, and for its successors and
assigns, does accept all of the terms and conditions of the foregoing franchise.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, has sigmed this day of
, 2004. Subscribed and sworn before me this day of , 2004.
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington,
residing in
My commission expires
Sa cbainbridge\Ordinuncestonecighty franchise - draft three 2- 10- 04.dac Page 14 of 14
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: February 10, 2004 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent X old business new business 0 public hearing
❑ information X admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Towing Regulations Update
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 46.55
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Staff has discussed towing - related issues with the
Council on several occasions over the past three months, particularly in relation to implementing
Ordinance No. 67, the Junk Vehicle Ordinance.
The Council had a first reading on 1- 13 -04.
BACKGROUND: Following the first reading, staff received a number of calls from tow operators
located outside of Spokane Valley that had questions about how the proposed ordinance would
impact them. Most of the questions centered around whether the proposed ordinance would
require those businesses doing private impounds in Spokane Valley to have a storage yard in
our city. This is a policy issue best left to the Council. Staff has outlined the issue in the
attached memo, including several pro's and cons.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Request that the Council choose whether to require
tow operators doing private impounds (as well as those doing public impounds) have a storage
yard located within our city limits.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
STAFF CONTACT: Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum regarding tow ordinance
Sio
.
Memorandum
To: Dave Mercier, City Manager; and to the City Council
From: Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206
509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhatt @spokanevalley.org
CC: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager; Kevin Snyder, Current Planning Manager
Date: January 22, 2004
Re: Towing Ordinance - Policy choices
Staff presented a draft Towing Ordinance on January 13, 2004. Since that time, we have
received a number of additional comments and concerns about the draft, including
numerous questions regarding who the Ordinance would apply to. The question and
analysis are as follows:
ISSUE On public impounds (those initiated by the police or pursuant to the Junk
Vehicle Ordinance), the tow operator performing the impound must have its storage yard
located in the City of Spokane Valley. The rationale, orally approved by the Council 1-
13-04, is one of convenience. It is not convenient for a person who has had their vehicle
towed at the direction of the police to go, for example, to North Division at the "Y" to
pick it up. A number of the tow operators that do not have a yard in Spokane Valley, but
who do pr ir here, are asking that the requirement of having a storage yard in
our city only apply to public iunpou.nds, but not private impounds. An example of a
private impound is where a private parking lot is posted with a "no parking" sign,
"violators will be towed ", and it will have the name of a local towing business. Many
local towing businesses perform this service, many of which are not located in our city
limits. The proposed ordinance, as currently drafted, requires under Section 9 that any
impound requires the presence of a storage yard (and business office) in the City.
The arguments for requiring a storage yard for private impounds include:
a. It would be just as inconvenient for our residents to go pick up a vehicle
on North Division at the "Y" on a private impound as it would be on a
public one;
b. Any tax revenue on all impounds would be attributable to Spokane Valley.
It is unlikely that tow operators from outside the city report that the
"transaction" originated in Spokane Valley when that does happen; and
c. if a business wants to do impounds in Spokane Valley, they can open a
storage yard in the city.
The arguments as stated by some operators for not having a storage yard here include:
a. Although there are 8 -9 nine tow operators with storage yards currently in
SV, there are few places properly zoned in SV to site new yards;
b. Not being able to locate a storage yard in SV may affect existing contracts
between tow operators and private businesses fbr private impounds; and
c. The City Attorney for Everett informed me today that the tax revenue
raised from public and private impounds is not substantial.
The policy question is thus: Should tow operators doing private impounds be required
to have a storage facility ll'ithin our city limits?
One possible compromise, to mitigate any impact to the argument that requiring a storage
facility in the city limits would impair contract rights between towers and private
businesses, could be to not impose the requirement of having a storage yard here until
after December 31, 2005, or some other date sufficiently in the future to allow a tow
business to locate a storage yard here. It would also give. the City an opportunity in the
Comprehensive Plan process to look at whether additional sites are needed to locate such
facilities. Given that we already have approximately nine, it may he that the City does
not need to provide many more vacant sites.
There were two other issues 1 was prepared to ask. One of them involved whether the
City should require minimal levels of insurance from those performing impounds (public
and private) in the city limits. 1 spoke with Peg Campbell at WCIA today about this. She
said WCIA would strongly recommend requiring at least $ 1,000,000.00 per event
coverage for those tow operators performing public impounds. This is primarily because
they are being performed at the request of the City. If something went wrong, we would
need that coverage. Given WCIA's position on this, it did not appear that there were any
policy decisions to make on the issue of insurance. Also, staff determined there is lik.ely
no need for the City to require minimum levels of liability insurance for those companies
only doing private tows and impounds. The City does not regulate other private
industries in this fashion, particularly where the transactions are purely private.
Kevin Snyder, Cun Planning Manager, has provided a brief outline of the zoning
implications mentioned above. That document is included in this packet as well.
Lastly, is whether the City is concerned with regulating all businesses performing towing
functions in the City, or whether it should be confined to those doing public impounds.
However, the private tows unrelated to impounds appear to be purely natters of private
contract that have no apparent need to be regulated by the City, particularly in that the
State already requires certain registration and insurance from tow operators state -wide.
Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.
Cary P. Driskell
Spoka oasol\e,
ne
.. Valley
Memorandum
To: Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
From: Kevin Snyder, AICP, Current Planning Manager
Date: January 29, 2004
Re: Towing Impound Yards, Public or Private
11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206
509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org
This memorandum responds to your request for information on how the current Spokane
Valley Interim Zoning Code addresses towing impound yards, public or private. I have
reviewed Chapter 14.605 (Residential Zones Matrix), Chapter 14.623 (Business Zones
Matrix) and Chapter 14.629 (Industrial Zones Matrix) as well as affiliated chapters. I did not
identify towing impound yards, public or private as a specified use in the current Code.
Section 14.604.140 (Zoning Matrix - General) states that non - listed land uses that resemble
identified uses in terms of intensity and character, and that are consistent with the purpose
of the Code and individual zone classification shall be considered as a permitted or non -
permitted use within a general zone classification matrix or zone, subject to the development
standards for the use it most nearly resembles.
Based on the standards of Section 1604.140, a public or private towing impound yard would
most closely resemble general outdoor storage in terms of intensity and character. General
outdoor storage land uses are specified in Chapter 14.629 (Industrial Zones Matrix) as
permitted in the Industrial Park (1 -1), Light Industrial (1 -2), and Heavy Industrial (1 -3) zoning
designations, subject to conformance with the applicable development standards of each of
these zones. General outdoor storage is not specified as a land use in Chapter 14.605
(Residential Zones Matrix) or Chapter 14.623 (Business Zones Matrix).
Greg McCormick, Long Range Planning Manager, has advised that currently within the City
limits there are 18.28 acres of 1 -1 zoned land, 2,427.45 acres of 1 -2 zoned land and 2,464.64
acres of 1 -3 zoned land. The current disposition of these properties is not available.
Please let me know if you need additional information on this matter.
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Approved Minutes
Council Chambers — City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave.
January 8, 2004
T. CALL TO ORDER
Ian Robertson, Planning Commission Vice Chair, called the meeting to order at
6:30 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Commission, audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
III. ROLL CALL
Fred Beaulac — Present
Bob Blum — Present
David Crosby — Present
Gail Kogle — Present
VI. PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
Bill Gotlunann — Excused Absence
Ian Robertson — Present
John G. Carroll — Present
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Robertson moved that the agenda be approved as presented.
Commissioner Crosby seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously.
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Blum requested that his name be stricken from the December 18,
2003 meeting record as having made the motion to approve the minutes of the
December 11, 2003 Planning Commission meeting, since he was absent.
Commissioner Crosby stated that he made that motion.
It was moved by Commissioner Kogle and seconded by Commissioner Beaulac
that the minutes of the December 18, 2003 Planning Commission meeting be
approved as amended Motion passed unanimously.
VII. COMMISSION REPORTS
Commissioner Kogle attended a Citizen's Advisory Committee for Transportation
recently. The Light Rail was discussed, and Option #4 was deemed the most
favorable option. She. will bring a copy of Option #4 to the Conunission when
one becomes available.
VITT. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Tonight will be a continuation of the Public Hearing on the Floodplain Ordinance.
The Commission will also hold the first discussion on a proposal to adopt the
International Building Code. This will be the beginning of a new two -phase
approach. The first phase will be to "clean up" the code, the second phase will be
to propose substantive changes down the road as amendments.
`there will he a Joint Planning Session with the City Council and Planning
Commission next Thursday, January 15 from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers. Commissioners present confirmed they would be in attendance at the
planning session.
IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS
A. OLD BUSINESS:
Continuation of Floodplain Ordinance Public Hearing
Commissioner Robertson declared the Public Hearing open at 6:38 p.m.
Director Sukup gave a brief overview of the Spokane Valley's Floodplain
and the need for the proposed ordinance. She pointed out that there are
only two provisions in the proposed Spokane Valley Ordinance which
differ from those of Spokane County: the requirement for a crawl space
with a footprint one -foot higher than base flood elevation for
manufactured housing; and the prohibition of impervious cover without
completion of an engineering study. The City of Spokane Valley can't
begin the one -year waiting period to obtain acceptance of its own National
Flood Insurance Program until the City Council adopts this Floodplain
Ordinance. Existing flood insurance policies will be continued under the
umbrella of Spokane County NFIP participation during this one -year
waiting period.
Since the first Public Hearing on the Floodplain Ordinance at the
December 11, 2003, Planning Commission meeting, staff has researched
the Commission's question regarding the proposed requirement for a
performance bond. Staff determined that enforcement of the provision is
better effected through changing procedural requirements to secure
elevation certificates as part of the building permitting process, so the
provision was deleted.
Commissioner Carroll asked for clarification of the definition for Critical
Facility. Ms. Sukup explained to him that the definitions used in the
Spokane Valley ordinance are FEMA definitions.
Commissioner Robertson opened the Hearing to public comment at 6:48
P.m.
Wayne Frost, 3320 N. Argonne Road, Spokane Valley, WA
Mr. Frost works for Inland Empire Paper Company, which owns a great
deal of land within the city limits. Before his present work, he was a
trained Civil Engineer.
2
He stated that he is in favor of a Floodplain Ordinance for the City of
Spokane Valley, but had the following observations:
1. Page 7. Section 5.04.04.5: Interpretation of Firm Boundaries —
Section 5.04 generally establishes the responsibilities of the Floodplain
Administrator, including the responsibility for interpreting boundaries. He
stated that FEMA maps contain errors, and would like a provision in the
ordinance that would allow citizens to go to planning staff to handle
FEMA map errors instead of requiring them to go to the Hearing
Examiner for resolution.
2. Page 13, Section 5.06.11, Items 2 & 3: Relating to construction
of "water dependent works ". Mr. Frost objected to language that
requires "a professional civil engineer registered as such by the State of
Washington "to certify" (emphasis added) work that will withstand 100 -
year flood flows and velocities or cause no increase in the 100 -year flood
elevation ".
3. Page 7, Section 5.05.01, Item 1.vi. Relating to procedures for
variances. Mr. Frost does not believe that the Hearing Examiner should
be allowed to consider alternative locations in considering approval of a
variance to specified construction. He thinks that there will always be an
alternative location, and thinks that this provision will be used to delay
construction at the desired site(s).
4. Page 10, Section 5.06.07. Relating to the issuance of building
permits in areas where elevation data is not available. Mr. Frost
objected to the discretion allowed the Floodplain Administrator to require
a minimum floor elevation two feet above adjacent natural ground surface.
He also questioned the wisdom of noting that insurance rates would be
adversely affected by a lower elevation.
5. Page 12, Section 5.06.09(5). Relating to requiring the consent
of adjacent property owners impacted by a rise in base flood elevation
resulting from a project. Mr. Frost felt that this item is open to
interpretation. It would require adjacent impacted property owners to
provide written, notarized approval for increased base flood elevations
upon their property as a condition of approval.
6. Page 14, Section 5.06.13. Relating to local amendments
requiring a study by a registered engineer verifying that a proposed
development located within specific areas would have no impact.
7. Page 14, Section 5.06.14. Relating to requirements for
construction of "Critical Facilities" in the floodplain. He noted that
provision requires floor elevation of three feet "above BFE" or to the
height of the 500 year flood, whichever is higher. .
The Public Hearing was closed to further public comment at 7:20 p.m.
The Commission asked Director Sukup if one, two or three feet made a
big difference in Floodplain insurance rates. Ms. Sukup explained that
any construction that goes beyond the minimum FEMA standards to
insure safety and stability makes a very big difference in rates. Flood
Insurance is the only insurance that is provided by the federal government.
The proposed Floodplain Ordinance is to assure safe construction, it is not
driven by insurance rates. She noted that the Floodplain Administrator is
required to maintain records of floor elevation for structures located in the
100 -year floodplain. This information drives the rate of insurance.
B. NEW BUSINESS:
Study Session — Sign Code Revision
Mr. Kuhta briefed the Commission on a Sign Code Text Amendment for
hospitals within the UR -22 Zone. The applicant requested the code text
amendment to allow greater flexibility in size and location of signage for
hospitals. Code changes would be made on page 804 -4, section
14.804.070, item 3.a.ii with the deletion of the word "hospital "; and in the
two tables on page 804 -5, item 3.b.i and 3.c.i. to include new language
specifically for hospitals in UR -22 zones.
Commissioner Beaulac asked if this code would have to be changed if the
zoning around the hospital changes. Mr. Kuhta responded that if the zone
around the hospital changes, staff would assure that hospital needs would
be addressed. Commissioner Carroll asked why the applicant didn't
request a variance instead of a code text amendment. Mr. Snyder
explained that the variance was offered as an option to the applicant, but
the applicant chose to pursue a code text amendment. Commissioner
asked staff if it would still be more reasonable to give the applicant a
variance until we could create a suitable zone for hospital facilities. Mr.
Kuhta reminded the Commissioners that they will have an opportunity to
discuss this issue with the applicant at the January 22 Public Hearing. A
Staff Report will be forwarded to the Commission on this subject as well.
Study Session — International Building Codes
Mr. Tom Scholtens, City of Spokane Valley Building Official, was
introduced to the Planning Commission. He explained that the
Washington Association of Building Officials passed resolution 2003 -02
that, in part, promotes the local adoption of the International Building
Codes and Uniform Plumbing Code with as few local amendments as
possible. The City of Spokane Valley Building Division has followed that
direction and is offering a very simple adoption ordinance for approval.
4
�J
He welcomed Planning Commission discussion today, in preparation for a
Public Hearing on January 22 " Mr. Scholtens' goal is for the City
Council to adopt this Ordinance within the next several months so that the
new code can take effect by July 1, 2004.
Conunissioner K.ogle asked if Code updates will be automatic since ours
will be the same as all those in the state. Mr. Scholtens explained that
Washington State statute requires us to adopt a new code each time it is
amended.
Commissioner Carroll recommended that the reference to the "sheriff's
office" on page 5, item 19.4, be changed to read "Spokane Valley Chief of
Police ". Mr. Scholtens mentioned that Section 3.02 — Professional Review
of Plans will also be revised.
The Commission praised Mr. Scholtens for a job well done.
X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER
Commissioner Crosby requested a complete packet of meeting backup at
his place at the dais before each meeting. Ms. Alley agreed to provide this
for the Commissioners.
Mr. Snyder announced that the Commission will be receiving information
on a Street Vacation Ordinance, scheduled for briefing on January 22,
2004.
Xi. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
SUBMITTED: APPROVED:
Debi Alley, Administrative Assistant Bill Gothmann, Chairman
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
DRAFT Minutes
Council Chambers — City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave.
January 22, 2004
1. CALL TO ORDER
13111 Gothmann, Planning Commission Chair, called the meeting to order at
6:33 p.m.
IL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Commission, audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
111. ROLL CALL
Fred Beaulac — Present
Bob Blum — Present
David Crosby — Present
Gail Kogle — Present
VI. PUBLIC COMMEND
There was no public continent.
Bill Gothmann — Present
Ian Robertson — Present
John G. Carroll — Excused Absence
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Robertson moved that the agenda be approved as presented
Commissioner Blum seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously.
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
It was moved by Commissioner Beaulac and seconded by Commissioner Kogle
that the minutes of the .lanrurry 8, 2004 Planning Commission meeting be
approved as presented. Motion passed unanimously.
VII. COMMISSION REPORTS
Commissioner Beaulac reported on the Transportation- Oriented Development
Committee meeting on January 21 Crandall Arambula, PC, passed out its
proposal for the Spokane Regional Light Rail Project, which included an excellent
development plan for a Spokane Valley City Center at the former site of
University City. A copy of the proposal was given to all Commissioners.
Commissioner Gothmann just returned from a visit to Arizona, and he reported on
the City Centers in Scottsdale and Mesa. IIe was impressed with Mesa's
integrated design.
VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
The Joint Planning Commissioners meeting is scheduled for January 28 from
11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. at the Downtown Library, Meeting Room 1B. Director
DRAT DRAFT
Sukup asked Commissioners to let staff know if they planned to attend this
meeting so a Notice of Public Meeting can be posted 24 hours in advance.
Kevin Snyder, Current Planning Manager, presented the Commission an
informational overview of the Street Vacation Ordinance, which was approved by
City Council on January 20 Street Vacation is a request to remove a portion of
street from public ownership and place it into private ownership. The City began
working on this issue last summer. The new ordinance will take effect five days
after publication.
The Commission was briefed on the background of the Street Vacation
Ordinance. Since Street Vacations are a land use issue, the Planning Commission
will hold hearings and forward recommendations to the City Council for adoption.
Street Vacation requests will likely be a frequent item of business on Planning
Commission agendas in the near future.
IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS
A. OLD BUSINESS:
Continuation of Floodplain Ordinance Public Hearing Conclusion
Chairman Gothmann called the continuation of Planning Commission
deliberation to order at 6:45 p.m. Public Testimony was concluded on
January 8
Director Sukup explained to Commissioner Blum that she had responded
to Mr. Frost's concerns with a letter, copies of which were sent to the
Planning Commission. She recommended that two words be added to the
document that the Commission discussed at the last meeting.
Commissioner Gothmann gave the Planning Commission a brief overview
of a professional engineer's obligations with regard to the certification
process and standards of practice.
Commissioner Blum asked if citizens will be allowed to go to staff instead
of the I earing Examiner with FEMA map en Director Sukup
explained that FEMA. map errors are normally handled by the Floodplain
Administrator, and they go to the Hearing Examiner only if the Floodplain
Administrator's decisions are appealed. Commissioner Blum requested a
change in language to make this matter clearer. Director Sukup suggested
the following amendment to Section 5.04.04.5 Interpretation of Firm
Boundaries (last sentence):
"The person contesting the interpretation of the F'loodplain Administrator
in relation to the location of the boundary shall be given a reasonable
opportunity to appeal - =ide4 pursuant to the
procedures outlined in Section 5.05. "
2
DRAFT DRAFT
Commissioner Robertson moved that the Planning Commission amend
the last sentence in Section 5.04.04.5 — Interpretation of Firin
Boundaries, as per. Director Sukup's suggestion. Commissioner Kogle
seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously.
It was moved by Commissioner Robertson and seconded by
Commissioner Beaulac that the Planning Commission recommend the
Floodplain Draft Ordinance, as amended, to the City Council. Motion
passed unanimously.
Commissioner Beaulac commended Director Sukup for her excellent work
in addressing Mr. Frost's concerns.
B. NEW BUSINESS:
Public Hearing — Sign Code Revision
Commissioner Gothrnann called the Public Hearing for a Proposed
Amendment to Chapter 14.804 — Signage Standards — Interim Spokane
Valley Zoning Code to order at 7:07 p.m.
Scott Kuhta, Associate Planner, presented a staff analysis and
recommendation to the Planning Commission. The applicant, Valley
Hospital and Medical Center, requested code changes that would provide
greater flexibility in the UR -22 Zone for hospitals. These changes
included the size of both wall signs and freestanding signs. In keeping
with Comprehensive Plan requirements, staff recommended the following
changes to the UR -22 Signage Standards:
• The city not separate hospitals out from other public use businesses
in the UR.-22 Zone.
• Maximum wall signage would be increased up to 250 square feet.
• No changes will be made to the freestanding sign standards.
The Hearing was open to applicant testimony at 7:17 p.m.
Doug Heyamoto, 1203 W. Riverside, Northwest Architectural
Company Spokane, WA:
Mr. Heyamoto gave a brief PowerPoint presentation to the Planning
Commission showing them what type of new wall signage is being
proposed for the Valley Hospital and Medical Center. Providing larger
wall signage will enable people unfamiliar with the Spokane Valley to
find the Hospital more easily in an emergency situation. The applicant has
read the staff recommendation and is in favor of other public use
businesses benefiting from the amended UR -22 sign code. The applicant
is also in favor of not changing the freestanding sign size at this time.
DRAFT DRAFT
Chairman Gothmann opened the Hearing to Public Testimony at 7:30 p.m.
David Tanner, 429 L. Sprague, L & L Architectural Sign, Spokane,
WA
Mr. Tanner spoke in favor of the Sign Code Text Amendment.
Dave Martin, Valley Hospital and Medical Center, Spokane Valley,
WA:
Mr. Martin spoke in favor of the Sign Code Text Amendment. He serves
as the Director of Support Services and Risk Management at Valley
Hospital and Medical Center (VHMC). He noted the Medical Center will
conclude construction this Spring with new signage as the last portion of
its remodeling project. He believes that enhanced signage would add to
the public safety of Valley citizens. VHsMC supports the City Staff
Analysis and Recommendation.
Commissioner Gothmann also placed a handwritten letter from Jan
Hannink, 1321 S. Wilbur Road, Spokane Valley, WA into the public
record supporting the proposed revisions for wall signs. She does not
favor changing the code to enlarge freestanding signs.
The Public Testimony portion of this Public Hearing was closed at 7:33
p.m.
Commissioner Gothmann stated that since the area surrounding the
Medical Center is becoming an extended medical community, the
Planning Commission may want to encourage a rezoning of that area to
reflect its unique function.
Commissioner Robertson moved that the Planning Commission
recommend Staff Recommendations for amendment to Chapter 14.804 —
Signage Standards — Interim Spokane Valley Zoning Code to City
Council. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Blum. Motion
passed unanimously.
The Planning Commission took a five- minute break.
Public Hearing — International Building Codes
Commissioner Gothmann called the Public Hearing on the International
Building Codes to order at 7:42 p.m.
Tom Scholtens, Building Official, gave an overview of the proposal to
adopt Establish Article III of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development
Code adopting the International Building Codes and certain appendices.
Mr. Scholtens recommended that the ordinance be made effective on the
July 1 statutory deadline. This will allow both builders and City Staff to
4
DRAFT DRAFT
become familiar with the new requirements. Mr. Scholtens also proposes
to amend the existing code relating to sprinkler systems as an interim
measure.
Commissioner Beaulac asked Mr. Scholtens to describe a "blighted
structure ". Mr. Scholtens responded that these are "junk buildings ",
similar to junk autos. The new Building Code brings the City Council into
the solution of this problem.
Chairman Gothrnann opened the Hearing to Public Testimony at 8:02 p.m.
Edwin "Larry" Andrews II, 1503 E. Wabash, Spokane, WA
Mr. Andrews asked to speak against adoption of the International Building
Code as the new Spokane Valley Building Code. Mr. Andrews provided
the Planning Coirunission with a 22 -page document detailing the
objections of a number of Washington State companies, contractors,
unions and associations opposing adoption of the 113C. Mr. Andrews
spoke to the following issues:
1.. Only code officials will have the right to vote on any changes.
2. The International Mechanical Code has no propane code and no oil
code. Mr. Andrews does not feels the National Electrical Code to
be as safe at the Uniform Code, and he finds the UL requirements
restrictive.
3 Statewide Contractors did not succeed with their fight against
Washington State's adoption of the International Building Code
because they could not afford to fight the powerful lobby in favor
if HB 1734.
4 The cost to his company for changing over to the International
Building Code standards will be over $5,000 for retraining and
purchase of books. There will also be a significant cost to
contractors for new materials.
5 Sheetrock standards are reduced in the International Building
Code.
6 The existing code prevents storage of "heavier than air" gases in
basement areas. He believes the new code does not address this
issue satisfactorily.
7 Mr. Andrews is not in favor of the City putting unnecessary
commercial restrictions on commercial businesses.
Commissioner Kogle asked Mr. Andrews why coffee roasters use unlisted
equipment. Mr. Andrews responded that many coffee roasters purchase
their equipment overseas for around $60,000. They are unique pieces of
equipment and typically remain unlisted. To have them listed would cost
the coffee roasters up to $500,000.
The Public Testimony portion of this Public Hearing was closed at 8:22
p.m.
Commissioner Blum asked Mr. Scholtens was an alternative to adoption
of the Building Codes. Mr. Scholtens responded that the Washington
State Legislature has required the International Codes and that Mr.
Andrews' objections had been raised during public testimony last year in
Olympia before passage of HB 1734.
Commissioner Gothmann asked if the community had been given an
opportunity to be involved in the development of the proposed Building
Code. Mr. Scholtens responded that the proposed code is mandated by the
state and there is little room for discussion.
The Spokane Homebuilders Association, 5813 E. 4 Avenue, Suite
201, Spokane Valley, WA submitted a letter with the following
recommendations (attached):
• Adoption of the International Code effective July 1, 2004.
• Allow contractors to operate under the current code until July 1,
2004 or allow them the option of operating under the International
Codes.
Following discussion, the Public hearing was closed at 8:34 p.m.
It was moved by Commissioner Blum that the Planning Committee delay
a vote on the adoption of the International Building Code until the next
meeting. Commissioner Crosby seconded the motion. Motion passed
unanimously.
Director Sukup noted that proposed amendments will include an
amendment to the existing ordinance revising sprinkler requirements
between now and July 1, 2004.
X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER
Mr. McCormick reminded Commissioners to let staff know if they plan to
attend the Joint Planning Commissioners meeting next week. He will be
emailing them a lunch menu.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
6
DRAFT DRAFT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
SUBMITTED: APPROVED:
Debi Alley, Administrative Assistant Bill Gothmann, Chairman