2004, 05-04 Study SessionTuesday, May 4, 2004
Employee Introductions - Tom Sc hnllens
1. Greg McCormick (25 minutes)
2. Mike Jackson (10 minutes)
3. Cary Driskell (15 minutes)
4. Steve Worley/Neil Kersten
(10 minutes)
5. Steve Worley/Neil Kcssten
(10 minutes)
Study Simian .yaruta, tL 44-04
AGENDA
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHEET
STUDY SESSION
CITY HALL AT REDWOOD PLAZA
11707 East Sprague Avenue, First Floor
Please Turn OR All Electronic Devices During the Meeting
DISCUSSION LEADER SUBJECT /ACTIVITY GOAL
Consultant Presentation of Community Survey
Results
CenterPlace Construction Status
Adult Entertainment Hours of Operation
Local Agency Agreement with WSDO'r for
Marker Road Bridge Replacement
Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement with
Transportation Improvement Board for Barker
Rd Project, and Bowdishi24 Ave Project
6. Councilmcmbcr Munson
(15 minutes)
7. Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes) Advance Agenda .Additions
8. Dave Mercier (5 minutes) Council Check -in
9. Dave Mercier (5 minutes) City Manager Comments
10. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pending Litigation
Proposed Establishment of Salary Commission
6:00 p.m.
Discussion/Information
Discussion/information
Discussionflnformation
Approve Agreement and
Authorize City Manager's
signature
Approve Agreement and
Authorize City Manager's
Signature
Discussion/lnforntation
Discussion/lnformation
Discussion/Information
Discussion/Information
Note: At Council Study Sessions, there will be no public comments, except Council reserves the right to request
information from the public and staff as appropriate,
NOTICE: IndividuaLi planning to attend the meeting who nquire special mistance to accommodate physical. honing. or tones 1
impairments, please contact the Cite Clerk at (509) 921 -1000 a� soon as possible so the arrangements may be made l
Pap 1 of
Meeting Date: 5-4 -04 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: El consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
A
AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Community Preference Survey Results — Presentation by Gayla
Smutny, PhD., Clearwater Research, Inc.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None
BACKGROUND: The Community Development Department contracted with Clearwater
Research to conduct a Community Preference Survey in support of the Comprehensive Plan.
Clearwater Research randomly contacted 400 Spokane Valley citizens for the survey, which
provided a statistically significant sample. The survey was designed to gauge the public's views
on issues such as.transportation, urban design, city identity, growth and development. Results
from the survey will be used to develop priorities in the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan.
OPTIONS: N/A
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: N/A
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A
STAFF CONTACT: Greg McCormick, AICP
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
ATTACHMENTS: Community Preference Survey Report
Community Preference Survey
City of Spokane Valley
Community Development Department
Project: 03-206 AIDS Program
Saved: April 28, 2004
Document: Final Report (GS)
Final Report
Presented by:
Clearwater Research, Inc.
1845 S. Federal Way
Boise, ID 83705
Contact:
Gayla Smutny, Ph.D.
(208) 376 -3376, ext. 426
Fax: (208) 376 -2008
E -mail: gsmutny @clearwater- research.com
Date:
April 2004
pli Clearwater
Research, Inc.
MI Clearwater
Research, 'Inc.
Contents
Executive Summary 1
Introduction 4
Background and Study Purpose 4
Scope of Work 4
Method 4
Survey Instrument 4
Sampling 4
Sample Production and Processing 5
Data Collection 5
Response Rates 6
Data Preparation 7
Coding 7
Weighting 7
Data Analysis 8
Findings and Interpretation 9
Demographics 10
Demographics Summary 11
Demographics Used In Subsequent Analysis 11
The Spokane Valley Community 12
Over 8 in 10 Think Spokane Valley is Headed in the Right Direction 12
Demographics and Spokane Valley Headed in the Right Direction 12
Economic and Planning Issues of Concern to Respondents 13
City Center / Community Identity 14
61% Believe Having a Downtown is Important to the Future of Spokane Valley 14
Demographics and Importance of Having City Center 15
Nearly Three - Quarters Support Spending Public Money to Create a City Center 16
Demographics and Spending Public Money to Create a City Center 16
Over Half Believe University City Area is Best Location for City Center 17
Demographics and Most Ideal Location for City Center 17
Only 26% Believe Spokane Valley Has a Distinct Identity 18
Demographics and Community Identity 18
Descriptions of Spokane Valley's Identity /Uniqueness 19
Majority Believe Having a Community Identity is Important to Future of Spokane Valley 19
Nearly Half Said Community Identity Development Best Accomplished Through Social Changes 20
Demographics and How Best to Develop Community Identity 20
Community Aesthetics 22
Few Dissatisfied with Typical Development Along Major Streets 22
Demographics and Satisfaction with Typical Pattern of Development Along Major Streets 22
23% Consider Adding Street Trees and Landscaping to Major Streets a High Priority 23
Demographics and Priority of Adding Trees and Landscaping to Major Streets 23
4 in 10 Consider Making Streets Pedestrian- Friendly a High Priority 24
Demographics and Priority of Making Streets Pedestrian- Friendly 24
Views Regarding Priority of Stronger Sign /Billboard Control Mixed 25
1/3 Had Direct Experience with Spokane Valley Sewer Project 26
Demographics and Reside in Area that was Part of Spokane Valley Sewer Project 26
Only 14% Dissatisfied with Reconstructed Streets 27
Nearly Half Support Development of Small Commercial Centers Close to Residential
Neighborhoods 28
Public Services 29
85% Rated Police Services as Good, Very Good, or Excellent 29
Demographics and Quality of Police Services 29
27% Willing to Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Police Services 30
Project: 03-206 AIDS Program
Saved: April 28, 2004
Document Final Report (GS)
M Clearwater
Research, Inc.
95% Rated Fire Protection Services as Good, Very Good, or Excellent 30
Demographics and Quality of Fire Protection Services 31
62% Would Not Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Fire Protection Services 31
83% Rated Library Services as Good, Very Good, or Excellent 32
Demographics and Quality of Library Services 32
42% Willing to Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Library Services 33
Over Half Rate Street Maintenance as Fair or Poor 34
Nearly 60% Willing to Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Street Maintenance 34
Demographics and Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes for Improved Street Maintenance 35
7% Had Interaction with Spokane Valley's Permit Center 35
59% Very Satisfied with Services Received From Permit Center 36
Transportation 37
Vast Majority Commute Less than 30 Minutes One Way 37
Very Few Use Alternative to Driving a Car to Get to Work 37
Over 2/3s Agree that Sprague /Appleway Couplet Had Been Useful Improvement 38
Nearly 1/3 Would Like to See A Portion of Sprague Returned to Two-Way Traffic 39
Demographics and Returning Sprague Avenue to Two -Way Traffic 39
Sprague /Appleway Couplet Has Been Improvement BY Returning Sprague Avenue to Two -Way
Traffic 40
Nearly Half Strongly Support Appleway Being Extended East 40
35% Oppose Couplet Being Extended East to Evergreen Road 41
Demographics and Extending Couplet East to Evergreen Road 41
27% Strongly Oppose Development of Light Rail in the Region 42
Demographics and Development of Light Rail in Spokane Region 42
Parks and Recreation 44
80% Gave Positive Ratings of the Quality of Parks in Spokane Valley 44
Demographics and Quality of Spokane Valley Parks 44
Two-Thirds Have a Park In or Close to Their Neighborhood 45
Demographics and Park In or Close to Neighborhood 45
14% Believe Building More Parks is a High Priority 46
Demographics and Priority of Building More Parks 46
Park In or Close to Neighborhood by Priority of Building More Parks 47
27% Rated Quality of Recreational Facilities in Spokane Valley Very Good or Excellent 47
Demographics and Quality of Spokane Valley Recreational Facilities 48
59% Have Recreational Facilities In or Close to Their Neighborhood 48
Few Believe Building More Recreational Facilities is a High Priority 49
Demographics and Priority of Building More Recreational Facilities 49
Recreational Facilities In or Close to Neighborhood by Priority of Building More Recreational
Facilities 50
Personal Safety 51
Vast Majority Agree that Spokane Valley is a Safe Place to Live 51
92% Agree Their Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live 51
Demographics and Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live 53
Appendix A: Community Preference Survey 54
Appendix B: Open -ended Responses 76
Project: 03 -206 AIDS Program
Saved: April 28, 2004
Document: Final Report (GS)
pli Clearwater
R esearch . , Inc.
11
Figures
Figure 1: Spokane Valley Headed in the Right Direction (0026) 12
Figure 2: Importance of Spokane Valley Having a Downtown (Q050) 14
Figure 3: Support/Opposition to Spending Public Money to Create a City Center (Q055) 16
Figure 4: Most Ideal Location for Spokane Valley City Center (0060) 17
Figure 5: Community Identity or Something that Makes Spokane Valley Unique (Q065) 18
Figure 6: Importance of Spokane Valley Having Community Identity (Q075) 19
Figure 7: Development of Community Identity Best Accomplished Through Physical or Social Changes
(Q080) 20
Figure 8: Satisfaction with Typical Pattern of Development Along Major Streets (Q120) 22
Figure 9: Priority Level: Adding Street Trees and Landscaping to Major Streets (0125) 23
Figure 10: Priority Level: Making Major Streets Friendly for Pedestrians and Bicyclists (Q130) 24
Figure 11: Priority Level: Stronger Controls on Signs and Billboards in Spokane Valley (0135) 25
Figure 12: Reside in an Area that was Part of the Spokane Valley Sewer Project (Q136) 26
Figure 13: Level of Satisfaction with Reconstructed Streets (0137) 27
Figure 14: Support/Opposition to Development of Small Commercial Centers Close to Residential
Neighborhoods (Q140) 28
Figure 15: Quality of Police Services (0030) 29
Figure 16: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Police Services (0031) 30
Figure 17: Quality of Fire Protection Services (0035) 30
Figure 18: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Fire Protection Services
(0036) 31
Figure 19: Quality of Library Services (0040) 32
Figure 20: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Library Services (Q041) 33
Figure 21: Quality of Street Maintenance (Q045) 34
Figure 22: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Street Maintenance (Q046) 34
Figure 23: Experience with Spokane Valley Permit Center in the Last Year (Q047) 35
Figure 24: Satisfaction with Services Received from City of Spokane Valley Permit Center (Q048) 36
Figure 25: Length of Time it Takes to Get from Home to Workplace (0020) 37
Figure 26: Usual Method of Getting to Work (Q025) 37
Figure 27: Level of Agreement that Sprague /Appleway Couplet Had Been Useful Improvement to Overall
Roadway System (Q090) 38
Figure 28: Return Sprague Avenue, from University Road to Interstate 90, to Two -Way Traffic (Q095) 39
Figure 29: Support/Opposition to Appleway Section of Couplet Being Extended East (Q100) 40
Figure 30: Support/Opposition to Couplet Being Extended East to Evergreen Road (Q101) 41
Figure 31: Support/Opposition to the Development of Light Rail in the Spokane Region (Q105) 42
Figure 32: Quality of Parks in Spokane Valley (0155) 44
Figure 33: Park In or Close to Neighborhood (Q160) 45
Figure 34: Priority Level: Building More Parks (Q165) 46
Figure 35: Quality of Recreational Facilities in Spokane Valley (Q170) 47
Figure 36: Recreational Facilities In or Close to Neighborhood (0175) 48
Figure 37: Priority Level: Building More Recreational Facilities (Q180) 49
Figure 38: Level of Agreement that Spokane Valley is a Safe Place to Live (0145) 51
Figure 39: Level of Agreement that Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live (Q150) 51
Project: 03 -206 AIDS Program
Saved: April 28, 2004
Document: Final Report (GS)
M Clearwater
Research, Inc.
iii
Tables
Table 1: Final Dispositions 6
Table 2: Examples of Variable Subscript Labels 7
Table 3: Summary Characteristics of Survey Respondents 10
Table 4: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Spokane Valley Headed in the Right
Direction 12
Table 5: Important Issues Facing Spokane Valley 13
Table 6: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Importance of Having a City Center 15
Table 7: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Support of Spending Public Money to
Create a City Center 16
Table 8: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Most Ideal Location for City Center 17
Table 9: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Spokane Valley Having an Identity 18
Table 10: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and How Best to Develop a Community
Identity 20
Table 11: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Satisfaction with Typical Pattern of
Development Along Major Streets 22
Table 12: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Adding Trees and Landscaping
to Major Streets 23
Table 13: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Making Major Streets Friendly
for Pedestrians and Bicyclists 24
Table 14: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Living in an Area that was Part of
Spokane Valley Sewer Project 26
Table 15: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Police Services 29
Table 16: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Fire Protection Services 31
Table 17: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Library Services 32
Table 18: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes for
Improved Street Maintenance 35
Table 19: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Returning Portion of Sprague Avenue to
Two -Way Traffic 39
Table 20: SpraguelAppleway Couplet Had Been Improvement BY Returning Sprague Avenue to Two -
Way Traffic 40
Table 21: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Extending Couplet East to Evergreen
Road 41
Table 22: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Development of Light Rail in the Spokane
Region 42
Table 23: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Spokane Valley Parks 44
Table 24: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Having a Park in or Close to
Neighborhood 45
Table 25: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Building More Parks 46
Table 26: Park In or Close to Neighborhood BY Priority of Building More Parks 47
Table 27: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Spokane Valley Recreational
Facilities 48
Table 28: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Building More Recreational
Facilities 49
Table 29: Recreational Facilities In or Close to Neighborhood BY Priority of Building More Recreational
Facilities 50
Table 30: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Level of Agreement that Neighborhood is
a Safe Place to Live 53
Project: 03-206 AIDS Program
Saved: April 28, 2004
Document: Final Report (GS)
M Clearwater
Research, Inc.
iv
Executive Summary
Introduction
In the Spring of 2004, Clearwater Research, working closely with the City of Spokane
Valley Community Development Department, designed and executed a telephone
survey with a random sample of 400 Spokane Valley adults. This Community
Preference Survey was conducted as part of the City's comprehensive planning process
and its major purpose was to gather representative community input on a variety of
planning - related issues. Survey data was collected from March 18 to April 7, 2004.
The Spokane Valley Community
The majority of respondents (83 %) indicated they thought Spokane Valley was headed
in the right direction. However, respondents did identify a number of important issues
facing Spokane Valley. Concerns about the economy and planningrelated matters were
among the top issues respondents identified as facing the City.
City Center / Community Identity
City Center. Sixty-two percent of respondents indicated that having a recognizable
downtown or city center was important to the future of Spokane Valley. Female
respondents, respondents at lower income levels, and respondents residing in one or
two person households were most likely to report that having a recognizable downtown
was important to the future of Spokane Valley. There was strong support among
respondents for spending public money to create a city center. Seventyfour percent of
respondents either somewhat or strongly supported Spokane Valley officials using
public money to develop a city center. Only 2% strongly opposed the use of public
money to create a city center. Over half of respondents (52 %) felt the University City
area would be the most ideal Spokane Valley location for a city center.
Community Identity. Only 26% of respondents thought Spokane Valley had a distinct
identity or something that made it unique. Interestingly, almost the same percentage of
respondents who said Spokane Valley does nct have a community identity (74 %)
indicated that having a community identity was important to the future of Spokane
Valley (76 %). While many respondents (47 %) felt community identity could be
developed through social changes, others believed physical changes (28 %) or a
combination of both physical and social changes (25 %) were the best means for
accomplishing the development of community identity.
Community Aesthetics
The typical pattern of development along the major streets of Spokane Valley did not
appear to be of great concern to respondents. Just 22% expressed dissatisfaction with
the current type of development along major streets. Further underscoring the general
lack of concern about the typical pattern of development along major streets, only 23%
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
MI Clearwater
Research, Inc.
of respondents indicated adding street trees and landscaping to major streets should be
a high priority for City officials. Interestingly, lower income respondents were much more
apt than higher income respondents to report that making streets pedestrianfriendly
should be a high priority for City officials.
Opinions regarding the priority City officials should place on stronger sign and billboard
controls were very mixed. However, 67% of respondents indicated that Spokane Valley
officials should place a medium or high priority on stronger sign and billboard control
and as such, it is probable that the majority of residents would be supportive of stronger
billboard control regulations. Respondents' opinions regarding the development of small
commercials centers close to residential neighborhoods were also sharply divided. Just
under half of respondents (46 %) were supportive of developing small commercial
centers close to residential neighborhoods.
One -third of respondents (33 %) resided in an area that had recently been part of the
Spokane Valley Sewer Project. Among those respondents who had direct experience
with the Sewer Project there was substantial satisfaction with the quality of street
reconstruction following the Sewer Project. Eightyone percent were either very or
somewhat satisfied with the reconstructed streets.
Public Services
Underscoring a high level of confidence in the Spokane Valley police force, 85% of
respondents indicated that the quality of police services was good, very good, or
excellent. Fire protection services and library services were also viewed quite positively
by respondents, with 95% and 83 %, respectively, rating these services as good, very
good, or excellent. The quality of street maintenance in Spokane Valley was not viewed
in such a glowing fashion. Fifty -four percent of respondents indicated that street
maintenance was fair or poor. However, of those respondents who gave fair or poor
ratings, 60% indicated a willingness to pay additional taxes in order to have improved
street maintenance.
Just 7% of respondents had had experience with the Spokane Valley Permit Center
within the last year. Generally speaking, those respondents who did have experience
with the Permit Center were very satisfied with the services they received.
Transportation
Commuting Behavior. Eight percent of respondents reported that their hometo -work
commute time was more than 30 minutes. The vast majority of respondents indicated
they usually got to work by driving alone. Only 2% of respondents, respective*, said
they typically got to work by using public transportation or by carpooling or van pooling.
Couplet. Sixty -nine percent of respondents agreed that the Sprague /Appleway Couplet
has been a useful improvement to the overall roadway system in Spokane Malley. Just
under one -third of respondents (31 %) said Sprague should be returned to twoway
traffic from University Road to Interstate 90. Not unexpectedly, respondents who
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
2
Clearwater
Research, Inc
indicated the Sprague /Appleway Couplet had been a useful improvement were much
less likely to indicate that Sprague, between University and 1 -90, should be returned to
two -way traffic. Extending the Couplet East to Evergreen Road was supported by a slim
56% majority. Male respondents tended to be more favorably disposed to extending the
Couplet East to Evergreen Road as well as to maintaining the Couplet rather than
returning it to two-way traffic between University and 1-90.
Development of Light Rail. Under half of respondents (48 %) indicated they were
supportive of the development of Ight rail in the Spokane region. Female respondents
and more highly educated respondents were most likely to support the development of
light rail in the region.
Parks and Recreation
Both parks and recreational facilities were viewed positively by the majority of
respondents. Eighty percent and 71 % of respondents, respectively, indicated that the
quality of parks and recreational facilities was good, very good, or excellent. Sixtysix
percent of respondents reported there was a park in or close to their neghborhood
while 59% said there were recreational facilities in or close to their neighborhood. Not
surprisingly, those respondents who resided close to a park or to recreational facilities
were more likely than those not in close proximity to such facilites to indicate the
building of parks and recreational facilities should be a low priority for City officials.
Personal Safety
The overwhelming majority of respondents felts that Spokane Valley was a safe place to
live. Further, 95% of respondents said then neighborhood was a safe place to live
highlighting a strong sense of personal safety among the majority of respondents.
Document
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project Final Report (gs)
3
MClearwater
Research, Inc.
Background and Study Purpose
In the Spring of 2004, the City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department
(SVCDD) contracted with Clearwater Research, Inc., to design and implement a
community preference survey of Spokane Valley residents. The survey was conducted
as part of the City's comprehensive planning and citizen participation process under the
Washington State Growth Management Act. The major purpose of the survey was to
solicit community input on land use, transportation, and capital facilities issues in order
to inform the comprehensive planning process.
Scope of Work
Clearwater Research, working closely with the SVCDD, designed and implemented a
telephone survey with a random sample of 400 Spokane Valley adults in late March and
early April of 2004.
Survey Instrument
Clearwater Research collaborated with SVCDD representatives to design the
Community Preference Survey questionnaire. The questionnaire covered core
demographics as well as several other areas of interest:
• Community Development (City Center and Community Identity)
• Community Aesthetics
• Public Services
• Transportation (Couplet and L'ght Rail Issues plus Commuting Behavior)
• Parks and Recreation
• Personal Safety
Many questionnaire items were derived from similar planning - related studies focused on
transportation, land use and community development. Other items were developed and
customized exclusively to address issues unique to Spokane Valley. The survey was
conducted in English only and the average interview length was thirteen minutes.
Sampling
Clearwater Research obtained a probability sample of the target population, nor
institutionalized adults residing within six Spokane Valley zip codes (99212, 99223,
99206, 99016, 99037, and 99216), using a 2-stage cluster sampling method. At the first
stage, a set of households was selected via the telephone numbers randomly selected
from the working banks in the zip codes outlined above. At the second stage, one adult
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
Introduction
Method
M Clearwater
Research, Inc.
4
was selected at random from the set of eligible adults living in the household using the
"most recent birthday" method. After introducing the survey to the person who
happened to answer the phone call, the interviewer asked for the adult (18 years of age
or older) in the household who had had the most recent birthday. This methodology is
commonly used for obtaining probability samples for telephone survey projects. The
overall sample size of 409 adults achieves a maximum 95% confidence interval of -Ff
4.9% for binomial proportions (such as "yes " / "no" items).
Sample Production and Processing
Clearwater Research used several techniques to design and process the sampled
telephone numbers in order to produce the highest quality probability sample and data
set in the most cost-efficient manner.
The sample design for the Community Preference Survey employed a listassisted
random digit dialing (RDD) sample methodology using a truncatedtelephone number
frame based on working banks. A bank is defined here as a series of 100 telephone
numbers specified by a 3 -digit area code, a 3 -digit exchange, and the first 2 digits of a
4 -digit telephone line number, ranging from )CXXXXX -XX00 to )00 000(40(99. A
working bank is defined here as a series of 100 telephone numbers from XXXXXX-
XX00 to XXX- XXX -XX99, at least one of which is listed in an up-to -date telephone
directory as reaching a household. The remaining banks of telephone numbers —those
for which no listed household telephone number can be found —are called zero banks.
The sample design did not include zero banks. This represents a slight decrease in
sample coverage of households with telephones and thus increases the risk of bias
associated with coverage error. However, compared with a full frame design, this design
provides a significant increase in sample efficiency, keeping data collection costs
manageable.
As an additional efficiency measure, Clearwater Research employed a service that
marked identifiable business and non - working numbers in the sampled telephone
numbers before the data collection began. These records were sequestered during the
data collection process and were assigned appropriate final disposition codes at the end
of the data collection field period.
During the field period, replicates of the sample records not identified as nonresidential
were loaded into the Clearwater Research computeFassisted telephone interview
(CATI) system and distributed to interviewers for caling. A sample record is resolved by
calling it until a final disposition code has been assigned or until the maximum number
of call attempts has been made during the field period.
Data Collection
Clearwater Research collected data from March 18 to ApriI7, 2004. Interviewers were
thoroughly briefed prior to data collection, and they rehearsed the questionnaire before
conducting actual interviews. Additionally, monitoring staff listened to a sampling of
interviews throughout the field period to maintain dAa quality.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
01 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
5
Sampled telephone numbers were called according to a schedule designed to minimize
bias problems associated with difficult-to -reach respondents. Each sample record was
resolved by attempting it a minimum of eight times during the calling perod or until a
final disposition code (such as "completed interview" or "disconnected /nonworking
number") was assigned. The calling hours for the project were primarily weekday
evenings and weekends. However, calls were also made during the daytime on
weekdays in an attempt to capture potential respondents who could be reached at
home during weekday business hours.
At the close of the field period, each sampled telephone number was assigned a final
disposition that summarizes the separate outcomes of each call attempt for that number.
The final dispositions for the Community Preference Survey sample are presented in
Table 1. A total of 409 interviews were completed during the field period.
Table 1: Final Dispositions
CODE DISPOSITION DESCRIPTION
1 Completed interview
2 Refused interview
3 Nonworking number
4 Not a private residence
5 No eligible respondent at this number
6 Selected respondent not available during the interviewing period
7 Language barrier /Respondent unable to communicate
8 Interview terminated within questionnaire
9 Final technological barrier
10 Final busy /Final no answer /Final answering machine
Total
RECORDS
409
617
1132
744
226
40
15
56
10
526
3775
Response Rates
The response rate measures the relaive success with which households sampled for
the survey actually participated. For RDD samples, this is typically calculated as the
percentage of households, assumed to be reachable via the sampled phone numbers,
that completed interviews during the field period. The higher the response rate, the
lower the potential will be for nonresponse bias in the data.
Clearwater Research typically calculates two widely used response rates developed
and popularized by the Council of American Survey Research Organizdions, which we
refer to as the CASRO response rate and the CASRO Upper Bound response rate. The
CASRO rate is a more conservative estimate, while the Upper Bound rate is a
commonly used "best case" rate. The CASRO response rate for this project was
31.4 %, and the Upper Bound rate was 38.0 %.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
6
MClearwater
Research, Inc
LABEL
MEANING
M
A variable which has been coded for interval level analysis. Answers such as
"Don't know," "Refused," and "No answer" recoded as system missing (e.g.,
0005M).
D
A variable which has been coded for use as a dichotomous (two-category)
variable. Answers such as "Don't know," "Refused," and "No answer" recoded
as system missing (e.g., Q005D).
T
A variable which has been coded for use as a trichotomous (three-category)
variable. Answers such as "Don't know," "Refused," and "No answer" recoded
as system missing (e.g., Q005T).
C
A scaled or categorical variable which has been recoded into more than three
categories. Answers such as "Don't know," "Refused," and "No answer"
recoded as system missing (e.g., Q005C).
Data Preparation
Survey data were entered and automatically consolidated into a CATI database as the
interviews were being conducted. Prior to analysis, Clearwater Research followed a
comprehensive routine of data preparation. Data were converted from the CATI
database and formatted for review and analysis in SPSS, a statistical analysis software
package. Prior to analysis, the original survey variables and response categories were
labeled, and additional variables were created for the analysis as needed. In addition,
open -ended responses were examined and cleaned for overall comprehension. Finally,
the individual cases (interviews) were weighted so the survey results would give the
most accurate picture of the adult pcpulation in Spokane Valley.
Coding
Clearwater Research has developed a standard set of procedures to prepare data for
review and analysis. First, each variable was provided a unique label matching the CATI
question number from the survey instrument. Next,each raw, labeled variable was
recoded into a new variable to remove nonresponsive answers (e.g., Don't Know,
Refused). These recoded variables were designated using an alphabetical subscript
that identifies the resultant measurement scale. A complete tiding of these recode
subscripts is provided in Table 2.
Table 2: Exam ales of Variable Subscript Labels
Weighting
Weighting is a simple statistical adjustment (a multiplier) for each survey respondent in
the data set. The purpose for weighting is usually to correct for bias in the unweighted
survey results that can occur as a result of sample design or variations in patterns of
response.
The database for the analysis was organized so that each case represented data from a
single interview with an adult. The cases were then weighted to account for probabilities
of selection that vaned from household to household, and nonsampling error that might
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
M Clearwater
Research, Inc.
7
arise from nonresponse and noncoverage of households without telephones. In the first
step, a probability -of- selection weighting factor was calculated that included the number
of eligible adults in the household and the number of residential telephone lines that
served the household. In the second step, a poststratification factor was calculated to
bring the proportions of age and sex in the sample in line with those in the population of
adults in Spokane Valley. Two weights were produced in these calculations. The first
weight is called the relative weight, which sums to the sample size and may be used
with standard statistical software (such as SPSS) to calculate point estimates of
population characteristics and approximate variance estimates for statistical tests. The
second weight is called the expansion weight, which sums to the population size and
must be used with specialized statistical software (such as SUDAAN) to calculate exact
variance estimates.
Eight of the interviews were removed in preparing the survey data set because they
lacked information essential for calculating case weights (i.e., age and number of
residential phone lines). The weighted data set used for analysis of the survey results
contains 401 cases.
Data Analysis
Clearwater Research used SPSS to analyze the data. The initial analyses involved
frequency tables and descriptive statistics (e.g., mean standard deviation) to examine
and characterize the distribution of responses for each variable. These descriptive
statistics also guided the subsequent analyses.
In the second phase of the analysis patterns of relations between variables to identify
meaningful similarities and dissimilarities among the data were examined. Chisquare
tests were primarily used to explore differences in response patterns and outcomes
across salient demographic variables.
Document
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
8
kliClearwater
Research, Inc.
Findings and Interpretation
The results of the anaysis are presented in the following order:
1. Demographics
2. The Spokane Valley Community
3. City Center / Community Identity
4. Community Aesthetics
5. Public Services
6. Transportation (Couplet and Light Rail Issues plus Commuting Behavior)
7. Parks and Recreation
8. Personal Safety
On the following pages, charts, tables, and descriptions of survey results include the
question numbers for easy reference. For the full text of the questions and response
categories for the Community Preference Survey, please refer to AppendixA.
Crosstabulations between core demographics (gender, age, education level, income,
and household size) and the majority of substantive survey questions were examined
during the analysis phase of this project.
During the course of the analysis the maprity of demographic and substantive survey
questions were recoded in a manner that grouped response categories together (e.g.,
responses of "strongly agree ", "somewhat agree" were grouped together and compared
to the grouped responses of "strongly disagree" and "somewhat disagree "). This re-
coding, or collapsing of response categories, facilitated interpretation of survey findings
and in some instances made 'n' sizes sufficient to conduct viable statistical analysis.
In many instances, crosstabular relationships did not reveal informative patterns. As a
result only two types of crosstabular relationships are presented in this report: 1)
relationships that were statistically significant based on the chi square statistic, a
statistical test of difference; cr 2) statistically insignificant relationships that illustrated
particularly noteworthy trends. All statistically significant crosstabulations are presented
with reference to corresponding chi square statistics and p- values
'The results of chi square statistical tests present findings in relation to expected values. These
expected values are calculated separately for each test using the frequency distributions of the
variables being analyzed. Significant findings for these statistical tests are interpreted in terms
of these expected values (i.e., how different the pattern of results is from the pattern we would
expect if there was no relation between the variables).
2 The p -value associated with a particular statistical test, indicated by the letter "p," conveys the
reliability of a particular finding. A p -value of less than .05. (i.e., p < .05), means that the result
was likely to have occurred by random error or chance just 5 in 100 times. A p -value of less
than .01. (i.e., p < .01), means that the result was likely to have occurred by random error or
9
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
111 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
Demographics
The following section describes the demographics of the survey respondents.
Table 3: Summary Characteristics of Survey Respondents
°A) OF RESPONDENTS
GENDER (Q200)
Male 43.4%
Female 56.6%
AGE (Q185)
Mean age in years 49.2
INCOME (0215)
Less than S20,000 10.2%
$20,000 to $34,999 22.5%
$35,000 to $49,999 22.2%
$50,000 to $74,999 20.2%
$75,000 or more 24.8%
EDUCATION LEVEL (Q195)
Less than high school 3.5%
High school graduate/GED 20.9%
Some college but less than 4 years /technical school 35.9%
4 -year college graduate or more 39.7%
EMPLOYMENT STATUS (Q015)
Employed for wages 53.5%
Self- employed 10.5%
Out of work 2.8%
Homemaker 6.0%
Student 2.0%
Unable to work 2.5%
Retired 22.8%
HOUSEHOLD SIZE (0205)
1 person 22.2%
2 person 34.7%
3 person 17.7%
4 person 13.5%
5 or more person 11.9%
OWN / RENT/ LEASE PLACE OF RESIDENCE (Q005)
Own 73.9%
Rent or lease 23.9%
Other 2.2%
HOUSING UNIT LIVED IN (0010)
Single family detached 81.0%
Duplex 4.4%
Apartment 10.8%
Townhouse or condominium 1.1%
Manufactured home 2.2%
Other 1.0%
chance just 1 in 100 times. A p -value of less than .001. (i.e., p < .001), means that the result
was likely to have occurred by random error or chance just 1 in 1000 times.
10
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
pli Clearwater
Research, Inc.
Demographics Summary
The sample, while not split evenly along gender lines, was comprised of a substantial
proportion of men (43 %). The average age of sampled espondents was 49 years and
ranged from 18 to 99. Both income and education level were fairly evenly distributed
among survey respondents. While a large proportion of survey respondents was
employed for wages or self - employed (64 %), a substantial portion cf the remaining
respondents were retired (23 %).
One and two person households comprised 57% of the sample. The majority of
respondents (74 %) owned their place or residence and 19% of respondents lived in a
housing unit other than a single - family detached home.
Demographics Used In Subsequent Analysis
In the subsequent analysis described in the sections below, the following demographic
variables are crosstabulated with substantive survey questions:
• Gender (male, female)
• Age (recoded into three groups: 18to 44, 45 to 59, and 60 to 99)
• Educational Level (recoded into three groups: high school or less, some college, and
four or more years of college)
• Income (recoded into three groups: less then $35,000, $35,000 to less than $75,000,
and $75,000 or more)
• Household Size (recoded into two groups: 1 and 2 person households and 3 or more
person households)
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
Clearwater 11
Research, Inc.
The Spokane Valley Community
General questions about the direction Spokane Valley is headed and issues facing the
City are covered in this segment of the analysis.
Over 8 in 10 Think Spokane Valley is Headed in the Right Direction
Figure 1: Spokane Valley Headed in the Right Direction (Q026)
12 No
■ Yes
In=318
83%
• The majority of survey respondents appeared optimistic about the direction Spokane
Valley is headed. Only 17% of respondents indicated they thought Spokane Valley
was not headed in the right direction.
Demographics and Spokane Valley Headed in the Right Direction
Table 4: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics andSpokane Valley
Headed in the Right Direction
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE SPOKANE VALLEY HEADED IN RIGHT DIRECTION
NO YES
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
GENDER
Male 22.5% 77.5%
Female 12.8% 87.2%
INCOME
Less than S35,000 16.9% 83.1%
$35,000 to less than $75,000 6.7% 93.3%
$75,000 or more 26.7% 73.3%
• Female respondents were more likely than their male counterparts to report that
Spokane Valley is headed in the right direction (Pearson chi square = 5.1; p< .05).
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
pli Clearwater 12
Research, Inc.
Q027: In your opinion, what is the single most important issue facing Spokane
Valley?
JCategory Percent
Economy (Overall economic growth) 14.6%
Traffic/roads
12.9%
Jobs (Unemployment)
10.4%
Taxes
6.9%
Controlling /managing growth
5.3%
Education (Level of funding)
4.5%
Police services /safety
3.9%
Budget
3.7%
Central city government/planning
3.1%
Developing city center /downtown
2.6%
Environment (Degradation /aquifer protection)
2.0%
Other
16.0%
Don't know
13.9%
Refused
3
Total
100.0%
• Respondents in highest income category were less likely than those in the low and
middle income categories to indicate that Spokane Valley is headed in the right
direction (Pearson chi square = 14.7; p< .001).
• Across income categories the majority of respondents reported that Spokane Valley
is headed in the right direction. However, it appears that respondents making
between $35,000 and $75,000 are the most convinced that Spokane Valley is
headed in the right direction.
Economic and Planning Issues of Concern to Respondents
Table 5: Important Issues Facinct Spokane Valle
• Respondents were asked to name the single most important issue facing Spokane
Valley. A list of potential response categories (important issues) was not read to
respondents. Rather respondents seF- identified a single issue they felt was the most
important issue facing Spokane Valley.
• Economic issues were clearly of concern to many respondents. The economy /
overall economic growth and jobs / unemployment were, combined, named by one
quarter (25 %) of respondents.
• Urban planning - related issues (traffic / roads and controlling / managing growth)
were also named by many respondents indicating that developing a comprehensive
plan for Spokane Valley is likely very timely.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
M Clearwater 13
Research., Inc.
City Center / Community Identity
This section of the analysis focuses on questions that examined a variety of land use
and community development issues including the importance of Spokane Valley having
a recognizable "city center" and a distinct "community identity ". Results from questions
centered on options for changing the appearance of both new and existing development
in Spokane Valley are also presented in this section.
61% Believe Having a Downtown is Important to the Future of Spokane
Valley
Figure 2: Importance of Spokane Valley Having a Downtown (Q050)
Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very
unimportant unimportant important important
• Respondents were asked how important it was to the future of Spokane Valley to
have an area of the City that is recognized as a city center or downtown.
• Thirty percent of respondents indicated itwas unimportant (very or somewhat) to the
future of Spokane Valley to have an area of the City recognizable as a downtown.
• In contrast, 26% of respondents thought it was very important to the future of
Spokane Valley to have recognizable downtown and anotier 35% indicated in was
somewhat important for Spokane Valley to have a downtown.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
MI Clearwater 14
Research, Inc.
Demographics and Importance of Having City Center
Table 6: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Importance of
Having a City Center
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING A CITY CENTER
UNIMPORTANT OR IMPORTANT
NEUTRAL
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
GENDER
Male
Female
INCOME
Less than $35,000
$35,000 to less than $75,000
$75,000 or more
HOUSEHOLD SIZE
1 and 2 person households
3 or more person households
43.6%
33.8%
23.8%
39.3%
46.4%
31.8%
43.6%
56.4%
66.2%
76.2%
60.7%
53.6%
68.2%
56.4%
• Male respondents were less likely than female respondents to indicate that having a
recognizable city center was important to the future of Spokane Valley (Pearson chi
square = 4.0; p < .05).
■ Seventy -six percent of respondents in the lowest income category said it was
important to the future of Spokane Valley to have a city center as compared to 54%
of respondents in the highest income category (Pearson chi square = 11.9; p< .01).
• Not surprisingly given their likely childless living circumstances, respondents living in
1 or 2 person households were more likely than those living in larger households to
indicate that having a city center was important to the future of Spokane Valley
(Pearson chi square = 5.7; p< .05)
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
M Clearwater 15
Research., Inc.
Nearly Three - Quarters Support Spending Public Money to Create a City
Center
Figure 3: Support/Opposition to Spending Public Money to Create a City Center
(Q055)
■ Respondents were asked how supportive they would be of Spokane Valley officials
spending public money to promote the creation of a city center.
• Three - quarters of respondents (75 %) indicated they were either somewhat or
strongly supportive of Spokane Valley officials spending public money to create a
city center.
• There was minimal opposition among survey participants to the spending of public
money to create a city center. Just 2% of respondents were strongly opposed, and
10% somewhat opposed, to the spending of public money to create a city center.
Demographics and Spending Public Money to Create a City Center
Table 7: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Support of
Spending Public Money to Create a City Center
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE SUPPORT /OPPOSE SPENDING PUBLIC MONEY TO
CREATE CITY CENTER
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
GENDER
Male 32.7% 67.3%
Female 20.1% 79.7%
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
OPPOSE
OR NEUTRAL
SUPPORT
pli Clearwater 16
Research., Inc.
• Given the fact that females were more hclined than males to indicate having a city
center was important to the future of Spokane Valley, it is not unexpected that
females were more likely than their male counterparts to support the spending of
public money to create a city center (Pearson chi square = 4.9; p < .05).
Over Half Believe University City Area is Best Location for City Center
Figure 4: Most Ideal Location for Spokane Valley City Center (Q060)
Other
Everygreen and Sprague 1112%
Pines and Sprague
Mirabeau Point
University City area
■
156
18%
62 °
■ n =233
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
• Fifty -two percent of respondents indicated that the Universitj City area would be the
most ideal location for a city center.
• Although respondents did indicate that other areas of Spokane Valley would be the
most ideal location for a city center, opinions were fragmented with no one area
clearly emerging as a second most ideal location as compared to University City.
Demographics and Most Ideal Location for City Center
Table 8: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Most Ideal Location
for City Center
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE MOST IDEAL LOCATION FOR CITY CENTER
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
EDUCATION LEVEL
High School or Tess
Some college (1 to 3 years)
4 or more years of college
STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT
AGE
18to44
45 to 59
60 or older
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
UNIVERSITY CITY OTHER LOCATION
38.5%
66.7%
46.4%
44.5%
55.6%
63.5%
61.5%
33.3%
53.6%
55.5%
44.4%
36.5%
M Clearwater
Research, Inc.
17
• Respondents with some college education were more likely than their counterparts
at other education levels, in particular those with no college education, to report that
the University City area would be the most ideal location for a city center (Pearson
chi square = 13.0; p < .001).
• Although the relationship between age and ideal center city location was not
statistically significant, it did reveal an interesting patten. Older respondents were
substantially more likely than younger respondents to indicate University City was
the most ideal location for a city center.
Only 26% Believe Spokane Valley Has a Distinct Identity
Figure 5: Community Identity or Something that Makes Spokane Valley Unique
(Q065)
• Nearly three - quarters of respondents (74 %) reported that Spokane Valley does not
have a community identity or something that makes it unique.
Demographics and Community Identity
Table 9: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Spokane Valley
Having an Identity
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE DOES SPOKANE VALLEY HAVE IDENTITY OR
SOMETHING THAT MAKES IT UNIQUE?
NO YES
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
GENDER
Male 78.9% 21.1%
Female 68.9% 31.1%
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
M Clearwater 18
Research, Inc.
• Female respondents were slightly more likely than male respondents to indicate that
Spokane Valley has an identity of something that makes it unique (Pearson chi
square = 4.8; p < .05).
Descriptions of Spokane Valley's Identity /Uniqueness
• Respondents who indicated that Spokane Valley did have an identity or something
that makes in unique (Q065) were asked to describe the City's identity or
uniqueness (Q070).
• Although respondents gave a variety of descriptions of Spokane \Iley's identity /
uniqueness, several similar themes emerged. Five reoccurring descriptions were:
o Friendly, wholesome, good place to raise a family
o Mirabeau Point/Park, Centennial Trail
o Parks and open space, tress and physical beauty
o Small town or rural atmosphere
o Everything needed is close by /convenient
Majority Believe Having a Community Identity is Important to Future of
Spokane Valley
Figure 6: Importance of Spokane Valley Having Community Identity (Q075)
Very Somewhat Neutral
unimportant unimportant
• Nearly the same percentages of respondents who indicated Spokane Valley does
not have an identity or something that makes it unique (74 %) reported that having a
community identity was very or somewhat important to the future of Spokane Valley
(76 %).
• There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic
characteristics and the importance of Spokane Valley having a community identity.
. Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
Clearwater 19
Research, Inc.
Nearly Half Said Community Identity Development Best Accomplished
Through Social Changes
Figure 7: Development of Community Identity Best Accomplished Through
Physical or Social Changes (Q080)
• Although nearly half of respondents (47 %) felt that the development of a community
identity could best be accomplished through social changes, another 28 %indicated
physical changes would be the best way to develop a community identity.
• Further, one - quarter of respondents (25 %) felt physical and social changes were
equally important to the development of a community identity.
• Taken together, these findings underscore mixed opinions regarding the best way to
develop a community identity and highlight potential support for implementing both
physical and social changes in the process of developing a community identity.
Demographics and How Best to Develop Community Identity
Table 10: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and How Best to
Develop a Community Identity/
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE BEST WAY TO DEVELOP COMMUNITY IDENTITY
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
INCOME
Less than $35,000
$35,000 to Tess than $75,000
$75,000 or more
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
PHYSICAL SOCIAL BOTH EQUALLY
CHANGES CHANGES IMPORTANT
29.3%
20.7%
36.8%
51.2%
51.4%
33.8%
19.5%
27.9%
29.4%
M Clearwater 20
Research., Inc.
• Although the relationship between income and how best to develop a community
identity was not statistically significant, it did highlight an interesting pattern of
results. Respondents at the highest income level were more likely to indicate that
community identity could best be accomplished through physical changes. Higher
income respondents (those making more than $35,000 per year) were also more
likely than their lower income peers to report that physical and social change were
both equally important to the development of a community identity.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project Final Report (gs)
01 Clearwater 21
Resea rch, Inc.
Community Aesthetics
This portion of the analysis is concentrated on questions that examine satisfaction with
current development practices as well as questions that explore potential support for
planning initiatives focused largely on community aesthetics.
Few Dissatisfied with Typical Development Along Major Streets
Figure 8: Satisfaction with Typical Pattern of Development Along Major Streets
(Q120)
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very
dissatified dissatisfied satisfied satisfied
• Just 22% of respondents expressed dissatisfaction with the typical pattern of
development along the major streets of Spokane Valley.
Demographics and Satisfaction with Typical Pattern of Development Along
Major Streets
Table 11: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Satisfaction with
Typical Pattern of Development Along Major Streets
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE SATISFACTION WITH TYPCIAL PATTERN OF
DEVELOPMETN ALONG MAJOR STREETS
DISSATISFIED OR SATISFIED
NEURAL
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
AGE
18 to 44
45 to 59
60 or older
47.1%
31.8%
32.5%
52.9%
68.2%
67.5%
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
M Clearwater 22
Research Inc
• Although younger respondents did not express overwhelming dissatisfaction with the
typical pattern of development along major streets, they were less likely than older
respondents to report that the typical development was satisfactory to them
(Pearson chi square = 9.2; p< .01).
23% Consider Adding Street Trees and Landscaping to Major Streets a
High Priority
Figure 9: Priority Level: Adding Street Trees and Landscaping to Major Streets
(Q125)
Low priority Medium priority High priority
• It appears that adding street trees and Iandscapingto major streets is viewed as a
relatively low priority among many respondents (41 %). However, another 59% of
respondents indicated that the addition of street trees and landscaping should be a
medium or high priority for city officials.
Demographics and Priority of Adding Trees and Landscaping to Major
Streets
Table 12: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Adding
Trees and Landscaping to Major Streets
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE ADDING STREET TREES AND LANDSCAPING TO
MAJOR STREETS
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
EDUCATION LEVEL
High school or Tess
Some college (1 to 3 years)
4ormore ears ofcolle•e
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
LOW MEDIUM HIGH
PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY
50.0%
43.6%
33.1%
30.4%
37.1%
37.6%
19.6%
19.3%
29.3%
M Clearwater 23
Research, Inc
• Respondents at higher education levels were more inclined than those with a high
school education or less to consider adding trees and landscaping to major streets a
medium or high priority for Spokane Valley officials (Pearson chi square = 9.9; p<
.05).
4 in 10 Consider Making Streets Pedestrian - Friendly a High Priority
Figure 10: Priority Level: Making Major Streets Friendly for Pedestrians and
Bicyclists (Q130)
Low priority Medium priority High priority
• Highlighting likely concem over the safety of major streets inSpokane Valley, 78%
of respondents said making streets friendly for pedestrians and bicyclists should be
either a high or medium priority for City officials.
Demographics and Priority of Making Streets Pedestrian - Friendly
Table 13: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Making
Major Streets Friendly for Pedestrians and Bicyclists
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE MAKING STREET FRIENDLY FOR PEDESTRIANS AND
BICYCLISTS
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
INCOME
Less than $35,000
$35,000 to Tess than $75,000
$75,000 or more
• Respondents at the lowest income level were substantially more likely, in particular
when compared ID those at the highest income level, to indicate making major
streets pedestrian - friendly should be a high priority for Spokane Valley officials
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
LOW MEDIUM HIGH
PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY
16.8
21.3
26.8
26.2%
38.0%
36.1%
57.0%
40.7%
37.1%
M Clearwater
Research, Inc.
24
(Pearson chi square = 10.6; p< .05). This finding may be related to lower income
individuals in Spokane Valley having more, and likely unfavorable experience, with
walking or riding a bicycle on major streets.
Views Regarding Priority of Stronger Sign /Billboard Control Mixed
Figure 11: Priority Level: Stronger Controls on Signs and Bilboards in Spokane
Valley (Q135)
Low priority Medium priority High priority
• The pattern of responses to Q135 suggests that respondents were sharply divided
regarding the priority city officials should place on tighter sign and billboard control.
However, with over two-thirds of respondents (67 %) indicating that Spokane Valley
officials should place a medium or high priority on stronger sign and billboard
control, it is likely that majority of residents would be supportive of stronger billboard
control regulations.
• There were no statistically signficant relationships between demographic
characteristics and the priority city officials should place on stronger sign and
billboard control.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
M Clearwater 25
Research, Inc.
1/3 Had Direct Experience with Spokane Valley Sewer Project
Figure 12: Reside in an Area that was Part of the Spokane Valley Sewer Project
(Q136)
• One -third of survey respondents reported they lived in an area that had recently
been part of the Spokane Valley Sewer Project.
Demographics and Reside in Area that was Part of Spokane Valley Sewer
Project
Table 14: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Living in an Area
that was Part of Spokane Valley Sewer Project
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE RESIDE IN AREA THAT WAS RECENTLY PART OF
SPOKANE VALLEY SEWER PROJECT
NO YES
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
AGE
18 to 44
45 to 59
60 or older
75.3%
61.2%
56.4%
24.7%
38.8%
43.6%
• Older respondents were more likely than younger respondents to live in an area that
has recently been part of the Spokane Valley Sewer Proj✓ct. (Pearson chi square =
11.2; p <.01).
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
Clearwater 26
Research, Inc.
Only 14% Dissatisfied with Reconstructed_ Streets
Figure 13: Level of Satisfaction with Reconstructed Streets (Q137)
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
7 7%
5%
Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very
tissatified dissatisfied satisfied satisfied
• Respondents who reported they lived in an area that had recently been part of the
Spokane Valley Sewer Project were asked how satisfied or dissatisfied they were
with the reconstructed streets once the Sewer Project was completed.
• Eighty -one percent of survey respondents said they were satisfied (either very or
somewhat) with the reconstructed streets.
• Further, nearly 50% reported they were very satisfied with the reconstructed streets
indicating substantial satisfaction with the quality of street reconstruction coinciding
with the Spokane Valley Sewer Project.
• This question was not compared to the various demographic characteristics because
insufficient sample size did not allow for viable statistical analysis.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
M Clearwater 27
Research., Inc.
Nearly Half Support Development of Small Commercial Centers Close to
Residential Neighborhoods
Figure 14: Support/Opposition to Development of Small Commercial Centers
Close to Residential Neighborhoods (Q140)
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
■ n =396
I
n
JI1
21% 22% 15%
Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly
oppose oppose support support
• Although 46% of respondents reported they were either very or somewhat
supportive of the development of small commercial certers close to residential
neighborhoods in Spokane Valley, many other respondents were neutral or opposed
to this idea.
• If Spokane Valley officials decide to pursue the development of small commercials
centers close to residential neighborhoods it might be useful to educate the general
Spokane Valley population about the benefits of such development in order to
prevent concern and build support for this initiative.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
pli Clearwater 28
Re search, Inc.
Public Services
In this segment of the analysis results of questions that asked responderts to rate the
quality of various public services are presented.
85% Rated Police Services as Good, Very Good, or Excellent
Figure 15: Quality of Police Services (Q030)
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
t n =334
39%
31%
15%
2%
Poor
Fair
Good Very good Excellent
• Eighty -five percent of respondents reported that police services were good, very
good, or excellent highlighting a generally high level of confidence in the Spokane
Valley police force.
Demographics and Quality of Police Services
Table 15: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics andQuality of Police
Services
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE QUALITY OF POLICE SERVICES
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
GENDER
Male
Female
• Female respondents were substantially rrore likely than their male counterparts to
rate the quality of police services in Spokane Valley as very good or excellent
(Pearson chi square = 10.5; p< .01).
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
POOR OR FAIR GOOD VERY GOOD OR
EXCELLENT
20.4%
11.0%
42.6% 37.0%
35.8% 53.2%
IMI Clearwater 29
Research, Inc.
27% Willing to Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Police Services
Figure 16: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Police
Services (Q031)
• Respondents who indicated police services were fair or poor were asked if they
would be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improved police services in
Spokane Valley.
• Just over one - quarter of the respondents (27 %) who gave lackluster ratings of the
quality of police services said they would be willing to pay additional taxes for
improved police services.
• This question was not compared to thevarious demographic characteristics because
insufficient sample size did not allow for viable statistical analysis.
95% Rated Fire Protection Services as Good, Very Good, or Excellent
Figure 17: Quality of Fire Protection Serves (Q035)
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project Final Report (Os)
M Clearwater 30
Research, Inc
• The overwhelming majority of respondents were positive about the quality of fire
protection services. Only 5% of respondents rated the quality of fire protection
services fair or poor.
Demographics and Quality of Fire Protection Services
Table 16: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Fire
Protection Services
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE QUALITY OF FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES
POOR, FAIR, OR VERY GOOD EXCELLENT
GOOD
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
AGE
18 to 44
45 to 59
60 or older
42.7%
32.6%
31.0%
• Respondents in the oldest age group were more inclined than those in the two
younger age groups to rate the quality of fire protection services as excellent
(Pearson chi square = 15.3; p< .01).
62% Would Not Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Fire Protection
Services
Figure 18: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Fire
Protection Services (Q036)
• Respondents who indicated fire protection services were fair or poor were asked if
they would be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improved fire protection
services in Spokane Valley.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
36.8%
30.2%
26.8%
20.5%
37.2%
42.3%
M Clearwater 31
Research, Inc.
• Only 38% of respondents who gave negative ratings of the quality of fie protection
services said they would be willing to pay additional taxes for improved fire
protection services.
• This question was not compared to the various demographic characteristics because
insufficient sample size did not allow for viable statisticd analysis.
83% Rated Library Services as Good, Very Good, or Excellent
Figure 19: Quality of Library Services (Q040)
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
■ The majority of respondents viewed library services in a positive light with 83% of
respondents reporting that library services were either good, very good, or excellent.
• Seventeen percent of respondents rated the quality of library services in a more
negative manner (i.e., ratings of poor or fair).
Demographics and Quality of Library Services
Table 17: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Quality of Library
Services
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
POOR OR FAIR
QUALITY OF LIBARY SERVICES
GOOD VERY GOOD OR
EXCELLENT
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
GENDER
Male
Female
23.6%
11.4%
35.7%
39.8%
40.8%
48.9%
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
M Clearwater 32
Research-, Inc.
• Similar to the pattern of responses for quality of police services, female respondents
were more likely than male respondents to rate the quality of library services in
Spokane Valley as very good or excellent (Pearson chi squae = 8.8; p < .05).
42% Willing to Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Library Services
Figure 20: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Library
Services (Q041)
• Respondents who indicated library services were fair or poor were asked if they
would be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improved library services in
Spokane Valley.
• Close to half of the respondents (42 %) who rated the quality of library services as
fair or poor said they would be willing to pay additional taxes to have improved
library services.
• This question was not compared to the various demographic characteristics because
insufficient sample size did not allow for viable statistical analysis.
(Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
M Clearwater 33
Research., Inc.
Over Half Rate Street Maintenance as Fair or Poor
Figure 21: Quality of Street Maintenance (Q045)
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
■ n =390
25%
Poor
28%
Fair
Good Very good Excellent
■ Fifty -three percent of respondents said street maintenance in Spokane Valley was
just fair or poor.
• Only 14% of respondents indicated that street maintenarce was very good or
excellent.
• There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic
characteristics and quality of street maintenance.
Nearly 60% Willing to Pay Additional Taxes to Have Improved Street
Maintenance
Figure 22: Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes in Order to Have Improved Street
Maintenance (Q046)
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
01 Clearwater 34
Research, Inc.
■ Respondents who indicated street maintenance was fair or poor were asked if they
would be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improvedstreet
maintenance in Spokane Valley.
• Fifty -seven percent said they would be willing to pay additional taxes for improved
street maintenance. This finding highlights substantial support for enhanced street
maintenance services.
Demographics and Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes for Improved Street
Maintenance
Table 18: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Willingness to Pay
Additional Taxes for Improved Street Maintenance
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE WILLING TO PAY ADDITIONAL TAXES FOR IMPROVED
STREET MAINTENANCE
NO
YES
STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT
GENDER
Male
Female
49.5%
36.6%
50.5%
63.4%
• Although the relationship between gender and willingness to pay additional taxes for
improved street maintenance was notstatistically significant, it did reveal an
interesting pattem. Female respondents were more likely than their male peers to
indicate they would be willing to pay more taxes in order to have improved street
maintenance in Spokane Valley.
7% Had Interaction with Spokane Valley's Permit Center
Figure 23: Experience with Spokane Valley Permit Center in the Last Year (Q047)
■ N
BY
in=397 1
0
Yes
93%
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
011 35
Clea7ater
Re sea, nc.
• Seven percent of respondents (n =29) reported that they had experience with the City
of Spokane Valley's permit center within the last year.
■ There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic
characteristics and experience with the City's permit center within the last year.
59% Very Satisfied with Services Received From Permit Center
Figure 24: Satisfaction with Services Received from City of Spokane Valley Permit
Center (Q048)
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
■ n =28
59%
7%
Very Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Very
dissatisfied dissatisfied satisfied satisfied
■ Respondents who indicated they had received services from the City's permit center
were asked how they would rate their level of satisfaction with the services they
received from the permit center.
• Nearly three - quarters of respondents (72 %) indicated they were very or somewhat
satisfied with the services they received from City's permit center.
• Although a few respondents (17 %) expressed dissatisfaction with the services they
received from the City's permit center, the overall pattem of responses indicates that
the City's permit center provided helpful assistance to the majority of respondents
seeking permit services.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
M Clearwater 36
Research., Inc.
Transportation
In this portion of the analysis results of several diverse transportationrelated questions
are presented.
Vast Majority Commute Less than 30 Minutes One Way
Figure 25: Length of Time it Takes to Get from Home to Workplace (Q020)
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
■ n =269 El
50% 42%
1%
Less than 15 Between 15 Between 30 More than an
minutes and 30 minutes to hour
minutes an hour
• Ninety - two percent of respondents reported that their hometo -work commute time
was 30 minutes or less.
• There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic
characteristics and home -to -work commute time.
Very Few Use Alternative to Driving a Car to Get to Work
Figure 26: Usual Method of Getting to Work (Q025)
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
M Clearwater 37
Research, Inc.
• Nearly 9 in 10 respondents (88 %) said they usually got to work by driving. Just 2 %,
respectively, reported they usually got to work by using publictransportation or by
utilizing a carpool or van pool.
• This question was not compared to the various demographic characteristics because
insufficient variation in responses did not allow for viable statistical analysis.
Over 2/3s Agree that Sprague /Appleway Couplet Had Been Useful
Improvement
Figure 27: Level of Agreement that Sprague /Appleway Couplet Had Been Useful
Improvement to Overall Roadway System (Q090)
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
■ n =393
44%
25%
Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly
disagree disagree agree agree
• Over two- thirds of respondents (69 %) somewhat or strongly agreed that the
Sprague /Appleway Couplet had been a useful improvement to the overall roadway
system in Spokane Valley.
• However, 23% somewhat or strongly disagreed that the Sprague/Appleway Couplet
has been an improvement, underscoring that support of the Coupbt is not universal
among Spokane Valley residents.
• There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic
characteristics and level of agreement that the Sprague/Appleway Couplet was a
useful improvement to the overall roadway system h Spokane Valley.
Document
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project Final Report (gs)
M Clearwater 38
Research, Inc.
Nearly 1/3 Would Like to See A Portion of Sprague Returned to Two-Way.
Traffic
Figure 28: Return Sprague Avenue, from University Road to Interstate 90, to Two
Way Traffic (Q095)
• While over two - thirds of respondents (69 %) did not think Sprague Avenue, between
University Road and Interstate 90, should be returned to two-way traffic, another
31 % said Sprague should be returned to two-way traffic.
Demographics and Returning Sprague Avenue to Two -Way Traffic
Table 19: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Returning Portion
of Sprague Avenue to Two-Way Traffic
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE RETURN SPRAGUE TO TWO -WAY TRAFFIC BETWEEN
UNIVERSITY AND 1 -90
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
GENDER
Male
Female
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
NO
74.6%
63.8%
YES
25.4%
36.2%
• Female respondents were more likely than males to indicate they would like to see
Sprague Avenue retumed to two-way traffic between University and Interstate 90
(Pearson chi square = 5.1; p< .05).
kli Clearwater 39
Research Inc.
Sprague /Appleway Couplet Has Been Improvement BY Returning Sprague
Avenue to Two -Way Traffic
Table 20: SpraguelAppleway Couplet Had Been Improvement BY Returning
Sprague Avenue to Two-Way Traffic
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE RETURN SPRAGUE TO TWO -WAY TRAFFIC BETWEEN
UNIVERSITY AND 1 -90
NO YES
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
COUPLET HAS BEEN USEFUL
IMPROVEMENT
Disagree or neutral 19.3% 80.7%
Agree 89.7% 10.3%
• Not surprisingly, those respondents who reported that the Sprague /Applevay
Couplet had been a useful improvement to the roadway system in Spokane Valley
were much Tess likely to indicate that Sprague, between Univesisty and 190, should
be returned to two-way traffic (Pearson chi square = 178.5; p< .001).
Nearly Half Strongly Support Appleway Being Extended East
Figure 29: Support/Opposition to Appleway Section of Couplet Being Extended
East (Q100)
1 00%
II n =393
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
49%
21%
Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly
oppose oppose support support
• Seventy percent of respondents indicated they were strongly or somewhat
supportive of extending the Appleway section of the couple east past University
Road.
• There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic
characteristics and supporUopposition to extending the Appleway section of couplet
east past University.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
Clearwater 40
Research Inc.
35% Oppose Couplet Being Extended East to Evergreen Road
Figure 30: Support/Opposition to Couplet Being Extended East to Evergreen
Road (Q101)
100%
80%
0
■ n =393J
0
34%
40%
20%
0%
Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly
oppose oppose support support
• Although 56% of respondents indicated they were strongly or somewhat supportive
of the couplet being extended east to Evergreen Raod, another 35% were either
strongly or somewhat opposed to this proposition.
Demographics and Extending Couplet East to Evergreen Road
Table 21: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Extendng Couplet
East to Evergreen Road
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE SUPPORT /OPPOSE EXTENDING COUPLET EAST TO
EVERGREEN ROAD
OPPOSE OR NEUTRAL SUPPORT
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
GENDER
Male 37.6% 62.4%
Female 49.3% 50.7%
• Generally speaking, male respondents appear to be more favorably disposed than
females toward the couplet. In this instance male respondents were more likely than
their female counterparts to indicate support for extending the couplet east to
Evergreen Road (Pearson chi square = 5.4; p< .05).
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
Clearwater 41
Research, Inc.
27% Strongly Oppose Development of Light Rail in the Region
Figure 31: Support/Opposition to the Development of Light Rail in the Spokane
Region (Q105)
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
■ n =394 L
27% 25% 23%
Strongty Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly
oppose oppose support support
• There was not overwhelming support for the development of light ral in the Spokane
region among survey respondents. Forty -eight percent respondents said they were
strongly or somewhat supportive of the development of light rail in the region. The
remaining 52% were either opposed to light rail development or neutral toverd the
proposal.
Demographics and Development of Light Rail in Spokane Region
Table 22: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Development of
Light Rail in the Spokane Region
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE SUPPORT /OPPOSE DEVELOPMENT OF LIGHT RAIL IN
THE SPOKANE REGION
STRONGLY
OPPOSE
SOMEWHAT
OPPOSE OR
NEUTRAL
SUPPORT
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
GENDER
Male
Female
EDUCATION LEVEL
High School or less
Some college (1 to 3 years)
4 or more years of college
38.1 %
17.6%
38.4%
23.2%
24.4%
21.7%
27.8%
21.2%
30.4%
22.4%
40.2%
54.6%
40.4%
46.4%
53.2%
• Female respondents were more likely than male respondents to support the
development of light rail in the Spokane region (Pearson chi square = 20.9; p<
.001).
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
M Clearwater 42
Research, Inc.
• More highly educated respondents were more likely to support the development of
light rail in the Spokane region than their counterparts with less formal education
(Pearson chi square = 10.5; p< .05).
Document
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
01 Clearwater 43
Research, -Inc.
Parks and Recreation
This segment of the analysis focuses on the quality of parks and recreational facilities in
Spokane Valley as well as on the priority respondents place on building more parks and
recreational facilities.
80% Gave Positive Ratings of the Quality of Parks in Spokane Valley
Figure 32: Quality of Parks in Spokane Valley (Q155)
■ Eighty percent of respondents reported that the quality of parks in Spokane Valley
was either good, very good, or excellent. While this finding is very positive, 20% of
respondents said the quality of parks was only fair or poor indicating room for
improving perceptions of Spokane Valley parks among some residents.
Demographics and Quality of Spokane Valley Parks
Table 23: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristicsand Quality of Spokane
Valley Parks
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE QUALITY OF PARKS
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
AGE
18 to 44
45 to 59
60 or older
INCOME
Less than $35,000
$35,000 to Tess than $75,000
$75,000 or more
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
POOR OR FAIR GOOD VERY GOOD OR
EXCELLENT
23.8%
20.6%
9.3%
12.1%
25.2%
22.0%
37.8%
34.3%
25.3%
39.4%
27.3%
39.6%
38.3%
45.1%
65.3%
48.4%
47.6%
38.5%
IIII Clearwater 44
Research, Inc.
Research, Inc.
• Respondents 60 years of age and older were substantially more likely than their
younger counterparts to rate the quality of pails in Spokane Valley as very good or
excellent (Pearson chi square = 16.7; p< .01).
• Respondents at the two lower income levels were more likely than those in the
highest income category to rate the quality of parks in Spokane Valley as very good
or excellent (Pearson chi square = 9.9; p< .05).
Two - Thirds Have a Park In or Close to Their Neighborhood
Figure 33: Park In or Close to Neighborhood (Q160)
• Many respondents (66 %) reported there was a park either in, or close to, their
neighborhood.
Demographics and Park In or Close to Neighborhood
Table 24: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Having a Park in or
Close to Neighborhood
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
EDUCATION LEVEL
High School or less
Some college (1 to 3 years)
4 or more years of college
26.5%
28.4%
43.1%
73.5%
71.6%
56.9%
• Respondents at the highest education level (4 or more years of college) were less
likely than those with less formal education to indicate they have a park in or close to
their neighborhood (Pearson chi square = 10.1; p< .01).
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
PARK IN OR CLOSE TO NEIGHBORHOOD
NO
YES
01 Clearwater 45
Research, Inc.
14% Believe Building More Parks is a High Priority
Figure 34: Priority Level: Builcbng More Parks (Q165)
Low priority Medium priority High priority
• The majority of respondents (86 %) indicated building more parks should be a low or
medium priority for City officials.
Demographics and Priority of Building More Parks
Table 25: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Building
More Parks
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project Final Report (gs)
PRIORITY OF BUILDING MORE PARKS
LOW
PRIORITY
MEDIUM
PRIORITY
HIGH
PRIORITY
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
EDUCATION LEVEL
High school or less
Some college (1 to 3 years)
4 or more years of college
43.0%
50.4%
37.3%
49.0%
38.8%
41.8%
8.0%
10.8%
20.9%
• Not unexpected, given their indication that there were not parks in or close to their
neighborhoods (Q160— Table 24), respondents in highest education category were
more likely than those with less formal education to indicate building more parks
should be a high priority for Spokane Valley officials (Pearson chi square = 13.1; p<
.05).
Illi Clearwater 46
Research., Inc.
Park In or Close to Neighborhood by Priority of Building More Parks
Table 26: Park In or Close to Neighborhood BY Priority of Building More Parks
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE PRIORITY OF BUILDING MORE PARKS
LOW MEDIUM HIGH
PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY
STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT
PARK IN OR CLOSE TO
NEIGHBORHOOD
No
Yes
35.9%
46.6%
54.0% 14.1%
39.0% 14.5%
• Although the relationship between having a park in or close to your neighborhood
and priority of building more parks was not statistically significant, it did expose a
pattern the would logically be expected.
• Respondents who already have a park in close proximity to their neighborhood were
more likely to indicate building more parks should be a low priority. Conversely,
respondents who said they did not have a park close to their neighborhood were
more likely to indicate building more parks should be a medium priority for City
officials.
27% Rated Quality of Recreational Facilities in Spokane Valley Very Good
or Excellent
Figure 35: Quality of Recreational Facilities in Spokane %Iley (Q170)
II n =371 1
44%
24% 21 %
5% 6 %
0
• Many respondents (44 %) said recreational facilities in Spokane Valley were "good ".
However, a fairly substantial percentage of respondents (29 %) said the quality of
recreational facilities was just fair or poor, highlighting a potential needto improve
actual recreational facilities and/or to improve perceptions of recreational facilities.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
MI Clearwater
Research, Inc.
47
Demographics and Quality of Spokane Valley Recreational Facilities
Table 27: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Qudity of Spokane
Valley Recreational Facilities
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE QUALITY OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES
POOR OR FAIR GOOD VERY GOOD OR
EXCELLENT
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
AGE
18 to 44
45 to 59
60 or older
24.4%
39.6%
25.0%
45.1%
34.7%
52.6%
30.6%
25.7%
22.4%
• Respondents between the ages of 45 and 59 were, comparatively, the harshest
critics of Spokane Valley recreational facilities. Forty percent of respondents in this
age group rated the quality of recreational facilities as fair or pocr (Pearson chi
square = 10.7; p < .05).
59% Have Recreational Facilities In or Close to Their Neighborhood
Figure 36: Recreational Facilities In or Close to Neighborhood (Q175)
• Recreational facility coverage appears to be relaively strong in Spokane Valley.
Nearly 6 in 10 respondents (59 %) reported there were recreational facilities either in,
or close to, their neighborhood.
• There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic
characteristics and having recreational facilities in or close to your neighborhood.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
01 Clearwater 48
Research., Inc.
Few Believe Building More Recreational Facilities is a High Priority
Figure 37: Priority Level: Building More Recreational Facilities (Q180)
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
■ n =396
45%
43%
Low priority Medium priority High priority
• Twelve percent of respondents indicated that building more recreational facilities
should be a high priority for City officials. The remaining 88% of respondents were
nearly evenly split between believing building more recreational facilities was a low
priority (45 %) or a medium priority (43 %).
Demographics and Priority of Building More Recreational Facilities
Table 28: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Priority of Building
More Recreational Facilities
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE PRIORITY OF BUILDING MORE RECREATIONAL
FACILITIES
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
GENDER
Male
Female
LOW MEDIUM HIGH
PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY
52.1%
38.5%
38.9% 8.9%
47.3% 14.1%
• Female respondents were more inclined than their male peers to indicate the
building of recreational facilities should be a medium or high priority for Spokane
Valley officials (Pearson chi square = 7.9; p< .05). .
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
Clearwater 49
Research, Inc.
Recreational Facilities In or Close to Neighborhood by Priority of Building
More Recreational Facilities
Table 29: Recreational Facilities In or Close to Neighborhood BY Priority of
Bu More Recreational Facilities
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE PRIORITY OF BUILDING MORE RECREATIONAL
FACILITIES
LOW MEDIUM HIGH
PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY
STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT
RECREATIONAL FACILITIES IN OR
CLOSE TO NEIGHBORHOOD
No
Yes
39.0%
50.2%
46.8% 14.3%
40.0% 9.8%
• Very similar to the pattern of responses for parks, the relationship between having
recreational facilities in or close to your neighborhood and priority of building more
recreational facilities while not statistically significant still revealed an expected
pattern.
• Not surprisingly, respondents who resided close to recreational facilities were more
likely to indicate building more recreational facilities should be a low priority.
However, respondents who did not live close to recreational facilities were
comparatively more inclined to indicate building more recreational facilities should be
a medium or high priority for City officials.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
Clearwater 50
Research., Inc.
Personal Safety
Two questions about perceived safety of Spokane Valley and Spokane Valley
neighborhoods are the focus on this final component of the analysis,
Vast Majority Agree that Spokane Valley is a Safe Place to Live
Figure 38: Level of Agreement that Spokane Valley is a Safe Place to Live (Q145)
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
6%
Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly
disagree disagree agree agree
2% 5%
• Seven percent of respondents disagreed when asked if they felt Spokane Valley was
a safe place to live. Indeed, the overwhelming majority of respondents either
strongly or somewhat agreed that Spokane Valley is a safe place to live.
• There were no statistically significant relationships between demographic
characteristics and level of agreement that Spokane Valley is a safe place to live.
92% Agree Their Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live
Figure 39: Level of Agreement that Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live (Q150)
Strongly Somewhat Neutral Somewhat Strongly
disagree disagree agree agree
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
pli Clearwater 51
Research, Inc.
• These findings point to Spokane Valley residents having a strong sense of being
safe within their neighborhoods as nearly all respondents (92 %) either strongly or
somewhat agreed that their neighborhood was a safe place to live.
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
MI Clearwater 52
Research Inc.
Demographics and Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live
Table 30: Linkages Between Demographic Characteristics and Level of
Agreement that Neighborhood is a Safe Place to Live
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE NEIGHBORHOOD IS A SAFE PLACE TO LIVE
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT
INCOME
Less than $35,000 52.8%
$35,000 to Tess than $75,000 53.3%
575,000 or more 29.9%
STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT
GENDER
Male 51.0%
Female 41.6%
Document:
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: Final Report (gs)
ALL BUT STRONGLY STRONGLY AGREE
AGREE
47.2%
46.7%
70.1%
49.0%
58.4%
• Respondents making more than $75,000 per year were substantially more likely
than their counterparts with smaller annual incomes to stronglyagree that their
neighborhood is a safe place to live (Pearson chi square = 15.3; p< .001).
• Although the relationship between gender and level of agreement that your
neighborhood is a safe place to live was not statistically significant, it is interesing to
note that female respondents appeared to feel slightly more secure regarding the
safety of their neighborhoods than did male respondents.
MI Clearwater 53
Research., Inc.
Appendix A: Community Preference Survey
INTROQ — EVERYONE GETS
Hello, my name is <INTERVIEWER NAME> and I'm calling on behalf of the City of Spokane Valley.
We are gathering information about people's attitudes toward Spokane Valley in order to guide future
decisions and plans for the area. This is an important research project, and we would appreciate your
participation.
Let me just check to be sure I have dialed the right number. Did I reach <PHONE NUMBER >?
01. NO ANSWER
02. BUSY
03. ANSWERING MACHINE
04. TECH BARRIER
06. FAX/ MODEM
10. COMMUNICATION BARRIER
14. FAST BUSY/ NOISE/ DEAD AIR
ANSMACH — GET IF INTROQ = 03
15. LANGUAGE BARRIER
23. DISCONNECTED/ NONWORKING
25. NOT A PRIVATE RESIDENCE
26. NO ADULTS AT THIS NUMBER
27. UNAVAIL. DUR. INT. PER.
34. FINAL REF.NON -SEL /HANGUP
41. YES (SKIP ADLTRESP)
42. NO (SKIP WRONGNUM)
MESSAGE LEFT ON FIRST ENCOUNTER WITH ANSWERING MACHINE
Hi, my name is <INTERVIEWER NAME >, and I'm calling about a research study being conducted by
Clearwater Research. I'll call back soon and tell you a little more about the study. Thank you very
much. Good -bye.
MESSAGE LEFT ON SECOND ENCOUNTER WITH ANSWERING MACHINE
Hello, my name is <INTERVIEWER NAME >, calling from Clearwater Research on behalf of the City
of Spokane Valley. I'm not selling anything. We are conducting an important research project that will
be used to guide future plans for Spokane Valley. We would like to include every household that we
call because it is very important to the success of the project.
We will try back soon. Or if you would like to schedule a convenient time to speak with us, please call
us toll -free at 1 -800- 727 -5016 and select option '1". When you call, please mention that your survey
ID number is <CATI STUDY NUMBER > - <CATI RECORD NUMBER >.
We look forward to talking with you. Thank you very much. Goodbye.
1. LEFT FIRST MESSAGE
2. LEFT SECOND MESSAGE
3. ALREADY LEFT TWO MESSAGES
4. MACHINE FULL / NOT WORKING
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
Ik1 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
54
ADLTRESP — GET IF INTROQ = 41
May I please speak with an adult who is age 18 or older?
1. YES - SPEAKING WITH ADULT
2. YES - ADULT IS COMING TO THE PHONE
3.NO
AVAIL — GET IF ADLTRESP = 3
When would be the best time to reach an adult age 18 or older?
1. SET CALLBACK TIME
7. I DO NOT KNOW / 1 DO NOT UNDERSTAND (SET CALL BACK 48 HRS)
(NOTE: IF RESPONDENT DOES NOT KNOW OR DECLINES TO SAY WHEN, SET CALL BACK
FOR 48 HOURS)
PRIVRES — EVERYONE GETS
[PROGRAMMING NOTE: only show INTRO if ADLTRESP = 2]
Hello, my name is <INTERVIEWER NAME> and I'm calling on behalf of the City of Spokane Valley.
We are gathering information about people's attitudes toward Spokane Valley in order to guide future
decisions and plans for the area. This is an important research project, and we would appreciate your
participation.
Is this a private residence?
1. YES
2. NO
NONRES — ONLY GET IF PRIVRES = 2
Thank you very much, but we are only interviewing private residences. (DISP 25)
WRONGNUM — ONLY GET IF INTROQ = 42
Thank you very much. I seem to have dialed the wrong number. It's possible that your number may
be called at a later time. (DISP 23 after 2 instance)
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
(GO TO LOCATE1)
(GO TO NONRES)
(GO TO PRIVRES)
(GO TO PRIVRES)
(GO TO AVAIL)
01 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
55
LOCATEI — EVERYONE GETS
What is your home zip code?
(home zip code)
ADULTS
88888 DON'T HAVE AN ADDRESS (GO TO NONRES)
99999 DON'T KNOW /REFUSED (GO TO NONRES)
CONTINUE IF ZIP = 99212, 99223, 99206, 99016, 99037, 99216. OTHER ZIPS = NONRES.
NONRES — ONLY GET IF LOCATE 1 = 88888 OR 99999 OR LOCATE2 = 2
I'm sorry, but for this study for are only interviewing residences within specific areas. Thank you very
much for your time. (DISP 24)
We need to randomly select one adult who lives in your household to be interviewed. I would like to
speak to the adult who lives in this household who has had the most recent birthday. Would that be
you?
1. YES (GO TO SECTION 1)
2. NO (GO TO GETADULT)
GETADULT – ONLY GET IF ADULTS = 1
May I speak with [HIM OR HER]?
1. YES, ADULT COMING TO THE PHONE
2. NO, GO TO THE NEXT SCREEN, PRESS CTRL END AND SCHEDULE A CALL-
BACK
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
01 Clearwater
Research, Inc
56
YOURTHEI - ONLY GET IF GETADULT = 1
Hello, my name is <INTERVIEWER NAME> and I'm calling on behalf of the City of Spokane Valley.
We are gathering information about people's attitudes toward Spokane Valley in order to guide future
decisions and plans for the area. Taking part in this survey is up to you, and you don't have to answer
any question you don't want to.
The interview takes about 10 minutes, but it could be a few minutes shorter or longer depending on
your answers.
Are you willing to help us with this survey?
Section 1
1. PERSON INTERESTED (CONTINUE)
2. TERMINATE (DISP 12)
First I'd like to ask you some questions about your current living and work situation.
Q005 — EVERYONE GETS
Do you currently own, rent, or lease your place of residence?
1. OWN
2. RENT OR LEASE
3. LIVE AT HOME WITH PARENTS
4. OTHER (SPECIFY)
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q010 — EVERYONE GETS
In what type of housing unit do you currently live? Do you live in a ...
1. Single family detached home
2. Duplex
3. Apartment
4. Townhouse or condominium; or
5. Manufactured home
6. OTHER (SPECIFY)
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project CCDC Urban Housing
01 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
57
Q015 — EVERYONE GETS
Are you currently:
11. Employed for wages
12. Self- employed
13. Out of work for more than 1 year
14. Out of work for Tess than 1 year
15. Homemaker
16. Student
17. Retired
18. Unable to work
77. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
99. REFUSED
(IF Q015 > 12, SKIP TO SECTION 2)
Q020 — ONLY GET IF Q015 < 13
How long does it take you to get from home to your workplace?
1. Less than 15 minutes
2. Between 15 and 30 minutes
3. Between 30 minutes to an hour
4. More than an hour
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q025 — ONLY GET IF Q015 < 13
How do you usually get to work?
1. PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION / BUS
2. CAR / DRIVE
3. WALK
4. CAR OR VAN POOL
5. BICYCLE
6. OTHER (SPECIFY)
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
M Cleamater
Research, Inc
SECTION 2
am now going to ask you a set of questions about Spokane Valley.
Q026 — EVERYRON GETS
In general terms, do you think Spokane Valley is headed in the right direction?
1. YES
2.NO
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q027 — EVERYONE GETS
In your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley today?
INTERVIEWER: CODE OPEN -ENDED RESPONSE. IF MORE THAN ONE, PROBE FOR ONE
CATEGORY. IF ANSWER CATEGORY IS NOT ON LIST OR RESPONDENT WILL NOT CHOOSE
ONE, USE "OTHER' AND SPECIFY CATEGORY /CATEGORIES.
1. EDUCATION (LEVEL OF FUNDING)
2. JOBS (UNEMPLOYMENT)
3. ECONOMY (OVERALL ECONOMIC GROWTH)
4. ENVIRONMENT (DEGRADATION /AQUIFER PROTECTION)
5. OTHER (SPECIFY)
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project CCDC Urban Housing
01 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
59
Q030 — EVERYONE GETS
PUBLIC SERVIICES
How would you rate the following services provided by the City of Spokane Valley?
Would you say police services are:
1. Excellent
2. Very good
3. Good
4. Fair, or
5. Poor
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q031 — ONLY GET IF Q030 = 4 OR 5
Would you be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improved police services in Spokane
Valley?
1. YES
2.NO
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q035 — EVERYONE GETS
Would you say fire protection services are:
1. Excellent
2. Very good
3. Good
4. Fair, or
5. Poor
7. DON'T KNOW /NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
Clearwater
Research, Inc.
Q036 — ONLY GET IF Q035 = 4 OR 5
Would you be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improved fire protection services in
Spokane Valley?
1. YES
2.NO
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q040 — EVERYONE GETS
Would you say library services are:
1. Excellent
2. Very good
3. Good
4. Fair, or
5. Poor
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q041 — ONLY GET IF Q040 = 4 OR 5
Would you be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have improved library services in Spokane
Valley?
1. YES
2. NO
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
M Clearwater
Research, Inc.
Q045 — EVERYONE GETS
Would you say street maintenance is:
1. Excellent
2. Very good
3. Good
4. Fair, or
5. Poor
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q046 — ONLY GET IF Q045 = 4 OR 5
Would you be willing to pay additional taxes in order to have street maintenance in Spokane Valley
improved?
1. YES
2.NO
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q047 — EVERYONE GETS
In past year, have you had any interaction with the City of Spokane Valley's permit center?
1. YES
2.NO
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
p el Clearwater
Research, Inc.
Q048 — ONLY GET IF Q047 = 1
How would you rate your level of satisfaction with the services you received from the City's permit
center? Would you say you were...
1. Very satisfied
2. Somewhat satisfied
3. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
4. Somewhat dissatisfied
5. Very dissatisfied
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q050 — EVERYONE GETS
CITY CENTER
How important to the future of Spokane Valley is having an area of the City that is recognized as a
"city center" or "downtown "? Would you say....
1. Very important
2. Somewhat important
3. Neither important nor unimportant
4. Somewhat unimportant
5. Very unimportant
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q055 — GET IF Q050 = 1 OR 2
How supportive would you be of Spokane Valley officials strategically spending public money to
promote the creation of a city center that would have a mix of restaurants, retail, and public buildings
like city hall? Would you say you...
1. Strongly support
2. Somewhat support
3. Neither support nor oppose
4. Somewhat oppose
5. Strongly oppose
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
pli Clearwater
Research, Inc.
63
Q060 — GET IF. Q050 = 1 OR 2
Which of the following areas of Spokane Valley would be the most ideal location for a city center?
1. University City area
2. Mirabeau Point area (MIRABEAU = MIRA — BOO)
3. Pines and Sprague
4. Evergreen and Sprague
5. OTHER (SPECIFY)
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q065 — EVERYONE GETS
CITY IDENTITY
In your opinion, does Spokane Valley have an identity or something that makes it unique?
1. YES
2.NO
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q070 — GET IF Q065 =1
How would you describe Spokane Valley's identity or uniqueness?
ENTER RESPONSE
Q075 — EVERYONE GETS
How important to the future of Spokane Valley is having a "community identity? Would you say....
1. Very important
2. Somewhat important
3. Neither important nor unimportant
4. Somewhat unimportant
5. Very unimportant
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
1111 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
Q080 — GET IF Q075 = 1 OR 2
Would development of a "community identity" best be accomplished through physical changes or
through social changes. Examples of physical changes include things like the development of a city
center or the building of gateways at the major points of entry into the city. An example of a social
change would be more community events like Valleyfest.
1. PHYSICAL CHANGES
2. SOCIAL CHANGES
3. PHYSICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES EQUALLY IMPORTANT
7. DONT KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q090 — EVERYONE GETS
TRANSPORTATION (COUPLET AND LIGHT RAIL)
Do you agree or disagree that the Sprague /Appleway couplet has been a useful improvement to the
overall roadway system in Spokane valley? Would you say you...
1. Strongly agree
2. Somewhat agree
3. Neither agree nor disagree
4. Somewhat disagree
5. Strongly disagree
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
IF NECESSARY: THE SPRAGUE /APPLEWAY COUPLET CONSISTS OF TWO PARALLEL ONE -
WAY STREETS, SPRAGUE AVENUE WEST BOUND AND APPLEWAY BOULEVARD EAST
BOUND. IT IS APPROXIMATELY 2 1/2 MILES LONG AND IS LOCATED AT THE WEST END OF
THE CITY. THE SEPARATION BETWEEN SPRAGUE AND APPLEWAY VARIES BETWEEN ONE
AND TWO BLOCKS. PRIOR TO THE COUPLET, THE MAIN THOROUGHFARE THROUGH
SPOKANE VALLEY WAS SPRAGUE AVENUE.
Q095 — EVERYONE GETS
Would you like to see Sprague Avenue, from University Road to Interstate 90, returned to two -way
traffic?
1. YES
2.NO
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
01 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
65
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q100 — EVERYONE GETS
How supportive would you be of the Appleway section of the couplet being extended east past
University Road? Would you say you...
1. Strongly support
2. Somewhat support
3. Neither support nor oppose
4. Somewhat oppose
5. Strongly oppose
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q101— EVERYONE GETS
How supportive would you be of the couplet being extended east to Evergreen Road ?. This would
result in Sprague changing to a one way east of University. Would you say you...
1. Strongly support
2. Somewhat support
3. Neither support nor oppose
4. Somewhat oppose
5. Strongly oppose
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
011 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
Q105 — EVERYONE GETS
The Spokane Transit Authority is currently studying the viability of building a light rail system from
downtown Spokane to University City in Spokane Valley.
Recognizing that taxpayers in the Spokane region would likely pay some portion of the cost of the
system, how supportive would you be of the development of Tight rail in the region? Would you say
you...
AESTHETICS
1. Strongly support
2. Somewhat support
3. Neither support nor oppose
4. Somewhat oppose
5. Strongly oppose
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q120 — EVERYONE GETS
Now think about the general character of the development
such as Sprague Avenue, Pines Road, and Sullivan Road.
What is your level of satisfaction with the typical pattern of
Would you say you are....
1. Very satisfied
2. Somewhat satisfied
3. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
4. Somewhat dissatisfied
5. Very dissatisfied
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q125 — EVERYONE GETS
Next I will be asking your opinion about options for changing the appearance of both existing and new
development in Spokane Valley. Recognizing that taxpayers in Spokane Valley would likely pay
some portion of the cost, would you consider each of the following a high, medium, or low priority for
city officials.
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
RANDOMIZE Q125 THRU Q135
along the major streets of Spokane Valley,
development along the major streets?
M Clearwater
Research, Inc.
67
Do you consider adding street trees and landscaping to major streets in Spokane Valley a high,
medium, or low priority for city officials.
1. HIGH PRIORITY
2. MEDIUM PRIORITY
3. LOW PRIORITY
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q130 — EVERYONE GETS RANDOMIZE Q125 THRU Q135
Do you consider making the major streets friendly for pedestrians and bicyclists by adding
things like sidewalks, benches, and bike paths a high, medium, or low priority for city officials.
1. HIGH PRIORITY
2. MEDIUM PRIORITY
3. LOW PRIORITY
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
0135 — EVERYONE GETS RANDOMIZE Q125 THRU Q135
Do you consider stronger controls on signs and billboards in Spokane Valley a high, medium, or
low priority for city officials.
1. HIGH PRIORITY
2. MEDIUM PRIORITY
3. LOW PRIORITY
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q136 — EVERYONE GETS
Do you live in an area that was recently part of the Spokane Valley Sewer Project?
1. YES
2.NO
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project CCDC Urban Housing
M Clearwater
Research, Inc
68
IF NECESSARY: THE MAJOR GOAL OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY SEWER PROJECT IS TO
PROTECT THE AQUIFER FROM WHICH SPOKANE VALLEY GETS ITS DRINKING WATER. THE
PROJECT INVOLVES INSTALLING NEW SEWER LINES BENEATH STREETS.
Q137 —ONLY GET IFQ136 =1
Once the Sewer Project was completed in your area, how satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the
reconstructed streets? Were you...
1. Very satisfied
2. Somewhat satisfied
3. Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
4. Somewhat dissatisfied
5. Very dissatisfied
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q140 — EVERYONE GETS
NEIGHBORHOOD / COMMUNITY CENTERS
For the next question, please think of small scale commercial centers as areas that might have a
restaurant, a day care center, and a small market or convenience store clustered together. Examples
of these types of small commercial centers in Spokane Valley would be the area of 32 " and SR27
and the area of University and 16 Avenue.
How supportive would you be of the development of small scale commercial centers closer to
residential neighborhoods in Spokane Valley? Would you say you would...
1. Strongly support
2. Somewhat support
3. Neither support nor oppose
4. Somewhat oppose
5. Strongly oppose
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
M Clearwater
Research, Inc.
69
Q145 — EVERYONE GETS
PERSONAL SAFETY
Do you agree or disagree that Spokane Valley is a safe place to live. Would you say you....
1. Strongly agree
2. Somewhat agree
3. Neither agree nor disagree
4. Somewhat disagree
5. Strongly disagree
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q150 — EVERYONE GETS
Do you agree or disagree that your neighborhood is a safe place to live. Would you say you....
1. Strongly agree
2. Somewhat agree
3. Neither agree nor disagree
4. Somewhat disagree
5. Strongly disagree
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q155 — EVERYONE GETS
PARKS AND RECREATION
Generally speaking, how would you rate the quality of parks in Spokane Valley? Would you say they
are....
1. Excellent
2. Very good
3. Good
4. Fair, or
5. Poor
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
MI Clearwater
Research, Inc.
70
Q160 — EVERYONE GETS
Is there a park in or close to your neighborhood?
1. YES
2. NO
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q165 — EVERYONE GETS
Recognizing that taxpayers in Spokane Valley would likely pay some portion of the cost, do you
consider building more parks in the area a high, medium, or low priority for city officials?
1. HIGH PRIORITY
2. MEDIUM PRIORITY
3. LOW PRIORITY
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q170 — EVERYONE GETS
Generally speaking, how would you rate the quality of recreational facilities such as swimming pools,
community centers, senior centers, and exercise opportunities in Spokane Valley? Would you say
recreational facilities are....
1. Excellent
2. Very good
3. Good
4. Fair, or
5. Poor
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
01 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
71
Q175 — EVERYONE GETS
Are there recreational facilities in or close to your neighborhood?
1. YES
2.NO
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q180 — EVERYONE GETS
Recognizing that taxpayers in Spokane Valley would likely pay some portion of the cost, do you
consider building more recreational facilities in the area a high, medium, or low priority for city
officials?
1. HIGH PRIORITY
2. MEDIUM PRIORITY
3. LOW PRIORITY
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
SECTION 3 Demographics
We're almost done now. I just have a few background questions that will be used for statistical
purposes only.
Q185 — EVERYONE GETS
What is your age?
Enter age
777. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
999. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
M Clearwater
Research, Inc
Q190 — ONLY GET IF Q185 = 777 OR 999
I understand this is a sensitive question. Would you be willing to tell me which of the following
categories best describes your age range?
[READ CHOICES]
1. Under 30
2. 30 to 44
3. 45 to 64
4. 65 or older
7. DON'T KNOW /NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q195 — EVERYONE GETS
What is the highest grade or year of school you completed?
[INTERVEWER NOTE: READ ONLY IF NECESSARY]
1. Never attended school or only attended kindergarten
2. Grades 1 through 8 (elementary)
3. Grades 9 through 11 (some high school)
4. Grade 12 or GED (high school graduate)
5. College 1 year to 3 years (some college or technical school)
6. College 4 years or more (college graduate)
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Q200 — EVERYONE GETS
INTERVIEWER: CODE SEX OF RESPONDENT. IF NECESSARY, ASK:
This may sound silly but I have to ask for research purposes: are you male or female?
1. MALE
2. FEMALE
7. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
M Clearwater
Research, Inc
Q205
How many people, including yourself, live in your household?
Q210
(NUMBER OF PEOPLE)
How many adults, including yourself, live in your household?
Q215 — EVERYONE GETS
(NUMBER OF PEOPLE)
Is your annual household income from all sources Tess than $25,000?
[INTERVIEWER NOTE: IF RESPONDENT REFUSES AT ANY INCOME LEVEL, CODE REFUSED]
04 Less than $25,000 If "no," ask 05; if "yes," ask 03
03 Less than $20,000 If "no," code 04; if "yes," ask 02
02 Less than $15,000 If "no," code 03; if "yes," ask 01
01 Less than $10,000 If "no," code 02
05 Less than $35,000 If "no," ask 06
06 Less than $50,000 If "no," ask 07
07 Less than $75,000 If "no," code 08
08 $75,000 or more
77 DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
99 REFUSED
Q220 — EVERYONE GETS
How many months or years have you lived in Spokane Valley?
01 -99 Years 01 -12 Months
Enter YEARS and then MONTHS (YYMM)
7777. DON'T KNOW / NOT SURE
9999. REFUSED
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
M Clearwater
Research, Inc.
74
Q225 — EVERYONE GETS
Not including cell phones or numbers that are only used by a computer or fax machine, how many
telephone numbers ring in your household?
1. 1
2. 2
3. 3
4. 4
5. 5
6. 6 OR MORE
7. DON'T KNOW /NOT SURE
9. REFUSED
GOODBYE
Those are all my questions. Thank you very much for taking the time to participate in this survey.
END CALL AS COMPLETED INTERVIEW
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
011 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
Q005: Do you currently own, rent, or lease your place of residence?
vying
Purchasing
Buying
Living with mother
Rent to own.
House - sitting for grandparents (do not have own residence)
Live with parents
Live with mother
Looking to buy a house
Own trailer, rent the space
0025: How do you usually get to work?
Work at home
haul a tractor- -big truck, 2 ton.
Drive and then fly.
Horne office
I work in my home
Work from home
Work from home.
Work from home.
Bus and car
Work from home.
Sometimes drive, and sometimes ride the bus, I alternate.
Work from home.
from home.
W Work
ork at home.
Appendix B: Open -ended Responses
010: In what type of housing unit do you currently live?
•
Separate homes in one house
Retirement community
House
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
76
Clearwater
Research, Inc.
*27: In your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley
oday?
Codes
10
Description
Centralized government/planning
11
Controlling /managing growth
12
Developing city center /downtown
13
Polices services /safety
14 Taxes /tax base
15 (Traffic /roads
16
frransportation
Crime drugs
17
18
Sewer /sanitation
19
Budget/spending
20
C od e
10
Other
Response
Being a new city determining the plan and putting the plan into practice
10
Central order.
10
City govemment
10
Get away from county influence
Getting everything together to really have a city.
10
10 Getting govemment figured out leadership.
10 Getting the city started like repairs and with the govemment of the city.
10 Govemment
10 Govemment power.
10 !Government, needs to stay small and true to its constituents.
10
Leadership
Organization
10
10
Planning commission
10
Planning in general.
The city needs to be more centralized.
10
10 The city's legal system
10 The managing, the governing of it.
10 Unity
11 Controlling growth
11
Growing too fast
,Growth
11
11 !Growth
11 Growth
11 Growth
11 Growth and development
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
77
01 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
Q27: In your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley
today?
11 iGrowth management
11
Growth management housin. and develo • ment
11
Growth, city planning
11
Growth, the city is growing too fast.
11
Growth.
11
I would like to see university city to begin growing again.
11
Land development
11
Limiting or controlling growth.
11
,Maintaining good school system
11
Manage growth
11
Over development
11
Overcrowding
11
Overpopulation
11
Population, overall growth
hey won't get a good return on city provided services due to sprawl and they are
11
inexperienced
11
Too much growth
11
Urban growth
12
,Central
area
12
City center
12
City center
12
,City
core needs to be developed to promote economic prosperity
12
Creating city atmosphere
12
Development of a city center
12
Downtown, city center.
12
Location of city center
12
Maintaining a viable town center of some kind.
12
Revitalizing the downtown core area- u city.
12
There is no downtown and no structure. I think the name sucks too.
12
They need a downtown.
13
!Adequate protection by police and fire keeping_property taxes down
13
Law enforcement
13
More funding for police, fire, better hospital
13
Not being able to get a hold of the police department.
13
Police
13
Police and fire
13
Police department
13
Police force is a little overzealous.
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
78
111 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
Q27: In
today?
13
your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley
'Police force.
13
Police services
13
Protection, police and fire. Roads
13
Safety
13
Safety in the neighborhoods.
13
Safety of the people.
13
Security
13
Spending too much on the police force.
13
They need to get the police issue dealt with.
An unrealistic estimate of the amount of tax revenue available for spending, it was
14
seriously underestimated.
City income, I don't know why they left Spokane. I see no difference except that
14
taxes will go up.
14
Increase taxes,
Keeping taxes lower and bringing more business into the community to support
14
,employment -- quality jobs
14
More taxes, and misspending.
14
Moved out on their own too soon, no tax base
'Organized because they were worried about being taken over by Spokane city
and because of that it forced them to make a decision to join and now they can't
be annexed and the tax base isn't large enough to support the Toss they took by
14
separating from the county
14
Proper use of tax revenues.
14
,Property
taxes.
14
Tax base.
14
Taxes
14
Taxes
14
!Taxes
14
(Taxes
14
Faxes
14
Taxes
14
ITaxes
14
axes
14
1 axes
14
Faxes
14
Taxes
14
Taxes
14
Faxes
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project CCDC Urban Housing
79
pli Clearwater
Research, Inc.
Q27: In your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley
today?
14 axes for income.
14
'T axes rising
14
Taxes.
14
They promised no new taxes
15
Appleway and Sprague two way
15
(Appleway couplet
15
Appleway /Sprague couplet
15
Better streets
15
Construction, mainly the freeways.
15
Couplet issue, Sprague
15
Extend Appleway
15
I don't want them to remodel the couplets.
15
I think its traffic.
15
Improve street system
15
Overdevelopment of roads.
15
Potholes
15
Road and traffic situation.
15
Road conditions
15
Road construction on i90.
15
Roads
15
Roads
15
Roads
15
Roads
15
Roads
15
Roads .
15
Roads
15
Roads
15
Roads
15
Roads and bridges.
15
Roads and traffic
15
, Roads are terrible and need to be repaired
15
Roads especially the freeway.
15
Roads.
15
Roads.
15
Sprague Appleway couplet
15
Sprague Appleway couplet
15
Sprague avenue couplet.
15
Sprague Avenue.
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
80
011 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
Q27: In your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley
today?
15
Sprague couplet
15
Street direction
15
Streets
15
The couplet
15
The couplet -- streets in general.
[The roads.
15
15
raffic
15
' raffic
15
(Traffic
15
Traffic
15
Traffic
15
Traffic
15
Traffic
15
Traffic
15
raffic and crime
15
raffle and roads
15
raffle congestion
! raffic congestion
15
15
Traffic congestion.
15
Traffic flow.
15
Traffic.
15
Traffic.
16
Adequate public transportation
16
Public transportation
16
Spokane valley not paying taxes for bus systems
16
Trans ortation
16
Transportation.
`Transportation.
16
16
transportation.
16
Transportation - traffic and road development
17
Alcohol and drug abuse, family deterioration.
17
1Crime
17
Crime and drugs
17
Crime and taxes
17
Crime.
17
Drug problem
17
Meth, all the drugs.
18
Product and waste management
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
81
pli Clearwater
Research, Inc.
27: In your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley
oday?
18 !Sanitation
18
Sewage
18
Sewer system
18
Sewer system
18
Waste treatment.
19
A balanced .ositive budget without over taxation.
19
Budget
19
Budget
19
Cost to run the new govemment.
19 'Deficit
Figure out how they are going to provide all the services with less money like they
19
said they would.
Finances, to keep finances on track to avoid having to increase taxes and still
19
accom.lish or meet the .oals the cit sets for itself.
19
Financing the new city.
19
Fiscal responsibility don't spend it if you don't have it
19
Funds
19
Having enough money to provide services without raising taxes.
19
How much it's going to cost, new council and all.
19
How to deal with their financial business.
19
Money issues, financial problems
19
Money, their budget.
19
To get more bang for the buck.
Affordability of retired people. Are they going to be able to afford living in the
20
Spokane Valley?
20
Beautification
20
Coalescing the entire county of Spokane under one government and the side
effect would eliminate all city governments
20 C ontinuation of services prior to corporations, basically are we going to get what
we got before we became a city in concern to property taxes?
20 "Creating its own identity
20
'Cultural diversity.
20
Doesn't think it should be a se•arate entity
20
Empty buildings and how to use them.
20
Establishing its identity as unique from shopping malls
20
Expanding business or bringing business to the area.
20
Filling the vacant buildings.
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
Clearwater
82
Research, Inc. Research, Inc.
Q27: In
today?
0
your opinion what is the single most important issue facing Spokane Valley
Getting the gutters turned correctly on Sprague so that when you are ridng your
bike there you don't fall in and get hurt. They go with the traffic and they are
spaced just enough so your tires go in and there is no other place to ride.
Health care
y 0
0
[Homeless
0
Housing and developing the valley
0
Housing and grandfathering.
0
I just was totally against the incorporation.
0
I think we shouldn't even have Spokane valley
+0
I'd like to see them get a different name.
PO
Image
+0
[Maintenance of assets
20
Make itself known as a city.
0
More information for residents
0
Name
0
Noise from trains
0
Places having junkie cars out front of their place of residence.
0
Playgrounds for the children.
0
Retail
0
Safety at schools
+ 0
School violence
+ 0
Separating Spokane valley from Spokane.
0
Services.
90
!Stupid by leaving Spokane
0
The businesses that are closing.
0
(The fact that it isn't closer to my house
90
The political stand for people's rights here in the valley.
+
They spent too much to build a school. I didn't want the new city in the first place.
[I'm really irritated with the school district.
0
Whether it should exist.
0
Why don't we have a real name? Snowplowing- -mine wasn't plowed at all this
winter.
0
Youth /kids.
0
Zoning
0
Zoning
0
'Zoning
0
Zoning
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project CCDC Urban Housing
83
01 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
Q060: Which of the following areas of Spokane Valley would be the most
ideal location for a city center?
• nywhere
• rgon and Sprague
By 1 -90 and Sullivan
Close to mall there is a park called Mirabeau Park.
Closer to town
Downtown
Downtown Spokane
[think it should be centrally located.
Liberty Lake
Right in the middle
Sprague and University place
ullivan & Sprague
University and Sprague
alley Couplet
here the valley mall is.
Q070: How would you describe Spokane Valley's identity or uniqueness?
IA nice average place to live.
Beauty.
Being separate
By how friendly the people are that live here, and they're housing, the attitude that
people have for other people that come from out of state.
Centennial Trail, and a sense of community.
Centrally located
Clean nice living.
Everything is so close.
For me personally it's Mirabeau Point.
Forced in under the City of Spokane. It came about because of the bickering within the
city.
Friendly
Friendly, open - minded people.
Good
Good.
Great place to live
Has a lot of shopping.
Has about everything you need, as far as products, services, and recreation.
History, it's a conservative community.
Homes etc. are nicer.
I like the Centennial Trail and Dishman Hills Reserve Park.
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
84
pli Clearwater
Research, Inc
Q070: How would you describe Spokane Valley's identity or uniqueness?
I like the parks. They're making the parks look better to enhance the look of Spokane
Valley.
think that the fact that it's new. Also it's pretty with the trees and everything.
think the people and the whole town.
think the valley has a wholesomeness; I see it as being very friendy, neighborly.
I think they improving. They're doing a lot of things to improve.
I wouldn't call it unique, I don't know what you'd call it.
In the valley
It's very quiet, peaceful, maintained and controlled so that you do not have to suffer the
drug use and stuff downtown.
It has a lot of nice stores, and services.
It has a mall.
It has it's own identity but I don't know how strong it would be.
It is a good •lace to raise a famil .
It is a nice area to live in.
It is more suburban -like.
It was originally a city, and should remain so.
It's "the valley"
It's a beautiful spot with good weather and it's productive.
It's a brand new city with a clean slate, not restricted by regulations of the past.
It's a little more rural.
It's a nice area, not in the city.
It's a small -town atmosphere.
It's different, it's Spokane valley instead of Spokane, and the atmosphere is different.
It's flat
It's in the valley
It's in the valley
Its just a neat place to live
It's just a valley. You just have to say you live in a valley and people know where it is.
It's like small town living.
It's not clustered, it's accessible. Beauty, trees everywhere. It's more county living.
It's rural and urban together
It's the fact that it is the valley. I identify t as the valley area between the downtown
Spokane city and the Idaho lakes. Low Crime. Much safer than downtown. With the
mall it has everything you need. Don't like to travel from downtown and I like to stay
for all my needs.
[h ere
Just the fact that they broke away from Spokane.
Larger city with small town attitude
Less traffic, Centennial Trail through the valley.
Location, and it is more in touch with community.
Mirabeau Point
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
85
01 Clearwater
Research, Inc.
0070: How would you describe Spokane Valley's identity or uniqueness?
Mirabeau Park area, the river.
Mirabeau Point and the Centennial Tral and the valley mall.
Mirabeau Point and the valley mall.
Mixed use of agriculture, commercial and residential.
More open, more spread out, more non -city feel
More room for families in living areas.
Not Spokane.
Open space for businesses and homes
Parks and Centennial Trail.
Particularly friendly people
Personal use of Mirabeau Point.
Pretty good of everything.
Quality of life is better.
Reasonable city govemment
Resources we have have not been used as they should.
Rural
Safe, open,
Schools are better more family- oriented.
Schools, housing development mostly new, mall, river
Simple country living.
Small town feel
Spacious suburbia.
Spacious, a little upscale, almost everything you need is here in the valley.
Spaulding's wrecking yard
Spokane valley
Spokane valley is trying to become a better place.
Spokane valley mall makes it unique.
Spokane valley mall.
Still fairly rural
Still living in the country but being in a city
Suburban
The businesses
The Centennial Trail
jT he community and the things you do in the community.
T he community is a good place to raise kids.
he ease and ability to get around
he extension of Spokane. It's not as busy as Spokane.
he location.
he mall.
he mall.
he people.
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
86
10 01Clearwater
Research, Inc
Q070: How would you describe Spokane Valley's identity or uniqueness?
he river .
he serenity of it the neighborhood concept is stronger there than other places.
he valley
he valley mall
he valley mall.
he views and prettiness of some of the areas of Spokane valley - -not real congested
and a lot of trees
hey don't want to be Spokane.
hey have lots of churches and a nice mall.
hey should keep the name and not change it.
ery pleasant and helpful to deal with, easier to deal with than Spokane.
ery polite, willing to help, but the work sucks
ery secure and safe then most areas
e are in the outer areas of the county not right downtown.
e have all walks, rural, city, and no reasons to leave the valley.
e're new, we're growing, and we're getting better.
hen they were first coming out with it- something caught my eye in the newspaper
meth [chef valley. It was talking about all the meth amphetamines that they were
manufacturing, it's not a positive thing, it definitely is a big_problem.
ou can be in the country and then just a few minutes away from better things
ou don't have to go anywhere else. Everything I need is right here.
ou're close to nature and hiking trails and stuff.
Questionnaire: Final Report
Saved: April 28, 2004
Project: CCDC Urban Housing
87
MI Clearwater
Research, Inc.
Spo'kan�
Memorandum
To: Dave Mercier, City Manager; City Council
From: Mike Jackson, Parks and Recreation Director 431
CC: Nina Regor Deputy City Manager
Date: 4/22/04
Re: CenterPlace Update
At the May 4 Council meeting, staff will provide an update to City Council on the CenterPlace
project. General topics include:
• Construction progress
• Possibility of finishing second floor of conference wing
• College lease
• Locating Parks and Recreation at CenterPlace
• Reservation/scheduling
• Senior Center Ad Hoc committee
11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206
509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall@spokanevalley.org
4 _
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: May 4, 2004 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business LI new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information X admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Case law update on adult entertainment hours of operation issue
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: First Amendment of United States Constitution; Spokane Valley
Ordinance 03 -036; Spokane Valley Ordinance 03 -097
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of adult entertainment regulations from
Spokane County on March 31, 2003; adoption of revised regulations relating to adult retail
facilities on December 6, 2003;
BACKGROUND: Upon adoption of Ordinance 03 -097, the Council instructed staff to provide
information on what issues would be at play in the event the Council wanted to consider
implementing a requirement for adult retail facilities to be closed at certain times of the day. On
March 2, 2004, staff introduced numerous documents to the Council relating to adverse
secondary impacts of adult retail and live entertainment facilities. Members of the Council are in
the process of reviewing those materials.
Part of any consideration of this type of action is to know and understand what the applicable
appellate courts have ruled on this matter. Tonight, I will brief you on several cases.
OPTIONS:
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None at this time.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None at this time.
STAFF CONTACT: Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS: None
Meeting Date: May 4, 2004 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply:
OPTIONS: Approve or Reject Agreement
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
STAFF CONTACT: Steve Worley and Neil Kersten
ATTACHMENTS Local Agency Agreement and Project Prospectus
[XI new business ❑ public hearing
❑ consent ❑ old business
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
Local Agency Agreement with WSDOT for Barker Road Bridge
AGENDA ITEM TITLE:
Replacement
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Approval of Six Year Transportation Improvement
Plan, which includes the Barker Road Bridge project.
BACKGROUND: The existing Barker Bridge was built in 1952 and is in need of replacement.
The Local Agency Agreement provides that the City, as lead agency, will commission the design
work (through a Type, Size and Location Study), the right of way acquisition and provide for
project construction. The City's work will be under the guidance and support of the WSDOT
Highway and Local Programs Office. The estimated project cost and funding is set forth in the
agreement with 100% of project funds coming from a Federal grant. The proposed Bridge will
be 54 feet wide with 4 travel lanes, bicycle lanes and sidewalks. The existing Bridge will be
removed. On the southeast end of the Bridge a parking area for the Centennial Trail will likely
be relocated as determined in the design phase.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve Agreement and authorize City Manager to
sign the Agreement.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Previously budgeted local match for this project ($1.6 million
over a three- to four -year period) will be saved since the project is now 100% funded by a
Federal Bridge Replacement grant.
s c i1 sp
••
.■OValley
Memorandum
To: Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
Thru: Neil Kersten, Public Works Director
From: Steve M. Worley, Senior Engineer (CIP)
CC:
Date: April 13, 2004
Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks.
11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206
509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org
Re: Barker Road Bridge Project — Local Agency Agreement wl WSDOT
Attached are a standard Local Agency Agreement between the City of Spokane Valley and the
Washington State Department of Transportation ( WSDOT) and a Local Agency Federal Aid
Project Prospectus for the Barker Road Bridge Project. The agreement and prospectus both
needs to be signed by the Mayor, or a designee.
Upon signing this agreement the city agrees to the provisions described in the standard
agreement form and allows the city to get reimbursed with federal funds for costs associated with
the Barker Road Bridge project. We cannot proceed with the project until this agreement and
prospectus is returned to WSDOT, Highway and Local Programs Office.
Could you please prepare a resolution for Council that accepts the applicable provisions set forth
in the standard agreement and authorizes the Mayor, or a designee, to sign the application and
prospectus?
Once this is complete, I will forward the original signed documents to WSDOT for further
processing and approval on their end.
� Washington State
�// Department of Transportation
Local Agency Federal Aid
Project Prospectus
DOT Form 140.101 i:F
Revised 12/2002
Page 1 of 3
■ Supersedes Previous Editions •
Prefix
Route
( )
Federal Aid
Project Number
F3RM.
4123
Date
3020004
Local Agency
Project Number
001
t WSDOT \
` Use Only/
Federal Employer
Tax ID Number
71 -0� 14170
Agency
City of Spokane Valley
Federal Program Title
g 20.205 • 20.209 • Other
ProjectTitte
Barker Road over Spokane River
Start Latitude N47.41.00
Start Longitude W117.09.0
End Latitude N
End Longitude W
Project Termini From
MP 3.75 at south side of Spokane River
To
MP 3.84 at north side of Spokane River
From: To:
MP 3.75 MP 3.84
Length of Project
0.1 miles
Award Type
►_I Local • Local Forces • State • Railroad
Federal Agency
►5 FHWA • Others
City Number
1223
County Number
32
County Name
Spokane
WSDOT Region
EAST
Congressional District
5
Legislative Districts
4
Urban Area Number
2
TMA / MPO / RTPO
SRTC
Phase
Total
Estimated Cost
(Nearest Hundred Dollar)
Local Agency
Funding
(Nearest Hundred Dollar)
Federal Funds
(Nearest Hundred Dollar)
Phase Start
Date
Month Year
P.E.
$697
SO
$697,200
5/2004
R/W
$45,000
SO
S45,000
1/2005
Const.
$7,350,500
$0
$7,350,500
6/2007
Total
$8,092,700
$0
$8,092,700
Description of Existing Facility (Existing Design and Present Condition)
Roadway Width
24.3
Number of Lanes
2
Existing bridge is an eight span concrete girder bridge. The two end spans are cantilevered. The bridge deck carries two lanes
of traffic and bike/pedestrians with a total curb -to -curb width of 24.3 feet. The bridge has two 2.5 ft. wide sidewalks. The
bridge crosses the Spokane River and a bike/pedestrian path at the south end. The existing approach road is 30 feet wide.
Description of Proposed Work
g New Construction ■ 3 -R • 2 -R
Roadway Width
54' curb - to - curb
Number of Lanes
4
The proposed bridge is 520 feet long (final length to be determined by TS&1..) and 54 feet curb -to -curb with 4 travel lanes,
bicycle lanes and curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. The new bridge will be built near the existing bridge, just off line. The existing
bike /pedestrian trail at the south end will be linked to a pathway across the new bridge. The existing bridge will be removed.
Local Agency Contact Person
Steve M. Worley, P.E.
Title
Senior Capital Projects Engineer
Phone
509 688 - 0191
Mailing Address
1707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106
City
Spokane Valley
State
WA
Zip Code
99206
By
Design Approval Approving Professional Engineer
Title Date
� Washington State
�// Department of Transportation
Local Agency Federal Aid
Project Prospectus
DOT Form 140.101 i:F
Revised 12/2002
Page 1 of 3
■ Supersedes Previous Editions •
Performance of Work
Year
Property
Damage
Accidents
In'ury Accidents
Preliminary Engineering Will Be Performed By
Engineering Consultants
Others
100
%
Agency
%
Construction Will Be Performed By
Contractor
Contract
100
%
Agency
%
Geometric Design Data
Year
Property
Damage
Accidents
In'ury Accidents
Description
Total Number
of Accidents
Through Route
Number of
Injuries
Crossroad
Federal
Functional
Classification
NIA
N/A
C■ Principal Arterial
❑ Urban
• Principal Arterial
MinorArterial
❑ Collector
❑ Minor Arterial
0 Urban
• Collector
❑ Rural
• Major Collector
❑ Rural
• Major Collector
• Minor Collector
• Minor Collector
• Access Street/Road
• Access Street/Road
Terrain
® Flat
•
Roll • Mountain
❑ Flat
• Roll ❑ Mountain
Posted Speed
35
Design Speed
40
Existing ADT
9762
Design Year ADT
3
Design Year
2050
Design Hourly Volume (DHV)
Accident - 3 Year Experience
Year
Property
Damage
Accidents
In'ury Accidents
Fatal Accidents
Total Number
of Accidents
Number of
Accidents
Number of
Injuries
Number of
Accidents
Number of
Fatalities
NIA
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
Agency
City of Spokane Valley
Project Title
Barker Road over Spokane River
Date
3/22/2004
Environmental Classification
❑ Final El Preliminary
❑ Class I - Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
❑ Project Involves NEPAISEPA Section 404
Interagency Agreement
❑ Class III - Environmental Assessment (EA)
❑ Project Involves NEPA/SEPA Section 404
Interagency Agreement
® Class II - Categorically Excluded (CE)
❑ Projects Requiring Documentation
(Documented CE)
Environmental Considerations
DOT Form 140 -101 EF
Revised 12/2002
Page 2 of 3
Right of Way
❑ No Right of Way Required
All construction required by the
contract can be accomplished
within the existing right of way.
Right of Way Required
❑ No Relocation
0 Relocation Required
(
Date
Agency
City of Spokane Valley
Project Title
Barker Road over Spokane River
Date
3/22/2004
Description of Utility Relocation or Adjustments and Existing Major Structures Involved in the Project
There exists a parking area for the Centennial Trail on the southeast end of the bridge. This trailhead will be
relocated as required depending on the final location of the new structure.
FAA Involvement
Is any airport located within 3.2 kilometers (2 miles) of the proposed project? ❑ Yes ® No
Remarks
This project has been reviewed by the legislative body of the administration agency or agencies, or its designee, and is
not inconsistent with the agency's comprehensive plan for community development.
Agency City of Spokane Valley
By
DOT Form 140 -101 EF
Revised 12!2002
Page 3 of 3
Mayodchairpetson
171 Washington State
Department of Transportation
Agency City of Spokane Valley
Address C/O Public Works Department
DOT From 140-039 EF
Revised 1W02
11707 E. Sprague Avenue
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Termini Spokane River
City_of.Spokane Valley
Local Agency Agreement
CFDA No. 20.205
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance)
Project No.
Agreement No.
For OSC WSDOT Use Only
The Local Agency having complied, or hereby agreeing to comply, with the terms and conditions set forth in (1) Title 23, U.S. Code Highways, (2) the regulations issued
pursuant thereto, (3) Office of Management and Budget Circulars A- 102, A -87 and A -133, (4) the policies and procedures promulgated try the Washington State
Department ofTransportttioa, and (5) the federal aid project agreement entered into between the State and Federal Government, relative to the ahove project, the
V■rashingtoa State Department of Tmnsportation will authorize the Local Agency to proceed on the project by a separate notification. Federal funds which arc to he
obligated for the project may not exceed the amount shown herein on line r, column 3, without written authority by the State, subject to the approval of the Federal
Highway Administration. All project costs not reimbursed by the Federal Government shall be the rc of the Local Aeency.
Project Description
Name Barker Road over Spokane River
Length 0.01 miles
Description of Work
Construct a new four -lane bridge with bike lanes and sidewalks to replace an existing 1952 two -lane concrete bridge.
New bridge will be built near the exisitng, just off line. Existing bicycle /Pedestrian trail under span 1, south end, will be
linked to a pathway across the new bridge.
Agency Official Washington State Department of Transportation
By By
Title Mayer Assistant Secretary for Highways and Local Programs
Date Executed
Type of Work
Estimate of Funding
(1)
Estimated Total
Project Funds
(2)
Estimated Agency
Funds
(3)
Estimated
Federal Funds
PE
100 %
a. Agency
70,000.00
70,000.0
b. Other Consultant
627200.00
627,200.4W'
Federal Aid
Participation
Ratio for PE
c. Other
d. State
e. Total PE Cost Estimate (a +b+c +d)
697,200.00
697,200.00
Right of Way
100 °/a
f. Agency
. Other Consultant
45,000.00
45,000.00
Federal Aid
Participation
Ratio for RW
h. Other
•
1. State
j. Total R/W Cost Estimate (f+q +h +i)
45,000.00
45,000.00
Construction
100 %
k. Contract
7,350,500.00
7,350,500.00
I. Other
m. Other
n. Other
E
o. Ague
Federal Aid
Participation
Ratio for ON
p. State
q. Total CN Cost Estimate (k +I +m +n +o +p)
7,350,500.00
7,350,500.00
r. Total Project Cost Estimate (e +j +q)
8,092,700.00
8,092,700.00
171 Washington State
Department of Transportation
Agency City of Spokane Valley
Address C/O Public Works Department
DOT From 140-039 EF
Revised 1W02
11707 E. Sprague Avenue
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Termini Spokane River
City_of.Spokane Valley
Local Agency Agreement
CFDA No. 20.205
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance)
Project No.
Agreement No.
For OSC WSDOT Use Only
The Local Agency having complied, or hereby agreeing to comply, with the terms and conditions set forth in (1) Title 23, U.S. Code Highways, (2) the regulations issued
pursuant thereto, (3) Office of Management and Budget Circulars A- 102, A -87 and A -133, (4) the policies and procedures promulgated try the Washington State
Department ofTransportttioa, and (5) the federal aid project agreement entered into between the State and Federal Government, relative to the ahove project, the
V■rashingtoa State Department of Tmnsportation will authorize the Local Agency to proceed on the project by a separate notification. Federal funds which arc to he
obligated for the project may not exceed the amount shown herein on line r, column 3, without written authority by the State, subject to the approval of the Federal
Highway Administration. All project costs not reimbursed by the Federal Government shall be the rc of the Local Aeency.
Project Description
Name Barker Road over Spokane River
Length 0.01 miles
Description of Work
Construct a new four -lane bridge with bike lanes and sidewalks to replace an existing 1952 two -lane concrete bridge.
New bridge will be built near the exisitng, just off line. Existing bicycle /Pedestrian trail under span 1, south end, will be
linked to a pathway across the new bridge.
Agency Official Washington State Department of Transportation
By By
Title Mayer Assistant Secretary for Highways and Local Programs
Date Executed
Construction Method of Financing (Check Method Selected)
State Ad and Award
❑ Method A - Advance Payment - Agency Share of total construction cost (based on contract award)
) ❑ Method B - Withhold from gas tax the Agency's share of total construction cost (line 4, column 2) in the amount of
$ at $ per month for months.
Local Force or Local Ad and Award
Method C - Agency cost incurred with partial reimbursement
The Local Agency further stipulates that pursuant to said Title 23, regulations and policies and procedures, and as a
condition to payment of the federal funds obligated, it accepts and will comply with the applicable provisions set forth
below. Adopted by official action on
DOT Form 140-039 EF
Revised 10!02
Provisions
I. Scope of Work
The Agency shall provide all the work, labor, materials, and services necessary
to perfonn the project which is described and set forth in detail in the "Project
Description" and "Type of Wort:."
When thc State acts for and on behalf of the Agency, the State shall be deemed
an agent of the Agency and shall perform the services described and indicated in
"Type of Work" on the fact of this agreement, in accordance with plans and
specifications as proposed by the Agency and approved by the State and the
Federal Highway Administration.
When the State acts for the Agency but is not subject to the right of control by
the Agency, the State shall have the right to perform the work subject to the
ordinary procedures of the State and Federal Highway Administration.
II. Delegation of Authority
The State is willing to fulfill the responsibilities to thc Federal (invcrnmcrt by
(The administration of this project The Agency agrees that the State shall have the
, (111 authority to carry out this administration. The State shall review, process, and
approve documents required for federal aid reimbursement in accordance with
federal requirements. Kite State advertises and awards the contract, the State
will further act for the Agency in all matters concerning the project as requested
by the Agency. lithe Local Agency advertises and awards thc project, the State
shall review the work to ensure conformity with the approved plans and
specifications.
III. Project Administration
Certain types of work and servioes shall be provided by thc State on this
project as requested by the Agency and described in the Type. of Work above. to
addition, the State will furnish qualified personnel for the supervision and
inspection of the work in progress. On Local Agency advertised and awarded
prnjects, the supervision and inspection shall he limited to ensuring all wort: is in
conformance with approved plans, specifications, and federal aid requirements.
The salary of such engineer or other supervisor and all other salaries and costs
incurred hy State forees upon the project will be considered a cost thereof. All
costs related to this project incurred by employees of the State in the customary
manner on highway payrolls and vouchers shall he charged as costs of the
pmj ect
IV. Availability of Records
All project records in support plat! costs incurred and actual expenditures
kept by the Agency are to be maintained in aaxurdance with local government
accounting procedures prescribed by the Washington State Auditnr's Office,
the U.S. Iepartment of Transportation, and the Washington State Department
of Trnnspnrtation. The records shall be open to inspection by the State and
Federal Government at all reasonable times and shall be retained and made
available for such inspection for a period of not less than kuee years from the
final payment nfany federal aid firnds to thc Agency. Copies of said records
shall he firmished to the State andtor Federal Government upon request
r Compliance with Provisions
�.`✓
'rho Agency shall not incur any federal aid participal1611 colts on any
classification of work on this project until authorized in writing by the State for
each classification. The classifications of work for projects are:
2
, Resolution /Ordinance No.
1, Preliminary engineering,
2. Right of way acquisition.
3. Project construction.
in the event that right of way acquisition, or actual construction of the road, for
which preliminary engineering is undertaken is not started by the closing of the tenth
fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the agreement is executed, the Agency
will repay to the State the sum or sums of federal funds paid to the Agency under the
terms of this agreement (see Section IX).
The Agency agrees that all stages of construction necessary to provide the initially
planned complete facility within the limits of this project will conform to at least the
minimum values set by approved statewide design standards applicable to this class
of highways, even though such additional work is financed without federal aid
participation.
The Agency agrees that on federal aid highway construction projects, thc current
federal aid regulations which apply to liquidated darnag=es relative to the basis of
federal participation in the project cost shall be applicable in the event the contractor
fails to complete the contract within the contract time.
VI. Payment and Partial Reimbursement
The total cost of the project, including all review and engineering costs and
other expenses of the State, is to be paid by the Agency and by the Federal
Government Federal funding shall be in accordance with the Transportation
Equity Act for the 2lst Century (TEA 21), as attended, and OtTce of
Management and Budget circulars A -102, A..87 and A -133. The State shall not
be ultimately responsible for any of the costs of the project The Agency shall be
ultimately responsible for all costs associated with the project which are not
reimbursed by the Federal Government Nothing in this egitement shall be
construed as a promise by the State as to the amount or nature of federal
participation in this project
The Agency shall bill the state for federal aid project costs incurred in conformity
with applicable federal and state laws. The agency shall mimimize the time elapsed
between receipt of federal aid funds and subsequent payment of incurred costs.
Expenditures by the Local Agency for maintenance, general administration,
supervision, and other overhead stall not he eligible for federal participation unless
an indirect cost plan has been approved hy WSIX)T.
The State will pay for Stale incurred costs on the project. Following
payment, the State shall hill the Federal Government for reimbursement of
those costs eligible for federal participation to the extent that such costs are
attributable and property allocable to tliis project The Suite shall bill the
Agency for that portion of State costs which were not reimbursed by tine
Federal Government (see Section iX).
1. Project Construction Costs
Project construction financing will he accomplished hy one of the three
methods as indicated in this agreement.
Method A — The Agency will place with the State, within (20) days after the
cxccutinn of the construction contract, an advance in the amount of the
Agency's share of the total construction cost based on the contract award. The
State will notify the Agency of the exact amount to be deposited with the State.
The State will pin all costs incurred under the contract upon presentation of
progress billings from the enntractnr. Following such payments, the State will
submit a hilling to the Federal Government for the federal aid participation
share of die cost. When the project is substantially completed and final actual
costs of the project can be determined, the State will present the Agency with it
final billing showing the amount due the State or the amount due the Agency,
This billing will he cleared by either a payment from the Agency to the State or
by a refund from the State to the Agency,
Method R— The Agency's share of the total construction cost as shown on
the face of this agreement shall be withheld from its monthly fuel tax
allotments. The face of this agreement establishes the months in whieh the
withholding shall take place and the exact urnount to be withheld each month.
The extent of withholding will be confirmed by letter from the State at the time
of contract award. Upon receipt of progress billings from the oontractnr, the
State will submit such billings to the Federal Government for payment of its
participating portion of such billings.
Method C— The Agency may submit vouchers to the State in the format
prescribed by the State, in duplicate, not more than once per month for those
costs eligible for Federal participation to the extent that such costs are directly
attributable and properly allocable to this project. Expenditures by thc Local
Agency for maintenance, general administration, supervision, and other
overhead shun not be eligible for Federal participation unless claimed under a
previously approved indirect cost plan.
The State shall reimburse the Agency for the Federal share of eligible project
costs up to the amount shown on the face of this agreement. At the time of
audit, the Aeenc v will provide documentation of all costs incurred on the
project
The State shall bill the Agency for all costs incurred by the State relative to
the project. The State shall also bill the Agency for the federal funds paid by
the State to the Agency for project costs which are subsequently determined to
be ineligible for federal participation (see Section IX).
VII. Audit of Federal Consultant Contracts
. The Agency, if services of a consultant are requited, shall he responsible for
audit of the consultant's records to determine eligible fedend aid costs on the
project. The report of said audit shall be in the Agency's files and made
available to the State and the Federal Government.
An audit shall be conducted by the WSDOT htternal Audit Office in
accordance with generally accepted governmental auditing standards as
issued by the United States General Accounting Of3ioe by the Comptroller
General of the United States; WSDOT Manual M 27 -50, Consultant
Authorization, Selection, and Agreement Administration; memoranda of
understanding between WSDOT and FHWA; and Office of Management
and Budget Circular A -133.
If upon audit it is found that overpayment or participation of federal
money in ineligible items of cost has occurred, thc Agency shall reimburse
the State for the amount of such overpayment or excess participation (sec
Section IX).
VIII. Single Audit Act
The Agency, as a subrecipient of federal funds, shall adhere to the federal
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A -133 as well as all
applicable federal and state statuses and regulations. A subrecipient who
expends 5300,000 or more in federal awards from all sources during a given
fiscal year shall have a single or program- specific audit performed for that
year in accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular A -133. Upon
conclusion of the A -133 audit, the Agency shall be responsible for ensuring
that a copy of the report is transmitted promptly to the State.
IX. Payment of Billing
The Agency agrees that if payment nr arrangenhent for payment of any of
the State's hilling relative to the project (e.g., State force work, project
cancellation, overpayment, east ineligible for federal participation, etc.) is not
made to the State within 45 days after the Agency has hccn billed, the State
shall effect reimbursement of the total sum due from the regular monthly fuel
tax allotments to the Agency from the Motor Vehicle Fund. No additional
Federal project fihnding will he approved until full payment is received unless
otherwise directed the Assistant Secretary for Highways and Local Prognuns.
DOT Form 140 -039 EF
Revised 10!02
3
X. Traffic Control, Signing, Marking, and Roadway
Maintenance
The Agency will not permit any changes to be made in the provisions for parking
regulations and traffic control on this project without prior approval of the State ar'—
Federal Highway Administratinn, The Agency will not install or permit to be
installed any signs, signals, or markings not in conformal= with the standards
approved by the Federal Highway Administration and MUTCD. The Agency will,
at its own expense, maintain the improvement covered by this agreement
XI. Indemnity
The Agency shall hold the Federal Government and the State harmless from and
shall process and defend at its own expense all claims, demands, or suits, whether at
law or equity brought against the Agency, State, or Federal Government, arising
from the Agency's execution, performance, or failure to perform any of the
provisinns of this agreement, or of any other agreement or contract comtected with
this agreement,, or arising by reason of the participation of the State or Federal
Government in the project, PROVIDED, nothing herein shall require the Agency w
reimburse the State ur the Federal Government for damages arising out of bodily
injury to persons or damage to property caused by or resulting from the sole
negligence of the Federal Government or the Sate_
No liability shall attach to the State or Federal Government except as expressly
provided herein.
XII. Nondiscrimination Provision
The Agency shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or
sex in the award and performance of any IJSOC)T- assisted contract and/or
agreement or in the administration of its DBE program ur the requirements of 49
CFR Part 26. The Agency shall take all necessary and reasonable steps under 49
CFR Part 26 to ensure nondiscrimination in the award and administration of
USDOT- assisted contracts and agreements_ The WSDOT's DBE program as
required by 49 CFR Part 26 and as approved by USDOT, is incorporated by
reference in this agreement. Implementation of this program is a legal obligation
and failure to carry out its terms shall be treated as a violation of this agreement.
Upon notification to the Agency of its failure to carry out its approved program, the
Department may impose sanctions as provided for under Part 26 and may, in
appropriate cases, refer the matter for enforcement under 18 U.S.C. 1001 and/or the
Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986 (31 U.S.C. 3801 et seq.).
The Agency hereby agrees that it will incorporate or cause to he incorporated in -
any contract for construction work, or modification thereof, as defined in the rules
and regulations of the Secretary of Labor in 41 CFR Chapter 60, which is paid for in
whole or in part with funds obtained from the Federal Government or borrowed on
the credit of the Federal Government pursuant to a grant, contract, loan, insurance,
or guarantee or understanding pursuant to any federal program involving such grant,
contract, loan, insurance, or guararhtee, the required contract provisions for
Federal -Aid Contracts (FHWA 1273), located in Chapter 44 of the Local Agency
Guidelines.
llhe Agency further agrees that it will be bound by the above equal opportunity
clause with respect to its own employment practices when it participates in
federally assisted construction work Provided, that if the applicant so
participating is a State ar Local Government, the above equal opportunity clause
is not applicable to any agency, instrumentality, or subdivision of such
government which does not participate in work an or under the contract
'Ilse Agency also agrees:
(1) To assist and cooperate actively with the State in obtaining the compliance of
contractors and subcontractors with the equal opportunity clause and rules,
regulations, and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor.
(2) To furnish the State such information as it may require for the supervision of
such compliance and that it will otherwise assist the State in the discharge of its
primary responsibility for securing compliance.
(3) To refrain from entering into any contract or contract modification subject to
Executive Ordc 11246 of September 24, 1965, with a contractor debarred from, or
who has not demonstrated eligibility for, government contracts and federally
assisted construction contracts pursuant to the Executive Order.
(4) To carry out such sanctions and penalties for violation of the equal
opportunity clause as may be imposed upon contractors and subcontractors by the
State, Federal Highway Administration, or the Secretary of Gabor pursuant to Part
1l, subpart D of the Executive Order.
In addition, the Agency agrees that if it fails or ref users to comply with these
undertakings, the State may take any or all of the following actions:
(a) Cancel, terminate, or suspend this agreement in whole ur in part;
f (b) Refrain from extending any further assistance to the Agency under the
..1 ograrn with respect to which the failure or refusal occurred until satisfactory
assurance of future compliance has been received from the Agency; and
(c) Refer the case to the I partntent of J ustice for appropriate Icgal proceedings.
XIII. Liquidated Damages
The Agency hereby agrees that the liquidated damages provisions of 23 CFR
Part 635, Subpart 127, as supplemented relative to the amount of Federal
participation in the project cost, shall be applicable in the event the contractor
fails to complete the contract within the contract lime. Failure to include
liquidated damages provision will not relieve the Agency from reduction of
federal participation in accordance with this paragraph.
XIV. Termination for Public Convenience
The Secretary of the Washington State Department of Transportation may
terminate the contract in whole, or from time to time in part, whenever
(I) The requisite federal funding becomes unavailable through failure of
appropriation or otherwise.
(2) The contractor is prevented frum proceeding with the work as a direct
result of an Executive Order of the President with respect to the prosecution of
war or in the interest of national defense, or an Executive Order of the
President or Governor of the State with respect to the preservation of energy
resources.
(3) The contractor is prevented from proceeding with the work by reason of
a preliminary, special, or pennament restraining order of a court of competent
jurisdiction where the issuance of such order is primarily caused by the acts or
omissions of persons or agencies other titan the contractor.
(4) The Secretary determines that such termination is in the best interests of
;'te State.
DOT Form 140-039 EF
Revised 10(02
Additional Provisions
4
XV. Venue for Claims and/or Causes of Action
For the convenience of the patties to this contract, it is agreed that any claims
and/nr causes nfactinn which the Local Agency has against the State of
Washington, growing out of this contract or the project with which it is
concerned, shall be brought only in the Superior Court for Thurston County,
XVI. Certification Regarding the Restrictions of the Use
of Federal Funds for Lobbying
The approving authority certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and helief,
tint:
(1) No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf
of the undersigned, to any person far influencing or attempting to influence an
officer or employee of any federal agency, a member of Congress, an officer or
employee of Congress, or an employe✓ of a member of Congr in connection with
the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any federal grant, the making of
any federal loan, the catering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension,
continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any federal contract, grant,
loam, or cooperative agreement.
(2) If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be
paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee
of any federal agency, a member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress,
or an employee of a member of Congress in oontr_ction with this federal contract,
{!runt, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and suhmit
the Standard Form - LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance
with its instructions.
(3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be
included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including suhgrants,
and contracts and subcontracts under grants, suhgrants, loans, and cooperative
agreements) which exceed 5100,000, and that all such subrecipients shall certify
and disclose accordingly.
This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was
placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this
certification as a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed
by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required
certification shall he subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more
than 5100,000 for each such failure.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
City Manager Sign -off:
Meeting Date: May 4, 2004
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business El new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement with the Transportation
Improvement Board for 1) Barker Road project and 2) Bowdishl24 Avenue Sidewalk project
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Approval of Six Year Transportation Improvement
Plan, which includes the Barker Road project and the Bowdish /24' Avenue Sidewalk project.
BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane Valley received a TIB grant for each of the projects
listed above. TIB has given authorization to proceed with the preliminary design phase of each
project. However, before we can request grant reimbursement for costs associated with these
two projects, the attached Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreements must be signed by a city
official and returned to TIB for processing.
OPTIONS: Approve or Reject Agreements
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve Agreements and authorize City Manager to
sign the Agreements.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Barker Road: grant = $2,398,560, local match = $599,640.
Bowdishl24` Avenue Sidewalk project: grant = $146,000, local match = $51 ,310. The 2004
budget includes these two projects.
STAFF CONTACT: Steve Worley and Neil Kersten
ATTACHMENTS Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreements (2)
TIB Members
Councilmember WiI am Caney
Char; Cky of Steals Ground
Commissioner Leo Bowman
tlrco Chair, Borden County
ark. John Akers, P.E.
City or ENenst urg
M ;. Therms Ballard, P.
Pierce County
Ms. Bonnie Berk
Berk and .Associates
Mr. George Cross
Pod ofLaurgvi°w
Ms. Kathleen Davie
WSOOT
Mr, Oen DeGu3io
Qattara Transit
Couruelnerr*er Mary Gales
City of Federal Way
Ms. Paula Ham:nand, P.E.
W bOT
Council President Rob Higgins
City cl Spokane
Counmlmember Rob McKenna
14 ng County
Mr. Dick McKinley
City of BeA
Mr. Dave Nelson
Grant Courtly
Mr. Dave O'Connell
Masan County
Mr. Paul Roberts
C. yorevGCn
Comrrissioner M s.a Shelton
Wand County
Mr. Arch! Tome._
Bidet, Agana) of Washington
lir. Jay Weber
runty Road Adrnaristratian Board
Mr- Theo Yu
Witco of Finew.tof Management
Ns. Kyn Zonis. P.E.
Spskane Transit AbfhNW'y
Mr. Stevan Gorcostor
Executive Dirr t r
P.O. Box 40901
Olympia, WA 00504.1901
Pismo: 360.596 -1140
Fair. 350 - 5954159
wvrw.0b.wa.9ov
Washington State
Transportation Improvement Board
Transmittal Letter
February 5, 2004
Mr. Neil Kersten
Public Works Director
City of Spokane Valley
11707 E Sprague Avenue, Suite 106
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Arterial Improvement Program
TIB Project Number 8 -3- 208(001) -1
Barker Road
Boone Ave to Barker Rd Bridge
Design Phase Approval
This is to confirm that the TIB has authorized the design phase of this project
effective February 5, 2004. Please sign the enclosed Fuel Tax Grant Distribution
Agreement and return the original to the TIB. Design phase payments will be
processed after an executed Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement is received
by the TIB. You may request reimbursement from TIB beginning July 1, 2004.
A Value Engineering (VE) Study is required for the project. Typically, agencies
conduct a VE study when design completion is nearing thirty percent. Contact
the TIB office prior to thirty percent completion to arrange a study for the project.
Future Requirements
1. Upon completion of the design phase, please send a construction
prospectus, a half -size set of plans, specifications and the final engineer's
estimate to your TIB project engineer to request construction phase approval.
This approval may be authorized by the TIB Executive Director if the project
meets the following criteria:
a. There is no change in the approved project scope.
b. The total TIB funds anticipated for the project have increased no more
than 15% or $750,000 above the amount at project selection.
All other projects must be approved by the Board
2. Submit a TIB Reimbursement Form to request payment for incurred eligible
project costs. Requests for reimbursement can be submitted electronically at
www.tib.wa.gov /services/ reimbursements /reimbursements.htm.
For assistance with your project, contact Gloria Bennett, TIB Project Engineer, at
(360) 586 -1143 or via e-mail at GloriaB @TIB.wa.gov.
Investing in your local community
LEAD AGENCY:
City of Spokane Valley
PROJECT NUMBER:
8 -3- 208(001) -1
PROJECT TITLE:
Barker Road
PROJECT TERMINI:
Boone Ave to Barker Rd Bridge
�� . Washington State Transportation Improvement Board
1/4 .' J Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement
1.0 PURPOSE
The Washington State Transportation Improvement Board (hereinafter referred to as
`TIBP) hereby grants funds for the project specified in the attached documents, and as
may be subsequently amended, subject to the terms contained herein. It is the intent of
the parties, TIB and the grant recipient, that this Agreement shall govern the use and
distribution of the grant funds through all phases of the project. Accordingly, the project
specific information shall be contained in the attachments hereto and incorporated
herein, as the project progresses through each phase.
This Agreement, together with the attachments hereto, the provisions of chapter 47.26
Revised Code of Washington, the provisions of title 479 Washington Administrative
Code, and TIB Policies, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and
supercedes all previous written or oral agreements between the parties.
2.0 PARTIES TO AGREEMENT
The parties to this Agreement are TIB, or its successor, and the grant recipient, or its
successor, as specified in the attachments.
3.0 TERM OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall be effective upon execution by TIB and shall continue through
completion of each phase of the project, unless terminated sooner as provided herein.
4.0 AMENDMENTS
This Agreement may be amended by mutual agreement of the parties. Such
amendments shall not be binding unless they are in writing and signed by personnel
authorized to bind each of the parties.
5.0 ASSIGNMENT
The grant recipient shall not assign or transfer its rights, benefits, or obligations under
this Agreement without the prior written consent of TIB. The grant recipient is deemed
to consent to assignment of this Agreement by TIB to a successor entity. Such consent
shall not constitute a waiver of the grant recipient's other rights under this Agreement.
6.0 GOVERNANCE & VENUE
This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the
state of Washington and venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in the Superior
Court for Thurston County.
TIB Form 190 -500
Page 1 of 3 Rev. 2/14/2003
TIB Form 130.500
Washington State Transportation Improvement Board
Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement
7.0 TERMINATION
7.1 UNILATERAL TERMINATION
Either party may terminate this Agreement upon 30 days' prior written notice to
the other party. If this Agreement is so terminated, the parties shall be liable only
for performance rendered or costs incurred in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement prior to the effective date of termination.
7.2 TERMINATION BY MUTUAL AGREEMENT
Either party may terminate this contract in whole or in part, at any time, by mutual
agreement with a 30 calendar day written notice from one party to the other.
7.3 TERMINATION FOR CAUSE
In the event TIB determines the grant recipient has failed to comply with the
conditions of this Agreement in a timely manner, TIB has the right to suspend or
terminate this Agreement. TIB shall notify the grant recipient in writing of the
need to take corrective action. If corrective action is not taken within 30 days, the
Agreement may be terminated. TIB reserves the right to suspend all or part of
the Agreement, withhold further payments, or prohibit the grant recipient from
incurring additional obligations of funds during the investigation of the alleged
compliance breach and pending corrective action by the grant recipient or a
decision by TIB to terminate the Agreement. The grant recipient shall be liable
for damages as authorized by law including, but not limited to, repayment of
misused grant funds. The termination shall be deemed to be a Termination for
Convenience if it is determined that the grant recipient: (1) was not at fault, or
failure to perform was outside of the grant recipient's control, fault or negligence.
The rights and remedies of TIB provided in this Agreement are not exclusive and
are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law.
7.4 TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE
TIB may, by ten (10) days written notice, beginning on the second day after the
mailing, terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, because federal or state
funds are no longer available for the purpose of meeting TIB's obligations, or for
any reason. If this Agreement is so terminated, TIB shall be liable only for
payment required under this Agreement for performance rendered or costs
incurred prior to the effective date of termination.
7.5 TERMINATION PROCEDURE
Upon receipt of notice of termination, the grant recipient shall stop work and/or
take such action as may be directed by TIB.
Page 2 of 3 Rev. 2/14/2003
Washington State Transportation Improvement Board
Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 specifies the grant program applicable to this project, identifies the grant
recipient, and contains the list of additional documents specific to the project which will
be attached and incorporated into this Agreement, together with subsequent
amendments, as the project progresses through each phase of design and construction.
Approved as to Form
This 14th Day of February, 2003
Christine 0. Gregoire
Attorney General
By:
Signature on file
Jeanne A. Cushman
Assistant Attorney General
Lead Agency Transportation Improvement Board
Signature of Chairman/Mayor Date
TIB Form 190 -500
Exedutive Director
Stevan Gorcester
Print Name Print Name
Date
3 of 3 Rev. 2/14/2003
Attachment 1
Urban Programs
Project Description
and
List of Documents to be Attached to this Agreement for each
Phase of the Project
Project Information
Lead Agency: City of Spokane Valley
Project Number: 8 -3- 208(001) -1
Project Title: Barker Road
Project Termini: Boone Ave to Barker Rd Bridge
TIB funds for the project are as follows:
Phase TIB Funds
Design 912,320
Construction (requires future approval) 1,486,240
Total Grant 2,398,560
Documents Required at Construction Phase
O Construction Prospectus and Certification Form (completed and signed)
O Plans and Specifications package
O Final engineer's estimate
Documents Required at Bid Award Phase
O Bid Award Updated Cost Estimate Form
O Bid Tabulations
O Cost Change Justification
Documents Required at Contract Completion Phase
O Contract Completion Updated Cost Estimate Form
O Final Summary Quantities and Ledger
O Cost Change Justification
Amendments to Agreement (if any)
TI6 Form 190 -600 Rev. 2/14/2003
TIB Members
Ccuncilirmmber VAlliarn Gnnloy
Cher, City of BetAe Ground
Conmissionorlea Bowman
Vice Chan, Behan Coony
Mr. Jean Akers, P.E.
City of Edbnstwre
Mr. Thomas Ballard, P.C.
Pierce Comfy
Ms. Bonnie Berk
Berk end Assoiates
Mr. George Cress
Port of Longview
Ms. Kathleen Davis
WSDOT
Mr. Dan DdGW10
Ch 7mosif
Councilmambar Mary Gates
Cky of Federal Way
Ms. Petda Hammond, P.C.
1
Come" President Rob } Ig tts
CO of Spokane
1!, I■rber Rob Macenna
;Ong Courr.ty
Mr. Dick McKinley
Ciry of BerengRam
Mr. Dave Nelsen
Grant County
Mr. Dave O'Connell
Mason Ccurny
Mr. Paul Roberts
City of Everett
Commissioner Mika Shelter.
(stand County
Mr. ArmoId Tornec
S iyck Af of Wasrumg o 1
MT. Jay Weber
runty Reno Ad,m'r,?,afion Boa:d
Mr. Theo Yu
Mite of Finarca7 Management
M3, !Gm Zentz, P.E.
.Spokane Trans*Aurhanry
Mr. Stevan Gorcester
Executive Director
P.O. Bo.. 40601
Olymp99,WA 0FSO4 -090i
Phone; 360.586.1 tae
Fux. 36D•5E&11E5
www.IIbnva•gov
Washington State
Transportation Improvement Board
Transmittal Letter
February 5, 2004
Mr. Neil Kersten
Public Works Director
City of Spokane Valley
11707 E Sprague Avenue, Suite 106
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Pedestrian Safety and Mobility Program
TIB Project Number P- E- 208(P01) -1
Bowdish Road /24th Avenue
22nd Ave to Pines Road
Design and Construction Phase Approval
This is to confirm that the TIB has authorized the design and construction
phases of this project effective February 5, 2004. Please sign the enclosed Fuel
Tax Grant Distribution Agreement and return the original to the TIB. After
completion of the project design, send a half -size set of plans, specifications and
the final engineer's estimate to your TIB project engineer. You will receive
approval to advertise the contract after TIB staff has reviewed the plans and
contract documentation.
Reimbursement requests will be processed after an executed Fuel Tax Grant
Distribution Agreement is received by the TIB. You may request reimbursement
from TIB beginning July 1, 2004.
Future Requirements
1. In accordance with TIB Guidelines, complete an Updated Cost Estimate
(UCE) form after bid opening and prior to agency award of the contract.
Contact your TIB project engineer to request the form. After receiving the
completed UCE form, your project engineer will give approval to award the
contract.
2. Submit a TIB Reimbursement Form to request payment for incurred eligible
project costs. Requests for reimbursement can be submitted electronically at
www. tib. wa. gov/ services / reimbursements /reimbursements.htm.
For assistance with your project, contact Gloria Bennett, TIB Project Engineer, at
(360) 586 -1143 or via e-mail at GloriaB @TIB.wa.gov.
Investing in your local community
LEAD AGENCY:
I City of Spokane Valley .
PROJECT NUMBER:
P- E- 208(P01) -1
PROJECT TITLE:
Bowdish Road /24th Avenue
PROJECT TERMINI:
22nd Ave to Pines Road
Washington State Transportation Improvement Board
Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement
1.0 PURPOSE
The Washington State Transportation Improvement Board (hereinafter referred to as
•TIB ") hereby grants funds for the project specified in the attached documents, and as
may be subsequently amended, subject to the terms contained herein. It is the intent of
the parties, TIB and the grant recipient, that this Agreement shall govern the use and
distribution of the grant funds through all phases of the project. Accordingly, the project
specific information shall be contained in the attachments hereto and incorporated
herein, as the project progresses through each phase.
This Agreement, together with the attachments hereto, the provisions of chapter 47.26
Revised Code of Washington, the provisions of title 479 Washington Administrative
Code, and TIB Policies, constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and
supercedes all previous written or oral agreements between the parties.
2.0 PARTIES TO AGREEMENT
The parties to this Agreement are TIB, or its successor, and the grant recipient, or its
successor, as specified in the attachments.
3.0 TERM OF AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall be effective upon execution by TIB and shall continue through
completion of each phase of the project, unless terminated sooner as provided herein.
4.0 AMENDMENTS
This Agreement may be amended by mutual agreement of the parties. Such
amendments shall not be binding unless they are in writing and signed by personnel
authorized to bind each of the parties.
5.0 ASSIGNMENT
The grant recipient shall not assign or transfer its rights, benefits, or obligations under
this Agreement without the prior written consent of TIB. The grant recipient is deemed
to consent to assignment of this Agreement by TIB to a successor entity. Such consent
shall not constitute a waiver of the grant recipient's other rights under this Agreement.
6.0 GOVERNANCE & VENUE
This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the
state of Washington and venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in the Superior
Court for Thurston County.
TIB Fort 190 -500
Page 1 of 3 Rev. 2/14/2003
7.0 TERMINATION
TIB Form 190 -500
Washington State Transportation Improvement Board
Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement
7.1 UNILATERAL TERMINATION
Either party may terminate this Agreement upon 30 days' prior written notice to
the other party. If this Agreement is so terminated, the parties shall be liable only
for performance rendered or costs incurred in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement prior to the effective date of termination.
7.2 TERMINATION BY MUTUAL AGREEMENT
Either party may terminate this contract in whole or in part, at any time, by mutual
agreement with a 30 calendar day written notice from one party to the other.
7.3 TERMINATION FOR CAUSE
In the event TIB determines the grant recipient has failed to comply with the
conditions of this Agreement in a timely manner, TIB has the right to suspend or
terminate this Agreement. TIB shall notify the grant recipient in writing of the •
need to take corrective action. If corrective action is not taken within 30 days, the
Agreement may be terminated. TIB reserves the right to suspend all or part of
the Agreement, withhold further payments, or prohibit the grant recipient from
incurring additional obligations of funds during the investigation of the alleged
compliance breach and pending corrective action by the grant recipient or a
decision by TIB to terminate the Agreement. The grant recipient shall be liable
for damages as authorized by law including, but not limited to, repayment of
misused grant funds. The termination shall be deemed to be a Termination for
Convenience if it is determined that the grant recipient: (1) was not at fault, or (2)
failure to perform was outside of the grant recipient's control, fault or negligence.
The rights and remedies of TIB provided in this Agreement are not exclusive and
are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law.
7.4 TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE
TIB may, by ten (10) days written notice, beginning on the second day after the
mailing, terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, because federal or state
funds are no longer available for the purpose of meeting TIB's obligations, or for
any reason. If this Agreement is so terminated, TIB shall be liable only for
payment required under this Agreement for performance rendered or costs
incurred prior to the effective date of termination.
7.5 TERMINATION PROCEDURE
Upon receipt of notice of termination, the grant recipient shall stop work and /or
take such action as may be directed by TIB.
Page 2 of 3 Rev. 2/14/2003
V 11 Washington State Transportation Improvement Board
Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement
8.0 ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 specifies the grant program applicable to this project, identifies the grant
recipient, and contains the list of additional documents specific to the project which will
be attached and incorporated into this Agreement, together with subsequent
amendments, as the project progresses through each phase of design and construction.
Approved as to Form
This 14th Day of February, 2003
Christine 0. Gregoire
Attorney General
By:
Signature on file
Jeanne A. Cushman
Assistant Attorney General
Lead Agency Transportation Improvement Board
Signature of Chairman /Mayor Date
Executive Director Date
Stevan Gorcester
Print Name Print Name
T13 Form 190 -500 Page 3 of 3 Rev. 2114/2003
Pedestrian Safety and Mobility Program
Project Description
and
List of Documents to be Attached to Agreement at each
Phase of the Project
Project Information
Lead Agency: City of Spokane Valley
Project Number: P- E- 208(P01) -1
Project Title: Bowdish Road /24th Avenue
Project Termini: 22nd Ave to Pines Road
TIB funds for the project are as follows:
Attachment 1
Phase TIB Funds
Design 14,599
Construction 131,401
Total Grant 146,000
Documents Required Prior to Advertising
O Plans and Specifications package
O Final Engineer's Estimate
Documents Required at Bid Award Phase
O Bid Award Updated Cost Estimate Form
O Bid Tabulations
O Cost change justification
Documents Required at Contract Completion Phase
O Contract Completion Updated Cost Estimate Form
O Final Quantities and Ledger
O Cost change justification
Amendments to Agreement (if any)
TIB Form 190.505 Rev. 2/14/2003
Meeting Date: 05 -04 -04 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Proposed Establishment of Salary Commission
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
BACKGROUND:
In an ongoing effort to evaluate compensation for the entire city staff, Council believes it to be
appropriate to include their compensation in that evaluation.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Council consensus to move forward for a first
reading May 11, 2004
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
CONTACT: Councilmember Munson
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Ordinance
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
DRAFT
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 04-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY,
WASHINGTON SETTING THE SALARY OF THE MAYOR ANI) CITY COUNCILMI .MBERS,
CREATING AN INDEPENDENT SALARY COMMISSION TO REVIEW AND SET TF11
SALARIES OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBER.S, PROVIDING FOR OTHER
MATTERS PROPERLY RELATED THERETO; AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 14.
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 14 set the interim compensation allowed for the newly elected Mayor
and Councilmembers; and
WHEREAS, the City Council believes it serves the interests of the City to have a separate,
independent commission establish the future salaries of the Mayor and City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature through RCW Chapter 35.21 authorizes cities,
towns and counties to create an independent salary commission to set the salaries of elected officials; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35.21.015, the action fixing the salary by a commission
supersedes any other provision of City ordinance related to the fixing of salaries for elected officials.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington ordains as
follows:
Section 1. Salary Levels Established.
A. Councilmembers. Each City Councilmember shall be entitled to receive a salary of four
hundred dollars ($400.00) per month, payable on the last day of each calendar month, unless said day is a
holiday or weekend, then said salary shall be paid the Friday before the last day of the month.
B. Mayor. The Mayor shall be entitled to a salary of five hundred dollars ($500.00) per
month, which is twenty -five percent (25.00 %) greater than Councilmember salaries, payable on the last
day of each calendar month, unless said day is a holiday or weekend, then said salary shall be paid the
Friday before the last day of the month.
C. Adjustment by Independent Salary Commission. If the City's Independent Salary
Commission establishes a salary schedule for the Mayor and Councilmembers, those salaries will take
effect at the times, in the amounts, and under the conditions established in the schedule as provided by
law.
Section 2. Independent Salary Commission.
A. Creation of Independent Salary Commission. There is hereby established for the City of
Spokane Valley an Independent Salary Commission.
B. Purpose. The purpose of the Independent Salary Commission shall be to review and
establish the salaries of the Mayor and the Councilmembers.
C. Composition. The Independent Salary Commission shall consist of five (5) members
appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council.
\'Sv -fsI lUsersl CBainbridgelcbainbritfgelOrdinanccs \Independent Salary Commission.doc Page 1 of 4
DRAFT
terms.
la. Compensation. The Independent Salary Commission shall serve without compensation.
E. Term. The term of appointment is two (2) years. No member may serve more than two
F. Qualifications.
1. Each person appointed to serve as a member of the Independent Salary
Commission shall be a citizen of the United States, a resident of the City of
Spokane Valley for at least one (1) year immediately preceding such appointment
and while serving on the Commission, and a registered voter in Spokane County.
2. No officer, official, or employee of' the City or any of their immediate family
members may serve on the Commission. "Immediate family member" as used in
this section means the parents, spouse, siblings, children, or dependent relatives
of the officer, official, or employee, whether or not living in the household of the
officer, official, or employee.
G. Operation.
1. The Independent Salary Commission shall elect a Chair and Vice Chair from
among its members. The Independent Salary Commission may establish and
adopt rules of procedure for the efficient and fair conduct of its business.
2. The City Manager shall appoint staff and make available supplies and equipment
to assist the Independent Salary Commission in preparation of its reports and
records.
3. Any communication from the Independent Salary Commission to any member of
the City Council while reviewing the schedule of salaries, shall be in writing and
made part of the record of the Commission's proceedings.
4. The Independent Salary Commission shall keep a written record of its
proceedings, which shall be a public record in accordance with state law, and
shall actively solicit public comment at all meetings which shall be subject to the
Open Public Meetings Act.
5. The first meeting of the independent Salary Commission shall occur no later than
June 23, 2004, and the Commission shall review and, if it so determines, amend
and file its schedule of salaries with the City Clerk no later than August 2, 2004.
6. Three (3) members of the Independent Salary Commission shall constitute a
quorum and the affirmative vote of three (3) members shall be sufficient for the
decision of all matters and the transaction of all business.
H. Responsibilities. To determine the appropriate rate of compensation, the Independent
Salary Commission shall assess the market rate of compensation for elected city officials and study the
relationship of salaries to the duties of the Mayor and the City Councilrnembers. Salaries shall be
established by an affirmative vote of not less than three (3) members.
L Removal. A member of the Independent. Salary Commission may only be removed
during the term of office for. cause such as incapacity, incompetence, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in
office or for a disqualifying change of residence.
\ 1Sv- fsllUsers\ CBainbridgc lcbainbridge \Ordinanccsllndependent Salary Comrnission.doc Page 2 of 4
DRAFT
J. Filing. Date - Salary Schedule. The Independent Salary Commission shall file its salary
schedule with the City Clerk who will publish the schedule two (2) times, at least one week apart, in the
official newspaper of the City. The second date of publication shall be considered the official filing date
of the salary schedule.
K. Effective Date — Salaries . The Commission's salary schedule will become effective in
the amounts, at the times, and under the conditions established in the schedule unless a referendum has
been filed in accordance with Section 3 of this Ordinance. Once filed, the schedule shall be incorporated
into the City budget without further action of the City Council or Salary Commission. Salary adjustments
established by the Commission that result in a salary increase are effective immediately as to all
Councilmembers and /or the Mayor, regardless of their terms of office. If the salary adjustment
established by the Commission results in a salary decrease, the decreased salary shall be effective at the
commencement of the incumbent's next subsequent term of office.
Section 3. Referendum.
A. Salary Schedule subject to Referendum Petition
1. The Commission's adopted salary schedule shall be subject to referendum
petition by the people of the City. A petition must be filed with the City Clerk
within thirty (30) days after the official filing date of the salary schedule. In the
event of the fling of a valid referendum petition, the salary increase or decrease
shall not go into effect until approved by a vote of the people.
2. Referendum measures under this section shall be submitted to the voters of the
City at the next following general or municipal election occurring thirty (30) days
or more after the petition is filed, and shall be otherwise governed by the
provisions of the State Constitution or other laws generally applicable to
referendum measures.
13. Referendum Statement. A referendum statement on a petition shall be phrased in the
following language:
Should the salary schedule filed with the City Clerk of the City of
Spokane Valley by the Independent Salary Commission on
be repealed in its entirety? Your signature on this petition indicates your
vote in favor of repeal of the attached salary schedule in its entirety.
A copy of the salary schedule or ordinance to such referendum petition shall be attached to
each referendum petition for the information of the parties requested to sign such petition.
C. Initiative provisions applied to referendum process. All state law provisions applicable
to the form of the petition and sufficiency of signatures required for an initiative petition as set forth
herein, and to the submission to the vote of the people as set forth herein, shall apply to a referendum
petition and to the salary schedule sought to be defeated thereby.
D. Referendum — Effective Date — Record. If a majority of the number of votes cast on the
referendum oppose the salary schedule or ordinance, such salary schedule or ordinance shall be deemed
repealed following the certification of the vote.
I fsIlUsers1C13ainbridgelcbainbridgelOrdinancesundependent Salary Cornmission.doc Page 3 of 4
( Section 4. Repeal.
Ordinance No. 14 passed by the City Council January 7, 2003 relating to salaries of the Mayor
and Councilmcmbcrs is repealed in its entirety.
DRAFT
Section 5. Severability.
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.
AI 1 EST:
Section 6. 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.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY WASHINGTON
this day of , 2004.
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
Stanley Schwartz, Interim City Attorney
Date of Publication:
Effective Date:
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON
By:
Michael DeVleming, Mayor
11Sv -fsl\ Users\ Ct3ainbridgel cbainbridge \OrdinanccsUndepen den t Salary Cominission.doc Page 4 of 4
DRAFT
ADVANCE AGENDA
For Planning Discussion Purposes Only
as of April 30, 2004 8:00 a.m.
Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative
To: Council & Staff
From: City Manager
Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings
Mav 11, 2004 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.ni. [due date April 301
1. Proclamation: Tourism Week
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of Municipal Code [10 minutes]
3. CONSENT AGENDA [5 minutes]
4. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Adopting Municipal Code — Chris Bainbridge [5 minutes]
5. First Reading Proposed Ordinance Establishing Salary Commission — Councilmember Munson [10 minutes]
6. Proposed Resolution 04 -013 Amending Governance Manual, and Superseding Resolution 03 -028
Mayor DeVleming [10 minutes]
7. Motion Consideration: Essential Public Facilities Interlocal Agreement Approval and
Authorization for City Manager's Signature — Marina Sukup [10 minutes]
8. Motion Consideration: Authorize a PLUS Software Agreement —Nina Regor [10 minutes]
9. Mayor Appointments: Ad Hoc Sign Committee — Marina Sukup [10 minutes]
10. Administrative Report:
a. International Trade Alliance Presentation — Roberta Brooke [ 10 minutes]
b. Library Advisory Committee Update —Nina Regor [10 minutes]
c. Precinct Lease Agreement Report — Cal Walker [ 10 minutes]
d. Managed Competition Discussion — Morgan Koudelka [15 minutes]
e. Cable Franchise Renewal Process — Morgan Koudelka [10 minutes]
f. Aquifer Protection Area Program Reauthorization —Neil Kersten [15 minutes]
(estimated meeting time: 140 minutes* )
May 12, 2004, 6:30 — 9:00 p.m. Comprehensive Plan Community Meeting
East Valley High School, 12325 E Grace
May 18, 2004, Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date May 71
Media Relations Training
May 25, 2004 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due date May 14]
Proclamation: Native Plant Appreciation Week [5 minutes]
1. CONSENT AGENDA [5 minutes]
2. 2` Reading Proposed Ordinance Establishing Salary Commission — Councilmember Munson [5 minutes]
3. Proposed Resolution, Cable Franchise Renewal Process — Morgan Koudelka [5 minutes]
4. Motion Consideration: Precinct Lease Agreement — Cal Walker [5 minutes]
5. Administrative Reports: [no public comment]
a. Review of Contracts Inventory —Nina Regor [20 minutes]
b. Weed and Seed Grant — Cal Walker [ 10 minutes]
c. Spalding Towing Contract — Cary Driskell [15 minutes]
d. Managed Competition Discussion — Morgan . Koudelka [15 minutes]
e. Setback Requirements — Marina Sukup [10 minutes]
f. Discussion, Proposed Ordinance Establishing Estate Residential Zone — Marina Sukup [10 minutes]
6. Information Only: [no public comment]
a. Status of Previous Public Comments /Concerns
b. Minutes of Planning Commission
c. Departmental Monthly Reports [estimated meeting time: 105 minutes* ]
Advance Agenda— Draft Revised: 4/3 0/2X14 7:57 AM
Paget cif 3
June 1, 2004 Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date May 21]
I. Administrative Report Proposed Sidewalk Ordinance — Neil Kersten (15 minutes)
2. Appointments: Student Advisory Council — Mayor DeVleming (10 minutes)
3. Ad Hoc Sign Committee — Marina Sukup (15 minutes)
4. Business License Program Discussion — Ken Thompson (20 minutes)
5. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes)
6. Council Check in — Dave Mercier (5 minutes)
7. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier (5 minutes)
TOTAL MINUTES: 75
Max mtg time: 150 minutes
June 2, 2004, 6:30 — 9:00 p.m., Comprehensive Plan Community Meeting
Greenacres Elementary School, 17915 E. 4 Avenue, Spokane Valley
June 8, 2004 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due date May 28]
1. Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program — Neil Kersten (15 minutes)
2. Administrative Report: Economic Development Council Presentation [tentative] (45 minutes)
3. Proposed Resolution Aquifer Protection — Neil Kersten (15 minutes)
4. Motion Consideration: Set Election Date of 09/14/04 for Fire Districts Annexation — Nina Regor (15 minutes)
(estimated meeting time: 90 minutes* 1
June 15— 18, 2004 AWC Conference Ocean Shores (No Council Meeting June 15, 2004)
June 17, 2004, 6:30 — 9:00 p.m., Comprehensive Plan Community meeting
Spokane Valley Church of the Nazarene, 15515 E. 20 Avenue
June 22, 2004 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due date June 11]
1. Proposed Resolution Amending Resolution 04-007 to include Student Advisory Council Bylaws —
Mayor DeVleming (15 minutes)
2. Finalization of Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program — Neil Kersten (15 minutes)
Saturday, June 26, 2004 — Ralf Day Council Retreat
1. Update Five —Year Financial Forecast
2. Options for Closing Budget Gaps
June 29, 2004 Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date June 18]
July 6, 2004 No Study Session
Advance Agenda — Draft Revised: 4/30/2004 7 :57 AM Page 2 of 3
July 13, 2004, Regular Meeting, 6:00 p.m. [due date July 2]
July 20, 2004, No Study Session
July 20, 2004 OPEN HOUSE: WASTEWATER ISSUES (meeting place. to be determined)
July 27, 2004 Study Session 6:00 p.m.
August 3, 2004 Study Session 6:00 p.m.
August 10, 2004 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m.
1 August 17, 2004 Study Session 6:00 p.m.
August 24, 2004 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m.
August 31, 2004 Study Session 6:00 p.m.
[due date July 16]
[due date July 23]
[due date July 30]
[due date August 6]
[due date August 13]
[due date August 20]
OTHER PENDING AND /OR UPCOMING ISSUES:
09/21/04 Study Session: Overview of Draft Comprehensive Plan — Marina Sukup /Greg McCormick
Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 04 -007 Stormwater — Stanley Schwartz (first reading 02- 24 -04)
Second Reading Proposed Sidewalk Ordinance 04 -012 — Stanley Schwartz (first reading 02- 24 -04)
First Reading Proposed Sewer Ordinance —Neil Kersten
MEETINGS TO 13E SCHEDULED
1 open house — wastewater issues
[" estimated meeting time does not include time for public comments]
Advance Agenda — Draft Revised: 4/302004 7:57 AM Page 3 of 3