Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2004, 06-01 Study Session
Tuesday, June 1, 2004 CITY HALL AT REDWOOD PLAZA 11707 East Sprague Avenue. First Floor Please Tarn OITAII Electronic Devices During the Meeting DISCUSSION LEADEIR St'BJECT /ACIivrfl Employee Introduction - Neil Kersten 1. Mayor DeVlcming (5 minutes) 2. Mayor DeVkming (10 minutes) 3. Councilmcmbcr Flanigan (10 minutes) 4_ Ana Matthews (10 minutes) 5. Jon Elia sen, President. CEO (20 minutes) 6. Cary Driskell/Stcve Worley (5 minutes) 7. Neil Kersten/Steve Worley (5 minutes) 8. Marino Sukup (10 minutes) 9. Marina Sukup (10 minutes) 10. Marina Sukup (10 mimics) 11. ken Thompson (20 minutes) 12 Mayor DeVieming (5 minutes) 13. Dave Mercier (5 minutes) 14. Dave Mercier (5 minutes) AGENDA CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL WORKSHEET STUDY SESSION Appointments: Sign Ad Hoc Committee (two Sign Industry Representatives) Appointments: Student Advisory Council Elotel/Motel Fund Allocations a Spokane Valley Jr. Soccer Association b. Valleyfcst Health District Helmet Safety Presentation Economic Development Council Presentation Proposed Opportunity Cemetery Association Easement Spokane Co. Water District 03, Water Line Easement Setback Requirements Proposed Interim Zoning Control, Estate Lots Sprague/Appleway Couplet, Economic Analysis Business License Program Discussion Advance Agenda Additions Council Check in City Manager Comments GOAL 6:00 p.m. Motion: Approval of appointments Motion: Approval of appointments Motion: Approval of Funds Motion: Approval of Funds Discussion/Information Discussion/Information Discussion/Information Discussion/Information Discussion /Information Discussion/Information Motion: Authorize Contract Discussion/lnfortnation Discussion/Information Discussion/Information Discussion/Information Sore As Council Study Sessions. there will be no public comments. except Council reserves the right to request Information from the public and staff' as appropriate. HUME ttutnvaduts planning to attend the ntoting sotto requut ape tit assistance to accommodate physics:. Item mg ut ut impairments, please cum= the Cul Civic at (509) 921-1009 as scam as pnesihie sn Thos arrsn emmus ma }' he made CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 1, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business © new business .❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Approval of Appointments to the Ad Hoc Sign Committee to review the Sign regulations GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Chapter 14.804 Signage Standards Interim Zoning Regulations PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On March 30, 2004, Council was briefed on the Interim Sign Regulations, and authorized the formation of an ad hoc Sign Committee on April 6, 2004. At the May 25, 2004 Council meeting, the following appointments were approved: Membership: Spokane Valley Business Community: Ken Holloway and Denny York Citizen Representatives: • Ray Perry and David Quinn Planning Commission: David Crosby The remaining two positions representing the sign industry, were to be appointed at the June 1, 2004 meeting. BACKGROUND: The City Council adopted Chapter 14.804 of the Zoning Code of Spokane County as interim regulations governing signage. The provisions were adopted by Spokane County in 2002 following a multi -year effort, which included a study group which submitted recommendations for action. The Committee will review and recommend updates to the existing regulations. It is anticipated that the Committee will meet weekly through the end of July 2004 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve the Mayor's appointments to the Sign Committee. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, AICP, Community Development Director CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 1, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Appointments: Student Advisory Council GOVERNING LEGISLATION: BACKGROUND: As per Resolution 04 -007, Creating the Student Advisory Council: A. Appointment: Members of the Student Advisory Council shall be nominated by the Mayor and confirmed by a majority vote of at least four (4) members of the City Council. Student Advisory Council members shall serve without compensation. B. Representation: The Student Advisory Council shall consist of fifteen (15) voting members. There shall be. three (3) representatives from Central Valley High School, three (3) from University High School, two (2) from East Valley High School, two (2) from West Valley High School, one (1) from Valley Christian, the Mayor of Spokane Valley, the City Manager of Spokane Valley, one (1) representative of the business community of Spokane Valley, and one (1) at -large student to be appointed by the other fourteen (14) members (at -large member must be a City resident, between 14 -20 years of age and cannot be attending any of the high schools currently represented). C. Length of terms: Each member of the Student Advisory Council shall serve a one -year term. Each one -year term shall be from September 1 to June 30. L.� Meeting Date: June 1, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Hotel /Motel Fund Allocations GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: 1. Motion of fund approval to Spokane Valley Junior Soccer Association 2. Motion of fund approval to Valleyfest BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None CONTACT: Councilmember Flanigan ATTACHMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action ,o \ it saner Spokane Valley Junior Soccer (Association y Sports Creel Building • 12505 E. Sprague, 2nd Floor Mailing Address: P.O. Box 14732 • Spokane, WA 99214 (509) 922 -7910 • FAX 891-1516 Email: spvjsaofc@spvjsa.org 27 April 2004 Vl.ike Flanigan Commissioner City of Spokane Valley RE: SpVJSA Marketing and Promotion Services Agreements for 2003 and 2004 Dear Mr. Flanigan Thank you for the funds amount of $5,422.36 awarded from the Hotel and Lodging Tax refunds to us per our SpVJSA Marketing and Promotional Services Agreement for 2003. The remaining amount of $19377.64 was not received due to invoices submitted from us to you that were not accepted. Please approve that the remaining 2003 amount of $19377.64 be extended and added to our award for the Marketing and Promotional Services Agreement for 2004. This would make the total for a revised 2004 agreement equal $39,377.64. We would be happy to accept a revised 2004 agreement. We will continue to submit invoices per the agreement criteria. When we enter into any sub- contract for some of our marketing and promotion activities, we will submit a draft contract for your approval. Thank you for your awards which are permitting our Spokane Valley Jr. Soccer Association to host the biggest youth soccer event in the history of the Spokane region so far. The Far West Regional Championship tournament coming to Plantes Ferry Park and the Polo Grounds from June 20th to 26th will bring over 12,000 visitors from 14 western states to our Spokane area. Sincerely Yours and Cheers, George Skidmore SpVJSA Board Member Director of Plantes Ferry Park CC: Dave Mercier, City Manager Ken Thompson, Finance Officer The CAMPAIGN FOR .HELMET LAWS insp....count .. • Spokane SAFE KIDS Coalition (509) 324-3613 The CAMPAIGN FOR HELMET LAWS ;n Spokane count T he Issue Since 1998, thousands of free helmets have been distributed to children in Spokane County and across the east region of Washington by the Spokane SAFE KIDS Coalition and partnering agencies. Hundreds of educational activities have been held to educate youth about the lifesaving benefits of helmet use. Despite these efforts, observations of helmet use among children reveals a decline - from 64 %in 1997 to 41 %in2003. In the summer of 2003, a young Spokane boy was fatally injured while riding a bicycle. An investigation by law enforcement revealed that the boy was not wearing a helmet at the time, and that his fatality was duc to head injury. This series of events was a call to action for the Spokane SAFE KIDS Coalition. T he Campaign In August 2003, the Spokane SAFE KIDS Coalition organized a Helmet Safety Committee to campaign for the adoption of helmet ordinances by local citics and Spokane County. The committee has gathered information from many of the 20 communities in Washington State with similar ordinances already in place. The group has collected local and state statistics, data about enforcement, and sample ordinances. From this work, a model ordinance for Spokane County has been written and the committee has developed a campaign action plan for 2004. The plan will: • Mobilize resources - gather grassroots support for the campaign, ensure a strong supply of free helmets and develop a compelling campaign information kit. • Build alliances - solicit the support of key community leaders and organizations through personal contacts, and collect endorsements. • Engage the media - educate local reporters and secure media partnerships to increase public awareness about the issue and the campaign. • Gather support - present at local City Council meetings and with the Board of County Commissioners to ask for the adoption of helmet ordinances. • Advocate for an all -wheel ordinance for everyone over the age of one. The H•lmot Sorot Commlttoo includes representatives from: Spokane County Traffic Safety Commission, Spokane and Cheney Police Department, Spokane and Cheney Fire Departments, Spokane Regional Health District, Spokane Public Schools and local schools and insurance agencies. Since 1993, over 20 local cities and counties in Washington State have adopted helmet legislation. Most recently, King County amended their ordinance to include the City of Seattle. These laws help protect nearly 46% Q. Wo•l,ln9ton Stat.. population from head injury and death by requiring the use of helmets. "I participate in more than my share of adventure sports. I've raced mountain bikes in the Expert category, guided and taught mountain climbing and kayaked and skied for fun. Each sport takes skill, experience, knowledge and the right equipment. I wouldn't think about participating in any sport with the potential for head injury without first putting on my helmet." —John Roskelley Spokane County Commissioner "An important junction ofpublic health is to prevent injuries. Helmets are highly effective at preventing or minimizing serious head injuries. in crashes and falls from bikes, skates or scooters. We in public health support laws, regulations, policies and ordinances that require helmet usage because they improve utilization and prevent injuries." —Kim M. Thorburn, MD, MPH Health Officer- Spokane Regional Health District The CAMPAIGN FOR HELMET LAWS In Spokane Count Life Is Defined In Moments Our lives were changed forever on August 23, 2003 when my fourteen-year-old daughter Alex was hit by a car while she was riding her bike_ She was not wearing a helmet. Alex .sheered traumatic brain injury and fractutrs at C4 -7. The brain injury created learning deficits of sewral years in some areas. She also has physical deficits that she must overcome to play volleyball again. Alex spent 3 weeks in critical condition at Deaconess. A few times she would fight her way through the narcotics and open her eyes. Looking into her big blue eyes was like looking into deep blue water. Then she would slip back to the depths as silently as she had surfaced. When Alex stabilized she began the second leg of her journey at St. Luke's• where she spent 3 weeks learning to eat, dress, walk, and talk again. Fast forward to present: Alex is back in school full-time. She is a semester behind but is determined to graduate with her class and go on to college. Only people that really know Alex notice the subtle changes: the scars on her face; the awkward gait when she runs. But they also notice changes that only follow life threatening trauma: a softer heart and an appreciation for life. Alex was given a second chance to live and to speak to other kids about the importance of wearing bike helmets. Brenda Goehring Spokane, WA About Brain Injury A blow or jolt to the head can result in a traumatic brain injury, which can disrupt the normal function of the brain. The severity of the injury may range from a brief change in mental status or consciousness, to an extended period of unconsciousness (30 minutes or more), prolonged amnesia after the injury or penetrating skull injury. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), any traumatic brain injury can result in short and long -term disabilities. Brain injuries are among the most likely types of injury to cause death and permanent disability. Crashes involving motor vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians and recreational vehicles are the primary cause of traumatic brain injury. An estimated 15% of people who sustain a rnild brain injury continue to experience negative consequences one year after the injury. Hoed trauma con ceu•o. • Blindness • Deafness • Paralysis • Epilepsy • Developmental disabilities • Trauma to the head can seriously injure the brain, causing it to bleed, bruise and swell. This can lead to many serious conditions, including death. Spinal Cob In 11,000 Multiple Sclemeiy 1.0WAIDS 10,400 43.681 Tr ; +c 3 .ivn Inluris 1 5i iC.I.0CI0 Comparison of Annual Incidence Drib (oM i0 on) n , brupp},to Cent au) Mfg: e.O.m1 to00 m &i. tart na Cu n s IV Q.ura C».w r aR.wur, As 140.1a C PCM ! ,C.I. Jftl Plasm '1..vu Sot Braga Cancer 176,300 The Fats About Injurics Bicycling, skateboarding, riding scooters and in -line skating are popular recreational sports. However, without the proper protective. gear, injury and death can occur. In 1998, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) estimated that about 3 million head .• injuries, related to consumer products, were treated in emergency rooms. About 440,000 of these injuries were concussions and skull • fractures. In Washington State, hospital discharge data shows that treatment for non -fatal bicycle injuries Among children aged 14 and under . costs more than $113 million each year, an average of $218,000 per injured child. ., • Over a five -year period, Spokane -area hospital emergency rooms treated 4,500 individuals for injuries related to pedal cycling. Of. these injuries, about 26% had a diagnosis that involved the head, face or neck. During this same time period (1997 - 2001), six people . were killed in pedal cycle - related incidents and 259 were hospitalized. • • Bicycling • According to the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute (1999), there are an estimated 85 million bicycle riders in the United States and about 800 die every year from bicycle- related injury. Roughly 90% of bicycle - related deaths involve collisions with motor vehicles. About half of the deaths are children under 15 years old. • • About 540,000 bicyclists visit emergency rooms with injuries every year. Of these, about 67,000 have head injuries. • About in 8 88% of' cyclists with reported injuries has a brain injury. • About 88% or cyclists brain inJuriaa eon bo bro./contact by o hairnet. • Direct costs of cyclists' injuries arc estimated at $81 million each year. • indirect costs of cyclists' injuries are estimated at $2.3 billion each year. • Bicycle crashes and injuries are under- reported, since many do not result in an emergency room visit. Skateboarding The CPSC reports that approximately 26,000 people are treated in hospital emergency rooms each year with skateboard related injuries. Sprains, fractures, contusions and abrasions are the most common types of injuries. Reported deaths typically are duc to collisions with motor vehicles and from falls. Riding Scooters Data gathered by the CPSC show that there were 84,400 scooter- related injuries treated in hospital emergency rooms from January 2001 through September 2001. Most non - powered scooter related deaths occurred when the rider collided with a motor vehicle. In -Line Skating According to CPSC estimates, approximately 11,000 in -line skaters suffer from head or fact injuries annually and as many as two - thirds of skaters do not wear safety gear. The use of safety gear is essential in preventing injuries. Between 70 and 80% of all fatal bicycle crashes involve brain injury. :Helmets reduce the risk of head Injury by 85%, and the risk of broln injury by 88% t happened on my bicycle last September. I was single track riding on trails at Riverside State Park and conning down a hill. I guesslgnt too far off the side oldie trail and caught a pedal. I'm not really sure what happened, but my pedals stopped and 1 kept going - right over the front of the handlebars and down the hill. 1 rolled head over heels a little ways and got up. My arm, shoulder, ankle and backside were pretty scraped up, but I got back on my bike and kept going. 11 wasn't until the, end of the ride when l took off - • my hehnet that I saw the hole - a nice hig hole dead center in the middle of the helmet. That hole could have been in my head, had it not been for the helmet. My helmet was definitely doing its job that day I'd hate to think what could have happened without it " -- Deputy Tom Walker Spokane County Sheriffs Office Spokane Helmet Ordinance Campaign Pedal Cyclist Fatal Injuries >6 Fatalities (1997 -2001) >259 Non- fatal Hospitalizations (1997 -2001) >4500 Emergency Room Visits (December 1998 - November 2003) 27% of all ER visits head, face or neck diagnoses Pedal Cyclist Injury Rates S • okane Coun •Head injuries account far. •30%orED visits •Two - thirds of the hospitalizations •Throe quarters of the deaths -I-lead injuries lead to lifelong consequences Bicycle Injuries & Deaths 1 Effectiveness of Helmets •First case - control study, NEJM 1989 •85% decreased risk of head injury •88% decreased risk of brain injury •Second case- control study, JAMA 1996 •69% decreased risk in head injury •65% decreased risk in brain injury 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% O% 1997 ® 1998 • 1999 O 2000 O 2001 ■ 2002 • 2003 Washington Observed Bicycle Helmet Use Rates 2 Costs to Schools Regular Education $8,200.00 /per year Special Education 529,200.00 /per year Washington City Ordinances All Ages Aberdeen (2.001); Bainbridge Island (2001); Bellevue (2002); Bremerton (2000); Des Moines (1993); DuPont; Duvall (1993); Enumclaw (1993); Firerest (1995); Gig Harbor (1996); Hunts Point (1993); Kent (1999); King County (1993/03); Lakewood (1996); Milton* (1997); Pie= County (1994); Port Angeles (1994); Puyallup (1944); Renton (1999); Snoqualmie (1996); Steilacoom (1995); Tacoma' (1994); University Place (1996) *Helmets also required for in -line skating, skatebmrding Washington City Ordinances Under 16 - Fart onvil le (1996) Under 1 7 — Orti nl; (1997) Under 18 — Poulsbo (1995) All ages over 1 year — Scatac (1999) All ages - Snohomish Skate Par (2002) repealed city -wide bike ordinance All ages recommendation only — Island County (1997) :r :d • • 3 Usage in Washington Cities w /Ordinance 100% 90% 80% T0% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 096 sue-. M Bellevue • DesMoines CI Enumclaw O Kent ▪ Port Angeles • Puyallup • Renton G Tacoma Conditions for Community Health Behavior Chan • e I. Community Support 2. Organizational Policies 3. Access • Low cost or free helmets widely available 4. Education/Information 5. Role Modeling • Adult behavior influences children's hehuviur 6. Legislation Helmet Ordinance Campaign Activities -Enforcement •Helmet Availability •Public Awareness Campaign 4 Spokane's Plan of Action •Partner Support •Public Awareness Campaign •SRI-ID BOW Regulation •Propose - June 2004 •Approve and Adopt — July 2004 5 Meeting Date: June 1, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: 0 consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Economic Development Council Presentation GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Jon Eliassen, President and CEO of the Economic Development Council, will give a 20- minute presentation. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Economic Development Strategy 2004-2007 Spokane Area Economic Development Council Creating a "High Performance" EDC Step 2 - Revisit Mission Spokane Area EDC Mission Continuously improve the Spokane Economy through a busness-focused strategy, proactively promoting Spokane's btniness identity and facilitating new investment and jobs in primary clusters while leveraging and collaborating with partner organizations. Step 3 — Define Core Competencies Spokane Area EDC Core Competencies 1. Focus — Economic Expansion 2. Expertise — Facilitate Business Solutions 3. Collaborate — Become Globally-Competitive Step 4 — Facilitation Role OutletS4 leson j( (' , • *Inne 1 Step 5 — Set Goals Create a'high- performance' economic development environment for existing and new business to maximize their performance to compete globally Create, with partners, a'collaborate to compete' mindset Create and market a business identity as a 'globally - competitive community' Create duster development strategies with partners to target locating ti islnesses in vacant fatalities and busvres3 parks ' 1 r t Step 6 — Set Performance Goals Facilitate ceneralion of 2,000 new jobs per year in primary cluster: with potential of 1.5 mutliplier effect Laver the current unemployment rate of 6.6% (2003) by 1% or at least equal to national average tncrease average earnings per worker in primary dusters to an annual average of 2% Facilitate new investment in infrastructure, buildings and equipment of at toast $15 million Strong Industry, Businoss 8 Government Leadership Understars Ito economic situnean for to global caallenpes and o ponunilies engage partners and feGlars C(Oata a ire nawvrt tar QOtlabaralbn t � � r4: Step 8 — Operational Budget • In 2000, David )(elbow recommended, a budget equal to 52.50 per resident dedicated to Economic Development • In 2004, wdh increased competition tor jobs and investment, a oommun3y's irw should equal 53.75 per resident. 1 is Why Invest in Economic Development? Economic Challenges a9,..12:10.zslimzeimtmarlaramf +? ' G TiZoc27s IttCt"itOO cflS_bt_ t' ago. fn p..G�� sf )ri3Tu' 1 > ,��. Iv —n .I UpL yet r0e.wei>?!',R. - - Mtr•'Jt;IJ�Jt'3 • Jobs _e Val added Qf' PJTic3f1 JC1 FbI�GC:1 ' uj74'K:SflQ g tint 'r�T`1irflr ) _D�'�il •1 r . C K9 ;ealli% Se4115 itlll ilrr�41 ?" 2 Ad.dd Amu I Al.41...P. 01....1.f. tra.. 1.0D TOD (on •ILM g) e 7 e - 1 tn.. • hat) . . ir 4:10 V+1 NA Lnn Na Nri Ms: IV I. NW NI) anl Z 3113 lb 1c11 21: Sum LleararnoCCadirarasleru.s........Er. H. la re..................rarrew rrarratrarar rat...a...rm.. Economic Indicator - Earnings & Employment Spot.. Color, Ewing. • Enpluirnanl by In•••1”/ UM 1 r Sliokanz's Economic Building' Gam:ay. waning and dagano OCOnally Win ■••arlwit• ai nnd chnNevves 14= tvrzaCirt t rerara • • las. Ca•••mace 1 0••••rr•••••• Economic Indicator-Unemployment • 1 - re? • 2ag Lurzzus' 3' _ Economic Indicator - Jobs Needed 3 Economic Opportunity- Employment Spokane WA Curtont Specialization by Traded Quetta 20062010 rn.p. es... e, . a Wm.e ]OOPS 3JO I spyeY, La .i Sal ems MD IOW 1 Spatcano WA Cement Specialization by Traded Mew =CI -2010 Five -Point Economic Development Agenda 4 Spokane Area EDC - Five -Point Economic Development Agenda 1. Business Identity Netkinal awareness at Socialite's gbesllycorrtpetl6vo business climate 2. Resource Collaboration K e y re s o u r c e or g:Ink: n'Red Team' agreements. S. Cluster Development Facilkato aniandien and attraction of six hiptHarraeh industry clusters. 4. Competitive Communities Conenunity products, irrfrm:duces° and workforce. '5. Economic Planning Transitionirij ideas and ptens into prosperity. Economic Opportunity- Employment Spokane WA Curtont Specialization by Traded Quetta 20062010 rn.p. es... e, . a Wm.e ]OOPS 3JO I spyeY, La .i Sal ems MD IOW 1 Spatcano WA Cement Specialization by Traded Mew =CI -2010 Five -Point Economic Development Agenda 4 • R • Marketing Coordinator • industry- Specific Project Managers • Business Development Assistant • Financing Specialist • Workforce Specialist Staflf ine • CC_DS/Economic Development Specialist • Chief Executive Officer • Director of investor Relations • Office Manager /Bookkeeper • Executive Assistant EDC Annual Budget Requests • County of Spokane • City of Spokane • City of Spokane valley • State— Department of CfED 5275,000.00 $405,000.00 $ 175,000.00 $20,000.00 •,r7 ,t-- �1 t• Spokane EDC Facilitating business solutions, economic expansion and globally - competitive communities Spokane Arai Economic Development Council Jon Ellassen. President & CEO Tel SO9.7429350 iww.spoknnocdc.org 5 Meeting Date: June 1, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action ❑ old business new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information X admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Opportunity Cemetery Association Easement GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: The Pines Cemetery, operated by the Opportunity Cemetery Association, has an irrigation water line within the 16 Avenue right -of -way. According to cemetery staff the irrigation line has been in place for over 50 years and provides water from the south side of 16 Avenue to the north side. However, approval to cross the right -of -way has never been granted for this water line. This issue was discovered by Spokane County during the design of the 16 Avenue widening project (Dishman Mica to Pines). The irrigation line will need to be relocated by during construction of the 16 Avenue improvements. City staff contacted the Cemetery Association and informed them that permission would be needed for use of the right -of -way. Originally, a draft franchise agreement was sent to them for their review and they agreed to its terms. Subsequently, staff discussed internally that an easement would be more appropriate to clarify that the use was very limited to the one location, and that an easement is a more appropriate vehicle to do that. At this time, we are waiting for the cemetery district to provide us with a legal description showing the exact location of the water pipe. As soon as that is provided, we will present the easement for consideration by the Council. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Recommend placing this on next council for a motion to approve the easement for the irrigation water line within the 16 Avenue right -of -way. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell / Steve Worley ATTACHMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 1, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: SCWD #3 Water Line Easement — Park Road Swale Property GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: As part of the Park Road widening project a 0.54 acre parcel was purchased near the north end of the project area for the construction of a stormwater treatment swale. Spokane County Water District #3 (SCWD #3) has requested a 15 foot water line easement across the north boundary of the swale property. SCWD has plans to construct a water tower east of the swale site and the water line easement would be used to supply water to the tower. In consideration for the easement, SCWD #3 is offering to waive the installation fee for the 1" irrigation service line that Spokane Valley needs for a swale associated with our 16th Avenue project at Dishman Mica Road. The cost of the irrigation service is $3,725.00. Spokane Valley staff has reviewed the proposed easement location and has determined that there will be no impacts from the easement on the city's use of the site for a swale. OPTIONS: Approve or deny the requested water line easement RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Recommend approval of water line easement and authorize City Manager to execute easement document. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten / Steve Worley ATTACHMENTS Water Line Easement WATER LINE EASEMENT DRAFT The Undersigned Grantor(s), City of Spokane Valley, whose address is 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206, for and in consideration of the installation of one (1) one -inch irrigation service near 16 Avenue and Woodruff Road (a value of $3,725.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, do hereby grant and convey to Spokane County Water District No. 3, (Grantee) whose address is P. O. BOX 11187, Spokane, Washington 99211-1187, their successors, assigns, lessees, licensees and agents a perpetual easement to construct, reconstruct, operate, maintain and remove such utility facilities as Grantee may require upon, over, under and across the following described land which the Grantor owns or in which the Grantor has any interest to wit: A fifteen (15.0) foot wide utility easement being the north fifteen (15.0) feet of the following described property. Section 19, Township 25N, Range 44 E.W.M. in Spokane County, Washington further described as follows: That portion of Government Lot 1 defined as follows: Beginning at a point 30 feet East and 1043.43 South of the Northwest comer of said Section; which point is on the right -of -way line of Park Road then East 188.86 feet, then South 125 feet, then West 188.86 to the East right -of -way line of Park Road then North 125 feet to the point of beginning. (Parcel Number 45192.9145) Said easement being a strip of land fifteen (15) feet wide, across the above described properties for ingress and egress and utility placement as shown on Exhibit "1 ". SUBJECT to easements and restrictions of record. Grantee shall have the right of ingress and egress and utility placement over and across the Land of the Grantor; and the right to clear and keep cleared all trees and other obstructions. The Grantor reserves the right to occupy, and use said Easement for all purposes not inconsistent with, nor interfering with the rights herein granted. In the event that the Grantee requires access to the Grantee's facilities in order to repair, reconstruct, operate, maintain and remove such utility facilities any cost incurred to remove and replace any improvements made by the Grantor shall be the responsibility of the Grantee and not the Grantor. B By: General Manager City Manager 1)) HA IF Er The Grantee will indemnify the Grantor and hold the Grantor harmless from liability (including reasonable attomey's fees) caused by, resulting from or related to the Grantee's use of the property. The rights, conditions and provisions of this easement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the respective parties hereto. Any claim, controversy or dispute arising out of this Agreement shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the applicable rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitration may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. The arbitration shall be conducted in Spokane County. In witness whereof the undersigned has executed this instrument this day of 2004. Spokane County Water District #3 City of Spokane Valley STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) ss. DRAFT On this day of , 2004, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared Ty Wick to me known to be the person who signed as General Manager, of Spokane County Water District No. 3, the corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was duly elected, qualified, and acting as said officer of the corporation, that he was authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate seal of said corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year first above written. (Signature of Notary) (Printed Name of Notary) NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at Spokane. My Commission Expires: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) COUNTY OF SPOKANE ss. On this day of , 2004, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared to me known to be the person who signed as City Manager, of the City of Spokane Valley, the corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was duly elected, qualified, and acting as said officer of the corporation, that he was authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed, if any, is the corporate seal of said corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year first above written. (Signature of Notary (Printed Name of Notary) Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at My Commission Expires: 3RD AVENUE _J 9 EXHIBIT" 10111 -- 1 - 1 N 8561. 51.55 15010.685 Mer54 J'11 PROPOSED EASEMENT 168.86' 5 5 O Crf 111 a. ii 111 PARCEL# 45192.9145 "Tk D 168.86 N86*58.37E PROPOSED WATER MAIN LOCATION SCALE: 1".-- DRAWN 5/5/04 S86583 N N N 1 0 z Meeting Date: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action June 1, 2004 City Manager Sign - off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative Report. Proposed ordinance establishing Section 4.15.1 Residential Standards and Section 4.15.2 Non - Residential Dimensional Standards of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code. The proposal consolidates and modifies regulations concerning height, area and setbacks contained in the Interim Zoning Code, deletes obsolete and/or non -urban provisions, provides for severability and effective date. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.63.105, WAC 365 -195 -845, WAC 365- 195 -855, Spokane Valley Ordinance 03 -53 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: City Council was briefed on interim development regulations requiring review on April 6, 2004. BACKGROUND: The City Council adopted the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan pursuant to Ordinance No. 03 -52, subsequently adopting the Zoning Code of Spokane County as interim development regulations for the new city (Ordinance 03 -53). The interim Zoning Code includes many regulations which do not apply within urban areas and other regulations which staff has suggested should be amended to eliminate redundancy, ambiguity and conflicts in enforcement. The proposed amendment would consolidate dimensional standards for development into two tables, residential and non- residential. The proposal would also amend residential dimensional standards as follows: 1. Front yard setbacks: reduced to fifteen feet from 25 feet, measured from the property line or the edge of the border easement. 2. Garage setbacks: twenty feet added to allow parking within the driveway which does not overhang public right -of -way or border easements. 3. Side yard setbacks: reduced to a flat five feet. 4. Side yard setbacks (flanking street): reduced to fifteen feet. A significant portion of the Administrative Exceptions relate to side yard setbacks on comer lots. 5. Rear Yards: the minimum size of rear yard would be increased from 15 feet to 20 feet for single - family and duplex developments only. 6. Minimum lot sizes and other dimensional requirements within Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) have been deleted. There is no change proposed for setback requirements of any accessory structure. Rural residential zoning classifications SRR -5, R -5, SRR -1, SR -1 and SR -1/2 are repealed as inappropriate for urban development and because no property within the corporate limits presently maintains this zoning classification. Rural Residential -10 is retained only because of existing property retains this designation. No changes to the non - residential dimensional standards are proposed. The repealing clause would delete a provision which requires a minimum separation between Neighborhood Business (B -1) zones of 2,640 feet, unless it is within 100 feet of another B -1 zone. The Interim Comprehensive Plan encourages the location of business clusters rather than arterial strip development, although there is no specific reference in the Comprehensive Plan that the Administrative Report Dimensional Standards Page 2of2 spacing of these zones is designed to accomplish this objective nor any evidence that the requirement is intended to accomplish this objective. The proposed amendment in the Interim Development Regulations is subject to review by the Department of Community Trade and Economic Development. The Environmental Checklist was completed on May 20, 2004 and a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) issued. Appeals to the DNS should be submitted not later than June 11, 2004. Subject to Council direction a public hearing will be held by the Planning Commission and their recommendation will be forwarded to City Council. OPTIONS: approve for placement on a future agenda, provide additional direction to the staff, or take no action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approval for placement on a future agenda, following a public hearing before the Planning Commission. . BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Not applicable. STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS: Draft ordinance. f �1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE No. 53 TO ESTABLISH SECTIONS 4.15.1 RESIDENTIAL DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS AND 4.15.2 NON- RESIDENTIAL DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODE; REPEALING PROVISIONS IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, The Interim Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City of Spokane Valley pursuant to Ordinance 53, specifies dimensional standards for residential and non- residential development; and Whereas, WAC 365 - 195 -845 provides that "[t]he development regulations of planning jurisdictions should include provisions addressing the general procedures for processing applications for development, designed to promote timeliness, fairness and predictability"; and Whereas, WAC 365 - 195 -855 which provides that "[i]n the drafting of development regulations.....procedures for avoiding takings, such as variances or exemptions, should be built into the overall regulatory scheme;" and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan Goal ED.5a is to "[p]rovide consistent, fair and timely regulations that are flexible, responsive and effective" and WHEREAS, Policy ED.5.6 directs "[r] development regulations continuously to ensure clarity, consistency, predictability and direction," including "[p]rovide opportunities for citizens to initiate amendments to inconsistent, outdated, inappropriate or unnecessary or confusing regulations.." consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (RCW 35A.63.105); and WHEREAS, the proposed development regulations must be submitted *to the Washington Department of Community Trade and Economic Development pursuant to WAC 365 - 195 -620; and follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, do ordain as Section 1. Section 4.15.1 Residential Dimensional Standards and Section 4.15.2 Non - Residential Dimensional Standards of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code are hereby established as provided in Exhibit "A" and "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof for all purposes. Section 2. Repealer:. The Interim Zoning Code, Sections 14.616.305 through 14.616.335, 14.618.305 through 14.618.335, 14.620.305 through 14.620.335, 14.622.305 through 14.622.335, 14.624.309 through 14.624.335; 14.626.310 through 14.626.335, 14.628.315 through 14.628.335, 14.630.310 through 14.630.335, 14.632.310 through 14.632.335, 14.634.310 through 14.634.335, 14.636.310 through 14.635.325, and Chapters 14.608 Semi -Rural Residential -5 (SRR -5), 14.609 Rural -5 (R -5), 14.610 Semi - Rural Residential -2 (SRR -2), 14.612 Suburban Residential -1 (SR -1), 14.614 Suburban Residential -1 /2 (SR -1 /2), and 14.812 Solar Developments. are hereby repealed. Page 1 Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect full force and effect five (5) days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City. ATTEST: PASSED by the City Council this day of _, 2004. City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved as to Form: Interim City Attorney, Stanley M. Schwartz Date of Publication: Effective Date: Mayor, Michael DeVleming Page 2 Section 4.15.1 Residential Zone Dimensional Standards • MIn mum-Se 5' treoture (j' "Clear view" Triangle required (Z) hichever -is- greater M easure! frormpr perty Finn outside border easement. if any Zero setbacks along rear and/or one side are allowed provided that a 5' -0" construction and maintenance easement(s) is recorded with the (3 1 Spokane County Auditor prior to issuance of a building permit. Minimum rear yard setbacks on zero lot line configuration shall not be Tess than fifty (50) feet or the sum of the rear yards required by the underlying zone, whichever is greater. (41 Minimum side yard setbacks between dwelling units and adjacent lots shall not be less than 10 feet on the side opposite the zero in a zero lot line configuration Mini () L- invited -by- underlying -zone (a) Ot-55- feel -from tlosentertineef -th 's- greater (a) In- addition -to- Density -@onus UR- 3.5 UR 713N11 UR 12 UR 22 (3)(1) UR-7- UR-12 Single Family Duplex Single Family Duplex Multi- family Single Family Duplex Multi- family Single Family Duplex Multi- family wrnululvv Lot Area /Dwelling Unit 10,000 20,000 6.000 11,000 15,000 4,200 5.000 6,000 1,600 3,200 6,000 Lot Frontage 80 80 65 90 100 50 50 60 20 40 60 Lot Depth N/A N/A 80 89 N/A 80 80 100 80 80 100 Front Yard Setback 25 15 25 3545 254542} 2445( 26 „ rzs 25-15 345 2545 24 25 -15 nrag Sa etbadk 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20m 20(2) 202.1 2D Rear Yard Setback"' 20 20 46 20 4 20 15 45 20 45 20 15 4.520 45 20 15 Side Yard Setback ` "' 5+ 5 5. 5 54-' 5 5 5 6+= 5 5 5 5 5 6.E' 5 54 5 6 + 5 5+= 5 Side Yard Setback (flanking Street) 2.5.15 2545 2.545(21 01 Ixl t2: 45 2545 25 - 15 (2: 254512' 2.545(2 II 60,0% wn II Density (DU/Acre) 4.35 4.35 7 7 7 12 12 12 22 22 22 Lot Coverage 50.0% 50.0% 55.0% 55.0% 55.0% 60.0% 60.0% 60.0% 65.0% 65,0% 65.0% Building Height (in feet) • 35 35 35 35 35 40 40 40 50 50 50 Building Height (in stories) 2t), 2'A 2',4 2Y2 3 3 3 4 4 4 Section 4.15.1 Residential Zone Dimensional Standards • MIn mum-Se 5' treoture (j' "Clear view" Triangle required (Z) hichever -is- greater M easure! frormpr perty Finn outside border easement. if any Zero setbacks along rear and/or one side are allowed provided that a 5' -0" construction and maintenance easement(s) is recorded with the (3 1 Spokane County Auditor prior to issuance of a building permit. Minimum rear yard setbacks on zero lot line configuration shall not be Tess than fifty (50) feet or the sum of the rear yards required by the underlying zone, whichever is greater. (41 Minimum side yard setbacks between dwelling units and adjacent lots shall not be less than 10 feet on the side opposite the zero in a zero lot line configuration Mini () L- invited -by- underlying -zone (a) Ot-55- feel -from tlosentertineef -th 's- greater (a) In- addition -to- Density -@onus 1 - SOL- AR -LOT- STANDARDS UR-3,5 UR-7- UR-12 UR-22 L4R -3-5 UR-7- 138-42 UR22 SF Duple* S L-ol-Ar-ea/Dwefiing -Unit W 4280 3 608 800 6 000 4208 3,609 5;000 800 Lot- Frontage 40 40 45 3e 59 50 45 50 30 Lot-Depth N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A 80 89 N/A F- ront•Yard- Setback 45 45 4-5 45 25,13- 36 25 K, 2 2c+, Rear-Yard-Set-bask N/A NIA N/A N/A 29 45 35 45 4-5 N/A NIA N/A N/A 5. 5+ 5* 54. 5AI NIA .NIA NIA NIA 25 "' 26 255 25'1 fit{, Oensity- (DIr/Asre) 5,35 42 22 4.35'°' r "' 3-n . 442" 2r LGE- Coverage Nene 60,0% Nene Nene 60,0% 60-0% 60:0% 69.0% 500% 141 iirting.Height-(In feet) 35 35 40 50 35 36 49 49 n/a Section 4.15.1 Residential Zone Dimensional Standards • MIn mum-Se 5' treoture (j' "Clear view" Triangle required (Z) hichever -is- greater M easure! frormpr perty Finn outside border easement. if any Zero setbacks along rear and/or one side are allowed provided that a 5' -0" construction and maintenance easement(s) is recorded with the (3 1 Spokane County Auditor prior to issuance of a building permit. Minimum rear yard setbacks on zero lot line configuration shall not be Tess than fifty (50) feet or the sum of the rear yards required by the underlying zone, whichever is greater. (41 Minimum side yard setbacks between dwelling units and adjacent lots shall not be less than 10 feet on the side opposite the zero in a zero lot line configuration Mini () L- invited -by- underlying -zone (a) Ot-55- feel -from tlosentertineef -th 's- greater (a) In- addition -to- Density -@onus CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: - June 1, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing © information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative Report. Proposal to Amend Ordinance No. 53 to establish Chapter 14.615 Urban Residential Estate (UR -1) Zone and applicable development regulations. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70, Spokane Valley Ordinance 53 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None. BACKGROUND: The City Council adopted the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan pursuant to Ordinance No. 52, subsequently adopting the Zoning Code of Spokane County as interim development regulations for the new city (Ordinance 53). The Comprehensive Plan establishes the following Policies in relevant part:' ....Low density residential areas shall range from 1 to and including six dwelling units per acre" (UL.9.1) and " Spokane County shall seek to achieve an average residential density in new development of at least 4 dwelling units per net acre in the Urban Growth Area through a mix of densities and housing types." (UL.9.2) The zoning classifications established by these regulations provide for a maximum density of seven dwelling units /acre for areas designated as "Low Density Residential" or "LDR" by the Comprehensive Plan. Two well - established neighborhoods located within areas designated for Low Density Residential (LDR) uses have requested consideration of a regulatory mechanism that would continue to permit the keeping of a limited number of large animals, primarily horses. These neighborhoods were originally established over twenty -five years ago to allow the keeping of such animals, a practice that was permitted under the previous zoning classification. WAC 365 -195- 310(2)(1) provides that "[i]n developing the housing element attention should be working with the desires of residents to preserve the character and vitality of existing neighborhoods, along with the rights of people to live in the neighborhood of their choice ". The proposed amendment in the Interim Development Regulations is subject to review by the Department of Community Trade and Economic Development. Subject to Council direction, a public hearing will be held by the Planning Commission and their recommendation will be forwarded to City Council. The actual zoning of one or more geographic areas is an area -wide rezone implemented by legislative action pursuant to the requirements of Section 14.402.100 of the Interim Zoning regulations. OPTIONS: approve for placement on a future agenda, provide additional direction to the staff, or take no action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approval for placement on a future agenda. . BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Not applicable. STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS: Draft ordinance. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 04 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 03 -53 TO ESTABLISH CHAPTER 14.615 URBAN RESIDENTIAL ESTATE (UR -l.) ZONE AND THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS APPLICABLE THERETO. WHEIOAS, The Growth Management Act provides that all zoning regulations be consistent with an adopted Comprehensive Plan (RCW 35A.63.105); and WHEREAS, The Interim Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City of Spokane Valley pursuant to Ordinance 03 -53, specifies a maximum net density (dwelling units /acre) for all residential zoning districts; and WHEREAS, "Low Density Residential" is identified as LDR in the adopted Plan, with maximum densities ranging from one to 4.35 (UR. 3.5) and 7 (UR 7) within designated districts; and WHEREAS, WAC 365 - 195- 310(2)(I) provides that "[i]n developing the housing element attention should be working with the desires of residents to preserve the character and vitality of existing neighborhoods, along with the rights of people to live in the neighborhood of their choice "; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan states that "Spokane County is a community that provides the opportunity for a variety of housing types and development patterns for all incomes and lifestyles while preserving the environment and the character of existing neighborhoods"; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan establishes the following Policies in relevant part: "UL.9.1. ....Low density residential areas shall range from 1 to and including six dwelling units per acre" and "UL.9.2 Spokane County shall seek to achieve an average residential density in new development of at least 4 dwelling units per net acre in the Urban Growth Area through a mix of densities and housing types. "; and WHEREAS, certain well- established neighborhoods located within areas designated for Low Density Residential (LDR) uses have requested consideration of a regulatory mechanism that would continue to permit the keeping of a limited number of large animals, primarily horses; and WHEREAS, these neighborhoods were originally established to allow the keeping of such animals; and follows: WHEREAS, these neighborhoods have been in existence for over twenty-five years. WHEREAS, the proposed development regulations must be submitted to the Washington Department of Community Trade and Economic. Development pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106WAC 365- 195 -620; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, ordains as Page 1 Section 1. Chapter 14.615 of the interim Zoning Code is hereby established as an amendment to Ordinance No. 03 -53 to read as follows: "Chapter 14.615 Urban Residential Estate (UR -1) Zone 14.615.100 Purpose and Intent The purpose of the UR -1 zone is to preserve the character and vitality of existing neighborhoods which have historically permitted the keeping of a limited number of large animals and livestock. Lots are presently served by a public water system and may require connection to a public sewer system. The residential character necessitates the provision of paved roads and other public facilities. 14.615.210 Permitted Uses Hereafter in the UR -1 zone no building, structure improvements or portion thereof shall be erected, constructed, converted, established, altered, or enlarged, nor shall any lot or premises be used, except for those uses specifically permitted in this zone pursuant to Chapter 14.605, Residential Zones Matrix, Section 14.416, and 14.816. In addition, the following specific standards are required for the following permitted uses. A. Residential uses B. Public and Semipublic Uses 1. Community hall, club or lodge, provided that it is related to local community social activities and its principal activity includes a service customarily carried on as a business. 2. Public. utility transmission facility, provided that: a. The utility company shall secure the necessary property or right -of -way to assure for the proper construction, continued maintenance, and general safety to the properties adjoining the public utility transmission facility; b. All support structures for electrical transmission lines shall have their means of access located a minimum of ten (10) feet above the ground; c. The facilities shall be compatible with the surrounding uses either by distance, landscaping, buffering, or design, as determined by the Zoning Administrator; and d. The height of the structure above ground does not exceed one hundred twenty - five (125) feet. 3. Day care center (in a church or public or private school), provided that: a. There are no more than fifty (50) children; b. Any outside play area shall not be closer than fifty (50) feet to a property line; or c. Any outside play area must be completely enclosed with a minimum four (4)- foot fence. 14.615.220 Accessory Uses 1. The keeping of poultry and livestock, excluding swine, is permitted subject to the following conditions: a. Any building or structure housing poultry or livestock, including but not limited to any stable, paddock, yard, runway, pen, or enclosure, or any manure pile shall be located not less than seventy-five feet from any habitation; and Page 2 b. No building or structure housing poultry or livestock, including but not limited to, any stable, paddock, yard, runway, pen, or enclosure, or any manure pile shall be located within the front yard nor be closer than ten feet from any side property line; c. Not more than three horses, mules, donkeys, bovines or llama shall be permitted per gross acre, or d. Not more than six sheep or goats shall be permitted per gross acre; or e. Any equivalent combination of c. and d. above; and f. A maximum of one animal or fowl including duck, turkey, goose or similar domesticated fowl, or rabbit, mink, nutria, chinchilla or similar animal , may be raised or kept per 3,000 square feet of gross lot area or fraction thereof. In addition, a shed, coop, hutch or similar containment structure must be constructed prior to the acquisition of any small livestock to ensure containment of the livestock on the premises. g. Structures, pens, yards, enclosures, pastures and grazing areas shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition. In the event that the City receives complaint(s) concerning the maintenance of animals on individual premises, the Spokane County Conservation District will evaluate conditions and propose environmentally acceptable measures for remediation. 2. Horne profession, provided that a home profession permit is obtained; 3. Tower, private, provided: a. That a building permit for the private tower is obtained, reviewed and signed off by the Community Development Department; b. The applicant shall furnish a site plan showing height and location of the private tower; c. The applicant shall furnish a copy of the tower manufacturer's construction /erection specifications; d. The private tower shall be erected in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications; e. The applicant shall show that the impact area (that area in all directions equal to the private tower's height above grade) is completely on his /her property. Up to one -half (1/2) of the tower's impact area in distance may be administratively approved if off of the applicant's property pursuant to Section 14.506.020(8); or, the applicant has secured an easement(s) for all property in the towers impact area if not entirely on his /her ownership. Such easement(s) shall be recorded with the County Auditor. with a statement that only the Planning Department can remove the recordation; f. That generally a residence has to be on the same site as the private tower, except for a private repeater facility or remote base operations; g. That the height limitation of the zone is not exceeded without approval of a variance or administrative exception as respectively pertains; and h. That the setbacks for the private tower shall be the accessory use setbacks of the zone where it is located, if detached, and shall be the primary use setbacks of the zone where it is located, if attached to the primary use /building of the property. 4. 13eekeeping, hobby, provided that: d. The activity shall be accessory to a residential use only; Page 3 e. The number of beehives shall be limited to one (1) beehive per four thousand three hundred fifty -six (4,356) square feet of lot area up to a maximum of twenty-five (25) beehives; and f. The beehives shall maintain at least the accessory use setbacks and be completely enclosed with a six (6) -foot barrier (solid fence, hedge, landscaping, etc.) that necessitates the bees flying over; or g. The beehives shall maintain at least a twenty-five (25) -foot setback from all property lines and be isolated from public access by a security fence; or h. The beehives shall maintain at least the accessory use setbacks, be not less than ten (10) feet in height above grade, and be isolated from public access by a security fence or located on a restricted access platform. 5. Accessory Structure(s) are permitted under the following provisions: a. Lot Size Total Combined Square Footage of Structure(s) Allowed i. Less than 30,000 sq. ft. 1,000 sq. ft. or 10% of lot size whichever is greater ii. 30,000 sq. ft. to 1 acre 3,000 sq.ft. iii. Greater than 1 acre to 2 acres 4,000 sq.ft. iv. Greater than 2 acres 10% of lot size b. One accessory structure not exceeding 1,000 square feet, shall be permitted prior to the construction of a primary use. This structure is not for residential occupancy, business use, or outside vehicle repair. 6. Wireless communication antenna array, provided: a. That mounted antennas shall not exceed twenty (20) feet above the existing structure to which they are attached. b. That before the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall have demonstrated that all applicable requirements of the Federal Communications Commission, Federal Aviation Administration and any required aviation easements have been satisfied. c. That the antenna array is pointed or finished in such a manner to match the existing structure in which it is placed upon, if possible. 14.615.230 Prohibited Uses All uses not specifically authorized in the UR -1 zone are prohibited, including, but not limited to, the following: 1. General agriculture use, except as specifically permitted in this section; 4. General industrial use; 5. General commercial use; and 6. Mining. 14.615.240 Conditional Uses Those uses designated as conditional uses within the UR -3.5 zone on the Residential Zones Matrix, Chapter 14.605, may be permitted in the UR -1 zone, subject to the sane standards and requirements. provided that a conditional use permit authorizing such use has been granted, as set forth in Section 14.404.100. , 14.615.300 Development Standards Prior to the issuance of a building permit, evidence of compliance with provisions of Sections 14.615.305 thru 14.615.355 shall be provided to the Department. Page 4 14.615.305 Density The maximum density of dwelling units in the UR -1 zone shall be one (1) Dwelling units per acre. 14.615.310 Minimum Lot Area The minimum lot area for residential units in the UR -1 zone shall be 40,000 square feet per residential unit. 14.615.315 Minimum Frontage The minimum frontage for residential units in the UR -1 zone shall be eighty (80) feet on a public road or street. 14.616.325 Minimum Yards The minimum yards and setbacks for permitted and accessory uses in the UR -1 zone shall be as follows: A.. All Uses Except Accessory Uses 1. Front Yard: A minimum fifty -five (55) -foot setback the centerline of all roadway rights -of- way or thirty-five (35) -foot setback from the lot front line, whichever provides the greater setback from the centerline of the roadway right -of -way. 2. Side Yard: Each lot shall have side yard(s) of at least five (5) feet for each story of building. 3. Flanking Street Yard: A minimum fifty -five (55) -foot setback from the centerline of all roadway rights -of -way or thirty -five (35) -foot setback from the existing property line, whichever provides the greater setback from the centerline of the roadway right -of -way. 4. Rear Yard: The minimum rear yard shall be twenty (20) feet. 13. Accessory Uses 1. Front Yard: A minimum fifty -five (55) -foot setback from the centerline of all roadway rights - of -way or twenty -five (35) -foot setback from the lot front line, whichever provides the greatest setback from the centerline of the roadway right -of -way. 1 Side Yard: Structure Height (at peak) 0 -15 feet = 5 feet Over 15 feet = 5 feet plus one (1) additional foot for each additional foot of structure height over 15 feet Flanking Street Side Yard: A minimum fifty -five (55) -foot setback from the centerline of all roadway rights -of -way or a thirty -five (35) -foot setback from the existing property line, whichever provides the greater setback from the centerline of the roadway right -of- way. 3. Rear Yard: Structure Height (at peak) 0 -15 feet = 5 feet Over 15 feet = 5 feet plus one (1) additional foot for each additional foot of structure height over 15 feet 4. Other Yards: No other yards are required beyond those required for "clear view triangle" as noted in Section 14.810.020 (2) or for other safety and health standards as determined by the Department. Page 5 14.615.330 Maximum 13uilding Coverage The maximum building coverage in the UR- I zone shall be thirty percent (30 %) of the lot area. Maximum Building Height The maximum height of buildings or structures in the UR -1 zone shall be thirty -five (35) feet. 14.615.335 14.615.340 Parking Standards Parking standards for uses in the UR -I zone shall be as provided in Chapter 14.802. 14.615.345 Signage Standards Signage standards for uses in the U.R -1 zone shall be as provided in Chapter 14.804. 14.615.350 Landscaping Standards Landscaping standards for uses in the UR -1 zone shall be as provided in Chapter 14.806. 14.615.355 Storage Standards All storage (including storage of recyclable materials) shall be wholly within a building or shall be screened from view from the surrounding properties and shall be accessory to the permitted use on the site. There shall be no storage in any required front yard or flanking street yard. Vehicle storage shall conform to the provisions of Spokane Valley Ordinance 03 -067, as it may be amended from time to time." Section 2. Amendment. The Zoning Code, Section 14.605.020 14.605.080 Residential Use Matrix is hereby amended as shown on the attached Exhibit "A." Section 3. Adoption of Other Laws. To the extent that any provision of the Spokane County Code, or any other law, rule or regulation or Resolution referenced in the attached Development Regulation is necessary or convenient to establish the validity, enforceability or interpretation of the Development Regulations, then such provision of the Spokane County Code, or other law, rule or regulation is hereby adopted by reference. Section 4. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence., clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect on the official date of incorporation provided publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof occurs in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. ATTEST: PASSED by the City Council this day of June, 2004. City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Mayor, Michael DeVieming Page 6 Approved as to Form: Interim City Attorney, Stanley M. Schwartz Date of Publication: Effective Date: Page 7 P Permitted P(4) Definition N Not permitted (1) Specific standards Chapter 14.605 RESIDENTIAL ZONES MATRIX P(1) Chap 14.615 - 14.622 standards P-(Acc.) Permitted accessory (1) Specific standards EXHIBIT "A" P(2) Chap 14.808 C.U.(1) Chap 1 4.816 RR -10 SRR-5- SRR-2- SR-1- SR-1F2 11Rd, UR -3.5 UR -7 UR -12 UR -22 14.605.020 RESIDENTIAL USES Accessory Structure(s) P- Acc(1) P- Ass(1) P At-x(1) P- Ace( -13- P Aco(1)- P- Acc(11 P- Acc(1) P- Aoc(1) Billboard N N- N- 41 14- N .- N N N N Caretaker's residence P(1) P(1) R(-t)- N- N- . -.N .. N N N N Clustered housing PUD only Community residential facility (8 or Tess residents) N 14- N- P- R- e P N N N Community residential facility, greater than 8 residents, no more than 25) N 14- 14 - 14- N- - f4 N P P P Community treatment facility (8 or less residents) N N- N- 6-U- G-U- C.U. : C.U. N N N Community treatment facility, greater than 8 residents, no more than 20) N N- N- N- N- d N C.U. C.U. C.U. Conditional residential accessory unit C.U.(1) 6 J-( G.41(4)- C.U.(1) C.41,-(-1-)- C.U.(11 C.U.(1) N N N -1-}- Density bonus (under Chapter 14.704) 14 . 14- 14- PUB- RUB ]`( PUD PUD PUD PUD Dependent Relative manufactured (mobile) home P- Aoc.(1) P- Acc.(-1-} P-Aee.((1.) P- Ass{1 -) N- N N N N N Dormitory P P- P- P - P- N . P P P P Duplex P R R- P- P- N- P P P P Fraternity sorority P P- P- P- P- N P P P P Home industry C.U. 6-.44- 6 -d1- 611- C,U- N C.U. N N N Home profession P- Acc.(4) P- Aee,(4) P- Ase:(4) P- Ass:(4) P- Aeo,(4) p P- Acc.(4) P -Ace (4) P- Acc.(4) P- Acc.(4) Household pets P P- P- R- P- 1, .. P P P P Manufactured (mobile) home P(2) P(2) P(2) P(24 P(2) Pte) _; P(2) P(2) P(2) N Manufactured (mobile) home park P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) N P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) Multifamily dwelling N N - 14- N- N- )Y N P P P Nursing home, convalescent home N N- N- 14- N- N N P P P Prison, jail, or institution C.U. N- 14- Al- 14- N . N N N N Private repeater facility P P- P- P- P- P P P P P Retirement/elderly apartment N N- N- A!- 14- N N P P P Single- family dwelling, new P P- P- 1 P= P. P P P P Solar collector & associated sys P -Aoc. P -AAee, P Ace, P Ace. P-Aco- P ACC. P -Ace. P -Acc. P -Ace. P -Aoc. Transitional community facility(8 or Tess residents) N 14- N- C.U- C.,U- C li ': __ C.U. N N N Transitional community facility(greater than 8 residents, PO more than 20 residents) 14 14- N- N- 14- , i) N C.U. C.U. C.U. Tower, private P- Acc.(1) P- AGC4-14 f' Aco.(1) P Acc.(1) P- Aeo,(a) P- Acc.(1,) P- Acc.(1) P- Acc.(1) P- Acc.(1) P- Acc.(1) 14.605.040 USE Public /Semi- Public Adult Entertainment establishment N N 14- 14- N- a - 14 N N N Adult Retail Use Establishment N 14- N- 14- N- N , N N N N Archery. rifle, gun, pistol ranges /clubs C.U. 6-U- N - N - N- h1 N N 14 N Business or professional office N N- N- 14- 14- N N P P Cernetery C.U. C-U- 14 - N - N- N N N N N Church and parsonage P P- P- 1 P- 1? P P P P Commercial composting storage /processing C.U. N- N. N- N- N N N N N P Permitted P(4) Definition N Not permitted (1) Specific standards Chapter 14.605 RESIDENTIAL ZONES MATRIX P(1) Chap 14.615 - 14.622 standards P-(Acc.) Permitted accessory (1) Specific standards EXHIBIT "A" P(2) Chap 14.808 C.U.(1) Chap 1 4.816 P Permitted P(4) Definition N Not permitted (1) Spri -- jlandards '\_../ Chapter 14.605 RESIDENTIAL ZONES MATRIX P(1) Chap 14.615 - 14.622 standards P- (Acc,) Permitted accessory (1) Spr. `standards EXHIBIT "A" P(2) Chap 14.608 C.U.(';' " - `;) 14.816 J RR -10 SRR-5- SRR-2 SPA- .UIZt _ UR -3.5 UR -7 UR -12 UR -22 Community hall, club, or lodge P(1) R(4-) P(1) R(4) P(4) ' P(.1) P(1) P P P Community recreational facility P- Acc.(1) P Acc.(1) P- Aee,(4 P Acc.(1) R- Aee:() PAcr (1) P- Acc.(1) P- Acc.(1) P- Acc.(1) PAcc.(1) Community transit center P(1) R{-1 -) R(4-) R(4) R(4) P(1) P(1) P(1) P(1) Day care center 14 14- N- 14- N- LEI N N C.U. C.U. Day care center (in a church or a public or private school) P(1) P(1.) R¢1) R(4) P(44 ._ E(]) P(1) P(1) P(1) P(1) Exercise facilitylgyrn athletic club) N N- N- N- I4- ` _ t _ N N N P(1) Family day care home P R R R R E P P P P Fire station P P R P P P P P P Golf course P(1) P(4) P(-1) R R ' :. - P N N N Golf driving range/training center N N- N- N- N- .. N _ N N N P(1) Hospital C.U. R R R R N_ P P P P Incinerator • C.U. N- N- 14- 14- N N N N N Landfill C.U. N- N- N- N- N , : N N N N Library P P R R R P P P P Medical Office N N- N- N- 14- f1 N N N P Mini- day care center (in a dwelling) P R R R P E P P P P Mini -day care center (not in a dwelling) N N- N- N- 14- N N P P Nonrnotorixed trail system C.U. 641- N- N- N- N N N N N Nursery school P R R R R Q . P P P P Park- and -ride facility P(1) P(4) ( P(1) R(4-) P(1) P(1) P(1) P(1) Park, public (including caretakers residence) ' P R R R R E P P P P Post office P R R R P P P P P Public utility local distribution P R R R R e P P P P Public utility transmission facility P(1) P(4) 12 ( 1 4 P(1) P(1) eLU P(1) P(1) P(1) P(1) Racetracks C.U. N- 14- N- 14- t N N N N Recreational area, commercial N N- N- N- N- [y N N N N Sanitarium C.U. R N- N- N- N ; , , N N N N Schools - public and private 1. kindergarten P R R R R E P P P P 2. elementary P R R P R e P P P P 3. middle P P R R R 1? ,, , P P P P 4. junior high P R R R R e P P P P 5. high P R P R R N N N P P 6. junior college - P P R R R N P P P P 7. college or university P R R p R P P P P 8. Expansion of existing structure on adjacent property P R R R R E P P P P Sewage sludge land application P(1) G,U- N- N- 14- N N N N Solid waste hauler N N- 14- N N- N N N N Solid waste recycling /transfer site P(1) P(1) P41) C,ld,- C U- N N N N Solid waste recycling /transfer site C.U. 6,4J,- G,J- C C U— pt N N N N P Permitted P(4) Definition N Not permitted (1) Spri -- jlandards '\_../ Chapter 14.605 RESIDENTIAL ZONES MATRIX P(1) Chap 14.615 - 14.622 standards P- (Acc,) Permitted accessory (1) Spr. `standards EXHIBIT "A" P(2) Chap 14.608 C.U.(';' " - `;) 14.816 J / Chapter 14.605 RESIDENTIAL ZONES MATRIX P Permitted P(4) Definition N Not permitted (1) Specific standards P(1) Chap 14.615 - 14.622 standards P- (Acc.) Permitted accessory (1) Specific standards vv EXHIBIT "A" P(2) Chap 14.808 C.U.(1) Chap 14.816 RR -10 SRR-6- SRR-1- SR-4- SR -412- 1LR1 UR -3.5 UR -7 UR -12 UR -22 Tower P(1) P4) GU- GUT G:43- N N N N N Video Board N 14- N• N- N- N N N N N Wireless Communication Antenna Array P- Acc.(1) P- Aeor(4) P- Aee,() P Acc.(1) P Ass{ -'y P= AQc..11J P- Acc.(1) P- Acc.(1) P- Acc.(1) P- Acc.(1) C.U. Wireless Communication Support Tower C.U. GU- GUT CAA CAli- C tL C.U. C.U. C.U. 14.605.060 USE - Agricultural, Silvicultural, and Agriculture- Related Agricultural processing plant, warehouse P R 14- N- N- )V N N 14 14 Agricultural product stand P(1) P(1) 1 P(4-) N- N N N N N Airstrip for crop dusting /spraying N N- 14- 14- N- LY N N N N Airstrip, personal P(1) P(1) N- N- N- , N N N N N Airstrip, private C.U. 6-41- N- N- N- _ N N N - N N Animal clinic large/small veterinary C.U. G-4-- GU.- N- N- N N N N N Animal clinic - veterinary -small animals C.U. C,U,- 6:U1- N- N- N N N C.U. P(1) Animal, Wildlife ReliabilitationfScientlflcResearch P(1) P(1) 14- 14- 14- N 14 14 N N Animal raising and/or keeping P(1) PO R(4) P(4-) P(1) EEf,i) 14 N N N Beekeeping, commercial P R 1 Ass:(4.) P- Acc.(1) N- N N N N N Beekeeping, hobby P R P Acc.(1) P-Acc ) P- Aeet(4) p- Arsr�.(i) P- Acc.(1) N N N Circus N 14- N- 14- 14- N N N N 14 Cultivation of land commercial P R R R 14- N 14 14 14 14 Dairy N N- 14- N- N- N N 14 N Farm machinery sales & repair P N- 14- 14- 14- N 14 N N N Feed lot N 14- N- N- 14- N N 14 14 N Feed udll P 14- N- 14- N- N N N 14 N Fish hatchery P P 14- N N- N N N N N Floriculture flower growing P R R P P -Ass: N N N N N Gardening P R R P R P P P P P Gasohol plant P(1) P(4-) 14- N- N- N. N N N 14 Grain elevator P R 14- N- N- . N N N N N Grazing P R P R 14- . N 14 14 14 Greenhouse - commercial P R R R 14- N 14 N N 14 Hazardous waste treatment/storage off-site N Id 14- N- N- N N N N 14 Hazardous waste treatment/storage on -site P- Aoc.(1) N 14- 14- N- N. 14 N 14 14 Horse boarding and training P g N- 14- N- N N N N Horticulture vegetable growing P R R R P -Acs. p4 N N N N Inherently Dangerous Mammal /Reptile Keeping P(1) GU- 14- 14- 14- N N N N 14 Kennel C.U. GM: N- N- N- N N N N N Kennel, private C.U. GUT CU:- GUT 6:44- C.U. C.U. N 14 14 Nursery - wholesale P R P R N- N N N 14 14 Orchard P R R P N- N N 14 N N Pigeon, performingfshow P- Acc.(1) P Acc.(1) P- ,Aec.(1) P Aco.(1) P- Ass:(4) ;l?-Acc.(1) P- Acc.(1) 14 14 N Riding stable P R N- N- N- N N N 14 N / Chapter 14.605 RESIDENTIAL ZONES MATRIX P Permitted P(4) Definition N Not permitted (1) Specific standards P(1) Chap 14.615 - 14.622 standards P- (Acc.) Permitted accessory (1) Specific standards vv EXHIBIT "A" P(2) Chap 14.808 C.U.(1) Chap 14.816 P Permitted P(4) Definition N Not permitted (1) Spr1 - jlandards Chapter 14.605 RESIDENTIAL ZONES MATRIX P(1) Chap 14.615 - 14.622 standards P- (Acc.) Permitted accessory (1) Sol, " - standards EXHIBIT "A" P(2) Chap 14.808 C.U.(`c' 14.816 RR -10 SRR-5 SRR-3- SR-1- SR 112- UR -1 UR -3.5 UR -7 UR -12 UR -22 Sawmill and lumber mill P(1) P{-1 -) N- N- N- N N N N N Transient - agricultural labor residence N N- N- N N- N N N N N Tree farming P R R N- N- Ll N N N N Truck gardening P R R R N- �( N N N N Vineyard P R N- N- N- N N N N N Winery C.U. C-U, N- N- N- N: N N N N Zoological Park P(1) P(a.) N- N- _ N- J N N N N P Permitted P(4) Definition N Not permitted (1) Spr1 - jlandards Chapter 14.605 RESIDENTIAL ZONES MATRIX P(1) Chap 14.615 - 14.622 standards P- (Acc.) Permitted accessory (1) Sol, " - standards EXHIBIT "A" P(2) Chap 14.808 C.U.(`c' 14.816 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 1, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ® old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with ECONorthwest for the development of an Economic Analysis on the Sprague /Appleway Corridor. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: NA PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: City Council was briefed on the proposed Scope of Work of an Economic Analysis for the SpraguefAppleway extension on March 23, 2004, with updates on March 30 and April 6, 2004. Council approved the Scope of Work on April 13, 2004. BACKGROUND: A Request for Proposal was issued on April 16, 2004. The original deadline was extended to 12:00 pm PDT, May 17, 2004. Two proposals were received. The Proposals were evaluated by a staff committee including the departments of Community Development, Public Works, Finance and the Office of the City Manager. The proposal submitted by ECONorthwest was found the most responsive to the RFP. The proposal provides for two alternatives: a "Basic" research study and an 'enhanced' study which incorporates provisions for additional public involvement in the study process. The schedule outlined would provide a Basic report to City Council in November 2004, with the note that the schedule could be accelerated by up to a month if necessary. The proposal noted, however, that an "Enhanced" Report could be expected to take additional time. The "Basic" proposal is offered at $49,000, with the enhancement offered at an additional $25,000. OPTIONS: Authorize negotiation of the contract with ECONorthwest, or provide additional direction. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with ECONorthwest for the development of an Economic Analysis on the Sprague /Appleway Corridor. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: $20,800 of the City's CDBG grant award for the Economic Development element of the Comprehensive Plan may be used for this analysis. The balance of the funding could come from Professional Services budgeted in the Community Development Department for R /UDAT and transportation analysis. STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, AICP, Director of Community Development ATTACHMENTS: Proposal 12 May 2004 Marina Sukup, AICP Director of Community Development City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Ave., Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Dear Ms. Sukup: Enclosed. is ECONorthwest's proposal for the SpragueJAppleway Corridor Economic Analysis. We have assembled a team that has the experience and qualifications to do the work required: ECONorthwest, project management, economic analysis, quality control, report writing; The Transpo Group, traffic and transportation analysis; and Freedman Tung & Bottomley, urban design. We have reviewed your RFP, especially Sections V and VI (Proposal Contents and Evaluation & Selection). We have organized our proposal in a way that addresses all the requested information and criteria in a logical order: Page Project Understanding 1 Project Team 2 Scope of Work 14 Overview of the Approach 14 Basic Work Plan (including budget and schedule) 18 Enhanced Work Plan 23 Summary of Schedule and Budget 24 References 26 Additional Qualifications 27 Resumes Appendix A By submitting this proposal we represent that we have the staff capacity to deliver the products, on schedule, and within budget, as specified in the proposal. We encourage you to call our references, who will confirm that we are scrupulous about meeting our deadlines and managing projects efficiently. As we discussed by phone, I am traveling out of the country for both vacation and work from mid -May to mid -June. If the ECO team is selected for an interview and, as seems likely, it will occur during that period, I will not be able to attend. I have talked with both Steve Fitzroy and Bob Parker, both of whom can very capably represent ECO at an interview, either in person or by telephone. Their contact information is: Steve Fitzroy (out Moore to Sukup re Corridor Economic Analysis 12 May 2004 Page 2 until end of May; fitzro Oseattle.econw.com; 206 919- 4890); and Bob Parker (rgp®darkwing.uoregon.edu; 541 346- 3801).. If you require additional information about our qualifications, please contact my assistant, Roberta Smythe (smythe@eugene.econw.com; 541 687 - 0051). As vice president and project manager at ECONorthwest, I am authorized to negotiate on behalf of ECO and its subcontractors. Sincerely, Terry Moore Vice President Spokane Valley, Corridor Study A Proposal from ECONorthwest PROJECT UNDERSTANDING The City of Spokane galley wants an economic evaluation of the SpraguefAppleway Corridor. The corridor is five and a half' miles long, extending from Interstate -90 on the west to Sullivan Avenue on the east. The Request for Proposals (REP) is clear that the project is primarily an economic analysis of transportation and land use issues. The City faces choices about the type of transportation improvements it will make in the corridor: fundamentally the choice is about extension of the couplet as either a one -way or tiro -way arterial. That choice will have impacts on traffic, which will in turn have impacts on land use and economic development. We view the evaluation of these alternatives, as we believe the City does, as including standard traffic analysis but going beyond that. There is clearly an interaction among transportation, and use, and market variables. If transportation improvements are changed, traffic patterns will change, and eventually land uses as well. Future travel, land use, and economic activity will be influenced not only by the traffic improvements (e.g., one -way or two - way configurations; other proposed North Spokane Corridor transportation improvements), but by other factors as well, several of which are noted in the RFP: retail centers outside the corridor such as the Spokane Valley Mall, the Costco /Home Depot center, and existing mining /pit operations. There is controversy in the City about which transportation option is best for the City. Such controversy is not unique to Spokane Valley. It occurs wherever there are large, long -term decisions about public investments being needed, and where different solutions tend to be perceived as benefiting different groups. Controversy is often especially acute for highway investments, where there can be conflicts among different jurisdictions over the importance of through speed versus local access; among the priorities of commuters versus those of businesses located along the corridor; among different local groups (and even different city departments) over traditional highway expansion versus demand management, transit, and land -use driven solutions to congestion; and among corridor versus city -wide property owners over who benefits and who pays. These conflicts get resolved, eventually, by elected representatives: in this case, the City Council. To make such a controversial decision, members of an elected body want to have the best information available about the impacts of such a decision. They need the facts, to the extent that they can be assembled, and they need to be able to tell their constituents that all the facts have been considered. We view that as the City's desired outcome for this project: they want an objective and understandable evaluation of the Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 Page 1 PROJECT TEAM issues, done by professionals with a demonstrated capacity for rigorous and unbiased analysis regarding the economic impacts of transportation improvements. We assembled a team with that objective in mind. We confirmed the emphasis on economic analysis with. City staff. It was critical in our decision to submit a proposal, because ECONorthwest is an economics consulting firm that specializes in the application of economic principles and analysis to the problems of public policy. In our public practice we specialize in economic development, land use, and transportation. ECO has extensive experience in economic evaluation at the intersection of those three areas. In other projects similar to this one, ECO has worked as part of a multidisciplinary team, either as a project manager or a subcontractor. The emphasis in this project on economics strongly suggested an economics lead. But the RFP also noted as desirable transportation and traffic design. ECO does not have that capability, but has worked with over a dozen different transportation firms over the last 20 years. As specialists, we tend to team with other specialist firms. in transportation design, a firm with whom we have worked many times because of the quality and timeliness of its work is The Transpo Group. That connection was an obvious one in this project because Transpo not only has the technical skills, but also is located in the Spokane area and has worked on local transportation issues. ECO has substantial land use experience, both in evaluation and planning. But ECO is not an urban design firm. Again, we have worked with many, but over the years have developed strong relationships with the ones we think are best. One of those is Freedman Tung & Bottornley, a firm that specializes in the planning, design, and restructuring of commercial corridors. FTB's corridor experience covers both the land use and development side and the street design side of the right -of -way line.:F1'B is currently working with ECO on two projects, one of which is an evaluation of corridors in the Portland metropolitan region. The rest of this section provides an overview of each firm, its staff that would be assigned to this project, and a few of its projects that are most relevant to the issues that the City wants to address in thi.s study. More information about staff and projects is provided in the final section of this proposal. ECONORTHWEST FIRM DESCRIPTION ECONorthwest specializes in the economic and financial analysis of public policy. ECO has completed over 1,500 projects for public and private clients. ECO has offices in Eugene and Portland, Oregon and Seattle, Washington. ECO has analyzed the economics of transportation, land -use, and growth - management issues since 1.974. ECO has analyzed and applied Page 2 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study least -cost and benefit -cost planning techniques to transportation projects for both federal agencies and regional planners. ECO has managed and participated in numerous analyses of transportation system planning, congestion pricing, transportation demand management, the economic and land -use impacts of proposed transportation projects, and transportation and land -use modeling. ECO incorporates into public planning an understanding of and respect for the merits of market decisions and a knowledge of the appropriate scope of government action for achieving public goals. ECO's policy analysis is informed by an understanding of the local, regional, and national economy. In addition to providing thorough technical analysis, ECO's staff also incorporates into its projects sensitivity toward procedural issues and works with advisory groups and the public to ensure that its recommendations are technically correct, institutionally feasible, and politically realistic. In all cases ECO's descriptive, explanatory, and predictive analyses are targeted toward helping clients plan for future growth, estimate the effects of proposed projects or policies, and take informed actions necessary to avert or mitigate potential difficulties. ECO is unsurpassed at explaining economic analysis in the larger context of public goals and political tradeoffs. KEY PERSONNEL Terry Moore, FATCP, would be project manager. He has been a vice president and project manager at ECONorthwest since 1979. He has managed over 400 projects in transportation and land -use planning, economic development, growth management, policy analysis, and market and feasibility analysis for private and public clients. Moore has worked on numerous related projects on topics including: regional transportation planning; finance; land -use and economic impacts of transportation planning; land -use and growth management; analysis of county urban services; county -level economic development planning; and market analyses for development of commercial, industrial, and residential properties. Moore specializes in the application of benefit -cost principles and techniques to public decisionmaking, transportation, and the connection between transportation and land use. He excels at the preparation of readable technical documents for both technical and lay audiences, and the management of large multidisciplinary projects. The basic microeconomic principles embodied in benefit -cost analysis are the foundation for the analysis in his book, The Transportation/ Land Use Connection, and for the majority of his transportation work, which includes reports such as: Land Use and Growth Impacts of Highway Lnprovements (Oregon Department of Transportation); Guidebook for Evaluating the Benefits and Costs of Transit (Transit Cooperative Research Program); User Benefit Analysis for Highways (National Academy of Sciences, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials); Benefit -Cost Analysis of Land -Use and Transportation Policies (Federal Highway Administration, Oregon Department of Transportation); Economic Impacts of Congestion Pricing (Portland Metro); Blue Ribbon Commission on Transportation (Washington State Transportation Committee); and Economic Impacts of Highway Bypass (North Idaho Community Action Network). Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 Page 3 Stephen Fitzroy is the managing director of ECONorthwest's Seattle office. He would be an advisor on this project. Prior to joining WO Fitzroy was the Principal Economist for The Louis Berger Group's Planning and Economics Department specializing in regional economic analysis, socioeconomic impact assessment, market analysis, policy- oriented social research, and transportation studies. He frequently served as a senior technical specialist and project manager for, studies involving transportation economics and policy, domestic and international freight movements, commodity flow analysis, survey research and design, forecasting and decision analysis. Fitzroy was the business manager and Principal Economist for Standard & Poor's DRI's (now Global Insight) International. Trade and Transportation practice, and served as the Director of Research and Forecasting for the Puget Sound Regional Council in Seattle, Washington. Robert Parker, AICP, has been a planner. with ECONorthwest since 1990. He would be a principal researcher on this project. Parker has a Bachelor of Science in Natural Resource Management from Colorado State University and a Masters Degree in Urban and Regional Planning from the University of Oregon. Parker is an instructor in the Department of Planning, Public Policy, and Management at the University of Oregon and teaches courses in planning research methods, land use, and growth management. Parker is also currently serving as the Director of the Community Planning Workshop at the University of Oregon. Parker specializes in land -use analysis and policy, housing, market analysis, and growth management. He has completed analyses of supply (buildable land inventory) and demand components for land and housing needs for the cities of Bandon, Canyonville, Central Point, Corvallis, Eagle Point, Gold Beach, Grants Pass, Lakeside, Mapleton, McMinnville, Medford, Seaside, Sweet Horne, and Winston. Parker has worked with Moore on numerous related projects throughout Oregon and Washington. Parker assisted with the development of the Buildable Lands Monitoring Program as well as the "reasonable measures" evaluation methodology for Snohomish County. He also worked on the Federal Way market and and use analysis. He recently assisted with the buildable lands inventory for the City of Corvallis, an urban reserve productivity analysis for Portland Metro, and industrial land inventories for the Port of Portland and the Oregon Department of Transportation. For the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, Parker analyzed the adequacy of public facilities requirements and assessed the effectiveness of urban growth- management practices in Portland, Bend, Medford, and Brookings. For. the Mapleton Area Master Plan, Parker conducted a comprehensive inventory of land -use, transportation, economic, social and environmental data. In addition, Parker has conducted land -use needs assessments for jurisdictions throughout the state, including the Cities of Canyonville and McMinnville, and analyzed the demand for development in Linn and Benton Counties. Carl Batten, senior economist, has been at ECONorthwest since 1986. He would be an advisor on this project, especially if any special expertise in computer modeling is required. He specializes in the identification and Page 4 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study estimation of the economic consequences of policy decisions and in all types of computer modeling. Batten has conducted econometric modeling and forecasting for numerous projects throughout Oregon. He is currently developing a Highway Cost Allocation model for the state of Oregon, He recently developed the economic model components of an integrated economic, land - use, and transportation modeling system for ODOT. For the Oregon Department of Administrative Services, he developed a model that estimates the costs imposed by various classes of vehicles and the user fees they pay. He has forecast the revenue effects of tax -rule changes for Portland '.Pri -Met, and has conducted modeling and forecast analyses for the development of Multnomah County's Strategic Investment Program. Rebecca Steckler, AICP has been a research analyst at ECONorthwest since 2002. She would provide research assistance on this project. She specializes in and use, natural resources, energy, transportation, and communications. Steckler's recent projects include managing an incorporation economic feasibility study, an employment lands study, conducting focus groups for a low- income housing project for the Housing Authority of Portland, and a process evaluation of commercial and residential new construction programs for the Energy Trust of Oregon. She has worked on numerous land use projects for Oregon government agencies, as well as natural resource issues for groups in Oregon and California, specializing in water quality and coastal issues. Steckler has extensive experience with volunteer organizations and has been on several boards of directors for organizations in both California and Oregon. She is the current Oregon ;Planners' Journal editor for the Oregon Chapter of the American Planning Association (OAPA), and she is a member of the OAPA Legislative Committee. SIMILAR WORK Land Use and Growth Impacts of Highway Improvements. For the Oregon Department of Transportation, ECONorthwest assisted in estimating how state highway improvements are likely to affect growth and land development, especially at the urban fringe. ICO analyzed historical records to determine the relationship between highway improvements and land -use change over 20 years for 20 Oregon cities. ECO also conducted case studies of Bend, Albany, McMinnville, Florence, Corvallis, Island City /La Grande, and Grants Pass to determine the causes of the observed changes. User Benefit Analysis for Highways. For the National Academy of Sciences and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ( AASHTO), ECONorthwest led the rewriting of the 1977 AASHTO Manual on User Benefit Analysis for. Highway and Bus Transit Improvements ( "AASHTO Redbook "). The new manual focused on highway improvements only and included topics not covered in the original Redbook, including intelligent transportation systems, road pricing, and innovative construction management techniques. Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 Page 5 Metro Corridors and Centers. For Portland Metro, ECONorthwest is investigating the relationship of Centers and Corridors. Corridors represent an important opportunity for redevelopment and infill but Corridors are often viewed as competing with Centers. Land uses, such as retail and offices that are highly desired in Centers are locating along corridors, often in sprawling development patterns rather than a compact urban form. The Corridors could complement the Centers by accommodating land uses that support a high level of accessibility for all modes of transport, emphasizing the connection between Centers and acting as the gateway into a Center. Determining the land uses that are best located in Centers and those that are best located in Corridors is the focus of Phase I. Corridors share a common link with the Centers and, if' properly planned and directed, can serve as a valuable supporting resource for the Centers. Phase l:i will apply the Phase i analysis to a specific Corridor and its related Centers. Economics of Density. For Portland Metro, ECONorthwest used an economic analysis to identify barriers to increased density and mixed -use development in Metro's designated "2040 Centers" -areas specifically re -zoned to permit higher density development. ECO's analysis examined issues of development timing, local government structure, competition between centers, financial feasibility of higher- density development, and the impact of commercial development. This work helped meet state requirements for Metro to evaluate additional efficiencies as an alternative to expanding the regional urban growth boundary. I- 5Beltline Socioeconomic Impacts. For the State of Oregon, ECONorthwest assessed the socioeconomic impacts of proposed improvements to the I- 5lBeltline interchange and Beltline /Gateway intersection. Socioeconomic impacts included impacts to residents and residential areas, area businesses, and public facilities. Assessing those impacts involved extensive review of alternatives for improving the Beltline /Gateway intersection as well as transportation and land use plans in the study area that could affect operation of the interchange or intersection. Socioeconomic Impact Analysis of Highway Corridor. For the Oregon Department of Transportation, ECONorthwest assisted in preparing an .EIS for the Sunrise Corridor in metropolitan Portland, Oregon. ECO researched and completed socioeconomic and land -use analyses for the EIS. Analysis of Land -Use Patterns. For the Federal Highway Administration, ECONorthwest assisted with the application of least -cost planning principles to an analysis of the impacts of transportation projects on land use. ECO developed a full -cost accounting framework for evaluating the impacts of alternative land -use patterns, and assisted with research to quantify these impacts. Economic Impacts of Highway Bypass. For the North Idaho Community Action Network (NICANi), ECO evaluated the impacts of a proposed highway bypass in Sandpoint, Idaho. The evaluation examined the potential long -term loss of economic value to the City from lost development options on the waterfront for business, recreational, and civic uses; the Page 6 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study impacts to downtown merchants during construction; and other economic losses that might result from lost amenity and character in the downtown. Benefit -Cost Analysis of Regional Transit Plan. For the Washington Research Council, ECO analyzed the benefits and costs of a proposed $4 billion transit plan in Puget Sound. ECO used the results of modeling and analysis developed by the Regional Transit Authority to estimate the project's net benefits. ECO's analysis indicated that the costs of rail transit portions of the plan significantly exceeded their benefits. ECO's analysis was reviewed and endorsed by an panel of leading transportation experts from around the country. Washington State Blue Ribbon Commission on Transportation. For a group of public and private sector leaders appointed by Washington's governor, ECO provides staff support and technical analysis to identify investment priorities and potential reforms to Washington's transportation system. ECO has developed white papers on a range of topics including congestion, inadequate maintenance of roadways, project prioritization, economic development, revenue sources, and alternative models of service delivery. Final recommendations addressed an appropriate investment strategy, funding sources, and reforms to the administration and operation of the current system. Regional Center Transportation Plan. For Clackamas County, ICONorthwest developed a funding strategy for a Transportation Master Plan for the Clackamas Regional Center. ECO estimated the level of funding available from Federal, State, County, and local. sources and identified transportation projects that may be eligible for funding from these sources. ECO also identified potential funding sources for remaining project costs, including taxes, user fees, and private funding, and potential public and private financing methods. ECO then developed an implementation strategy for funding transportation projects in the Regional Center. 1 - 5 /Highway 217 Transportation Plan. For the Oregon Department of Transportation, ECONorthwest prepared the economic component of the I- 51Highway 217 Subarea Transportation Plan. ECO described the past, current, and likely future economic conditions in the study area, the relative importance of transportation in economic development, and the outlook for funding. THE TRANSPO GROUP FIRM DESCRIPTION Transportation systems supply the populace with the means to work, communicate., and travel. Transportation planning and innovation must stand the test of time. That is what we at The Transpo Group set out to do— provide transportation solutions that are sound, secure, smart, and long - lasting. Since 1975, we've offered transportation planning and traffic engineering to both public and private sector clients. We employ over 40 professionals with offices in Kirkland and Spokane. Transpo is organized into three Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 Pane 7 transportation- related service areas: transportation engineering, traffic analysis, and transportation planning. The entire staff is a resource for supporting any given project. For each project, Transpo's assigned project manager has the ability to include input from the range of Transpo experts. This means that specialists in traffic operations, design, institutions, transit/rail, Intelligent Transportation Systems, traffic impact and comprehensive planning could play roles on any project. We take pride in the fact that more than half of our work is through repeat clients who understand the quality and value of Transpo's service. As an industry leader for traffic engineering and transportation planning, our experience is vast, our skills are varied, and our attention to local regulation and requirements is steadfast. We approach every project with an emphasis on quality, enthusiasm, and urgency —and our satisfaction rests entirely on that of our clients. KEY PERSONNEL Christine Fueston, Senior Transportation Planner, has 23 years of experience as a project manager and project planner. Her experience includes a wide variety of public and private projects requiring multi- agency coordination, permitting, environmental documentation, public involvement, and work with representative Boards and committees. Many projects have required project programming, including: build- around activities while maintaining traffic flow, regulatory compliance, federal grant management, and project closeout. Christine's work has included many circulation and public parking facilities and projects, with duties ranging from project management to Board /Agency liaison. Most recently she has served as the project manager or lead planner on several corridor studies in Kootenai County including Highway 41, US 95 through Coeur d'Alene, and the Huetter Corridor Study involving Interstate 90, Highway 41 and US 95. She also serves as the project manager for the Bonner County Transportation Plan. Currently, she is writing access management guidelines and standards for District 1 of: the Idaho Transportation Department. Christine's history with the corridor includes the original concept of the corridor and traffic operations, as well as transit, operations predating the construction in her work with Spokane Transit Authority and coordination with local and state agencies. She has a master's degree in Urban and Regional Planning. Larry Toedtli, P.E., is Transpo's lead in the Comprehensive Planning practice area. He has 24 years of experience in transportation planning and traffic operations analyses. Larry has managed or assisted in the development of more than 30 citywide and subarea multi -modal transportation planning studies. He also manages transportation analyses for corridor studies and large mixed -use, master planned developments. The planning efforts managed by Larry have included development of both short - and long -range transportation improvement programs. The plans resulted in realistic and balanced transportation financing programs. Larry is well versed in public/private transportation financing programs, including traffic impact fees. He has an M.S. in Urban Transportation. Page 8 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study Spokane Valley, Corridor Study SIMILAR WORK South Valley Corridor, Spokane, WA. Transpo, as a subconsultant, evaluated the traffic operations impacts related to High Capacity Transportation alternatives in the South Valley corridor. The information was used as part of an EIS. Key elements in the study included an intersection, freeway ramp, ramp metering operation analysis, and light-rail transit operational impacts. This study was conducted for the Spokane Regional Transportation Council. The work was used in the overall assessment of High Capacity Transportation alternatives the South Valley corridor in the I -90 vicinity. South Valley Couplet, Spokane, WA. As prime consultant, `.I'ranspo was responsible for evaluating the effectiveness of the proposed Spokane County Urban Connector roadways for those external -to- external (outside the downtown core) trips including the impacts to freight mobility. The study focused on evaluating the effectiveness of the proposed Urban Connectors, including any environmental constraints associated with the proposed connector, and helping identify a priority for the projects. The North Spokane Corridor was also analyzed as it relates to the proposed Urban Connectors. The analysis focused on 10- and 20 -year horizons, which are consistent with current adopted and planned land use plans. Spokane County EIS, Spokane County, WA. Transpo prepared the transportation section of the EIS for the Spokane County Transportation Plan and the Interim Urban Growth Areas required by the Growth Management Act. Transportation impacts were evaluated for the four, land use alternatives identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Impacts identified for each alternative included those to the road system, future travel demand and operating conditions, the transit system, non - motorized travel, and needed transportation improvements. Spokane County Urban Connectors —North Spokane Limited Access Corridor Study, Spokane County, WA. Transpo prepared an EIS for Spokane County for Spokane County Urban Connectors North Spokane Limited Access Corridor Study. As prime consultant, Transpo was responsible for evaluating the effectiveness of the proposed Spokane County Urban Connector roadways for those external -to- external (outside the downtown core) trips including the impacts to freight mobility. The study focused on evaluating the effectiveness of the proposed Urban Connectors, including any environmental constraints associated with the proposed connector, and helping identify a priority for the projects. The North Spokane Corridor was also analyzed as it relates to the proposed Urban Connectors. The analysis focused on 10- and 20- year horizons, which are consistent with current adopted and planned land use plans. ECONorthwest May 2004 Page 9 SR 522 Corri r Improvements, Bothell, W4. State Route 522 is a regional i 'r ipport t �n corri.dor that passes through the City of Bothell. The City, in conjcti (∎,wi urn th some of the regional transit agencies, is interested in adding biislandusiiress access only lanes (BAT). In addition, the City desires to i l m.p r oveeiritersection capacity and safety on SR. 522. A traffic analysis of the proposed improvement was carried out in order to determine _the- adequac }_ and- efficiency of proposed designs and recommend design . changes where needed.iMicroscopic simulation was conducted to identify -----specific-operational issues. The proposed methodology for the traffic analysis is to quantify the benefits of the improvements for both general purpose traffic and transit coaches and identify intersection capacity deficiencies. There were more than ten design scenarios simulated for this project. Each simulation scenario was provided to a Community Advisory Committee to assist in the decision- making process. Mesa Downtown Plan, Mesa, AZ. The Transpo Group worked with. .the City of Mesa to provide a simulation and analysis of two primary areas in !the City. This included ;the downtown core as well as a primary major i e"� t./west corridor. With the two networks combined, the simulation included proximately 30 signalized intersections. .7ih.e purpose of the analysis was to le valuate several changes planned for the area; including the conversion from two- way to one -way streets,, light rail., and additional intersection- related • 'improvements. This work was done in conjunction with an update of their 1 transportation systems plan. The analysis 'f;. ' , also included the use of Synchro to optimize signal timing for the future year, scenarios. SR 4/SR 411 Congestion Mitigation Plan, Longview, WA. Transpo assisted the cities of 'Kelso and Longview, WA and the Cowlitz- Wahkiakum Council of Governments to develop strategies to reduce future congestion levels in these t«rrl,oxr : cidors. The corridors serve major north -south and I lJ east -west travel patterns and are constrained by the Cowlitz River, two bridges, and existing developments. A.s part of the study, Transpo developed an interface between the regional travel. demand model and traffic operations models. The VISSIM microscopic simulation model was used for analyses and presentations. This process provided for quick and efficient evaluation of alternatives ranging from Transportation Systems Management to major capital projects. It also provided an excellent tool for presenting operational alternatives and results to stakeholders, city council members, and the public. The evaluation also addressed pedestrian and bicycle connections and impacts on local access streets. The planning analysis was built on and incorporated other regional transportation planning efforts. Page 10 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study FTB FIRM PROFILE Freedman Tung & Bottomley (FTB) is an urban design firm headquartered in San Francisco. The firm has become known for providing communities with creative and effective solutions to revitalize their downtown districts, commercial corridors, and regional centers; preparing master plans and building standards for transit - oriented development; restructuring failing or, stagnated commercial corridors and workplace districts; developing master plans for civic centers and transit centers that function as the "hearts" of communities; and creating special streets, boulevards, and public places that stimulate new investment and vitality. The firm attributes the success of its projects to three primary factors: First, the opportunity to work for some of the country's most gifted leaders, who consider the creation of great cities and towns of fundamental importance to them personally. Second, FTB's multi - disciplinary approach, melding the arts of creative urban design with sound economic development strategies. Third, a thorough understanding of the unique political environment in which urban design is accomplished effectively, including an engaging and satisfying process of open public participation. KEY PERSONNEL Michael Freedman is the Founding Partner of FTB, and has been at the helm of the firm for 20 years. Freedman holds a Master's Degree in Urban Design from the University of California at Berkeley. He is a highly sought after speaker for a wide variety of organizations both within and outside of the United States concerned with the renewal of cities and towns. lie specializes in redevelopment and infill development master planning, district and corridor revitalization, and use /transportation planning, and streetscape design His work includes preparation of plans, strategies and designs to organize the physical development of opportunity sites within existing cities, particularly where increased market share of private investment, increased pedestrian activity, and substantially enhanced visual character and livability are high priorities. His skills include community workshop facilitation, urban design education, and training presentations. Since the revitalization and restructuring of commercial arterial corridors necessarily involves the creative intermingling of broad -brush settlement pattern design, land use & development policy, street & boulevard design, and development strategies, FTB's project team staff reflects that needed collaboration of trained urban design staff with different specializations. SIMILAR WORK Because of the firm's very focused specialization, virtually all of FTB's project experience is relevant to this project. It is unlikely that any firm can match the depth of FTB's experience with the restructuring of corridors and centers in existing cities in metropolitan America. The following examples are selected to highlight that experience. Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 Page 11 Page 12 ,:e' t lidti '1;< <.,_ -rte -� ■'��. _= Tukwila Urban Center Subarea Plan for the City of Tukwila, Washington. Restructuring of land uses, development pattern and streetscapes within a 1,000 acre regional retail center; transition from single -use, surface parked, haphazard development pattern to a mixed use, transit-oriented development, transitioning to structured parking, smart growth patterns, all in a package of changes that support the enhanced success of the regional retail center. 42nd Avenue Center /Bel Mateo Specific Plan for Carstens Realty. Complementing downtown centers, workplace centers and corridor restructuring, this project demonstrates our experience with the redevelopment and restructuring of a key commercial site along a commercial corridor. ,- `- , T ai • � ,. 11 . W111 1 1 .4 Campustown Streetscape and South Duff Corridor Gateway Design for the City of Ames, Iowa. Street design (final constructed street design included landmark clock tower), parking strategy and revitalization concept for central corridor of Iowa State University's Campustown in Ames, Iowa. Subsequently re-hired to Ames city gateway design corridor improvement plan for South Duff Avenue. Palm Canyon Drive Corridor and Downtown Center Redevelopment Master Plan for Palm Canyon Drive and A new Town Center for the City of Cathedral City, California. Complete transformation of primary segment of failed commercial corridor in the center of the city. Primary project features: complete redesign and PSE's for Palm Canyon Drive streetscape, land use and development strategy for properties fronting the corridor, site development master plan for primary development of new downtown district on key opportunity site, development policies and design guidelines for all new development in the plan area. ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ttmer • • -ay. • rwu_ East 14th Street Corridor Specific Plan and Capital improvements, City of San Leandro, California. Corridor restructuring policies and boulevard and landmark design improvements to instigate physical and economic transformation of the city's central commercial corridor. • Revitalization Strategy Tasman East /Capitol Avenue Light Rail Transit Corridor for Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. Urban design plan for one of Silicon Valley's primary new light rail corridors, to integrate new stations into existing corridors, to link those station areas to existing neighborhoods and workplace districts, and to provide station and station area amenities for mode - transfer, walking and bicycling to stations. Whittier Boulevard Corridor Revitalization Master Plan for the City of Whittier, California. Plans, policies and designs for the restructuring of a seven -mile commercial corridor running through the center of greater Los Angeles. Planning process organized around community workshops resulting in the development of community - supported revision of entire zoning code for the corridor, addition of mandatory design guidelines, approval of street design concepts for each of five segments serving to attract and support desired new forms of investment. Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 Page 13 SCOPE OF WORK OVERVIEW OF THE APPROACH The focus of the research is on how changes in transportation systems affect travel and traffic (in the long run during operation, but also in the short run during construction), and how changes in travel affect economic activity. At a general level, these are fundamental questions addressed by the professional literature of, urban and transportation economics. That literature is both theoretical and empirical. Theory can be qui.te useful in predicting :impacts. We are not talking here about some abstract academic theory. Rather, we mean a theory of cause and effect —of the relationships between transportation access, land_ development, economic activity, and economic value —that is generally accepted as plausible by not only planners, but by real estate and business analysts. The literature is consistent with the common observation that better transportation access increases land values, density, and economic activity. ECONorthwest is very familiar with the theory and, in fact, has contributed to it substantially) The professional literature also addresses real -world cases where corridors and couplets have been built. But the empirical work that will be directly relevant to the existing conditions along Sprague / Appleway Corridor is spotty. Very little ex post (after -the -fact) analysis has been conducted; what has been done is often done poorly, or is very specific to the circumstances of a particular location and project. The challenge is to find good analysis of a situation and city directly comparable to Spokane Valley. Nationally the debate of one -way versus two -way streets for downtown circulation began in the 1950s. Most downtown areas began converting two - way streets to one -way streets in an attempt to rid downtown areas of traffic congestion. This occurred before by- passes, loops, and the full interstate system. The one -way street systems successfully reduced congestion without the need for constructing new facilities. The trend now, starting in the 1990s, is to convert one -way streets back to two -way operation. This trend is not because the one -way street system failed, or that traffic volumes have decreased. Rather, the prevailing wisdom 1 The best - selling textbook in the United States, and thus the world, on urban economics (coincidentally titled Urban Economics) was written by Arthur O'Sullivan a former ECO employee and current ECO associate. Terry Moore summarized all this theory for planners in his book The Transpona ion / Land Use Connection, published by the American Planning Association. Terry Moore and Randy Pozdena of ECONorthwest are the principal authors of new guidebooks from the Transit and Highway Cooperative Research Programs of the National Academy of Sciences on how to evaluate transit and highway projects, including how those projects affect land development and economic activity. Page 14 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study of urban planners and designers is that a busy street, somewhat congested, is an indicator of a healthy business environment. A study of the economic impacts of one -way streets on the retail industry in Olympia, Washington, reports that businesses on a pair of one -way streets had better gross retail sales than comparable two -way streets. However, the study concluded that the economic impact could not definitely be linked to the change in traffic flow. The link between traffic flow and economics is not easily measured because there are so many variables affecting customer purchases that the one-way street variable cannot be isolated from other factors. In 1996, the City of Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, discussed the conversion of one -way streets to two -way. Before proceeding, the local chapter of the Canadian Automobile Association (CAA) commissioned a survey to determine citizen support and consumer preferences. One questions was: "if the major streets were changed to two -way, would the number of times you shop downtown increase, stay the same, or. decrease ? " Eighty -two percent indicated that their shopping habits would not change, 10 percent of the respondents would increase their shopping activity, and 8 percent would decrease their shopping activity. Although these are preference results, they indicate that the direction of traffic flow and economic activity are independent. One -way street systems have disadvantages and advantages, as with any street system design. Primary negative properties of one -way street systems that have been noted include: • Infrequent users find one -way systems confusing. • Infrequent users have a difficult time locating return service. • An increase in circuitous vehicles locating driveways. • Added distance for transit service using cross -over streets to one -way connectors. • :Possible adverse effects on businesses. All of the disadvantages have been cited or noted in various documents; however, many of the claims have not been validated with research. Advantages of the one -way system are primarily safety and capacity. The intersection of a one -way street system has fewer pedestrian and vehicular conflicts than its two -way counterpart. The reduction of conflict points on the one -way system typically results in a reduction of vehicle -to - vehicle accidents as well as vehicle -to - pedestrian accidents compared to two -way operation. 2 l3ugge, W.A. "A Study of Vehicle Traffic and Business Trends Before and After One -way Streets in Olympia, Washington." By the Traffic Engineering Division of WSDOT, 1952. 3 Canadian Automobile Association —South Central Ontario. "Two•vway Traffic Study." Prepared by Medershot Research Consultants, March 1997. Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 Page 15 For the most part, capacity benefits arise because there are no left turns across opposing traffic flow. The Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook" reported a conversion of two -way to one -way operation that resulted in: • 37 percent reduction in average trip time • 60 percent reduction in number of stops • 38 percent reduction in accidents • 1.9 percent increase in average daily traffic In 1994 the City of Lubbock,s Texas, was confronted with a similar situation. Members of the community petitioned the City to convert a downtown one -way couplet from one -way back to two -way. The streets were originally converted to one-way in 1960 to alleviate growing traffic congestion due to thriving downtown retail and commercial business. In the 1970s much of the retail businesses moved out to locations closer to the freeway. In 1995 the one -way street couplet was converted back to two, two - way streets. As of 1998 the City has not received any unfavorable comments, except requests to improve the two-way signal progression. Early "before and after" data comparison results indicated that traffic volumes are relatively unchanged, and traffic accidents have only increased at a rate consistent with annual increases. The business community claims to have experienced minor growth. The theoretical and empirical literature is a good start: it is essential to developing a proper and consistent evaluation structure, and it provides some ideas about the types of impacts to expect, and their direction and magnitudes. But ultimately, as the City and the RFP recognize, this research is going to have to get into the particulars of the Sprague / Appleway Corridor. The logic of the argument above leads us to a general approach that is consistent with the guidelines of the RFP. It is shown in Figure 1, which, despite all the arrows, is lacking many. By that we mean that we have shown the general order of the research (moving from left to right), but that many boxes connect in multiple places (e.g., the Literature Review may provide information about designing the Evaluation Framework or Development Scenario; Data gets collected early, but clearly gets used in creating Transportation Options and Development Scenarios, and in the Economic Evaluation). 4 llomburger, W.S. "Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook" 23d Ed., Prentice Hall, Engelwood Cliffs, NJ, 1982. b Hart, Jeryl D.P.E. "Converting Back to Two -way Streets in Downtown Lubbock." Institute of Transportation Engineers, August 1998. Page 16 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study Figure 1: Overview of the approach Evaluation Framework 4 Data: Transportation, Land Use, Economy 4 Exisiting Conditions; Opportunities and Constraints —► Transportation Options; Development Scenarios 1 Policy Options; Mitigation Literature Review; Experience 1 Economic Evaluation 9 Recommendations Figure 1 illustrates the following points: • Establish an evaluation framework and assemble base data. These two tasks happen simultaneously at the beginning of the project. • Describe existing condition, likely opportunities and constraints for future development, and forecasts. At the same time we can describe existing and potential policy options. We will use those descriptions to create future developrnent scenarios for transportation and development: a base case, and some alternatives. Constraints include any barriers to redevelopment: market, policy (regulatory), or institutional (implementation of policies). An important part of this task will be getting and reviewing transportation forecast data from Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SR • .Describe the likely economic impacts of the scenarios. That economic evaluation will derive, in part, from our assessment of the professional literature on, and our experience i.n other similar project with, likely impacts. The economic impacts will be influenced by the policies adopted (including mitigation policies). Here we will be working through the chain of cause and effect to describe how changes in the transportation system are likely to affect development and economic activity. The analysis will consider impacts: • On different classes of property or business activity. • At different periods of time: short run (construction, 1 to 5 years) and long run (operation, 5 to 20 years). • That can be influenced by public actions: to mitigate negative impacts and enhance positive ones. • Report and present recommendations. We are very familiar with the steps of this evaluation approach. We have used them many times in other projects; they are consistent with the requirements of the REP. Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 Page 17 Not called out as a separate component in Figure 1 is stakeholder and public involvement. There are several reasons for this. First, a public involvement effort is not specified in the REP. Second, in our discussions City staff said that this project was contentious, but the focus of the RIP was on getting the facts, which could occur without a special public involvement process. Third, there is no specified budget for this project, which made adding a public involvement component risky if it, were not strictly necessary. That last point was the most important one. In preparing this proposal we asked City staff about the approximate budget for this project. That is a standard question by consultants, because the budget provides useful information about the City's immediate priorities, which leads us to the type and detail of analysis to propose. Occasionally a public jurisdiction will not provide that information: that is the case for this project. Given that situation, we suggested, and City staff allowed, that we provide two work programs driven by two different assumptions about budget. The first is "the Basic Work Plan ": it contains all the tasks that we think are necessary, at a minimum, to meet the City's objectives for this project. The second is "the Enhanced Work Plan," which, as the name suggests, includes additional work that we think could be quite useful in achieving the City's objectives. In general, the enhancements provide a little more technical analysis, and much more community outreach in the specification of the problem, potential solutions, and evaluation methods, and in review of the evaluation and recommendations. The suggested enhancements derive from our team's repeated experience that in a politically- charged decisionmaking process facts are only as powerful as the amount of "buy in" to those facts on the part of stakeholders. We describe all these points in more detail in the next section. BASIC WORK PLAN TASK 1 PROJECT START -UP We assume that, if selected, we would refine the scope of work with City staff during contract negotiation. Thus, we would expect to start with a clear scope of work and agreement with the City on that scope. In the Basic Work Plan one of the things we propose to keep costs low is to skip the typical kick -off meeting that occurs at the very beginning of a project. In lieu of a kick- off- meeting, we expect to communicate among consultants and City staff by phone and email to get some initial assignments underway. Several related subtasks can occur. simultaneously: • Conduct a literature review. ECO is thoroughly familiar with the literature on the economics of transportation and land use. We can 6 Among several important topics during that negotiation will be the relationship of this project to other City work efforts, especially its comprehensive planning. Page 18 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study quickly summarize the general expectations about key causal relationships. Transpo and FTB will assist by giving references to relevant case studies in the professional literature or in local studies with which they are familiar. • Develop an eualuation framework. We expect the essence of the framework to be the one implied by the RFP and outlined in the previous section: develop scenarios (plausible combinations of land development and transportation improvements in the corridor, given expected City growth and its land use and development policies) and describe (through various techniques) the likely economic impacts of those scenarios in both the short and long run. The evaluation framework should address the effects of potential changes in policy. In other. projects ECO has developed all manner of computer - assisted evaluation models, ranging from simple spreadsheets, to complex linking spreadsheets with risk- analysis add -ons, to and development simulations that couple parcel -level database analysis with GIS analysis and presentation, as well as to specialized econometric models written in any of several programming languages. For the Basic Work Plan, we propose to keep the costs low by keeping the analysis simple. We expect to use simple spreadsheet analysis coupled with some mapping display through GIS. • Assemble base data. We expect some direction and assistance from the City on identifying and assembling the most current information about transportation, land use, development, demographic, and socioeconomic variables. Transpo's location in Spokane and familiarity with local data and agencies should allow us to do this efficiently. We understand that traffic forecasts will be developed by the SRTC, who will also provide baseline data for use in the analysis. Data from Spokane County regarding previous transportation projects, such as 16th and 32nd Avenues, will prove useful to this project, as well as information concerning capacity improvements and timing of the improvements on Interstate 90 from Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). We will also confirm the status and impact of the North Spokane Corridor and its impact to the City as well as the Urban Connectors /Bigelow Gulch project. The 'Bridging the Valley' analysis will also impact the corridor's function in the long term as consolidated rail service may change land use focus in some areas. The Comprehensive Plans for the Cities of Spokane and Liberty Lake and Spokane County where common borders are shared will provide background for the area and development within the City. Land-use planning as a result of the Light Rail study and LRT study recommendations will also provide guidance for the study. Further related transportation improvements within these same jurisdictions which can impact how and where traffic enters the Spokane Valley will have an influence on circulation within the City and particularly within the couplet. Local business forecasts and data from both the EDC and the Valley Chamber will also provide a foundation for the Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 Page 19 analysis. Specific demographic and building permit data within the City by block group or traffic analysis zone will be requested from SRTC and the City. • Prepare an outline of the final report. Our experience is consistent on this point: preparing an outline of the final product early facilitates communication with City Staff and a larger audience, if necessary, about what the study is supposed to do, and keeps us focused on the desired product. The outline will get amended during the course of the research (usually in minor ways), but we strongly believe that we need it at the start of the project. • .Prepare for Task 2. We expect that the City would have primary responsibility for identifying and organizing people or stakeholders for the focus groups that we would conduct in Task 2. Products: Outline of Final Report. We will make progress on the items listed above, but will deliver them in a subsequent task Meetings: None Budget: $10,000 Schedule: Weeks 1 - 4 TASK 2 SITE VISIT AND TEAM CHARETTE We will. prepare drafts of the products begun in Task 1 and circulate them among team members. In general, the idea is to bring ECO staff (Moore) and F staff (Freedman) to Spokane Valley to meet with Transpo (Fueston), City staff, and other interested parties. Prior to that meeting we would prepare and distribute basic data and maps in whatever format is desired by the City and is readily available and convenient. The City staff and consultant team would meet over a two -day period in Spokane Valley. The activities would include: Internal. meeting of the staff / consultant team (morning. Day 1). The team will review progress, outline of final report, data, and preliminary findings of the literature review and evaluation framework. The team will also discuss existing and possible City policies. • Site visit (afternoon, Day 1). The team tour of the corridor and related areas of the City. • Focus groups (afternoon or evening, Day 1). All the consultants are adept at running focus groups. To take advantage of our time in Spokane we would run three focus groups in parallel on day one (probably in the evening): transportation (Fueston), land use and development, and street design as it relates to enfronting development (Freedman), and economics (Moore). City staff would attend and take notes at the focus groups • Internal work session (morning, Day 2). On the second day the staff / consultant team would meet to discuss and make final decisions on the evaluation framework, transportation options, development scenarios, and policy variations. City staff input into traffic and Page 20 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study development options will be important. Transportation components of scenarios will obviously include variations on the couplet arrangement; development components will include a continuation of existing patterns, and shifts based on market trends or changes in public policy. ECO would summarize the results of the site visit, and the implications for next steps in a memorandum to be delivered five working -days after the site visit. Products: Summary memo: findings, decisions, and assignments Meetings: One Budget: $10,000 Schedule: Weeks 5-6 TASK 3 ECONOMIC EVALUATION After the site visit ECO will synthesize the decisions made by consultants and City staff regarding the scenarios for evaluation, and the base forecasts and assumptions that define those scenarios. ECO will also describe the recommended methods for the economic evaluation. To work efficiently and reduce costs, that synthesis will be written directly into a draft of the evaluation report as the chapters on methods (including data and assumptions) and on definition of scenarios. City staff, FTB, and Transpo will review and comment on those draft chapters. If they were not able to do so during Task 2, Transpo and the City will do a final review of the traffic forecast data that will be prepared by the SRTC. ECO will then conduct its economic evaluation. That evaluation will discuss impacts on existing businesses of changes in transportation options, traffic, and development patterns over a five -, ten -, and 20 -year period. That evaluation cannot be definitive: there is too much uncertainty in all the variables over that long a period. But it can illustrate and provide justification for some reasonable description of alternative futures. ECO has conducted this type of evaluation several times. What is critical is to be clear about assumptions, a reasonable range of variability around those assumptions, and the sensitivity of the conclusions to that variability. In scenario planning, where future results can be quite variable, it is often more important to describe the downside risks of unfavorable conditions then the best case that can occur if all favorable assumptions prove true. An important part of the evaluation is to identify and describe the tradeoffs among the transportation / development scenarios. Every decision — whether to build or not build; what variation to build —has economic consequences that we will describe. Transpo will review traffic projections for the study horizon years and address traffic control, possible traffic calming techniques, access management/control, pedestrian/bicycle needs, transit operational needs, internal versus external circulation, and signage. Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 Page 21 Products: Refined report outline; draft sections of the final report Meetings: None Budget: $20,000 Schedule: Weeks 7 -12 TASK 4 DRAFT AND FINAL REPORT We will summarize our research in a draft of a final report that we will submit to City staff for review and comment. The City will provide a single set of consolidated comments in writing. We will incorporate agreed upon changes into the document and provide the City with one unbound copy of final report and one copy in electronic format (MS Word, Excel or Adobe :P:D.F). Products: Meetings: Budget: Schedule: Products: Meetings: Budget: Schedule: ENHANCED WORK PLAN Draft and final report None $5,000 Weeks 13 -17 TASK 5 PRESENTATION ECO will make one presentation of the results of the analysis to the Spokane Valley City Council. The most likely time for that presentation is after the draft report has been reviewed and edited to make it a final report. It is also possible, however, to make a presentation to the Council based on the draft report, and then incorporate Council comments into the final report. We will decide with City staff which method is most useful. ECO will prepare a PowerPoint presentation summarizing the results and recommendations of the study. The PowerPoint presentation will be developed in a manner that it can be used later by City staff to present the results to other. groups. In our presentations, we clearly communicate our technical information to technical and non - technical audiences. We favor a few clear charts and diagrams that highlight the key issues without getting bogged down in details. We are always prepared to answer technical questions, but find it better to focus on the policy issues facing the public and policymakers. By combining sound technical work with good public presentations, we provide citizens with a solid foundation upon which to make a judgment about what they think is right for their community. PowerPoint presentation One $4,000 Week 18 The Basic Work Plan gets the job done. It delivers the products specified in the RFP: an economic evaluation report, and a presentation of that report to the Spokane Valley City Council. The analysis in the report will be Page 22 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study technically solid, consistent with professional standards, and written in a way that makes its assumptions and methods clear to a nontechnical audience. What then, are the reasons for an enhanced work program? There are two. First, a bit of supplementary analysis may turn out to be pivotal in the decisionmaking process. In the basic work program we are generally accepting population, employment, and transportation forecasts, both in the aggregate and at the subarea level. For example, we are not doing any new modeling; the most we can do is comment on any inconsistencies or alternative allocations that our basic review of the data suggest. A point we make in all of our forecasting work is that there is not a single known future for urban development. Instead, there are many possible futures, some more likely than others, that depend on ones ideas about the economy (national and local), socioeconomic and demographic shifts, and public investment and policy. The fact that Spokane Valley believes there is a decision to be made about the Corridor is evidence of a belief that things will be different depending on what decision gets made: we share that belief. Second, and more important, we have very little public outreach built into the Basic Work Plan. It is our understanding that there is substantial controversy about this project —a very typical situation where public actions to instigate change on built -out commercial corridors are being discussed. It is possible that simply coming forward with a fully- prepared, rigorous, and objective evaluation will facilitate agreement on a preferred course of action. But, having done a lot of this work, we can say with confidence that such agreement is not inevitable or even likely in a politically charged environment, no matter how compelling the analysis is to the professionals on the City Staff /Consultant team. No matter how good and fair we, the analyst, think our work is, interests on all sides will likely be motivated to critique its methods, its data, and its assumptions. One way to reduce the controversy at the end, or at least to give decisionmakers more confidence to deal with that controversy, is to get people involved from the beginning in defining the problems, the range of possible solutions (scenarios), the options for evaluation, and key assumptions. Doing that in an open process, and documenting decisions along the way, can built a base of support for the recommended solutions, and typically leads to a bit less controversy at the end of the project (although there will still be controversy). Community workshops well attended by stakeholders also provide City Council members with better justification for making the decisions that they do, even in the face of the controversy that remains (i.e., that there has been an open process of debate about all aspects of the issue, that the best information has been made available, and now it is the Council's responsibility to make a decision that it realizes will be unpopular with some but best for the majority). We are not familiar with the history of the controversy regarding the project, but we are confident that our substantial experience in other projects will allow us to quickly create a program that meets the City's needs. Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 Page 23 Exactly what an outreach program should include depends in part on what has already been done. Stakeholders in the City, and in particular along the corridor, may have a high interest in the study and may present an opportunity for the City to engage the community. In other projects of this nature we would typically have three public workshops: one in advance of any presentations of analysis or recommendations to listen to what people think. are the problems and what they want out of the study; one to propose, discuss, and amend transportation / development scenarios and methods to evaluate them; and one to discuss the results of our evaluation. After that last workshop we would amend our evaluation and draft report as appropriate, and then send it to the City Council. When presented to City Council, modifications made in response to workshop participant input could be highlighted. In addition to the workshops, there are many other techniques we have used to involve and get information to and from people during the project, including a website, press releases, and web -based surveys: we have used all of these and more on other projects. Such involvement creates a better product. Its only disadvantage is cost: a full program can take a lot of staff and consultant time. SUMMARY OF SCHEDULE AND BUDGET Figure 2 summarizes the schedule for the Tasks of the Basic Work :Plan as described in the previous section. We think four to five months is a reasonable amount of time for this type of evaluation to take. We also understand, however, that the City may see an advantage to having something come out of this study that would tie to its current schedule for the development of its comprehensive plan. We believe that we could compress the schedule by a full month if the City finds that desirable, though that would require reciprocal obligations from the City regarding the provision of data, scheduling of meetings, and turn - around of comments on interim and final products, The Enhanced Work Plan would take longer, because there would have to be time between workshops. Figure 2. Schedule and milestones, Basic Work Plan Activity Name Jun i Jul 2004 Aug Sept Oct Nov Task S: Project Start -Up Task 2: Site Visit Task 3: Evaluation Task 4: Report Task 5: Presentation ■ = Milestone i0 =Deliverable `V Page 24 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study Task Basic Work Plan Additional for Enhanced Work Plan Total (including Enhanced Work Plan) Task 1: Project Start-Up S10,000 $7,000 $17,000 Task 2: Site Visit $10,000 $7,000 $17,000 Task 3: Evaluation $20,000 510,000 530,000 Task 4: Report $5,000 51,000 $6,000 Task 5: Presentation $4,000 54,000 TOTAL $49,000 S25,000 574,000 Firm Basic Work Plan Additional for Enhanced Work Plan Total (including Enhanced Work Plan) ECONorthwest $35,000 514,000 549,000 The Transpo Group 57,000 $5,000 $12,000 Freedman Tung & Bottomley $7,000 56,000 $13,000 TOTAL $49,000 S25,000 574,000 REFERENCES Table I. summarizes the budget, both for the Basic Work Plan and the Enhanced Work Plan. Table 1. Budget summary Table 2. Budget distribution FOR ECONORTHWEST Mary Weber, Program Supervisor. Portland Metro 600 NE Grand Ave. Portland, OR 97232 (503) 797 -1735 Bob Cortright, Transportation Specialist Department of Land Conservation and Development 1175 Court St., NE Salem, OR 97310 (503) 373 -0050, ext. 241 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 Page 25 Mike Ogan Portland Development Commission 1900 SW Fourth Ave., Suite 7000 Portland, OR 97204 (503) 823 -3309 Stuart Meek, Senior Research Fellow American Planning Association 122 South Michigan Ave., Suite 1600 Chicago, IL 60603 (312) 786 -6358 Liz Sedler, Executive Director NICAN P.O. Box 1357 Sandpoint, ID 83864 (208) 263 -5281 Dan Cardwell, Planning and Land Services Pierce County 2401 South 35th St. Tacoma, WA 98409 (253) 798 -7039 FOR THE TRANSPO GROUP Spokane County Public Works Projects Ross Kelley, County Engineer Spokane County (509) 477 -3600 SR 4 /SR 411 Congestion Mitigation Plan Rosemary Siipola, Transportation Planner/Manager Cowlitz - Wahkiakum Council of Governments (360) 577-3041 FOR FREEDMAN TUNG & BOTTOMLEY Mark Roberts, Community Development Director City of Livermore (925) 960 -4465 Mr. Roberts has been our main client for preparation of revitalization strategy, land use and development master planning, land use & development policies, and streetscape designs and construction documents. Bruce Liedstrand, Community Development Director City of Redwood City (650) 780 -7244 Mr. Liedstrand has been our client almost continuously over a 20 year period for a wide variety of district and corridor redevelopment and revitalization projects in the cities of Redwood City, Cathedral City, and Mountain View, California. Page 26 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ADDITIONAL QUALIFICATIONS ECONORTHWEST ADDITIONAL EXPERIENCE Benefits and Disbenefits of Transit. For the National Academy of Sciences' Transit Cooperative Research Board, ECO developed a guidebook to help transit agencies measure the benefits and disbenefits of providing rail and bus transit. ECO's work included an extensive review of the existing literature and the development of clear methods to help transit agencies measure economic impacts. The guidebook includes chapters on impacts on land use and the local economy. Benefit -Cost Analysis of Proposed Monorail System. ECONorthwest assisted with estimating the cost effectiveness and reviewed a benefit -cost analysis of the Elevated Transit Co.'s proposed monorail system for Seattle, Washington. The cost effectiveness study compared the cost per trip and per passenger-mile of the proposed monorail system with light rail, ferries, bus, and automobile trips in the central Puget Sound region. Cost Accounting. For Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), ECONorthwest developed a functional design for an environmental cost accounting system that would estimate and track environmental costs and benefits associated with all WSDOT program activities. This involved both the identification and categorization of these costs as well as developing the technical methods needed to quantify these costs. This system will provide cost and benefit information aggregated at different levels of detail to all of the primary decision process points within WSDOT planning processes. Benefit -Cost Analysis of Regional Transit Plan. For the Washington Research Council, ECO analyzed the benefits and costs of a proposed $4 billion transit plan in Puget Sound. ECO used the results of modeling and analysis developed by the Regional Transit Authority to estimate the project's net benefits. ECO's analysis indicated that the costs of rail transit portions of the plan significantly exceeded their benefits. ECO's analysis was reviewed and endorsed by an panel of leading transportation experts from around the country. Least -Cost Planning in Transportation. For the Federal Highway Administration, ECONorthwest reviewed least -cost planning techniques in the electric utility industry to identify insights and approaches relevant to transportation planning. ECO integrated techniques of least -cost planning with the best practices for evaluating the benefits and costs of transportation investments across modes. ECO's research resulted in a manual for metropolitan planning organizations to assist in the multi -modal investment analysis required under federal ISTEA legislation. Congestion Pricing Policies. For the Oregon Department of Transportation, ECONorthwest developed a manual for policymak.ers for the Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 Page 27 evaluation of road - pricing projects. The manual describes how a model road_ pricing system could be used to rationalize highway investment decisions, improve mobility, and address the equity effects of pricing, Highway Cost Allocation Study. For the Oregon Department of Administrative Services, ECONorthwest is assisting the Oregon Department of Transportation with the 2005 -2007 Highway Cost Allocation Study. ECO had helped conduct the 2003 -05 Highway Cost Allocation Study using a model developed by ECONorthwest for the 2001 -03 study. Pricing Measures to Achieve Transportation Goals. For the Lane Council of Governments, ECONorthwest identified transportation pricing policies and described how they work, how they perform on various evaluative criteria, how they could be implemented, and which would be most appropriate for the Eugene - Springfield metropolita.n area, given its size, traffic conditions, and transportation system. Analysis of Land -Use Patterns. For the Federal Highway Administration, ECONorthwest assisted with the application of least -cost planning principles to an analysis of the impacts of transportation projects on land use. ECO developed a full -cost accounting framework for evaluating the impacts of alternative land -use patterns, and assisted with research to quantify these impacts. Willamette Valley Alternative Futures. For the Oregon Agricultural Education Foundation and 1000 Friends of Oregon, ECONorthwest managed a project to evaluate the impacts of alternative urban development patterns on farming, forestry, and taxpayers. The study looked. at two growth patterns at the urban fringe: trend densities, and a higher density from a more compact, but still realistic, pattern of development. Economic Development Strategy. For the Portland Development Commission, ECO developed an Economic Development Strategy for the City of Portland. The Strategy included a long -run view of the regional economy, a description of economic issues in the City of Portland, a broad strategy for City action on those issues, and things that the City can do to work toward long -run goals for economic development. As part of the study, ECO conducted a comparative analysis of Portland's competitive position relative to similar metropolitan areas. Eugene Economic Development. For. the City of Eugene, ECO is providing technical assistance to the City's Blue Ribbon Committee on Economic Development. ECO designed the Committee's process, prepared the agenda and technical material for all meetings and facilitated those meetings. The emphasis of the project was on getting agreement among a very diverse group of civic leaders and interest -group representatives on three to five specific and immediate actions that the City could take to facilitate desirable types of economic development. These actions will form the basis of the final report prepared, by ECO, that will be presented to the City Council for adoption. Woodburn Economic Development. For the City of Woodburn, ECONorthwest prepared a study to assist in updating the City's Page 28 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study Comprehensive Plan consistent with the requirements of statewide Goal 9. ECO determined Woodburn's comparative advantages and constraints in the regional economic market place, identified potential appropriate industrial and commercial firms with higher paying jobs, and the demographic, locational, site and infrastructure characteristics desired by these firms; and evaluated what it would take (in terms of investment, City policy changes, plan and code amendments and state approvals) to move in the direction of desired changes. McMinnville Economic Opportunities Analysis. For the City of McMinnville, ECONorthwest prepared an economic opportunities analysis as specified by Goal 9, and OAR 660- 008 -015. ECO reviewed the Economic Element of the City's Comprehensive Man, as well as a draft analysis produced by the City and another contractor. The analysis included revised employment forecasts and a demand analysis of land needed for employment. RESUMES Resumes for the following key personnel are attached at the end of this proposal. Terry Moore Steve Fitzroy Bob Parker Carl Batten Becky Steckler THE TRANSPO GROUP ADDITIONAL EXPERIENCE South Plateau Corridor Access Road, Issaquah, WA. This corridor connects the residential areas on the Sammamish Plateau with 1 -90, traveling through the Issaquah Highlands development. A one -way couplet concept was defined within the Town Center area. Transpo applied microsimulation to illustrate how traffic operations and pedestrian needs would work within the corridor. The simulation was integrated with buildings to illustrate the overall design concept. Covington Transportation Plan, Covington, WA. As part of its initial Transportation Plan, prepared by Transpo, the City and WSDOT coordinated on an access management program for the SR 516 corridor to identify local circulation and access impacts. The plan also included development of a local circulation system to facilitate economic growth in the downtown core, while improving traff operations along the state highway. A median planter strip and improved pedestrian crossings were incorporated into the project. International Boulevard Corridor Plan, SeaTac, WA. A key element of this project fronting Seattle- Tacoma International Airport was incorporating wide sidewalks, landscaping, and a median within limited right- Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 Page 29 of -way. The design solution included locations for U -turns for access to existing development and mid -block pedestrian signals to reduce pedestrian /vehicular conflicts. A survey was conducted to define the amount of through traffic in the corridor to assist in gaining public acceptance. Hamilton Transportation Plan, Hamilton, MT. In 2001, a consultant team including Transpo developed a tailored transportation plan for the City of Hamilton. The US 93 north -south corridor essentially splits the City of Hamilton in half. One of the unique challenges in this study was to address means that provide "connection" across this transportation barrier. The City was concerned with the lack of gaps in traffic flow and the resulting challenges for motorized and non - motorized users to access on and across this corridor. The planning process included developing population, housing, and employment forecasts that were used to project 2020 travel demands. The existing and forecast traffic volumes were analyzed for operations, safety, and road standards. The plan identified needs to support the growth and help maintain the safety and capacity of the state highway. City of Redmond Time Travel Study, Redmond, WA. As part of its update of its Transportation Master Plan, the City of Redmond identified a strategy to use travel times as potential measures of the adequacy of its transportation system. Travel times were identified since they represent what the public actually experiences. The project was developed in two phases. During Phase 1, a program was documented for collecting and analyzing actual travel times for nine corridors was defined and implemented. During Phase 2, a strategy for forecasting travel times and speeds was identified. The forecasting process uses the Synchro traffic operations software to estimate delays at intersections. The intersection delays are combined with estimates of travel times between intersections using the Bureau of Public Roads formula. The methodology allows travel speeds to be forecasted based on changes in traffic volumes or roadway /intersection improvements. 166th Avenue NE Improvements, Redmond, WA. The Transpo Group assisted the City of Redmond in evaluating and preparing preliminary design plans for various improvements aimed at improving safety and traffic operation along the 166th Avenue NE corridor. Several alternatives were evaluated including three- and four -lane cross - sections, bike lanes, center medians, and on- street parking. The Transpo Group has provided operational evaluation expertise and preliminary design assistance, which has been used to present information to a varying audience that has included City policy makers and staff. One of the improvements adopted was a flashing beacon warning system for the crosswalk in front of the elementary school. The flashing beacon system was to serve as a prototype for school crossings City -wide, and Transpo's facilitation between the City and vendors was key in designing a system which would meet the City's expectations. Transpo prepared the final design plans for the improvements mentioned above. 1st Avenue S /SW 160th Street/Sylvester Road Corridor Evaluation, Burien, WA. Transpo prepared traffic operations evaluation of possible design concepts on la Avenue S in Burien. The City's travel demand Page 30 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study model was used to estimate future travel volumes along Pt Avenue S. Anticipated improvements such as the SR. 509 extension and the SR 51.8ISR 509 interchange reconstruction were assumed in the analysis. Once the future volumes were determined, traffic simulation software was used to evaluate intersection operations and vehicle queuing at the major intersections along the corridor. The simulation showed that the current five -lane design of the 1st Avenue S corridor is of sufficient size to handle the anticipated future travel demand. However, the operations at several of the major, intersections along the corridor reduce capacity of the current facility, resulting in congestion. The improvement alternatives identified in the study focused on improving the operations of the intersections that were identified as not meeting the City's adopted level of service standards. WSDOT Cost Estimate Validation Process (CEVP), State of Washington, WA. Transpo was a team member for the CEVP of the Urban Corridors Mega- Projects. CEVP is the use of a team of industry design and construction experts to review the work of WSDOT and/or consultant - designed projects. The review is to ensure that adequate cost and risks have been addressed and as such are represented by a range of total costs and probable risks associated with those costs. Transpo's role was to provide consulting on maintenance of traffic during construction and to provide a determination of whether adequate costs had been included within project budgets to account for building the projects while maintaining traffic. Eight major projects were reviewed in this capacity —SR 509 from SeaTac Airport to 1 -5, SR 5 /SR 16 Interchange and Tacoma HOV, SR 395 Spokane N -S Freeway, SR 520 Translake, SR 99 Alaska Way Viaduct, SR 405 Tukwila to Lynnwood, SR 104. Hood Canal Bridge, and SR 5 Everett HOV. I -182 Corridor Study, Pasco, WA. Transpo conducted a traffic study for the City of Pasco to assess future transportation facilities needed to accommodate anticipated land use growth along the I -182 corridor. The study found that one roadway project along with nine intersection- related improvements (signals) were required by 2005 to achieve the citywide roadway and intersection level of service (LOS) standard of LOS D. An additional analysis of the "build -out" conditions was also conducted. The build -out condition represented a long -term horizon that assumed all developable property was built out to its allowable zoning. Travel demand modeling was conducted to assess where transportation improvements would be needed to accommodate the future build -out traffic volumes to maintain the City's LOS D standard. The plan will also formalize an implementation strategy and include a financial plan. RESUMES Resumes for the following key personnel are attached at the end of this proposal. Christina Fueston Larry Toedtli, PE Spokane Valley, Corridor Study ECONorthwest May 2004 page 31 40th Street Improvements /Shellmound Avenue Bridge & Corridor Design Standards; City -Wide Streetscape Design Manual for the City of Emeryville, California. Streetscape design for new street designed as central spine for prominent commercial uses, including the 40th Street Bridge, a structure highly visible for interstate highways at the foot of the San Francisco /Oakland Bay Bridge. Follow -up project: Design Manual for the City featuring detailed design standards for sidewalk paving, tree grates, tree species, boulevard and pedestrian- scaled ornamental streetlights designed by FTl3, white metal halide lighting, bus shelters, decorative fencing, and finish recommendations for retaining walls. FREEDMAN TUNG & BOTTOMLEY ADDITIONAL EXPERIENCE 1. velyn Transit Corridor and Multi -Modal Transit Facility for the City of Mountain View, California and the Joint Powers Board. :Design and implementation of entirely new design prototype for multi -modal transit center; master plan, land use & development standards and design guidelines for station -area development; street design improvements for primary corridor, and street design standards for streets to he added as development occurs (entire project constructed according to plan; award winner). Master Plan and Street Design for Whittier Boulevard in the City of Montebello, California. Revitalization Strategy, Development Standards& Design Guidelines, Capital Improvements and Street Improvements targeted at turning around the long -term economic decline of a major east -west arterial in the center of the Greater Los Angeles region. Separate policy and street _ improvements for central segment ' 1 doing "double- duty" as the City's downtown "Main Street." FTB is currently preparing construction documents for implementation of over two miles of corridor design improvements and landmark features. RESUMES The resume for Michael Freedman is attached at the end of this proposal. Page 32 ECONorthwest May 2004 Spokane Valley, Corridor Study CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 1, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent D old business X new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information 0 admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Business registration program discussion GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Ordinance 34 adopted a business registration system for the City of Spokane Valley in March of 2003. BACKGROUND: The City engaged Microflex to identify and register businesses operating within our city limits. There are 2800+ registered businesses within the database built by Microflex. We have another 1600 names of businesses that may need to be added to the database once we verify they are bona fide businesses and not already included in the database. While we still have work to do to identify businesses operating within our city limits, we need to begin planning for the first renewal of registrations, which will take place late this year, and the registration of new 2004 businesses. The following issues need to be addressed as we proceed with this project: 1. Who should register and renew these businesses? Options include handling this work in -house with city employees, continuing with Microflex or contracting with the Washington State Department of Licensing (DOL). 2. Should the City charge a reasonable fee for maintaining these registrations and to recover costs already incurred? 3. Should non - profit agencies be included in those organizations being registered? A memorandum is attached to provide additional information and recommendations on these issues. Also attached is a schedule reflecting estimated City revenues and expenditures for registering businesses. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Ongoing costs to register businesses in the City and recovery of costs spent in 2003/2004 are expected to be between $60,000 and $65,000 each year for three years. A business registration fee of $25 /year will pay for these ongoing costs and reimburse the city for costs incurred in building the database. STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance Director Attachments: Business registration memo Business registration Schedule of Revenues and Expenditures Spokane .f Valley Memorandum To: Dave Mercier, City Manager & Members of the Council From: Ken Thompson, Finance Director CC: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Date: May 21, 2004 Re: Business Registration Project 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall®spokanevatley.org PURPOSE OF MEMO: The purpose of this memo is threefold: 1) to consider options for registering businesses operating within the City; 2) to consider charging a fee to pay the cost of registering businesses; and 3) to consider registering non -profit organizations. BACKGROUND: The City engaged Microflex to identify and register businesses operating within our city limits by using the sales tax database Microflex developed for the City late last year. Microflex also used other sources and a Fire District #1 database to assist in their search for businesses. There are 2800+ registered businesses within the database built by Microflex. We have another 1600 names of businesses that may need to be added to the database once we verify they are bona fide businesses and not already included in the database. While we still have work to do to identify businesses operating within our city limits, we need to begin planning for the first renewal of registrations which will take place late this year, and the registration of new 2004 businesses. THE ISSUES: The following issues need to be addressed as we proceed with this project: 1. Who should register and renew these businesses? Options include handling this work in -house with city employees, continuing with Microflex or contracting with the Washington State Department of Licensing (DOL). A comparison of key factors for each of the three options appears below. Factor .Options In -house Micrflx State DOL One stop licensing for those that must renew with the state (25% of businesses) No No Yes Can city avoid hiring an extra 1 /2 person? No Yes Yes Cost to Business to register — initial year* $25 $25 $25 Cost to Business to renew* $25 $25 $25 Flexibility to add or extract data Yes Some Some Can city avoid hosting a limited field office? Yes Yes No Estimated annual income to city after recovering 1/3 ($12,000) of the startup costs and annual costs. $4,150 $6,800 $11,600 *assumes city initiates a $25 fee Note: Handling fees are charged by Microflex ($9.60) and DOL ($9) for renewal. These fees would be part of the 525 annual fee shown above with the City receiving the difference. however, if the City doesn't implement a fee but uses Microflex or DOL to process registrations, the handling fee will still be due to Microflex or DOL. 2. Should the City charge a reasonable fee for maintaining these registrations and to recover costs already incurred? During 2003 and early 2004 the City spent in excess of $35,000 in direct costs . to create the existing database of business registrations. These costs included contractors to create the database, supplies, forms, postage and city employee time in coordinating the effort. I would like to recover these costs over a three year period at $12,000 /year. I expect costs to the City to find additional unregistered businesses, to renew those already in the database and to recover costs already spent to be $60,000 to $65,000 for the corning year. $63,000 divided by an estimated 3,000 businesses produces a fee of $21 per business. Since I haven't included indirect costs (rent, telephone, computers) and I've been conservative with my estimates on other costs, a $25 fee for business registration is reasonable. Anticipating a question regarding what other cities charge for business registration/licensing, we have the following information on cities of our size and on cities in our area: CITY POPULATION ANNUAL FEE Spokane 195,700 $60 + $10 /partner, employee Federal Way 83,890 $50 Kent 81,900 $75 + fire inspctn Yakima 73,040 $43 + Bellingham 68,890 $40 + tax (one time) Lakewood 58,190 S35 + home occ. fee Kennewick 55,780 $50 + home occ. fee Sammamish 34,560 $24 Cheney 9,200 no fee for most businesses Liberty Lake 3,654 $20 -$30 depending on inc. 3. Should non -profit agencies be included in those organizations being registered? City ordinance #34 implementing a business registration system did not require registration by governmental entities, nonprofit enterprises, newspaper delivery persons nor baby sitters. One of the reasons for requiring businesses to register with the city is to maintain an emergency contact list in the event of a fire, break -in or other emergency. Fires, break -ins and other emergencies are just as likely to occur in a nonprofit enterprise as they are in private businesses. Staff will also be reviewing zoning for all new businesses that register. This would be true of nonprofits as well as for profit businesses. While we can all understand the benefits of exempting nonprofits, it makes sense to register all organizations so that we have current emergency contact information on file, and zoning boundaries are observed. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: 1. Who should handle business registration? +A motion to use the State Department of Licensing is recommended. This option provides one -stop permitting for businesses where both state licenses and city registration can be renewed annually. As a contract city, use of outside organizations is preferred. Additional employees increase our costs for desks, computers, office space,, telephones, office supplies and overhead. 2. Should the city charge a fee for maintaining the business database? +A motion to charge a $25 annual fee is recommended. It is expected this fee will pay the ongoing costs of renewals and will recover the city's costs of building the database over a three year period. If this recommendation is implemented, a review of income and expenses and the corresponding registration fee would be scheduled for 2007 with changes implemented in 2008, once start -up costs have been reimbursed. 3. Should nonprofit agencies be required to register? +A motion to register nonprofit agencies with a $25 annual fee is recommended. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY BUSINESS REGISTRATION JUNE 1, 2004 BACKGROUND a. Ordinance #34 adopted March 2003, requires bus. registration b. City contracted with Microflex c. 2,900 businesses registered d. Maybe another 1 ,600 e. New businesses f. Businesses that close 1I. WHO SHOULD HANDLE BUSINESS REGISTRATION? a. City? b. Microflex? c. State Department of Licensing? 1. One stop licensing 2. No additional city employees 3. Will generate small amount of income to City However: 1. City must establish limited - service field office 2. City must conform to state system III. SHOULD THE CITY RECOVER CITY COSTS? a. Spent $35,000+ (recover over 3 years @ $12,000 /yr ?) b. Expect costs to be $63,000 each year c. 525 /year fee is in line with other cities d. Try 3 years then evaluate the program IV. SHOULD NON - PROFITS BE REGISTERED? a. No b. Yes 1. Need emergency contact information 2. Need to check zoning on new companies TASK IN -HOUSE MICRFLX STATE DOL Revenues at $25/year $ 75,000 S 75,000 $ 75,000 less uncollectibles $ (7,500) S (3,750) $ (3,750) Total Revenues $ 67,500 $ 71,250 $ 71,250 EXPENSES: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY EST OF REV /EXP BY OPTION BUSINESS REGISTRATION MAY 20, 2004 Telephone calls, walk -in traffic, questions $ 6,500 $ 6,500 $ 6,500 Finance Dir. Time S 2,200 $ 2,200 $ 2,200 One -half employee $ 22,000 $ $ Fee to Microflex /DOL $ - $ 28,800 $ 27,000 i Register new businesses $ 7,200 S 5,200 $ 5,200 Software (c (3 yrs) S 1,500 $ $ Desk, chair, computer (over 3 yrs) $ 1,200 $ - $ - Bank fees for cr. Cards $ 1,750 $ 1,750 $ 1,750 Forms, letters, postage $ 4,000 $ 3,000 $ Add non - profits (over 3 yrs) $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Recover 1/3 of prior years costs $ 12,000 $ 12,000 $ 12,000 Total Exp. $ 63,350 $ 64,450 $ 59,650 Net to City if estimates $ 4,150 $ 6,800 $ 11,600 are accurate DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning :Discussion Purposes Only as of May 28, 2004 11:15 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 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 281 1. Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program — Neil Kersten [ 15 minutes] 2.2003 Comp Plan Amendments, Reconsideration of Ordinances Remandecl by the GMA Hearing's Board: 1st Readings (7 proposed ordinances) — Greg McCormick[20 minutes] 3. Motion Consideration: Approval of Opportunity Cemetery Association Easement — Cary Driskell [5 minutes] 4. Proposed Resolution Aquifer Protection —Neil Kersten [15 minutes] 5. Mayor Appointments: Salary Commission [5 minutes] 6. Administrative Report: a . Plan Review Fee Structure — Marina Sukup [30 minutes] b. Precinct Lease Agreement Report — Cal Walker [10 minutes] c. Criminal Code Adjustment (noise, etc.) — Cary Driskell [15 minutes] d. STV01 -04, STV02 -04 Street Vacations — Marina Sukup [15 minutes] 7. Infommtion Only: a. Ad Hoc Sign Committee. — Marina Sukup [estimated meeting time.: 130 minutes* ] June 14 —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 111 1. First Reading Proposed Vacation Ordinance, STVOI -04 — Marina Sukup [10 minutes] 2. First Reading Proposed Vacation Ordinance, STV02 -04 — Marina Sukup [ 10 minutes] 3. Proposed Resolution Amending Resolution 04-007 to include Student Advisory Council Bylaws — Mayor DeVleming [ 15 minutes] 4. Finalization of Six -Yeas Transportation Improvement Program —Neil Kersten [15 minutes] 5. Motion Consideration: Precinct Lease Agreement — Cal Walker [5 minutes] 6. Motion Consideration: Set Election Date of 09/14/04 for Fire Districts Annexation — Nina Regor [15 minutes] 7. Motion Consideration: Parks MasterPlan Contract Award — Mike Jackson [15 minutes] 8. Valley Corridor Environmental Assessment/Traffic Study —Neil Kersten [20 minutes] [estimated meeting time: 105 minutes*] Advance Agenda— Draft Rcviscd: 528/2004 11:10 AM Page 1 of 3 Saturday, June 26, 2004 — Half Day Council Retreat 9:00 a.m. — 1:00 p.m. 1. Update Five —Year Financial Forecast 2. Options for Closing Budget Gaps 3. Update City Workplan .tune 29, 2004 Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date June 18] 1. Proposed Sidewalk Ordinance Discussion —Neil Kersten (15 minutes) 2. Policy Issues Concerning a Possible New City Hall — Nina Regor (30 minutes) 3. Spalding Towing Contract — Cary Driskell (15 minutes) 4. Clear View Triangles — Marina Sukup/Neil Kersten (20 minutes) 5. Code Enforcement Workplan — Marina Sukup (30 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: 110 Max mtg time: 150 minutes July 6, 2004 No Study Session July 13, 2004, Regular Meeting, 6:00 p.m. [due date July 2] 1. Second Reading Proposed Vacation Ordinance, STV01 -04 — Marina Sukup 2. Second Reading Proposed Vacation Ordinance, STV02 -04 — Marina Sukup 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. [due date July 16] Ad Hoc Sign Committee Report — Marina Sukup (15 minutes) August 3. 2004 NO MEETING August 10, 2004 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due date July 30] August 17, 2004 Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date August 6] August 24, 2004 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.rn. August 31, 2004 NO MEETING Advance Agcnda — Drnfl Revised: 528/2004 11:10 AM [due date August 13] [10 minutes] [10 minutes] Pape 2 of 3 September 7, 2004 Study Session 6:00 p.m. September 14, 2004, Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. (due date September 3] September 21 2004 Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date September 10] Overview of Draft Comprehensive Plan — Marina Sukup /Greg McCormick September 28, 2004 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due date September 17] OTHER .PENDING G Al41) /OR. UPCOMING ISSUES: 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 BE SCFTEDULED 1 open house — wastewater issues I* estimated meeting tirne does not include time for public comments) Advance Agenda — Draft Revised! 512S12004 11: 10 AM [due date August 27J Page 3 of 3