Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2004, 06-08 Regular Meeting
AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING #45 Tuesday, .tune 8, 2004 6:00 p.m. CITY HALL AT REDWOOD PLAZA 11707 East Sprague Avenue, First Floor Council Requests AU Electronic Devices he Turned Off During Council Meeting CALL TO ORI)FR PLF.DGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION: Pastor Gary Hcbdcn, Valley Open Bible Church ROLL CALL. APPROVAL OF AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS COMMITTEE. BOARD, LLAISON SUMMARY REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT: PUBLIC COMMENTS For members of the Public to speak to the Council regarding matters NOT on the Agendas. Please sutte your name and address for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. 1. CONSENT AGENDA Consists of items considered routine which are approved as n group. A Councilmcmbcr may remove an item from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately a. Approval of Regular Council Meeting Minutes of May 25, 2004 b. Approval of Study Session Minutes ofJune 1, 2004 c. Approval of Claims in the amount of 52,642,374.15 d. Approval of Payroll of May 31, 2004 of 5149,747.01 NEW BUSINESS 2. Proposal Resolution # 04 -016 Authorizing Inclusion of Spokane Valley Within an Aquifer Protection Area - Neil Kersten [public comment] 3. Motion Consideration: Approval of Opportunity Cemetery As_socintion Easement — Cary Driskcll [public comment:] 4. Motion Consideration: Approval to advance 2005 -2010 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program to public hearing for adoption consideration at Council's pure 22 meeting — Neil KerstenfSteve Worley [public comment] 5. Motion Consideration. Mayor Appointments to Salary Commis;ien — Mayor DcVlcming [public comment PUBLIC COMMENTS (Maximum of three minutes please; state your name and address for the record) Council Agenda (16. 011 -t)4 Rcgular itiacting ke 4)3, 1'agr 1 of 2 • ADMLNISTRATIVE REPORTS: no public comment] 6. Plan Review Fee Structure — hiarina Sukup 7. Discussion Points on Potential Amendments to Criminal Code — Cary Driskcll R. CentcrPiacc Project Status — Mike Jackson 9. Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Reconsideration of Ordinance Remanded by the GMA Hearing Board —Cireg McCormicklScott Kuhtn INFORMATION ONLY: [no public comment] 10. Ad floc Sign Committee Status Report - Marina Sukup ADJOURNMENT F(`TURE SCHEDULE Regular Council Meeting.~ are generally held 2nd and 4 Tuesdays, beginning at 6:00 p.m. Council Study Sessions are generally held 1", .r and 5th Tuesdays, beginning at 6:00 p.m. Other Tentative Uocominr AfeetinvsEvents: June 15 - 18. 2004, Association Washington Cities Conference Ocean Shores June 15, 2004 - No Council Study Session or Council Meeting June 17. 2004. 6. J0 p.m. Comprehensive Flan Community Mtg, Spokane Valley Nazarene Church Jww 26. 2004 - Half Day Council Retries July 6, 2004 - No Council Study Session or Council Meeting NO'T'ICE: Individuals planning to attend ins meeting who require special assistance to accommndaie pb}z,crl, hcarinst, Or Other impairments, please contact the City Clap at (509) 921 -1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made Council Agenda 06 -08-04 Regular Meeting Page 2of2 DRAM' Attendance: Councilmembers: Michael DeVleming, Mayor Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Richard Munson, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Steve T aylor, Councilmember MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday, May 25, 2004 Mayor DeVleming called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the 44 official meeting. Staff: Dave Mercier, City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Stanley Schwartz, City Attorney Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Neil Kersten, Public. Works Director Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Cal Walker, Police Chief Ken Thompson, Finance Director Mike Jackson, Parks & Recreation Director Tom Scholtens, Building Official Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk Chris Bainbridge City Clerk PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor DeVleming led the Pledge of Allegiance. INVOCATION: Pastor Linda Crowe of the United Church of Christ led the invocation. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called roll; all Councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA.: Mayor DeVleming stated that an item 7A will be added, which is a discussion and motion consideration for a hotel /motel tax adjustment; and that item #12 Radio Car Track will be moved to item #7B as a motion providing direction to staff regarding activities at Sullivan Park. It was moved by Councilmember Munson and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite to add item #7A and 713 as described, to the agenda. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. COMVIM:1TTEE, BOARD. LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Councilmember Schinnmels: reported that he attended the Spokane Regional Transportation Commit that they are considering a letter we submitted regarding funding assistance for a traffic study of the couplet; he stated he also attended the Couplet Meeting held last week. Counci/nember .Taylor: stated that he attended the Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce Executive Board Meeting, at which time some cities' issues were discussed concerning the Chamber's position that they want the Board to take regarding wastewater treatment issues; and also of what to do with the future of the Couplet; that the Transportation Committee brought forward a proposal to the Chamber Board to endorse changing the couplet back to two ways, but that the Board wants more information including input from city staff. Councilmember Munson: said that he attended the Light Rail Steering Committee meeting where discussion took place to have representation from the City of Spokane on that committee, and the Board has taken that into consideration; they also identified numerous funding sources which may assist in improvement of the north /south street corners; that he also attended the Ad Hoc Steering Committee for Council Minutes 05 -25 -04 Nags 1 of 6 hate Approved by Council: DRAFT Growth Management, that the Growth Management Act requires municipalities and the County to re- examine the growth management act as passed, and to make any changes which would be applicable to the plan; the Ad Hoc Committee is examining different policies and will make recommendations to the steering committee as how we want to approach this re- evaluation period, and stated that the committee will he meeting weekly to work on this issue. Councilmember Denenny: reported that he attended a meeting put together by citizens wanting to form a group to bring forth the issue of continuation of the couplet; and he also thanked Council for its support of the recent STA measure. Deputy Mayor Wilhite: said that she also attended the meeting on the couplet extension sponsored by interested citizens; that she attended an Economic Development Council Board meeting where it was mentioned that several companies have expressed interest in moving their business to this area; and that she also attended as an observer, an East Central Community meeting on a proposal for the wastewater treatment plant at the Playfair site. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor DeVleming mentioned that he received a request from the Spokane Homeownership Resource Center's Board for representation from someone on the Council, and that Deputy Mayor Wilhite has accepted that. It was then proved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Munson to approve Deputy Mayor Wilhite's appointment to the Spokane Homeownership Resource Center. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Mayor DeVleming then read the "Native Plant Appreciation Week" proclamation. Mayor DeVleming invited Dave Nobel to speak on behalf of the Northeast Chapter of the Washington Native Plant Society and Mr. Nobel extended his thanks for the proclamation in recognition of the first Native Plant Appreciation Week. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Prior to the public comments, Mayor DeVleming invited Public Works Director Kersten to comment on the recent storm and its aftereffects. Director Kersten showed several pictures of areas affected by the large amount of rainfall and of some of the swales which were overcome as a result of last Friday's rainstorm, plus drain problems and some areas which were washed out. Director Kersten stated that: according to the weather service, this was a record storm for a 24 -hour period, that we received over two inches, topping the previous 1.4 inch record in 1925, and that such records have been kept since 1881; he said that staff received approximately 50 reports of problem areas, that all reports have been documented and staff is working to check all drain areas and get the areas cleaned up. Mayor DeVleming invited public comments; no comments were offered. CONSENT AGENDA: After City Clerk Bainbridge read the consent agenda, it was proved by Councilmember Flanigan and seconded by Councilmember Denenny to approve the Consent Agenda. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. NEW BUSINESS 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 04 -018 Establishing Salary Commission — Councilmember Munson After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember Munson and seconded by Councilmember Taylor to approve Ordinance 04 -015. Councilmember Munson explained that in an ongoing effort to evaluate compensation for the entire city staff, Council believes it to be appropriate to include their compensation as well. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment, no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: in Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Ah.sterrtions: None. Motion carried. Council Minutes 05 -25 -04 Page 2 of 6 Date Approved by Council: DRAFT 3. Proposed Resolution 04 -013 Repealing and Replacing Governance Coordination Manual — Mayor DeVleming Ti was moved by Councilmember Denenny and seconded by Councilmember Munson to approve Resolution 04 -013. Mayor DeVleming stated that several changes were suggested for the Governance Coordination Manual at the March 30, 2004 meeting, and that those changes are incorporated in the draft document. After discussion of the proposed addition concerning approaching the dais Mayor DeVleming moved to amend his motion to reflect approaching the dais before and during the meeting and to strike the portion referring to "after" the meeting. Councilmember Denenny seconded the amended motion. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Discussion continued on the topic with Councilmembers stating no objection to members of the community approaching the dais before the meeting starts, but agreeing there should be no approach during the actual meeting. It was then moved by .Deputy Mayor Wilhite and seconded to change the words to not approach the dais once the meeting starts. During discussion, it was suggested by City Manager Mercier that the approach not occur after ten minutes prior to the start of the meeting. Deputy Mayor Wilhite amended her motion to reflect City Manager !vfercier's suggestion; the seconder concurred. Vote by Acclamation to amend the motion: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Vote by Acclamation on the amended motion to approve Resolution 04 -013 amending the section concerning approaching the dais to read that the "approach will not occur after ten minutes prior to the start of the meeting." In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 4. Proposed Resolution 04 -015 for Cable Franchise Renewal Process — Morgan Koudelka It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Denenny to approve Resolution 04- 015. Administrative Analyst Koudelka explained the background and discussed the highlights of the issue and resolution. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Tony Lazanis stated that he would like Channel 5 as a public channel if the opportunity presents itself. Mayor DeVleming invited further public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 5. Motion Consideration: Essential Public Facilities interlocal Agreement Approval and Authorization for City Manager's Signature — Marina Sukup It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Denenny, to authorize the City Manger to execute the interlocal agreement. Community Development Director Sukup gave some background on the proposed agreement and said that without City agreement with the regional review process, the location of essential public facilities may be determined by the State. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were. offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 6. Motion Consideration: City Manager Appointment to Municipal Research & Services Center (MRSC) Board — Dave Mercier 11 was moved by C'ouncihnember Flanigan and seconded by Councilmember Denenny, to endorse the appointment of the City Manager to the MRSC Board of Directors. City Manager Mercier explained that he was asked to consider serving a two -year term on the board, and then explained the make -up of the board, some of the functions of MRSC, and that the agency would pay all travel costs associated with service on the Board. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 7. Mayor Appointments: Sign Committee — Marina Sukup It was moved by Mayor De ir7eming and seconded by Councilmember Munson to appoint the following members to the Ad Hoc Sign Committee, an advisory committee to the Council regarding the evaluation of the existing signs and sign code, that the committee will consist of seven members: Spokane Valley Planning Commission Member David Crosby.; two citizens at- large, Ray Perry and David Quinn; two Council Minutes 05 -25 -04 Page 3 of 6 tote Approved by Council: DRAFT general business representatives Ken Holloway and Denny York. It was then moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded by Coanncilnrember Munson to amend the motion that we waive the requirement for the sign industry representatives to live within the City of Spokane Valley and save the sign indusny appointments for next week. Councilmember Taylor said this stipulation is on the application form, yet. in the case of several sign companies who have a large investment in our City, that they would not be able to be a part of this committee if they lived outside the City limits, although they do extensive business within the City and have assets within the City. Councilmember Munson added that it is important to note that we have representation of different sectors, and that the national sign people have a large interest in this matter and having those individuals will be beneficial to the City of Spokane Valley and to the community. Councilmember Denenny recommended that we contact the sign industry itself, to ask that group who they night recommend and seek input. Mayor DeVleming mentioned he will speak with Community Development Director Sukup regarding input from the sign industry. Vote by acclamation on amending the motion: In favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion Carried. Vote by acclamation on the amended motion: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 7a. Motion Consideration: Hotel/Motel — Stanley Schwartz It was moved by Councilmember Flanigan and seconded by Councihmmber Munson that a contract with the YMCA be ratified and executed as of October 28, 2003, by the City to provide for the distribution of 2003 Lodging Tax Funds toward the development of the Skate Park, as proposed in the original Lodging Tax request of the YMCA. The contract shall be written so that the City does not have liability for design, construction and operation of the Skate Park. In return for the distribution, the City facilitates the development of tourism facilities, the related tourism marketing and promotion and, as further consideration, shall receive the right to use all YMCA facilities for Park Department programs at a group discounted rate for five years. City Attorney Schwartz explained the reasoning for this issue as noted on his May 25, 2004 memo to Mayor and Councilmembers, and gave the background highlights. Attorney Schwartz said that the legal analysis concludes that the lodging funds must be used for a proper purpose and the lodging tax statute is supplemental to other existing authority of the City, and that the City may, through its general contracting power, use the lodging tax proceeds to obtain both tourism facility development and the benefit of discounted rates for participants in City Park Department Programs. In addition, Attorney Schwartz explained that the previous council motion stipulated that the lodging tax funds for the YMCA be used for tourism marketing, that the YMCA represented it cannot allocate those funds solely for tourism marketing and accordingly, the City Council has been requested to review this matter and authorize execution of a contact with the YMCA as set forth in the above motion. Councilmember Taylor expressed his opposition as he feels tourism funds should not be used for development. Vole by Accicnnation: In Favor: Mayor DeVlerning, Deputy Mayor Wilhite, Couuncilmennhers Schirnmels, Munson, Flanigan, Denenny. Opposed: Councilmember Taylor, Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 7b. Radio Car Track at Sullivan Park (former agenda item #12)— Mike Jackson After Parks and Recreation Director Jackson explained the issue of unauthorized construction at Sullivan Park concerning the Radio Control Car Club of Spokane, it was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan, to instruct the City Manager or designee representative 10 establish a license agreement with RCCCS Club for the use of a race track at Sullivan Park. Director Jackson further explained that at this point, the long term use for the park is unknown, and he recommends against making improvements until the completion of the Masterplan, adding that perhaps something else might be better for that location and the race track might be better in another place. Regarding the concept of putting in fixtures and allowance of private use and construction on parks, Director Jackson recommends the fixtures not be installed; however, Director Jackson stated that the status for the Club's weekend use this weekend will be approved once the check from the Club has been received. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Council Minutes 05 -25.04 Date Approved by Council: Page 4 of 6 DRAFT The following individuals spoke on behalf and in support of the RCCCS Club's use of Sullivan Park: !es Ulrick, RCCCS President; Marcus Anzivino, 8505 E. Cataldo; Matthew Afana, 8316 E. Mission; Robert T. Shafer, 1824 E. Ridge; Dick Behm, 3626 S .Kidgeview (who also gave. a history of the use of the park); Conrad Wolf (who also spoke on the use of the park by the Western Dance Association Board); and Tony Lazanis, who suggested use of modernized lights. Councilmember Munson added that there are a number of issues to be resolved before going forward with the lighting situation, and as the plan is developed, he gave assurance that the community will have opportunity for input; and that he feels negotiations should move forward. In reference to the use of lights for the weekend's activities, Director Jackson said that several possibilities have been discussed, and that the club also suggested reconnecting the existing lights; Director Jackson added that he hesitates to develop a long term commitment before the master plan is complete; he recommends we continue as we have, stated that neither he nor the County has been able to locate an agreement, but the group can continue for the weekend. Director Jackson also mentioned that part of the park belongs to the State, and the City owns other parts. City Manager Mercier stated that an option before Council is to consider having staff at a License agreement for the use of the premises for the balance of the year while the masterplan is being formulated, and in advance of discussion of a use agreement, which would likely be after delivery of a master plan. Mayor DeVleming stated that was the intent of his motion. Vote by acclamation on the motion to instruct the City Manager or designee representative to negotiate a license agreement with RCCCS Club for the use of a race track at Sullivan Park: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Mayor DeVleming called for a recess at 7:45 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 7:55 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were offered. 8. Review of Contracts Inventory — Nina Regor Deputy City Manager Regor explained that the majority of the City's service contracts are with Spokane County, and she proceeded to update Council via her PowerPoint presentation on the 2003 contract costs, adding that some contracts are still pending with financial issues not yet resolved. Ms. R.egor concluded by stating that the 2004 contracts will be analyzed, and credits or charges will be applied to the next available monthly invoice. 9. Weed and Seed — Cal Walker Police Chief Walker reported on the progress of the weed and seed project, and said that of the five basic planning stages in developing the weed and seed strategy, they are currently at step 3, the conducting of a community assessment of the designated neighborhood. Chief Walker mentioned that they are always receptive to assistance, and Councilmember Munson volunteered to be a member of the steering committee. 10. Managed Competition Discussion — Morgan Koudelka Administrative Analyst Koudelka give a PowerPoint presentation explaining that one of Council's goals for 2004 was to experiment with a managed competition program; and added that park maintenance and library services are candidates for pilot programs. City Manager Mercier added that the purpose of managed competition is to attempt to find alternatives to the present source, and define performance criteria which might mean, for example, improvements in the current library system, or changing to a private sector as an alternative. Council gave consensus for staff to proceed as outlined. Couacil Minutes 05-25-04 Page 5 or6 Date Approved by Council: DRAFT 11. Administrative Exceptions/Administrative Variances — Marina Sukup Community Development Director Sukup explained that this is more of a housekeeping measure, in that reviewing Chapter 14.506 of the zoning code, the provisions of "Arterial /Overlay Zones" and "Future Acquisition" areas are obsolete; that the provisions were deleted but the intent was to preserve information in a new subsection which would identify administrative exceptions. Director Sukup stated that a determination of non - significance was issued May 6, 2004, and on May 10, 2004, a draft: proposal was submitted to CTED and other agencies for their review. She added that. a public hearing will be held June 10 before the Planning Commission prior to consideration by Council. There being no further business, it was moved by Councilmember Flanigan and seconded, to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 5:32 p.m. ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Minutes 05 -25 -04 Pagc 6 of 6 Date Approved by Council; Michael DeVleming, Mayor DRAFT Attendance: Councilmembers: Michael DeVleming, Mayor Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Dick Dencnny, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Rich Munson, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Study Session .Tune 1, 2004, 6:00 p.ni. Staff: Dave Mercier City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Ken Thompson, Finance Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Mike Jackson, Parks R. Recreation Director Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Cal Walker Police Chief Tom Scholtens, Building Official Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor DeVleming opened the meeting at 6:00 p.rn., welcomed all in attendance, reminded everyone that this is a study session and requested that all electronic devices be turned off for the duration of the meeting. Mayor DeVleming announced that Council will hold an Executive Session at the end of tonight's meeting for consultation with their attorney, that the session should last about twenty minutes; and that no decisions will be made after reconvening the meeting. Employee Introductions: Public Works Director Kersten introduced Carolyn George, new Public Works Administrative Assistant. Council welcomed Carolyn to the City. 1. Appointments: Sign Ad Hoc Committee —Mayor DeVleming It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Munson to appoint Duane Halliday and John Johnston to the Ad Hoc Sign Committee. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous_ Opposed: !None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 2. Appointments: Student Advisory Council — Mayor DeVleming, Mayor DeVleming reported that after a year of working on student advisory council formation, Tots of pizza and lots of discussion, tonight he will announce the members of the first. Student Advisory Council. It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Munson to appoint the following students to the Student .Advisory Council: Central Valley High School: Randee Berg, Tanner Daly, Michael Green East Valley High School: Kellie Brennan University High School: Victoria Benson, Paul Heim, .Katie Oslerback Valley Christian High School: Steven Leeberg West Valley High School. Joseph Neaves Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Study Session Minutes 06 -01 -04 ' Page 1 of 6 Date Approved by Council: DRAFT 3. Hotel /Motel Fund Allocations — Councilmember Flanigan 3a. Spokane Valley Junior Soccer Association: It was moved by Councihnember Flanigan and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite, that this Council authorize the re- allocation of the money that was allocated in 2003 for the Spokane Valley Junior Soccer Association in regard to Plantes Ferry .Park, the amount of $19,377.64 which will, when added to the 2004 agreement, total $39,377.64. Councilmember Flanigan explained that this motion is an attempt to resolve. issues, that it is not new money as the funds were awarded previously, but it is moving funds granted from 2003 to 2004 so that procedural errors that were made can be rectified. Councilmember Munson stated that he feels uncomfortable in setting precedent in carrying over funds from one fiscal year to another and in the future does not intend to support such movement; but realizes this is a special situation and will vote in favor of the matter. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 3b. Valleyfest: It was proved by Councilmember Flanigan and seconded by Councilmember Munson that out of the reserves for the hotel /motel tax money, we allocate $15,000 to Valleyfest specifically for a regional television ad campaign promoting Valleyfest and various other entities in conjunction with Valleyfest that takes place within the valley and the region. Councilmember Flanigan explained that this is to promote several aspects of the Spokane Valley region wide; and similar to the ad previously authorized in the State Tourism Guide, this is one of the purest uses of funds in the hotel /motel allocation of funds. Councilmember Flanigan stated that all Spokane Valley hotels will be included in the ad listing; and added that the promotion of the event will begin about mid - August. Councilmember Flanigan said this year's Valleyfest is working almost as an umbrella with other entities, and this year's three -day celebration will also help promote mall shopping; in addition, the Hotel/Motel committee voted unanimously to support this and that Jeff Fox was the originator of the motion. Councilmember Taylor asked why this is brought up now instead of when other proposals are normally brought forward; and Councilmember Flanigan replied that Valleyfest was still on its "training wheels," that since then the focus group has donated a marketing person who put the proposal together; that they have corporate sponsorship now close to the total amount they had for last year's events; the proposal has come now as they feel Spokane Valley would like to be involved in the movement, that it is a good opportunity to join in and show support for this event; and he reminded everyone that Valleyfest withdrew their request last time in order not to draw any kind of controversy as their earliest proposal was very general and this proposal is very specific. Councilmember Taylor expressed concern of setting a precedent with this and asked if others were made aware of this reserve fund. Councilmember Flanigan explained that anyone can make requests of Council at any time, and that this request did go through the Committee; and after allocation of these funds, there will be approximately 565 to 575,000 in remaining funds. Councilmember Taylor stated that he would like to see a more disciplined approach in the future as it might appear to other competing agencies that Valleyfest withdrew from the last competition and carne forward later when there was less competition for funds. Mayor DeVleming added that he feels this request meets the definition for use of the reserve funds. Councilmember Denenny asked about acquiring input from Jeff Fox about the impact this will have and Councilmember Flanigan said that this will be tracked and added that Valleyfest will also be polling on site. Councilmember Taylor concluded by stating that he would like to see this type of request made during the appropriate season so the process will be considered fair by all entities that might want to compete for these funds. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 4. Health District Helmet Safety Presentation — Ana Matthews, Health District Ana Matthews thanked Council for the opportunity to present data in support of their campaign for a helmet ordinance, and introduced Collision 1.nve.stigator, Officer Ken Thomas. Ms. Matthews gave her PowerPoint presentation explaining the reasons for a helmet law; followed by Officer Thomas speaking Study Session Minutes 06-01-04 Paige 2 of 6 Date Approval by Council: ( DRAFT concerning enforcement issues, that other ordinances have been designed imposing noncompliance as a civil infraction; that officers tend to use the "stop and talk" approach to educate members of the community of the dangers of not wearing a helmet. Ms. Matthews also mentioned that the Traffic Safety Commission has pledged free helmets to those in need, and that. the Spokane City Council is putting forth their ordinance this month. Officer Thomas added that he has a concern with motorized scooters as there are presently no regulations governing helmet use and scooters. After brief discussion, it was agreed that. council would like to review several model ordinances for further discussion and consideration. 5. Economic Development Council Presentation — Jon Eliassen, President. CEO Jon Eliassen, President and CEO of the Economic Development Council, went through a PowerPoint presentation on their economic development strategy for 2004 -2007. After the presentation, Mr. Eliassen mentioned that the EDC coordinates with other organizations like the Chamber of Commerce in an attempt to eliminate duplication of funding efforts. Mayor DeVleming called fora recess at 7:05 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 7:15 p.m. 6. Proposed Opportunity Cemetery Association Easement — Cary Driskell/Neil Kersten Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained that Opportunity Cemetery Association's Pines Cemetery, has an irrigation water line within the 16 Avenue right -of -way; that crews were in the process of preliminary work for the reconstruction of 16` Avenue when they discovered a water pipe along I6` Street, which has been in place for approximately fifty years without permission; that private parties must acquire permission from governmental units to cross a right -of -way, and that staff is in the process of obtaining a legal description showing the exact location of the water pipe, adding that when that:. is provided, staff will present the easement for Council consideration. Public Works Director Kersten added that the cost should not be significant, and it is the responsibility of the Association to pay for the relocation. it was Council consensus to move forward with the easement. 7. Spokane County Water District 43. Water Line Easement — Neil Kersten /Steve Worley Public Works Director Kersten reported that as part of the Park Road widening project, a .54 acre parcel was purchased near the north end of the project area for the construction of a stormwater treatment swale; that Spokane County Water District 43 requested a 1 5-foot water line easement across the north boundary of the swale property and they plan 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 addition, Director Kersten explained that the SCWD #3 is offering to waive the $3,725.00 installation fee for the irrigation service. It was mentioned that the service will be metered. It was proved by Councilmember Munson and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to give the City Manager approval to execute on easement document with Water District 43. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 8. Setback Requirements — Marina Sukup Community Development Director Sukup explained that the interim zoning code includes many regulations which do not apply within urban areas and other regulations which staff suggested should be amended to eliminate redundancy, ambiguity and conflicts in enforcement. Director Sukup went through her PowerPoint presentation on proposed dimensional standards, which explained the current setbacks and showed proposed setbacks and the affects those changes would have on the areas. It was mentioned that these changes in setbacks would be for new developments. Director Sukup added that staff realizes some of these issues are a matter of community preference, such as how close is too close, how small can Tots be before they are uncomfortably small, and that many issues depend on what affects the community wants. She stressed that proposed changes are to make the rules more clear, to limit the amount of time it takes to go through the administrative exception process as it is expensive and takes some unnecessary staff time; in addition, she mentioned that the Homebuilders Association is very positive about the Study Session Minutes 06 -01 -04 Page 3 of 6 Date Approved by Council: DRAFT proposed changes. After further discussion on lot sizes and what the comp plan would allow, City Manager Mercier said policy implications have been discussed tonight, that during the April 6 meeting, council was briefed on issues encountering in the permit shop, and that the draft ordinance is included to provide context to see how these numbers fit into the draft ordinance; that his experience is councils generally prefer planning commissions to gather input, and then convey that input to council in the form of a draft ordinance; that if we are operating out of sequence, to let us know how to meet Council's preferences. Councilmember Munson stated he is concerned that when it comes to policy decision, council defers to staff recommendations, and that perhaps council defers when they should have discussed the policy in more depth; he added there are times when council does not want to see an ordinance along with a position paper, but the paper should be complete to provide all the parameters to be debated so that council can come up with a policy; that he is concerned that perhaps council should be debating the issues more to make sure what is finalized is what the community wants. Mayor De\'Ieming added that one of the keys to our success is our level of communication; and feels that staff will address the majority of situations during the three -touch principle, keeping in mind there will be times when things should be done differently and that Council needs to be flexible. City Manager Mercier said that as we are involved with a huge volume of issues, there is a potential of using a sequence wherein papers will be. in circulation in the community that might touch on a hot issue, that were not circulated to council beforehand; but that sometimes those issues have not ripened to the council stage of attention. To help avoid misfires, Mr. Mercier asked Council to identify hot topics so staff will be aware to circulate materials to council even if the matter is not brought before council for action; and concluded by stating that we are trying to fine -tune communication so not to be caught by surprise and at the same time not come to a complete standstill before an issue's initial showing. 9. Proposed Interim Zoning Control. Estate Lots — Marina Suku Community Development Director Sukup explained that established zoning classifications provide for a maximum density of seven dwelling units per acre for areas designated low density residential; that two, well- established neighborhoods located within those areas have requested consideration of a regulatory mechanism that would continue to permit the keeping of a limited number of large animals, primarily horses. Director Sukup explained that those neighborhoods were originally established over 25 years ago to allow keeping such animals, and the practice was permitted under the previous zoning classification. Director Sukup said that the proposed amendment in the interim Development Regulations is subject to review by the Department of Community Trade and Economic Development (CTED); and that subject to council direction, a public hearing will be held by the Planning Commission with their recommendation being forwarded to the City Council. City Manager Mercier added that other issues are at large including a third neighborhood whose residents may be circulating a petition to also have that designation. Ms. Sukup mentioned that staff is aware that "one size does not fit all," and that GMA. mandates working with neighborhoods to determine what the neighborhood wants. Deputy City Attorney Driskell stated that staff is trying to satisfy as best it can, the citizen requests and comments with what is understood GMA requires and allows us to do, and that we have adopted an interim comprehensive plan, and before adoption of a final plan, there will be many discussions among staff and residents to best determine what issues must be addressed now; that now, people who have horses and large animals have legal nonconforming rights from the county. Attorney Driskell added that staff has submitted this issue to CTED to gain information and make sure we operate within the constraints of GM.A. Ms. Sukup added that some of the difficulty is the animals; where two animals would be appropriate, but six would not be, but the neighbors are asking to maintain the status quo until we can go through the process, and the status quo is allowing large animals as an allowed use. It was council consensus that staff continue with this issue and bring the natter back again for further development and discussion. Study Session Minutes 06-01 -04 Page 4 of 6 Date Approved by Council: DRAFT 10. Sprague /Appleway Couplet, Economic Analysis — Marina Sukup Community Development Director Sukup said she is requesting authorization for the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement. with ECONorthwest for the development of an economic analysis on the Sprague/Appleway Corridor; that they extended the deadline to submit proposals, and after review, staff found ECONorthwest's proposal the most responsive. It was moved by Councilmember Munson and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan 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. Councilmembers Munson and Denenny mentioned that they feel the response is well done, and Councilmember Munson asked that in the negotiation process, the role of the council be expanded should ECONorthwest seek input on how they are progressing. Director Sukup stated that ECONorthwest has proposed an aggressive timetable, and that staff can submit monthly reports on the progress. City Manager Mercier said he anticipates that the company will closely follow the scope of work, that if they need factual data to incorporate into the analysis process they can solicit that from staff; he feels the company will not ask policy questions as the intent is to perform the economic scan as things are now. Councilmember Flanigan suggested having an interim report as the company accomplishes each task, thereby allowing council the opportunity to review the progress and provide feedback. It was Council consensus to monitor the progress of the project; and if anything alarming, or out of the ordinary occurs, staff will bring those issues to Council's attention. After brief discussion concerning the expanded or basic plan, it was determined to authorize the basic plan. Vote by Acclamation on the motion 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 for the Basic Plan: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. It was moved by Mayor DeVleming to extend the meeting to 9:15 p.m. There were no objections. ( _h 11. Business License Program Discussion — Ken Thompson Finance Director Thompson stated that tonight he is not seeking any decision, but rather is presenting options to consider regarding the business license /registration program. As background, Director Thompson explained that the City contracted with Microflex to identify and register businesses operating within our city limits; and that there are over 2800 registered businesses within Microflex's database. Director Thompson estimated a few hundred more businesses need to be registered, and the issues to consider are who should handle that process. Options include Microflex, the City, or the State Department of Licensing, which Mr. Thompson said is his preference as that would be a one -stop shopping for many businesses, and we would not have to hire any additional employees. Other issues to determine are whether we should recover our costs as it is estimated that it takes 563,000 a year to maintain the database, and we have already spent over 535,000 in direct costs to create the existing database. Director Thompson said he would like to try a program for three years and then re- examine it including re- examination of any fee charged. i Councilmember Munson said he does not want to recover the costs of registering businesses last year as we said in our ordinance we would not:; that if we were not going to charge a fee the first year we should not recover those first year costs, Councilmember Taylor stated he would have liked to charge a fee from the beginning and feels it fiscally responsible to recover costs. Director Thompson went over the fees anticipated if the Department of Licensing were to handle the program. After further discussion on whether to charge a fee, it was council consensus to move forward with the Department of Licensing handling the registrations, and Mayor DeVleming added that staff and Council will consider the fee and recovery costs and discuss that at a future date, including the issue of how much or if any charge should be assessed to the nonprofit businesses. City Manager Mercier said staff will work to do an amortization of costs of building a database versus the cost of charging a license for the first year. Study Session Minutes 06-01-04 Page 5 of 6 Date Approved by Council: DRAFT 12. Advance Agenda — Mayor DeVleming There were no suggestions for revisions to the advance agenda. 13. Council Check -In — Dave Mercier: - no issues. 14. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier City Manager Mercier said he wanted to alert Council of the various openings on the AWC Boards, with a potential opening in for an Eastern at -large position, which is currently occupied by a councilmember at Pasco who will be seeking re- election; but that AWC still solicits interest. EXECUTIVE SESSION: It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded that Council retreat to the Opportunity conference room for an Executive Session for consultation with their attorney; that the estimated time is no greater than 25 minutes, and that Council will come back and adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. Council adjourned into executive session at 9:12 p.m. Mayor DeVleming declared Council out of executive session at 9:25 p.m., and at 9:26 p.m. it was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously. ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Study Session Minutes 06 -01 -04 Date Approved by Council: Michael DeVleming, Mayor Page 6 of 6 Meeting Date: 6 -08 -04 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: x consent ❑ old business ❑ new business I] public hearing [J information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Claims: Voucher listing total for May 25, June 1 and June 4, 2004 OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve claims for 05/25/04 in the amount of $1,355,588.91 Approve claims for 06/01/04 in the amount of $1,284,005/9 Approve claims for 06/23/04 in the amount of $ 2,779.45 TOTAL $2,642,374.15 BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Ellen Avey ATTACHMENTS Voucher Lists CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 05/25/2004 8:51:02AM Spokane Valley • Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor 4795 5/24/2004 000177 U.S. POSTAL SERVICE 4796 4797 4798 4799 4800 5/25/2004 000030 5/25/2004 000497 5/25/2004 000452 5/25/2004 000498 5/25/2004 000326 AVISTA UTILITIES BANK OF NEW YORK CLEARWATER RESEARCH INC. CONDRON CONSTRUCTION Invoice CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION DIST, 1 11534.2 5859 4801 5/25/2004 000136 DEPARTMENT OF INFO SERVICES, :1113468 4802 5/25/2004 000246 EAST SPOKANE WATER DIST #1 4803 5/25/2004 000171 GEIGER CORRECTIONS CENTER APR2004 4804 5/25/2004 000222 ICMA RETIREMENT CORP. 4805 5/25/2004 000033 MCPC 4542755 4806 5/25/2004 000387 MODEL IRRIGATION DIST. #18 06 -0400 June SC newsletter April 2004 050404 -1710 04- 280-02 ref -01 PO # 40069 Description /Account POSTAGE Total : STREET LIGHTING /SIGNAL POW Total : FIRST SEMI - ANNUAL DEBT SER\ Total : SURVEY SERVICES Total : REFUND OF BOND FOR SWALE Total : WATER FOR DISCOVERY PL SP WATER FOR DISCOVERY PL SP Total : 40076 SOFTWARE LICENSE RENEWAL Total : 1073 WATER FOR 8325 E SPRAGUE Total : GEIGER CORRECTIONS SERVIC Total : 22542 ANNUAL PLAN FEE FOR 401A - 2 22548 ANNUAL PLAN FEE 4/1 THRU 6/3 Total : 40133 OFFICE SUPPLIES WATER UTILITY BILLING Total : Amount 163.51 163.51 17,797.82 17,797.82 225,560.82 225,560.82 5,885.00 5,885.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 17.00 1 46.47 163.47 430.34 430.34 3.90 3.90 7,808.40 7,808.40 250.00 125.00 375.00 33.56 33.56 4.38 e : 1 vchlist 05/25/2004 8:51:02AM Bank code: apbank Voucher 4806 4807 4808 4809 4810 4811 4812 4813 4814 4815 4816 4817 Date Vendor 5/25/2004 000387 000387 MODEL IRRIGATION DIST. #18 (Continued) 5/25/2004 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER COMPP Apri12004 5/25/2004 000193 NORTHWEST CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS June Rent 5/25/2004 000058 OCCUPATIONAL MEDICINE, ASSOCI. 446872 5/25/2004 000494 PRO PEOPLE STAFFING SERVICES IN- 154581 5/25/2004 000499 SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DIST. 05/01/2004 5/25/2004 000406 SPOKANE REGIONAL CVB 5/25/2004 000411 SPOKANE VALLEY NEWS HERALD 5/25/2004 000419 SUMMIT LAW GROUP 5/25/2004 000398 TAN MOORE ARCHITECTS 5/25/2004 000167 VERA WATER & POWER 5/25/2004 000021 WITHERSPOON, KELLEY, DAVENPO 61107 23 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 23 Vouchers in this report Invoice Vouch List Spokane Valley 04/22/2004 24266 -75 21916 5 APR2004 PO # Description /Account TOURISM PROMOTION LEGAL FEES Total : STREET LIGHTING POWER/WAT Total : CITY HALL RENT FOR JUNE Total : PRE - EMPLOYMENT EXAMS Total : TEMPORARY STAFFING SERVIC Total : FIRST SEMI - ANNUAL PAYMENT Total : Total : PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES Total : ATTORNEY'S FEES THROUGH 4r Total : CENTERPLACE CONSTRUCTION Total : STREET MAINT UTILITY BILLS Total : Total : Bank total : Total vouchers : Page: 2 Amount 4.38 13,232.71 13,232.71 22,738.68 22,738.68 202.00 202.00 562.40 562.40 1,010,148.00 1,010,148.00 12,500,00 12,500.00 134.40 134.40 1,620.00 1,620.00 13,177.36 13,177.36 2,196.74 2,196.74 14,850.42 14,850.42 1,355,588.91 1,355,588.91 Page: 2 vchlist 05/25/2004 8:51:02AM Bank code : apbarrk Voucher Date Vendor Invoice , • PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify to said claim. Finance Director Date Voucher List Page: 3 Spokane Valley PPROV MAYO OU R 4833 4834 4835 4836 4837 4838 4839 4840 / 1 vchlist 0610112004 4:55:16PM Bank code : Voucher 4829 4830 4831 apbank Date Vendor Invoice 6/1/2004 000427 76 /CIRCLE K FLEET SERVICES 4954287 6/1/2004 000150 ALLIED SECURITY 6/1/2004 000335 ALTON'S TIRE 4832 6/1/2004 000037 AMERICAN LINEN 6/1/2004 000392 APERFECTWEB, INC. 6/1/2004 000052 BEST BUY SPOKANE EAST 6/1/2004 000242 CAMPREGISTER.COM 6/1/2004 000109 COFFEE SYSTEMS INC 6/1/2004 000508 CONOCOPHILLIPS FLEET 6/1/2004 000278 DRISKELL, CARY IVC20057007 06 -82622 06 -82653 06 -82917 393510 402293 6/1/2004 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION DIST, 05/28/04 6/1/2004 000035 CORPORATE EXPRESS 52065151 05/28/04 Voucher List Spokane Valley 1174 0506040040407431 234 21112 870166725404 PO # 40145 Description /Account VEHICLE FUEL OPERATING SUPPLIES VEHICLE MAINTENANCE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FLOOR MAT SERVICE FLOOR MAT SERVICE WEBSITE DEVELOPMENT COMPUTER HARDWARE ON -LINE REGISTRATION FEES Total : COFFEE VEHICLE FUEL Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : WATER FOR DISCOVERY PLACE Total : 40147 OFFICE EQUIP. & SUPPLIES Total : TRAINING REIMBURSEMENT Page: 1 Amount 154.37 154.37 8.05 8.05 23.12 202.93 75.16 301.21 69.40 69.40 138.80 1,000.00 1,000.00 129.67 129.67 105.00 105.00 138.80 138.80 380.47 380.47 137.67 137.67 201.20 201.20 693.31 Page: 1 vchlist ' 06/01/2004 4:55:16PM Bank code : apbank Voucher List Page: 2 Spokane Valley Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount 4840 6/1/2004 000278 000278 DRISKELL, CARY (Continued) Total : 693.31 4841 6/1/2004 000246 EAST SPOKANE WATER DIST #1 1073 WATER FOR 8325 E. SPRAGUE 135.85 Total : 135.85 4842 6/1/2004 000208 GIBSON, JAMES 05/28/04 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 36.00 Total : 36.00 4843 6/1/2004 000002 H & H BUSINESS SYSTEMS 1200120 MONTHLY COPIER PAYMENT 23.00 120062 MONTHLY COPIER CHARGE 256.03 120075 MONTHLY COPIER CHARGE 273.99 120076 MONTHLY COPIER CHARGE 60.30 120079 MONTHLY COPIER CHARGE 192.27 120080 MONTHLY COPIER CHARGE 66.08 Total : 871.67 4844 6/1/2004 000505 H & H FINANCIAL SERVICES 6012004 MONTHLY LEASE PAYMENT 201.04 Total : 201.04 4845 6/1/2004 000441 HOME DEPOT COMMERCIAL CREDI 1019109 SMALL TOOLS & EQUIPMENT 82.23 Total : 82.23 4846 6/1/2004 000507 HOOLEY, TERA Hooley REFUND REQUEST FOR DAY C/ 15.00 Total : 15.00 4847 6/1/2004 000259 HUMANIX 137463 TEMPORARY LABOR 65.57 138457 TEMPORARY LABOR 65.57 Total : 131.14 4848 6/1/2004 000022 INLAND BUSINESS PRODUCTS, INC. 51042 CITY PHOTO ID CARD 17.30 Total : 17.30 4849 6/1/2004 000401 INLAND NW CHAPTER OF ICC ICC registration SEMINAR REGISTRATION FOR S 75.00 Total : 75.00 4850 6/1/2004 000288 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL 0774676 -IN 40071 BUILDING CODE BOOKS 36.54 Total : 36.54 Page: 2 vchlist' 06/01/2004 4:55:16PM • Bank code: apbank Voucher 4851 4852 4853 4854 4855 4856 4857 4858 4859 4860 4861 4862 Date Vendor Invoice 6/1/2004 000504 LISA COLES 6/1/2004 000138 LOISLAW ASPEN PUBLISHERS 6/1/2004 000252 LOWE'S BUSINESS ACCOUNT 6/1/2004 000258 MICROFLEX INC. 6/1/2004 000157 MOAT, BRIAN 6/1/2004 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER COMP/ 05/24/04 6/1/2004 000484 MOONEY & PUGH CONTRACTORS II 04 -187 04 -190 6/1/2004 000062 MUNSON, RICHARD 05/28/04 6/1/2004 000043 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 03/06 -05/05 6/1/2004 000239 NORTHWEST BUSINESS STAMP 48580 6/1/2004 000121 NORTHWEST MAILING INC 6961 6/1/2004 000058 OCCUPATIONAL MEDICINE, ASSOC!. 445395 445536 445650 446872 List Spokane Valley coles refund 002553236 & 02553244 64701 00014951 05/28/04 PO # DescriptionlAccount PARKS RESERVATION CANCEL/ Total : LEGAL BOOKS ONLINE Total : ASSORTED SMALL TOOLS & EQI Total : BUSINESS REGISTRATION SERA Total : CONTRACT LABOR ELECTRICITY - TRAFFIC LITES Total : DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE IRRIGATION WATER SERVICE Total : MEALS REIMBURSEMENT NEXTEL SERVICE THRU 05/05/0 Total : OPERATING SUPPLIES Total : Total : OPERATING SUPPLIES EMPLOYMENT EXAMS EMPLOYMENT EXAM EMPLOYMENT EXAM EMPLOYMENT EXAM Total : Total : rage: 3 Amount 89.00 89.00 1,673.91 1,673.91 661.45 661.45 1,740.34 1,740.34 877.50 877.50 213.98 213.98 4,700.00 4,400.00 9,100.00 10.78 10.78 852.91 852.91 48.92 48.92 152.31 152.31 137.00 101.00 15.00 101.00 Page: 3 vchlist 06/01/2004 4:55:16PM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor 4862 6/1/2004 000058 OCCUPATIONAL MEDICINE, ASSOC!, (Continued) 446898 4863 6/1/2004 000036 OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN 244696106 4864 6/1/2004 000503 PAUL WILLIAMS williams refund 4865 6/1/2004 000119 PIP PRINTING 13330026168 4866 6/1/2004 000029 PITNEY BOWES CREDIT CORP. 5618533 -MY04 4867 6/1/2004 000494 PRO PEOPLE STAFFING SERVICES IN- 154784 4868 6/1/2004 000019 PURRFECT LOGOS, INC. 4869 6/1/2004 000322 QWEST 4870 6/1/2004 000256 RAINBOW ELECTRIC INC 4871 6/1/2004 000024 RESOURCE COMPUTING INC. 4872 6/1/2004 000341 RICOH CORPORATION Invoice 10685 05/28/04 C14286 36326 36332 36348 Voucher List Spokane Valley 04064903230 04064903749 04064927131 PO # 40134 Description /Account EMPLOYMENT EXAM OFFICE SUPPLIES Total : Total : PARKS RESERVATION REFUND Total : LOCAL SALES TAX CODE STICK! Total : MONTHLY COPIER RENTAL Total : TEMPORARY STAFFING SERVIC Total : VEHICLE LOGO TELEPHONE CHARGES IT CONSULTING IT SUPPORT IT SUPPORT COPIER RENTAL COPIER RENTAL COPIER RENTAL Total : Total : ELECTRICAL LABOR & MATERIA Total : Total : Total : Page: 4 Amount 101.00 455.00 193.95 193.95 200.00 200.00 1,363.52 1,363.52 447.53 447.53 562.40 562.40 75.67 75.67 38.22 38.22 473.41 473.41 6,400.00 2,324.15 162,15 8,886.30 245.39 410.78 237.82 893.99 Page: 4 vchlist 06/01/2004 4:55:16PM Bank code: apbank Voucher 4873 4874 4875 4876 4877 4878 4879 4880 4881 4882 Date Vendor 6/1/2004 000415 ROSAUERS U -CITY 6/1/2004 000230 6/1/2004 000090 6/1/2004 000001 SPOKANE COUNTY TREASURER 6/1/2004 000323 SPOKANE COUNTY UTILITIES 6/1/2004 000406 SPOKANE REGIONAL CVB 6/1/2004 000411 SPOKANE VALLEY NEWS HERALD 6/1/2004 000501 THOMPSON PUBLISHING GROUP, SI 6/1/2004 000167 VERA WATER & POWER 6/1/2004 000100 WABO 54 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 54 Vouchers in this report Invoice 554784 554785 SPOKANE CNTY AUDITORS OFC, RE 04/09/04 SPOKANE COUNTY INFORMATION, ; 40605 Voi cc er List Spokane Valley M ay04 ApriI2004 5/6/04 24326 -24439 05/28/04 M ay04 May2004 2118 2353 PO # Description /Account MEETING SUPPLIES ROSAUERS U -CITY Total : COUNTY RECORDING FEES Total : TECHNICAL SERVICES Total : COUNTY SERVICES FOR MAY Total : SEWER UTILITY CHARGES Total : TOURISM PROMOTION PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES & NC Total: • PUBLICATION REGISTRATION BLDG MANUALS Total : Total : STREET LIGHTING POWERIWAT STREET MAINTENANCE UTILITY Total : Total : Total vouchers : rage: 5 Amount 61.22 47.31 108.53 114.00 114.00 6,019.70 6,019.70 1,228,837.06 1,228,837.06 681.49 681.49 12,500.00 12,500.00 674.25 674.25 359.00 359.00 281.27 367.22 648.49 25.00 36.86 61.86 Bank total : 1,284,005.79 1,284,005.79 Page: 5 vchlist 06/01/2004 4:55:16PM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # DescriptionlAccount Amount I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify to said claim. Finance Director Date Voucher List Page: 6 Spokano Valley APPROVED: Mayor Council Member Page: 6 vchlist 06/03/2004 9:50:29AM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 4885 6/3/2004 000028 FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANK 1217 /apr - may04 CREDIT CARD PAYMENT 311.68 1225 /apr -may04 CREDIT CARD PAYMENT 536.69 1332 /apr -may04 CREDIT CARD PAYMENT 1,686.44 1563 /apr -may04 CREDIT CARD PAYMENT 37.98 1829 /apr -may04 CREDIT CARD PAYMENT 50.10 5045 /apr - may04 CREDIT CARD PAYMENT 62.83 5078 /apr -may04 CREDIT CARD PAYMENT 93.73 Total : 2,779.45 1 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 2,779.45 1 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 2,779.45 I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify to said claim. Finance Director -2 -0� Date Voucher List Page: 1 Spokane Valley Mayor APPROVED: Council Member Page: 1 OPTIONS: Meeting Date: 6 - 08 - -04 City Manager Sign -off, Item: Check all that apply: x consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ admin. report ❑ pending le-gislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE ❑ information Payroll for Period Ending May 31, 2004 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: STAFF CONTACT: Daniel Cenis CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action BUDGETIFINANCIAL IMPACTS: Payroll for period ending 05- 31 -04: Salary: $ 100,864.74 Benefits: $ 48,882.27 $149,747.01 ATTACHMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 8, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent X old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report 0 pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Aquifer Protection Area Program Reauthorization GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.36 Aquifer Protection Areas PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Presentation to Council on the Aquifer Protection Area Program on March 16, 2004 & May 16, 2004 BACKGROUND: The Spokane County Board of Commissioner sent a letter dated January 27, 2004 to Spokane Valley requesting consideration for inclusion of the City of Spokane Valley in the reauthorization of the Aquifer Protection Area. On May 3, 2004 the City received a copy of a draft resolution from the County. The County has requested that the City approve the resolution by the beginning of June. We had asked the County for the following information prior to consideration of the resolution: • History of the revenues and use funds in prior years. • History of the water quality in the APA, specifically with in the City of Spokane Valley, since the beginning of the program. • Proposed use of funds under the new program. • Copy of the interlocal agreement between the County and the City of Spokane. • Copy of the proposed County resolution as required by RCW 36.36.020. • Detail on how and where the fees will be used. We have received the following information: • Spreadsheets on Fund 436 — APA — Revenues & Expenses. • Spokane Aquifer Quality Trends — through July, 2000. • Copy of the interlocal with the City of Spokane. • E -mail from Bruce Rawls /James Emacio dated May 26, 2004 regarding use of fees. OPTIONS: • Request additional information. • Request development of an interlocal agreement. • Approve the resolution. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Request that an interlocal agreement be developed - prior to approving the resolution. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten ATTACHMENT: Draft Resolution Spreadsheets on Fund 436 — APA — Revenues & Expenses. . Spokane Aquifer Quality Trends — through July, 2000. . . Copy of the interlocal with the City of Spokane. . . E -mail from Bruce Rawls /James Emacio dated May 26, 2004 regarding use of fees.. DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 04 -016 A RESOLUTION OF THE CiTY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON AUTHORIZING THE IiNCLUSION OF THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES OF Ti-I.E CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY WITHIN AN AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of chapter 36.36 R.CW, the legislature provided for the creation of Aquifer Protection Areas to finance the protection, preservation and rehabilitation of subterranean water and to reduce special assessments imposed upon households to finance facilities for such purposes; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.36.020, an Aquifer Protection Area may include territory located within a city or town only with the approval of the City or Town governing body; and WHEREAS, in 1985 the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County placed a ballot proposition before the electors to create the Spokane Aquifer Protection Area and established certain Aquifer Protection Area fees for a 20 -year time frame. The boundaries of the Aquifer Protection Area included portions of the unincorporated areas of Spokane County, which at that time included the Cite of Spokane Valley and City of Liberty Lake, as well as the City of Spokane and Town of Millwood; and WHEREAS, in 1985, the voters overwhelming approved the ballot proposition to create the Spokane Aquifer Protection Area as well as the corresponding Aquifer Protection Area fee(s) with both sun - setting December 31, 2005; and WHEREAS, the Spokane Region will continue to face significant issues with regard to the protection of the water quality in the Spokane Aquifer even after the expiration of the current Aquifer Protection Area as well as corresponding Aquifer Protection Area fees; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County believes that it is in the best interest of the region to reauthorize the Spokane Aquifer Protection Arca and corresponding Aquifer Protection Area fees for an additional twenty (20) year time frame to provide financial resources to allow the Region to make continued progress toward the elimination of septic tanks in the urban areas. In conjunction with such determination, and as required by RCW 36.36.040, the Board of County Commissioners further believes that the boundaries of the reauthorized Spokane Aquifer Protection Area should encompass all or a portion of the municipal boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley and therefore are desirous of obtaining approval from the City of Spokane. Valley legislative authority to include its municipal boundaries within the reauthorized Spokane Aquifer Protection Area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City of Spokane Valley Council of the City of Spokane Valley, as authorized by RCW 36.36.040, that the Council does hereby approve of the inclusion of its municipal boundaries within the boundaries of the reauthorized Spokane Aquifer Protection Area. In making the decision, the Council understands that this action will enable the Board of County Commissioners to place the reauthorization of the Spokane Aquifer Protection Area and corresponding fee before the electors. Provided, further, in taking this action, the Council is not taking a position in support or opposition to any ballot proposition which may be submitted to the electors by the Board of County Commissioners to reauthorize the Aquifer Protection Area and corresponding fee. Such an action can only be taken consistent with the provisions of RCW 42.17.130. Resolution 04 -016 Aquifer Protection Area Pane 1 r,f DRAFT ATTEST: PASSED by the City Council this day of June, 2004. Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to form: Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attomey Resolution f14 -016 Aquifer Protection Area Michael DeVleming, Mayor Pege 2 of 2 REVENUES: APA Fees & Charges Investment Interest Grants to WO Program Other Misc. Revenues TOTAL FUND 436 - AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA REVENUES & EXPENSES 1986 THROUGH 2003 $45,002,315 $3,379,911 $2,763,060 $142,690 $51,287,976 EXPENSES: Operation & Administration (1) $9,922,043 Spokane County Sewer Construction $22,914,733 City of Spokane 66,250,000 Town of Millwood $685,334 Spokane County Health District $1,370,629 TOTAL $41,1 42,739 RESERVES $10,145,237 Notes (1) Water Quality Management Group transferred from Road Fund (110) to APA (436) in 1995. Revenues and Expenses after 1995 include WO Management 5/5/2004 RVENUES: APA Fees & Charges Investment Interest Other Misc. Revenues EPA Grants State Grants EXPENSES: Operation & Administration Spokane County Construction City of Spokane Town of Millwood Spokane County Health District REVENUES: APA Fees & Charges Investment Interest Other Misc. Revenues EPA Grants State Grants EXPENSES: Operation & Administration Spokane County Construction City of Spokane Town of Millwood Spokane County Health District FUND 436- AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA REVENUES & EXPENSES 1986 THROUGH 2003 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 $1,840,243 $2,200,386 52,408,818 $2,376,446 52,398,179 $2,429,014 $2,450,829 $2,510,263 $2,491,343 $2,552,599 19,580 110,474 88,795 241,847 276,172 236,747 98,876 25,992 53,984 131,384 1996 1997 $2,531,769 $2,608,876 86,825 157,364 (437) 1,981 141,656 283,722 58,700 44,540 52,818,513 $3,096,483 4,757 2,517 23,912 27,121 18,713 1998 $2,621,936 233,175 108 749,906 1,564 53,606,689 1999 2000 52,675,086 52,694,109 278,802 391,094 5,108 4,260 285,304 214,358 18,391 $3,262,691 53,303 821 180 $ 455,722 $ 265,573 $ 374,552 $ 369,456 $ 392,991 $ 438,358 $ 378,148 2,479,266 1,447,727 - 1,428,574 2,500,000 3,950,000 600,798 915,438 483,764 250,000 28,923 68,323 88,088 200,000 64,239 $ 455,722 $2744,839 51,822,279 $ 999,177 52,805,326 $3,510,210 $4,842,387 51,859,823 52,315,617 $2 500 130 $2 642 205 52,701,472 52,684,474 52,549,885 52 536 255 $2 545 347 52,694,597 $ 408,376 1,445, 750 100,000 108,309 52,062,435 20 285 10,329 $ 497,315 $ 552,121 1,378,407 1,244,313 100,000 119,071 115,698 $1,994,793 52,012,132 NOTE: The Water Quality Management Group was transferred from the County Road Fund(110) to Aquifer Protection Area(436) in 1995. 2001 2002 2003 52,724,918 $2,733,071 $2,754,430 432,434 354,528 161,838 19,516 25,336 9,313 290,189 340,621 323,780 $3 467 057 $3,453,556 $3,249,361 $ 918,562 $ 685,084 $ 750,533 $ 562,609 $ 575,790 $ 749,020 $ 741,607 $ 806,226 1,704,689 842,922 900,000 921,150 900,000 1,071,935 700,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 100,000 135,189 143,701 179,217 116,634 112,622 80,885 93,652 101,412 $1,553,751 $3 133,474 $2,272 672 $2 079,243 $2,109,562 52,229,905 $ 2 407 794 5 2 107 638 TOTAL 545,002,315 3,379,911 142,690 1,674,946 1,088,114 $51,287,976 $ 9,922,043 22,914,733 6,250,000 685,334 1,370,629 $41,142, 739 SPOKANE AQUIFER QUALITY TRENDS CHANGES RESULTING FROM SEWER CONSTRUCTION Through July, 2000 Aquifer Quality Monitoring Spokane County initiated a ground water monitoring program in 1980 that was designed to track the water quality changes that occurred as result of the various Aquifer protection activities implemented in the region. Of special interest is the benefit derived for the construction of a regional sewer system to reduce the amount of septic tank leachate reaching groundwater. Nitrate — nitrogen is used as an indicator for dornestic waste impact because it is found in high concentrations in leachate from drainfields, is found in low concentration street runoff and is not a significant component of agricultural recharge water. ' Water quality studies conducted in 1977 – 1979 showed that the impact from fertilizer nitrogen in agricultural areas over the Aquifer was negligible. Nitrate is also of interest because of its public health significance at concentrations above • ' 10 mg/L, the drinking water standard for nitrate. Trend Analysis Graphs Attached are graphs of water quality at four wells showing the change in nitrate – nitrogen in the Spokane Valley Aquifer over time. The results plotted are annual average nitrate nitrogen concentration based on quarterly monitoring results through July of 2000. Overall the data below shows the impact of residential development using leach fields (septic tank drainfields) for sanitary waste disposal has on nitrate— nitrogen concentrations in the Aquifer and the effect the County's sewer program has had on those nitrate levels. The first graph shows the changes in nitrate in groundwater in the Eastern portion of the Spokane Valley at the Consolidated Irrigation District's Well #2 well in Greenacres. This graph illustrates the generally low nitrate concentrations found in relatively undeveloped areas of the Aquifer Recharge Area. Sewer service is not scheduled for the area around the CID #2 well until 2014 – 2015. Note that nitrate levels have varied significantly over the 28 -year record but that there has been little change in average water quality. This is consistent with the low level of development found east of the well site and the relatively slow growth that has occurred in the area. The three additional graphs illustrate the impact of central sewer installation on several individual water supply wells Modern Electric Water Company's Well #1 and Vera Water and Power's Well #4 are located at Dines and Valley Way and Adams and 24th respectively. The Modern well is located within the boundary of the North Pines ULU), which, in 1985, became the first area in the Valley connected to the County sewage collection system. The Modern #1 is also immediately downgradient from the East Sprague ULID which was connected in 1986. The Vera well is located within the Vera Crest ULID which was connected in 1991. Concurrent with the connection of Vera Crest, conununity drainfields for the Bella Vista and Timberline subdivisions were intercepted. Elimination of these drainfields diverted a large volume of wastewater away from the aquifer near this well. Lines are drawn on both the Modern and Vera graphs to show the trend in nitrate— nitrogen before and after the interception of sewage flows upgradient from the wells. Though improvement in water quality is not expected immediately, the lines are broken in the year sewer connections were made in the area immediately around the well as a standard convention. In both cases, sewer connection had a clearly beneficial effect. At Modern the trend toward lower quality water has leveled off. At Vera the water quality has dramatically improved following interception of waste discharge to the ground. These examples clearly show the benefit of sewer installation on Aquifer. Water quality. The level of water quality improvement is partly a function of the number of ERU's eliminated and partly a result of the proximity of the discharge to the well. The elimination of the large drainfield serving Bella Vista, located less than V/4 mile from the well, removed the discharge from several dozen homes. Thus, the steep drop in nitrate at Vera #4. An additional pair of graphs is included for the Orchard Avenue Irrigation District #1 well. This well is on north Park Road in an area not scheduled for sewer installation until the 2006 — 2009 time frame. Even though the area immediately around the well is not sewered, there has been a reduction in the rate of increase in nitrate concentration at this site. This minors the cumulative effect of the overall sewer program. Still, the continued increase in nitrate demonstrates the impact of onsite domestic waste disposal on the Aquifer. 3.5 3.0 — 2 s 2.0 - z t+1 I.5 — 0 L0 L 0.5 — 0.0 H H s c t t g O O O O O CID 2, Nitrate Trend I 8 A O O O Sample YearEnding C9 e) i a M O O O 2 Modern 1, Nitrate Trend Pre - sewer Sample Year Ending 2.5 2.0 Mi 1.5 l_0 0.5 0.0 Modern 1, Nitrate Trend Pos t - S esser Sample Year Ending r s) .6 1 •0 .ci O c lk, 1 :l. :) !a?. 1E0 lid .2 3 E 0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 f Vera 4, Nitrate Trend Pre - Sewer � .k,‘• ' \ �' � •°' 'b i Y� ° '�� 4 '` 5 4 .� •a \ 3 ∎E;i• • g , � t ∎ ∎� bF6 � � � �0.' tt3 L ; c �° � ��} ��j w'�` LyT tt- :a, l Lc � ; Sample Year hiding 1• 5.0 - 1.0 - 0.0 Vera 4, Nitrate Trend Post- Sewer ti w Sample YearEnding 4 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 G 2.0 z 1.5 1.0 0.5 2.5 0 2.0 0.0 0.0 Orchard 1, Nitrate Trend , Pre - Sewer Orchard 1, Nitrate Trend Post - Sevier • \1 41. ' \A \ °S4) .ot 3 A1 -4. S A i ' ' 4 A \ 'L tpo tcp Sample Year Ending Sample Year Ending 5 A note on the water quality results graphed. Under Spokane County's monitoring program samples are collected in January, April, July and October. The numbers shown on the graphs are annual averages of the samples collected. The seasonal sampling regime is based on the results of several studies that have shown considerable seasonal variation in water quality at any given sampling site. The sampling dates were selected to provide data that, for a typical year, would produce an average dose to what would be obtained from continuous sampling and testing. The seasonality of the data is attributed to the availability of excess precipitation in the fall and spring to carry contaminants that accumulate in the soil during the dry summers and cold winters. If the winter is warm allowing precipitation to infiltrate through the season rather than accumulate as snow and ice there may not be a "peak" in the spring. Similarly, during long cold winters the thaw may come too late for contaminants to be tamed to the aquifer in tirne to be picked up in the April sampling. Much of the variability in the annual averages is a result of precipitation. Studies have shown that it takes two to three weeks for contaminants to be flushed from at or near the land surface to the aquifer. Typically Spokane's combination of precipitation and freezing patterns results in two high concentration sample events and two low concentration sample events per year. As indicated above, the timing of the spring thaw will greatly impact the concentrations rneasured in the usually high April sampling round. If the thaw occurs too soon or too late the sample collection period could miss the April peak and the year's average may be lower than actual average that would be calculated from continuous data. Similarly, a large summer storm two or three week before the July sampling or a rain event in early January could flush contaminants to the aquifer so they are measured during these usually low concentration periods. This could produce a higher annual average than is warranted. Several years' worth of data tends to iron out these variations. However, there will always be points that reflect the Aquifer's naturally variable conditions when data is plotted on graphs such as these. 6 BACKGROUND INTERLOCAL COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SPOKANE AND SPOKANE COUNTY in the STATE OF WASHINGTON Interlocal cooperative agreement between the City Council of the City. of Spokane and the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington establishing the conditions and understandings under which the two agencies will apply to the Washington State Department of Ecology for an Extended Payment Grant to offset the costs associated with completing the necessary sewering projects in Spokane County for protection of the Spokane - Rathdrum Aquifer, the sole source of our drinking water, and other related issues. The Centennial Clean Water Act required a legislative review of the Act's grant fund allocation formula in 1995. Following this review, the allocation formula for the grant program was revised. The Legislature has authorized the Department of Ecology(DOE) to offer the Spokane region an Extended Payment Grant(provided for in the RCW) for a total of $10,000,000 for the FY 95 -97 biennium, with an • anticipated legislative biennial appropriation of $10,000,000 during each of the next 9 biennia for a total 20 - year appropriation of $100,000,000. This would commit the state to provide the. r,egion'with $5,000,000 annually over the twenty year period for sewering needs which apply to .the Act's goals. For this region, the objective is the prevention of contamination of the Spokane - Rathdrum Aquifer. The DOE proposes to condition this grant on the following: 1)the.region must provide a definitive project scope and goal which addresses the total sewering needs including aquifer protection and surface water. considerations; 2) the project must demonstrate a pressing need or urgency to provide justification for the Extended .Payment Grant; and 3) the project's urgency will require an accelerated construction schedule with a completion date of approximately fifteen years .after start. 1 ca f 28 Condition 1 implies that no further funding within this grant will be available toward project or legislative goals unless applications are processed through a state -wide competitive process. There would be no further grants available for construction of collector /lateral sewers. Condition 1 further implies that there is an interconnect between the water quality requirements for discharges to the river and aquifer protection. This concept has been used previously in obtaining grant funding for both combined sewer overflow(CSO) and, stormwater planning. Conditions 2 and 3 address the intent of the Extended payment Grant legislation which is to provide funding assistance for high cost projects which have an urgent need. The City and County aquifer protection (sewering) costs for the collection system construction alone will exceed the grant eligible amount of $200,000,000(based upon a 50S local match requirement). There is no consideration in this DOE proposal for treatment plant expansion and /or modification to meet increased flows and regulatory requirements. There is no provision for continued efforts to reduce the CSO to the river, and there are no provisions for addressing regional stormwater problems. Treatment plant needs could be in the hundreds of millions of dollars, depending upon federal and state regulatory requirements and growth. It is important for the City and County to approach the DOE in a united and coordinated manner in effort to gain some flexibility in the grant program to allow for these additional needs. RECITALS' WHEREAS, there are significant numbers of unsewered areas within the metropolitan area of Spokane County contributing to the potential • degradation of the Spokane- Rathdrum Aquifer; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the citizens of the metropolitan area of Spokane County to have the sewering programs of the city and county completed as soon as practicable; and WHEREAS, the Washington State Department of Ecology has 'indicated there is an anticipated $100,000,000 Extended Payment Grant available to the Spokane region for aquifer protection which will assist in reducing the cost to those areas needing sewers; and WHEREAS, there are issues between the City of Spokane.and Spokane County that need to be resolved in order for the two agencies to work cooperatively in pursuing this grant; NOW THEREFORE, the City of Spokane and Spokane County agree: DEFINITIONS City shall mean the City of Spokane. County shall mean Spokane County. 2 Grant shall mean the Extended Payment Grant offered under the administration of the Washington State Department of Ecology. MGD shall mean Million Gallons per Day. COOPERATIVE PROVISIONS 1. PURPOSE OF THIS AGREEMENT. The purpose of this agreement is to establish the conditions and understandings under which the City and County pursue the Grant for the region's sewering, treatment plant, and other related needs. 2. GRANT SHARE. It is agreed that the Grant payment shall be shared by the two agencies on a 75/25% basis, with the County receiving the larger share. In the event that either agency cannot productively utilize its share, the City and County agree to cooperatively reallocate the unused funds. 3. AQUIFER PROTECTION FUNDS. The City and County agree that, starting in 1996, the County will remit $500,000 annually to the City as their share of the funds collected. The use of APA funds by either agency is subject to the limitations of Chapter 36.36 of the Revised Code of Washington and the County's enabling legislation. Within such limitations, the use of APA funds by either agency lies within that agency's sole discretion and judgment. The County will issue a check to the City in December of each year. If APP. funds are not collected, this clause will not be effective. 4. CAPACITY CHARGE FOR ADDITIONAL CONNECTIONS. The City and County agree to negotiate a connection charge or operations and maintenance fee for the additional connections made by the County to the City's collection system which were not included in the existing Interlocal agreement. Specifically, these connections are the North Valley Interceptor(NVI) and the North Spokane Interceptor(NVI). This amendment to the existing Interlocal agreement shall be completed by December 31, 1997. 5. FRANCHISE. The City and County agree that execution of this agreement constitutes a Franchise Agreement for the installation of water and /or sewer facilities in County Rights of Way in the Moran Prairie area of the unincorporated County remaining to be sewered by the City. This is in recognition of the previously approved franchises in that area for the purpose of sewer and water construction and the existing responsibility of the City to provide that area with water and sewer service. Technical issues regarding roadway repair, compaction and the like will be coordinated between the appropriate City and County departments according to County standards in use for similar projects. 3 6. ANNEXATION COVENANTS. The City and County agree to limit annexation covenant requirements to new developments within the City's utility service area which receive City water and /or sewer service. Covenants will not be required for utility services when provided to existing structures. 7. FUTURE FLOW REQUIREMENTS. The City and County agree to negotiate at some future date the projected treatment plant capacity requirements of the County in coordination with the projected City treatment plant capacity needs. These collective needs will be better known at the completion of the City's Wastewater Facility Plan and the County's Comprehensive Wastewater Plan. It is further agreed that until these total needs are further identified, service capacity allocations will remain as currently agreed upon(10 MGD for the County), although by mutual agreement, the two agencies may agree to serve outside their respective service area boundaries if it is more appropriate to do so. Rather than addressing the capacity issue with each out -of- service area connection that may be made, the net resulting capacity needs will be determined in conjunction with the final capacity calculations for each agency. B. PROGRAM COORDINATION. Given the finite capacity of the Wastewater Treatment Plant and the uncertainties of future regulatory treatment requirements, it is imperative that the City and County include each other in any plans, discussions or programs which will affect the treatment plant capacity or capability to satisfactorily process wastewater. In that regard, the City and County agree to such cooperation and coordination and further agree to annually review and coordinate their respective capital sewer plans and programs. The respective documents shall be submitted to each agency prior to May 1st of each year. They shall contain at least the following six years of programmed sewer projects. Earlier staff coordination and consultation is expected. 9. FUNDING FOR FUTURE TREATMENT PLANT MODIFICATION /EXPANSION. The City and County agree to develop a funding plan and mechanism in 1996 -97 to avoid significant and sharp rate increases that may result from future capacity and regulatory requirements. The final levels of funding needed by each agency can be better determined after the studies and plans identified in paragraph 7 above are completed; however, it is considered important and prudent to initiate such a funding plan before final needs and costs are determined. 10. STORMWATER PLANNING AND PROJECTS. In recognition that both agencies must work cooperatively to determine and solve the regional stormwater problems, the City and County agree to jointly study, plan and fund stormwater projects that include areas within the City boundaries as well as in the unincorporated areas of the County. 4 • Expenses pertaining to or relevant to land area lying within the corporate boundaries of the City will be borne by the City. 0` • Expenses pertaining to or relevant to land area lying only in the unincorporated area of the County, and not affected by the Urban Growth Area boundary, will be borne by the County. For the purposes of the Glenrose Watershed Study, and other studies as may be required and /or appropriate, the City and County agree on the following parameters governing the cost - sharing of this study. If the Urban Growth Area boundary, as determined in the Growth Management Act process, is positioned outside the present City limits, the City agrees to fund that portion of the study pertaining to the area lying within the City's Urban Growth Area if it is annexed to the City within five years of establishment of the UGA boundary; provided, such funding will be prorated with the County depending upon when the annexation is finalized. For example, if the annexation takes place at the first year mark, the City will bear 80S of the study cost for that area annexed. If it takes place at the fourth year, the City will be responsible for 20%. In future studies, the City and County will coordinate and agree on the Scope of Work's common requirements. Cost of those common requirements will be allocated according the above parameters. Special or unique requirements of either agency will be borne by that agency. Project costs resulting from the above studies will be determined on a case -by -case basis depending upon the relative benefits to each agency. 11. GENERAL A. Maintenance of Records. Both City and County shall make available to each other or the Washington State Auditor, if requested, at any time during their normal business hours, all records, books or pertinent information which each agency shall have kept in conjunction with this agreement. B. Assignment • Land area, measured or approximated, in square feet or acreage, whichever is most appropriate, will be the factor to determine the cost of each agency. J Both City and County agree that neither may assign any interest in this agreement without the written permission of the other. 5 C. Waiver No officer, employee or agent of the City or County has the power, right or authority to waive any of the conditions or provisions of this agreement. No waiver of any breach of this agreement shall be held to be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach. Failure of either the City or County to enforce at any time any of the provisions herein, or to require at any time performance by the other of any provision herein, shall in no way be construed to be a waiver of such provisions nor in any way affect the validity of this agreement or any part thereto, or the right of either to hereafter enforce each and every such provision. D. Notices All notices called for or provided for in this agreement shall be in writing and must be served -on any of the parties either personally or by registered mail, return receipt requested, at their respective addresses at the time of notice. Notices sent by registered mail shall be deemed served when deposited in the United States mail with postage prepaid E. Headings The headings used in this agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of convenience and ready reference. In no way do they purport to and shall not be deemed to define, limit or extend the scope or intent of the captions to which they pertain. F. All Inclusive Agreement This agreement contains all of the terms and conditions agreed upon by the City and County. No other understandings, oral or otherwise, regardless of the subject matter of such agreement shall be deemed to exist or to bind either of the parties. 12. PERIOD OF AGREEMENT A. Duration. This agreement shall be perpetual unless terminated by mutual consent of the City and County. B. Amendment. Modification or amendment of this agreement shall not occur without the concurrence of both parties. C. Termination. If this agreement is terminated by mutual consent or otherwise, the County's payment obligation under paragraph 3, is prorated in accord with the number of days elapsed up to the date of termination. 6 13. ADMINISTRATION 11 11 11 1 1 OFF ICt OF CIT Y CLERK This agreement shall be administered by the City Manager and the County Administrator, or their respective designees. Dated June 7, 1996 ty Prase 4 1/' 7 1 " f— .. .```. ED AS t'1'd', I C • A ■rney ATTEST: APP , IIP - lc -1 (79 �o 7 11 11 1 AR 1 11 11 4005111 Page: 7 of 7 0611711996 03:17P Spokane Go, WA COUNTY, WASHINGTON CITY OF SPOKANE, WASHINGTON Neil Kersten From: Rawls, Bruce [BRawls @spokanecounty.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 3:37 PM To: Neil Kersten; Hendron, Lars Subject: FW: APA reauthorization Neil and Lars: Here below is an e-mail regarding allowable uses for APA Fees that was prepared by Jim Emacio. Currently, the APA Fees are used as follows: * City of Spokane -- $500,000 annual allocation per 1996 Interlocal Agreement, Provision 3 * Administration, Customer Service, and Billing for the APA Program * Health District Septic Tank Permit Monitoring * Aquifer Water Quality Monitoring and Regional Water Quality Program Management * Spokane County STEP contruction subsidy I propose that we continue to operate under Provision 3 of the 1996 Interlocal Agreement between Spokane County and the City of Spokane, through year 2010, when we are scheduled to complete the septic tank elimination program construction. Then, a different allocation to increase funding to other APA allowable uses, such as treatment plants may be appropriate. My rationale for this is that the primary purpose and reason for the APA Fee has always beer to fund the STEP program in the Valley. Sometime between now and 2010, I suggest that funding to the Health District be discontinued, since in theory most septic tanks inside the UGA will be eliminated. We are proposing to adjust the boundaries of the APA, just to make them coincidental with the boundaries of the Voting Precincts. Thanks, Bruce Rawls Spokane County Utilities Director (509) 477 -3604 Original Message > From: Emacio, James > Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 2:21 PM > To: Rawls, Bruce > Subject: APA reauthorization > Bruce: > I need to know if you will use the moneys from the fees for all the > purposes in RCW 36.36.040. I need to delineate in the exact uses of the money in the > notice and resolution. You might not want to include all items. RCW > 36.36.040 provides as follows: 1 > RCW 36.36.040 Use of fee revenues. 1> Aquifer protection areas may impose fees to fund: > (1) The preparation of a comprehensive plan to protect, preserve, and > rehabilitate subterranean water, including ground water management > programs adopted under chapter 90.44 RCW. This plan may be prepared > as a portion of a county sewerage and /or water general plan pursuant > to RCW 36.94.030; > (2) The construction of facilities for: (a) The removal of > water -borne pollution: (b) water quality improvement; (c) sanitary > sewage collection, disposal, and treatment; (d) storm water or surface > water drainage collection, disposal, and treatment; and (e) the > construction of public water systems; > (3) The proportionate reduction of special assessments imposed by a > county, city, town, or special district in the aquifer protection area > for any of the facilities described in subsection (2) of this section; > (4) The costs of monitoring and inspecting on -site sewage disposal > systems or community sewage disposal systems for compliance with > applicable standards and rules, and for enforcing compliance with these applicable standards and rules in aquifer protection areas • created after June 9, 1988; and > (5) The costs of: (a) Monitoring the quality and quantity of > subterranean water and analyzing data that is collected; (b) ongoing > implementation of the comprehensive plan developed under subsection > (1) of this section; (c) enforcing compliance with standards and rules > relating to the quality and quantity of subterranean waters; and (d) > public education relating to protecting, preserving, and enhancing > subterranean waters. > Jim CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 8, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business X new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Opportunity Cemetery Association Easement GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Staff presented the issue to Council 6 -1 -04 as an administrative report. 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 the cemetery 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. To help expedite the final resolution of this matter, staff is requesting that the Council approve a motion authorizing the form of the easement, and authorizing the City Manager to sign the easement once the legal description is provided. That way, once the legal description is provided to staff, that can be plugged and finalized in short order. OPTIONS: Not granting the easement, which would force the cemetery to pay for a separate hookup from the water district for the north portion of their property. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Recommend approving a motion authorizing the City Manager to sign the easement for the irrigation water line within the 16 Avenue right -of -way once the legal description has been provided. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell / Steve Worley ATTACHMENTS Opportunity Cemetery Association Easement Filed at the Request of: City of Spokane Valley, Washington 11707 East Sprague, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 F GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR CONSI'DERATION OF THE ACTUAL BENF;F ITS FIEREIN DERIVED by the parties, the undersigned Grantor hereby grants an easement to Grantee for the placement of a water pipe in Grantor's right-of-way. The easement for placement of a water pipe is described as follows: Situated in the County of Spokane, State of Washington Parcel No.: Said easement shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. Recovery of Costs. Grantee shall be subject to all permit fees associated with activities undertaken through the authority granted in this Easement or under ordinances of the City. Where the City incurs costs and expenses for review or inspection of activities undertaken through the authority granted in this Easement or any ordinances relating to the subject for which a permit fee is not established, Grantee shall pay such costs and expenses directly to the City. In addition to the above, Grantee shall promptly reimburse the City for any and all costs it reasonably incurs in response to any emergency involving Grantee's facilities. 2. Non - Exclusivity. This Easement shall, in no way, prevent or prohibit the City from using any of its right -of -ways, roads, streets or other public properties or affect its jurisdiction over them or any part of them. The City hereby retains full power to make all changes, relocations, repairs, maintenance, establishments, improvements, dedications or vacation of same as the City may deem fit, including the dedication, establishment, maintenance, and improvement of all new rights -of- way, streets, avenues, thoroughfares and other public properties of every type and description. 3. Non - Interference with Existing Facilities. The City shall have prior and superior right to the use of its roads, streets, and alleys, and public properties for installation and maintenance of its facilities and other governmental purposes, and should in the sole discretion of the City a conflict arise with the Grantee's facilities, the Grantee shall, at its own expense and cost, conform to the City's facilities and other government purposes of the City. The owners of all utilities, public or private, installed in or on such public properties prior to the installation of the lines and facilities of the Grantee, shall have preference as to the positioning and location of such utilities so installed with respect to the Grantee. Such preference shall continue in the event of the necessity of relocating or changing the grade of any such public properties. Grantee's system shall be constructed and maintained in such manner as not to interfere with any public use, or with any other pipes, wires, conduits or other facilities that may have been laid in the rights -of -way by or under the City's authority. 4. Right to Roads Not Superseded. The City, in the granting of this Easement, does not waive any rights which it now holds or may hereafter acquire, and this Easement shall not be construed so as to deprive the City of any powers, rights, or privileges which it now has, or may hereafter acquire, including the right of eminent domain, to regulate the use and control of its roads covered by this Easement, or to go upon any and all City roads and highways for any purpose including constructing, repairing, or improving the same in any such manner as the City, or its representatives may elect. The City shall retain full authoritative power in the same and like manner as though this Easement had never been granted. Nothing in this Easement shall be construed to prevent the City from constructing facilities, grading, paving, repairing and/or altering any street, or laying down, repairing or removing facilities or constricting or establishing any other public work or improvement. All such work shall be done, insofar as practicable, so as to not obstruct, injure or prevent the unrestricted use and operation of the facilities of the Grantee under this Easement. If, however, any of the Grantee's facilities interfere with City projects, Grantee's facilities shall be removed or replaced. Any and all such removal or replacement shall be at the sole expense of the Grantee. Should Grantee fail to remove, adjust or relocate its facilities by the date established by through written notice to Grantee, the City may cause and/or effect such removal, adjustment or relocation, and the expense thereof shall be paid by Grantee. 5. Restoration After Construction. Grantee shall, after installation, construction, relocation, maintenance, or repair of facilities within the area of this Easement, restore the surface of the right - of-way or public property to at least the currently adopted City standards or as required by the City Public Works Department through a right - of-way permit, depending upon special circumstances. Grantee agrees to promptly complete all restoration work and to promptly repair any damage caused by such work within the area of this Easement or other affected area at its sole cost and expense. 6. Damage and Non - Compliance. Any and all damage, or injury, done or caused to City right -of -way, City facilities, or any portion thereof in the construction, operation, maintenance or repair of Grantee's facilities shall be immediately repaired and reconstructed to the satisfaction of the City Public Works Department; and in the event the Grantee shall fail, neglect, or refuse. to inunediately repair and reconstruct said damage or injury to said City right-of-way or facilities, the same may be done by the City and the cost and expense shall be immediately paid by the Grantee to the City. If it is discovered by the City that Grantee has damaged, injured, or failed to restore the right-of-way in accordance with this Easement, the City shall provide the Grantee with written notice including a description of actions the City believes necessary to restore the right-of-way. If the right -of -way is not restored within ten (10) days' from written notice, the City, or its authorized agent, may restore the right -of -way and facilities. The Grantee is responsible for all costs and expenses incurred by the City to repair and restore the right -of -way and facilities in accordance with this Easement. 7. Inspections and Fees. All work performed by Grantee shall be subject to inspection by and approval of the City. The Grantee shall reimburse the City for all expenses incurred by the City in the examination, inspection, and approval of Grantee's work. Such reimbursement shall be in addition to any other fees or charges levied by the City. 8. City Ordinances and Regulations. Nothing herein shall be deemed to direct or restrict the City's ability to adopt and enforce all necessary and appropriate ordinances regulating the performance of the conditions of this Easement, including any reasonable ordinances made in the exercise of its police powers in the interest of public safety and for the welfare of the public. The City shall have the authority at all times to control by appropriate regulations the location, elevation, and manner of construction and maintenance of any facilities by Grantee, and Grantee shall promptly conform with all such regulations, unless compliance would cause Grantee to violate other requirements of law. Dated this day of June, 2004. Grantor: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY: BY: Attest: County of Spokane DAVID MERCIER City Manager CARY P. DRISKELL, Deputy City Attorney STATE OF WASHINGTON ) s s. On this day of , 2004, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, personally appeared David Mercier and Cary P. Driskell, to me known to be the individuals who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be their free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. TN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year first above written, Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Spokane Valley. My commission expires - 4 - C:rartee: Opportunity Cemetery Association BY: WALLACE PLOWMAN President STATE OF WASHINGTON County of Spokane ) s On this _ day of , 2004, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, personally appeared Wallace Plowman, to me known to be the individuals who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be their free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned_ I WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year first above written. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Spokane Valley. My commission expires 0 J CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 8, 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: 2005 — 2010 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP), 2005 Annual Construction Program GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.77.010, Perpetual advanced six -year plans for coordinated transportation program expenditures. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adopted 2004 -2006 Six Year TIP last year on June 10, 2003, Resolution #03 -037. Adopted Amended 2004 -2009 Six Year TIP on December 23, 2003, Resolution #03 -055, to include Bowdish /24 Avenue Sidewalk grant project. BACKGROUND: The City is required by RCW 35.77.010 to prepare and after public hearing adopt a revised and extended comprehensive transportation program for the ensuing six calendar years. This plan must be submitted to the Washington State Secretary of Transportation before July 1 of each year. Staff presented to Council a draft 2005 -2010 Six Year TIP at the April 6, 2004 study session. The proposed TIP in large part reflects the 2004 -2009 adopted Six Year TIP prepared last year by the interim staff and Spokane County. Proposed changes from last year's TIP include: • Adding the widening of 8 Avenue from Havana to Park Road to a 3 -lane urban section (2005) • Adding Sullivan Road North Extension in coordination with Spokane County's Bigelow Gulch project (2005) • Identifying four road rehabilitation projects for federal funding (Broadway Ave., Wellesley Ave., Park Rd. and Dishman Mica Road) (2005) • Rescheduling the Couplet project from 2008 to 2006 • Delaying Park Road Grade Separation (Bridging the Valley) to 2006 to coincide with revised schedule • Delaying to 2009 the widening of 32 Avenue from SR27 to Best Road (City limit) to coincide with County's schedule for widening 32 Avenue from Best Road to Sullivan. OPTIONS: Accept or revise project list and /or project schedule RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Motion to advance 2005 -2010 Six Year TIP to public hearing and adoption at Council's June 22 meeting. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS• The Ci(y's share of the proposed projects wl be budgeted within the Street Capital Projects Fund which has be revenue r s accommodate b e proposed TIP. STAFF CONTACT: Neil Karsten, Steve Worley ATTACHMENTS: 1) Summary de description of proposed projects 2) H# of Amended 2004-2009 Six Year TI P projects 3) Lk of Craft 2005-2010 Six Year TIPpoects 4) Drat2 10 S% Year TIP, 2005 A ud Construction Program 5) Map of Darn 2005-2005 Six Year TIP City of Spokane Valley Draft 2005-2010 Six -year Transportation Improvement Program Project Descriptions 1. Barker Road Barker Road will be constructed to a full three -lane arterial standard from Boone Avenue to the bridge over the Spokane River. Curbs and sidewalks will be included. I'It3 grant received for this project. Total Project cost: $2,500,000. City share $468,000. 2. Barker Road Bridge This project will reconstruct the Barker R.oad bridge over the Spokane River. Widening of this bridge is needed because development in the area has increased traffic volumes. Federal Bridge R.eplacement Grant funds covering 100% of the project cost was received in 2004. Total Project Cost: $8,100,000 City share: $0. 3. Pines/Mansfield Project This is a joint project between the City, WSDOT, and private developers. It will move the signal at westbound on- and off-ramps to the Mansfield Intersection reducing congestion on Pines Road. The project will reconstruct the westbound on- ramp aligning it with Indiana to the east. This will close the access to Montgomery Road, which will end in a cul -de -sac. The westbound off-ramp will be connected to Indiana Avenue. Construction is scheduled for 2005, 2006 and 2007. There is currently a funding shortfall of approximately $960,000. Federal funds will be sought to fill the shortfall. Cost $3,768,000. City share $55,000. 4. Applcway Blvd. Reconstruct Appleway Blvd. to five lanes with curbs and sidewalks from Tschirley Road to Hodges Road. Cost $3,200,000. City share $433,000. 5. 8th Avenue This project will widen 8 Avenue from Havana to Park Road to an urban 3 -lane section with curb, gutter, sidewalks and bike lanes. This project will be coordinated with SRTC's Southside Transportation Study. Total project cost: $4,780,000. City share: $643,000. 6. Sullivan Road North Extension Extend Sullivan Road north of Wellesley Avenue to the City limit with a 5 -lane arterial. This project is being done in coordination with Spokane County's Bigelow Gulch Road project. Total project cost: $4,030,000. City share: $60,000. 7. Valley Couplet — Project 2 Construct a one -way street from University R.oad to Evergreen Road. This will be a 3 -lane urban arterial with sidewalks and bike lanes. This project is partially funded. A $4.2 million grant was secured from the TIB. t% SD(T has promised funding to cover half the cost of the Pines Road/Appleway Blvd_ concrete intersection and s.i gnats. Federal finds will be sought to cover part of the current city match requirement. Program is to begin PE in 2006 with RIW and construction in 2008 and 2009. Total project cost: $8,376,000. City share: ],7 15,000, 8. Evergreen Road Reconstruct Evergreen Road from 32 Avenue to 16 Avenue to a three -lane urban section. Cost $2,500,000. City share $500,000. 9. Park Road Grade Separation - BTV This project is part of the Bridging the Valley program and will construct a bridge to take vehicle traffic over the BNSF tracks at Trent Avenue. The County has applied for funding through the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FM However, it has not risen high enough on their list to be actually funded, We would anticipate that the BNSF, TIB, and possibly WSDOT cou]d be funding partners with the. City on this project. Cost to be determined by SIT. City share unknown_ 10. Barker Road Reconstruct Barker Road from the Spokane River to Euclid Avenue. The section will be three Janes wide and cost approximately $1,287,000. City share $172,000, I1. Sullivan Road West Bridge Reconstruct the west bridge over the Spokane River. This bridge would widen to accommodate traffic turning west onto Indiana Avenue. Cost $8,000,000. City share $0. 12. Flora/SR 290 Minor Intersection Improvements This is a WSDOT safety project to prevent southbound vehicles from turning left onto Sly 290. Cost is about $13,000. City share: $2,000. 13. Flora Road This project will construct Fora Road to a three -l section from Sprague Avenue to Mission Avenue. Cost 52,500,000, This project is not funded, City share $388,000, .14. Valley Couplet — Project 3 Construct a one-way street from Evergreen R.oad to Sullivan Road. This will be the same width and number of lanes as the existing Appleway Blvd. between University and Evergreen. Project cost: $3,300,000, City share $489,000. 1.5. Bowdish Road Construct a tree - lane urban arterial with curbs and sidewalks from 32 Avenue to 8 Avenue_ Cost approximately $2,980,000. City share $598,000_ 1.6. Barker Road This project proposed to construct Barker Road to a three -lane section from 8th Avenue to Broadway Avenue. Cost $3,053,000. City share $413,000. 17. Valley Couplet — Project 4 Extend the one -way Appleway Blvd. from Sullivan Road to Sprague Avenue at Tschirley Road. This project will finish the couplet project. 18. Park Road This project would reconstruct Park Road from Broadway Avenue to Indiana Avenue. This will be a five -lane arterial with curbs and sidewalks linking Broadway Avenue to the new overpass at the BNSF tracks and Trent Avenue. 19. 32" Avenue Reconstruct 32 Avenue from SR 27 to Best Road (City limits). This road would be a three -lane arterial with curbs and sidewalks connecting to a County project at Best Road that will continue the improvement to Sullivan Road. 20. Ferret Avenue This project proposes to connect Ferret Avenue in Ponderosa to Dishman Mica Road. 21. Sullivan Road Reconstruct to seven lanes from Euclid Avenue to Wellesley Avenue. Widen bridges at the Spokane River, UPRR. BNSF, and SR 290 (Trent). 22. Euclid Avenue/Flora Road This project is proposed to reconstruct and provide a 2 -lane, shouldered arterial on Euclid Avenue from Flora Road to Barker Road and on Flora Road from Euclid Road on the west to Euclid Road on the east. 2004 Project _ From 1 151h Avenue Projecl 2' I]ishman Mica Rd. 2 Parts Road - Project 2' 8th Avenue 3 Fveryreen Road' 16th Avenue 4 PinesfMansfield Wilbur 5 Barker RI 6 Harker Road Bridge' 7 Bowdish R 24111 Ave_ Sidewalk 2005 Pro)ect 1 Bridging the Valley - Park Rd. 2 Pines)Mansfiield 3 Barker Road' 4 Appleway Road 5 Park Road 6 Barker Road Bridge' 7 32nd Avenue 2006 Protect 1 Bridging the Valley - Park Rd. 1�arker Road' 3 AppLeway Road 4 Barker Road 5 Evergreen Road 6 Park Road 7 32nd Avenue 8 Sullivan Rimed West Bridge 9 BarkerRoaABrd.ge' 10 FLOra RoedISR290 Minor Intersection Improvements 11 Barker RoadISR290 Minor Intersection Improvements 207 _ Project _ 1 Bridging the Valley - Park Rd. 2 Appleway Road 3 Barker Road Evergreen Road 5 Park Road 6 32nd Avenue 7 Sullivan Road West Bridge 6 Barker Road 9 Mara Road 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2006 Project Barker Road Evergreen Road Sullivan Road West Bridge Barker Road Valley Couple; - Protect 3 VaIley Couplet - ProjeCE 2 Flora Road Bowdish Road 2009 Project r+tata- oasis buroncl on adaprad , I , IP_ Total r1lamir amounra may have ir revised &sod nu 2X1€3 acli,Aty. � 1 Barker Road 2 Valley Couplet - Project 3 3 Valley Couplet - Projecl 2 4 Flora Road 5 Bowdish Road 6 •Valley Couplet - Proled 4 7 Sullivan Road 8 Euclid Road /Flora Load City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Adopted Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2004 -2009 Pines $ Indiana Boone at Spokane River Bowdish & 24111 Ave. From Indiana Avenue Wilbur Pines 8 Indiana Boone Tshi r ey Road Broadway Me. at Spokane River SR 27 From Indiana Avenue Boone Tshlrley Road Spokane River 32nd Ave. Broadway Ave. SR 27 at Spokane River al $pokane River From Indiana Avenue Tshirley Road Spokane River 32nd Ave. Broadway Ave SR 27 at Spokane River 8th Ave. Sprague Ave From Spokane River 32nd Ave. al Spokane River 8111 Ave. Evergreen Rd. University Rd. Sprague Ave, 32nt1 Ave, From 8th Ave. Evergreen Rd. University Rd. Sprague Ave. 32nd Ave. Sullivan Rd. Euclid Ave. Flom Rd. Grant funds appal oved -- Additional grant funds required To SR 27 2nd Avenue 2nd Avenue Pines Road West Bound Ramps Spokane River Br. #5503 To Montgomery Ave. Hodges Road SR 290 1611 Ave. Indiana Ave. Seat Road #4511-S Broadway Ave. 11 siarl Ave. To SR 290 16th Ave. 04511-S • Broadway Ave_ Sullivan Rd. Evergreen Rd. Mission Ave. 9th Ave. Broadway Ave. Sullivan Rd_ Evergreen Rd. Mission Ave. 81h Ave. Apploway Rd, Wellesley Ave. Barker Rd. Primary Source STP(1,11 AIP AIP TPP AIP 6R P5MP To Primary Source 1ulontgomcry Ave. Other State Pines Road TPP West Bound Ramps Spokane River Br. AIP Hodges Road STP (U} Indiana Ave. Al #5503 BR Des! Road STP(U) Primary Source Ogre r State STP(U) STP(U) AIP AIP STP(U) BR STP(U) TPP Primaz Source STP (U} Al P BR STP(U). STP(U) TPP STP(U) Al P City Amount 5 250.000 5 156,000 $ 156,000 $ 55,000 5 100,000 $ 141,000 $ 51 000 5 929,000 Amount 5 1,932.000 $ 782,000 $ 831,000 $ 675,000 $ $02,0OD $ 702,000 S 197,000 5 5,621,000 Amount $ 115,000 $ 2,450,000 $ - $ 2,459,000 $ 221,000 5 993,000 5 60,000 $ 438,000 5 73,000 $ 365,000 $ 730,000 5 3,649,000 5 29,000 $ 213,000 5 1,229,000 510,567,000 To Primary Source Amount Montgomery Ave. _ Other State 6 331,000 5 7,046,000 Spokane River Br. AIP $ 279,000 $ 1,059,000 Hodges Road STP(U) 5 254,000 5 1,876,000 SR 290 STP(U} S 55,000 $ 418,000 16th Ave. AIP $ 190,000 5 500,000 Indiana Ave. AIP 5 178,000 5 890,000 Best ✓toad STP(U) S 60,000 6 592,000 #4511 -S BR $ 67,000 $ 435.000 45503 BR 5 730,000 5 3,649,000 Other Slate S 2,000 5 13,000 Other Slate $ 3 000 S 12,000 52,'100.000 816,490,000 Amount $ 249,000 5 5,296,000 5 380,000 5 2,813,000 $ 76,000 $ 562,000 5 220,000 5 1,120,000 5 292,0DD $ 1,460,040 $ 90,000 5 1657.000 $ 757,000 $ 3,763,000 5 228,000 $ 517,000 5 27 ODD $ 200,000 5 2,319,000 516.418,000 Amount $ 386,000 5 2,858,000 5 - $ 680,000 $ 757,000 $ 3,783,000 5 142,000 $ 1,050,0°0 5 90,000 5 274,000 $ 50,000 $ 622,000 $ 108,000 5 600,400 5 132,000 $ 559,000 5 1,655 200 511.126.000 7a Prlmaiy Source Amount STP(U) 5 271,000 $ 2,003,000 STP(U) 5 148,000 $ 1,095,000 TPP 5 50,004 $ 822,000 STP(U) $ 263,000 $ 1,500,000 AIP 5 210,000 $ 1,048,000 STP(0) 5 54,000 $ 404,000 City 5 93,000 $ 93,000 City $ 50 000 $ 50.000 $ 1,079,000_ _5 7 015 000 2005 Project 1 Barker Read 2 Barker Road Bridge 3 Pines/Mansfield 4 Appleway Road 5 Sullivan Road North Ext. 6 8111 Avenue 7 Broadway Ave. Reikab. 8 Wellesley Ave, Rehab. 9 Park. Road Rehab, 10 Disiuran Mica Road Rehab. 2006 Project 1 Barker Road 2 Barker Road Bridge 3 Pirtesirianslield 4 8th Avenue 5 SulOvan Road Nash Ext. 6 Appleeray Road 7 Valley Couplet - Project 2 8 Evergreen Road 9 Brooginy the Ve5ey - Pad: Rd 10 Barker Road From Boone at Spnkane River Wilbur Havana Forker & Progress Tshirley Road University Rd 32nd Ave. Indiana Avenue Spokane River al Spokane River 12 Flora Road @ 5R290 Minor Intersection Improvements 11 Sullivan Road West Bridge 44511 -S 2007 Project 1 Barker Road Bridge 2 6th Avenue_ 3 Sullivan Road North Ext. 4 Applevray Road 5 Valley Couplet - Prc ect 2 6 Evergreen Road 7 Bridging the Valley - Park Rd. 8 Barker Road 0 Sullivan Road West Bridge 10 Barker Road 11 Flora Road 2008 Pro)eci 1 Barker Road Bridge 2 Sullivan Road North Ext. 3 Valley Couplet - Project 2 4 Evergreen Road 5 Bridging the Valey • Per Rd. 6 Barker Road 7 SuII)van Road West Bridge 8 Barker Road 9 Veltey Couplet • Project 3 10 Flom Road 11 Bcmt1 sh Road 2009 Project 1 Valley Couplet - Project 2 2 Barker Road 3 Valley Couplet - Project 3 4 Flora Road 5 Bowdish Road 6 Valley Couplet - Project 4 Part: Rca i 8 Euclid Road / Flora Road -32nd ;t,•enue 2010 Project 1 Valley Couplet - Project 3 2 Bowdish Road 3 Park Road 4 Euclid Read / Flora Road 5 32nd Avenue 6 Ferret Avenue 7 Valley Couplet - Project 4 8 Sullivan Road City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works DRAFT Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2005 -2010 From Boone at Spokane River Wilbur Pines & Indiana Tshirtey Road Forker & Progress Havana Bales Rd. Sunnyvale Rd Sprague Ave. I st Ave. From at Spokane River Havana Forker a Progress Tshirley Road University Rd. 32nd Ave. Indiana Avenue Spokane River al Spokane River 8th Ave. Sprague Ave, From To Primary Source at Spokane River #5503 BR $ - Forker a Progress Wel3asleyAve. TPP S 18,000 University Rd, Evergreen Rd. TPP 5 993,000 32nd Ave. 16th Ave. AIP $ . Indiana Avenue 1 c'nlgornery Ave Other Fed. $ - Spokane River Euclid Ave. STP(U) $ 129,000 at Spokane River #4511•S BR S - Oth Ave. Broadway Ave. STP(U) S 142,000 Evergreen Rtl. Sullivan Rd. STP(U) $ 80,000 Sprague Ave. Mission Ave. STP(U) $ 108,000 32nd Ave. 8th Ave. AIP $ 132,000 5 1.602,000 From To University Rd. Evergreen Rd. 81h Ave. Broadway Ave. Evergreen Rd. Sullivan Rd. Sprague Ave. Mission Ave. 32nd Ave. 61h Ave. Sullivan Rd. Appleway Rd. B*oaae:a; Ave In:iara Ave. Flora to Barker Euclid to Euclid SF:7 $e51 Rd From Funded Proi:acis Model Pro efts Rescheajiad Proiecfia To Primary Source Spokane River Br. AIP 45503 BR Pines Road TPP West Bound Ramps Hodges Road STP(U) Wellesley Ave. Park Road Sullivan Rd Flora Rd. Broadway Ave, Sprague Ave, To Spokane River 61. 45503 Pines Road Park Road Wellesley Ave, Hodges Road Evergreen Rd. 16th Ave. Montgomery Ave. Euclid Ave. Evergreen Rd. Sullivan Rd. 32nd Ave, 8111 Ave. Broadway Ave. Indiana Ave, Flora to Barker Euclid to Euclid SR27 Best Rd. Ponderosa Dr. Dlshman Mica Rd. Sullivan Rd, Applaway Rd. Euclid Ave. Wellesley Ave. TPP STP {U) STP (U) sTP(u) STP(U) STP(U) Primary Source AIP BR TPP STP(U) TPP STP(U) TPP AIP Outer State STP(U) BR Other State To Primary Source 45503 Part: Road Wellesley Ave. Hodges Road Eve green Rd 16th Ave. Montgomery Ave. Euclid Ave. #4511 -S Broadway Ave. Mission Ave. BR STP(U) TPP STP(U) TPP AIP Other Fed. STP(U) BR STP(U) STP(U) Primary Source TPP STP(U) STP(U) STP(U) AIP STP {U) P TPP ST Pi Ur To Primary Source STP(U) Al? AIP TPP STP(U) City STP(U) City City Amni Total Project $ 215,000 5 1.114,000 $ $ 234,000 5 28.000 S 1,777,000 8 30,000 S 218,000 5 5,000 $ 327.000 $ 153,000 $ 1,136.000 $ 110,000 $ 812,000 $ 47,000 $ 344,000 $ 22,000 $ 184,000 $ 7,000 5 41,000 5 617,000 5 6,165,000 Amount 5 253,000 $ 1,394,000 $ $ 234,000 $ $ 1,506,000 $ 245,000 $ 1,820,000 $ 1,000 5 96,000 3 180,000 $ 1,331,000 $ 50.000 5 822.000 5 100,000 $ 500,000 $ 2.450 000 $ 18,000 $ 140,000 $ $ 435,000 $ 2,000 $ 13,000 $ 849,000 $10,741,000 Amount $ - $ 3,849,000 $ 245.000 5 1,820,000 $ 36.000 5 2.418,000 $ 223,000 $ 1,650,000 5 50.000 5 822 000 $ 400,000 S 1,120,000 $ $ 7,047,000 $ 25.000 $ 188,000 $ $ 3,783,000 S 70,000 $ 517,000 5 27,000 5 200,000 $ 1,076,000 523,214,000 $ 622,000 $ 271,000 5 148,000 S 203,000 $ 210,000 $ 54,000 8 - :.00.3 $ 50,000 5 `0000 $ 1.660,000 $ 261,000 5 256,000 3 178,000 $ 550,000 $ 80,00D $ 710,000 $ 51,000 S 93,000 S 2,179,000 Amount $ 3,649,000 5 1,189,000 8 4,227,000 $ 880,000 5 5 296.000 $ 959,000 5 3,783,000 8 1,050,000 $ 274,000 $ 800,000 $ 659,000 522, 7 68,000 Amount $ 2,505,000 $ 2,003,000 5 1,095,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 1,048,000 5 404,000 $ 50,000 5 ..17, .00 $ 9,163.000 Amount $ 1,932,000 S 1,277,000 S 890,000 $ 550,000 $ 592,000 S 7110,000 S 375,000 $ 93,000 $ 6,419,000 6 /1/2004 1:05 PM DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE - "DNS" WAC 197 -11 -970 and Section 11. 10.230(3) SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The 2005 — 2010 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) arid 2005 Annual construction Program identifies road projects required to accommodate current and future public transportation needs in the City of Spokane Valley. The TIP is a guide for the planning and implementation of road construction work. The Annual Construction Program is a listing of those projects proposed for construction during 2005. Both programs contain capital improvement projects on existing facilities. Both programs are consistent with the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan and Regional Transportation Plan, as adopted by the City of Spokane Valley. The TIP is updated annually for adoption by the Spokane Valley City Council. HEARI1i TG DATE AND TIME: June 22, 2004 at 5:00 P.M. APPLICANT: City of Spokane Valley LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: The 2005 — 2010 Transportation Improvement Program and 2005 Annual Construction Program contains projects for the transportation system within the boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley. LEAD AGENCY: City of Spokane Valley Public Works .Department DETERMINATION: The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197 -1 1- 340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for at least 14 days from the date issued (below). Comments regarding this DNS must be submitted no later than 5:00 p.m., June 18, 2004, if they are intended to alter the DNS. All comments should be sent to the contact person listed below. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: 13y: Neil Kersten, AIA, Public Works Director Attention: Steve M. Worley, P.E., Senior Engineer (CLP) City of Spokane Valley Public Works Department 1 1707 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509) 921 -1000 DATE ISSUED: June 4.2004 SIGNATURE: COMMEl\rTS REGARDING F`i JVRONME TAL CONCERNS ARE WEIR OME AT THE 1- 1GARING. APPEAL OF THIS DETERMINATION, after it becomes final, may be made to the City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department, Spokane Valley, WA 99206. The appeal deadline is fourteen (14) calendar days after issuance of this determination. This appeal must be written and the appellant should be prepared to make specific factual objections. This DNS was mailed to: 1. WA State Department of Ecology (Olympia) 2. City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department 3. Spokane County Division of Utilities; Jim Red 4. Spokane Regional Health District; Steve Holderby S. Washington State Department of Transportation; Mark Rohwer 6. Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 1 7. Water Districts () E NV1 R I i CH ECKLI S SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE SECTION 1 1 . 1 0.230[ 1 ] Updated November 19, 2002 (WAC 197 -11 -985) Section 11.10.230(5) SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE Environmental Checklist Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SE'T'A) chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of a.n EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write °do not know" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about goverrunental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (Part D). For nonproject actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 2005 - 2010 Transportation Improvement Program, 2005 Annual Construction Program 2. Name of applicant: City of Spokane Valley 3. Address and phone number of applicant or contact person: Attn: Steve M. Worley, P.E. , Senior Engineer (CIP), City of Spokane Valley Public Works Department, 11707 E. Sprague Ave., Spokane Valley, Washington 99206, 509 -921 -1000 4. Date checklist prepared: June 1, 2004 PAGE 2 OF 13 (WAC 197 -11 -985) Section 11.10.230(5) SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE 5. Agency requesting checklist City of Spokane Valley, Washington 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Projects for 2005 through 2010 7. a. 17o you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain . Yes. The 2005 - 2010 Transportation Plan is the initial implementation of all the project environmental processes and more specific data will be provided on a project -by- project basis. b. Do you own or have options on land nearby or adjacent to this proposal? If yes, explain. Yes. Most projects lie within and adjacent to city owned right -of -way. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to his proposal. Several projects will have Environmental Assessments or Environmental Impact Statements prepared during project development. Existing environmental documents are on file with either the City of Spokane Valley, Public Works Department, 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, Washington or Spokane County Public Works Department, Division of Engineering and Roads at 1026 W. Broadway Avenue in Spokane, Washington. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. a) City of Spokane Valley Council Resolution b) Interagency agreements where applicable 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. The 2005 - 2010 Transportation Plan is a planning document used to schedule projects for maintaining and expanding the City's transportation infrastructure. This document schedules projects for a six -year period and is updated annually and provides the necessary documentation to submit applications to obtain grant funds and expend dollars on transportation related projects. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information to a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit application related to this checklist. The proposal consists of many projects within the boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley, including some projects which are to be coordinated with the Spokane County and the Washington State Department of Transportation. PAGE 3 OF 13 (WAC 197 -11 -985) Section 11.10.230(5) SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE 13. Does the proposed action lie within the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA)? The General Sewer Service Area? The Priority Sewer Service Area? The City of Spokane? (See: Spokane County's ASA Overlay Zone Atlas for boundaries.) The proposal includes projects that are within one or more of the listed areas. 14. The following questions supplement Part A. 1. Earth a. Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA) / Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA) (1) Describe any systems, other than those designed for the disposal of sanitary waste, installed for the purpose of discharging fluids below the ground surface (includes systems such as those for the disposal of stormwater or drainage from floor drains). Describe the type of system, the amount of material to be disposed of through the system and the types of material likely to be disposed of (including materials which may enter the system inadvertently through spills or as a result of firefighting activities). Disposal of new stormwater runoff (drainage) will be accomplished through the use of "208" swales and drywells and oil /water separators where allowed by the regulating authority. Some road improvements may utilize existing drywells. The use of existing drywells will be reviewed on a project -by- project basis. (2) Will any chemicals (especially organic solvents or petroleum fuels) be stored in aboveground or u.nderground storage tanks? If so, what types and quantities of material will be stored? ( Non - project, does not apply What protective measures will be taken to insure that leaks or spills of any chemicals stored or used on site will not be allowed to percolate to groundwater? This includes measures to keep chemicals out of disposal systems. Project specifications will follow local guidelines to insure that protective measures are taken. (4) Will any chemicals be stored, handled or used on the site in a location where a spill or leak will drain to surface or groundwater or to a stormwater disposal system discharging to surface or groundwater? Project specifications will follow local guidelines to insure protective measures are taken. b. Stormwater (1) What are the depths on the site to groundwater and to bedrock (if known)? Non - project, does not apply (2) Will stormwater be discharged into the ground? If so, describe any potential impacts? Non - project, does not apply TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT B. ENV'IRON'MENTAL ELEMENTS PAGE4OF 13 Evaluation for Agency Us, Only (WAC 197 - - 985) Section 11.10.230(5) 2. Air SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE a. General description of the site (circle one): flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountains, other: The geographic area includes all of the listed types of terrain. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Non - project, does not apply c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Non- project, does not apply d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Non - project, does not apply e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill: Non - project, does not apply f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Non - project, does not apply g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Non - project, does not apply h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion or other impacts to the earth, if any: Non project, does not apply a. What type of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial, wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Non - project, does not apply b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that: may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Non - project, does not apply c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Non - project, does not apply 3. Water a. SURFACE: (1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Several surface water bodies are located within the City of Spokane Valley. The projects listed in the 2005 - 2010 Transportation Improvement Program may be PAGE 5 OF 13 Evaluation for Agency Use Only (WAC 197 -11 -985) Section 11.10.230(5) SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE within the immediate vicinity of one or more of these surface water bodies. (2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the . described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes. Some projects are adjacent to and may cross the surface water bodies within the City of Spokane Valley. (3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from the surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Non - project, does not apply (4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give • general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Potential diversions may occur during bridge construction projects. Generally, diversions will be temporary for the placement of bridge footings and piers. (5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Certain areas of the City of Spokane Valley have been designated as 100 -year flood plains. (6) Does the proposal involve any discharge of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No discharges are anticipated. b. GROUND: (1) Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Non project, does not apply (2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sanitary waste treatment facility. Describe the general size of the system, the number of houses to be served (if applicable) or the number of persons the system(s) are expected to serve. Non - project, does not apply c. WATER RUNOFF (INCLUDING STORMWATER): (1) Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and method of collection and disposal if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Within the Aquifer Sensitive Area surface water runoff will be handled in accordance with the 208 disposal procedures, where feasible. See 14.a(1)above. PAGE 6 OF 13 Evaluation for Agency Use Only for Agency Use • Only (WAC 197 -11 -985) Section 11.10.230(5) 4. Plants S. Animals SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Project specifications will follow local guidelines to insure protective measures are taken. d. PROPOSED MEASURES to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any. Within the Aquifer Sensitive Area, surface water runoff will be handled in accordance with the 208 disposal procedures, where feasible. a. Check or circle type of vegetation found on the site: Deciduous tree: alder, rnaple, aspen, other. Evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other. Shrubs Grass Pasture Crop or grain \Vet soil plants, cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other. Water plants: water Iilly, eelgr-ass, milfoil, other. Other types of vegetation. This proposal includes projects that may contain one or more of the above listed types of vegetation. b. What kind a.nd amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Non - project, does not apply c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Non- project, however, lists will be requested on a project - by- project basis. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or • enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Non- project does not apply a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: other: This proposal includes projects where one or more of the above listed animals may be on or near the project location. PAGE 7 OF 13 Evaluation for Agency Use Only (WAC 197 -11 -985) Section 11.10.230(5) SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Non- project, however, .lists will be requested on a project -by- project basis. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. This proposal includes projects throughout the City of Spokane Valley where migration routes may exist. Specific routes will be addressed on a project -by- project basis. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Non - project, does not apply 6. Energy and natural resources a. What kinds or energy (electric, natural gas, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity may be used on some projects once the infrastructure is complete to provide street lighting and traffic signal operation. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. In general, the individual transportation projects should not affect the potential use of solar energy. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Recycling of existing asphalt, which may be removed during same projects, is utilized where possible. Some projects encourage the use of alternative transportation by the inclusion of bike lanes, sidewalks, and trails for bikes /walkers and transit related projects are included. 7. Environmental health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Non - project, does not apply (1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Non - project, does not apply (2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Some projects encourage the use of alternative transportation by the inclusion of bike lanes, sidewalks, PAGE 8 OF 13 Evaluation for Agency Use Only C) (WAC 197 -11 -985) Section 11.10.230(5) b. NOISE: SPOKANE ENV CRONATENTAL ORDINANCE trails for bikes /walkers and transit related projects are included. (1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Non - project, does not apply (2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short -term or a long -term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise wou.id come from the site. Most projects will improve congestion, which will reduce carbon monoxide (CO) emissions. (3) Proposed measure to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Follow local noise ordinances. 8. Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Non - project, does not apply b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Non - project, does not apply c. Describe any structures on the site. Non - project, does not apply d. Will any strucwres he demolished? If soo, which? Non - project, does not apply e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Non project, does not apply f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Current comprehensive plan designations vary throughout the project locations. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Non - project, does not apply h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area? If so, specify. Any effects to environmentally sensitive areas will be addressed in the individual project environmental documents. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Non- project, does not apply PAGE 9 OF 13 Evaluation for • Agency Use Only SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE (WAC 197 -11 -985) Section 11.10.230(5) j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Non - project, does not apply k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Non - project, does not apply Evaluation for I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and Agency Use projected land uses and plans, if any: Only Non - project, does not apply 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle or low- income housing. The proposed projects do not include increasing housing. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high -, middle- or low- income housing. Non- project, does not apply c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Non - project, does not apply 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Non - project, does not apply b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Non - project, does not apply c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Non - project, does not apply 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Non - project, does not apply b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Non - project, does not apply c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Off -site sources of light usually do not affect transportation projects. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control Light and glare impacts, if any: _ Non - project, does not apply 12. Recreation PAGE 10 OF 13 Evaluation for Agency Use Only CTh C ) (VVAC 197-11-985) Section 11.10.230(5) 13. Historic and cultural preservation SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the imrnediate vicinity? Non project, does not apply b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. Non - project, does not apply c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Non - project, does not apply a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. Any affects to historical or culturally sensitive areas will be addressed in the individual project environmental documents. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic archaeological, scientific or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Non - project, does not apply c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Project impacts will be avoided or mitigated where possible during project design. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. All projects in the 2005 - 2010 Transportation Improvement Program are related to public roadways and are part of the local transportation infrastructure. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. The Spokane Transit Authority maintains a number of routes on many of the roads contained in the proposal. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? 1-iow many would the project eliminate? The proposal contains improvements to roadways where parking may or may not be allowed along the roadway. The amoun of parking created or deleted is project specific. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). All proposed projects in the 2005 - 2010 Transportation Improvement Program are related to the improvement and /or development of new and existing roads and bridges. PACs 1 1 OF 13 Evaluation for Agency Use Only (WAC 197 -11 -985) Section 11.10.230(5) e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Some of the projects will occur in the immediate vicinity of water, in particular the bridge projects. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak would occur. Does not apply. (Note: to assist. in review and if knoum indicate vehicle trips during PM peak, AM Peak and Weekday (24 hours).) g. 15. Public services SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: _ Non - project, does not apply. a. Would the project result m an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. All transportation projects will require maintenance by the public agency. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: The proposed transportation improvement program will help reduce impacts through congestion relief and safety improvements. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. All of the above utilities are generally located within the City of Spokane Valley. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Coordination with all utilities takes place during the adoption of the six -year program and during design of individual projects to minimize the disruption of traffic and to maximize the cost savings. C. SIGNATURE PAGE 12 OF 13 Evaluation for Agency Use Only 1, the undersigned, swear under penalty of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, the agency must withdraw any determination of Nonsignificance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist. (WAC 197 -11 -985) Section 11.10.230(5) Date: June 1, 2004 Signature: Please Print or Type: Proponent: City of Spokane Valley Address: 11707 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 Phone: 509 -921 -1000 Person completing form (if different from proponent): Steve M. Worley, P.E. Address: Same as above Phone: 509 -688 -0191 SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE FOR STAFF USE ONLY Staff member(s) reviewing checklist Based on this staff review of the environmental checklist and other pertinent information, the staff concludes that: A. there are no probable significant adverse impacts and recommends a Determination of Nonsignificance. B. probable significant adverse environmental impacts do exist for the current proposal and recommends a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance with conditions. C. there are probable significant adverse environmental impacts and recommends a Determination of Significance. PAGE 13 OF 13 Spokane jUalley City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Draft 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2005 Annual Construction Program Functional Classification: Rural: 7 Major Collector 8 Minor Collector 9 Access Urban: 14 Principal 16 Minor 17 Collector 19 Access Program item Number: A number assigned for tracking purposes Work Method: C- Indicates work is to be done by contract D- Indicates work to be done by City forces. N- Indicates a non - capital project. Environmental: Significant Impacts under SEPA anticipated I-Insignificant Environmental Impact anticipated Work Types: New construction Relocation Reconstruction Major Widening Minor Widening Other Enhancements New Bridge Const Bridge Replacement Bridge Rehabilitation Minor Bridge Rehab Safety/Traffic Oper/TSM Environmentally Related 01 02 03 04 05 06 08 09 10 11 12 13 GLOSSAE' 413 ABBREVIATIONS Bridge Program Special Transit Capital Project Transit Operational Project Transit Planning Transit traininglAdmin Non - Capital Improve. Non Motor Vehicle CO: Box is checked if the project lies within the Carbon Monoxide non- attainment area Fund Status: S- Project is subject to funding selection P- Project is listed for planning purposes only Util Code: Utilities that would be impacted by the project: C Cable TV G Gas 0 Other P Power S Sewer T Telephone W Water Funding Sources: Federal assistance: These funds are authorized under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21" Century (TEA - 21) and are administered by the Federal Highway Administration through the Washington State Department of Transportation and the Metropolitan Planning Organization (SRTC), BR- Bridge replacement projects CMAQ- Congestion Management and Air Quality Other Fed- Other federal funds. ill 14 21 22 23 24 31 32 STP- Surface Transportation Program. Individual funds are designated by the letters in parenthesis that follow the initials "STP': (U) Urban improvements (R) Rural improvements (C) Competitive funding (E) Enhancement improvement (S) Safety improvements Stato assistance: TPP, AIP, and PSMP are administered by the Transportation Improvement Board. RAP and CAPP are administered by the County Road Administration Board TIP- Transportation Partnership Program �I - Arterial Improvement Program PSMP: Pedestrian Safety Mobdity Program RAP- Rural Arterial Program CAPP- County Arterial Preservation Program Other State- Other state funds Local funding: LID Bonds are sold to finance the construction of local roads. This funding is administered by Spokane County. Private funds are paid by private companies or individuals for various reasons, usually for commercial reasons. ,LID Bonds- Road Improvement District funding from private properly owners. Private- Funds from other private sources. SUMMARY 2005 ANIn STREET CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM The CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM is responsitso tor the improvement of the City Street System. ANNUAL and SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS are prepared and updated each year. Priority programming is used to select projects for improvement Funds for the 2005 ANNUAL STREET CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM coma from the (elbowing sources: Source 1 Pines/Mansfield Amount (1000's) $616 $3,153 $2,175 5246 City Federal State Other Total Construction Project $6,190 2005 Major Construction Project Summary From To Wilbur Road Pines & Indiana Pines Road West bound on ramp to 190 Note: For each CITY dollar spent, a total of 510.0 of CONSTRUCTION will be accomplished. Primary Source Amount TPP 51,852,000 2 Sullivan Road North Extension (Bigelow Gulch) Forker Road & Progress 1 Wellesley Road TPP 5327,000 3 Barker Rd Reconstruct - Boone to Spokane Riv Boone Spokane River Bridge A1P $1,114,000 4 Appleway Road Tschirley Road Hodges Road STP(U) $216,000 5 8th Avenue Reconstruction Havana Street Park Road STP(U) 51,138,000 6 Broadway Avenue Rehabilitation Bates Road Sulriven Road STP(U) 5812,000 7 Wellesley Avenue Rehab!litellen Sunnyvafe Road Flora Road STP(U) $344,000 8 Park Road Rehabilitation Sprague Avenue Broadway Avenue STP(U) 516 4,000 9 Barker Road Bridge @ Spokane River #5503 BR $234,00D SUMMARY 2006 ANN' 1_ STREET CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM The CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM is responsible tor the improvement of the Gay Street System. J 'AL and SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS are prepared and updated each year. Priority programming is used to soled projects :or improvement Funds for the 2006 ANNUAL STREET CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM came from tho following sources: Souoo Amount (1000 city $936 Federal 56,415 Slate $2,965 Other $411 Total Construction $10,727 2006 Major Construction Project Summary Note: For each CITY dollar spent, a total of 511.4 of CONSTRUCTION will be accomplished. Project From To Primary Source Amount 1 Pines/Mansfield Wilbur Road Pines Road TPP 51,508.000 Pines & Indiana West bound on ramp to 190 2 Bridging the Valley- Park Road/ BNSF Grade Se Indiana Avenue Montgomery Ave. Other Fed $2,450,000 3 8th Avenue Reconstruction Novenas Street Park Road STP(U) 51.820,000 4 Appleway Road Tschirloy Road Hodges Road STP(U) 51.331.000 5 Evergreen Road 32nd Avenue 161h Avenue AIP 5500.000 6 Barker Rd Reconstruct - Boone to Spokane Riv Boone Spokane River Bridge AIP 51,394,000 7 Valley Couplet - Pro(ec1 2 University Rd Evergreen Rd TPP 5822,000 University Rd Evergreen Rd 8 Barker Road Bridge ® Spokane River #5503 OR 5234.000 9 Sullivan Road West Bridge @ Spokane River 94511 -S BR 5435.000 SUMMARY 2007 AN (L STREET CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM The CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM is r=ponsibto for the improvement of the City Street System, UAL and SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS are prepared and upctatwd each year. Priority programming Is used to select projec s for improvement Funds for the 2007 ANNUAL STREET CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM come from iho tolbwi g sources: Source City Federal State Other Total Construction $22,848 Project Amount (1000's) $1,833 $17,487 $3,176 0352 2007 Major Construction Project Summary Note: For each CITY dollar spent, a total of $12.4 of CONSTRUCTION will be accomplished. From To Primary Source Amount 1 Sullivan Road North Extension (Bigelow Gulch) Porker Road & Progress I Wellesley Road TPP $2,418,000 2 Bridging the Valley- Park Road/ BNSF Grade Se Indiana Avenue Montgomery Ave. Other Fed $7,047.000 3 81h Avenue Reconstruction Havana Street Park Road STP(U) $1,820,000 4 Valley Couplet - Project 2 University Rd Evergreen Rd TPP $822,000 University Rd Evergreen Rd 5 Appleway Road Tschirley Rood Hodges Road STP(U) $1,650,000 6 Barker Road - Spokane River to Euclid Avenue Spokane River Euclid Avenue STP(U) 0188,000 7 Evergreen Road 32nd Avenue 16th Avenue AIP 01,120,000 8 Barker Road - 81h to Broadway Avenue 8th Avenue Broadway Avenue STP(U) 5517,000 9 Flora Road Sprague Av Mission Av TPP 5200,000 10 Barker Road Bridge @ Spokane River #5503 BR $3,649.000 11 Sullivan Road West Bridge SUMMARY 2007 AN•1I.I, °,t_ STREET CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM Spokane River #4511 -S BR 53,783,000 SUMMARY 2008 AN[-"IL STREET CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM The CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM is responsible for the improrement of the City Stroud Systcrc r, AWL and SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS are prepared and updated each year. Priority programming is used to select projects for improvement. Funds for the 2008 ANNUAL STREET CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM count from tho following sources: Source Amount (1000's) City $2,359 Federal $14,501 State $5,461 Other $265 Total Construclion $22,586 Project 2008 Major Construction Project Summary Note: For each CITY dollar spent, a total of $9.57 of CONSTRUCTION will be accomplished. From To Primary Souroe Amount 1 Valley Couplel - Project 2 University Rd Evergreen Rd TPP $4,227,000 University Rd Evergreen Rd 2 Sullivan Road North Extension (Bigelow Gulch) Forker Road 8 Progress I Wellesley Road TPP $1,189,000 3 Evergreen Road 32nd Avenue 16th Avenue AIP $880,000 4 Barker Road - 8th to Broodw•ay Avenue 8th Avenue Broadway Avenue STP(U) $1.050,000 5 Barker Road - Spokane River to Euclid Avenue Spokane River Euclid Avenue STP(U) $959,000 6 Valley Couplet - Project 3 Evergreen Road Sullivan Road STP(U) $274.000 7 Flora Road Sprague Av Mission Av TPP 5800,000 8 Bridging the Valley Park Road/ BNSF Grade Se Indiana Avenue Montgomery Ave. Other Fed $5,296,000 9 Bowdtsh Road 32nd Avenue 8th Avenue AIP $559,000 10 Sullivan Road West Bridge Q Spokane River #4511 -S BR 53,783,000 11 Barker Road Bridge SUMMARY 2008 ANtp- L STREET CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM To Spokane River , #5503 BR $3,649.000 SUMMARY 2009 ANI STREET CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM The CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM Is responsible !of the improvement of the City Strcct System. ANNUAL and SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS are prepared and updated each year. Priority programming c used to select projects for improvement. Funds for the 2000 ANNUAL STREET CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM Dome from the lolloktrg sources: Source City Federal Stoic Other Total Construction Amount (1000'5) $1,640 5-3,780 $3,763 $0 $9,183 2009 Major Construction Project Summary Note: For each CITY dollar spent, a total of 55.60 of CONSTRUCTION will be accomplished. To Primary Source Amount Sullivan Road Applcway Road STP(U) $404,000 From Project 1 Valley Couplet- Project 4 2 Valley Couplet - Project 2 University Rd Evergreen Rd TPP $2,505,000 Unlvetsity Rd Evergreen Rd 3 Park Road Broadway Av Indiana Av AIP $365,000 4 Valley Couplet - Project 3 Evergreen Road Sullivan Road STP(U) SI.095,000 5 Flora Road Sprague Av Mission Av TPP 51.500.000 6 32nd Avenue SR 27 Best Road STP(U) $213,000 7 Bowdish Road 32nd Avenue 8th Avenue AIP $1,048,000 8 Barker Road - 8th to Broadway Avenuo 801 Avenue Broadway Avenue STP(U) S2,003,000 Source City Federal State Other Total Construction Project SUMMARY 2010 ANNUAL STREET CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM The CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM is resportslbte for tho inprovemont of the Cily Street System. rl and SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS aro prepaced orrd updated each year. Priority progrnvnmfng is used to select paojoeia,.. ",,quovernerd. Funds for the 2010 ANNUAL STREET CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM come from tho following sources Amount (1000's) $2,179 $2,507 $1,733 $0 $6,419 2010 Major Construction Project Summary 1 Valley Couplet- Protect 4 Sullivan Road Appsewoy Rood 2 Valley Couplet - Protect 3 Evergreen Road Sullivan Road 3 Ferrel Avenue Ponderosa Drive Dishman Mica Road 4 Euclid Rd/ Flora Rd Flora Road Barker Road Euclid Road Euclid Rood 5 Park Rood Broadway Av Indiana Av 6 Bowdish Road 32nd Avenue 8th Avenue 7 32nd Avenue SR 27 Best Road Note: For each CITY dollar spent, a total of $2.95 of CONSTRUCTION will be accomplished. From To Primary Source Amount STP(U) STPN) City City AIP AIP STP(U) $375,000 $1.932,000 5710,000 5550.000 5890,000 51,277,000 $592,000 Project Name Road names Program Fune Work Srorpo Item Class Status Street Improvements 1 Ptnos&Mansfleld I 03 0 P 09 Mansfield Ave Wilbur Road Peres Road 02964 0.00 14 Pines Rd Pines & Indiana West bound on ramp 0.00 This project will rcconfguro the WB ramps of 1.90 at SR27. It will also widen and reconstruct Mansfield Avo. from Wilbur Rd. to SR27 to a 3-tano roadway otth curb. gutter Prelim. Engineering, Right-of-Way, Construction 2 Sullivan Road North Extension (Blgciow Gulch) 08 Bigelow Gulch Road Porker Road & Progress 1'Jelcslley Road 03765 0.91 Rewoonstnrct arid widen tho Sull Road erdension nodh etso known as Bigelow Gulch Road to a 4-line roadway with 8 -foot shoulders and a 12 -foot two way left turn lane. Prelim. Engineering, Right-0f-Way 3 Barker Rd Reconstruct - Boone to Spoken River From 14 Barker Road Boone Spokane River Brklg 00230 0.59 Reoonstnrd to a four -lane curbed arterial with center turn tone_ Right•ot•Way, Construction City of Sri, ire Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2005 Annual Construction Program Dater• in thousands Printed: 5282004 1 C C3y C 1PP C STP(U) 499 C Other Sta C Other Envir Work C Fund Work UtiICies Fed State Other City To Road rk Proj 8 I..en(mt) Typo 0 Stat Meth Fund Source Funds Funds Funds Funrfo S 03 J P TGP I 03 U P C Gay C AIP C Other Hearing Date: Env. Assess. Date 1,050 28 Resolution No. P,E R.W. Coast Total 27 15 12 0 27 05 260 706 1,060 0 0 499 498 25 3 0 28 238 0 0 238 238 135 275 1,442 1,852 C C3y 5 4 1 0 5 C County 44 6 0 50 C TPP 196 173 23 0 195 C STP(U) 76 67 9 0 76 288 39 0 327 215 0 130 85 214 891 0 520 37) 691 6 0 0 8 8 0 650 404 1,114 Project Marne Road Names Program Func Work Scope Item Class Status 4 Appi wvay Road 14 Appla ay Road Rocortstntd to a five -lane urban arterial Prelim. Engineering, Right- o1-Way 5 8th Avenue Reconstruction City of Si ;tie Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2005 Annual Construction Program Dollars in thousands From S 03 P CPT Tschirioy Rood Hodges Road 00031 1.26 16 6111 Avenuo Havana Street Pert Road 0.0D Reconstruct 815 Ave. to a Ihrco lane section with curb. gutter, sidewalks and bike lanes. Prelim. Engineering, Right-of -Way 6 Broadway Avenue Rehabilitation 1 06 14 Brosdway Avenue Bales Read Sullivan Rood 0324 2,47 GAM and ovortay 2.48 naees, 50' wife, 4 ranee to a depth o! 2' horn mile marker 4.58 to StAlvan Road. Prellrn Enginecring, Constnrdion 7 Wollcsley Avenue Rehabllltatlon 18 Wellesley Avenue Remove, replace and widen 0.33 unites of roadway, Prelim. Engineering, Construction I 066eiS Sunnyvale Road Flom Road 05249 0.27 Printed: 52612004 2 Emir Work c Fund Work Utilities Fed Steto Other City To Road 0 Prof 3 ten(ml) Type 0 Slat Meth Fund Source Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E. R.W. Cons! Total C C8y C STP(U) 180 03 :4 S CTPGSW C City C STP(U) 983 C City C STP(U) 702 Hoaxing Dale: Adoldi Env. Assess. Dote Resort-f, 30 14 15 0 30 86 100 0 186 100 116 0 216 153 39 114 0 153 252 731 0 983 291 845 0 1,136 110 11 0 99 110 70 0 632 702 81 0 731 812 C City 47 5 0 42 47 C STP(U) 297 30 0 267 297 3.5 0 309 344 Project Nano Road Names Program Func Work Scope Item Class Status 16 Pads Road Rernorec and replace 0.09 miles, 8T wide (2 Lanes) to a depth al 2'. Pram. Engiieori np, Construction From City of Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2005 Annual Construction Program Dollars in thousands 8 Park Road Rehabilitation I 08 S Sprague Avenuo Broadway Avenue 03714 0.50 Grind R ovortay 0.5 mites, 3T wide, 2 tans to a depth of 2 indresfrom Sprague Avcrwro lo Broadway Avenue. Prelim. Engineerin., Construction OishmarrMica Road Rehabilitation 1 06 tze S 14 Dis nsarrhti Road Rehabilitation is1 Avenue Sprague Avenue 00879 0.09 Printed: 5/28;2004 3 Hearing Date: Em. Assess. Date Adopt'•_ _�: Resolution No. Envir 1 •'ork C Fund Work Utilities Fcd Sta10 Other Cily To Road d Pro) d Len(rni) Type 0 Stat Muth Fund Sowce Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E. R.W. Coast Total C Cily 22 2 0 20 22 C STP(U) 142 14 0 128 142 15 0 148 164 C City 7 1 0 6 7 C STP(U) 34 3 0 31 34 4 0 37 41 Street lmprovoments Projects Total. 2,919 2,175 246 616 950 1,925 3,131 6,006 Project Nemo Road Ramos Program Func Work Ssopc Item Class Status 14 Barker Road Totarl Program tor 2005 Printed: 5/28/2004 City of fie Valley Department of Nublic Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2005 Annual Construction Program Miters in thousands From Bridge Construction 10 Barker Road Bridge 1 09 ❑ P T © Spokane Rimer 55503 Enva Work C Fund Work Utilities Fed State Other City To Road 0 Proj0 I- cnirra) Typo 0 Slat Meth Fund Source Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E. RW. Const Total 0.10 Nearing Date: Adopt Env. Assess Dab C BR 187 175 12 0 187 C BR 47 44 3 0 47 Replace bridgo over tho Spokane River. 219 15 0 234 Prelim. Engineering, Right- of -We Bridge Corrstnulion Projects Tatel: 234 219 15 0 234 4 3,153 2,175 246 616 1,169 1,940 3,131 6,240 Project Name Road Names Program Fanc Work Scope Item Vass Status From Street Improvements 1 Plncs/Mansfield I 03 A P 09 Mansfield Ave Wwr Road Pines Road 02964 0.09 14 Pines Rd Pines 6 Indiana West bound on ramp 0.0D 2 This project wil reconfigure the W8 ramps of I.90 at SR27. 1I will also widen and reconstruct Mansfield Avo. from Wilbur Rd. to SR27 to a Urine roadway wiii curb, gutter Construction Sullivan Road North Extension (Bigelow Gulch) S 03 i P TGP 08 Bigelow Gulch Road Fnukcr Road 6 Progress Wellesley Road 03786 0.91 Rewconstruct and widen tiro Sullivan Road extension north also known as Bigclow Gulch Road to a 44ane roadway with 8 -foot shoulders and a 12 -tool lwo way k6 tun Lino, Right -oGWay City of Spu ene Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2006 Annual Construction Program Dollars in thousands 3 Bridging tho Valley- Park Rood/ BNSF Grade Sep 94 Park Road Indiana Avenue Montgomery Ave. 03714 0.20 Rcconstrud Park Road to separate the grottos of Park Road and tho BNSF railroad tracks. Prelim. Engateering, Right- of-Way, Constnrdion Printed: 5126/2004 5 Envir Work C Fund Work Utilities Fctl Salto Other City To Road 4 Proj l cn(m0 Type 0 Stet Meth Fund Beanie Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E. R.W. Cansl Total I 03 ry_lS C TPP 776 0 0 778 776 C STP(U) 456 0 0 468 466 C Other Sta 0 0 0 0 0 C Other 262 0 0 262 262 C City C TPP C County C STP(U) 23 C Other Fed 2,204 C Other Sta C Other Hearing Date: Env. Assess. Date Resolution No. 0 0 1,506 1,506 1 0 1 0 1 53 0 58 0 58 0 14 0 14 0 2.3 0 23 0 96 0 96 944 1.260 0 2,204 123 53 70 0 123 123 53 70 0 123 1,050 1,400 0 2,450 Prefect Name Road Names Program Fume Work Scope Item Class Status From 4 8th Avenue Reconstruction 16 8th Avenue Havana Street 6 Reconstruct 8th Ave. to a three Lane section with curb, gutter, sidewa8.s and bike lanes. Construction 5 Appleway Road S 03 P CPT 14 Appleway Road TeclIrtey Road Hodges Road 00031 1.25 Reconstruct to a tive-tane urban arterial Prelim. Engineering, Right- of -Way, Construction Evergreen Road 1 03 P 14 Evergreen Rd 32nd Avenue 16t1s Avenue 01170 1.00 Reconstruct and widen to three lanes Prerrninary Engineering City of Si , one Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2006 Annual Construction Program Dollars In thousands I 03 0 S t,iPGSW Park Road 0.00 7 Barker Rd Reconstruct - Boone to Spokane River 1 03 U P 14 Barker Road Boone Spokane River Bride 00230 0.69 Reconstruct to a four -lane curbed arterial with center turn krne, Construction Printed: 5/2812004 0 Hearing Date: Env. Asses. Date Adopt, ,i Re401uar6 n rw. Env* Work C Fund Work Utr'L1ier Fed Stale Other City To Road A Prod 0 Len(mi) Type 0 Scat Meth R Source Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E RW. Const Total C City 245 0 0 245 245 C STP(U) 1,575 0 0 1,575 1,575 0 0 1,620 1,820 C City 160 13 40 127 160 C STP(U) 1,151 80 260 811 1,151 C City C AIP C City C AIP C Other 93 300 936 1.331 100 40 60 0 100 400 160 240 0 400 200 300 0 500 253 0 0 253 253 1,115 0 0 1,115 1,115 26 0 0 26 26 0 0 1,394 1,394 Project Name Road Names Pr ogram Func Work Scope Item Class Status 9 Recanstnrci to a three -lane curbed arterial Prefm. Engineering, Right-of-Way 16 Flora Rd SR290 Construct raised curb channeliration on SR290 to eliminate NBL & SSL move:nersts Prelim. Engineering, Construction City of . mane Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2006 Annual Construction Program Dote in thousands From 8 Valley Couplet - Project 2 2893 S 01 2 S 14 Sprague Ave University Rd Evergreen Rd 04538 2,02 14 2nd Avenue University Rd Evergreen Rd 00001 2.02 Construct mutt-lane facility with curbs and sidowals. Remove Islands on Sprague Avenue and restrfpe. Prelim_ Engineering, Right-of-Way Barker Road . Spokane We; to Euclid Avenue 1 03 U P 14 Barker Road Spokane River Euclid Avenue 00230 0.58 10 Flora Rd/SR290 Minor Intersection Improvements I 12 U P Envlr Work C Fund Work Utilities Fed State Other City To Roatl D Prof D Len(ml) Ty 0 51a1 Meth Fund Source Funds funds Funds Funds F.E. R.W. Const Total SR290 01345 0.00 Printed: 5/2812004 7 C City C TPP C STP(U) 292 Hearing Date: Adop1: _ A t: Env. Assess Date Resolution No. C City C Other Sta 50 12 39 0 50 480 120 360 0 480 69 273 0 292 C City 18 10 8 0 18 C STP(U) 122 67 55 0 122 11 201 621 0 822 77 63 0 140 2 1 0 1 2 1 0 10 11 2 0 11 13 St met Impraventerrta Projects Total 5,833 2,965 411 849 1,623 2,780 5,669 10,072 Project Name Road Names Program Func Work Scope Item Class Status Bridge Construction 11 Barker Road Bridge 14 Barker Road Replace bridge over the Spokane River. Prelim. Engineering, Right-0l -Wey 12 Sutltven Road Wont Bridge I 03 lei P 14 Sullivan Road ® Spokane River 04511-S 04597 0.22 Reconstruct and widen w=t bridge Prelim. Enpsrcering, Right-of-Way City of Si :ale Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2006 Annual Construction Program Dollars fn thousaixts From ® Spokane River 05503 Printed: 528J2IX04 Roaring Bate: Adopti( Env. Assess, Cato Resole Erwir Work C Fund Work Utilities Fed State Other Gay To Road S Pros Lon[m9 Type O Syt Meth Fund Source Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E. R.W_ Const Total I 090P T 0.10 C BR C BR 47 187 44 3 0 47 175 12 0 187 219 15 0 234 C City 87 60 7 0 87 C BR 348 320 28 0 348 400 35 0 435 Bridge Construction Projects Total: 582 67 619 50 0 659 Total Program for 2008 6,415 2,965 411 936 2,242 2,830 5,669 10,741 Project Name Road Names Program Euoc Work Scope Item Class Status From Street Improvements 1 Sullivan Road North Extension ( Bigetow Gulch) S 03 © P TGP 08 Bigelow Gulch Road Faker Road 8 Progress Wellesley Road 03788 0.91 Rewconstnud and widen the Sullivan Road extension north also known as Bigelow Gulch Road to a 44ane roadway wiah B -foot shoulders and a 12-foot two way ICft him lane. Con, W ction City of S umaane Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2007 Annual Construction Program Dollars in thousands 2 Bridging the Valley- Park Road! BNSF Grade Sep 1 03 IA S 14 Park Road tndianaAvenue Montgomery Avo, 03714 0.20 Roconstruct Park Road to separate the grades of Park Road and the 67:SF railroad tracks. Prelim. Engineering, Right -of -'Nay, Construction 3 8th Avenue Reconstruction 16 BO Avenue Havana Street Park Road 0.00 Reconstnt 1 8th Ave. W a three lane section with curb, gutter. sidewalks and bike lanes. COnslrrcion Printed: 5/28/2004 9 Hearkig Date: Env. Assess. Date Resolution No. Envir Work C Fund Work Ulilitios Fed Salto Oiher City Road a pm] # Len(rni) Typo O Stet Mu`h Fund Source Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E. R.W. Cont Total 1 03 S CTPGSW C City 38 0 0 38 36 C County 0 0 368 366 C TPP 1,451 0 0 1,451 1,451 C STP(U) 565 0 0 555 565 C Other Fed 6,343 C Other S1a C Other 0 0 2,418 2,418 316 1260 4,767 6,343 352 17 70 265 352 352 17 70 265 352 350 1,400 5,297 7,047 C City 245 0 0 245 245 C STP(U) 1,575 0 0 1,575 1,575 0 0 1,820 1,820 Pro(cct Name Road Names Program Func Work Scope Item Class Status 4 5 Reconstruct to a fire -lane urban arterial Construction r City of Sp„ ,/ lie Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2007 Annual Construction Program Dollars in thousands From Valley Couplet- Project 2 2983 S 01 2 S 14 Sprague Ave University Rd Evergreen Rd 04538 2.02 14 2nd Avonuo University Rd Evergreen Rd 00001 2.02 Construct rnulll -lane facility Math curbs and sidewalks, Remove 'lands an Sprague Avenue and restripe_ Prelim. Engkmerimg, Right -of -Way Applaway Road S 03 U P CPT 14 Appieway Read Tschirley Road Nodg>w Road 00031 1.28 6 Barker Road - Spokane River to Euclid Avonuo 1 03 U P 14 Barker Road Spokane River Euclid Avenue 00230 0.56 Reconstruct to a three -lane curbed arterial Right-of-Way 7 Evergreen Road 1 03 hS, P 14 Evorgrocn Rd Reconstruct and widen to throe lanes Right-of-we appraisal R acgisiion Printed; 528/2004 10 Emir Work C Fund Work Uli ct s Fcd State Other City To Road a Pro, g Len(m) Typo 0 Slat Moth Fund Source Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E. R.W. Const Total 32nd Avenue 16th Avenue 01170 1.00 C City C TPP C STP(U) 292 C City C S7P{U) . 163 C City C City C AIP Nearing Date: Mopti Env, Assess, Data Ranaluliiun r�o. 50 12 38 0 60 460 120 360 0 480 69 223 0 292 201 621 0 822 C City 223 0 0 223 223 C STP(U) 1,427 - 0 0 1,427 1,427 0 0 1,650 1,650 25 0 25 0 2S 0 183 0 183 0 188 0 188 180 0 180 0 180 220 0 0 220 220 720 0 720 0 720 0 900 220 1.120 Prajo * Name Road Ramos Program Fune Work Scope Item Class • Status 8 Barker Road • 8th to Broadway Avenue I 02 d P CCPT 16 Barker Road 8th Avsnuo Broadway Avenue 00230 1.03 9 Reoonshuc1 to a three.lanc urban arterial from 8th to Appleway. Reconstruct to a tour- lane arterial with center turn 13no from Appleway to Broadway Ave. Prelim. Engineering, Right -of -Way Flora Rood 1 03 P 14 Flora Rd Sprague Av Mission Av 01344 1.00 Reconstruct to a three-lane arterial, Strout Improvements Projects Total: City of Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2007 Annual Construction Program Dollars in thousands From Hearing Dodo: Env. Assess. Data Adot___ __ a; Resolution No. Eareir Work C Fund Work Utilities Fed Stab Other City To Road d Proj d Len(mi) Typo o Stat Meth Fund Source Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E. R.W. Coast Total C City 70 23 47 0 70 C STP(U) 447 144 303 0 447 167 350 0 517 C City 27 27 0 0 27 C TPP 173 173 0 0 173 200 0 0 200 10.812 3,176 352 1,076 918 3,459 11.405 15,782 Project Name Road Names Program Func Work Scope Item Class Status Bridge Construction 10 Barker Road Bridge 14 Barker Road Replace bridge ova the Spokane River. Construction 11 Sullivan Road West Bridgo 14 Sullivan Real Reconstruct and widen wort bridge Construction Bridge Construction Projects ToWI_ City of S�� one Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2007 Annual Construction Program From Spokano Ri er 85503 Dollars et thousands Spaknnc River 04511 -S 04597 012 Printed; 5/28/2004 92 Healing Dalo: Adopts Env. Asao -ss. Date Resflt ,, Err& Work C Fund Work Utllltles Fed Stale Other City To Road D Prod 0 Len(nfi) Type 0 Slat Meth Fund Source Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E. R.W. Const Total 1 09 D P T 0.10 I 03 1l P C BR 730 0 0 730 730 C BR 2,919 0 0 2,919 2,919 0 0 3,849 3,649 C City 757 0 0 757 757 C BR 3.020 0 0 3,026 3,026 0 0 3,783 3,763 6,675 757 0 0 7,432 7,432 Total Program for 2007 17,487 3,176 352 1,833 918 3,459 18,837 23,214 Project Noma Road Names Program Func Work Scope Item Class Status Street Improvements valley Couplet - Project 2 2883 S 01 J S 14 Sprague Ave University Rd Evergreen Rd 04533 2.02 14 2rd Avenue Construct rrwlt-Iano fealty with curbs and sidewalks. Rcmo c islands on Sprague Avenue and restripo. Construction City of Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2008 Annual Construction Program Dollars In thousands From Envir Work C Fund York Utilities Fed State Other City To Rood 8 Pro) a 1 en(ml) Typo 0 Slat Meth Fund Source Fund. Funds Funds Funds P.E. R.W. Cant Total University Rd Evergreen Rd 00001 2.02 Printed: 5128/2004 Sullivan Road North Extension (Bigelow Gulch) S 03 t4 P TGP 09 Bigelow Gulch Road Forster Road 8 Progress Wellesley Road Rewconslnaq and widen the Sullhvan Road extension north also known as Bigelow Guldx Road to a 4danc roadway with 8-fool shaukters and a 12 -foot two way left tum lane. Construction Reconstruct and widen to three lanes 03788 0.91 3 Evcrgroon Road 1 03 IA P 14 Evorgroen Rd 32nd Avenue 16th Avcnuo 01170 1.00 13 C City C TPP C STP(U) 850 C Other Ste Hearing pato: Env. Assess. Date Resolution No. 993 0 0 993 893 1,914 0 0 1,914 1,914 O 0 850 850 470 0 0 470 470 O 0 4,227 4,227 C City 18 0 0 18 18 C TPP 713 0 0 713 713 C County D 0 180 180 C STP(U) 278 0 0 278 278 O 0 1,189 1,189 C AIP 880 0 0 880 880 0 0 880 880 Project Name Road Names Program Func Work Scope Item Class Status 4 7 Barker Road - 8th to Broadway Avenue 1 02 ® P CGPT 16 Barker Road 8th Avemre Broadway Avonuo 00230 1.03 Reconstruct to a three -lane urban artorial from 6th to Apple'say_ Reconstruct to a four- lane arterial with center turn lane from Apptcway to Broadway Ave. Right-of-Way 5 BaJkUT Road • Spokane River to Euclid Avenue 1 03 U P 14 Barker Road Spokane River Euclid Avenue 00230 0.56 Reconstruct to a tluee•kine curbed arterial Construction 14 Va8oy Couplet City of S3', )ne Valley Department orPublic Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2008 Annual Construction Program Dollars in thousands From Construct multi -lane fatuity with curbs and sidewalks. Renscve islands on Spraguo Avenuo and rest Right-of-Way Flora Road I CO tI P 14 Flora Rd Spraguo Av Mission Av 01344 1.00 Reconstruct to a three•lane arterial. Printed: 5)26)2004 14 Hearing Date: Errv. Assess. Dote Ao` Envtr Wok C Fund Work Utilities Fed Stalo Other To Road Q Proj # Len(mI) Type 0 Stst Meth Fund Source Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E. R.W. Coast Total 8 Valley Couplet - Project 1 2797 S 01 U 5 CGPIVJ Evergreen Road Sullivan Road 06000 1.02 C City 142 0 142 0 142 C STP(U) 903 0 906 0 008 O 1,050 0 1,050 C City 129 0 0 129 129 C STP(U) 830 0 0 630 830 O 0 859 659 C Clay 80 30 50 0 60 C STP(U) 994 194 0 0 194 224 50 0 274 C City 108 0 108 0 108 C TPP 692 0 692 0 692 O 800 0 800 Protect Nome Road Nantes Program Func Work Scope Item Class Status City of SNs,r:dne Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2008 Annual Construction Program Collars in thousands From 8 Bridging the Valley- Park Road/ BNSF Grado Sap 14 Park Road Indiarm Avcnuo Montgomery Am. 03714 0.29 Rewnstnrc* Park Road to separato the grades of Park Road and the BNSF railroad tracts. Construction 9 Bowdish Road 14 &radish Road Printed: 5128J2004 Reconstruct and wlden roadway to three lanes. Prcfminary Ergineedng Street Improvements Projects Total: Envir Work C Fund Work Utilities Fed State Other City To Road p Pro II I,en(mq Type O Slat Meth Fund Source Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E. R.W. Cans* Total 32nd Avenue 8th Avenue 00297 1.52 1 03 S I 03 ❑ P CCPIW 15 C Other Fed 4,768 C Other Sta C Other C City C AIP 7,826 5,481 265 1,602 i Hearing Date: Adios _l• Env. Assess. Data Rcsotution No. 9 0 4,766 4,766 265 0 0 265 265 265 0 0 265 265 0 0 5,295 5,296 132 32 100 0 132 527 127 400 0 527 155 500 0 659 383 2,400 12,551 15,334 Project Name Road Names Program Func Work Scope Item Class Status Bridge Construction 10 SuElven Road West Bridgo 14 Sullivan Road 11 Barker Road Bridge 14 Barker Road Construction Printed: 528/2004 Reconstruct and widen west bridge Rcptace Midge over the Spoken River, Bddgo Carr~truction Projects Total: City of Si me Valley Department of F ublic Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2008 Annual Construction Program Dollars to thousands From 1 03 ® @ Spokane River i4511S 04597 0.22 Q Spokane River Era Wod C Fund Work Utilities Fed Sbto Other Oily To Road C Proj II Lon(mq Typo 0 Stet Meth Fun Source Funds Funds Funds Funds P.5.. RW. Coast Total :5503 I 09 0.10 16 Hearing Dale: Env. Assess. Date C City 757 0 0 757 757 C BR 3,026 0 0 3,026 3,026 T Adopt. 0 0 3,783 3,783 C BR 2,919 0 0 2,919 2,919 C BR 730 0 0 730 730 D 0 3,649 3,649 6,675 757 0 0 7,432 7,432 Total Program for 2008 14,501 5.461 265 2,359 383 2,400 19,983 22,766 Project Name Road Names Program Func Work Scope Item Class Status Street Improvements 1 Valley Couplet- Project 4 14 Valley Couplet Sullivan Road 2 Printed; 5.2312004 Constnxt four lanes with curbs and sidewalks, Remove islands on Sprague Avenue and rostripo. Prclminary Engineering 14 2nd Avenue Construct multi-tano facility with curbs and sidewalks. Remove islands on Sprague Avenue and =tripe. Construction Par% Road 14 Park Rd Reconstruct arid widen to live lanes PrelM. Engineering, Right.or -Way 4 Valley Couplet - Project 3 14 Valle/ Couple1 Construct multiolane facility with curbs and sidewalks. Remove islands on Sprague Avenue and restrtpe. Complete construction City of Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2009 Annual Construction Program Dollars In thousands From S 01 ® P CGPTW Appleaay Road 08000 1.19 Valley Couplet • Project 2 2683 S 01 14 Sprague Ave University Rd Evergreen Rd 04533 202 Envlr Work C Fund Work Utilities Fad State Other City To Rood 8 Prn$ D Len(m1) Typo 0 Stal Meth Fund Source Funds Funds Funds Funds University Rd Evergreen Rd 00001 202 Broadway Av Indiana Av 03714 I 03 0,75 2797 5 01 S CGPTW Evergreen Road Sul3van Road 0800D 1.02 17 C City C STP(U) 350 C City C TPP C STP(U) 567 C Cdy C AIP \ Hearing Date: AdoP _ _ ( r; Ern. Assess. Date Reso5rtioe No, P.E. R.W. Can; t Total 54 37 17 0 54 242 105 0 350 279 925 0 404 602 0 0 502 602 9,336 0 0 1,336 1,318 0 0 567 567 0 0 2,505 2,505 73 28 45 0 73 292 112 190 0 292 140 225 0 365 C City 148 0 61 57 146 C STP(U) 947 0 360 557 947 0 451 644 1,095 Prefect Name Road names Program Funs Work Scow Envir Work C Fund Work Utilities Fed Stale Other City Item Class Status From To Roed # Prof d Lon(ml) Typo O Slat Meth Fund Source Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E. R,W, Const Total 5 Flora Road 1 03 P 14 Flora Rd Sprague Av Mission Av 01344 1.00 Reconstruct to a threo -lano artcrial. 6 Euclid Rd/ Flora Rd 1 03 &fJ P 17 Eaad Av Flora Road Barka' Road 01166 0,97 16 Flora Rd Euclid Road Euclid Road 01345 0.14 8 Reconstruct to provide a two lane, shouldered arterial Prelim, Engineering 7 32nd Avenue 1 03 1 J P CGPTW 14 32nd Avon= Reconstruct and widen to three lanes with curbs and sidowa0 s. C City / City of Si, ,ine Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2009 Annual Construction Program Dollars in thousands Prelim. Engineerng, RIO-al -Way Bowdish Road 1 03 U P CGPTW 14 Bowdish Road 32nd Avenue 6th Avenue 00297 1.52 Reconstruct and widen roadway to three lanes. Right -e6Wey SR 27 Best Road 05971 0.48 Primed: 5f28/2004 18 Nearing Date: Adoplt; Env. Assess. Ora C City 203 0 0 203 203 C 1PP 1,297 0 0 1,297 1,297 0 0 1.500 1,500 50 50 0 0 50 50 0 0 50 C City 29 9 20 0 29 C STP(U) 184 57 127 0 184 ' 68 147 0 213 C Coy 210 0 100 110 210 C AIP 838 0 400 438 838 0 500 548 1,048 Pro tect Rama Road Names Program Func Work Scope Item Class Status Roconstruct to a threo -la no urban arterial from 80 to Appteway. Reoonslrul to a !cur- ium arterial with center tum lano from Appllrray to Broadway Ave. Construction Street Improvomonts Projocts Total: Total Program for 2009 City of S ane Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2009 Annual Construction Program D tars in thousands • From 9 Barker Road - 8th to Broadway Avenue 1 02 2 P CGPT 16 Barker Road SIb Avcnuo Broadway Avenue 00230 1.03 Printed: 5125/2004 19 Hearing Date: Ador l e• Env. Assess. Date Resolution No. Envy Work C Fund Work Utilities Fed State Dlher City To Road p Prof 0 6on(mt) Type 0 Slat Meth Fund Source Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E.. R.W. Const Total C City 271 0 0 271 271 C STP(U) 1,732 0 0 1,732 1,732 0 0 2,003 2,003 3,760 3,753 1,540 535 1,448 7,200 9,183 3,780 3,783 1,640 535 1,448 7,200 9,183 Projed Name Road Names Program Func Work Scope Item Claes Status Street Improvements 1 Valley Couplet- Project 4 14 Vafley Couple! Sulfnan Road Applcway Road 08000 1.19 Construct tour lanes with curbs and sidewalks. Remove islands on Sprague Avenue and restripe. Rk ht.o1 -wa 2 Valley Couplet - Project 3 2797 5 01 14 VuEeyCouple! Consinrd multi -Lino facdrty with cubs and sidewalks. Remove islands on Sprague Avenue and Ireart10. Construction 3 Sullivan Road Reconstruct to a seven -lane urban arterial. Widen bridges et Spokane River, UPRR, 13NRR, and SR 290 Prelim. Engineering 4 Forret Avenue 17 Ferret Avenue Construct a two-lane cubed arterial W,th an a! -grade Railroad crossing at rho UPRR, City of SI ine Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2010 Annual Construction Program Defiers in thousands From 14 Sullivan Road Euclid Avenue Wellesley Avenue 04597 1.00 Printed: 5282004 20 Hearing Dale: Adopt"; Env. Assess. Date Rcselu .: Emir Work C Fund Work Ulilitfes Fed State Other City To Road g Proj p Len(ml) Type O Slat Meth Fund Scarce Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E R.W. Const Total Evergreen Road Sullivan Road 05000 1.02 Ponderosa Orivo Di,hman Mica Road 0.00 S 01 P CGPTW 1 03 i P C City C SW(U) 324 51 0 51 0 51 O 324 0 324 O 37S 0 375 01 U PT CGPTW C City 261 0 0 261 261 C STP(U) 1,671 0 0 1,671 1,671 C City 0 0 1,932 1,932 93 93 0 0 93 93 0 0 93 C City 710 60 100 550 710 60 100 550 710 Preled Name Road Names Program FUOO Work Scapa I1cm Class &aim 5 Euefid Rd' Flora PC 1 . ea 2 P 17 acid AN Flora Road Balker Roos 01166 17.97 15 Flora Rd Euclid Read Euclid Road 013215 0.14 6 7 Reaonsxruct to prowido , Iwo lane, shouldered arterial Construction Park Road Rccor.slnack and widen La five lanes Printed: 5.252004 Right.. 4tI Y, Conslru 1iin Bowdlsh Road 14 Bowdish Road Reto rst1t end %Olen roadway to throe lanes. C5nS1ruG1i8h 14 32nd Avenue FirXu Reconstruct and Alden 10 Chma lanes wrh ourLm and sidewalks. RIghl-oPNe ConstrucZion SR 27 Br Road City of Spuicane Valley Department of Public Works 2005 - 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2010 Annual Construction Program Dollen In thousand* IA Park Rd Broadway Rv ind',ana Av 08714 0.33 Enwir Work G Fund Work LFilfics Fed S1ale 05hor Cdy To Rand Proj s LenPni) TYPe O 51a1 Moth Furs Source Funda Funds Funds Funds 32nd P.venue $;h Avonuo 001797 1,52 05971 21 03 21 C City I 03 P COPY44 8 32nd Awrnuo 1 03 ? P GCP1Vd DAB Hearing Da ds; Adap"- Env. Assess. Data Resolulion No, P.E. iLW- Coast toial 550 0 0 550 550 O 0 550 5110 C City 17B 0 105 73 17B C NP 712 0 420 42 712 O 525 355 690 C City 256 0 Q 258 255 C NP 1.021 0 G 1.021 I.021 4 0 1 ,277 1,277 City 64 0 20 $a 90 C smith. 512 0 127 365 612 O 147 4 592 Project Namo Road Namcs Program Func Work Scope teem Class Status Stroct Improvement Projects Total: Total Program for 2010 Printrxt: 5292004 City of Sp,-ie Valley Department of Public Works 2005 2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2010 Annual Construction Program Dollars In thousands From Hearing Data Adoptit; Env. Aascss, Data ResotU. Emir Work C Fund Work Utilties Fed Slate Other City To Rood g Proj u Len(mi) Type o Slat Moth Fund Source Funds Funds Funds Funds P.E. R.W. Canal Total 22 2,507 1,733 2,179 153 1,147 5,119 6,419 2,507 1,733 2,179 153 1,147 5,119 6,419 • _ } %An . . I.� F 1 e j ��-��� yy h eu, � — _� iwj�l F a]Ih11 .. I l ks. — 1 r 1JIh -r $ ?iu ' .ran h 166- i 1 --- rl - r. — '1116 = -,,, � .M+ [ idn. 1 —r --° 1 ... 1 r : T : ::- j 611 _— _- f -L ' 'c .a..._ -F I 12411 I� j2GIh Y l__.4 -- - , . - T A I — 2 h E i ' n _.1--- .ggll - -- _ i - - .I_ . 0 - -. - — 1nfum 1 = =i ?._ --- T— 59m J�In - 3 - I ''1D L- 1 a1 , e 4.4.0 1 '.s+ I berti a e 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SIX YEAR T.I.P. 2005 — 201 uRAFT Sciii5kane Valley {"U@IJC WOA]SS UL•PAR'T P JT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 8, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business x new business (❑ public hearing 0 information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration, Mayor Appointments to Salary Commission GOVERNING LEGISLATION: City of Spokane Valley Ordinance 04 -018 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: 1. Approve the Mayor's appointments to the Salary Commission 2. Choose not to approve the appointments. 3. Take other appropriate action RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve the Mayor's Appointments to the Salary Commission BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Mayor DeVleming ATTACHMENTS Ordinance 04 -018, copy of PSA Seeking Members PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY WANTED: SALARY COMMISSION MEMBERS The City of Spokane Valley seeks members to serve on an Independent Salary Commission, the purpose of which is to review and establish the salaries of the Mayor and the Councilmembers. The committee will consist of five members. The term of appointment is one year, and the expected duration of the committee is no more than one year. Member qualifications include: U.S. citizenship, and a resident of the City of Spokane Valley for at least one year. The Commission will serve without compensation. The first meeting of the Commission shall occur no later than June 23, 2004; members will also be responsible for filing a report of their recommendations, by August 9, 2004. If you or someone you know is interested in serving on this committee, please request an application from: City of Spokane Valley, City Clerk 11707 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509) 921 -1000 11C.._f4•111 too.d f'I1oi ,l.,UnFArl\ainhririoo\Prrcc Rnleacpc_hC A dCp lary ('nmmiccinn AEI zinc AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON SETTING THE SALARY OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS, CREATING AN II.NDEPENDENT SALARY COMMISSION TO REVIEW AND SET 1HE SALARIES OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS, PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATED THERETO; AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 14. WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 14 set the interim compensation allowed for the newly elected Mayor and Councilmembers; and WHEREAS, the City Council believes it serves the interests of the City to have a separate, independent commission establish the future salaries of the Mayor and City Council; and WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature through RCW Chapter 35.21 authorizes cities, towns and counties to create an independent salary commission to set the salaries of elected officials; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35.21.015, the action fixing the salary by a commission supersedes any other provision of City ordinance related to the fixing of salaries for elected officials. follows: Section 1. Salary Levels Established. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 04 -018 NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington ordains as A. Councilmembers. Each City Councilmember shall be entitled to receive a salary of four hundred dollars (5400.00) per month, payable on the last day of each calendar month, unless said day is a holiday or weekend, then said salary shall be paid the Friday before the last clay of the month. B. Mayor. The Mayor shall be entitled to a salary of five hundred dollars ($500.00) per month, which is twenty -five percent (25.00 %) greater than Councilmember salaries, payable on the last day of each calendar month, unless said day is a holiday or weekend, then said salary shall be paid the Friday before the last day of the month. C. Adjustment by Independent Salary Commission. If the City's Independent Salary Commission establishes a salary schedule for the Mayor and Councilmembers, those salaries will take effect at the tames, in the amounts, and under the conditions established in the schedule as provided by law. Section 2. Independent Salary Commission. A. Creation of Independent Salary Commission. There is hereby established for the City of Spokane Valley an Independent Salary Commission, for a period of one year. 13. Purpose. The purpose of the Independent Salary Commission shall be to review and establish the salaries of the Mayor and the Councilmembers. C. Composition. The Independent Salary Commission shall consist of five (5) members appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council. Ordinance 04 -018 Salary Commission Page 1 or4 ll. Compensation. The Independent Salary Commission shall serve without compensation. E. Term. The term of appointment is one (1) year. F. Qualifications. 1. Each person appointed to serve as a member of the Independent Salary Commission shall be a citizen of the United States, a resident of the City of Spokane Valley for at least one (1) year immediately preceding such appointment and while serving on the Commission, and a registered voter in Spokane County. 2. No officer, official, or employee of the City or any of their immediate family members may serve on the Commission. "Immediate family member" as used in this section means the parents, spouse, siblings, children, or dependent relatives of the officer, official, or employee, whether or not living in the household of the officer, official, or employee. G. Operation. 1. The Independent Salary Commission shall elect a Chair and Vice Chair from among its members. The Independent Salary Commission may establish and adopt rules of procedure for the efficient and fair conduct of its business. 2. The City Manager shall appoint staff and make available supplies and equipment to assist the Independent Salary Commission in preparation of its reports and records. 3. Any communication from the Independent Salary Commission to any member of the City Council while reviewing the schedule of salaries, shall be in writing and made part of the record of the Commission's proceedings. 4. The Independent Salary Commission shall keep a written record of its proceedings, which shall be a public record in accordance with state law, and shall actively solicit public comment at all meetings which shall be subject to the Open Public Meetings Act. 5. The first meeting of the Independent Salary Commission shall occur no later than June 23, 2004, and the Commission shall review and, if it so determines, amend and file its schedule of salaries with the City Clerk no later than August 2, 2004. 6. Three (3) members of the Independent Salary Commission shall constitute a quorum and the affirmative vote of three (3) members shall be sufficient for the decision of all matters and the transaction of all business. H. Responsibilities. To determine the appropriate rate of compensation, the Independent Salary Commission shall assess the market rate of compensation for elected city officials and study the relationship of salaries to the duties of the Mayor and the City Councilmembers. Salaries shall be established by an affirmative vote of not less than three (3) members. 1. Removal. A member of the Independent Salary Commission may only be removed during the term of office for cause such as incapacity, incompetence, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office or for a disqualifying change of residence. Ordinance 04 -018 Salary Commission Page 2 of 4 J. Filint; Date- Salary Schedule. The Independent Salary Commission shall file its salary schedule. with the City Clerk who will publish the schedule two (2) times, at least one week apart, in the official newspaper of the City. The second date of publication shall be considered the official filing date of the salary schedule. K. Effective Date — Salaries . The Commission's salary schedule will become effective in the amounts, at the times, and under the conditions established in the schedule unless a referendum has been filed in accordance with Section 3 of this Ordinance. Once filed, the schedule shall be incorporated into the City budget without further action of the City Council or Salary Commission. Salary adjustments established by the Commission that result in a salary increase are effective immediately as to all Councilmembers and /or the Mayor, regardless of their terms of office. If the salary adjustment established by the Commission results in a salary decrease, the decreased salary shall be effective at the commencement of the incumbent's next subsequent term of office. Section 3. Referendum. A. Salary Schedule subject to Referendum Petition 1. The Commission's adopted salary schedule shall be subject to referendum petition by the people of the City. A petition must be fled with the City Clerk within thirty (30) days after the official filing date of the salary schedule. In the event of the filing of a valid referendum petition, the salary increase or decrease shall not go into effect until approved by a vote of the people. 2. Referendum measures under this section shall be submitted to the voters of the City at the next following general or municipal election occurring thirty (30) days or more after the petition is filed, and shall be otherwise governed by the provisions of the State Constitution or other laws generally applicable to referendum measures. B. Referendum Statement. A referendum statement on a petition shall be phrased in the following language: Should the salary schedule fled with the City Clerk of the City of Spokane Valley by the Independent Salary Commission on be repealed in its entirety? Your signature on this petition indicates your vote in favor of repeal of the attached salary schedule in its entirety. A copy of the salary schedule or ordinance to such referendum petition shall be attached to each referendum petition for the information of the parties requested to sign such petition. C. Initiative provisions applied to referendum process. All state law provisions applicable to the form of the petition and sufficiency of signatures required for an initiative petition as set forth herein, and to the submission to the vote of the people as set forth herein, shall apply to a referendum petition and to the salary schedule sought to be defeated thereby. D. Referendum — Effective Date — Record. If a majority of the number of votes cast on the referendum oppose the salary schedule or ordinance, such salary schedule or ordinance shall be deemed repealed following the certification of the vote. Ordinance 04 -018 Salary Commission Page 3 of 4 Section 4. Repeal. Ordinance No. 14 passed by the City Council January 7, 2003 relating to salaries of the Mayor and Councilmembers is repealed in its entirety. Section 5. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY WASHINGTON this 25 day of May, 2004. — 4;04 Christine Bainbridge, ity Clerk Approved as to form: Stanley Schwartz, Interim City Attorney Date of Publication: - — Effective Date: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON Michael DeVleming, Maycl By: Ordinance 04 -018 Salary Commission Page 4 of 4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 8, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ICJ information admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Plan Review Fee Structure GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Spokane Valley Ordinance 04 -010 Spokane Valley Resolution 03 -053 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Master Fee Schedule / Resolution 03 -053 BACKGROUND: The Master Fee Schedule provides Building Permit Fees based on the total valuation of a construction project. The Plan Review Fee is based as a fraction of the Building Permit Fee. As the Building Permit Fee climbs the Plan Review Fee correspondingly climbs. For large projects the Plan Review Fee may be very high. For example, if a project would be valued at $35,000,000.00, a value expected for a large commercial building such as a large stadium or arena, the Building Permit Fee would be $112,708.75. The Plan Review Fee for this structure would be $73,260.69. Although the total of these two fees only amount to .53% of the total cost of the example project, it may be questioned that there is actually a $73,260.69 cost in reviewing and processing during the plan review function. In addition, capping the Plan Review Fee at a fixed number, for example $35,000.00, may not only capture the total cost of the plan review function, but that action may be viewed as a business friendly approach to limiting development costs and possibly encourage large commercial development in our community. OPTIONS: 1. Recognizing that the Plan Review Fee helps support the development review efforts of the City, keep the Master Fee Schedule and that specific revenue stream constant. 2. Modify the Master Fee Schedule by capping the maximum Plan Review Fee at a number dedded by City Council. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Provide direction to staff. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Impact would be to reduce the total fee collected by capping the maximum Plan Review Fee for larger projects. STAFF CONTACT: Community Development Director Sukup / Spokane Valley Building Official Scholtens ATTACHMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 04 -011 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALISEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING RESOLUTION 04 -001, AND APPROVING AN AMENDED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2004 WHEREAS, it is the general policy of the City to establish fees that are reflective of the cost of services provided by the City; and WHEREAS, the Spokane Valley City Council adopted Resolution No. 03 -053 on November 25, 2003 to adopt a City fee schedule for 2004; and WHEREAS, the Spokane Valley City Council adopted Resolution No. 04 -001 on January 20, 2004 to adopt a fee schedule for 2004. ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE PERMIT REGISTRATION FEE ESTABLISHMENT: WFI,ER.EAS, Ordinance No. 03 -065, Section 9(C) states that the City shall adopt by resolution the fee for an Alcoholic Beverage Permit; and and WHEREAS, the City Council directed staff to determine an appropriate cost for such a permit; WHEREAS, staff has determined that the appropriate fee for the permit is $10.00 per event; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to modify the current Master Fee Schedule for 2004 specific to the establishment of an Alcoholic Beverage Permit Registration Fee. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, as follows: Section 1. Establishment of an Alcoholic Beverage Permit Registration Fee in Schedule E ( Parks & Recreation) of Exhibit A of the Master Fee Schedule. For the purpose of establishing an Alcoholic Beverage Permit Registration Fee in Schedule E (Parks & Recreation) of Exhibit A of the Master Fee Schedule, the City Council hereby adopts the amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" as if fully set forth herein. Section 2. Repeal. To the extent that previous fee schedules are inconsistent with those set forth herein, they are repealed. Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect April 13, 2004. Resolution 04 -0I I: Amended 2004 Master Fee Schedule 1 A"I TE Adopted this 13 day of April, 2004. Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Roan: ary P. riskell, De City Attorney CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Michael DeVlem g, Mayor Resolution 04 -01 I : Amended 2004 -Master Fee Schedule 2 Resolution No. 04 -011: Exhibit A AMENDED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE Fee Schedule Page No. Schedule A: Planning 2 Schedule B: Public Works 4 Schedule C: Building 5 Schedule D: Fire Code 12 Schedule E: Parks & Recreation 15 Schedule F: Administrative 17 Schedule G: Other Fees 18 Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 Page. 1 of 18 AMENDMENTS Comprehensive Plan amendment Zoning or other code text amendment APPEALS Appeal of Administrative Decision Appeal of Hearing Examiner findings ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SEPA checklist Single dwelling (when required) All other developments Environmental Impact Statement Review Shoreline Substantial Development Permit $800.00 Critical Areas $300.00 PERMITS Home Occupation Permit Conditional Use Permit Temporary Use Permit PLATS Subdivisions Preliminary plat Final plat Shore .Plats Preliminary 2 -4 lots Final Plat 2-4 Lots Preliminary plat 5 -9 Lots Final Plat 5 -9 Lots MASTER FEE SCHEDULE Schedule A - PLANNING $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,000.00 $300.00 $100.00 $300.00 $2,000.00 580.00 $800.00 $150.00 $2,000.00 Plus $25.00 per lot $1,000.00 Plus $10.00 per lot 5500.00 $800.00 Plus $10.00 per lot $1,000.00 Plus $25.00 per lot $800.00 Plus $10.00 per lot Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fee Sche.dule for 2004 Page 2 of 18 Plat Modification Subdivision plat Short plat Binding Site Plan Binding site plan modification Change of Conditions Aggregation/Segregation Lot line adjustment Lot line elimination Zero lot line ZONING Zoning map amendments (rezone) PUT) plan PUD modification $650.00 $265.00 $1,500.00 $1,300.00 5650.00 SIGNS Review of permanent sign 550.00 Review of temporary sign $50.00 SITE PLAN REVIEW $250.00 STREET VACATION APPLICATION $1,300.00 VARIANCES Administrative $300.00 Public Hearings $1,500.00 $100.00 $100.00 5100.00 Plus 510.00 per lot 51,500.00 51,500.00 Plus 525.00 per lot $500.00 Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 Page 3 of 18 Estimated cost of public works review fees is due upon submittal of application. Any additional actual costs are due at the time of occupancy permit or final land action, whichever applies. ENGINEERING/PLAN REVIEW — For road design, drainage, erosion and sedimentation control, right of way improvements, plat maps, etc. Commercial $250.00 Plus hourly rate after 5 hours Residential S150.00 Plus hourly rate after 3 hours INSPECTIONS Stormwater system review Stormwater system inspections Schedule B — PUBLIC WORKS HOURLY RATE* 550.00 *Examples of activities charged on an hourly rate system include but are not limited to commercial site plan reviews and rezone reviews. Field monitoring or inspections of grading sites, residential or non - residential Commercial, multifamily, and multi lot sites Industrial or mineral industrial sites PERMITS Right -of -way obstruction permit Approach permit Floodplain permit Conditional Use permit Shoreline permit Variances Cash, certified check or bond for right of way cleaning *S25.00 minimum at time of application TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REVIEW Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 . $250.00 $ 50.00 $200.00 $225.00 $16.00 525.00 $50.00 $200.00 $50 Hourly rate $1,000.00 Plus hourly rate after 1 hour Hourly rate Plus hourly (four hour minimum) Plus hourly Plus review & inspection fee at hourly rate* Plus review & inspection fee at hourly rate* Plus hourly rate after 1" hour Plus inspection fee Plus hourly rate after 1 hour $50.00 Plus hourly rate after 15, hour Page 4 of 18 The building code permit fees are collected at the time of the issuance of the building permit. Other fees are also to be collected at the time of the issuing of the building permit. Each department for whom the fee is collected is to advise the permit specialist of fees due. GRADING Permit Fees Cubic Yards 100 or less 101 to 1,000 1,001 to 10,000 10,001 to 100,000 100,001 to 200,000 200,000 or more Plans Checking Fees Cubic Yards 50 or less 51 to 100 101 to 1,000 1,001 to 10,000 10,001 to 100,000 100,001 to 200,000 200,001 or more Land Clearing only (without earth being moved) STRUCTURAL CODE Schedule C — BUILDING No fee $12.00 $20.00 $25.00 $25.00 for the first for each additional $98.00 for the first for each additional $158.00 FEE $20.00 $20.00 for the first 100 Cu. Yd., plus $7.00 for each additional 100 Cu. Yd. $83.00 for the first 1,001 Cu. Yd., plus $6.00 for each additional 1,000 Cu. Yd. $147.00 for the first 10,000 Cu. Yd. plus $15.00 for each additional 10,000 Cu. Yd. $368.00 for the first 100,000 Cu. Yd. plus $15.00 for each additional 100,000 Cu. Yd. $503.00 for the first 200,000 Cu. Yd. plus $15.00 for each additional 200,000 Cu. Yd. FEE 10,000 Cu. Yd. plus $7.00 10,000 Cu. Yd. 100,000 Cu. Yd. plus $6.00 100,000 Cu. Yd. $65.00 Building permit fees for each project are set by the following fee schedule. The table below is to be used to determine the building permit fees and plans check fees based on the value of the construction work as stated by the applicant or the value calculated by the Building Official using the latest valuation data published in the Building Safety Journal by the International Code Council, whichever value is greatest. Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fec Schedule for 2004 Page 5 of 18 Valuation Table Total Valuation $1 to $25,000 $25,001 to $50,000 $50,001 to $100,000 $100,001 to $500,000 $500,001 to $1,000,000 $1,000,000 and up Private garages (wood frame) Private garages (masonry) Pole buildings Open carport, decks, porches Plans Review Fees Valuation Exceptions Fee $69.25 for the first $2,000 plus $14 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, up to and including $25,000 $391.25 for the first $25,000 plus $10.10 for each additional $ 1,000, or fraction thereof, up to and including $50,000 $643.75 for the first S50,000 plus $7 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, up to and including $100,000 $993.75 for the first $100,000 plus $5.60 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, up to and including $500,000 $3,233.75 for the first $500,000 plus $4.75 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, up to and including $1,000,000 $5,608.75 for the first $1,000,000 plus $3.15 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof Fee Per Square Foot $19.00 $22.00 S19.00 $15.00 Fees are to be collected at the time of receiving the application for permit if the plans review fee is over $50.00. If less than $50.00, it may be collected at the time of permit issuance. Plans review fee (general) Plans review fee — Group R -3 occupancies (single family Tess than 7,999 sq. ft.) Plans review fee — Group R-3 occupancies (single family 8,000 sq. ft. or greater) Plans review fee — U -1 or U -2 occupancies (sheds, barns, etc.) Plans review fee — temporary tent or structure 65% Of bldg permit fee 40% Of bldg permit fee 65% Of bldg permit fee 25% Of bldg permit fee 25% Of bldg permit fee Plans review fees are not refundable once the plan review has been started. This fee is in addition to the full basic fee. The WSBCC fee is to be collected at this time. If a set of plaits already checked and approved is resubmitted by the owner or his/her agent, an hourly rate of $47.00 will be applied for the re- review. Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 Page 6 of 18 PLUMBING CODE The plumbing code fees will be collected when the associated permit is issued. If the plumbing is included in the Building Permit the unit costs are added, but not the basic plumbing permit fee. A. Basic fees 1) Basic fee for issuing each permit 2) Basic for each supplemental permit 13. Unit fees (in addition to the basic fee) 1) For each plumbing fixture on a trap (including garbage disposals, dish washers, back flow device, drainage, hot tubs, built in water softener, water closets, lavatories, sinks, drains, etc ) 2) Private sewage disposal system 3) Water heater 4) Industrial waste pretreatment interceptor including its trap and vent, except kitchen type grease interceptors functioning as fixture traps. 5) Repair or alteration of water piping, drainage or vent piping 6) Lawn sprinkler system on any one meter 7) Atmospheric type vacuum breaker 8) Backflow protective device other than atmospheric type vacuum breakers 9) Medical gas 10) Interceptors 1■ECHANLCAL CODE A. Basic fees 1) Basic fee for issuing each permit 2) Basic for each supplemental permit B. Unit fees (in addition to the basic fee) 1) Furnaces & suspended heaters - Installation or relocation a. up to and including 100,000 btu b. over 100,000 btu 2) Duct work system Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 $35.00 $7.50 $6.00 $20.00 $6.00 Each $15.00 S6.00 Each fixture $25.00 $6.00 Each S6.00 Each $6 .00 Per outlet $6.00 Each The mechanical code fees will be collected when the associated permit is issued. If it is included in the Building Permit, the unit costs are added, but not the basic mechanical permit fee. $35.00 $7.50 $12.00 $15.00 $10.00 Page 7of18 3) Heat purnp & air conditioner a. 0 to 3 tons b. over 3 to 15 tons c. over 15 to 30 tons d. over 30 to 50 tons e. over 50 tons 4) Gas water heater 5) Gas piping system 6) Gas log, fireplace, and gas insert installation 7) Appliance vents installation; relocation; replacement 8) Repairs or additions 9) Boilers, compressors, and absorption systems a. 0 to 3 hp - 100,000 btu or less b. Over 3 to 15 hp - 100,001 to 500,000 btu c. Over 15 - 30 hp - 500,001 to 1,000,000 btu d. over 30 hp - 1,000,001 to 1,750,000 btu e. over 50 hp - over 1,750,000 btu 10) Air Handlers a. Each unit up to 10,000 cfm, including ducts b. Each unit over 10,000 cfm 11) Evaporative Coolers (other than portable) 12) Ventilation and exhaust a. Each fan connected to a single duct b. Each ventilation system c. Each hood served by mechanical exhaust 13) Incinerators a. Installation or relocation of residential b. Installation or relocation of commercial 14) Appliances, each 15) Unlisted appliances a. under 400,000 btu b. 400,000 btu or over 16) Hood a. Type I b. Type II 17) L P Storage tank 18) Wood or Pellet stove insert 19) Wood stove system - free standing $12.00 S20.00 $25.00 $35.00 560.00 $10.00 51 .00 Per outlet $10.00 $10.00 Each $15.00 $12.00 520.00 $25.00 $35.00 $60.00 $12.00 $15.00 $10.00 $10.00 $12.00 $12.00 $19.00 $22.00 $10.00 $50.00 $100.00 $50.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 525.00 Ezhit,it A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 Page 8 of 18 ENERGY CODE Energy Code Plans check fee is also established to check to meet the requirements of RCW 51- 11 WAC. These are in addition to the Building Code Fees. If City inspectors are assigned to verify Energy Plans, the following fees apply. If an outside energy inspector is required, that fee will be determined by the outside agency. Residential Remodel /Addition $ -0- New Single Family $ -0- Tenant Improvement A. 0 to 10,000 square feet $35.00 13. 10,001 square feet and over $45.00 C. Multi - Family $60.00 Per building D. New Commercial and industrial $90.00 OTHER BUILDING CODE FEES Annual Permit Annual Spokane Valley Building Permits used to: 1) maintain equipment or buildings, 2) construct or remodel small areas of assembly occupancies, or 3) install tents or membrane structures may be available depending upon the determination of the valuation of work made by the Spokane Valley Building Official. Certain record keeping and inspection responsibilities shall be established in a site specific Spokane Valley Annual Permit Agreement. Demolition Permit Single Family Residence Commercial buildings Garage or accessory building associated with a residence or commercial building Septic tank or underground flammable tank associated with a residence or commercial building $44.00 $125.00 $20.00 $10.00 Each Early Start Agreements (Foundations) 25% Of bldg permit fee Exhibit A of Resoitition 04-011: Amended Master Fce Schedule for 2004 Page 9 of 18 Sign Fees Fees collected for a sign permit and a plans check fee for signs erected in accordance with the Sign Code. The below fee plus the WSBCC fee of $4.50. Signs mounted on buildings Sign and pole mounting OTHER MISCELLANEOUS FEES A. For City personnel 1) Hourly rate set for City Employees (unless otherwise specified) 2) Hourly rate for permit specialist 3) Overtime charges $45.00 $65.00 Temporary Certificate of Occupancy $50.00 Washington State Building Code Council (W.S.B.C.C.) Surcharge A flat fee of $4.50 will be collected on each permit for approved plans or any other permit that is issued in accordance with the Spokane Valley Building Code. EXCEPT: For multi - family projects, the fee is $4.50 for the first living unit and $2.00 for each additional unit. The City Finance Department will forward this fee to the WSBCC on a quarterly basis. $47.00 $42.00 1.5 times regular rate Set according to contract rate B. Hourly rate for contracted services C. Hourly rate for special called inspections $47.00 D. Mobile home location permit and inspection 1) Temporary mobile home $60.00 2) Manufactured home inspection, per section $50.00 E. House Moving Fee I) Class I, IL and III — Moving permit $60.00 2) Class I, II, and III — Inspection fee $60.00 ** 3) Class IV (if already permitted by Spokane $ -0- County or Spokane City) * Plus basementJcrawlspace valuation permit fee * *Plus $47.00 per hour after the 1st hour, and $.50 per mile if the building to be moved into the City is outside the City limits Exhibit A of Resolution 04-011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 Page 10 of 18 F. Minimum Housing Inspection fee $55.00 Plus $47.00 per hour after 1' hour G. Work on any structure or building without a permit if a Spokane Valley Permit is required: 1) Minimum investigative inspection fee 2) Total investigative fee to be equal to the permit fee work accomplished H. Special inspections (requested by owner or tenant) 1) Fire, wind, mud slide or flood damage 2) Day Care 3) Nursing Homes, hospitals, et al Temporary tents, canopies, and air supported structures for public use; inclusive of all tents for a single event. It does not apply to tents less than 200 sq. ft., canopies less than 400 sq ft, camping tents, or to tents used for private, non commercial events. 1) Plans check fee $13.00 2) Basic permit fee $60.00 L. Enclosing an existing deck or patio 1) Plans check fee 40% Of the basic fee for plans examination Based on value of project; minimum $3,000 $50.00 Plus plumbing fees No plan review fee will be charged unless M. N. 0. 1'. 4) Special Occupancies Excess inspections for a given project created by the developer, owner or contractor Condominium conversion plans review /inspection fee 2) Basic permit fee Swimming pools (Over 5,000 gallons) Re -roof Permit: Fee based on the value of the project. plans are submitted for review. Change of Use or Occupancy Classification permit Towers, elevated tanks, antennas BUILDING CODE FEE REFUND POLICY $55.00 determined for the value of the illegal $60.00 $60.00 $60.00 $60.00 $47.00 $47.00 Plus $ 47.00 per hour after 1st hour Per inspection or re- inspection Based on value of project and bldg code valuation Based on value of project No Permit Fee refund is allowed once the work has been started. I.f a refund is requested, the request shall be addressed to the Building Official in writing, and shall be received at the Spokane Valley Permit Center within 180 days of the date of issuance of the pen -nit. Any fee refund request received after 180 days of the date of pen issuance shall be denied. Any refund approved shall be limited to 80% of the total Permit Fee paid. Refunds shall be limited to Building, Plumbing and Mechanical Permit fees paid to the City of Spokane Valley. Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 Page 11 of 18 0 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 8, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business 0 new business Q public hearing ❑ information X admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Discussion points on potential amendments to Criminal Code GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Ordinance 03 -046 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of the Criminal Code, Spokane Valley Ordinance 03 -046 on March 26, 2003. BACKGROUND: Several agencies involved with carrying out our criminal justice contracts have brought forward several suggested changes to the Criminal Code. Given that this is a first touch, staff has provided some discussion points for the Council in the form of a Memorandum. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum on policy points for discussion by the Council s Memorandum To: Dave Mercier, City Manager, City Council From: Cary P. Driskell CC: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Date: June 8, 2004 Re: Policy point discussion on proposed amendments to Criminal Code The Police Department and Prosecuting Attorney's offices have raised several issues in the Criminal Code that they propose bringing forward for potential amendment. Staff would like some policy guidance on whether the Council would like to add a noise provision and amend the open container provision. The first issue is in Section 16. The constunption of alcoholic beverages was originally made a misdemeanor offense when the Criminal Code was adopted prior to incorporation. The possession of an open container in a public place has been almost universally de- criminalized in most cities in the state, if not all. Spokane County and City of Spokane have this offense as an infraction. The current Section 16 reads as follows: 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org Except as provided by Title 66 RCW, any person who possesses an open container of liquor in a public place is guilty of a misdemeanor and fined one hundred dollars. Provided, that this provision shall not apply to containers kept in the trunk of a vehicle or in an area of the vehicle not normally occupied by the driver or passengers. A utility compartment or glove compartment is deemed to be within the area occupied by the driver and passengers. In the event the Council decides to move this issue forward, the staff would proposed the following language to replace the existing Section 16: Except as provided by Title 66 RCW, any person who possesses an open container of liquor in a public place shall be issued an infraction and fined twenty -five dollars, plus applicable court costs and fees. This provision shall not apply to containers kept in the trunk of a vehicle or in an area of the vehicle not normally occupied by the driver or passengers. A utility compartment or glove compartment is deemed to be within the area occupied by the driver and passengers. This provision does not apply to passengers in a public conveyance that is commercially chartered for group use or a for -hire vehicle licensed under city, county or state law. The last sentence allows for the current practice whereby a charter bus service can serve alcohol to passengers. This may occur for vehicles passing through Spokane Valley on their way to another place, or for such charters originating in Spokane Valley. The second issue relates to our noise provisions. The Criminal Code does not currently have any provision for noise violations. The only ordinance relating to noise issues is within the Nuisance Ordinance. Discussion between staff and the Police Department has focused on whether it is appropriate to call out our code enforcement staff in the middle of the night to respond to such complaints. The result of those discussions was to propose that the Criminal Code contain a separate provision for a nuisance violation. There are two basic approaches to this. The County adopted a provision that does not require the use of a decibel meter to determine whether something is "too loud." Instead, it uses as its standard the creation of a noise disturbance which disturbs the peace, comfort or repose of a reasonable person of normal sensitivity. This approach seems to work for Spokane County, and is what the Deputy's are accustomed to. The County ordinance allows the Deputy to charge the violation as either a misdemeanor or an infraction. I would assert this violates state law, in that the same conduct can either be charged as a crime or an infraction. In short, the current County approach raises serious equal protection issues that we do not want to litigate. As such, staff would propose to make any noise violation a misdemeanor. I have taken the liberty of providing you with language if we used the County approach, but revised to avoid the issue relating to misdemeanor vs. infraction: Section 46. Noise Disturbances Prohibited. 1. It is unlawful for any person to make, continue, cause to be made, or to allow to originate from real property in the possession of said person, any sound which creates a noise disturbance. 2. For the purposes of this section, the following sounds are declared to be noise disturbances: A. Sounds created by use of a radio, television set, musical instrument, sound amplifier or any other device capable of producing or reproducing sound, which emanate frequently, repetitively or continuously from any building, structure or property located within a residential area, and which annoy or disturb the peace, comfort or repose of a reasonable person of normal sensitivity; B. Any other sound occurring frequently, repetitively or continuously which annoys or disturbs the peace, comfort or repose of a reasonable person of normal sensitivity. This section shall not apply to noncommercial public speaking and public assembly activities conducted on any public space or public right -of- way for which a permit has been obtained. Additionally, this section shall not apply to noises produced by dogs, which are addressed in Ordinance 03 -056. 3. Exemptions. A. The following shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter: i. Sounds created by motor vehicles when regulated by VAC Chapter 173 - 62; ii. Sounds originating from aircraft in flight and sounds that originate at airports which are directly related to flight operations; iii. Sounds created by surface carrier engaged in conunerce or passenger travel by railroad; iv. Sounds created by warning devices not operating continuously for more than five minutes, or bells, chimes or carillons; v. Sounds created by safety and protective devices where noise suppression would defeat the intent of the. device or is not economically feasible; vi. Sounds created by emergency equipment and work necessary in the interest of law enforcement or for health, safety or welfare of the community; vii. Sounds originating from officially sanctioned parades and other public events; viii. Sounds emitting from petroleum refinery boilers during startup of the boilers; provided, that the startup operation is performed during daytime hours whenever possible; ix. Sounds created by watercraft, except to the extent that they are regulated by other City or State regulations; x. Sounds created by motor vehicles licensed or unlicensed when operated off public highways, except when such sounds are made in or adjacent to residential property where human beings reside or sleep; xi. Sounds originating from existing natural gas transmission and distribution facilities; xii. Sounds created in conjunction with public work projects or public work maintenance operations executed at the cost of the federal government, state or municipality; xiii. Sounds created in conjunction with the collection of solid wastes; xiv. Sounds created in conjunction with military operations or training; xv. Sounds originating from organized activities occurring in public parks, playgrounds, gymnasiums, swimming pools, and other public recreational facilities during hours of operation; xvi. Sounds originating from agricultural activities. B. The following shall be exempt from provisions of this chapter between the hours of seven a.m. and ten p.m.: i. Sounds originating from residential property relating to temporary projects for the repair or maintenance of homes, grounds and appurtenances; ii. Sounds created by the discharge of firearms on authorized shooting ranges; iii. Sounds created by blasting; iv. Sounds created by aircraft engine testing and maintenance not related to flight operations; provided, that aircraft testing and maintenance shall be conducted at remote sites whenever possible; v. Sounds created by the installation or repair of essential utility services. C. The following shall be exempt from the provisions of this chapter between the hours of seven a.m. and ten p.m., or when conducted beyond one thousand feet of any residence where human beings reside and sleep at any hour: i. Sounds originating from temporary construction sites as a result of construction activity; ii. Sounds originating from forest harvesting and silvicultural activity; iii. Sounds originating from the quarrying, blasting and mining of minerals or materials, including, but not limited to, sand, gravel, rock and clay, as well as the primary reduction and processing of minerals or materials for concrete botching, asphalt mixing and rock crushers; iv. Sounds originating from uses on properties which have been specifically conditioned to meet certain noise standards by an appropriate City hearing body. 4. Violation — Misdemeanor — Penalty. Any person violating any of the provisions of this chapter shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor. The other option for a noise ordinance would be to use an ascertainable standard for noise, as measured by a decibel meter from a given distance, such as from the front property line. This would require each officer responding to such complaints to have a decibel meter, as well as training to use it. Chief Cal Walker advises that there is grant money available to purchase the necessary equipment and for training. In looking at the two choices from a legal standpoint, my professional opinion is that this second choice is more legally defensible. The first option would more likely result in litigation as to whether the "reasonable person" standard is sufficiently specific to put a person on notice. On the other hand, the County has used this approach for some time With success. Cary P. Driskell Deputy City Attorney Stio .jValley Memorandum � To: Dave Mercier, City Manager From: Mike Jackson, Director of Parks & Recreation Date: June 4, 2004 Re: CenterPlace Construction Update On Tuesday, June 8, staff will provide an update on CenterPlace construction. Topics will include: o Construction update o Potential floor plan change for Senior Center Wing o Update on discussions with college 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org CenterPlace Construction Update June 4, 2004 1 Senior Center Multi-Purpose Room Wood Floor 2 c.� f� CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: June 8, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report Spending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2003 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Remand GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A - Growth Management Act — Spokane Valley Interim Comprehensive Plan — Spokane Valley Interim Zoning Code PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: The Council reviewed the 2003 amendments at its October 7, 2003, study session, and adopted amendments to the City's Interim Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map on October 28, 2003. BACKGROUND: : The City of Spokane Valley Interim Comprehensive Plan provides for an annual comprehensive plan amendment process. The deadline for submitting comprehensive plan amendment requests was July 1, 2003. On August 28, 2003, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider 7 Comprehensive Plan requests. The Commission continued the hearing to September 11, 2003, requesting staff to develop an alternative recommendation for CPA- 03 -05. At the September 11 meeting the Commission finalized recommendations for the 7 comprehensive plan amendments. On October 28, 2003, the Spokane Valley City Council adopted the amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission. The amendments were subsequently appealed to the Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board by the City of Liberty Lake. Liberty Lake did not argue any substantive issues with the amendments; rather, Liberty Lake cited a procedural error where the Spokane Valley failed to notify the Washington State Office of Community Trade and Economic Development (CTED) at least 60 days prior to adoption of the amendments per RCW 36.70A.106. The Hearings Board ruled that Spokane Valley must comply with the procedural requirements of RCW 36.70A.160. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on May 27, 2004 to satisfy the Hearings Board decision and the procedural requirement of RCW 36.70A.160. Notice of the proposed amendments was sent to CTED on April 8, 2003 via email. A letter confirming receipt of the notice was received by the Spokane Valley Community Development Department on April 12, 2004. The Commission's recommendations are consistent with their original recommendations with the exception of CPA- 03 -07, which are noted and underlined for clarity. The Comprehensive Plan Amendments, with Planning Commission Recommendations, are summarized below: 1. File No. CPA -03 -01 Location: 8915 East Montgomery Request: Change 5 acres from Low Density Residential to Regional Commercial Original PC Recommendation: Change to Community Commercial and zone B -2 City Council Decision: Change to Community Commercial and zone B -2 Remand PC Recommendation: Community Center and zone B -2 File No. CPA -03 -02 Location: South side of Appleway Avenue, east of Park Road Request: Change 3 acres from Neighborhood Commercial to Regional Commercial Original PC Recommendation: Change to Community Commercial and zone B -2 City Council Decision: Change to Community Commercial and zone B -2 Remand PC Recommendation: Community Commercial and B -2 zoning. 3. File No. CPA -03 -03 Location: West side of Pines Road, between Union Pacific Railroad right -of -way and Mansfield Avenue Request: Change 2.5 acres from High Density Residential to Light Industrial Original PC Recommendation: Change to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2 City Council Decision: Change to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2 Remand PC Recommendation: Light Industrial and 1 -2 zoning. 4. File No. CPA -03 -04 Location: Cataldo Avenue, west of Bradley and north of 1 -90 (Golf Dome property) Request: Change 2.6 acres from Low Density Residential to Light Industrial Original PC Recommendation: Change to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2 City Council Decision: Change to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2 Remand PC Recommendation: Light Industrial and 1 -2 zoning. 5. File No. CPA -03 -05 Location: West of Pines Road between Broadway and Cataldo Avenue Request: Change 3 acres from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential Original PC Recommendation: Change southern portion to Medium Density Residential and zone UR -12; no change on northern portion of parcel. City Council Decision: Change southern portion to Medium Density Residential and zone UR -12; no change on northern portion of parcel. Remand PC Recommendation: Change southern portion only to Medium Density Residential and UR -12 zoning only on southern portion. 6. File No. CPA -03 -06 Location: North side of Broadway Avenue, between Blake and Mamer Roads Request: Change 5 acres from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential Original PC Recommendation: Change to High Density Residential and zone UR -22 City Council Decision: Change to High Density Residential and zone UR -22 Remand PC Recommendation: Change to High Density Residential and zone UR -22. 7. File No. CPA -03 -07 Location: Northwest corner of Barker Road and Boone Avenue Request: Change 3 acres from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential Original PC Recommendation: Change to west portion of property to Medium Density Residential and zone UR -12; change east portion of property to Community Commercial and zone B -2 City Council Decision: Change to west portion of property to Medium Density Residential and zone UR -12; change east portion of property to Community Commercial and zone B -2 Remand PC Recommendation: Change easterly portion to Community Commercial and B -2 Zoning; change westerly portion of property to High Density Residential and UR -22 zoning. OPTIONS: The Council may adopt the Planning Commission recommendations, deny the requests, remand the requests back to the Planning Commission for further proceedings, or modify the Commission's recommendations after conducting a public hearing, per RCW 36.70A.035(2)(a). The Council may set a public hearing date at any regularly scheduled meeting. The public hearing requires at least 15 days public notice and all property owners within 400 feet of the proposal must be mailed an individual notice. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approval to bring amendment ordinances forward for council consideration at the June 22, 2004 meeting BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Greg McCormick, Long Range Planning Manager ATTACHMENTS: Individual ordinances for each amendment will be forwarded under separate cover. 2003 Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Reconsideration CPA -03 -01 • Location: North of Montgomery, West of A/QOMe • Comp Plan; Low Density Residential • Camp Plan Request: Regional Commercial • Prior Council Decision; Community Commercial • PC Recommendation: Community Commercial 1 { art I I it it t t • -� I BACKGROUND • Planning Commission held public hearings on August 28, 2003 and September 11, 2003 • City Council adopted Planning Commission recommendations on October 28, 2003 • Liberty Lake appealed amendments to Growth Management Hearings Board • RCW 36,70A.160 - 60 Day Notice to CTED • Amendments remanded back to Spokane Valley for procedural correction • Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 27, 2004 CPA -03 -01 • Site currently developed with a car wash, truck rental and self- storage facility. • 1970 - Zoned Commercial • 2002 - Rezoned to UR - CPA -03 -01 • Zoning: UR -7 • Zoning Request: B-3, Regional Business • Pr tor Council Decision: B -2, Community Business • PC Recommendation: B -2, Community Business • Stab Concurs with PC • Site is Undeveloped • 1976 - Zoned Commercial • 2001 - Zoned B -1, Neighborhood Commercial CPA -03 -02 CPA -03 -02 • Location_ South ofAppteway, West of Park Road • Comp Plan: Neighborhood Commercial • Comp Plan Request Regional Commercial • Prior Council Decision: Community Commercial • PC Recommendation: Community Commercial • Staff Concurs with PC Zoning: B-1, Neighborhood Business 1111_ IM Zoning Request: iwi`' B-3, Regional Business Prior Council Decision: B-2, Community Business PC Recommendation: 2 CPA -03 -03 • Location: West of Pines, South of Mansfield • Comp Plan: High Density Residential • Comp Plan Request: Light Industrial • Prior Council Decision: Light Industrial • PC Recommendation: Light Industrial • Staff Caryqurs with P CPA -03-03 • Zoning: UR -22 • Zoning Request: 1 -2, Light Industrial • Prior Council Decision: I -2, Light Industrial • PC Recommendation: 1 -2, Light Industrial • Staff • ancurs with PC CPA -03 -03 • Site is Currently Undeveloped • 2002 - Zoned UR -22 Location: Cataldo Avenue, West of Bradley and North of 1 -90 Comp Plan: Low Density Residential Comp Plan Request: Light Industrial Prior Council Decision: Light Industrial 3 CPA -03 -04 • 1994 Rezoned I -2 to 13-3 • 2001 - Designated Low Density Residential : -. 2002Rd e zfl edIUR`rl `, CPA -03 -05 • Location: West of Pines Rood between Broadway and Caleldo • Comp Plan: Low-Density Residential • Original Request High Density Residential • Revised Request Medium Density Residential an Southern Portion • Prior Council Decision: _Medium Density Residcrfral an Souther Pa�iran -- ,• • .PC Recornmendatlon 5� Ovimow Mulom Scut " Portion Residenliat M.OR .1 1 - - .t/U i lr o IIIallEIIi CPA -03 -04 • Zoning: UR - 7 • Zoning Request: 1 -2, Light Industrial • PC Recommendation_ 1 -2, Light Industrial • Prior Council Decision: 1 -2, Light Industrial • Staff Concurs with PC • Multifamily Housing South of Broadway, Playground for Prnes'Roed Elemernary ;��- b 1978Ad'acerttTP I Rezoned 4 CPA -03 -05 • Zoning: UR 3.5 • Original Zoning Request UR -22, High Density Residential • Revised Zoning Request: UR -12 on Southern Portion • Prior Council Decision: UR -12 on Southern Portion • PC Recommendation: UR -12 on Southern Portion • Staff Concurs with PC Cistaelorn .• •• • Majority of Site Currently Developed as Retirement Facility • Construction Underway for Addition •• 1998 oned UR - `22 .. :'•;;' CPA -03 -06 • Location: North of Broadway between Blake and Maurer Roads • Comp Plan: Low Density Residential • Comp Plan Request High Density Residential • Prior Council Decision: High Density Residential • PC Recommendation: High Density Residential • Staff Concurs with PC ..we..s.. R-t CPA -03 -06 • Zoning: UR -3.5 • Zoning Request UR -22 • Prior Council Decision: UR -22 • PC Rocommondatlon: UR -22 .„,,„Staff Coacuis ^with P 5 CPA -03 -07 • Location: Northwest comer of Barker Rd & Boone Ave • Comp Plan Request Community Commercial on east portion: High Density Res. on west portion • Prior Council Decision: Community Commercial and Medium Density Residential • PC Recommendation; Community Cornmercial.and ;High I]ensity.Rdsiden`tiok: n a u wit va�u sStAff'concu wit P. e CPA -03-07 • East Portion Developed with Commercial West Portion Vacant • 1957, 1958 & 1971 - Zoned I- • . 2, Light • . "� [ndu�st""ial o DO :o Zoned comp CPA -03 -07 • Zoning: UR -7 • Zoning Request: B-2 on East Portion UR -22 on West Portion • Prior Council Decision: B- 2 on East Portion UR -12 on West Portion • PC Recommendation; - 'r2 on East Po 6 *Wane � -! • Ualley Memorandum 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org To: Dave Mercier, City Manager, Mayor and Members of the Spokane Valley City Council From: Marina Sukup, AICP, Community Development Director CC: Date: June 4, 2004 Re: Ad Hoc Sign Committee The first meeting of the Ad Hoc Sign Committee will be held on Tuesday June 8, 2004, at 8:00 a.m. in the Veradale Conference Room. The agenda for this meeting is attached. s jVauey 5. Adjournment David Crosby Duane R. Halliday Ken Holloway John L. Johnston AD -HOC SIGN COMMITTEE AGENDA Tuesday, June 8, 2004 — 8:00 — 9:00 a.m. City Hall — Veradale Conference Room 1. Introductions 2. Election of Chair and Vice Chair 3. Review of Committee Purpose & Future Committee Agendas Suq estion. Identify specific issues by sign type for conflicts, ambiguities, omissions, enforcement 4. Set Future Meeting Dates and Times COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Ray Perry David Quinn Marina Sukup Denny York