The URL can be used to link to this page

2004, 10-26 Regular MeetingVOUCHER LIST DATE VOUCHER Number(s) TOTAL VOUCHER AMOUNT 10- 06-04 5673 -5705 37,974.55 GRAND TOTAL 37.97435 AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING #54 Tuesday, October 26, 2004 CITY HALL AT REDWOOD PLAZA 11707 East Sprague Avenue, First Floor Council Requests All Ekctronic Device be Turned Off During Council Meeting CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION: Pastor Eric Hinnenkamp, New Hope Bible ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL, GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT: PUBLIC COMMENTS For members of thc Public to speak to thc Council regarding matters NOT on the Agenda. Please state your name and address for thc record and limit remarks to three minutes. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Final 2005 Budget Hearing - ken Thompson 2. CONSENT AGENDA Consists of items considered routine which arc approval as a group. A Councilmembcr may remove an item from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. n. Approval of Regular Council Alerting Minutes of October 12, 2004 b. Approval of Study Session Minutes of October 19, 2004 c. Approval of Payroll of October 15 of $108.992.68 d. Approval of Following Vouchers: NEW BUSINESS 3. Second Reading: Proposed 2005 Annual Property Tax Ordinance 04 -041- Kew Thompson (public comment] 4. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 04 -042 to Confirm Extra 1+3'. Levy - Ken Thompson [public comment] 5. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 04-044 Adopting 2005 Budget - Ken Thompson [public comment] 6. Proposed Resolution 04 -025 Amending Fee Resolution for 2005 - Ken Thompson [public comment] 7. First Reading Proposed Utility Tax Ordinance 04 -045 - Kea Thompson [public co nrncnt] Council A g e n d a I 0 - 2 6 - ( 1 1 Regular Melting 4 /e d 6:00 p.m. Pare lat'2 8. Vacation of a Portion of David Road • Second Reading:: Proposed Street Vacation Ordinance 04-043 (David Street) - Marina Sukup [public comment • Motion Consideration: Declaring the remainder of the property as Surplus Property. [public comment j 9. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 04-046 for Pt f l) Amendments - Marina Sukup [public comment) PUBLIC COMMENTS (Maximum of three minutes please: State your name and address fur the record) INFORMATION ONLY: [no public comment] 10. Departmental Monthly Reports 11. Spokane County Library District September Report 12. Planning Commission Minutes of September 23, 2004 (includes documents pertaining to the Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Area Wide Rezone) 13. Response to Previous Public ('ommentsiConcerns AI)JO IJRNMENT F( SCHEDULE Regular Council Mertings are genera!!' held 2nd and e Tuesdays, beginning at 6:00 p.m. Council Study SeDionc are generally held l , 3 and 5th Tuesdays, beginning at 6 :00 p.m. Other Tentative Ultcuminx Mt. n 'Events: October 28, 2004 - Spokane Valley Community Meeting. 6:30 p.m., Pratt Elementary School, 6903 E 4 Avenue, Spokane Valley, Wa. TOPIC: Spokane Valley's 20 Year Plan November 4, 2004 - Park, Recreation and Open Space Needs in the City of Spokane Valley, 7 p.m.. Spokane Valley Church of the Nazarene, 15515 E 20 Avenue November 23, 2004 - No Council Meeting or Council Study Session November 30, 2004 - Regular Council Meeting December 28, 2004 - No Council Meeting or Council Study Sawsion Fchruary 12, 2005 - 1 -calf- -Day Council /Staff Retreat NOTICE Individuals planning in attend tt,e meeting whn require special amtianee to accommodate physical, hearing. or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk at (SI$) 421.1001) as soon as pasaihk so !tint arrartgaucnb may be made. Council Agenda 10-26-04 Regular Meeting Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 26, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business X public hearing ❑ information Q admin. report X pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Public Hearing — 2005 Proposed Budget GOVERNING LEGISLATION: State law requires a hearing on the 2005 Budget PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: A hearing on the revenues proposed for 2005 was held on September 14. The City Clerk provided public notice when the City Manager filed his preliminary budget in September. The City Council has discussed the budget process, goals, outside agency requests and other budget related issues at several meetings during the summer and fall. The City Council scheduled 2005 budget hearings for October 12 and October 26. Departments highlighted significant budget issues at the October 5 council study session. The first 2005 budget hearing was held on October 12. Public notice of budget hearings has been published. BACKGROUND: State law requires at least one public hearing before we adopt the 2005 budget. The City scheduled public hearings for October 12 and October 26 to consider the 2005 budget. The first public hearing was held on October 12. OPTIONS: A public hearing was held on October 12. The City Council could elect to hold the second hearing on October 26 or at a later date. However, the ordinance adopting the budget must be passed prior to late December, 2004. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: This pubic hearing is recommended to give the public an opportunity to provide additional input on the 2005 City Budget. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This will be the adopted budget for 2005. STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance /Administrative Services Director � XJW lr7hi+hTw�Y7d'J�KSL/,I.wi►1Y:h� �� Second 2005 Budget Public Hearing City of Spokane Valley October 26, 2004 Overview • Balanced Budget o $44 Million total - down 13% II Includes • CenterPlace operations • Service level reserves • Contingency o Capital Expenses of $10 Million 1 Overview cont • Future Financial Needs • General Fund operations • Street Fund operations • Capital Needs 2 Draft MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday, October 12, 2004 Mayor DeVleming called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the 53 meeting. Attendance: Councilmembers: Michael DeVleming, Mayor Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Absent: Richard Munson, Councilmember, excused CALL TO ORDER Staff: David Mercier, City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Attorney Stanley Schwartz, City Attorney Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Mike Jackson, Parks & Recreation Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director .Ken Thompson, Finance Director Cal Walker, Police Chief Courtney Moore, Accountant/Budget Analyst Greg McCormick, Long Range Planning Manager Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Tom Scholtens, Building Official Bing (Greg) Bingaman, IT Specialist Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor DeVleming led the Pledge of Allegiance. INVOCATION: Pastor Mike Sager of Holy Trinity Lutheran gave the invocation. ROLL CALL City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; All Councilmembers present except Richard Munson, excused. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor DeVleming mentioned the amended agenda includes a scrivener's error as noted in the consent agenda, but there are no changes proposed to the agenda as presented. It ,vas moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite to approve the amended agenda as presented. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carriecf. COMMITTEE. BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS Councilmember Denenny: reported that he attended last week's UAA meeting where a presentation was given by CH2M Hill, and he encouraged everyone to access their website to read that report. Councilmember Flanigan: said that he also attended the UAA meeting; and also attended the State Auditor's Exit Interview concerning the City's first audit; that the audit committee was very impressed; he reported that he attended the meeting of the Senior Center Ad Hoc Committee, which is a committee working on the transition of moving the current senior center to its Mirabeau Point location; and he also attended last night's Library Ad Hoc Committee meeting, which begins the process of reviewing the two proposals received for library services consideration. Council Meeting Minutes: 10 -12 -04 Page 1 of 6 Approved: Draft Councilntentber Taylor: stated that he attended the GMA Steering Committee of Elected• Officials two weeks ago; that they are examining the revised county -wide planning policies, clarifications and updates and are promoting more collaboration for all entities to work closely together on joint planning areas. Cotatcilntember Schimmels: said that he attended the Weed and Seed initial meeting held at Sports USA with the Sheriff's Department and members of SCOPE; and he mentioned that the State Department of Transportation Board will be meeting next Tuesday at Sea -Tae and as our representative, he asked to be excused from next week's council meeting. I1 was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to excuse Councilmentber Schimmels from next Tuesday's meeting. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried Deputy Mayor Wilhite: reported that she also attended the UAA meeting and learned about dissolved oxygen levels in the River; and that she also attended the Library Ad Hoc Committee meeting. As a member of the National Association of Women business Owners (NAWBO), Deputy Mayor Wilhite read the proclamation announcing October 10 -17 as National Association of Women Business Owners Week. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor DeVleming reported that he attended the SCOPE annual recognition dinner which was very well attended; and that the Student Advisory Council had its first official meeting; that the group is ambitious, and have selected their chair, vice chair, and historian. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Meg Arpin, 1117 Fact 35` Spokane Valley, 99203: Said that in reference to the Pines /Mansfield situation, she wanted to bring the issue back to ensure it doesn't lose Council's attention; that she asks Council to discuss the issue with staff in terms of closing the gap that exists between the present funding and the increased cost that were the result of some errors on the part of WSDOT, and whether there is a monetary comfort level among council above the S55,000 that is already committed, but short obviously of the 5900,000 shortfall previously reported; she asked Council to think about some number between Council's present commitment of $55,000 and the $900,000 so that all could move forward, sign mitigation agreements and issue permits; she expressed concern for the property owners who desire permits now; and that situations may not be the same three or four months from now; and that she would appreciate it if discussions did take place, and maybe additional direction be given to staff that whatever that figure might be, that there is some additional willingness to assume some risk over the next six years. Mayor DeVleming invited further public comment; no other comments were offered. L PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2005 Budget — Ken Thompson Mayor DeVleming opened the public hearing at 6:18 p.m. Finance Director Thompson introduced Budget Analyst Courtney Moore, and then proceeded with the PowerPoint presentation. Director Thompson explained that this is the first complete hearing on the 2005 budget and that the second hearing is set for October 26, 2004; and added that this is a balanced budget. After the PowerPoint presentation, Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Gene Semenli, 24608 E Maxwell Lane: West Valley High School Principal: said that the school has a resource officer and they had anticipated that the issue might be discussed tonight on the question of continuing those positions; that he brought several people with him to provide testimonials of the need for those officers, and thanked Council for continuing to fund those positions. Ed Mertens. 1310 N Pierce, Spokane Valley: said that he has seen progress in the City; that he also sees businesses developing and making their appearances better to the public; he feels there will be a need for a tax increase in the future; and that the best thing we can all do is to encourage business in the valley in order to get more tax revenue, and he encouraged everyone to shop in Spokane Valley. Council Mccting Minutes: 10 -12 -04 Approved: Page 2 of 6 VOUCT -IER. T TST DATE VOUCHER Number(s) TOTAL VOUCHER AMOUNT 09 -27 -04 5593 10,000.00 09 -27 -04 5595 -5629 2,288,141.41 09 -27 -04 5631 -5635 18,552.34 09 -28 -04 5636 64.84 10-01-04 5649 -5672 91,418.51 GRAND TOTAL 2,408,177.10 Draft John Eliassen, CEO of pokane Valley Economic Development Cotmcil.: thanked Council for looking at the business plan at the last meeting; said that the 1✓DC's job is to bring new businesses to the Valley to create revenue; and then introduced Randy Fuel, President and Chair of the Board of Trustees, and Rob Gragg, EDC Board Member. Randy Fuel, 1308 S W Cliff Place, Spokane; said that he is also the CEO of Inland Northwest Bank which bought ground in the Valley; he thanked Council for the $55,000 given to the EDC this past year; that with their task of job recruitment they feel there should be approximately 16,000 more jobs by about 2010; and to accomplish their job, they need to double their budget and they're asking for an increased contribution from the City of $175,000; that Inland Northwest Bank is doubling its contribution to the EDC for 2005; and he asked Council t:o think of it as an investment in the creation of jobs needed to balance the budget. Rob Gragg, 201 W Woodwav: stated that he is here as a Board Member of the Spokane Area Economic Development Council and as one of Spokane Valley's largest taxpayers, Crownless Realty, which owns Spokane Industrial Park; that he cannot over - emphasize the importance of economic development; and that the best way to raise the tax base is with economic development and better paying jobs; that Spokane Valley is about to lose Huntwood Industries to the City of Liberty Lake, and that his company is loosing a rental stream of about $960,000 a year; if one were to capitalize that value it has a value of over $10 million; $10 million dollars of value times the current property tax rate which is about $17.05 per $1,000 value, and Spokane Valley will lose $182,000 in tax revenue; and that this amount represents more than the $175,000 that EDC has requested for calendar year 2005. He stated that the Spokane Area Economic Development Council is the best and only cost- efficient way to ensure economic growth in our region. He stated that the EDC has the expertise to help us sell and overcome the anti- business climate in Washington; that the City's investment in EDC should not be viewed as an expense, but viewed as a future revenue generator; and that on behalf of the entire community, and the future of our city, he urged Council to fund the EDC at the requested amount. Mayor DeVleming invited further public comment; no further comments were offered. Mayor DeVleming closed the public hearing at 6:37 p.rn. 2. CONSENT AGENDA Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. A Councilmember may remove an item from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. a. Approval of Regular Council Meeting Minutes of September 28, 2004 h. Approval of Study Session Minutes of ptet- toberj 5, 2004 c. Approval of Payroll of September 15 of $107,033.03 d. Approval of Payroll of September 30, of $156,461.79 e. Approval of Following Vouchers: f. Authorize Use of City Logo Resemblance It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Cow:cil Taylor to waive the reading and approve the consent agenda. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanirnous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Council Meeting Minutes: 10 -12 -04 Approved: Page 3 of 6 Draft NEW BUSINESS 3. First Reading Proposed 2005 Annual Property Tax Ordinance 04 -041 - Ken Thompson After City Clerk Bainbridge read the Ordinance title, it was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Schintmels to advance ordinance 04 -041 to a second reading. Director Thompson gave his PowerPoint presentation, and explained that state laws restrict the amount of property tax receipts that can flow to the City, to a 1.37% increase over the prior years, plus taxes generated by new construction, and that a separate ordinance must be passed by Council to declare the desire to receive the L37% increase. However, this first ordinance must be approved in order to get any property tax at all for next year. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Tony Lazanis, Spokane Valley: said he does not understand the percentage calculation or how that fits with the $1.60 rate. At Council direction, Director Thompson explained that we are allowed $1.60 per $1,000 assessed value; but there is an extra SW to operate the library, and that the total tax rate will not exceed $2.10 per $1,000 of assessed valuation. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 4. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 04-042 Confirming An Excess Property Tax Levy — Ken Thompson After City Clerk Bainbridge read the Ordinance title, it was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite to advance Ordinance 04 -042 to a second reading. Director Thompson explained that budget law states if you want to increase the dollars collected, a separate ordinance must be approved that states in dollar terms and as a percentage what. that does to the taxes that you levy; for this one year only we are levying a 1.37% increase, which equals $126,681. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 5. Motion Consideration: Planning Commission Mayoral Appointments — Mayor DeVleming It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Counciltnenrber Denenny to appoint David Crosby and Bob Bluth to the Planning Commission for three year terms each. Mayor DeVleming explained that there were only two applications for these two available positions, and both incumbent Planning Commission members submitted their application. Mayor DeVleming thanked Mr. Crosby and Mr. Blum for their past service, and for their willingness to serve again. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Bill Gothmann, 10010 East 4 Planning Conrnrission Chair, stated he has a recommendation letter on file and he recommends the applicants, and also expressed his gratitude adding that the applicants are invaluable to the commission. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 6. Motion Consideration: Authorize CenterPlace Change Order — Mike Jackson /Steve Worley It was proved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Counciltnenrber Denenny to authorize the City Manager to approve the CenterPlace change order. Engineer Worley stated that this is a small change order, but because the amount places us so close to the amount authorized for City Manager authority, staff felt it best to bring this to Council; and that this change order includes office space and a server room to house necessary computer equipment. In response to Councilmember Denenny's question concerning housing staff at CenterPlace, City Manager Mercier said with this ten million dollar investment, staff felt it important to have a physical presence in that building, that the area will include storage space, and that building and City Hall will be networked for expedient communication. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Richard Helm, 3626 S .Ridgeview said he was confused about the funding received and questioned if we are justified in taking over that place and wanted to make sure we are not in violation of funding restrictions. City Manager Mercier said that from the origination of the project idea, it has always been known that City employees would need to occupy some space in that building; and when composing bonding for financing that building, our bond council did a detailed review of occupancy and it was his opinion that this fits well within the legal provisions. Yore by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Council Meeting Minutes: 10 -12 -04 Page 4 of 6 Approved: Draft 7. Motion Consideration: Extension of Delegated Authority — Dave Mercier It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Schinunels to extend the authority of the City Manager, or designee, to grant right -of -nay acquisitions. City Manager Mercier explained that this is more of a housekeeping item, that typically councils will delegate right -of -way transactions (as they relate to construction projects) to administrative staff; that in May 2003 such delegation was given to the City Manager but did not include the phrase "city manager or designee" and by so adding the designee this will be consistent with other authority delegated to him. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor; Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS: James Pollard, 17216 E Baldwin Ave, Greenacres, Wa: handed the City Clerk his letter addressing concerns about the north Greenacres area and the necessary steps toward due process; he said that with the rezoning by the County to UR7, the neighborhood petitioned to ask for a rezone, as of this date no answer has been received regarding the rezone; that meanwhile the area has been running through developers; he said that the Planning Commission held a hearing September 23, but the issue became confused and the Commission tabled the matter for two weeks; he said that he is now getting notices that at least one particular developer has entered an application for development, that he feels there will be nothing left of neighborhood by the time the City gets to this issue; that a lot of damage has been done, and that he had asked for a moratorium at one point but has not received a response and he feels the approach being taken does not follow GMA. Mayor DeVleming said Council will direct staff to research the issue and get a response back to Mr. Pollard as soon as possible. Mayor DeVleming invited further public comment; no further comments were offered. Mayor DeVleming; called for a short recess at 7:10 p.m.; he reconvened the meeting at 7:20 p.m. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: [no public comment) 8. Sign Code Committee Update — David Crosby Mr. Crosby explained that the Ad Hoc Sign Committee was charged with the review and update of the existing sign regulations, and added that the Committee has met on a regular basis since June 2004. Mr. Crosby's PowerPoint explained the background, the committee findings, the recommendations to date, and the next steps, which include staff drafting an ordinance for review of the committee and forward to CTED, an eventual public hearing before the Planning Commission, and then to Council for adoption consideration. 9. Code Report — Tom Scholtens Building Official Scholtens said there are two issues which need to be addressed: the Building Code and the Fire Code. i`lr. Scholtens explained the issues as per his October 12, 2004 Request for Council Action, and afterwards remarked that we would need to amend our ordinance to conform with Washington State Code, and if Council desires, to amend the current ordinance to establish a greater hydrant spacing than currently provided, and to have fixed commercial hydrant spacing. After brief discussion, Council stated it has no objection to staff working toward these amendments; and suggested staff work with the fire department to modify the ordinance dealing with fire hydrant placement, and to have meetings with the Water Districts to participate in discussion of these issues. 10. Report on CDBG Project Ideas — Greg McCormick Long Range Planning Manager McCormick gave his PowerPoint presentation concerning Community Development Block Grants. Mr. McCormick reviewed the listed projects as shown on his October 12, 2004 Request for Council Action. He added that the County estimated that the CDBG program will have $1,500,000 in funds to allocate in 2005, and ended by explaining the next steps leading to funding, Mr. McCormick also stated that staff has contacted local school districts for potential projects, and is working with the Public Works Department for additional possible projects. Discussion ensued regarding specific Council Meeting Minutes: 10 -12 -04 Page 5 of 6 Approved: Draft projects, project objectives and definitions to qualify for the grants, and identified locations for proposed projects apparently in business areas. 11. Budget Discussion: Street Fund —Neil Kersten/Ken Thompson Public Works Director Kersten gave his PowerPoint presentation on the Street Fund budget; he mentioned that some of the costs noted will be moved to stormwater, like drywell repair and cleanout, culvert repair and cleanout, and swale maintenance. After hearing the shortfall summary, Mr. Mercier added that we are not the only city with this type of problem as cities across the nation are dealing with similar issues. He proposed that in the next six- years, expenses would accelerate between six and eight percent; that there are other expenses coming such as increased prices for items purchased within the departments, and other factors to consider such as employer contribution of employee retirement, which is slated for a 4% increase effective Jul}; and that there are a series of other increases over the next few years; he explained that as the County pays higher costs for their billings, some of that cost will be transferred as an increase to us. Discussion continued concerning the Consumer Index indicating the rising cost of living, and some of the problems associated with being a contract city. 12. CenterPlace Update — Mike Jackson /Steve Worley Parks and Recreation Director Jackson explained some of the key considerations as the construction of CenterPlace continues; he discussed auditorium audio - visual equipment, anticipated change orders, upcoming contracts for furnishings and kitchen equipment, the overall construction budget, and anticipated needed CenterPlace staff. 13. Centennial Trail Maintenance — Mike Jackson Parks and Recreation Director Jackson said that this is a first touch on the issue of the trail maintenance. Director Jackson explained that we have been invited to join a partnership with the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Spokane County, and the City of Spokane to maintain the trail, and we are being asked to accept maintenance responsibility for the 6.8 miles of trail within our city Limits. The invitation from the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission states that it is exploring the possibilities offered by such a partnership, and would include all agencies in the decision - making protocols of the various jurisdictions; that there is currently a 40 -year Interagency Cooperative Agreement that governs the trail management and sets forth responsibilities of the respective parties. The question before Council is whether we must participate during the year 2005; do we want to be a full partner, should the agreement be re- negotiated and if so, to what extent. In response to Councilmember Flanigan's question concerning use of local hotel /motel lodging funds, Attorney Schwartz said he will examine that issue and respond back to council with his findings. City Manager Mercier said other issues to consider and research include who has basic responsibility to maintain the trail, when was it installed, and what were the contractual obligations at the time the agreement was adopted; what is the appropriate division of responsibility between governmental agencies for various parts of the facilities; and that we need to ensure we have full understanding of all responsibilities contained in the agreement, and build up a fact basis before determining which way to go regarding trail responsibility. There being no further business, it was moved by Councilmember Flanigan, seconded, and unanimously agreed upon to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m. ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Michael DeVleming, Mayor Council Meeting Minutes: 1012 -04 Page 6 o16 Approved: DRAFT Attendance: Councilmembers: Michael DeVleming, Mayor Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Rich Munson, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember MINUTES CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY STUDY SESSION Tuesday, October 1 2004, 6:00 p.m. Staff: Nina Rcgor, Deputy City Manager Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Ken Thompson, Finance Director Neil Kcrstcn, Public Works Director Cal Walker, Police Chief Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Tom Scholtens, Building Official Greg McCormick, Long Range Planning Manager Bing (Greg) Bingaman, IT Specialist Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Chris Berg, Code Enforcement Officer Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor DeVleming opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m., welcomed all in attendance, reminded everyone that this is a study session, and requested that all electronic devices be turned off for the duration of the meeting. 1. PUBLIC REARING: 2005 -2006 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Projects — Greg McCormick Mayor DeVleming opened the public hearing at 6:05 p.m. Long Range Planning Manager McCormick explained that this hearing is a required step in order to be eligible to receive CDBG funding. After giving a brief explanation on the background of the program, and he statutory funding limits on what the funding can be used for, Mr. McCormick explained the funding priorities which are established county- wide as a result of a survey conducted by the County: street improvements are high priority; sidewalks were not rated; sewer improvements were high priority; and planning or economic development were high priority. Mr. McCormick reviewed the projects for consideration: (1) street project on Montgomery from UPRR Crossing to SR 27 (Pines): a grind and replace, not a full reconstruction, with an estimated cost to the city of $464,400; (2) second portion of that project, from Hutchinson to UPRR Crossing, with an estimated cost of $461,700; and (3) an economic development planning project: Urban Design Action 'ream (R/UDAT) which is a grass -roots type of approach to help communities identify actions that would increase livability, with an estimated cost of $25,000. Mr. McCormick then explained the next steps in the process. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Mary Pollard, Greenacres. Wa: in order to assist those interested in participating in this process, she asked if materials might be made available (in the future), to help members of the public understand what is at issue, and that it would help if Council explain what CDBG stands for. At Council direction, Mr. McCormick explained what CDBG stands for, and said that the County has all the program information which can be found at their website. Mayor DeVleming invited further public comment, no further comments were offered. Council discussion continued regarding the Mansfield interchange that affects Montgomery road. Mr. Worley explained that Spokane County Public Works determined which are the worst streets which Study Session Minutes of 10.19 -04 Page 1 of 4 Approved by Counci I; DRAFT would qualify under this program, and that this road came up high in terms of needing to be replaced due to road condition and amount of traffic. There being no further discussion, Mayor DeVleming closed the public hearing at 6:16 p.m. 2. Motion Consideration: CDBG Project Selection — Greg McCormick it was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Denenny to approve the list of project applicants. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 3. First Reading Proposed Street Vacation Ordinance — Marina Sukup After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Schimmels to advance Ordinance 04 -043 to a second reading. Community Development Director Sukup went over the background including information about the public hearing held by the Planning Commission. She explained that a portion of that road is still under jurisdiction of' Washington State Department of Transportation ( WSDOT) so the request had to be amended; she explained that the Sprague Avenue right -of -way and a portion of David Road 20 feet south of the Sprague Avenue right-of- way were conveyed to WSDOT for the same project; that the applicant wants to acquire the property to construct 208- swales; and that portion must be declared as surplus as shown on the map. Discussion ensued regarding easements, utilities, wastewater interceptors, and procedure to declare the property (or a portion of it) surplus. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor DeVleming, Deputy Mayor Wilhite, and Councilmembers .Schimmels, Munson, Flanigan and Denenny; Opposed: Councilmember Taylor. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 4. Budget Discussion, Outside Agency Funding - Nina Rcgor Deputy City Manager Regor explained the background concerning these outside agency funding requests for the 2005 budget; and went over what the 2004 funding results were; she said that staff seeks direction on the 2005 allocation to include in the budget. Ms. Regor also mentioned that regarding comments made last week from members of the Economic Development Council (EDC), that they were speaking about the value of the EDC in the business community, with the tax rate of about $17, and that a ten million dollar value would produce about $180,000 in tax revenue for Spokane Valley; but that actually $17 is the consolidated tax rate for this area which includes the school and fire districts; so the revenue figure would be closer to $16,000 to $20,000. Concerning these outside agency requests, $100,000 has been proposed for the 2005 budget, and request totals came to about $267,483. After examining and discussing the chart and figures showing each councilmember's suggested allocation for each agency, it was suggested to allocate funds the same as those allocated during 2004, except move $1,000 from the Chase Youth Foundation to the Spokane Valley Meals on Wheels. Deputy Mayor Wilhite said she feels marry of these social agencies should not be competing with the. EDC for the same funding, and it was Council consensus to include a separate line item for the EDC in future budgets. 5. Code Enforcement Update - Tom Scholtens /Chris Berg Building Official Scholtens and Code Enforcement Officer Berg explained some of the history concerning code enforcement, and how it has been helping citizens understand and comply with the various civil laws Council has provided. Mr. Scholtens and Berg gave their PowerPoint presentation showing numerous examples of "before" and "after" pictures in dealing with general nuisance complaints, environmental/hazardous complaints, solid waste complaints, etc,; and mentioned we have no ordinance yet on weed control. They discussed how the number of pending cases was steadily increasing until the hiring of the second code enforcement officer, and how she has made a direct impact on those numbers; that all abatements that have taken place thus far are voluntary; and they ended with an explanation of the mobile automation system and how it dramatically increases productivity. Deputy City Manager Regor commended staff for their work and added that staff has been building cooperative arrangements and Study Scssion Minutes of 10 -19 -04 Pagc 2 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT partnerships with other agencies like the police and fire departments, Health District, and Department of Ecology. It was mentioned that since incorporation there have been approximately 1100 cases abated. 6. Scooters (safety, nuisance) Cary Driskell Deputy City Attorney Driskell, Legal intern Josh Leonard, and Police Chief Walker went over the background concerning motorized foot scooters and that staff was directed to address the issue of scooters from a safety and nuisance stance, and to review and perhaps incorporate into our own ordinance, some of the City of Spokane's draft scooter ordinance. Mr. Driskell also mentioned the issue of parental responsibility needs to be resolved concerning underage use of scooters, and the issue of confiscation. Chief Walker added that there is always the option of using the juvenile referral process for underage users of motorized scooters. Discussion ensued regarding the operation of scooters on sidewalks, and use of radar to track the speeds of the devises. It was decided to move forward to include parental responsibility and confiscation, and to examine the language concerning not allowing any modification to the device as that might mean no one could add brakes to a scooter if they did not come so equipped. Attorney Driskell added that once more information becomes available on statistics and actual use, the ordinance can be modified later as needed. It was Council consensus to proceed. 7. Panhandling Research Report Cal Walker /Cary Driskell Chief Walker summarized his October 11 report, and showed several slides of areas of concerns; he mentioned that he met with several individuals from various social agencies to discuss ways to work together in contacting the homeless to assist them in their situation and to also aid in criminal prevention; he mentioned that at I -90 and Sullivan next to the Mirabeau Hotel, there have been about fifteen to twenty people camping regularly in a spot near the freeway; that most businesses don't want the transients using their facilities; and with the people camping in that and other areas, human waste is a problem; that some of these people are mentally impaired, and he asked how Council desires to address this in the community. Discussion turned to the issue of people passing money from their cars to the panhandlers which at times infringes on the flow of traffic; and along with this to perhaps set some guidelines about people volunteering their time to solicit donations for valid charities. Mayor DeVleming asked what we can do to help protect businesses in the community and those who are being victimized by those campers. Chief Walker will direct his staff to work on camping issue, and Attorney Driskell said he will also check to sec the approach used by other Cities facing these similar issues $. Special Events Ordinance Amendments - Cal Walker Chief Walker summarized his October 19, 2004 memo concerning the coordination of special events, and of perhaps further refining the city's ordinance. He mentioned that these special events raise many concerns such as noise, traffic congestion, and other public safety issues; that we presently to not have the tools to handle a large influx of people; that perhaps a fee should be associated with these permits to cover costs, and that some process must be in place to coordinate all efforts from the various departments who will need to be involved. Council gave consensus for staff to work toward creating something more workable. 9. Massage Parlors /Bath Houses Regulations - Cal Walker Chief Walker explained that this is the first touch on this issue, and wanted to generate discussion on the licensing procedure; that there are three bathhouses /massage parlors within our city limits, and apparently there is no ordinance regulating these establishments; and that he requests Council consider establishing an ordinance that mirrors the existing County requirements for licensing establishments and employees, adding that he has received numerous phones calls concerning this subject. Attorney Driskell said he examined the County's ordinance which was enacted in 1973, and that he has some suggestions for change. There was no objection for staff to move forward with this issue, to review the complete application process and tie it in to cost recovery. Study Session Minutes of 10- 19-04 Page 3 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT 10. B3 Uses in 12 Zones - Marina Sukup Community Development Director Sukup explained that during the next several months, the Planning Commission will be working on implementing regulations for the Comprehensive Plan, and that part of that will entail reviewing the schedules of permitted and accessory uses included in the matrices, as well as the definitions associated with those uses; that in reference to Ordinance 03 -053, Council added back a number of uses that had been deleted, and that the same ordinance amended the provisions relating to nonconforming uses but only as to those deemed nonconforming as a result of our adoption of the ordinance. As an example, Ms. Sukup said when the County adopted their ordinance, they got rid of slaughterhouses, but failed to get rid of animal processing and stockyards plants. Councilmember Denenny said he would like to see some examples of situations we would be dealing with or examining to change, and discussion included future land use, land use in terms of existing uses, and consistency. Director Sukup said this is a first touch on this subject and is brought as an information item that the Planning Commission will be working on this including the definitions. It was moved by Councilmember Munson, seconded, and unanimously agreed upon to extend the meeting fifteen minutes. 11. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming Councilmember Taylor brought up the topic of the upcoming proposed utility tax proposal and of the importance of hearing from the public on this topic; and that although Council has been discussing this issue for several weeks, it does not want the public to perceive that next week will be the first real discussion. Deputy City Manager Regor said that based on next week's discussion, she can put some information on our website. Councilmember Munson said probably in the fall of next year, a decision should be made about being an entitlement city for community development grants, and feels the need for discussion to develop consensus on how much funding we get and what to do with those funds and that he would like to get that discussion started. Mayor DeVleming asked staff to get the schedule from Mr. McCormick and work backward in putting those dates on the advance agenda. Mayor DeVleming mentioned that the Student Advisory Council has been working on their by -laws, and that Council must approve them, and that a presentation is set for December 7 with approval consideration set for December 14, and that he expects some or all of the students present at the December 7 study session. 12. Council Check -in — Nina Regor Deputy City Manager Regor asked if Council had any other issues to address and they indicated there were none. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Michael DeVleming, Mayor Study Session Minutes of 10 -19 -04 Page 4 of 4 Approved by Council: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: ATTACHMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 10 -26 -04 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: x consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Payroll for Period Ending October 15, 2004 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Payroll for period ending 10 -15 -04 Salary: $ 98,526.20 Benefits: $ 10,466.48 $ 108,992.68 STAFF CONTACT: Daniel Cenis /Courtney Moore Meeting Date: 10 - 26 - 04 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: x consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve claims for vouchers 5673 through 5705 for a total of $37,974.55 BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Mary Baslington ATTACHMENTS Voucher Lists CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Voucher List of claims vchlist 10/06/2004 4:37:59PM Bank code : apbank Voucher ' Date Vendor 5673 5674 5675 5676 5677 5678 5679 5680 5681 5682 5683 5684 Invoice Voucher List Spokane Valley 10/7/2004 000197 AIR 71375 10/7/2004 000101 CDWG OW96977 10/7/2004 000508 CONOCOPHILLIPS FLEET 870166725409 10/7/2004 000060 DENENNY, RICHARD 10/01/04 Denenny 10/7/2004 000059 DEVLEMING, MICHAEL 10/01/04 - DeVleming 10/05/04 MD Reimb. 10/7/2004 000072 FLANIGAN, MIKE 10/01/04 Flanigan 10/7/2004 000022 INLAND BUSINESS PRODUCTS, INC. 518.81 10/7/2004 000070 INLAND POWER AND LIGHT CO 9/29/04 IPL 10/7/2004 000288 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL • 0829315 -IN 10/7/2004 000353 INTERNATIONAL TRADE ALLIANCE 215 10/7/2004 000388 IRVIN WATER DIST. #6 112500.0 10/1/04 10/7/'2004 000117 JOURNAL NEWS PUBLISHING 25150 2 5151 25152 PO # 40113 Description /Account EMPLOYEE BACKGROUND CHECK Total : 40316 SMALL TOOLS & MINOR EQUIPMEt Total : Total : Total : VEHICLE FUEL CELL PHONE - DENENNY CELL PHONE - DEVLEMING REIMB. TRAVEL/MILEAGE Total : CELL PHONE - FLANIGAN Total : EMPLOYEE PHOTO I.D. CARD Total : STREET POWER LIGHTING PUBLICATIONS WATER CHARGES ADVERTISING ADVERTISING ADVERTISING Total : Total : PROF. SERVICES - ECONOMIC DEVI Total : Total : Page: 1 Amount 50.00 50.00 526.40 526.40 796.02 796.02 70.00 70.00 70.00 65.13 135.13 70.00 70.00 17.34 17.34 372.95 372.95 158.13 158.13 3,500.00 3,500.00 949.65 949.65 37.50 43.50 42.75 1 vchlist 10/06/2004 4:37:59PM Bank code : apbank Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount 5684 10/7/2004 000117 000117 JOURNAL NEWS PUBLISHING (Continued) Total : 123.75 5685 10/7/2004 000164 LABOR & INDUSTRIES 1015/04 Volunteer VOLUNTEER L & I 16.89 Total : 16.89 5686 10/7/2004 000650 LAVALLEY, TERRY 10/05/04 Refund REFUND COMPLETION BOND 1,000.00 Total : 1,000.00 5687 10/7/2004 000033 MCPC 4614260 40298 OFFICE FURNITURE 379.42 4614604 40310 OFFICE SUPPLIES 216.65 4615646 40320 OFFICE SUPPLIES 903.6 i 4616427 OFFICE SUPPLIES 44.78 Total : 1,544.46 5688 10/7/2004 000258 MICROFLEX INC. 00015201 TAXTOOLS SOFTWARE RENTAL 559.23 Total : 559.23 5689 10/7/2004 000549 MOBILE OFFICE VEHICLE, INC. 04-35958 SMALL TOOLS & MINOR EQUIPMEP 348.40 40321 Total : 348.40 5690 10/7/2004 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER COMPANY 09/29/044 Modem STREET LIGHTING POWER/WATEF 7,895.92 Total : 7,895.92 5691 10/7/2004 000052 MUNSON, RICHARD 10/01/04 Munson CELL PHONE - MUNSON 70.00 Total : 70.00 5692 10 /7/2004 000058 OCCUPATIONAL MEDICINE, ASSOCIATE A500163 10/1/04 EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS 202.00 Total : 202.00 5693 10 /7/2004 000024 RESOURCE COMPUTING INC. 36292B IT SUPPORT 3,459.20 Total : 3,459.20 5694 10 /7/2004 000651 ROCKIN' D W CONSTRUCTION, INC. 9/20 Refund REFUND FOR PERMIT 73.75 Total : 73.75 5695 10/7/2004 000415 ROSAUERS U -CITY 481319 MEETING AND OPERATING SUPPL 14.25 Page: 2 vchlist 10/0612004 4:37:59PM Bank code : Voucher 5695 5696 5697 5698 5699 5700 5701 5702 5703 5704 5705 apbank Date Vendor 1017/2004 000415 000415 ROSAUERS U -CITY 10/7/2004 000064 SCHIMMELS, GARY 10/7/2004 000406 SPOKANE REGIONAL CVB 10/7/2004 000063 TAYLOR, STEVE 10/7/2004 000093 THE SPOKESMAN- REVIEW 10/7/2004 000167 VERA WATER & POWER 10/7/2004 000061 WILHITE, DIANA 10 /7/2004 000649 WSBA 33 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Invoice 10/1/04 Voucher List Spokane Valley (Continued) 10/01/04 - Schimmels 10/7/2004 000081 STATE OF WA, DEPART OF REVENUE 602 251 431 6 9/04 10/01/04 Taylor 42801 9130/04 09/30/04 Vera 10/7/2004 000409 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT, 01 Z 600202105 10/7/2004 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 1326605- 2681 -4 1326607- 2681 -2 1326608- 2681 -0 1326609 - 2681 -8 1326610- 2681 -6 1326611- 2681 -4 10/01/04 Wilhite 24087 2004/2005 PO # 40311 Description /Account CELL PHONE - SCHIMMELS TOURISM MARKETING CELLPHONE - TAYLOR ADVERTISING Total : Total : Total : COMBINED EXCISE TAX RETURN Total : Total : Total : STREET POWER LIGHTINGANATEF Total : LEASEHOLD EXCISE TAX RETURN Total : WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICES WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICES CELL PHONE - WILHITE Total : Total : WSBA SECTION MEMBERSHIP Total : Bank total : Page: 3 Amount 14.25 70.00 70.00 12,500.00 12,500.00 53.37 53.37 70.00 70.00 30.00 30.00 1,933.29 1,933.29 192.60 192.60 260.10 191.91 173.39 158.25 96.10 182.07 1,061.82 70.00 70.00 40.00 40.00 37,974.55 °age' 3 vchlist 10/0612004 4:37:59PM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount 33 Vouchers in this report 1, 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 1p, 4,oX Date Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 4 Total vouchers : 37,974.55 Page: 4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 10 -26 -2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business new business ❑ information ❑ admin. report X pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Second Reading of Proposed Property Tax Ordinance for 2005 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: State Law PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: There has been discussion at study sessions regarding the anticipated amount of property tax revenue for the 2005 budget. A public hearing was held on September 14 to review 2005 projected revenues, including the property tax levy. A public hearing was held on October 12, to discuss the 2005 proposed budget which included proposed property taxes. The first reading of the property tax ordinance was held on October 12, 2004. BACKGROUND: State law requires the City to pass an ordinance in order to levy property taxes. 2005 will be the second year the City has a property tax levy. The City is limited to a maximum of $3.60 per thousand dollars of assessed value, less the highest levy rate authorized by a fire district within the city limits of the City of Spokane Valley. OPTIONS: This ordinance is required by law. The council could modify the ordinance to levy an amount less than that proposed, and reduce the budget an equal amount. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: A motion to pass the ordinance levying property taxes for the 2005 budget for the City of Spokane Valley is recommended. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This ordinance levies property tax for the City's 2005 budget year. We expect property tax revenues to be near $9.87 million once growth in assessed value and the allowable increase in the tax levy have been included. Property taxes make up 36% of General Fund revenues. STAFF CONTACT: Finance & Admin. Services Director, Ken Thompson DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE. NO. 04-041 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA.SiI:INGTON, LEVYING THE REGULAR PROPERTY TAXES FOR THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON iN SPOKANE COUNTY FOR THE YEAR COMIlV.i:ENCING JANUARY 1., 2005 TO PROVIDE REVENUE FOR CITY SERVICES AS SET FORTH IN THE CITY BUDGET. WHEREAS, State law authorizes the City of Spokane Valley to levy regular property taxes upon the taxable property within the corporate limits in order to provide revenue for the 2005 current expense ..budget of the City; WHEREAS, the City of Spokanc Valley is authorized to levy $3.60 per thousand of assessed valuation deducting therefrom the highest levy collected by a Fire District within the Spokane Valley city limits; WHEREAS, RCW 84.52.020 requires the City Council on or before the 15 day of November to certify budget estimates to the clerk of the Spokane County Board of Commissioners including amounts to be raised by taxing property within the limits of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council pursuant to notice held public hearings on September 14, October 12 and October 26 on the proposed budget estimates for 2005 including revenue sources which will fund the provision of City services, projects and activities. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane - Valley, Washington, do ordain as follows: Section 1. 2005 Levy Rate. There shall be and is hereby levied and imposed upon real property, personal property and utility property, as defined in RCW Chapter 84.02 and 84.55.005 in the City of Spokane Valley, Washington a regular property tax for the year commencing January 1, 2005 in the total amount of $9,870,000.00. It is recognized that fire districts are authorized to levy upon property within the City at a rate of up to $1.50 per one thousand of assessed valuation and the City intends to • provide up to $.50 per one thousand dollars of assessed valuation pursuant to a contract for library services, therefore the total Icvy rate shall not exceed $3.60 per one thousand dollars of assessed valuation, less the amount of the highest fire district levy within the city limits of the City of Spokane Valley. The regular property tax levied through this ordinance is for the purpose of receiving revenue to make payment upon the general indebtedness of the City of Spokane Valley, the general fund obligations and for the payment of services projects and activities for the City during the 2005 calendar year. The purpose of this ordinance is to establish the levy amount as permitted by law. Section 2. Notice to Spokane County. Pursuant to RCW 84.52.020 the City Clerk shall certify to the County Legislative Authority a true and correct copy of this ordinance, as well as the budget estimates adopted by the City Council in order to provide for and direct the taxes levied herein that shall be collected and paid to the City of Spokane Valley at the time and in the manner provided by the laws of the State of Washington. Ordinance 04 -041 Property Tax Levy Page 1 of 2 DRAFT Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionally of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. ATTEST: PASSED by the City Council this day of , 2004. City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved As To Form: Deputy City Attorney, Cary P. Driskell Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 04 - 041 Property Tax Levy Mayor, Michael DeVieming Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 26, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business X new business public hearing ❑ admin. report X pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Proposed Ordinance Confirming 2005 Property Tax Levy GOVERNING LEGISLATION: State budget law PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: The 2005 proposed revenues were presented to the City Council on August 24, as an informational item. A public hearing was held on September 14, to discuss projected revenues including authorized increases in property taxes under state law. The public was invited to offer comment at the September 14 hearing. Additional public hearings were held on October 12 and 26 to consider the entire 2005 proposed budget including property tax revenues. At the council meeting on October 12, the city council passed the first reading of this ordinance. BACKGROUND: State budget law requires we make our revenue projections known and conduct a public hearing to consider input from the public. At the public hearing on September 14, special mention was made of property tax increases including the limited allowable annual increase. The City is required to pass an ordinance expressing our desire to levy the limited annual increase in the property tax levy. The proposed ordinance is attached. OPTIONS: State law requires an ordinance be passed confirming our desire to levy the annual allowable increase in property tax. A second option would be for the council to decide not to pass the resolution and find $126,681 in additional reductions in the 2005 budget. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: A motion to adopt the ordinance is recommended. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The city will receive an increase of $126,681 (1.37 %) in property tax dollars in 2005 if this ordinance is passed. STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance Director CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 04 -042 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON, CONFIRMING THE CITY PROPERTY TAX LEVY AT 1.37% (5126,681) IN EXCESS OF THE 2003 AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAX LEVY WHICH WAS COLLECTEI) IN THE CITY 2004 FISCAL YEAR, PURSUANT TO RCW 84.55.120 WHEREAS, State law authorizes the City of Spokane Valley to levy regular property taxes upon the taxable property within the City limits in order to provide revenue for the annual Current Expense Budget of the City; WHEREAS, Initiative 747 (RCW Chapter 84.55) provided that cities with a population of over 10,000 persons can increase the amount of their regular property taxes annually by the lesser amount of inflation or 101% of the highest levy, plus any additional value resulting from new construction, improvements and state assessed property; WHEREAS, State law protects future levy capacity to the extent the full amount of the ad valorem property tax authorized by law has not been levied (ie. "Increased Capacity "); WHEREAS, to increase the amount of property taxes by more than 101% in any given year, the City's property tax rate must have been below the maximum amount authorized by law (ie. "Increased Capacity"); WHEREAS, an increase in property tax revenue may be authorized by the City through adoption of a separate ordinance, pursuant to notice, specifically authorizing the increase stated in terms of dollars and percentage. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, do ordain as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to utilize excess levy capacity of the City (the Increased Capacity) that resulted from the tax levy in 2003 for the city 2004 fiscal year. State law authorizes the City to increase its property taxes by an amount of 1% above the highest lawful allowable levy in a preceding year (excepting new construction, improvements and .assessment of State owned property). The taxes received from the increased levy set forth herein and the regular property tax levied through Ordinance 04 -041 are appropriated in the 2005 City Budget. Section 2. Findings. A. The City, following public hearings, will adopt a balanced Current Expense Budget that sets forth citizen priorities and promotes the health, welfare and safety oldie City. B. The City published notice of this Ordinance through the procedure used to notify the public of regular Council meetings. C. To support the adopted Current Expense Budget of the City and provide for the delivery of services, the malting of improvements and promote the health, welfare and safety of the citizens, the City Council, after considering the financial requirements of the City for 2005, finds and determines that there is substantial need to levy an ad valorem property tax in the maximum amount allowed by State law. D. This Ordinance has been adopted by a majority of the City Council plus one. Ordinance 04 -042 Additional 1'ropTax Paige 1 of 2 Section 3. Levy. There is hereby and shall be levied against all property within the corporate limits of the City of Spokane Valley, for the 2005 City Fiscal Year (January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005) the maximum levy allowed by State law pursuant to RCW Chapter 84.55. The City hereby levies and imposes upon real property, personal property and utility property, as defined in the laws of Washington in the City of Spokane Valley, Washington an increase in the regular property tax levy (in addition to the increase resulting from the addition of new construction, improvements and the increased value of State assessed property), in the amount of $126,681.00 which is a percentage increase of 1.37% from the 2003 M Valorem Property Tax Levy, which was collected in the City 2004 Fiscal Year. Section 4. City Clerk. The City Clerk shall certify a copy of this Ordinance and forward the same to the Board of County Commissioners and the Spokane County Assessors Office upon its passage. Section 5. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision 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. Al 1 EST: Passed by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley on , 2004. Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Deputy City Attorney, Cary P. Driskell Date of Publication : Effective Date: Mayor, Michael DeVleming Ordinance 04 -042 Additional PropTax Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 26, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent old business El new business public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report X pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : 2005 Proposed Budget Ordinance GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Passage of an ordinance is required under state law to adopt the 2005 City Budget. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Public hearings on the proposed budget for 2005 were held on September 14, October 12 and October 26. OPTIONS: The City Council could conduct the first reading of the attached budget ordinance. The City Council could also elect to consider the first reading of the ordinance adopting the 2005 budget at a later date. The council could also modify the amounts appropriated within this ordinance and conduct the first reading. However, ordinances take two readings and the second reading must take place prior to December 24, 2004 to comply with state law. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: A motion to conduct the first reading of the 2005 budget ordinance is recommended. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Once passed, this will be the adopted budget for 2005. STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance /Administrative Services Director FUND ESTIMATED APPROPRIATION GENERAL FUND 528,381,796 STREET FUND 3,318,066 ARTERIAL, STREET FUND 856,400 TRAILS & PATHS FUND -0- HOTEL/MOTEL FUND 300,000 DEIST SERVICE LTGO 03 582,835 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 332,545 SPECIAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 205,145 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 04- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE • VALLEY, WASITINGTON, ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 2005 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2005 APPROPRIATING FUNDS AND ESTABLISHING SALARY SCHEDULES FOR ESTABLISHED POSITIONS. WHEREAS, State law requires the City Manager to prepare a preliminary budget for the City of Spokane Valley at least sixty (60) days before the beginning of the City .fiscal year beginning January 1, 2005 and ending December 31, 2005; WHEREAS, the City Manager in consultation with the Finance Director and Department Heads has prepared and placed on file with the City Clerk a preliminary budget together with an estimate of the amount of money necessary to meet the expenses of the City including payment of outstanding obligations; WHEREAS, notice was posted and published October 1 and 8, 2004 that the City Council in the City of Spokane Valley would meet and receive public continent in the City Council Chambers prior to the adoption of the budget. WHEREAS, following the filing of the preliminary budget with the City Clerk, notice of the same and a hearing on the budget, the City Council desires to adopt the 2005 budget, including all allowances and an appropriation for each fund so that a balanced budget, where appropriations are limited to the estimated revenues, is adopted for the City. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as follows: Section 1. Adoption of 2005 Budget. The budget for the City of Spokane Valley for the year of 2005 is hereby adopted as the balanced budget of the City with appropriations limited to the total estimated revenues of the City. The final budget for 2005 is attached hereto and by this reference is incorporated herein pursuant to RCW 35A.33.075. For summary purposes the total estimated appropriations for each separate fund plus the aggregate total for all such funds are set forth as follows: Budget Appropriation Ordinance 2005 Page 1 oft STREET CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND 933,000 MJRABEAU POINT CAPITAL FUND 3,000,000 STREET BOND CAPITAL FUND 406,000 CD BLOCK GRANT FUND -0- CAPITAL GRANTS FUND 3,827,000 BARKER BRIDGE FEDERAL FUND 234,000 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FUND 1,512,521 EQUIPMENT R &R FUND 66,051 R1SK MANAGEMENT FUND 134,450 DRAFT The total balance of all funds appropriated for the year 2005 is $44,089,809. Section 2. Positions and Salary Schedules. The various positions and salary ranges for City Employees are attached to this Ordinance as Appendix "A." Section 3. Transmittal of Buda, A complete copy of the budget as adopted, together with a copy of this Ordinance shall be transmitted by the City Clerk to the Division of Municipal Corporations in the Office of the State Auditor and the Association of Washington Cities. Section 4. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after the date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City PASSED by the City Council this day of , 200_. ATTEST: Michael DeVleming, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved As To Form: Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Budget Appropriation Ordinance 2005 Page 2 of 2 Position Title Grade 2005 Range City Manager Unclassified Deputy City Manager 21 $ 7,020 - $ 9,000 Community Development Director 21 7,020 - 9,000 Finance Director 21 7,020 - 9,000 Public Works Director 21 7,020 - 9,000 Parks and Recreation Director 19 5,686 - 7,290 City Engineer 19 5,686 - 7,290 Planning Manager 18 5,118 - 6,561 Building Official 18 5,118 - 6,561 Senior Engineer - Capital Projects, Development 18 5,118 - 6,561 Senior Engineer - Traffic, CIP Planning /Grants 17 4,606 - 5,905 Deputy City Attorney 16 4,145 - 5,314 City Clerk 16 4,145 - 5,314 Senior Planner 16 4,145 - 5,314 Accounting Manager 16 4,145 - 5,314 IT Specialist 15 3,731 - 4,783 Associate Planner 15 3,731 - 4,783 Assistant Engineer 15 3,731 - 4,783 Public Works Superintendent 15 3,731 - 4,783 Accountant/Budget Analyst 14 3,358 - 4,305 Administrative Analyst 14 3,358 - 4,305 Assistant Planner 14 3,358 - 4,305 Building Inspector II 14 3,358 - 4,305 Plans Examiner 14 3,358 - 4,305 GIS Technician 14 3,358 - 4,305 Engineering Technician 14 3,358 - 4,305 Maintenance /Construction Inspector 13 -14 3,022 - 4,305 Recreation Coordinator 13 -14 3,022 - 4,305 Code Enforcement Officer 13 3,022 - 3,874 Building Inspector I 13 3,022 - 3,874 Planning Technician 13 3,022 - 3,874 Deputy City Clerk 12 -13 2,720 - 3,874 Senior Center Specialist 12 -13 2,720 - 3,874 Maintenance Worker II 12 2,720 - 3,487 Administrative Assistant 11 -12 2,448 - 3,487 Permit Specialist 11 -12 2,448 - 3,487 Accounting Technician 11 -12 2,448 - 3,487 Maintenance Worker I 10 -12 2,203 - 3,487 Office Assistant II 10 -11 2,203 - 3,138 Office Assistant I 9 -10 1,983 - 2,824 Recreation Assistant 5 1,301 - 1,668 Appendix A 2005 Salary Schedule Appendix A EMPLOYEE POSITION CLASSIFICATION MONTHLY SALARY SCHEDULE 2005 Salary Schedule Picture to come Preliminary Budget January 1 — December 31, 2005 Updated October 7, 2004 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY — 2005 BUDGET Table of Contents Budget Message Councilmembers & Staff 1 Budget Introduction 2 City Manager Budget Message 5 Budget Guide About the Budget & the Budget Process 12 Spokane Valley Budget Policies 15 Basis of Accounting and Budgeting 16 Explanation of Revenue Sources 18 Budget Summary Revenue Assumptions 22 Expenditure Assumptions 23 Budget Summary 24 Revenues by Type 25 General Fund Revenue Sources Chart 26 City -Wide Revenue Sources Chart 27 Detail Revenues by Type 28 Expenditures by Department 30 General Fund Expenditures by Department by Type 31 General Fund Expenditures by Department Chart 32 General Fund Expenditures by Type Chart 33 Expenditures General Fund: Legislative Branch 34 Executive & Legislative Support 36 Public Safety 38 Contract Expenditures Chart 40 Operations & Administrative Services 41 Public Works 45 Planning & Community Development 47 Library 50 Parks & Recreation 51 General Government 57 All Other Funds: Street Fund 58 Arterial Street Fund 59 Trails & Paths Fund 59 Hotel/Motel Fund 60 Debt Service Funds 61 Capital Projects & Special Capital Projects Funds 62 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY — 2005 BUDGET Table of Contents Street Capital Projects Fund 63 Mirabeau Point Capital Project Fund 64 Street Bond Fund 64 Capital Grants Fund 65 Barker Bridge — Fed Grant Fund 65 Stormwater Management Fund 66 Equipment Rental & Replacement Fund 67 Risk Management Fund 68 City Profile & Other Budget I General Fund Capital Expenditures 69 All Other Funds Capital Expenditures 70 Position Listing by Department 71 Full Time Equivalent Count by Year 72 2004 Workforce Comparison 73 Community Profile and History 74 Budget Ordinance 78 Glossary 81 10/7/2004 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY City Council Members Michael DeVleming, Mayor Position #3 Steve Taylor Position #2 Richard Munson Position #5 Dick Denenny Position #7 Staff David Mercier, City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Ken Thompson, Finance, & Administrative Services Director Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Mike Jackson, Parks & Recreation Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Tom Scholtens, Building Official Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk 1 Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Position #1 Gary Schimmels Position #4 Mike Flanigan Position #6 City of Spokane Valley Introduction of the FY 2005 Preliminary Budget Prepared By David Mercier, City Manager September 14, 2004 A. It is my pleasure to submit a "balanced" preliminary budget for Council consideration. This budget proposal acknowledges the fiscal constraints of the City and concentrates on sustaining core program responsibilities, consistent with directionfrom the City Council. B. Again this year, the City Council Finance Committee has worked closely with administrative staff in examining and understanding the budget construction process, the cost control methods applied to the emerging budget, and the financial data upon which the budget is based C. As prescribed by City Council, the six (6) specific goals for Council and staff focus and accomplishment in 2005 are: • Adopt Spokane Valley's First Comprehensive Plan in compliance with the requirements of the Growth Management Act, including an accepted vision statement, documentation of land use goals in support of that vision and identification of significant transportation system goals linked to implementation of the Plan. • Enact a Uniform Development Code that collates all of the City development related regulations into a single, understandable reference that streamlines the permitting process and facilitates customer service and business development. • Recompose the Five - Year Financial Forecast into a Six - Year Strategic Financial Plan that forecasts revenues and expenses; identifies fiscal constraints; and, formulates for Council consideration a budget - balancing plan that proposes necessary service reductions or increased revenues or a combination thereof. • Advance the Interests of Spokane Valley through Effective External Relations such as building a constructive relationship with the newly - composed Board of County Commissioners; participating as full members of regional and statewide boards and Commissions whose work affects the quality of life in the community, and by advocating city issues with neighboring jurisdictions, municipal organizations, the Legislature and Congress. • Collaborate with Wastewater Dischargers and Regulatory Agencies in analyzing data related to system acquisition options and in pursuit of interim and long - term resolutions to water quality and wastewater treatment capacity concerns so that economic development and natural resources continue to support the vitality of the region. 10/7/2004 2 • Establish a formal city -wide customer service program with emphasis on . timely response, a user- friendly atmosphere, and an attitude of facilitation and accommodation within the bounds of responsibility, integrity, and financial capability of the City, including organizational and job description documents while pursuing "best practices" in customer service. D. Conservative fiscal policies geared toward the attainment of long -term financial health for the City are recommended for adoption in the Final Budget. Meeting the targets established by these fiscal policies require a commitment to fund only those levels of service that are fiscally sustainable. E. This Preliminary Budget adheres to thefiscally responsible principles established last year. Several measures worthy of comment are: 1. The utilization of conservative revenue projections and realistic expenditure forecasts in the construction of this budget proposal—guarding against fiscal disappointments. 2. The constraint of programmatic growth —no new programs. 3. The commitment to fully pay -off the interfvnd loan used to defray start-up costs and thus end the year with a modest positive fund balance— moving out of the red and into the black 4. The maintenance of a CenterPlace Operating Reserve that will function as a hedge against any lag in the receipt of state funding upon which repayment of construction bonds are dependent —no delay in receipts to date. 5. The funding of a $500,000 Operating Contingency that will serve as the City's first line of defense against unforeseen expenses. F. Several positive fiscal indicators are reflected in the proposed Preliminary Budget. They include: 1. Increases in sales tax receipts apparently due to improved use of the correct Spokane Valley #3213 geo- code by local businesses filing reports with the Washington State Department of Revenue. 2. Continued leveraging of state and federal funds to reduce the cost of local capital improvements borne by city residents. 3. Closely controlling the number of new employees hired. Total direct employment funded in FY 2005 is 52.2 full time equivalent positions versus 46.95 in 2004 —a change of only 5.25 FTE's. Two positions are related to the new CenterPlace Community Building due for completion in 2005. Two positions are needed to replace the Stormwater Management Utility work formerly provided by the County as a contract service. The other one and a fraction positions relate to capital project grant solicitation, design and monitoring. 10/7/2004 3 G. The remaining action steps toward adoption of the budget include 1. October 5: Departmental highlights and work program presentations. 2. October 12: Public hearing to take citizen comment on the 2005 proposed budget 3. October 12: First reading of the Proposed Property Tax Levying Ordinance. 4. October 12: Budget discussions and focus on the Street Fund. 5. October 19: Continued general budget discussions. 6. October 26: A final public bearing on the proposed budget. 7. October 26: Second reading of the Proposed Property Tax Levying Ordinance 8. October 26: Adoption of the Proposed Fee Resolution. 9. October 26: First reading of the Proposed 2005 Budget Ordinance. 10. November 9: Second reading of the Proposed 2005 Budget Ordinance 11. November 9: Adoption of the FY 2005 Budget. H. As a budget adoption follow -up activity, a City Council - Staff Retreat is scheduled for February 12, 2005 at which time an updated five year financial forecast will be reviewed I. The FY 2005 budget process begins in March with a targeted adoption date in mind of November 8, 2005. 10/7/2004 4 City Manager's Budget Message Preliminary Annual Budget For Fiscal Year 2005 Spine jUalley Dear Citizens, Mayor and City Council of Spokane Valley: It is my pleasure to present the budget document for the fiscal year of 2005, which represents the combined efforts of the City Council, staff and citizens. Budget Highlights The 2005 budget continues to recognize the dynamic and changing environment within which the City must operate. The budget process has been used to reinforce the City's commitment to delivering its core services, and the budget document was built around funding a set of services and investments that are consistent with that core mission. A summary of key budget highlights for the Council and community's review is as follows: Revenue: Little Growth: Revenues for the 2005 fiscal year are conservatively estimated to grow at just 1% until the economic rebound occurring elsewhere becomes evident in our region. Unlike the pre - incorporation revenue assumptions, these budget projections reflect conservative growth, consistent with recent trends. Expense: Moderate Growth in Current Operational Expenses: Investing in the necessary core services identified by the Council and community creates baseline costs that are currently growing at a higher rate than tax revenues. Even with a remarkably small internal staff, credible programming requires an investment in basic capacity to operate. Threshold personnel costs, the price of operating supplies and charges for contract services are escalating at a compound rate approximating 6% to 8% annually. For example, the Legislature is expected to refinance the cost of the public employee retirement system by charging employers an additional 4% contribution. Capital Inveshnents: Good Deal for City: The best financial news is the fabulous rate of return the City realizes on its investments in capital improvements— roads, bridges and parks —that accommodate the needs of the community. The capital construction program totals $10,303.551 of which the City contributes $1,763.551 or just 17.1 %. 5 I ulm,oco S3,500,00D $3,000,000 52,900,00) $2,001030 $1,500.000 51,003,000 Street Fund: Trouble Brewing: This fund derives its revenues from an allocation of the state gas tax currently amounting to only about S1.2 million, when about $3.8 million is needed to pay for street maintenance activities like snow plowing, pothole repair, resurfacing eroded lanes, sweeping, weed control, street lighting, traffic signals and state roads and a variety of other repairs. Spokane County budgeted about $3.1 million for just a portion of those services prior to incorporation. A new work order system has been implemented in an effort to reduce maintenance services expenses by better targeting work assignments and priorities. The problem facing Spokane Valley for the foreseeable future will be closing that gap between street related revenues and costs. Clearly, reduced expenditures would result in noticeable differences in the conditions of local streets. 2004 2.305 The Current Fiscal Year in Review Street Fund Operating (Not Capital) Revenues'Expenditures June 2004 0011112004 6 206 - .- ExPfflitures—a—Rveru I 2007 2305 It has been a challenging yet successful year for Spokane Valley. Initiating a new City is a high civic privilege filled with high demands and activity. The City Council initiated a broad and inclusive public involvement process to develop a twenty (20) year Comprehensive Plan that will serve as the foundation of vision, values and mission which will guide the community in reaching its potential. The absence of prior history as a city requires us all to continuously design, build and evaluate public policies, services and spending plans. The learning curve is steep, the workload plentiful and the satisfaction of effort rewarding. Despite the demands created by these changing dynamics, the City achieved substantial progress in meeting the 2004 budget goals this year. Progress in A ttainrnent of the six (6) Major Goals of 2004: Experiment with a Managed Competition Program designed to identify alternative service providers at more economical rates than accorded by current service providers. With City Council approval, staff researched the methods used to implement managed competition elsewhere and recommended that pilot projects be launched seeking competitive bids from providers of library and park maintenance services. Proposals are due back in early fall. Initiate the Development of Spokane Valley's First Comprehensive Plan which will create the City's long -term vision and link transportation system improvements to land use goals in support of that vision. The City Council and Planning Commission held several joint sessions to initiate brainstorming about the future of the new City. They created a draft vision statement that creates the broad statement of purpose to be pursued in developing a Comprehensive Plan: "A community of opportunity where individuals and families can grow and play and businesses will flourish and prosper." Subsequently, a scientifically valid survey of community attitudes and perceptions was commissioned and the results shared with the community. Five (5) well attended neighborhood meetings were held around the City and citizens energetically participated in exercises designed to solicit their opinions about a broad range of community wide and neighborhood issues. Staff prepared numerous draft documents to stimulate policy discussions about the fundamental issues facing the community. Continuously Improve Overall Communication between government and its citizens, between staff and Council, among staff; and between Councilmembers. The City's official website was designed and made available online for ease of information sharing between citizens and their City Hall. The City Council and staff engaged in six (6) Conversations with the Community which provide a comfortable Town Meeting atmosphere at various locations so that citizens could talk about city matters that interest them. Outreach to the youth in our community was made through a series of "Pi77a with the Mayor" conversations in local schools where students and Councilmembers met and discussed issues of importance to students. As a result, a 7 r.M.X;C d2 TO &MANE t ALLfl WEB SITE •••. t. 2ep.49 2••94440 a+. :•3 , 97 3 d .n_ 2.2004 . .' 6. S/A44 V4207 !Amy C.404■4 F.iev Imes Gd. its Geerears7 L•4•••• 4.4• 44.4.,4- rm. .7 sm Sp.M ..r.►7 F.... Co eery ARerrr 1644.4aL1/4 T. wel• 4s bs! !:oeta 4dq Lmzas Student Advisory Council was formed to contribute energy and ideas to the development of Spokane Valley. City Council and staff held two retreats that were open to the public to review and adopt work plans for each city department that outlines the major tasks to be accomplished during the year. Develop a Five -Year Strategic Financial Plan that forecasts revenues and expenses as well as identifies funding and financial challenges and options. The City faces many complex issues which require multi -year projects and programs to effectively address them. A five -year financial forecast of the City's financial health was made to create a snapshot of our long -term fiscal situation so that today's budget choices are not made without awareness of the financial trends that affect the sustained affordability of public services. The forecast has served as a useful tool to evaluate spending priorities. Develop and StrenLticen Exlernal Relations to advance the interests of Spokane Vallee through interaction and advocacy with neighboring jurisdictions, the state legislature, funding boards and commissions, the congressional delegation and statewide and national municipal organizations. Councilinernbers have readily assumed additional responsibilities when they agreed to provide Spokane Valley representation on twenty -seven (27) regional boards and commissions whose activities affect the quality of life in our community Both Council and staff have initiated contact with their counterparts locally, statewide and nationally about the issues that matter most to Spokane Valley. Develop an Approach for Lone - Term Wastewater Services including the evaluation of a regional .system option. An immense amount of time and talent has been applied in researching potentially workable interim and long -term solutions to wastewater treatment problems in order to provide for continued growth and economic development in the region_ There are major capacity limitations, natural resource protection concerns and regulatory hurdles to overcome that require an extraordinary willingness and necessity to collaborate with people of diverse opinions about how best to proceed. City representatives have participated extensively in sorting through a variety of complex choices and restrictions that defy simple solutions. That work continues. The Budget Proposal for 2005 Balanced Budget Proposed: The 2005 budget is in balance; expenses have been limited to known or reasonably predictable revenues. The General Fund does not register a positive fund balance because the start-up interfund loan of $3.69 million required to fund the first year of city operations has not been completely repaid. However, this budget proposal is calibrated to continue paying down this loan amount at an accelerated rate. In pursuit of that outcome, special attention was given to limiting the growth in new programs and financial commitments while city revenue and expenditure patterns stabilize. This approach allows available resources to be put toward sustaining services consistent with Council's priorities for 2005 and beyond. 8 The City of Spokane Valley growth rate was a modest 2.3 %. One of the many fiscal realities we must contend with, is the realization that sufficient revenues are not available for use in defraying the costs associated with adding and maintaining basic infrastructure and programs Therefore, proposed increases in expenditures for ongoing operations continue to be made with caution, relying on the City's five -year financial forecast that indicates significant sustainability challenges for the foreseeable future. Department Achievements: Each of the City's departments undertook an aggressive work program in 2004. The budget document contains descriptions of their accomplishments for the year and their goals for next year. I invite residents to take a few minutes to acquaint themselves with the efforts made by municipal employees on their behalf. Multiple positions needed to address demands of a City of 83,950 people: As we moved through the formative stage of incorporation, this City has taken a conservative approach to adding new City staff. A 2004 survey of 31 full service and contract Washington cities with populations greater than 30,000 revealed an average count of 862 full-time employees and 51 part-time employees. By comparison, Spokane Valley contracted for many services and employed just 47 full -time and 4 part-time employees. [Please see the attached 2004 Work Force Comparison.] Although significant staff increases are warranted, the conservative approach followed in formulating the 2005 preliminary budget, which affords the addition of five point two five (5.25) fiill -time equivalent positions spread across two departments. Parks. Two positions are proposed to staff CenterPlace, the new community building now under construction at Mirabeau Point and fully financed through state revenues and donations. Occupancy is anticipated next summer and a maintenance worker and administrative assistant are needed to operate the facility for the community. Public Works. Three point two five positions are proposed for addition to the public works department in the Engineering division. A project engineer is needed to keep up with the demand for rehabilitation of roads, bridges and new facilities added to the system from new development and the City's capital program. The addition in Engineering will allow for a substantial amount of the design and monitoring work that is currently contracted to outside vendors to be completed in -house thereby assuring the City can meet its responsibilities in a timely manner as mandated by customer needs and relevant state and federal laws. 9 "Fact About $62,500,000 of building construction value is needed to product enough property tax revenue. to pay for each polio officer position." Lastly, an engineer and one technician will be brought "in- house" because Spokane County has advised the City that it no longer has the staff to provide stormwater facility management and construction as a contracted service as they had in 2004. So the funding used to pay for the contract services will be redirected to pay for the new City personnel who perform the stormwater functions. Goal Statement 2005: The Principal 2005 Budget (;roaIs The 2005 budget reflects the dispatch of resource consistent with the ('ounct.1's_c re service priorities for the LasL the current and future budc,et cycles. The following list reflects the broad service gnats affecting core services for the City'_ _Adopt Spokane_Va1lev's First Comprehensive Plan in coinplianee v.ith the requirements of the Grout Management Act includirm :Ail accepted vision statement, documentation of land use ,oats in cuppf.irt of that vision. and idL.nttitcatioit o significant tran Jx rtation systcm goals linked to implementation of the flan. Enact a 1- niform Development Code that collates all of the City developthent re12Ie l re ulations Intel a simile, understandable reference slut stre;nnlines the pc-minim! process and facilitates cu. ttorner sen".lre and btl�me s development_ Recompose the Five-Year Financial Forecast into a Sit -Year Strategic Financial I'lau t . i l '•forecaas revenu_s and expenses: identifies fiscal cons-tra uts; and fvrrnula!es for Council cbaside abud zct- balancing plan that proposes n ecesca y servic;; re�'uctions or i?icrc:_sed revenues. or a Combination thereof. .td∎ •once the Interests of Spokane Valley throunh Effective External Relations such as building a cons ructi\c relationship the nesv1 - zompos.d Floard of Count) LoInn11ssi ners : :1 as full members of rett oii::1 and stateN.ide boards and i'onttn; sion,:.viu?_ewor:k affects the quality of lice in the community, and bti- 3dvc+ca1 ira cite• i_;;ucs with m 121thoritte_iurisdictioii , municipal or _Taniz2tiLlm_ tlIt I caisl::turc Lind t 'undress. Collaborate N1 ith 1V:t 1t. ►ater Dischargers and Regulatory _ Antics in :inalyriu! Data Related to ■) - stem _acquisition Options 1T in pursuit of interim i.nJ long-term resolutions to W3it'r quality and wastl watt r ire -attm.mt u:1p:' -cite' concerns. so that economic dove1t''pInenl and na ura1 re: t11!rc::s continue to s!Irpnr1. the vitality of the reiz)on Establish :i formal city -wide customer service program with emphasis on tinme1v response,. a user - friendly atv)osphr_rc, and an attitude of facilitation and accommodation within the bounds if cspcnsihilit� . inteerity, and fitl::nciJ calrabilit}• of t1i.. City. includint_ ornnizational and job description documents Mile pursuing. ='best gracticcsr in-custom -r service. 10 Acknowledgments: In closing, it has been a pleasure to work with the Council and individual City departments to usher this preliminary budget in its earliest stages. I look forward to working with the City's team over the coming year to deliver to the citizens of Spokane Valley the services it funds. I also offer my continued appreciation to the citizens of Spokane Valley, the Mayor and City Council, the departments, and all those individual staff members who have made it possible for the City to travel this early road of success, sampling its potential and working toward a bright future. Everyone involved continues to give generously of their time and energy during this period of rapid formation of community identity and programs, and has risen to the challenges it has presented. Thanks also for the patience and feedback from the many citizens wbo have shown interest or volunteered their time in activities to improve the quality of life in Spokane Valley. Respectfully, David Mercier, City Manager 11 ,00 Spokane Valley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99205 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall®spokanevaliey.org TO: David Mercier, City Manager and Members of Council FROM: Ken Thompson, Finance & Administrative Services Director DATE: September 1, 2004 SUBJECT: About the Budget and the Budget Process l authority to obligate public funds. and legal The budget includes the financial planning 8' e Additionally, the budget provides significant direction st staff and public are uncil to olvedthn staff and community. As a result, the City Council establishing the budget for the City of Spokane Valley. The budget provides four functions: 1. A Polic . Document t The budget functions as a policy document in that the � motions taken for the fut�u'euAs will reflect the general principles or plans that policy document, the budget makes specific attempts to link desired goals and policy direction to the actual day -to -day activities of the City staff. 2 An Operational Guide The budget of the City reflects its operation. Activities and described in he foloving and organization have been planned, debated, form alized of the various operations of sections. This process will help to maintain an understanding the City and how they relate to each other and to the attainment of the policy issues and goals of the City Council. 3. A Link with the General Public The budget provides a unique opportunity to allow and encourage public review of City operations. The budget describes the activities of the City, the reason or cause for those activities, future implications, and the direct relationship to the citizenry. 4. A Leeall Re uired Financial Planning Tool use. In this The budget is a financial planning tool, which ha�bee been em n all ties as stated in light, preparing and adopting a budget is a State 1 eq Title 35A of the Revised Code of Washington �be�. The ofahe fiscal adopted year. The balanced budget and must be in place prior by budget is the legal authority to expend public oY d s levelc T he revenues ths are limiting the amount of the appropriation at the 12 estimated, along with available cash carry- forward, to indicate funds available. The budget takes into account unforeseen contingencies and provides for the need for periodic adjustments. Year 2005 Bud et Process The City of Spokane Valley operates on a calendar year basis. It utilizes an incremental budgeting approach that assumes, for most functions of government, that the current year's budget is indicative of the base required for the following year. Any increases are incremental and based on need defined by the organization's budget policies, emerging issues, Council goals, and available resources. The formal budget planning begins in the Spring with discussions between the City Manager and City Council during a raid -year retreat. Following the retreat, the City Manager and the Department Directors prepare the preliminary budget based upon the City Council priorities. The City Council reviews the preliminary budget beginning in September. In June, departments prepare requests for new staff, programs, or significant increases to their current year budget that will address emerging issues and other operational needs. In their requests, the departments identify the problem that they are trying to address, the recommended solution, implementation plan, projected cost and expected outcomes. The Finance Department and City Manager conduct an analysis of the departmental base budgets and the revenue outlook for the coming year to determine the availability of funds for any new initiatives. During June submitted to thdepartments inance develop their base budgets. These budget requests middle of July. In early August, the City Manager reviews each department's budget requests and develops a preliminary budget recommendation. As mandated by RCW 35A.33.135, the first requirement is that the City Manager submit estimated revenues and expenditures to the City Council on or before the first Monday in October. The preliminary budget is presented to the City Council in late September or early October. Public hearings are held to obtain taxpayers' comments, and revisions as applicable, are made. The Council makes its adjustments to the preliminary budget and adopts by ordinance a final balanced budget no later than December 31. The final operating budget as adopted is published, distributed, and made available to the public during the first three months of the following year. After the budget is adopted, the City enters a budget implementation and monitoring stage. Throughout the year, expenditures are monitored by the Finance Department and department directors to ensure that funds are within the approved budget. Finance provides financial updates to the amendments City made during the year are adopted by City to keep them current with the City's financial condition. Any bud Council ordinance. 13 The City Manager is authorized tot transfer of a fu do or that affect tha number any revisions that alter the total expenditures authorized employee positions, salary ranges or other conditions of employment roust be approved by the City Council. When the City Council determines that it is firmtnd the best do so by ordinance to increase or approved by decrease the appropriation for a particular one more than the majority after bolding one public hearing. Si ficant Chan es to the 2005 Budge= A review of the 2005 preliminary budget reveals the following significant changes: Rev, enues 1. Sales tax receipts have been increased and owtb in O retai reflecting ales of 34-%. Al coding by retailers of sales locations $600,000 of this increase is based on the voter approved sales tax increase of .1% for criminal justice purposes. 2. A vibrant construction industry has fueled an increase of $154, 000 in estimated building permits and planning fees. 3. Fine receipts have been increased $200,000 reflecting a greater backlog of citations. 4. Recreational program revenues have n been reduced aa se the city council prefers not to compete with organza Ex enditures 1. CenterPlace at Mirabeau Point, a regional activity center, will open during the summer of 2005. Operating costs of $321,000 have been included in the budget. 2. Construction costs on CenterPlace at Mirabeau Point have been reduced from $9.5 million to $3 million reflecting the completion of this project. 14 City of Spokane Valley Selected Budget Policies responsibility for formulating budget D directors have primary p proposals in line with City Council and City Manager priority direction, and for implementing them once they are approved. The Finance Department is responsible for coordinating the overall preparation and administration of the City's budge This function erning �o� � compliance with applicable State of Washingt budgeting practices. The Finance Department assists department staff in identifying ecesdget problems, formulating solutions and alternatives, and implementing y corrective actions. Interfund charges will be based on recovery of the direct costs associated with providing those services. Budget adjustments requiring City Council approval will occur through the ordinance process at the fund level prior to fiscal year end. The City's budget presentation will be directed at displaying the City's services plan in a Council/constituent- friendly format. Achieving a fund balance of 8% to 15% oflu eme�� d aging unanh Patel fiscally prudent in providing for cash flo v /ro eq expenditures and sustaining essential services. The City will begin the 2005 fiscal year with a negative fund balance due to an interfund loan to pay for start up costs es so that in 2003 and 2004. The proposed budget oa constraints loan and end th�year with a sufficient funds will be available pay-off the modest positive fund balance. of At full stabilization in the eighth year, c�rt �tR�thoutidentification exceed a re ° enue revenues. No long term debt will be incurred source to repay the debt. Long term debt will be incurred for capital purposes only. The City will maintain equipment replacement funds that will receive annually budgeted contributions from the operating to pns replace es of the epart equipment at the end of capital equipment in an amount necessary its useful life. Life cycle assumptions and required contributions will be reviewed annually as part of the budget process. 15 BASIS OF ACCOUNTING AND BUDGETING Accounting Accounting records for the City are maintained in accordance with methods prescribed by the State Auditor under the authority of Washington State law, Chapter 43.09.20 RCVS, and in compliance with generally accepted accounting principles as set forth by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. Basis of Presentation - Fund Accounting The accounts of the City of Spokane Valley are organized on the basis of funds, each of which is considered a separate accounting entity. Each fund is accounted for with a separate set of double -entry accounts that comprise its assets, liabilities, fund equity, revenues and expenditures or expenses, as appropriate. The City's resources are allocated to and accounted for in individual funds depending on their intended purpose. The following are the fund types used by the City of Spokane Valley: Governmental Fund Types Governmental funds are used to account for activities typically associated with state and local government operations. All governmental fund types are accounted for on a spending or "financial flows" measurement focus, which means that typically only current assets and current liabilities are included on related balance sheets. The operating statements of governmental funds measure changes in financial position, rather than net income. They present increases (revenues and other financing sources) and decreases (expenditures and other financing uses) in net current assets. There are four governmental fund types used by the City of Spokane Valley: General Fund This fund is the primary fund of the City of Spokane Valley. It accounts for all financial resources except those required or elected to be accounted for in another fund. Special Revenue Funds These funds account for revenues that are legally restricted or designated to finance particular activities of the City of Spokane Valley. Special Revenue funds include the Street Fund, Arterial Street Fund, Trails & Paths Fund, and the Hotel/Motel Fund. Debt Service Funds These funds account for financial resources which are designated for the retirement of debt. Debt Service funds are comprised of the Debt Service LTGO 03. Capital Project Funds These funds account for financial resources, which are designated for the acquisition or construction of general government capital projects. Capital Project Funds include the Capital Project Fund, Special Capital Projects Fund, Streets Capital Projects Fund, Mirabeau Point Capital Project Fund, CDBG Fund, Capital Grants Fund, and Barker Bridge Federal Grant Fund. 16 Proprietary Fund Types Proprietary funds are used to account for activities similar to those found in the private sector where the intent of the governing body is to finance the full cost of providing services, including depreciation, which based on the commercial model uses a flow of economic resources approach. Under this 'approach, the operating statements for the proprietary funds focus on a measurement of net income (revenues and expenses) and both current and non - current assets and liabilities are reported on related balance sheets. Their reported fund equity (net total assets) is segregated into contributed capital and retained earnings components. As described below, there are two generic fund types in this category Enterprise Funds These funds account for operations that provide goods or services to the general public and are supported primarily by user charges. The Stormwater Management Fund is included in this group of funds. Internal Service Funds These funds account for operations that provide goods or services to other departments or funds of the City. The Equipment Rental and Replacement Fund and Risk Management Fund are included in this group of funds. Basis of Accounting Basis of accounting refers to when revenues and expenditures are recognized in the accounts and reported in the financial statements. The City of Spokane Valley uses a modified accrual basis of accounting. Modified accrual recognizes revenues when they become both measurable and available to finance expenditures of the current period. The basis of accounting for enterprise and internal service hands is full accrual. The appropriate basis is used throughout the budgeting, accounting, and reporting processes. Full accrual is a method of accounting that matches revenues and expenses with the period to which they relate, rather than focusing on actual cash flows. In this method, for example, an asset is depreciated as it is "used up ", and the expense is recognized in periodic increments, rather than assuming the asset holds its value until it is actually disposed of. However, since the focus of budgeting is on the revenues and expenditure accounts, depreciation and amortization are not considered budgetary accounts, and are excluded from the budgeting system. Budgets and Budgetary Accounting Annual appropriated budgets are adopted for all funds. These funds are budgeted on the modified cash basis of accounting. The financial statements include budgetary comparisons for those funds. Budgets are adopted at the fund level that constitutes the legal authority for expenditures. Annual appropriations for all funds lapse at the fiscal period end. 17 GENERAL FUND REVENUES: EXPLANATION OF REVENUE SOURCES Property Tax Revenue Property taxes play an essential role in the finances of the municipal budget. State law limits the City to a $3.60 levy per $1,000 assessed valuation, deducting from there the levy of $1.50 by the Spokane County Fire Districts #1 and #8, which leaves the City with the authority to levy $2.10 for its own purposes. The levy amount must be established by ordinance by November 15th prior to the levy year. Local Retail Sales and Use Tax The local retail sales and use tax is comprised of two separate .5% options with the County receiving 15% of each .5 %. After deducting .01% as a County administrative fee, the City's effective rate is .84 %. Local Criminal Justice Sales Tax Local Sales Tax for Criminal Justice funding is to be used solely for criminal justice purposes, such as the City's law enforcement contract. This tax is authorized at 1/10 of 1% of retail sales transacted in the County. Of the total amount collected, the State distributes 10% to the County, with the remainder being distributed by population to the cities and the unincorporated areas of the County. Beginning in 2005, an additional .1% voter approved increase in sales tax will be devoted to criminal justice purposes. Gambling Tax Revenues Gambling tax revenues must be spent primarily on law enforcement purposes pertaining to gambling. Funds remaining after necessary expenditures for such enforcement purposes may be used for any general government purpose. Gambling taxes are to be paid quarterly to the City, no later than the last day of January, April, July and October. The City imposes a tax'on the following forms of gambling at the following rates: Bingo (5% gross, less prizes); Raffles (5% gross, less prizes); Games (2% gross, less prizes); Punch Boards (5% net); Pull Tabs (5% net); Card playing (10% gross). Leasehold Excise Tax Taxes on property owned by state or local governments and leased to private parties (City's share). Franchise Fees Cable TV is the only franchise fee levied in the City at a rate of 5% of gross revenues. This is a fee levied on private utilities for the right to use city streets, alleys, and other public properties. State - Shared Revenues State - shared revenues are received for liquor sales, and motor vehicle excise taxes including travel trailer and camper excise tax. These taxes are collected by the State of Washington and shared with local governments based on population. State- shared revenues are distributed on either a monthly or quarterly basis, although not all quarterly revenues are distributed in the same month of the quarter. The 2004 population figure used in the 2005 Preliminary Budget is 83,950 as determined by the Office of Financial Management for Washington State. This figure is important when determining distribution of State shared revenues on a per capita basis. Liquor. Board Profits and Liquor Excise Tax Cities receive a share of both liquor board profits and liquor excise tax receipts. The profits are distributed on the last day of March, June, September, and December. The excise portion is distributed on the last day of January, April, July, and October. To be eligible to receive these revenues, a city must devote at least two percent of the distribution to support an approved alcoholism or drug addiction program. Service Revenues Fees are charged for services rendered by the City of Spokane Valley. Most of the fees in the General Fund are construction inspections and permits related to services such as planning, zoning and building. Fines and Forfeitures Fines and penalties are collected as a result of Municipal Court rulings and other miscellaneous rule infractions. All court fines and penalties are shared with the State and the City, on average, keeps less than 50% of the amount collected. Recreation Proeram Fees The Parks and Recreation Department charges fees for selected recreation programs. These fees offset some of the costs related to providing the program. Investment Interest The City earns investment interest on sales tax, property tax, and fund investments. OTHER FUND REVENUES: STREET FUND: Motor Vehicle Fuel Excise Tax (gas tax) There are two separate distributions to cities of revenues from this tax. Cities with a population of 15,000 and above are required to account for the per capita share of the unrestricted gas tax as a source to finance street maintenance. Cities in this population group are also required to account for the per capita share of the restricted gas tax to be used for arterial street construction. Both distributions must be accounted for in separate funds, the Street Fund receives the 19 �J unrestricted portion of the gas tax, while the restricted portion goes to the Arterial Street Fund. The City's allocation for the gas tax in the Street Fund for 2005 is S14.33 per capita. ARTERIAL STREET FUND: Motor Vehicle Fuel Excise Tax (gas tax) This fund receives its tax revenue from the restricted portion of the gas tax. This Fund is to provide capital project funding as well as major maintenance functions on arterial streets. The City's allocation for the gas tax for 2005 is $6.70 per capita. TRAILS & PATH FUND: A small percentage of the City's gas tax must be set aside for trails and paths This money will likely accumulate for several years until adequate dollars are available for a project. HOTEL/MOTEL FUND: This fund receives all revenue resulting from the Hotel/Motel Tax levied upon charges made for the furnishing of lodging by a hotel, rooming house, tourist court, motel, trailer camp and other' transient accommodations in the City. The tax rate is 2 percent of the selling price or charge made for the lodging. It is collected and administered by the Washington State Department of Revenue. State law requires that these taxes be credited to a special fund with limitations on use, principally to support tourism/convention activities and related facilities, as prescribed by RCW 67.28.310. DEBT SERVICE FUND — LTGO 03: The Public Facilities District will provide funding for the debt service on CenterPlace Bonds. The City's Capital Projects and Special Capital Projects Funds will provide funding for the debt service on street bonds. CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND: Under Washington State Law, RCW 82.46.010, the City is allowed to impose an excise tax on each sale of real property at the rate of one - quarter of one percent of the selling price. The revenue generated is be used for financing capital projects as specified in the capital facilities plan under the Growth Management Act. SPECIAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND: Under Washington State Law, RCW 82.46.010, the City is allowed to impose an additional excise tax on each sale of real property at the rate of one - quarter of one percent of the selling price. The revenue generated is to be used for financing public works capital projects as specified in the capital facilities plan under the Growth Management Act. 1NTERFUND TRANSFERS: Many funds receive their revenues from other funds in the form of an interfund transfer. These transfers may represent payments for service, an operating transfer, or a concentration of revenues for a specific project. The following funds receive transfers from other funds. General Fund is budgeted to receive transfers from Street Fund, $152,495, Capital Projects, $40,000 and Stormwater Management Fund, $54,462. Trails & Paths Fund is budgeted to receive a transfer from the Street Fund in the amount of $5,100. Street Capital Projects Fund is budgeted to receive transfers from Arterial Streets, S670,400, and Special Capital Projects, $112,600, and Stormwater Management, $150,000. Capital Grants Fund is budgeted to receive transfers from Arterial Streets, $186,000, and Street Bond Fund, $406,000. Equipment Rental & Replacement is budgeted to receive transfers from the General fund for interfund charges in the total amount of $145,305. Risk Management Fund is budgeted to receive $134,450 from the General Fund for employment security payments and City insurance premiums. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FEE: This fee is imposed upon every developed parcel of property within the City and is an annual charge of $24.00 for each single family unit and $24.00 per 3,160 square feet of impervious surface for all other properties. These charges are uniform for the same class of customers or service facilities. These fees are estimated to be $1,794,000 for 2005. 21 2005 PRELIMINARY BUDGET Major Revenue Assumptions 1. The 2004 population figure used in the 2005 Preliminary Budget is 83,950 as determined by the Office of Financial Management for the State of Washington. This figure is important when determining distribution of State shared revenues on a per capita basis. 2. The 2005 estimated assessed valuation (AV) is $4,700,000,000. The City's actual assessed value will be assigned by the Spokane County Assessor. 3. Property taxes are levied based on assessed value and the City expects to collect 95% of those taxes levied in 2005 realizing the remaining 5% may be collected in the following years. 4. Estimates for sales tax receipts were based on the City's actual collections in 2004. 5. Gambling tax estimates were estimated from amounts collected by the City in 2004. 6. Franchise fees were based upon the projected fees collected in the 2004 budget year. 7. Liquor excise taxes and liquor profits are based upon estimates from the Municipal Research Services & Center (RISC). 8. Fines & Forfeits were based upon projected collections by the City in 2004. 9. Building permit and land use fees were estimated by the Spokane Valley Community Development Department based upon 2004 records. 10. Real estate excise taxes were based upon projected collections by the City in 2004. 11. Gas tax revenues are based upon estimates from the MRSC. 12. The Stormwater Management fee is based upon an Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU), or the amount of stormwater associated with the frontage of a standard residence. 2005 PRELIMINARY BUDGET Major Expenditure Assumptions 1. Service levels are the same or greater than provided in 2004. 2. Positions and salary ranges are based upon the City's compensation and classification plan. 3. Benefit amounts were based upon the proposed employee benefits plan. 4. The contract costs for public safety, library, park maintenance and street maintenance are based upon estimates by City staff. 23 Fund 001 General Fund 101 Street Fund 102 Arterial Street Fund 103 Trails & Paths Fund 105 Hotel /Motel Fund 204 Debt Service LTGO 03 301 Capital Projects Fund 302 Special Capital Projects 303 Street Capital Projects 304 Mirabeau Point Capital Projects 305 Street Bond Capital Projects 306 CD Block Grant Fund 307 Capital Grants Fund 308 Barker Bridge Federal Fund 402 Stormwater Management 501 Equipment R & R 502 Risk Management City of Spokane Valley 2005 Budget Summary Est_ Beg Fund Balance $ 544,981 1,197,418 519,538 12,800 86,827 1,299,904 1,106,457 30 3,000,000 406,000 784,276 127,587 6,378 $ 9,092,196 General Fund Estimated Beg. Fund Balance: Expected ending fund balance 2004 Adjustments for. Mirabeau Operating Reserve Service Level Stablization Reserve 2005 Interfund Loan Repayment 24 Revenues • $ 28,381,796 * 2,605,740 566,465 5,100 351,000 582,835 806,000 806,000 933,000 3,827,000 234,000 1,800,000 145,305 134,450 $ 41,178,691 $ (257,755) (300,000) (200,000) 1,302,736 Estimated beginning fund balance 2005 $ 544,981 Expenditures $ 28,381,796 3,175,216 856,400 300,000 582,835 332,545 205,145 933,000 3,000,000 406,000 3,827,000 234,000 1,512,521 66,051 134,450 $ 43,946,959 Est. Ending Fund Balance $ 544,981 627,942 229,603 17,900 137,827 1,773,359 1,707,312 30 1,071,755 206,841 6,378 $ 6,323,928 * Estimated beginning fund balance includes reserves for Mirabeau operations and an adjustment for a 2005 loan repayment. These do not include interfund loans receivable or payable. City of Spokane Valley 2005 Budget General Fund Property Tax Sales Tax Gambling Tax Leasehold Excise Tax Franchise Fees State Shared Revenues Service Revenues Fines and Forfeitures Recreation Program Fees Miscellaneous & Investment Interest Transfers ' Total General Fund Other Funds Street Fund Arterial Street Fund Trails & Paths Fund Hotel /Motel Fund Debt Service LTGO 03 Capital Projects Fund Special Capital Projects Fund Street Capitial Projects Fund CD Block Grant Fund Capital Grants Fund Barker Bridge - Federal Grant Fund Stormwater Management Fund Equipment Rental & Replacement Risk Management Fund Total Other Funds Total All Funds Revenues by Type 25 $ 10,055,316 13,000,000 800,000 5,000 620,000 1,035,340 1,293,000 1,200,000 90,000 36,000 247,140 28,381,796 2,605,740 566,465 5,100 351,000 582,835 806,000 806,000 933,000 3,827,000 234,000 1,800,000 145,305 134,450 12,796,895 $ 41,178,691 \ J All Other Revenues 1.0% Recreation Program Fees 0.3% Fines & Forfeitures 4.2% Service Revenues 4.6% State Shared Revenues 3.6% Franchise Fees 2.2% Gambling Tax 2.8% City of Spokane Valley 2005 General Fund Revenue Sources $28,301,796 Property Tax 35.4% Sales Tax 45.8% Real Estate Excise Tax 3.9% Facilities District 1.0% HoteVMotel Tax 0.8% Motor Fuel Excise Tax 4.3% All Other Revenues 0.7% Stormwater Management Fee 4.3% Recreation Program Fees 0.2% Fines & Forfeitures 2.9% Service Revenues 3.1 % Interfund Transfers 8.8% State Shared Revenues 2.5% Franchise Fees 1.5% City of Spokane Valley 2005 Estimated City Resources $41,178,691 Gambling Taxes 1.9% Property Taxes 24.2% Sales Tax 31.4% Grant Proceeds 8.4% General Fund Revenues Property Tax Property Tax Property Tax - Delinquent City of Spokane Valley 2005 Budget Detail Revenues by Type 2004 Amended 2005 Budget Budslct S 9,265,809 S 9,870,000 105,316 9.2665,809 10.055,316 ales Taxes Sales Tax 11,000.000 11,480.000 Sales Tax - Criminal Justice 920,000 920,000 Sales Tax - .1% County Criminal Justice - 600,000 11,920,000 13,000,000 Gambling Taxes Punch Boards & Pull Tabs 110,000 130,000 Bingo & Raffles 30,000 44,000 Card Games 550.000 626.000 600,000 800,000 Leasehold Excise Tax 5,000 5,000 Fran Fees 640,000 620,000 State Shared Revenues MVET Criminal Justice - Population 11,100 11,100 Criminal Justice Area #1 14,134 14,000 Criminal Justice Area #2 20,191 20,000 Criminal Justice Area 4:3 20,191 20,000 Criminal Justice Area 04 17200 18.000 DUI - Cities 12.000 12.000 Liquor Board Exrsse Tax 296.000 327,405 Liquor Board Profits 492,000 612,835 882,816 1,035,340 Service Revenues Building Permits 506,000 600,000 Plumbing Permits 49,000 53,000 Grading Permits 7,000 7,000 Mechani=I Permits 49.000 50,000 Demolition Pemtlts 1,000 1,000 Misc. Permits & Fees 195,000 205.000 Plans Check Fees 197,000 197.000 Planning Fees 135,000 180,000 1,139,00D 1,293,000 Fines and Forfeitures Fires & Forfeits - Traffic 509,000 600,000 Other Criminal Non - Traffic Fines 500,000 600 000 1.000,000 1,200,000 Recreation Prooram Charges Activity Fees (To use a recreational facility) 9,090 30.900 Program Fees (To participate in a program) 112,000 60.000 121,000 90,00D Investment interest Investment Interest 6,000 12,000 Sales Tax Interest 6,000 12,000 Property Tax Interest 6,000 12,000 18,000 36,000 Transfers Transfer from Street Fund 42,500 40.000 Transfers for Interfund Billings 167,140 Transfer from Capital Projects 80,000 40,000 122,500 247,140 Total General Fund Revenue S 25,804,125 S 28,381,795 2004 Amended 2005 Other Fund Revenues Budget Budget 101 Street Fund Motor Fuel (Gas) Tax 1,187,200 1,203,004 Operating Transfer - Loan Repayment 800,000 1,302,735 Transfer from Mirabeau - Interfund Services - 25,000 Interfund Loan Intere 1 75,000 75,000 2,062,200 2,605,740 102 Arterial Streed Fund Motor Fuel (Gas) Tax 542,000 562,465 investment Interest - 4,000 542,000 568,455 103 Tmiis & Paths Fund Transfer from Street Fund 12,800 5,100 105 Hotel/Motel Fund tc4e1/Moad Tax 380,000 350,000 Investinant Interest - 1,DOD 380,000 351,000 ,204 Debt Service - I.TGO 03 Facilities District Revenue 600,000 397,745 Debt Service Transfer from Capital Projects and Special Capital Projects 200.000 185,090 800,000 582,835 301 Caudal Projects Fund REET 1 -1st .25 Percent 840,000 600,00D Investment Interest - 6,000 840,000 806,1300 302 SRacinl Capital Proieats Fund REET 2 - 2nd .25 Percent 840,000 800,000 Investment Interest 6,000 840.000 805,000 3A3 StmM Capital Protects Transfer from Arterial Street Fund 600,000 670,400 Transfer from Stormwater Management Fund 150,000 Transfer from Special Capital Projects 200,000 112,600 800,000 933,000 306 CD Block Grant Fund CDBG Grant Proceeds 375,965 Transfer from Arterial Street Fund 128,035 504,000 307 Capital Grants Fund Capital Grant Proceeds 547,000 3,235,000 Transfers from Arterial Street Fund 186,000 Transfers from Street Bond Fund 230,000 • 406,000 837,000 3,827,000 3138 Bnrker Bridge Reconstruction - Fed Greint Federal Grant Proceeds 702,000 234,000 402 Stonmtalcr Managem Fund Stormwater Management Fee 747,500 1.794.000 tnvestment Interest - 6,000 747,500 1,800,000 501 Eouloinesrt Rental & Replacement Fund Workstation Charges 88,200 81,750 Pool Car Charges 5,560 3,800 Vehicle Purchase Transfers 15,000 18,551 Vehicle Replacement Charges 37,874 41.204 146,634 145,305 502 Risk Management Fund Employment Secunly Transfers 7,500 4,450 Risk Management Services 130,000 130,000 137, 500 134,450 Total All Other Funds Total Revenues City of Spokane Valley 2005 Budget Detail Revenues by Type 20 9,351,634 12,795,895 $ 35,155,759 3 41,178,691 City of Spokane Valley 2005 Budget Expenditures by Department General Fund Legislative Branch Legislative & Executive Services Public Safety Operations & Administrative Deputy City Manager Finance Legal Human Resources Public Works Planning & Community Dev. Planning Building Library Parks & Recreation Administration Maintenance Recreation Aquatics Senior Center CenterPlace General Government Total General Fund Other Funds Street Fund Arterial Street Fund Hotel /Motel Fund Debt Service - LTGO 03 Capital Projects Fund Special Capital Projects Fund Street Capitial Projects Fund Mirabeau Point Capital Projects Fund Street Bond Capital Projects Fund CD Block Grant Fund Capital Grants Fund Barker Bridge - Federal Grant Fund Stormwater Management Fund Equipment Rental & Replacement Risk Management Fund $ 288,226 442,867 15,711,424 268,942 436,969 202,307 119,383 723,990 934,006 696,559 2,100,000 215,425 854,837 158,215 255,818 126,592 321,299 4,524,937 28,381,796 3,175,216 856,400 300,000 582,835 332,545 205,145 933,000 3,000,000 406,000 3,827,000 234,000 1,512,521 66,051 134,450 Total All Funds $ 43,946,959 General Fund Legislative Branch Legislative & Executive Public Safety Operations & Administrative Deputy City Manager Finance Legal Human Resources Public Works Planning & Community Dev. Planning Building Library Parks & Recreation Parks Administration Maintenance Recreation Aquatics Senior Center CenterPlace General Government 1Ql7ra Total General Fund Wages & Benefits 152,675 391,969 249,292 407,619 93,945 32,062 661,392 633,301 555,816 162,718 116,790 78,998 144,848 3,681,425 City of Spokane Valley 2005 Budget January 1 - December 31, 2005 General Fund Expenditures by Department by Type Supplies 15,460 6,998 Services 109,291 38,650 6,200 7,700 7,700 12,400 2,300 102,562 3,500 81,821 29,878 15,620 16,250 270,955 31,575 74,255 9,580 40,127 33,755 821,082 8,555 24,930 255,818 2,600 43,494 10,075 146,325 23,000 2,785,538 207,426 4,830,568 Intergov, 15,711,424 2,100,000 154.918 Interfund Capital Exp Deb Svr 10,800 5,250 5,750 9,250 3,500 2,000 17,100 13,500 26,664 3,000 7,940 1,500 20,051 205.000 8,249 53,745 1,302,736 17,966,342 331,305 61,994 1,302,736 tai 206,226 442,867 15,711,424 268,942 436,969 202,307 119,363 723,990 934,006 696,559 2,100,000 215,425 854,837 158,215 255,818 120,592 321,299 4 28,381,796 Parks & Recreation Planning & Community Development 5.7% Public Works 2.6% General Government 15.9% City of Spokane Valley 2005 General Fund Expenditures by Dept $28,381,796 Legislative Branch Legislative & Executive Support 1.6% 1.0% Operations & Administrative Support 3.6% 32 Public Safety 55.4% Intergovernmental Payments 63.3% City of Spokane Valley 2005 General Fund Expenditures by Type $28,381,796 Interfund Transfers 1.2% Capital Outlay 0.2% Debt Service 4.6% Salaries & Benefits 13.0% Supplies 0.7% _Services & Charges 17.0% Fund: 001 Dept 011 General Fund Legislative Branch Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 011 - Legislative Branch This department accounts for the cost of providing effective elected representation of the citizenry in the governing body. The Council makes policy decisions for the City and is accountable to Spokane Valley citizens by making decisions regarding how resources are allocated, the appropriate levels of service, and establishing goals and policies for the organization. Accomplishments for 2004 • Managed competition methods were researched and two pilot projects selected for implementation: competitive bids from providers of library and park maintenance services. • A draft vision statement was created "A community of opportunity where individuals and families can grow and play and businesses will flourish and prosper." A scientifically valid survey of community attitudes and perceptions was commissioned and the results shared with the community. Five (5) well attended neighborhood citizen participation meetings were held around the City. Numerous draft documents were prepared to stimulate policy discussions about the fundamental issues facing the community. • City's official website was designed and launched. • The City Council and staff engaged in six Conversations with the Community. Outreach to the youth in the community resulted in the formation of a Student Advis- ory Council. Two retreats that are open to the public to review and adopt work plans for each city department that outlines the major tasks to be accomplished during the year. • A five -year financial forecast of the City's financial health was made to create a snapshot of our Tong -term fiscal situation so that today's budget choices are not made without awareness of the financial trends that affect the sustained affordability of public services. The forecast has been a useful tool to evaluate spending priorities. • Councilmembers serve on twenty - seven (27) regional boards and commissions. Both Council and staff have initiated contact with their counterparts locally, statewide and nationally about the issues that matter most to Spokane Valley. • Potentially workable interim and long -term solutions to wastewater treatment problems were examined. City representatives continue to participate extensively in sorting through the major capacity limitations, natural resource protection concerns and regulatory hurdles facing the region. Goals for 2005 • Adopt Spokane Valley's First Comprehensive Plan in compliance with the requirements of the Growth Management Act, including an accepted vision statement, documentation of and use goals in support of that vision and identification of significant transportation system goals linked to implementation of the Plan. Fund: 001 Dept 011 General Fund Legislative Branch Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 011 - Legislative Branch Goals for 2005, Continued • Enact a Uniform Development Code that collates all of the City development related regulations into a single, understandable reference that streamlines the permitting process and facilitates customer service and business development. • Recompose the Five -Year Financial Forecast into a Six -Year Strategic Financial Plan that forecasts revenues and expenses; identifies fiscal constraints; and, formulates for Council consideration a budget - balancing plan that proposes necessary service reductions or increased revenues or a combination thereof. . • Advance the Interests of Spokane Valley through Effective External Relations such as building a constructive relationship with the newly-composed Board of County Commissioners; participating as full members of regional and statewide boards and Commissions whose work affects the quality of life in the community, and by advocating city issues with neighboring jurisdictions, municipal organizations, the Legislature and Congress. • Collaborate with Wastewater Dischargers and Regulatory Agencies in analyzing data related to system acquisition options and in pursuit of interim and long- term resolutions to water quality and wastewater treatment capacity concerns so that economic development and natural resources continue to support the vitality of the region. • Establish a Formal City -Wide Customer Service Program with emphasis on timely response, a user - friendly atmosphere, and an attitude of facilitation and accomodation within the bounds of responsibility, integrity, and financial capability of the City, including organizational and job description documents while pursuing "best practices" in customer service. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Personnel - FTE Equivalents Mayor 1.0 1.0 1.0 Cou ncil 6_0 6_0 6_0 Total FTEs 7.0 7.0 7.0 Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ 80,821 $ 83,008 $ 152,675 Supplies 10,010 14,760 15,460 Services & Charges 19,372 105,844 109,291 Capital Outlay 3,403 - Interfund Charges 11,187 11,760 10,800 Total Legislative Branch $ 124,793 $ 215,372 $ 288,226 35 Fund: 001 Dept 013 General Fund Executive & Legislative Support Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 013 - Executive & Legislative Support This department is accountable to the City Council for the operational results of the organization, effective support of elected officials in achieving their goals; fulfillment of the statutory requirements of the City Manager, implementation of City Council policies, and provides communication linkage between citizens, the City Council, City departments, and other govemment agencies. Accomplishments for 2004 • Managed competition methods were researched and two pilot projects selected for implementation: competitive bids from providers of library and park maintenance services. • A draft vision statement was created "A community of opportunity where individuals and families can grow and play and businesses will flourish and prosper." A scientifically valid survey of community attitudes and perceptions was commissioned and the results shared with the community. Five (5) well attended neighborhood citizen participation meetings were held around the City. Numerous draft documents were prepared to stimulate policy discussions about the fundamental issues facing the community. • City's official website was designed and launched. • The City Council and staff engaged in six Conversations with the Community. Outreach to the youth in the community resulted in the formation of a Student Advis- ory Council. Two retreats that are open to the public to review and adopt work plans for each city department that outlines the major tasks to be accomplished during the year. • A five -year financial forecast of the City's financial heatth was made to create a snapshot of our long -term fiscal situation so that today's budget choices are not made without awareness of the financial trends that affect the sustained affordability of public services. The forecast has been a useful tool to evaluate spending priorities. • Councilmernbers serve on twenty -seven (27) regional boards and commissions. Both Council and staff have initiated contact with their counterparts locally, statewide and nationally about the issues that matter most to Spokane Valley. • Potentially workable interim and Tong -term solutions to wastewater treatment problems were examined. City representatives continue to participate extensively in sorting through the major capacity limitations, natural resource protection concems and regulatory hurdles facing the region. Goals for 2005 • Adopt Spokane Valley's First Comprehensive Plan in compliance with the requirements of the Growth Management Act, including an accepted vision statement, documentation of land use goals in support of that vision and identification of significant transportation system goals linked to implementation of the Plan. Fund: 001 Dept 013 General Fund Executive & Legislative Support Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 013 - Executive & Legislative Support Goals for 2005, Continued • Enact a Uniform Development Code that collates all of the City development related regulations into a single, understandable reference that streamlines the permitting process and facilitates customer service and business development. • Recompose the Five -Year Financial Forecast into a Six -Year Strategic Financial Plan that forecasts revenues and expenses; identifies fiscal constraints; and, formulates for Council consideration a budget- balancing plan that proposes necessary service reductions or increased revenues or a combination thereof. • Advance the Interests of Spokane Valley through Effective Extemal Relations such as building a constructive relationship with the newly- composed Board of County Commissioners; participating as full members of regional and statewide boards and Commissions whose work affects the quality of life in the community, and by advocating city issues with neighboring jurisdictions, municipal organizations, the Legislature and Congress. • Collaborate with Wastewater Dischargers and Regulatory Agencies in analyzing data related to system acquisition options and in pursuit of interim and long- term resolutions to water quality and wastewater treatment capacity concerns so that economic development and natural resources continue to support the vitality of the region. • Establish a Formal City -Wide Customer Service Program with emphasis on timely response, a user - friendly atmosphere, and an attitude of facilitation and accomodation within the bounds of responsibility, integrity, and financial capability of the City, including organizational and job description documents while pursuing "best practices" in customer service. 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Budget Summary Personnel - FTE Equivalents City Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 City Clerk 1.0 1.0 1.0 Deputy City Cleric 0.5 0.5 0.5 Administrative Assistant (CC) 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant (CM) LQ 1.0 1.0 Total FTEs 4.5 4.5 4.5 Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ 170,816 $ 367,312 $ 391,969 Supplies 12,321 10,600 6,998 Services & Charges 70,169 54,690 38,650 Capital Outlay 2,636 - - Interfund Charges 6,070 5,880 5,250 Total Executive & Legislative Support $ 262,012 $ 438,482 $ 442,867 37 Fund: 001 Dept: 016 General Fund Public Safety City of Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 016 - Public Safety The Public Safety department budget provides funds for the protection of persons and property in the city. The City contracts with Spokane County for law enforcement, municipal court, prosecutor services, public defender services, probation services, jail and animal control services. See following page for detail information on each budgeted section. Law Enforcement - The Spokane County Sheriffs office is responsible for maintaining law and order and providing police services to the community under the direction of the Police Chief. The office provides for the preservation of life, protection of property, and reduction of crime. Budgeted contract amount: $ 13,018,576 Judicial System - The Spokane County District Court is contracted to provide municipal court services. The contract provides for the services of judge and court commissioner with related support staff. Budgeted amount also includes jury management fees. Budgeted contract amount: $ 1,403,423 Jail System - Spokane County provides jail and probation services for persons sentenced by any City of Spokane Valley Municipal Court Judge for violating laws of the city or state. Budgeted contract amount: $ 289,798 Animal Control - Spokane County will provide animal control services to include licensing, care and treatment of lost or stray animals, and response to potentially dangerous animal confrontations. Budgeted contract amount: $ 402,295 36 Judicial System: District Court Contract Jury Management Contract Public Defender Contract Prosecutor Contract Crime Victim Compensation Pretrial Services Contract Probation Services Contract Subtotal Judicial System Law Enforcement System: Sheriff Contract Emergency Management Contract Law Enf. Bldg Maintenance Contract Vehicle Decals Clothing & Uniforms Purchase of Law Enf. Building Vehicle Usage Costs Equipment Replacement Charge Subtotal Law Enforcement System: Jail System: Jail Contract Work Release (Geiger) Subtotal Jail System: Other: Capital Outlays Fines & Forfeitures State Remittance Prosecution - Animal Control Animal Control Contract Total Public Safety City of Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 016 - Public Safety 39 2003 9 -Month Actuals* 818,342 260,946 271,622 4,078 5,393 1,360, 381 6,729,927 36,483 4,105 7,408 1,199 4,100 6,783,222 146,589 146,589 50,117 290,567 288,120 628,804 $ 8,918,996 2004 Amended 2005 Budget Budget 910,000 691,328 5,000 5,000 294,400 310,028 369,000 294,159 10,000 10,000 24,000 32,908 30,000 60,000 1,642,400 1,403,423 11,690,000 12,892,303 " 64,590 64,700 28,500 38,573 10,000 10,000 7,000 7,000 28,500 - 500 500 5,500 5,500 11,834,590 13,018,576 210,000 48,000 258,000 590,000 369,000 959,000 171,039 118,759 289,798 590,000 7,332 402,295 999,627 $ 14,693,990 $ 15,711,424 * Not all contract services were paid for the full 9 -month period " Sheriff Contract increase in 2005 is largely paid for using the increased sales tax of .1% approved by voters in 2004 for criminal justice purposes. 14,000,000 12,000,000 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2.000,000 691,328 1. City of Spokane Valley 2005 Budgeted Contract Expenditures 12,892,303 310,028 294,159 402,295 171,039 118 5,000.. 10,000 32,908 60,000 64,700 ,759 t r N. NS `e NS to o c o c o c o c � 4 ac c o c o c 0° 01 � \ NP oc < < \ G N. Go.) G a��c eca� G �JN° G G a m �� G �y ra` G �¢� �a� �ay� c,`o� 5 o a ar o po � Q� ~ � c � ` r � �� a a '� Q- \ Go G \ iy Cc Q Q a 6 G G 40 Fund: 001 Dept 010 General Fund Operations & Administrative Services Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 018 - Operations & Administrative Services The Operations & Administrative Services Department is composed of four divisions, the Deputy City Manager Division, the Finance Division, the Legal Division, and the Human Resources Division. 013 - Deputy City Manager Division The Deputy City Manager (DCM) supervises the Operations & Administrative Services Department, assists the City Manager in organizing and directing the other operations of the city and assumes the duties of the City Manager in his/her absence. Accomplishments for 2004 • Developed a managed competition pilot program and issued an RFP for library and parks maintenance services. Performance measures, including those for customer service, were developed as a part of the proposal. • Presented major decision points concerning options for City Hall. Council determined that the City should continue leasing, and evaluate specific options when and if they became available. • Developed administrative policies and procedures for the organization. • Developed an employee recognition program. Goals for 2005 • Oversee and refine the day-to-day operations of the City services, focusing on interdepartmental cooperation. • Develop and institute procedures to ensure timely monitoring, response and intervention in all critical path projects and significant issues in the operating departments of the City. • Complete an identification process to define the values which reflect the organization's culture as well as its vision, mission and goals. • Establish a formal, citywide customer service program. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Personnel - FTE Equivalents Deputy City Manager 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Analyst 1.0 1.0 1.0 Office Assistant II 1.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 0_5 0_5 Q,,./5 Total FTEs 3.5 3.5 3.5 Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ 91,668 $ 247,200 $ 249,292 Supplies 9,383 4,800 6,200 Services & Charges 74,623 8,770 7,700 Capital Outlay - Interfund Charges 6,856 6,380 5,750 Total Deputy City Manager Division $ 182,530 $ 267,150 $ 268,942 41 Fund: 001 Dept 018 General Fund Operations & Administrative Services Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 014 - Finance Division The Finance Department provides financial management services for all city departments. Programs include accounting and reporting, payroll, accounts payable, purchasing, budgeting and financial planning, treasury, information technology and investments. The department is also responsible for generating and analyzing data related to the City's operations. The department prepares monthly, quarterly, and annual financial reports and budgets to ensure compliance with state laws. Accomplishments for 2004 • Developed a Five -Year Financial Plan. • Implemented a business registration system. • Produced a disaster recovery plan for the IT system. • Produced the first Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. • Received unqualified opinion for 2003 financial statements. Goals for 2005 • Expand multiyear financial plan to six years, identify financial constraints and propose a budget balancing plan. • Complete an A -87 cost allocation study and plan. Budget Summary Personnel - FTE Equivalents Finance & Admin Services Director Accounting Manager Accountant/Budget Analyst Accounting Technician IT Specialist Administrative Assistant Total FTEs 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ 128,385 $ 380,867 $ 407,619 Supplies 4,494 8,883 7,700 Services & Charges 91,806 11,960 12,400 Capital Outlay - - - Interfund Charges 6,407 10,240 9,250 Total Finance Division $ 231,092 $ 411,950 $ 436,969 Fund: 001 Dept: 018 General Fund Operations & Administrative Services Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 015 - Legal Division The City Attorney provides accurate and timely legal advice to the Council, City departments and advisory boards and commissions on a wide variety of municipal issues to improve effectiveness and minimize risk of City operations. General legal services for the city are contracted from Witherspoon, Kelley, Davenport, & Toole. Stanley Schwartz is the lead attorney. Additional funds have been included in the budget for special counsel, which may be needed from time to time. Funding has also been included for a Legal Intern, who will provide assistance to the Deputy City Attorney on a number of issues. Accomplishments for 2004 • Drafted most of the ordinances, resolutions and contracts adopted by the Council since January 2004. o Provided legal/technical support to the Department of Community Development in planning phase of the Comprehensive Plan. o Successfully prosecuted Growth Management appeal. Goals for 2005 • Continue researching options for provision of court- related services. • Provide quality and timely legal support for all city departments. • Assist Community Development in developing Final Comprehensive Plan. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Personnel - FTE Equivalents Deputy City Attomey 1.0 1.0 1.0 Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ 62,638 $ 87,964 $ 93,945 Supplies 562 3,180 2,300 Services & Charges 94,212 105,300 102,562 Capital Outlay - Interfund Charges 18 3,860 3,500 Total Legal Division $ 157,430 $ 200,304 $ 202,307 43 ( �J Fund: 001 Dept: 018 General Fund Operations & Administrative Services Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 016 - Human Resources Division Human Resources (HR) is administered through the Deputy City Manager (DCM) who serves as the Human Resources Manager for the City. The HR operation provides services in compensation, benefits, training and organizational development, staffing, employee relations, and communications. Accomplishments for 2004 • Developed City's web based intranet to make information more accessible to employees. • Developed a basic City employee training program, based upon an assessment of legally required or highly encouraged topics. • Conducted training classes for employees, including topics such as media relations and professional (report) writing. Goals for 2005 • Negotiate the City's first labor agreement. • Review and revise human resources policies and procedures. • Develop a schedule for reviewing and revising the City's job descriptions. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Personnel - FTE Equivalents Deputy City Clerk 0.5 0.5 ' 0.5 Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ 24,233 $ 29,701 $ 32,062 Supplies 2,611 5,000 3,500 Services & Charges 41,307 820 81,821 Capital Outlay - Interfund Charges 2,680 2,000 Total Human Resources Division $ 68,151 $ 38,201 $ 119,383 44 Fund: 001 Dept 032 General Fund Public Works Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 032 - Public Works The Public Works Department provides overall planning and oversight of public works projects in the City of Spokane Valley. The department provides engineering plan review, inspection, coordination of major public works capital improvement projects, long -range transportation planning and neighborhood traffic management. Accomplishments for 2004 • Continued on -going analysis and review with the County, City of Spokane, and DOE regarding Wastewater Treatment Facility options. • Established a Regional Wastewater Committee to evaluate the possibilities of a Spokane Regional Wastewater Alliance. • Managed and refined contracts with Spokane County and others for public works services and construction. • Provided engineering review and support for City projects and other City public works needs. • Developed the 2005 -2010 Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) for Council adoption. • Provided public works expertise in the Comprehensive Planning effort. • Provided Development Review on nine (9) new Commerical Development Projects, and sixty -three Single Family projects from July 1, 2003 to July 1, 2004, resulting in seventy -one new Commercial Development lots and one thousand, twenty -one Single Family Tots. • Implemented and closely supervised the major Street Capital Projects. Goals for 2005 • Analyze and review with the County, City of Spokane, and DOE regarding Wastewater Treatment Facility options. • Work with the Regional Wastewater Committee to evaluate the possiblities of a Spokane Regional Wastewater Alliance. • Develop a Public Works strategic plan that will provide a blueprint for the development of the department. 45 Fund: 001 Dept 032 General Fund Public Works Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 032 - Public Works Goals for 2005, Continued • Manage and refine contracts with Spokane County and others for public works services and construction. • Provide engineering review and support for City projects and other City public works needs. • Develop the Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) for Council adoption. • Provide public works expertise in the Comprehensive Planning effort. • Provide Development Review on new Commercial Development Projects, Single Family Lots and Multi - Family Units. • Implement and closely supervise the major Street Capital Projects. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Personnel - FTE Equivalents Public Works Director 1.0 1.0 1.0 City Engineer 1.0 0.0 0.0 Administrative Assistant 0.5 1.0 1.0 Senior Engineer (Development) 1.0 1.0 1.0 Assistant Engineer (Development) 1.0 1.0 1.0 Senior Engineer (CIP) 1.0 1.0 1.0 Engineer (CIP Planning /Grants) 0.0 0.0 1.0 Assistant Engineer (CIP) 1.0 1.0 1.0 Engineering Technician 1.0 1.0 1.0 Total FTEs . 7.5 7.0 8.0 Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ 309,172 $ 524,019 $ 661,392 Supplies 16,284 16,740 29,878 Services & Charges 98,779 40,240 15,620 Capital Outlay 20,530 35,170 - Interfund Charges 17,950 14,910 17,100 Total Public Works $ 462,715 $ 631,079 $ 723,990 46 Fund: 001 Dept: 058 General Fund Planning & Community Development Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 058 - Planning & Community Development The Planning & Community Development Department provides overall management and oversight of development services including current and long -range planning, coordination of regional environmental issues, building permitting and inspections, and code enforcement. The Permit Center provides coordinated, one -stop administration of all development permits. The Code Enforcement Officer is responsible for the enforcement of zoning regulations and nuisance abatement. 058 - Planning Division The Planning Division is responsible for providing professional policy guidance on land use issues to the City Council and Planning Commission. It is also responsible for processing land use permits, reviewing environmentally sensitive areas, and providing code enforcement services. Accomplishments for 2004 • Streamlined the development review process. • Implemented a functional permitting system. • Completed a draft of the Comprehensive Plan for Community Review. • Secured participation in the National Flood Insurance Program. • Completed revisions to the Sign regulations. • Completed webpage update process. • Initiated review of key development standards. • Completed economic analysis for Sprague Appleway Corridor. • Initiated a strategic annexation plan. • Updated Shoreline Management Program. • Completed development regulations informational pamphlet. 47 Fund: 001 Dept: 058 General Fund Planning & Community Development Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 058 - Planning Division Goals for 2005 • Complete the Comprehensive Plan. • Complete Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code. • Complete the strategic annexation plan. • Participate in a Regional /Urban Design Assistance Team (R/UDAT) Program. Budget Summary Personnel - FTE Equivalents Community Development Director Planning Manager Senior Planner Planning Manager - Current Associate Planner Assistant Planner Planning Technician Permit Specialist Administrative Assistant Total FTEs Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits Supplies Services & Charges Capital Outlay Interfund Charges 2003 9 -Month Actual 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 0.5 8.5 $ 298,987 15,904 222,785 1,811 15,940 Total Planning Division $ 555,427 2004 Amended Budget 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 9.0 $ 623,975 19,999 260,500 20,284 $ 924,758 2005 Budget 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 9.0 $ 633,301 16,250 270,955 13,500 $ 934,006 48 Fund: 001 Dept 058 General Fund Planning & Community Development Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 059 - Building Division The Building Division implements the Washington State Building Code. It is responsible for ensuring that buildings and structures comply with adopted building code standards through professional plan review and inspection services. The Permit Center receives applications and coordinates the review and processing of permits. Accomplishments for 2004 • Streamlined the permit process. • Completed implementation of a functional permitting system. • Completed the Grading Ordinance. • Secured participation in the National Flood Insurance Program. • Adopted International Building Codes. • Completed informational pamphlets. • Established pool of on -call inspectors to supplement inspection staff • Instituted enforcement of Clear View triangles. Goals for 2005 • Integrate Building and Code Compliance provisions within the Uniform Development Code. • Reduce backlog of Code Compliance actions by 10 %. • Consolidate Planning site plan review within Plan Review. • Integrate inter - agency requirements with adopted Code provisions. • Expand inter - agency participation in Code Compliance. Budget Summary Personnel - FTE Equivalents Building Official Building Inspector II Code Enforcement Officer Permit Specialist Plans Examiner Total FTEs 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1_0 1_0 L¢ 7.0 8.0 8.0 Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ 254,832 $ 497,058 $ 555,816 Supplies 18,940 31,998 31,575 Services & Charges 39,006 19,265 74,255 Capital Outlay 51,704 40,000 8,249 Interfund Charges 14,061 31,440 26,664 Total Building Division $ 378,543 $ 619,761 $ 696,559 49 Fund: 001 Dept 072 General Fund Library Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 072 - Library Library services to Valley residents are currently provided by the Spokane County Library District (SCLD). Under a managed competition pilot project, the City issued a request for proposals for 2005 library services. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ $ $ Supplies Services & Charges - 2,053,250 2,100,000 Capital Outlay Interfund Charges Total Library $ $ 2,053,250 $ 2,100,000 50 Fund: 001 Dept 076 General Fund Parks & Recreation Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 076 - Parks & Recreation The Parks and Recreation Department is composed of six divisions, the Administration, Park Maintenance Division, Recreation, Aquatics, Senior Center, and the CenterPlace Division. The overall goal of the department is to provide quality recreation programs and acquisition, renovation, development, operation, and maintenance of parks and recreation facilities, within a defined budget. 000 - Parks Administration The Administration Division provides direction and leadership for the Parks and Recreation Department in implementing the goals and objectives of the City Council and facilitates the general upkeep of parks and public areas of the City. Accomplishments for 2004 • Started the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. • Dedication of Mirabeau Meadows Park. Goals for 2005 • Strive for the highest level of customer service in all department activities. • Complete & evaluate Master Plan to determine community's needs and provide direction for a Comprehensive Plan. • Dedication /Grand Opening of the CenterPlace facility. • Pursue new grant opportunities. Budget Summary Personnel - FTE Equivalents Parks & Recreation Director Administrative Assistant Total FTEs 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ 129,229 $ 169,069 $ 162,718 Supplies 2,713 44,487 9,580 Services & Charges 659,619 649,539 40,127 Capital Outlay 32,589 112,127 - Interfund Charges 3,185 5 3,000 Total Parks Administration $ 827,335 $ 980,262 $ 215,425 51 J Fund: 001 Dept: 076 General Fund Parks & Recreation Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 300 - Maintenance Division The Maintenance Division coordinates and facilitates the operation and maintenance of all City parks. Currently, the City contracts with Spokane County for the parks maintenance services. In 2004, a request for proposals was issued for parks maintenance services to assure the City is getting a reasonable price for the service. Accomplishments for 2004 • Created a park maintenance proposal for the privatization of park maintenance. Goals for 2005 • Evaluate and manage the park maintenance contract. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ $ $ Supplies - 33,755 Services & Charges - - 821,082 Capital Outlay - Interfund Charges - Total Maintenance Division $ $ $ 854,837 Note: The Maintenance Division was combined with the Administration Division for 2003 and 2004. Historical maintenance costs are included in the Parks Administration budget. 52 Fund: 001 Dept: 076 General Fund Parks & Recreation Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 301 - Recreation Division The Recreation Division coordinates and facilitates the delivery of recreation programs and services throughout the city and the City's park system. In 2004, the Division developed summer recreation programs to provide healthy, constructive leisure time for citizens of all ages, Accom _plishments for 2004 • Developed cost recovery spreadsheets for all recreation programs, is Developed a comprehensive List of other recreation providers for Spokane Valley. Goals for 2005 R Pursue recreation programming as per Master Plan recommendations. ▪ Continue to serve as a clearinghouse for recreation program needs by referring citizens to other providers. Budget Surrim 53 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Personnel - FTE Equivalents Recreation Coordinator 1.0 1.0 1.0 Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ 24,754 $ 61,187 $ 118,790 Supplies 4,707 8,888 8,555 Services & Charges 48,489 25,561 24,930 Capital Outlay Interfund Charges 4885 8,120 7,940 Total Recreation Division $ 82,835 $ 103,433 $ 158,215 Fund: 001 Dept 076 General Fund Parks & Recreation Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 302 - Aquatics Division The City of Spokane Valley owns three pools: Park Road Pool, Terrace View Pool, and Valley Mission Pool. Services include Open Swim, Swim Lessons, Swim Team and facility rentals. In addition, the City leases a portion of Valley Mission Park to Splashdown Inc. for a water park. The City currently is contracting with Spokane County for all aquatic activities within the City. The County provides the lifeguards and maintains the pools during the season. Accomplishments for 2004 • Participation was as follows: 16,001 swimmers; 909 people enrolled in swim lessons; and 79 people enrolled in swim teams. • Pools were open additional hours and on weekends. Goals for 2005 • Pursue recommendations of the Parks & Recreation Master Plan. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ $ - $ Supplies Services & Charges 253,074 255,818 Capital Outlay 10,000 Interfund Charges Total Aquatics Division $ $ 263,074 $ 255,818 54 Fund: 001 Dept 076 General Fund Parks & Recreation Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 304 - Senior Center Division The Senior Center Division accounts for the costs associated with providing entertainment and leisure activities for the City's senior citizens. Accomplishments for 2004 • Expanded program opportunities. • Expanded volunteer opportunities for seniors within the community. • Developed fundraiser activities. • Reduced cost to print the monthly newsletter. Goals for 2005 • Develop programs to reach the 50+ (young seniors). • Develop a Wellness Center at CenterPlace and expand wellness awareness. • Offer outdoor activities for active seniors. • Recruit volunteers to work in the greenhouse. • Investigate feasibility of extended hours for activities at the Center for working seniors. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Personnel - FTE Equivalents Senior Center Supervisor 1.0 1.0 1.0 Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ 6,271 $ 84,021 $ 78,998 Supplies 2,465 3,945 2,600 Services & Charges 2,864 38,045 43,494 Capital Outlay - Interfund Charges 3 1 Total Senior Center Division $ 11,600 $ 129,371 $ 126,592 55 Fund: 001 Dept: 076 General Fund Parks & Recreation Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 305 - CenterPlace Division Construction of Mirabeau Point CenterPlace began in late 2003, and has an expected completion date of mid -year 2005. The project represents the culmination of eight years of planning and fundraising by Mirabeau Point Inc. and the joint involvement of the City and Spokane County. This $10 million project is financed through numerous corporate, individual and service club donations along with funding support from the Spokane Public Facilities District_ The City will be responsible for the construction, finance and operation of the new facility. At total build out, the approximately 54,000 square foot facility will house the new City of Spokane Valley Senior Center, a great room (banquet facility), numerous meeting rooms, multi purpose rooms and a high tech lecture hall. The facility will combine with Mirabeau Meadows Park and Mirabeau Springs to form a regional focal point for Northeast Washington and Northern Idaho. Accomplishments for 2004 • Construction continued on schedule and within budget. Goals for 2005 • Develop programs and ideas for space utilization, and begin marketing and future reservations for the facility. • Assist with construction oversight and with purchase of furniture, kitchenware, etc. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Personnel - FTE Equivalents CenterPlace Manager 0.0 1.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant 0.0 0.0 1.0 Maintenance Worker 0_0 0, 1.0 Total FTEs 0.0 1.0 3.0 Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ $ 75,719 $ 144,848 Supplies - 6,554 10,075 Services & Charges 29,725 146,325 Capital Outlay - 11,962 - Interfund Charges 1,680 20,051 Total CenterPlace Division $ - $ 125,640 $ 321,299 56 Fund: 001 Dept 09D General Fund General Government Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 090 - Genera.! Government; The General GGovemme.nt Department comprises activities that encompass services to multiple departments. Included in this department are the costs of city hall and related utilities, management information services, insurance costs, mir-Fllaneous city intergovernmental costs and capital equipment costs that benefit more than one department In 2005, the General Fund is scheduled to repay $1,302,736 of outstanding debt. pudcet Summary j3udaet Detail General Citywide Costs Accounting & Audit Services Software Maintenance Election Costs Business Registrations Advertising Employee Recognition & Safety Program Web Page TelephonelDSL Charges IT Consulting Permitting Software Student Advisory Council Operating Supplies Search Fees Start -Up Capital Outlays Miscellaneous $ 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget $ 35,000 $ 156,900 13,155 35,000 20,00D 50,000 50,000 5,075 15,000 15,00D 21,550 21,550 3,000 3,000 26,104 10,000 5,000 20,000 20,000 77,660 60,000 70,000 60,000 500 500 22,867 - 5,000 122,408 271,795 - 1,183 20,000 20,000 Inferfund Interfund Loan Interest 34,891 75,000 75,000 Interfund Risk Management Payment 669 130,000 130,000 Operating Transfer - Loan Repayment 800,000 1,302,735 Facilities Facility Repairs & Maintenance - 1,500 - Miscellaneous Building Maintenance 3,077 5,000 5,000 City Hall Leasing Costs: City Hall Rent 190,580 220,683 251,055 Leasehold Improvements 36,193 88,745 53,745 Storage Space & Parking - 3,000 3,000 Outside Services Memberships - SRTC - 42,500 36,00D Alcohol Treatment 8,858 15,800 19,000 Spokane County Air Pollution Authority 87,227 115,000 118,918 Voter Registration Maintenance - - 50,000 City Economic Development 4,306 10,000 10,000 Cable Franchise Negotiations - 50,000 20,000 Impact Fee Study - - 50,00D Requests from Outside Agencies - 100,000 100,000 Contingency & Reserves Reserve for Revenue Adjustments 463,300 813,533 Operating Reserve - Mirabeau Project 300,000 Service Level Stabilization Reserve 200,000 600,000 Contingency 500,000 500,0D0 $ 906,068 $ 3,450,578 $ 4,524,937 57 Fund: 101 Dapt 042 Street Fund Spokane Vancy 2005 Budget. 101 - Street Fund The Street Operating program is established to provide efficient and safe movement of both motorized and non - motorized vehicles as well as pedestrians within the limits of the City and coordinate convenient interconnect to the regional transportation system. The transportation networks, under this program, are designed, constructed, and maintained to improve the quality of life while providing the efficient movement of commerce. Accomplishments for 2004 • Managed contracts with the County and State for public works services including maintenance, engineering and construction. • City assumed operation and maintenance of all City streets and two state highways, SR 290 and SR 27. • Continued to contract with Spokane County for engineering services related to operations and maintenance of City streets. • Worked with Community Development to ensure that adequate traffic and transportation mitigation was provided. Goals for 2005 • Operate and maintain all City streets and two state highways, SR 290 and SR 27, which the City has assumed. • Continue to contract with Spokane County for engineering services related to operations and maintenance of City streets. • Develop a Neighborhood Traffic Calming Management program. • Work with Community Development to ensure that adequate traffic and transportation mitigation is provided. • Develop a six -year street master plan and a 20 year pavement management plan. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Personnel - FTE Equivalents Senior Engineer - Traffic 0.4 0.4 0.4 Public Works Superintendent 1.0 1.0 1.0 Construction Inspector 1.5 1.4 1.4 Senior Engineer (PlanninglGrants) 0_0 015 0_4 Total FTEs 2.9 2.95 3.2 Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ 85,953 $ 185,638 $ 198,354 Supplies 3,584 13,280 13,280 Services & Charges 2,354,215 3,531,766 2,796,442 Capital Outlay 49,611 - - Interfund Charges 22 42,500 167,140 Total Street Fund $ 2,493,385 $ 3,773,184 $ 3,175,216 58 Fund: 102 Dept: 041 Arterial Street Fund Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 102 - Arterial Street Fund The Arterial Street Fund accounts for the receipt and expenditure of the State - levied motor vehicle fuel tax distributed to the City in accordance with State RCW 82.36.020. These revenues will be transferred to the Street Capital Projects Fund for the construction, improvement, chip sealing, seal coating, and repair of arterial streets. Budget Summary Budget Detail Transfer to Street Capital Projects Transfer to Capital Grants Fund Total Arterial Street Fund 2003 2004 9-Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget $ 165,549 $ 600,000 $ 670,400 186,000 $ 165,549 $ 600,000 $ 856,400 Fund: 103 Dept: 103 Trails & Paths Fund Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 103 - Trails & Paths Fund The Trails & Paths Fund accounts for the receipt and expenditure of the State - levied motor vehicle fuel tax distributed to the City in accordance with State RCW 47.30.050. These revenues originate from .42% of motor vehicle fuel tax attributable to Street Maintenance. These funds are restricted for the purpose of constructing new trails and paths throughout the City. No expenditures are budgeted for this fund in 2005. 59 Fund: 105 Dept 105 Hotel /Motel Fund Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 105 - HotellMotel Fund The Hotel/Motel Fund accounts for the receipt and expenditure of a basic tax of two percent on all charges for furnishing lodging at hotels, motels, and similar establish- ments for a continuous period of less than one month. When this tax is imposed, the state sales tax decreases by a like amount, so tourists and other lodgers experience no increase as a result of this tax. This basic tax is to be used solely for the purposes of tourism promotion, acquisition or operation of tourism - related facilities, and marketing of special events and festivals designed to attract tourists. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Budget Detail Tourism Promotion $ 35,425 $ 475,000 $ 300,000 10/6/2004 60 Fund: 204 Dept 204 Limited Tax General Obligation - Debt Service Fund Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 204 - Limited Tax General Obligation - Debt Service Fund The LTGO - Debt Service Fund collects and distributes monies received and paid for Tong -term debt obligations. Revenue to this fund consists of money received from the Public Facility District, which will be used to pay annual debt obligations for the Mirabeau bonds. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Budget Detail Debt Service on Mirabeau Bonds $ $ 600,000 $ 397,745 Debt Service on Street Bonds - 200,000 185 Total Debt Service Fund $ - $ 800,000 $ 582,835 10/612004 61 Fund: 3011302 Capital Projects & Special Capital Projects Funds Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 301/302 - Capital Projects & Special Capital Projects Funds These funds account for the collection and expenditure of the real estate excise tax levied on all sales of real estate. The tax is levied in two phases of a quarter of a percent each. The first quarter percent of the real estate excise tax (REET 1) must be spent on capital improvements identified in a capital improvements plan. This REET 1tax is accounted for in the Capital Projects Fund 301. The second quarter percent (REET 2) may only be levied by cities that are planning under the Growth Management Act. These funds must be used for public works capital projects The REET 2 tax is accounted for in the Special Capital Projects Fund 302. Revenues accumulated in these funds will be used as matching funds for construction projects and will be transferred to other Capital Project Funds. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget 301 - Capital Projects Fund Transfer to Street Capital Projects $ 36,554 $ $ Transfer to Debt Service - 100,000 92,545 Transfer to General Fund 80,000 40,000 Parks Capital Improvements - 200,000 Total Capital Projects Fund $ 36,554 $ 180,000 $ 332,545 302 - Special Capital Projects Fund Transfer to Street Capital Projects $ 110,000 $ 200,000 $ 112,600 Transfer to Debt Service - 100,000 92,545 Total Special Capital Projects Fund $ 110,000 $ 300,000 $ 205,145 10/6/2004 62 Fund: 303 Street Capital Projects Fund Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 303 - Street Capital Projects Fund The Street Capital Projects Fund accounts for monies used to finance the 6 year transportation improvement plan. Revenues are transfers from the Arterial Street Fund, Capital Projects Fund, and Special Capital Projects Fund and bond sale proceeds. Expenditures are often for matching funds for Transportation Improvement Board and other grants. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Budget Detail Road Design & Construction Projects Pines/Mansfield, Wilbur Rd. to Pines $ - $ 55,000 $ 28,000 Sullivan Road Extension 15,700 5,000 16th Avenue - Project 2 260,000 - Park Road - Project 2 195,000 Evergreen Road - 348,000 Valley Couplet 15,000 TIB Matching Funds 294,964 - Engineering Services 17,109 Road Preservation Projects Other Preservation Projects 830,000 750,000 Consultant Contract - 60,000 Contingency - 150,000 Road Paveback (Septic Elimination) Sipple 141,000 Veradale Phase II 284,000 Bums Road 31,000 Orchard Avenue Inland Johnston Sherwood Forest - Parks Road - Edgerton Miscellaneous Projects 92,609 • See page 70 for funding information on these projects. Total Street Capital Projects Fund $ 312,073 $ 2,327,309 $ 933,000 10/6/2004 63 Fund: 304 Dept: 304 Mirabeau Point Capital Project Fund Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 304 - Mirabeau Point Capital Project Fund Mirabeau Point is a multi -use regional project located at 2426 Discovery Place which will be constructed and operated by the City. CenterPlace will provide space for a Conference Center Wing, Senior Center Wing and a Great Room Wing. The portion of CenterPlace used for the Conference Center Wing and Great Room Wing is being developed as a "regional facility" as defined in RCW 36.100 and 35.57.020. Budget Detail Construction in Progress Bond Issue Costs Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget $ 98,470 $ 9,500,000 $ 3,000,000 170,692 Total Mirabeau Point Project Fund $ 269,162 $ 9,500,000 $ 3,000,000 Fund: 305 Dept: 305 Street Bond Capital Projects Fund Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 305 - Street Bond Capital Projects Fund The Street Bond Capital Projects Fund accounts for monies received from bond proceeds which will be used for various capital street projects. Budget Summary Budget Detail Transfer to Street Capital Projects Bond Issue Costs Total Street Bond Capital Fund 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget $ - $ 2,460,000 $ 406,000 48.584 - $ 48,584 $ 2,460,000 $ 406,000 10/6/2004 64 308 - Barker Bridge - Federal Grant Fund The Barker Bridge - Federal Grant Fund was created to account for the revenues and expenditures associated with the Barker Road Bridge Replacement Project. This project is fully funded by BRAC grant proceeds and will cost approximately $8,000,000 over the course of the next few years. Budget Summary 2003 9 -Month Actual 2004 Amended Budget 2005 Budget Budget Detail Barker Road Bridge Replacement Project $ $ 702,000 $ 234,000 See page 70 for funding information on these projects. 10/6/2004 Fund: 307 Dept 307 Capital Grants Fund Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 307 - Capital Grants Fund The Capital Grants Fund accounts for capital improvement projects funded partially by grant proceeds from other govemmental agencies, such as TIB, SRTC and BRAC. Revenues to this fund are from grant proceeds and transfers from other special revenue funds. Budget Detail Barker Road Reconstruction 24th Avenue Sidewalk Project 8th Avenue Broadway Avenue Wellesley Avenue Park Road Dishman Mica Road Appleway Road Total Capital Grants Fund Budget Summary 2003 9 -Month Actual • See page 70 for funding information on these projects. $ $ 639,000 $ 198,000 2004 Amended Budget $ 837,000 2005 Budget $ 1,114,000 1,136,000 812,000 344,000 164,000 41,000 216,000 $ 3,827,000 Fund: 308 Dept 308 Barker Bridge - Federal Grant Fund Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 65 Fund: 402 Dept 402 Stormwater Management Fund Spokane volley 2005 Budget 402 - Stormwater Management Fund The Stormwater Management fund accounts for receipt and expenditure of the stormwater management fee. This fee is levied on an annual basis based upon a number of service units attached to the parcel. The expenditures are used for stormwater construction and management through both the Public Works Department and Spokane County. Accomplishments for 2004 • Enforced standards to improve water quality and protect the aquifer. • Provided support to planning and building to insure that new development meets stormwater standards. • Participated in the development of Department of Ecology stormwater regulations including the UIC and NPDES Phase II programs and the finalization of the Eastern Washington Stormwater Manual. • Investigated existing drainage problems. • Performed floodplain permit engineering review. • Managed the swale inspection program. • Managed Spokane County contract work for stormwater billing. • Initialed development of City drainage design manual based upon DOE's Eastern Washington Manual Developed new swale design method. Goals for 2005 • Design and implement solutions for existing drainage problems. • Perform fioodplain permit engineering review. • Manage the swale inspection program. • Update stormwater billing procedures. • Implement new swale design method. • Develop and implement six year plan for construction of regional and semi- regional drainage facilities. • Continue development of the City stormwater design manual. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Personnel - FTE Eouivalents Engineer 0.0 0.0 1.0 Engineering Technician 0_0 0_0 1.0 Total FTEs 0.0 0.0 2.0 Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ $ - $ 151,112 Supplies 6,700 22,700 Services & Charges 4,141 352,000 1,059,102 Capital Outlay - 20,000 Interfund Transfers 150 259 Total Stormwater Fund $ 4,141 $ 518,700 $ 1,512,521 65 Fund: 501 Dept: 501 Equipment Rental & Replacement Fund Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 501 - Equipment Rental & Replacement Fund The Equipment Rental & Replacement Fund (ER &R) accounts for the cost of maintaining and replacing City vehicles and equipment for all City departments. The ER &R fund is an Internal Service fund. The fund accumulates the resources for vehicle and equipment replacements in the fund. The Funds or Departments using the vehicle or equipment pay the scheduled replacement fee. Replacement funds are being collected on the telephone system, computer network system, desktop computers, and vehicles. Maintenance and service charges for copiers, telephones, Internet are also charged to funds through this department The fund also finances and administers a fleet of pool cars for use by City departments. Accomplishments for 2004 • Administered an accounting system for replacement costs for city equipment. • Revised replacement charges for the 2005 budget year to better reflect expected usage. Goals for 2005 • Continue to administer and refine the accounting system for replacement costs. • Setup and administer an inventory tracking system. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Budget Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ $ $ Supplies 2,212 5,000 7,500 Services & Charges 26,579 23,600 25,000 Capital Outlay 41 15,000 33,551 Interfund Transfers - Total ER &R Fund $ 28,832 $ 43,600 $ 66,051 67 Fund: 502 Dept 502 Risk Management Fund Spokane Valley 2005 Budget 502 - Risk Management Fund The City of Spokane Valley Risk Management Fund is established to account for insurance costs, claims settlement and administration of a risk management safety program. This fund also accounts for the funding of self- insured unemployment claims through the State of Washington and Washington Cities Insurance Authority. Accomplishments for 2004 • Administered an accounting system for the risk management internal service fund. Goals for 2005 • Continue to administer and refine the risk management internal service fund accounting system. Budget Summary 2003 2004 9 -Month Amended 2005 Actual Budget Budget Budaet Detail Salaries, Wages, & Benefits $ - $ $ Supplies Services & Charges - 137,500 134,450 Capital Outlay Interfund Transfers Total Risk Management Fund $ $ 137,500 $ 134,450 68 City of Spokane Valley Capital Expenditures for 2005 Department Capital Outlay Description Total 059 Building Shelving 8,249 090 General Government Leasehold improvements 53,745 Total Capital Expenditures $ 61,994 *Real Estate Excise Tax 1 69 Revenue Source City REET 1* 8,249 53,745 $ 61,994 301 Cantle! Protects Fund 30.3 Suoss Fund 307 Capital (runts Fund Department Capital Outlay besertptlon Total Proceeds ace Os 'Pensive end Fees 300 Barker Mktg() - Fed Grant Fund 304 Wildman Poed 492 otormweler Fund 601 Equipment RSA Fund Aoad,Dc.km 8 CarntnrciMn PivIst* Bodnar Road AsiXewey Road 00. Avenue fiaa4 Preserve0rm Frllfecil Bweder y A rcnue Wd1esloy Avenue Park Road Dlrhnum Mica Road 'Reel Estate Excise Tex 1 "Reel Estate Excise Tax 2 • "Ttenrportatan improvement Doard (State Fundsl •'•'Speeane Regional Transportation Council (Federal Funds) Bridge Replacement Advisory Committee (Federal Funds) Pens 4nprovernents 200,000 (t.40!1k?�p1La Cansauc11on Pruitttl Plnoaftarrs5eld, Wilbur Rd. to Phials 1,777,000 Sutivan Road E ienrlon 327,000 (load Preoery0U *tea ocla Other Preservation PeNecie 750,000 Contingency 150,000 1,114,000 210,000 1,135,000 012.003 344.000 154.000 41,000 Barker Road Bridge Racons/smaon 234,0170 Construction ht Pmgross 3.000,000 Vahhlo PustSmoe 20,000 2 Vctide Puedtesea 10,551 Total Capital Expenditures A10.30J.551 City of Spokane Valley Capital Expenditures for 2005 Mlrtbesu Point General Grant Bond Street Rand Fund Proceeds 70 REE7 1' E Artarlol Stemiwoler Sheet Management Fund Fce IR" 200,000 1,749.000 70,000 322,000 5,000 112,550 520,441 117,000 150,000 715000 8,000 001,000 30,0110 115.000 153,000 901000 110,000 702,0000 47,000 207,0170 0,000 14,000 142,000 7,000 34,000 234,000 3,000,000 20,000 10,551 _ 53 01101160 S 406, 0 . ; 10,551 1A00 5 200,000 S 112.559 ; 090,441 S 170.000 S 091 040 $ 2 344 .000 S 234 000 301 Cantle! Protects Fund 30.3 Suoss Fund 307 Capital (runts Fund Department Capital Outlay besertptlon Total Proceeds ace Os 'Pensive end Fees 300 Barker Mktg() - Fed Grant Fund 304 Wildman Poed 492 otormweler Fund 601 Equipment RSA Fund Aoad,Dc.km 8 CarntnrciMn PivIst* Bodnar Road AsiXewey Road 00. Avenue fiaa4 Preserve0rm Frllfecil Bweder y A rcnue Wd1esloy Avenue Park Road Dlrhnum Mica Road 'Reel Estate Excise Tex 1 "Reel Estate Excise Tax 2 • "Ttenrportatan improvement Doard (State Fundsl •'•'Speeane Regional Transportation Council (Federal Funds) Bridge Replacement Advisory Committee (Federal Funds) Pens 4nprovernents 200,000 (t.40!1k?�p1La Cansauc11on Pruitttl Plnoaftarrs5eld, Wilbur Rd. to Phials 1,777,000 Sutivan Road E ienrlon 327,000 (load Preoery0U *tea ocla Other Preservation PeNecie 750,000 Contingency 150,000 1,114,000 210,000 1,135,000 012.003 344.000 154.000 41,000 Barker Road Bridge Racons/smaon 234,0170 Construction ht Pmgross 3.000,000 Vahhlo PustSmoe 20,000 2 Vctide Puedtesea 10,551 Total Capital Expenditures A10.30J.551 City of Spokane Valley Capital Expenditures for 2005 Mlrtbesu Point General Grant Bond Street Rand Fund Proceeds 70 REE7 1' E Artarlol Stemiwoler Sheet Management Fund Fce IR" L7tY MANAGER DEPUTY CRY MANAGER DEPUTY CITY ATT0ITHEY 1.0 1.0 1.0 O. O P O O O O O O O f O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 O R 0 .7. 0 0? ? ?? O O O o 0 0 ei•ae; J��. =tj �cJ ACS �e3 ►� ►� 1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 1.0 PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR 1.0 FINANCE DIRECTOR 1.0 PM.1XS 8 RECREATcar DIRECTOR 1,0 CRY CLERK 1.0 PLANNING MANAGER 1.0 CENTERPUACE MANAGER 1.0 SENIOR ENGINEER 2.0 0.4 5En10R ENGINEER 1.0 SENIOR ENGINEER - TRAFFIC 0 4 ASSISTANT ENGINEER 2.0 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN 10 SENIOR PLANNER 1.0 ASSOCIATE PLANNER - CURRENT 1.0 ASSOCIATE PLANNER - LONGTERM 1.0 ASSISTANT PLANNER 1.0 COOE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER 2.0 BUILDING OFFICIAL 1.0 BUILDING INSPECTOR 11 2.0 BUILDING INSPECTOR I PLANS EXAMINER 1,0 PERMIT SPECIALIST 1.0 2.0 PLANNING TECHNICIAN 10 PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT 1 0 RECREATION COORDINATOR 1 ADMf.YISTRATTVE ANALYST 1,0 ACCOUNTANT/BUDGET ANALYST 1,0 ACCOUNTING MANAGER 1.0 IT SPECIALIST x 1.0 SENIOR CENTER SPECIALIST 1.0 DEPUTY CITY CLERK 0.5 0.5 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 1.0 0.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 ADMIN.ISTRATIVEASSMTANT x 1,0 1.0 OFFICE ASSISTANT II 1.0 ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN 1,0 MAINTENANCE WORKER x 1.0 CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR 1.4 Totals 4,6 3.6 6.6 1.0 0.6 5.0 9.0 GA 2A 1.0 1.0 7.0 1.2 ZA 52.2 Unfilled Fund1n0 Souneel PonLOcn Llatln0 Ctly of Spokane Valley 2005 Budgeted PonIllt ne General Fund 1 A Stem- Street Water Fund Fund City of Spokane Valley FTE Count by Year 2005 Budget 2004 2005 2005 Budget Authorized FTE Proposed Department FTEs Additions FTEs General Fund: Executive & Legislative Support 4.5 - 4.5 Operations & Administrative Services: Deputy City Manager 3.5 3.5 Finance 5.5 5.5 Legal 1.0 1.0 Human Resources 0.5 - 0.5 Public Works 7.0 1.0 8.0 Planning & Community Development Planning 9.0 9.0 Building 8.0 - 8.0 Parks & Recreation: Parks Admin 2.0 2.0 Recreation 1.0 - 1.0 Senior Center 1.0 1.0 CenterPlace 1.0 2.0 3.0 Street Fund 2.95 0.25 3.2 Stormwater Fund - 2.0 2.0 TOTAL 46.95 5.25 52.2 72 200 Work Force Comparison: Mfr- v,.Washington Communities with.JS:ulation_o 50 ,00 e r .� j 4 . ,�., `" - C -, PRTTIME ` " POPULATION FULL -TIME _ -.: Seattle 571,900 9473 899 Tacoma 196,300 3447 69 Spokane 197,400 2139 35 Bellevue 117,000 1163 62 Everett 95,470 1041 16 Vancouver 150,700 1016 25 Bellingham 69,850 750 57 Kent 84,210 748 34 Yakima 79,220 630 18 Renton 54,900 571 19 Kennewick 57,900 358 9 Federal Way 83,500 286 23 Shoreline 52,730 120 10 Lakewood 58,940 99 7 Spokane Valley 82,005 47 4 AVERAGE 1459 86 '. 'Te 16`Wash comm inities1wittiPAStaatiofi _ ' : = ti 4" 3� Q 04999 9 � - ,. Y Olympia 42,860 548 44 Redmond 46,480 548 38 Richland 41,650 540 6 Auburn 45,355 443 2 Kirkland 45,630 419 40 Lynnwood 34,500 334 24 Bremerton 38,700 332 25 Puyallup 35,490 309 18 Longview 35,290 289 63 Edmonds 39,580 260 7 Bothell 32,900 237 10 Pasco 37,580 228 13 Lacey 32,240 196 9 University Place 30,720 66 4 Sammamish 35,930 59 2 Burien 31,480 40 13 AVERAGE 303 19.9 10/6/2004 Source: Association of Washington Cities Survey: 2004 73 Sgo'kankan e ., COMMUNITY PROFILE AND HISTORY "You cannot look to the future if you do not know the past." On May 21, 2002, voters within the City approved incorporation of the City of Spokane Valley, which is the second largest city in the County and the eighth largest city in the State, with approximately 83,950 residents. The City incorporated as of March 31, 2003. The assessed valuation of real property within the boundaries of the City for taxation purposes is estimated for 2005 tax collection to be approximately $4,700,000,000. Spokane Valley encompasses approximately 38.2 square miles of land area. It has an extensive retail tax base and is home to several major auto dealerships and the Spokane Valley Mall, which includes over 700,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. There are an estimated 5,000 businesses in Spokane Valley with estimated retail sales of 81.5 billion. The first permanent settler in the Spokane Valley was Antoine Plante, a retired French - Canadian trapper. Mr. Plante built a cabin near the Spokane River in 1849, from which he operated a small Hudson's Bay Company trading post. Other settlers began arriving in this area between 1 865 and 1 882. "Firsts" to occur in Spokane Valley include the first settler in 1849, first business and ferry in 1850, the first store and bridge in 1862, the first house in 1866, and the first post office in 1867. All of these "firsts" occurred before the arrival in 1873 of James Glover who was considered the "Father of Spokane." In 1883, the Northern Pacific Railroad opened the west up with the transcontinental railroad. The new railroad, coupled with the discovery of silver in north Idaho, created an influx of people to the Spokane Valley area. Within a few years the Spokane area was connected to the rest of the country by five transcontinental railroads. The next major innovation to Spokane Valley was the introduction of irrigation to the area. Within 20 years 30,000 acres of dry land had been converted into fertile farm land. The first irrigation systems were constructed between 1899 and 1905. The Valley population grew from 1,000 residents at the turn of the century to nearly 10,000 by 1922. During this time apple growing became the predominant agricultural crop with nearly 2 million apple trees being planted by 1912. As the population of the Valley increased, small communities with churches, schools, businesses, community clubs, and other organizations thrived. Prior to World War lI, the federal government made a decision to build an aluminum plant in Spokane Valley along the Spokane River. Additionally, the federal government 10/7/2004 74 identified a need for warehouse space and facilities to support coastal activities during the war. In 1942, Spokane Valley was chosen as a site for one of theses Inland Supply Depots. The Naval Storage Yards are now the Valley Industrial Park that has 5,000,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. Rapid growth continued in Spokane Valley throughout the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. Along with this continued growth came concerns regarding the impact of the development on the Valley environment. Citizens' concerns were related to impacts to lakes in the area as well as the aquifer underlying a majority of the Spokane Valley. No protections were put into place to address these issues; sanitary sewers were not required for new construction. Steady residential and commercial growth continued in the Spokane Valley throughout the 80s and 90s. High tech companies followed Hewlett Packard into the Liberty Lake area. Later, some high tech companies moved into the Industrial Park. The State Board of Health threatened to enact a moratorium on new development in 1983, unless sewering of the Valley began. In response, Spokane County developed a wastewater management plan that put into motion construction of a sewer trunk line and a sanitary sewer system was made available to the citizens of Spokane Valley. MAJOR PUBLIC FACILITIES AND PARKS IN SPOKANE VALLEY There are public facilities and a number of parks in the City of Spokane Valley. The Spokane Indians, a minor league baseball team, plays its home games at Avista Stadium, located just inside the city limits on the east side of Havana Street. This stadium is one of the finest facilities in the Northwest League and can seat 7,200 spectators. Situated next door to Avista Stadium is the Spokane County Fair and Exposition Center. The Fairgrounds was expanded in 2003 with the construction of a new covered grandstand that was opened at the 2003 Interstate Fair. Various other shows and events are held throughout the year at the Fairgrounds. Mirabeau Point Park, situated on 54.5 acres of land, located between Pines Road and Evergreen Road interchanges (north of I -90), along the south bank of the Spokane River, is a City cultural development currently under construction. It has been designed as a multiuse community facility that will provide public, educational, recreational, and cultural activities for its citizens. CenterPlace, a 54,000 square foot facility, will be built to accommodate a regional senior center, education and business center, and a cultural and performing arts center. Mirabeau Meadows is a 15 -acre parcel of land providing another area for community activities, such as family get - togethers and games, outdoor music, corporate outings, farmers markets, arts and crafts, and other special events in Mirabeau Point Park. Valleyfest, an annual community event that is sponsored by individuals and businesses in our City, was held in this park in 2004. 10/7/2004 75 Park Name Park Classification Park Size Balfour Community Park 2.8 acres Brown's Community Park 8.2 acres Castle Community Park 2.7 acres Edgecliff Community Park 4.8 acres Mirabeau Point Park Community/Regional Park 6.5 acres owned/54.5 total Myrtle Point Natural Area 31.0 acres Opportunity Township Special Use 0.2 acres Park Road Pool Special Use 2.0 acres Sullivan Community Park 10.3 acres Terrace View Community Park 9.1 acres Valley Mission and Valley Mission South & Pool Community Park 27.2 acres Valley Senior Center Special Use 2.0 acres Centennial Trail Trail 7 linear miles The City of Spokane Valley operates a number of parks within the City. Below is a summary of these parks: THE FUTURE OF SPOKANE VALLEY Spokane Valley: a community of opportunity where individuals and families can grow and play, and business will flourish and prosper. The potential of Spokane Valley is tremendous, with an adequate tax base and room for expansion of residential, commercial, and industrial growth. Spokane Valley rivals other cities in Eastern Washington in terms of population and significance in the region. The City is committed to planning for the future. It has created a rough draft of its first Comprehensive Plan, which is undergoing community review. In addition, the City is developing a Parks and Recreation Master Plan. 10/7/2004 76 LOCATION The City of Spokane Valley is located in the eastern part of Spokane County adjacent on the east by the City of Liberty Lake and on the west by the City of Spokane and is accessible from I -90, SR 27 and SR 290. Demographics Square Miles Population Housing Units Miles of Paved Streets' CITY COUNCIL Mike DeVleming, Mayor Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Richard Munson, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember MUNICIPAL SERVICES 38.5 83,950 37,867 420 Law Enforcement The City of Spokane Valley contracts with the Spokane County Sheriff's Office for its law enforcement services. The City also contracts with Spokane County for jail and court services. The Washington State Patrol also provides services on state and interstate highways and as backup for emergencies. Fire Protection Spokane County Fire District 1, the largest District in Spokane County, provides fire protection as well as basic and advanced EMT life support services for the majority of the City. Portions of the City are also served by Spokane County Fire District 8. 10/7/2004 77 COMMUNITY PROFILE Library Services The Spokane County Library District provides library services to the City. Public Works The City's engineering and roads maintenance is provided by the City's Public Works Department, with road maintenance provided under contracts by Spokane County. Animal Control Animal control services are provided by the Spokane County Animal Control Department, and is staffed with Animal Control Ofcers trained and commissioned by Spokane County Sheriff's Department. Parks and Recreation The City of Spokane Valley contracts with Spokane County for the maintenance of parks within the community. Recreational Facilities ■ Balfour Park • Brown Park • Castle Park ■ Centennial Trail • Edgecliff Park ■ Mirab eau ■ Orchard Park • Park Road Park • Sullivan Park ■ Terrace View Park and Pool ■ Valley Mission Park, Pool and Senior Center Educational Services The City of Spokane Valley is served by: • Central Valley School District No. 356 • East Valley School District No. 361 • Spokane School District No. 81 • West Valley School District No.363 • (7) private schools CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 26, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Amended Fee Resolution STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance Director ❑ old business new business ❑ public hearing Item: Check all that apply: (] consent ❑ information ❑ admin. report X pending legislation GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Resolution 04 -021 contains the existing fee schedule for the city. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Resolution 04 -021 was passed in August of this year and included updated fees. As the city approaches 2005 there are a few new fees that need to be established in the fee schedule. Business registration fees were authorized by council earlier this year. Expanded storm water utility responsibilities and the fee increase were authorized by council on September 28. Business Registration Business Registration $13 /year Non - profit business registration $3 /year Storm water utility fee on developed parcels $24 for each single - family unit each year $24 per 3,160 square feet of impervious surface /year for all other properties BACKGROUND: The city uses a resolution to establish fees for city programs, permits and services. Periodically, the city must update the fee resolution to incorporate new or modified fees. The attached resolution adds city business registration fees and increases the fee for the storm water utility ($24 per equivalent residential unit rather than $10). OPTIONS: Adopt the new fees. Make changes to these fees. Leave the fees as they exist today. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: A council motion to make these fee changes and approve the resolution is recommended. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Business registration fees are expected to generate approximately $37,000 /year in receipts to offset city registration costs. The storm water utility fee is projected to generate $1.8 million for costs incurred by the utility. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 04 -025 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING RESOLUTION 04 -021, AND APPROVING AN AMENDED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, it is the general policy of the City to establish fees that are reflective of the cost of services provided by the City; and WHEREAS, on January 20, 2004, the Spokane Valley City Council adopted Resolution No. 04- 001 adopting a fee schedule for 2004; and WHEREAS, on April 13, 2004, the Spokane Valley City Council adopted Resolution 04 -011 amending the fee schedule for 2004; and WHEREAS, on August 24, 2004 the Spokane Valley City Council adopted Resolution 04 -021 amending the fee schedule; and WHEREAS, Council desires to modify Schedule B of the Master Fee Schedule to include storm water utility fees; and WHEREAS, Council desires to modify Schedule G of the Master Fee Schedule to include business registration fees; and WH,ER.EAS, the remainder of the Master Fee Schedule shall remain unchanged. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, as follows: Section 1. Establishment of business re istration fees in Schedule G of the Master Fee Schedule. For the purpose of establishing business registration fees in Schedule G of Exhibit A of the Master Fee Schedule, the City Council hereby adopts the amended Master Fee Schedule, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" as if fully set forth herein. Section 2. Establishment of storm water utility fees in Schedule B of the Master Fee Schedule. For the purpose of modifying the storm water utility fee in Schedule B of the Master Fee Schedule, the City Council hereby adopts the amended Master Fee Schedule, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" as if fully set forth herein. Section 3. Repeal. To the extent that previous fee schedules are inconsistent with those set forth herein, they are repealed. Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect January 1, 2005. Resolution 04 -011: Amended 2004 Master Fee Schedule 1 ATTEST: Adopted this 26' day of October, 2004. Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Michael DeVlemin, Mayor Resolution 04-011: Amended 2004 Master Fee Schedule 2 Resolution No. 04 -025: 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 PERMITS Home Occupation Permit Conditional Use Permit Temporary Use Permit PLATS Subdivisions Preliminary plat Final plat Short 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 Shoreline Substantial Development Permit $800.00 Critical Areas S300.00 S80.00 $800.00 $150.00 $2,000.00 Plus $25.00 per lot $1,000.00 Plus $10.00 per lot $500.00 $800.00 Plus 510,00 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 Schedule for 2004 Page 2 of 18 C) 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 SIGNS Review of permanent sign $50.00 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 ZONING Zoning map amendments (rezone) PUD plan PUT) modification $650.00 $265.00 $1,500.00 $1,300.00 $650.00 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 Plus $10.00 per lot $1,500.00 $1,500.00 Plus $25.00 per lot $500.00 Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 Page 3 of i8 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 Residential HOURLY RATE* *Examples of activities charged on an hourly rate system include commercial site plan reviews and rezone reviews. INSPECTIONS Stormwater system review Stormwater system inspections 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 *,25.00 minimum at time of application STORM WATER UTILITY CHARGE ON DEVELOPED PARCELS $24 for each single - family unit each year $24 per 3,160 square feet of impervious surface /year for all other properties TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REVIEW Schedule B — PUBLIC WORKS Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fcc Schedule for 2004 $250.00 Plus hourly rate after 5 hours $150.00 Plus hourly rate after 3 hours $50.00 but are not limited to $250.00 550.00 $200.00 S225.00 $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 rates Plus hourly rate after 151 hour Plus inspection fee Plus hourly rate after 1 hour $50.00 Plus hourly rate after 1' 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 STRUCTURAL CODE 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. Valuation Table Schedule C — BUILDING earth being moved) $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. 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 FEE 1 0,000 Cu. Yd. plus $7.00 10,000 Cu. Yd. 100,000 Cu. Yd. plus $6.00 100,000 Cu. Yd. $65.00 Exhibit A of Resolution 04-011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 Page 5 of 18 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 $50,000 plus $7 for each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, up to and including $1 $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 $19.00 $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 less 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. Initial Plan Review Fees shall be capped at $35,000 maximum with the following exception: Exception #1: If additional professional resources are required for individual project plan review for those projects that reach the maximum Plan Review Fee, the Building Official shall be authorized to Inhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 Page 6 of 18 require the permit applicant to provide those resources to the City of Spokane Valley. If a set of plans 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. 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 B. Unit fees (in addition to the basic fee) I) 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 mctcr 7) Atmospheric type vacuum breaker 8) Backflow protective device other than atmospheric type vacuum breakers 9) Medical gas 10) Interceptors 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) I) Furnaces & suspended heaters - Installation or relocation a. up to and including 100,000 btu b. over 100,000 btu 2) Duct work system 3) Heat pump & air conditioner a. O to 3 tons b. over 3 to 15 tons $35.00 $7.50 $6.00 $20.00 $6.00 Each $15.00 $6.00 Each fixture $25.00 $6.00 Each $6.00 Each $6.00 Per outlet $6.00 Each MECHANICAL CODE The mechanical code fees will be collected when the associated permit is issued. If it is included in the Building Permit, the unit costs arc added, but not the basic mechanical permit fee. $35.00 $7.50 $12.00 $15.00 $10.00 $12.00 $20.00 Exhibit A of Resolution 04-011: Amended Master Fcc Schedule for 2004 Page 7 of 18 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 11 17) L P Storage tank 18) Wood or Pellet stove insert 19) Wood stove system — free standing $25.00 $35.00 $60.00 $10.00 $1.00 Per outlet $10.00 $10.00 Each $15.00 $12.00 $20.00 $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 $25.00 E hibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amerided 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 Si- ll 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 B. 10,001 square feet and over $45.00 C. Multi - Fancily $60.00 Per building D. New Commercial and industrial $9000 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 S10.00 Each Early Start Agreements (Foundations) 25% Of bldg permit fee Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fee 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 S45.00 Sign and pole mounting $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 Departrnent will forward this fee to the WSBCC on a quarterly basis. OTHER MISCELLANEOUS FEES A. For City personnel I) Hourly rate set for City Employees (unless otherwise specified) 2) Hourly rate for permit specialist 3) Overtime charges B. Hourly rate for contracted services $47.00 $42.00 1.5 times regular rate Set according to contract rate 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 1) Class I, II, and 111 — 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 basement /crawlspace valuation permit fee * *Plus $47.00 per hour after the 1 hour, and $.50 per mile if the building to be moved into the Ciry is outside the City limits Exhibit A of Resolution 04-011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 Page 10 of 18 F. G. Work on any structure or building without a permit if a Spokane Valley Permit is required: 1) Minimum investigative inspection fee $55.00 2) Total investigative fee to be equal to the permit fee determined for the value of the illegal work accomplished 1 -1. Special inspections (requested by owner or tenant) 1) Fire, wind, mud slide or flood damage $60.00 2) Day Care $60.00 3) Nursing Homes, hospitals, et al $60.00 Plus S 47.00 per hour after 1st hour 1. J. K. Minimum Housing inspection fee $55.00 Plus $47.00 per hour after I hour 4) Special Occupancies Excess inspections for a given project created by the developer, owner or contractor Condominium conversion plans review /inspection fee 2) Basic pernlit fee L. Enclosing an existing deck or patio 1) Plans check fee 2) Basic permit fee M. Swimming pools (Over 5,000 gallons) N. Re -roof Permit: Fee based on the value of the project. No plans are submitted for review. 0. Change of Use or Occupancy Classification permit P. Towers, elevated tanks, antennas BUILDING CODE FEE REFUND POLICY $60.00 $47.00 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. I) Plans check fee $13.00 $60.00 40% Of the basic fee for plans examination Based on value of project; minimum $3,000 $50.00 Plus plumbing fees plan review fee will be charged unless 547.00 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. If 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 permit. Any fee refund request received after 180 days of the date of permit issuance shall be denied. Any refund approved shall be limited to 80% of the total Permit Fee paid. Refunds shall be limited to Building, Phunbing and Mechanical Permit fees paid to the City of Spokane Valley. Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fcc Schedule for 2004 Page 11 of 18 Schedule D - FIRE CODE FIRE ALARM, SPRINKLER AND OTHER PROTECTION SYSTEMS Plans check and review fees, inspections, and permit for installation of separate fire alarm system or sprinkler system applications, and other fire protection systems. Fire Alarm System A. Commercial — permit, plans check and inspection B. Residential 1) All zones 2) Permit fee Sprinkler Systems A. Tenant improvements 1) Less than 10 heads 2) 11 or more heads B. New systems 1) Commercial — permit, plans check and inspection 2) Residential Other Protection Systems A. Fire extinguishing system (other than sprinklers) B. Standpipe installation 1) Class 1 and Class II 2) Class III C. Fire pump installation D. Emergency or standby commercial power generators installation E. Flammable and combustible liquids storage tanks installation 1) a. Underground, 1st tank b. Plus each additional tank on same site 2) a. Above ground tank b. Plus each additional tank on same site 3) Annual permit fee for storage P. Hazardous materials storage tanks installation 1) Less than 500 gallons 2) 500 - 1,199 gallons 3) 1,200 gallons or more Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -01 I: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 $40.00 $35.00 $65.00 $85.00 $58.00 $70.00 $55.00 $55.00 $55.00 $35.50 $55.00 $35.00 $30.00 $75.00 $104.00 $147.00 Based on value of system Based on value of system $60.00 Each riser, plus $1.10 per plug/head $50.00 Plus $1.50 per nozzle Per tank Page 12 of 18 G. Liquefied petroleum tanks installation 1) Less than 500 gallons 2) 500 - 9,999 gallons 3) 10,000 gallons or more H. Gaseous oxygen systems installation 1) Less than 6,000 cubic feet 2) 6,000 - 11,999 cubic feet 3) 12,000 cubic feet or more 1. Nitrous systems installation J. Medical gas systems installation 1) Gaseous system 2) Liquefied system K. Hazardous material recycling system installation 1) 110 gallons or less per day capacity 2) More than 110 gallons per day capacity L. Vapor recovery system installation 1) Phase 1- tank truck and tank 2) Phase 11- vehicle fueled and tank M. Cryogenic tank installation I) First tank 2) Each additional tank on same site N. Removal, abandonment, or any combination thereof, of flammable or combustible liquid storage tanks 1) First tank (commercial) 2) Each additional tank on the same site (commercial) 3) Contractor's permit for removal or abandonment of residential under - ground fuel tanks $84.00 $104.00 $147.00 Per tank $78.00 $90.00 $118.00 $95.00 Plus $12.00 each outlet $90.00 Plus $12.00 each outlet $95.00 Plus $12.00 each outlet $95.00 $117.00 Per tank $90.00 $115.00 $95.00 $35.00 $84.00 $47.50 $75.00 0. Fire Department fee for inspections and follow up. For initial inspection, plans check and follow up inspections as called for in the Fire Code and performed by the fire dcpart:ment_the fire department will be paid 65% of the fee collected for the permit. This payment will be paid quarterly. Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 Page 13 of 18 FIRE FALSE ALARM FEES The following fees are set for repeated malfunctioning false alarms in a given six month period. First alarm Second alarm Third alarm Fourth alarm Fifth and subsequent alarms $30.00 $70.00 $120.00 No charge FIREWORKS Public display fees $ 100.00 Maximum per RCW 70.77 *Also requires a performance bond or cash deposit of $500.00 for clean up purposes and a liability insurance policy of 51,000,000.00. PLANS CHECK AND REVIEW BY THE BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION A. New commercial plans check and inspection (for projects $40.00 not mentioned elsewhere) B. Fire watch service C. Hourly rate D. After hour inspections, plans review, consultations for projects that do not require a permit, and other special services Exhibit A of Resolution 04 - 011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 R.equire a hired fire watch $140.00 3 hour min. plus $47.00 hourly thereafter 1.5 times regular rate Page 14 of 18 ADMINISTRATIVE FEES Schedule E — PARKS & RECREATION Basic fees to be considered when applying rates Administrative Fee Refuse Fee $30.00 $50.00 AQUATICS Pool admission (age 5 and under) free Pool admission (age older than 5) $1.00 Pool punch pass (25 swims) $20.00 Weekend family discount 1 child under 13 free with paying adult Reservation (less than 50 people) $100.00 Per hour* Food fee (if applicable) $25.00 Reservation (50— 100 people) $125.00 Per hour* Food fee (if applicable) $50.00 Reservation (101 — 150 people) $150.00 Per hour* Food fee (if applicable) $75.00 *Minimum 2 hours EVENTS — includes Pavilion Events include but are not limited to activities such as car shows, tournaments and activities involving 200 or more people. The Director of Parks and Recreation will make the final determination. General Fee $150.00 Non -profit applications $80.00 Or free with sponsorship* *Applications for joint sponsorship with the City of Spokane Valley will be considered by the Spokane Valley Parks Department. FIELD RENTAL Use Fee $25.00 First hour plus $15 each additional hour INDOOR USE Open gym admission Playground program admission (10 entries) MJ RABEAU Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 $2.00 $20.00 Page 15 of 18 Mirabeau Springs Small shelter and waterfall Refundable deposit (less than 200 people) Mirabeau Meadows Shelter (less than 200 people) Shelter (200 or more people) Refundable deposit (less than 200 people) Refundable deposit (200 or more people) ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE PERMIT Alcoholic Beverage Permit Fee 510.00 PICNIC SHELTERS Picnic Shelter (less than 200 people) Picnic Shelter (200 or more people) Refundable deposit (less than 200 people) Refundable deposit (200 or more people) RECREATION $150.00 Maximum 4 hours $50.00 $80.00 $150.00 $50.00 $250.00 $30.00 $150.00 $50.00 $250.00 PROFESSIONAL PHOTOGRAPHY Permit Fee 525.00 Annual Recreation program fees are set to recover costs as specified in the Parks and Recreation revenue policy. VALLEY MISSION ARENA Rental* $100.00 Per weekend Refundable deposit $50.00 *Renter responsible for on -site preparation. Rental requires liability insurance. exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 Page 16 of 18 Schedule IF - ADMINISTRATIVE COPY FEES Copy of audio tapes, video tapes, photos, maps or other records needing reproduction Copy of written records Copy of annual budget Copy of full documents OTHER ADMENISTRATTVE FEES NSF Check $25.00 At cost S0.15 Per page $10.00 At cost Exhibit A of Resolution 04 -011: Amended Master Fce Schedule for 2004 Page 17 of 18 ADULT ENTERTAINMENT FEES Establishment Licenses Live Adult Entertainment Adult Arcade Other Adult Entertainment Licenses Adult Arcade Device License Manager License Entertainer .License Lute License Fee — Charged in addition to license fee. BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEES Business registration Nonprofit registration SECURITY FALSE ALARM FEES First alarm Second alarm Third alarm Fourth and subsequent alarms Schedule G - OTHER F.C:ES Percent of Past Due Calendar Days License Fee 7 -30 25% 31 — 60 50% 61 and over 75% $13 each year $ 3 each year $1,500.00 $1,500.00 Repeated malfunctioning security false alarms in a given six -month period. $150.00 $150.00 $150.00 TOW OPERATOR ANNUAL REGISTRATION FEE $100.00 No charge $30.00 $70.00 $120.00 Exhibit A of Resolution 04-011: Amended Master Fee Schedule for 2004 Page 18 of 18 JJ Meeting Date: 10 -26 -2004 AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Ordinance to Implement 6% Utility Tax CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business • new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation GOVERiNiNG LEGISLATION: State law authorizes cities to levy utility taxes of up to 6% on private utilities operating within the boundaries of the city. in addition, cities may levy utility taxes on all city -owned utility operations. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: At the October 5, 2004 Study Session, staff presented utility tax scenarios for Council review. BACKGROUND: Staff has developed a multi -year financial plan which helps identify potential financial problems several years before they occur. As staff projects revenues and expenditures into the future, we tend to be conservative with revenue estimates and realistic with expenditure estimates. As a new city, we have not yet accumulated reserves upon which we can rely, if the economy declines, thus a conservative approach is warranted. Although the City budget for 2005 is balanced, staff has identified several developing problems in future years. Starting in 2006, staff anticipates a deficit in the General Fund, as revenues increase at a rate of 1 to 2 %, while expenditures climb at a rate between 6 and 8 %. If conditions do not improve, the General Fund will be facing a projected shortfall of $1 million in 2006 increasing significantly in later years. The Street Fund poses a similar problem. The only significant source of revenue to the Street Fund is about 51.2 million of motor vehicle fuel tax passed through from the State. Through 2005, the Street Fund will be able to rely on reserves to pay for a street maintenance program that is estimated to cost 54.2 million per year. By 2010, the Street Fund could see a shortfall of 54 million assuming expenditures grow at a rate similar to the General Fund. These shortfalls do not include capital expenditure needs, which are another concern over the next six years. Staff has reviewed various revenue options and expenditure reductions that could assist us in avoiding the problems outlined above. To avoid significant service level reductions, staff recommends the implementation of a 6% utility tax on electric, natural gas, telephone, storm water and refuse collection operations. This tax would provide approximately $6 million per year, which could be used to offset these problems in both the General and Street Funds through 2010. The Boundary Review Board noted in their 2001 incorporation study, that new revenues might be needed. The cities of Federal Way, Spokane, Yakima, Kent, Bellevue, Everett and others have implemented utility taxes. Notice to affected utility companies would need to be provided 60 days ahead of the implementation date to allow adequate time for utility companies to modify their billing systems. OPTIONS: The first option is to implement a 6% utility tax effective February 1, 2005. The second option would be to implement a utility tax at a lower percentage effective on the same date. A third option would be to do nothing in 2004 and revisit this issue during the 2005 budget year. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Based on the City's financial condition, a recommendation to implement a 6% utility tax effective February 1, 2005 is suggested. A proposed ordinance is attached. 1 BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Implementing a 6% utility tax effective February 1, 2005 would secure funding needed to maintain existing service levels through 2010. This revenue would allow the City to balance the General and Street Fund budgets through 2010 and to build reserves for unforeseen conditions. STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance Director and Courtney Moore, Accountant/Budget Analyst 2 Spokane Valley Council Meeting October 26, 2004 City Utility Tax Proposal Why tax? • City multiyear financial projections identify financial problems in 2006 & beyond • New city, no reserves available to weather economic downturns • City revenue estimates are conservative, expenditure estimates realistic • Boundary Review Board indicated in 2001, new revenues might be needed 1012.U201/4 2 Why tax? cont uswaee. • Cities are authorized to levy a utility tax • Other cities use utility tax • Federal Way • Yakima • Spokane • Kent • Everett • Coeur d'Alene • Bellevue 3 Why tax? cont • Several options were explored • Admission tax • Increased business license • Increased gambling tax • Business & Occupation tax • Joint venture with a private business • Reductions in operating costs 2 Recommendation • A 6% utility tax is recommended to raise $6 million annually on: • Natural Gas • Electricity • Refuse • Telephone • Stormwater • 60 days minimum notice to utilities is needed to implement 10;21112004 3 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 04 -045 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING A UTILITY TAX WITHIN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, PROVIDING PROCEDURES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION THEREOF INCLUDING CIVIL AND CRIMENAL PENALTIES AND OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the State of Washington pursuant to RCW 35A.82.020 and RCW 35.21.870 has authorized code cities to raise revenue for the privilege of conducting certain utility businesses in the City and use the revenues to maintain the services, duties and obligations of the City; and WHEREAS, a excise utility tax may be imposed upon gross receipts of a business provided the tax is uniform in its application; and WHEREAS, the City desires to provide for a City Utility Tax as authorized by law. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, do ordain as follows: Section 1. Definitions. Unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the words, phrases and terms used in this Ordinance shall have the following meanings: A. "Cellular Telephone Service" means a two -way voice and data telephone /telecommunications system based in whole or substantially in part on wireless radio communications which is not subject to regulation by the Washington State Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC). This includes cellular mobile service. The definition of cellular mobile service includes other wireless radio communications services such as specialized mobile radio (SMR), Personal communications services (PCS), and any other evolving wireless radio communications technology which accomplishes a purpose similar to cellular mobile service. Cellular Telephone Service is included within the definition of "Telephone Business" for the purposes of this Ordinance. B. "City Manager" means the City Manager and designees. C. "Competitive Telephone Service" means the providing by any Person of telecommunications equipment or apparatus, or service related to that equipment or apparatus such as repair or maintenance service, if the equipment or apparatus is of a type which can be provided by Persons that are not subject to regulation as telephone companies under Title 80 RCW and for which a separate charge is made. D. "Gas Distribution Business" means the business of operating a plant or system for the production or distribution for hire or sale of gas, whether manufactured or natural. E. "Light and Power Business" means the business of operating a plant or system for the generation, production, distribution or furnishing of electrical energy for hire or sale and/or for the wheeling of electricity. Utility Tax Ordinance Page 1 of 7 DRAFT F. "Solid Waste" means all putrescible and nonputrescible solid and semisolid wastes including, but not limited to, garbage, rubbish, ashes, industrial wastes, swill, sewage sludge, demolition and construction waste, abandoned vehicles or parts thereof. G. "Solid Waste Collection Business" means every person who receives Solid Waste or recyclable materials for transfer, storage, or disposal including but not limited to all collection services, public or private solid waste disposal sites, transfer stations, and similar operations. H. "Gross Income" means the value proceeding or accruing from the sale of tangible property or service, and receipts (including all sums earned or charged, whether received or not) by reason of investment of capital in the business engaged in (including rentals, royalties, interest and other emoluments however designated) excluding receipts or proceeds from the sale or use of real property or any interest therein and the proceeds from the sale of notes, bonds, mortgages, or other evidences of indebtedness, or stocks and the like and without any deduction on account of the cost of the property sold, cost of materials used, labor costs, interest or discount paid, or any expenses whatsoever, and without any deduction on account of losses. Further deductions and exceptions from Gross Income upon which the fee or tax described in this Ordinance is computed are set forth in Section 6. I. "Pager Service" means service provided by means of an electronic device which has the ability to send or receive voice or digital messages transmitted through the local telephone network, via satellite or any other form of voice or data transmission. "Pager Service" is included within the definition of "Telephone Business" for purposes of this Ordinance. J. "Person or Persons" means persons of either sex, firms, co- partnerships, corporations, limited liability companies, and other associations, whether acting by themselves or through servants, agents or employees. K. "Stormsewer Business" means the collection of storm or surface water through drains, channels and facilities controlled by the City including treatment and disposal facilities all as described and set forth in City of Spokane Valley Ordinance No. 31. L. "Taxpayer" means any Person liable for the license fee or tax imposed by this Ordinance. M. "Tax Year or Taxable Year" means (1) the year commencing January 1st and ending on December 31st of such year, or (2) the Taxpayer's fiscal year when permission is obtained from the City Manager to use that period as the tax year. N. "Telephone Business" means the business of providing access to a local telephone network, local telephone network switching service, toll service or coin telephone services or providing telephonic, video, data or similar communication or transmission for hire, via a local telephone network, toll line or channel cable, microwave, or similar communication or transmission system. The term includes cooperative or farmer line telephone companies or associations operating an exchange. Telephone Business also includes Cellular Telephone Service. Telephone Business does not include the providing of Competitive Telephone Service, the providing of Cable Telephone Service, nor the providing of broadcast services by radio and Telephone stations. Utility Tax Ordinance Page 2 of 7 DRAFT Section 2. Utility Tax Levied - Rate. There is levied on and shall be collected from every Person a tax for the act or privilege of engaging in utility business activities, measured by multiplying the below respective rates against Gross Income as follows: A. Telephone Business. Upon every Person engaged in or carrying on any Telephone Business (including Cellular Telephone Service and Pager Service) within the City a fee or tax equal to six percent (6 %) of the total Gross Income from such business in the City. Tax liability imposed under this Section shall not apply to that portion of Gross Income derived from charges to another telecommunications company, as defined in RCW 80.04.010, for connecting fees, switching charges, or carrier access charges relating to intrastate toll telephone services, or for access to, or charges for, interstate services, or charges for network telephone service that is purchased for the purpose of resale. B. Natural or Manufactured Gas. Upon every Person engaged in the Gas Distribution Business or carrying on the business of transmitting, distributing, selling, brokering and furnishing natural and /or manufactured gas, a tax equal to six percent (6 %) of the total Gross Income from such business in the City. C. Solid Waste. Upon every Person engaged in the Solid Waste Collection Business or carrying on the business of collecting Solid Waste, recyclable materials or yard waste, a tax equal to six percent (6 %) of the total Gross Income from such business in the City, but not including income from the sale of recyclable materials or yard waste. D. Light and Power (Electricity). Upon every Person engaged in the Light and Power Business or carrying on the business of selling, furnishing, or transmitting electric energy, a tax equal to six percent (6 %) of the total Gross Income from such business in the City. E. Storm and Surface Water. Upon every Person engaged in or carrying on the business of operating a public Stormwater Business, a tax equal to six percent (6 %) of the total Gross Income from such business in the City. Section 3. Allocation of Income - Cellular Telephone Service. A. Service Address. Payments by a customer for the telephone service from telephones without a fixed location shall be allocated among taxing jurisdictions to the location of the customer's principal service address during the period for which the tax applies. B. Presumption. There is a presumption that the service address a customer supplies to the Taxpayer is current and accurate, unless the Taxpayer has actual knowledge to the contrary. C. Roaming Phones. When the service is provided while a subscriber is roaming outside the subscriber's normal cellular network area, the Gross Income shall be assigned consistent with the Taxpayer's accounting system to the location of the originating cell site of the call, or to the location of the main cellular switching office that switched the call. D. Dilute Resolution. If there is a dispute between or among the City and one or more other cities, as to the service address of a customer who is receiving Cellular ' Telephone Services and the dispute is not resolved by negotiation among the parties, then the dispute shall be resolved by the City and the other city or cities by submitting the issue for settlement to the Association of Washington Cities (AWC). Once the taxes on the disputed revenues have been Utility Tax Ordinance Page 3 of 7 DRAFT paid to one of the contesting cities, the Cellular Telephone Service company shall have no further liability with respect to additional taxes on the disputed revenues so long as it changes its billing records for future revenues to comport with the settlement facilitated by AWC. E. City Manager Authority. The City Manager is authorized to represent the City in negotiations with other cities for the proper allocation of Cellular Telephone Service taxes imposed pursuant to this Ordinance. Any agreement with respect to the allocation of the Cellular Telephone Service taxes shall receive the final approval of the City Council. Section 4. Remittance. A. Monthly Remittance. The tax imposed by this Ordinance shall be reported and remitted to the City monthly on or before the last day of the subsequent month. If a Taxpayer commences to engage in business at any time other than the first day of the month, then the Taxpayer's first return and tax payment shall be based upon and cover the portion of the month during which the Taxpayer engaged in business. B. Returns. The remittance shall be in legal tender and shall be accompanied by a return on a form to be provided and prescribed by the City. The Taxpayer shall be required to swear or affirm in writing on the return that the information therein Riven is full and true and that the Taxpayer knows it to be so. If the total tax for which any Person is liable under this Ordinance is not reasonably expected to exceed $100 in any month, the Taxpayer may file a written request with the City Manager to file and pay taxes due under this Ordinance annually. Such requests are subject to approval by the City Manager. Section 5. Taxpayer engaged in more than one business. Any Person engaged in, or carrying on more than one activity or business subject to the tax imposed by this Ordinance, shall pay the tax so imposed on each such business or activity. Section 6. Deductions. In computing the tax imposed by this Ordinance, the following may be deducted from the measure of the tax: A. Adjustments made to a billing or to a customer account or to a telecommunications company accrual account in order to reverse a billing or charge that had been made as a result of third -party fraud or other crime and for which the Taxpayer can provide documentation to the City. 13. All cash discounts allowed and actually granted to customers of the Taxpayer during the tax year and for which the Taxpayer can provide documentation to the City. C. Amounts derived from transactions in interstate or foreign commerce, or from business done for the government of the United States, its officers or agents in their official capacity, and any amount paid by the Taxpayer to the United States or the State of Washington, as excise taxes. D. The amount of credit losses actually sustained by Taxpayers whose regular books are kept on an accrual basis. E. Amounts derived from business which the City is prohibited from taxing under the Constitution or the laws of this State or the United States. Utility Tax Ordinance Page 4 of 7 pent ~r Section 7. Record Retention Requirements. it shall be the duty of every Person liable for payment of the tax hereunder to obtain an occupation license, as prescribed by Spokane Valley Municipal Code 5.05.020, and to keep and preserve for a period of five years such books and records as will accurately reflect the amount of Gross Income from the business, and from which can be determined the amount of any tax for which the Person may be liable under the provisions of this Ordinance. The term "books and records" as used in this section includes but is not limited to copies of the Taxpayer's Federal income tax returns, Federal excise tax returns, State of Washington excise tax returns, and copies of income tax and excise tax audits made by the United States or the State of Washington and furnished to such Person. The Taxpayer's books and records shall be available for examination at all reasonable times by the City Manager and his or her duly authorized. In the case of any Taxpayer who does not keep the necessary books and records within the City for examination, it shall be sufficient if such Person product the same within the City as instructed or required by the City Manager Any Taxpayer who fails, neglects, or refuses to produce such books and records in accordance with this Ordinance, or fails to file a return, in addition to being subject to other civil and criminal penalties provided by this Ordinance, is subject to a tax assessment in an amount determined by the City Manager in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance, which tax assessment shall be deemed prima facie correct and shall be the amount of fee or tax owing to the City by the Taxpayer unless the Person can prove otherwise by competent evidence. The Taxpayer shall be notified by certified mail of the amount of tax assessment imposed pursuant to this Section, together with any penalty and/or interest due, and the total of such amounts shall thereupon become immediately due and payable. Section 8. Tax Delin uq eney -- Unlawful Acts. A. Penalties and Interest. For each payment due, if such payment is not made by the due date thereof, there shall be added penalty and interest as follows: (1) If paid l - 10 days late, there shall be a penalty of 5% added to the amount of tax due. (2) If paid 11 - 20 days late, there shall be a penalty of 7% added to the amount of tax due. (3) If paid 21 - 30 days late, there shall be a penalty of 10% added to the amount of' tax due. (4) If paid 31 - 60 days late, there shall be a penalty of 15% added to the amount of tax due. (5) In addition to the above penalty, the City shall charge the Taxpayer interest on all taxes due at the rate of one percent (1 %) per month or portion thereof that said amounts are past due. (6) The tax imposed by this Ordinance, and all penalties and interest thereon, shall constitute a debt to the City, and may be collected by court proceedings in the same manner as any other debt which remedy shall be in addition to all other available remedies. Any judgment entered in favor of the City may include an award to the City of all court and collection costs including attorneys' fees to the extent permitted by law. Utility Tax Ordinance Page 5 of 7 DRAFT Amounts delinquent more than sixty days may be assigned to a third party for collection, in which case the amount of any collection charges shall be in addition to all other amounts owed. Amounts due shall not be considered paid until the City has received payment for the full amount due or has discharged the amount due and not paid. B. Unlawful Acts. It is unlawful for any Person liable for the tax imposed by this Ordinance to fail to pay the tax when due or for any Person, firm, or corporation to make any false or fraudulent return or any false statement in connection with the return. C. Criminal Penalties. Any Person who intentionally violates any provision of this Ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof punished pursuant to state law or City ordinance. Section 9. Quitting, Selling, or Transferring Business. Whenever any Taxpayer quits business, or sells out, exchanges, or otherwise disposes of such business, any tax payable under this Ordinance shall become immediately due and payable, and such Taxpayer shall, within ten (10) days thereafter, make a return and pay the tax due; and any Person who becomes a successor shall become liable for the full amount of any unpaid tax, interest, and penalties and shall withhold from the purchase price an amount sufficient to pay any tax due from the Taxpayer until such time as the Taxpayer shall produce a receipt from the City showing payment in full of any tax due or a certificate that no tax is due. if such tax, interest or penalty has not been paid by the Taxpayer within 10 days from the date of such sale, exchange, or disposal, the successor shall become liable for the payment of the full amount of tax, interest and penalties. The successor's liability shall be limited to the purchase price or fair market value of the. business purchased if no cash transaction took place. No successor shall be liable for any tax due from the Taxpayer from whom the successor has acquired a business or stock of goods if the successor gives written notice to the City Manager of such acquisition and no assessment is issued by the City Manager within six (6) months of receipt of such notice against the former operator of the business. Taxpayer's account will remain on an active status and be subject to all taxes, penalties, and interest until such time as the City Manager is notified in writing that the Taxpayer has discontinued business activity within the City. Nothing in this Ordinance is intended nor shall it be construed to prohibit the successor from engaging in business in the City pending resolution of the successor's tax liability. Section 10. Tax Not Exclusive. The tax levied herein shall be additional to any license fee or tax imposed or levied under any other law or under any other ordinance of the City. Section 11. Rate Changes. No change in the rate of tax upon Persons engaging in the business of furnishing natural gas or in the Telephone Business, including Cellular Telephone Service, shall apply to business activities occurring before the effective date of the change. Furthermore, except for a change in the tax rate authorized by RC \V 35.21.870, no change in the rate of the tax on the business of furnishing natural gas or the Telephone Business may take effect sooner than sixty (60) days following the enactment of the ordinance establishing the change. The City shall send to each Cellular Telephone Service company at the address on its occupation license, a copy of any ordinance changing the rate of tax upon Cellular Telephone Service promptly upon its enactment. Section 12. Appeal Procedure. Any Taxpayer aggrieved by the amount of the fee or tax found by the City Manager to be required under the provisions of this Ordinance may, upon full payment of the amount assessed, appeal from such finding by filing a written notice of appeal with the City Clerk within fourteen (14) days from the date such Taxpayer was given notified in writing of such amount. The Clerk shall, as soon as practicable, fix a time and place for the hearing of such appeal before the Hearing Examiner which time shall be not more than sixty (60) days after the filing of the notice of appeal, and Utility Tax Ordinance Page 6 of 7 DRAFT shall cause a notice of the time and place thereof to be delivered or mailed to the appellant. At such hearing before the Hearing Examiner, the Taxpayer shall be entitled to be heard and to introduce evidence in his or her own behalf. The Hearing Examiner shall render a decision together with findings of fact and conclusions of law, based upon the evidence presented at the time of the hearing and all material on file in the case. The Hearing Examiner's decisions shall indicate the correct amount of the fee or tax owing. The Hearing Examiner's decision shall be final. The appellant or the City may appeal the decision of the Hearing Examiner to the Superior Court of Washington in and for Spokane County within thirty (30) days after the date of the Hearing Examiner's decision. The Hearing Examiner may, by subpoena, require the attendance of any Person, and may also require him/her to produce any pertinent books and records. Any Person served with such subpoena shall appear at the time and place therein sated and produce the books and records required, if any, and shall testify truthfully under oath administered by the Hearing Examiner as to any matter required of him/her pertinent to the appeal, and it shall be unlawful for him /her to fail or refuse so to do. Section 13. Over or Underpayment of Tax. In the event that any Person makes an overpayment and within two years of the date of such overpayment makes application for a refund or credit, the Person's claims shall be allowed and a refund made by the City upon determination by the City Manager that no other sums are owed by the Person to the City. If a Person determines that the tax has been underpaid and without notice by any party pays the amount due to the City, such amount shall not be subject to penalty. Section 14. 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 15. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City, and the taxes imposes herein shall take effect .February 1, 2005. ATTEST: PASSED by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley this _ day of , 2004. City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved as to Form: Interim City Attorney, Stanley M. Schwartz Date of Publication: Effective Date: Mayor, Michael DeVleming Utility Tax Ordinance Page 7 of 7 DRAFT CiTY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 04-043 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON, PROVIDING FOR THE VACATION OF' A PORTION OF DAVID ROAD LOCATED BETWEEN SPRAGUE AVENUE AND APPLEWAY BOULEVARD, WEST OF THIERMAN AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City Council by Resolution 04 -022 initiated vacation proceedings for a portion of David Road located between Sprague Avenue and Appleway Boulevard, west of T h.ierman Road. by providing that a hearing on the proposal would be held before the Planning Commission on the 26th day of August, 2004.; and WHEREAS; the Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT) retains that portion of David Road located south of the Sprague Avenue right -of -way pursuant to deeds recorded on January 1 I, 2000 (R.ecording Nos. 4446885 through 4446897); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 26, 2004 on the proposed vacation, and subsequently held a public hearing on October 14, 2004 to consider an amended request excluding that portion of David Road currently owned by WSDOT; and WHEREAS, following a hearing before the Planning Commission, it has been found and determined that the vacation of the above referenced street complies with City Ordinance 04- 002, Section 11(SVMC Chapter 10.05) and includes one or more of the following findings: (1) The change of use or vacation will serve the public interest; (2) The Street or Alley is no longer required for public use or access; or (3) An alternative public way or private access would be more useful to the public and adjoining land owners; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission findings and /or minutes have been filed with the City Clerk. as part of the public record supporting the vacation; Wl IEREAS, fifty percent of the property owners abutting the property to be vacated did not file a written objection to the proposed vacation with the City Clerk; WHIEREAS, through ordinance the City shall provide that the vacated property be transferred to the abutting property owners, one -half to each, unless circumstances require a different division of property, that the zoning district designation of the properties adjoining each side of the street shall attach to the vacated property; that a record of survey shall be submitted to the Director of Community Development and that all direct and indirect costs of title transfer to the vacated street be paid by the proponent or recipient of the transferred property; Ordinance 04 -043 Starbucks Vacation Page 1 0(.4 URA FT WHEREAS, the City Council pursuant to RCW Chapter 35.79 and City Ordinance No. 04 -002 (SVMC Chapter 10.05) desires to vacate the above street as set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, do ordain as follows: Section 1. Findings of Fact. The City Council makes the following findings of fact: (1) the City Department of Public Works has reviewed the right -of -way to be vacated and determined that the property adjacent to the vacated property is otherwise served by public or private access; (2) a public hearing on the proposed vacation has been held in accordance with State Law and City Ordinance before the Planning Commission with the record of such hearing and proceedings lodged with the City Clerk; (3) a written protest has not been filed with the City Clerk by at least fifty percent of the abutting property owners; and (4) vacation of the street or alley serves the public interest. Section 2. Property to be Vacated. Based upon the above findings and in accordance with this ordinance, the City Council does hereby vacate the street or alley described on the attached Exhibit "A" which is incorporated herein by reference. Section 3. Zoning. The Zoning designation for the vacated property shall be the designation attached to the adjoining properties as set forth within the respective property or lot lines. The Director of Community Development is authorized to make this notation on the official zoning map of the City. Section 4. Conditions of Vacation. The following conditions shall be fully satisfied prior to the transfer of title by the City. 1. A record of survey shall be submitted to the City in accordance with City Ordinance 04 -002, Section 16 (SVMC Chapter 10.05). 2. Fees and Costs associated with the transfer of title to the vacated property shall be paid by the recipient (or grantee) of such property. The fees and costs include all direct and indirect costs of title transfer to the vacated street. 3. A reservation in the form of an easement providing for private and public utility services subject to such conditions shall be made in the vacated area. Section 5. Closing. Following satisfaction of the above conditions, the City Clerk shall record a certified copy of this Ordinance in the office of the County Auditor and the City Manager is authorized to execute all necessary documents, including a Quit Claim Deed, in order to complete the transfer of the property identified herein. Section 6. Severability. if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Ordinance 04 -043 Starbucks Vacation Page 2 or4 DRAFT Section 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect live (5) days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City of Spokane - Valley as provided by law. ATTEST: PASSED by the City Council this day of 2004. City Clerk, ChristineBainbridge Approved As To Form: Deputy City Attorney Cary P. Driskell Date of Publication: Effective Date: Mayor, Michael DeVleming Ordinance 04 -043 Starbucks Vacation Page 3 of 4 !)RAFT Exhibit "A" ' -"y os Ht};, 28 - E 330_5 (330.00 30' SEWER EASEN.D•rT PER ASSESSOR'S o00u4r.iu1 4 8505. 4 0 RECCAVER 03hbr003 NBA11'2• 26/66' O+ 9'50'0 'r 1.6.04' tat AVE 14UCR PARK ctt4TU UNN Property Description Ordinance 04 -043 Starbucks Vacation Pagc 4 of 4 A portion of David Road located between Sprague Avenue and Appleway Boulevard, west of Thierman Road. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 26, 2004 Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Second Reading of an Ordinance vacating a portion of David Road located between Sprague Avenue and Appleway Boulevard, west of Thierman Road. (Street Vacation Request STV- 03 -04) and a motion declaring the remainder of the property acquired for the Appleway Extension (portions of Lots 1 and 2 Miller Park Addition) west of David Road and north of Appleway be declared surplus property. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: City Council adoption of Ordinance No. 04 -001 (Street Vacations) in January 2004. On July 27 2004 by Resolution 04 -022 City Council set August 26`', 2004 as the date for a public hearing on the proposal. The vacation ordinance had a first reading on October 19, 2004 and was advanced to a second reading. BACKGROUND: Planning Commission held a public hearing on the vacation on August 26, 2004. The Washington Department of Transportation ( WSDOT) retains a portion of David Road extending 20 feet south of the Sprague Avenue right -of -way. It had originally been acquired by Spokane County for the Appleway Extension. The applicant, Chris Linc Properties L.L.C., 2320 North Atlantic Street, Spokane WA 99205 the owner of abutting Parcel No. 35242.0102, amended the request to exclude that portion of David Road. Planning Commission held a public hearing on the amended request on October 14, 2004. Spokane Utilities will require a 25 -foot easement for a 54 inch wastewater interceptor currently located on the adjacent property to the east. The sewer interceptor extends to the centerline of David Road and then proceeds in a southerly direction. Spokane Water District No. 3 will require a 20 -foot easement to allow for the repair, maintenance and replacement of an existing water line. Drywells will need to be located not less than ten feet from the water line, while maintaining five feet of cover over the line itself. In addition Avista will require a ten foot easement five foot from the centerline of existing power lines along the east boundary of the property and a ten foot easement along the west side of David Road located five feet from the centerline of a two inch natural gas line extending between Sprague Avenue and Appleway. The gas line will require a minimum of 30 inches of cover and prohibition of asphalt paving and /or the traffic of heavy equipment exceeding 30,000 pounds /axle over the easement. Any future vacation of that portion of David Road currently within the jurisdiction of WSDOT will require reservation of a seven foot easement adjacent to the right -of -way of Sprague Avenue for Avista. N8$' TSB 3:0.5 (3:1040' .� WSDOT Jurisdiction /89'a'2 ; .GI , David Street ROW 30' 'SEVER EAMNENT PER ASS5 O S 00cVUCNT 4030548 PECOROER 93/1 j et AVE MELM PARK CENTERLINE STAFF CONTACT: Manna Sukup, AICP, Community Development Director The vacation request also includes a request from the applicant to declare a piece of the property as surplus, because it is not part of the street right -of -way. Property declared surplus may be disposed of following completion of an appraisal by public auction or sale to the highest bidder as determined by the City Manager pursuant to Section 3.40.070 § 4, 5 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. OPTIONS: Approve the ordinance vacating a portion of David Street; and a motion declaring the remainder surplus, deny the request or take no action. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Approval of an Ordinance vacating a portion of David Road located between Sprague Avenue and Appleway Boulevard, west of Thierman Road. (Street Vacation Request STV- 03-04) subject to meeting the requirements for reservation of easements by public and private utilities, and conditions associated therewith and 2. approval of a motion declaring the remainder of the property acquired for the Appleway Extension (portions of Lots 1 and 2 Miller Parts Addition) west of David Road and north of Appleway be declared surplus property. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 26, 2004 Item: Check all that apply: 0 consent ❑ old business [ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: First Reading: An ordinance establishing Section 4.08.19 of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code relating to Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) and amending Section 4.15.1 Residential Standards of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70, Spokane Valley Ordinance 03 -53 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: City Council was briefed on interim development regulations requiring review on April 6, 2004 and on proposed amendments to development regulations relating to Planned Unit Developments on September 7, 2004. BACKGROUND: The City Council adopted the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan pursuant to Ordinance No. 03 -52, subsequently adopting the Zoning Code of Spokane County as interim development regulations for the new city (Ordinance 03 -53). Chapter 14.704 of these regulations establishes the requirements for Planned Unit Development (PUDs) which are designed to provide flexibility in site design and incentives. Spokane County amended their regulations effective July 13, 2004, as part of the Phase II Development Regulations to correct deficiencies. Substantive changes include: • Bonus Density calculations (see chart); • Requiring that streets be designed and constructed to public street standards; • Providing that required landscape areas and drainage facilities are not included in the required open space requirements, and that the open space be usable. • Specifying the requirements for financial guarantees for open space and private street maintenance. • Requiring sidewalks on both sides of the street. • Maintaining existing provisions for lighting, but requiring provisions that street lighting is owned and maintained by the property owners association. • Requiring that streets will not impede the current or future development of an arterial or collector and that the PUD shall have direct access to a designated collector or arterial. Table 4.15.1 Residential Standards will be updated to include provisions for PUDs. Also added is a footnote providing that rear and side setbacks of five feet apply to accessory structures. A Determination of Non - Significance was issued on August 19, 2004 with comments due not later than September 14, 2004 and a draft proposal was submitted to CTED and other agencies for their review on August 24, 2004. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed ordinance on October 14, 2004 and recommended approval by a vote of 6 -0. Lot Standards C Current Proposed 800 square feet 1 1,600 square feet Road Standards 20 feet one-wa , 22 feet two way_private streets Public street standards O ern SJace 11 10% of development 200 square feet Bonus Density Open Space 0.3 du /acre if 10% with slope of 10% or less 0.3 du /acre if 50% with slope of 10% or less 0.3 du /acre if l landscaped open areas, tennis courts, pool or play areas 0.5 du /acre if two or more specific improvements, including hard surface trails, improved playfields swimming or wading pools or play areas with structures /equipment 10,000 in size. Environmental 0,15 dulacre if "significant" public access to lake river 0.3 du /acre if access to lake river 0.1du /acre if to traits 0.1 du /acre if to trails 0.1 du /acre if to scenic view 0.1 du /acre if to scenic view 1.0 du /acre if 40% of existing disease -free trees > 10 caliper preserved, where trees number more than 10 /acre Internal Circulation /Parking 0.1 du /acre if off- street parking 50 feet or less from the entrance deleted 0.15 du /acre if non - residential parking small (10 -20 spaces/• rou. and landscaped 0.2 du/acre if non - residential parking small (10-20 spaces/group) and landscaped 0.5 dulacre with bike /pedways separate from road 0.15 dulacre with bikelpedways separate from road 1.0 du /acre for interconnected roadways w/o cul -de -sacs 1.0 /acre for interconnected roadways w/o cul -de -sacs 0.5 du /acre for un -gated development allowing public access 0.2 du /acre if 'A parking is covered deleted 0.3 du /acre If all parking is covered deleted Public Service & Facility Availability 0.15 dulacre if public transit within' /. -mile 0.3 du /acre if public transit within % - mile 0.15 du /acre if off -site convenience shopping within % -mile 0.2 du /acre if off-site convenience shopping within % -mile 0.1 dulacre if water and sewer lines are within or adjacent and service district will not be "stressed" deleted 0.15 du /acre if primary access is via arterial road deleted 0.1 du /acre with a crime prevention plan incorporating locks, lighting, doors, windows and alarms deleted 0.1 du /acre if within school "preferred growth" area deleted 0.15 du /acre if transit amenities included e.g shelters schedule information, bus passes 0.5 du /acre if transit amenities included ie, shelters, benches and park 'n ride spaces 0.2 du /acre for school bus loading shelters approved by the school district. Other City Current Proposed 0.2 dulacre with a "design development team° deleted 0.15 du /acre with housing mix and 10% single family detached. deleted Administrative Report Planned Unit Developments Page 2 of 3 Administrative Report Planned Unit Developments Page 3 of 3 OPTIONS: Advance to second reading, remand to Planning Commission for additional consideration with direction, or take no action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Advance to second reading. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, AICP, Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS: Draft ordinance CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 04 -046 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE No. 03 -53 TO ESTABLISH SECTION 4.08.19 OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODE RELATING TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUDs), AMENDING SECTION 4.15.1 RESIDENTIAL DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODE; REPEALING CHAPTER 14.704.00 OF THE INTERIM DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, The Interim Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City of Spokane Valley pursuant to Ordinance 03 -53, specifies dimensional standards for residential and non - residential development; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan Goal ED.5a is to "[p]rovide consistent, fair and timely regulations that are flexible, responsive and effective" and WHEREAS, Interim Comprehensive Plan Goal UL.3 is to .. "[e]ncourage exemplary developments by providing for flexibility and innovative design through planned unit commercial /industrial and residential developments "; and WHEREAS, Interim Comprehensive .Plan Policy UL.3.1 through UL.3.3 encourage flexible regulations and incentives; and WHEREAS, there exist geographic areas within the City of Spokane Valley which would benefit from more flexibility in order to preserve and protect sensitive environmental resources; and WHEREAS, the development of Mixed -Use and Urban Activity Centers identified in the Interim Comprehensive Plan require flexibility for successful design and implementation; and WHEREAS, the proposed development regulations must be submitted to the Washington Department of Community Trade and Economic Development pursuant to WAC 365- 195 -620; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, do ordain as follows: Section 1. Section 4.08.19 of the City of Spokane Valley's Interim Zoning regulations is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 4.08.19 Planned Unit Development Overlay Zone 1 Section 4.08.19.01 Purpose and Intent The purpose of the Planned Unit Development Zone is to establish a process to foster creative, efficient, and comprehensive design of site development. The overlay zone is to be used in conjunction with other zoning classification except the Ex- e Ficultural4GA) d the Mining (MZ) zones. . These regulations provide flexibility in site design and offer incentives in order to: 1 Encourage eFeative, efficient-Lis-es-et land; 2. Encure prose - space; 1. Encourage innovative design and the creation of permanent open space. 2. 3- Preserve and enhance special site features. 3. Encourage the conservation of natural features, wildlife habitat, and critical areas. 4. Facilitate the development of mixed -use proiects. 5. Encourage the development of street, pedestrian and bicycle paths that contribute to a system of fully connected routes. 6. 4- Facilitate the economical and adequate provision of public services. s; and 7. Provide for diverse and convenient recreational opportunities. 8. 6- Provide a variety of environments for living, working, and recreation. - ' • Section 4.08.19.02 Applications and Process 1. Planned unit developments shall be initiated by the owner(s) of all property involved, if under one ownership, or by joint application of all owners having title to all the property in the area proposed for planned unit development. 2. The planned unit development process entails a preliminary and final phase. -A preliminar ludes a site dcvelopment-plan- approve t# epmeet- and- uces-to -be- allowed IUD- inflexible. Said appr-eval- is -veli ied #+c- maybe extended -by -deter ation- of -he-1 earing- Becky- , as follows: a. The preliminary phase examines the planned unit development plan for compliance with the requirements of the zone. The preliminary planned unit development is considered through a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner. Once approved by the Hearing Examiner, the planned unit development is a binding plan that defines the concept of the development and uses to be allowed. The planned unit development approval is valid for a 5 -year period, which may be extended by a period not to exceed twelve months by submitting a time extension request to the Department. Any extension of time must be requested by the applicant, in writing, before expiration of the original approval, stating specific reasons for such a request. b. The final planned unit development plan may be approved administratively, to determine if all standards, requirements, and conditions of preliminary approval have been met. 2 Section 4.08.19.03 Preliminary Planned Unit Developments The preliminary planned unit development shall have a site development plan, including, but not limited to, the following: 1. The exact boundaries and legal description of the property to be developed. 2. The name of the proposed planned unit development. 3. Date, north arrow, and scale of the drawing. 4. Names, addresses, and telephone numbers of the owner(s), applicant(s), engineer, and surveyor. 5. 2The general location of all proposed improvements that are to be constructed on the land, including, but not limited to, all residential and nonresidential structures, building heights, recreational facilities, walls, fences, refuse areas, streets, walks and public transit facilities. 6. Setbacks to the property line, roadways, and the planned unit development perimeter. 7. Location of pedestrian and bicycle circulation systems. 8. 3 . Common open spaces showing size and functions upon completion. 4. Floor plans- e€#yjaic a of pr+vat pace -in- square -feed 9. A description of the method of ownership and responsibility for maintenance of all common open space and private streets. 10. &The location and dimension of off - street parking facilities, public and private, including transit facilities for nonresidential uses. 11. 6:- Location and size of all public and semipublic sites if applicable (i.e., schools, churches, parks, plazas, etc.). 12. 87A tabulation of densities within each project area, phase or sector. 9 Building elevat+- - - ^ - - - - - - - - ed; api - indicating e-tye- and - the - size -of plant- materialto lie -use roviding- perfaan-eiat-Maintenanse- to -all- planted afe ; 13.41 -If applicable, a subdivision map showing land divisions. The preliminary and final subdivision map shall comply with the county subdivision ordinance and state subdivision regulations. 14. 4 A proposed phasing and /or timing schedule. 15. 43—Topographical map of existing terrain at a minimum 49- two foot contour level, including 100 -year flood plains identified under the National Flood Insurance program. 16. 44— Natural features to be retained, such as natural slopes, stands of trees, etc. 17. All critical areas as defined in the Comprehensive Plan, Section 4.08.19.04 Final Planned Unit Developments 3 1. Prior to expiration of the preliminary planned unit development, approval of a final planned unit development plan is required. Approval of the final planned unit development shall be administrative. A final planned unit development differs from the preliminary planned unit development in the amount of detailed information provided. In addition to all of the information required for a preliminary planned unit development, the final planned unit development plan shall include the following items. a. Approved road plans. b. Approved drainage system plans. c. Typical building footprints. d. A tabulation of the percentage of total building coverage in the development. e. A schematic landscaping plan indicating the type and the size of plant material to be used, and the method for providing permanent maintenance to all planted areas and open spaces. 2. Any planned unit development not finalized before the expiration of the preliminary planned unit development approval shall become void, unless a time extension is granted by the Director of Community Development. Construction shall not commence until a planned unit development has been given final approval. Section 4.08.19.05 Phased Planned Unit Developments 1_ A planned unit development may be developed in phases, subject to an approved phasing schedule. All construction and improvements not completed within throo (3) five (5) years of approval of the phased final planned unit development are subject to compliance with updated City Standards through a time extension action. Any planned unit development where construction has not commenced before expiration of the final planned unit development approval shall become void. 2. Each phase of the proposed development must contain the required parking spaces, common open space, ingress, egress and transportation circulation landscape, and utility areas necessary to sustain that phase as an independent development, in the event that the remaining property is not developed. Section 4.08.19.06 Modifications 1. The Hearing Examiner may require modifications to the application for a planned unit development to ensure that the purpose spirit and intent of this chapter is accomplished. 2. A substantial modification to the approved preliminary or final planned unit development plan shall only be approved through a change of condition application process. All modifications which are not minor, shall be considered substantial. 3. A minor modification to the preliminary or final planned unit development plan may be approved administratively. Minor modifications shall be consistent with the following requirements: a. The modification shall be limited to minor shifting of the location of buildings, proposed streets, utility easements, or common open space. b. The modification shall not: i. Enlarge the boundaries of the approved planned unit development plan. 4 ii. Change the approved uses. iii. Change the general location or amount of land devoted to a specific land use. iv. Increase the residential densities. Section 4.08.19.07 Permitted Uses Uses for the planned unit development overlay zone shall include single - family, multi- family and other uses as may be permitted in the underlying zone(s). Accessory uses and structures ordinarily associated with a permitted use shall be allowed. All-a eGe sseFy-4i s • - - " • - ehitiited t- not limited -te- the- feUiwi g- — A�iraing Section 4.08.19.08 Development Standards Prior to the issuance of a building permit, evidence of compliance with provisions of this chapter, when applicable, shall be provided to the Division. Section 4.08.19.09 Density 1. The total units permitted in a planned unit development shall be determined as follows. a. In any planned unit development, the number of dwelling units per acre of land shall not exceed that which is permitted by the underlying zone(s), except as approved for density bonus by the Hearing Examiner subject to the following procedures. However, this does not preclude an applicant from transferring density from one portion of the development to another portion of the development, so long as the total project does not exceed the maximum density of all zoning classifications included within the project boundary. Residential density shall be determined by the following formula: Net Maximum number of Density Development x units per acre + Bonus = Total Units Factor allowed in underlying Earned Permitted zone • b. The net development factor is the acreage of the planned unit development area minus the area set aside for, or existing in, any of the following: 5 i. Schools. ii. Commercial and/or industrial uses. iii. Single- family residential platted areas, if determining net development factor for the multifamily portion of a mixed single - family, multifamily development. iv. Natural water bodies, including lakes, streams, swamps, marshes, and bogs which are riot incorporated in the common open space plan of the planned unit development. v. 75% of areas having slopes that exceed 40 %. vi. Public or private streets. 2. Bonus Density: The following units per acre may be cumulatively earned as additional density to the maximum base unit density of the underlying zone. a. Common Open Space. i. 0.3 unit - per -acre bonus if at least 10% 50% of the dry, common open space has a slope of 10% or Tess. ii. 8-3 -0_5 unit - per -acre bonus if significant recreation areas are developed and equipped with sus#at least 2 of the following features: , but not limited to,: hard surface biking, hiking or walking trails laedssaped -epen- areas ets- connecting the entire development: improved playfields, sport tennis- courts; swimming or wading pool; or children's play areas that incorporate play structures /equipment and are at least 10,000 square feet in size. b. Environmental Concern. i. (x45 -0_3 unit - per -acre bonus if significant-general public access is provided to lake or river; to trails, 0.1 unit -per -acre bonus; to scenic viewpoint, 0.1 unit -per- acre bonus. ii. 1.0 unit - per -acre bonus if 40% or more of the existing, disease -free trees over 10 inches in diameter, are retained on the site. Tree diameter shall be measured at 6 feet above the ground. This bonus shall only apply in forested areas where the density of the above - described trees is equal or greater than 10 trees per acre. The health of the trees shall be certified by a licensed arborist. c. Internal Circulation and Parking. less - #rear the-entFa nce-t awe .. - - - - - - - - - - - • • , • _ - - _ o = - ^2 fed (150) feet- away-afld- still- Feseive -the- bens; i. 0.15 0.2 unit- per -acre bonus if nonresidential parking areas are kept small (10 to 20 spaces in a group) and interspersed with landscaping, or provided within or under main buildings. fnal -bike -and d -fr-em ; and - not- adfasent- te- readways ii. iii. 1.0 unit -per -acre bonus for an interconnected roadway system without cul -de- sacs. 6 et- parking -i s- €583- feet -eF iv. 0.5 unit - per -acre bonus for an un-qated development allowing through access to the public. wit -per east ef-the-feq-uife d Public Service and Facility Availability. i. 0.15 -0_3 unit - per -acre bonus if public transit is available within % -mile walking distance of the majority of dwelling units and offices. The walking route shall be hard - surfaced and accessible, and may require an off-site sidewalk/pathway. ii.O4 -0_2 unit - per -acre bonus if off-site convenience shopping facilities are functionally accessible within reasonable walking distance (approximately' /- mile). The walking route shall be hard - surfaced and accessible, and may require an off -site sidewalk /pathway. re - bones -if &ewer a ater ' , rare at- their -syste iv- Fifteen- one - lay undrebthas -(-15) unit-per -acre- bonds -if-th f assess -to- the-proje ; evelepment- provides -a- crime eiling4nit- lighl4 , windows -an provide ra onus i€ -the -pro istrict has - identified- as-- a -prefe area sensi - - - - - - ' - - - - - . drag- objectives- , +moist -and -water 7 iii. 045-0.5 unit - per -acre bonus if integrated- special facilities and- a- pregrana-te encourage -and van/safpeoling) -for public transit are incorporated into the design and approved by the STA (e.g., sheltered, lighted waiting /loading facilities, including benches formation and park- and -ride spaces ). sses- incorporated -in monthly - maintenance- sharg. s). Thise#ert must cxce Section - 1.4.704- 383 -and be- approved- by--the -P-lan ' ltatien with- the - Spokane Transit- Authority. iv..0.2 /acre for school bus loading shelters approved by the school district. e. Other- er -acre bonus -if- the - applicant -uses- a- design/developraent team, consisting -of ss eyes and - builder, thre design- and- conctrusti phases- sf- ti:►e- project; and ii. Fifteen one - hundredths -(.1 unit-per-aacre. bonus- -if-th s a mix -of housi -- ' - =• - - ' -- = - . -- ! °. -- - - - - - 'ts being - detached, 6ingle- family - dwellings. Detached i+ogle- familyreei4enses; attached, tingle- €aniil-y- residers = - = - - -; - - - - ' - - ^^ eats -are examplecof- housing types- 'mum -Lot Area €- v \ y-1 o � ��ed for - reside rpose �i f-ei t h u n ,, red ^ - (880) guare -fee , Flying zone( c olly ni mum lot -aFee -fof reside m- Frontage w-- poses - shall -h idth -of thirty (34)-feet w irty- (30) -€eet- minimum -- frontage -oa-a- public -or- private ctroct, or pedectrian access 1:in4es derIying- zone (c) cpccific lly-s tags - for- fesidentiat- puFpese in a P.U.D. s E-aee p UTD- hearing, mini+ ► ►e underlying -z-o e- shall- apply -te- exterior - project boundaries- Interior yards - shall be ac iewed -to e l- structures- Frame- Building -Cove r -age A -rnaxa ° _ - • - excltisii! er 14.7043 glat dual r- flexibitity -with e- development. Con ideration chafl- be- give+a -to adjacent -1 eig#ats -as -well as-buiid4n development, Section 4.08.19.10 Parking, Signage, and Landscaping Standards Parking, signage and landscaping standards shall be as provided in chapter 14.802, Off- Street Parking and Loading Standards; chapter 14.804, Signage Standards; and chapter 14.806, Landscaping and Screening Standards. Section 4.08.19.11 Storage Standards All storage in the planned unit development zone shall be within a closed building, except for the storage of retail products that are for sale or rent, which may be stored outdoors during business hours only aft -not Outdoor storage of retail products shall not be within any required front or side yard, nor in any public street or road right - of - way. Section 4.08.19.12 Refuse Storage All outdoor trash, garbage and refuse storage areas shall be screened on all sides from public view and, at a minimum, be enclosed with a 5% -foot -high concrete block, masonry wall, or sight - obscuring fence with a sight - obscuring gate for access. Single- family and duplex residences are exempted from this provision. Section 4.08.19.13 Mechanical Equipment All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be placed- bekt +n ra restricted -ffora -view- screened from adjacent roadways and properties. so as not to be visible by persons standing at the property line. Section 4.08.19.14 Utilities All utilities shall be underground. Section 4.08.19.15 Street- Desigxibitity— Additional Requirements 8 Within planned- +gait -deer t Feclu fa ren b Q R e-way-stm than - more -tha way-streets-saga 9 et- ter -twe- way - traffic a-- 941- sate- {aaFki- - - - - - - - = - - .o a14y -cs dwedtiag -u ' gad- te- tdtle --e st- paFking; o6ess -peiet ska44- sewe -Fie-r ere a. All streets shall meet or exceed the current design and construction standards for public streets adopted by the City of Spokane Valley, as they may be amended from time to time. Fehidaited- street the - design- specificaIIy accon} medates maaint c. No proposed street shall impede the current or future development of any arterial or collector identified on the Arterial Road Plan. All PUDs shall have direct access to a designated collector or arterial. d. Energy efficient street lights shall be located at the entrance of the development and at each intersection. The lights shall be owned and maintained by the property owner's association. e. Subdivisions with private streets must have a property owner association and meet the following requirements: i. Reserve Fund: the property owner association documents must establish a Reserve Fund for the maintenance of private streets and other improvements such as common greenbelts. security station structures and equipment, and other significant property owner association infrastructure. This Reserve Fund shall not be co- mingled with any other property owner association fund. The balance of the fund shall be equal to the total replacement cost of the private streets and other improvements divided by the average fife expectancy of those improvements times the age of the improvements. ii. Membership Requirements: Every owner of a lot within the private street development must be a member of the property owner association. iii. Required Disclosures: The property owner association documents shall include the following: "The property owner association documents must indicate that the streets within the development are private, owned and maintained by the property owner association, and that the City of Spokane Valley has no obligation to maintain or reconstruct the private streets. ft iv. Assessment for Repairs - Assignment of property owners association lien rights: The declaration in the property owner association documents shall provide that should the property owner association fail to carry out its duties in compliance with any of the provisions of these regulations or of any applicable city codes, regulations or agreements with the City, the City or its lawful agents shall have the right and ability, after due notice to the association of such failure. to perform the responsibilities of the association and to assess the association or the lot owners for all costs incurred by the City in performing said responsibilities. The City shall further have any and all liens and lien rights granted to the property owner association to enforce the assessments required by the declaration and /or to avail itself of any other enforcement actions available to the City pursuant to state or city codes and regulations. No portion of the property owner association documents pertaining to maintenance of the private streets may be amended without the written consent of the City of Spokane. v. Services Not Provided: The property owner association documents shall note that certain City of Spokane Valley services shall not be provided on private streets including without limitation, routine police patrols, enforcement of traffic and parking ordinances, and preparation of accident reports, maintenance, repair and replacement of pavement, curbs, sidewalks, pathways, storm drainage, traffic signs and other street infrastructure items, snow and ice control. street sweeping and engineering services associated with street operation and maintenance. Depending on the characteristics of the proposed development other services may not be provided. vi. Access Required: The property owner association documents shall contain a provision that requires access to emergency vehicles utility personnel, the U.S. Postal Service, and governmental employees in connection with their official duties. f e.All areas which are to be occupied or traveled over by motor vehicles shall be paved. 2. Drainage. A drainage -pIar- skull- be-feati ed- 6ensisteet- with- the- Seekane -6e+ aty 1344aage- Guieteiines- Drainage improvements shall be designed, constructed and maintained in accordance with the current Spokane Valley Storm Water Management Standards. as they may be amended from time to time. 3. Pedestrian Circulation Facilities. Within planned unit development projects, pedestrian circulation facilities serving each unit shall be provided on both sides of the street or private road and shall be: a, Pa ' - _ r.-- __ _ - - _ _ _ _ - -- ;Hard - surfaced with asphalt or concrete. Asphalt walkways shall be only allowed when physically separated by a minimum of 7' from the vehicle roadway. Alternative hard surface material may be used when approved by the Public Works Department. 10 Sidewalks separated by Tess than 3' from the roadway shall have a vertical curb separating sidewalk from roadway. Walkways shall meet accessibility standards. b. Functionally and safely convenient to each dwelling unit served; c. Functionally and safely convenient to schools and to industrial, commercial, recreational and utility areas within or adjacent to the project, and -€une ally s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - en- system-cuts ie tho P.U.D.; d. Sufficiently wide (minimum of six [6] feet for commercial areas and five [51 feet for residential areas) to accommodate potential use; e. Located and designed in accordance with approval from the City of Spokane Valley County-ERgigeer-and ; f Lin�4 -fa -seeufity- and - safety- Section 4.08.19.16 Required Open Space 1. Required Open Space: A minimum of 10% of the total area of the planned unit development shall be cesefvethiesignated and maintained as common open space. Required landscape areas and storm water facilities shall riot be used in the calculation of open space. 2. Types of Open Space: Land dedicated for open space should be usable for either greenbelts that serve as a buffer between and uses, using existing vegetation and new plant materials, active or passive recreational activities, or for protecting environmentally sensitive areas or critical areas. Unusable open space includes the design of areas that do not meet the intent and purpose of this chapter, such as open space areas that are not accessible to residents of the development, or do not function for active /passive recreation or do not conserve wildlife habitat or other natural features. 3. Maintenance and Ownership of Common Open Space: The applicant shall choose 1 or any combination of the following methods of administering common open space: a. Dedication of common open space to the County City, which is subject to formal County City acceptance; or b. Establishment of an association or nonprofit corporation of all property owners or corporations within the project area to ensure ownership of and responsibility for perpetual maintenance of all common open space. €-Rote inteeaRoe- of-all -. - -- - -- = - - - - - - - s-ex e • - - - - ^ eels -e ►amen -open- space- is-pef are sha Site -D - - . - - = - - - - - - - - - - - 'th-t a rmed -un ga +R segfegatieRs- witheut- fu4hef- CouFty- appFevals7 4. Transfer of Ownership. Where dedication to the public or a property owners association is proposed required improvements shall be completed prior to any transfer of ownership. Where improvements are not completed in accordance with these requirements, building permits and /or approval of permitted structures may be withheld upon notification to the Building Official by the Community Development Director, pending completion of said improvements. 11 5. Phasing: All common spaces, as well as public and recreational facilities, shall be specifically included in the phasing schedule and be constructed and fully improved by the applicant at an equivalent or greater rate than the construction of structures. dreel88)-sgua s residential - -unit. eria The- aferementioned- Devetepme andards -a sh- the - following design- sriteria- objectives -in- all - D.'s- 4 -Q en- spaces- pedest i irsua aeilitics, a nd other - pertinent -any iAtegral o€- the - landscape -particular attention -shall b „ -�,ato -the- r►d ite- 2,-The layout -e ffect t-and utility - improve Talents: 3 Recreational -areas (acme -a r►e deveIopmeet -ante- easily -a welling - units. 11.704.395 Public- T- ransit All - developments -I - -tubli portation -Bern i . (20) or-- - - _ _ - - - - - - - - s -if_ss -rid ng-Di •e Section -1.4- 802.200 for-r irem sportation -Klan. Section 2. Section 4.15.1 of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code is hereby amended to add the dimensional standards for residential PUDs as shown on Attachment "A° made a part hereof for all purposes. Section 3. Chapter 14.704 Planned Unit Development Overlay Zone of the Interim Zoning Code is hereby repealed. Section 4. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force five (5) days after publication of this ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. ATTEST: PASSED by the City Council this day of _ , 2004. Mayor, Michael DeVleming Approved as to Form: Interim City Attorney, Stanley M. Schwartz Date of Publication: Effective Date: 13 °2) ( ( (6) Section 4.15.1 Residential Zone Dimensional Standards "Clear view" Triangle required Measured from property line outside border easement, if any Zero setbacks along rear and /or one side are allowed provided that a 5'-0' construction and maintenance easement(s) is recorded with the Spokane County Auditor prior to issuance of a building permit. Minimum rear yard setbacks on zero tot tine configuration shall not be less than fifty (50) feet or the sum of the rear yards required by the underlying zone, whichever is greater. Minimum side yard setbacks between dwelling units and adjacent lots shall not be less than 10 feet on the side opposite the zero in a zero lot line configuration Institutional and Office uses have the same setback as residential uses in zones where permitted. Attached garages loading from the side may have the same setback as a principal structure. Permitted accessory structures shall maintain a five foot (5%01 side and rear yard setback ATTACHMENT "A" 14 UR- 3.5j7r1') UR 7 (3)111 - UR 12 " ( ' ) UR 22 " °' Residential PUDs 1,600 Single Family 10,000 Duplex 20,000 Single Family 6,000 Duplex 11,000 Multi- family 15,000 Single Family 4,200 Duplex 5,000 Multi- family 6,000 Single Family 1,600 Duplex 3,200 Multi- family 6,000 Minimum Lot Area/Dwelling Unit Lot Frontage 80 80 65 90 100 50 50 60 20 40 60 30 Lot Depth 80 80 100 80 80 100 50 Front Yard Setback lb) 15 15 15° 15 15 15 ° 15 15 15 15 15 1 5 151 Garage Setback 20 20 20 ° 20 ° 20 20` 20 20R no 20 no 20 ° • im Rear Yard Setback (4)15Ks) 20 20 20 20 15 20 20 15 20 20 15 15 Side Yard Setback (015101 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Side Yard Setback (flanking Street) 15 15 15 15 15 15 15° 15 15 15R 15 10 Open Space - 10% gross - area I wnwixepij Densit DU /Acre 4.35 4.35 7 7 7 12 12 12 22 22 22 zone+ Bonus Lot Coverage 50.0% 50.0% 55.0% 55.0% 55.0% 60.0% 60.0% 60.0% 65.0% 65.0% 65.0% 60.0% Building Height (in feet) 35 35 35 35 35 40 40 40 50 50 50 Zone Building Height (in stories 2% 2'/2 2% 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 Zone °2) ( ( (6) Section 4.15.1 Residential Zone Dimensional Standards "Clear view" Triangle required Measured from property line outside border easement, if any Zero setbacks along rear and /or one side are allowed provided that a 5'-0' construction and maintenance easement(s) is recorded with the Spokane County Auditor prior to issuance of a building permit. Minimum rear yard setbacks on zero tot tine configuration shall not be less than fifty (50) feet or the sum of the rear yards required by the underlying zone, whichever is greater. Minimum side yard setbacks between dwelling units and adjacent lots shall not be less than 10 feet on the side opposite the zero in a zero lot line configuration Institutional and Office uses have the same setback as residential uses in zones where permitted. Attached garages loading from the side may have the same setback as a principal structure. Permitted accessory structures shall maintain a five foot (5%01 side and rear yard setback ATTACHMENT "A" 14 Web Site Summary — Month of September Unique User Sessions 11,154 Top Five Pages Viewed* Employment 1,115 Community Development 368 GIS /Maps 326 Council Agendas and Minutes 312 Departments 304 Top Five "Referrer" Web Sites Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC) 141 Work Source Spokane 56 Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce 55 Spokane County 49 Spokane County Library District 43 Memorandum To: David Mercier, City Manager, and Members of Council From: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Date: October 26, 2004 Re: Monthly Report — Summary of September 2004 Activities 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall ®spokanevalley.org Contract Negotiation and Administration • Fire Services. At the September 14 election, all four fire annexation ballot measures were approved by voters. The City will become annexed to Fire Districts One and Eight (depending upon location) effective January 1, 2005. The City requested that the County remove the back -up measures from the November 2004 ballot. • Managed Competition. The City received two responses to its Library Services Request for Proposals (RFP), and four responses to its Park maintenance RFP. An update is scheduled for City Council on November 2, 2004. Operations • New Employee. Mike Basinger was hired to fill the vacant Associate Planner position. He began working for the City on September 27, 2004. • Employee Training. Vicki Dalton conducted training for staff on various topics from the Spokane County Assessor's Office. Staff from Community Development and Finance attended the training. *Note: Numbers reflect full or majority weeks of the month. . ;apital Projects: Construction Projects PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT September 2004 Agreements for Services Adopted and in Operation: • County Street Maintenance Proposed Contract Changes for 2005: o In 2005 Contract, propose to delete reference under 'Basic Services' that work be done as customarily done by the County and add that work be as directed by the City. o More detailed definition will be developed to the list of activities. • Street Maintenance - WSDOT • County Utilities - Storm Water Management Contract ends on December 31, 2004. • Solid Waste - Regional Solid Waste Interlocal Wastewater: • Wastewater Treatment — The County is currently working to provide financial information regarding the County's sewer utility as it relates to the assumption of the County owned sewer facilities. • County submitted the SRF Loan to the Department of Ecology and has received conditional approval. • Draft Spokane River Use Attainability Analysis (UAA) is available on the UAA web site at http://www.spokaneriveruses.net/links.htm • Centerplace Ballast for parking areas on south side of building are being fine graded in preparation for paving the week of October 18' Plumbing and electrical rough -in work on first and second floors is in progress. Electrical and mechanical work in basement is approximately 50% complete. Interior framing is 100% complete and roof framing over north wing is 95% complete. Masonry work on walls of north wing is approximately 30% complete. Roofing to start the week of October 18 o Evergreen RoadlSutters Sanitary Sewer Project Project complete — minor punchlist items remain. o 16th Avenue Project Installing sidewalk and driveway approaches. Swale excavation, sprinklers and topsoil at Dishman -Mica and Pines swales. Asphalt complete on entire project. o Park Road Project Rock placement, curb placement and asphalt placement week of October 18th. o 24th Avenue Sidewalk Project Project completed o Sullivan & 4th Signal Project complete. o South Greenacres Sanitary Sewer Project (Flora & Mission) Project Complete o Weatherwood /Owens Sanitary Sewer Project Mainline and side sewers complete Placing rock and grading for asphalt Asphalt to be complete week of the 18th Construction Complete — November 1st o Veradale Sanitary Sewer Project Mainline, side sewers and ACP complete Punchlist items remain Construction Complete o Sipple Sanitary Sewer Project Mainline and side sewers complete Placing rock and grading for asphalt Asphalt to be complete week of the 18th Construction Complete — November 1st o Carnahan Sanitary Sewer Project Construction to be carried over until next spring. Project awarded to Norms — Construction scheduled to begin March 2005 Maintenance Activity: • Estimated cost from the County for 2004 is $3,113,268. • City 2004 budget is $2,120,000. Additionally, we budgeted $300,000 for contracted minor road maintenance that we are using to cover the County contract. • Through the end of September the County has billed $1,769,517 or 73% of the above available funds. Land Development • Applications Reviewed /Conditions Prepared (Including Comm. Pre -App): Commercial Projects — 10/61*, Residential Projects — 3/41 • Road and Drainage Plan Review: Commercial — 0/4, Residential — 4/22 • Hearings Held: Commercial — 1/4, Residential —1/7 • Construction Walk - Throughs: Commercial — 1/1, Residential — 2/4 • Rezone Applications: Commercial — 2/5, Residential — 2/9 *(current month totals/annual totals) • Spokane Valley 2004 PROPOSED PROJECTS Road Construction Projects Evergreen Road Sullivan Road & 4th Ave. Signal Park Road - Project 2 16th Avenue - Project 2 24th Avenue Sidevralk Project Pines /Mansfield Road Design Projects Barker Road Reconstruction Boone to Barker Rd. Bridge Barker Road Bridge Replacement Barker Rd. at Spokane River Sewer Projects Camahan Weatherwood /Owens Sipple Veradale South Green Acres - Phase 1 Burns Road Miscellaneous Projects Miscellaneous Valley Couplet Road Replacement Projects Consultant Contract Centerplace at Mirabeau Point Construction in Progress Stormwater Drainage Projects Statewide Transportation Plan (STIP) Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) ... Bridge Replacement Advisory Committee (BRAC) 2004 Construction Projects r ects (MR)- September 16th Ave. to 2nd Ave. Sullivan & 4th 8th Ave. to 2nd Ave. Dishman -Mica to SR 27 Bowdish to Pines Wilbur Rd. to Pines Rd., Pines to 190 1 -90 to 8th, Havanna to Eastern McDonald to Maurer, Mission to Mallon Vercler to Mamer, I -90 to Boone Dalton to Rutter, Bradley to Vista Calvin to Sommer, Springfield to Main Indiana to Mission & Flora to Long Rd. Capital Improvement Projects Project Location Completion Date Design Construction Complete Complete 8/18/04 100% 100% 9/1/04 100% 100% 11/1/04 100% 65% 11/1/04 100% 85% 9/1/04 100% 100% 10/1 /05 0% 0% 10/15/05 0% 12/1/06 0% 7/1/05 100% 11/1/04 100% 11/1/04 100% 85% 9/1/04 100% 100% 7/31/04 100% 100% 2004 Funding S 1,521,000 $ 15,700 S 821,000 $ 1,932,000 $ 198,000 $ 620,000 Total Project Cost S 2,787,000 $ 165,000 $ 972,000 $ 3,302,000 $ 198,000 $ 3,134,000 0% $ 1,150,000 $ 2,998,200 0% $ 702,000 $ 8,057,615 0% $ 2,569,000 $ 2,569,000 85% $ 4,083,000 $ 4,083,000 $ 2,914,000 $ 2,914,000 $ 2,985,000 $ 2,985,000 $ $ 380,000 5 31,000 S 31,000.00 S 50,000 S 50,000.00 11/04 $ 15,000 $ 15,000,00 $ 830,000 $ 830,000.00 $ 60,000 $ 60,000.00 5/05 100% 30% $ 9,500,000 $ 9,500,000 $ 200,000 $ 200,000.00 Total $ 30,196,700 S 45,230,815 Spokane ■•0 Memorandum To: Dave Mercier, City Manager From: Ken Thompson, Finance Director CC: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Date: October 08, 2004 Re: Monthly Report 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhatl@spokanevatley.org Finance employees worked in the following areas during the month of September. Audit of 2003 financial statements The state auditor's office concluded their review of city records and met with city representatives to discuss procedures and practices. An unqualified (this is good) opinion on the City's Financial Statements will be forthcoming. 2005 budget process We. are fine - tuning the 2005 preliminary budget. Significant discussions and presentations have taken place regarding the Stonnwater Fund, Street Fund, General Fund and our capital needs. Two additional public hearings are scheduled for October 12 and October 26, with adoption of the budget planned for November 9. Business registration 3300+ businesses are in our database. We have been working closely with representatives of the Washington State Department of Licensing to ready our registration database. We expect to generate city renewal notices with the state system near the 15' of November. Gambling tax letters Letters were mailed to operators of punchboard and pull tab games explaining the repeal of the existing tax and announcing the "tax free period" in which operators can pay the outstanding tax with no penalty or interest. Gambling returns are due at the end of October for the quarter ending September 30, 2004. These returns will provide the information needed to calculate the amounts due the City and the amount of the quarterly payment for those operators with outstanding obligations. Budget variance/investment reports Reports showing a comparison of fund revenues and expenditures to our 2004 amended budget at September 30, 2004, are attached. If revenues and expenditures flowed to the City equally over the twelve months, we would expect to see 75% in the right -hand column. Revenues and expenditures do not flow equally in twelve monthly installments to the city so the percentages appearing in the right hand column will often be skewed. Overall, revenues and expenditures are in line with our projections. The investment report at September 30, 2004 is also attached. City of Spokane Valley General Fund Budget Variance Report For the Period January 1 - September 30, 2004 Budget September YTD 2004 Revenues Revenues General Fund Revenues: Property Tax $ 9,265,809 $ 33,812 $ 4,880,902 Sales Tax 11,920,000 1,256,955 9,683,334 Gambling Tax 690,000 2,515 435,386 Leasehold Excise Tax 5,000 3,309 Franchise Fees 640,000 319,824 State Shared Revenues 882,816 146,537 689,620 Planning & Building Fees 1,139,000 184,381 1,392,325 Fines and Forfeitures 1,000,000 99,818 837,273 Recreation Program Fees 121,000 8,396 117,952 Investment Interest 18,000 6,717 38,007 Operating Transfers 122,500 - 34,300 $ 25,804,125 $ 1,739,131 $ 18,432,232 General Fund Expenditures: Legislative Branch $ 215,372 $ 8,376 Executive & Legislative Support 438,482 27,422 Public Safety 14,693,990 1,273,849 Operations & Administrative Svcs 917,605 58,578 Public Works 631,079 58,373 Planning & Community Dev, 1,574,519 120,590 Library Services 2,053,250 Parks & Recreation 1,601,780 104,145 General Government 3,450 45 $ 25,576,655 $ 1,697,318 19111!2004 2:35 PM Budget 2004 $ 153,308 267,487 10,742,344 609,038 465,589 982,936 1,010,148 1,045,208 778,565 $ 16,054,623 Unrealized Percent Revenue Realized $ 4,384,907 2,236,666 254,614 1,691 320,176 193,196 (253,325) 162,727 3,048 (20,007) 88,200 $ 7,371,893 52.68% 1 81.24 63.10 66.18 49.97 78.12 122.24 14 83.73 97.48 211.15 28.00 17 71.43% September YTD Unrealized Percent Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures Realized $ 62,064 170,995 3,951, 646 308,567 165,490 591,583 1,043,102 556,572 2,672,013 $ 9,522,032 71.18% 61.00 73.11 66.37 73.78 62.43 49.20 65.25 22.56 16. 19 62.77% Other Funds Revenues: Street Fund Arterial Street Fund Trails and Paths Hotel /Motel Fund Debt Service - LTGO 03 Capital Projects Fund Special Capital Projects Fund Street Capital Projects Mirabeau Point Project Street Bond Capital Projects CD Block Grant Fund Capital Grants Fund Barker Bridge Reconstruction Sewer Fund Stormwater Mgmt Fund Equip. Rental & Replacement Risk Management 10111/2004 135 PM City of Spokane Valley Other Funds Budget Variance Report For the Period January 1 - September 30, 2004 Budget 2004 $ 2,062,200 542,000 12,800 380,000 800,000 840,000 840,000 3,230,000 3,000,000 30,000 504,000 837,000 702,000 747,500 146,634 137,500 $ 14,811,634 Budget 2004 Other Funds Expenditures: Street Fund $ 3,773,184 Arterial Street Fund 600,000 Hotel /Motel Fund 475,000 Debt Service LTGO 03 800,000 Capital Projects Fund 180,000 Special Capital Projects Fund 300,000 Street Capital Projects 3,219,700 Mirabeau Point Project 9.500,000 Street Bond Capital Projects 2,460,000 CD Block Grant Fund 504,000 Capital Grants Fund 837,000 Barker Bridge Reconstruction 702,000 Sewer Fund 238,608 Stormwater Mgmt Fund 518,700 Equip. Rental & Repiacemnt 43,600 Risk Management 137,500 $ 24,289,292 September Revenues S 105,718 $ 48,198 43,758 87,467 87,180 160,003 984,632 3,797 82,000 51 3,552 145 40 S 1,606,541 September Expenditures $ 296,552 $ 27,280 122,930 833,602 242,000 3,670 81,245 7,912 6,649 $ 1,621,840 YTD Revenues 959,771 357,377 236,689 225,561 630,114 628,466 416,290 1,426,791 27,360 86,300 234 426,427 64,636 130,176 $ 5,616,192 YTD Expenditures 2,179,166 342,682 225,561 25,945 225,945 415,630 3,276,013 302.604 3,670 86,215 197,594 53,344 47,381 111,066 $ 7,492,816 Unrealized Percent Revenue Realized $ 1,102,429 46.54% 19 184,623 65.94 12,800 18 143,311 62.29 574,439 28.20 20 209,886 75.01 211,534 74.82 2,813,710 12.89 8 1,573,209 47.56 2,640 91.20 504,000 - 8 750,700 10.31 8 702,000 - 8 (234) - 321,073 57.05 81,998 44.08 11 7,324 94.67 $ 9,195,442 37.92% Unrealized Percent Expenditures Realized $ 1,594,018 600,000 132,318 574,439 154,055 74,055 2,804,070 6,223,987 2,157,396 500,330 750,785 702,000 41,014 465,356 (3,781) 26,434 $ 16,796,476 57.75% 7 72.14 28.20 20 14.41 7 75.32 12.91 8 34.48 8 12.30 8 0.73 8 10.30 8 8 82.81 10.28 9 108.67 80.78 30.85% Note: 1 Property taxes are due in two equal installments on April 30 and October 31. The majority of revenues from property taxes is received on May 10 and November 10. 3 State shared revenues (liquor) are received quarterly on succeeding months. 7 These funds are used primarily for capital projects. Cash is not actually moved from these funds (expenditures) to the construction funds until needed 8 Capital projects often take a number of years to plan, engineer, acquire right of way and costs to flow evenly throughout the year. 9 60% of this budget is tied to potential construction projects which are not yet underway. 11 Internal journal entry will be made twice /year 13 Internal transfer made in early 2004 to pay for city insurance 14 New construction projects are exceeding our estimates 16 40 +% of this budget are reserves. They would only be used in an emergency 17 Transfer for parks masterplan ($80,000) is planned for late 2004 18 Transfer for trails planned for late 2004 19 Loan repayment will be received in late 2004 20 Next debt transaction will be late 2004 10/11/2004 2:35 PM FOOTNOTES 10/11/2004 2:35 PM dec Beginning Deposits Withdrawls Interest Ending City of Spokane Valley Investment Report For the Month Ending September 30, 2004 LGIP' $ 9,751,131.41 1,597,653.64 (2,620,000.00) 12,217.04 $ 8,741,002.09 $ General Fund Street Fund Arterial Street Hotel /Motel Capital Projects Spec. Capital Proj. Street Capital Proj. Mirabeau Paint Proj. Street Bond Proj. Sewer Stormwater Mgmt. Equipment Rental Risk Management Balances by Fund *Local Govemment Investment Pool Total F &M MM Investments $ 6,303,222.93 $ 16,054,354.34 1,597,653.64 (950,000.00) (3,570,000.00) 9,072.56 21,289.60 5,362,295.49 $ 14,103,297.58 $ 3,333,916.79 537,550.34 643,713.38 115,041.05 1,233,404.33 960,756.07 2,269.71 4,050,375.26 2,169,063.99 30,233.65 923,515.75 78, 567.37 24, 889.89 $ 14,103,297,58 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MONTHLY REPORT FOR SEPTEMBER 2004 LONG RANGE PLANNING DIVISION: Planning Commission The Spokane Valley Planning Commission met on September 23, 2004 to conduct a public hearing for consideration of eight 2004 Comprehensive Plan amendments. A ninth hearing was held to consider a proposal to rezone over 400 acres in the Greenacres neighborhood from UR -7* to UR -3.5. The rezone was initiated by over 51% of property owners residing within the area. Hearings on the Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone Application #REZ -17 -04 and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -07 -04 will be continued at the October 14, 2004 Planning Commission meeting. Background information on the Comprehensive Plan amendments and areawide rezone application are included with the Planning Commission minutes of September 23, 2004. Community Meeting The City's Community Development Department hosted the first of four community meetings scheduled for the fall of 2004 on September 9th at Zion Evangelical Lutheran Church. These fall meetings have been designed to share information compiled during spring meetings with citizens in order to develop more detailed planning strategies for several "Hot Topics ". Summaries of formal and informal community surveys conducted during the spring and summer months are also presented, and citizens are given information about how to view and study the Comprehensive Plan Discussion Draft. After the staff presentation, citizens attending the meeting are divided into small groups to discuss "Hot Topics ", which include neighborhood preservation, transportation and City Center /City Identity. The small groups are given time to present their findings at the end of the meeting. This second phase of community involvement will help staff to focus Comprehensive Plan priorities. Future meetings are scheduled for October 7 at Bowdish Middle School, October 28 at Pratt Elementary School and November 4 at the Spokane Valley Church of the Nazarene. The November 4 meeting will also kick off the public involvement process for the Parks Master Plan. Comprehensive Plan Development Long Range staff continues to develop draft chapters of the first Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. A draft of all Comprehensive Plan chapters has been posted on the City's home page and the Long Range Planning web page for discussion purposes. Page 1 of 7 City of Spokane Valley Department of Community Development Monthly Report for September 2004 In September the Community Development Department filled a vacant Associate Planner position created when Scott Kuhta moved into the Senior Planner role. Mike Basinger is the newest addition to department staff. Mike comes to the City after working for more than four years with the Boundary Review Board of Spokane County. Mike worked extensively on the Spokane Valley Incorporation Study and is very familiar with the Spokane Valley area. He is also an expert in geographic information systems (GIS) and will be a valuable asset to the department during the final stages of developing the city's comprehensive plan. Welcome Mike!!! Staff attended a Steering Committee of Elected Officials meeting On September 30, 2004. At the meeting, the Steering Committee conducted a public hearing on an update of the Countywide Planning Policies (CWPPs), including policies which clarify the process to change urban growth area boundaries. Growth Management Grant Funding Update The City of Spokane Valley received a $30,102 GMA grant check in September. Total GMA grant funding for 2004 has reached $90,305. Ad Hoc Sign Committee The Ad Hoc Sign Committee held two meetings in September; during which a summary chart for sign standards in specified zones was developed and refined, several new definitions were added to the revised sign code, a standard for requirements of a comprehensive sign plan was determined, and committee accomplishments were discussed for presentation to City Council on October 12 The committee hopes to complete its immediate work in October. Details of the Ad Hoc Sign Committee's work to date can be found on the Community Development web page. CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION: The Current Planning Division opened 26 land use application files in September. In addition, 20 licenses /permits were sold. In order to make the chart below easier to follow, activity has been consolidated into two categories: License /Permits (adult entertainment, sign review permits); and Land Actions (binding site plans, rezones, subdivisions, short plats, boundary line adjustments, street vacations, site plan reviews and SEPA reviews). 2004 MONTHLY CURRENT PLANNING ACTIVITY BY CATEGORY 100% 50°!0 o% El Land Actions 21 11 11 Licanualall�Jrrits 0 ; 9 Page 2 of 7 A comparison of new application /permit/license activity through the month of September to the annual projection for each of these is shown below: Site Ran Review Sign Rant Review Boundary Line Adjustments SEPA Review Short Plat Subdivision Rezone Home Profession Binding Site Ran Adult Entertainment License $30,000 $20,000 $10,000 $0 BUILDING DIVISION: City of Spokane Valley Department of Community Development Monthly Report for September 2004 - n (0 Q 2004 CURRENT PLANNING ACTIVITY ANNUAL COMPARISON 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 l ❑ 2004 Projections • Activity to Date Monthly revenue for the Current Planning Division totaled $20,575 in September. The Division's total 2004 income stands at $171$76. 2004 CURRENT PLANNING REVENUE 0) C (0 In September 2004, the Current Planning Division served 234 customers at the Planning Counter, and returned or answered 282 phone calls. The Building Division issued 284 permits in September. This is 79% of the number of permits issued in August. New commercial construction involved three of those permits. Twenty -five new single - family dwellings and four two- family structures were permitted: Page 3 of 7 _ 0 z 0 0 C to - C ci 400 300• 200 100 0 -n m 7 In an effort to compare the number of City of Spokane Valley Building Permits to Actual Value, the charts below have been developed. As you will see, permit sales and value of associated property continue to increase in 2004: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY BUILDING PERMIT SALES Comparison of 2003 (4/1.12131) to 2004 (111 -9130) City of Spokane Valley Department of Community Development Monthly Report for September 2004 2004 BUILDING PERMITS SOLD • Cormrercieal Fbrrrits a Residential I nits Page 4 of 7 5100,000,003 $00,000,000 590.000„000 $40,000,000 520,000,000 so c ® 0 z 0 CO v 0 0 _ e /D , CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY BUILDING PERMIT VALUATION Comparison of 2003 (411 - 12131) to 2004 (111.9130) Committal S21,671,735 ® 2003 ■ 2004 549,861,395 Residrsfal Total 942,271,860 549.445,044 599,306,439 $20,600,125 The Permit Center collected $126,689.37 in Permit and Plan Review Fees in September, bringing our yearly total income to $1,079,000.89. The Permit Center reports that there is no noticeable decrease in activity as our community continues to grow. Although our commercial permit numbers dropped this month, we are still seeing continued commercial activity well beyond what we experienced last year. In the nine months of 2004, we have seen an increase of 315% in new commercial building permit issuance activity above the nine months of 2003 operations. Our one- and two- family dwelling permits are almost the same for those nine month comparisons. I JJ,WJ,W 125,00000 - — — 100,000.00 875,00.00 130,000.00 125,000.€0 i i � S0111 � ID Rans Check Fees License & Fbrrtit Fees Y1 co City of Spokane Valley Department of Community Development Monthly Report for September 2004 D] r t7 2004 BUILDING REVENUE Commercial permits included a replacement for a fire damaged building on 17711 E. Euclid Avenue, a dry storage building on North Howe Road, and a 13,560 sq. ft. building at 8721 E. Mission for the University of Phoenix. A comparison of Building Division fiscal activity through the month of September to annual budget projections is shown below: 2004 BUILDING FISCAL ACTIVITY ANNUAL COMPARISON $0 5100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000 $700,000 $800,000 $900,000 e Actual YID Revenue L Annual Revenue Projection In 21 business days we performed 965 inspections. This averages out to just under 46 inspections per day. Although we continue to use On -Call Inspection Staff to supplement our workload -- using one on -call inspector five days per week, and another on -call inspector intermittently -- our current inspection activity exceeds our target level of twelve inspections /inspector /day. Our on -call inspectors performed 312 of the inspections in September. This confirms the assistance these additional staff members have given our full -time staff. Our workload has continued to be more manageable using this labor resource. Over the next few months, we continue to expect a larger volume of inspections, since inspection requests track actual permit activity. We continued to expect to use the second on -call inspector for a few more months to help us maintain the capacity of excellent customer service the Building Division strives to sustain. Page 5of7 0 0 v CD n 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 City of Spokane Valley Department of Community Development Monthly Report for September 2004 Q Ca - m CODE ENFORCEMENT: 2004 BUILDING INSPECTIONS Page 6 of 7 m 0 7 0 v w 0 In September, the Building Division organized a meeting with the Department of Ecology and City staff. We held a round table discussion here in Council Chambers to help us understand our different functions and to help us put faces to names. It seemed very productive as members of Development Engineering, Planning Division and Code Enforcement were able to discuss topics of interest with this state agency. The Building Division also met with the Washington Survey and Rating Bureau to conduct its first Building Code Effectiveness Survey. Community Development met with the Water Districts in the Valley during the monthly meeting to discuss the Wellhead Protection Program. A questionnaire had been prepared and distributed to the Water Districts hoping to discover a community -wide level of service the districts provide to our citizens. In September, the Building Official attended a three -day ICC Educational Form in Salt Lake City, Utah. Not only did he participate in the Annual Business Meeting, but attended two days of training covering issues of importance to the City. The number of "Violations Reported" on the following chart reflects actual Spokane Valley Zoning Code violations, plus complaints received which were not violations. The complaints received are added to the total because they reflect time officers spent in the field conducting investigations. In addition, the "Investigated" and "Pending" columns accurately reflect Code Enforcement's current ability to process and investigate backlog cases due to additional staffing. City of Spokane Valley Department of Community Development Monthly Report for September 2004 L. CODE ENFORCEMENT STATUS 6 Violations Reported l3 Abaterrents 0 File Transfers 6 Fending FIes j The chart below provides a monthly comparison of the types of Spokane Valley Code violations reported. In order to make the chart easier to follow, activity has been consolidated into the following five categories: Environmental (sewer /septic, critical areas, animal and nuisance violations); Property (Right of Way, property use, dangerous building, landlord/tenant, illegal business and signage violations); Junk Auto; Solid Waste (solid waste, illegal dumping, and household waste violations); and Complaint — No Violation. 2004 CODE VIOLATIONS REPORTED (BY TYPE) G Complaint - No Violation = • Solid Waste 0 Junk Auto 103% 90% 80% 70% 60%• 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0 %• Page 7 of 7 spokan�` jUalley Memorandum To: Dave Mercier, Nina Regor, Members of City Council From: Mike Jackson Date: October 13, 2004 Re: Monthly Report, October 2004 Administration and Parks: • The deadline for Park Maintenance proposals was October 1. The City received four proposals for park maintenance. Staff is currently reviewing the proposals. • The Parks and Recreation Master Plan consultant will hold the first community meeting to get input from the public as to the needs and issues facing the City. The first meeting will be held November 4 at the Spokane Valley Church of the Nazarene at 7:OOpm. During the day, several meetings are being arranged with focus groups to get their input. In order to gain further insight the community's needs, the consultant will conduct a random household survey during the month of November. • The water and restrooms in the parks are closed for the season. Recreation: 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org • Staff is in the process of gathering and evaluating rental rates for CenterPlace. • Staff will be training on new Safari Reservation software Oct. 25 - 29. Senior Center: • Variety Show called The Feeble Follies on September 25 was a great success. There were two performances. One at 2PM and the other at 6PM. The Association earned $813. The estimated attendance for two performances was 100. The entrance fee was by donation, no set fee. The performers practiced for weeks each Wednesday. About 25 people were active in putting on the performance. • Plu shots at the Senior Center have been cancelled due to a nationwide shortage. The seniors that went to the Health District were turned away at noon, because the vaccine was all gone. • Maintenance staff will begin repairing railings and the ramps which the Health District i.ndicated needed to be repaired. 10: Dave Mercier, City Manager FROM: Cal Walker, Chief of Police Dale Dolman, Administrative Sergeant DATE: October 14, 2004 RE: Monthly Report September 2004 Attached is the activity report for September for the Spokane Valley Police Department. There were a total of 5,356 computer -aided dispatch (CAD) incidents. These are self - initiated officer contacts, as well as calls for service. Out of those 5,356 incidents, 1,597 actual reports were taken during the month of September. Attached is the breakdown describing those incidents. Additionally, there were 1,830 traffic stops conducted that resulted in 146 traffic reports. 1 have included hotspot maps for September residential burglaries, September traffic accidents and September commercial burglaries, along with August & September stolen cars and trucks. AAMINISTRATIVE: We are working on finalizing the 2005 budget. In September the senior staff from the Sheriff's Office and 1 participated in a two -day staff retreat, which was basically an administrative planning session for '05. Detective Rick Grabenstein, who has worked for the Spokane County Sheriffs Office for 29 years, retired in September. Rick will now be working for the Washington State Attorney's Office as an investigator in their HITS unit. Nina Regor and 1 met with Spokane Police Deputy Chief Al Odenthal to discuss the dilemma coming up with Crime Check. This will be an ongoing discussion. COMMUNITY - ORIENTED POLICING: MEMO • Neighborhood Watch Training: Crone Prevention Officer Greg Snyder offered Neighborhood Watch organizer training at the Spokane Valley Precinct, 12710 E. Sprague. In support of our nation's Domestic Preparedness efforts, the Spokane County Sheriff's Office and Spokane Valley Police are expanding the Neighborhood Watch program in Spokane County. Neighborhood Watch is a conununity safety program of neighbors watching out for neighbors. Through organization, education and communication, the program promotes reducing the opportunity for crime to be committed. Participants in the organizer training session are provided tools to help them establish a Neighborhood Watch program. In turn, Neighborhood Watch creates a sense of community that fosters a safer living environment for their family and friends. The 1 Neighborhood Watch organizer training is a one -Hour program that is followed by a one - hour terrorism awareness /domestic preparedness presentation. • S.C.O.P.E. Volunteers Lauded At Dinner: Members of S.C.O.P.E., the Sheriff's Community Oriented Police Effort, received special recognition for the thousands of hours they donate to the Sheriff's Office and Spokane Valley Police Department . Sheriff Mark Sterk presented special plaques and awards to specific standout members of the organization. S.C.O.P.E. volunteers provided the Sheriff's Office, the Spokane Valley Police Department and Spokane County citizens more than 1 10,000 hours of their time in 2003. Members serve the community as traffic controllers at crime incidents and traffic collisions, work the front desks at the Public Safety Building and Spokane Valley Precinct, take incident reports, provide crone prevention to their neighborhoods and perform a host of other work that allows commissioned deputies and officers to spend a greater amount of time targeting criminal suspects. Volunteers are involved in 25 different crime prevention and community service programs, and staff 15 S.C.O.P.E. stations, three of which serve the Spokane Valley. The stations serve as an information conduit between those neighborhoods and law enforcement. ♦ Reserve Deputies: Eighteen volunteer Reserve Deputies worked a total of 650 hours at this year Spokane County Fair. They made five arrests and monitored two rival gangs, deterring a potential gang fight. Their presence helped make the fair a success. OPERATIONS: ♦ Racist Literature: Numerous Spokane Valley residents discovered racist literature on their lawns and driveways over the Labor Day weekend, and officers seized the items hoping to identify the suspects involved. The flyers urge the reader to join the White Revolution and list a phone number and address in Russellville, Arkansas. One flyer targets persons of Hispanic descent and the other African American. ♦ Fugitives Rounded Up: Numerous Spokane -area felons found themselves in a jail cell as the Eastern Washington Joint Fugitive Task Force conducted a warrants sweep. Seven teams of investigators, armed with fugitive intelligence provided by the SPD Crime Analysis Unit, hit last known addresses around Spokane to arrest persons with felony warrants. Fifty -one suspects were arrested. Numerous other fugitives were discovered hiding in prisons and jails in Idaho, Montana, California and New York. Additional leads were developed in roughly another 100 fugitive cases and those pursuits are ongoing. The Eastem Washington Fugitive Task Force is comprised of Deputy U.S. Marshals, Spokane County Sheriffs detectives (shared resource) and Washington State Dept. of Corrections officers. The Drug War continues. This is only a small synopsis of the drug arrests by Spokane Valley Police Officers this month: 2 • Spokane Valley Police arrested a 33 -year -old vehicle prowler after he made a second trip to steal items from cars parked at the Spokane Valley Mall. Officers booked him on charges of Second Degree Theft, Second Degree Vehicle Prowling and Possession of Marijuana. ♦ Spokane Valley Police arrested a 25- year -old Cheney man after they discovered him in possession of a rifle and several varieties of controlled substances during a protection order violation investigation. Officers booked two people into jail for First Degree Unlawful Possession of A Firearm, Possession of Methamphetamine and Possession of a Schedule lII Controlled Substance. A misdemeanor count of Possession of Mari- juana is pending. ♦ Spokane Valley Police arrested a 42- year -old Greenacres man after the antsy suspect was unable to hide the second (Allis two drug pipes. Officers booked him on a felony count of Possession of Methamphetamines. ♦ Spokane Valley Police arrested a 41- year -old woman after discovering metham- phetamine in her pocket during a traffic stop. Officers booked her on a felony count of Possession of Methamphetamines. ♦ Officers arrested a 33- year -old Valleyford man after they stopped him as a possible vehicle prowler and discovered baggies of methamphetamine and cocaine inside his pants pockets. ♦ Spokane Val ley Police arrested a 19 -year -old woman after they stopped her for failing to signal several turns and discovered methamphetamine, scales, pipes and other drug paraphernalia inside her car. • Police arrested a 26- year -old Spokane man after an officer spotted him using the roof of a stolen car as a platform to scratch a lottery ticket he had just purchased. In addition to a couple of backpacks in the vehicle belonging to the suspect, there was a Brinks Security lockbox in the vehicle that contained several syringes and small baggies of methamphetamine. ♦ Spokane Valley Police arrested a 37- year -old drug suspect after they discovered meth- adone and other apparent controlled substances in her purse during a traffic stop. ♦ Spokane Valley Police Officer Jeff Thurman arrested a 40- year -old motorist when he discovered she had an outstanding arrest warrant in police records and methamphetamine in her bag. She was booked on the warrant and a fresh felony charge of Possession of Methamphetamines. ♦ Spokane Valley Police arrested an 18 -year -old Spokane man after they found him seated in a stolen truck that had a bag of methamphetamine under the front seat. 3 ♦ Officer Jeff Getchell arrested a 26 -year -old Spokane man after he stopped him for a. traffic infraction and found marijuana, scales and a large amount of cash inside the vehicle. Suspect was booked on a felony count of Possession of Marijuana With Intent To Deliver. He also issued him a $101 infraction for defective lighting. ♦ Spokane Valley Police arrested a pair of Idaho residents after discovering prescription painkillers in their possession. One of the men was charged with an additional felony after he assaulted an officer during the incident. ♦ Spokane Valley Police arrested a 19- year -old Greenacres man after he was caught inside a garage by a homeowner who sat him down on the ground and held him until officers arrived. Officers booked him on the burglary charge and a second felony count of Possession of Methamphetamines. ♦ Spokane Valley Police arrested a man and woman on several felony charges after stopping them in a stolen car and discovering drugs and paraphernalia in the car and in their clothing. In a subsequent search of the car, officers located a multi - colored "Nike" case inside the car that contained drug scales, baggier containing methamphetamine and photos. A check through Police Records showed that the male had outstanding warrants charging him with Escape From Community Custody and Possession of Methamphetamines. ♦ Spokane Valley Police arrested a 34- year -old woman after she tried to obtain pain pills with a forged prescription and then tried to flee from the officer called to investigate. ♦ A woman found prowling a customer's car at the East Sprague Rosauers was later arrested on felony drug charges after Methamphetamines and paraphernalia were discovered in her purse and in her car during the subsequent investigation 4 2004 SEPTEMBER CRIME REPORTS I September, 2004 September, 2003 2004 to Date BURGLARY 92 65 752 FORGERY 25 46 318 MALICIOUS MISCHIEF 105 100 952 NON - CRIMINAL 66 75 688 PROPERTY OTHER 144 126 1,324 RECOVERED VEHICLES 68 17 282 STOLEN VEHICLES 74 30 440 THEFT 220 201 2,181 UIOBC 0 3 6 VEHICLE OTHER 1 2 39 VEHICLE PROWLING 112 98 1014 TOTAL PROPERTY CRIMES 907 763 7,996 ASSAULT 67 78 670 DOA/SUICIDE 9 22 127 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 79 51 582 HOMICIDE 1 0 3 KIDNAP 3 0 17 MENTAL 30 52 280 MP 7 15 81 PERSONS OTHER 141 166 1,266 ROBBERY 5 9 42 TELEPHONE HARASSMENT 11 11 143 TOTAL MAJOR CRIMES 353 404 3,211 ADULT RAPE 3 5 27 CHILD ABUSE 5 8 90 CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE 17 15 156 SEX REGISTRATION F 0 1 4 INDECENT LIBERTIES 4 1 17 CHILD MOLESTATION 5 3 62 CHILD RAPE 3 4 26 RUNAWAY 43 331 323 SEX OTHER 15 15 124 STALKING 0 1 23 SUSPICIOUS PERSON 32 32 271 TOTAL SEX CRIMES 127 118 1,123 DRUG 64 54 765 ISU OTHER 0 0 1 TOTAL ISU 64 54 766 TOTAL TRAFFIC REPORTS 146 259 2,221 TOTAL REPORTS RECEIVED 1,597 1,598 15,317 [1_=Uprover Mission 7 .1-•- - 13o,dne Ri . 1. 70 - _ cr--2 -- L4-Tr 0 3ECIA11 Josep 7 , ego 11111al ORM 'To ar e If - _--- , - ,. - z 0 a nox 1:111 I -- ' 1 no x IP 0 77 I Pene D M - 11n 1 x w --Ls n t V5Ileyw ED-- -(11:30th GB; -4- c gi 47 F4- I11oIrn- J- 1,,c6 I rg h et in , -1-1 _- a OtbE LcI - - _1 h 8th 6T __: - 90302 ai li tr B rb Alki 1 1 Clime - Main 1:1 1 CO -Yi • ie t v 's. 5 "t CD c---- Kie —Tn 0 q.) L H In ustrial Pa k E t I m a . I ' CDt- im ?- I_ -Buckzye Ma a ,I — - Fir'--- --:z.- Montg ci e? r Baldwin rn ft 0 1 <Zs ' n h ` I-- 9th=ca > 3th x j rt3cfq 16tbH¢,21` :": A ki (1) Main r 'II =1 r\ , - / ` CD i 391h 9 P,) 44thi 0 L , a• - ^ • atb , 8th eel) I 0 It 0 CD L I IL i ,Ma Ion Dear _le , co tti n,. m -- ZhNixon ED -7 - 10 )( k i - 41111 H e -It -17-1 - Ig 1- v gl 1 Litt?- _ _ -, Stiltft___L-H I _ ° i5t m , ...2 I. 14tH k zi __ -vey-_- L .:2=C74- fTth „ I \ \ 21st (_.— ✓ 67 €111 1, E) I -'t 0- o --'-- 7 1 • ri--- 1 OT •.< Missfonr, 0 uous - - Sharp 1 fc 6, ) c - -11 -:29th7 < o' T -- --- — 1 21 :-/ f' - 2 .-1 3i _ — 5 rt 3.311 tv , --T----- _ 4tt i i G) i r cp n 1 0 r 40th i m --, cij N....r 1 74-id ' - ,51 i 3 - CE) `-. —44th ""--) , -li GIO - ,\ /1_ a. .4.---, - P ..' N • 0 - .57th ' 1 1 il CD in - I - 4 1 1 th '' '' ." .. ,.... • CD k =s 1 „tvtilnnga c -o c -n Fruit !I'll Air abeau Nera \r Sanscin c r IJ - 01 I y 0)_R ckwellE1- Ri 0 L 4 'ndiana co ail:: co 32J)d- I 1 36th I —92- 11310 - a4 ) RIch "7 . 4_L C1 Ca) 0 24th =.) 24 [ V cT -- a n 4th- -- Stolen -- Stolen Vehicle 1=1 I I (1) Low in Medium OM High . 0 0.5 - 1 1 I "I8s August & September 2004 Stolen Vehicle Hotspots 14th Joseph 7 ' - t - s �-4 Main '1_s�;gA ' irabeau TnQli}ef r - Buck= ye -» Montgomery, Q �`a . Baldwin , 1 dian ; o r Th'1 ! `= - Th. .0 rn A. f-`; Lf :wley —,_�l = w. -*--- 21st ( \t, 25th 71 v ( • ' "� ; �; y `2 I 31st m o 01 _0 o o m I-44th - --- (1)_ L 00- t, 4 rk d a ie r ' 0 k ' cv 4 r1naire f1 I y. ?. . 0.5 1 Miles L 136t0) 40 th''._- elle Ter r ` .� N ( _ Q `• O 1 0, \ r . r �\ rl ohaw 39th September 2004 Resid=J ial Burglary Hotspots 0 0 O) 7� 44th Map Produced: 12 Octc 24th w d Residential Burglary O Low mg Medium ® High L 1 ▪ c • • s ' e u , 1 ■1. 1 71 M ssion b oa Bocinel Ra�1r_ `Uta fiver —'-. - 4 - Mallon Al mfr .a3 n1 r"1 st - -- - 71� ▪ V41_= 14th ca` n 0 d(0. `C - 1a) '"- • -/ lua Sharp ' M i ( 1 t- - De -i Kl t ;8th r1. 31st -n o G - a --�ti, -rte M ixion 1st 1 1 6 t ea J +y. -1 Ju) 1 f;,n) 10 a � I `. m h44th 1 4 •Ir'kdai � - - 7 , n tnnaire 1 t) lY�.y \‘'07) 57thL? 11 l. � I 11 ffi I. 1' - Grace . , dry ' �- *mans 'eld o vKnox - - Indiana fir r � utaxw . 1 rr if Sharp- Bovne . sr r�et Mello -,. VII �Jt r ' ■\-o Spr_'gue -L__— 3rd_ 4th' -"r' -t - n - 6tht 6th � . 9 ct -- d 43_ �� 16th �� 0371 - ,4z0t -1:at i sit, �� `\�I..1.14hj 1 r= ft3th _ca - e irabeau Broadiw ?u Olivel YwaY Ivl 't 5th t th . �� -,,,_, e.,_ vi[ , —.3.0 .6 LL� ` ° '"��`i34th p � .- 35 8t , = \,. ,-5 ..„.1 _ T -- • m:2t Cro _ W e i r le y L r- R i c h - h <1 ca \Oth ��40th k -77 '9_.)--,Belle Terre .1 o � ` ' `� ` ° � ` `' ' . mo d J-\ U ' 4 t i o J � , - 46th ¢5 i ti l l ol�ari. 1 � �`�` r � 1st e ' \ orro `r, f \ - ' cr,, �. St Mohawlca �� ` - � ' y r v `- >� a - �— = -- Q c� Kiernan 1 Ind uuia E Ma °ietta �� 1'� Monty Q 2. 9� Baldwin o t' T Euclid i -Bucke •m et'∎ cc fi !Catald o i_• AIki -i - e -Main 5� 6t -`- 11 e i th- T6tt Q T� a� tfil 6th 32nd L 3 tI 0 4th- - o_. _L! , 6 39th 44th 0 ,l) — 9 c nn) 7 ' 8th Traffic Accident Low Medium Low MI Medium High ye D Q Mission 0 7 0.5 Josepi L� J 1 Miles Fruit VV Sensors Forker nom, September 2004 Traffic Accident Hotspots Map Produced: 12 October 2004 bl ellesl ' y cw. -N■ I eh-- `_�� ro Kie Vl Sanson Forker C) a w- 3 -0 m co a = � r0.71 u4trial Park E uclid lea 77- - SUCL ye 1=L: Mantg G7.r! r D — i 1 §slo = VJ atald 1. lt+laln!�— � .. " - Man i) 4th — I 8th 0 (D z iMided ' - III i'.;�lctirE ( : �-,57th�r�� ti ;� '1...- �v T1I 1 �I U' C. 0.5 1 Miles th 7, cu 'O c 1 'eSt Mohawk\ L ' 1 3dtI 40 "th' cn .� Terre N 0 46th , 776 /be � ( 4-1— September 2004 Comm ;ial Burglary Hotspots 6. O 32nd n f ' J�1 39th 0) 141 11 44th i o �, r o 03 3 24th Ott 0) 2 jC d in Commercial Burglary [- -- I Map Produced: 12 Ode 14 Low ® Medium MO High INCIDENT TYPE Year to Date Jan Feb MarcliApril May June' July August IScipt Oct Nov Dec 11-6 Structure Fire Single Res . onse 195 31 18 16 10 24 19 31 24 22 11-F Structure Fire 100 10 11 12 17 11 11 13 10 5 11.W Working Fire 14 23 0 1 2 3 0 0 3 13.5 Vehicle Fire 73 77 8 4 6 9 12 13 7 14-UH Brush Fire-Low 65 0 3 7 3 9 6 20 15 2 15-S Trash Fire 26 0 2 2 7 4 3 3 2 3 18.S Alarm System-Single Response 79 I 16 11 10 7 14 4 8 4 7 18•F Alarm System- Full 278 54 32 27 22 21 27 26 37 32 31-A119 EILS EMS Alarm 1879 211 163 206 184 218 211 240 230 216 31-C/D ALS SAS Alarm 2115 235 202 232 235 251 235 240 257 228 31-F 2nd alarm EMSItilass Casualty 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35-F Extrication 10 2 0 1 3 0 1 1 0 2 36-F Water Rescue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37-F Tech Rescue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40-1 Hazmat Investigation 60 6 6 4 3 5 11 11 8 6 40-F Hazmat Full Response 7 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 0 1 46.A1B Auto Accident - Unknown Injuries 504 63 46 35 57 57 i 76 68 52 50 46-CID Auto Accident - Life Threats 48 7 1 7 3 7 4 8 7 4 50-6 Service Call 127 26 10 14 13 18 9 10 17 10 MONTHLY TOTAL 6680 670 515 581 569 648 631 692 676 598 0 0 0 Spokane County Library District Spokane Valley Library Services and District Support Report to the City of Spokane Valley September 2004 LIBRARY SERVICES Customer use measures September is an "in- between" month, as customers get back into their fall routine and school gets underway. Library use is normally lower than either August or October, and it's dependent to some degree on the weather and the date for Labor Day. For the District as a whole, year -to -date materials circulation continues at 1% above 2004. However, circulation for the last cornpleted. quarter (July - September) is 5% above the same quarter in 2003. The door count increased again, now 5% above last year at the same time. The decrease in reference inquiries continues to lessen, but Internet booking's are up 10 %. The registered borrower count is 115,196, compared to 104,260 in September 2003, a 10% increase. 72% of cardholders are adults and 28% are under 18. An interesting trend in materials circulation is the increasing use of our Web site for renewals, which now account for 5.2% of total year -to -date circulation. Last year at this time the percentage was 2.9 %. Through the end of September of this year, the Web renewal total is higher than the year -to -date circulation of four individual branches. Web renewals "take away" circulation from physical branches, somewhat reducing their totals. For the three libraries most used by Spokane Valley residents, customer use measures continue to be mixed, and continue to be impacted by the loss of City of Liberty Lake customers. Otis Orchards bears the brunt of the loss, but Valley was also used, though to a lesser degree. Selected September 2004 Statistics Page 1 of 6 Circulation Door count Reference Inquiries Program Attendance Internet Bookings YTID YTD to 2003 YTD YTD to 2003 YTD 1'1'D to 2003 YCD YTD to 2003 YTD YID to 2003 Total SCLD 1,412,304 +1.3% 691,167 +4.7% 187,130 -9.1% 41,883 +1.2% 139,582 +9.6% Valley 401,168 - 5.3% 190,230 4.2% 61,494 -110% 9,848 -2.1% 45,751 +5.6% Argo 93,620 -2.4% 59,893 +4.0% 8,684 42.5% 1,690 -5.9% 10,608 +2.0% Ohs 74,997 -12.7% 36,712 - 12.5% 5,833 -41.3% 1,900 - 32.2% 6,501 +3.2% Subtotal 569,785 -5.9% 286,835 -3.8% 76,011 -14.6% 13,438 -8.3% 62,860 +4.7% % SCLD 40.3% --- 41.5% - -- 40.6% - -- 32.1% - -- 45.% -- Spokane County Library District Spokane Valley Library Services and District Support Report to the City of Spokane Valley September 2004 LIBRARY SERVICES Customer use measures September is an "in- between" month, as customers get back into their fall routine and school gets underway. Library use is normally lower than either August or October, and it's dependent to some degree on the weather and the date for Labor Day. For the District as a whole, year -to -date materials circulation continues at 1% above 2004. However, circulation for the last cornpleted. quarter (July - September) is 5% above the same quarter in 2003. The door count increased again, now 5% above last year at the same time. The decrease in reference inquiries continues to lessen, but Internet booking's are up 10 %. The registered borrower count is 115,196, compared to 104,260 in September 2003, a 10% increase. 72% of cardholders are adults and 28% are under 18. An interesting trend in materials circulation is the increasing use of our Web site for renewals, which now account for 5.2% of total year -to -date circulation. Last year at this time the percentage was 2.9 %. Through the end of September of this year, the Web renewal total is higher than the year -to -date circulation of four individual branches. Web renewals "take away" circulation from physical branches, somewhat reducing their totals. For the three libraries most used by Spokane Valley residents, customer use measures continue to be mixed, and continue to be impacted by the loss of City of Liberty Lake customers. Otis Orchards bears the brunt of the loss, but Valley was also used, though to a lesser degree. Selected September 2004 Statistics Page 1 of 6 September Registered Customers by Branch of Registration At branches serving Spokane Valley residents... Regional Summary (Ellett Miller, regional manager): September is traditionally a transition month between the summer library activities and the school year library activities - two very different use patterns. With the rain and cool temperatures during the month, we got a few more people in than usual. Several of them mentioned needing a good book to curl up by the fire, usually a continent that we don't get for another month or two. The topic of the response to the City of Spokane Valley's request for proposal for library service was on everyone's mind - staff and customers. Information services /Adult services (Karen Byrne, regional supervisor): Adult programming got off to a start again in September. In Region II we had two programs entitled Sacagawea: an Interpretation, presented by Sara Edlin- Marlowe. The Otis Orchards program had 25 attendees and the Valley program had 24. Staffers Stacey Goddard and Pat Stainbrook prepared the Internet 101 workshops, which they presented at six branches this month. Youth Services (Mary Ellen Braks, regional supervisor): With school back in session, the kids are now asking homework questions instead of just reader's advisory questions. Storytimes are off to a good start everywhere and the After School Specials are going well. Staff walked along with the outreach van in the Valleyfest parade and helped kids make bookmarks (as well as passed out balloons) at the SCLD booth. Quite a few kids came up to Mary Ellen to say "You were at my school last year." It's good to know that they remember us. And we saw quite a few of our regulars who all said, "We love the library. We come all the time." We handed out lots of storytime and after school flyers. We may have even convinced a few teens to come to the teen program. in October. Times were arranged for the four outreach storytirnes done by branch staff. Argonne (Judy Luck, branch supervisor): September displays included Lewis and Clark books, voter information and books pertaining to politics, and seashells in the display case. Programs for the month were the school -age After School Special and an Internet 101 class. Otis Orchards (Bev Bergstrom, branch supervisor): Our lobby display area has been tweaked so that there is more room for SCLD posters and flyers. We had thoughtful pictures colored for the 9/11 children's activity. One particular picture was a hand on a heart. We had a solid turnout for our Sacagawea program. Other programs were the Book Tree after - school special and Internet 101. Valley (Ellen Miller, regional manager): Two more self - checkout stations were installed, one at the first floor self -check counter and the other at the second floor information desk. The baby lapsit storytime now has a core group of 12, and a steady attendance of six to seven babies. Staff interacted with many customers who had questions and concerns about the potential of library privatization. The Spokane Valley Art Council hung a new set of paintings, the largest display that they have installed. The Spokane Valley Heritage Museum had a display in the case of smaller artifacts from Page 2 of 6 2004 Total % of SCLD YTD Change from 2003 % Adult % Youth Total SCLD 115,196 -- + 9.1% 72% 28% Valley 39,481 34.3% + 9.9% 75% 25% Argonne 10,638 9.2% + 9.5% 75% 25% Otis 6,075 5.3% -1.2% 65% 35% Subtotal 56,194 48.8% -- -- September Registered Customers by Branch of Registration At branches serving Spokane Valley residents... Regional Summary (Ellett Miller, regional manager): September is traditionally a transition month between the summer library activities and the school year library activities - two very different use patterns. With the rain and cool temperatures during the month, we got a few more people in than usual. Several of them mentioned needing a good book to curl up by the fire, usually a continent that we don't get for another month or two. The topic of the response to the City of Spokane Valley's request for proposal for library service was on everyone's mind - staff and customers. Information services /Adult services (Karen Byrne, regional supervisor): Adult programming got off to a start again in September. In Region II we had two programs entitled Sacagawea: an Interpretation, presented by Sara Edlin- Marlowe. The Otis Orchards program had 25 attendees and the Valley program had 24. Staffers Stacey Goddard and Pat Stainbrook prepared the Internet 101 workshops, which they presented at six branches this month. Youth Services (Mary Ellen Braks, regional supervisor): With school back in session, the kids are now asking homework questions instead of just reader's advisory questions. Storytimes are off to a good start everywhere and the After School Specials are going well. Staff walked along with the outreach van in the Valleyfest parade and helped kids make bookmarks (as well as passed out balloons) at the SCLD booth. Quite a few kids came up to Mary Ellen to say "You were at my school last year." It's good to know that they remember us. And we saw quite a few of our regulars who all said, "We love the library. We come all the time." We handed out lots of storytime and after school flyers. We may have even convinced a few teens to come to the teen program. in October. Times were arranged for the four outreach storytirnes done by branch staff. Argonne (Judy Luck, branch supervisor): September displays included Lewis and Clark books, voter information and books pertaining to politics, and seashells in the display case. Programs for the month were the school -age After School Special and an Internet 101 class. Otis Orchards (Bev Bergstrom, branch supervisor): Our lobby display area has been tweaked so that there is more room for SCLD posters and flyers. We had thoughtful pictures colored for the 9/11 children's activity. One particular picture was a hand on a heart. We had a solid turnout for our Sacagawea program. Other programs were the Book Tree after - school special and Internet 101. Valley (Ellen Miller, regional manager): Two more self - checkout stations were installed, one at the first floor self -check counter and the other at the second floor information desk. The baby lapsit storytime now has a core group of 12, and a steady attendance of six to seven babies. Staff interacted with many customers who had questions and concerns about the potential of library privatization. The Spokane Valley Art Council hung a new set of paintings, the largest display that they have installed. The Spokane Valley Heritage Museum had a display in the case of smaller artifacts from Page 2 of 6 the area as part of their celebration of the grand opening of the museum. We did a book display in support of this very special local event. Outreach (Annette Eberlein, supervisor): Outreach visits forty licensed childcare centers per month, providing storytime and drop -off of thirty books for the child care facilities over a one month period. We have completed the schedule for the school year, a list of new materials and a welcome letter for each facility. We participated in the Valleyfest parade "Dr. Seuss" theme: the outreach service van was decked out with a banner with SCLD branches and Website. We handed out over one - hundred pencils, bookmarks and balloons with SCLD information. Along the parade route, kids recognized us. "Hey you come to our school." Many kids recognized our mascot, a puppet named "Toad." We followed up with a storytime at Mixabeau Park. Friends of the Library Valley: The Valley Friends held a meeting this month, part of which included a "behind the scenes" tour of the library. They also arranged to have a table at Valleyfest next to the SCLD booth. They stayed busy all day and acquired lots of new members and folks who were interested in being Friends. They have a total of 63 members now and are gathering materials so that they can have a book sale at some point in the future. COLLECTION SERVICES Library materials September saw a record number of materials processed and sent to branches: 8,294. This is the highest number ever for a non -bond project month and it's the third highest of all time. Only May and Ju.ne, 2000, when we were pushing to be ready for the Moran Prairie branch opening, were higher. Also this .month, we added 5,944 more items than were deleted. The number of items assigned to Valley continues to be well ahead of last year, as we continue our efforts to replace weeded items and provide multiple copies of popular materials. At the end of September, we've added 14,843 items; the total for 2003 was 15,270, so that number will be probably be eclipsed in October. We began to make music call number changes, dropping the Dewey number and using only the "author" name. The music collections will become browsing collections by genre, by author, making our collection accessible similar to materials in music stores, a way that works for customers and is less work for our staff. A shipment of adult foreign language books arrived: Chinese, Hindi, Japanese, Korean, Russian, and Spanish. Hindi materials will go to Valley. Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Russian, and Spanish will go to North Spokane and Valley. Some Spanish items will go to Cheney. We have two more shipments of Spanish books to come. The last big audiobook order for the year was placed, with only adult standing order requirements placed until January. This format continues to increase in popularity and publishers are increasing the numbers of titles they publish simultaneously with print. However, this is a double -edged sword for us. We'd like to wait and order library- edition unabridged copies because they have better packaging and better quality, and because we can get replacements for damaged individual tapes or CDs but much of the simultaneous publishing is not by the major audiobook publishers. It's by others whose products don't meet our criteria. So we have the dilemma of whether or how long to hold a customer request hoping that our favorite audiobook vendors will publish the work. We've already spent over 542,500 this year on adult audiobooks. Programming Page 3 of 6 ■ Our Internet 101 workshop series has been well- received with very positive evaluations. Airway :Heights and Fairfield sessions are scheduled for October. ■ We're partnering with AI-IANA in presenting four small business workshops at the Deer Park Library during October and November. Two others in this series are being held at the Deaconess Education Center downtown. AHANA is taking care of the arrangements and registrations; we're supplying the space and publicity. Plans were completed for our Spokane is Reading book talk programs at all branches. Technical Services Russian language videos now have a label in Russian to identify them to Russian speakers. We've learned that many of our Russian- speaking adults are not particularly literate in their own language and that they use videos for entertainment and to learn English. These DVDs are entertainment videos of our usual quality, in Russian, with English (and other language) subtitles. Interlibrary loan For the past several months, we've lent over 600 ILL books to other libraries and have borrowed fewer than 300. This is a big difference from a year or so ago, when we usually lent around 450 and borrowed close to the same number. We believe the changes are a response to two things: our increasingly good and up -to -date collection due to the effort being put into purchasing and weeding, and our deleting of old database records having no viable copies, causing us to borrow the item for a customer hold. Other Youth services coordinator Thom Barthelmess attended a PLA /ALSC training session on "Every Child Ready to Read @ Your Library" and came away with much valuable information plus plans for staff training and training for daycare providers and parents. ADMINISTRATION Annual Audit On -site work for our annual audit was completed during September, with the entrance briefing taking place on the 1st. The final report is targeted for October, depending upon the turnaround time for the Auditor's Office management review locally and in Olympia. The exit conference hasn't yet been scheduled. The audit was budgeted for 120 hours of work, at an estimated cost of approximately $9,000. It was gratifying to note the following statement included under "Audit Cost" in the entrance conference handout: "Objective is to keep audit costs low due to outstanding audit history. " This is testament to the work of all of our branch staff who handle money and the collections staff who purchase materials, as well as the business office staff. Moran Prairie project design We've been very pleased with the opportunities for early input afforded by ALSC Architects, as noted at the September Board meeting. Maintenance coordinator Dave Johnson has been meeting with ALSC and its engineering team for some time, and IT manager Priscilla Ice began working with them late in the month. We have a set of blueprints and outline specifications, understandably incomplete at this point, earlier than ever before. As ALSC Principal -in- Charge Steve Walther said at the meeting, the project is currently within budget and the estimate already includes a significant inflation factor. Even with that, we still have 5% contingency amount remaining as well as some flexibility for additional funds if that becomes Page 4 of 6 necessary at bid opening. The next Board of Trustees action will be approval of the final bid documents and budget in December so the project can be put to bid in January. Classification and compensation study recommendations We received consultant Fred Owen's preliminary classification and compensation study recommendations. In the area of position classifications, he recommends seven position titles for upgrade and none for downgrade. Managers have reviewed the classification recommendations with their staff. Anyone who believes that his or her position should have been reclassified or that a recommended reclassification was incorrect may submit a position review request which Mr. Owen will consider before finalizing his report. The deadline for submitting requests is Monday, October 4. Once we have the final report, we'll finalize cost estimates for implementation of the consultant recommendations on both classification changes and salary range adjustments to reflect current labor market salaries for comparable positions. This information will be part of the preliminary budget presentation at the board's November 2 special budget meeting. Because our ability to implement the full set of recommendations is driven by our anticipated revenue, it may be necessary to propose a multi-year implementation plan as we did with 1993 classification and compensation study recommendations. GOVERNMENT RELATIONS Spokane Valley The District's proposal for Spokane Valley library services was submitted on September 28, the deadline date, and the proposal narrative posted on our Web site after the 5:00 p.m. deadline. Copies of the full proposal, including the extensive appendices, are available to the public at the Valley and Argonne branches. COMMUNITY RELATIONS August saw several community -based contacts and activities throughout the District. • We participated once again i.n Valleyfest, which went relatively well for us for the first year i.n a new venue, although we did get moved four times prior to the 10:00 a.m. opening. Staff reported that we had about the same number of kids making bookmarks as last year. The Valley Friends of the Library were very happy with the event, as they signed up many new members. • If you listen to Spokane Public Radio, you may have heard the "libraries of Washington State" mentioned as program underwriters. This is part of the Library Services and Technology Act - funded statewide library marketing campaign that will also include print advertisements. • The EWU history department is applying for a National Endowment for the Humanities grant to create and make available "artifact boxes" for use by schools for local history education. We were contacted regarding our interest in being a distribution point for material — currently envisioned as 16 boxes —and are following up on this potential partnership. COMMUNICATIONS (BETH GILLESPIE, COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST) • I- Ielped coordinate District participation in Valleyfest and staff SCLD's booth. • In media relations, responded to inquiries regarding the Spokane Valley library services proposal and prepared a news release on the SCLD proposal; coordinated KXLY radio and Good Morning NW interviews for Thorn Barthelmess on the library September 11 Project. Page 5 of 6 • Drafted and distributed a Spokane Is Reading program schedule press release; finalized the PSA and distributed it to four local TV stations; continued to distribute posters and program flyers to schools and bookstores; and outlined Orson Scott Card's potential media schedule: ■ With Spokane Public Library's communications coordinator, developed a work -back schedule for WLA 2005 conference communications materials development. HUMAN RESOURCES (PAUL EICHENBERG, HR MANAGER) • The final classification and compensation study job alignment table, along with an excerpt of the consultant's report regarding proposed position reclassifications was distributed for staff review. Included in the distribution packet was an appeal procedure for employees who feel their positions were not accurately evaluated. • Paul attended the Washington Counties Insurance Fund meeting in Sea -Tac on September 16. The premiums for Washington Counties Insurance Fund Pool PPO plan will go up 9 %; Group Health, up 3 %; Willamette Dental will increase 2.29 %. Washington Dental will have no increase and VSP vision will decrease 11.8 %. • The new employee orientation was conducted. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (PRISCILLA ICE, IT MANAGER) ■ The two new notices were set up to run automatically, one alerting customers that their library card will expire in 30 days and the other a friendly reminder that books are almost due. Both notices go only to customers who provide an e-mail address so only about 30% of the "almost due" notices and less than 20% of the card expiration alert notices were sent. • The Directors Station server was installed in the rack and work began with SIRSI to begin implementation; however, there hasn't been a new date set. SIRSI is having a hard time keeping up with orders for this new product. • Specifications were finalized for the Web site redesign and interviews with four companies were completed. ■ Two additional laptop computers and an LCD projector were ordered so that a laptop and LCD projector can be available in each of the three larger buildings. New cases for the laptop computer lab were also ordered. FINANCE, PURCHASING, FACILITIES (BILL SARGENT, BUSINESS MANAGER) • Due to the uncertainty regarding Spokane Valley, the Argonne branch carpeting and painting project will be deferred to 2005. The re- carpeting and repainting of Collection Services is still scheduled for December. ■ Maintenance coordinator Dave Johnson worked with DIVCO to plan the Valley heat exchanger project, and scheduled the work for Friday, October 15th. Dave also worked on updating the District's five year rolling facility maintenance plan. • The State Auditors Office completed the 2003 audit onsite work. • The next key event for the Abra /HR project is to process the PPE 9/15/04 data through the Abra payroll system. The results of this process will be compared with the actual data processed through the MAS-90 system and corrective actions will be taken as necessary. • Bill met with bond counsel Roy Koegen to discuss alternatives for TANs and the possible need to re- solicit for underwriting services. Note: This report is excerpted from the September 2004 report to the Spokane County Library District Board of Trustees with added information related to Spokane Valley. Page 6 of 6 Spokane Valley Planning Commission Approved Minutes Council Chambers — City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave. September 23, 2004 I. CALL TO ORDER Planning Commission Chair Gothmann called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. 11. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Commission, audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Fred Beaulac — Present Bob Blum — Present David Crosby — Excused Absence Gail Kogle — Present VI. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. Bill Gothmann — Present. Ian Robertson — Present John G. Carroll — Present W. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Gothmann suggested that the Public Hearings for REZ -17 -04 (Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone) and CPA -06 -04 be moved to the top of the scheduled list of hearings. Commissioner Robertson moved that the September 23, 2004 agenda be approved as amended. Commissioner Kogle seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Gothmann asked that the record reflect an excused absence for Mr. Crosby on August 26, 2004. It was moved by Commissioner Beaulac and seconded by Commissioner Robertson that the minutes of the August 26, 2004 Planning Commission meetings be approved as amended. Motion passed unanimously. VII. COMivIISSION REPORTS Commissioner Robertson thanked the Planning staff for the new Comprehensive Plan Community Meeting format. It worked very well at Zion Evangelical Lutheran Church on September 9, 2004. Ms. Sukup announced the dates of the final three Community Meetings: October 7, 2004 at Bowdish Middle School, October 28, 2004 at Pratt Elementary School, and November 4, 2004 in the City Hall Council Chambers. Commissioner Kogle reported that the Clear View Triangle Ordinance and Street Vacation Request #STV -04 -04 were both advanced to a second reading on October 28, 2004, by the City Council. Commissioner Gothmann reminded the Commissioners that there will be two vacancies on the Planning Commission as of December 31, 2004. City Council has decided to open the positions up to interested community members, and Commissioners Crosby and Blum have been asked to submit applications to formally reapply. I3e also complimented the Planning staff on the Couplet Economic Analysis presentation and Charrette held on Monday, September 20, 2004. VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Ms. Sukup notified the Planning Commission that some of their regularly scheduled meetings in October and November have been changed to accommodate the final three Comprehensive Plan Community Meetings. The October 28, 2004 regular meeting has been cancelled to accommodate a Community Meeting at Pratt Elementary School on that date. Since both regular meetings in November fall on City holidays, meetings will be changed to the first and third Thursdays of the month with a Community Meeting on November 7, 2004, and a regular meeting on Thursday, November 18, 2004. A current Community Development Calendar was passed out to all Commissioners. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS A. NEW BUSINESS: Public Hearing: Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone Application #REZ -17 -04 Chairman Gothmann opened the public hearing for REZ -17 -04 at 6:50 p.m. Mr. Greg McCormick, Planning Division Manager, provided the Commission and audience with a brief overview of the area -wide rezone application. REZ -17 -04 is a request from over 51% of Greenacres area citizens to rezone a site generally bounded by Mission Avenue on the south, Barker Road on the east, and the Spokane River on the north and west from UR -3.5 and UR -7* to UR -3.5 only. Planning Division staff recommended the requested rezone be approved with one exception: existing property owners in the area maintain the ability to rezone back to UR -7* through the City's formal application and Hearing Examination process. Commissioner Carroll asked Mr. McCormick if there were any property owners within the boundaries of this area -wide rezone who were already 2 vested to be zoned outside the proposed UR -3.5 zone. Mr. McCormick affirmed that the City has some preliminary plat applications from this area that are consistent with the UR -7* usage. Commissioner Carroll responded that it would be worthwhile for the Planning Commission to be provided a map containing details about the properties which are already vested to be zoned outside the UR. -3.5 zone. In preparation for public testimony, Commissioner Goth.mann read the audience the associated Rules of Procedure. He explained that individual testimony would be limited to three minutes. Those providing testimony for groups would be allowed to speak for five minutes. Public Testimony for REZ -17 -04 was opened at 6:58 p.m. Mary Pollard, Applicant, 17216 E. Baldwin Ave., Spokane Valley Ms. Pollard was speaking on behalf of the 71% of Greenacres area citizens who signed the petition in favor of an area -wide rezone to UR -3.5. She thanked the Planning Commission and Planning Division staff for their assistance with this area -wide rezone application. Ms. Pollard strongly suggested that after this area has been successfully rezoned, all property owners within the stated borders be required to present their rezone requests as annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments to limit sudden and random land use activity. The application for REZ -17 -04 contained a written narrative of citizens' concerns, which were briefly outlined during Ms. Pollard's presentation to the Commission. She emphasized her community's belief that building high density structures within this area would be detrimental in many ways. She assured the Commission that she and other members of her group will be paying careful attention to any new developments, and will be forwarding their zoning concerns throughout the GMA process. Vicky Dalton, 1816 N. Greenacres, Spokane Valley Ms. Dalton spoke in favor of the area -wide rezone request. She has lived in Greenacres for thirteen years, and it is a very close knit community. Greenacres citizens understand that development will occur. They would, however, like to participate in the design and structure of what their neighborhood will look like in the future. This rezone application was submitted to buy them time so they can continue to share the closeness of the community with everyone moving in or visiting. Ms. Dalton thanked the Planning Conunission and Planning Division staff for their help with the area -wide rezone application. Commissioner Robertson read the names of audience members who were in favor of the proposed area -wide rezone but did not wish to speak. They were: Bob and Pat Loweree, E. 16908 Indiana, Spokane Valley John Bowditch, 17725 E. Montgomery, Spokane Valley Rich & Alice Beattie, 17324 E. Montgomery, Spokane Valley Nahlah Abdal -Wahed and Mohamed El-Bakkush, 18410 E. Riverway, Spokane Valley Mr. Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner, submitted letters and emails from citizens in favor of REZ -17 -04 to the Planning Commission. These letters will become part of the permanent record and were from: John Bowditch, 17725 E. Montgomery Ave., Spokane Valley Grace & Al Frederick (no address provided) Bob and Pat Loweree, E. 16908 Indiana Ave., Spokane Valley A petition in favor of the rezone application was submitted by Gary & Laurie Hopkins, 1306 N. Long Road, in Greenacres and signed by eighteen other citizens living in or around the subject area. It will be placed in the permanent record. Citizens opposing the proposed Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone were called to testify: Jayn Courchaine, 17201 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley Ms. Courchaine was opposed to REZ- I 7 -04. She owns and operates Arbor Grove Mobile Home Park, which is a 96 -unit adult Mobile Home Park. She purchased some UR -7* zoned property on the corner of Indiana and Greenacres in December 2003 to extend her Mobile Home Park and potentially build duplex units. She recently discovered that this property is now within the proposed boundaries of the area -wide rezone to UR -3.5, which would prohibit her from development. Ms. Courchaine has already hired an engineer to begin development of her property. She was told by a City Planner that if she requested an exclusion of her property from the area -wide rezone, the Planning Commission could grant her request. Mr. McCormick affirmed that the Planning Commission does have the power to exclude Ms. Courchaine's property from the rezone request at this time so it could maintain its UR -7* zoning. Rick Berg, 18313 E. Riverway, Spokane Valley Mr. Berg requested his property and another parcel of land at 18319 E. Riverway be exempted by the Planning Commission from REZ -17 -04 so the 1JR -7* zoning can be maintained. Dan Frickle, 18400 E. Indiana, Spokane Valley Mr. Frickle lives next door to Ms. Courchainc, and requested that the Planning Commission exempt his property from REZ -17 -04 so it can maintain its present UR -7* zoning. Mr. Kuhta submitted two letters to be placed into the permanent record in opposition to REZ- 17 -04. One was a letter from Attorney Margaret L. Arpin, Arpin Law Office, and requesting exemption of the following properties: Lots N Land, L.L.C. Properties: Parcel numbers 55073.0715, 55073.1235 and 55074.0303 have received preliminary plat approval and are vested to be reviewed under the zoning in effect today. The second was a letter from: Joe & Jayne House, 17406 E. Montgomery Ave., Spokane Valley Vicky Dalton, 1816 N. Greenacres, Spokane Valley Ms. Dalton stepped up to the microphone a second time to ask the Planning Commission not to remove the requested parcels from the area - wide rezone application. They are directly north of her home and there are serious electrical infrastructure issues in that area. The applicants wish to have their area looked at in its entirety, she asked the Planning Commission not to allow spot zoning at this time. Javn Courchaine, 17201 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley Her main concern in attending this public hearing was to protect her rights as a landowner. She has no intention of growing quickly, but wishes to take her time to do it right. Jerry Norman, 18321 E. Riven way, Spokane Valley Mr. Norman explained that Greenacres citizens are not afraid of development, but they wish to halt congested development. He doesn't want to see empty lots fill up with seven houses per acre. He is against spot zoning as well The hearing was closed to further public testimony at 7:30 p.m. The Commission raised the question of the different processes for exemption from the requested rezone to UR -3.5. Property owners have two options: to gain exemption from the UR -3.5 zoning designation by direct request to the Planning Commission at the time of public hearing, or to submit a rezone request to the City at a cost of $1,800 for processing and Hearing Examiner fees. Commissioner Robertson moved that the Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone Request #REZ 17 -04 be approved as presented by the staff. Motion seconded by Commissioner Beaulac. Motion tabled. Ms. Sukup explained to the Planning Conunission that it could draw the boundaries for the area -wide rezone proposal, excluding requested parcels, but she did not recommend that. It was moved by Commissioner Blum that an amendment be made to Commissioner Robertson's original notion to exclude the four parcels requested by Jayn Courchaine, Rick Berg and Dan Fricke, plus the three parcels requested in Attorney Margaret Arpin's letter on behalf of Lots N Land, L.L.C. Properties. The amendment was seconded by Commissioner Carroll. Commissioners Carroll, Blum and Robertson voted in favor of the amendment. Commissioners Kogle, Beaulac and Gothmann voted against the amendment. Motion for amendment to the original motion failed to carry. The Planning Commissioners continued its discussion of REZ-17-04. Commissioner Kogle moved to table the original motion to approve the Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone as presented, and to table the Public Hearing on REZ-17-04 to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission October 14, 2004. Commissioner Carroll seconded the notion. Commissioners Kogle, Beaulac, Blum and Carroll voted in favor of the motion. Commissioners Gothmann and Robertson voted against the motion. Motion passed 4 -2. Planning Division staff will gather information on present land actions and requested parcel exemptions in order to prepare a map for the Commissioners to study and discuss at the October 14, 2004 public hearing. At 7:50 p.m., Public Hearing on REZ-17-04 was tabled for continuation on October 14, 2004. The Commission took a break from 7:50 to 8:00 p.m. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -06 -04 Commissioner Gotlunann opened the hearing for CPA -06 -04 at 8:00 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application by the Crosby Family Land, LLC for approximately 8 acres of land located on the east 6 side of Adams Road, approximately 400 feet south of Mission Avenue; Parcel No. 45141.9003. Applicant's proposal: change the property from Low Density Residential to .l -High Density Residential and to change the zoning from UR -3.5 to UR -22. The application states the intent to develop the property into an adult living/assisted living facility. Staff recommendation: no change to the current Comprehensive Plan designation. The area is surrounded by Large, undeveloped parcels of land with limited infrastructure available to support higher densities. The area should be reviewed during the City's Comprehensive Plan process with community input into the design of the Land Use Plan. Public Testimony for CPA -06 -04 was opened at 8:03 p.m. Conunissioner Robertson explained that there were no speaker cards submitted in favor of the proposal. The following citizens spoke in opposition to CPA- 06 -04: Ron Van Tassel, 1003 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Mr. Van Tassel's rear property line abuts the subject property. Staff recommendation coincides with his opinion. He submitted a petition signed by over 200 residents of the area in opposition to the change in Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning. Existing infrastructure cannot support a high - density development. Area residents don't want this development. Ruth Maddox, 919 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Ms. Maddox explained that the vacant lot is presently being used as a park. She is happy to know that the staff doesn't recommend the proposed changes. Cart/ Ramsey, 1207 N. Adams Road, Spokane Valley Mr. Ramsey reported that the sewer is new this year, and is not capable of high - density flow. Dona Slaton, 15311 E. 15 Avenue, Spokane Valley Mr. Slaton concurs with the staff recommendation and the views of the previous speakers. Lillian Mittman, 1010 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Ms. Mittman concurs with all the previous speakers in opposition to this proposal. She has lived in this neighborhood since 1957, and finds it stable and established. There are already many care centers in the area. Sewer capabilities are of major concern to area residents. Bill Downie, 14215 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley Mr. Downie agrees with the previous speakers. He doesn't believe adding high- density development to this low- density neighborhood would be prudent. Traffic, especially on the corner of Cataldo and Evergreen, has become a problem. He believes that this vacant lot would be a perfect location for a park. Commissioner Gothmann suggested that Mr. Downie speak to Mike Jackson, Parks & Recreation Director, about the Parks Department Long Range Plan. Gretchen Hoy, 1218 N. Marcus, Spokane Valley Ms. Hoy owns four properties adjacent to the Crosby Family Land property. Access to the Crosby property is a concern to her. She presented the Commission with a copy of a letter to be placed into the permanent record. Amanda Clemmons, 1006 N. Warren, Spokane Valley Ms. Clemmons' concern is for the safety of her children. She moved to a low - density area so there would be less traffic danger. Jill 'Woolf, 524 N. Adams Road, Spokane Valley Ms. Woolf teaches school at Progress Elementary. All of the school children in this area walk to school. There are no sidewalks or curbs, and no street lights except on Broadway. This high- density development adds to the safety issues already existing in the neighborhood. Other citizens present, who were opposed to Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. CPA -06 -04 but did not wish to speak, were: Vic Headlee, 1017 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley *Linnea and Karin Hall, 1021 N. Calvin Road, Spokane Valley Mary E. Summerson, 1107 N. Warren Road, Spokane Valley Martha L. Summerson Witter, 1105 N. Warren Road, Spokane Valley Sam and Andria Delgado, 1.4513 E. Mallon, Spokane Valley Franklin and Nancy Smith, 917 N. Warren Road, Spokane Valley Karl H. Oarlock, 921 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Dave and Dani Fergen, 14316 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley Robert and Maryann Adams, 14507 E. Mallon, Spokane Valley Chris and Jamie Owens, 14511 E. Mallon, Spokane Valley Thomas Endicott, 1115 N. Warren, Spokane Valley Rich and Peggy Cannon, 1.103 Burns Road, Spokane Valley Debbie Downie, 14215 E. Cataldo Avenue, Spokane Valley Leonard and Lena Lyson, 1111 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Eric and Colleen Meyer, 14207 E. Cataldo Avenue, Spokane Valley Tanner Woolf, 524 N. Adams Road, Spokane Valley Jeff and Kristie James, 14315 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley *Joan E. Colwell- Hartung, 918 N. Calvin Road, Spokane Valley Paul Swavely, 924 N. Calvin Road, Spokane Valley *Letters from these citizens were received by the Planning Commission and placed into permanent record. Mr. Kuhta presented the Commission with a letter opposing CPA -06 -04 to include in the permanent record from: Cary L. Collins, 1204 N. Calvin, Spokane Valley Public Testimony for the hearing on CPA -06 -04 was closed at 8:24 p.m. Commissioner Carroll moved that the Planning Commission accept the staff's recommendation on CPA -06 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further action. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Blum. Motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Robertson commended the neighborhood for banding together on this issue. The Commission took a second break from 8:25 to 8:33 p.m. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -01 -04 Couunissioner Gothmann opened the hearing for CPA -01 -04 at 8:33 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Warren and Sylvia Riddle for approximately 4.23 acres of land located on the south side of Dishman -Mica Road, west of Bowdish Road; Parcel Nos. 45333.9024 and 45333.9155. Applicants' proposal: change the land use designation from Low- Density Residential to Community Commercial; change zoning from B -3 and UR -3.5 to B -2. Staff recommendation: change property to Community Commercial and zone entire property B -2. The property is not suited for residential use due to railroad adjacent to southern parcel boundary and a busy arterial intersection. Public Testimony for CPA -01 -04 was opened at 8:36 p.m. Sylvia Riddle, Applicant, 13616 E. Mt. Spokane Drive, Spokane County (home.), 1.121.0 E. Dishman -Mica Road, Spokane Vallcv (work) Mrs. Riddle grew up in the Chester Township. She and her husband bought this property in chunks with the express purpose of breathing new life into a stretch of property that was once Chester Township's community center (post office, grade school, etc.). They now need to sell the property, and wish to have it rezoned consistently with the surrounding parcels so it can more easily be sold to another entrepreneur. She asked the Planning Commission to approve the request. Public 'Testimony for CPA -01 -04 was closed at 8:43 p.m. It was moved by Commissioner Robertson and seconded by Commissioner Carroll that the Planning Commission accept the staff's recommendation on CPA -01 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further action. Motion passed unanimously. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment #CPA -01 -04 was closed at 8:45 p.m. Ms. Sukup explained to the Comuussion and audience that Comprehensive Plan Amendments will be presented to the City Council for a first reading at its November 23, 2004 meeting. Public Hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -02 -04 Public Hearing on CPA -02 -04 was opened at 8:46 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Robert G. Curry for approximately 1.4 acres of land located on the north side of Broadway Avenue, east of Ella Road; Parcel No. 45812.9035. Applicant's proposal: change land use designation from Low- Density Residential to High-Density Residential; change zoning from UR -3.5 to UR -22. Staff recommendation: change the Comprehensive Plan designation to High- Density Residential for the subject property and the property surrounding the subject that is currently zoned UR -22. Staff also recommends changing the zone of the subject parcel to UR -22. Public Testimony for CPA -02 -04 was opened at 8:48 p.m. Robert Curry, Applicant, P.O. Box 1031, Chcwelah, WA 99109 Mr. Curry's aim with this application is to make the subject and surrounding property more compatible for development. Public Testimony for CPA -02 -04 was closed at 8:49 p.m. It was moved by Commissioner Beaulac that the Planning Commission accept the staff's reconunendation for CPA -02 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further action. Motion passed unanimously. 10 Public Hearing on CPA -02 -04 was closed at 8:50 p.rn. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -03 -04 Chairman Gothmann opened the public hearing for CPA -03 -04 at 8:50 p.m. Mr. K.uhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Dwight Hume, representing the Pring Corporation, for 1.45 acres of land located on the south side of Springfield Avenue, west of Sullivan Road, one block north of Valleyway; Parcel No. 45144.0245. Applicants' proposal: change the land use designation from Medium- Density Residential to High - Density Residential; change zone from UR -7 and B -2 to UR -22. The Applicant indicates that the site would be an ideal location for a medical office facility, and that the current Comprehensive Plan designation would not allow for medical offices. Staff recommendation: staff recommends changing the Comprehensive Plan designation to High - Density Residential and implementing with the UR -22 zone. Public Testimony for CPA -03 -04 was opened at 8:53 p.m. Dwight Hume, Applicant, 9101 N. Mt. Vicw Lane, Spokane Mr. I-Iume reviewed the staff report and agreed with the recommendation. Greg Waggoner, 15317 E. Springfield Avenue, Spokane Valley Mr. Waggoner approves the zoning change with the understanding that a medical office, not an apartment building, will be built on the land. Road improvements are needed in this area, and this development may encourage pavement and curbs. John Rohrback, 15311 E. Springfield, Spokane Valley Mr. Rohrback's major concern with the zone change is that apartments may be built on the land, and he is totally opposed to any use of the property other than for a medical office building. Planning staff explained to Mr. Waggoner and Mr. Rohrback that the Planning Commission has no control over land use after a zone has been determined. Public Testimony for CPA -03 -04 was closed at 8:56 p.m. Commissioner K'ogle moved, and Comriissioner Blum seconded, a motion for Planning Commission to accept the staffs recommendation for CPA -03 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further 11 action. Commissioners Blum, Beaulac, Gotlunann, Robertson and Kogle voted in favor of the motion. Commissioner Carroll voted against the motion. Motion passed 5-1. Staff explained that UR -22 is the only existing zone that would allow for a medical office to be built on the property, so it was the only viable rezone option. Public Hearing for CPA -03 -04 was closed at 9:00 p.m. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -04 -04 Public Hearing for CPA -04 -04 was opened at 9:00 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Paul Gillespie, Jr. for 4.85 acres of land located on the south side of Broadway Avenue, about 4,000 feet east of Sullivan Road; Parcel No. 45134.0206. Applicant's proposal: change property from Low- Density Residential to High - Density Residential; change zone to UR -22. Staff recommendation: staff reconunends no change to the current Comprehensive Plan designation. The area is surrounded by large, undeveloped parcels of land with limited infrastructure available to support higher densities. The area should be reviewed during the City's Comprehensive Plan process with community input into the design of the Land Use Plan. Public Testimony for CPA -04 -04 was opened at 9:03 p.m. Paul Gillespie, 740 E. Plateau Road, Spokane Mr. Gillespie explained that there is some development occurring in the area, noting the Wal -Mart shopping area, and he doesn't think east Broadway will remain a two -lane road forever. He foresees a need in the area for small, well- built, multi - family areas. Public Testimony for CPA -04 -04 was closed at 9:07 p.m. Staff explained that the City of Spokane Valley has not scheduled any road improvements for east Broadway in its six -year road plan. There are no sewers in the area. M.r. Gillespie's proposal does not appear to be the best choice for his property at this time. Although Mr. Gillespie has made some good points in his application, the absence of design standards negatively affects the timing for approval. Commissioner Beaulac moved that the Planning Commission accept the staffs recommendation for CPA -04 -04 as written, and forward it to the 12 City Council for further action. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Carroll. Motion passed unanimously. Public Hearing for CPA -04 -04 was closed at 9:10 p.m. Public Rearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -05 -04 Public Hearing for CPA -05 -04 was opened at 9:11 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Vernon Eden for 1.75 acres of land located on the north side of Valleyway Avenue, about 150 feet off Sullivan Road; Parcel Nos. 45133.0524 and 45133.0540. Applicants' proposal: change property from Low - Density Residential to Regional Commercial; change zone from UR -22 to B -1. Staff recommendation: Planning staff recommended changing the property to Regional Commercial and applying the 13 -2 zone. Staff further recommended no further commercial zoning east of the subject property along Valleyway. There was no Public Testimony for CPA- 05 -04. Commissioner Robertson moved that the Planning Commission accept the staffs recommendation for CPA -05 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further action. Commissioner Blum seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Public Hearing for CPA -05 -04 was closed at 9:19 p.m. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -07 -04 — Mansfield Road Alignment Public Hearing for CPA -07 -04 was opened at 9:20 p.m. Mr. Kuhta introduced Sandra Raskell, P.E., who works in the City's Public Works Department. He provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Todd R. Whipple, P.E., on behalf of Chris Ashenbrener and Bill Lawson, for the undeveloped portion of Mansfield Avenue between Houk and Mirabeau Parkway, measuring approximately 2,000 feet. Applicants' proposal: amend the Interim Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan by removing Mansfield Avenue between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway. Staff recommendation: Community Development and Public Works staff recommends denial of the proposed Arterial Road Plan change. 13 Extension of Mansfield Avenue would provide traffic relief from Indiana Avenue and connectivity of the City street system. Public Testimony for CPA -07 -04 was opened at 9:23 p.m. Chris Ashenbrener, 202 E. Trent, #400, Spokane Mr. Ashenbrener presented the Commissioners with copies of a document entitled "Argument for Removal of Mansfield Extension to Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan". This document will become a part of the permanent record. Commissioner Gothmann moved that the meeting be extended to 9:45 p.rn. Motion was seconded by Commissioner .Kogle. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Ashenbrener spoke to each of the points detailed in his four -page proposal to remove the Mansfield Extension from the Spokane Valley Road Plan. In summary, he believes that the existing north and south streets provide adequate access in that particular area of development. It was moved by Commissioner Gothmann, and seconded by Commissioner Robertson that the meeting be extended to 10:00 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Todd Whipple, 13218 E. Sprague Ave., Spokane Valley Mr. Whipple presented the Commissioners with copies of his five-page letter intended to help clarify points from his testimony. This document will become a part of the permanent record. He spoke to each of the points detailed in his letter, giving the Commission and remaining audience a historical overview of the issue. In summary, Mr. Whipple believes that the line that was drawn from Houk to Mirabeau Parkway was a mistake. Commissioner Gothmann moved to extend the meeting to 10:15 p.m. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Kogle. Motion passed unanimously. It was moved by Commissioner Carroll that the Planning Commission continue the hearing and public testimony for CPA- 07 -04, and table the Commissioner's discussion until October 14, 2004. Commissioner Blum seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Whipple asked that Mr. Wayne Frost be allowed to speak at this hearing. The Commission agreed to hear Mr. Frost. Wayne Frost, Centennial Properties, 3320 N. Argonne Rd., .Spokane Valley Mr. Frost works with the inland :empire Paper Company and stated that it is true that h.is organization has extended Mansfield to the west of their property line. They also plan to extend Mirabeau Parkway. He asked the Commission to take into consideration the "Bridging the Valley" project which could potentially provide better arterial access for the City within the next ten years. Staff will take a look at the information that was handed out at the public hearing by Mr. Ashenbrener and Mr. Whipple before the October 14 meeting. Public Works staff will present the City's proposal at that time. Commissioner Gothmann moved to extend the meeting to 10:30 p.m. Motion was seconded by Commnissioner Kogle. Motion passed unanimously. At 10:12 p.m., Public Hearing for CPA -07 -04 was tabled for continuation on October 14, 2004. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -08 -04 Public Hearing for CPA -08 -04 was opened at 10:12 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by the City of Spokane Valley, for ten (10) acres of land located north of Rutter Road and west of Dora Avenue, on the southeastern boundary of Felts Field. It is the only portion of Airport property located within the City of Spokane Valley. Applicant's proposal: change the land use designation from Low Residential to Light Industrial; change zoning from UR - 3.5 to I -2. Staff recommendation: change property to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2, consistent with current uses. Public Testimony for CPA -08 -04 was opened at 10:13 p.m. Rodney Rick, 1920 N. Dora Road, Spokane Valley Mr. Rick's family has had problems with the fumes from landing airplanes. The fumes get stuck in his basement. He doesn't know what to do about this, and is worried that if the Planning Commission approves this proposal, things will get worse for his family. Commissioner Gothmann suggested that Mr. Rick contact the F.A.A. He offered the City's support with Mr. Rick's efforts. Commissioner Kogle also recommended that shrubs or other protective landscaping be 15 considered by both Mr. Rick and the Airport. Mr. Kuhta agreed.to speak with someone from the Airport about considering fume mitigation through the use of protective landscaping. John Gordon, 7105 E. Euclid, Spokane Valley Mr. Gordon believes that increased Airport traffic will break up the roads in that area well before their time. He is also concerned about the property values in the area, having already lost his view of the sunset. Mr. Gordon is concerned about adequate Airport use regulation, and an increase of hazardous waste in the area. Public Testimony for CPA -08 -04 was closed at 10:25 p.m. Mr. Kuhta explained that this is a routine and expected land transaction, which is not really negotiable. It was moved by Commissioner Blum that the Planning Commission accept the staff's recommendation for CPA -08 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further action. Commissioner Robertson seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Public hearing for CPA -08 -04 was closed at 10:27 p.m. Commissioner Kogle recommended that the Planning Commissioners and staff members use respect and caution when speaking in public. It was obvious to her that people were tired and wanted to rush the hearing process, and she felt the final two citizens waiting all night to testify bore the brunt of that impatience unnecessarily. OLD BUSINESS: B. Tabled Public Hearing on Street Vacation Request No. STV - - There was a change of scope for Street Vacation Request #STV- 03 -04, so it has been re- noticed and will be opened again for public testimony on October 14, 2004. Ms. Sukup handed out a revised Request for Planning Commission Action on this proposal. X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER Commissioner Carroll asked staff if the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code contain information regarding air quality issues. He asked staff if the City should consider this in the Comprehensive Plan process. Ms. Sukup explained that this is typically the job of the Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority. 16 XI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:32 p.m. SUBMITTED: APPROVED: Debi Alley, Administrative Assistant William II. Gothmann, Chairman �` si 1 1. Valley 1 To: Spokane Valley Planning Commission Hearing Date: September 23, 2004 Staff: Greg McCormick, AICP — Planning Division Manager Scott Kuhta, AICP — Senior Planner Marina Sukup, AICP — Community Development Director I. BACKGROUND The Spokane Valley Interim Comprehensive Plan includes an annual amendment cycle that runs from July 2" to July 1st of the following year. Applications received prior to July 1 are considered by the Planning Commission in August and September, with a recommendation forwarded to the City Council in late September or early October. A decision by the City Council is to be made no later than December of each year. All parts of the Comprehensive Plan can be amended during the annual cycle. The Community Development Department received 7 requests for site - specific Comprehensive Plan amendments and one request for an Arterial Road Plan amendment for 2004. Sites that are approved for a Comprehensive Plan amendment will automatically receive a • zoning designation that is consistent with the new land use designation. Attachments to this report include application materials, SEPA documentation, land use, zoning and aerial maps to assist the Commission's review. II. NOTICE STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: 2004 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS Community Development Department PLANNING DIVISION Notice for the proposed amendments was placed in the Spokane Valley News Herald on September 3, 2004 and each site was posted with a "Notice of Land Use Application" sign, which included a map and description of the proposal and a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) determination. Finally, individual notice of the proposals was mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of each amendment. III. SEPA REVIEW Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA — RCW 43.21C) environmental checklists were required for each proposed comprehensive plan amendment. Under SEPA, amendments to the comprehensive plan are considered "non- project actions" which Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments are defined as actions involving decisions on policies, plans, or programs that contain standards controlling use or modification of the environment. Additional environmental review may be required for the actual development of the subject properties. Staff reviewed the environmental checklists and a threshold determination was made for each comprehensive plan amendment request. Determinations of Nonsignificance (DNS) were issued for the requested comprehensive plan amendments on August 25, 2004. The DNS's were published in the city's official newspaper on September 3, 2004 consistent with the City of Spokane Valley Environmental Ordinance. IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROPOSALS CPA -01 -04 Applicant: Warren and Sylvia Riddle Request: Change the and use designation from Low - Density Residential to Community Commercial; change zoning from B -3 and UR 3.5 to B -2. Location: South side of Dishman -Mica Road, west of Bowdish Road; Parcel No. 45333.9024 and 9155. Site Area: 4.23 acres Current Use: The site is largely vacant, but does include a single- family residence and a commercial office. Adjacent Uses: Railroad to the south, commercial to the north and east, vacant residential to the west. Public Facilities: The property is currently served with public water and sewer and is accessed from a Dishman -Mica Road, a Principal Arterial on the Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan. Comprehensive Plan /Zoning Analysis: The Bowdish /Dishman Mica Road intersection has developed as a commercial center over the years. This is reflected on the Interim Spokane Valley Land Use Map by the Community Commercial land use designation for property at the intersection. The proposal would extend the Community Commercial designation northwest along Dishman -Mica Road. The Applicant requests that the property be designated Community Commercial, consistent with property to the north and east. A portion of the subject property was zoned B -3 in 1993; the remainder of the property is zoned UR 3.5. The small parcel directly east of the subject property, at the southwest September 15, 2003 Page 2 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments corner of Bowdish /Dishman Mica Road, was zoned B -1 in 1997. Property directly across Dishman -Mica Road to the north is zoned B -3. The Applicant requests that the entire property be zoned B -2, including the portion currently zoned B -3. The B -2 designation is the appropriate implementing zone for the Community Commercial Comprehensive Plan designation. Public Comment: Staff has received no letters concerning the proposal to date. Staff Recommendation: Change property to Community Commercial and zone entire property B -2. The property is not suited for residential use due to railroad adjacent to southern parcel boundary and the busy arterial intersection. CPA -02 -04 Applicant: Robert G. Curry Request: Change land use designation from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; change zoning from UR -3.5 to UR -22. Location: North side of Broadway Avenue, east of Ella Road; Parcel No. 45812.9035. Site Area: 1.4 acres Current Use: The property has one, single- family dwelling located on it. Adjacent Uses: A construction company office is located on the parcel directly west on Broadway Avenue; single story apartments are located west and north of the property; a single - family dwelling is located to east; Centennial Middle School is located across Ella Road to the west. Public Facilities: The subject property is located within Spokane County Water District # 3. The area was sewered by Spokane County in 1996; access is via Broadway Avenue, which is designated as a Principal Arterial. Comprehensive Plan /Zoning Analysis: The current land use designation for the subject and surrounding property is Low Density Residential. This designation is not consistent with the existing office and multi - family apartment uses surrounding the subject parcel. The subject property is zoned UR 3.5; property surrounding the site is zoned UR -22, which is consistent with current office and multi - family uses. The single - family dwelling located east of the subject is zoned UR -3.5. Public Comment: Staff has received no letters concerning the proposal to date. September 15, 2003 Page 3 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Staff Recommendation: Change the Comprehensive Plan designation to High Density Residential for the subject property and the property surrounding the subject that is currently zoned UR -22. Staff also recommends changing the zone of the subject parcel to UR-22. CPA -03 -04 Applicant: Pring Corporation (represented by Dwight Hume) Request: Change the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential; change zone from UR -7 and B -2 to UR -22. The Applicant indicates that the site would be an ideal location for a medical office facility and that the current Comprehensive Plan designation would not allow for medical offices. Location: South side of Springfield Avenue, west of Sullivan Road, one block north of Valleyway; parcels No. 45144.0245. Site Area: 1. acres Current Use: Vacant Adjacent Uses: Property to the east, fronting Sullivan Road, is commercial retail; single - family residences are located to the north across Springfield Road; a Vera Water and Power pump house is located to the west; Progress Elementary is located approximately 200 feet further west.. Public Facilities: Water is available from Vera Water and Power; public sewer is available. Springfield Road is an unpaved local access street. Future development on the subject parcel would require Springfield to be paved. Comprehensive Plan /Zoning Analysis: The Interim Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property Medium Density Residential, which is intended as a buffer between the commercial uses along Sullivan and single - family residential neighborhoods to the east. Property to the east, fronting Sullivan, is designated Regional Commercial and is zoned B- 2; property directly north, south and west is designated Medium Density residential on the Interim Comprehensive Plan map. Property to the south is zoned UR -22 while property to the west and north is zoned UR -7. The site has good to Sullivan Road and Commercial services. The requested Comprehensive Plan designation would allow for office and multi - family development under the implementing UR -22 zone. These uses would be compatible with current uses surrounding the property. Public Comment: Staff has received no letters concerning the proposal to date. September 15, 2003 Page 4 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends changing the Comprehensive Plan designation to High Density Residential and implementing with the UR -22 zone. CPA -04 -04 Applicant: Paul H. Gillespie, Jr. Request: Change property from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; change zone to UR -22. Location: South side of Broadway Avenue, about 4000 feet east of Sullivan Road; Parcel No. 45134.0206. Site Area: 4.85 acres Current Use: The property has one, single - family residence located on it. Adjacent Uses: The property is surrounding by largely vacant, single - family residential and on the south side of Broadway; property on the north side of Broadway includes single - family and duplex units. Public Facilities: Public water is provided by Consolidated Irrigation District No. 19. Sewer is not currently available at the property. Future development of the site would either require public sewer or interim septic systems until public sewer is available. Access is via Broadway Avenue. Comprehensive Plan /Zoning Analysis: The Interim Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the subject parcel and surrounding property Low Density Residential. Policies in the Land Use Chapter encourage High Density Residential areas to be designated near commercial areas with good access to Major Arterials. The site is located within close proximity to the Sullivan Road commercial district. However, Broadway Avenue is a narrow, two -lane road designated as a Minor Arterial. The Comprehensive Plan also requires the development of regulations that establish design standards for multifamily developments. The intent of this policy is to better integrate multifamily developments adjacent to single - family neighborhoods. The design standards would specify building heights and design features to give a residential scale and identity to multifamily developments. Spokane Valley has not adopted design standards that would address compatibility between multi- family developments and single - family neighborhoods. Further, Spokane Valley is currently in the process of developing a new Comprehensive Plan. Caution should be used in making Land Use decisions that may be contrary to the direction of the community planning process. September 15, 2003 Page 5 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments The property is currently zoned UR 3.5 which is consistent with surrounding uses and current Comprehensive Plan designation. • Public Comment: Staff has received no letters conceming the proposal to date. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends no change to the current Comprehensive Plan designation. The area is surrounded by large, undeveloped parcels of land with limited infrastructure available to support higher densities. The area should be reviewed during the City's Comprehensive Plan process with community input into the design of the Land Use Plan. CPA -05 -04 Applicant: Vernon Eden and David Wheldon Request: Change property from Low Density Residential to Regional Commercial; change zone from UR -22 to B -1. Location: North side of Valleyway Avenue, about 150 feet of Sullivan Road; Parcel No's 45133.0524 and 0540. Site Area: 1.75 acres Current Use: Each parcel is occupied with a single - family dwelling. Adjacent Uses: Residential to the east, vacant to the north, a Vera utility station to the west, commercial strip mall across Valleyway to the south. Public Facilities: The property has public sewer available; water is provided by Vera Water and Power; sewer is provided by Spokane County. Access to the site is from Valleyway Avenue, a two lane road designated as an Urban Collector. Previous Land Use /Zoning Actions: The subject property received a zone change to UR -22 in 2000. Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Analysis: The subject site is located adjacent to property designated Regional Commercial to the west, along Sullivan Road, and south, across Valleyway. The Interim Comprehensive Plan states that Regional Commercial areas are intended to draw customers from the City and outlying areas and accessible from roadways of major arterial classification or higher. At the time of application, the Interim Spokane Valley Zoning Code required B -3 and B -2 properties to have direct access to either a Minor or Major arterial. Valleyway is designated as a Collector on the Arterial Road Plan map. Planning Staff advised the applicant to request B -1 zoning, which could be approved with access to a Collector. September 15, 2003 Page 6 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments However, the Zoning Code was amended recently and the requirement for B -3 and B -2 zones to have access to a Minor or Major arterial was deleted. Therefore, the Planning Commission may consider zoning the parcel B -2. The requested Regional Commercial designation and proposed B -2 zoning is consistent with property directly across Valleyway to the south and along Sullivan to the west. Public Comment: Staff has received no letters concerning the proposal to date. Staff Recommendation: Planning Staff recommends changing the property to Regional Commercial and applying the B -2 zone. Staff further recommends no further commercial zoning east of the subject property along Valleyway. CPA -06 -04 Applicant: Crosby Family Land, LLC Request: Change property from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; change zoning from UR 3.5 to UR -22. The application states the intent to develop the property into an adult living /assisted living facility. Location: East side of Adams Road, approximately 400 feet south of Mission Avenue; Parcel No. 45141.9003. Site Area: 8 acres Current Use: The property is vacant. Adjacent Uses: The site is surrounded by single - family residential development. Public Facilities: Vera Water and Power provides water service; public sewer available. The site is accessed by Adams Road which is a Local Access street on the Interim Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan. Comprehensive Plan /Zoning Analysis: The area surrounding the subject parcel is exclusively single - family residential. The nearest high density development is north, across Mission Road. The Interim Comprehensive Plan encourages multi - family residential development to be located near commercial areas and on sites with good access to major arterials. The nearest commercial services are along Sullivan Road, approximately one -half mile to the east. Adams Road is a narrow, two -lane collector without sidewalks or shoulders for pedestrians. The Comprehensive Plan also requires the development of regulations that establish design standards for multifamily developments. The intent of this policy is to better integrate multifamily developments adjacent to single - family neighborhoods. The design September 15, 2003 Page 7 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments standards would specify building heights and design features to give a residential scale and identity to multifamily developments. Spokane Valley has not adopted design standards that would address compatibility between multi - family developments and single - family neighborhoods. Further, Spokane Valley is currently in the process of developing a new Comprehensive Plan. Caution should be used in making Land Use decisions that may be contrary to the direction of the community planning process. Public Comment: Staff received a letter dated September 14, 2004, signed by area residents opposing the proposed Comprehensive Plan change. Staff also received an email from Peggy and Richard Cannon opposing the change (letter and email attached). Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends no change to the current Comprehensive plan designation. The application states the intent to construct an adult living /assisted living facility. However, it is not possible to condition approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to limit development to the stated intent. The UR -22 zone would potentially allow 172 dwelling units to be developed on the 8 -acre site, which would negatively impact the single - family neighborhood. The site could accommodate approximately 32 single - family residences under the UR 3.5 zone. The area should be reviewed during the City's Comprehensive Plan process with community input into the design of the Land Use Plan for this neighborhood. CPA -07 -04 Applicant: Todd R. Whipple, P.E. Request: Amend the Interim Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan by removing Mansfield Avenue between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway. The application indicates that other options will be available that won't require Mansfield Avenue to be constructed per the Arterial Road Plan. The Applicant proposes to replace Mansfield with Houk Street extended south to Indiana, which would require a new railroad crossing (see application documents for full details). The Applicant further suggests that the Bridging the Valley project would remove this segment of railroad some time between 2009 and 2012. According to a letter by Christopher R. Ashenbrener, Corporate Counsel for A & A Construction (see application materials) Mansfield Avenue was "casually proposed' to be extended easterly as a traffic fix for problems along the Pines Road corridor during development project discussions. The intent was to provide for east/west traffic flow without impacting the Pines /Indiana intersection. Extending Mansfield west to Pines would require the purchase and demolition of a 6 -plex apartment building. Mr. Ashenbrener further states in his letter that the extension of Mansfield would be extremely burdensome because it would bisect a residential community planned for the area between Mirabeau Parkway and Houk Street. September 15, 2003 Page 8 of 10 Site Area: The undeveloped portion of Mansfield Avenue measures approximately 2000 feet. Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Current Land Use: The westem end of the Mansfield alignment consists of multi - family residential development; the eastern end consists of office, commercial and recreational uses. Property in the middle is currently vacant, with a multi - family residential development in process of approval. Comprehensive Plan Analysis: The Arterial Road Plan Map is a part of the Transportation Element of the Interim Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. The map identifies current and future roads that are required to support the future land uses envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan. Mansfield Avenue was added to the Arterial Road Plan in the late 1990's as an important east/west link from Pines Road to Mirabeau Parkway. The future road will provide for better traffic circulation in this area and is an important link to the Pines /Mansfield /Montgomery Road realignment project (Pines Road Corridor Project). The Pines /Mansfield Mitigation Project is scheduled for construction in 2005. Part of that project would improve Mansfield Road west of Pines, moving east bound traffic crossing Pines to the north. This will alleviate congestion at the current Montgomery/Pines intersection. Constructing Mansfield east of Pines Road will then allow connection through Mirabeau Parkway. It should be noted that Mansfield Avenue is currently being extend both east and west of Mirabeau Parkway for new developments, consistent with the Arterial Road Plan. The Bridging the Valley project will remove the rail line paralleling Indiana Avenue; however, the right -of -way will not be vacated. The entire project is expected to be completed by 2015, if funding is secured. The most applicable goals of the Comprehensive Plan are: Goal T.7 Provide efficient and cost effective movement of people, goods and freight to maintain industrial, commercial and manufacturing capability. The future Mansfield Road is an important link in the City's transportation system that will provide better circulation between the light industrial areas west of Pines and residential areas north of Pines to the Valley Mali office parks east of Pines. Goal T.8a Establish and maintain level of services standards for roads. Level of service is currently failing at the Pines /Montgomery/Mansfield /Indiana intersections. The proposed Pines Road Corridor project will maintain adequate levels of service in this area. Construction of Mansfield Road east of Pines will remove more cars from the Pines /Indiana intersection, which will help to maintain level of service standards. September 15, 2003 Page 9 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Public Comment: Staff has received no letters concerning the proposal to date. Staff Recommendation: Community Development and Public Works Staff recommends denial of the proposed Arterial Road Plan change (see letter from Sandra Raskell, P.E., Spokane Valley Development Review Engineer). Extension of Mansfield Avenue would provide traffic relief from Indian Avenue and connectivity of the City street system. CPA -08-04 Applicant: City of Spokane Valley Request: Change the land use designation from Low - Density Residential to Light Industrial; change zoning from UR -3.5 to 1 -2. Location: North of Rutter Road, west of Dora Avenue, on the southeastem boundary of Felts Field, the only portion of Airport property located within the City of Spokane Valley. Site Area: 10 acres Current Use: The site is developed with airplane hangars and storage facilities. Adjacent Uses: Single family residential to the east. Public Facilities: The site has public sewer and water available and is accessed from Rutter Road. Comprehensive Plan /Zoning Analysis: The current Low Density Residential designation is not consistent with the use of the airport property. The City of Spokane Valley signed an interlocal agreement with the City of Spokane and Spokane County that which states that development of airport property must be consistent with the Felts Field Airport Master Plan. The agreement further states that the Master Plan supercedes the City's zoning of the property. Staff Recommendation: Change property to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2, consistent with current uses. V. ATTACHMENTS Attached to this Staff Report are application materials, zone maps, comprehensive plan maps, aerial maps and letters submitted to date. September 15, 2003 Page 10 of 10 CURRENT POLICY A Q • PROPOSED POLICY /9 NAME: / PHONE: ADDRESS: /V b /7,p EMAIL: CITY /STATE /ZIP �. 11Pn map O FAX: NAME: / PHONE: ADDRESS: C3 /j `P EMAIL: FAX: CITY /STATE /ZIP : �. 11Pn map O ^ NAME: WA rrer • . /uc �ak / PHONE: gab - 6o./ 7 EMAIL: Wri / 0Cava. /ier } -ate ADDRESS: /AP /D ,� ,9 /S4»La.l2 -74-& , CITY /STATE/ZIP: k l !/ 4 qr,.,etc n5il4 FAX 9. 5 —SG8 9 ( ' ( Sk 40 0 Valley APPLICANT PHON EMAIL: FAX: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY/STATE/ZIP: PROPERTY OWNER 1 (IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT) _aQ. JZLP PROPERTY OWNER 2 IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: PART z } COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL ( ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET tF NECESSARY): 1 City of Spokane Valley Application for CEIVED Comprehensive Plan Amendment FILE No. `PA - 0)-CP APR 2 3 2004 SPOKANE VALLEY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOP OFFICE USE ONLY: Concurrency Review ' equired: 0 Yes Date Received: 2 Lt Received By: 11/4/2003 0 City Initiated Citizen Initiated o Page 1 of 5 CURRENT DESIGNATION PROPOSED DESIGNATION LAND USE MAP �oc�1 n5il4 ,r�,O�i�L �. 11Pn map O e6/l)rn 0PciQ( ZONING MAP a /j 3 , 5 �JJ 5- ( ' ( Sk 40 0 Valley APPLICANT PHON EMAIL: FAX: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY/STATE/ZIP: PROPERTY OWNER 1 (IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT) _aQ. JZLP PROPERTY OWNER 2 IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: PART z } COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL ( ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET tF NECESSARY): 1 City of Spokane Valley Application for CEIVED Comprehensive Plan Amendment FILE No. `PA - 0)-CP APR 2 3 2004 SPOKANE VALLEY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOP OFFICE USE ONLY: Concurrency Review ' equired: 0 Yes Date Received: 2 Lt Received By: 11/4/2003 0 City Initiated Citizen Initiated o Page 1 of 5 PART TX LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE (Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) I, c� /0 r0. ktai - , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVE RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE AREA PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED LAND USE ACTION, OR, IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS /HER BEHALF. ADDRESS: // ./O F is //nit /1 - /d /LCQ PHONE: . 91;%— a/ 7 /tea n e 4(49- ZIP: 49(-0-4 (City) (State) �cZ 9 ; 3 (Sign ature) (Date NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this r ,rdday of , 20 64 11/4/2003 NOTARY SEAL APe cNt i NOTARY SIGNATURE Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at 'r 0-,ML .\ }aQ r wA My appointment expires: I Di 2.r1 ) Page 2 of 5 PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SQ. FT.) J "ii. j etches -o ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SQ.FT.) ,fi __ e` _p nLP d ! t -C' EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: SCHOOL DISTRICT: C P4+ti) ! LcAroi FIRE DISTRICT: -t�.Q 4, ;,_t * / WATER DISTRICT: _2[....A._,,,,45 u -3 L-/l -e Sf. ►^ NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: L/ ALI ii tsl WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC /PRIVATE ROAD: c.5 .SDc re.k ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL? (YIN) U Ye._ NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: ! %ki/rkQ - /?7e e G L W al disk PART f /ia . 1 533 .9 oaf � °i /5.5 PREVIOUS ZONINGILAND USE DECISION LIST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: fV /le KAOZtilrL CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGES CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? VI Ca AJ /lea "4,15 iau ait?uah1 0 t ,ba5me -su t / i � z ce t - // � L a h 6r� � rov � e 6 LL/Ile 5 s AL � Fer �la � a � . p -- C L L — , q , • Ca kc e,s 5a acti ALcXece ecvee". raiL, -60.4 z Yak a, I 4 . 4.4 is PA 4,7a h / - F v r 1- e_ r 1e tJI . ,bilk d .( YXe ear J a_/ ea 11/4/2003 Page 3 of 5 PROPOSAL PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: //)15/ /-e_zt/te .C4(11"" , FA-/,54/4 /i las raj ced A /te �- Cf c ChFa5e� r / yerl fja /u e.s ; f 7X lS SdL( � � b e de ve/ap d /% LO l c NPR LL .51/; SS� , ADJACENT LAND USES 11/4/2003 • DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: (AJ — OG .� we � LQ kJ2 — sea soK t. ►Y, 1\15,r-f-k — Lax c Ll 61 c Wale a se �t �Q Tnacn +^ dr a nct 52304 ad( tl^at — Vet CA k± 3 et I'LrQ ic`or∎ 041s -4 ®aA- Page 4 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE HOW PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - CITE SPECIFIC GOALS /POLICIES: - eLtt L( Th e cv/n i'n.0 ri Corr► Q reams 5�v�ra e-s I s/ me s / e-4-o 5�r�e 6941 /AU h.c 3 /A_ _.5 at k e.� 5 6ka. y1 �c /�ba r�o �s UlL . �. p G Lecdse,'o" s .� L6 ' 4 S bCc5 /nES� /J JJ �/ll i e-cttc. b u s i n e 5 5' l l e s /ria des 4A.4-44 4 1 u� p zt °/'4 i� - /&*. � `nF 1L rs rJ- a J .- 11 m i suba ,/a 41 // PUBLIC FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT: 0 )riap0- f �YD tiIS 6k inan i1t� e 4 -e b Aotil 41-0:14 ri 11/4/2003 bast )1.e.._.3 C°ius II a. s Page 5 of 5 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -01 -04 Mil ‘1 e n n n limWiq Wiart4 Comprehensive Plan Map 1 Ita Comp Plan Category 1 1 Law Density Residential n Medium Density Residential ME High Density Residential Mixed Use Community Center go Urban Activity Center Neighborhood Commuacial Community Commercial Regional Commercial I Light Industrial r Heavy Industrial Mineral land il l I Ha ... ein . II - rrrrrrr - Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -01 -04 August, 2004 Spokane e \4a1Iey 1.11 lira= won Pile' se 1/4, mor wailh Zoning Map plik ' UR -3 IJ90 g Catery .5 UR -7 ' p UR - 12 M UR -22 B-1 i M B -2 RR -10 I -2 ta I -3 A4Z N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -01 -04 August, 2004 *lane Valley 1 CURRENT POLICY S PROPOSED POLICY PHONE: NAME: S PHONE: PHONE: ADDRESS: / /� l CITYISTATE/ZIP: EMAIL: CITY/STATE/ZIP FAx: 1( -3. S FAX: NAME: - S PHONE: ADDRESS: /V� EMAIL: CITYISTATE/ZIP: CITY /STATE/ZIP: FAx: NAME: S PHONE: ADDRESS: _ EMAIL: est'elai, CITY /STATE/ZIP: I, Dera ese FAx: - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- - - - - - CURRENT DESIGNATION PROPOSED DESIGNATION LAND USE MAP 1-ot,,,.1- Sr est'elai, 14 I, Dera ese ZONING MAP 1( -3. S Sfikane jUal APPLICANT NAME: R EL' T G�UR�2Y k ADDRESS: P, 0 130 X 10 3 CITY /STATE/ZIP: CE{.E E(,,A -l-1 Gd • gel 1 Q ai PPLICANT Y ROPOS OFFICE USE ONLY: Concurrency Revi Date Received: 11/4/2003 City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment PART Y 0 City Initiated equired: 0 Yes 2 Received By: , PHONE: EMAIL: FAx: ROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET I r �C�tvE� JUN Z 1 2eUk �. -.rn,, r SPDiC�ci�r�.� ,NT OF I- __ �o,j _ammo ItdiTY n v- ITdProl -l4T N POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL ( ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): FILE No. PA -02-0 itizen Initiated Page 1 of 5 11/4/2003 City) (Signature PART II LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE Signatur I . er or representative as authorized by legal owner) I, /� ` � L/ , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE A =.VE RESPONSES A DE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE AREA PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED LAND USE ACTION, OR, IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS /HER BEHALF. ADDRESS: PO &), ' 7 0 Ee.AH 4) - ZIP: (State) PHONE:72g O & &Ce NOTARY SEAL STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this NOTARY My appointment expires: Ca0'* day of , 2 Aft NOTARY SIGNATURE Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at: � Q _ Va Q 12j WA a7/CY7 Page 2 of 5 PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SQ. FT.) ( .. 4 0 ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SQ.FT.) NO /UT EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: ge Da Ala E SCHOOL DISTRICT: bliES T / LI .EY FIRE DISTRICT:. WATER DISTRICT: Ji3 NONE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: 4 43r, OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: rVVIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC /PRIVATE ROAD: r - i ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL ? N) NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: 6 PART in p N taa. D35 PREVIOUS ZONING /LAND USE DECISION . LIST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGES CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? A aticJ o Frice olv mot ti". 4 leas s1C)E of fop,, - tY �/AV C P Et: IV TlIar , E Fob. YE'► S 11/4/2003 Page 3 of 5 PROPOSAL PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: ADJACENT LAND USES DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: 11/4/2003 �o frtvE uttLr- Fir m►L y Liu/A/5 API To NeRTH 4- Po TioNS d aFFICC 5011.1) INC4 To 14.1t5t SIUGL( F-+P rLy ReS,DeWCZ 7A Cis . Page 4 of 5 '1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE How PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -CITE SPECIFIC GOALS/POLICIES: To RLLaGJ Ap #et leAr r 5 c> 7/7 LAMP Ala) 8LE,UO !A! r6 RFAR f»i iuTS ,Uoi✓ oA/ pRo Pg K r y 1'0 IDES t D. 0? ribS rib P,42C L Z. 13L35O oFF /G6' 50/ ld/NG- To /Jes7 Aeideyr uG Tft15 p/4-g t. PUBLIC FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT: 11/4/2003 .SEWER Nr{s 1-3E6 5TuB /3E» /P 4e Two t.o ci41 /oN S l.44PtTEJZ /S ,I/I Z/4GLC L31)S /S ,r/EL?AI3LE O/✓ ,BROA1-1-WAy -5 C /4C:1° L /0 )0 PU4y Y rz0 Age: 1.4.165T LE S TIC I-N R 6LoC K• FKc/ -i p. o PC Ty Page 5 of 5 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -02 -04 August, 2004 4 j Val ley Comprehensive Plan Map Comp Plan Category - High Density Residential - Urban Activity Center I 1 Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Mixed Use Community Center Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial 11111 Regional Commercial I 1 Light Industrial Heavy Industrial r Mineral Land Den ity Resid ntia N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-02-04 August, 2004 Siiikane �Val Zoning Map coe."..14 I on! Nplompil ril .11 111 • Zoning Category UR-3.5 UR-7 ED UR-7* I= UR-12 1M UR-22 EL j B-1 M B-2 B-3 EM RR-10 1-1 M 1-2 EM 1-3 1. • - mz N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-02-04 August, 2004 Silaane 04 . ___ _ 6 -23 -04 Spokane Valley Planning Department 11707 E. Sprague Avenue Suite 106 Spokane, Valley, WA 99206 Land Use Consulting Services 9101 N. Mt. View Lane Spokane, WA 99218 509- 467 -0112 (0) 509 -435 -3108 (C) 509- 467 -0229 (F) Attn: Kuhta Long Range Planner Ref: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change Dear Scott: Enclosed are the completed forms you provided for a comprehensive plan amendment and zone change. I am filing this application on behalf of my client Pring Corporation, who owns property just west of Sullivan Rd. on Springfield Avenue one block north of Valley Way. The site is currently designated Medium Density Residential but only zoned UR -7. It adjoins their retail development within a Regional Commercial category along Sullivan and would be an ideal location for a medical office facility. As you know, this requires a UR -22 zone, therefore we are filing this request to amend the map from MDR to HDR to provide UR -22 zoning for medical office use. I think you will find that the location and surrounding land uses lend the site to medical use better than apartments. Unfortunately, we still live with the mixed beg of zoning inherited from the County regulations. Ultimately, if this approved, we would prefer straight "office" zoning if and when such is available. Please keep me informed of your progress toward a public hearing with the Planning Commission. Land Use consulting Services Enclosure: Comp Plan Application, SEPA Checklist and Fees Copy: Pring Corporation C/O John Peterson S5i 4 ,Ualley I LAND USE MAP 1 ZONING MAP 6/23/2004 PART T APPLICANT Name: Pring Corporation C/O John Peterson Address: 8412 E. Sprague Avenue City /State /Zip: Spokane, WA 99212 PROPERTY OWNER 1 (IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT) NAME: Same ADDRESS: CITY /STATE /ZIP: AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY Name: Dwight J. Hume Address: 9101 N. Mt. View Lane City /State /Zip Spokane, WA 99218 LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment CUR_RENT DESIGNATION MDR UR -7 CURRENT POLICY Not Applicable PROPOSED 1 Not Applicable POLICY PHONE: 924 -6423 EMAIL: FAx: PROPERTY OWNER 2 (IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET) I NAME: NA i PHONE: ADDRESS: EMAIL: CITY /STATE /ZIP: PHONE: EMAIL: i FAx: FAx: Phone: 435 -3108 Email: dhume @spokane - landuse.com Fax: 467 -0229 PROPOSED DESIGNATION • HDR L UR -22 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL (ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): Page 1 of 5 FILE No.CP/r - O3 -0 TI OFFICE USE ONLY: 0 City Initiated l Citizen Initiated Concurrency Review Required: O Yes l No Date Received: j„ - 2i1'O Received By: ! ADDRESS: 8412 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane, WA By: ? Kirk O reasur ey (Sign STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) PART FL LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE (Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) I, Kirk M. Owsley , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVE RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. Prin Corporation, a Washington corporation is I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT 0' 4 THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE AREA PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED LAND USE ACTION, OR, IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF. NOTARY (State) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 24th day of June NOT`,RY ,AL ., 4 Wi•' OTARY SIGN "TURF gl NOTARY : Notary Public in and for the State of Washington • �' ' = t: AllBllC �_� Residing at: Spokane /Iil if " My appointment expires: July 2, 2005 PHONE: (509) 921 -8880 ZIP: 99121 June 24., 2004 (Date) , 20 04 6/23/2004 Page 2 of 5 PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SQ. FT.) 2.23 acres (97,139 sf) .87 acres ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SQ.FT.) ' EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: vacant SCHOOL DISTRICT: _ CVSD #356 FIRE DISTRICT: WATER DISTRICT: _ I , FD #1 Vera Water and Power NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: Unknown PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: r Springfield Avenue approximately 215 ft. WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC /PRIVATE ROAD: ;^ ■ ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL? (Y /N) : NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: Y NO u Sullivan Rd. PART III ?a r - c.eA k) v. 1 5 1 YL ° O 2L4 S PREVIOUS ZONING /LAND USE DECISION LIST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: The City has not acted upon this property through previous actions. CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGES CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? • The conversion to commercial along the adjacent easterly boundary at Sullivan Rd. i The conversion to UR -22 office uses and zoning adjacent to the south along Valley Way. ' The installation of full services to the subject property. The requirement for GMA Planning. The combination of high density residential and medical office uses within the UR -22 zone and the lack of specific office land use designations and zones. 6/23/2004 Page 3 of 5 PROPOSAL PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: PROPOSED LAND USE CHANGE FROM MDR TO NOR TO PROVIDE THE ABILITY TO HAVE MEDICAL OFFICE USAGE, WHEREAS THE UR-12 ZONE OF THE MDR CATEGORY DOES NOT ALLOW MEDICAL OFFICE USES. ADJACENT LAND USES DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: NORTH: 5 SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS EXIST ALONG SPRINGFIELD; WEST: VERA WATER AND POWER HAS A PUMP HOUSE FACILITY AND A CITY PARK IS ADJACENT THAT. EAST: RETAIL AND OFFICE USES SOUTH: VACANT AND OFFICE USES; DUPLEX UNITS TO THE SW. 6/23/2004 Page 4 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE HOW PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - CITE SPECIFIC GOALS /POLICIES: THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS VOID OF ANY "OFFICE" USE POLICIES. SINCE THE USE IS ALLOWED WITHIN THE HDR CATEGORY, IT IS BEST TO ADDRESS THE USE BY THAT CATEGORY. PERHAPS THE MOST APLLICABLE GOAL FROM THE EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT IS UL2.16 WHICH STATES . THAT WE SHOULD ENCOURGAGE THE LOCATION OF MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CATEGORIES NEAR COMMERCIAL AREAS AND PUBLIC OPEN SPACES AND ON SITES WITH GOOD ACCESS TO MAJOR ARTERIALS. COMMENT: THIS GOAL DESCIBES THE SUBJECT SITE COMPLETELY. IT IS NEAR PUBLIC OPEN SPACE AND ADJACENT COMMERCIAL AREAS AND CAN HAVE GOOD ACCESS TO SULLIVAN RD. A MAJOR ARTERIAL, VIA SPRINGFIELD AVENUE ONCE IMPROVED WITH PAVING, CURBING AND SIDEWALKS TO MATCH EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS AT SULLIVAN. SINCE THE UR -22 ZONE SERVES BOTH HOUSING AND MEDICAL OFFICE IT IS PRESUMED THAT THIS GOAL AND POLICY APPLIES. PUBLIC FACILITIES • DESCRIBE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT: ALL SERVICES ARE AVAIALABLE TO THE SITE, HOWEVER SPRINGFIELD IS GRAVEL AND NEEDS TO BE PAVED, CURBED AND SIDEWALKED PER ADJACENT IMPROVEMENTS ADJACENT OUT TO SULLIVAN. 6/23/2004 Page 5 of 5 PARCEL 1 - 45144.0221 LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE SOUTH HALF OF TRACT 49 OF VERA, IN VOLUME "O" OF PLATS, PAGE 30; EXCEPT THE WEST 200 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE EAST 231 FEET THEREOF; AND ALSO EXCEPT SPRINGFIELD ROAD DEEDED TO SPOKANE COUNTY RECORDED ON NOVEMBER 19, 1970 UNDER RECORDING NO. 520823C; AND ALSO EXCEPT THE SOUTH 130 FEET OF THE EAST HALF THEREOF; TOGETHER WITH THE WEST 78 FEET OF THE SOUTH 130 FEET OF THE EAST HALF OF SAID TRACT 49; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, COUNTY OF SPOKANE, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Aerial Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -03 -04 August. 2004 S :anc j Valiel Comprehensive Plan Map 1 Comp Plan Category Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Mixed Use Community Center ® Urban Activity Center Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial gill Regional Commercial Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Mineral Land Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -03-04 August, 2004 S .-ane i Valley ( UR -22 f B M B -2 1 1B-3 MI RR -10 I -1 iM 1 -2 1-3 N Zoning Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -03 -04 August, 2004 Spokane j Valley '=04 -04 / -� Gi rt' I Spokane ..Valley APPLICANT ADDRESS: E 75' 7 � � o ad( CI TY /STATE/ZIP: S70/27.ve 1,..414 1 r Z03 PROPERTY OWNER 1 OF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT) NAME: E sha/ . o f Pa a/ /7• 6.-74.,-43, PHONE: ADDRESS: Sim _ . -- EM CITY / STATE/ZIP: PROPERTY OWNER 2 (IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTA PHONE: SEPAFtATE SHEET) NAME: ADDRESS: CITY /STATE /ZIP: AGENT/CONSULTANT/ATTORNEY NAME: ADDRESS: CITY /STATE/ZIP City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment PART f LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: CURRENT DESIGNATION I LAND USE MAP Lot- Pt S)l'r Res aen6 /a I ZONING MAP U/ 3. S" CURRENT POLICY PROPOSED POLICY OFFICE USE ONLY: 0 City Initiated Concurrency Review Required: ❑ Yes Date Received: G -Pct '0 Received By 11/4/2003 PHONE: rO 9-838 - S/2 -3 EMAIL: PG-i / /esJrG °L,COM FAX: EMAIL: FM: PHONE: EMAIL: FAX: PROPOSED DESIGNATION frb v -I Res /W«4 .i/ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL (ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): itizen Initiated Page 1 of 5 L FILE NonP LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE (Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) "Pr? (/4 Jr , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVE RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. AREA I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I AM THE O ACTT N ,OF T OWNER, PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED LAND ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS /HER BEHALF. ADDRESS: L' • 7 S / of S�7o,�a�� / J t r ) d (Sta 11/4/2003 A 7? -e-e - // 1/ (Signature) . PART II PHONE: ?3Y - 3 ZIP: 'Z y , STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE . ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me t ' A. r :: NOTA % 4 N� = P UBLIC ' � . I I i6,' 1 .290 •'•S ° - x'44 OF WASN\� NOTARY day of c.o.) € , 20 0 4 NOTARY SIG ° TURE Notary Public in and for the State Washington Residing at: C4. � O' � '5143Let U1/4)4 "> My appointment expires: 14c/01 Page 2 of 5 ESTATE ,OF SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF SPOKANE PAUL H. GILLESPIE, Dated: OCTOBER 29, 1999 (Seal) {Seal} LETTERS TESTAMENTARY Dated: OCTOBER 29, 1999 DECEASED I. BASIS MrLEb O T 2 9 1999 THOMAS R FALLQUIST .?OKAN[ COUNTY CLEaY: CASE NO. 99-4- 01305 -2 LETTERS TESTAMENTARY 1.1 The last will of the decedent(s), late of Spokane County, Washington was exhibited, proven and recorded in this court on: OCTOBER 29, 1999. 2.2 In that will: PAUL H. GILLESPIE, JR. is named personal representative. 1.3 The personal representative has qualified. II. AUTHORIZATION THIS CERTIFIES: PAUL H. GILLESPIE, JR. is authorized by this court to execute the will of the above decedent according to law. THOMAS R. FALLQUIST SPOKANE COUNTY CLERK State of Washington ) County of Spokane ) As clerk of the superior court of this county, the Letters Testamentary in the above -named case III. CERTIFICATE OF COPY By Vivian Nachtwey, Deputy Clerk I certify that the above is a true and correct copy of which was entered, of record on: 1012911999. I further certify that these letters are now in full force and effe ct. I R. THO • FALLQUIST SPO • N,E,COUNTY CL By RCW 1 1.28.010.090 Deput r Probate 1 PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SQ. FT.) Y Q c! c/ A/aw e ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SQ.FT.) EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: S/ - / f r't �I / o iilfg/ICa Pen zf l' - '4P/ 14 ey SCHOOL DISTRICT: FIRE DISTRICT: .4.61-1 WATER DISTRICT: Ver'e al c 7 ter , Pow e r _1) 0 A 42 J3/o ,7c1 td0 irleiiv e. NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC/PRIVATE ROAD: 31/3 e t ' Y ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL? (Y /N) NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: 3ro jy ? A 'env e SITE DATA Guru/ No, LI 5 3 i PREVIOUS ZONING /LAND USE DECISION LIST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: Al 0 M e. CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGES CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? ,l ev /.�esre4 /s o cc - vr K. i%� 7y, c rrt,e, /'fe ri /e/.& zy a ��'o�JtrE / y, %wo GP�P /er 1?0GP_V' y vscl is w�v rc� c,��zt /Y d L"i /t // - 17/ 7 7 e o1 /.:.- z' e /y a� l r o s f / a �tv d� T r o .� + 17,.07 - ` /e..4 eJ w .e. r � c e s� L r 6 u ten - ,S ‹- v R a ' , env- fcc t - '.5- e o 7` e � � ' f e • - /9 r ,i e .2 C°� �Cr O Va //ey1.e) / ,I�1/�ICA;�CeJ,v 11/4/2003 PART III Page 3 of 5 f � PROPOSAL ADJACENT LAND USES e c f • PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: / • g5 8 c r e.l -Fro �1�/1S �y res e��/ ? / z o /Qez t o z�bf, � .7 e zo rr /.ry � � 2Z DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: Cu rr fi x Si 7. /e f97/11; '77 v �6�'Gf c L fc" / ; /eX r rsio+e.7Crs. ✓ f'iP C 1 be.) v e I' e c r rr L 7 6 e e .r G 4 / /t ch. -e-c 1 /y aC "•^�/r -erer' =' ' Oh JCPPrj �� -e s� O 7 F L ' , � rz'Ge ( r ee go �,j d Son (JS2 L� 0/7 S /S�s v '� S /�l rk -Pd�r/7, /7aa-r , a.r 1/ gc.2 /67,1,/, 11/4/2003 Page 4of5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE How PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - CITE SPECIFIC GOALS /POLICIES: 2, /‘ ,44 co way re - 79 e /a ca /, ac Tried/2 Tried/2 a m slo/ ,4 e f:; / e iel,z1 4,.61 fledr C.orn//t a - cia/ 2r @s ?X o-Z Sieex w/ '4 / o / a ess t o I r cP ter /a /s - The p ra / a e v y /r l o c `�°• � / yr .ed -4..ese ar 74 _ er /. ZE �� O S'�'l 1 cr.-7- �O/'od�Cf/o?r d /1.'78,% D rant /.lJc� /i�iarf /f'd / /iv awl �f ha�riil� e P��er e2 / i 1 Pj. -Fran Sj o ko7ae 14e / /ex 'ta/ /. & L,. ?. /71 , lo 4, Ides r flee si e iny of / ifv :( homes f`froa lion t e UI 6>a t Area so •z 1 17-4 y a,-e i �r fc — 9 r. Zcsl i.r�L0 <S /mall scaeZ {� ( / 0 e e/r 7`' /ra1 t �¢a'is 1'v 1 - ex /;; / e&t.//a.eds. lhir 0 ,pr7,096r ' e e a- Oh / ..2y a- /i wou l 7 .° or Xe iZ a 4/6? A 01a....,74, Ao vrinj d' /-e-,r �.rsl s /i/ /r faf�i �y h o vs /may 0 ��o4zd wa e a s 6 o Su /7iva.s Bo /olor /h t. e Sd�e �ro'/ziler ar /%vs �, de" „7 psf of fto SL /l/ Car 't a' / / Bag' a '7I ! 37 r PUBLIC FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT: << / O"o" , erL 7 - �r>ryf S orz a lrt ✓f' e"-Zed- a (. Gt/�t i t deiai 6 /e, on .e 7,,- z,a f, ! rd lua lei a �oct. er_ S /aa�d.�e Tds/S/`e 7r 6 r' z 0-s" /o4-&„e O - i / 0.4 on So 6(3.9 / 7/ � s.6—.4..) /r / /r✓ JAI RC, c 7 e"( (/�2 <�t4� m �7l /t /, Z- �� dv4ozAvP errs.aZ . / 07rec7 /S S� 1( iTy.9. 1 ?a/-1 IS /, 2 nk 1 es /•:roan aN� -h- / c Ce K'Z e /7%7/07/ �� / / /0 /71, ,74).7 y. � j3��aY G zoo R- S'ew sc Aeo e r l S 't a t e ° r ronl //tY !�/ Sa[cJe /.S /' -�l( bet n J2- kde 'r P n to Ka(er eon 5"6"" uc'{-co� no.-fh /y�o c 2 ��f cc p Ze `7 soJ7r/ QG�5 o - e / "to 11/4/2003 Page5of5 Aerial Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -04 -04 August. 2004 �iokancc Comp Plan Category - I Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential En High Density Residential Mixed Use Community Center ® Urban Activity Center Neighborhood Commercial Community Commensal Re Commercial Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Mineral Land �T47' raM111110 ac. Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -04 -04 August, 2004 SPokane Malley Zoning Category UR -3.5 UR -7 uR -r ET UR -12 ® UR -22 B-1 EM B -2 B-3 1- ® �-1 RR -10 EM 1-2 1 -3 MZ Zoning Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -04 -04 August, 2004 CPA -05 -04 l■ulvlrr[cncI•IJiv . CU ENT POLICY v.. . .....•.�_ .._. -- -- ROPOSED OLICY () l Spo NAME: ADDRESS: CITY/STATE/ZIP: AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY NA ADDRESS: CITY /STATE /ZIP LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: LAND USE MAP ZONING MAP 11/4/2003 L rr\ v City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment APPLICANT NAME: V' tR d c J ADDRESS: \ o 4 o S 71 A.D t ts_hI CITY /STATE/ZIP: V / I toy QL 1/ -I3,o3 PROPERTY OWNER 1 (IF DIFFERENT RENT FROM APPLICANT) PROPERTY OWNER 2 OF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET) NAME: A. V I d W e -L, c e L J ADDRESS: (.5,5'2 j C, \/ r4 ) /8 W CITY /STATE /ZIP: q q bj 7 ('. S - Al/er CURRENT DESIGNATION PART1 PHONE: EMAIL: FAx 4), - PHONE: EMAIL: FAx: PHONE: EMAIL: FAx: PHONE: EMAIL: FAx: V- //�� PROPOSED DESIGNATION e) 0�11i,\ Cam ✓v^e.A.€ {rte. r -itz_332-___I EPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): OFFICE USE ONLY: ❑ City Initiated Concurrency Review Required: ❑ Yes Date Received: (• - 21-0 ct Received By: itizen Initiated • , _4p Page 1 of 5 FILE No. cm -05-at xcW, �c•tis 11 l4 /2003 PART lI LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) ( g SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT ABOV RESPONSES • 6 EL F (print name) OF MY THE ABOv= R ESPONSES ARE MADE TRUT AND TO THE BEST KNOWLEDGE. I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I AM THE OWNER OF EE R, , IF PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED PERMINON FROM T OWNER AUTHORIZING MY A TTACHED IHALF ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF. ADDRESS: C- / . S VA r t \J 4A- L C. `P° (City) (Signature) NOTARY SEAL NOTARY HONE:.'2 �� 5 ZIP: 4'7 tate) STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) t1.■ , 200 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day of �i� -�— Notary N ry in and for the State of W!•hington (Date) Residing at: My appointment expires: Page 2 of 5 11/4/2003 vo fie ,y (City) PART II LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE (Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) I, D ()II? Law= L p , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOvc RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE AREA PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED LAND USE ACTION, OR, IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HISfHER BEHALF. ADDRESS:1 3 /� Vof l l� y alay PHONE:. 92' - /g3 9 rag, ZIP: 9' 90.3 (State) (Signature) (Date) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day of , 200 -/ N 0 TA Y, � • • • 0 �ERTF • . N TARP SIGNATURE .. • • • , 4 �s f fi 9, Notary Public in and for the State of Washington a - - : Residing at: = PUBLIC , • IF aF wasH` My appointment expires: 0 G— D 1 6 3 • f 1 a• • Page 2 of 5 (Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) 1, f� (. 70A0A. ea'dJ , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVt RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. 11/4/2003 PART II LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE 1 FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE AREA PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED LAND USE ACTION, OR, IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS /HER BEHALF. ADDRESS: B)C /g 7 PHONE:, j,v,28 - a,S ? /14-/ f.✓.4- ZIP: ??e C ' ity (State) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this cle day of 4_L rw , 2004 NOTA' SIGNATURE Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at: My appointment expires: 4 /w'v (Signature) Date) � Page 2 of 5 PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SQ. FT.) ' , 7,s C x ) ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SQ.FT.) v EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: 2i_i_eei.,,,,Lu4J f SCHOOL DISTRICT:x/�"r-" FIRE DISTRICT: fjap_J,stLQlGz WATER DISTRICT: al L8 1 NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: CA orT -f;' a.41/49 1.1 2--, zvt aa_y Li al to OK PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: 1-1 .0256 _YE,$ v9 id / /i A// • WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC /PRIVATE ROAD: ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL? (Y /N) NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: � PART 0,)y--e.,J Not Li, (3 3, 0 5 p PREVIOUS ZONING /LAND USE DECISION LIST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: 1 h a. N $ ' ,,ti u.R 3, Xo N l7H Ala o '4oSIT' )t ` 20 01 CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGES CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? 1O 4 2_ L a e_ 4 u y c It 4- ct- i'i ‘t � ICI 2 c , - 1 d w Ned. 1 k C Propel - T - S i rJ L 7 77, o cc4Y ix) - t ti`s T,., - 5 I LL 5 . ��51�►r�SS. f O mi lt ci!- `I K 5 11/4/2003 Page 3 of 5 PROPOSAL PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: e 6C5 r h JT IN j \J,9 H y A- lc �a S C UA w6-7 -f' I T Q o tiJ i-t G J e_ oLa -4b e5 Vde L Gv bw load -f- k e 1, Q Y .c Y5 A L SI\ -- rD I's ,9 -t- k e_ ? r o P€ t-i- y -t O i s L h. I y h e r L Q v e d o c Lt Se the 1, iS C o u S∎sr4N1" 1'0 P }0 p 4Aid e L41-11- kSe_ \A)e Are- No.4) 3 rde,d .by Co.- r,,+,crci4.1. �) 3 5 d $ . ADJACENT LAND USES DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: bN hh 5 I We-- . .4 P o r nl b 7 xr - r [ o ti e i 5 cs� ujro. sh - f - o h e r S i d -� l S S `t' Y t' � i+� l L A J 41- 11 /4/2003 Page 4 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE How PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - CITE SPECIFIC GOALS/POLICIES: i - 165 " 1 rot sw►� •-aOL L d e k& r -e b u5 � cssPs .4d 3Ore! t " t $ ko erTy, A k i'cad o..1 A Nd 4L5, b�3T L S < o A Nd G o rp.( \) LT Z L 1^ t >c o Pe_ rTy/ Ad 3Q, t I - 144- T5 aL- 0 "Po 1-:1 CteS tit. L 1 O. J' �-I • l., ! d_ � u ID. PUBLIC FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT: y .3 eY i S •I h _S - r � J a t I c-\( way � t r e d e �arT \A) ,4- r S L P P Ly 5 .4 1- to td r be -e_IJ i4 P Pro. ve.j, • v e. F a., W a.Te. r- ► s W 41- ).3 .1 e L e r e c d. L. ,5 Ec- P L. e °, 11/4/2003 Page 5 of 5 N Aerial Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -05 -04 August. 2004 Comp Plan Category Low Density Residential 7 Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Mixed Use Community Center Urban Activity Genter i Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial Regional Commercial Light Industrial I j Heavy Industrial I I Mineral Land _. N A, Comprehensive Plan Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -05 -04 August, 2004 Wkane c' Valley ill r7 • i I Zoning Category j UR -3.5 UR -7 UR -7' L_ J UR -12 M UR -22 1 B -1 ® B -2 B-3 RR -10 1 -1 ® I -2 MN I �MZ Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -05 -04 August, 2004 *Oka' Spokane 4,000Ualley CPA -06 -04 1 CURRENT POLICY CLOL .4.) / Z -° CA. CITY /STATE/ZIP: • S CITY /STATE/ZIP PROPOSED R Qul.“ -2="4 U` q ' -7 POLICY 1A- ( 2 -- 1.2- NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: EMAIL: CITY /STATE/ZIP: FAx: NAME: I PHONE: ADDRESS: LAND USE MAP EMAIL: CITY /STATE/ZIP FAx: ^„v vv` ••••• _ -- CURRENT DESIGNATION PROPOSED DESIGNATION LAND USE MAP LOW De y S; 1,1 .1, A ' � - �� A Y.=____?.. S- ZONING MAP (A2-- -3 . S _ ___ Spokane. 4 . 0 0 ey APPLICANT NAME: I L C L,,C_ PHONE: c$ 7 �� 1 ADDRESS: S G(�-J� ( EMAIL: j� t/ U 2 I N CITY /STATE/ZIP: PROPERTY OWNER 2 (IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET) NAME: � PHONE: ADDRESS: EMAIL: CITY /STATE/ZIP: FAx City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment PAI.t FAX: \poe_ 1 TTACH SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): OFFICE USE ONLY: ❑ City Initiated Concurrency Review Required: ❑ Yes Date Received: 7--iL0ff Received By: 11/4/2003 I Izen Initiated Page 1 of 5 v FILE No. C4 A -UG" 09 LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE (Signature of legal owner representative as authorized by legal owner) C �� t F,gr".I v C- 0 t.jnlf (L. 1, 1.— t)u.11 o i420t6nv&r , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVE RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE AREA PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED LAND USE ACTION, OR, IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS /HER BEHALF. ADDRESS: (2L . PHONE(509) g f -/q(0/7 t s- ua- tiJA— ZIP: ci 015 (City) (State) 11/4/2003 PART II (D L/30 STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this NOTARY SEAL Notary Public Notary State of Washington MICHAEL J BRYANS Residi My Appointment Expires Apr 19. 2008 NOTARY day of ►p,) 2 20 NOTARY SI GNATURE ublic in and for the State of Washington at: 5 OR /SS L 7 — intment expires: All i / 11 l 20 g Page 2 of 5 PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SO. FT.) 6 AC 0-T- -S KA 0 i-- ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SQ.FT.} N Ory e,,, EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: VAC.r.-..i LYT r.Sras t_ \Z8--1_1 Y SCHOOL DISTRICT: FIRE DISTRICT: e I> 441 WATER DISTRICT: V.\thS-_2t 'b_c�1x'�_ NE IGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: p�� PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: p_LA__S , WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC /PRIVATE ROAD: ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL? (Y /N) i IV NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: a Q _ k .. mi d PART Ill ) ,c_d /Uo 45/Lf (. 9 o 3 PREVIOUS ZONING /LAND USE DECISION UST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: (`IONS. CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGES CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? prz.a f -( ef) ►'1 i Tji2 _ ptt c2 W n1 LA. '►a I N u 2 vi D) P 'Tkf1L \//el tie-T/ l v-s� . 1� 5 > J o � �v tuo A l— r7 Pr'z -c) er 2 fz ' c c -v t4- 1- ■AIE -- • C.cp--)sq 1-4--y .D 6 -( 1 " ic r t&si r - I rL I TasStVr —S Cy an- '1� 14 ! GLES) ,{a-rcr I. LL - - L taw P 1 6r-- 04---3 -'- c S s LD«.lz-- e L' Y L,c3 ( 1 g e 'rft A/Lt L'`9 L 3`^ -<5 - IAA - PYW PS tom l S i- C. 1 1/4/2003 Page 3of5 PROPOSAL PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: ADJACENT LAND USES DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: 11/4/2003 Page 4 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE HOW PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — CITE SPECIFIC GOALS /POLICIES: PUBLIC FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT: 11/4/2003 Page 5of5 PROPOSAL Provide General Description of Proposal: We propose to develop our approximately eight -acre parcel into a quality adult care/ assisted living facility. This facility would be much along the lines of the Broadway Court just to the west of this property and Sullivan Park to the south on south Adams road. We feel that this would be an ideal use for this property as it has nearby access to the Valley Medical Complex as well as numerous shopping options. ADJACENT LAND USES Describe Existing Land Uses within the Vicinity of Proposal: The existing land use is single family residential along with duplexes across the street from the property location. There is also a Montessori school just to the south of the property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY Describe How Proposal is Consistent with Comprehensive Plan -Cite Specific Goals/Policies: We feel that our company's proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. It would provide a nice fit for the neighborhood by incorporating a quality adult living/assisted living facility with access to both major arterials north and south providing a reduction of the traffic impact. It would also be a improvement for the neighborhood from it's current use as a vacant lot that is being used as an illegal dumping ground for trash, abandoned vehicles and unsafe trespassing motor vehicle traffic. We have had to erect large signage in order to help curtail these activities. Under the Comprehensive Plan, it states that it is desirable for the following: • Locate high density near commercial areas- We believe that this project would be complimentary with this goal as it is very close to the busy Sullivan Road and Sprague business corridors. It is also in very close proximity to the Valley Mall Complex with good access from both Sullivan and Evergreen interchanges. • Locate high- density sites with good access to major arterials- Our project would be very near the arterials of Broadway and Mission Avenues. It would also benefit by the close proximity to the Sullivan and Evergreen interchanges. • Create a variety of residential densities within the Urban Growth Area with an emphasis on compact mixed use development in designated centers or corridors -We feel that our project adheres to this goal by locating in an area that this type of development is already present but not clustered together. It would provide a nice mix while not being overwhelming. • Provide a healthful, safe, and sustainable urban environment that offers a variety of opportunities for affordable housing and employment. — This project would provide affordable and convenient housing for the growing senior population while also adding nearby jobs to the community. • Require effective landscape buffers and/or transitional uses between incompatible industrial, commercial, and residential uses to mitigate noise, glare, and other impacts associated with uses - This project would provide an attractive landscaped buffer zone while eliminating the dust, noxious weeds, and nuisance of the current state of the property. PUBLIC FACILITIES Describe Availability of Public Facilities and Services, Including, Roads Water, Sewer, Parks, and Public Transit: The property is serviced for power and water from Vera Water and Power Utility. The sewer is currently being constructed up Adams road and is scheduled for completion this summer. The nearby parks include Valley Mission Park, Sullivan Park, and close proximity to the Centennial trail. Public transit is available with bus routes on both Broadway to the immediate south and Mission Avenue to the immediate north. Scott Kuhta From: Peggy L Cannon [cannonrp @juno.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 4:24 PM To: Scott Kuhta Subject: Application No. CPA -06 -04 September 16, 2004 Mr. Scott Kubta Spokane Valley Community Development Department 11707 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 RE: Application No. CPA -06 -04 Dear Mr. Kuhta: After learning of the application by Crosby Family Land, LLC, to change the designation of 8 acres of land east of Adams Road, 400 feet south of Mission Avenue, Parcel No. 45141.9003, from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential, we feel compelled to notify you that as homeowners and taxpayers we enthusiastically oppose this proposaL We object to this proposal for many of the same reasons you might object should someone propose a zoning change which would allow a multilevel, multifamily apartment complex to be built literally in your backyard. We object to the increased traffic, noise, and pollution it would ultimately bring. We object to the consequential loss of property value such a development would mean for all neighboring residential properties. We object to the taxing of community resources which would result from a bulging population. We bought our current home in good faith, 'mowing it was located in an area zoned as Low Density Residential. We realized that at some point the land in question would indeed be developed. We expected, however, it to be developed as designated — low density residential. We have watched with dismay as our neighbors on Evergreen Road have had their front yards encroached upon and their living environments changed forever. We realize that yours is an awesome responsibility — providing the greater good for the greatest number of citizens. It is our hope, Mr. Kuhta, that you and your fellow planning commissioners will agree that the greater good is maintaining good, solid, environmentally and esthetically friendly neighborhoods in whiclrthe citizens of the City of Spokane Valley can live, raise their families, and contribute to the community. It is our hope that you will realize that allowing a business organization to change a zone solely for its own profit is not in the best interest of the City's homeowners and taxpayers. We sincerely hope that you will reflect carefully on this decision. Your decision will have an enormous impact on the lives of many of your city neighbors. Please help us maintain the neighborhoods which we call home. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Richard and Peggy Cannon 1103 North Burns Road Spokane Valley, Washington 9/17/2004 Sept. 14,2004 We have received notice of the desire of the Crosby Family Land, LLC to have the Comprehensive Land Use designation changed to High Density Residential on the parcel of land they own. This has caused considerable consternation among the residents near this parcel. This is a stable neighborhood with many residents of long tenure who are very comfortable with the neighborhood as it presently exists. It has been well accepted that one day the parcel would be put to use for more single family homes. We feel that any development on the land should not disturb the environment we are accustomed to. While these are emotional concerns, they are important to near -by residents. There are other concerns of a more technical nature. The parcel between the eight acre parcel and Broadway has already been sold and developed which allows no direct access to Broadway. The intersection of Adams and Broadway is already difficult, so more traffic would flow to Mission. While Mission has been recently improved, the improvement has caused many of the residences on the north side of the street to lose access and parking to the widening. Backing out of those driveways is already a problem, a problem that would be exacerbated by additional traffic on that street. Since Mission is essentially a two lane street, the possibility of collision with resulting property damage or personal injury would increase with increased traffic. A UR -22 zoning could allow 176 units to be built. Traffic control uses a possibility of five car trips per day per unit for a possibility of 880 car trips per day added to Adams, a two lane street.. Additional policing would be required to monitor traffic. This brings up the question of sewer capacity. Though the recently added sewer has not yet be approved for use, it could already be insufficient to handle the increased load. If high density structures were to be built, there would be no buffer between that property and the properties that now exist on the west side of Burns Rd. There has been a long standing practice in zoning to provide a zoning buffer between high and low density. To allow this change would upset that practice. The Central Valley School District is already considering the possibility of instituting busing as early as next year. An influx of 1800 new residences is forecast for the next five years. Progress Elementary has a capacity 416 students and currently has fewer than that, but that school is targeted to receive busing. Pines Middle School is currently being re- modeled for expected influx. New high density housing in an area of low density housing would increase the burden. We, the tax payers, paid the bill for a long process of study and meetings to develop a comprehensive land use plan. If errors were made in that plan, and if it is argued that sufficient land was not designated for high density use, one might look at the area south of Sprague and east of Argonne where a change of designation could be made with far less impact. 7K f Dom/ A/ ems, f4y4 10 ( 2It) S tk i(. .,e' t002 IQ . t3 . (A) ��zly Sept. 14,2004 We have received notice of the desire of the Crosby Family Land, LLC to have the Comprehensive Land Use designation changed to High Density Residential on the parcel of land they own. This has caused considerable consternation among the residents near this parcel. This is a stable neighborhood with many residents of long tenure who are very comfortable with the neighborhood as it presently exists. It has been well accepted that one day the parcel would be put to use for more single family homes. We feel that any development on the land should not disturb the environment we are accustomed to. While these are emotional concerns, they are important near -by residents. There are other concerns of a more technical nature. The pa Cel between the eight acre parcel and Broadway has already been sold and developed which allows no direct access to Broadway. The intersection of Adams and Broadway is already difficult, so more traffic would flow to Mission. While Mission has been recently improved, the improvement has caused many of the residences on the north side of the street to lose access and parking to the widening. Backing out of those driveways is already a problem, a problem that would be exacerbated by additional traffic on that street. Since Mission is essentially a two lane street, the possibility of collision with resulting property damage or personal injury would increase with increased traffic. A UR -22 zoning could allow 176 units to be built. Traffic control uses a possibility of five car trips per day per unit for a possibility of 880 car trips per day added to Adams, a two lane street.. Additional policing would be required to monitor traffic. This brings up the question of sewer capacity. Though the recently added sewer has not yet be approved for use, it could already be insufficient to handle the increased load. If high density structures were to be built, there would be no buffer between that property and the properties that now exist on the west side of Burns Rd. There has been a long standing practice in zoning to provide a zoning buffer between high and low density. To allow this change would upset that practice. The Central Valley School District is already considering the possibility of instituting busing as early as next year. An influx of 1800 new residences is forecast for the next five years. Progress Elementary has a capacity 416 students and currently has fewer than that, but that school is targeted to receive busing. Pines Middle School is currently being re- modeled for expected influx. New high density housing in an area of low density housing would increase the burden. We, the tax payers, paid the bill for a long process of study and meetings to develop a comprehensive land use plan. If errors were made in that plan, and if it is argued that sufficient land was not designated for high density use, one might look at the area south of Sprague and east of Argonne where a change of designation could be made with far less impact. )"‘ 9q -7L9 lDl7 i0. ✓J 1 4o, boa / /III I 6' -4-Y Pi g 1, ga41 > 301 q,21 Jo. ,ct Snvk c(99-i6 ll Vae , �� `�/ r S lr0V-Afu k 1\ n s U °r) a l September 14, 2004 I have read the attached letter and agree with it's contents. y,1i55y.3 Sept. 14,2004 We have received notice of the desire of the Crosby Family Land, LLC to have the Comprehensive Land Use designation changed to High Density Residential on the parcel of land they own. This has caused considerable consternation among the residents near this parcel. This is a stable neighborhood with many residents of long tenure who are very comfortable with the neighborhood as it presently exists. It has been well accepted that one day the parcel would be put to use for more single family homes. We feel that any development on the land should not disturb the environment we are accustomed to. While these are emotional concerns, they are important to near -by residents. 'There are other concerns of a more technical nature. The parcel between the eight acre parcel and Broadway has already been sold and developed which allows no direct access to Broadway. The intersection of Adams and Broadway is already difficult, so more traffic would flow to Mission. While Mission has been recently improved, the improvement has caused many of the residences on the north side of the street to lose access and parking to the widening. Backing out of those driveways is already a problem, a problem that would be exacerbated by additional traffic on that street. Since Mission is essentially a two lane street, the possibility of collision with resulting property damage or personal injury would increase with increased traffic. A UR -22 zoning could allow 176 units to be built. Traffic control uses a possibility of five car trips per day per unit for a possibility of 880 car trips per day added to Adams, a two lane street.. Additional policing would be required to monitor traffic. This brings up the question of sewer capacity. Though the recently added sewer has not yet be approved for use, it could already be insufficient to handle the increased load. If high density structures were to be built, there would be no buffer between that property and the properties that now exist on the west side of Burns Rd. There has been a long standing practice in zoning to provide a zoning buffer between high and low density. To allow this change would upset that practice. The Central Valley School District is already considering the possibility of instituting busing as early as next year. An influx of 1800 new residences is forecast for the next five years. Progress Elementary has a capacity 416 students and currently has fewer than that, but that school is targeted to receive busing. Pines Middle School is currently being re- modeled for expected influx. New high density housing in an area of low density housing would increase the burden. We, the tax payers, paid the bill for a long process of study and meetings to develop a comprehensive land use plan. If errors were made in that plan, and if it is argued that sufficient land was not designated for high density use, one might look at the area south of Sprague and east of Argonne where a change of designation could be made with far less impact. September 14, 2004 I have read the attached letter and agree with it's contents. 4 /Y, ,f ae /'d. .�~ (o z y = d am= ? 0 r✓ a vx.L 'r), / l 0 2 tJ or-v• S Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -06 -04 LJ Zoning Category UR -3.5 UR -7 UR -7' UR -12 Ea UR -22 I B -1 MI B-2 B -3 IM RR -10 _I F-1 M1 -2 Zoning Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -06 -04 August, 2004 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Map PIN 111 Plan Category 111 Medium Density Residential 1111 High Density Residential Mixed Use Community Center 1111 Comp I I Low Density Residential H ® Urban Activity Center I - 1 Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial ® Regional Commercial Light Industrial j Heavy Industrial Mineral Land N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -06 -04 August, 2004 *lane Malley CPA -07 -04 Se Valley CURRENT POLICY 6/30/2004 City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment PART I APPLICANT NAME: TODD R. WHIPPLE, P.E. ADDRESS: 13218 E. SPRAGUE AVENUE CITY /STATE/ZIP: SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99216 PROPERTY OWNER 1 (IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT) NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: EMAIL: CITY /STATE/ZIP: FAX: FILE No.C -pi -I PHONE: 893 -2617 EMAIL: TRWATWCE @MSN.coM FAX: 926 -0227 PROPERTY OWNER 2 (IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET) NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: EMAIL: CITY/STATE/ZIP: FAX: AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY NAME: CHRIS ASHENBRENNER PHONE: 624-1170 ADDRESS: 202 E. TRENT EMAIL: CHRIS @AACDI.COM CITY /STATE/ZIP: SPOKANE, WA 99202 FAX: 624 -1255 LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: CURRENT DESIGNATION PROPOSED DESIGNATION LAND USE MAP N/A N/A ZONING MAP N/A N/A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL (ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN CURRENTLY SHOWS A FUTURE MANSFIELD AVENUE BEING EXTENDED BETWEEN ITS CURRENT TERMIMUS WITH HOUK STREET AND MIRABEAU PARKWAY To CHANGE THE ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN BY REMOVING MANSFIELD PROPOSED AVENUE BETWEEN HOUK STREET AND MIRABEAU PARKWAY AND POLICY REPLACING THIS ROADWAY WITH HOUK STREET EXTENDED SOUTH TO INDIANA AVENUE AND CREATING A NEW INTERSECTION WITH INDIANA AVE OFFICE USE ONLY: d City Initiated Concurrency Review Required: CI Yes Date Received: Received By: Citizen Initiated dri--- Page 1 of 7 PART II LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE (Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) I, Todd R. Whipple SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVE RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. ATTACHED HERE ADDRESS: 13218 E. Sprague Avenue 6/30/2004 W' (State) S•okane Val Signature) PHONE: 893 -2617 ZIP: 99216 June 30, 2004 (Date) NOTARY SEAL NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this / day of .TL(ty , 20Q i i,..1,0 • TARY S L Notary Pu • is in and for the State Residing at: My appointment expires: 4", - )0'05 -- NATU a hington Page 2 of 7 PART flY SITE DATA PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SQ. FT.) N/A ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SQ.FT.) N/A EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: N/A SCHOOL DISTRICT: N/A FIRE DISTRICT: N/A WATER DISTRICT: N/A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: N/A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: N/A WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC /PRIVATE ROAD: N/A ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL? (Y /N) N/A NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: MANSFIELD AVENUE / HOUK STREET PREVIOUS ZONING /LAND USE DECISION LIST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: MANSFIELD AVENUE BETWEEN PINES ROAD AND MIRABEAU PARKWAY WAS INCLUDED ON THE SPOKANE COUNTY ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN AND INCORPORATED BY THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, DATE AND JUSTIFICTION FOR PLACEMENT ON THE PLAN ARE UNKNOWN. CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGES CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? IN ADDITION TO THOSE ITEMS NOTED BELOW PLEASE SEE ATTACHED LETTER REPORT ON CHANGED CONDITIONS AND GENERAL PROPOSAL NARRATIVE. WE BELIEVE THE FOLLOWING CHANGED CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROPOSAL • MANSFIELD AVENUE REMAINS AN UNFUNDED ROADWAY ON THE ARTERIAL ROAD SYSTEM BETWEEN HOUK AND MIRABEAU PARKWAY • THE PINES ROAD CORRIDOR PROJECT HAS REMAINED UNFUNDED AND SLOWLY MOVING FORWARD IF MOVING FORWARD AT ALL • THE BRIDGING THE VALLEY RAILROAD REALIGNMENT PROJECT IS MOVING FORWARD WITH THE VACATION OF THE UPRR LINE PLANNED FOR 2009 TO 2012 • HOUK STREET EXTENDED REPRESENTS A $600,000 TO $800,000 COST SAVINGS TO THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY • MANSFIELD AVENUE WAS DESIGNATED BASED UPON INSUFFICIENT DOCUMENTATION AND PROCESS AS A FUTURE ARTERIAL ROADWAY • DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THIS CORRIDOR IS BEHIND ORIGINAL PROJECTIONS FOR GROWTH AND INFRASTRUCTURE NEED • INDIANA AVENUE WITHN THIS VICINITY REMAINS AN UNDERUTILIZED FACILJTY 6/30/2004 Page 3 of 7 PROPOSAL PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: THIS APPLICATION IS SUPPLEMENTED BY A SEPARATE DOCUMENT, HOWEVER A BRIEF DESCRIPTION IS NOTED HERE. IN 1993 THE AREA NORTH OF INDIANA AVENUE, EAST OF HOUK, WEST OF MIRABEAU POINT AND SOUTH OF THE THEN WALK IN THE WILD ZOO, WAS THE SUBJECT OF SEVERAL LAND USE ACTIONS. DURING THE LAND USE PLANNING PORTION FOR THESE PROJECTS, SPOKANE COUNTY AND THE WSDOT IN IN ATTEMPT TO IMPROVE TRAFFIC CONGESTIONS ALONG THE PINES ROAD CORRIDOR BETWEEN MISSION AND TRENT CONDUCTED THE PINES ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY. THE PRIMARY GOAL OF THIS STUDY WAS TO MINIMIZE THE NUMBER OF INTERSECTIONS ALONG PINES ROAD WITHIN THESE LIMITS. TO THAT END THE REALINGMENT OF MONTGOMERY FROM THE MONTGOMERY / INDIANA / PINES INTERSECTION TO THE MANSFIELD AND PINES INTERSECTION WAS PROPOSED. THE INTENT OF THIS MOVE WAS TO PUSH TRAFFIC THAT WAS ONLY HEADING EAST AND WEST ON INDIANA / MONTGOMERY FROM USING THE REALIGNED PINES ROAD / INDIANA / WB RAMP INTERSECTION. To THAT END A NEW ARTERIAL ROADWAY EXTENSION FROMT THE INTERSECTION OF MANSFIELD AND HOUK AND TIEING INTO MIRABEAU PARKWAY, HENCE MANSFIELD EXTENDED WAS ENVISIONED AND ADDED TO THE COUNTY'S ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN. THE PREMISE OF THE MANSFIELD PROPOSAL AT THE TIME THAT IT WAS PROPOSED WAS THAT THERE WAS ONLY ONE WAY TO MOVE TRAFFIC EAST AND WEST AND STILL GET THEM BACK TO INDIANA AVENUE WITHOUT HAVING THIS TRAFFIC USE THE RECONFIGURED PINES AND INDIANA INTERSECTION. THE PRIMARY REASON WAS NOT AN OVERWHELMING DESIRE BY EITHER THE AGENCY (COUNTY OR WSDOT) TO HAVE THE ROAD BISECT PROPERTIES TO INTERESECT WITH MIRABEAU PARKWAY. RATHER IT WAS MORE PRAGMAT1C, THERE WAS ONLY ONE CROSSING OF THE UPRR BETWEEN PINES AND SULLIVAN AND THAT WAS AT MIRABEAU PARKWAY HAVING BEEN MOVED FROM THE ORIGINAL SHANNON AVENUE CROSSING (MCDONALD RD. EXTENDED). WITH THE BRIDGING OF THE VALLEY PROJECT MOVING FORWARD AND THE VACATION OF THE UPRR RAILROAD AN OPTION THAT DIDN'T EXIST IN 1998 WHEN THE PINES ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY WAS PROPOSED, WE BELIEVE THAT OTHER SOLUTIONS ARE AVAILABLE SUCH AS THE HOUK EXTENSION TO INDIANA. ADJACENT LAND USES DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: LAND USES WITH THE AREA OF THIS PROPOSAL ARE RECREATIONAL, MULITI- FAMILY, VACANT LAND, OFFICE, BUSINESS PARK AND COMMERCIAL. • 6/30/2004 Page 4 of 7 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE HOW PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - CITE SPECIFIC GOALS /POLICIES: WE BELIEVE THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THROUGH THE FOLLOWING POLICIES AND GOALS: T.2.2 — TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED TO SERVE NEW DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE IN PLACE AT THE TIME NEW DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS OCCUR. IF THIS IS NOT FEASIBLE, THEN A FINANCIAL COMMITMENT, CONSISTENT WITH THE CAPITAL FACILIITIES PLAN, SHALL BE MADE TO COMPLETE THE IMPROVEMENT WITHIN SIX YEARS. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAUPOLICY AS FOLLOWS: • BECAUSE THE OWNERS OF MUCH OF THE AFFECTED PROPERTY WHICH THE PROPOSED MANSFIELD AVENUE WOULD CROSS ARE CURRENTLY WORKING WITH THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY AND WSDOT IN THE PINES (SR -27) /MANSFIELD CORRIDOR CONGESTION RELIEF PROJECT BY CONTRIBUTING A SHARE CURRENTLY CALCULATED AT $119,866.00. THIS AMOUNT WOULD BE APPLIED TO EITHER HOUK OR MANSFIELD IN THE EVENT THAT THERE IS A PROJECT TO TIE THESE FUNDS TO IN ORDER TO MEET CONCURRENCY. HOWEVER, TO DATE THERE HAS BEEN NO TRANSPORTATION PROJECT AND THE DEVELOPERS ARE DESIREOUS TO MOVE FORWARD. THEY BELIEVE THAT THEIR CONTRIBUTION WILL BE BETTER SPENT EXTENDING HOUK RATHER THAN PAYING $600,000 TO $800,000 CONDEMENING AN EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDING, HAVING THEIR PROJECT BISECTED AND RUNNING A STRAIGHT THROUGH 35 MPH ARTERIAL ROADWAY WHICH MANSFIELD WOULD REPRESENT. T.2.4. — TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH LAND USE PLANS, CAPITAL FUNDING AND OTHER PLANNING ELEMENTS. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAUPOLICY AS FOLLOWS: • IT IS CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT LAND USE PLANS • IT IS CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT CAPITAL FUNDING ISSUES - MANSFIELD IS NOT ON THE 6 -YEAR PLAN AND REQUIRES A $600,000 TO $800,000 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE TO PURCHASE AND DEMOLISH AN EXISTING 6 -UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING • IT IS CONSISTENT WITH OTHER PLANNING ELEMENTS - IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT PHASE 1 REGULATIONS, WITH THE BRIDGING THE VALLEY PROJECT AND WSDOT 1 -90 — FOUR LAKES TO STATELINE EIS. T.2.7. — THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHALL SUPPORT THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE SPOKANE COUNTY (CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS GROWTH OCCURS. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAUPOUCY AS FOLLOWS: • THE PROPOSAL FOR HOUK STREET EXTENDED AND THE REMOVAL OF MANSFIELD WILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS GOAL AS ADJACENT LAND ACCESS WILL BE MAINTAINED, ARTERIAL ROADWAYS WILL NOT BISECT DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY AND HAVE UNNECESSARY ACCESS POINTS, THROUGH TRANSPORTATION AND OVERALL AREA MOBILITY WILL BE MAINTAINED AND ARTERIAL TRAFFIC WILL STAY ON THE ARTERIALS (PINES AND INDIANA) AS PLANNED. T.3A.1 -THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHALL PROVIDE A RANGE OF TRANSPORTATION MODES. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAL/POLICY AS FOLLOWS: • INDIANA AVENUE IS A MAJOR BUS ROUTE FOR SPOKANE TRANSIT AUTHORITY, BY ALLOWING HOUK TO DIRECLTY ACCESS INDIANA, YOU WILL ALLOW OVER 1000 APARTMENT UNITS DIRECT ACCESS TO MASS TRANSIT, INCLUDING ANY RESIDENTS OF THE AREA WITH DISABILITIES. THE MANSFIELD ROUTE TO PINES OR MIRABEAU PARKWAY DOES NOT AFFORDED THE SAME LUXURY AS A NEW CONNECTION TO INDIANA WOULD PROVIDE. 6/30/2004 Page 5 of 7 GOAL - T.4A - ENSURE THAT URBAN ROADWAY SYSTEMS ARE DESIGNED TO PRESERVE AND BE CONSISTENT WITH COMMUNTIY CHARACTER WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAUPOUCY AS FOLLOWS: • MANSFIELD EXTENDED IS NOT PLANNED TO PRESERVE NOR TO BE CONSISTENT WITH COMMUNITY CHARACTER AS IT BISECTS A COMMUNITY BETWEEN PINES AND MIRABEAU PARKWAY WITH AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY. • HOUK, WHILE INTRUSIVE USES THE SAME ALIGNEMENT AS EXISTING WITH A SHORT EXTENSION OVER THE UPRR RIGHT OF WAY TO INDIANA. • MANSFIELD EXTENDED WILL DESTROY AN EXISTING 6-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING AT A COST OF 8600,000 TO $800,000 WHICH CANNOT SUPPORT NOR BE CONSISTENT WITH COMMUNITY CHARACTER. T,4A.2 — OPTIMIZE THE CAPACITY OF EXISTING ROADS TO MINIMIZE THE NEED FOR NEW OR EXPANDED ROADS THROUGH THE USE OF IMPROVED SIGNAGE, SIGNALIZATION, ROAD MAINTENANCE AND OTHER MEANS. WE BELIEVE THAT THE CURRENT MANSFIELD PROPOSAL IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAUPOLICY AS FOLLOWS: • WE BELIEVE THAT THE EXTENSION OF HOUK TO INDIANA MEETS THIS GOAL BE I r tR THAN THE EXTENSION OF MANSFIELD BECAUSE HOUK EXISTS, THE EXPECTED VOLUME OF TRAFFIC WILL NOT EXCEED THE CAPACITY OF HOUK AND IS A LESS COSTLY OPTION TO RESULT IN THE SAME BENEFIT. THAT BENEFIT IS THE REDIRECTION OF TRAFFIC EAST AND WEST ACROSS PINES AND AWAY FROM THE PINES AND INDIANA INTERSECTION. T.4A.5 — TRANSPORTATION FACILITY DESIGN STANDARES SHALL SUPPORT THE CREATION AND PRESERVATION OF COMMUNITIES AND NEIGHBORHOODS WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY PROVIDING FOR THE SAFE AND EFFICIENT MOVEMENT OF PEOPLE AND GOODS. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAL/POLICY AS FOLLOWS: • WE BELIEVE THAT THE PROPOSAL FOR HOUK STREET EXTENDED IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH THIS POLCIY AS IT RELATES TO THE EXISTING APARTMENT COMMUNITY THAN THE PROPOSED EXTENSION OF MANSFIELD AVENUE. • WE BELIEVE THAT THE INTRODUCTION OF PASS - THROUGH TRAFFIC FROM THE MIRABEAU POINT DEVELOPMENT ALONG MANSFIELD EXTENDED IN ADDITION TO EAST / WEST TRAFFIC HEADING BETWEEN EVERGREEN AND ARGONNE WOULD BE ONEROUS TO THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED APARTMENT COMMUNITIES AND COULD LEAD TO A SITUATION WHERE VACANCIES INCREASE DUE TO AN INORDINATE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC AND NOISE AND DECREASE IN SAFTEY AND AESTHETICS FOR THESE APARTMENT UNITS. • WE BEUVE THAT HOUK, WHILE MAKING THE SAME CONNECTION, WILL REDIRECT TRIPS IN A CURVALINEAR WAY TO MINIMIZE SPEEDS, REDUCE TRAFFIC NOISE AND THE OVERALL IMPACT TO THE EXISTING APARTMENT COMMUNITY WITHOUT THE STRAIGHTAWAY SPEEDS THAT WILL BE INHERANT ON A STRAIGTH THROUGH MANSFIELD. T.4A.6 — DEVELOP AN ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN THAT EMPHASIZES PLANNED CORRIDORS FOR HIGH - CAPACITY ROADWAYS TO KEEP HIGH -SPEED TRAFFIC OUT OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAUPOUCY AS FOLLOWS: • WE BEUEVE THAT WHILE MANSFIELD FULFILLS THIS GOAL FOR HIGH CAPACITY ROADWAYS IT FAILS THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS POLICY IS INCONFLICT WITH T.4A.5 NOTED ABOVE AND THAT POLICY T.4A.5 IS MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE EXISTING AND PLANNED APARTMENT COMMUNITY WITHIN THIS AREA WHICH SHOULD DISCOURAGE STRIAGHTTHROUGH AND HIGH- CAPACITY ROADWAYS. 6/30/2004 Page 6 of 7 T.4A.7 — DESIGN OF NEW TRANSPORTATION FACIUTIES OR FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS SHOULD INCORPORATE ADEQAUATE CONSIDERATION OF THE CULTURAL, HISTORICAL AND AESTHETIC ISSUES ASSOCIATED WfTH A PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAUPOLICY AS FOLLOWS: • WE BELIEVE THAT MANSFIELD DOES NOT MEET THIS POLICY WHICH IS ALSO IN CONFLICT WITH T.4A.5 IN THAT MANSFIELD EXTENDED DOES NOT DEAL WITH ANY OF THESE ISSUES, MOST NOTABLY THE AESTHETIC ISSUE. WHILE HOUK EXTENDED IS AN EXISTING ROAD AND EXTENDING AN EXISTING ROAD IS MORE AESTHETIC THAN TEARING DOWN A BUILDING AND BUILDING A STRAIGHT LINE THROUGHFARE BETWEEN PINES AND MIRABEAU PARKWAY. T.4A.1 1 - ENCOURAGE STREET DESIGNS, WHICH REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ACCESS POINTS ON PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS AND HIGHWAYS BY COMBINING DRIEWAYS FOR ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND USE OF FRONTAGE ROADS. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAUPOUCY AS FOLLOWS: • WE BELIEVE THAT MANSFIELD EXTENDED IS INCONSISTENT WITH THIS GOAL AS DRIVEWAYS TO EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDINGS WILL NEED TO BE MAINTAINED AS THERE IS NO VIABLE OPTION FOR COMBINING THESE DRIVEWAYS AS WELL THERE ARE NO VIALBE ALTERNATIVES AVAILABLE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF FRONTAGE ROADS. T.4A.13 — ENCOURAGE LOCAL ACCESS STREES WHICH ARE CURVALINEAR, NARROW OR USE OTHER STREET DESIGNS CONSISTENT WITH SAFETY REQUIREMENTS TO DISCOURAGE THROUGH TRAFFIC IN NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE SUCH DESIGN FITS INTO THE SURROUNDIGN STREET SYSTEMS AND AIDS IN IMPLEMENTING SPECIFIC LAND USE GOALS. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAL/POLICY AS FOLLOWS: • WE BELIEVE THAT MANSFIELD AVENUE AS CURRENTLY SHOWN ON THE CITY'S ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN IS INCONSISTENT WITH THIS POLICY AS MANSFIELD WILL BISECT AN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE IS VERY LITTLE ROOM FOR A CURVALINEAR ALIGNEMENT. • WE BELIEVE THAT WHILE HOUK IS A CURVALINEAR STREET AND WHILE IT WILL EXPERIENCE HIGHER TRAFFIC VOLUMES THAN IT CURRENTLY DOES, IT WILL NOT EXPERIENCE AS HIGH OF SHORT CIRCUITING / PASS THROUGH TRAFFIC AS IF IT WERE A CURVALINEAR ROADWAY. • THIS IS ESPECIALLY TRUE WHEN CONSIDERING THAT MIRABEAU POINT WAS NOT ANALYZED NOR PLANNED WITH A DIRECT ACCESS TO PINES AND IT IS UNKNOWN WHAT THE TRANSPORTATION AND SAFETY IMPACTS TO THE SURROUNDING APARTMENT COMMUNITY WILL BE IN THE EVENT THAT MANSFIELD IS CONSTRUCTED AND SHORT CUT AND PASS THROUGH TRAFFIC FROM A DEVELOPING MIRABEAU POINT ARE DIRECTED BACK TO PINES AND THE NEW MANSFIELD INTERSECTION SIGNAL. PUBLIC FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACIUTIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT: THE AREA IN QUESTION WILL BE SERVED BY ALL KNOWN PUBLIC FACILITIES INCLUDING WATER, SEWER, ROADS, PARKS (MIRABEAU) AND PUBLIC TRANSIT (PINES AND INDIANA). 6/30/2004 Page 7 of 7 0 June 30, 2004 W.O. No. 2004 -30 City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 D E Dear Sirs, CPh -o'j - oc} Re: Application for Modification of the City of Spokane Valley, Transportation Comprehensive Plan / Arterial Road Plan Specifically: Removal of Mansfield between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway from the Arterial Road Plan with Alternate Route of Houk Road Extended to Indiana This application has been prepared on behalf of the Sponsor A&A Construction which is currently in the process of rezoning the existing RR -10 parcels (Parcel Numbers 45103.0205, 45103.0206, 45103.0208, 45103.0244, 45103.0210) just east of the existing apartments on Houk Street from RR -10 to UR -22 to fulfill the Comprehensive Plan Designation of Community Center. It is anticipated that once the rezone is complete an apartment site plan for the development of the A&A Construction parcel will be forwarded for approval. It is anticipated that this proposal will be in keeping with the original applications to Spokane County for 350 to 400 multi - family dwelling units. For this Comprehensive Plan Change Application, the following documents need to be noted as they form the basis of the analysis and recommendations for this proposal. Reference Documents 1. Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared for the Lawson /Gunning Properties Rezone, June 1993 — Inland Pacific Engineering 2. Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared for the Lawson /Gunning Project, Shannon Avenue, June 1999 — Inland Pacific Engineering 3. Mirabeau Point Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Reclassification, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix B — Traffic Impact Analysis, September 1997 — Inland Pacific Engineering 4. Mirabeau Point Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Reclassification, Final Impact Statement, Appendix C — Technical Appendicles to the Revised Traffic Impact Analysis, May 14, 1998 — Inland Pacific Engineering 5. Pines Corridor Improvement Project, Westbound On -Ramp Realignment for WSDOT & Spokane County, July 1998 — Inland Pacific Engineering . WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEEPS • CIVIL AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 091R F APR/SO.11P CUFMI IP • CP(1KGMP Val I GV ma, CLtIhIf Trmi oo'it . ou• cna.oan erne• cnn nnc non-7 City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 2 Background Narrative The following is a narrative to help the reviewer understand the nature of the request and the reasoning for Mansfield being placed on Spokane County's and the City of Spokane Valley's Arterial Road Plan / Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). In 1993 Bill Lawson and Ted Gunning, the owners of two separate parcels of property were desirous of starting the development process and contemplated a rezone of approximately 35.30 Acres of property from RR -10 to UR -22, see a copy of the Vicinity Map in the Appendix. Originally, both Lawson and Gunning saw value in pursing a joint rezone as both the Gunning property (now owned by Hamilton) and the Lawson properties were complimentary as they lay east of the development along Houk and west of the Inland Empire Paper property (now Mirabeau), north of Shannon Avenue and the UPRR and south of the Walk in the Wild Zoo and the DNR 40 acre parcel. Additionally, both Sponsors wanted to pursue the development of multi - family developments. Access to these parcels at this time came from Shannon Avenue which had two access opportunities one each to the east and west. To the west these properties had access to Shannon Avenue which via Houk Street would direct them to Mansfield Avenue and its unsignalized intersection with Pines Road, a copy of the site plan from that project is attached for reference in the appendix. The second access, or easterly access point was a crossing of the UPRR at McDonald Road, extended, but it was known as the Shannon Road railroad crossing by County Personnel as well as the overall community. This approach was an unsignalized crossing of the UPRR and therefore provided direct access to Indiana Avenue. At the time of the original study, the McDonald crossing was intended to be the primary access point for the combined properties. It was contemplated at that time that this railroad crossing could be expanded and signalized to meet UPRR, WSDOT, FHWA and USDOT guidelines. At the time of the original study it was understood that Shannon Road would be improved to allow, by congestion, a pressure relief to Mansfield and Pines intersection, and encourage access via Indiana and the Shannon crossing of the UPRR. It should be noted that at the time of the original study, Indiana Avenue ended 2000 -feet east of Pines Road, the current configuration between Pines Road and Sullivan Road did not exist until a later date. . In 1997 Lawson and Gunning made formal application to Spokane County for a rezone, ZE- 36 -97, which at this time has not been completed. From June of 1993 until June of 1999 (6 years) no additional traffic studies were prepared or submitted on behalf of the Lawson and Gunning Properties Rezone. During that time, however, development within this part of Spokane Valley continued as well the privately owned zoo Walk in the Wild failed. The zoo was on property owned by the Inland Paper Company. The Spokane Valley Regional Mall developer Price City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 3 announced that they were moving forward with the proposed 1,000,000 sf +/- mall with the addition of several large anchors. As a part of the new mall they then constructed Indiana Avenue from a point 2,000 feet east of pines to Sullivan Road. The WSDOT continued to proceed with an interchange at Evergreen Road to serve the development of the new mall as well as growth within the Greater Spokane Valley. In addition to Evergreen the WSDOT made access revisions to the Pines Road interchange as well as the Pines and Mission Avenue intersection to accommodate additional traffic volumes. The railroad crossing at Shannon was officially closed by action of the Washington State Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC) and moved approximately 1,1,00 feet east to a new arterial roadway to be known as Mirabeau Parkway which was to provide access to a new Master Planned Development, known as Mirabeau Point. The proposal for Mirabeau Point included a principal arterial running between the intersection of Euclid and Pines and Indiana Avenue. It should be noted here that the loss of the Shannon Road (McDonald Road extended) crossing of the UPRR had significant traffic access impacts to the proposed Lawson and Gunning Properties Rezone which had intended to use the Shannon Road crossing of the UPRR as their primary access point due to capacity limitations with the Pines Road and Mansfield intersection. This then forced Lawson Gunning to deal with the Pines and Mansfield intersection as the only ingress /egress point to the larger transportation system. The Mirabeau Point development was supported by an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process that started in 1997 and finished in 1998. During that time Inland Pacific Engineering (IPEC) again participated in that process by providing documentation for traffic and access to this proposed development. In September of 1997 IPEC prepared the initial Traffic Impact Analysis for the Mirabeau Point Draft EIS. In May of 1998 IPEC revised the September 1997 traffic study as part of preparing the Final EIS. Copies of the Site Plan and appropriate access and traffic count diagrams are included within the appendix. It is important to note that the Mirabeau Point project included the Lawson and Gunning Properties Rezone as a background project for analysis. The Mirabeau Point project anticipated as a part of their development that it would generate1166 PM Peak hour trips. It is important to note that in both 1997 and 1998 for the Mirabeau Point project, these studies did NOT include Mansfield Avenue as a straight through access point across the Lawson and Gunning Properties, rather they included the originally proposed option for the construction and improvement of Shannon Avenue which ran from Houk, along the UPRR and then back up to meet the proposed alignment for Mansfield within the Mirabeau Point development, exhibits from the Mirabeau Point EIS are clear on this point and are attached in the Appendix for reference. This is extremely significant because the Mirabeau Point project was the last substantial piece of property north of the UPRR to develop or be analyzed and Figure 6 through 11 show no Site Generated PM Peak Hour volumes using the Mansfield, Houk, Shannon, Mansfield route. There was consensus at that time that it was more important to keep trips on either Mirabeau City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 4 Parkway or Indiana Avenue which were intended to be THE Principal Arterial roadways. This therefore, meant that the entire Mirabeau Point project was contemplated with traffic getting to this site either via the Pines and Euclid /Mirabeau intersection or the Mirabeau and Indiana intersection with no access to /from the Mansfield and Pines intersection. The result of this analysis yielded acceptable LOS which included Lawson /Gunning as a background project In July of 1998, IPEC was contacted by Spokane County as a apart of the Lawson and Gunning Properties Rezone to further analyze the arterial roadways in the area and more specifically provide a detailed capacity analysis for the Pines Road Corridor Improvement Project. The intent of this analysis project was to analyze capacity improvement options between Mission Avenue and Mansfield Avenue, more specifically from the Westbound 1 -90 Ramps to Mansfield Avenue. The IPEC study was to provide a circulation and mobility analysis to provide for the efficient movement of traffic through the Pines, Indiana and Westbound 1 -90 Ramps closely spaced intersections. It should be noted that after nearly six years of analysis this was the first document to propose connecting Mansfield between Houk and Mirabeau Parkway. This proposal came about because of a meeting between the project Sponsors (Lawson and Gunning) and Spokane County, as a pretense to solving the larger transportation issues within the Pines Road and Indiana Avenue and Pines Road and Mansfield Avenue intersections. It should also be noted that the loss of the Shannon Avenue railroad crossing also had a significant impact as this railroad crossing provided direct access to Indiana for the combined Lawson and Gunning properties and alleviated the capacity problem at Pines and Mansfield which was identified in 1993. It is significant to recognize that the IPEC Pines Road Corridor Study, proposed significant changes to the 1 -90 Westbound ramps and their intersections with Pines Road and Indiana Avenue, the Montgomery /Indiana Avenue and Pines Road intersection as well as the alignment of Montgomery as far back as Wilbur Street and the UPRR crossing of Pines Road. See the Overall Concept Plan of Pines Road (SR- 27) Improvements provided in the appendix. By looking at this exhibit you can see that in order to begin to fix the Indiana and Pines intersection, Montgomery Drive was relocated to tie directly into Mansfield Avenue at Wilbur and move the eastbound portion of the Montgomery and Pines intersection up to Mansfield. The idea would be that based upon conversations between Lawson and Gunning, the County would acquire a 6 -unit apartment parcel (L5, Blk 1, Meadows End Subdivision) from a third party and extend Mansfield through so that Lawson, Gunning and Inland Paper (Mirabeau Point) could ultimately connect Mansfield from Pines Road to Mirabeau Parkway. Given the State of the Knowns vs. Unknowns this seemed like a logical presumption for Lawson and Gunning for the following reasons. A. The lost direct access to Indiana when the Shannon crossing was closed for Mirabeau Parkway. City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 5 B. The Mansfield / Pines intersection was a very difficult mitigation issue for the Lawson /Gunning properties and the cost/benefit analysis for this mitigation was askew. C. The UPRR gave all appearances that the line between Shannon and Indiana was viable for the long term so future access to Indiana from Shannon or Houk was not a near term option. D. The proposal to use Houk via Shannon via Mansfield to get to Mirabeau Point was not a reasonable solution for the Gunning parcel which bore the brunt of the geometric design issues. Now, the 1997 and 1998 traffic studies done by IPEC for the Mirabeau Point Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements had no traffic accessing Pines Road via Shannon and Mansfield. Rather it was anticipated that traffic from Mirabeau Point heading north would use Mirabeau Parkway to access Pines Road at the old Euclid Intersection and those wanting to travel south and west of Pines Road would access Pines from Mirabeau and Indiana vicinity, including those trips continuing west from the Indiana and Pines intersection on Montgomery. The Pines Road Corridor study was trying to move traffic east and west of Pines Road and away from the Pines and Indiana intersection. To that end the Indiana and Westbound ramps along with the realignment of Montgomery allowed the removal of an intersection along Pines Road, as it.turns out to the detriment of the Lawson and Gunning properties. Therefore, it is important to remember, that the goal of the Pines Road Corridor Study was to A) reduce the number of intersections between Mansfield Road and the Westbound Ramps on Pines Road and B) reduce the number of vehicles using the these same intersections, hence the connection of Mansfield to Mirabeau Parkway. This connection then moved trips /vehicles from west of Pines to a point east of Pines bud did not add traffic to the Pines and Indiana intersection. This was one of the main premises of the corridor study. This proposal proposes to maintain the intent of the previous studies conducted to date within this area (reduce traffic congestion at Indiana and Pines), consider new available information, while at the same time reducing the onerous impacts imposed upon Lawson /Gunning and now Hamilton of having an arterial roadway (Mansfield Avenue) bisecting their respective parcels and directly impacting their opportunity for them to develop their parcels to their highest and best use. We believe that Mansfield extended as proposed is not consistent with the following Phase 1 Policies due to the undue impacts to the Lawson / Gunning properties and surrounding community. Please see responses to the following Goals and Policies in the application • T.2.2; T.2.4; T.2.7; T.3a.1; T.4a; T.4a.2; T.4a.5; T.4a.6; T.4a.7; T.4a.11; T.4a.13 City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 6 Lawson and Gunning Properties 1999 Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Having Iaidthe background for all pertinent studies from 1993 to 1999 it is here that we discuss the last traffic study prepared for the Lawson and Gunning Properties Rezone and Project. Up to this point, all of the studies for these Sponsors as well as all of the other studies were generic rezones, analyzing the intent for development, in 1999 that changed for this property as specific proposals were now being proposed. As it relates to site plans several site plans were proposed as is normal for the process that was then on going in 1999. At that time, the planner was John Konen at David Evans and David Evans prepared several drafts for both Lawson and Gunning. All drafts either centered around the straight through Mansfield or the more circuitous route using Houk, Shannon and Mansfield which was consistent with the Mirabeau Point Draft and Final EIS's. However, with the Pines Road corridor study being adopted by the agencies and with the Shannon Avenue railroad crossing relocated to it's current location and with the capacity issues at Mansfield, there really weren't many options for access from the Lawson and Gunning properties other than the updated Pines and Mansfield intersection via the Corridor improvement project. A copy of the site plan from the 1999 study is included as reference, also included are several other options that were internal options that were evaluated but were not included within the 1999 TIA but may have been discussed with Spokane County staff. In this 1999 study, many things were different as it related to the analysis performed and scoped with Spokane County. First, the direction from the County in keeping with the 1998 Pines Road Corridor Study was that Mansfield would be used for primary ingress and egress. Shannon Avenue would be vacated due to several factors, most notably the fact that the Shannon Avenue (McDonald extended) railroad crossing was no longer available and the fact that the Agencies involved needed a revised /updated Mansfield and Pines intersection to be implemented to facilitate changes on how traffic that use to use Montgomery west of Pines would access Pines not only north and south, but also head east of Pines without using the reconfigured Indiana and Pines intersection. Additional differences lie in the rezone requests themselves, Lawson held with the rezone to UR -22 while Gunning changed to an 1 -2 rezone so that he could have more of a mixed used development to develop options such as retirement care facilities, RV Park, Mini - storage and an office park w/ some commercial development. Because of the long timelines associated with the development of not only the Lawson and Gunning properties (5 to 10 years) as well as Mirabeau Point (10 to 20 years) the study analyzed the overall area with Mansfield extended between Pines and Mirabeau and without the connection made but with the Lawson and Gunning project completed. The result of this analysis was that either way the intersection of Pines and Mansfield with the Pines Road Corridor Project items implemented would continue to work at adequate levels of service. Enclosed in the Appendix is Table 6 from the 1999 study titled "Table 6 — 2006 Traffic With Proposed Project, With and Without Mansfield City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 � 1 Page 7 Connection (to Mirabeau). As shown on this table, it was anticipated that all of the existing levels of service with many of the other changes in effect resulted in all signalized intersections operating with an LOS of D or better. It should be noted again that the successful implementation of the Mansfield extension from Houk to Mirabeau Drive involved the taking (by Spokane County /City of Spokane Valley) of a residential rental property which is an existing and occupied 6 unit complex as this property was and is owned by a party not involved with the Lawson and Gunning land use actions. As noted, the implementation of the Pines Road Corridor project would entail the taking of this 6 -unit apartment building would cost between $600,000 and $800,000. For this reason, the likelihood of this connection being made may not be cost effective for the benefit that will be received to the overall transportation system. From the completion of the 1999 analysis to today, the changes in the overall area from a development and transportation system perspective, that need to be considered for this proposal are as follows: • • Spokane Valley Mall is complete or nearing completion with only a few restaurant pads left to build out. • Hansen Center East is still undergoing development with a Residence Inn, Hansen Industries Building, Sullivan Homes and a "Ramey" office buildings are under construction. • ITT is building a new building on the Hansen property west of Evergreen along Indiana. • The Hansen property on the north side of Indiana from Sullivan east to the UPRR has been developed to it's maximum commercial potential with an Oxford Suites, Best Buy, Arby's Fast Food restaurant, Krispy Kreme donuts and another strip development. • Mirabeau Parkway is complete. • Mirabeau Point is moving forward with the YMCA complete, WDOE building under construction as well as the Valley Center building and other construction progressing with plans for more office buildings to come along Mansfield both east and west of Mirabeau Parkway. • The Pines Road Corridor Improvement project has not moved forward yet. • Interstate 90 is being widened to 6 -lanes (3 in each direction). • The Wal -Mart shopping center is nearing completion with only one or two pads left to complete. • The northbound to westbound ramp from Sullivan to 1 -90 is now in operation and an intersection on Sullivan has been partially removed as is the intent for the NB Pines to WB on Ramp at Indiana. • The WSDOT, The State of Idaho, Spokane County, the City of Spokane Valley, Union Pacific Railroad, Burlington Northern Railroad, FHWA and USDOT have proposed a project titled, Bridging the Valley, which is to begin implementation within a year or so. This project is expected to be complete and ready for UPRR line vacation as early as 2009 but no later than 2012 a 5 to 7 year time frame. City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 8 • Mirabeau Point has had Mansfield Avenue west of Mirabeau Parkway designed and construction is to begin with completion in 2004. However, Mirabeau Point is not constructing all the way to the Hamilton Property, at this writing they will be stopping 100 -feet short with paving operations, as approved by the City of Spokane Valley. • Discussions with Mirabeau representatives have revealed that while they understand the potential for a Mansfield extension, they intend to be neither a proponent nor an opponent for a Mansfield extension to Pines Road from Mirabeau Parkway. • Phase 1 Development regulations with Spokane County were adopted as a part of Growth Management. • The City of Spokane Valley was formed adding a new Municipal Corporation to the mix of jurisdictions within the Valley. Proposal Discussion As noted at the beginning of this document we are proposing the following: APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, TRANSPORTATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN /ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN SPECIFICALLY: REMOVAL OF MANSFIELD AVENUE BETWEEN HOUK STREET AND MIRABEAU PARKWAY FROM THE ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN WITH RECOMMENDED ALTERNATE ROUTE OF HOUK ROAD EXTENDED SOUTH OVER THE FUTURE UPRR VACATION TO INDIANA As described in the Background section of this document, this area has been analyzed off and on over the last 11 years by both the private and public sector with the author of this document participating in many of these analyses if not all. After all of this discovery, investigation and analysis several things within this area have yet to reach there anticipated outcomes, most notably the projected traffic volumes are well below projections. Since 1993, the Pines Road and Mansfield Intersection has been counted and projected into future years. Table 1 below shows the counts by movement from 1993 and 2004; Figure 3 in the appendix provides a summary of all the turning movement counts for 1993, 1996, 1998 and 2004. F }" t . 1993 S , � r r . a. r� ,,, ;x; r n' 'ti.,s, ub c 4,,f k .r r r xr i� '" `,;r .r�•"t i..r, 'tF - .. � �. r r3� ,,x ,.s.�2004 r•�ii r. �.Yk y3 z.-10 .,-,t-r' rff.' >i.– --T - A , + GROW TH 6 l''' A' "'OVER - 1� 1 :: .ti a ,- '�YRS`r�.. 1.26% a ` >w ' 7 , D IRECTIO N' �ei'-: � : Left 0.zAz f 0 . :4 ; 41 F4 r,�4 4 ' 0, . r.r. . .. `' , -I. 'E _.'y. 20 i'I ��r es w4 - APPROACH r _ , ` , �+� ei r f l s ?'. . �.t..t 'tTY :i`' � a+. 87 i "c sn F, -I uts.g. ;iDIRECT1ON � C? 3 • � � - r 5. WB , r��.e _ a LA NE " t 1-: i[d y�� -.• . Left .' 4 y ; as �,4 , ... OLUME.z5APPROAC tf „; ` . I ... V r-. -r<s. -, 23 , ... St • ; • R r `iaTF�+_� > -&r`t .5. i . r _ ,�. q � .., ;!4a, 101 NCRE • � 411- r • : BY r is _ � `�` r- ` . t ,ROACH gv - P . ...., tn -4�r 14 WB Thru 5 Thru 11 Right 62 Right 67 EB Left 52 70 EB Left 65 113 43 3.46% Thru 1 Thru 13 Right 17 Right 35 NB Left 137 835 N8 Left 107 942 107 1.03% Thru 640 Thru 730 Right 58 Right 105 SB Left - 26 505 SB Left 43 679 174 2.33% Thru 459 Thru 610 Right 20 Right 26 Intersection Totals Thru 1497 Right 27 Right 1835 338 1.67% :4se0:7. " 1ti,- -,2004 PRO':IECTED:t ,ZP,- s k 4 .420O4:ACTUAe :C OUNTS'(MAY '4 W DIFFERENCE By a .�S . " ., { A PPROACH r �- T�. s.47,$i;�DIFFERENCE "A s . a y : , ,,,' P.CT ta .i, J 1 e'+l.: -s;. - j.�'J`3•;�-'ir ., ,DIRECTION; .'eALt:a.. � YF'•` ' ,D A LANE 7 1 .� _� _, S :' - ' VOLU MEe 5 ;0g;- Rr. ,>i %:t lY4.`ti .- t, APPROACH AePROAC :Tf"^''.'i... s'sre7 8 6=i, II_10"3i4'. AD . 4- . 1r• ?", b'.i Ktitz - sTLYi 1c45. L ANE' fNOLUME� f : r : x31+li bt?. -a �' +•�. o - 1 '� . .�APPR'OACH.:r _.... .e;vi.T�- 7 WB Left 27 113 WB Left 23 101 (12) - 10.62% Thru 0 Thru 11 Right 86 Right 67 EB Left 73 113 EB Left 65 113 0 0% Thru 1 Thru 13 Right 39 Right 35 NB Left 193 1424 NB Left 107 942 (482) - 33.84% Thru 1044 Thru 730 Right 187 Ri• ht 105 SB Left 64 831 SB Left 43 679 (152) - 18.29% Thru 740 Thru 610 Right 27 Right 26 Intersection Totals 2481 1835 I (646) - 26.04% City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 9 Table 1 — 1993 to 2004 Actual Count Volume Comparison at Mansfield and Pines As demonstrated within Table 1, the average intersection growth rate for the Mansfield and Pines intersection is 1.67- percent. From 1993 through 1999, the growth rate for all intersections within this area was analyzed with a growth rate of 3.0 percent. Therefore, for all studies performed over time, the future year volumes are overstated. This is evident when you look at the projected 2004 traffic Volumes at the Pines and Mansfield intersection with the 1999 Lawson and Gunning project from the Mirabeau Point Project EIS documents. These are shown graphically on Figure 2 in the appendix and listed with the actual counts from 2004 shown on the same Figure in Table 2 below. Table 2 — 2004 Projected vs. Actual Turning Movement Counts at Pines and Mansfield City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 10 As can be seen from Table 2, the anticipated growth on Pines has been overstated by over 25- percent. Some of this overstatement, granted has been because the NB rights and SB lefts from Pines to Mansfield have not materialized due to the fact that the Lawson and Gunning projects have not been constructed and occupied. However, the issues remain the same depending upon which side you may or may not be on, the Mansfield connection to Mirabeau was and is intended to allow traffic from west of Pines to access Indian Avenue east of Pines without having to use the revised Pines and Indiana Avenue intersection. The intent is still the same and the result will be much better once the Pines Road Corridor project is implemented, even without Mansfield extended. The resulting LOS will be better than projected by year because of the progress, or lack thereof, of development north and east of the Pines and Indiana intersection, however, extending Mansfield per the Pines Road Corridor Study (PRCS) is not the only alternative available in 2004 as it was in 1998 when it was proposed. To this point, we have only been dealing with the original purpose for Mansfield being provided as an option to meet the issues associated with the Pines Road Corridor Study which was prepared for Spokane County and the WSDOT. At the time the analysis was prepared and presented there appeared to be no other alternative available that would accomplish the same goals that Mansfield extended would do. However, as noted in the bullet points of changed conditions a very significant item has changed and that is the Bridging the Valley project. In 1998, it could never have been envisioned by myself as one of the principal authors of the Pines Road Corridor Study that sometime in the future the UPRR line between Indiana Avenue and Shannon Avenue would be vacated with both the UPRR and BNRR sharing mainline adjacent to Trent Avenue. If, at that time, this was someone's ultimate solution to the railroad crossing issues in the Valley, it was not divulged during all of the meetings held between numerous agencies that met and commented on the Pines Road Corridor project. What this Bridging the Valley project does is alleviate the two largest issues associated with the Pines Road study which were; 1.) How to move traffic from the west side of Pines to the east side of Pines, get them to Indiana and move them to the east either to Evergreen Road, the Mall, Mirabeau Point or Sullivan Road without impacting the new Pines /lndianaJWB Ramps intersection; and 2.) Deal with the high cost and low benefit or condemning a 6 -unit apartment building for $600,000 to $800,000 for the through extension from Houk to the Lawson property. What the Bridging the Valley project does is provide a low cost (Estimate of $100,000 without a signal and $300,000 with a signal) solution by extending Houk to Indiana over the future vacated UPRR right'of way. The result would be the same and meet the needs and goals of the original Pines Road Corridor Study, traffic would move from west to east at Mansfield, traffic would access Indiana via Houk Street instead of Mirabeau Parkway and not use the Indiana and Pines Road intersection. Therefore, by extending Houk Street to Indiana Avenue, the City /County/WSDOT would save $350,000 to $725,000 and use these funds for other projects in the Valley. City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 11 Proposed Alternative Discussion Based upon the above discussion, the intent of this change is to modify the City of Spokane Valley Transportation Improvement Plan / Arterial Road Plan to allow for the deletion of Mansfield Avenue between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway. This link would be replaced with a less costly and intrusive alternative to realign Houk Street and extend Houk Street south and tie into Indiana Avenue. By removing Mansfield extended from the Arterial Road Plan and replacing it with Houk Street extended you will have the same opportunity to keep traffic from east of the Pines away from the Pines and Indiana intersection. It our opinion that this would in every aspect keep in place the intent of the Pines Road Corridor Study. By utilizing Houk Street it would keep the Corridor study intact and at the same time delete the impact to development by not bisecting the Lawson and Gunning (Hamilton) properties with Mansfield. Therefore, we believe that the overall area mobility will not be impacted by this proposed change, to that end we have provided a limited transportation analysis based upon various components from the background studies to further our proposal and to provide a reasonable assertion that the premise is appropriate and should be adopted. For this analysis the following assumptions shall apply. • The intent of the 1999 Lawson Gunning Traffic Impact Analysis (1999 study) will be followed. • • Within the 1999 study, the WITH Mansfield analysis will be used for trips_ dealing with the Pines Road Corridor Study and the Pines and Mansfield intersection for volume definition. • The assumptions for directional distribution will be modified as follows: 1. The Lawson properties will access Pines and Indiana from the construction and improvement of Shannon Avenue and Houk Street. 2. The Lawson and Hamilton Properties although adjoining do not and should not require cross access if adequate access can be provide separately and per City and Fire codes. Therefore, the notion that access between these two parcels is advantageous it is necessarily not, especially if one develops into a 300 to 400 unit apartment complex and the other into a business park or development with office capabilities, etc... 3. For this analysis, it will be assumed that Mansfield Avenue may or may not be extended to the west past the Inland Empire Paper property known as Mirabeau Point, currently its westernmost terminus. It has not been fully decided by Hamilton if he will extend as a public or private road. 4. Directional distributions will hold from the 1999 study, only easterly travel from Lawson will use Indiana from Houk, All traffic from Hamilton will use Mansfield east to Mirabeau Parkway and then either south to Indiana or north to Pines. City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 12 • Traffic Volumes from the 1999 study will not be normalized for 2004 from the count at Mansfield even though the projections are 25- percent over existing for conservatism. • There will be no modification of trip generation rates or distribution percentages other than previously noted from the 1999 study. • For consistency, the results of the analysis will be cross checked with the Mirabeau Point EIS documents as these documents held that no trips would access Pines except from Euclid (Mirabeau Parkway) and Indiana Avenue as this analysis was prepared prior to the adoptions of Mansfield as a through street from Mirabeau and Houk. • Applicable sections of the appropriate document will be provided in the appendix for reference. The affected intersections for discussion and analysis purposes for this proposed comprehensive plan change are as follows. A. Mansfield and Pines B. Pines and Indiana C. Indiana and Houk D. Indiana and Mirabeau Parkway E. Mansfield and Mirabeau Parkway It should be noted, that all of these intersections have been previously analyzed by other proposals that have or are already moving forward. As noted at the beginning of this document, the following reference documents make up the basis and justification for this change. 1. Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared for the Lawson /Gunning Properties Rezone, June 1993 — Inland Pacific Engineering 2. Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared for the Lawson /Gunning Project, Shannon Avenue, June 1999 — Inland Pacific Engineering 3. Mirabeau Point Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Reclassification, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix B — Traffic Impact Analysis, September 1997 — Inland Pacific Engineering 4. Mirabeau Point Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Reclassification, Final Impact Statement, Appendix C — Technical Appendicles to the Revised • Traffic Impact Analysis, May 14, 1998 — Inland Pacific Engineering 5. Pines Corridor Improvement Project, Westbound On -Ramp Realignment for WSDOT & Spokane County, July 1998 — Inland Pacific Engineering Most notably from this list, this proposal takes note of Item No. 2, the Traffic Impact Analysis provided for ZE -36 -97 which was the rezone application applied for by Lawson and Gunning that was not dropped, but was not completed. This traffic study evaluated the impacts for this area both with and without Mansfield extended. The reason for this implementation ana min ine 11ouK to inaiana Intersection. A ' r 5, t t lIS ' ` s gf ; I INTERSECTI ONg- d is " e , 4' :, s ,0.1,v r �,,,� _ - ... 47-- s i -tr.. .=-4..-.1..... ;, 4T 20061P,MZPEAKIH ou'R TRAFFIC "S TYPE O �i� c " g `4'�;r- A :l ,4,44T f ^° � DELAY, r �� • y 10 ;S : � _OR'' , U: 9 6 , � 3r ' ? w ` �ti," ,a- tu' 1 ' i 'a�a, ar * Ir LOS ' . 3 :;?_ '.`.s?L :-ice Houk and Shannon U WB Left = 25.9 seconds D Houk and Indiana U SB•Left = 17.2 seconds C Pines and Mansfield S Intersection = 28.3 sec D Pines / WB On / Indiana S Intersection = 21.3 sec C Indiana and Mirabeau S Intersection = 16.7 sec C Mirabeau and Mansfield S (future) Minor Left = 15.0 sec B Based on this the only new elements to be analyzed would be the Proposed Houk Street and Indiana Avenue intersection and the Houk Street and Shannon Avenue for unsignalized level or service. It should be noted prior to review of this Table that all traffic from the Lawson and Gunning (Hamilton) was assumed to use the Shannon L,) Avenue approach and that no traffic was routed to Mansfield east of the Gunning (Hamilton) property to maximize the potential for impact to the new Shannon and Indiana intersections with Houk. t f City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 13 was the private parcel laying between Houk and the Lawson properties and that even though Lawson and Gunning could have moved forward and developed their properties, per the Pines Road Corridor Study (Item No. 5) the local agencies needed to act on the existing 6 -plex lot as well the Mirabeau Point project would need to move forward to build their portion of Mansfield for the Lawson /Gunning properties to have access to both Pines Road and Mirabeau Parkway. Based on the fact that the County could not preclude the Lawson and Gunning properties from developing and moving forward the rezone was analyzed without Mansfield extended to Mirabeau Parkway. Lastly, the other study of note is Item No. 4, the Mirabeau Point EIS, wherein, this analysis, used the Mansfield, Shannon, Houk, Mansfield to Pines route and no traffic access pines from this route, thereby, assuming that no connection in fact was available and it was incumbent upon Mirabeau to move traffic east, west, north and south via Mirabeau Parkway from either the Pines and Euclid /Mirabeau Pkwy or the Mirabeau Pkwy and Indiana intersection. The following Table 3, supplements Table 6 of the 1999 study for existing 2004 traffic volumes and presents the Existing LOS of the affected intersections. Table 3, 2006 Level of Service w! Project w/ Pines Road Corridor Study • = Signalized / "U" = Unsignalized Intersections As shown in Table 3 without Mansfield extended and with Houk extended to Indiana the Houk and Indiana intersection levels of service are adequate as are all the other intersections within this area. It should be noted, that with the exception of the trip generation rates as revised for the proposed increase in apartments on the Lawson parcel all traffic turning movements were either taken from the 1999 Lawson /Gunning City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 14 study or the 1998 Revised Mirabeau Point TIA that include a built in 25- percent increase over existing volumes and should represent levels of service at a 1.67- percent growth rate for 10 to 12 years beyond 2006. It is apparent from a level of service and land access perspective that both the Lawson /Gunning and other traffic from realigned Montgomery can reach the west side of Pines Road, by not going through the Pines and Indiana intersection and not have a detrimental impact to Indiana Avenue with the addition of the new Houk intersection. Summary It is the intent of this presentation to provide the City of Spokane Valley Staff, Planning Commission and City Council with the appropriate information to make an informed decision to modify the City of Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan (and any other affected documents) by removing Mansfield extended from Houk Street to Mirabeau Parkway and replacing this link with an extension of Houk Street to Indiana Avenue. In order to make this decision the following information was presented and is either included as text or as reference materials in the Appendix of this document. 1. The Pines Road Corridor, prepared in 1998 proposed the first extension of Mansfield Avenue between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway. This extension was originally collaboration between the WSDOT, Spokane County and the Lawson /Gunning properties. However, the premise of this mutual agreement has changed with the potential changes incurred from the Bridging the Valley project. 2. Lawson and Hamilton (Gunning) are desirous of developing their property, but they do not wish to have their single proprietor developments bisected by an Arterial roadway that may or may not have a beginning or an end, when the Houk Street extension to Indiana will for all intents and purposes meet all of the requirements of the ALL.known previous traffic studies as well as the Pines Rood Corridor Study. 3. Indiana Avenue between Pines, Evergreen and Sullivan has always been the preferred Arterial route of choice. Re- directing traffic to Mirabeau unduly stresses Mirabeau Parkway and Mirabeau's portion of Mansfield as well as places a significant development burden on Lawson and Hamilton to design residential communities around an Arterial roadway. 4. Since 1993, Indiana Avenue has always been the preferred route of choice for access from the Lawson and Gunning properties. When the Lawson and Gunning projects started in 1993 the assumption was that they would use and modify the Shannon Avenue (McDonald Extended) existing railroad crossing and use that as their primary point of ingress and egress. This crossing allowed Lawson and Gunning to stay out of the issues associated with the Pines and Mansfield intersection and to move forward with their project. City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 15 5. The extension of Houk Street to Indiana Avenue continues to meet the intent of the Pines Road Corridor Study by providing for the movement of traffic from east to west around the future Pines /IndianaNVB Ramps intersection. The Corridor study was not fixated on Mirabeau Parkway as the only means to redirect traffic back to Indiana via the Mirabeau and Indiana intersection. However, at the time it was the ONLY CROSSING OF THE UPRR except at Pines Road! It is important to remember that in 1998 the constraints for north south travel between Shannon and Indiana are substantially different once the UPRR line is vacated. 6. As noted in No. 5 above the concept of Bridging the Valley changes all of criteria and assumptions for the Mansfield Avenue extension to Mirabeau Parkway in that it allows for a crossing of the UPRR that did not exist in several places. It may very well be that in Hamilton's instance he may want his property to connect to Shannon, Mansfield (within Mirabeau) and also to Indiana. The point being that with the Bridging of the Valley project moving forward, to some degree all bet's are off and additional access options are now available to the Lawson and Gunning properties, much the same as they are to Mirabeau Point, which most likely would like to have an Evergreen extension north at the Evergreen and Indiana intersection. It makes logical sense and is already signalized on three legs. 7 Lastly removing the Mansfield extension makes economic sense. As has been discussed within this document, between the Gunning parcels and Houk Street there is an existing 6 -unit apartment building that would need to be condemned by the local jurisdiction (City of Spokane Valley) before Mansfield could ever be extended. The cost of this purchase originally was discussed with the County in 1998 and at that time it was estimated to cost between $600,000 and $800,000, which did not include any construction of Mansfield, which a small portion would need to be constructed over this lot once the building was demolished. It is important for the reviewer to note, that even if Lawson moves forward with his project, Hamilton, now the owner of the gunning parcel may not move forward for several years to come. Therefore, it could come to pass that the City could spend $800,000 and still not have a through access to Mirabeau Parkway. 8. It is more reasonable to assume, that the cost benefit ratio would say that an extension of Houk Street to Indiana Avenue at a cost of $100,000 to $300,000 a saving of between $500,000 and $700,000 that maintains the intent of the Pines Road Corridor Study would be the appropriate answer for the problem within this area as it will provide for area wide mobility, pass traffic from west to east out of the Pines and Indiana intersection and allow for pedestrian access from a highly populated multi - family developed area directly to Indiana and the sidewalks and busses found there. Therefore, we ask the City of Spokane Valley to modify your Arterial Road Plan and Transportation Improvement Plan if need be, to remove the extension of Mansfield from City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 16 Houk Street to Mirabeau Parkway. We would ask that you replace this with Houk Street extended to form a new intersection with Indiana Avenue south of Shannon and the UPRR tracks. We believe that given the history of this project, the time spent to date, 1993 to 2004 and the likely hood of Mansfield being extended with the next 5 to 10 years anyway provides a more reasonable and cost effective solution to the issues at hand. Additionally, I will be available at the Planning Commission and City Council meetings to provide a presentation and discussion on this topic for your consideration and deliberation. Should you have any questions related to this document do not hesitate to call at 893 -2617. Sincerely, Whipple ' onsuljwrg nginee Todd R. Whipple, P.E. Enclosures — Appendix Cc: Bill Lawson Chris Ashenbrenner Jay Bonnett File a 0 I PROD #: 2004.30 DATE: 08/05/04 DRAWN: RLM APPROVED: TRW FIGURE NO. 1 INDIANA AVE. zXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXISTING MAP W / MANSFIELD EXTENDED AS SHOWN PROPOSED ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN REVISION MANSFIELD - HOUK TO MIRABEAU A & A CONSTRUCTION SHANNON APARTMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON VICINITY MAP PROJECT SITE INDIANA AVE, D AV ENU E . P U.P .RIR• Q PROPOSED REVISION NEW MAP J/0 MANSFIELD EXTENDED SHOWING HOUK EXTENDED TO INDIANA AND NEW SHANNON 4WC E WHPPLE CONSULAIMG € GIN IS CIVIL AND TRASS. ORTION dlGINEERING 13216 SPRAGUE .AVENUE SPOKANE VALLEY, ViASH'+KGTON 99216 PH: 569- 532517 FAX 939- 325.0227 "A" ACTUAL P.M. PEAK COUNT MAY OF 2004 27 c 39 0`✓ <3= 1 86 G 73 OI 0 op P 0 — "C" EXISTING 1996 W/ & W/0 EVERGREEN INTERCHANGE FIG. 4 & 15 OF MIRABEAU FINAL E.I.S. PROJgr: 2004.30 DATE: 06/0 5/0 4 DRAWN: RLM APPROVED: TRW PROPOSED ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN REVISION MANSFIELD - HOUK TO MIRABEAU A & A CONSTRUCTION SHANNON APARTMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON FIGURE NO. 2 "B" 1998 PROJECTED 2004 TRAFFIC VOLUME WITH LAWSON PROJECT FROM FIG. 16 & 17, MIRAEAU POINT E.I.S. p AVENUE INDIANA AVENUE' I -go NOT TO SCAL)T 4WC E WHPPPLE CONSULAT1NG ENGINEERS CAL AND TRANSPORTION ENGINEERING 1 3216 SPRA Le AVENUE SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHNGTON p921 Ptt 509- 691.2637 FAX �l ; FIGURE NO. 3 "A" ACTUAL P.M. PEAK COUNT MAY OF 2004 23 G 35 11 G= 67 r 65 N 0 rf1 0h0 0 N 0 M N 21fj 1 0(=> N 1 68ez e 58 c'l 0 v u1 n in "C" EXISTING P.M. PEAK HOUR EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES O U) W Z MANSFIELD EXISTING COUNTS 1 993.1996.1999 "B" 1993 EXISTING P.M. PEAK TRAFFIC VOLUMES 0 0 EA N 111 N 20 GP i7 5� Gr i 62 e52 N0 CO M P LEI r � MANSFIELD AVENUE INDIANA AVENUE I -90 N 0 N 1n 22�� 19 72 � e 62 di CO P "D" 1998 P.M. PEAK HOUR NOT TO SCALE PRO.) #: 2004.30 DATE: 06/05/04 DRAWN: RLM APPROVED: TRW PROPOSED ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN REVISION MANSFIELD - HOUK TO MIRABEAU A & A CONSTRUCTION SHANNON APARTMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON m WHIPFLE COTJSUL>TIN3 ENGINEERS CP& AND TRANSPORTION ENGINEEFFNGi 13216 SPRAGUE AVENUE SPO:KANE VALLEY. WASHINGTON 93216 crw-1o7.0C.tt C. vn evac.w,y 1999 LAWSON /GUNNING FIGURE 12, 2006 WITH PROJECT, WITH MANSFIELD. WITH PINES ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY TO ARGONNE I/C 1999 LAWSON /GUNNING FIGURE 12, 2006 VAIN PROJECT, W1TH MANSFIELD. VATH PINES ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY MANSFIELD AVENUE I.r ��[.IlKwwr. -- Mummer SHANNON PINES ROAD E I/C AREA lll� 124 x•191 277 Gm• z41 1999 STUDY A FROM FIGURE 6 AND FIGURE 7 ON MANSFIELD BACKGROUND 100 VPL 1 3 VPH NEW INTERSECTION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGE N INDIANA AVENUE 1 -910 •• ASSUMES ALL GUNNING (HAMILTON) TRIPS USE SHANNON AS ACCESS, WORST CASE FOR HOUK AND INDIANA INTERSECTION • MOVEMENT VOLUMES ARE DIFFERENT, THIS IS !, FOR APPROACHES THAT WOULD BE REDIRECTED TO MIRABEAU PARKWAY MANSFIELD AVENUE MIp OINT NEW INTERSECTION P J 0 U.P.RR. TO SE VACATED DUE TO BRIDGING THE VALLEY PROJECT P }} ( ) :ll �Y 023413.5 fIR r �° 50 5 J •• 1G 150 .5co Pg 1998 MIRABEAU POINT E.I.S., REVISED E.I.S FIGURE 12, 2006 WITH PROJECT 10ATHOUT MANSFIELD r (1999 IAWSON /GUNNING STUDY, FIGURE 12) 1998 REVISED T.I.A., MIRABEAU POINT PROJECT, FIGURE 19 NOT TO SCALE n 0 J 3 0 L` nu a 0 zn '413. ° f<p oo< _oo< z 0 z z 0 U 7 0 I 1- 3 0 J L- z F P z 0 z 3 C 7 0 I W L d L 1 a 0 c LAND USE P.M PEAK HOUR RATE ENTERING !EXITING VOL. t % VOL. R LAWSON — APIS. 400 0.62 67% 165 3356 82 TABLE 4 1999 STUDY REMAINDER — — fl7 — 160 TOTALS' 262• 242• fl a ;Ear n^ o. " G o u ac44 &0 t00• u z 01 a CURRENT LAWSON PROPOSAL as 393 SAY 400 M.F. UNITS • WORST CASE ALL TRIPS ACCESSING SHANNON PREVIOUS LAWSON PROPOSAL = 222 M.F. UNITS WITH MANSFIELD AS EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY, t33 3 .4> 4 3 0 0 m z MANSFIELD AVENUE NOTE: COMPARE TO FIGURE 8, 1999 LAWSON GUNNING STUDY FOR ORIGINAL SITE TRIPS W/0 NOW( AND WITH MANSFIELD S1- IANNON 1 BPS J� I .4s • INDIANA AVENUE 1 -9U MANSFIEL AVENUE 1 MN 1=1 —�1 - -1 - -r— — UnUMIMIN -- -Mal �\Qt ��P Q- NOT 1 0 y\1 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Todd Whipple, P.E. intersection Houk and Indiana Agency /Co. Whipple Consultin Engineers Jurisdiction City of Spokane Valley Analysis Year 2006 Date Performed 6/24/2004 - Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Project Description 2004 -30 A&A Construction - Mansfield Comprehensive Plan Chan EastNVest Street: Indiana Avenue North/South Street: Houk Street intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 176 277 0 0 261 193 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 185 291 0 0 274 203 Proportion of heavy vehicles, P p 0 - 0 — — Median type Two Way Left Tum Lane RT Channelized? 0 1 Lanes 1. 2 0 0 2 1 Configuration L T T R Upstream Signal - 1 1 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (vehth) 0 0 0 181 0 296 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 190 0 311 Proportion of heavy ehicles, PIS, 0 0 0 0 0 0 P ercent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N . N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 1 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 1 ;Configuration - L R Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service' Approach ES WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R Volume, v (vph) - 185 190 311 Capacity, c (vph) 1301 483 885 v/c ratio 0.14 0.39 0.35 Queue length (95 %) 0.50 1.85 1.59 Control Delay (s/veh) 8.2 17.2 11.3 LOS A C g Approach delay (s/veh) — — 13.5 Approach LOS — — B Two Stop Control Page 1 of 1 fiCS2000TAt Copyright 0 2003 Uoivcrsity or Florida, AU Rights Reserved Version 4,Id Intersection Houk and Shannon Jurisdiction City of Spokane Valley Analysis Year 2006 Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 ot General Information Analyst Agency /Co. Date Performed !Analysis Time Period Todd R. Whipple, P.E. Whipple Consulting Engineers 6/25/2004 PM Peak Hour Project Description 2004 -30 A&A Construction - Mansfield Comp Plan Change East/West Street: Shannon Avenue Intersection Orientation: East -West ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street vlovement olume ( veh/h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHv Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal Minor Street Movement olume (veh /h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHV Percent grade ( %) Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? anes Configuration Eastbound 1 L 0 0.95 0 0 0 7 L 0 0.95 0 0 0 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 2 T 0 0.95 0 0 0 Northbound 8 T 148 0.95 155 2 N 0 1 T Site Information North /South Street: Houk Street Study Period (hrs): 0.25 3 R 0 0.95 0 Undivided 0 0 9 R 205 0.95 215 0 0 0 1 R Westbound 4 L 197 0.95 207 2 1 L 10 L 42 0.95 44 0 1 L 5 T 0 0.95 0 0 0 11 T 76 0.95 80 2 N 0 1 T 6 R 33 0.95 34 0 1 R Southbound 12 R 0 0.95 0 0 0 0 0 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service . Approach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, C (vph) vlc ratio Queue length (95 %) Control Delay (s /veh) LOS Approach delay r/veh) pproach LOS Es 1 WB 4 L 207 1613 0.13 0.44 7.6 A Northbound 7 8 T 155 434 0.36 1.59 17.8 C 9 215 1081 0.20 0.74 9.2 A 12.8 8 Southbound 10 L 44 216 0.20 0.74 25.9 D 11 T 80 453 0.18 0.63 14.6 8 18.6 C 12 FICS7000T Copyright G 2003 University of Florida All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Pines Corridor Improvement Project Westbound On -Ramp Realignment for WSDOT & Spokane County f EXP IRES: 9f,/r1'1' Timothy A. Schwab, P.E. Spokane County, Washington July 1998 IPE W.O. Num. 95551 Prepared as a part of Lawson/Gunning Rezone Traffic Study ZE-36-97 Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 707 W. 7th Avenue, Suite 200 Spokane, WA 99204 (509)458 -6840 Todd R. Whipple, P.E. Preliminary Design Analysis Introduction/Purpose Existing Conditions Planned Improvements Description of Proposed Improvements Design Standards Used Cost Estimates Attachments TABLE OF CONTENTS Level of Service Calculations With 2006 Traffic Improvements Level of Service Calculations With 2006 Traffic Improvements Typical Roadway Sections Overall Concept Plan Plan of Improvements Volumes Without Proposed Volumes With Proposed Pines Road/Indiana Proposed Transportation Improvements 1-90 Westbound Ramps to Mansfield Intersection Preliminary Design Analysis Introduction/Purpose The land north of I -90 surrounding Pines Road has a combination of retail, commercial, multi- family and single family land uses as well as public uses including a park and ride lot and a maintenance/storage area for WSDOT. There is some proposed developments for vacant land in this area, including the Mirabeau Point project, additional mall/retail space and both multi- family and single family land uses. With the proposed projects comes increased use of the existing transportation facilities and a need for capacity improvements for the transportation system. The purpose of this design analysis is to present a concept for improving the transportation circulation and mobility in the area from the westbound ramp intersection north of I -90 to Mansfield Road on Pines Road and from the proposed Mirabeau Parkway east of Pines to approximately Wilbur Road west of Pines. This information is intended to show that the proposed improvements will provide adequate levels of service for the anticipated traffic volumes in this area of Spokane County as well as provide a proposal of the general layout of the improvements. This design analysis is being provided as supplementary information to the Lawson/Gunning Comprehensive Plan and Rezone request ZE- 36 -97. This document incorporates by reference the Lawson/Gunning TIA, the Mirabeau Point EIS and the SR 90 - Four Lakes to State Line EIS documents. Existing Conditions The portion of Pines Road (SR27) from I - to Mansfield Avenue is located in Spokane County east of the City of Spokane in the Spokane Valley area. Within the last decade, a significant amount of development has occurred along the Pines Corridor increasing traffic congestion. The new Spokane Valley Mall along with other proposed land developments and annual increases in background growth of traffic will bring the levels of service to intersections in this area to unacceptable levels. While the proposed new Evergreen Interchange will take some traffic from the Pines Road Interchange and provide some relief for the traffic on Pines Road, with the proposed land developments in the area, additional transportation improvements are needed. The existing intersections of Pines Road/Indiana Avenue/Montgomery Avenue and Pines Road/Westbound ramps are closely spaced without adequate room for storage. These two intersections are both signalized, but operate from one controller. During peak periods, there is not enough storage for the vehicles making the northbound le$ turn onto Montgomery. The southbound traffic at the Pines/Indiana intersection also suffers excessive delay during the peak Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 1 Pines Road Corridor Improvements periods while the westbound traffic on Indiana is only given a few seconds of green to turn onto or cross Pines Road. Pines Road in the project area has two through lanes in both the northbound and southbound directions. The posted speed limit.is 35 mph. There are left turn lanes for the left turning movements on Pines Road at all signalized intersections. A two way left turn lane exists between Indiana and Mansfield on Pines Road. Indiana Avenue east of Pines Road has two through lanes in both the eastbound and southbound directions. Two way left turn lanes and dedicated left turn lanes exist on Indiana to service the existing and proposed commercial/retail land uses. Montgomery Avenue west of Pines Road has one lane each direction with no turn lanes. Mansfield Avenue (east/west) currently has one lane each direction. The Mansfield Avenue and Pines Road intersection is located approximately 600 feet north of Indiana Avenue. The general topography of the project area is flat to rolling. A railroad crossing exists immediately north and adjacent to the Pines/Indiana intersection. Planned Improvements RTSDOT has two planned projects on Pines Road schedule for construction within the next two years. The first project will widen Pines Road at the westbound ramp terminal intersection to accommodate a second left turn lane for the traffic going westbound on I -90. The second project is an overlay project on Pines Road between I -90 and Trent Avenue (SR 290). The traffic impact analysis for the Mirabeau Project has identified several transportation improvements needed to adequately handle the traffic from the proposed developments in this area. These improvements include: 1) Relocate the westbound off -ramp from Pines Road to the existing slip ramp at Indiana with a signal at this ramp intersection, and 2) At Pines Road/Indiana intersection, construct an eastbound right turn lane and revise the eastbound and westbound phasing to split phasing. Additionally, several land use actions are moving forward within this area with several transportation improvement mitigations proposed. At the present time, a project proposed by Divcon, Inc. at the southeast corner of Pines Road & Euclid Avenue is being conditioned to add a southbound to eastbound left turn lane on Pines Road at Euclid Avenue as well as provide for full signalization of this intersection. Description of Proposed Improvements The primary design issue which causes problems in this area is the existing closely spaced intersections on Pines Road, namely the westbound ramps and the Indiana/Montgomery intersections. Based on supplementary analysis provided by Inland Pacific Engineering, we are proposing improvements that will combine these two intersections eliminating many of the storage /queuing problems and improve circulation through this area. The main components of Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 2 Pines Road Corridor Improvements the proposed improvements are as foUows; please see overall plan in the attachments. 1. Move the westbound on -ramp to be the west leg of the Pines/Indiana intersection. This west leg would be a one -way road (westbound) with two lanes which would serve as the on -ramp. Montgomery would be realigned to "tee" into the on -ramp road.. At this "tee" intersection, only right turns in and right turns out would be allowed. Revisions to the on -ramp would be constructed to transition from existing Montgomery Road to the existing on -ramp roadway. 2. At the Pines/Indiana intersection, construct a second northbound to westbound left turn lane. Pines would be widened to the west to accommodate this additional lane. The west railroad crossing gate would require relocation to the west. 3. Montgomery Avenue access would be revised east of the "tee" with the on -ramp. Those wanting to leave sites on Montgomery, but not wishing to use I -90 will no longer be able to access Pines Road from Montgomery but instead have to go to Mansfield Avenue to access Pines Road. It is the intent that Mansfield Avenue replace Montgomery as the primary east/west collector /arterials as future construction east of Pines Road will tie Mansfield into Mirabeau point Drive for access to the Mall and point east. 4. At the Pines/Mansfield intersection, a signal will be installed. Striping for eastbound right turn and westbound left turn lanes would be installed. 5. At the Mansfield /Montgomery/Wilbur intersections, a four legged intersection would be constructed by straightening out Montgomery Dr. to tie into Mansfield Avenue. Wilbur Road would provide the north/south legs of the intersection. Stop control would be installed on the north and south legs to provide unimpeded through movement for the east/west traffic on Montgomery/Mansfield. 6. Mansfield Avenue would be improved to collector arterial design standards in phases from Wilbur Road to Pines Road. Design deviations may be required for portions of this roadway to remain within available right -of -way until additional CRP and acquisition funds become available. However, this portion of Mansfield is generally consistent with portions of existing Montgomery within this area. 7. Mansfield Avenue would be extended east from approximately the Houk/Mansfield intersection on a new alignment to connect to the east/west road in the Mirabeau Point project adjacent to the proposed YMCA site. Collector arterial design standards would be used for the new roadway. This connection will make the collector /arterial east/west mobility link complete by providing access to the mall and other proposed developments. 8. Shannon Avenue east of Houk Road along the railroad would be vacated. Access to the remaining property will be from the extended Mansfield Avenue. (This property is part Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 3 Pines Road Corridor Improvements INTERSECTION Level of Service With 2006 Traffic Volumes Without Improvements With Proposed Improvements Delay LOS Delay LOS Pines Rd./WB Ramps 30.8 sec. D N/A - Intersection Removed Pines Rd./Indiana Ave. 28.4 sec. D 18.7 sec. C Pines Rd. /Mansfield Ave. (Unsig.) (Signalized) ** F - 19.0 sec. - C Indiana Ave./WB Off -Ramp (Unsig.) (Signalized) 22.7 sec. D - 7.8 sec. - B of the "Lawson/Gunning Rezone" proposal.) See the appendix for typical roadway sections and preliminary plan sheets for a concept plan of these improvements. Shown in the following table is a summary of the levels of service for the anticipated traffic volumes with the proposed developments and improvements outlined in the Mirabeau Point EIS (Without Improvements column) and with the proposed improvements as outlined above (With Proposed Improvements column) The levels of service shown are based on the assumption that Evergreen Interchange is constructed since this is a requirement for most of the development in the area. Table 1 - Level of Service With and Without Proposed Improvements ( ** ) Denotes that the calculated value was greater than 1,000 seconds The above table shows that the level of service for the intersections in this area will improve to LOS C or better with the proposed improvements and at full buildout of all proposed developments. The intersection at Mansfield Ave./Montgomery/Wilbur Road will operate at LOS C with 15.2 seconds of delay as shown in the attachments. The proposed on -ramp realignment is expected to require FHWA approval since the proposed improvements revise the access point onto I -90. This will likely require an Access Point Decision Report (Six Point Report). The FHWA approval process for the ramp realignment will require a minimum time of three months. Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 4 Pines Road Corridor Improvements Other Improvements to be Considered in the Future With the relocation of the westbound on -ramp from the current location north to opposite Indiana Avenue, there becomes room available to consider a westbound 1 -90 to southbound Pines Road loop ramp. A loop ramp at this location would improve the flow of traffic in this area, particularly at the Indiana Ave./Pines Road intersection. A loop ramp with radius lengths of 150 'feet will fit within the area which will be available. However, there will not be enough room for deceleration and taper lengths due to the bridge abutment. To provide adequate room for deceleration and taper lengths, the bridge abutmentwill need to be moved north and girders replaced. Under current traffic conditions without Evergreen Interchange, this would not be practical. However, when Evergreen Interchange is constructed, one bridge at a time could be reconstructed with traffic diverted to the other bridge. Lanes would be constricted to one to two lanes each direction with more of the traffic using Evergreen Interchange. Design Standards Used Spokane County Roadway design standards were used in the preliminary design and layout of the roadway widening on Mansfield Avenue. WSDOT design standards were used for the horizontal layout of the revised westbound on- ramp/Montgomery/Indiana access. The minimum horizontal curves used for the widening on Mansfield Road are 450 foot radius curves to keep the roadway within the right -of -way. A design deviation will be needed for this since the minimum radius on collector arterials is 500 feet. This design deviation should be approved since there are existing horizontal curves on Montgomery with approximately 350 foot radius curves. The construction of walls may be required for Mansfield Avenue between Pines Road and Wilbur Road due to topography and to reduce adjacent property impact. Vertical grades through the proj cct will be maintained at a minimum grade of 0.5 %. Maximum grades used will most likely be less than 1.5% as this area is relatively flat. A constant superelevation of 2% was assumed throughout the project. For the relocated west -bound on -ramp, horizontal curve radii of 500 feet and 800 feet were used to transition to the existing ramp. Cost Estimates The following cost estimates are preliminary, but should be sufficiently accurate to provide information for pursing funding for this project. The significant items of construction for widening and realigning the roadway will be the grading, any walls which may be needed, and surfacing materials, namely the crushed rock, concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk and the asphalt pavement. The required thickness of these materials can vary depending on the pavement design. When a pavement design has been completed, the cost of these items can be determined more accurately. For this preliminary estimate, we assumed a thickness of 6 inches of crushed rock and 4 inches of asphalt pavement. This should provide an adequate pavement section from the anticipated truck traffic with the commercial and industrial land uses in reasonable good native .Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 5 Pines Road Corridor Improvements Transportation Improvement Component Preliminary Construction Cost Roadway Improvements at Montgomery, Westbound on -ramp S300,000 Signal Revision at the Pines/Indiana intersection $100,000 Roadway widening of Mansfield west of Pines Road $450,000 Mansfield Avenue extension east of Pines Road Developer Constructed New Signal at Pines/Mansfield Intersection $1 50,000 valley gravel soil conditions. The following table gives the preliminary cost estimate for each component of the overall improvement. Table 2 - Preliminary Cost Estimates of Components Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 6 Pines Road Corridor Improvements f � Iq DA. MAN 'IEU AVENUE — MONTGOMERY DRIVE TO PINES MANSFIELD AVENUE — HO(74 TO MIRABEAU PO:VT WIDENING ON PENES RO.AO FOR 2 —NORTH BOUND LEFT TURN LANE RELOCATION OF WEST BOUND ON —RAMP 4-. OME(a[LL CONCEPT PLAN OF pHU I OG°11� (SR 277) ONP OO V PAENT .AA41* -D 4F-x- 1 P w. -4 np SEC. 9 .�� 25 N., R.44 LW_M. SPO(N GOUN IY. WASHINGTON Lwow IN wa. F:h�ln_ g.*_,>r 12/2,4 Sto 12/2'41" =OL UN AVENUE PID'ANA AtE14.f INLAND EN 1m til .•b !m (=r) 4215.55.0 t n •A RIF 1.4 WO YA AD w: _VIOL clw'o, .7.A.0 1 07 I M .7 R LAWSON / GUNNING PIKES ROAD (SR 27) IMPROVEMENTS r\ TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for LAWSON /GIJNNTh G PROJECT Shannon Avenue Spokane County, Washington June, 1999 Prepared by: Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 707 W. 7th Avenue, Suite 200 Spokane, WA 99204 (509) 458 -6840 This report has been prepared by the staff of Inland Pacific Engineering Company under the direction of the undersigned professional engineer whose seal and signature appears hereon. I EXPIRES: of p / Timothy A. Schwab, P.E. FRANQS A VE BUCKEYE MAXWELL o REMY g ua cc u. 4 C4 . c cc WABASH v o . o °; oASX C G fl a rt 0 r,.� r trtmrpcu WEUES EY L 5iE 0OA0 x • CROWN BOONS MULE; CATALOO NAKWEU. F REDBRICK FAIR VIEW 1 Li GRACE G 5... AVE -' B UCXE YE, BUCXEr ! ot c g f� r te. r 3 NONTGOUf ORIV lA[xsO• 1 AVE o r. �<'F. O 'S ; K OX AVE 111 INVIANA AV 4 77V _ - /G #A •r C4 vYi a 4„ _ ,CODA Mt AVA • 1 ITT A AnLO A ° . C 4608YA 4ssian AVE ; m g NA TWEL WART p BOONE •• AVE 0 AV E v Y AVE o North Pint! !I. H. ALE AYE ;.1H nor AV; CNGYELLOf NAY o 0 aLKI 6 0 VALLEY 0 II • 01 TRA fI1L7r HILL RD SAIGON SAIGON UI EAH•.ON RD DRIVE MUTT O.a.* -.y EI.,, 0 AC, E. co -- 11. 7 ... OUVE s ° se! WELLESELY of 00 141000 FORKER O MON 2 NUON 6 ....�... ?1 ; C p INLAND FIGURE 1 LAWSON / GUNNING PACIFIC ENGINEERING VICINITY MAP TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 707 West 7th • Saito 200 (509) 458 -6840 Spokane. WA 99204 FAX: (509) 458-6844- PROJECT NO. 95551 J • OION T MftON ! • Ili 111! 1:11;1 Eli : i n • i Ill H+�� I! t- t.1•:Ie• ' :1 11,4 r.n.+K • .n�. 0.11 � 1'1 1 II :iii' ''- It11 Iikiilll V . I I . Y Nii ai I. J U t X II ' fl t I 1 x !111 1'I 1. ■i• !'lll ill 11 " i;I I 1'11 Iiiilt !W \ R j 1 7.'J: l I COMONNid Veal ^1 1 fwd INLAND et, a RNiD rho sc wiz LC PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 Wc'ot 7th • Suite 200 (509) 458 -6840 FAX: (509) 458-6844 Spokane. WA 99204 0 1 a,s0 FIGURE 2 LAY►'SON / GUNNING SITE PLAN TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 95551 1 INLAND INC PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 West 7th -Suite 200 (509) 458 -6840 Spokane, WA 99204 FAX. (509) 458 -6844 LAWSON /GUNNING TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 95551 PROJECT LOCATION FIGURE 3 ZONING MAP NOT TO SCALE I Project Size Status Hotel (Lawson Site) 200 Rooms Completed prior to 4/98 Office Building (Lawson Site) 20 k.S.F. Include as Background Strip Mall 9 k.S.F. 75% occupied in 4/98 • Office Building (Wolff Site) 24 k.S.F. Include as Background Restaurant 5.5 k.S.F. Completed prior to 4/98 Ridgeview Estates Apartments (Whimsical Pig) 317 units Completed prior to 4/98 Retirement (on Evergreen) 72 units Include as Background Inland Constr. Business Park Various 75% Occupied in 4/98 Cherry Street Apartments 233 units Include as Background Walmart Various Partially Occupied, Little or no impact to Pines & Evergreen Spokane Valley Mall: Mall 715 k.S.F. Completed prior to 4/98 Spokane Valley Mali: Hotel 300 units Trips traded for additional commercial buildings Spokane Industrial Park Expansion Various Little or no impact to Pines & Evergreen Spokane Valley Mall: Add. Mall 315 k.S.F. Include as Background Spokane Valley Mall: Commercial 318 k.S.F. Include as Background Spokane Valley Mall: Business Park 390 k.S.F. Include as Background Spokane Valley Mali: Industrial Park 800 k.S.F. Include as Background information on background projects from the Mirabeau Point traffic impact analysis. This study lists all background projects for this study as well as trip generation from the Mirabeau Point traffic impact analysis which become background trips for this study. A copy of the list of background projects is included in the appendix. The following table lists each of these background projects from the Mirabeau Point study and lists the completion status at the time of the traffic counts in April 1998. Table 3 - Status of Background Projects in April 1998 ' Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 18 Lawson./Gunning Project TM I P, K s:-t� ,yJ?�,�,,�`r"r' rcil 'Hl -i13f ti� -," ,` V �T� t (s,'k 4 � �n� \ �' 711 ^ i •' J� � .\h i j� .Y ..`A''`-.4. N "vS iL � �� 1T'� 4 ;7 ;. � 4 f rr� I fiERSE : Q1 ' "• .may; sx< : ik t-. b .1 ' �' riP 1 4" ,L '"� �,, ' *... — �i }l C..,. A V .f^.33• _ a.++i- 'hn"4.N�` ?!• - 1 .y .. .r.,,'T ]L' !N�'�itf :L� � . �r`4'= 4 J Y �.,n.' •y � SJI : M AIM ua ; *fit. i�� :.Connnection -� It ; ry' r�l� !� T G b '� �� Yi YM - 'v�7- 3 �t i el � 'NZ.,.. . '��' , r Gonnectiv A. l' iS .i } - y 6 U M 3.N$ a n " , Pines Rd./Mission Ave. 26.3 sec. D 25.4 sec. D Pines Rd'BB Ramps 29.3 sec. D 25.5 sec. D Pines Rd./WB On- Rampllndiana 26.3 sec. D 21.3 sec. C Pines Rd./Mansfield Ave. 33.3 sec. D 28.3 sec. D Indiana Ave./WB Off -ramp 14.2 sec. B 13.7 sec. B Evergreen Rd'/EB Ramps 12.9 sec. B 13.0 sec. B Evergreen Rd./WB Ramps 8.0 sec. B 8.2 sec. B Evergreen Rd./Indiana Ave. 15.9 sec. C 19.8 sec. C Mirabeau Point/Indiana 16.0 sec. C 16.7 sec. C • Mirabeau Point/Mansfield 14.5 sec. B 15.0 sec. B On the intersections analyzed with the anticipated traffic volumes, the improvements to the transportation system including Evergreen Interchange and improvements listed in the Pines Corridor Improvement Study, and without the proposed project, the levels of service will be at adequate levels, LOS C or better. Build Out Levels of Service With Proposed Project Using the number of generated trips shown on Table 4 and estimated trip distribution shown on Figures 8 & 9 and adding it to the background traffic, the total number of trips projected to use the transportation system at build out is obtained. Figures 12 & 13 show the future traffic volumes under these conditions. Using these future traffic volumes, build out year (2006) level of service calculations were performed and the results are displayed in Table 6. Table 6 - 2006 Traffic With Proposed Project, With and Without Mansfield Connection On the intersections analyzed with the anticipated traffic volumes and the improvements to the transportation system including Evergreen Interchange and improvements listed in the Pines Corridor Improvement Study, with the proposed project, the levels of service will be at adequate levels, LOS D or better. Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 29 Lawson /Cunning Project TIA 462./ 640 ■ nmm 58 4,4 C+ 61 94=> 4 547e7 /x373 n N C'1' 370 6=179 e 529 4 r' J P b n — ♦ N en wM m e+ moo — C V 0 N < ei 161 445 114 p260 80% / C Yt N — Y 0 N MANSFIELD AVE. INDIANA AVE. EAST BOUND RAMPS 0 cri W Z a i INLAND IC PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 west 7th •Suite 200 (509) 458 -6840 Spokane, WA 99204 FAX: (509) 458 -5644 q d MISSION AVE. 0 ° n ° 20 - 50 5 . p10 150 . 500 ^ c' 1 e 169 4 k , 620 333 , p 345 435 , 473 c7 LAWSON /GUNNING TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 95551 CO tit EC v 0 O A Q WEST BOUND RAMPS EAST BOUND RAMPS 393 p 351 1346 < ,a a ro v N Y 4 CO roh n o 317 NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 12 2006 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH PROJECT WITHOUT MANSFIELD CONNECTION 46 640 n m .c,1\ 4 a1 a n m n n m N n EAST BOUND RAMPS Y 161 448 Q 114 X280 60 �' fs 152 u Z v 0 1 - Ism INLAND PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 Wcst 7th •Suite 200 (509) 458 -6840 FAX: (509) 458 -6844 Spokane, WA 99204 MISSION AVE. s=C> X 10 150 e 500 mn.. P% IV * VI a tEta 620 33,3 G= 422 i=> G3=508 435 LAWSON /GUNNING TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 95551 WEST BOUND RAMPS aZ CO EA BOUND RAMPS O Z W LJ Ix 303 = <1=351 1346 e 568 FIGURE 13 71 N CI GO In 414 cV4 O f 317 /j55 NOT TO SCALE 2006 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH PROJECT WITH MANSFIELD CONNECTION REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for MIRABEAU POINT PROJECT Spokane County, Washington May 14, 1998 Prepared by: Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 707 W. 7th Avenue, Suite 200 Spokane, WA 99204 (509) 458 -6840 This report has been prepared by the staff of Inland Pacific Engineering Company under the direction of the undersigned professional engineer whose seal and signature appears hereon. Timothy A. Schwab, P.E. 'ENTRA • EUCLID x SHANNON AYE CATALOO ICKEYE G SIERT FRUIT P !C SICICSON BUCKET 3 5 INDIANA AVE ....rrdD teaONa xr' R UMrI� ((n .•'. AUG TA 8 Nola Pines Jr_ 0.S. ` - lKatTf O •r r^ ri:M l.. army j �C ty7 4. IC OUVr ^/ � 3 LU NOW/. l Lat9 Wiry C yj CC to 4 C i 11 G o • h_ N$ ISa C.1 iC W 1 TIrt -- O/oo0 a4 i�/ a .., a AVE w WELLES EY = u : ' El : � ;� NERDY HERO dxcsELLGN MT.., m ►17 •C r _ w0 won 11101 11101 ai L ` S � of I" Qom a RIL'N AVE i . ' «[� Is_ o al i u c 2 ROCKWELL ¢ i LOCK M'( < LL P ' AV MCA t lataossia KWEL.L e- '' I � 1 o i NOM AYE Slnacrteto rt W 47.11" 1iTLO Rre Eas9 Ye !S j AYE: RRIM !ILL 1 till INLAND PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 Wert 7th • Saito 200 (509) 458 -6840 Spokano, WA 99204 FAX: (509) 458 -6844 WE LLESELY ( 4 S rs` ^y • SAMSON IN ` SAMSON SO FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAR 4 a FRANCIS AVE A rI O ove w. FORKER �C • S g MIRABEAU POINT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 96149 geut ITC% 010 e..a.on ro a uc. pxocc - wet.) 707 Weal 7th • Suite Spokane. WA 99204 I NLAND PACIFIC ENGINEERING 200 (309) 438 -6840 FAX (509) 458 -6B44 0.1113L /11 Ism. et YAM 0071 MOO {0000, MIRABEAU POINT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 96149 NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 2 n.•w SITE PLAN i 111111111 INLAND 00 PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 West 7W - c'; - to 200 (509) 458 -6840 Spoke-no, W/; :4 FAX: (509) 458 -6844) MIRABEAU POINT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 96149 WY F. J'd {d # }X2 N.Z.I• .,h L. T r i T N ,( rl^ T� 72 M : 3 S < 1 an c1 5e h .. ,ys X''' 4v , H M } e� xf}¢ }} Otd X 'hl N f Y 5 f4 i0 Y sYX !, T H J''' W b A h W fir .. b k . Y $iY �l{!.V 5 ,h o �a } S h .4 d . ++` 'd' �L `2 d} h � .$M }L 1 s Y h T (w�.� M �7.. CtaY:'X.., }:'.. �.� :V +tr+t -T i ' T .'J. M . 'S4 i + JJ Y J di h �. \ „ J S' } ' 4, 7 L e, ' k ) _ { \ 'yh 741- ' 'R` r' : 1 }. <h ^Y.4H Y� T f.� 1M}.. �.Lp t Y h An F 4 . f $✓ 4 d y T < .> < \ T } P]VII Peak <Haux Y t fi <7 �„t h f 3+n✓ S1. ... .,.h 4 T} .l aiV . � JC7 fi �{.(y!] }}((��f `( �$S J.W l �Yt \ 7 47� ;� h2 ..,..., ,i< a»:w .�o. ri , 1 S {' {X. r 42 4{ > >a 7 L a d C }< h /y �� y ` p � 1 �t` 1LLlil� x} a ,.. } .; �7 ,>.Y> .3;k..'£,.,...{i........ T . .. �+ M Ld \ ttr'SJ 7t l %''' ''.4.<::' 4 Lh IY{ �i S�"r 1 n }. < d J � li � C r � . u � ,» � +Y ..: S F . A L S }} { i 7,i y }. } �X �•i n +✓. �7 2 - S i . X X L F { `< R �. � F ,g'., z .5 .... ., ... .: i WM Ld � } A " ( J i X @�' > Y �' 01ame J .._ ,..._ ..._.... S 7 1 ih4 d ih �f �4 ./ � }d s kx e ric%nt > A.. .... a. .2fi:. 7.1 ! 4 `0 Y. C 7 l h /2 Volume x. , Q: Hote1o) 200 Rooms 0.62 124 60% 74 40% 50 Office Building') 20 k.S.F. 2.92 58 17% 10 83% 48 Strip Mall 9 k.S.F. 15.14 136 50% 68 50% 68 Office Building 24 k.S.F. 2.68 64 17% 11 83% 53 Restaurant 5.5 k.S.F. 12.92 71 56% 40 44% 31 Apartments» 317 0.63 200 68% 136 32% 64 Retirement 72 units 0.28 20 56% 11 44% 9 Business Park Various N/A 141 N/A 28 N/A 113 Apartments' 233 units 0.49 114 64% 73 36% 41 Walrnart Various N/A 2,287 N/A 1 ,127 N/A 1,160 Valley Mall: Mall Hotel 715 k.S_F. G.L.A. 300 units 3.26 0.76 2,331 228 50% 54% 1,165 123 50% 46% 1,166 105 Industrial Park Expan. Various N/A 1,710 N/A 747 N/A 963 Table 4 - Trip Generation Rates for Background Projects - PM Peak Hour 0) - Lawson site (2) - Wolff site (3) - Ridgeview Estates Apartments (4) - Cherry Street Apartments (5) - Included in the Spokane Valley Mall project Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 24 Mirabeau Point Project TIA 4 p Y , } pps } { J ' ' C fi. a. h >: x {i " } k ■y y ax o } p w, '3.< S'GSkf 32• P, vf x} nlC q A{ ,i riY S .P '� N M J 9 'RS { • 'tY 4 S\Ci wY r� fi qt r} { �b�o-.. Nv aaR=KgCy w, i`{a. 'A=t-,,. Aa� 1 � 1 ..i ) L O 4 ro f ?yfi$ } a'' IC a a b 2\ yo r �b�J�f , qW j ., 2!! 'i ;a ' t �R S� {fi " Y' Y { a> V 'a J 4... at}Y Y} Ay'� { SV' +� r3 7 N om %N /. " : 'a r v .. .�5. �, a.,« <4 C.S.�.. : ra> ay. R. b (r .L`S'Vi' \ 4 %∎ Vi a4 h�,ht�t'. �. yt }'� > Sx� l,} 1x�'�i' ^�, /4"�.4 `�� a `+a � .q. 't.{q%W }• daA-0 �Y{ `'�S4 a� <t y3. _'S'1 {i l7 .p. raV '" r rw _ « y � f y: «�. \ \. } S t , Y YA, a t 3.4 L.'SMa V'i ao-i .Y} x° r #.• x <}.2 c ` y N my, �i% r +nc. k tir` h ? aa -.�pp•• $'� ` IY a& q v B L S - N fN K�y Qr■■��' ` ?ir A, K. af:TJ3t�.ir"isl y W Qi9'I'J4d A .Ja +x 4 tv� P { e} A 9 a a .i ; •.. 2 aj L' )' a YbkL r { l > l s. r ,CZk > tc a ,r}o- "' Rw• • a q 3 SSe,a�r 5 �xi o- 3 a E� f S`� ° 'S[+ 2 y o 6a n.41, y o1 ume SY R a'9 {• L °r�Y , / i x�. } 5 6, ' % a as i+ •! r 3 yoa� y ` ,. . Apartments 144 units 0.49 64% 45 . 36% 25 Retirement Community 208 units 0.28 56% 32 44% 26 Nursing Home 27.8 k.S.F. 0.35 42% 4 58% 6 Mini- Warehouse 72.3 k.S.F. 0.26 52% 10 48% 9 RV Park 116 units 0.46 65% 35 35% 19 } 1. 4 } ar +r iV't k C „2 { J { { 6 ) T < fi d { \ *t` ; i x y "a,�a '. '- A ` »1 M Ya Vi C^ { it i �s 2;� S ST a 9 1 aF 1�a \ ..� {-.r r as k 3x. ..... 1 � 1 ..i ) L O 4 ro f ?yfi$ } a'' IC a a b 2\ yo r �b�J�f , qW j ., 2!! 'i ;a ' t �R S� {fi " Y' Y { a> V 'a J 4... at}Y Y} Ay'� { SV' +� r3 7 N om %N /. " : 'a r v .. .�5. �, a.,« <4 C.S.�.. Y} } S F \. fir ) �t � y\ <Y v F �SP .2- ' S . .,. . r Py }(y * A { S qq n77ff y j w, Sia �NK � 7 }a tt, / ii ) '?,' } Tal ` �4{L. dt ) <4> n .L ;? .M.Av. } q q ¢ 6a: "4 a i fi, .S } �k � ,e g C \. 1\`,,',, {�4 S w.i. 7 a o-a} h{ r ,. y am ) ^ i Ja }A�'^ r Z'i{ ^FY y FXtY[ng '. _ } . ? ?. \ ��a`�,pK}S Ck } .J e - 4 � M a Y \ .: 4... n 1 V 1 1 1�C. 4S.. N N'(<, rv4�v {a _ W rt } f { SY \' 1 S` .Y.7..�c.:�..cr..`�q�L�ulli'�:: Regional Center 1,030 k.S.F. 2.95 50% 1,519 50% 1,519 Other Commercial 318 LS.F. 3.5 50% 557 50% 557 Hotel 300 rooms 0.76 54% 123 46% 105 Business Park 390 k.S.F. 1.48 22% 127 78% 450 Industrial Park 800 k.S.F. 0.91 21% 153 79% 575 Table 5 - Trip Generation for Background Projects (Lawson/Gunning) - PM Peak Hour Table 6 - Trip Generation for Background Projects (Full Build out of Spokane Valley Mall) - PM Peak Hour Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 25 Mirabeau Point Project TIA UAXVr!LL MIN 70 l STRIP MAL :VALLEY -MALL BUST P AR AWSON UNNIN. VIEW TES AP . C3 TI ME O o • tL 2 AVE n� SUET CATALCO CU - . ID OVCK[YE CATALCO FRUIT DEAN( S I FAIRYIP GRACE AYE RUC GRNE_ /�CSYOM° UAT LOH ACTOSSA . CATALOO! 130a c ac MAMA AVE v1 9raairay Bea Korth Vl:ns ffi D „ sp ACOLLO 0 k. HS < ALKI AVE " �� ,. K • 04��PC ^, Q1YHG OLYYM J ° t ul m wAna01 range er.il r Cast Yllley ° ° C w z ° a ET " • Jr. H.S. 0 C[ a= M'Tr sD " FE C aO w m 7"1612s a. r 5 AVE w WELLES Y' Y1 . i c 1rosl� 1 Q a i moo\ E. T u a { HEFfO'1. 1 AV Kppl • Q - p•� ▪ 1 tnDV w O Don So. LOHCF J OXIV 1DY �c . , La m- •p 0 0 l0 . N OW O.�iR I j r C r 0 ai RICH s ` ' s a¢N Ave � ,®, � R' o y J _ _ 1CA'alt RDCKWEL AVE v As ‘ 0 7 , OCKWELL ° - ROCKWELL y I ? { n �� is Ac m. W i I .. SM1.onr o 1! w ▪ ▪ S,IIIttIRLD •W. iC - u` w - ALl.I AVE CT ALSO a .Q ALAI OBE z qi DLJYe a' OLIVE w s m VALLEY < II VALLEY WAY Is " LL, , 1 WAY WALMART FRUIT HILL AC - WELLESELY c NCROY AiarM* c > g t O CARLAN AM= I RD FRANCIS AYE 1 INLAND PACIFIC LOCATION OF ENGINEERING BACKGROUND PROJECTS 707 West 7th • Suite 200 (509) 458-8840 Spokane, WA 99204 FAX (509) 458 -6844 FIGURE 7A FORK ER L. O 4 CQO • . iYEA$7T o1 m o. L'1 [ILS7T Q q • H m y A 0 � a C MIRABEAU POINT EAST Vale, TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 96149 ::. y 'r t N, a, w t" : r + w 2 �� °7i`�g � aj.�Y?COw 6 i5 and�'U's ef:4L R n § K y e 4.u` q` a a�tYy`�•E�a �:,., C'f'o� k ao- °S '. R..s s.. SC'fKrS' y�Y r 4 4 �w r Y r.a4 4 A. Q: ..: ` .y , R S 4 < .i : w . fir. N4".' C-; 2 ^:t., +,. 4 , .2` Y� h SL t' m' R.^ r.� ,R-�a w H w a t � RY � .+x ' � A+ �■ :�, •1 �} m \ p \m �; ..� ® �A <�! W e !i?> .. P 'w ,,,,w,4,,,..,:?..; F MIhW V IIterin M S'. �. Y e ,:, F` Y, 4 F _ ]y{ -j �� i g� . Y SQA 9 � 4 ^ ! C 4 > 1J A } t } R , o 9Ll � kR»f } ti k ro4 Y..: F,q> , � ., 44 ` .r- �'n s .4 'xm wa St ' r, }} ` ,� r',..,, . ,, o ... +o +L �` o 1 rSkA.- 2�, x p i aY '� ti x n "4fS 5. 4 .r / Y ? A2,�,.rw -a.: S t `r ks ; ... u {� , Yn:v.�MV Ice Arena 2 sheets 37.5 67% 50 33% 25 YMCA 42 k.S.F. 1.75 34% 25 66% 49 Performing Arts See Below N/A 25% 5 75% 15 Educational See Below N/A 25% 3 75% 9 Planetarium See Below N/A 20% 1 80% 5 Senior Center See Below N/A 0% 0 100% 1 Retail Center 50 k.S.F. 4.93 57% 141 43% 106 Fitness Center 20 k.S.F. 4.3 60% 52 40% 34 Totals 277 244 Project Trip Generation Using the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 5th Edition, and other data gathered from similar facilities, the anticipated number oftrips to be generated on adjacent streets by the proposed project was determined. The Trip Generation Manual (TGM) provides empirical data, based upon actual field observations for trip generation characteristic of similar projects throughout the United States. The TGM provides trip generation data for the Mirabeau Point Project development as shown in the following tables. Table 7 - Site Trip Generation Rates and Volumes for Phase 1 The following land uses for phase 1 were either not found in the ITE Trip Generation Manual or other specific information was used. The following is a list of these non - standard land uses and the assumptions used for trip generation: Ice Arena - A trip generation study was performed at an existing ice arena with similar uses as the proposed ice arena. The detailed information is included in the appendix. The following land uses do not have an operator or owner for the proposed use. However, Ron Tan, an architect involved in concept planning for these facilities has written a letter regarding the peak usage of these proposed facilities. Please refer to the appendix for a copy of this letter and how the facilities will most likely be used. Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 31 Mirabeau Point Project TIA 0 Performing Arts - The concerts and other events that will occur at this facility will be scheduled after the PM peak hour. Therefore PM peak hour trips will be generated from staff and performers rehearsing. We assumed a total of 20 PM peak hour trips, 5 entering and 15 exiting. Educational Complex - The seminars and lectures will occur during off-peak hours. Only the administrative/staff people will generate PM peak hour trips. For the PM peak hour, we assumed 12 trips, 3 entering and 9 exiting. Planetarium - The shows at this facility will occur during off peak hours and on the weekends. Operation will be similar to the Denver Planetarium.. They have 7 full time employees and 4 part time employees. Volunteers leave the site before 4:00 PM. Hours vary greatly from employees, spreading out the trips. We assumed 6 PM peak hour trips, 1 entering and 5 exiting. Senior Center - The Valley Senior Center which may move into this facility closes generally by 3:30 PM on weekdays. We assumed 1 exiting PM peak hour trip for the one employee. See letter in the appendix regarding the use of the existing Valley Senior Center. Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 32 Mirabeau Point Project T7A ..u� fr ` x �> # * `d ^‹: & a oc:w t ';A:: Z •a} o- f t w °( u Y. Y - �Ki �L aPTPeaI.�TIaur 4ar " � /ƒ\ �� . w 7 } '� n. � ' r �y 4 v at e r r Y"r >'` ,,,,,-.:.:•,, ., x 3^" '�.,p 4 , n '3� . � r y : 1 - S . a 4, rin b a y� t ing k i o k .b`.t ..w4 D.C: ti N s ; <r.• r i v x # r ,is -3- ycru f S .t Y } •? 5 'd ', rt'.tj w d�'h r +`:<oa (hPQ ' Al4 { .%, „ -4 ..r> ar �g.v r :wu' " '{` t$ }'# ]�i -., c olW �„`�Y r od'�`fr r ......� S.. ` . � .. ; uYx {y,� x�. Lr3: „Yo l utue� : : Office Park 50 k.S.F. 1.51 15% 11 85% 64 RV Park 80 units 0.46 52% 19 48% 18 Residential, Apartments 230 units 0.49 64% 72 36% 41 Totals 141 43% 102 Library 123 Cumulative Totals 48% 34 881 37 1,144 roZr : ... - • Hf.2 k r r a -A. ,qH h Y Y a r 9' t p 't H a> } ` 9 h ° ' io uHr 13'K S ? �• 'Y t } dn, cf } .r ... aC� y.l ' 3 r. , t . 4,. � ,6�, Xt• �t � ( ac i� ,t w t'2"'... aC Xad 'V Y S"' rrY�L•" ror a sh t ^Y tr.h 2C, <r.:a...' d.:.� . ,,.i.,. .. a:.o. ,¢9. nv { ".�" W „� t $fir t ,a ' ' t5j S4k < >.a' v • 'Gb, £'4„ya \ c 2 ° U�Q. t R •r +`2 } r rtrvu } d *(r } w S 't r, Z` P"X S✓�T+' 'Y ° .�t� 1� .�' u9Y S('•t� }2� "�. kt k e2 ;}rd >r .u. t, xi x. ,a :$:.,. . 5,; a N ° i Y. a x, ?, S 9, g{ , ; rao . r{•b; Aw s c rd9 p ..,,, x r' :.• r..'�svn�i y `1� ° QYk' 12O LL itl� RTi M • , f S : w _ K • '�c .y . .E y, �!$a. s' 'A r r '- .- r � Kµ 9 4 �' to a .. ` y ^ r ic..'�4... - ct s ^ro ;c c+ > < w t S S. a /" `#,. f srr I w•b' 7 +w ,c 2u a S7 e.cA y�y. ." x: Fintering>' �, :� x� hi J wS'tt`^c. r R t w --!c xn ft..L” - e"4 •rii.... $ r .� o %' l a X .c t.4'. Y .4 :°° { } I wzt ti ,#fy� .' $:.. .� /� i .f. -•x }ft a,Y2-.,[• r+nw d ' , .r• Q• Qlume.t.. a x r s . + V L e O' r s k r , .te r. i �D i o ty K 'N.: V.] ... 9 ,... Y <� ume Hotel 0 ) 150 rooms 0.76 54% 49 46% 42 Business Park 250 k.S.F. 1.48 22% 81 78% 289 Office Park 100 k.S.F. 1.51 15% 23 85% 128 Specialty Retail 50 k.S.F. 4.93 57% 141 43% 106 Library 15 k.S.F. 4.74 48% 34 52% 37 Conven. Store 2 k.S.F. 53.73 50% 54 50% 54 Bank, Drive -In 3 k.S.F. 43.63 48% 63 52% 68 Fast Food Rest. 3 k.S.F. 36.53 52% 57 48% 53 Totals 502 777 Cumulative Totals 779 1 1,021 Table 8 - Site Trip Generation Rates and Volumes for Phase 2 (1) Assume 80% occupancy. Table 9 - Site Trip Generation Rates and Volumes for Phase 3 Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 33 Mirabeau Point Project TM Y a t . \ a> ?� {{T i4. f Y $< L ai C ,a � A. t vrK,, 2 � <t• 4 '�. /p q ' P }t { f •f ? ,' %�''b a E * to 1 1t1 S�11 � S � d '� 4``' � �. [�7, / TT lh L 3 � } � � J'k n � � � x� <r L t> ' bt a Via✓ W } v < 2X. { 4... i= �a3L.3.Q a L fi > t �` < J(x'.:• {: S.!F ^h'J .�!hs!.... 1' >f;, { { L a , J »��. >`J_� :v\ l..�f J a J % .. i�}K:2 T` a< {' f ;. t . S,J , ° M � <T Y R ITI " , (.Pik 3 L f s . T { v . Nf �' � J' � }. � i x % {2 J w a.. 'eta aaao- } a Z{< 2 .f ai "S a }... ,4a g kY Ur - V Y 3 ; 2 J t h �.,� S 41 � L �(l lu taL'�l QJe p L x ,� 4. � � y �, a a �£ . ; �S �' `. y } v"K' V ''h Y } 'y t S P Y i li ,F .��e� { c j `$t'Y � 6 ,� } ? ..K � X...2 �- L L} ;n: 'N S} r i2 a 4 h � m.', .y� na ,S" • � Y j . �' . R a : n 4 � ?i Lx'3 Y ? 2 0� , Y � , ' 4 ' 2 �<D Pines Rd./Mission Ave. (With Phase 2 Revisions) 43.1 sec. - E - - 31.0 sec. - D Pines Rd./EB Ramps (With Ph. 2 Improvements) 98.0 sec. F - 30.8 sec. - D Pines RdJWB Ramps (With off -ramp revisions) 18.8 sec. - C - 30.8 sec. 6.2 sec. D B Pines Rd./Indiana Ave. (With off -ramp revisions) 36.3 sec. - D - 28.4 sec. 24.4 sec. D C Pines Rd Mansfield Ave. ( Unsig.) ( *) F ( *) F Pines Rd./Euclid Ave. ( Unsig.) (Signalized) 33.1 sec. - E - - 16.3 sec. - C Pines Rd./Trent Ave. (With Ph. 2 Improvements) 159.5 sec. - F - - 38.9 sec. - D Indiana Ave. /Off -Ramp (Unsig.) (With off -ramp revisions) 12.3 sec. - C - 22.7 sec. 11.5 sec. D 13 Indiana Ave./Mirabeau Pt. 8.8 sec. B 17.6 sec. C Evergreen Rd./EB Ramps 12.9 sec. B 15.2 sec. B Evergreen Rd./WB Ramps 7.5 sec. 13 16.6 sec. 13 Evergreen Rd./Indiana Ave. (With Ph. 2 Improvements) 16.5 sec. - C - 61.7 sec. 13.6 sec. F B Phase 3 (2006) Build Out Levels of Service With and Without Proposed Project Using the number of generated trips shown on Tables 6, 7 & 8 and the estimated trip distributions shown on Figures 9, 10 & 11 and adding it to the background traffic, the total number of trips projected to use the transportation system at phase 3, year 2006 is obtained. See Figures 18 & 19 for the total traffic volumes with and without phase 3 traffic Evergreen Interchange is assumed to be constructed by this phase. A summary of the LOS calculations is shown in Table 13 which follows. Table 13 - 2006 Traffic (Phase 3) With and Without Proposed Project Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 54 Mirabeau Point Project TIA s%�i %{ � � z • y1 a Z Y'Cl v L b0 FC. ir5\ r v > +'� P r . dx+ $ r ii'?\,ytt. 2 ' Y' K MY $ 2 t) k hJ "' -.4 h } " y w1i. Z'Mt )Y' v' S w r i �C d u ' ,a)+.,,., E d$ h .f#� � if s- L h � . fJ .x 'C - — NI s� h. , ): (�� yrix • R SY Y, °Y �...1 .23 d ° t° '� .'„kfi4 �JSK 9 2' i'Y} '+ 4 h J <. y K 1 (^ h� ,�, h W 1MV�tr l V, I,V`i' aC% 1 . 0 .. ?Y 'Aw 4. ' `CP j S a �6.T ii Y" 4 +. 8 SS w1 ih u � ��`V�V `Y Y +C{ R !^rfir. f .� ^ J S• 1��ff+ 4. N i Y 4 k -, } 3{w.kS tf J '� 2 h% h' {S 1' v6 C £ i -2 .eL i,Y 'iY } JOEY } ' 1� Yao ' fi' » �< /,..: °.r < ?6; .: c .....1..:1.`.v....,..4...c..>. :,i,. k, ..... Y 4r? Pa 17 ' < + M / . ai , YSY3 r ,•. � r 2 Y x \ r a I�ELIILYfS'� v Sf . 7' (♦ r w ? a rk x . :: Sullivan Rd./Mission Ave. 26.1 sec. D 26.6 sec. D Sullivan Rd./EB Ramps 72.8 sec. F 72.9 sec. F Sullivan Rd./WB Ramps 111.4 sec. F 111.4 sec. F Sullivan Rd./Indiana Ave. 167.8 sec. F 168.1 sec. F ( *) Denotes that the calculated value was greater than 999.9 seconds. Without Phase 3 traffic in the year 2006, levels of service on Pines Road will be at unacceptable levels for the Mission Avenue, Eastbound Ramps and Trent Avenue intersections. The other signalized intersections on Pines Road will operate at acceptable levels. The Pines/Mansfield intersection will continue to operate at LOS F. On Sullivan Road, the Eastbound Ramps, the Westbound Ramps and Indiana Avenue Intersections will be at LOS F. The Sullivan Road/Mission Avenue intersection and the intersections on Evergreen Road will operate at acceptable levels of service without Phase 3 traffic. With Phase 3 traffic in the year 2006, levels of service on Pines Road will be at unacceptable levels for the Mission Avenue, Eastbound Ramps, Euclid Avenue and Trent Avenue intersections unless Phase 2 improvements are in place. if phase 2 improvements are in place, all the intersections on Pines Road will operate at acceptable levels. On Sullivan Road, levels of service will be the same as the without project condition. Levels of service on Evergreen Road will remain at acceptable levels with Phase 2 improvements in place for the Evergreen Road/Indiana Avenue intersection. The intersection at Indiana Avenue/Mirabeau Parkway will operate at acceptable levels with a signal. Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 55 Mirabeau Point Project TIA f ZR 111 " "Ill SJ ll cc, ¢115, 0 S SHANNON AVENUE to z - - -- ALTERNATIVE TO RELOCATE RAMP (0000) VOLUMES FOR RELOCATED ALTERATIVE RAMP 1 , , INLAND la PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 West 7th •Sulte 200 (509) 458 -6840 Spokane. WA 99204 FAX: (509) 458 -8844 7- MIRABEAU POINT A NOT TO SCALE 'A VENUE FIGURE 19 2006 (PHASE 3) WITH PROJECT WITH EVERGREEN I/C TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS P.M. PEAK HOUR PROJECT NO. 96149 j TRAFFIC VOLUMES S 16k .0400 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 549.921.1006 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org May 6, 2004 Subject Pines (SR 27)JMansfield Corridor Congestion Relief Project Dear Developer Partner, At the request of many of the Developer Partners, a meeting was held on Monday, April 26, 2004 to review the Mitigation Agreement language that was sent to each of you on April 12, 2004. Several issues were brought up during the discussion including the following: • No time limit on how long the P.M. Peak Hour trips are reserved • Latecomer's agreement for other developments adding 5 or more trips to Pines/Indiana intersection • Credit for unused trips after some time limit (20 years ?) City staff agreed to review these issues and respond back with any proposed changes to the Mitigation Agreements. We reviewed these issues and propose to replace Section 7, Committed P.M. Peak Hour Trips, with the following: 7. Committed P.M. Peak Hour Trips. The City agrees to reserve up to a total of P.M Peak Hour trips for the Property until the Development is complete provided such reservation complies with all federal, state and local laws at the time application for a building permit is made. "Complete" is defined as having received all governmental permits and approvals necessary to construct and permanently occupy the Development. If the total number of P.M. Peak Hour trips for the Development exceeds the total number of reserved trips noted above, a new traffic study shall be provided to determine if additional traffic mitigation is required With this proposed change there would be no latecomer's agreement and no credit for any unused trips. Each Development covered by this Mitigation Agreement will be considered a "pipeline" project in terms of traffic- related concurrency requirements. Any proposed developments in and around the project area that does not have a Mitigation Agreement for the Pines/Mansfield project and that is required to provide the City a traffic analysis will be required to include all trips from approved pipeline projects. Developer Partners Pines (SR 27)/Mansfield Corridor Congestion Relief Project In order to finalize each agreement please let me know if 1) the name and address of each developer and their respective companies are correct and 2) The parcel(s) shown in Exhibit A is correct for your development. I also need to have a complete legal description of the parcel(s) identified in Exhibit A from your licensed surveyor. Please provide this information to me via email if possible at sworley@spolcanevallev.org. spokanevallev.org. Please let me know by May 14, 2004 if you have any comments regarding the proposed change to paragraph 7. I can be reached at 688 -0191. Sincerely, Steve M.R'orley, P.E. Senior Capital Projects Engjnee 5/6/2004 Page 2 A & A CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, INC. 202 East Trent Avenue, Suite 400, Spokane, Washington 99202 (509) 624-1170 fax (509) 624 -1255 To: & U �I e From: Re: FAX TRANSMITTAL Date: ,37.c) Page 1 of it Fax # - 400CS Contractor's Licenses Alaska M20704 Arizona 124930 California 760705 Oregon 66668 Utah 0000431130 Washington AACONDI134LE A & A CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, INC. 202 East Trent Avenue, Suite 400, Spokane, Washington 99202 (509) 624-1170 fax (509) 624 -1255 FAX TRANSMITTAL To: 4(4 -rZ.. C lv_A. Date: P. %-- �,�.�. eha Page 1 of From: d (�?�i�t rrff - �� - h_ Fax# `477 c.1d /3 Re: Contractor's Licenses Aloha AA20704 Arizona 124930 California 760705 Oregon 66668 Utah 0000431130 Washington AACONDI134LE A & A CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, INC. 202 Fast Trent Avenue, Suite 400, Spokane, Washington 99202 (509) 624 -1170 fax (509) 624 -1255 August 23, 2002 Scott Engelhard Spokane County Engineers 1026 W. Broadway Avenue Spokane, WA 99260 -0170 Greg Figg WSDOT 2714 N. Mayfair Spokane, WA 99207 RE: Updated SR27 Corridor Project Participation Lawson / Hamilton / Ashenbrener Parcel Dear Scott & Greg: This letter is in response to your request for participation in the SR27 Corridor Congestion Relief Participation Project. Bill Lawson, Tom Hamilton, and I have reviewed your suggested breakdown from the various private parties which was faxed to us on August 23, 2002. A copy of your suggested contribution schedule is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. The breakdown suggests the contribution from our project in the amount of $119,866.00. We agree to commit to payment of that amount toward matching funds for the grant on the following conditions: 1. This amount will satisfy all traffic mitigation and impact fees with regard to the following parcels. 45103.0205 45103.0206 45103.0208 45103.0210 45103.0244 The amount that we pay as satisfaction toward our participation in the grant must satisfy all traffic mitigation and impact irrespective of any final use to which we are, entitled. ' We acknowledge that the duration of this commitment by the County cannot be open - ended and we agree to reassess traffic mitigation in the event that we have not committed to some type of binding site plan or master plan for all five parcels within twenty years from the date the grant is finally awarded. 2. The satisfaction of traffic mitigation and impact fees shall preclude the necessity of any further traffic studies or analysis with regard to these parcels for twenty years. . e. aa. a, o�•.. o... �r- .«....�- .. —a..s: _- ..e.t.nao+. •^. . ars.•: v _cxn_.,.v ..�.......�... .. _- �r...:,.•.._..�..e:r__�_�o..� _. Contractors Lice7scs Alaska AA20704 Arizona 124930 California 760705 Otrgon 66668 Utah 000 431130 Wash futon .4ACOAVII34LE 3. Satisfaction of the traffic mitigation and impact shall include any perceived impact upon Trent Road, Pines Road (Highway 27) and the Evergreen Freeway Interchange at I90 and shall satisfy any and all prior agreements discussed or verbally agreed upon. 4. The payment of the amount referenced in the first paragraph above shall not be due until the grant is awarded and improvements are actually commenced. 5. Payment of the $119,866.00 is based on 395 peak hour trips, and such mitigation shall apply to any usage to which the above five parcels shall be put and shall satisfy traffic mitigation for zone changes, binding site plans, subdivision, building permits and any other SEPA triggering within 20 years from the date the grant for this improvement is awarded. We are excited about the possibility of this grant and look forward to assisting you in any manner possible. I would appreciate each of you signing below to approve these stipulations. Please then either fax or mail a copy back to me at your earliest convenience and thank you for this assistance. WSDOT • SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEERS BY: BY: Greg Figg Scott Engelhard Very Truly Yours, hristopher R. Ashenbrener CRA:sf Enclosure cc: Bill Lawson Tom Hamilton 08/23/2002 14:05 FAX 3246190 PLANN ING—TRAFI C Transportation Partnership Program Participation Breakdown SR27/Manafteld Ave. Project 303E Match Cast of improvements Melded Ava. County $ 1250.551 Pins IC WB Ramps 8 1.438201 Met5Aeld and Knee Signal . S 281,583 Euclid and Me Signal $ 225,883 Puna RIW at Euclid 3 25,000 $ 512,288 002 Total Pfsd ed Coats 3 3.198,318 30% maY?i $ 959.795 t Petit Match $ 460,000 j Private Match 3 499.795 ( Total Public Suva S 2.899,523 84.4% i Total Private Share $ 489.795 15.69E 5 3,189,318 100.0% Petalled Punting Partners Cash Contributors 4 al New % at New Total Iasi develcget Uses Trips Trips Contribution arsae 1 STPU Raids i 350.000 $ 350.000 2 Spokane Cburrty 3 55,000 $ 53.000 3 WSDOT — S 55,000 3 55,000 • 4 hard Emcee Paper Ulrebeau Point 500 30.39% $ 151,729 $ 151.729 •• 5 Jehr1 Mier 15 Acres 1981ot 183 11.11% $ 55,533 6 55,533 0 BM Lawson LaweoWGunning mint -use 395 23.9316 5 119,888 $ 118,888 ••• 7 Bob Banumd5 35 Acres 400 24.2896 S 121,383 $ 98.383 8 Tam Ham[tlon kamitton Apts. 152 Apt 94 5.71`6 5 28.525 5 28.525 ! 9 Radt Neckar Yaw Ranch at 48 SFDU 48 2.7996 $ 13,959 $ 13,959 I 10 Four Square Church 8 0.38% $ 1.821 $ 1,821 11 Gunning Changed Conditions add 10 Apts. 6 0.38!6 5 1,921 S 1,321 � 12 Grant Person Wan:11m a 34ksf 17 1.03°6 S 5,159 $ 5.159 1647 100% eoatlalp 10 Ovate devetoprr+or4 5303.48 $ 959,795 $ 829.837 • includes a reduces' al 143 trips tram sale of 12 aces to John MiUer. •• 70 trip redrelfan Eat 51.8 If strcady constncted and 143 trip Incroaso kern pure of 12 acres from Inland Emple Paper and 368.635 creel tat aignal design -• trts,tdes a $25,000 aerie tram right-of-way agreement w WSIIOT A & A CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, INC. •. a .- +.r.�..r•�.rr.- _..:.'w•r.�... ..R[= ..M�,.N. . . .c. :^r... .2. • r .r, \•w • ....[ n__ ...1 . n -t_. ... ♦ . • .•. r ■•••■wc app. Ity - • 202 East Trent Avenue, Suite 400, Spokane, WashJzzgton 99202 (509) 624 -1170 fax (509) 624 -125' August 26, 2002 Scott Engelhard Spokane County Engineers 1026 W. Broadway Avenue Spokane, WA 99260 -0170 RE: Participation in Spokane County's Corridor Congestion Relief Program Application for the SR27 Mansfield Project Dear Mr. Engelhard: Bill Lawson, Tom Hamilton and I own property east of Pines Road near Mansfield in the Spokane Valley. We have attempted to develop this over the past several years and have conducted several traffic studies. We also own a number of apartments in the area and are aware of the traffic problems there. We have worked hard to find an appropriate remedy to the traffic problems and have come to realize that none are easy. We are very much in support of the County's application for the Corridor Congestion Relief Grant. We will contribute the sum of 5119,866.00 to be used as a local match on behalf of the five parcels that we own and that are listed in my earlier correspondence to you dated August 23, 2002. We understand that we will need to enter into a Developer's Agreement with Spokane County once the grant has been approved. We would expect the conditions set forth in our August 23rd letter to be part of that Developer's Agreement. We are very excited to see progress finally being made toward resolution of this difficult traffic problem. Please contact me on behalf of our partnership if I can be of any further assistance. Very Truly Yours, Christopher R. Ashenbrener CRA:sf cc: Greg Figg Bill Lawson Tom Hamilton ........, _... _.... ........ ... ...... ,... v. ....._.. .. . _.. 1..._2 2........... p..... y.. v. Lt..I•nm...J.•...:a.v.._..ru,.. :... ......... vr.. ..._ • ..... v. r ...yw.. _.gy...e.a .R_.....�.= ,y..ri... Cantrndpr's Licenses Alzs at i1A20704 A.tizonv 124.930 Calitartzin 760705 Or...sun 66668 07ah 0000431130 Washington AACOND1134LE A & A CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, INC. 202 East Trent Avenue, Suite 900, Spokane, Washington 99202 (509) 624-1170 fax (509) 624 -1255 June 30, 2004 City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: Letter in Support Amendment of Comprehensive Plan/Arterial Road Plan Removal of Mansfield between Houk St, & Mirabeau Parkway Ladies and Gentlemen: This letter of support is presented by and on behalf of sponsor, A & A Construction & Development, Inc., for purposes of removing the extension of Mansfield from Houk Street to Mirabeau Parkway and thereby amending the Comprehensive Plan/Arterial Road Plan, accordingly. The purpose of this letter is to provide some background and understanding as to how the proposed extension of Mansfield from Mirabeau Parkway, westerly to Houk Street ("Mansfield Extension ") came to be included in the Arterial Road Plan, and more importantly, why the Mansfield extension is inappropriate. By way of summarized bullet points, it is my intention to expose how the Mansfield Extension is really nothing more than an oversight or mistake, and not part of a well analyzed, long term traffic flow strategy. Salient points that are relevant to the history and evolution of this "mistake" are as follows: 1. Bill Lawson and Ted Gunning each owned approximately 16 acres adjacent to each other north of Shannon Road and near the Mirabeau area of the Spokane Valley. Gunning's acreage on the east was subsequently transferred to Tom Hamilton and I subsequently purchased a portion of Lawson's acreage on the west. Joint efforts began by Lawson and Gunning in 1993 to develop both parcels. The overriding issue and concern was always traffic and the first of several Traffic Impact Analysis was done as early as June of 1993. 3. Access to the development was always to have been in two places, one being on Shannon east to Pines Road, and the other being across the railroad crossing from Shannon south to Indiana. 4. When we started discussions with the Railroad concerning improving the Shannon crossing (at McDonald Road) to meet necessary traffic standards, we were informed that some consideration was being given to closing this crossing and moving it to the east. 5. I subsequently attended a public hearing concerning the possibility of closing the Shannon crossing and opening a similar but controlled crossing to the east. At that time I acted as attorney for Lawson and Gunning and expressed concern at the potential loss of access to Lawson and .�•.. CSt�.'/�'� . wu. n. �Q-.. u+ Y1. 11..==' .1�- '�T�w�.iC[rh..TU�Yu'AT2L :�'cT.r.WWiC.��.� +'� Cont. otor's Licenses Alaska .4A20704 Arizona 124930 Ci4i rnia 760705 arson 66663 Mb 0000431130 14ishinsIon AACO,1'D1134LE Gunnings projects if this closing took effect. I was assured by Denny Ashlock, the main proponent for the Mirabeau Point development, as well as others, that the closing of the Shannon crossing would not affect our access at all. It would merely move it along Shannon Road to the east to a separate crossing. I was also assured that the Shannon crossing closing was for thy, greater public good in that it would benefit the Mirabeau Point project which would serve as a community recreational development. 6. The Shannon crossing at McDonald was closed. Shannon was never extended easterly to the new crossing. Our access point was lost. 7. From 1993 through the present time, many meetings and negotiations were conducted with the Washington State Department of Transportation and the Spokane County Traffic engineers in an effort to determine the overall traffic impact from both Lawson and Gunnings projects and how the mitigation could be handled in a way to enable these developers to proceed with a defined "traffic fix". Pursuant to State Statutes, neither the County nor the State could accept traffic mitigation that did not completely remedy the impact produced by the proposed project. Any traffic mitigation had to be toward an existing defined project. Any eventual remedy that was not completed within five (5) years, resulted in those funds needing to be refunded to the Developer. We needed a specific mitigation project. 8. Our traffic was always proposed as going westerly towards Pines Road. Accordingly, we tried to develop a "traffic fix" that would relate to our impact and that would not necessitate the contribution or involvement of other projects so that we could move forward immediately. 9. At the time, we were utilizing John Konen of David Evans Engineers as our Planner. John casually mentioned a proposal while in discussions with either the County or the State one day which involved extending Mansfield easterly from Pines straight through to our project as a "specific fix" for our project. The problem was that this extension necessitated the acquisition and demolition of a six-plex apartment structure. Without knowing the cost or possibility of acquisition of the six -plex, a site plan was drawn for our project which included extending Mansfield through the six -plex. 10. Subsequently, it became clear that the cost of the six -plex would prohibit our extending Mansfield as shown. Discussions with the County and the State also quickly brought a definitive response from them that they could not generate the funds necessary to accomplish the same. 11. The plan was quickly abandoned although, somehow, a copy of the proposal had become entwined in the County files and showed up in their Arterial Road Plan. When questioned about this, County personnel indicated they really had no idea how that happened and fully acknowledged that there were no funds available or anticipated to accomplish the Mansfield Extension. 12. At some point, a group of developers with property in the area were contacted by the County with regard to a potential grant for mitigation to the area that would satisfy all of our traffic needs and we were all asked to contribute matching funds. The Pines/Mansfield Corridor Congestion Relief Project was the resulting "specific fix" that we could all contribute to. At no time was the Mansfield Extension ever a part of those discussions concerning the grant or the eventual mitigation that would be accomplished by the grant and accompanying matching funds. 13. The Mansfield Extension was forgotten and not again discussed until our recent meetings with the City of the Valley revealed that the Mansfield Extension had become a part of your Arterial Road Plan. The Mansfield Extension is a mistake and should be removed from the City of the Valley's Arterial Road Plan. It arose out of a narrowly defined need to structure mitigation for traffic impact from the Lawson Gunning proposed projects that would comport in cost with the traffic impact it generated and would not necessitate other developers or other projects. It was ill conceived and impractical. Additionally, we feel the arterial would be duplicative since Indiana is so close and parallels to the south. The cost of acquiring the six -plex is both prohibitive and a poor use of Municipal funds since Indiana can serve the satne function. Since it is the intention of the Gunning parcel, now owned by Hamilton, and Inland Empire's parcels to utilize Mirabeau Parkway and Indiana, there is no need for the Mansfield Extension. The parcel owned by Lawson and me will access westerly to Pines and our contribution of matching funds to the Pines/Mansfield Corridor Congestion Relief Project and the overall relief which that project is intending to provide, is precisely in anticipation of our traffic moving westerly only. Finally, since it is our intent to develop a single residential community that will cover our entire parcel, dividing the parcel by an arterial thoroughfare will be extremely burdensome to the project. We intend to have a recreation area and swimming pool which would, necessarily, need to be on one side of the arterial or the other. This would result in many residents, including children, needing to cross the arterial to visit the recreation area. The Manager's office would also have to be located on one side of the arterial or the other, creating the same problem. It would also damage the "sense of community" that we would attempt to accomplish for a residential community of this type. My partner, Bill Lawson, and I urge you to amend the Comprehensive Plan/Road .Arterial Plan to remove the Mansfield Extension. It would create a tremendous burden on us by dividing our residential project into two separate halves as well as a burden on the Municipality with regard to the cost of the duplex needed to complete the extension. Very truly yours, A & A Construction & Dev., Inc. Christopher R. Ashenbrener Corporate Counsel CRA: sf JUN -30 -2004 WED 10:51 All haR CONSTRUCTION & DEV FAX NO. 609'. ,2SS P. 02 June 30, 2004 City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: Request for Inclusion in Amendment of Comprehensive Plan/Arterial Road Plan Removal of Mansfield Extension between Houk St Bt Mirabeau Parkway Dear Council Members, Commission Members & Staf6 This letter is to request that the Application for Amendment of the Comprehensive Plan/Arterial Road Plan to remove the extension of Mansfield between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway which is being filed by Lawson and Ashenbrener include my parcel of land to the east of the Lawson/Ashenbrener pal. As auch, I support the application for modification of the City of Spokane Valley Transportation Comprehensive Plan/Arterial Road Plan filed on behalf of Lawson and Ashenbrener and dated June 28, 2004. I purchased approximately 16 acres from Ted Gunning in the year 1999. This land is located immediately adjacent to and east of the land owned by Lawson and Ashesbrcner. When I acquired the land I became involved in the many meetings and negotiations with the Department of Transportation for the State and the County Transportation Department I was never made aware that there was ever en intention of creating a main thoroughfare through the middle of my property that would become part of the Arterial Road Plan. I was always of the belief that I could put a road through there if I wanted to but not that 1 world be obligated to. I have been informed that Inland Paper is developing their property to the east of pie and intends on constructing a road to my casteca boundary that I will be entitled to use for access. I have also been informed of the proposal to Bridge the Valley which will eventually result in the vacation of the railroad enabling access to Indiana to the south. In this regard, it would seem completely unnecessary to have Mansfield serve as a parallel arterial that is so close to Indiana. It would be costly to the City of the Valley as it would appear that someone would have to acquire property to the west including the demolition of a building which seems to be in the way. It would also be very burdensome to my parcel to require the construction of this thoroughfare right through the middle of my property. For these reasons, I support the Application which has been filed by Lawson and Ashenbrer er and request that the removal of the Mansfield Arterial apply to my parcel as well. Tom Hamilton c•c :ca ._.• 1=7:5 Spokane • Ualley Memorandum To: Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner Thru: Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Date: 9 -2 -04 Re: Mansfield Avenue Comp. Plan Amendment (CPA -07 -04) 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall ®spokanevalley.org L .�' r ^-•_ im. •2!'��'•,,iC+...i1R5Zr".�� "" ..r= adY�s^.*s4Stf:oa`fk John V. Hohman, P.E. — Senior Engineer /Maintenance Superintendent. From: Sandra Raskell, P.E. — Assistant Engineer -5' The Public Works Department reviewed the application to amend the alignment of Mansfield Avenue. We recommend denial of this application. The proposed alignment of Mansfield Avenue provides traffic relief from Indiana Avenue, connectivity of our City street system, as well the extension of Mansfield Avenue from adjacent development. The proposed Mansfield Avenue alignment is an extension to the proposed Pines/Mansfield Traffic Mitigation Project currently scheduled for construction 2005. Aerial Map - A • II '' Fuure Mansfield Road f J "I � , II I I �; Alignment _ , a 74 ; 1 1 I is 1 v . ■ J1 i i► Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -07 -04 August. 2004 fix►! ne`li�;� j\ai I 1 l Comp Plan Category i I Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential INIVI High Density Residential Mixed Use Community Center ® Urban Activity Center Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -07 -04 August, 2004 Sg6l an j�al. zoning polygon E UR-3.5 1:. • UR - I' - UR -7' [71:1 UR -12 EZI UR -22 B-1 M B-2 L! B-3 RR -10 L_ 1 -1 I -2 OM 1-3 M2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -07 -04 CPA -08 -04 Spokane �J jMtlle City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment PART Y APPLICANT NAME: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY � PHONE: 509 -688 -0030 MARINA SUKUP, COMMUNITY DEV. DIRECTOR �„( J" ______ ADDRESS: 11707 EAST SPRAGUE 1 EMAIL: MSUKUP @SPOKANEVALLEY.ORG CITY /STATE/ZIP: SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99206 I FAX: PROPERTY OWNER 1 (IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANTS NAME: CITY OF SPOKANE/SPOKANE COUNTY /AIRPORT BOARD 1 PHONE: ADDRESS: PO Box 19186 I EMAIL: L CITY /STATE/ZIP: SPOKANE, WA 99219 -9186 [ FAX: PROPERTY OWNER 2 (IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET) -- --- - -- — NAME: PHONE: r .. I ADDRESS: __.. -_ B EMAIL: C ITY / STATE/ZIP: _1 FAX: AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY NAME: € PHONE: ADDRESS: EMAIL: CITY / STATE/ZIP LFAX: CURRENT POLICY N/A PROPOSED PoucY NIA (Wt v U - v1 FILE No.CPA -o9 o1 LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: CURRENT DESIGNATION --r PROPOSED DESIGNATION LAND USE MAP L Low DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING MAP I UR -3.5 1 -2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL (ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): D Citizen Initiated D No OFFICE USE ONLY: D City Initiated Concurrency Review Required: 0 Yes Date Received: `1 .Ji 10 - Received By: 711/04 Page 1 of 5 PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SQ. FT.) 10 ACRES MOL ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SQ.FT.) FELTS FIELD AIRPORT EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: PLANE HANGARS SCHOOL DISTRICT. WEST VALLEY FIRE DISTRICT. VALLEY FIRE WATER DISTRICT: CITY OF SPOKANE __ NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: N/A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: DORA, EUCLID,RUTTER WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC/PRIVATE ROAD: 50' MOL ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL? (YIN) Y NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: RUTTER AVE. - PRINCIPAL MINOR PART II PREVIOUS ZONING /LAND USE DECISION LIST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: ADOPTION OF AIRPORT MASTER PLAN FOR FELTS FIELD. . CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGED CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TOTALLING APPROXIMATELY 10 ACRES IS OWNED BY SPOKANE COUNTY AND THE CITY OF SPOKANE AND OPERATED BY THE SPOKANE AIRPORT BOARD. THIS IS THE ONLY PIECE OF AIRPORT PROPERTY LCOATED WITHIN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY. THE REST OF FELTS FIELD IS WITHIN THE CITY OF SPOKANE. THE PROPERTY IS DEVELOPED WITH AIRPLANE HANGARS THAT SUPPORT AIPORT OPERATIONS. THE CURRENT Low DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION AND UR -3.5 ZONING IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR USES ASSOICATED WITH AIRPORTS. THE CITY OF SPOKANE'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATES FELTS FIELD AS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, WHICH IS THE SAME DESIGNATION PROPOSED BY THIS AMENDMENT. 711/04 Page 3 of 5 PROPOSAL PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND CHANGE ZONING FROM UR3.5 TO 1 -2, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY OR THE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN. ADJACENT LAND USES DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: PROPERTY TO THE EAST AND SOUTH IS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL; TO THE NORTH AND WEST IS AIRPORT PROPERTY. 7/1/04 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE HOW PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — CITE SPECIFIC GOALS/POLICIES: THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE FOLLOWING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES: POLICY T.3G.5 DISCOURAGE NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT NEAR AIRPORTS WHERE SIGNIFICANT NOICSE IMPACTS AND SAFETY HAZARDS EXIST OR ARE UKELY IN THE FUTURE. THE PROPOSAL WILL REMOVE RESIDENTIAL ZONING ON AIRPORT PROPERTY. GOAL UL.14A PROVIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF WELL- PLANNED INDUSTRIAL AREAS THAT CREATE HIGHER - INCOME JOBS, PROVIDE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND IMPROVE THE OVERALL TAX BASE OF SPOKANE COUNTY. POLICY UL.14.1 IDENTIFY AND DESIGNATE INDUSTRIAL LAND AREAS FOR HEAVY INDUSTRY AND LIGHT INDUSTRY. AIRPORT OPERATIONS, WHICH INCLUDE THE STORAGE AND MAINTENANCE OF AIRPLANES, ARE INDUSTRIAL IN NATURE. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP SHOULD REFLECT THE INDUSTRIAL NATURE OF AIRPORTS WITH AN APPROPRIATE LAND USE DESIGNATION. PUBLIC FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABIUTY OF PUBLIC FACIUTIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT: THE PROPERTY IS SERVED ADEQUATE FACILITIES INCLUDING PUBLIC SEWER AND WATER AND ARTERIAL ROADS. A CITY PARK IS A SHORT DISTANCE TO THE NORTHEAST. Page 5 of 5 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -08 -04 Comp Plan Category Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential IMO High Density Residenlisi Mixed Use Community Center 1111 Urban Activity Center Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial 1111 Regional Commercial Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Mineral Land City of Spokane Comprehensive Plan Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-08-04 August, 2004 'lane ..„00Val ley Zoning Category UR-3.5 UR -7 UR -7' . UMUM -12 UR -22 B -1 MB B-3 0111 RR -10 1 -1 M 1 -2 -3 MZ N Ns V r N. ‘ ,■ ser 11111 I NN Zoning Map ■`, \1`. `\ \ \1 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -08 -04 August, 2004 t MI as ma' ail �� 1�� . .dam o dd! sea 1111111111 • • • • • B • • 1 .) • SO45kane C . 00 0Valley K STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: AREA WIDE REZONE -01 -04 Community Development Department PLANNING DIVISION i Hearing Date: September 23, 2004 Staff: Greg McCormick, AICP — Planning Division Manager Scott Kuhta, AICP — Senior Planner I. Background Section 14.402.100 of the Interim Spokane Valley Zoning Code provides a process for property owners to initiate an area -wide rezoning action by petition. The code requires that at least 51 percent of property owners within the boundary of the proposed zone change sign the petition to initiate the rezone process. On July 1, 2004, a representative from the Greenacres neighborhood submitted a petition with signatures of more than 51 percent of property owners requesting a zone change from Urban Residential -7* (UR -7 *) to Urban Residential -3.5 (UR -3.5). The Community Development Department placed a notice of public hearing in the Spokane Valley News Herald on September 3, 2004, notifying the public that a public hearing on the proposed area wide rezone would be conducted by the Planning Commission on September 23, 2004. As required by Section 14.402.100 of the city's interim code, public notice boards were posted in conformance with requirements of the appropriate code sections. Moreover, city staff sent written notice to all property owners within the proposed rezone area and property owners within 400 feet of the boundaries of the rezone area, based on the most current tax payer records of the Spokane County Assessor's office. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) an environmental checklist was required for the proposed rezoning action. Under SEPA rezones are considered "non- project actions ", which are defined as actions involving decisions on policies, plans, or programs that contain standards controlling use of modification of the environment. Staff reviewed the environmental checklist submitted for the proposed rezone and a threshold determination was made on the requested rezone. The City issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) on August 24, 2004. The DNS was published in the City's official newspaper consistent with City of Spokane Valley requirements. REZ -I 1 -04 — Greenacres Areawide Rezone Page 1 of 4 II. Previous Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Actions The subject site is generally bounded by Mission Avenue on the south, Barker Road on the east, and the Spokane River on the north and west. The subject site is approximately 457 acres and approximately 264 separate parcels of land. As previously stated, the existing zoning in the area is UR -7 *. The UR -7* zoning district allows 6 single family dwelling units per acre. The UR -7* district also allows duplexes and multifamily structures as long as the overall density does not exceed 6 units per acre. This area was involved in an area wide rezoning action in 1994 by Spokane County. The County received a comprehensive plan amendment request (CPA- 79 -94) and rezone request (RZ- 17 -94) from the North Greenacres neighborhood requesting the following: • Amend the comprehensive plan map west of Flora Road, north of Mission from "Industrial" to "Urban "; • Amend the zoning map from I -2, Industrial west of Flora Road and from UR -3.5 east of Flora Road to SR -1. Based on this request the Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) directed county planning staff to conduct a study of the subject area. The Spokane County Planning Department developed a "Lead Agency Report" (June 16, 1994) referred to as the "North Greenacres" Study. The report stated that the County was mandated to establish an "interim" urban growth area (IUGA) by October of 1996. This action would determine if the subject area was "Urban" or "Rural" under the County's comprehensive plan required by the Growth Management Act (GMA). As indicated above, the IUGA was established prior to the County starting work on the GMA comprehensive plan. The North Greenacres study states: "The Planning Departments major concern, regarding the "North Greenacres" Neighborhood, is the unknown results of the 20 year Urban Growth Area (UGA) boundary and which future Land Use Category would be assigned to the "North Greenacres" portion of the Valley." The report further states (page 20) that County's intention was to consider the comprehensive plan amendment and rezone as an "interim" measure until the IUGA and ultimately the GMA Comprehensive Plan was adopted by the County. Spokane County adopted an IUGA that designated the subject area as "Urban ". Additionally the County adopted its GMA Plan in January 2001 that designated the subject property as "Low Density Residential" on the comprehensive plan map. REZ -17 -04 — Greenaeres Arcawide Rezcme Page 2 of 4 c� ' III. Analysis of Proposed Rezone The City of Spokane Valley adopted the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan (including map) and development regulations as interim measures upon incorporation. As the attached Comprehensive Plan Map indicates the subject area is designated Low Density Residential (LDR). Several goals and policies are included the City's interim comprehensive plan related to residential areas of the City, particularly the Residential Land Use Section of the Urban Land Use Chapter. Specific goals and policies that support the requested rezone include: Goal UL.7 — Guide efficient development patterns by locating residential development in areas where facilities and services can be provided in a cost - effective and timely fashion. Policy UL.7.3 — New urban development must be located within the Urban Growth Area (UGA) boundary. Goal UL.8 — Create urban areas with a variety of housing types and prices, including manufactured home parks, multifamily development, townhouses and single - family development. Goal UL.9a — Create a variety of residential densities within the Urban Growth Area with an emphasis on compact mixed -use development in designated centers and corridors. The City of Spokane Valley adopted interim development regulations under Ordinance 53 -03, which adopted the Spokane County Zoning Code as amended, as the interim zoning code for the City. The interim zoning code includes the County's Phase I Development Regulations. Section II of the Phase I Development Regulations include a table designed to stipulate comprehensive plan categories and zoning designations that are consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan map designations. As previously stated the subject area is designated LDR on the City's interim comprehensive plan map. The table referenced in the previous paragraph indicates that implementing zoning designations for the LDR map designation are UR -3.5 and UR -7 *. The proposed rezone to UR -3.5 is consistent with the subject table. Staff would like to state that the rezoning of this area to UR -3.5 will not preclude individual property owners in the subject area from requesting rezones of individual properties to UR -7* Site specific rezone requests are processed through the City's hearing examiner on a case -by -case basis. REZ-1 7-04 — Grccnacres Areawide Rezone Page 3 of 4 IV. Findings and Recommendation Planning Division staff makes the following findings related to the proposed rezone: 1. The rezone petition is sufficient in that signatures of over 51% of the property owners in the affected area have signed the petition; 2. An environmental review of the proposed rezone was completed and a threshold determination issued by the City consistent with state requirements; 3. The proposed rezone is consistent with appropriate goals and policies of the City's Interim Comprehensive Plan; and 4. The proposed rezone is consistent with the City's Interim Zoning Code's comprehensive plan category/implementing zoning table included in Section II of the Phase I Development Regulations adopted by the City of Spokane Valley in Ordinance 53 -03. Planning Division staff recommends the requested area -wide rezone be approved. Attachments REZ -17 -04 — Grccnacres Arcaw•ide Rezone Page 4 of 4 AREAWIDE REZONE APPLICATION 0 APPLICANT OR REPRESENTATIVE: Mary Pollard MAILING ADDRESS: 17216 East Baldwin CITY: Spokane Valley STATE: WA ZIP: 99224 PHONE (home): 926 -8899 PHONE (office): 926 -8899 CELL: 990 -3103_ EMAIL ADDRESS: maryp @icehouse.net NUMBER OF PARCELS WITHIN SUBJECT AREA: 264 GENERAL BOUNDARY OF PROPOSAL: North and West boundary is Spokane River; South boundary is Mission Avenue; east boundary is Barker Road. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN SUBJECT AREA: Farming, storage of large machinery, greenhouses, commercial raising of flowers, equipment repair shop, single family residential homes, classic car paint shop, small orchards, gardening, barns and shops for storage of personal and small business use (such as an upholstery shop.) SIZE OF SUBJECT AREA (acres or square feet): EXISTING ZONE CLASSIFICATION(S): Urban Residential 7* (UR -7 *) PROPOSED ZONING: Urban Residential 3.5 (UR -3.5) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CATEGORY: Low Density Residential LIST PREVIOUS LAND USE ACTIONS, IF ANY, INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: In 1994 there was an area -wide study conducted by Spokane County following the GMA process that resulted in an area -wide zoning of SRi. In January, 2002, when the county adopted their Comprehensive Plan, they zoned our area UR.7 *. Our existing land use and insufficient level of services and improvements (such as roads), created a hardship for this neighborhood to safely function at this density. The zoning designation also changes the ability to continue animal keeping, except under the grandfather provision. There is a majority interest in retaining this right. This is the impetus for application for an area wide rezone of UR3.5. We are seeking to protect our area from high development. This is the only zoning available under the existing zoning ordinances. We would prefer larger lot sizes of 1 acre minimums but are seeking to protect ourselves with this zoning of UR3.5 while the City of Spokane Valley writes our own Comprehensive Plan and adopts a broader variety of zoning designations to accommodate a richer variety of lifestyles, more closely resembling the community that makes Spokane Valley an attractive place to live. WHAT ARE THE CHANGED CONDITIONS OF THE AREA WHICH YOU FEEL MAKE THIS PROPOSAL. WARRANTED? This area has not changed, but areas nearby have dramatically increased in population as developments have encroached around us. This has caused increased traffic on all roads. Mission recently had a sewer line brought by a developer but the rest of the area is still not part of the 6 year sewer plan. This has created an inequitable situation. Those with money are purchasing public services at the expense of capacity that the general public on the plan should have been receiving. Also, others desiring sewer, cannot develop their properties and may be delayed even longer as capacity of our waste water treatment facility reaches capacity "officially in 2009." One citizen should not receive special treatment over another for public services. Present road conditions on the secondary roads such as Baldwin, Indiana, Montgomery, Riverway, Long and Greenacres Road, are narrow and not well maintained. In winter, we are not plowed on snow days. It usually stops at Mission, and days later we may have our streets plowed. This will create more hazardous road conditions with the hundreds of new cars that are expected to travel daily down these roads. Neighbors have already commented they have had near misses with head on collisions when they have moved over on the road to accommodate a bicyclist. Any reduction in homes will lessen the traffic and hopefully avert more serious problems but I believe the roads are not up to the standards needed for any significant increase in traffic. Concurrency is demanded by GMA, UR 3.5 is the only zoning available to try to mitigate the road problem that is being created. During summer months, slow moving vehicles such as tractors and harvesting equipment utilize Flora and some of the other roads. WHAT FACTORS SUPPORT THE ZONE RECLASSIFICATION? CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: To quote the Short Course on Planning, "the perception or reality that existing roads cannot handle present traffic and that they would be overtaxed by significant new levels of use - would be a barrier to increasing densities in existing urban or suburban areas. The Comprehensive Plan demands that capital facilities funding is provided for in the present. The courts have ruled that you cannot hold an area's land indefinitely. There must be a clear need for those lands for housing and without that it is a taking of property that must be compensated. It is too early to know where the people want to put our growth and what we want to preserve. The County Comprehensive Plan 74111JTNC: DCrI ACCTCTrATTnN &DOI TrATTl1N On 7 of requires a 4 house average per acre of new housing. The zoning would conform to this goal 0 while North Greenacres waits out this Interim period. The land use element of the plan and the finance piece of the capital facilities element must be coordinated and consistent. COMPLIANCE WITH PURPOSE AND INTENT OF ZONING: Zoning is to prevent urban sprawl and must have capital facilities in place. Good planning would not initiate large developments in an area without sewer services for the entire area. We need to have good management of what already exists before we attempt to Increase the population and traffic of an area. Schools are full and there is a need for more schools. While there may not be enough room for new students, by law schools cannot turn any student away and so we must not just follow the letter of the law but the intent and purpose of insuring there is money and capacity in the present school system. Otherwise, students that move into an area are bused outside of their neighborhood and cannot begin making friends and their educational experience is interrupted by school moves beyond their physical move to an area. Poor development standards may cause the larger community to bear the expense of retrofitting the development to meet urban standards. WHAT IMPACT WILL THE PROPOSED ZONE RECLASSIFICATION HAVE ON THE SURROUNDING AREA? It will be consistent with zoning adjacent to the South Boundary on Mission WHAT MEASURES DO YOU PROPOSED TO MITIGATE YOUR PROPOSAL'S IMPACT ON SURROUNDING LAND USE? Animal keeping should not be a variance since 71% of the area support this use. We would like to see something created to permit this use, to be submitted with the community comprehensive plan amendments if needed. Likely, this is a bureaucratic decision that can be made at this time. The present zoning is injurious to the historical and present land uses and deprives us of rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in this vicinity such as Otis Orchards and South Greenacres area. This is a takings that can be rectified. In addition, the following measures should be enacted to mitigate the interim zoning that was enacted to assist the proposed zoning. In order to preserve the scenic view, 1 1 story houses should also have a 10 foot setback so there is not a visible wall created since that is the setback required of 2 story homes. Since it 's more than one story, it should be treated as a 2 story not a single story structure. 7ANTNP DCru ACCTCTrATTAN ADDI TrATTnN Dann 1 of Setbacks should be a minimum of 10 to 12 feet if there is animal keeping on adjacent to the proposed building project. This is to protect both neighboring property owners from harm to one another. Fencing should be required of any PUD or housing development along the entire perimeter of the development to protect the neighboring properties. The benefits to the local area to continue agricultural use is of public interest. Residential development adjacent to these lands should be advised that these uses shall not be considered a nuisance if conducted and maintained according to beset farming and animal management practices. Informing new or potential purchasers of the daily activities and potential "inconveniences" (i.e. dust, odors, machinery operation, sounds, etc.) would be helpful in maintaining a harmonious neighborhood, while such notices do not have any real force of law. If one is determined to live in an area that has these land uses they should be prepared to accept inconveniences or discomfort as a normal and necessary aspect of living in an area with a rural character. Definitions: Agricultural Operations means, but is not limited to, the cultivation and tillage of the soil, production, irrigation, frost protection, cultivation, growing, harvesting and processing of any agricultural commodity, including viticulture, horticulture, timber or apiculture, the raising of livestock and poultry, any agricultural practice or process, private or commercial, performed as incident to or in conjunction with such operations, including recycling of agricultural waste, preparation for market, delivery to storage or to carriers for transportation to market. A Grievance Committee could be established to assist in the resolution of any disputes that might arise regarding agricultural operations and the right to farm or use your property. Electric fence should be encouraged and provided for in our zoning ordinances to prevent damage to neighboring property and fences - since it discourages leaning on the fence and does not pose any harm beyond a shock to any child or adult touching the fence. (Any planner wishing to touch an electric fence as a trial is welcome to try.) Penalties for unlawful interference, theft, trespassing, or vandalism to owners in agricultural pursuits should be created since a large majority of the area are grandfathered with these uses and should be protected. DATE SUBMITTED: RECEIVED BY: FILE NUMBER: PART II (For Staff Use Only) 71111.1TPJt OCPI ACCTCTrATTAN AODI Tr/VT-TAN D9f\A A of C Comp Plan Category Um Dom+uy Reeld nfr ' Medium Dorsey Residential - H1 UornNy Rwidenliel 1] Mt■.d us. - Community ewes no Wein Activity Comer f Neighborhood Corm eraal ("-1 Community G miner sal - Regional Conanorar .4.41111111IM t V A 'tip*, II Illimitras iiiv w ' jj 1111111r ;;�amud..' igi . mill ��:....1 -, a ��I rzr = _IU ! -�L - Aratilff_2110E15 OW:: l WITHERSPOON, KELLEY, DAVENPORT & TOOLE Stanley M. Schwartz SMS @wkdtlaw.com Licensed in Washington & Idaho Meg Arpin Arpin Law Office 1117 E. 35 Ave. Spokane, WA 99203 A. Background. B. Discussion. A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CORPORATION ATTORNEYS & COUNSELORS 1100 U.S. BANK BUILDING 422 WEST RIVERSIDE SPOKANE. WASHINGTON 99201-0300 Telephone: (509) 624.5265 Tcicoopicr. (5G9)4514-2728 October 20, 2004 COEUR ['PALM amnia THE S1ORESILAN REVIEW BUILD:NO 601 NORTk'OEET BOULEVARD. surreal COMM D'ALENT., IDAHO 831114116 (303)65T-4003 Re: Qualchan Investments Spokane, Inc. Pines/Mansfield Mitigation Agreement Dear Mrs. Arpin: This letter replies to your letter dated September 22, 2004 and sets forth matters we have discussed in connection with your client's property located at the near Pines and Grave Avenue. As you know, on September 14, 2004 the Spokane Valley City Council, discussed the re- development of the Pines/Mansfield Intersection. Staff sought Council direction following the receipt of WSDOT's revised project cost estimate that increased the City's share of project cost by $900,000.00. The previous estimate received from WSDOT required the City to fund approximately $55,000.00. At the meeting, Council decided it did not wish to presently assume responsibility for the full local funding package of $960,000.00. Following the Council action, you, on behalf of your clients, sent a letter stating Qualchan Investments Spokane, Inc. would contribute up to $125,000.00 toward the Pines Road Intersection improvements. In exchange, your client desired the assured issuance of a building permit upon application for the generally identified development I understand that your client's property was rezoned to UR -22 in 1991 and 1999. When the matter was considered for a rezone in 1998 (with the Decision made in January 1999), the Examiner was reviewing a plan to develop 270 units in an apartment complex consisting of 17 buildings. I am also aware that for this rezone application Spokane County issued a DNS. Upon application for a project permit with the City of Spokane Valley your client will be required to submit project specific information including applicable SEPA documents. If your client submits SEPA documents from the rezone application the City will need to determine whether there is new information or circumstances that warrant further environmental review. Meg Arpin October 13, 2004 Page 2 The City of Spokane Valley, through Ordinance No. 60, adopted the Spokane County "Application Review Procedures for Project Permits." I know you are familiar with these land use procedures. Specifically, I draw your attention to Chapter 13.600 entitled 'Technical Review ". This Section provides for a determination of consistency, as well as, a project review. In summary, the proposed project's consistency with the development regulations under RCW 36.70A must be evaluated. If warranted, further environmental review pursuant to RCW Chapter 43.21C (SEPA) may be required. In summary, your statement that you "do not believe that Spokane Valley can refuse to issue a building permit for the project based on the current conditions on Pines Road" is not correct. Clearly, upon application for a building permit, the City must follow its land use permitting process. You and I have discussed the vested rights doctrine with respect to a rezone of property. We agree that there is no reported Washington case that holds a rezone of property creates a vested right to develop that property under the laws in existence as of the date of the rezone. Thus, the 1991 and 1999 rezone of the Qualchan Investment Property does not result in a vested right to develop in accord with the laws in effect on the date of the rezone. This means that your project permit application will be evaluated under the laws in existence on the date of such application. C. Conclusion. I hope your client understands the sincere desire of the City to foster and promote economic development. The City realizes that the development of your client's property enhances the use of the property and fulfills the land use goals of the City Comprehensive Plan. Indeed, as you represent, the construction of a 270 unit apartment complex with a budget in excess of 21 Million Dollars is significant. As of this date, I am not aware of any change in the amount of the City's contribution to the Pines /Mansfield Project. I do know that City Staff is continuing to work with the grant and transportation agencies in an effort to obtain additional funding to construct the project. I this regard a status letter is being sent out by the City Public Works Department. However, your offer of S125,000.00 to be used toward the improvements on Pines Road in exchange for the assured issuance of a building permit is not accepted. If the funding circumstances change, and proper application for a project permit is made, I suspect we can revisit this issue. Otherwise, I assume that at the time a project permit is applied for, the mitigation measures that are directly attributable to this significant project will be addressed. As always, I appreciate your courtesies. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. SMS /jp cc: City Manager Director of Public Works Senior Engineer By Very truly yours, WITHERSPOON, KELLEY, DAVENPORT • & TOOLE, P.S. 6100°N, Spo ..goo 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall@spokanevalley.org October 13, 2004 Mr. and Mrs. James Pollard, Spokane Valley, WA Re: Correspondence dated October 9, 2004 to City Manager Mercier Dear Mr. and Mrs. Pollard: This letter is in response to your correspondence with City Manager Dave Mercier, dated October 9, 2004. In responding to your inquiries and comments, we will use the same identifying system you did, calling out the paragraphs by number. We are including a copy of your letter to Mr. Mercier for easy reference. 1. As you know, North Greenacres is designated as Low Density Residential in the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan, adopted as an Interim Plan by the City of Spokane Valley. Approved implementing zone classifications for Low Density Residential (LDR) are UR -7, UR -7* and UR -3.5. Planned Unit Developments and other development with densities within allowable' 1 -4.35 (UR 3.5), 6 (UR -7 *) or 7 (UR -7) dwelling units per acre are vested with a completed development application. As we both have discussed with you previously, the reason this rezone request is being treated as a Comprehensive Plan amendment is because of the size of the area involved, and that if granted, it would result in a measurable change in the previous city -wide density calculations made by the City. As such, it would affect the previous Comprehensive Plan work adopted by the City. Given these facts, it is our opinion that the Growth Management Act would require the rezone to undergo the Comprehensive Plan amendment process. As such, we respectfully disagree with your contention that this process, and the reasoning for it, violate GMA. 2. An application for area -wide rezoning was submitted timely on July 1, 2004 for consideration in 2004. A petition was submitted at the same time for a moratorium on development. We misunderstood that you wanted both to proceed at the same time. No process has been initiated for processing the request, in large part because the request for the area -wide rezone was in progress. City Council may impose a moratorium for up to six months without a public hearing, and for up to one year if a hearing is held and a work plan developed, as was the case with the UR -1 affecting the Ponderosa and ' Rotchford Acres neighborhoods. Both of these cases were based on the original residential design of the single - family neighborhoods and the present condition of full development, as well a material environmental issues resulting from topography and location. In North Greenacres, there appear to.be no circumstances except the absence of a sewer line that justify a moratorium, and this only if the developer refuses to connect to the existing sewer trunk line. We are not unsympathetic to the neighborhood's concerns, although the rural character of existing development and the presence of a significant amount of vacant and/or under- developed land cannot justify a prohibition against additional development within designated Urban Growth Areas. However, now that we are clear that you wish to proceed with the request for a moratorium in your area, we will begin processing it. We will briefly discuss internally whether it can be brought forward quickly enough to be considered simultaneously with the request for area -wide rezone. If so, we will do so. If not, it will follow behind the re- zone request as quickly as we can from a procedural standpoint. Staff may not ultimately agree that a moratorium is appropriate in your area, but that is not staffs decision to make, it belongs to the City Council so it will be forwarded to them. 3 -8. Each of these six items are very directly in the realm of policy discussion matters that can only properly be considered and commented on by our City Council. We are providing copies of this letter to each of the City Council members for review. 9. We have carefully reviewed and considered this question in light of the concerns you have expressed. When we first became a city, the City Council discussed many of these types of issues, and, as a result, adopted the Spokane Valley Governance Coordination Manual. Section 3.3(g)(1) states that people who wish to speak at a Council meeting must provide their name, address and the topic they wish to speak on. Washington law is silent on the issue of whether the public is even allowed an opportunity to speak at council meetings. IIowever, the City Council wanted to provide the public, but primarily its own residents, an opportunity to comment on issues of public concern. Our Council pays particular attention to the comments and requests of our own residents. Requiring speakers to state their address allows the Council to have that information. We cannot establish different rules for different speakers, requiring some to provide their address and others not. As discussed on the phone with you, the remedy would appear to be advising the police of the conduct you feel to be harassment, which you have done. There is another reason for requiring speakers to provide their address. Some issues presented -to the Council occur in public hearings. A person can seek to gain standing for appeal by speaking up at such hearings. In such cases, we may need to know if the person is a citizen or not. We hope this response adequately answers your concerns. If not, I am confident you will let us know so we can attempt to supplement our comments. V • trail) � 1 kell Marina Sukup Deputy City Attorney Community Development Director CD/MS /pd c: David Mercier, Spokane Valley City Manager City Council Members 7Th October 9, 2004 City of Spokane Valley Mr. Dave Mercier City Manager Dear Mr. Mercier, i appreciate the time you extended to discuss some of my concerns of which I am hoping are shared by the city. A short recap of our discussion is as follows: 1. Due Process There needs to be a predictable time line that creates a fair process when an entire neighborhood applies for redress of an injustice. The present County Comprehensive Plan that is being used as our city interim plan has already been amended. There is no reason to not continue making adjustments and our application for a rezone was being used as a comprehensive plan amendment even though technically it wasn't needed because it can be adjusted through the present plan. Citizens believe that there is a perception of allowing development interest in the name of property rights to supersede the rights of owners whose domicile is this neighborhood. There is no question that the present practice and approvals clearly violates GMA for many reasons. 2. Moratorium Criminals are afforded speedier due process. Our neighborhood has been put on death row and as the applications have been vested and allowed to trickle in, our appeal for a moratorium while this decision is being made has been ignored — the ensuing months do not resemble a timely process nor any appearance of fairness. Our neighborhood has dramatically been impacted in the time since July l until present. in the May Testimony before Mr. Dempsey we asked for a Moratorium as a safeguard to allow time to study this area. The city council was given a written petition. I spoke frequent times with the planning department about this need. The taking of this neighborhood is a shocking example of neglect by the city to recognize our desperate situation. During the ensuing months, it has been changed by plans that will make ow neighborhood unrecognizable and traffic beyond imagination. We want the same treatment that Ponderosa area has been given. While we are not already established into one acre parcels and have a larger conglomeration of different densities, we needed an effective legal mechanism to effectively create a slowdown of development while solutions to the recharge of the aquifer, the road problem, and other issues could be studied. Instead, our neighborhood has been ravaged by developers getting in their applications at 6 houses per acre. We could have been put into an urban reserve area but none of these solutions were offered to us. A very disturbing shell game ensued. We were not offered a deal like Ponderosa. Marina Sukup graciously attended our neighborhood meeting in May and people vociferously demanded a return of the zoning and rights that had been taken when the county made their plan, about 50 were in attendance. We talked at length to planning about our problem and realized that without being included with Ponderosa we had to find another way to protect our area immediately. Planning met with several of us and we inquired about rezoning to U.R. 3.5 with the understanding that we would be protecting ourselves to a slightly less density. They went over what we needed to do for the area - wide rezone to U.R. 3.5. We were quite clear that this was an interim zoning that we wanted to be revisited when they created a wider range of implementing zones under LDR. After hours and at least 52,000 worth of fees and work, we find that we didn't achieve a thing. Anyone can apply to become 6 houses per acre because it is in the same category. We are not planners, we had a right to be apprised of that information, especially as a neighborhood rezone application process. We are not developers that use and know the process. We have been tricked and been victimized by the city and want redress. You should ethically return our money. Also, we provided the parcel numbers and a very useable list to make the planning department's job easier. This was a list they didn't have, so it saved them a lot of time and we also paid for that. 3. Pollution Some of the properties in this area will be affected by the Shoreline Master Plan which is still in process. Also, swales provide some recharge it does not address the entire problem. It is an inequitable situation to allow developers to bring sewer at the expense of people who are on the 6 year county plan. 4. Public Health Hazard Aiso, with a case of the West Nile Virus finding it's first case in Washington, we ought to be concerned about standing or ponding water without ensuring that mosquitoes are not breeding. While we have very porous soil — they often water these swales to keep the grass marshy so it cleans the runoff but that is a great environment for creating a public health hazard. 5. Sewers and Preferential Treatment of Developers In allowing developers to bring sewer and to use our dwindling capacity is at the expense of citizens on the six year plan who will not have the resources to buy their own private sewer and will not get a sewer since there is 4 years maximum capacity left. Those unable to bring sewer re unable to segregate their property, sell parts of it, or develop without sewer. That means that a limited resource is given to a monied interest over a public interest. 6. Public Participation and GMA The work continued on the new Comprehensive Plan has absorbed the minds and time of the staff to the exclusion of addressing development and design standards and mitigating the impacts to allow communities to live in harmony. It's as ridiculous as dusting fastidiously while your house is burning down. Testimony people find objectionable about developments should be combined with testimony from GMA meetings into a single document — This will give a better picture and memory of what has been testified — there are likely recommendations from the public that may be helpful. Presently, there is not a continuing thread — every hearing is in isolation; decided and forgotten. Neighborhoods have been told that the rationale for voluntarily enslaving their neighborhoods into a configuration that they object to is so we don't have to pay for litigation brought by developers or proponents of GMA . GMA does not dictate density. Implementation by the county has stated 4 house minimum per net acre average. This is an average — we could plan to build high rises and allow larger parcels. Unchecked the cost of living, property values and housing are already soaring out of the reach of many people as this problem is ignored. It would hearten the community to see the city voluntarily and aggressively grapple with and solve the issues that we take issue with. 7. Urban Sprawl — an erroneous concept Fact: Residential Housing never pays for infrastructure — industry and business offsets these costs. An Industry that only brings a burden for more infrastructure cannot be treated with a "Preferred" Citizen status in the guise of property rights. A Farmland Trust Study has shown across the country that leaving rural area intact save money and that developing these areas cost more than the taxes they generate. There is a perception that bringing high density residential will offset the cost and make effective a mass transit system but the University of Washington did a study and found that unless you have 5,000 people per square mile it is not cost effective. 1 don't think we want to be New York. Rural Areas provide amenities to a community such as inexpensive produce, recreation, field trips for children, fruit and vegetable stands and open areas to please the eye. Common Sense would dictate leaving areas along the river to be used as large parcels and to beautify the area and gradually fan out your zoning in to more intense use of the land. 8. Economic Impacts of present Planning Direction Developers are voluntarily by cut throat tactics raising the cost of land by doubling the price the average homebuyer would offer to ensure they control the area. This goes beyond business practice and is creating a monopoly of land by a single industry. For the sake of greed, they have effectively raised the cost of housing and the cost of living. If stores are required to build right up to the sidewalk, with glass store fronts, and then a small amount of parking behind, this is not a great environment. Anyone having to walk with small children and their parcels will not likely venture out if they have to park in an alley, with the potential to be mugged in a less visible place. By making it more difficult to shop, by needing public transit, lack of parking, or walking in poor weather conditions, they will quickly find a less time intensive way to purchase their needs, via internet or stores that are more consumer friendly. I think this idea needs revisiting. Also, as cities and crime grow, stores with glass fronts ends up with the unattractive reminder of crime as they pull across their metal gates and padlock at night, to keep people from breaking out their glass and entering. We need to bring in industry that makes products of something tangible beyond service industry jobs. 9. Privacy. Public Records need to protect citizens in the new environmet of people who are disrespectful of individuals testifying in the public arena. Private Citizens do not have a business address to hide behind and must give their home address. There is a need for the city to be the conduit that connects those who may want to contact someone who has testified. There existing in the Municipal Code exceptions to Public Disclosure that would permit this kind of protection. 1 personally, need this due to a series of events this September. Thanks for your attention to these concerns. Mary Pollard