The URL can be used to link to this page

2004, 10-12 Regular MeetingVOUCHER LIST 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 L\IENm:D :AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING #53 Tuesday, October 12, 2004 CITY HALL AT REDWOOD PLAZA 11707 Eat Sprague Avenue, First Floor 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2005 Budget — ken Thompson f. Authorize Use of City Logo Resemblance 6,ceK 6:00 p.m. Council Requests All Electronic Devices be Turned Off During Council Meeting CALI., TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION: Pastor Mike Sager. Holy Trinity Lutheran ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS COMMITTEE. BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT: Proclamation: National Association of Women Business Owners Week PUBLIC COMMF..NTS For members of the Public to speak to the Council regarding matters NOT on the Agenda Please state your name and address for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. 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 Se . tember 28, 2004 b. Approval of Study Session Minutes of 1q+ 5, 2004 c. Approval of Payroll of September 15 of S107,033.03 d Approval of Payroll of September 30, of $156,461.79 c. Approval of Following Vouchers: Counal /tscnda 10-1244 Regular Steams Pugc 1 of 2 NEW BUSINESS 3. First Reading Proposed 2005 Annual Property Tax Ordinance 04-041 - Ken Thompson [public comment] 4. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 04-042 Confirming An Excess Property Tax Levy — Ken Thompson [public comment] 5. Motion Consideration: Planning Commission Mayoral Appointments — Mayor DeVleming [public comment] 6. Motion Consideration: Authorize CenterPlace Change Order — Mikc Jackson/Steve Worley [public comment] 7. Motion Consideration: Extension of Delegated Authority — Dave Mercier [public comment] PUBLIC COMMENTS (Maximum of three minutes please: state your name and address for the record) AI)11IIN1STR4T VF. REPORTS: [no public comment] 8. Sign Code Committee Update — David Crosby 9. Code Report — Torn Scholtens 10. Report on CDBG Project Ideas — Greg McCormick 1 1. Budget Discussion: Street Fund — Neil KerstenlKen Thompson l? CenterPlacc Update — Mike Jackson/Steve Worley 13. Centennial Trail Maintenance — Mikc Jackson 14. INFORMATION ONLY [no public comment] a. tltility Tax Scenarios b. Planning Commission Minutes of August 26, 2004 ADJOURNMENT FUTURE SCHEDULE Regular Council Meetings are generally held 2nd and •!° Tuesdays, beginning rot 6 :00 p.m. Council Study Sessions are generally held 1 ". 3' and 5th Tuesdays, beginning at 6 :00 p.m. Other Tentative tncominr Meetini►x /Events: October 13, 2004, 6 p.m. Conversation with the Community, Valley Hospital Conference Center October 26, 2004: Regular Meeting, PCTBLIC HEARING: Final 2005 Budget Hearing November 23. 2004 — No Council Meeting or Council Study Session November 30, 2004 — Regular Council Meeting February 12, 2005 — 1Ialf- -Day CounciVStaff Retreat NOTICE Individuals planning to anend the meeting who require special assistance to aceotnmodatc physical. hearing. or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk al (309) 91 -1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. Cnwuil Ascridn I0. 12-(14 Rcgutar Meeting Page 2 of 2 Spokane •Ualley � Y � ! PROCLAMATION CIS OE S OWE ` LL ; WASOINGTOW WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley acknowledges the contributions made by members of the National Association of Women Business Owners (NAWBO), to promote economic development in this region and throughout the Country; and WHEREAS, the NAWBO strives to create innovative and effective changes in the business culture; and build strategic alliances, coalitions and affiliations; and WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley recognizes that the NAWBO's vision is to propel women entrepreneurs into economic, social, and political spheres of power worldwide. NOW, , THE1 EF I E, I Mayor Michael 1 eV1erning, on behalf of the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, proclairn October 10 — October 17, 2004, as National Association of Women Business Owners Week in Spokane Valley, Washington, and I encourage and invite all citizens to support the numerous women business owners which form a vital component of the Spokane Valley business community. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City pf Spokane Valley to be affixed this 12 day of October, 2004. MICHAEL DEVLEMI 1 , MAYOR CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 12, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business X public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ 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. Public notice of this budget hearing was published. BACKGROUND: State law requires a public hearing before we adopt the 2005 budget. The City has scheduled public hearings for October 12 and October 26 to consider the 2005 budget. OPTIONS: At least one public hearing is required prior to adopting the 2005 budget. The City Council could elect to hold the hearing at a later date. However, the hearing must be held and the ordinance passed prior to late December, 2004. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: No council action is needed at this time. The public hearings should be held on October 12 and October 26 to keep the City on schedule. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This will be the adopted budget for 2005. STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance /Administrative Services Director 2005 Budget Hearing Spokane Valley Council Meeting October 12, 2004 4 Overview ■ A balanced budget ■ 2005 goals • Adopt first comprehensive plan • Enact a uniform development code • Recompose 5 -year financial forecast into a 6 -year plan • Advance Spokane Valley interests through external relations • Collaborate with wastewater dischargers and regulatory agencies in analyzing system acquisition options • Establish city -wide customer service program O 2 1 Budget Highlights • 2005 budget is $43 million, 2004 amend. bud. was $50 million — down 14% • Conservative revenue projections, realistic expenditure projections • Opening of CenterPlace Budget Highlights cont • Continue: . Loan repayment . CenterPlace operating reserve . Service level reserve • Contingency • Contract city: 13% of General Fund is salaries/ benefits compared to 50 -70% for many govern- ments, 52 employees compared to 300 -700 • Capital expenditures of $10 million, $1.8 million city funds (18 %) -J 2 Budget Highlights cont ■ Street fund financial difficulties . Typical revenues of $1.2 million /yr, needs of $4+ million /yr • Using county road tax $ from first year of incorporation • Additional revenue needed for street operations 112;2004 5 3 ■ DRAFT Mayor DeVleming called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the 52nd meeting. Attendance: Councilmernhers: Michael DeVleming, Mayor Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember Gary Schimmels,Councilmembec Absent: Richard Munson, Councilmember, excused MINUTF;S City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday, September 28, 2004 Staff: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Stanley Schwartz., City Attorney Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Mike. Jackson, Parks & Recreation Director Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Greg McCormick, Long Range Planning Manager Cal Walker, Police Chief Scott Kuhta, Long R.ange Planner Ding (Greg) Bingaman, TT Specialist Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor DeVleming led the Pledge of Allegiance. INVOCATION: Pastor David Johnson of the Valley United Methodist Church gave the invocation. ROLL CALL City' Clerk Bainbridge called roll; Councilmember Munson excused; all remaining Councilmembers present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor DeVleming explained that he would like to add agenda item 6a, change order addendum for CenterPlace, and item 6b appointment to Student Advisory Council. It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councihnember Denenny to approve the amended agenda. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Councilmember Flanigan: reported that last Thursday he attended the Public Health District Board meeting where the topic of fluoride was discussed; they also gave a monthly update on the West Nile Virus and stated that according to the CDC (Center for Disease Control), Washington State is the only state which has not experienced any human infections. Councilmember Flanigan also reported that Valleyfest was well attended with an estimated 28,000 to 30,000 people; and that STA's shuttle service was exemplary. Deputy Mayor Wilhite: said that she also attended Valleyfest, and attended the dedication at Mirabeau and an autumn red maple tree was planted in commemoration; and that she attended the CVB meeting in Councilmember Denenny's absence. Councilmemher Denenny: mentioned that STA had their first evening meeting, and that the meetings are televised from the Spokane City Council Chambers beginning at 5:30 p.m.; they discussed light rail funding, reiterated the intent to use the authorized three- tenths of one - percent sales tax for the authorized system, that they granted authority to continue study to pursue all rapid transit alternatives, from rubberized bus rapid transit to the full blown light rail system, but that nothing would happen without another vote of the people. Council Meeting Minutcs of 9 -28 -04 Page 1 of 6 Approved: DRAFT MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor DeVleming mentioned that the Student Advisory Council held its orientation meeting and that their first official meeting will be October 7, 2004. PUBLIC COMMENTS John Snediker, 18316.E Broadway Avenue: spoke of his concern regarding the library, and reiterated his request for a year extension of the current agreement while all options are examined; asked that we apply sound business principals to this proposal, and do what makes the most sense; distributed three kinds of candy and said that concerning the proposal, we are looking at 1.5 books per person when 85,000 is divided, which could represent the smaller kitkat candy; if you look at what the library has now 408,000 that could be perceived as the larger candy; and looking at how that goes together with the reciprocal agreement with the downtown library that's another 577,000, which works out to 11 total for the current arrangement we have, and if we pull out and reduce down, there won't be the right number to have the reciprocal agreement with the downtown library; and that needs to be examined, and he feels there is not enough time to thoroughly examine all those options between now and January 1. 1. 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 14, 2004 b. Approval of Study Session Minutes of September 21, 2004 c. Approval of Voucher List of 9 -10 -04 and 9 -16 -04 in the total amount of 5409,635.48 for voucher numbers: 5524 through 5553; and 5561 through 5591. it was moved by Mayor DeVleming, and seconded by Councilmember Denenny, to waive the reading and approve the consent agenda as written. Vote by Acclamation: In .Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. NEW BUSINESS 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 04 -038, Clear View Triangles — Marina Sukup After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember Denenny and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to approve Ordinance 04 -038. Community Development Director Sukup gave a brief overview, and explained that there have been no changes since the first reading. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 3. Second Reading Proposed Vacation Ordinance 04 -039, STV -04 -04 - Marina Sukup After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to approve Ordinance 04 -039. Community Development Director Sukup explained that staff and the planning commission recommend approval subject: to the conditions stated in the ordinance, including a request from Avista to provide for a 10' wide strip over and along the north ten feet of that portion of the alley where the vacation is requested. Mayor DeVleming asked if the property owner is willing to keep an open mind on the cut - through of the streets; Director Sukup said it is her understanding that has not been discussed with the property owner but could be pursued and stated that the property owner is here. Mayor DeVleming asked the property owner to speak to this issue. Bob Irish, 124 N 19 said he represents the property owner; that this alley doesn't go anywhere, if they'd consider opening up Sipple which is used as a public thoroughfare now, it would completely disrupt their business operation. It was moved by Mayor DeVleming to table this issue until staff has an opportunity to discuss this issue with the property owner. No second was offered and the motion was not considered. After further council discussion, it was determined that Sipple would not be an issue. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation to approve Ordinance 04 -039: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Council Meeting Minutes of 9 -28 -04 Page 2 of 6 Approved: DRAFT 4. First Reading, Proposed Ordinance 04 -040, Public Record Lndexes — Chris Bainbridge After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councihnember Flanigan, and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite to suspend the rules and approve ordinance 04 -040. City Clerk Bainbridge gave a brief overview of the ordinance as explained in the accompanying Request for Council Action form. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by • Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried 5. Motion Consideration: Six -Year Stormwater Utility Financial Plan - Neil Kersten It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Schinmels to approve the six-year stormwater financial plan. Public Works Director Kersten explained that the proposed six -year plan was previously discussed August: 24, September 7 and September 21, and that the plan includes funding for two staff, costs associated with stormwater- related planning, cleaning, repair and maintenance, but does not include funding for major capital projects; and that the plan calls for a fee increase from the annual $10 per equivalent residential unit (ERU) to an annual $24 ERU. After Director Kersten gave his PowerPo intpresentation,.Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Dick Rehm, 3626 S Ridgeviel+' Rd: said he takes exception to a staff member; said this is for the birds; he said he spent six and one -half years on a Spokane County Water Quality Advisory Board and he knows more about the stormwatcr system in Spokane County then almost anyone in the valley would; that Glenrose is about a $12 million dollar project, Five Mile is almost that much; that those projects were being funded by the stormwater tax from the valley; and when the valley incorporated that took it away; the last year he was on the Water Quality Advisory Board, they were discussing fee schedules and that the stormwater fee would have to increase to subsidize Glenrose and the rest and there was quite a bit of talk about that as the valley was subsidizing the rest of the county on stormwater fees; he said it is quite inappropriate to put street cleaning and sweeping into a stormwater fee basis and make people pay for it twice, that that is not a stormwater issue and should not be charged against the stormwatcr fee; that Spokane County also charged ERUs as on all impervious surfaces within the stormwater area and that included county roads; they charged Spokane County Road's Department ERU charges for the county roads just like it charged any commercial property, and then the County roads department charged the Spokane County Stormwater Utility department the cost to maintain drywells and swales; and that there's more to this then presented tonight and he's disappointed in the presentation; and he asks Council to take this issue to members of the public and get more discussion before going ahead with this. TonyLazanis: said he is surprised Council never asked any more questions and will implement the $24.50 even though the valley has no stormwater problems, and most businesses have to take care of their own drainage, and that he is surprised that Councilmember Denenny was with the county's stormwater system for many years and he never asked any questions; and that Council will change the amount to $24.50 and never ask any questions; that no one takes care of the swales; that Council should be careful with what it does; and he doesn't want Council to drive the city into the ground. Councilmember Denenny stated that he doesn't wait until the last minute at the dais to ask questions, and because he doesn't ask questions up here doesn't mean this has not been thoroughly discussed, and this is not the time to question staff when this has already been presented three or four times; that the majority of this funding is for street cleaning, that he believes street cleaning should be part of the stormwater as there is no question stormwater problems along drywells are created by debris left on the street and winter sanding, etc and that it is appropriate to use stormwater funding. Councilmember Taylor said he agrees with Councilmember Denenny and that drywell maintenance and stormwater facility maintenance is required because of the debris and winter cleaning. Vote on motion to approve the six -year stormwater �1 financial plan: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Council Meeting Minutes of 9 -28 -04 Page 3 of 6 Approved: DRAFT 6. Mayoral Appointment: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee — Mayor DeVleming • 11 was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite to appoint JefFimcm to the Lodging Tar Advisory Committee for Spokane Valley. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 6a — Addendum to the CenterPlace Project It was moved by Deputy Mayor Wilhite and seconded by C'ouncilmennber Denenny, to approve the CenterPlace addendum and give the City Manager the authority to approve the changes in the contract, Engineer Worley explained this change order to the CenterPlace Project as per the accompanying Request for Council Action form, he stated that bids were received for the construction and completion of the classrooms and can now be completed within the project budget; that the contractor has requested $315,155 and ten additional weeks to complete the work and will guarantee this price until the end of September; and in an effort to keep the construction of CenterPlace moving forward, it is also requested that the City Manager be granted authority for an additional $50,000 in change orders for Mooney & Pugh's contract. Deputy Mayor Wilhite moved, seconded by Councilmember Denenny, to amend the motion to add authorizing the City Manager an additional S50, 000 in change order authority. Vote to amend the motion: In Favor.: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Further discussion ensued regarding the projects, funding issues, the college use of the area, and that an agreement with the college is almost finalized for use of the five rooms and a server room. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote on the amended motion to approve the CenterPlace addendum, give the City Manager the authority to approve the changes in the contract, and authorize the City Manager an additional $50,000 in change order authority: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 6b Appointment to Student Advisory Council — Mayor DeVleming It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Denenny to appoint Jill I3urgard as the "student at large." Mayor DeVleming added that the Student Advisory Council is writing by -laws and desires to have this vacancy filled as soon as possible to get the benefit of an older student. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were offered. In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed.: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried Mayor DeVleming called for short break at 7:20 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENTS: No comments were offered ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: [no public comment] 7. Regional Convention & Visitor's Bureau Update,' Tourism Promotion Budget — Ron Anderson Mr. Ron Anderson gave an update on the Regional Convention and Visitor's Bureau, Tourism Promotion Budget, and said that he represents the Spokane Hotel /Motel Association as well as the Hotel Commission; that he appreciates our endorsement for the TE'A interlocal; that the Hotel Commission of eight. commissioners (four representing downtown Spokane hotels, two representing unincorporated areas, and two representing the Spokane Valley) voted unanimously to support marketing efforts of both the Spokane Regional Sports Commission and the Regional Convention and Visitor's Bureau; he mentioned the grants available to assist the organizations, the marketing plans which have been approved by the County Commissioners, convention forecasting; and of the cun staff's efforts in all these areas. in response to a request from Councilmember Taylor, Eric Soyer spoke of the Sports Commission's assets and goals; that they are working on their sports events to be in a stronger position to be more effective to bring in even more events. John a3rewer mentioned his goals relating to increasing room nights and economic development over the next eighteen months to generate an additional S70,000 in additional room nights, that they are working to hire an additional support staff and four additional sales Council Meeting Minutes of 9 -28 -04 Page 4 of 6 Approved: DRAFT staff; that some items are specific to the Fair and Expo Center and some items are specific to Mirabeau Point; that there will be twenty-two international tour travel planners arriving within the next week and weekend from Germany, Italy, France and the UK; that they will start their tour with a two -hour bike ride on the Centennial Tail; and that future projects they are working with include the Fox Theater, Science Center, and support of Mirabeau and the Fair Expo Center. 8. Community Development Block Grant Application Process — Greg McCormick Long Range Planning Manager McCormick gave an overview of the 2005 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) process, went over the background of the City joining in the CDBG Consortium in June 2003, that we are eligible to apply for funding through Spokane County; that the CDBG funds target low and moderate income households; that the City received over $396,000 in 2004; and discussed upcoming timelines including dates for future public hearings. 9. Overview of Draft Comprehensive Plan — Marina Sukup /Greg McCormick Long Range Planning Manager McCormick went through his PowerPoint presentation. on. the Comprehensive Plan 2005 -2025 overview; which discussed the timetable, items for discussion, and common themes; and Director Sukup explained some of the hot topics such as neighborhood presentation issues, transportation issues, City Center, community feedback, and the next steps for council; she mentioned the goal is to get most of the community feedback at meetings set for early November; and to assemble and digest that information for council dissemination by early December. 10. Boundary Review Board Process — Cary Driskell Before Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained this issue, Mayor DeVleming excused Attorney Schwartz, who removed himself from the dais. Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained the background of the issue as per his September 28, 2004 Request for Council Action form, concerning Liberty Lake's intent to annex 644 acres between the two cities; he went over the issues including the Boundary Review Board process; and advised council that if they want to further appeal, we must participate by submitting a letter to the BRI3 outlining Spokane Valley's concerns with Liberty Lake's request, consistent with the statutory requirements. Council stated it had no objection to continue. Attorney Schwartz returned to the dais. It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to extend the meeting to 9:15 p.m. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor DeVleming, Deputy Mayor Wilhite, and Councihnembers Schimmels, Flanigan, and Denenny. Opposed: Councilmember Taylor. Abstentions: None. Motion carried 11. Scooters (safety /nuisance) — Cary Driskell /Josh Leonard Deputy City Attorney Driskell and Legal Intern Josh Leonard gave their PowerPoi.nt presentation on the issue of motorized scooters and how they affect nuisance/noise and safety concerns. In response to specific questions, Council said they feel 16 should be the age limit; nighttime operating should be permissible with WSP approved lamps and reflectors; and that brakes should be required. After discussing the issues and listening to concerns voiced by Police Chief Walker, it was mentioned that the City of Spokane has an excellent draft ordinance and we should coordinate our efforts with theirs, and that staff can return to council within a few weeks to consider items to be added to or omitted from the draft ordinance. Other items to consider in such an ordinance including whether to ban passengers, require helmets (Spokane requires a motorcycle helmet for gas powered scooters), ban sidewalk use from gas powered scooters; address the use of the Centennial trail, ban the use on city property and in parks, address bike lanes, arterial use, and overall safety on streets. Council Meeting Minutes of 9 -28 -04 Page 5 of 6 Approved: DRAFT Before adjourning Deputy City Manager Regor reminded Council to submit their proposed allocations for outside agency funding for 2005, as soon as possible. There being no further business, it was moved by Councilmember Flanigan, seconded, and unanimously agreed upon to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Michael DeVleming, Mayor Council Meeting Minutes of 9 -28 -04 Page 6 of 6 Approved: DRAFT Attendance: Councilmemhers: Michael DeVleming, Mayor Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Rich Munson, Councilmember (excused) Steve Taylor, Councilmember (excused) Absent: Rich Munson, Councilmember (excused) Steve Taylor, Councilmember (excused) i'I11`UTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Study Session October 5, 2004, 6:00 p.m. Staff: Dave Mercier City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Ken Thompson, Finance Director Greg McCormick, Long Range Planning Manager Cal Walker, Police Chief Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Mike Jackson. Parks and Recreation Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Bing (Greg) Bingaman, IT Specialist Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Guest: Stan McNutt, Facilitator 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. Employee Introduction — Long Range Planning Manager Greg McCormick introduced Mike Basinger, recently hired Associate Planner, who previously worked for the Boundary Review Board and assisted incorporation studies for Liberty Lake and Spokane Valley. Council welcomed Mike to the staff: 1. Mayoral Appointments: Ad Hoc Library Committee — Nina Regor Deputy City Manager Regor reported that steps have been taken to get this committee up and running and get the work in place in a relatively short time; that copies of the RFP issued in August, and copies of the evaluation tool to help evaluate the proposals, will be immediately sent to those appointed committee members. It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Denenny to appoint Deputy Mayor Wilhite and Councilmember Flanigan as council representatives to the committee. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Mayor DeVleming mentioned that eight applications were received for consideration to this committee; it was then moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to appoint the following individuals to the Ad Hoc Library Committee: Jennie lYillardson, Julie Ro.senoff, Joan Dunham, .Donna Connell, and Joni Driskell, Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Mayor DeVleming also mentioned that Councilmember Munson will be out of town until mid October, and that. Councilmember Taylor had to go out of town today for another meeting, is in route, and hopes to arrive shortly. 2. Department 2005 Budget HiQhlights/Workplan — Nina Regor Deputy City Manager Regor mentioned that this is an opportunity for each department to summarize their goals and activities for 2005. Deputy City Manager Regor explained the Executive and Legislative Support and reiterated the six Council goals. Study Session Minutes 10 -05 -04 Page 1 of 4 Datc Approved by Council: DRAFT Police Chief Walker then explained the several aspects as shown on the Public Safety slide, followed by Ms. R.egor's Operations and Administrative Services explanation, adding that one of the goals is to carry out a process to define the employee and organization's values, and another research option includes alternatives to incarceration. Concerning cost allocation, Ms. Regor stated that they are working to secure the details of the county's overhead cost for next year's contract and on standardizing the language in the contract. Public Works Director Kersten then explained his goals, adding that concerning the wastewater treatment options, the Department of Ecology continues work on the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study, and the County is working on defining the costs; concerning street operations, staff is working to develop information on traffic calming management program with a goal to distribute information to the communities to get feedback on noise and traffic issues in various neighborhoods. Director Kersten mentioned that the County typically does traffic counts in July and August and generally engage the assistance of college students in that count, but that counts should be conducted when school is in process. Director Kersten also stated that we are starting to implement control of levels of service such as tracking the reporting and repairing of potholes; he added that street painting is typically done in the spring and staff is researching the logistics and economics of using markings which will last longer than the paint currently used. Concerning stormwater, Director Kersten said that assessing drainage problems and implementing new swale design methods will be improved with the addition of the two previously approved staff positions. Director Kersten also highlighted the capital projects, which are all from the transportation improvement plan approved last spring. Community Development Director Sukup explained her portion of the presentation, and stated that within six months of the Comprehensive Plan, we must have regulations in place to implement the plan; she went over the adoption process of the Plan, and added that several workshops are planned, beginning with one set for this Thursday. Director Sukup also mentioned that Mr. Crosby will be giving Council a report next week on the sign regulations. Parks and Recreation Director Jackson reported that four responses have been received in response to the recent RFP; and that we have been notified under separate letter that the County will not operate the aquatic program unless they also receive the Parks Maintenance Contract, and that staff is in the process of exploring other possibilities for the aquatic program. Concerning CenterPlace, staff will present a report next week on the construction and other details including furnishings, technology, security, and needed software and staff; that there is a need for a marketing plan for the facility; and that another issue for future consideration is demolition or other future uses for the existing senior center building. Finance Director Thompson then briefed Council on financial matters including impact fees, cost allocation plan, loan repayment, contingencies and reserves, and ongoing costs. Deputy City Manager Regor stated that the preliminary budget was presented in August, that staff did projections for those unfinished projects; that since we are now in the final months of the year, staff will bring policy issues to council for future actions, and will be giving wrap -up reports on activities such as code enforcement, capital improvement projects, and building permits. City Manager Mercier added that the first public hearing on the 2005 budget is set for next Tuesday; that we will be updating the budget book for council which will incorporate all the changes since council first considered the preliminary budget; and added that there will be another change in proposed budget as we did not provide for the recently voter approved 1110" of 1% additional tax for criminal justice and public safety purposes; that we not sure how much that will raise, but an early forecast is that it might generate approximately $600,000 annually, but that due to setup time and coordination with the State Department of Revenue, that new revenue might not become active until the first part of January 2005; that he Study Session Minutes 1045 -04 Date Approved by Council: Page 2 of 4 DRAFT recommends Council allocate all of the $600,000 directly to the law enforcement line in the public safety budget, as we are aware of the accelerating costs in that budget in 2005, and putting the funds there would be in conformance with statutory provisions. Council voiced no objections to placing the funds in the public safety budget. Staff then continued with their second presentation: "2005 Preliminary Budget." Finance Director Thompson stated there are still three areas of concern, (I) general fund, (2) street fund; and (3) capital needs, such as the issue of capital dollars needed to match capital projects. He also stated he feels parks will have a greater need than estimated. Deputy City Manager Regor explained slide #4 showing national trends of U.S. cities; and City Manager Mercier discussed the six year forecast; that customarily as we move forward, we would insert another layer of calculation to account for and accommodate growth and demand for services; as an example, we have a half -time IT person; with the community depending on technology as much as we do, and with adding CenterPlace with its high -tech lecture hall, Mr. Mercier said he can't imaging going another six years without adding to our IT programming; and that scenario is true across the six year forecast. Mr. Mercier added that a more detailed statement on problem statement #2 will be given next week.; and he reminded Council we are trying to itemize the range of possibilities and then present scenarios and a recommendation of which avenue to pursue. After Finance Director Thompson explained the local government revenue options (slide #11), City Manger Mercier said that these next slides show how funding from a utility tax would flow through our system; he explained that if a utility tax were enacted, its first priority would be to close the gap in the general fund each year; and if there were additional remaining revenues after closing that gap, then those funds would go to the street fund. He added that in all scenarios, there is no funding available to address problem area 43 — the capital needs. Mr. Mercier said that staff recommends to council that the option which gives the greatest likelihood to provide fiscal stability and viability is a utility tax, and staff recommends council consider implementing the 6% utility tax effective January 1, 2005, because it does the most to remediate the deficit schedule; and staff suggests that as council moves through the decision making process in adoption of the 2005 budget, that this be made part of that decision packet in the final adoption of the budget scheduled for November 9, 2004. Mayor DeVleming called for a recess at 7:40 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at 7:50 p.m. 3. Facilitation Process - Stan McNutt, Facilitator City Manager Mercier introduced facilitator Stan McNutt; and stated that this presentation will be a type of expanded council- check. Mr. McNutt said this is an opportunity to discuss procedural items to refine; that when this Council worked on the Governance Manual, it was done with the expectation that there would be changes as time progressed. He discussed the mayoral role in the council /manager form of government, and went over the accompanying document entitled "Traits of Outstanding City Councils and Mayors." Mr. McNutt also briefly touched on additional documents for further council review, including "Changing Roles for Public Leaders" and "Understanding the Mayor's Office in Council - Manager Cities." There followed a brief question and answer session concerning the traditional roles of council and mayors, public perception of the mayor's role, and percentage of cities with our form of government. Mr. McNutt also mentioned that the Mayor's Handbook as an excellent resource. City Manager Mercier added that now that Councilmembers have experienced elective office, there are many things encountered over time where one had an idea of how it would operate, yet aver time the reality suggested that sometimes things happen differently; that tonight's topic is an exercise in moving forward in time, and that he is certain there are some unfilled expectations, that this is not a question of any councilmember's or Mayor's service, but he hopes that there is now a fuller sense of the role of councilmernber and mayor. Mr. Mercier added that he feels this body will encounter a growing demand for contact and presence in the community, by attending civil meetings or as speakers. Study Session Minutes 10.05 -04 Page 3 of 4 Date Approved by Council: DRAFT 4. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming No topics were suggested to add to the advance agenda. 5. City Manager Comments - Dave Mercier Mr. Mercier mentioned that the audit process is wrapping up, and an audit exit will be scheduled soon; and that we expect the final report in November; he mentioned we also expect no findings or recommendations for changes; and after their very thorough examination of our practices of purchasing, bookkeeping, etc, that we will get a clean audit. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:32 p.m. ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Study Session Minutes 10 -05 -04 Date Approved by Council: Michael DeVleming, Mayor Page 4 of 4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 10 - 12 - 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 September 15, 2004 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Payroll for period ending 09- 15 -04: Salary: $ 96,767.63 Benefits: $ 10,265.40 $ 107,033.03 STAFF CONTACT: Daniel Cenis /Courtney Moore ATTACHMENTS Meeting Date: 10- 12 - -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 September 30, 2004 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: = OPTIONS: r RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Payroll for period ending 09 -30 -04 for 54 employees: Salary: $ 107,777.70 Benefits: $ 48,684.09 $ 156,461.79 STAFF CONTACT: Daniel Cenis /Courtney Moore ATTACHMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 9 -28 -04 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: x consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information 0 admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Voucher List of 9 -27 -04 for voucher numbers 5593, 5595 through 5629, and 5631 through 5635 in the total amount of $2,316,693.75; voucher list of 9 -28 -04 for voucher number 5636 in the total amount of $64,84; and voucher list of 10 -01 -04 for voucher numbers 5649 through 5672 in the total amount of $91,418.51; for grant total' amount of $2408;177.10: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve claims vouchers as listed above, totaling $ 2,408,177.10 BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Mary Baslington ATTACHMENTS Voucher Lists vchlist 09/27/2004 3:06:54PM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor 5593 9/17/2004 000640 THE FOCUS GROUP Invoice Voucher List Spokane Valley 09/17/04 Valleyfest 5595 9/24/2004 000135 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 090904- 050281 090904- 072351 5596 9124/2004 000644 ARTISTIC DESIGN 91404 -0 5597 9/24/2004 000643 AVISTA ADVANTAGE 09/20/04 5598 9/24/2004 000271 BAINBRIDGE, CHRISTINE 09120/04 CB Reimb. 5599 9124/2004 000209 CENIS, DANIEL 09/24/04 DC Reimb. 5600 9/24/2004 000603 CONTRACT DESIGN ASSOC., INC. 18987 5601 9/24/2004 000152 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RE- 313- ATB40914070 RE- 313- ATB40914071 5602 9/24/2004 000059 DEVLEMING, MICHAEL 09/16/04 MD Reimb. 5603 9/24/2004 000278 DRISKELL, CARY 09/17/04 CD Reimb. 5604 9/24/2004 000246 EAST SPOKANE WATER DIST #1 9/20/04 Dist. #1 5605 9/24/2004 000645 ECONORTHWEST 6332 PO # Description /Account BROADCAST TELEVISION - VALLE' Total : MEMBERSHIPS - GREG MCCORMIC MEMBERSHIPS - MARINA SUKUP Total : KITCHEN COUNTER TOP REFUND DAMAGE DEPOSIT TRAVEL & MILEAGE WATER CHARGES Total : Total : MEMBERSHIPS FEES AND DUES Total : WFOA CONFERENCE REIMBURSE! Total : 40276 SMALL TOOLS & MINOR EQUIPMEP Total : REIMB TRAFFIC SERVICES MAINT REIMB ROADWAY MAINT OFF SYS' Total : REIMB. FOR LUNCH MEETING Total : Total : Total : PLANNING PROFESSIONAL SERVII Page: 1 Amount 10,000.00 10,000.00 309.00 390.00 699.00 145.94 145.94 250.00 250.00 40.00 40.00 453.95 453.95 1,270.72 1,270.72 3,737.98 3,924.87 7,662.85 12.00 12.00 29.25 29.25 668.82 668.82 12,484.63 1 vchlist 09/2712004 3:06:54PM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor 5605 9/24/2004 000645 000645 ECONOFRTHWEST 5606 9/24/2004 000614 FALKNER, RONNA 5607 9/24/2004 000028 FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANK 5608 9/24/2004 000171 GEIGER CORRECTIONS CENTER 5609 9/24/2004 000002 H & H BUSINESS SYSTEMS 5610 9/24/2004 000642 INLAND NW CAMARO CLUB 5611 9/24/2004 000288 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL 5612 9/24/2004 000117 JOURNAL NEWS PUBLISHING 5613 9/24/2004 000252 LOWE'S BUSINESS ACCOUNT Invoice Voucher List Spokane Valley (Continued) 09/24/04 Refund Aug., 2004 Geiger 124053 124082 124083 124086 124157 127087 09/21/04 0823596-IN 25090 25091 25115 25116 25117 64759 821 3148 018991 4 PO # 09/24/04 MasterCard 9/24/04 MasterCard3 40293 9/24/04 MasterCard4 40297 40113 Description /Account REFUND FOR MIRABEAU SPRINGS Total : CREDIT CARD CHARGES CREDIT CARD CHARGES CREDIT CARD CHARGES GEIGER CONTRACT PAYMENT Total : COST PER COPY CHARGES COST PER COPY CHARGES COPY PER COPY CHARGES COST PER COPY CHARGES COST PER COPY CHARGES COPY PER COPY CHARGES REFUND SHELTER DEPOSIT PUBLICATIONS ADVERTISING ADVERTISING ADVERTISING ADVERTISING ADVERTISING ADVERTISING OPERATING SUPPLIES Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Q Page: 2 Amount 12,484.63 200.00 200.00 1,330.99 895.00 205.40 2,431.39 12,146.40 12,146.40 192.26 219.46 49.75 107.24 15.39 35.20 619.30 70.00 70.00 60.93 60.93 101.25 25.00 60.00 102.00 36.00 35.35 359.60 78.12 Page: 2 vchlist 09/27/2004 3:06:54PM Bank code : Voucher 5613 5514 5615 5616 5617 5618 5619 5620 5621 5622 5623 5624 5625 apbank Date Vendor 9/24/2004 000252 000252 LOWE'S BUSINESS ACCOUNT . (Continued) 9/24/2004 000033 MCPC 4606226 9/24/2004 000157 MOAT, BRIAN 9/24/2004 000484 MOONEY & PUGH CONTRACTORS INC. 04 -001 08/31/04 9/24/2004 000647 MOORE, COURTNEY 9/24/2004 000119 PIP PRINTING 9/24/2004 000322 QWEST 9/24/2004 000024 RESOURCE COMPUTING INC. 9/24/2004 000415 ROSAUERS U -CITY 9/24/2004 000003 ROYAL BUSINESS SYSTEMS 9/24/2004 000189 SILVERWOOD THEME PARK 9/24/2004 000230 SPOKANE CNTY AUDITORS OFC, RECO 09/09/04 Recording 9/24/2004 000172 SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEERS Invoice Voucher List Spokane Valley 09/20/04 Moat 09/27/04 CM Reimb. WFOA CONFERENCE REIMBURSEI Total : 1330028110 40305 INSIDE TINT WINDOW ENVELOPE: Total : 509 - 921 -6787 5118 TELEPHONE SERVICES 36494 IT SUPPORT 481364 482956 482957 360509 COPIER MAINT. PER COPY /USAGE Total : 13045 04 -30 COUNTY ENGINEER SERVICES PO #t 40307 Description /Account OFFICE SUPPLIES MEETING SUPPLIES MEETING SUPPLIES MEETING SUPPLIES DAY CAMP FIELD TRIP Total : Total : FACILITIES REPAIRS & MAINTENAI Total : 40176 PROJECT BILLING ON CENTERPLP Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : SHORT PLATS AND INTERLOCAL P Total : Page: 3 Amount 78.12 72.39 72.39 315.00 315.00 808, 529.00 808,529.00 451.22 451.22 703.62 703.62 37.76 37.76 999.93 999.93 2.38 35.50 4.30 42.18 251.13 251.13 690.86 690.86 196.00 196.00 144,754.99 3 vchlist 09/27/2004 3:06:54PM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor 0 Voucher List Spokane Valley 5625 9/24/2004 000172 000172 SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEERS (Continued) 5626 9/24/2004 000090 SPOKANE COUNTY INFORMATION, SYS 41218 Page: 4 Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount COUNTY IT SERVICES - 8/04 Total : Total : 144,754.99 8,172.94 8,172.94 5627 9/24/2004 000001 SPOKANE COUNTY TREASURER 09/20/04 County COUNTY CONTRACT PAYMENTS 1,278,402.13 Total : 1,278,402.13 5628 9/24/2004 000323 SPOKANE COUNTY UTILITIES 037059/109325 County COUNTY SEWER CHARGES 59.50 Total : 59.50 5629 9/24/2004 000470 SPOKANE COUNTY, AIR & EXPO CENT 2 TOURISM PROMOTION 4,779.86 Total : 4,779.86 5630• 9124/2004 000607 SPRINTPCASSERSO 9/24/04 MasterCard 2 40284 CREDIT CARD CHARGES Il �',i 64.84 Total : J 64.84 5631 9/24/2004 000257 STATE AUDITOR'S OkFICE L50857 STATUTORY AUDIT SERVICES 15,322.50 Total : 15,322.50 5632 9/24/2004 000488 SUKUP, MARINA 09/20/04 MS Reimb. TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT 166.28 Total : 166.28 5633 9/24/2004 000419 SUMMIT LAW GROUP 23084 LEGAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 860.00 Total : 860.00 5634 9/24/2004 000646 U.S. POSTAL SF_RVIGE, NEOPOST POST 05320424 9/04 POSTAGE 2,010.00 Total : 2,010.00 5535 9/24/2004 000167 VERA WATER & POWER 09/16/04 Vera STREET POWER LIGHTINGMIATEF 193.56 Total : 193.56 42 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 2,316,758.59 42 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 2,316,758.59 Page: 4 vch1ist 09/27/2004 3:06:54PM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished. the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that 1 am authorized to authenticate and certify to said claim. Finance Director Date Voucher List Page: 5 Spokane Valley ge: 5 vchlist 09128/2004 10:29:18AM Bank code : apbank Voucher Dale Vendor 1 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 1 Vouchers in this report I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify to saki claim. Finance Director Date Voucher List Spokane Valley 5636 9/28/2004 000028 FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANK MasterCard 9/24 CREDIT CARD CHARGES Total : Bank total : Total vouchers : 0 Page: 1 Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount 64.84 64.84 64.84 64.84 Page: 1 vchlist 1010112004 3:30:09PM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 5649 9/30/2004 000648 ABADAN REPROGRAPHICS & IMAGING 65355 5650 0130/2004 000335 ALTON'S TIRE 06 -86215 5651 9/30/2004 000037 AMERICAN LINEN 484691 5652 9/30/2004 000334 ARGUS JANITORIAL SERVICE, INC. 7174 5653 9/30/2004 000604 CAMERON CONTRACTING. INC. 04 -002 5654 9/30/2004 000101 CDWG OV28297 5655 9/3012004 000109 COFFEE SYSTEMS INC 24285 5656 9/30/2004 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION DIST, #19 9/20/04 Discovery 5657 9/30/2004 000284 CRUCIAL TECHNOLOGY 206575924 5658 9/30/2004 000641 GIBSON'S NURSERY & LANDSCAPE 103336 5659 9/30/2004 000410 GRIFFIN PUBLISHING INC. 04822 5660 9/30/2004 000288 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL 0826100 -IN 5661 9/30/2004 000033 MCPC 4612532 Voucher List Page: 1 Spokane Valley P011 Description /Account Amount PLANS FOR PROJECT MANAGER 162.42 Total : 162.42 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 23.12 Total : 23.12 FLOOR MAT SERVICE 45.65 Total : 45.65 CLEAN/WAX TILE FLOOR 625.00 Total : 625.00 BOWDISH/24TH SIDEWALK PROJE 81,245.19 Total : 81,245.19 40308 COMPUTER HARDWARE /SOFTWAI 382.07 Total : 382.07 COFFEE SUPPLIES 138.39 Total : 138.39 WATER CHARGES 184.04 Total : 184.04 40317 SMALL TOOLS & MINOR EOUIPMEP 672.36 Total : 672.36 40314 TREE/MIRABEAU PARK DEDICATIC 162.15 Total : 162.15 SENIOR CENTER NEWSLETTERS 348.08 Total : 348.08 40248 PUBLICATION 30.01 Total : 30.01 40310 OFFICE SUPPLIES 291.23 1 vchlist 10/0112004 3:30:09PM Bank code : apbank Voucher List Spokane Valley Q Page: 2 Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount 5661 9/30/2004 000033 MCPC (Continued) 40310 4612533 40315 OFFICE SUPPLIES 23.62 4612534 40315 OFFICE SUPPLIES 55.44 Total : 370.29 5662 9/3012004 000036 OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN 6011565610072627 OFFICE SUPPLIES 257.00 Total : 257.00 5663 9/30/2004 000029 PITNEY BOWES CREDIT CORP. 5618533 -SPO4 COPIER CONTRACT PAYMENT 447.53 Total : 447.53 5664 9/30/2004 000019 PURRFECT LOGOS, INC. 11827 POLICE VEHICLE GRAPHICS 3,270.03 Total : 3,270.03 5665 9/3012004 000415 ROSAUERS U -CITY 481316 MEETING SUPPLIES 15.20 Total : 15.20 5666 9/30/2004 000324 SCWD #3 170- 0040 -03 9/13 WATER CHARGES 158.96 Total : 158.96 5667 9/30/2004 000090 SPOKANE COUNTY IiJFORMATION, SYS 41257 CD'S OF SPOKANE COUNTY PLAT 175.00 Total : 175.00 5668 9/30/2004 000273 SPOKANE REGIONAL, TRANSPORTATIC TS -1263 TRAINING 968.26 Total : 968.26 5669 9/30/2004 000311 SPRINT PCS 01412766643 9/15 CELL PHONE CHARGES 721.12 Total : 721.12 5670 9/30/2004 000167 VERA WATER & POWER 9/23- 9/27/04 Vera STREET POWER LIGHTING/WATEF 492.48 Total : 492.48 5671 9/30/2004 000625 WABASH VALLEY MANUFACTURING 192237 40312 SMALL TOOLS & MINOR EQUIPMEP 489.16 Total : 489.16 5672 9/30/2004 000100 WABO 4562 40313 WABO FALL MEETING 35.00 Page: 2 vchlist 1010112004 3:30:09PM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount 5672 913012004 000100 000100 WABO 24 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 24 Vouchers in this report I, the undersigned, do certify under penally of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify to said claim. Finance Director Date Voucher List Page: 3 Spokane Valley (Continued) Total : 35.00 Bank total : 91,418.51 Total vouchers : 91,418.51 0 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 10 -12 -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 : Authorize Use of City Logo Resemblance GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: The Area Ministry has submitted a request to use some semblance of our logo, without the City Name, as part of their upcoming meeting. OPTIONS: Disapprove use of City Logo Resemblance; or take other action deemed appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve Area Ministry's Use of City Logo Resemblance BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS 0 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 10 -12 -2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business x new business ['information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : 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. 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. 2005 will be the first year delinquent property taxes (from 2004) will be included in the budget as a revenue source. The City is limited to a maximum of $2.10 per thousand dollars of assessed value which includes library services. However, there are state laws which restrict the amount of property tax receipts that can flow to the city, to a 1.37% increase over the prior year, plus taxes generated by new construction. A separate ordinance must be passed by the council to declare our desire to receive the 1.37% increase. 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 first reading of 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 a 1.37% 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 Spokane Valley Council Meeting October 12, 2004 MINSPIMMINIMPIENIMINSWI 2005 Proposed Property Tax Ordinance • By State Law • Hearing held September 14 • Increase limited to 1.37% + taxes generated by new assessed value & inc. generated by state assessed properties • Ordinance needed to levy the 1.37% ($126,681) • Levy totals $9.87 million l DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 04 -041 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON, LEVYING THE REGULAR PROPERTY TAKES FOR THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON IN SPOKANE COUNTY FOR THE YEAR COMMENCING CONLYIENCING 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 Spokane Valley is authorized to levy $3.60 per thousand of assessed valuation deducting therefrom levies collected by a Fire District in the total amount of $1.50 per thousand dollars of assessed valuation: 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. follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, do ordain as 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 59,870,000.00. it is recognized that fire districts currently levy upon property within the City at the rate of $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 contract for library services, therefore the total levy rate shall not. exceed $2.10 per one thousand dollars of assessed valuation. 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. llS v- fs11Users\ CBainbridgc lcbaiabridee\ Ord inanoes \Pn pTaxOrdinance10- 12- 04,cloc 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: 11Sv -fs 11Users 1(: Bainbridge\ cbainbridge \Ordinanccs1PropToxOrd i nonce l 0- 12- 04.doc Page 2of2 Mayor, Michael DeVleming CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 12, 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. 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 anticipating the passage of the full - width pavement program and the limited annual increase in the property tax levy. There is no reason to address the full -width pavement property tax levy because voters did not approve that program. 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 DRAFT 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% ($126,681) IN EXCESS OF THE 2003 Al) VALOREM PROPERTY TAX LEVY WHICH WAS COLLECTED 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.. Pu�pr ose. 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 of the 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 making 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 DRAFT tax in the maximum amount allowed by State law. D. This Ordinance has been adopted by a majority of the City Council plus one. 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 Ad 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. Scverability. 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. ATTEST: Passed by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley on , 2004. Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Date of Publication : Effective Date: Michael DeVleming, Mayor CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY . Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 12, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Planning Commission Mayoral Appointments GOVERNING LEGiSLATION: Spokane Valley Municipal Code: 2.55. Establishment and purpose. The purpose of the planning commission is to study and make recommendations to the mayor and city council for future planned growth through continued review of the City's comprehensive land use plan, development regulations, shoreline management, environmental protection, public. facilities, capital improvements and other platters as directed by the city council. Membership: A. Qualifications. The membership of the planning commission shall consist of individuals who have an interest in planning, land use, transportation, capital infrastructure and building and landscape design as evidenced by training, experience or interest in the City of Spokane Valley. 13. Appointment. Members of the planning commission shall be nominated by the mayor and confirmed by a majority vote of at least four members of the city council. Planning commissioners shall be selected without respect to political affiliations and shall serve without compensation. The mayor, when considering appointments, shall attempt to select residents who represent various interests and locations within the City. C. Number of Members/Terms. The planning commission shall consist of seven members. All members shall reside within the City of Spokane Valley. The terms for the initial commissioners shall be two one - year terms, two two-year terms and three three -year terms. The initial members and their terrns shall be decided by the mayor and confirmed by the city council. Subsequent terms shall be for a three -year period. Terms shall expire on the thirty -first day of December. BACKGROUND: Planning Commission William Gothmann (3 -year term) Appointed: 12 -31 -03 Ian Robertson (3 year term) John Carroll (3 year term) Fred Beaulac (2 year term) Gail Kogle (2 year term) David Crosby (1 year term) Robert Blunt (1 year term) Appointed: 12 -31 -03 Appointed: 12 -31 -03 Appointed: 12 -31 -03 Appointed: 12 -31 -03 Appointed: 12 -31 -03 Appointed: 12-31-03 Term Expires: 12 -31 -06 Term Expires: 12 -31 -06 Term Expires: 12 -31 -06 Term Expires: 12 -31 -05 Term Expires: 12 -31 -05 Term Expires: 12 -31 -04 Term Expires: 12 -31 -04 For purposes of clarification: At the October 14, 2003 Council meeting: Motion consideration: Clarification of Intent and Reaffirmation of Planning Commission Appointments: City Attorney Schwartz explained that Ordinance 35 provides that Planning Commission terms expire on the thirty -first (31) day of December; but that clarification is needed if year 2003 or 2004 was intended as the first expiration date. It ryas moved by Deputy Mayor Wilhite and seconded by Councibnember Flanigan that the Planning Conmrission members he reappointed for their identified terms, effective December 31, 2003, • r►'ith the understanding that their respective appointments and terms he measured from December 31, 2003 and not April 15, 2003. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; none was offered. The motion was passed unanimously. At the September 14, 2004 Council Meeting, Mayor DeVleming explained that there are two upcoming vacancies on the Planning Commission, that both incumbents David Crosby and Bob Blum would like to be considered for re- appointment and asked Council's pleasure of automatically re- appointing the incumbents, or opening the vacancies to the public. After brief discussion, it was Council consensus to advertise the openings to allow members of the public to apply, and to encourage the incumbents to also apply. On September 28, 2004, notice of the two openings was published in the Spokesman R.eview and the Valley News Herald; the notice was also placed on the City's website. Applications for consideration have been received from incumbents David Crosby and Robert I31um. OPTIONS: 1. Approve the Mayor's Recommended Appointments 2. Choose not to approve 3. Take other action deemed appropriate by council. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve the Mayor's recommended appointments to the Planning Commission BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Mayor DeVleming ATTACHMENTS None CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 12, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ® old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report 0 pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: CenterPlace — Change Order to Revise Classroom 112 into Office Space and Computer Server Room GOVERNING LEGISLATION: The City Manager has authority to approve up to $50,000 in change orders per Resolution 04 -012. However, due to the large amount ($44,737) of this single change order, City Administration has requested council consideration. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council awarded the CenterPlace construction contract to Mooney & Pugh Contractors, Inc. in March 2004. Council has also approved several change orders to the construction contract prior to delegating change order authority (up to $50,000) to the City Manager. On September 28, 2004 Council approved a change order for the completion of the second floor classrooms in the amount of $315,155. BACKGROUND: The construction plans for CenterPlace include seven classrooms on the first floor of the west wing. City administrative staff has recommended that to better serve the citizen's of our community the Parks & Recreation Department should be consolidated together into office space at CenterPlace. To accomplish this it has been proposed that classroom #112 (the most northeast classroom in the west wing) be converted into office space for the Parks & Recreation Director and his Administrative Assistant. In addition, there is enough remaining space in the classroom to create a computer server room to accommodate redundancy and emergency backups for the City's computer system. City staff and the Project Architect have reviewed the cost and schedule impacts associated with this change order and recommend Council approval. OPTIONS: 1) Approve the proposed change order, 2) not approve the proposed change order, or 3) give additional direction to staff. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: That the Council authorizes the City Manager to approve and sign Mooney & Pugh's $44,737.00 change order for revisions to classroom 112 for the creation of office space and a computer server room. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This change order will increase the construction contract amount by $44,737.00. This would bring the total construction contract amount to $7,679,021.00. The project budget has sufficient funds to cover this change order. STAFF CONTACT: Steve Worley, Mike Jackson ATTACHMENTS: 1) Cost estimate from Mooney & Pugh Contractors, Inc. 2) Layout of proposed changes to classroom 112 1 Ref Descr4113on 3050 PM ihtsilotY tiatta MjLh1RCa Estimate Report .lob_ Cerde pLaca CAR 32 RFP 14 S 112 Labor Material erne? Sub Otirx Xtrlanst 11 06.1 Mims Metal Framna 100 EA 175130 0.11) 524130 0.0D 0.0 0.00 1526.00 M 00.2 Wood Doom 300 EA 718.00 0.00 048.00 0.00 0.00 0 CO $6+10130 5 06.3 (km 6 Fruns IDS lolbliw► 3.00 EA 170.00 0.0D 0.00 ago 51000 0.00 651000 M D31 Fo1ch Han:Imre 1310 15 MOO OO 0.00 568.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 $.938 00 s 03.8 (31.ac 6 ©1as)n0 100 LS 000.00 0.00 000 0,00 600.00 0.00 10001)0 S 002 0:rw11, fig. Finishes 1310 LS 5,325.40 0.00 0.04 0.00 5.325.00 0.00 $5 32sPo S 096 Attaaxa* Ribber Bass 0800 LP 2.00 0.00 0 110 0110 176.00 1100 $175.00 s 131 Fire Roteslloo 1.00 LS 582.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 552_00 0.00 6562_00 6 15.4 Plumbing 140 L3 1.f.iOD 0.00 0.00 0.00 103210 0.03 $1,632.00 s 15.7 MHtC 1110 LS 7.027_00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7027.00 MOD iTga,00 S 155D EroOdlc91 1:00 1.0 19.044.00 Om 0.00 0130 19.634.03 0.00 i19A04130 1 17 RA Uonel Flood Claridge 1 A LS 160130 150.00 0.00 000 0so 0*) 615003 A I0IAdmts Administration 1.00 LS 1+5.0 1001)0 0.00 000 0.30 175.00 $355.00 O 0961 :.•a1 Tools (604400 9.00 % 11D D130 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.60 gage o 69310 E u0dges Risk 025 % 44737 0.00 81)4 000 0.01) 11134 6111.04 O 99 /33 LithiRr Ili Sreeatro 1.50 % 447.3T 0.00 0.0D MOO 000 07115 $071.01 Q 0060) Fos an Cawx1ees Wart 10.00 % 30.59 000 0.00 0.00 000 305.66 63=CDS O 3991 Fee on SJasonbvciots Y Oric 600 11. 354.45 1100 0.00 0.00 OW 2.116.76 =2,12679 R 9095 Pedonranoo Band 100 % 44737 040 5.00 040 0.00 447.37 644737 7 0?09 WSST 8.10 16 113.06 040 OM W M 0.00 3,352.17 $3,352.17 6230.00 $1.701.00 60.00 6354 $7,100.18 644,716.90 Moon v andPOOh Con'ractoie.Inc. tatf, 7 3 7 '--- 1 011 CID 1 8 , 4 D :zi• w. [ f q 1?� O+c�• 6,a Y x...63. • aGFf E'- CHI32AI NOTES: I. ..y 0.10446 n0000 .0 !1 •ar.. . YO q 6640 C. n. 664. 0.. 2. 6 /2. 06 631.160. CM:1•001.5 ARC PO CR111cv It C6 4. ..0. 1. 1Q .t] ra. hVL RTs 4• C� a ,co. lYGS.• •SY M14t I. •'TLrn1 PD.. t 660 MAIN FLOOR FLAN - %iEST 'AINb 11D' • 1 . 0 . 6. ?s a.,ce.C4 p.eVAuc:a rme .ou.nw mow!. V!AK..L ?,c0,, - .p0 '44 ,4 I. • C CLAASa n.n p nOn . EMJO.On) D. .61 ...0' •� .0 =OK= 630. !. J= , lU pert OCL•...yCw C_R.LS 40. != CEI N•t9 6 6C 1=/619 PC. M.rw • KEY NOTES! 1v4q.62L6. o 6•226•22.40664.. :R.4C. 40422 `V 0 qq. .....•2142. 160711.11. 1'4' , 1 1. 0 16:- =46S. t. ® nes L`n 4.041!. as 461 . ® we Cr PPM ..O .4* 64 KR 1C•P0IO •••••• •• .a.1l4..;.L lseranr.c.. ® 1 4:w.nc P0C0 .cw3446 0 cc.12266 rcwr.o• ORE I N.l. Kr 0 1^+.•..1,. Ka 641..40:464 nxlwrcx Ma. =w c5. ..o 6 4011016 6 6 046.14E ••tiec .ULK Opp N.,, IRE CeT611.0 4 611 1 2141 6l0406 44•RUIR W .'RV...w..L B TAN bI QQI E Me...•tO11 ..]•ICtnR 6•01266 O[3C8 •CUnnwO •10.01.1.• 3 4.16 4MN .R4 +V I4.60uun o w. Smmnoun awy, w.. 6316 I PM ■4U,....40 4 ..at000r •d. w„ w CENTERPLACE A'I MIRABEAU POINT PARK CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS ^...P MAIN FLOOR PLAN WEST WING :-; Madsen Mitchell Evenson :. &Conrad,., Architecture Interiors Caretruction Man emt flt 509.624 -680.O In ALICGoum wnh TAN ARCHITECTS �e� CENTERPLACE AT MIRABEAU POINT PARK SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON rif a von by Ch cti d b� Seale 9 eet Na Date a -a-oa 1/4' • I r 1 AC -24b L CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 10/12104 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business x❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Extension of Delegated Authority Related to Right -of Way Acquisitions GOVERNING LEGISLATION: None PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On May 20, 2003, the City Council passed a motion unanimously authorizing the City Manager to execute right -of -way acquisitions as they relate to construction projects. BACKGROUND: As a matter of routine, street widening projects such as on Evergreen and 16 Avenue require many right -of -way acquisitions agreements with abutting landowners. The delegation of authority granted in May 2003 did not include the phrase "city manager or designee" which has become standard language in more recent delegation actions approved by Council. As a practical matter, these right -of -way transactions can be handled by the Public Works Director in a timely and responsible manner. The proposed motion would enable this appropriate delegation of task within the responsible department. OPTIONS: 1. Give the matter further thought. 2. Choose not to move forward with the delegation. 3. Grant the expanded delegation of authority. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Authorize the city manager, or designee, to execute right -of -way acquisitions as they relate to construction projects. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: No unanticipated impact on the city budget. STAFF CONTACT: Dave Mercier ATTACHMENTS None 0 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 12, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing (E) information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative Report. Ad Hoc Sign Committee GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Spokane Valley Ordinance 03 -53, Chapter 14.804. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: City Council was briefed on the progress of the Ad Hoc Sign Committee on July 20, 2004. BACKGROUND: Chapter 14.804 of the Interim Zoning Regulations regulates the placement and dimensions of signage. The Ad Committee was charged with the "review and update" of the existing regulations. The Committee has met on a regular basis since June, 2004. Mr. David Crosby, Chairman will report on the findings and preliminary recommendations of the Committee. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Not applicable BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, AICP, Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS: ackgr • City Council: authorized the formation of an ad hoc Sign Committee on •April 6 2004, charging the Committee with the review and update of existing regulations • The Committee has met every other week since mid June in the-Council Chambers meetings are open to the public C ornmuittee Fin . iings • The regulations should be reorganized into a more readable format • Definitions should be unambiguous • The 25% maximum area of wall- signage should control (delete maximum 250' copy area) • Maximum copy area for commercial (B2 and B3) and industrial areas should be uniform s Minimum spacing between signs on a single property sho;u Id be reduced to 300 feet • Incentives for monument signs is ineffective • Electronic signs should be permitted in commercial and industrial area on the same basis as other signs C ommittee F ingjs • Maximum height for multi- business signs (62/63 and Industrial) should be increased to a maximum of 40 feet in height and 250 square feet of copy area to encourage (consolidation of structures • lAesthetic corridors should not include developed !commercial areas that are not ae South side of Appleway between Park and Dishman Mica only should be included in aesthetic corridor 1 of-8th 1 • Dishman south of 8 Avenue should :be designated as an aesthetic corridor } n d i a na, b etwe�eir nTGE1 org ©boo corrn o G o dramant DoT Rin umgn unman 0 Recomm e . 6 d 0 Immediate fixes • Amend the definitions o Eliminate unnecessary complexity in organization O Establish more uniform height and area, standards Post- Comp Plan fixes Cap and Replace policy on billboards with spacing requirement. Allow billboards along ae corridors with requirement for increased spacing • • • • Re-visit aesthetic corridors designations tion to date N o Staff will draft ordinance for final review o Committee will review the draft prior to forwarding to CTED • Public hearing before the Planning Commission • Council consideration o CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 12 October 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing .0 information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Code Report GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Spokane Valley Ordinance 04-010 WAC 51 -50 -004 Conflicts with Washington State Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality Code RCW 19.27 State Building Code PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Spokane Valley Ordinance 04 -010 BACKGROUND: 1. Building Code: City Council approved Ordinance 04 -010 after a public hearing with the City of Spokane Valley Planning Commission and two readings. Washington requires amendments to the residential code to be reviewed by the State Building Code Council (SBCC) afterpassage of the local Building Code Ordinance. Earlier this month we received notification that SBCC voted to disapprove our local amendment to the IRC Section 310.1.5, the section that requires rescue windows meet current dimensional standards if windows are changed out in dwellings. SBCC states that this condition could not be addressed locally as it wasn't a unique local condition that was being addressed and that this requirement could pose structural difficulties in some older homes. -In addition SBCC determined that IRC Appendix F, Radon, was in conflict with Washington State Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality Code and was disapproved. No other details were provided. 2. Fire Code: City Council approved the adoption of Appendix C from the International Fire Code that details the spacing of Fire Hydrants. This detail adopted in Ordinance 04 -010 is the same detail that Council had previously adopted in Ordinance 03 -041 except that in that code the Appendix Chapter is "III -B" Spokane Valley Fire District (SVFD) has requested that we amend the spacing requirement of 500 feet between hydrants for residential construction to increase that space to 600 feet. SVFD has stated that their first response equipment is outfitted to accommodate hydrant spacing of 600 feet and that increasing the spacing will not impact the safety of the community. For reference, the City of Phoenix, Arizona, City of Boise, Idaho, the City of Tacoma, the City of Spokane, Washington the Washington State Fire Marshal's office, and Bill Rehr, the ICC staff member that wrote the hydrant requirements for the Fire Code all recommend staying at a maximum hydrant spacing in residential areas of 500 feet. The City of Vancouver, Washington uses a hybrid hydrant spacing system. They allow 600 feet between hydrants in 1 & 2 family areas but require the most remote wall of a structure to be no further than 450 feet away from a hydrant. Commercial hydrants are spaced at 400 feet maximum with no more than 350 to the most remote portion of a structure. Bob Garrison, technical advisor to the Western Fire Chiefs Association, Page Dougherty, Regional Manager, Fire Service Activities for ICC all recognize that establishing acceptable hydrant spacing is an operations issue for the local fire department, and /or 600 feet spacing between hydrants is not excessive. In addition, there are currently many residential areas of the City of Spokane Valley that have fire hydrants located much further apart than 600 feet. There are some locations where hydrants are over 1000 feet apart. And there are other hydrant locations that are either not working at all or have very low water flows. OPTIONS: Ordinance 04 -010 is required to be amended to comply with the disapproval of amendments as itemized by SBCC. As the Council wishes, Ordinance 04 -010 Section 3.03.4 may be amended to establish a greater hydrant spacing than is currently provided and a fixed spacing for commercial hydrant spacing. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: 1. Motion to amend Ordinance 04 -010 to delete those two amendments identified by SBCC. 2. Staff supports continuing using the minimum hydrant spacing requirements that the adopted Appendix Chapter provides. 3. Staff requests direction concerning the discussion on how infill hydrants will be provided as well as low fire flow is addressed in our neighborhoods. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None for the City. Possibly increased development costs for contractors passed on to consumers if a fire hydrant would be required at the 500 feet spacing and not be required at the 600 feet spacing requirement. Fire hydrants cost between $2500 and $8000 depending on the length of larger diameter water pipe required for installation. Proper hydrant spacing and adequate, fire flow provide the basis for fire suppression and may be reflected in lower fire insurance costs for our citizens. STAFF CONTACT: Spokane Valley Building Official Scholtens ATTACHMENTS : 1. Copy of SBCC letter. 2. Copy of SVFD letter. 3. Copy of Bob Garrison / WFCA E -mail STATE OF WASHINGTON STATE BUILDING CODE COUNCIL 906 Columbia Street SW • PO Box 48350 • Olympia, Washington 98504 -8350 (360) 725 -2967 • fax (360) 586 -9383 • e -mail sbcc@cted.wa.gov • www.sbcc.wa.gov September 14, 2004 Thomas Scholtens, CBO Building Official 11707 E. Sprague Avenue Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 RE: Council Review of the City of Spokane Valley Ordinance 04 -010 Dear `1r. Scholtens: Thank you for your request for State Building Code Council review of the City of Spokane Valley ordinance amending the State Building Code. The Council reviewed the ordinance at their September 10, 2004, meeting. The following amendments were determined by the Council to be administrative and therefore do not require Council approval: • Amendment to IRC Section R323.1.3, Design flood elevation. • Amendment to IRC Section R323.2.1, Flood elevation. • Amendment to IRC Section R323.3.6, Flood elevation. The Council voted to disapprove the amendment to IRC Section 310.1.5, Escape rescue windows. The Council determined this amendment did not address a condition unique to the jurisdiction, and could pose structural difficulties in some older homes. The Council also voted to disapprove the amendment to IRC Section R102.5. The Council determined Appendix F does conflict with the Washington State Ventilation and Indoor Air Quality Code. The Council's policy, established in VAC 51 -04 -030, allows local adoption of appendices that do not conflict with the state building code for single- and multi - family buildings, without Council approval. If Appendix F was dropped from the list of adopted appendices, the Council determined none of the other appendix chapters would require Council approval. If you have any questions regarding this action, please contact Al Rhoades at (360) 725 -2970. Sincerely, Stan Price Council Chair Administered by the Office of Community, Trade and Economic Development �w� SPOKANE VALLEY FIRE DEPARTMENT Spokane County Fire District 1 10319 EAST SPRAGUE AVE. • SPOKANE. WA 99206 -3676 • (509) 928 -1700 • FAX (509) 892 -4125 Tom Scholtens City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Mark Grover Chief Re: Fire hydrant spacing for 1 and 2 family dwellings Dear Tom: September 30, 2004 The Spokane Valley Fire Department requests an exception to the 2003 International Fire Code page 373, SECTION C -105, Distribution of fire hydrants. SECTION C- 105.1- Hydrant Spacing, add exception #2 to read as follows: The average spacing between fire hydrants for one and two family dwellings Tess than 3600 square feet shall.be 600 feet ". The following is a basis for the amendment to the international fire code: 1. The Spokane Valley Fire Department has equipped their fire engines with 700 feet of 5 -inch hose. This has been designed to supply 1000 GPM fire flow for one and two family dwellings. The neighboring fire districts have also equipped their engines with 700 feet of 5 -inch hose. On June 25, 2004, Spokane Valley Fire Department conducted a test of our 5 inch hose, and confirmed that we are able to move 1000 gallons of water down 600 feet of 5 inch hose. 2. 3. The 600 -foot spacing of hydrants is a continuation of the existing design that Spokane Valley Fire Department has asked its 19 different water districts to use over the past twenty years. The 600 -foot spacing corresponds to the quarter mile streets that exist throughout the Valley. The platting that was done initially was set in grids with approximately 600 foot spacing between. Q,1Dept Data Unshared\Prevention Unshared'tFire Marshal (Paul)1Code Enforcements- Scholtens.DOC Page 2 September 30, 2004 JPC /dc The 600 -foot spacing would correspond with page 41 of the International Fire Code 508.5, Fire Hydrant Systems where exception #1 reads for group R -3 and group R -2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet. As you read further in this code, this is a reference to how far each building should be placed from a hydrant. This would be the exception that we would use in dealing with Cul -de -sacs or dead end lanes. Sincerely, Paul Chase Fire Marshal Q:1Dept Data Unshared\Prevention Unshared\Fire Marshal (PaulyCode Enforcements- Scholtens.DOC Tom Scholtens From: Bob Garrison [bob.garrison @comcast.netj Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 9:12 AM To: Tom Schottens Subject: Re: Response to Hydrant Spacting Question You are quite welcome. My pleasure. Bob Garrison -- - -- Original Message From: Tom Scholtens To: Bob Garrison Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 8:28 AM Subject: RE: Response to Hydrant Spacting Question Thank you very much. Tom Scholtens Spokane Valley Building Official 9/24/2004 - - -- Original Message---- - From: Bob Garrison [ mailto:bob.garrison @comcast.net] Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 9:08 AM To: Tom Schottens Cc: Teri VanWagner Subject: Response to Hydrant Spacting Question Mr. Scholten, In your August 11th email to the Western Fire Chiefs, you ask "What is the recommended method for figuring out the spacing of fire hydrants ? ". As we replied earlier, that question comes to me as a technical advisor to the WFCA. I have been researching the matter and can now offer the following reply on behalf of WFCA. First and formost, the recommended method for figuring out hydrant spacing is to let the fire department determine what works best for them. Of course, the only reason for having fire hydrants is so that the fire department can use them for extinguishing fires. As tactics and equipment vary from fire department to fire department, only the fire department responsible for fire suppression in a given area can really judge what hydrant spacing and locations be most appropriate. Hydrants spaced and/or located in a manner not compatible with fire suppression tactics are a disservice both to the fire department and to the public we all seek to serve. -That said, your inquiry goes on to question the 500 foot spacing requirements found the International Fire Code, which, or course, is the adopted fire code in Washington State. The IFC is based on the Uniform Fire Code, for decades a product of the WFCA. It has always been the intention of the WFCA, through the UFC and now the NFPA1/UFC (as well as the IFC) to offer minimum requirements for adoption by state and local jurisdictions, but always defer to the "authority having jurisdiction" (the Fire Chief) to make final determinations on spacing and locations. Originally, back in the 1970's, the 500 foot spacing was based on the Insurance Services Office "Grading Schedule for Municipal Fire Protection ". They, as I'm sure you know, set the fire protection ratings for given commercial occupancies, based on (among other things) water systems and fire department capabilities. Spacing of hydrants is often a product of determining fire flow requirements for 9/24/2004 a given budding, factored with the available fire flow from the municipal water system, to determine how many hydrants are required and where they will be located. While Washington is not an ISO state, the Washington State Rating Bureau largely follows ISO methodology so the ISO logic holds true there as well. Also considered in the 500 foot rule was the standard load of 3" "lay -in line" carried on fire engines at the time. Friction loss is a serious consideration in using 3" hose and long lays result in excessive toss of fire flow due to this friction foss. In hose Pays in excess of 500 feet it was necessary to connect -in the 2 1/2" "stretch line" carried in the hose bed, which resulted in even more serious friction loss considerations. Over time most fire departments have gone to larger diameter supply hose which has greatly reduced the friction Toss consideration. Nevertheless, minimum fire flow for a given building or location has to be met by the appropriate number of fire hydrants, properly located for the tactical considerations of the local fire department. Finally, you mention response time and ask whether that is also a factor. No, response time is really not a consideration in the determination of hydrant spacing and locations. It is considered by ISO in its grading of fire department capabilities, but not in the locating of fire hydrants. trust this information will prove useful to you. If there is more that I can assist you with, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Bob Garrison for the Western Fire Chiefs Association bob.garrison@comcast.net This e -mail and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient; please notify the sender immediately by retum e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 12, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2005 -2006 Community Development Block Grant GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Staff briefing on September 28, 2004 BACKGROUND: Spokane County estimates that the CDBG program will have approximately $1,500,000 in funds to allocate in 2005. There are statutory limits for the administration and planning allocation of 20% of new funds, or approximately $300,000 maximum. A majority of these funds are used by the County to cover the expenses of administering the CDBG program on a county -wide basis. A small portion of the administration and planning allocation is provided for qualified planning projects related to economic development or housing. Also limited by statute is the human service allocation at 15% of 2005 available funds or approximately $225,000. The County has indicated that it will typically receive requests for funding that is two to three times the amount of the available funding. The following projects are a preliminary list. Staff is still evaluating additional projects that may be eligible for CDBG funding; staff will present an overview of all potential projects at the October 12 meeting. City staff has identified the following projects as CDBG eligible: Sewer Projects — 1. Inland — east of Park Road, Sprague Avenue to 1 -90: $136,449 2. Johnston — 4°' Avenue, Farr to Felts, Appleway to 6 $ 25,808 3. Parks Road —1 -90 to Trent, Bradley to Park $127,016 Street Projects — 1. 8' Avenue Reconstruction $153,000* * Only a portion of that total project cost may be eligible for CDBG funding due to location. Eligible amount will be determined after consultation with County staff. The City is required to hold a public hearing on the proposed projects for CDBG funding application, which has been scheduled for October 19, 2005. OPTIONS: N/A RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: N/A BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Undetermined at this time. STAFF CONTACT: Greg McCormick, AICP, Planning Division Manager ATTACHMENTS None *Wane jUalley 2005 Community Development Block Grant Program Community Development Department October 12, 2004 Background • City received over $396,000 in CDBG funding in 2004 • Projects eligible either through "area- wide" benefit, limited clientele (elderly, youth) or through "direct" benefit • County estimates a 2005 HUD entitlement of $1.5 million ($1.8 million in 2004) • County estimates $300,000 in program income /savings from previous years Statutory Funding Limits • 20% of new funding for administration & planning ($300,000 approximately) • 15% limit for human service allocation ($225,000 approximately) • Remainder for capital projects 2005 Funding Priorities • Street Improvements - High • Sidewalks — Not rated • Sewer Improvements — High Project 1 - Inland Sewer Project Estimated City costs - $136,449 Project 3 - Parks Road Sewer Project Project 4 — 8th Avenue Reconstruction (Havana to Park) it Vl,N ble Ftrtion from Havana to rma ■ i — north side only.., Estimated 2005 City costs - $153,000 0 Next Steps 0 • October 19, 2004 — Public Hearing • November 12, 2004 — Applications due to Spokane County • January 2005 — HCDAC review of applications • March 2005 — HCDAC public hearing on applications • April 2005 -BoCC review of HCDAC recommendations & public hearing • May /June 2005 — Applicants notified of funding Questions? 2005 CDBG Program Si�kane � jValley CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: October 12, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten /Ken Thompson ATTACHMENT: Street Fund Presentation ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information X admin. report ❑ pending legislation Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Budget Discussion: Street Fund GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council approval of the Stormwater Six -Year Plan on September 28, 2004. BACKGROUND: During the 2005 budget discussions on September 21 and October 5, 2004, the City Manager presented information regarding the projected shortfall in the Street Fund. On September 28, 2004 the Public Works Director presented a six -year financial plan for the Stormwater Utility which included moving the costs for stormwater related street maintenance services from the Street Fund to the Stormwater Utility. The attached presentation will provide the background for the budget discussion on the Street Fund. 1 City of Spokane Valley Budget Discussion: Street Fund Street Fund: Six Year Plan Based on Current Revenues Street Fund 6-Year Plan Based on Current Revenues 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Salaries, W ages & Benefits $198,354 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 S upplies $13,280 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 S pokane County E ngineering Contract $400,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 W S DOT S t r e e t M a i n t e n a n c e - S R 290 & SR 2 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 S pokane County Street M aintenance Contract $2,185,364 $599,820 $599,820 $599,820 $599,820 $599,8201 M inor Road M aintenance $300,000 $0 $0 $0 30 $0 Street LightinglS ignal P over $300,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000' Consulting Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 S RTC $36,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Interfund Transfers - Replacem eni $18,645 Total Expenditure $3,801,643 $1,199,820 $1,199,820 31,199,820 $1,199,820 $1,199,8201 30 $0 $0 $01 Revenue $1,223,312 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 51,200,000. Fund Balanance $1,515 $1,695 $1,875 $2,055 $2,235 $2,415 Activity # Description 2312 2320 2322 2330 2340 2340W 2343 2344 2346 2351 2413 2511 2512 2513 2610 2611 2620 2645 2646 2647 2661 2662 2663 Dust Control Prep Shoulder Repair Shoulder M aint /G rader G ravel /Dirt Rd Grading Pothole Patching W inter Pothole Patch Pavem ent Rem ovallReplace Crack Sealing Blade Patch Hot G ra ve in) in R d Te m p Light Ditch Cleaning Bridge Inspection Bridge Repair -Super Bridge Repair -Sub Sidewalk Curbs Paths Guardrail Maint. Right of W ay Fencing Median M aint. Liquid Deicing Sanding Snow Rem oval-Roadways COUNTY STREET MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 2004 County Contract $10,292 $33,480 $48,112 $18,972 $196,044 $25,296 $354,144 $151,776 $113,832 $1,240 $1,240 $1,860 $12,648 $6,324 $1,860 $1,240 $620 $15,128 $3,224 $6,324 $189,720 $290,904 $278,256 2005 $10,292 $33,480 $48,112 $18,972 $150,000 $25,296 $354,144 $140,000 $o $1,240 $1,240 $1,860 $12,648 $6,324 $1,860 $1,240 $620 $15,128 $3,224 $6,324 $186,240 $250,000 $250,000 1 200612009 so $0 $0 $0 $49,000 $0 $42,184 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,860 $12,648 $6,324 $0 $0 $0 $5,000 $0 $2,000 $82,000 $148,804 $150,000 Activity # 2664 2711 2712 2713 2713A 2714 2714A 2716 2750 2750D 2753 2760 2762 1641 1644 2641 4201 4202 2642 4203 C 2649 2643 2653 COUNTY STREET MA Description Snow Rem oval - Sidewalks Roadside M owing B rush ClearinglTree Trim m ing W eed Control -- Residual Weed Control - -No Spray W eed Control -- General W eed Control- -Gen No Spray Pond Maintenance Litter Pickup Litter P ickup - -Deer Litter Control Contour Control Contour Control- -Right of W ay A rte ria I Signs - -New Traffic - -X -w a lk s Traffic Sign Maintenance Sign Vandalism Accident Repair - -Signs Traffic Signal M ainlenance Accident Repair -- Signals X -W alks & P vm t Markings W eight Restriction Signing S triping Striping - -P rep & Cleanup Subtotal INTENANCE CONTRACT 2004 County Contract 2005 $6,324 $6,324 $12,648 $12,648 $44,268 $44,268 $25,296 $25,296 $6,324 $6,324 $37,944 $37,944 $6,324 $6,324 $0 $5,084 $5,084 $2,480 $2,480 $1,240 $1,240 $1,240 $1,240 $3,844 $3,844 $0 $0 $86,056 $86,056 $0 $0 $278,256 $278,256 $0 $40,424 $40,424 $1,860 $1,860 $107,508 $107,508 $0 $2,429,656 $2,185,364 200612009 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 so $0 $0 $0 so $100,000 $0 $0 so $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $599,820 LJ Street Maintenance Costs Transferred to Stormwater Street cleaning; winter sweeping $569,755 and clean -up Drywell repair and cleanout $116,064 Culvert repair and cleanout $12,202 Swale maintenance $4,613 Curb, gutter and inlet repair $11,867 Other $24,422 Total $738,923 Street Fund: Recommended Six Year Plan Salaries, Wages & Benefits $198,354 $214,222 $231,360 $249,869 $269,858 $291,447 Supplies $13,280 $14,342 $15,490° $16,729 $18,067 $19,513 Spokane County Engineering Contract $400,000 $432,000 $466,560 $503,885 $544,196 $587,731 WSDOT Street Maint. SR 290 & SR 27 $350,000 $378,000 $408,240 $440,899 $476,171 $514,265 County Street Maintenance Contract $2,185,364 $2,360,193 $2,549,009 $2,752,929 $2,973,164 $3,211,017 Minor Road Maintenance $300,000 $324,000 $349,920 $377,914 $408,147 $440,798 Street LightinglSignal Power $300,000 $324,000 $349,920 $377,914 $408,147 $440,798 Consulting Services $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SRTC $36,000 $38,880 $41,990 $45,350 $48,978 $52,896 Interfund Transfers Replacement $18,645 $20,137 $21,748 $23,487 $25,366 $27,396 Total Expenditure $3,801,643 $4,105,774 $4,434,236 $4,788,975 $5,172,093 $5,585,861 Revenue imio. Shortfall Fund Balanance Street Fund 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 $1,226,342 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $2,905,774 $3,234,236 $3,588,975 $3,972,093 $4,385,861 $1,515 ($2,904,259) ($6,138,496) ($9,727,471) ($13,699,564) ($18,085,425) Street Fund: + Shortfall Summary Year Street Fund 2005 $0 2006 ($2,905,000) 2007 ($3,235,000) 2008 ($3,590,000) 2009 ($3,970,000) 2010 ($4,385,000) Seattle has Incroascd general fund spending on transporcatian by 66% over oho past 10 years. but still (TIC :J. $SOOM maintenance baciclog_ Mount Vernon. with a small annual budget and $62 million In transportation prolact needs, will require scare and fodoral grants. Five cities and King County aro investing over $ 100 million on capacity and Hc7V improvements ort 15. miles of Pacific 1 -ligh- way (SR-99).a state facility. WSDOT's investment on this scarce highway is limited to minor paverncnc overlay expenditures. Vancouver. a r.ional hub, has an annual average of $30M in transportation Investments ovor the past four yours. Despite this large invesernenc. they face an annual deficit of $ 1 41'1 ire cranap tacton costs. 1i Redmond: Microsoft employment has Eons from Ions than 4,000 in 1990 to more than 25.000 today. r•csnil:iris in rnasslve mai ntenance issues- City funds cannot keep pace_ University Plaice lost. 30% of its E ener-al fund col-695. With only $300.000 available for street irnpr•ovements. the city faces a backlog of $63M for arcorial screac improversnranc alone_ 1sJp_ . r. t .= a t i o n Crisis Issaquah: Severe congestion on 1 -90 moans char, Its Streets have soon unprecedented wear and tear with no funding so1utiort. Spokane has a 5200M backlog in atrcot repair's. and an annual scrcec repair deficit of $ 13.2M_ Wenatchee has only 35% of the funds is Hoods to pave its streets_ creating a big rnainccnanCe backlog. Y :rldr'n, h iss 1 $2.8M 3nnur1 shortfall for street. maintenance. 1 he city is using cash reserves to fund critical rtraintenancia projects. bkit will run oa t of naonoy by 2005. Pullman's street maintenance reserves are depleted, with the city unable to budget even half of what's nocdad for street ropair•. Pasco subsidizes its street fund yearly with $300.000 iron-. the city "s general fund.Tl'.e city faces major capital project reeds. on arterial streets exceed- ing $ 1 8N1 with no defined rove•,....?• f inc:ing source. Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 10/12/04 City Manager Sign-off Item: Check all that apply: 0 consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing D information X admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : CenterPlace Construction Update GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: STAFF CONTACT: Mike Jackson, Parks & Recreation Director, Steve Worley, Senior Engineer CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY BACKGROUND: The Parks & Recreation Director and Senior Engineer will provide an update on the progress of construction at CenterPlace. Upcoming contracts and proposed change orders will also be discussed. 0 OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None. Administrative Report BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None outside of project scope. ATTACHMENTS Power Point Presentation 1. Technology .Componen - Fiber T-1 phone and da, llines =: 1,4f . 7.i 1 Crcuit s itched (traditiornaI p`Jone1 hnes)ipus A a s V over I ercnet Protocol (140 1t �l Prc»iisioni for.',', ','tireless' Ziiternet x Adrministrative.:o E ces/ �,mputer�: ei; room 1 s I. • Auditorium AN' equipment • I4 All controlled: from single touch :pad console: Ceiling Mounted, Projector, DU.o, Video, screen Quality sound, system nounted. cameras stotecord.presentatioits - Docurnent camera: 4 Network cannectwity' tp Touch pad voting System Card Access System, for,;;. select extelnor- door; a : - Security System, )nit [InforrxiationcS;yste s, 2 • Construction • •2 Floor:Education Wing • Steel 'Price Increases • - Office/Server Room 'D ovation Furnishings: • EitcheniEquipment • • Furniture. Fiber,: Phones, - Information; Systems Arzhiteet Fees. Water/Sewer .Evergreen City Permits. • Otter Permits/Fees • Band SateCosts. • Contingency - • CartldAccessSystem (Allied) • Security System :: Auditorlum;A /ViEqutpment • ToachVird-Votirg:System.-- • Engineering Review Budget ADAroved Amt P.rcmosed Amt $7,600,000 $7,634,284 $21;500 $315;155 $28,095 • :$44,737 ,4110,000 $107,109 ($30,000) • $600,000 $250;000 $300;ODD; $200,0x0 $200;OD0. '$350; 10 :$298060 $65,000. '$9,200, $13;195 $74,000 $74,000 $48,000 $45,494 $50;000 43;160 $2.00,000 $172,000' ;+$735;598 $20,000 • $15,000 : :$100,004 $23;000 $22•400 "TOTAL• :$10,0555 $8,607;562` $1056,527 Total. Approved: &Proposed Amts $9,664;089 Contingency Balance $391,309 3 4 0 0 0 6 0 0 7 8 10 1 c7--) Se i1,r /Sou fie $�I I' '� ; dl. I ' 6q , 11in pia 11 12 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 10/12/04 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business X new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Spokane River Centennial Trail Partnership GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: ` None BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane Valley has been invited to join a partnership with the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Spokane County and the City of Spokane to maintain the Centennial Trail. There is a pre - existing agreement — the Interagency Cooperative Agreement Spokane River Centennial Trail- between the other three parties dated April 30, 1992. Spokane County and the other partners are requesting that the City of Spokane Valley join the partnership and accept maintenance responsibility for the 6.8 miles of trail within the new city limits. The City of Spokane Valley has paid the County for some routine trail maintenance on an interim basis but has not entered into long -term agreement to maintain the trail. Considerations include recreational value, the age and condition of the trail, annual maintenance costs, and major repairs. OPTIONS: Provide staff direction, request additional information. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None at this time. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Potentially significant. Will be discussed. STAFF CONTACT: Mike Jackson, Parks and Recreation Director ATTACHMENTS Letter from Wayne McLaughlin, Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, September 7, 2004. Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Spokane County, City of Spokane, Interagency Cooperative Agreement Spokane River Centennial Trail, April 30, 1992. Spokane River Centennial Trail Management Plan July 1991. September 7, 2004 Mr. Mike Jackson Parks & Recreation Director City of Spokane Valley 1 1707 East Sprague Ave. Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 Dear Mr. Jackson: STATE OF WASHINGTON WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 7150 Clei nwater Lane • P.O. Box 42650 • Olympia, Washington 98504 -2650 • (360) 902-8500 Internet Address: http: / /www.parks.wa.gov TDD (Telecommunications Device for the Deaf): (360) 664 -3133 As we discussed at our meeting on August 26, 2004, we are working on a formal communique that will invite the City of Spokane Valley to participate with the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission and our partners, the City of Spokane and Spokane County, in the management program for the Spokane River Centennial Trail. Knowing you have a City Council meeting in the very near future and that this issue may be pressing, 1 wanted to provide you with written evidence of our interest in expanding the current partnership for the benefit of the citizens of Spokane Valley, and for visitors from all over the state. If the City Council of Spokane Valley is open to exploring the possibilities offered by such a partnership, we are prepared to engage in further discussions involving all of the partners and to address the decision- making protocols of the various jurisdictions. Enclosed for your reference is the current 40 -year Interagency Cooperative Agreement that governs the management of the trail corridor, and sets forth the responsibilities of the respective parties. Please give me a call if you have any questions, and let me know of the Council's reactions. Thanks. Sin e ely, W yne i !c aughlin Manager, Partnerships & Community Services cc: Jim Harris Manager, Eastern Region Gary Long, Assistant Regional Manager, Programs & Services Rene Wiley, Manager, Riverside Area 0 FOR CGU`■101. MEETING OF: _A 22, YL F for to Meeting: 5' J ane Valley Advisory Council? 0 Other? FO: MAYOR. AND CITY COUNCIL 0 For Action APR 17 l9'.-31 m X For InforaR CE 1UE1] 4GENDA WORDING: Spokane River Centennial Trail Interagency Cooperative Agreement 3ACKGROUND: The' City, County, and State Parks and Recreation Commission have developed a long -term contract for the naintenance, management, and security, of the Trail from Spokane House to the Idaho Border. The detailed : ontract is available for review in the office of the City Clerk and an oral report will be available Monday evening on :he status of the various segments of the trail. I attach a copy of the recent status report on the trail to the State Parks ind Recreation Commission to bring you up to date. Page three of that report refers to this cooperative agreement ieveloped by the coordinating council representing City, County, Citizen's ComTnittee and State Parks. Ttty Management, Parks, Police and Public Works all recommend approval of this contract. FISCAL IMPACT: . 3UDGET ACCOUNT #: ATTACHMENTS: Status Report to Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission Memo, dated April 19, 1991. i1GNATURES OF: iubmit'ting Department tanager of Engineering Services ::OUNCIL ACTION: �11 CMC/AA TY CLERK'S OFFICE SPOKANE, \'1A RfSUUttl;n vc4r-1ArHOT JUN 1519 APPROVED BY SPOKANE CITY COUNCIL: APR 2 2 1991 Interagency Cooperative Agreement; ANE YCYCL� ECEAVED �t Acr JITEGORT o o Annexation x Report o Contract o Resolution o Emergency Ord. o First Rdg. Ord. o Report of City Manager Clerk's File File # on file for revie l Office of City CIerf City Manager RECOMMENDATION o Accept o Approve o Deny o Place on File o Set Hearing Date For: o Defer /Continue To: o Council Direction DISTRIBUTION: Taylor Bressler Frank McCoy Chamber of Commerce Valley Chamber of Commerce 1= ny. - r3► -i0. VrelouSc}- aycenir2.ecc r 92 051.2 WHEREAS, Spokane County, hereinafter referred to as the County, is owner of certain land within the Spokane River Centennial Trail corridor; and, WHEREAS, the City of Spokane, hereinafter referred to as the City, is owner of certain land within the Spokane River Centennial Trail corridor; and, WHEREAS, the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, hereinafter referred to as the Commission, is owner of certain land within the Spokane River Centennial Trail corridor; and, WHEREAS, the Spokane River corridor is ecologically important; has significant potential for interpretive purposes; provides. outstanding scenic beauty, tranquil surroundings and valuable historic and prehistoric features; is uniquely held in public ownership for more than 39 miles of its length, is the common thread that links governments, communities and neighborhoods together; has for many thousands of years been the corridor for commerce in the •area and provides significant recreational opportunities; and, WHEREAS, the Commission, the County and the City desire to provide for the development and operation of a multi - purpose trail system within-the intent and authority of RCW and RCW 39.34.030(2); and, 71 THIS IS TO CEATiFY TiIS IS A TF UE AND CORRECT COPY OF HE CA;;:i "L !NDCUME■[r Pt0. F '� _ , t BY t✓ f 44° CL =I7:1 �ii •I- Jul♦ WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION SPOKANE COUNTY CITY OF SPOKANE INTERAGENCY COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT SPOKANE RIVER CENTENNIAL TRAIL 920505032 RF:E - FILED 9F. R c•ORDEO e f '37 • INTEROFFICE Gt. .1_2'30 f14 1; Y HOY WHEREAS, all parties agree that the primary development objective should be to preserve the river environment and provide facilities for public access, recreation, education and ecological and historic interpretation; and 79A. 0 S WHEREAS the Commission is authorized under RCW j and RCW 39.34.030(2) to cooperate with the County and the City in accomplishing the program herein referred to and to enter into this agreement to that end; and, WHEREAS, the Commission at its May 19, 1989 meeting authorized the Director or designee .to enter'into a long -term cooperative agreement with the County and City for the development and operation of the Spokane River Centennial Trail corridor; and, WHEREAS, the parties agree that the trail corridor can most advantageously be managed by the Commission with shared operation, maintenance and law enforcement responsibilities, NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of-the mutual benefits to be derived, the parties hereby enter into an agreement for a management program as described - herein for the Spokane River Centennial Trail corridor. 1. The term of the agreement shall be for 40 years commencing on the date' last below written. This agreement may be renewed for any period not in excess of 40 years upon expiration of the original 40- year term by mutual agreement of the parties. The Commission will be given the first right to renew the agreement before any other party is given the opportunity to manage the trail under agreement: with the County and the City. 2 v[, 1 2 Ei i t �'�� I 4 7 2. All development and management of the trail shall be the responsibility of the Commission and the Commission shall be the lead agency in preparing future development plans. Operation, including maintenance and law enforcement, shall be as set forth in the Management Plan labeled Exhibit "1" attached hereto and by reference made a part hereof in cooperation with a coordinating council comprised of one member each from State Parks, the City of Spokane, Spokane County, and the Friends of the Centennial Trail or assigns. Each jurisdiction shall be responsible for all costs related to its trail operation, maintenance and law enforcement activities. 3. Management of the trail over its entire 39 mile length will be the responsibility of the Commission in cooperation with the City and County as agreed to in the Management Plan. Management of lands outside.the trail corridor shall be the same as set forth in Article 4 herein for maintenance of the designated segments,- except as detailed in Article 8 herein. 4. Maintenance of the trail and adjacent City, County or Commission owned buffer land as agreed to in the maintenance section of the Management Plan will be the responsibility of the Commission from Spokane House in Riverside State Park to the current west boundary of the Spokane City limits, the responsibility of the City within the current city limits of Spokane and the responsibility of the County from the current east boundary of the Spokane City limits at Frederick and Upriver Drive to the Idaho border. 1 4 vot. 12 r ` y �46c 1 4.17 5. Law enforcement of the trail as agreed to in the law enforcement section of the Management Plan will be a shared responsibility between the Commission, the City and the County. The Commission will patrol the entire trail responding to trail user types of enforcement activities as part of their overall management responsibilities activities. They will inform the City and /or County of urban and suburban type law enforcement situations beyond park rule violations requiring city and /or county action. The City and County will be responsible for responding to these enforcement activities 6. The 'te is to be managed consistent with the provisions of Chapter 79k RCW and the rules and regulations adopted thereunder, unless otherwise exempted by the Director or Commission. 7. Development and maintenance along the trail corridor shall be done in full possession of all necessary permits and licenses and in accordance with all applicable codes and regulations including SEPA compliance and consistent with the overall development plans prepared by the Commission. Obtaining' permits will be the responsibility of the initiating party. 8- This agreement allows management by the County of Commission owned lands, as shown on Exhibit "2 ", outside the trail 'corridor from the current. east end of Maringo Drive to the Idaho border. Any modifications or uses of this property for other than buffer shall be consistent with trail development and preservation of the river corridor and approved by Commission staff prior to use, modification or con - struction. Use of these lands for County recreation purposes may be granted by amendment to this agreement upon approval of County plans for said property by Commission staff and approval of use by the Commission. The County shall be in possession of all necessary permits and licenses and shall carry out all development, maintenance and operation according to all applicable codes and regulations, including SEPA and archaeological clearance. 9. This Agreement allows the use of County owned lands, as shown on Exhibit "2 ", by the Commission at Myrtle Point for the placement of the Plante's Ferry pedestrian bridge and the trail. All new facilities and improvements other than those specified above made by the Commission shall be consistent with trail development and preservation of the river corridor and- approved by County staff prior to construction. The Commission shall be in possession of all necessary permits and licenses and shall carry out all development, maintenance and operation according to all applicable'.codes and regulations, including those of SEPA and archaeological clearance.. 10. The Hamilton Street pedestrian bridge is located on City owned property. Routine maintenance of this bridge will be the responsibility of the City. Any repairs relating to the structural integrity of the bridge and, if necessary,'replacement will be the responsibility of the City. 0 11. The Plante's Ferry pedestrian bridge is located on both Commission and County owned property. Routine maintenance of this bridge will be the responsibility of the County. Any repairs relating to the structural integrity of the bridge and, if necessary, replacement will be the responsibility of the Commission. 12. This agreement is only permission to allow the Commission to use the County and City owned property and the County to use the Commission owned property for the purposes and on the terms and conditions herein stated. No legal or equitable title is conveyed hereby. Title to the subject property shall remain with the landowner throughout the term of this agreement or any renewal thereof. 13. The County and /or City shall defend and hold harmless the Commission and the state of Washington, its officers, agents, employees, successors or assigns against any and all claims suffered or alleged to be suffered on the property, except such claims which arise out of the activities of the Commission, its officers, agents or employees, for which claims the Commission will defend and hold the County and /or City harmless. 14. The Commission shall erect and maintain a sign(s) identifying the County and City as cooperating agencies. Any development authorized in accordance with Article 8 herein shall be signed by the County identifying the Commission as a cooperating agency. The Commission will be the primary focal point and contact for signing. VOL. 1 G :i', pi,GIT 14 ,, 0 15. This agreement may be terminated at any time by mutual written consent of all parties hereto. 16. The provisions of this agreement may be modified at any time by the mutual consent of all parties hereto. 11. No rights under this agreement may be assigned without the prior written' consent of the other parties. This does not preclude third party. agreements for concession or agricultural purposes in compliance with the Management Plan. 18. Any tree removal shall be in accordance with landowner rules and regulations. 19. The site is to be used by the Commission for public trail corridor purposes. Except as otherwise provided for herein, this agreement may be terminated by any party in the event of non - compliance by any party with the terms and conditions hereof, providing that the terminating party allow the non- complying party 90 days written notice of violation in which to correct any situation - whi-ch is not in compliance with the terms and conditions of this agreement. If correction is not made to the satisfaction of the terminating party within the 90 days, this agreement will automatically terminate without further notice. 20. Upon termination or expiration of this agreement, all improvements placed on property under this agreement shall be disposed of in compliance with applicable RCW's. DATED this 6 day of , 191.. ATTEST: SPOKANE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPROVED AS TO FORM: This • day of 19 By Deputy Prosecuting Attorney CITY OF SPOKANE By y VI Roger Crum, -etc,- City Manager o / f 3 — JDate By �G City Cle ff Date 8 VOL. 12. 0 1 1 4 5 i WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION Tveten, Director 'APPROVED AS TO FORM: KEN 0. EIKENBERRY Attorney General Date By // - -•l ?-0 Shirley W. attan Senior Ass tent Attorney General • APPRO ED As TO FORM: ssist nt City Attorney . .X I ~C' ADDENDUM 13 SPECIAL ACTIVITY PERMIT /APPLICATION ❑ SPECIAL RECREATION EVENT • ❑ SPECIAL BEACH RECREATION EVENT AND AND CONDLTIONS Park Manager may add conditions. 1. STATE PARKS authorized representative shall be the park manager and /or his designee. This representative shall have free access to, from and over the premises at any and all times. 2. The specific extent of the Permit area shall be subject to the approval of the park manager or his desiynee and may be adjusted at his discretion. 3, The USER GROUP assumes responsibility for all activities conducted, including but not limited to supervision and control to prevent injury or damage; maintenance of the premises during the use clean -up of litter and debris; and provision of surveillance and security to preserve order. 4. The USER GROUP shall comply with all applicable codes, rules, regulations, and laws, and any lawful order of the park manager or his designee. 5. The USER GROUP shall obtain and be in possession of all permits and licenses required for the permitted use. 6. The USER GROUP shall hold harmless and defend STATE PARKS and the United States of America from any and all liability arising out of any actual or alleged claims; losses, or lawsuits directly or indirectly resulting from the USER GROUPS use of the premises, and shall obtain a liability insurance binder naming Washington State Parks as co- insures. 7. Any damages to property of STATE PARKS (or the United States of America) caused by the USER GROUP while acting . under this permit shall be repaired by the USER GROUP at the USEP. GROUPS expense. Any such damages not repaired to the satisfaction of STATE PARKS (or the United States of America) may be repaired by STATE PARKS and the costs thereof paid by the USER GROUP. B. STATE PARKS may revoke this permit if the USER GROUP fails to comply with or violates any of the terms and conditions herein. 9. This permit and the permission granted may not be assigned in whole or part without the priqr written consent of STATE PARKS. 10. The USER GROUP shall display a copy of the Special Activity Permit and this Addendum on the premises during the use period(s). 11. Within 10 days following termination, the USER GROUP shall provide to STATE PARKS a written statement reporting any revenues received by the USER GROUP from its use of the premises, and the disposition of these revenues. 12. Following review, STATE PARKS.has determined that the actions proposed by the USEP. GROUP are exempt from SEPA under WAC 197- 11- B00(14)(C). _ 13. Upon approval by STATE PARKS, Damage Deposit, Bond or copy of Insurance Binder (naming STATE PARKS as co- insures) is due to Washington State P.arks and Recreation Coamission. 14. Before leaving the park, the Group Leader who signed permit, or his /her representative, will make arrangements for an inspection of the assigned area by the Park Manager or his representative. leader recognizes that all or any part of their deposit may not be refunded if, in the judgement of the Park Manager, or his representative the area is not left in a clean and orderly condition. 15. It shall be within the authority of the Park Manager or his representative, to remove from the park, any or all members of the USER GROUP whose behavior, at any time, is in conflict with any state laws, becomes detrimental to the health and safety of the group or other park users, or becomes so unruly as to affect the reasonable enjoyment of the park by other users. y ) fr a VOL 1 :1 2 .; \� f'i{�L 14 V WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION CITY OF SPOKANE SPOKANE COUNTY EXHIBIT "1" • I. Purpose VOL _ 0 r' 4 SPOKANE RIVER CENTENNIAL TRAIL MANAGEMENT PLAN AN ADDENDUM TO THE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT . BETWEEN WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION SPOKANE COUNTY CITY OF SPOKANE JULY 1991 1 II. Parties Involved 1 III. Areas of Jurisdiction 1 IV. Management 1,2 V. Maintenance 2,3,4 VI. Law Enforcement 4 VII. Exhibits A. Centennial Trail Use 5 B. Centennial Trail Approved Activities 6 C. Centennial Trail Prohibited Activities. . 7 D. Maintenance Report Form 8 E. Special Activity Permit /Application 9 F. Special Activity Permit /Addendum A 10 G. Special Activity Permit /Addendum B 11 H. Trail Map 12 0 l J P GL J. 4 a / I. PURPOSE The purpose of this plan is to establish the jurisdiction for each party involved and to set minimum standards for the management, maintenance and law enforcement along the Spokane River Centennial Trail. II. PARTIES INVOLVED This plan is appended to and is part of the interagency cooperative agreement entered into by the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, 7150 Cleanwater Lane, Olympia, WA 98504 -5711, through the Director, hereinafter referred to as the "Commission "; the City of Spokane, W. 808 Spokane Falls Blvd., Spokane, WA 99201, through the City Manager, hereinafter referred as the "City "; and Spokane County, W. 1115 Broadway, Spokane, WA 99260 -0220, through the Board of County Commissioners, hereinafter referred to*as the "County" for the development and operation of the Spokane River Centennial Trail. III. AREAS OF JURISDICTION A. The Commission is responsible for management of the entire 39 mile length of the Spokane River Centennial Trail and maintenance and law enforcement on or within the Trail corridor and adjacent buffer lands within Riverside State Park from Spokane House to the current west boundary of the Spokane city limits. B. The City is responsible for the management of adjacent buffer lands and maintenance and law enforcement on or within the Trail corridor and adjacent buffer lands within the current city limits of the City of Spokane. C. The County is responsible for management of adjacent buffer lands and maintenance and law enforcement on or within the Trail corridor and adjacent buffer lands from the current east boundary of the Spokane city limits at Frederick and Upriver Drive to the Idaho ----�. bo r d E r . IV. MANAG EMEIJT A. General 1. Overall management of the entire 39 -mile length of the Spokane River Centennial Trail will be done by the Commission through the Riverside State Park Manager's office. • 2. All special activities along the Trail' corridor will be coordinated through Riverside State Park via Special Recreation Event permits (Exhibits 'E','F','G'). Special activities on the Trail within city limits will be coordinated by the Commission, who will notify the Riverfront Park • administrative staff and the Special Events Office of the City Police. 1 V. MAINTENANCE 3. As determined by the Commission, State Parks currently collects an application fee and may require an insurance binder with a minimum coverage of $1 million for parties of 20 or more people or a damage deposit or a bond. 4. Special Activity Permit (Exhibit 'G') specifies what money transactions can occur under a concession permit on the Trail facility. S. Centennial Trail Use, Approved Activities and Prohibited Activities are included as Exhibits 'A', '8' and 'C' respectively. 6. The Trail facility will be run on existing State Parks posted hours, 6:30 a.m. to dusk, year- round; access to trail head facilities will be 8 a.m. to dusk, year- round. 7. Emergency response for fire, medical and water rescue districts is indicated on attached Exhibit 'N'. 8. Each agency is responsible for obtaining fire protection for their jurisdiction. A. General Standards c 4 .1. r , ). :,i;r -'1,GE I_Li 30 1. Each agency will be responsible for their respective areas of the Centennial Trail as set forth in "III. Areas of Jurisdiction." 2. Corrective action to protect the public will be taken within 24 hours of report of damage to the jurisdiction responsible. Permanent repair or replacement, where not possible due to weather other circumstance, will be accomplished on a time schedule approved by the Commission. 3. Asphalt and asphalt sealant will be purchased and applied by each jurisdiction. 4. Commission, City and County will use the same standardized amenities and replacement amenities, including but not limited to signs, benches, picnic tables, bollards, mile markers and bulletin boards. Each agency shall bear cost of repair and replacement of amenities as necessary. 5. No amenity other than replacement of existing amenities shall be placed along the Trail corridor without the approval of the maintenance agencies through the Coordinating Council. 2 B. Specific Maintenance Items Following is a listing of specific maintenance items with comments as needed: r. VOL . I2t)0 145a 6. A comprehensive record of maintenance will be kept by Riverside State Park, requiring City and County to send a copy . of maintenance reports on a monthly basis to Riverside State Park (form provided by Commission). See Exhibit 'D'. 1. Amenities - interpretive and informational signs, benches, picnic tables, bollards, water fountains, trash receptacles, mile markers, hitching posts, rest stations and bulletin boards. Asphalt Repair - Asphalt Sealant - a gilsonite-type binder • meeting ASTM (American Standards for Testing Materials) specifications, will be applied five years after paving and each 5 years thereafter, or sooner if needed, to the Trail where Trail and roadway are separated. 3. Bridges 4. Fencing 5. Guardrail 6. Handrail Hazardous Conditions /Objects - removed immediately by each jurisdiction upon receipt of damage report. Temporary emergency Trail closure will be imposed, if necessary, until hazardous condition is corrected (i.e. fire, flood, washout, leaning trees).' Notify Riverside State Park Manager's office. 8. Litter Control - litter will be picked up a minimum of three times a week. 9. Mile Markers - both posts and large mile numbers painted on asphalt will be maintained. 10. Signs - an inventory of replacement signs is required. 11. Snow Plowing - no snow plowing will be done on the Trail. Trail head parking lots will be plowed, depending upon user demand by the jurisdiction responsible. 3 O' 12. . Sweeping - entire Trail length swept a minimum of three times a year (spring, summer, fall) and other areas as needed by each jurisdiction using the County sweeper which will be loaned to the City and the Commission for their non -road segments of the paved Trail. 13. Trail heads - inspected and cleaned a minimum of three times a week, including facilities, parking lot and entry road. 14. Vandalism - submit incident report on Commission form, Exhibit kr H4L J_ 1 15. Weed Control - in compliance with Spokane County Noxious Weed Contrdl Board requirements, a control program along the Trail will be developed and accomplished, the cost borne by the individual jurisdictions. VI. LAW ENFORCEMENT A. General 1. Primary responsibility for law enforcement /patrol in the Trail corridor in the City is with the City Police and in the � � County, with the County Sheriff, and within Riverside State Cry Park by State Parks Rangers. G 2. The Commission will assist within the city and county jurisdictions in normal park patrol and enforcement along the Centennial Trail (see Exhibit 'C'). 3. Upon request of the Commission, the City or County will respond as backup during any law enforcement situation beyond park rule violation (See Exhibit 'C'). 4. The City and County will provide documentation of all law enforcement activities related to the Trail on a monthly basis to the Riverside State Park office. B. Specific Enforcement 1. Law enforcement violations attributable to the Trail are specified through WAC (Washington Administrative Code), RCW (Revised Code of.Washington) or SMC (Spokane Municipal Code) and are listed in Exhibit 'C', Prohibited Activities, and include fines if convicted. 4 EXHIBIT "A" CENTENNIAL TRAIL USE 1. Trail Hours: 6:30 a.m. to dusk, year -round Trail Head Facility Access: 8 a.m. to dusk, year -round 2. Keep To The Right 3. Alcoholic Beverages Prohibited 4. Pedestrians Have Right -Of -Way on Paved Trail 5. Horses Have Right -Of -Way on Soft Trail 6. All Users Remain On Designated Trails 7. Bike Speed Limit - 15 m.p.h. 8. Maximum of Two Bicycle Riders Abreast At Any Time. If Pedestrians•Are Present, Only Single File Riding Allowed 9. Animals Must Be On Leash 10. Do Not Disturb The Plants Or Animals 11. Pack It In — Pack It Out 12. No Structures (Including Vendor Equipment) Other Than Centennial Trail Structures Allowed Within The Trail Property Boundaries. 13. Organized Events Require Permits (Call the number listed below) FOR INFORMATION, PERMITS AND TO REPORT PROBLEMS PHONE: 4-51 RIVERSIDE STATE PARK EMERGENCIES - PHONE 911 5 vol 1 2 2 IPI,CJ 1461_ 1) BICYCLES 2) X -C SKIING 3) MARATHONS 4) BICYCLE RALLIES 5) TRIATHALONS 6) WALKATHONS 7) FOOT RACE/ RUN 8) WHEELCHAIR RACE 9) WHEEL SKIING /SKATING 10) PICNICKING 11) PARKING 12) CAMPING 13) RIVER ACCESS - NON- N'IOTORIZED BOATS 14) PETS 15) SKATEBOARDS EXHIBIT '13' Y(J1. � �.., Cf P46E 1462 APPROVED ACTIVITIES FOR CENTENNIAL TRAIL must stay on designated trail, 2 riders abreast maximum must stay on designated /posted trail special activity permit required special activity permit required special activity permit required special activity permit required special activity permit, required special activity permit required cannot use sharp tipped poles only at. designated site only at designated parking areas or :railheads only at. designated camp area at designated areas only must be on leash at all times and under direct control; leash eight feet or shor ter remain on paved trail at all times; no jumps, jumping or demonstration type skateboarding allowed 6 0 PROIHIBITED ACTIVITIES ON CENTENNIAL TRAIL USE 1) AMPLIFIED SOUND (peace and quiet) 2) CAMPING • . 3) CONSUMPTION - alcohol 4) CUTTING /REMOVING VEGETATION, ROCKS 5) DESTRUCTION OF PUBLIC PROPERTY 5) DISROBING 7) FIREARMS /WEAPONS 3) FIRES 9) FIREWORKS ._ 10) HORSEBACK RIDING OFF DESIGNATED EQUESTRIAN TRAILS 11) HUNTING 12) INTOXICATION 13) LITTERING 14) METAL DETECTORS 15) MOTORIZED VEHICLE 16) NON- MIOTOP1ZED CYCLES OR SIMILAR DEVICES iN STATE PARKS 17) PETS OFF LEASH 15) PROHIBITED ACTS 19) RECKLESS ENDANGERMENT 20) REMOTE CONTROL UNITS CARS, PLANES. BOATS • (public nuisance) 2 1) RUBBISH 22) SANITATION 23) SOLICITATION 24) STOPPING. STANDING OR PARKING PROHIBITED IN SPECIFIC PLACES 25) SWIMMING 26) VICIOUS ANIMALS EXHIBIT 'C' SECTION BAIL WAC 352 -32 -056 SN1C 10.10.040 (B2) WAC 352 -32 -030 WAC 352 -32 -210 RCW 9A•45.070 -090 WAC 352 -32 -100 352 -32 -120 WAC 352 -32 -140 WAC 352 -32 -070 RCW 77.16.020 - WAC 352 -32 - RCW 70 -93 -060 . WAC 352 -32 - 235 WAC 352 -20 -020 SMC 10.10.040 (B3) RCW 46.61.570 WAC 352-3 7 -050 SNIC 10.19.010 W AC 352 -32 -060 SMC 10.19.050 7 547.00 45.00 5 5.00 57.00 WAC 352 -32 -075 (2aJc) 25.00 WAC 352 -32 -060 47.00 RCW 69.50.401 MANDATORY RCW 9A.36.050 'MANDATORY Isc /2nd degree RCW 9.66.010 250.00 SNIC 10.10 040 ' ' ='3 WAC 352 -32 -170 130.00 WAC 352 -32 -180 55.00.. WAC 352 -32 -195 '55.110 10.00 45.00 4 7.00 VOL. 1 0»46., I 6 3 MANDATORY APPEARANCE 47.00 80.00 57.00 80.00 45.00 • MANDATORY APPEARANCE MANDATORY APPEARANCE 130.01) 47.00 57.00 EXHIBIT "D" VOL. 1 _ 0 1 ) 1 , 6 1 : 1 4 6 4 4 : 1 SPOKANE RIVER CENTENNIAL TRAIL INSPECTION / MAINTENANCE / VANDALISM REPORT . INSPECTION MAINTENANCE VANDALISM DATE: TIME: NAME & PHONE # OF INSPECTOR: LOCATION /MILE #: MAINTENANCE: garbage pickup brush removal asphalt repair (include quantity) sweeping sign repair /replacement mile markers (upright or pavement) parking lot structures clean /repair Other AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED: EQUIPMENT REQUIRED: # OF PEOPLE REQUIRED: .ESTIMATED COST: LABOR MATERIALS IS TI.IIS A REPEAT REPAIR? DESCRIPTION: COMMENTS /SUGGESTIONS: Mail Form To: Riverside State Park N. 4427 A.L. White Parkway Spokane, WA 99205 8 PARK SPECIFIC AREA Or VS4 A GATE ON KvC /IT • FROM TO TIME 00 EVENT FROM TO EVENT MUST TER INATC NO LATER THAN HALF HR. SEF(w`lE PARK CLOSES S►LCI /Y ACTIVITY OUP SIZE If over 100, please C p (J 20 - 50 0 51 - 100 ❑ 101 - 500 note estimated attendance: ALCOM0LIC OCVCtIACCSI CRCOP LEADER /APPLICANT recognizes and Lill insure compliance with the limitiation imposed by state law CI Yrs 0 Ion the use of alcoholic beverages, especially no dispensing of alcoholic beverages to minors. 1 APPLICANT: Please complete, sign, date and return by �1 6 t11 payment of $ die check payable Co: i. in CICT4 STATE TR.EA .IR After Activity Report: Arad was left in ❑ ACCEPTABLE SICr.ATtJOC Cr AOCI. DESTRIBUT1CN FOR SPECIAL RECD ATIC4 EVENT C.'ILY: :Yaw Or_, r\ , 0L Inn -n% '?(Pri517 n voi WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION SPECIAL ACTIVITY PERMIT /APPLICATION RFOUr:,T DAYY. C$UUr AAA, C,WOUF LLA OF.wf w��y1 CA »T Mwli.l »C ADDRESS ISTMKETJ. CITY STA rr ZI,. ( AUSINCSS TCLCr NU »r. ) NOME TCLC ♦AONC ) AGREEMENT OP GROUP LEADER /APPLICANT 0 GROUP LENDER /APPLICANT agrees to all of the terns and /or conditions of this Special Activity Permit and attac'1,od Addendum. Failure to comply may result in forfeiture of part or all of the .7 LA.. deposit. AGn.SD AND ACCEPTED, this day of 19 CROUP LEADES /APPLICANT Signature: X APPLICANT - BRING YOUR COPY OF THIS FORM TO EVENT .- -INAGENCY USE ONLY CROUP DAY use (No Reservation Made) GROUP DAY USe (FDe a Reservation) GROUP CAMPING (No Reservation male) GROUP CAMPING (For a Reservation) USE ADDENDUM A PORM PSR 0 -282 0 D SPECIAL RECREATION EVENT SPECIAL RECREATION EVENT (Ocean Beaches] * PUBLIC ASSEMBLY } USE. ADDENDUM 8 FORM P&R 0 -283 USE PUBLIC .5.5E'1. APPLIC. FO (IM POI A -255 Cl UNACCEPTABLE condition. c Y. fS: (Use back of .`or -1 if needed) 6i3.TTz- Tnroulh Regicr•. to Headrva:tcrs CANARY- Park Copy Pr - App1icantIs Cop, F-5 1 6 I Iv 2 w a 7 6 co c m w o w a w , co m co m x x .. N N N (ante's Ferry , W • En .ridge Trent Ave. (St.Rt. 290) Centennial Trail SPOKANE COUNTY East of,Boulder Beach to Idaho stateline • Map not to scale Post 1 • Falls 1 1 • 1 1 Spokane River Pori of Entry { a N 12 3 O Z 1 0 -{ I 0' z Centennial Trail SFD = City of Spokane ,Fire Department FDI1 = Fire District No.1 FD9= Fire District No.9 Centennial /Trill ' ,r? Q Centennial Trail Deep Creek WASHINGTON STATE PARKS and RECREATION COMMISSION Riverside State Park to Meenach Bridge Riverside State Park Spokane House interpretive Center N ine Milo Roa a Bowl and Pitcher Overlook tP 0 Mukogawa/ SFCC Campuses co 11 41 Ft. Wright Drive T.J. Meenach Bridge Summit Blvd. Ohio -Ide Rd. J 0 0 0 N 1) o cr■ m m X. x N N m c , 0 0 0 0 VOL eA4154T`14 3 - 2 : 0 et,Gc 14 6 7 Boulder Beach. • Upriver ▪ Drive Upriv r Dam ; a Kardong Bridge Hamilton exit 282 0 x N Farr CITY of SPOKANE City limits from Meenach Bridge thro Boulder Beach Maringo to Islands •••„•:, P7.p4,P-5 z 4. ,.fi .- . r..,•!•:' ` •• • , r.,........- , r;rnc...r ::;%%,,' •:. -4; 1 . ,-.....,,,..." ,,,••.:.••••.".. _, ...,:—....• .47--- - • ------ ... 1 ••• f:. _ ..... ----___ 1' A S A 6 A PA.1K e ..r • ...< ' ..,........1 • • 0, •• SPO ill A17.SERVI: • •• - .; -": * - 4 " .1-$ T4 , rillIrifkx ( -::•.-..•:.f.:. : . ..4•-•,.,•:. _...„.•„: 7. :;.:!...,..:....:•-•:,• • -.- ..., ..-e.r ••••• ....::.:.• -....:-. :••......,..,- - -........ ,..-:_•.••,.:- -,- :. ..,_ ••,...;•••:.;:b •.... • ..- s •• ....-• t•••• •-.... ...: - .:-: 4 :, gjAct ;,..1.,. ..,.. ..• • :, • Islands to Plantes Ferry.. 8 . 8 5 F; • . , _ ... • .. • • *.• ..; • :ii;3 " , • - •••••••• — • • „■• e • I 3vA`dicif Tttnr 1 WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION -r, ■ V-1:-. ".• ..; . • :ITES RRYs • • • , ; • 1 • :7•5s:` - '•'' -- k" . • • • . "ta 3 • r. k r • SPOKANE RIVER CENTENNIAL TRAIL 0") S.4&5 T 25N R44 E SPOKANE RIVER CENTENNIAL TRAIL S 3 T 25N 1844E y • • • Mirabeau :, 16.29 P- R W f I p .' Matsch —week Tract • --2-4.a P-4 . So K NNE RIVER CENTENNIAL TRAIL - OAAF s • r , A � -; ..1 :. s.: �; ... : . - il• 14.4_1- �,- 1$.•,..:' r; --'" - • `•; • Ir • ti. Matsch & AB BIesslny • , 15.7 146 •. y • 1 • t.• • •N. • 1 • ,� 1 • —• C.f., . •..r• q tr• ti . �.. • •.• : I -• •••• EXHIBIT 2 • • y • • • WASHING STA PAR D REC REATION C OMMISS ION CENTENNIAL Alt_ Sr`�OKANa" SlVS11 T11 S 12 & 13 1 2514 114 A � 11 /4 '3 .: CJ r.• Sheet 4 of ti0 et a dahlen, gtessin9 3 Div e 2 P-12. • —�� 1 0 v i c 6R o C I • 1 : • . • •. ;4 ••••"" • 4 t. • vi : T. • :••: • • • .1. : ' - .,•,,".,:• ,..• ,.. 9 . .. r ---1 V egalin •' .1.-..... ___ - -.. 7 ....-:-.=------- -- ; .._..„-- - • • • • - • ^ • ). 1 9 1.t.•••:- g ...,\., _ 7:5 i :;. / __ ,. 1 ,..,. .. \ ‘t,.... ..... --,r,:-'- .'" • % .--. t to Balchr ( '/ 4.. 1,': • • '.›.• 21 39: P • . • ,,i'l / ,.\...-.." * *' * *!' 1• '.. 1 2 .1i i '• ' /1' •••••" .. , . .*?. • I I ''..:. . '• •• .. ••• '' . . --- . ,. ' j i I-' l' I - ''). ' .1. . I. i' .. . .1....: I , - ; ..7 •.°- -1' --: • " 7 - .. 1: • •'-f•—•• -- • - - - • - . `.7 - 4".. - - ‘ • . , , • I.( – t.'7 ' • — r - — •••-- \ :... ...• I 5 — /0 • • — .; • •-•••• • -7- :• , • .1 7 ra • A •• , • • • -i• „•'1: '1 • • / 41..../ • • : • SPOKANE RIVER CENTENNIAL TRAIL S 7 T 25N R45E WASHINGTON STATE PARKS AND • RECREATION COMMISSION Sheet 5 of 10 . • - 95 . • • EXHIBIT 2 • - _ • . •. . • • • 4 Z • • PL1/7 - ••: .7 - :••• ' • , . i3 ; :IV * •,:', ' : • -• . - • 9 7 ? .-*.<, i • 1 • .' • ...'.. -. •: ' , Z 1 ...:'.. •- • •. ' • 1 11 • 4 • ..1 . .*,... -. • • I:5 . • ' • 1,, A . f‘.'...'...,.*:.,.., •_:-.:, . ...,.........--,..- -.,. I+ (-,-) 1 "z•• . 1••••.I .1%•.,...e•••••••• •• • 1 Z: C. • -:•;;;18. ' • , . . . • • • 7 ;P,13 9 , 4 • - e".74. . • 7 " T • /VO. kVZ 94- • t 21 • i z .1 • 4. , '—•—•—••—'"— : I - 47 .•4 ..ki • ' --) IP •— - 4/ ;.1 •/c) .4 .../ ...__ .....-.; ,• • \ .A„,., , ", - . • • - '3 ;.• . . 7• dr,to N 3 -.1....=—;;;.....;;;Z:: =': -- • l • i\l-.. KeIly,•WiIl larnq. r 5 )3 1 ... 1 •:. -':. 1 - •.::. --- L- • :. • -; .•:: .•- • ; • • ••• : .• • ••••-'• % „ 97 ' CT •• . • : • • z. • • —7: • 1.1 • 1". l e" • • . r 4. 4 • 4 . , • L. •:., r . : . • (1 6 6 • • . .t.•-: z . .1 • ; j " • • • •• • I 717. Z- .I.V ...t. 5 : 12 0 -4 • 7 . ..t EXHIBIT 2 0 • 51 ,...r/• •. • .1. 4' '"'• . ' J •.'• ' •• '.- '-' • :i. • ....;••• 4 • . ..“ 7- ' - 'f •'" . . •' -4 ^-,--,-- .:- -- Bark P Sf 1 c 9 t l t.7.t. $ ii..! .,.. .... ..., . .. , ..... 2 I ,.. 1 - •: • ..... l,.___ eir.........____.......... r V . . . SPOKANE RIVER CENTENNIAL TRAIL S 8 T 25N R45E Shc:Let 6 Of 10 .1 .. ..` - -- , r '? i `liI 3 W A S H I N G T O N STATE PARKS I. AND RECREATION C O M M I S S I O N _ r = � - f I `- . X43 N•Y O 6, L p�ifieI 'I I tq e Tien c7 ? Dormen Grant 1 8,0 Kro.I! ; .e�tlf<h'C_M'l__!�•vew:!_...... .• ti...n1 r'7 r�� 10 If 7 r ,4;, 0 J am ! 2 • e • • ^ • e f = . 2 • SPOKANE RIVER CENTENNIAL TRAIL S 10 T 25N R45E J r- • ' i 1. , -.. i 1 Sheet 8 of 10 i • • frRg rl 5 TVG erg P..77.c(qc ' 1 so 3 • I-, ABC 31.0 FLgr fee R /6 Fir D 5 . .,9 112.1 • .18 • k... , ,1 1 11 ...•--.•••••-• : I 4'. • . • 't. 4 5 i . . ; *1 35 • • . ::t. , ". t t I.: , , t : • I .5.) I • .„ \ 77; . : • : , as p -.,, ri :.:. 1 s ..:-..--.. i o . Itil L 64 of 3 ' , • . 10 11 3 .t. ' •. • 1 r ` .11 -5 \ 6 • ' .1 e (....", • ' '.\ • • ..;;*‘ ; • t /.• • • 14 • •••• • g‘' . . .6. -:. j ,'_-,..--...........—, —.. r,- • • • .... ••■....s:,;.,:ei 1. . , ....-. _ ••• t 1 .0 „..e; • •••//' -A /,- - .."' • ,'/-••• 4 . • • :•:.• • / 7Z ■•-, .// •/./ WASHING STATE PARKS A RECREAT C OMMISS ION • / SPOKANE RIVER CENTENNIAL 111.442 S 11 T 25N R45E S 2 T -25N R45E S 1 T 25N R45E :/heet 9 of NO. 92 (.. ?b1 • BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON IN THE MATTER OF AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF ) AN INTERAGENCY COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT IN) RESOLUTION CONJUNCTION WITH THE CENTENNIAL TRAIL ) WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington, pursuant to the provisions of the Revised Code of Washington Section 36.32.120(6), has the care of county property and the management of county funds and business; and WHEREAS, the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Spokane County and the City of Spokane, individually, own certain parcels of land within the Spokane River Centennial Trail corridor; and WHEREAS, the State Parks Commission, the County and the City desire to provide for the development and operation of a multi - purpose trail system within the intent and authority of RCW 43.51.040(8) and RCW 39.34.030(2); and WHEREAS, all parties agree that the trail corridor can most advantageously be managed by the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission with shared operation, maintenance and law enforcement responsibilities. BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington that either the Chairman of the Board or a majority of Board members are hereby authorized to execute that agreement entitled "Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission Spokane County City of Spokane Interagency Cooperative Agreement Spokane River Centennial Trail, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. APPROVED BY THE BOARD this 21 day of April, 1992. ATTEST: WILLIAM E. DONAHUE CLERK OP f - BOARD RY• �`��! /�/Yl�/ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON • C AIRM ' N 1 dre .110%,4 dir HNR.MCB P.TRICIA A. I G T'f Y STEVEN Ii ASSO 'Purpose The purpose of this presentation is to initiate discussion on whether or not the City of Spokane Valley would like to be a Formal partner in the maintenance and management of the Centennial Trail. roUltle, The EXPO in 1974 was the event which started the most concerted efforts to recapture and restore the river In 1979, Spokane County Parks proposed a bicycle /pedestrian pathway along the river that would run from Argonne Road to State Line. In 1986, the County proposed a 10-1/2 mile trail segment that was built in conjunction with the Washington Centennial Trail Construction that was to occur in 1989. (Information from www.spokanecentennialtrail.org) The entire trail is 69 miles in length Approximately 6.8 miles are within Spokane Valley City limits. The County and the would like the City of Spokane Valley to maintain the 6.8 miles of the trail within City limits. The City has funded the trail maintenance in 2004 at approximately $35,000. There is a 40 -year Interagency Cooperative Agreement between Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, City of Spokane and Spokane County entered into 4/30/92. The agreement runs until 2032. Basic Terms of .Agreement • Each jurisdiction is responsible for all costs related to trail operation, maintenance and law enforcement activities in its area. The Cooperative Agreement does not provide a source of funding. ■ The Washington Parks and Recreation Commission (WPRC) is responsible for development and management of the entire trail. ■ The WPRC is responsible for trail user enforcement along the entire trail The City of Spokane and Spokane County are responsible for law enforcement beyond park rule violations. City of Spokane Valley Invited to Join Ea The City of Spokane Valley has received a letter (September 10, 2004) from the State Parks and Recreation Commission inviting the City of Spokane Valley to join in the Interagency Cooperative Agreement. 6g Spokane County has indicated that regardless of the City's decision, they no longer feel responsible for the cost associated with maintaining the trail inside the City limits. Proposed Amendments ■ Spokane County has proposed an amendment to the contract stating they will maintain part of the trail inside the county "except for that portion of the trail and adjacent buffer land lying within the corporate limits of the City of Spokane Valley additionally if a new city is incorporated or an existing city annexes an area containing the trail "the county shall no longer be responsible for the management, maintenance, and law enforcement for the portion of the Trail corridor and adjacent buffer lands located within the incorporated area of said city or town" Pro sec, endm nt cont 7 There has also been discussion about limiting the financial obligation of the partners to $10,000 in any given year. Under this scenario, the State Parks and Recreation Commission would be responsible for the remainder of the funds. This has not been agreed to by the Commission Annual Operation Costs ■ The current estimated annual cost of $35,000 includes maintaining mowing, sweeping parking lots, cleaning Barker and. Mirabeau restrooms, litter control, painting, trimming, fence repairs, asphalt patches & weed control along the 6.8 miles of trail. ■ Estimates for Fog Seal $25- $30,000 needed now ■ Estimates for Hot Asphalt Overlay in future $320,000 ■ Portions of the trail are susceptible to flooding and washing out each year. In 2002, Spokane County and AT &T spent approximately $220,000 in the Barker area. The repairs have not yet been tested . by high runoff. 4s ertin Ann ual Coats (co!t. Extensive sandbagging is done annually to help prevent washout in the Barker Bridge area. o There is potential for major repairs. Trail is about 15 years old and asphalt beginning to show wear and tear. • Decisi 'k ? n Poitiits Ei Decide whether or not. the City will participate in maintenance in 2005. Funds are in the budget but have not been included in the Request for Proposal for Park Maintenance. o Decide whether or not the City desires to be a full partner in the Interagency Cooperative Agreement. If so, to what extent should the Agreement be re- negotiated? General Fund Revenues: Sales Tax Property Tax Gambling Tax t,aosc ,cld Excise Tax minty Tax 4% Franchise Foos State Shared Revenues Planing E Bvtdin9 Fees Fines & Fortoiteres Recreation Program Foes Interiund Transfers Investment interest Total General Fund General Fund Expenditures: Leglstathve Executive & Legislative Public Safety Deputy City Manager Finance Loge! Human Resources Public Works Planting Bucking Library Parks Adrrin Recreation Aquntics Sor4ar Center CenterPlaca General Govemmom Transfer to Street Fund Total General Fund Eslirnated Reginnhg Fund Balanco Excess Rovertuef(Erpenditure) Contingency Reserve SeeAce LevelSlabl3zation Wa. er Weather Reserve Loan Repayment Estimated Ending Fund Balance Fund Balance Includes: Contingency rtes, Service Level Res. Mit drew Reserve 44intcr Weather Reserve UndeeIgnaled Fund Balance City of Spokane Valley Multiyear Financial Plan - Utility Tax 4% - Sales Tax 2% 9/20/2004 2005 Estimate 5 12,400,000 9,500,000 800,000 5,000 4,000,000 620,000 1,035,340 1,293,000 1,20%000 90,000 60,000 36,000 31,359,340 290,305 460,369 15,652,483 209,942 440.269 207,300 121,462 756,202 954,601 721,760 2,100,000 1,070,282 158,213 255,815 128,592 321,299 5.700,885 742,802 $ 30,355,651 (237,755) 1,003,680 500,000 300,000 500,000 2,690,000 4,935,934 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate $ 12,750,000 5 9,995,000 800,000 5.000 4,060,000 626,200 1,061,224 1.203,000 1,200,000 901300 42,500 50.000 31,995,924 313,529 497,199 16,904,687 290,457 475,491 223,864 131,179 818,898 1,031,055 779,501 2,268,000 1,15.5,883 170,972 276,2E13 136,719 350,000 1,650,000 4.200.829 $ 31,932,266 4,935,434 63,658 13,005,000 5 13,265,100 $ 13,530,402 $ 13,801,010 10,197,060 10,3,960 10,603,960 10,610,000 800,000 600,000 300,000 800.000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 4.161,600 4,244,832 4,329,729 4,416,324 632,452 638,787 645,175 651.627 1,087,755 1,114,949 1,142,823 1,171,394 1,293,000 1,293,000 1,293,000 1,300000 1,200,000 1,200000 1,200,003 1,200,000 90,000 90,030 90,000 90,000 42,500 42,500 42,500 42,500 50,500 51,005 51,515 52,030 32,565797 33,145,133 33,734,104 S 34,339,885 338,611 335,700 394,458 426,552 536,975 579,933 626,328 676,434 18,257,042 19,717,627 21,295,037 22,998,640 313,694 338,790 385,893 395,760 513,530 554.612 538,981 646,099 241,795 287,139 252,030 304,592 141,673 153,007 165,248 176,468 882,034 952,597 1,028,805 1,111,109 1,113,539 1,202,622 1,292,832 1.402,729 841,661 909,210 951,947 1.060,500 2,449,440 2,845,395 2,857,027 3,035,559 1,248,354 1,340,222 1,456,080 1,572,568 164,542 198,303 215,249 232,469 298,388 322,257 343,038 375,881 147,657 159,470 172,228 188,006 410,400 443,232 478,691 516,966 1,990,000 2,082,000 2,271,000 2,340,000 2,599,256 842, 002 - - S 32,.508,809 $ 33,087,200 5 34,775,370 $ 37,510,597 4,999,592 5,050,580 5,114,513 4,072,247 50,9138 57,933 (1,042,266) (3,170712) 4,999,592 5,050,580 5,114,513 4,072,247 901,535 (500,600) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) 1500,000) (500,000) (300000) (300,000) (300,000) (300,000) [300,000) (300000) (500.000) (500.000) (500,000) (500,000) 1500,0001 1500.000 3,135,934 3,199,592 3,256,580 3,314,513 2,272,247 (898,465) 10% Fund Balance Target 3,135,934 3,199,592 3,256,580 3,314,513 3,373,410 3,433,989 City of Spokane Valley Street Fund Analysis - Utility Tax 4% - Sales Tax 2% 9120!2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Street Fund Beginning Fund Balance 2,511,785 652,944 1,947,999 1,313,018 (1,433,875) (5,405,968) Transfer from General Fund 742,802 4,200,829 2,599,256 842,082 - Motor Fuel Tax 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 4,454,587 6,053,773 5,747,255 3,355,100 (233,875) (4,205,968) Street Fund Expenditures Ending Fund Balance 3,801,643 4,105,774 4,434,236 4,788,975 5,172,093 5,585,861 652,944 1,947,999 1,313,018 (1,433,875) (5,405,968) (9,791,829) General Fund Revenues: Sees Tax Properly Tax Gambling Tax Leasehold Excise Tex Let/ Tax 4% Franc se Fees Stab 5narrl Revenues Planning & Buikrng Fees Fines R Forfeitures Recreation Program Fees tnterfund TrmvshJs Investment (merest Total General Fund General Fund Expenditures: Legislative Execuive & Legis ati•ro Public, Snfoty Deputy City Manager Finance Legal Human Resources Public Works Planning Building Library Perks Aarnin ROM melon Aestatic Senior Center Cen'erPlace General Govommere Transfer to Street Fund Total General Fund Estimated 8enning Fund Balance Excess Reverruel(Expendilure) Contingency Reserve Service Level Slidailizatian Winter Weather Reserve Loan Repayment Estimated Ending Fund Balance Fund Balance Inc8utes: Contirgoncy Ras. Service LeYet Res. Mirateau Reserve Wfr4cr Weather Rosen•o Undeslgaated Fund Balance 2005 Estimate S 12,400,000 9,800,000 800,000 5,000 4,000,000 620,000 1,035,340 1,293,000 1,200,000 90,000 80,000 36 ODD 31,159,340 1500,000) (500,000) (300,000) (500.000) 3,135,934 City of Spokane Valley Multiyear Financial Plan • Utility Tax 4% 912012004 2006 2007 2006 2009 2010 Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate S 12,750,000 5 9,992,000 600,000 5,00D 4,090,000 626,200 1,061,224 1,293,000 1,200,000 90,009 42,50D 50,000 _ 31,995,924 12,877,500 S 13,150,000 6 13,281,500 S 13,414,315 10,197,980 10,399,960 10,603,960 10,810,000 800,000 600,000 800,000 800,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 4,161,600 4,244,832 4,329,720 4,416.324 632,482 638,787 645.175 651,627 1,087,755 1,114,949 1,142,823 1,171,394 1,293,000 1,293,000 1,293,000 1,300,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 93,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 42,500 42,500 42,500 42,500 50,500 51 51 52,030 32,438 33 ,030,033 33,485,202 S 33,953,190 290,305 313,529 338,611 365,700 394,958 428 552 400,309 497,190 330,973 579,937 626,328 676,434 13,652,488 16,904,687 16,257,062 14,717,627 21,285,607 22,906640 268,042 290,457 313,694 336,790 365,593 5,1 440,269 475,491 513,530 534,612 598,981 648 64 207,300 223 241,795 261,139 282,000 304,592 121, 462 131,179 141, 673 153, 007 18;x,248 178, 468 756,202 816,693 652,034 952,507 1,023,805 1,111,109 954,681 1,031,055 1,113,539 1,202,622 1,298,832 1,402,739 721,760 779,501 841,881 909,210 961,947 1,060,503 2100,000 2,268,000 2,449,440 2,645,395 2,857,027 3,085,589 1,070,282 1,155,883 1,248,354 1,3c8,222 1,456,080 1,572,566 158,215 170,672 184,542 199,305 215,249 232,469 255,818 275,253 296,386 322,257 348,066 375,861 126,592 136,719 147,657 159,470 172,226 168,006 321,299 380,000 410,400 443,232 478,091 516,986 5,706,665 1,880,000 1,990,000 2,092000 2,211,000 2,340,000 742,602 4,200,829 2.484 508 725.742 S 18,155,851 S 31 ,932 ,2E9 S 32 394,059 $ 32,970,690 $ 34,776, 5 37,510,597 (257,755) 4,935,934 4,999,592 5,043,830 5,100,003 3,811,835 1,033,689 03,050 44,238 59,173 (1,291,108( (3,557,407) 500,000 - - - - - 200,000 500,000 2,890,000 4,935,934 4,999,592 5,043,83D 5,103,003 3,811,835 254,428 (600,000) (500,000) (5003100) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,000) (300,000) f300,000) (300,000) (300,000) (300,000) (500.030) (500,000) (500,000) (500,003) (500,060) 3,199,592 3,243,630 3,303,003 2,011,83.5 (1,545,572) 1016 Fund Ualence Target 3,135,934 3,199,692 3,243,630 3,303,003 3.349,520 3,355,310 Street Fund Beginning Fund Balance Transfer from General Fund Motor Fuel Tax Street Fund Expenditures Ending Fund Balance 2005 Estimate City of Spokane Valley Street Fund Analysis - Utility Tax 4% 9/2012004 2006 Estimate 2007 Estimate 2008 Estimate 2009 Estimate 2010 Estimate 2,511,785 652,944 1,947,999 1,198,268 (1,664,965) (5,637,058) 742,802 4,200,829 2,484,506 725,742 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 4,454,587 6,053,773 5,632,505 3,124,010 (464,965) (4,437,058) 3,801,643 4,105,774 4,434,236 4,788,975 5,172,093 5,585,861 652,944 1,947,999 1,198,268 (1,664,965) (5,637,058) (10,022,919) General Fund Revenues: Saks Tax Property Tex Gambling Tax Leasehold Exeise Tax Utility Tax 5% Franchise Fees State Shared Revenues Pranning & B11d)ng Fees Fines & Forfeitures Recteatlon Program Fees Intcrfund Transfers Investment' Interest Total General Fund General Fund Expenditures: Legislative Exoctrtivo & Lcgislo`5vo Public Safety Deputy City Manager Finance Legal Human Resources Public Works Planning Brftding Litxary Petits Admin Recreation Aquatics Senior Center Centerf' ice General Gavemrnrn1 '1'ranster to Street Fund Total General Fund Estimated Beginning Fund Balance Excess Reverwd(Expcnditure) Contrgency Reserve Service Level StabEzaticn Winter Weather Reserve Loan Repayment Estimated Ending Fund Balance Fund Balance tncludes_ Contingency Res. Service Level Res. Mlrabeau Reserve Winler Weather Reserve Undeslgnatod Fund Balance 10% Fund Balance Target 2005 Estimate 5 12,400,000 9.800,000 800,000 5,000 5,000,000 620.000 1,035,340 1,293,000 1,200,000 90,000 80,000 36,000 32,359,340 290,305 313,520 460,369 497,199 15.652.488 16,904,687 265,942 200,457 440,269 475,491 207,300 223,684 121,462 131,179 750,202 816,698 954,661 1.031,055 721,700 779,501 2,100,000 2.268,000 1,070,282 1.155,883 156,215 170,872 255.918 276,283 126,592 130,719 321299 380,000 5,706,855 1,880.000 1,642,802 5,218,829 $ 31,255,651 S 32,950,266 (257,755) 1,103,689 500,000 300.000 500,000 2.690 000 5.035.934 (500,000) (500.000) (300.000) (500.000) 3,235,994 3,235,934 City of Spokane Valley Multiyear Financial Plan - Utility Tax 5% 9/202004 2006 Estimate 5 12,750,000 5 12,877,500 5 13.150600 S. 13,281,500 5 13,414,315 9,998,000 10,197,980 10,399,960 10,603,960 10,810,000 600.000 800,000 800600 600,000 800,000 5,000 5.000 5.000 5.000 5,000 5.100,000 5,202,000 5,306.040 5,412,161 5,520,404 826,200 632.462 638.737 645.175 651,627 1,061,224 1,087.755 1,114,949 1,142,823 1,171.394 1,293,000 1,293,000 1,293,000 1,293,000 1.300,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1.200,000 90600 90,000 90.030 90,000 90,000 42.500 42,500 42,500 42,500 42,500 50,000 50,500 51,005 51,515 52,030 33,015.924 33,478,697 34,091.241 34,587,634 f 35.057,270 5,035.934 65,658 6,101,592 338,611 365,700 394,956 426,552 538,975 579,933 626,323 576,434 16,257,052 19,717,027 21,295,037 22,993,640 313,694 336,760 365,693 :595,164 513,530 554,812 596,981 646,899 241,795 261,139 282,030 304.592 141,673 153,007 165,248 178,468 882,034 952,597 1,026,805 1,111,109 1,1 13,539 1,202,622 1,298,832 1,402.739 841,861 909.210 981,947 1,050,503 2,449,440 2,645,395 2,857.027 3,085.589 1,248,354 1.348,222 1,456,060 1,572.566 184,542 199.305 215,249 232.460 298,366 322,257 348,038 375.831 147,657 159,470 172,228 166.006 410,400 443,232 478,691 516,986 1,990,000 2,092,000 2,211,000 2,340,000 1522,860 1,784.869 • - 5 33,432,419 $ 34,029,987 $ 34,776,370 $ 37,510,597 5,101,592 46,278 5.147.970 (500,000) (500.000) 4500600) (500,000) (300,000) (300,000) (500,000) (500,000) 3,301,592 3,301,592 3,347,570 2007 2008 2009 2010 Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate 3,347,870 5,147,870 5,209,124 81.254 (208,735) 5,209,124 4500,000) (500,000) (300,000) 4500,000) 3.409.124 3,409.124 5,000,385 1500.000) 4500,000) (300,000) (500,000) 3,200,388 5,000,388 (2,453,327) 2,547,061 (500,000) (500,000) (300,000) (500,000) 747,061 3,456,763 3,505,727 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate City of Spokane Valley Street Fund Analysis - Utility Tax 5% 9120/2004 Street Fund Beginning Fund Balance 2,511,785 1,552,944 3,865,999 4,154,628 2,350,522 (1,621,571) Transfer from General Fund 1,642,802 5,218,829 3,522,866 1,784,869 - - Motor Fuel Tax 1,200,000 1 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 5,354,587 7,971,773 8,588,865 7,139,497 3,550,522 (421,571) Street Fund Expenditures Ending Fund Balance 3,801,643 4,105,774 4,434,236 4,788,975 5,172,093 5,585,861 1,552,944 3,865,999 4,154,628 2,350,522 (1,621,571) (6,007,432) General Fund Revenues: Sales Tax Property Tax GsnbC ng Tax Leasehold Excise Tax Utility Tax 6% Frarudtiso Fees State Snared Reverues Nanning 8 Building Forts Fines & Forfeitures Recreation Program Fees lrtterfund Transfers 6ivesttrcnt Inlcro% Total General Fund General Fund Expendlluros: Legislative Executive 8 Legislative Public Safety Deputy City Manager Finance Legal Humor: Resources Pi 0c Works Piercing Bu5t6ng Library Parks Adnin Recreation Aquatics Scr3or Center Centednace General Government Transfer to Strain Fund Total General Fund Estimated Beginrtng Fund Balance Excess Rovcrucf(Expcnditurc) Contingency Resent+ Service Level Stabilization Winter Weatner Reserve Loan Repayment Estimated Ending Fund Balance Fund 8almtco tncludos: Contingency Res. Service le,oI Res. Mirebeau Reserve Walter Weather Reserve Untieslgtsated Fund Balance 10% Fund Balance Target 2005 Estimate $ 12,400,000 9,600,000 800,000 5,000 6,000,000 620,000 1,035,340 1,293,003 1,200,000 90,000 80,000 35,000 33,359,340 City of Spokane Valley Multiyear Financial Plan - Utility Tax 6% 9f2012004 290,305 313,529 460,369 497,199 15,552,488 16,904,687 208,942 290,457 440,269 475,491 207,300 223,684 121,402 131,179 756,202 818,698 954,681 1,031,055 721,760 779,501 2,100,000 2,253,000 1,070,282 1,155,833 158,215 170,572 255,318 276,283 120,592 1 36,719 321,299 360,000 5,706,885 1,680,000 2,542,802 6,236,629 5 32,155,551 5 33,966,266 (500,000) (500,000) (300000) (500,000) 3,335,934 2006 2007 Estimate Estimate 5 12,750,000 5 12,877,500 5 9,598,000 10,197,980 800,000 800,000 5,000 5,000 6,120,003 6,242,400 626,203 6..'2,462 1,081,224 1,067,755 1,293,000 1,293,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 90,000 90,000 42,500 42,500 50,000 50,500 34,035,924 34,519,097 (257,755) 5,135,934 1,203,689 67,658 500,000 300,000 500,000 2,990,000 5,135,934 5 203,692 338,651 536,975 18,257.062 313,694 513,530 241,795 141.673 882,034 1,113,539 841,861 2,449,440 1,245.354 184,542 298,396 147,557 410,400 1,990,000 4,561,226 $ 34,470,779 5,203,592 46,315 2008 2009 2010 Estinune Estimate Estimate 13,150,000 5 13,231,500 5 13,414,315 10,399,960 10,600,960 10,810,000 600,000 800,000 800,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 6,367,246 6,494,593 6,624,435 629,787 645,175 655,627 1,114,949 1,142,823 1,171,394 1,293,000 1,293,000 1,300,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1.200,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 42,500 42,500 42,500 51,005 51,515 52,030 35,152,449 35,650,066 S 36,161,351 365,700 394,958 426,552 579,933 828,328 678,434 19,717.627 21,295,007 22,998,640 336,790 355,593 396,164 554,612 598,981 646,899 261039 282,000 304,592 153,007 195,248 178,469 952,597 1,028,505 1,111,109 1,202.622 1,290.632 1,402, 739 909,210 981,947 1,060,503 2,645,395 2,857,027 3,065,589 1,348,222 1,456.090 1,572,566 199,305 215,249 232,459 322,257 348,038 375,881 159,470 172,22 8 180, 006 443,232 478,691 556,086 2,092,000 2,211,000 2,340,000 2.843,990 623,934 • $ 15 089,114 $ 35,600,304 $ 37,510,597 5,251,910 5,315,245 5,355,007 63,335 49,762 (1,349,246) 5,251,910 5,315,245 5,365,007 4,015,701 (500,000) 000,000) (500,000) (500,000) (500.000) (500,000) (500,000) (500,0001 (500,000) (500000) (300,000) (300,000) (300,0001 (300,000) 4300.000) (500,000) 1500,000) (500,0001 (500,000) (500,000) 3,403,502 3,451,910 3,515,.245 3,665,007 2,215,701 3,335,934 3,403,592 3,451,910 3,515,245 3,565,007 3,615,135 City of Spokane Valley Street Fund Analysis - Utility Tax 6% 9/20/2004 Street Fund Expenditures Ending Fund Balance 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Street Fund Beginning Fund Balance 2,511,785 2,452,944 5,783,999 7,110,988 6,366,009 3,217,850 Transfer from General Fund 2,542,802 6,236,829 4,561,226 2,843,996 823,934 - Motor Fuel Tax 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 1,200,000 6,254,587 9,889,773 11,545,225 11,154,984 8,389,943 4,417,850 3,801,643 4,105,774 4,434,236 4,788,975 5,172,093 5,585,861 2,452,944 5,783,999 7,110,988 6,366,009 3,217,850 (1,168,011) Spokane Valley Planning Commission Minutes Council Chambers — City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave. August 26, 2004 1. CALL TO ORDER Planning Commission Chair Gothmarw called the meeting to order at 6:40 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Commission, audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.. iII. ROLL CALL Fred Beaulac — Present Bob Blum — Excused Absent David Crosby — Excused Absent Gail Kogle — Present VI. PUBLIC COMMENT 13i11 Gothmann — Present Ian Robertson — Present John U. Carroll — Present IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner .Robertson moved that the August 26, 2004 meeting agenda he approved as presented. Commissioner Beaulac seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Commissioner Robertson and seconded by Commissioner Kogle that the minutes of the August 12, 2004 meeting be approved as written. Motion passed unanimously. Richard Harmon, 17610 E. Mission, Spokane Valley. WA Mr. Hannon asked for clarification of the Greenacres Area Rezone request, which has recently been proposed to change his neighborhood from UR -3.5 and UR. -7* zoning to UR -3.5 zoning exclusively. He has seen a Notice of Hearing before the Hearing Examiner for a rezone application on Flora & Mission. This application proposes to change the zoning of a parcel of land across the street from his neighborhood to UR -7* exclusively, and he wished to understand how these things work. Mr. Greg McCormick, Planning Division Manager, explained that the rezone request on Flora & Mission is a "site specific" rezone and is handled internally by planning staff. The Planning Commission deals only with "areawide" rezone requests. It was suggested that Mr. Harmon make an appointment with Mr. McCormick to discuss this issue in greater detail. V11. COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Beaulac reported that the Interim UR -1 Zone was adopted by the City Council on August 24` He also wanted to publicly thank the Council for their individual community service and involvement. Commissioner Gothmann mentioned a petition recently submitted by people in the Greenacres area calling for a temporary moratorium against development of densities of more than one house per acre until interim zoning is adopted; and for a zone change that accommodates the recent rights under SR-1. Ms. Sukup explained that the Greenacres Areawide Rezone will have the same effect, and is scheduled for Public Hearing on September 23, 2004. VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Ms. Sukup advised that the City Council approved to cap Building Plans Check Fees at $35,000. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS A. OLD BUSINESS: There was no old business. B. NEW BUSINESS: Public Hearing to Consider an Ordinance Amending Provisions in Spokane Valley Ordinance Nos. 03 -053 and 03-083 Relating to "Clear View Triangles" The Public Hearing was opened at 6:55 p.m. Ms. Sukup presented an overview of the purpose, background, and specifics related to the proposed amendments. Staff reconunnended approval of the following: • Establishment of Section 7.06 of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code; • Amendment of City Ordinance No. 03 -083 to reference Section 7.06 of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code; and • Deletion of provisions in the Interim Zoning Regulation Section 14.810.020 Fences which conflict with the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code and the International Building Codes. Commissioners asked Ms. Sukup questions regarding the size of sign poles in relation to tree size regulations, public /private responsibility for removing weeds and debris, placement of electric fences inside of regular fences, and a regulation for the height of barbed wire fences. Public Testimony for Clear View Triangles was opened at 7:17 p.m. 2 Mr. Gary Schimmels, 3915 N. Joel Road, Spokane Valley, WA Mr. Schirnmels submitted a photograph from the corner of Driftwood and Woodruff, where a recent scooter accident occurred. He challenged the Commissioners to find the stop sign in the photograph, and urged them to approve the recommended amendments. Richard Harmon, 1.7610 E. Mission, Spokane Valley, WA Mr. 1-Iarmon spoke to the problems which might occur to a Clear View Triangle if citizens build their fences before there are curbs on their streets. He also mentioned the problem with shrubs on street corners. There being no further comments, the Public Testimony portion of the hearing was closed at 7:20 p.m. Ms. Sukup explained to Mr. Harmon that fences are not supposed to be built on the public right -of -way, but rather on private property. Therefore, addition of curbs to a public street should not affect visibility around an existing fence. She stated that shrubbery is always a seasonal issue, and it is the responsibility of citizens to keep their shrubs trimmed down. Commissioner Kogle moved that the Planning Commission recommend Council adoption of the staff recommendations for Clear View Triangle regulations, with inclusion of an amendment to prohibit use of barbed wire on fences under six feel tall, and an allowance for electric fencing to be placed inside an existing fence structure if a proper buffer is provided between the two fences. Commissioner Robertson seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Ms. Sukup will work on the best language for the requested amendments before the issue is presented to City Council. The Clear View Triangle Public Hearing was ended at 7:35 p.m. Public Hearing: Street Vacation Request STV -03 -04 The Public. Hearing was opened at 7:36 p.m. Street Vacation Request (STV- 03 -04) is being made for the remainder of David Road located between Sprague Avenue and Appleway, west of Thierman Road. Chris Linc Properties, L.L.C., 2320 N. Atlantic Street, Spokane WA, is the owner of abutting Parcel No. 35242.0102. Spokane Utilities has noted that the parcel is located over an existing sewer line which will require establishment of an easement. Spokane County Engineering has also indicated that the parcel for which vacation has been requested may remain within the jurisdiction of WSDOT, precluding any vacation at this time. WSDOT has been contacted concerning their interests in this property. A copy of Mr. Richard Birr's email response, dated 8/20/04, was handed out to all Commissioners and will become a part of the permanent record. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission defer any decision concerning the proposed vacation request pending the reservation of a sewer easement and confirmation of the City's authority, if any, to vacate the right -of -way. Public Testimony for STV -03 -04 was opened at 7:38 p.m. Richard Harmon, 17610 E. Mission, Spokane Valley, WA Mr. Harmon asked the Planning Commission if turning Sprague back into a two-way again was an option for the Valley's future. If so, the City will need that section of David Road. There being no further comments, the Public Testimony portion of the hearing was closed at 7:42 p.m. It was moved by Commissioner Robertson, and seconded by Commissioner Gothmann that staff recommendations he heeded in the matter of STV- 03 -04. The request will he tabled indefinitely, pending reservation of a sewer easement and confirmation of the City's authority to vacate right -of -way. Motion passed unanimously. Public Hearing on STV -03 -04 was ended at 7:43 p.m. Public Hearing: Street Vacation Request STV -04 -04 Public hearing on STV -04 -04 was opened at 7:44 p.m. The applicant, McCollum Ford Sales, Inc., 8200 E. Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA, is the owner of adjacent Parcel Nos. 45192.0101 and 45 192.0102. They are requesting vacation of a twenty -foot alley on Lewis Road, located east of First Avenue in between its parcels. Property to the east is fully developed. The alley is unimproved, but appears to have power lines in place. Modern Electric Water Company has been contacted. The City has no objection to vacation of the alley, but power easements may need to be reserved. Staff recommended that the street vacation request be submitted to City Council, subject to reserving necessary private utility easements. There was no public testimony on STV- 04 -04. Commissioner Carroll moved that the Planning Commission recommend Street Vacation Request No. STV -04 -04 to City Council for approval, subject to reservation of necessary private utility easements. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Beaulac. Motion passed unanimously. Public Hearing on STV -04 -04 was ended at 7:45 p.m. The Commissioners took a break from 7:45 p.m. to 7:54 p.m. Briefing on Comprehensive Plan Chapter 2 — Land Use. Element Mr. McCormick presented an overview of the City of Spokane Valley's Land Use Element. lnforniation for this chapter was compiled from a vast number of resources, including the Washington State Growth Management Act, Countywide Practices and Policies, transit studies, and information obtained from Valley Citizen surveys. In drafting the plan, staff used three land use alternatives: "Modified Existing Conditions ", "Urban Activity Centers ", and "City Center Emphasis ". Long Range Planning Staff has been working with the Steering Committee of Elected Officials to determine population projections for the City of Spokane Valley. There will be a public hearing regarding population allocations for the City of Spokane Valley and the City of Liberty Lake on September 30, 2004. The results of this hearing will provide staff with a number that can be used for Comprehensive Plan development purposes. An environmental impact statement is also required. Staff members were praised for their good work on this element. Conunissioner Gothmann provided a number of comments and suggestions for improvement of the chapter. Commissioner Beaulac asked i\4r. McCormick if a cost analysis could be applied to each of the land use alternatives. Mr. McCormick responded that the City will be in a better position to evaluate money when a direction has been determined. Other issues of Commission concern were: a process for design review and sewer system development. X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER Commissioner Robertson reminded staff of his willingness to become more involved with neighborhood groups during the Comp Plan development process. He plans to work with the Weed and Seed program as well. Commissioner Carroll addressed a grave concern about individual members of the Planning Commission sharing their personal opinions aloud during a public hearing before hearing from the public or allowing the entire Commission to thoroughly discuss the matter first. 5 DTI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:58 p.m. SUBMITTED: APPROVED: Debi Alley, Administrative Assistant William H. Gothrnann, Chairman 6