The URL can be used to link to this page

2016, 12-20 Study SessionAGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION FORMAT (with some action items) Tuesday, December 20, 2016 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11707 East Sprague Avenue, First Floor (Please Silence Your Cell Phones During the Meeting) 6:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL ACTION ITEMS: 1. CONSENT AGENDA: consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion: I move to approve the Consent Agenda. a. Approval of claim vouchers on Dec 20, 2016 Request for Council Action Form, Total: $921,219.03 b. Approval of December 6, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Special Meeting c. Approval of December 6, 2016 Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session 2. Motion Consideration: City Sponsorship of 2017 Food Event — John Hohman [public comment] 3. Motion Consideration: Spokane Valley Arts Council Sculpture — John Hohman [public comment] 4. Motion Consideration: Amended Legislative Agenda — Mark Calhoun [public comment] DISCUSSION LEADER SUBJECT/ACTIVITY GOAL NON -ACTION ITEMS: 5. John Hohman, Mark Goodman, CAI Tourism Study Discussion/Information 6. Mark Werner Property Crimes Discussion/Information 7. Mike Stone Appleway Trail Update Discussion/Information 8. Carolbelle Branch Social Media Discussion/Information 9. Eric Guth, Steve Worley Consultant Agreement: Design Discussion /Information Barker Rd. BNSF Separation Project 10. Morgan Koudelka False Alarms Discussion/Information 11. Mark Calhoun Library Ad Hoc Committee Discussion/Information 12. Mayor Higgins Advance Agenda Discussion/Information 13. Information Only (will not be reported or discussed): Department Reports 14. Mayor Higgins Council Check in Discussion/Information Study Session Agenda, December 20, 2016 Page 1 of 2 15. Mark Calhoun City Manager Comments Discussion/Information 16. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Potential Litigation [RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)] ADJOURN Study Session Agenda, December 20, 2016 Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 20, 2016 Department Director Approval: El Check all that apply: ►t consent ❑ old business ❑ new business El public hearing AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers: VOUCHER LIST VOUCHER NUMBERS 12/07/2016 5706; 5715-5717; 5719; 5726; 39993, 39994 12/08/2016 39995-40035; 1173228 12/09/2016 40036-40057 12/12/2016 40058 12/12/2016 6982-6987 TOTAL AMOUNT $306,132.19 $503,055.90 $103,603.39 $7,799.55 $628.00 GRAND TOTAL: $921,219.03 Explanation of Fund Numbers found on Voucher Lists #001- General Find Other Funds 001.011.000.511. City Council 101 — Street Fund 001.013.000.513. City Manager 103 — Paths & Trails 001.013.015.515. Legal 105 — Hotel/Motel Tax 001.016.000. Public Safety 106 — Solid Waste 001.018.013.513. Deputy City Manager 120 - CenterPlace Operating Reserve 001.018.014.514. Finance 121— Service Level Stabilization Reserve 001.018.016.518. Human Resources 122 -- Winter Weather Reserve 001.032.000. Public Works 123 — Civil Facilities Replacement 001.058.050.558. CED - Administration 204 — Debt Service 001,058.051.558. CED — Economic Development 301 —REET 1 Capital Projects 001.058.055.558. CED — Development Services -Engineering 302 - REET 2 Capital Projects 001.058.056.558. CED -- Development Services -Planning 303 -- Street Capital Projects 001.058.057.558 CED — Building 309 — Parks Capital Grants 001.076.000.576. Parks & Rec—Administration 310 — Civic Bldg Capital Projects 001.076.300.576. Parks & Rec-Maintenance 311 — Pavement Preservation 001.076.301.571. Parks & Rec-Recreation 312 — Capital Reserve 001,076.302.576. Parks & Rec- Aquatics 314 -- Railroad Grade Separation Projects 001.076.304.575. Parks & Rec- Senior Center 402 — Stormwater Management 001.076.305.571. Parks & Rec-CenterPlace 403 --Aquifer Protection Area 001.090.000.511. General Gov't- Council related 501 — Equipment Rental & Replacement 001.090.000.514. General Gov't -Finance related 502 -- Risk Management 001.090.000.517. General Gov't -Employee supply 001.090.000.518. General Gov't- Centralized Services 001.090.000.519. General Gov't -Other Services 001.090.000.540. General Gov't -Transportation 001.090.000.550. General Gov't -Natural & Economic 001.090.000.560. General Gov't -Social Services 001.090.000.594. General Gov't -Capital Outlay 001.090.000.595. General Gov't -Pavement Preservation RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve attached list of claim vouchers. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: Voucher Lists vchiist Voucher List Page: 1 12107/2016 2:25:52PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 5706 12/5/2016 000165 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS Ben70635 303,231.15.00 PERS: PAYMENT 93,399.74 Total : 93,399.74 5715 12/5/2016 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A PLAN Ben70637 001.231.14.00 401A: PAYMENT 29,814,34 Total : 29,814.34 5716 12/5/2016 000682 EFTPS Ben70639 001.231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES: PAYMENT 35,352.43 Total : 35,352.43 5717 12/5/2016 000145 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS, 457 PLf Ben70641 001.231.18.00 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION: PAYI 6,376.27 Total: 6,376.27 5719 12/5/2016 000162 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A EXEC PI Ben70643 001.231.14.00 401 EXEC PLAN: PAYMENT 637.50 Total : 637.50 5726 12/5/2016 000682 EFTPS Ben70647 001,231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES: PAYMENT 993.99 Total : 993.99 39993 12/5/2016 000120 AWC 39994 12/5/2016 D00699 WA COUNCIL CO/CITY EMPLOYEES Ben70631 309.231.16.00 HEALTH PLANS: PAYMENT 124,767.46 Ben70645 001.231.16.00 HEALTH PLANS (COUNCIL): PAYMENT 12,276.66 Total : 137,044.12 Ben70633 001.23121.00 UNION DUES: PAYMENT 2,513.80 Total : 2,513.80 8 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 306,132.19 8 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 306,132.19 Page: 1 vchlist 1210812016 2:01:06PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 39995 12/8/2016 005424 ANDERSON COLLISION 39996 12/8/2016 000673 BUDGETARBOR & LOGGING LLC 39997 12/8/2016 000101 CDW-G 39998 12/8/2016 000322 CENTURYLINK 39999 12/8/2016 004437 COMMUNITYATTRIBUTES INC 40000 12/8/2016 000508 CONOCOPHILLIPS FLEET 40001 12/8/2016 001880 CROWN WEST REALTY LLC 40002 12/8/2016 003255 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS 40003 12/8/2016 002604 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 40004 12/8/2016 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 40005 12/8/2016 000999 EASTERN WAATTORNEY SVC INC 4182687 11-3237 FGS1766 FH P8017 FHW9691 FQZ4011 GBP9717 NOVEMBER 2016 1867 47799679 NOVEMBER 2016 585322 78781680 RE-313-ATB61114041 RE-313-ATB61114052 103952 Fund/Dept 402.402.000.531 101.042.000.542 001.090.000.518 001.090.000.518 001.090.000.518 001.090.000.518 001.090.000.518 001.076.000.576 105.000.000.557 001.058.057.558 101.042.000.543 Description/Account Amount REPAIR FOR #400 2011 FORD F25C Total : 813.15 813.15 BUDGET ARBOR - REMOVE 2 TREE 3,913.20 Total : 3,913.20 COMPUTER HARDWARE NON -CAF CREDIT RE INVOICE FDN7353 COLI CREDIT RE INVOICE FBD4699 NET COMPUTER HARDWARE NON -CAF IPAD REFRESH Total : 2016 PHONE SVCS: ACCT 509 -Z14 - Total : SPOKANE VALLEY TOURISM ANAL: Total : NOVEMBER 2016 FLEET FUEL BIL Total COMMON AREA CHARGES FORM) Total : 101.042.000.543 TOWER RENTAL 001.090.000.548 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 001.013.015.515 Total : COMPUTER LEASE: 001-8922117-0 Total : REIMBURSE TRAFFIC SVCS MAIN REIMBURSE ROADWAY MAINTENP Total : 308.10 -464.21 -1,100.10 958.81 2,571.02 2,273.62 529.87 529.87 19,927.50 19,927.50 1,557.31 1,557.31 155.10 155.10 208.13 208.13 862.13 862.13 6,303.41 13,089.55 19,392.96 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 85.00 Page: /f/ vch l ist 12/08/2016 2:01:06PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: -3 —2 - Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 40005 12/8/2016 000999 000999 EASTERN WAATTORNEY SVC INC (Continued) Total : 85.00 40006 12/8/2016 003274 EXCHANGE PUBLISHING LLC 434077 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 36.00 434078 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 75.05 434079 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 40,50 434080 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 12.64 434081 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 30.02 Total : 194.21 40007 12/8/2016 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 46586 001.058.056.558 LEGAL PUBLICATION 161.60 46591 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 27.20 Total : 188.80 40008 12/8/2016 002992 FREEDOM TRUCK CENTERS PC001348521:01 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 29.35 PC001352385:01 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 6.65 Total : 36.00 40009 12/8/2016 001253 GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL Nov16 1042 001.011.000.511 GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 4,146.03 Total : 4,146.03 40010 12/8/2016 000007 GRAINGER 9281349226 101.043.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 344.71 Total : 344.71 40011 12/8/2016 002568 GRAN1CUS INC 81937 001.011,000.511 MAINTENANCE FOR DECEMBER 21 777.16 Total : 777.16 40012 12/8/2016 003297 HIGGINS, LEWIS ROD EXPENSES 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 121.10 Total : 121.10 40013 12/8/2016 001728 HP FINANCIAL SERVICES CO 600511021 001.090.000.548 SCHEDULE 572E3651 830.28 600512731 001.090.000.548 SCHEDULE 572DD016 745.84 Total : 1,576.12 40014 12/8/2016 005425 IDAX 16326 101.042.000.542 TRAFFIC - TURNING MOVEMENTS 19,760.00 Total : 19,760.00 40015 12/8/2016 005373 INDUSTRIAL SUPPORT SERVICE LLC 2741 101.000.000.542 SERVICE PUMP 3,670.58 Page: vch list 12/08/2016 2:01:06PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: a� Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40015 12/8/2016 005373 005373 INDUSTRIAL SUPPORT SERVICE LL (Continued) 40016 12/8/2016 004632 LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS 48861152 40017 12/8/2016 003190 LUKINS & ANNIS P.S 40018 12/8/2016 005426 NACLEN PRODUCTS LLC 40019 12/8/2016 000662 NAT'L BARRICADE & SIGN CO 40020 12/8/2016 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 357849 114897 Fund/Dept 001.090.000.518 001.013.015.515 101.000.000.542 Description/Account Amount TELECOM SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS 93591 001.032.000.543 SUPPLIES: PW 93620 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: STREET 2006478308 2010395915 875007387001 876097381001 876099177001 876399041001 876745879001 879591919001 880065025001 880065126001 880066177001 881426312001 881426312002 881693300001 883414671001 883549005001 40021 12/8/2016 000058 OMA A500163 40022 12/8/2016 002193 QSCEND TECHNOLOGES INC 8076 001.013.000.513 001.013.000.513 001.032.000.543 001.032.000.543 001.032.000,543 001.032.000.543 001.032.000.543 001.032.000,543 001.032.000.543 001.032.000.543 001.032.000.543 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.090.000.518 001.018.016.518 001.018.014.514 001.018.016.518 001.143.70.00 Total : 3,670.58 Total : 1,159.37 Total : 560.00 Total : 74.57 Total : 1,159.37 OFFICE SUPPLIES: CITY MGR OFFICE SUPPLIES: CITY MGR OFFICE SUPPLIES: PUBLIC WORK OFFICE SUPPLIES: PUBLIC WORK OFFICE SUPPLIES: PUBLIC WORK OFFICE SUPPLIES: PUBLIC WORK OFFICE SUPPLIES: PUBLIC WORK OFFICE SUPPLIES: PUBLIC WORK OFFICE SUPPLIES: PUBLIC WORK OFFICE SUPPLIES: PUBLIC WORK OFFICE SUPPLIES: PUBLIC WORK OFFICE SUPPLIES: CENTERPLACE OFFICE SUPPLIES: CENTERPLACE OFFICE SUPPLIES: IT OFFICE SUPPLIES: HR OFFICE SUPPLIES: FINANCE Tota! : NEW HIRE PHYSICALS FOR NOVE Total : 560.00 74.57 48.92 75.51 124.43 26.07 39.12 39.46 80.69 14.65 59.34 -39.46 75.70 8.61 33.03 8.14 102.04 8.89 39.99 29.35 51.35 576.97 155.00 155.00 SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE & SUP 9,391.48 Page: -S� vch I ist 12/08/2016 2:01:06PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40022 12/8/2016 002193 002193 QSCEND TECHNOLOGES INC 40023 12/8/2016 000675 RAMAX PRINTING & AWARDS INC 28857 40024 40025 40026 12/8/2016 002616 12/8/2016 000031 12/8/2016 002520 ROADWISE INC ROYAL BUSENESS SYSTEMS RWC GROUP 40027 12/8/2016 002835 SCS DELIVERY INC 40028 12/8/2016 005168 SOFTWAREONE INC 40029 12/8/2016 000230 SPOKANE CO AUDITORS OFFICE 40030 12/8/2016 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 40031 12/8/2016 005398 TERADEK LLC 40032 12/8/2016 000335 TIRE-RAMA (Continued) crdlock 236 1N52840 12954 41021N 9293 US -PSI -527139 US -PSI -536703 NOVEMBER 2016 42000330 51503564 934001844 68542 8080046500 8080047061 8080047064 8080047125 Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 001.032.000.543 NAME PLATE 101.000.000.542 ICE MELT 001.058.057.558 501.000.000.594 101.000.000.542 001.011.000.511 001.090.000.518 001.090.000.518 001.013.015.515 001.016.000.554 402.402.000.531 001.016.099.594 107.000.000.594 101.042.000.542 001.058.057.558 001.058.057.558 001.076.000.576 Total Total : Total : NOVEMBER 2016 COPIER COSTS Total : SNOWPLOW - CAB & CHASSIS SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOW #203 Total : PACKAGE DELIVERY FOR COUNC1 Total : WINDOWS REMOTE DESKTOP SEI MS OFFICE 2016 STANDARD LICEI, Total : RECORDING FEES Total : ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICE DECE OCTOBER 2016 WORK CREW INV( Q3-16 CAD/RMS Total : ENCODER AND DECODER FOR LI\ Total : OIL CHANGE 2016 F-250 #217 6105 TIRES FOR 2013 ESCAPE #007 53E OIL CHANGE 2014 ESCAPE #009 5 SNOW TIRE CHANGEOVER 2004 F 9,391.48 16.85 16.85 840.70 840.70 1,038.93 1,038.93 118,512.60 67.23 118, 579.83 100.00 100.00 2,324.28 9,912.11 12,236.39 898.00 898.00 20, 517.41 6,077.30 39,706.11 66,300.82 5,008.00 5,008.00 44.08 723.38 36.36 76.09 Page: vchlist 12/08/2016 2:01:06PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: T .._.5 -- Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 40032 12/8/2016 000335 000335 TIRE-RAMA 40033 12/8/2016 000014 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC. (Continued) 045-175031 Total : 001.143.70.00 EDEN SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE Total : 40034 12/8/2016 000087 VERIZON WIRELESS 9775554498 001.032.000.543 NOVEMBER 2016 VERIZON CELL F 9775678210 001.090.000.518 WIRELESS DATA CARDS Total : 879.91 47,397.91 47, 397.91 2,462.88 158.73 2,621.61 40035 12/8/2016 000964 VOLT MANAGEMENT CORP 34532170 001.090.000.518 HELP DESK TEMP 930.00 Total : 930.00 1173228 12/5/2016 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER NOVEMBER 2016 001.016.000.512 SPOKANE COUNTY SERVICES 153,632.45 Total : 153,632.45 42 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 503,055.90 42 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 503,055.90 vchlist 12/09/2016 11:03:10AM Voucher List Spokane Valley r Page: '1— Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40036 12/9/2016 000394 AM LANDSHAPER INC 40037 12/9/2016 003076 AMSDEN, ERICA 40038 12/9/2016 001862 BISCHOFF, PATTY 40039 12/9/2016 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 40040 12/9/2016 005212 BRIGHT IDEA SHOPS LLC 40041 12/9/2016 000572 CARTER, CAROL 40042 12/9/2016 001169 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 40043 12/9/2016 003624 DEHN, SHELLY 40044 12/9/2016 000246 EAST SPOKANE WATER DIST #1 40045 12/9/2016 004813 FIRST CHOICE COFFEE SERVICES 40046 12/9/2016 000070 INLAND POWER & LIGHT CO 40047 12/9/2016 001635 ISS FACILITY EVENT SERVICES Pay App 1 Update Expenses Expenses 9805745 9807793 80151305 80151821 33610B Expenses Nov 2016 Expenses November 2016 157244 2301 1117592 Fund/Dept 309.223.40.00 001.032.000.543 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 309.000.244.594 001.076.305.575 001.058.056.558 001.018.016.518 402.402.000.531 001.076.305.575 101.042.000.542 001.076.305.575 Description/Account Amount DISCOVERY PLAYGROUND SHADE Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C Total : COSV PARK SIGNS Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : PETTY CASH: 14807,08,09,10,11,12 Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : WATER CHARGES: NOV 2016 Total : COFFEE SUPPLIES AT CENTERPU Total : UTILITIES: NOV 2016 Total : 710.00 710.00 19.44 19.44 195.44 195.44 99.05 47.10 159.69 314.89 620.73 6,739.30 6,739.30 57.80 57.80 24.11 24.11 15.93 15.93 483.51 483.51 116.59 116.59 454.27 454.27 EVENT SVCS FOR CENTERPLACE 84.28 Page: vchlist 12/09/2016 11:03:10AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 40047 12/9/2016 001635 001635 ISS FACILITY EVENT SERVICES (Continued) 40048 12/9/2016 000252 LOWE'S BUSINESS ACCOUNT Nov 2016 40049 12/9/2016 000193 NORTHWEST CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC 3RD QTR 2016 CAM 40050 12/9/2016 001084 PARCH, JENNIFER 40051 12/9/2016 000709 SENSKE LAWN & TREE CARE INC. 40052 12/9/2016 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST #3 Expenses 6965002 7004481 7004486 7612516 1441 Nov 2016 40053 12/9/2016 001083 STANDARD PLBG HEATING CONTROLS 55090 40054 12/9/2016 002306 TERRELL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, MIC 2797 40055 12/9/2016 000167 VERA WATER & POWER 40056 12/9/2016 000964 VOLT MANAGEMENT CORP 40057 12/9/2016 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE Nov 2016 34504630 0375468-2681-1 0375469-2681-9 0375470-2681-7 Fund/Dept 001.076.305.575 001.090.000.518 001.076.301.571 402.402.000.531 402.402.000.531 001.076.300.576 001.016.000.521 001.076,300.576 402.402.000.531 001.016.000.521 001.076,300.594 101.042,000.542 Description/Account Amount Total : OPERATING SUPPLIES: PARKS/PI/I Total : 3RD QTR 2016 CAM CHARGES FOf Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 2016 ROADSIDE LANDSCAPING SE 895 CONTRACT MAINTENANCE CONTRACT MAINT: PARKS NOV 20 MONTHLY SVCS AT PRECINCT - NC Total : CONNECTION FEE AND 1NSTALLA7 WATER CHARGES FOR NOV 2016 Total : WORK ORDER 28526: PRECINCT Total : BROWNS PARK WATER SERVICE [ Total : UTILITIES: NOV 2016 MASTER BILL Total : 001.090.000.518 HELP DESK TEMP 402.402.000.531 001.076.305.575 001.016.000.521 Total : WASTE MGMT: MAINT SHOP NOV ; WASTE MGMT: CENTERPLACE WASTE MGMT: PRECINCT Total : 84.28 123.34 123.34 670.45 670.45 64.24 64.24 6,430.89 530.46 58,934.26 135.82 66, 031.43 18,000.00 335.59 18, 335.59 256.53 256.53 2,785.25 2,785.25 3,874.06 3,874.06 744.00 744.00 173.27 740.74 283,09 1,197.10 Page: vchlist 12109/2016 11: 03:10AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 22 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 103,603.39 22 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 said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Total vouchers : 103,603.39 Page: vchlist 12/12/2016 8:45:36AM Voucher List Page: Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice FundlDept Description/Account Amount 40058 12/12/2016 004849 US POSTMASTER Dec 9, 2016 001.018.013.513 POSTAGE FOR HOT TOPIC WINTEI 7,799.55 Total : 7,799.55 1 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 7,799.55 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 tabor 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 said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Total vouchers : 7,799.55 Page: vchlist 12/12/2016 11: 05:15AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: y,-1----- Bank /C'1'---- Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 6982 12/12/2016 005427 ADVOCARE INC 6983 12/12/2016 005428 FLORIANOVICH, VICTORIA 6984 12/12/2016 004835 NEXT IT CORP 6985 12/12/2016 005429 NIKKEN MAGNETIC LEADERS LLC 6986 12/12/2016 005430 ROBERTSON, MELISSA 6987 12/12/2016 005431 SPOKANE COUNTY RACEWAY 6 Vouchers for bank code : pk-ref 6 Vouchers in this report PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: LG MEETING R Total : 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: FIRESIDE LOUI Total: 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: MEETING ROO Total: 001237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: AUDITORIUM Total: 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: ROOM 111 Total : 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM/, Total : Bank total : 52.00 52.00 210.00 210.00 52.00 52.00 52.00 52.00 52.00 52.00 210.00 210.00 628.00 Total vouchers : 628.00 Page: DRAFT MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING Spokane Valley Tech School 115 S University Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 December 6, 2016 7:30 a.m. Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Rod Higgins, Mayor Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Pam Haley, Councilmember Mike Munch, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Sam Wood, Councilmember ABSENT: Caleb Collier, Councilmember Mark Calhoun, City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Eric Guth, Public Works Director Mike Stone, Parks & Rec Director John Hohman, Comm & Eco. Dev Director Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Steve Worley, Capital Imp. Program Mgr. Greg Bingaman, IT Specialist Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 7:30 a.m. and asked that the City Clerk note those Councilmembers present. Spokane Valley Chamber President/CEO Ms. Katherine Morgan introduced Mr. Ben Small, Chamber Chairman, who then welcomed everyone to the meeting and to Spokane Valley Tech, which he said is a collaborative effort of four school districts: Central Valley, East Valley, Freeman and West Valley Schools. Mr. Small introduced Mr. Greg Repetti, Executive Committee Chair Elect. Mr. Repetti said that he would be emceeing today's meeting; said the idea today is to get together to discuss revenue sources; that Spokane Valley City Manager Mark Calhoun will give a PowerPoint presentation, then the floor would be opened for free flowing, constructive dialogue. City Manager Calhoun welcomed everyone; and said today he and staff will attempt to condense thirteen years of transportation and infrastructure information into a thirty -minute presentation; and that after the presentation, there would be an opportunity for question and answer. Mr. Calhoun went through the PowerPoint explaining some of the history and proposed need as it relates to deficits in transportation and infrastructure; he mentioned the number of times Council met to discuss the issue; he also explained some of the aspects of pavement preservation, including the City's set aside amount, which he said is a good start but falls short of the estimated $6.8 million need to maintain roads in their current condition; he explained REET (real estate excise tax) purpose and uses, and noted that we estimate our annual unmet revenue need will be $3.2 million Public Works Director Guth explained the process of the pavement preservation program, how the plan was developed, the process and frequency for scanning the streets, what the PCI (pavement condition index) looks like for poor, fair, good and excellent pavements, and showed some charts and graphs to help provide a better understanding of the PCI results; he also explained some of the cost associated with pavement reconstruction, and mentioned PCI and backlog and how they relate to each other; and went over investments, costs, consequences, and related backlog. Finance Director Taylor went over the structure and purpose of the street O&M (operation and maintenance) fund #101, and sited examples of some expenditures associated with that fund, including street maintenance, lighting, traffic operations and maintenance, snow maintenance, and bridge Special Council Meeting: 12/06/2016, Transportation & Infrastructure Page 1 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT maintenance and repairs. Ms. Taylor also talked about the current funding sources in the street O&M Fund including motor vehicle fuel tax of about $2 million, and telephone utility tax of about $2.2 million, and showed a graph depicting the telephone utility tax's declining revenues; she also explained some of the funding challenges with the street O&M fund, such as aging traffic signals. Ms. Taylor stated that the City has identified funding deficits for transportation and infrastructure programs in both the Street Fund and the Pavement Preservation Fund, and noted some major assumptions in defining revenue needs, such as expenditures increasing at an inflation rate of approximately 2% in the street fund, and transfers from the General Fund to the pavement preservation fund. After briefly going over the street fund projection with an alternative revenue source as shown on slide 25, and the pavement preservation fund projection with new revenue source as shown on slide 26, she showed the combined revenue needs for years 2018 through 2021. Ms. Taylor went over some of the revenue options such as a Transportation Benefit District, property tax banked capacity, and utility tax, and also compared the City's projected 6% utility tax with utility taxes of other municipalities, and noted projected utility tax revenue estimates for each utility service, with a 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6% tax. [Councilmember Wood left the meeting at approximately 8:05 a.m.] Mr. Repetti thanked the City staff for their informative presentation to help people understand the need, and he opened the floor for questions. Q: Why have an extra $1.7 million? A: The discussion among the Council Finance Committee was, the extra would be for the City to finance one of the grade separation projects. [Mark Calhoun] Q: Is it 6% total or 6% on each utility, and if on each, then that's well over the 6% that doesn't need to be voted on, but that the whole thing adds up to a 24 or 30% tax. A: it would be 6% on each utility. [Mark Calhoun] Q: I am on retirement and disability, and wonder how much more will be needed to maintain my budget; and there is a large retirement community here. A: An estimate would be about $6 a month more for electrical; and no decisions have been made on this and this is just for discussion purposes. [Chelsie Taylor] A: Council has heard from the community and this issue has been taken off the table for action; Council is going to work in a type of re -start of this discussion in 2017; we need to do a variety of stakeholders' meetings in getting this story out to the public; Council and the community will need to determine whatever PCI will work, and at which level of condition will the streets be maintained and funded, if any; and to discuss how to deliver the highest level of service possible with the existing funds; and include discussion about possibly replacing the phone tax with some reliable source, again, from a Council and community standpoint. [Mark Calhoun] A: A utility bill of $100.00 with a 6% tax equates to $6.00; the tax would be 6% on each and not a total of 24% but rather a 6% on each, which does not equate to a 24% tax; I don't like taxes either but there are times when they are necessary as we don't want streets like Spokane; they work on their roads, but they will never get caught up. [Deputy Mayor Woodard] A: If there are five separate utility bills of $100.00 each, with a 6% tax on each of those, that would be $6.00 for each one, or $500.00 in total bills and a total of $6.00 for each or $30.00 total tax, which equates to 6%, as $30.00 divided by the $500.00 equals 6%. ]Mark Calhoun] Statement: When they talk about projections for the highway, it looks to me like we'd be better off going to a higher number, because you'd spend less money because you'd go to a less number of approval, we'd spend a ton more money; when it talks about increasing the vehicle tax for licensing; if I already pay $100.00, to pay another $20.00, that is 20%; we need clarity and a better explanation; there are discrepancies in the graphs there of where it was presented; you should have presented that this is what we have to do to maximize it, and this is how much money you're going to save, because if we don't, you're going to pay this much more. Special Council Meeting: 12/06/2016, Transportation & Infrastructure Page 2 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT Statement: it shows here that under current funding that you're getting $2 million from the motor vehicle tax, and then the 2 plus 2 for the telephone tax; if you get rid of the telephone tax, you'd want to go to a utility tax, but you're still going to get the $2 million from the motor vehicle tax, so if you want $6.1, you're still getting $2 million, so that means you only need $4.1 million more. [Diana Wilhite] A: It's looking at the street O&M versus the pavement preservation separately, so we can walk you through each of those charts again, we talk about $2.9 million in the street O&M fund, but in 2009 that generated $3 million, so what we're proposing would be to replace and re -set that amount; in 2009, the first year of that telephone tax, our street fund budget was $4.6 million; in 2017, the street budget is $4.7 million, so in that eight years, the street fund rose on average .275% annually, so Council and staff did a good job of controlling those costs. [Mark Calhoun] [Deputy Mayor Woodard left the meeting at approximately 8:35 a.m.] A: In examining slide #25 and looking at the street fund projection, that $2 million for motor vehicle fuel tax is included and is taken into account in coming up with the $2.9 need for the street fund. [Chelsie Taylor] Q: I am a representative on the Transportation Commission for the State, and am also connected with the Spokane Area Good Roads Association, a 108 -year old transportation advocacy organization; those organizations look at long-term use and the Transportation Commission constantly recommends to the state legislature to put more money in maintenance and preservation; most of last year's tax package went to capital construction and very little to maintenance and preservation; starting next year that $2 million gas tax revenue will start declining as cars become more efficient; regarding utility taxes, most cities that charge a utility tax, the tax is used mostly, for their general government operations; by charging a utility tax, you are charging one utility to pay for another; the legislature authorized about twenty years ago, for entities to use the TBD (Transportation Benefit District); there are different methods for charging a tab fee, from $20 to $40, or more, up to 2/l0ths of 1% sales tax; that would be charging the users of the roads for the maintenance of the roads [Joe Tortorelli] Q: You say more money goes over to Olympia; why not pass something that keeps more of the money here? A: Obviously the money is spread throughout the state; we got $867 million to build the north Spokane corridor; which has been sixty years in the process; plus several other projects around here; for those people who have been over on the west side; would you want those kind of problems here? There is a great need for maintenance and preservation on state roads, including the maintenance of bridges. [Joe Tortorelli] Q I think the approach for road preservation is going in the right direction; and the question is, how to get there. Have all the funding sources been explored; and are there combinations of some of those sources? I agree with the previous statement of having those sources funded by those users. A: In discussions with the City's Finance Committee, the TBD and taxing the car tabs is a viable source and even up to $50.00, that would generate about $3.7 million; but the conclusion from those discussions was that those funds fell short of the total need if we wanted to achieve the $6.1 million; with a TBD and a voter -approved increased sales tax of 2/10"15 of 1%; with the current sales tax across the county of $8.7, and that additional sales tax would take it to 8.9%, and the conclusion was that would put Spokane Valley out of step with the sales tax rate across the rest of the County, and would chase businesses into other communities; concerning the idea of property tax banked capacity, that's $555,000; it would be helpful but wouldn't really do it; at this point the City of Spokane Valley has gone for eight consecutive years without imposing the 1% property tax increase authorized by state law and we'd like to stay away from that; there is not a direct correlation between utility taxes and transportation and infrastructure; Mr. Tortorelli is correct Special Council Meeting: 12/06/2016, Transportation & Infrastructure Page 3 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT in that utility taxes are generally tied to government services, but we very responsibly manage our general fund and we don't need the money there; but could use it on the transportation and infrastructure; and again, this will ultimately be a Council and community discussion. [Mark Calhoun] Q: I'd like to know who prepared the survey of the streets; why don't you divide those street preservation funds into maintenance, repair and capital so taxpayers know what they are paying for those services; with the utility tax, when the City was a city of homeowners, the utility tax being proposed might have been of benefit and fair; but now, with the City being a city of renters, it is not a fair tax and shouldn't be enacted; when we had money, a few months ago, I think it was Ed Pace, made a motion to give $270,000 back that we had in grant money, totally incompetent. [Lynn Plaggemeier] A: Regarding the comments related to pavement preservation, we contract with IMS, a consultant for infrastructure management services out of Tempe, Arizona; they do this work across the nation, they collect the data, they have a software program, and they develop the outputs from that program and that goes into this report; then we take the report and do field investigation on top of that report, to set the priorities; regarding the differences between maintenance, repair and capital, it identifies everything from reconstruction which is the most costly, all the way up to just maintenance activity like backfilling; so all these segments are evaluated; and what comes out of that is a score and a recommended rehabilitation for that segment; so that gets put into various pots of money; we have money allocated for maintenance, for pavement preservation, and for reconstruction; we typically try to get grant money for reconstruction, we haven't done a lot of reconstruction projects with our pavement preservation program; we also have a capital program which we use REET money to go after grants; the City has been very aggressive and very successful in getting grants for capital projects, but there are matching dollars that have to go toward those grants; the REET is being depleted by pavement preservation so that leaves us without matching funds for those million dollars in grants. [Eric Guth] Q: Concerning the funds in grants, these are almost the same numbers we had back in the budget retreat; grant money is also people's tax dollars so we are getting our own money back; that $1 million in grant match seems low. [Brenda Grassel] A: We were asked how much money annually could be contributed to pavement preservation related to grants; we have grants that help us with bridges, like the Sullivan Bridge, which is a $12 million project, and roughly 80% of that is paid for by grants; grants typically come from two sources, the federal government and the state government, which is all tax money, but in the federal case, that's tax money across the nation; and the state money is all across the state; so we are a percentage of that. Regarding the $1 million, we were trying to roughly identify how much grant money can be applied to pavement preservation. As Joe Tortorelli mentioned, a lot of state and federal funding is moving toward pavement preservation grants; historically they were not that way and were more related to reconstruction, larger projects, roads and bridges; with the declining federal and state budgets, they have now gone to a pavement preservation perspective. They still fund large projects, like bridges and highway safety projects, but they also have a portion of funding now going toward pavement preservation; so we estimated that $1 million [Eric Guth] A: There were years where we don't have any grants for pavement preservation, so that amount would be zero; and there were other years where we'd have a $1.5 to a $2 million grant for projects, so we are trying to pick a middle ground that would work for any annual estimate. [Chelsie Taylor] Statement: Commenting on Mr. Plaggemeier's comment, I assume you're talking about the $270,000 for the Blake sidewalk project, I guess it was me that made the motion, but we did vote to turn it back, it was federal money. The reason we turned it back was because the people who live in the area along Blake didn't want it; we represent you all. Something to think about on federal money is, if we get a federal grant, it's Special Council Meeting: 12/06/2016, Transportation & Infrastructure Page 4 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT not necessarily your tax dollars coming back to you, `cause what's happening to our national debt, it keeps going up; so a lot of what we get back in tax dollars is funny money, I mean grant money is funny money; it's not really your tax dollars. [Councilmember Pace] Q: Regarding the REET tax, the definition says it is based on the sale of homes? A: That's correct [Mark Calhoun] Q: That's kind of like you know, let the mouse come in to live there, then chase him out after twenty years. What about the idea of, and this was proposed many years ago, start looking at our contractors and people who are buying new houses, new construction, and they start looking at absorbing some of that cost through their access and roads, sewers, septic, power, and gas, because people say they don't want to pay that extra money when they buy that house; it might cost an extra $1,000, but after twenty years if you sell that house, and you live there for forty years for free based on that, you'll get your money back when it sells, and I think those are some things and ways to look at revenues. A: That is something that the City of Spokane Valley has not considered, that it is somewhat unique to the west side of the Cascades and not typically a funding source used east of the Cascades; regarding the real estate excise tax, you have a good point; real estate excise tax very closely tracks with the economy and is one of the standards and can be a predictor of upcoming recessions. For instance, the high point that we received the REET was in 2007 when the City received $2 7 million; but that figure dropped in the recession to about $900,000 over a couple successive years; we are now backup in the neighborhood of $2.2 million; it's very valuable, but is predictably unpredictable. [Mark Calhoun] Statement: I work with a homeless programs, and a lot of decisions in the homeless department are based on utility costs and where people choose to live; and I was thinking about the energy assistance program and people of low income who come to us and a lot of times they can't currently afford to pay their bills; we help about 20,000 people with their utility costs, so they are having to budget already to try to get by and this additional cost could create problems. For the seniors, we see a lot of times that they don't rack up bills they can't pay, they just keep turning down the heat, and ultimately sometimes have to decide to heat or eat; and that I don't know if that's the kind of community that we want; but I don't like driving over potholes either. Q: My question would be on the paving quality; Mr. Guth and I have had conversations before. We have a new way of doing our paving to get a longer life out of it, it's thicker. By using the conditioned index, the 85-100 figure is a perfect road by the picture; it says it is excellent. If that road is excellent, how long of a life span is for that road, right here on Sprague Avenue, before you have to go back into it? [Dan Allison] A: "It depends" is my quick answer. Actually, it depends on the classification of that road's usage on it; how many trucks you have on it, what is the average daily traffic on it; we do a design of the asphalt to accommodate the traffic and it includes an analysis with a percentage of trucks; for example, that road may carry 30% trucks; and we actually do weight load counts, and do lab work on the asphalt and there are areas where DOT (Department of Transportation) has 24-hour trucks and cars to drive around the track just to test the asphalt. All the asphalt that we specify in the city is all WSDOT, DOT -specified asphalt. The asphalt mixes that we put down generally mimic highway interstate asphalts. As far as the comment that asphalt is not as good as it once was, or being putting down like it was once; we've actually improved all the new asphalt specifications; in the old days, there was a rule of thumb based on classification; so if it was a local road, it got three inches of asphalt over six inches of road base; if it was an arterial, it got four or five inches of asphalt on top of eight inches of road base; now we actually do a computation based upon what I just talked about, on the loading and average daily traffic, etc., and put it into an equation that accounts for life of pavement, and the reading on that pavement, and we come up with a specific pavement design for each of our streets. We do that on every one of our projects. Now, that does not necessarily translate into pavement preservation activity, so the top course, that's different, that's putting a Band-Aid, that's Special Council Meeting: 12/06/2016, Transportation & Infrastructure Page 5 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT extending the life of the pavement. As far as your comment about the life of the pavement and when you have to get into it, we are dealing with mother nature and weather, so the sun bleaches out the asphalt and that's when they turn gray; depending on the loading and the mix and other things that happen over time, it's not going to be perfect and every circumstance of pavement won't look the same. We typically like to get into that brand of pavement in five years and do a crack -seal and a seal -coat, and rejuvenate that asphalt. It gets brittle, it gets older and starts to show its wear, and that seal -coat helps rejuvenate that asphalt and put oil back into it. [Eric Guth] Q: My follow up question is this particular picture of road, which is east of Conklin looking west on Sprague, that's scheduled for a re -pave sometime within the next few years, yet it's rated as an excellent road. Why are you going to do that when it is excellent as it is today? [Dan Allison] A: Very good question which I do not have an answer for right now. We do have anomalies occasionally in the program. That's why we review it and go through it. I've got engineers who review this document. We also go out and do field investigations, and many times we change what the report says; this is again a scanning of the road of the top surface of the road, and its put into to a program that evaluates that and comes out with a database of everything we've got out there. So it's a very large scale problem that gets put into a digestible annual budget. You're probably aware of this, this past year we changed two or three projects that were identified in the report and we felt there were roads that were more needy; and there were others on the list too, as an example, could be moved up a year. Your specific example, I'd have to look into it. Q: What I don't see in this whole process, is the funding of the projects. Is it funded with debt or funded with cash flow from our revenue? Mayor Higgins: in the interest of protocol, since we have an open meeting with the Spokane Valley City Council, which was scheduled to end at 9:00 a.m., I don't want the meeting to end but we have to adjourn the meeting, and then can continue on informally after we adjourn the meeting. It was moved by Councilmember Munch, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting officially ended at 8:55 a.m. Informal discussion continued: A: In response to the question regarding our street O&M fund, the $2 9 million of our need, and the pavement preservation the $3.1 million of our need, collectively the $6 1 million, the idea would be that we would cash finance all street O&M and pavement preservation activities if the Council and the community collectively decided it was worth imposing the 6% utility tax, that $7.8 million, the difference between the $6.1 and the $7.8, that additional $1.7 million, that would be money that would serve as debt to make pavement on a bond issue where we'd borrow money for the railroad overpass project, but if we didn't do that, the idea would be to cash finance all activities. Q: My follow-up question would be then you'd be using that debt financing, would you just be committing future funds that could be used for road preservation, and you'd be back here in another five years with an additional tax increase? A: I don't see that. Based on our evaluation, and looking at this over the next five years, in our opinion, we'd continue to finance this well into the future. (A question came from the floor about the individual preferring to keep his costs from going up.) From this point, this is off the table; neither staff nor Council is pushing this forward. What we need to do from a staff level, is for Council and the community to go back to the foundation of this, which is the street report, and make sure everyone understands and is comfortable with the report; and then the discussion is, what level, what pavement condition index, what PCI does the Special Council Meeting: 12/06/2016, Transportation & Infrastructure Page 6 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT Council and the community want and how much are they willing to pay to do that; and at a staff level, we will figure out how to comply with the wishes of the Council. Mr. Repetti thanks Council and staff for the dialogue, and extended thanks to Mr. Small, who also expressed thanks to everyone. It was noted that these discussions will likely continue in the future as needed. The meeting ended at 9:00 a.m. ATTEST: L.R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Special Council Meeting: 12/06/2016, Transportation & Infrastructure Page 7 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT Attendance: Councilmembers MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL MEETING STUDY SESSION Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley, Washington December 6, 2016 Staff Rod Higgins, Mayor Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Caleb Collier, Councilmember Pam Haley, Councilmember Mike Munch, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Sam Wood, Councilmember Mark Calhoun, City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Eric Guth, Public Works Director Steve Worley, Capital Improv. Program Mgr John Hohman, Comm & Eco. Dev. Director Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director Mark Werner, Police Chief Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the amended agenda [adding the executive session]. 1. District Court Presentation — Cary Driskell; Judge Walker, Court Administrator John Witter Mr. Driskell introduced presiding Judge Patti Walker, District Court Administrator John Witter, and other judges in attendance. Mr. Driskell explained that the City receives court services from the Spokane County District Court as set forth in the interlocal agreement, which has been in effect since 2003; said the court services are for hearing cases such as gross misdemeanors, misdemeanors, and traffic infractions; and earlier this year Spokane Valley Senior Administrative Analyst Koudelka provided Council an update on some of the financial aspects of the interlocal, such as cost per case and included some comparative data on what similar jurisdictions pay. Judge Walker thanked Council for the opportunity to be here tonight, and via her PowerPoint, briefly explained what it is the Court does for Spokane Valley and other jurisdictions; she included their vision statement, types of cases and types of hearings; number of court filings for the past three years; how many cases involved interpreters; revenues and payment options; specialty courts such as Veteran's Court, DUI Intensive Supervision Court, and Domestic Violence Court; she explained about alternatives to incarceration pretrial and post -conviction, and went over some of the features of the District Court website. Judge Walker also mentioned innovative projects such as robo-texting, which sends message reminders about appearing in court; Smart Court Forms which can be done on-line; innovative fingerprint program, and the ability for on-line name and case searches. Other projects briefly discussed included traffic ticket options, deferral programs, the Alive @25 Program, and the relicensing program Councilmember Wood asked about restitution, giving his own stolen vehicle as an example, and Judge Walker explained that was likely a felony so would be handled in Superior Court which has different rules; but she explained that restitution could be made a part of probation, or entered as a separate judgment. Councilmember Munch asked if we pay for 20% of judges' salary; and Judge Walker explained that the City of Spokane Valley pays by the case, and does not pay for any judge or staff salary, and she noted the Council Study Session: 12-06-2016 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT information included in the packet, on the bottom of page 3 of 8. Council thanked Judge Walker and Mr. Witter for their informative presentation. 2. Myrtle Point Cleanup — Cary Driskell City Attorney Driskell gave an update on the Myrtle Point clean up, as noted in his Request for Council Action and PowerPoint presentation, including the history of how our City acquired the park, and of the various factors involved in the park's contamination and clean up. Councilmember Pace asked if this cost the City anything, and Mr. Driskell replied mostly in staff time, along with a few thousand dollars over many years in consulting with outside counsel. Councilmember Munch asked if the cap were to leak, would Holcim come clean it up, and Mr. Driskell replied that they would as it would still be their issue. 3. Street Maintenance Contract Renewal — Eric Guth Public Works Director Guth explained the background of the contract renewal for street and stormwater maintenance as noted in his December 6, 2016 Request for Council Action form; he said that this request is for the 2017 renewal, and is the second of four renewal options; said this is a public works contract so by Labor & Industries' standards, prevailing wage is required. Mr. Guth also explained that although the prevailing wage increased this year, we are not requesting an increase in the total contract amount as we plan to adjust the work plan accordingly. Council asked and Mr. Guth agreed that a copy of the contract will be included in next week's Council packet as this comes before Council for a motion approval consideration. Councilmember Pace had some questions about the 2017 street budget, and Mr. Calhoun stated that fund's 2017 budget is $4 million; and Mr. Guth added that the difference between that $4 million and this $1.36 million is landscape, and a small portion of street sweeping. Mr. Calhoun remarked that those figures will be provided in next week's packet material when this comes before Council for a motion. Councilmember Haley asked about the scope of work and Mr. Guth replied that since this is a maintenance contract, there isn't a scope of work; the work contracted for includes such things as shouldering; said it is not like a five-year plan, but rather staff puts together an annual work plan for the contractor. There was Council consensus to bring this forward at next week's meeting for a motion consideration. 4. Street Sweeping Contract Renewal — Eric Guth As noted in his Request for Council Action form, Mr. Guth explained the background of this 2017 option year contract renewal for street sweeping with contractor AAA; and said that this would be the second of four, one-year renewals; and as with the previous item, this also would be a service contract so we are required to pay prevailing wage; said within the contract, it is noted the contractor can ask for an increase, which is then negotiable, and tied to the CPI -U (Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers) of 1.5%, or 3%, whichever is smaller. Also as in the previous contract, although the contract is asking for a 1.5% rate increase, Mr. Guth explained that staff is not requesting an increase in the total contract amount and will adjust the work plan accordingly. Mr. Guth said that AAA Sweeping has provided a good level of service through the 2016 contract year and staff recommends exercising the 2017 renewal option with the 1.5% rate increase. There was brief discussion about how many times they sweep and when, and of the overall sweeping process. There was also some discussion about sweeping debris off the storm drains and Mr. Guth said staff also checks these things when made aware. Other discussion included mention of our C.A.R.E.S. (citizen action request system) program for reporting problems; that the rate increase is negotiable and there was no increase last year, and City Attorney Driskell added that staff can look into some of the details of health care costs, but when we contract for outside services, many factors are included in those contract negotiations, including labor costs, and health, and we are not in a position to drill down to all the individual costs associated with running a business. Discussion moved back to the process of doing the sweeping and Mr. Guth noted that staff watches the weather and the trees, and many times it is a judgment call when to go out and start sweeping and to get it done in a reasonable amount of time before winter; said he doesn't feel doing a sweep just to have the wind pick up the next day is futile or a waste of money; and that staff tries to do their best to get as much done Council Study Session: 12-06-2016 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT as can be done appropriately. Mr. Guth said staff could re-examine the idea of not doing a full sweep, but the Department of Ecology would probably not be happy nor would the stormwater crews; but staff could research that issue. Councilmember Pace asked if we are doing this service to satisfy the Department of Ecology; said that that this is a contract, and this is a symptom of only having one bidder; that when Council holds the workshop this winter, he will push for a process and policy to aggressively go after developing more than one qualified bidder for every contract. Mr. Guth noted that the contract has strong language on how much they can ask for and as mentioned, is tied to the CPI; he also noted the expensive machinery used for this service and that there are not a lot of people who do this privately; but we can discuss these issues further, including the idea of separating out the winter and fall sweep, or trying to split it up so maybe someone could get in the business, maybe a smaller operator. Deputy Mayor Woodard noted that AAA dumps leaves and debris on the south Mission Park property, and Mr. Guth stated that staff monitors that and acknowledges that and also gets calls from neighbors; and he noted that is a parcel the City owns and has over the years used as a staging site for sweeper debris as opposed to the sweeper running back and forth to the shop, and said it saves time and money. Deputy Mayor Woodard asked if the debris is tested for contaminants, and Mr. Guth said he would have to research that. Deputy Mayor Woodard noted that this is a very specialized operation so we may only have a single bidder; he also noted that AAA worked intensively to get last November's wind storm cleaned up and said they did a remarkable job. There was Council consensus to bring this item back next week for a motion consideration. Mayor Higgins called for a recess at 7:34 p.m. He reconvened the meeting at 7:46 p.m. 5. Consultant Agreement, Design Barker Road/BNSF Separation Project — Eric Guth, Steve Worley Mr. Worley explained that a few weeks ago, he shared a lot of information with Council about the contract for the Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation project, and tonight we have the actual scope of work showing what staff has identified for the consultant to do with the available funding. Mr. Worley said that staff issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ), that two proposals were received, and after holding interviews, the selection committee unanimously selected DEA/HDR as the most highly qualified firm for this project. Councilmember Munch asked about the cost associated with staff time, and Mr. Worley said likely in the $47,000 to $50,000 range, or about sixteen hours a week to help manage the project and lead the consultant through the design process. Councilmember Pace asked what percentage design will this get us and Mr. Worley said about 40-50%; Councilmember Pace said that originally about that much money would get us 90%. Mr. Worley agreed and said that was the discussion about three week ago; but upon further researching, there was a lot of information outdated, that the environmental process previously approved the entire Bridging the Valley project, but we needed a project specific NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) document, and over the last twelve years the approval process changed for BNSF as well as the design changes for WSDOT, which all resulted in additional cost to the project. There was talk about the advantage of having shovel ready jobs when applying for grants, and Councilmember Munch asked if we have a number of what it will take to get this 90% ready. Mr. Worley explained that the consultant looked at the whole thing and he cautioned against coming up with a number without having a lot of details; said this scope will give us an idea of how much will be needed, and as we go through this scope of work, he will update the cost estimates which will help in trying to get additional money, and said this puts is in a better position for getting grants; said the goal now is to put in for the next grant application which is due in about a week; and said we would like to say we are under contract and moving forward with the design; he said we were already at the best place we could be, and the best thing now is to get more political help from the Secretary of the Department of Transportation. Concerning the timing on the final design, Mr. Guth said if this were fully funded and shovel ready, we were planning to finish 90% through December of 2017 and maybe in the middle of 2018 finish the design. A question arose about how much of this process is engineering and how much is bureaucratic hoops; and Mr. Worley said he is not sure how to define bureaucratic hoops, but that we have to go through the environmental process and must meet certain design standards with WSDOT, as well as keep to the BNSF regulations. Council Study Session: 12-06-2016 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT Councilmember Pace said there is still much he doesn't understand and would like to wait until all members of Council can say they understand this process. Mayor Higgins agreed this issue is uncertain as we move from 30% design to maybe 50%, and would like more solidarity in the numbers; and said it is unclear if we are at 10% now or not, and whether this money will get us to 50%, and if not, what will get us there; said he is not comfortable with the numbers he is seeing. Mr. Worley said he will try to gather those numbers for next week; that the idea was to try to see if we can get some other grant money to help pay for the final design and the right-of-way and the phases. Councilmember Pace said he is not comfortable having a motion next week on this, and suggested moving that to after the first of the year in order for staff to get another administrative report ready to give Council more clarity. Councilmember Haley said if we were already in the best place we could be for grant funding, then why do this; said she too is uncomfortable as we went to 90% then only 40-50%; said this is a large amount of money and she would like to see figures of just what is needed. Mr. Guth said that the $720,000 was slated for the project in 2009, but we got notice last year about our money as well as others, if not moving forward they would take the money back; so we brought this to Council; said the twelve years lapse in the project has a lot to do with the 90% versus the 50% design ready; said the 50% is what the consultants tell us based on how long it will take to go through the environmental process; or through the WSDOT or BNSF process and regulations; that once it's through that, it's engineering from then on; said a normal project of this size is about $36 million; that until we get through some of this initial project permitting and design, we won't know exactly how long or how much; said our application will be stronger now that the City and the federal earmarked money is put into this, which gets it closer to being shovel ready; but if we don't apply, there is of course, no chance for funding. Councilmember Collier suggested going with the $720,000 and see where it goes; and Mr. Worley said it would not get us through the scope of work. The additional $300,000 allocated for this project was also mentioned and Mr. Calhoun said that yes, Council did allocate that as the thought was, the total $1 million would take us to 90% design; but now $1.2 million wouldn't get us close to that 90% and apparently we would need $1.3 million to get to the 50%; plus we have committed REET (real estate excise tax) funds as a portion of the needed match; plus another $700,000 from the capital reserve fund, so we set aside $2.9 million. Mayor Higgins said with the engineer costs now over $1 million, he sees too many moving parts and would like things a little more solid and thinks we can do more than an educated guess. Councilmember Pace said we have about $3 million plus the $720,000 and have ten years to do that; said it feels like a lot of money to spend to wade through the swamp that was already waded through, and feels we should wait. Councilmember Wood said it has been twelve years now and we have a new set of rules; that if we wait another ten years the rules could change again and there is no guarantee we'd get this grant. Mr. Calhoun said staff is looking to Council on how to proceed. Mayor Higgins said we can afford to wait a couple of weeks to get a better estimate. Mr. Guth said he can get more details and report back to Council. Deputy Mayor Woodard noted we won't get the grant without more design, and said it would help if staff could bring as much information as possible next week, and perhaps compare this to the Sullivan Bridge project process, showing a comparison of what another $1.3 million will get us; said we did Sullivan for about half the value of that overpass. Mr. Calhoun said staff will work to have this for the December 20 meeting. 6. City Hall Update — Eric Guth Mr. Worley and Mr. Guth went through the PowerPoint showing the update on the City Hall project. 7. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins Councilmember Pace mentioned the information item on tonight's agenda of the Sullivan Bridge, and said he would like a future administrative report on that to cover the difference between the planned opening and the final close out, the length of time and final completion, actual cost to plan, the contractor's Council Study Session: 12-06-2016 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT administrative error and resulting affect, and how to prevent anything like that from happening in the future. Mr. Calhoun said staff will work to bring that forward. 8. Information Only Items: The (a) Sullivan Bridge Update; and (b) Bid Information, Appleway Trail, Pines to Evergreen, were for information only and were not reported or discussed. 9. Council Check in — Mayor Higgins Councilmember Pace said Councilmembers won't know how the vote will be on something until the question is called, and that there could be something in the discussion to change one's mind; and that the only way to have a real discussion is to put something on the agenda, like the utility tax. 10. City Manager Comments — Mark Calhoun City Manager Calhoun mentioned that he periodically hears from Council about the number of bids we receive on projects, and that Public Works is working on gathering that information for a three year time period, including how many projects were bid, how many bids were picked up, and the time of year the projects were bid. Mr. Calhoun noted that last Wednesday, November 30, Council and several staff were at CenterPlace for a meeting about the results of the study on the potential sports complex; and at that meeting it was mentioned that our City would be in a better position to voice an opinion after our December 13 meeting where we would hear our consultant's analysis of six projects; and said that item has now been moved to the December 20 meeting. Executive Session: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive session for approximately twenty minutes to discuss potential acquisition of real estate and potential/pending litigation, and that no action will be taken upon return to open session. Council adjourned into executive session at 8:34 p.m. At 9:07 p.m., Mayor Higgins declared Council out of executive session, at which time it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. ATTEST: L.R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Study Session: 12-06-2016 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 20, 2016 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ information ❑ admin. report Department Director Approval: ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: City Sponsorship of Potential 2017 Food Event: NW Savor Spokane Valley GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Not Applicable PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Administrative report December 13, 2016 BACKGROUND: In 2015, the City began a tourism study to develop strategies to increase overnight stays and tourism related spending. The study was conducted by Community Attributes Inc. (CAI) in two phases. In Phase I, CAI developed a tourism enhancement strategy and a list of projects through a series of workshops, interviews and surveys with stakeholders and City Council. In Phase II, CAI is analyzing the potential feasibility and return on investment of six projects. One of the projects being studied is the development of new events and festivals to complement Valleyfest and their Cycle celebration. To gain insight about successful regional events, City staff and CAI contacted several event promoters including Vision Marketing, a company that started and owns the Spokane Golf Show and Spokane Oktoberfest. Through those conversations, the City learned that Vision Marketing is partnering with Adam Hegsted and the Mirabeau Park Hotel to develop a new annual, multi -day food and drink event in the region called NW (northwest) Savor. NW Savor scheduled for June 15-18, 2017 is expected to be similar to Feast Portland and the South Beach Wine & Food Festival in Miami, Florida. Adam Hegsted is an executive chef, the owner of Le Catering Company (CenterPlace caterer) and six successful restaurants in the region and has received national and international cooking awards. NW Savor is ambitioned to be one of a kind event in the region that will showcase renowned chefs from the Pacific Northwest and include different forms of entertainment. When the event becomes established, they estimate that 40 percent of their attendance will be from outside of the area. Vision Marketing and Adam Hegsted are proposing to host NW Savor in CenterPlace if the City will be the title sponsor at a cost of $50,000, which can be in-kind as well. For example, the rental fees for CenterPlace which are estimated to be $22,000 for the proposed four day event could be used toward the cost of the sponsorship. The annual cost will be used to develop a website, marketing materials and offset other event costs and will guarantee that the event is held in the City of Spokane Valley for five years. A copy of the proposal is attached. City staff believes that Northwest Savor has the potential to be a successful event and is in line with the economic development strategies in the Comprehensive Plan and in the tourism studies, and the community's desire for more events in Spokane Valley that foster a sense of community and identity. OPTIONS: Move to approve, move to approve with changes, or take other action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move to approve the sponsorship of the Northwest Savor event in Spokane Valley for the next five years. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Cost of sponsorship of $50,000, which could be partially offset the first year by CenterPlace rental fees of approximately $22,000. and the remaining $28,000 could come from the Economic Development marketing funds. The City's cost in subsequent years could come from Lodging Tax funds. STAFF CONTACT: John Hohman, Community & Economic Development Director ATTACHMENTS: NW Savor Proposal EXHIBIT A — NW Savor Proposal Why Are We Here? City of Spokane Valley ➢ Looking for signature events to hold in the city. o Need promoters to produce new events (very few new great ideas) o Need promoter(s) to move existing events (perceptional issues) o Infrastructure (where) and legal issues (alcohol rules) ➢ Create a brand for the city, where it is and what it will be. ➢ Looking to grow hotel rooms and lodging tax base. NW Savor - the public fool event in the region Why Now? ➢ It fits. ➢ It's real, others are doing it in large cities throughout the country. o Feast Portland www.FeastPortland.com o South Beach Wine & Food Festival Miami www.SOBEfest.com ➢ One must act now or the idea will be captured or located elsewhere regionally. ➢ The City of Spokane Valley can "own" it with title sponsorship and insure the location is in Spokane Valley for five years. Page 1 of 5 Why Us? Vision Marketing ➢ 33 years of marketing and sales experience, the company is 20 years old on 1/1/17. ➢ WSU Food Fair — started it in 1988 ➢ WSU Corporate Tents — started it in 1990 ➢ WSU football attendance growth of 35% in eight years to 29,800. No significant growth since ➢ Spokane Golf & Travel Show, 19'' year 2017 ➢ Ski industry — association work for Ski Idaho, Ski Washington, Ski Montana and currently Ski the NW Rockies ➢ GSL — marketing and radio sales since 1997 ➢ Oktoberfest at the River, 3rd year 2017 ➢ Tourism experience o Visit Spokane marketing committee member and active participant. Eat Good Group ➢ 20 years of food industry experience. ➢ Executive chef for 16 years o Coeur d Alene Casino's 12 million dollar food and beverage program ➢ Eat Good Group 6 restaurants with 5.5 million in sales this year. ➢ Adam Hegstad o Has received national and international awards for his cooking o Was a national semifinalist for James Beard awards best chef NW o Featured at the International Chefs Congress in New York in 2016 o South Beach Food and Wine Festival in 2012 o Brought national attention to Spokane by having his restaurant featured in the Wall Street Journal and LA Times. o Just named to the Board of Directors at Visit Spokane Together You Have ➢ Direct engagement from the owners of their respective businesses. ➢ Tourism engagement. ➢ A commitment to excellence. Page 2 of 5 The Ask $50,000 annually for five years for title sponsorship ➢ Exclusive naming rights. NW Savor presented by the City of Spokane Valley. ➢ Prominently featured throughout NW Savor. ➢ Prominently featured on all festival promotions, advertising, website and earned media. ➢ Hospitality opportunities at all NW Savor events. ➢ Ability to integrate City of Spokane Valley into the event to meet economic development objectives. NW Savor presented by the City of Spokane Valley www.NWSavor.com (secured) Spokane Valley, WA June 15, 16, 17 & 18, 2017 NW Savor is more than a food and drink event. It's a movement that showcases the energy, creativity and enthusiasm that's driving America's food revolution while celebrating the culinary world's most inspiring places: Spokane, Washington and the Pacific Northwest. From spirited one -of -a -kind large-scale events featuring trendsetting chefs from all over the Pacific NW, to intimate hands-on classes, collaborative dinners and panels, NW Savor offers some of the most compelling experiences and original programming in the modern food festival conversation. The NW Savor is proud to support charity Big Table. Big Table exists to see the lives of those working in the restaurant and hospitality industry transformed by building community around shared meals and caring for those who are in crisis, transition, or falling through the cracks. This community and care are open to all in the industry without condition. http://www.big-table.com/ This first year event has a big vision to be the best food festival in the Pacific Northwest. Savor is a series of smaller events all under one umbrella, NW Savor presented by the City of Spokane Valley. The City of Spokane Valley will receive: ➢ Full integration within the event website. ➢ Full integration within over $50,000 of paid media. ➢ Full integration of Spokane Valley within paid public relations campaign for earned media. ➢ Full integration of signage and Spokane Valley branding within the event. Page 3 of 5 Main Events Thursday • Seafood Bash, 6 — 8p (Chefs, breweries, artisans, wineries & distillers) Friday • Grand Tasting Event, 1— 5p (Chefs, Breweries, artisans, wineries & education seminars) • Street Foods Market, 6 — 9p (Chefs, Breweries, distillers & wineries) Saturday • Grand Tasting Event, 1— 5p (Chefs, tastemaker, breweries, artisans, wineries & education seminars) • Fire & Smoke, 6 — 9p (Chefs, artisans, wineries, breweries, distillers) Sunday • Father's Day Brunch, 11— 2 $45 (Chefs, wineries, breweries & distillers) Secondary Events Cocktail Tour/drink, Friday 4 — 7p (bartenders, chefs, distiller & bars) Classes/Education, Friday & Saturday afternoons at Mirabeau Place in classrooms. • Author • Wine • Low Proof Inspired Education Cocktails • Cocktails • Brewing • Plating • Food • Coffee Photography • Food Pairing Partner Events After Parties — party with the Chefs! • Thursday, 9 - ?p (cocktails and chefs) • Friday, 9:30 - ?p (cocktails and chefs) • Saturday, 9:30 - ?p (cocktails and chefs) Presented by Vision Marketing, 509-621-0125, www.NWFoodandWineFestival.com ### ma "9 About Vision Marketing: Vision Marketing started, owns and produces the 19th Annual Spokane Golf Show, the 4th Annual Boise Golf Show and the 3rd Annual Spokane Oktoberfest. In addition Vision Marketing offers a full range of integrated marketing services — from strategic planning, creating funding to execution — for small businesses, non-profit organizations, and trade associations. For more information about Vision Marketing, call 509-621-0125 or visit www.vision-marketing.net. Page 4 of 5 Key demographics from SOBEfest.com Ticket Purchasers came from 47 states and 13 countries ➢ 60% of ticket purchasers came from South Florida's three nearby counties ➢ 40% came from outside the area Ticket Purchaser Demographics ➢ Income o 39,999 or less 3% o 40,000 to 79,999 8% o 80,000 to 119,999 10% o 120,000 to 199,999 9% o 200,000 plus 26% o Did not disclose 38% ➢ Age o 21 —24 3% o 25-34 21% o 35 — 44 29% o 45 — 54 28% o 55 — 64 15% o 65 plus 4% ➢ 57.5% female, 42.5% male http://sobefest.com/about/sponsorship/# is where the event overview is housed. We share this for illustrative purposes as we work towards having the best event in the Pacific Northwest. Page 5 of 5 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 20, 2016 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ information ❑ admin. report Department Director Approval: ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Spokane Valley Arts Council Sculpture GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Not Applicable PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: City Hall Supplemental Design Efforts August 16 and August 23, 2016, Outside Agency Funding Requests September 21, 2016, Outside Agency Funding Allocations, October 25, 2016. Council discussion December 13, 2016. BACKGROUND: On August 16th and 23rd, staff discussed funding a design effort with Architects West concerning the placement of a sculpture entitled The Rise of the Schitsu'Umsh by artist Kevin Kirking. This sculpture would be donated by the Spokane Valley Arts Council (SVAC) and was a part of their request for 2017 Outside Agency Funding. On October 25, 2016, City Council awarded the SVAC $48,601 towards their 2017 request of $99,400. The sculpture could be considered controversial since it depicts the historical conflict between General George Wright's cavalry troops and the Coeur d'Alene tribe in relation to the slaughter of 900 tribal horses near the Washington/Idaho state line. The scope and scale of the anticipated sculpture was determined to be incompatible with the anticipated site plan of the new City Hall building so staff worked with the SVAC and Architects West to investigate sites to place the sculpture throughout the City. Staff also attempted to contact the tribes to coordinate efforts on this project. Several potential sites had been identified but the associated costs of purchasing and improving these properties are significant. Additionally, the SVAC worked with Mr. Kirking to develop a cost estimate for the sculpture which totaled over $200,000. This amount greatly exceeded their available budget. On December 7, 2016, staff was approached by the SVAC with a proposal to purchase and donate an alternative sculpture by artist Jerry McKellar entitled Coup Ponies. This sculpture is also tribal themed but is of a sufficient scale that staff believes is compatible with the City Hall site. The Coup Ponies sculpture fits within the SVAC's available budget and would require greatly reduced improvements for placement within or near the City Hall Plaza. Staff will discuss both sculptures with City Council and will look for consensus to bring this item back for a motion consideration to approve the alternate SVAC proposal. If approved, staff will work with Architects West to develop a concept for the sculpture placement which will be brought back to City Council for further discussion. On December 13, 2016 the City Council had an administrative report to discuss this item. OPTIONS: Move to approve the change in funding allocations , or take other appropriate action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move to reallocate the $48,601 awarded through the Outside Agency process to the Spokane Valley Arts Council from the Rise of the Schitsu'Umsh sculpture, to the Coup Ponies sculpture. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The $48,601 initially allocated for the Schitsu'Umsh sculpture was part of the $150,000 of Outside Agency appropriations included in the 2017 budget. Consequently, the redesignation from one sculpture to another will have no budget impact. STAFF CONTACT: John Hohman, Community & Economic Development Director ATTACHMENTS: Kevin Kirking's The Rise of the Schitsu'Umsh Jerry McKellar's Coup Ponies Copy of August 5, 2016 request for Outside Agency Funding Kevin Ki rki ng's Rise of the Sch itsu' U msh • SPoiLA,YL- ..7L11r CoU Cf14 t:•, okane Valley Arts oitincil "1:3.,Q.;:041.4,1614.:.:: e Spokane Valley, WA 99214 .0'69)':9,74.40.09:-.'. 1 (9),94 `6001 'August 5, 2016 f a,` y::of Spokane Valley AttnSarah Farr, Finance •Department ,Spl11707 E;'agile Ave, Suite 106 - Spokarie Valley, WA' 99206 Dear City; of Spokane Valley Council Members, ` ' ' - ; On behalf of the board. of directors of the Spokane ValleyArts Council, 1 wish to thank the C of Spokane Valtey foronce again giving us the opportunity to apply for an econornic development grant for 2017. ' `• . .ty „ • • ` Since we,formed twelve years ago, the Spokane Valley Arts Council has pursued our goal of bringing art to the citizens in our area. Our mission is to promote, support and enhince the diversity, -quality add accessibility of arts and culture in the Spokane Valley..' •• We are iequesting funding to help us support and continue the following goals: Our fourth bronze, :Great, Spirit :r GO by Ace Powell, is completed and awaiting a place to • be• installed Our fifth bronze will be the largest and most expensive endeavor yet. It is by, local attxstKevinKirking, titled Rise of the.Schitsu'Um h.This.bronze depicts the • historical "conflict between General George'Wright's cavalry troops and the Coeur,• d'Alene -tribe, and the resultant slaughter of 900 tubal horses. ` This magnificent sculpture' • is, being consfiucted for the very first tinie, and Will most certainly become a focal point , for tourism promotion: We continue to support DanceFest and Inland Northwest Dance Association, which put on a•free dance event once a'.year showcasing the talents of dancers of all ages and abilities•: - • • • • This year at Valleyfest we will have an.Artist Corner. This willffeature pi`ofessional artistsand stucreating ating artwork which Will then be for sale 'dining Valleyfest We continue to maintain art exhibits at CenterPlace and the Spokane Valley Main Libiary;-These exhibits include local amateur and professional artists, local area high `seihool strident art, and loaned art from private collections. - _ =• Tyvo years;ago, Spokane Valley Arts Council launched an art scholarship for high school seniors'from'East Valley, West Valley, Central Valley and: University high schools.' We. award four high school seniors $1000 (one from each school), based on their art 2 • s ibniissions,'andal additional $1000 scholarship is awarded the evening of our auction, Schoiarslup; funded by Quarry Tile. The students snbmitt%ng art have the option of sell�rrg their pieces during the evening at Artast:Shotivctrse, The liy,kt Shoit'case just celebrated its' 10th year in.May We sold 55 pieces in our live aiuction, 15 pieces made that evening during the a tist demonstration, and Over a dozen pieces iii the silent auction. Thegrant we ' are request•nig will help with the admirtistratrve`expenses of SVAC, continued • •irtrprovemerits'to our 1,,VO:sitei panting, postage; advertising, insurance and piaduction of our. - bronze 1 • ; r. The followrngis a suriritar-y budget for thesexecluested funds ivhichzepresent 55°l0 of:o rr arinuai`: budget: Insurance • $800.• Artist Showcase $6000 Web Site $1I00 •Pointing and Postage; $4500 Momirnental:Bionze Production $80,000 ,Scholaislups" $4000 • Administrative` Support and Advertising: $30004 • Total:, $99,400,,: Thank yTou for Considering the Spokane Valley Arts Council for a grant :I:Iook forward to' ' addressing the Spokane Valley City Council on September, 20, X01;6. `- • Sincerely, Iain:es H. Harken Director of Art Procurement • CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 20, 2016 Department Director Approval: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Amended 2017 Legislative Agenda GOVERNING LEGISLATION: NA. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council discussed the 2017 Legislative Agenda at meetings held August 9th and 23rd, and adopted the Agenda at the September 6, 2016 Council meeting. This item was included as an information item with the December 13, 2016 Council packet. BACKGROUND: On November 22, 2016, Council and Staff met with our Legislative Delegation and discussed the City's 2017 Legislative Agenda that was adopted at the September 6th Council meeting. During the meeting with our Legislators, we discussed and agreed with their observations that the 2017 Legislative Session would likely be difficult in terms of awarding grants for projects such as adding amenities to the Appleway Trail — Pines to University section. Consequently, we are proposing a change to the Appleway Trail agenda item that reflects fewer amenities and reduces the estimated cost from $1,185,655 to $540,100. OPTIONS: Move to approve the amended legislative action, with or without further amendments. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve the amended Legislative Action as drafted. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: If this particular 2017 Legislative Agenda request was awarded, it would lead to an increase in budgeted revenues and expenditures of $540,100. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun, City Manager; Mike Stone, Parks and Recreation Director. ATTACHMENTS: • Legislative Agenda as adopted September 6, 2016, and showing proposed track changes. • Worksheet with detail supporting revised request for Appleway Trail amenities. • Photos CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 2017 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA Support Legislation Clarifying Valley Water Providers' Water Rights The City of Spokane Valley residents and businesses receive water through multiple regional water providers. To ensure adequate water supply for the growing Valley community, current law needs to be changed to clarify these water providers' water rights are for municipal water supply purposes and are not subject to relinquishment. The water providers are using water rights currently designated for agricultural irrigation and dairy purposes, rather than for municipal water supply. Ecology has indicated that agricultural irrigation and dairy water rights held or acquired by a municipal water supplier cannot be considered municipal water supply water rights without filing for a change of use permit. A change of use permit process is slow, costly, and may diminish the overall water right. The City supports legislation that clarifies that the water rights held by water providers serving the Spokane Valley region can be changed to municipal water supply purposes without going through the change of use permitting process. Transportation Funding Request — Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation Project The City of Spokane Valley respectfully requests that the state invest in Phase 1 of Bridging the Valley by allocating funds to the Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation project. The Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project replaces an at -grade crossing with an overpass of BNSF's railroad tracks and Trent Avenue (SR 290). The project will eliminate two at -grade crossings, eliminating train/vehicle crash risks. The project will improve train travel through the Spokane region, which is a bottleneck of the Great Northern Corridor. The total project cost is $36 million. The City has already secured $9.8 million. The City is seeking $26.2 million in future funding for the Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation. Funding Applewav Trail Park Amenities The City of Spokane Valley requests $540,100$1,185,655 in the 2017-2019 Capital Budget for park amenities for the first mile of the Appleway Trail. These amenities include a restroom, picnic shelter, topsoil, limited turf and dryland seeding, trees, drinking fountain and benches along with an increased square footage of irrigated turf and trees.. The City previously funded, designed and constructed the paved portion of the first mile with over $1 million without these amenities. The state has allocated funding for the remaining 3.25 miles (including amenities), scheduled over the next two years. This funding will bring amenities to the entire 4.25 -mile trail, realizing the full conceptual plan and orienting future economic development. Protect the Local State -Shared Revenues The City of Spokane Valley requests that the Legislature preserve and restore local state -shared revenues. These funds include the Liquor Excise Tax Account ($303,724 in 2015), Liquor Board Profits ($806,570 in 2015), Streamlined Sales Tax Mitigation ($572,577 in 2015), Municipal Criminal Justice Assistance Account ($273,160 in 2015), City -County Assistance Account, and Marijuana Revenues ($37,912 in 2015). Specifically, the City supports legislation that removes the 2011 cap on Liquor Profit revenues to restore the 50/50 revenue sharing relationship between the state and local governments. Protect Businesses by Reforming State Regulatory Burden The City of Spokane Valley strongly supports small and large businesses in our City and across the state, because they are the lifeblood of our economy. Unfortunately, these businesses are forced to compete in a state regulatory environment that is increasingly burdensome, making it difficult to compete with businesses in neighboring states. Of most urgent concern is the regressive state business & occupation tax, with the current Labor & Industries program close behind, and both need significant reform before they do irreparable damage to commerce in Washington. Spokane Valley supports rebalancing the state- wide regulatory framework to encourage and support business development and retention. The City supports AWC legislative agenda items that serve the best interests of Spokane Valley. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 2017 Legislative Agenda Amended Appleway Trail Legislative Agenda Cost Estimate - University to Pines irra,I Landscape Imprsoveniei' Mobilization/Site Work Topsoil 4" depth Irrigation - 40% Turf (Hydroseed) Dryland Seeding - 60% Restroom Benches Drinking Fountains Trash Receptacle Trees Permits Design (A&E) Contingency ^' 10% Total Trail Landscape Costs lump sum lump sum 180,000 sq. ft. 180,000 sq. ft. 270,000 sq. ft. 1 2 1 2 50 lump sum lump sum $75,000.00 $121,000.00 $ .40/sq. ft. $72,000.00 $ .25/sq. ft. $45,000.00 $.10/sq. ft. $27,000.00 $65,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $4,000.00 $ 1,500.00 $3,000.00 $300.00 $15,000.00 $10,000.00 $50,000.00 $49,100.00 MS Dec 2016 revise $540,100.00 .9' G' DIA CLECTRICAL Ht.IlCI EUT ALU1D:NG IiL=caul' 4' =LING WIUIN71711 FLZUR=ZVI' L16{TING 1T.{TURC ®l OW I Precast Products ECI N. pJwer 77 Ibaw Tt 71.45 CORTEZ (WOWED) Mai= tlf-a4 .... Y�ym 4 rFMZ. `.rrr.w�.a��r Sv 17.17.- J hOY FLOOR FLAN CR -03 22 � I CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 20, 2016 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ information ® admin. report Department Director Approval: ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Tourism Enhancement Study GOVERNING LEGISLATION: None PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: On March 8, 2016, Council heard a report from CAI on the Retail Improvement Study, as well as the Tourism Enhancement Study. On August 16, 2016, Council authorized staff to move forward with the analysis of six potential tourism enhancement projects. On November 30, 2016, Council and staff attended a special Council meeting to hear about and discuss the CSL Feasibility Study, the purpose of which was to consider a potential sports complex on land located near the HUB facility, and for potential major enhancements to Spokane County's existing Plante's Ferry Sports Facility. BACKGROUND: In 2015, the City engaged the services of Community Attributes, Inc. (CAI) to conduct a study to determine the city's retail trade, demand and demographics in order to improve area retail activities. This study, conducted in two phases, indicated that tourism related spending (Accommodation, Food and Beverage, and Performing Arts and Spectator Sports) is underperforming compared to other retail sectors. In phase I, CAI developed the strategies. In phase II, CAI analyzed the potential feasibility and return on investment of six strategies. To develop a list of potential strategies, CAI analyzed regional and local tourism spending, reviewed case studies from other cities, and involved a stakeholder's group that consisted of local business owners, economic development partners, hoteliers and citizens. The stakeholder's engagement process included interviews, two surveys, and two workshops; one held December 10, 2015 and the second held March 9, 2016. On March 8, 2016, CAI provided Council an overview of the tourism study. On August 16, 2016, Council was presented with a list of six proposed projects, and concurred to continue the analysis of the those projects: 1. Develop new events and festivals to compliment Valley Fest and Cycle Celebration 2. Development of a waterfront park and whitewater course 3. Balfour Park development 4. Fairground expansion and Avista Stadium district 5. Trail development and public art 6. Events center, multifaceted arts and entertainment venue Tonight, CAI will provide an overview of their analysis and compare their results with the two sports facilities, Plante's Ferry expansion and the HUB Complex Development, analyzed by Conventions, Sport and Leisure International (CSL) in partnership with Spokane County, the City of Liberty Lake, the City of Spokane Valley, Central Valley School District, and the Sports Commission. OPTIONS: Discussion RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This could result in the City's investment of one or more of the six projects listed above, as well as one of the two projects contained in the CSL Feasibility Study. STAFF CONTACT: John Hohman and Gloria Mantz ATTACHMENTS: Tourism Enhancement Strategy Presentation SPOKANE VALLEY TOURISM AND LODGING ANALYSIS PROJECT EVALUATION CITY COUNCIL PRESENTATION, December 20, 2016 • Ca' community attributes �� • aicommunity attributes Inc Founded in 2005, Community Attributes Inc. (CAI) tells data -rich stories about communities that are important to decision makers. > Regional economics > Land use economics > Land use planning and urban design > Community and economic development > Surveys, market research and evaluation > Data analysis and business intelligence > Information design 2 Contents I. Background II. Tourism Strategy Overview III. Investment Profile Draft Findings I. Background Project Approach and Purpose > Approached by the City to conduct the tourism analysis in conjunction with the retail analysis conducted last year > Project has been conducted in two phases: Phase I • Analyze • Develop strategies • Identify project for further study Phase II • Study the potential feasibility and economic attributers of projects identified in Phase I > Tourism analysis and strategy (Phase I) has been leveraged to inform current Phase II analysis as well as the update of the City's Comprehensive Plan > The tourism and retail strategies combine to form the backbone of an economic development strategy for the City Strategies and Framework Focused on identifying projects that fall in either of the following categories: Direct drivers of tourism and spending in the City • People visiting from outside the region for a specific facility or event • Hotel stays • Spending at local restaurants and stores Indirect drivers of tourism • Focused on long term improvements that will attract people from within and outside the region • Includes projects related to civic attractions and facilities that improve the quality of life and sense of place for both residents and visitors 11. Tourism Strategy Overview xisting Conditions > Spokane Valley's occupancy rate is more seasonal than Spokane County: comparatively higher in the late summer and lower in the winter than Spokane County as a whole. Exhibit 1. Occupancy Rates by Month, September 2014 - September 2015 Occupancy Rate 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Spokane Valley Spokane County YIx 10,h ti ti Y 'Y y � titi \o' Y� he6 OGS boa CP P. <<QC e4`�' PQM' �a� Month/Year Exhibit 2. Per Capita Taxable Retail Sales, Spokane Valley, Spokane and Spokane County, 2010-2014 Taxable Retail Sales (Thousands) $25 0 $20.0 $18.9$18_9 $15.0 $10 0 $5.0 $0.0 $15 4 s19.6 $19.9 19.1 155 Spokane Valley Spokane Spokane County $20.9 197 $16.0 $21.4 20 6 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Year 167 Sources: Smith Travel Data, 2015; Community Attributes, 2015. Sources: Washington Department of Revenue, 2015; Community Attributes, 2015. Spokane Valley CAGR 2010-2014: 3.1% Spokane CAGR 2010-2014: 2.3% Spokane County CAGR 2010-2014: 2.0% 8 Local Assets 11 EXHIBIT 2. LODGING INVENTORY. SPOKANE VALLEY 1 EXHIBIT 3. PARKS AND FACILITIES INVENTORY. SPOKANE VALLEY, PO16 4446 I r _ .) • a n PI A �arti SONO • rtaren & moray • RN' {X30, 6 RY park.,.../mae% bebw A1,1,01Mer Sources: Community Attributes, 2015. Parks and FaCIIIMu Slxice • rrnrr Io tines Soustan iwbrCosy GO MIS Corm, 9 Engagement with Tourism Industry > Interviews — Conducted in depth interviews with project stakeholders > Survey — Developed a survey to supplement interviews and verify opportunities and challenges related to tourism > Stakeholder workshop I — Conducted a workshop with stakeholders to develop strategies and identify potential investments/projects > Stakeholder workshop II — Conducted a follow up workshop with stakeholders to review goals, strategies and potential projects for further study 10 Strategy a Projects > Designed to complement the City's retail strategy > Established strategies and actions to implement goals identified during the planning process > Specific investments and projects were identified through development of actions GROW SPOKANE VALLEY'S PRESENCE IN REGIONAL EVENTS AND PROMOTE LOCAL DESTINATIONS 2.2 IMPROVE ACCESS TO THE SPOKANE 2.2.1 Improve Access and Signage Identify new access points and improve wayfinding and access signage. 2.2.2 Create North-South Trail Connections Plan for the creation of new north -south trail connections to and parks and the Spokane River. fromkey commercial centers, thriving neighborhoods, existing 2.2.3 Develop Waterfront Public Space Encourage owners, designers and builders of new rivedront development to provide quality public space with shared access to the river as part of the development plan. 4151 sr 2.3 EXPAND AND PROMOTE EXISTING RECREATION DESTINATIO'. 2.3.1 Advertise Recreation Assets Advertise proximity to mountain bike trails, ski resorts, and other regional recreation destinations and develop profiles of Dishman Hills, Camp Sekani, etc. for distribution. 2.3.2 Encourage Package Deals Encourage development of package deals (hotel and fishing, skiing, kayaking etc) and conned service providers so that they may negotiate bundled packages. Action 3.2.4 Assess the feasibility of constructing a designated whitewater course on a section of the Spokane River. Efforts intended to spur tourism in Spokane Valley should y assets, intludingdie Spokane capitalize oheofilesnivaa already wellsuired to rubin mer. Though acing designated wh,cewater park would instantly paddling an ey's ch of river a regional attraction. make Spokane v da These whirewater parts have been extremely successful elsewhere, including in downtown Reno, Nevada {pictured) on the Truckee River. Here, the mnatrucred minds dray crowds ofrecreadonists daily,and ..a event occassamally bring hundreds of visitors to downtown far organized ..,y III. Investment Profiles Strategy e ' projects What are the projects? Waterfront and Whitewater Park Develop a new waterfront park along the Spokane River in tandem with a whitewater course and venue in the Spokane River. The analysis would focus on successful examples throughout the country and potential locations operational attributes specific to Spokane Valley. The analysis would focus on key development and operational attributes and the ability of the facility to draw visitors and events. Multimodal Trail Development and Public Art Design and develop trail connections to the north and south connecting to river, recreation amenities and neighborhood clusters. As part of trail development, explore feasibility of an arts walk along the river or near the City's civic facilities with permanent and temporary exhibits. Analysis would focus on understanding potential impacts of said facilities and success stories from other regions. Fairgrounds Expansion Redevelop and/or expand facilities on county owned fairground property and potential connections with Avista Stadium. The analysis would focus on exploring expansion and improvement opportunities with the County fairgrounds and potential connections with Avista Stadium. Balfour Park Redevelopment Study potential uses for the Balfour Park with tourism oriented elements such as a visitor center "launch pad" or a year round farmers market/market hall. The analysis would focus on researching suitable uses for the site and their potential colocation with other retail and commercial uses. Special Events Promotion Fund new special events within the City to complement Valley Fest and Cycle Celebration. The events could build on the City's existing success with Valley Fest while focusing on the City's recreational amenities and access. The analysis would focus on learning from other City led events throughout the region to better understand their costs and benefits. Arts and Entertainment Venue Develop a multifaceted arts and entertainment venue in partnership with local arts organizations, galleries and theatre production companies. The analysis would focus on potential facility and operational attributes. Whitewater Park Context Why is Spokane Valley Interested in a Whitewater and Waterfront Park? Community has indicated that the river is an underutilized amenity Excellent access to the Spokane River with whitewater activity already occurring Recreation anchor and lifestyle amenity Building on past efforts in Spokane Observed economic benefits in other communities This investment profile assumes the following project characteristics: Sullivan Park would be expanded and improved with children's' playground equipment, a small boat rental facility, additional benches, tables and fountains and upgrades to existing park facilities. • A small, secondary parking lot would be provided near the rapids along Flora Rd. • A non -paved trail would be developed along the 1.6 miles of river frontage, from Sullivan Park to the rapids. • Seven in -channel whitewater features would be constructed in the Spokane River as well as a put -in and take-out for boats hESNgEbT Judd's New Hole Flora Roa North Ace n Road Access f Sullivan Hole Greenacres Park Mission Avenue Access MISSION AV Interstate 90 BROAD 0016, Whitewater Play Area City of Spokane Valley • Centennial Trail Access River Access Whitewater Play Spot Rapids ® City Park State property Informal Trail Centennial Trail 500 1,000 1.500 2.000 2500 15 Whitewater Park - By the Numbers Exhibit 3. DRAFT Whitewater Park Summary Table ANNUAL INVESTMENT SUMMARY Visitation Total Visitors Visitor Segmentation Daytime Users Daytime Spectators Overnight Users Overnight Spectators Economic Impacts Total Visitor qpending Direct Spending (on-site) Associated Spending (off-site) Wages ,bbs Created Total Fiscal Impacts To the City of Spokane Valley To County and State Construction, Operations and Maintanence Initial Capital Costs VVaterfront Park' VVhitewater Park Operating Expenses VVaterfront Park VVhitewater Park Total Attendance Days Low 115,800 14,475 96,500 4,825 0 Baseline 231,600 28,950 193,000 9,650 0 High 463,200 57,900 386,000 19,300 0 Total visitation is 231,600 (including "users" and spectators) in the baseline scenario 25% of users are assumed to stay overnight; spectators are assumed to be local or regional users and do not require hotel accommodations Total visitor spending exceeds $2.5M in the baseline scenario, and includes spending on food and beverage, lodging and miscellaneous retail This level of visitation and spending could create 31 jobs (FTE) and $931,000 in wages $1,265,000 $2,537,000 $5,070,000 Initial capital costs are heavily dependent on specific design assumptions; full buildout assumes the acquisition of 15 acres of land, new park facilities, and the construction of seven whitewater features for a total up -front cost of approximately $2.6M $464,000 $931,000 $1,861,000 15 31 64 $113,000 $16,000 $97,000 $225,000 $452,000 $31,000 $63,000 $194,000 $389,000 $2.1 M to $2.6M $2.1 M to $2.6M $2.1 M to $2.6M $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $1,850,000 $1,850,000 $1,850,000 $180,000 $170,000 $10,000 Direct Operating Revenues' N/A $180,000 $170,000 $10,000 N/A $180,000 $170,000 $10,000 N/A There are opportunities to phase development of with future land purchases and major capital improvements not a prerequisite to short term implementation Operating costs for the whitewater features are estimated to be minimal but could be more significant for a waterfront park Potential Strategy: Develop a phasing plan that identifies initial implementation opportunities that could precede a larger and more costly buildout of the park and whitewater facilities Approximately67% of initial capital costs forthe waterfront park are attributed to land acquisition,•pursuinga pian that involvesthe acquisition ofless land would significantly reduce the initial capital costs forpark development. 2 Underthe assumptions used forthis project, the City would not operate any facilities that generate revenue; should the Citychoose to operate revenueproducingfacilitiesas pad of this project, those revenues could be evaluated ate laterdate. 16 Trails and Arts- Context Why is Spokane Valley Interested in implementing new trails and public art? Coupling this endeavor with art and historical features could assist the City in continuing to establish a clear identity. In 2014, total outdoor recreation expenditures in Spokane County totaled $1.3 billion (Earth Economics, 2015). Capitalize on its natural assets: The City has a relatively small amount of trail offerings but benefits from being adjacent to or directly connected to a number of major recreational amenities, such as the Spokane River and the Dishman Hills. The City is currently working on expanding trail capacity and infrastructure, including the already funded Appleway Trail. This investment profile assumes the following project characteristics: Being evaluated based on the potential draw of the trail/arts and associated spending at local businesses. The Analysis analyzes the following: - Development of a north/south urban trail connecting the Centennial Trail to the City's Appleway Trail; - Enhancement of the Appleway Trail with public art Pc.% and PpsiMe ••• w.+tt Crx+nn 17 Trails and Art- By the Numbers Exhibit 4. DRAFT Trails and Art Summary Table ANNUALINVESTMENTSUMMARY Total Attendance Days Visitation Low Turnout Baseline Turnout High Turnout Total Visitors 357,000 397,000 436,000 Economic Impacts Total Visitor Spending $2,313,000 $2,572,000 $2,826,000 Direct, Indirect and Induced Spending (on-site) N/A N/A N/A Associated Spending (off-site) $2,313,000 $2,572,000 $2,826,000 Wages $886,000 $986,000 $1,083,000 .bbsCreated 29 32 36 Total Fiscal Impacts To the City of Spokane Valley To County and Sate $196,000 $219,000 $240,000 $20,000 $22,000 $24,000 $176,000 $197,000 $216,000 Construction, Operations and Maintanence' Initial Capital Costs Trails Development $1.6 to $5.6 Mil $1.6 to $5.6 Mil $1.6 to $5.6 Mil Arts Walk2 $15k to $40k $15k to $40k $15k to $40k Total visitation is 397,000 in the baseline scenario and represents a mix of users on foot and bicycle and is based on regional usership rates A large majority of users are assumed to be daytime users/visitors Total visitor spending exceeds $2.5M in the baseline scenario, and includes spending on food and beverage, lodging and miscellaneous retail This level of visitation and spending could create 32 jobs (FTE) and $986,000 in wages Initial capital costs are heavily dependent on specific design assumptions; this profile assumes development of a new trail segment ranging from 1 mile to 3.5 miles in length and art installations along the Appleway Trail with a total development cost range of $1.6M to $5.6M Operating costs for the trail are based on trail maintenance costs found in the City and County and could range from $3.6K to $12.6K annually depending on the length of the trail There are opportunities for grants from the SRTC for trail development and other grant opportunities for public art Operating Expenses Potential Strategy: Study potential routes for a north south trail connector; meet with Trails Development $3.6k to $12.6k $3.6k to $12.6k $3.6k to $12.6k local arts organizations/artists to gage interest in installing art along a section of the ArtsWalk(seefootnotes) NA NA NA Appleway Trail 1 Development and maintenance costs for trails and art installations Is dependent on the size and type of facility Cost estimates are based on real trail maintenance and development costs found in the City. Maintenance costs for art installations is often associated with vandalism and general upkeep andis dependent on the location and type of art Direct Operating Revenues NA NA NA 2 Based on the costto install approximately 5 art installations. Costs will van/ based on howthe art is commissioned and procured 18 Stadium District/Fairgrounds - Context Why is Spokane Valley Interested in the Stadium District and Fairgrounds? • Opportunity to increase market share in event hosting and to compete with the Convention Center Need for renovation or replacement of existing facility Opportunity to capitalize on existing visitors to the Fair and Expo Center and Avista Stadium Existing demand in winter could be captured with a new facility Long-term potential to create a multifaceted stadium or entertainment district This investment profile assumes the following project characteristics: • Demolition of an aging 24,000 square foot building • Construction of a new 50,000 square multi-purpose foot building with insulation, concrete floors and other finishes • Increased capacity for 10 to 30 events per year • Additional data will be provided by the Fair and Expo Center prior to completion of the investment profile. =t. 44' Lansing Lugnuts Stadium District 19 Stadium District/Fairgrounds - By the Numbers Exhibit 5. DRAFT Stadium District/Fairgrounds Summary Table ANNUALINVESTMENTSUMMARY Visitation Total Visitors Visitor Segmentation Daytime Visitors Overnight Visitors Economic Impacts Total Visitor Spending Direct, Indirect and Induced apending (on-site) Associated apending (off-site) Total visitation is estimated at 57,600 in the baseline scenario, which assumes that the Total Attendance Days new facility would host 20 new events annually (the "low" and "high" attendance Low Baseline High estimates are based on 10 and 30 new events, respectively) 28,000 57,600 86,400 17,280 34,560 11,520 23,040 Approximately 40% of visitors are assumed to stay overnight 51,840 34,560 Total spending is in excess of $3.9M in the baseline scenario, and includes spending on food and beverage, lodging and miscellaneous retail $1,974,000 $3,948,000 $5,920,000 $609,000 $1,218,000 $1,827,000 $1,365,000 $2,730,000 $4,093,000 Wages $771,900 $1543,900 $2,316,800 .bbs Created 22 43 67 Total Fiscal Impacts $220,000 $437,000 $658,000 To the City of Spokane Valley $28,000 $56,000 $86,000 To County and aate $192,000 $381,000 $572,000 Construction, Operationsand Maintanence Initial Capital Costs Operating Expenses2 Direct Operating Revenues $8,417,000 $8,417,000 $8,417,000 $445,000 $445,000 $445,000 $230,400 $460,800 $691,200 The amount present& represents an average of the high and low cost estimates provided. 2 The amount present& rep resen ts an average of the high and low cost estimates. Additional data will b e provided by the Fair and Expo Center prior to completion of the investment profile. Operating and maintenance expenses and revenues would be born by the County as it is the operator of the facility. This level of visitation and spending could create 43 jobs (FTE) and $1.5M in wages Initial capital costs are estimated at $8.4 and annual O&M expenses are estimated at $305,000; these estimates may be revised as the Fair and Expo Center provides additional information Operating revenues range from about $230,000 to $690,000. Potential Strategy: Work with Spokane County, fairgrounds staff, Avista Stadium operators and surrounding property owners to facilitate development of an overall vision and master plan for the area 20 Balfour Park Redevelopment - Context Why is Spokane Valley Interested in redevelopment of Balfour Park? The City owns a majority of the site and has a vested interest in successfully redeveloping the property The site is centrally located near the City's new City Hall and Appleway Trail A conceptual design has been established for the site that included a library/civic use This investment profile assumes the following project characteristics: Uses: For the purposes of the analysis the following uses are considered: - Library/civic uses - Public Park Space - Public Farmers Market/Market Hall Space Private redevelopment of the site is not considered Density: modeled at a modest scale to reflect past planning efforts and current buildout patterns near the site _ 5 Min Walk Time 10 Min Walk Time %�� LibrarylCivicUse Balfour Park Redevelopment By the umbers Exhibit 6. DRAFT Balfour Park Redevelopment Summary Table ANN UAL INVESTMENT SUMMARY Land Utilization Office Retail Civic Space Park Building SqFt by Use Office Retail Civic Space Park .bbs (Capacity)2 Fiscal Indicators Property Tax Potential Sales Tax Potential Construction, Operations and Maintenance Initial Capital Costs Annual Expenses3 Scenarios 1. Civic 2. Public Market 0% 0% 0% 0% 26% 26% 74% 74% Land utilization scenarios represent the various economic activities that may occur on site and assumes approximately 1/4 of the site is dedicated to redevelopment as a civic use. The civic scenario indicates that the equivalent of 30 jobs could be located on site at the proposed library use A privately developed mixed use commercial scenario is not currently contemplated for the site 0 0 o Scenario 2 could result in direct fiscal impacts to the City from sales tax revenues but 30,000 20,000 would rely greatly on the number of vendors and the types of good associated with a 400 400 public market 30 2 to 5 Initial capital costs would depend on the development program of the site with the park component of the site costing approximately $3.9 million and a new market venue costing in the range of $2.8M to $4.0M $0 $0 $0 $12.5Kto $25K $3.9M $36,000 $6.7M to $7.9M $36,000 1 The analysis of Balfour Park redevelopment was conducted based on two land use scenarios. 2 Employment for Scenario 1 describes the potential employment capacity of the site base don the sfaffing needs of a new library. Scenario 2 illustrates the potential full time employment associated with market operators/staffing. 3 Annual expenses represent the cost to maintain the park based on data provided by the Qty of Spokane valley Potential Strategy: Explore interim short term uses of the property for special events such as a seasonal farmers market; consider implementation of the expanded park portion of the property. 22 Special Events Suppor* - Context Why is Spokane Valley Interested supporting special events? The Spokane region is known for a variety of special events including major sporting events like Hoopfest Spokane Valley has a signature event in Valleyfest but lacks other major events Community input indicates the desire for more local events Special events can vary greatly in their draw and impact but can be an effective way to attract visitors from outside the area, especially in a place like Spokane Valley with it's existing retail draw This investment profile assumes the following project characteristics: • The baseline scenario is modeled after Valleyfest and its overall attendance Major capital improvements are not required and therefore not included based on conversations with local event promoters and analysis of other major events in the area Special Events Support - By the Numbers Exhibit 7. DRAFT Special Events Summary Table ANNUAL INVESTMENT SUMMARY Total Attendance Days Visitation Small Event Medium Event Large Event Total Visitors 20,000 40,000 80,000 Visitor Segmentation Daytime Users 19,000 36,000 64,000 Overnight Users 1,000 4,000 16,000 Economic Impacts Total Visitor Spending Direct, Indirect and Induced sp ending (on-site) Associated spending (off-site) Wages ,bbs Created $1,259,000 $2,635,000 $729,000 $1,500,000 $530,000 $1,135,000 $5,650,000 $3,095,000 $2,555,000 Total visitation is 40,000 in the baseline scenario, which assumes support and implementation of a new major event similar in size and scale to Valleyfest Scenarios modeled also reflect implementation of a smaller event with 20,000 in attendance and a larger scale event with 80,000 in attendance (representing a major event or festival taking place in the City) The three scenarios modeled reflect varying percentages of overnight visitors ranging from 5% of visitors for the smallest event to 20% of visitors for the largest Total spending is in excess of $2.6M in the baseline scenario, and includes spending on food and beverage, lodging and miscellaneous retail $359,600 $758,400 $1,660,400 Implementation of an event would not necessarily require capital improvements but 14 27 62 would likely required contributions from the City in the form of lodging tax dollars and in kind services Total Fiscal Impacts $101,000 $221,000 $486,000 To the City of Spokane Valley $9,000 $21,000 $53,000 To County and State $92,000 $200,000 $433,000 Construction, Operations and Maintanence1 Initial Capital Costs NA NA NA Operating Expenses Qty Services Lodging Tax Funds Direct Revenues $31,000 $63,000 $13,000 $26,000 $18,000 $37,000 $476,750 $964,750 $125,000 $52,000 $73,000 $1,968,500 1 Costs for special events are highly variable and depend on the type of activity, venue and financial resources An example of recent funding by the City of Spokane Valley for ValleyFest included the following: $36,600 in lodging tax funds and $25,774 in City services such as police, transportation, etc... • Potential Strategy: Conduct meetings with local event promoters to evaluate interest and identify potential opportunities for event hosting in the City Attendance 300,000 250 000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 - 0 I ME I I Arts & Entertainment Venue - Context Why is Spokane Valley Interested in an arts and entertainment venue? Was cited as a facility or amenity currently lacking in the City by project stakeholders The City has a limited number of arts venues but is home to an active arts community Spokane has an existing concentration of performing arts venues to build on A venue of this type could attract a new demographic of visitors This investment profile assumes the following project characteristics: • Smaller scale venue - 200 seat capacity The space is assumed to be flexible and would host both performances and private events (rentals) Would host an "anchor tenant" in the form of a local theater group, orchestra, or other established group with frequent performances, it will also host other performers throughout the year OObWARR MARCH 5 JACK 6 THE BEANSTALK 11110D PEP1011 LA Arts & Entertainment Venue - "v th- umbers Exhibit 8. DRAFT Special Event Support Summary Table Annual Investment Summary Visitation Total Visitors Visitor Segmentation Daytime Users Overnight Users Economic Impacts Total Visitor Spending Direct, Indirect and Induced Spending (on-site) Associated Spending (off-site) Total Attendance Days Initial Year Stabilized Year 15,000 28,000 9,000 16,800 6,000 11,200 $880,000 $170,000 $710,000 $1,640,000 $312,000 $1,327,000 Wages $331,500 $620,200 .bbs Created 9 20 Total Fiscal Impacts City of Spokane Valley To County and State $92,000 $14,000 $78,000 $172,000 $26,000 $146,000 Construction, Operations and Maintanence Initial Capital Costs $3.15M to $4.5M Operating Expenses Direct Operating Revenues I City Contribution to Revenue @15% $232,362 $341,286 $180,259 $342,527 $34,854 $51,193 1 Based on review and analysis of performing arts venues operating pro formas. The analysis reflects a potential operating pro forma fora venue of this size. • The initial year(s) of operation would likely have lower overall attendance resulting in negative net operating income • A successful and well utilized venue of this size would require annual visitation of approximately 28,000 patrons (stabilized year) • Total visitor spending is estimated at approximately $1.6M at stabilized operations, and includes on-site spending (direct) and off-site spending (associated spending) • This level of visitation and spending could create 20 jobs (FTE) and $638,000 in wages including those at the venue • Much like other projects, initial capital costs are heavily dependent on specific design assumptions; this profile assumes the development of a 200 seat facility built from the ground up with total construction costs ranging from $3.1 to $4.5 million (not including the cost of land) • In order for the venue to be successful the venue would need to generate $340,000 annually assuming a City contribution equivalent to 15% of overall operating revenues (based on analysis of other similar venues) • Potential Strategy: Conduct outreach with local arts, music and theatre groups to evaluate overall interest and potential leadership opportunities 26 Plante's 1Thrry and Hub Complex Notes on the projects > The Spokane County study includes a more detailed operating pro forma and conceptual design (see "Feasibility Study for Potential New Outdoor Multi -use Sports Facilities in Spokane County", Conventions, Sports & Leisure, 2016. ) > Spending patterns between the two studies varies based on the types of projects and overall project methodology > Indirect and induced impacts have a substantial impact on overall spending and different approaches to these impacts were utilized for each study > Estimated jobs from the Spokane County study include full-time and part-time employees Plante's Ferry and Hub Complex Plante's Ferry Exhibit 9. Estimated Financial Operations and Economic Impacts - Conventions Sport & Leisure (CSL), 2016 Plante's Ferry (soccer/multisport+ softball) Operating Revenues League, Practice and Camp Rentals Tournament Rental Income ImHause Tournament Registration Fees Sponsorship Concessions (Net) Other Revenue Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenses Salaries & Wages Tournament Expenses Utilities Repairs & Maintenance Materials and Supplies Insurance General & Administrative Other Miscellaneous Management Fee Total Operating Expenses Stabilized Year Year 1 2 3 4 5841,969 $33,000 $207,200 $75,000 $184,466 $25,000 51,366,635 ,517,803 $82,880 $290,000 $240,000 $123,750 $60,000 $85,000 $50,000 $150,000 $1,599,433 $877,088 $37,000 $207,200 $75,000 $195,278 $25,000 51,416,565 $528,159 $82,880 $290,000 $240,000 $123,750 $60,000 $85,000 $50,000 $150,000 51,609,789 5912,206 537,000 5207,200 575,000 $206,570 525,000 $1,462,977 5538,722 582,880 5290,000 $240,000 5123,750 560,000 585,000 550,000 5150,000 $1,620,352 5912,206 537,000 5207,200 575,000 5213,484 525,000 51,469,890 $538,722 582,880 5290,000 5240,000 5123,750 560,000 585,000 550,000 5150,000 51,620,352 Operating Income/[Cris) 0232,798) (9193,224) ($157,376) 0150,462) Other Expenses Replacement Reserve $130,000 $130,000 5130,000 $130,000 Total Net Income/(Loss) (5362,798) (9323,224) 0287,376) [9280,462] Plante's Ferry (soccer/multisport+ softball) Total Attendee Days Total Non -Local Visitor Days Total Hotel Room Nights Direct Spending by Type Hotel RestaurantMeals Entertainment/Leisure Retail/Shopping Other Total Indirect/Induced Spending Total Economic Output Personal Earnings Employment (full & part-time jabs) Initial Stabilized Existing Year Year Complex 1 2 3 4 405,375 535,481 563,888 583,219 585,469 42,375 67,350 73,538 75,188 76,313 8,625 13,704 15,002 15,398 15,668 $1,334,813 $2,121,525 52,316,431 52,368,406 52,403,844 1,048, 781 1,666,913 1,820,053 1,860,891 1,888, 734 254,250 404,100 441,225 451,125 457,875 349,594 555,638 606,684 620,297 629,578 190,688 303,075 330,919 338,344 343,406 $3,178,125 55,051,250 $5,515,313 $5,639,063 55,723,438 51,970,438 $3,131,775 $3,419,494 $3,496,219 $3,548,531 55,148,563 $8,183,025 $8,934,806 $9,135,281 59,271,969 52,574,281 54,091,513 $4,467,403 $4,567,641 54,635,984 66 105 115 118 119 timated Distribution Spokane Valley Liberty Other Lake In -County 70% 10% 20% 70% 10% 20% 85% 10% 5% 50% 10% 40% 70% 15% 15% 70% 1596 15% 73% 11% 16% 70% 10% 20% 70% 10% 20% 70% 10% 20% 70% 10% 20% Sources: Conventions, Sports & Leisure, "Feasibility Study for Potential New Outdoor Multi -use Sports Facilities in Spokane County", 2016. 28 Plante's Ferry and Hub Complex HUB Complex Exhibit 10. Estimated Financial Operations and Economic Impacts - Conventions Sport & Leisure (CSL), 2016 HUB Complex (softball+ baseball) Operating Revenues League, Practice and Camp Rentals Tournament Rental Income In -House Tournament Registration Fees Sponsorship Concessions (Net Other Revenue Total Operating Revenues Operating Expenses Salaries & Wages Tournament Expenses Utilities Repairs & Maintenance Materials and Supplies Insurance General & Administrative Other Miscellaneous Management Fee Total Operating Expenses Stabilized Year Year 1 2 3 4 5 $393,750 560,000 $50,400 $125,000 575,150 550,000 $754,300 5407,550 520,160 $96,000 586,400 599,000 548,000 $85,000 525,000 5150,000 51,017,110 5477,500 585,000 5209,200 5125,000 5110,595 550,000 $1,057,295 5419,777 583,680 598,880 586,400 599,000 548,000 585,000 525000 5150,000 $1,095,737 5556,250 5115,000 5279,200 5125,000 5142,980 550,000 51,268,430 5432,370 $111,680 5101,846 586,400 599,000 548,000 585,000 525,000 5150,000 $1,139,296 5555,250 5115,000 5279,200 5125,000 5147,640 550,000 51,273,090 5445,341 5111,680 5104,902 586,400 599,003 $48,000 585,000 525,003 5150,000 51,155,323 5556,250 5115,000 5279,200 5125,000 $152,451 550,000 51,277,901 5458,701 $111,680 5104,902 586,400 599,000 $48,000 585,000 525,000 5150,000 51,158,683 Operating Income/(Loss) ($262,810) (538,442) 5129,134 5117,768 5109,218 Other Expenses Replacement Reserve 5260,000 5260,000 5260,000 5260,000 5260,300 Total Net Income/(Loss) 15522,810) (5298,442) (5130,816) (5142,232) (5150,782) HUB Complex (softball+ baseball) Total Attendee Days Total Non -Local Visitor Days Total Hotel Room Nights Direct Spending by Type Hotel RestaurantMeals Entertainment/Leisure Retail/Shopping Other Total Indirect/Induced Spending Total Economic Output Personal Earnings Employment (full & partalrnejobs) Initial Stabilized Year Year 1 2 3 4 5 175,875 36,750 7,425 51,157, 625 909,563 220,500 303,188 165,375 52, 756, 250 $1,708,875 $4,465,125 $2,232,563 58 245,975 310,750 61,563 83,713 12,439 16,911 $1,939,219 1,523,672 369,375 507,891 277,031 $4,617,188 $2,862,656 $7,479,844 $3,739,922 96 $2,636,944 2,071,884 502,275 690,628 376,706 $6,278,438 $3,892,631 $10,171,069 55,085,534 131 Note: Figures presented in 2016 ddlars. Only reflects spending byestimated visitors who are not local residents. 311,950 84,313 17,055 $2,655,844 2,086,734 505,875 695,578 379,406 $6,323,438 53,920,531 510,243,969 $5,121,984 132 313,150 84,913 17,199 52,674,744 2,101,584 509,475 700,528 382,106 $6,368,438 53,948,431 510,316,869 $5,158,434 133 Spokane Val i• Liberty Lake Other In-Coun 65% 15% 20% 65% 15% 20% 65% 25% 10% 45% 20% 35% 60% 25% 15% 60% 25% 15% 63% 20% 17% 65% 15% 20% 65% 15% 20% 65% 15% 20% 65% 15% 20% Sources: Conventions, Sports & Leisure, "Feasibility Study for Potential New Outdoor Multi -use Sports Facilities in Spokane County", 2016. 29 Investment Profile Summary NOTE: Text in Grey italics represents the most directly comparable attributes. Exhibit 11. Profile Summary Table, DRAFT Findings, Base or Stabilized Year *Values not calculated or not applicable ANNUAL INVESTMENT SUM MARY COMPARISON Trails and Arts Special Events Whitewater & Park Arts & Enter. Fairgrounds Balfour Park Visitation Total Visitors 397,000 40,000 231,600 28,000 57,600 Overnight/Out of Town Visitors * 4,000 9,650 11,200 23,000 Estimated Hotel Nights * 1,400 1,740 4,100 8,300 Economic Impacts Direct Visitor Spending 2 $2,572,000 $1,480,000 $2,537,000 $1,490,000 $3,190,000 /n Spokane Valley $2,572,000 $1,480,000 $2,537,000 $1,490,000 $3,190,000 Wages $986,000 $758,400 $931,000 $620,000 $1,544,000 Jobs Created 32 27 31 20 43 Total Fiscal Impacts $219,000 $221,000 $225,000 $172,000 $437,000 * To the City of Spokane Valley $22,000 $21,000 $31,000 $26,000 $56,000 $12.5K to $25K Tootherjurisdictions $197,000 $200,000 $194,000 $146,000 $381,000 * Construction and Operations Initial Capital Costs Annual Operational Revenues Annual Expenses (City or Operational) 3 $1.6M to $56M $4k to $13k Plante's Ferry ' Hub Complex 585,469 313,150 76,313 84,913 10,968 11,179 $5,723,438 $6,368,438 $4,178,110 $4,012,116 $3,245,189 $3,352,982 83 86 * $2.1M to $26M $3.15 to $45M $8.4M $3.9M to $8.9 $5,861,000 $27,880,000 * * $342,500 $460,800 * $1,469,890 $1,277,901 $60,000 $180,000 $341,000 $305,000 * $1,750,352 $1,428,683 1 Values for Plante 'sFenyandthe Hub Complex are cited from the "FeasibdityStudy for Potential NewOutdoorMultimseSports Facilities inSpokaneCounty"2016Final Repoli. 2 Direct visitorspending represents spending by visitors while ata facility/eventas well asspendingon hotels, restaurants and other retail outside of the event or facility. 3 Expenses varybyprojectand represent costs to operate the facilityorcosts born bytheCity. Revenues represent operational revenuesassociated with the project where applicable. Revenuesand expenses may be born by the Cityoran operator. For example, the hypothetical Fairgroundsprojectwouldbe owned and operated bythe County. 4 The analysis of BalfourPark focused on /and use scenariosanddoes notinclode manydiroct/ycompamb/e investmentattnbutes 30 Evaluation Considerations and Next Steps Evaluation of the projects based on: > Fit within City's vision and quality of life for local residents > Financial risk/burden to the City of Spokane Valley > Potential to impact local business community and drive fiscal revenues > Opportunities for interim uses and short term implementation including project phasing Next steps: > CAI: Finalize investment profiles > City of Spokane Valley: More in depth feasibility assessments for one or more projects (site evaluation, operational analysis, design) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS City of Spokane Valley Mike Basinger Chaz Bates John Hohman Gloria Mantz Visit Spokane Cheryl Kilday, President & CEO PROJECT TEAM Community Attributes Inc. Chris Mefford, President and CEO Mark Goodman, Project Manager Elliot Weiss, Planning Analyst Michaela Jellicoe, Economic Analyst CITY OF SPOKANE VAL TOURISM STRATEGY 11707 E. Sprague, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 • Calcommuni#y trig ,;. 1411 Fourth Ave., Suite 1401 Seattle, WA 98101 communityattributes.com CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 9 > BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE > TECHNICAL APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY TOURISM PROFILE 13 > UNDERSTANDING TOURISM > LODGING PERFORMANCE > ASSETS: RECREATION > ASSETS: RETAIL > STRATEGIC THEMES > STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT GOALS, STRATEGIES, ACTIONS 27 > GOALS AND STRATEGIES AT A GLANCE > GOAL ONE: SUSTAIN EXISTING SEGMENTS > GOAL TWO: EVENTS AND DESTINATIONS > GOAL THREE: NEW TOURIST ATTRACTIONS > GOAL FOUR: LONG-TERM IMPROVEMENTS IMPLEMENTATION 51 INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Community Attributes was approached by the City of Spokane Valley to conduct an analysis of the city's tourism sector and to identify opor- tunities for economic development based on tourist activity. This study follows a retail analysis and strategy performed for the city by Commu- nity Attributes, and because there are clear connections between thriving retail and tourist visitation, there are intentional synergies between the two documents. This study will be leveraged to inform future investments and will, along with the retail strategy, inform the upcoming update of the Comprehen- sive Plan. Together, these documents form the backbone of an economic development strategy for Spokane Valley. The tourism analysis and strategy will be conducted in two phases. Phase I will identify current tourism drivers and analyze Spokane Valley's tour- ism industry, develop appropriate strategies and actions to improve the tourism economy, and identify projects for detailed feasibility study. Phase II focuses on those projects identified in Phase I to identify obstacles to project feasibility and assess the potential return -on -investment for each project, so that the city can immediately begin to implement projects that meet its goals. 9 TECHNICAL APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY Phase I of the tourism strategy asks the following questions: > What are key drivers of tourism in the city of Spokane Valley? What is missing from current tourism offerings? > What is the city's role in fostering tourism in Spokane Valley? > What can the city do to improve tourism and what impact could they have on attracting visitors to the city? This phase relies on a technical analysis, which draws on data from the follow- ing sources: > Washington State Department of Revenue > Washington Employment Security Department > City of Spokane Valley Monthly Budget Report > Smith Travel Data > Washington State Tourism Alliance > Spokane County Assessor The analysis deploys rigorous analytics and evaluation methodologies to fore- ground an actionable strategy for improvement in the tourism sector and tour- ism -related industries. When specific projects are selected for Phase II analysis, a specific scope of work will be developed cooperatively between the city and CAI for each of the selected projects to assess feasibility and potential return -on -in- vestment. 10 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley IOURISM PROFILE TOURISM PROFILE UNDERSTANDING TOURISM Direct visitor spending in Washington in 2015 was $20.7 billion, generating $6.37 billion in earnings, 170,500 employees, $488 million in local taxes and $714 million in state taxes. Trips by Washington residents represented approximately one-third of all visitor spending and approximately two-thirds of all trips. Direct visitor spending in Spokane County in 2015 was $947 million, generating $322 million in earnings, 10,040 employees, $23 million in local taxes and $41 million in state taxes. Visitor spending falls into the following categories: > 26% on food services > 14.1% on local transportation and gas > 19% on accommodations > 11.9% on retail sales > 29% (remainder) on arts, entertainment and recreation; air transportation; and food stores The average length of stay for overnight visitors to Washington in 2015 was 2.2 nights, and the average travel party was approximately 2.4 people. These facts and figures clearly illustrate the importance of tourism to local economies in Washington State. The average length of stay for overnight visitors in Spokane County in 2015 was 2.4 nights, and the average travel party was 2.2 people. For cities, retail sales tax and lodging tax revenues are directly affected by tourist activity as well. Spokane Valley and the greater Spokane region have significant tourist assets already; this study ex- plores the local and regional tourism economy and offers strategic interventions to improve pefor- mance in this economic segment. 13 LODGING PERFORMANCE Smith Travel Data offers insights into hotel and motel performance in Spo- kane Valley. Hotels and motels are particularly important to this study because they have a direct bearing on the visitor experience and because they generate revenue for the city in the form of lodging tax dollars. According to the data, hotels and motels in Spokane Valley experience the same general seasonal trends as Spokane County with occupancy rates and average daily room rates. In lower occupancy periods Spokane Valley hotels charge lower rates than other hotels regionally. Hotel and motel occupancy rates are at their highest on Saturdays and their lowest on Sundays. However, Spokane Valley occupancy rates outcompete countywide rates on Mondays and Tuesdays, particularly during the sum- mer months. These trends are displayed in Exhibit 1, where red values in- dicate where Spokane Valley occupancy lags behind regional rates and blue values indicate where Spokane Valley occupancy is ahead of regional rates. The relative affordability of hotels and motels in Spokane Valley, as well as the seasonality of high occupancy and the strong weekday performance, suggest that lodging options in Spokane Valley tend to compete on price, and that business travelers and families on road trips along Interstate 90 could be important tourist segments for the city to pursue. Spokane Valley's lodging options are represented on the map in Exhibit 2. 14 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley EXHIBIT 1. DIFFERENCE IN DAILY AVERAGE OCCUPANCY BY MONTH BETWEEN SPOKANE VALLEY AND SPOKANE COUNTY, OCTOBER 2014 TO SEPTEMBER 2015 Month/Year Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Oct -14 Nov -14 Dec - 14 Jan - 15 Feb - 15 Mar- 15 Apr - 15 May -15 Jun - 15 Jul - 15 Aug -15 Sep - 15 -6% -2% -2% -4% -7% -4% -3% -4% -3% -1% 0% -3% -5% -1% 1% -1% -8% -2% -2% -4% -5% 0% 1% 0% -5% -1% -1% -3% -8% -4% -1% -2% 1% 6% 8% 7% 5% 11% 11% 10% 6% 11% 9% 8% -7% -2% 1% -1% -6 % -4% -3% -6% -6% -5% -5% -8% -8% -5% -7% -8% -5% -5% 4% -11% -11% -11% -12% 712, J ��o -9% -8% 1% 1% 5% 5% 6% 2% 2% -2% -3% -5% Sources: Smith Travel Data, 2015; Community Attributes, 2015. EXHIBIT 2. LODGING INVENTORY, SPOKANE VALLEY dr NIz C N a z E Upriver Dr Wellesley Ave Spokane River Frederick Ave Residence Inn Motel 6 • Super 8 Qua ity Inn Suites z v 0 z O o -a rn� Park Land Motel ,Suites& RY Park Maple -Tree Motel &'R5tPark • z z E Mission Ave Holiday Inn Express Pheasant Hill Inn & Suites • Mirabeau' Park Hate My Place Hotel • H�am,,pton Ramada Inn & Suites Broadway Ave z Trailer's Inn E 8th Ave E 17th Ave E 37th Ave E G Re arose >e. 0 an E 16t • Crossland Economy S udios 0 O Ave a 0 0 0 rn E 0 an N an en 0 0 v E 29th Ave E 32nd Ave E 24th Ave 0 0 N E 57th Ave 0 1 2 Miles I I Map created by ommunity Attributes, Inc. 2015 a a o U an \e . Lodging • Hotels & motels • RV parks & RV parks w/motels Sources: Hoover's 2015; Spokane County GIS 2015; Community Attributes 2015 15 DISRmAN Hlas %MURAL RESOUREEs CONSERVATION AREA ASSETS: RECREATION Exhibit 3 identifies the parks and recreation facilities and assets located within or near Spokane Valley. Critical assets include the Spokane River, mountain bike parks in Camp Sekani, hiking trails in Dishman hills, the Appleway and Centennial Trails and, more distant, recreational amenities like 49° North, Mt. Spokane and Lake Coeur D'Alene. These recreation amenities draw visitors and differentiate Spo- kane Valley from other regional destinations. 16 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley ■ EXHIBIT 3. PARKS AND FACILITIES INVENTORY, SPOKANE VALLEY, 2015 c ■ j a z Esmeralda Gold Course Ave Centennial Trail Camp Sekaark �- nie's Ferry E Upriver Dr N'_park P• i E Liberty Ak•.• po i =-• •.•� _. E FrederickAv Mirabe Point Pa CenterPlace O z z E Mission Ave E Broadway Ave Cif sslon or Hall Site E 8th Ave Dishman Hi Natural Area E 16t z Spokane Valley _ter •�j�llivn Antoine Peak Conservation Area 0 O Ave a E 17th Ave E 37th Ave E 57th Ave A E G Rei »rose 0 E 29th Ave Dishman Hills m 0 N Conservation Area 1,1 0 1 2 Miles � t I Map created by ommunity Attributes, Inc. 2015 Iller Creek Conservation Area 1 0 c m rn E 0 27 E 24th E 32nd Ave Ave Welles'ey Ave m� E Eyclid Ave 'a v • •y 2 E Sprague E PPpeoY 0 Ave : - • Mica Creek Conservation Area -116-111. Applew \•A Trail Saltese Uplands Conservation Area Parks and Facilities Parks and Open Space • • • River Corridor • • • Trails 0 Facilities Sources: Hoover's 2015; Spokane County GIS 2015; Community Attributes 2015 17 Latah Cre_Edx Winr Celia 1303U E L��s�iaJ.... )J1,a 1)ally. 9-5 ASSETS: RETAIL Exhibit 4 depicts restaurants and retailers in Spokane Valley. These businesses represent essential amenities for visitors to Spokane Valley. For visitors looking for convencience, or a more curated experience, the clustering of retail and services with other tourist draws is important. Therefore, the geographic distribution of these businesses throughout the community may provide insight into existing concen- trations and areas for need for tourists and residents alike. For Spokane Valley, it is important to make sure that future visitor draws/facilities are accessible from extablished retail centers in the City 18 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley EXHIBIT 4. RESTAURANTS AND RETAIL INVENTORY, SPOKANE VALLEY, 2015 II{ Frederick Ave E Upriver Dr Spokane River 0 Spr. okane Valley Mall E Mission Ave E Broadway Ave z • E 17th Ave E G Ro rr E 29th AveiTe E 37th Ave 0 E 57th Ave a ft; 0 0 N E 8th Ave 1 2 Miles I t I Map created by ommunity Attributes, Inc. 2015 • • S Bowdish Rd • 3 c O 0 c 0 E 16t Ave a O1 uv W v, %• o c v F� Teo ami E 0 a E 24th Ave 27 E 32nd Ave le,,, oy E Sprague E O'PPye• Av> syr• ac c na Wellesley Ave a 0 0 z • EE clid Ave \A Restaurants/Retail • Limited service restaurants • Full service restaurants • Bars & drinking establishments Sources: Hoover's 2015; Spokane County GIS 2015; Community Attributes 2015 19 STRATEGIC THEMES Exhibit 5 is a comprehsive map that provides information about Spokane Valley's parks and recreation amenities, retailers and restaurants, lodging options and other assets. Understanding what these assets are, and where they are located in and around the city, is important context for strategy development. The following represent initial strategic themes related to the analysis and data compiled on tourism and lodging in Spokane Valley. Overview of Tourism > "Visitors" are defined as any non-resident that comes into the com- munity for tourism and tourism -related activities, including but not limited to shopping, recreation, business, events, and travel > Visitors to major retail draws (i.e., Spokane Valley Mall), business travelers, and short-term visitors on longer trips via the highway need to be considered in the strategy Economic Role for Tourism > There was a significant rebound in local activity since 2009 > Employment in sectors related to tourism or visitation represent a larger share of overall employment in Spokane Valley than in Spokane or Spokane County; alternatively employment in Accom- modation and Amusement is lower than found regionally > Taxable retail sales data indicate that Spokane Valley's retail cluster is a major tourism draw; retail is a more important tourism draw in Spokane Valley than in Spokane > It is important to recognize the role of the Spokane Valley Mall as a draw for visitors and a local economic / tourism engine 20 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley Lodging > The lodging market in Spokane Valley is doing well, particularly in the summer months (see hotel visitor data) > Spokane Valley is positioned to take advantage of its proximity to Spokane, I-90, and regional tourism draws to bring in visitors > Accommodations are oriented to business travelers; a strategy may consider the needs of business visits and explore roles for local partners and resources; another may be to focus on family travel and positioning Spokane Valley as a more cost effective alternative > Lodging options close to I-90 will require strategies to link visitors with restaurant/retail opportunities and tourism resources: how can visitors to these hotels/motels see what Spokane Valley has to offer? Tourism Assets and Inventory > There are major recreation corridors available with the Centennial Trail / Spokane River and the Appleway Trail > Opportunities are available to link green spaces (including sur- rounding parklands outside the City limits), community facilities, retail opportunities to provide destinations with a greater sense of place and draw > Regional and local facilities such as the County fairgrounds and Mirabeau Point Park / CenterPlace offer opportunities to collaborate with private facilities to provide visitors with coordinated experi- ences > There is an opportunity to implement a central visitor center which could complement the City's existing assets and events City topri f Spokane Valley m Concept Map EXHIBIT 5. TOURISM CONCEPT MAP, SPOKANE VALLEY Centennial Trail / Spokane River • Regional recreational opportunities for hiking, rafting and other activities • Linkages with major green spaces within the community • 1-90 provides barrier to access from south Future Waterfront Development • Site currently vested for new development • Potential for synergistic uses with Discovery Playground, CenterPlace, Centennial Trail, Spokane River corridor Spokane Valley Mall • Super -regional mall providing regional draw for visitors to the City • Lack of major pedestrian connections to other local retail opportunities • Potential for improved connections with Centennial Trail, river eerridor L— Plante's Fe Park Esmeralda Gold Course _ � b Mirabeau Point Park CenterPlace -1,247 SPOKANE Spokane Co Fde and Expo C: , Emote Sta pp' ,//AMWAY ,K.4 Oty Hall Spokane Vall 7v use m— Dishman Hills Natural Area Spokane County Fair + Expo Center / —Av sta Stadium • e ional festival s facility is a strong draw on gional visitors • Close to Spokane; benefits to surrounding businesses may not be received by Spokane Valley • Future opportunities for supporting retail and commercial uses nearby Mirabeau Point Park • Large urban park / complex containing Discovery Playground, Mirabeau Meadows, Mirabeau Springs • CenterPlaceregional ever -ft facility located on the site • Location of annual Valleyfest Dishman Hills Conservation Area E Sprague Commercial Corridor • Primarily auto oriented ommercial uses, with a number o local bjsinesses • More difficult to aw visitors from other attractions in n • Future Town all development, pedes '--•riented improvements could imprdr-w to this area I I ler Creek Conservatlo=� I� �J Appleway Trail • Multi use trail built on former Milwaukie ad right of way corridor • Built in stages, with final route connecting to Liberty Lake • Opportunity to provide pedestrian linkages along major City corridor ,Itese Uplands nservation Area Legend Accommodation ® Hotel/Motel 0 RV Park/ Campground Facilities fel Museum In Town Hall site ® Sports Complex / Stadium ® Fairgrounds / Festivals Meeting Facility Specialty Recreation ® Golf Course MI Equestrian A Food and Drink ® Limited Service Restaurant ® Full Service Restaurant 0 Coffee Shop Brewery ® Winery Infrastructure Xz Parks and Open Space Spokane River Corridor Potential Development ® Development Opportunity (Retail / Mixed -Use) IMiles °V.(=n2ieu "''' 0 0.5 1 21 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT As part of this process, CAI conducted two stakeholder workshops and sev- eral targeted interviews. Together with the city, CAI also administered a survey to better understand lodging and tourism in the area. The findings inform strategic priorities and imply projects for further study. The word cloud at right (Exhibit 6) contained the most frequently used words from responses to the survey. This provides a high-level overview of the tourism -related concepts that have garnered the attention of stakehold- ers, offering insight into both challenges and opportunities that the strategy may address. Interview Findings The follow bullets present perspectives from stakeholder interviews con- ducted as part of this project. Key Tourism Challenges > No distinct community identity or city brand > Absence of central activity core, sprawling nature of the city > Few high-quality restaurants, limited sit-down dining options > Competition with downtown Spokane hotels and attractions > Lack of investment by economic development organizations > A few minor local attractions and no major attraction to serve as a regional draw Key Tourism Opportunities > Expansion of existing sports facilities (e.g. Plante's Ferry, the Hub) > Potential for multipurpose sports facility 22 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley > Market local and regional recreation opportunities (e.g. Centennial Trail, fishing, hiking) > Enhance recreation assets (e.g. improve river access, trails) > Create a defined center, encourage concentrations of businesses that create activity like restaurants and retail > Promote Spokane Valley as gateway to Mt. Spokane and other ski resorts > Shoppers from outside region and Canada > Growth in healthcare industry > Hotels could partner with local businesses to offer package deals to visitors Characterization of Lodging Market > Supply of hotels is sufficient (perhaps overbuilt), with a range of offerings > Affordable, provides a different vibe from pricier options in Down- town Spokane > Excellent accessibility for I-90 travelers > Mostly chain hotels but lacking presence of larger/higher end pres- ence > Lodging development has been stagnant, whereas downtown Spo- kane has experienced new development > While the lodging market generally seems stable, there are con- cerns it is struggling } N d Volleyball Neighborhoods River Traffic �11reFa;r'ounds Safety Events Biking L Wrestling YMCa �7 Access Bier Wrestling Entertainment Shopping11) Parkingiuuau.t R � WineTr';'s�'— �D1.fleSS An E m"o :VMSLL�Recreation a iv LIM EXHIBIT 6. TOURISM SURVEY WORD CLOUD 23 Suggestions for City -led Efforts > Support development of new events to attract visitors > Improve wayfinding to orient visitors and direct them to local attractions > Provide financial support via lodging tax for local events > Produce marketing materials for businesses to display > Public investments should benefit both residents and attract tour- ism, building upon existing tourism drivers (e.g. expansion of Plante's Ferry) > Establishment of an indoor/outdoor farmers market > Targeted business attraction for anchor retailers and to specific commercial corridors Survey Results Highlights from the survey, which targeted hoteliers and other business owners that rely on tourist traffic, are presented in Exhibits 7 and 8. Key findings from the survey generally reinforce findings from other portions of this study. According to the survey, hotel visits tend to be shorter in duration and most frequent in the summer months. Hoteliers perceive their advantag- es to be affordability and good highway access. However, comments from the survey indicate that these advantages may not be sufficient to capture a broader market. Respondents said the following: "We have had to keep our prices compressed to compete in this market below normal pricing for this type of product." "It meets the needs. If you stay in the valley, you HAVE to have a car because there is [nowhere] you can walk and enjoy a few days, like down- town. We have no central location for many places to visit where you don't have to spend 10-20 minutes driving." 24 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley EXHIBIT 7. SURVEY RESULTS: TOP 3 REASONS TO STAY OVERNIGHT IN SPOKANE VALLEY Responses 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 7 Highway access / car travellers 6 5 Price Location/ ease of access 4 2 2 Sports/ Shopping/ sporting retail events 2 Passing Ease of through parking Reasons for staying in Spokane Valley EXHIBIT 8. SURVEY RESULTS: TYPICAL LENGTH OF OVERNIGHT STAY IN SPOKANE VALLEY Responses 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 7 8 8 2 1 Day trips only Overnight stays Weekend stays 3-5 day stays Stays of a week or more Typical Visitor Stay GOALS, STRATEGIES AND ACTIONS GOALS, STRATEGIES AND ACTIONS The strategic planning framework relies on Goals, Strategies and Action Steps to organize the content and speed implementation. > A goal provides a high-level objective > A strategy is an approach to achieving a goal > An action step is a critical task in pursuing a strategy Additionally, projects are identified for every goal at the end of each goal section. These projects represent potential investment choices for the city, and may be studied further in subsequent phases of this project. There are four goals in this Tourism Strategy, and though they sometimes overlap or are mutually reinforcing, they each contain unique strategies united by a common theme. Every goal is an essential component of Spo- kane Valley's efforts to grow tourism and establish a platform for econom- ic development. 27 GOALS AND STRATEGIES AT A GLANCE SUSTAIN EXISTING SEGMENTS SUSTAIN SPOKANE VALLEY'S EXISTING HIGH-VALUE & HIGH-VOLUME TOURISM SEGMENTS This goal is about identifying the tourism segments that currently perform well for the city, and working to sustain those segments over time. In particular, business travel and recreation drive tour- ism in the status quo, and the city must continue to invest in these segments to maintain a tourism baseline and, eventually, to grow to new levels. Most of the strategies in this goal pertain to market- ing and promotion, as well as some infrastructural investments. 28 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley EVENTS & DESTINATIONS 0 GROW SPOKANE VALLEY'S PRESENCE IN REGIONAL EVENTS AND PROMOTE LOCAL DESTINATIONS This goal pertains to existing events and local destinations where additional effort is needed to bring greater awareness or carve a niche for Spokane Valley. An expanded role in events throughout the region could lead to additional tourist spending in Spokane Valley on lodging and retail, and some destinations in Spokane Valley exist now but suffer from a lack of exposure. The strategies in this goal aim to maximize the potential of these assets. NEW TOURIST ATTRACTIONS r L • CREATE NEW ATTRACTIONS THAT ASSERT SPOKANE VALLEY'S POSITION AS A SUPERIOR TOURIST DESTINATION This goal is about creating new attractions that don't currently exist, to compete with other tourist destinations and grow Spo- kane Valley's market share. The strategies focus on attractions that make sense given Spokane Valley's current strengths, like sports and recreation. LONG-TERM IMPROVEMENTS Ileil: INVEST IN LONG-TERM IMPROVEMENTS TO CREATE A MORE ATTRACTIVE TOURIST DESTINATION This goal highlights investments that indirectly increase tourism by creating a fun and inviting environment where people will want to visit and stay. These improvements are likely to have spillover benefits, including improved livability for current residents. 29 SUSTAIN SPOKANE VALLEY'S EXISTING HIGH-VALUE & HIGH-VOLUME TOURISM SEGMENTS SUSTAIN EXISTING SEGMENTS ARG ET MARKT 1.1.1 Distribute Branded Materials Pending results of a professional branding effort, distribute branded marketing materials at local outfitters, ski resorts, wineries and other tourist attractions. 1.1.2 Identify Visitor Characteristics Develop and distribute a survey to local hoteliers to identify demographic and economic characteristics of Spokane Valley visitors. 1.1.3 Market Hotel Deals Work with hoteliers to target hotel specials toward core demographics- -including business travelers, sporting event participants, families and through -traffic on 1-90. 1.1.4 Create Event Signage Provide large, visible signage (such as an interstate billboard) for popular existing events that identify Spokane Valley explicitly as an event location. 1.1.5 Explore Billboard Partnerships Explore partnerships with billboard owners to fill unused billboards with tourism -related content until the boards are leased. 1.1.6 Maintain "Clean and Safe" Continue to maintain Spokane Valley as a clean and safe city that is inviting to visitors. 30 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley EMOGRAPHICS Carolyn Doucette Action 1.1.5 Explore partnerships with billboard owners to fill unused billboards with tourism -related content until the boards are leased The City of Spokane Valley has the advantage of several miles of prime Interstate 90 frontage, and on every stretch of highway there are billboards that periodically go unused. Innovative cities are fos- tering partnerships with the owners of those billboards that allow the city to post public service announcements, public art, and targeted advertisements on vacant billboards until those vacancies are filled. The Billboard Creative is a Los Angeles -based non-profit that special- izes in pairing works of art with underutilized billboards. ItmosrArataiiiorengictincimailorcumonoxeltimmiteoliTTEMITEN SUSTAIN SPOKANE VALLEY'S EXISTING HIGH-VALUE & HIGH-VOLUME TOURISM SEGMENTS SUSTAIN EXISTING SEGMENTS 1.1.7 Address Transportation Challenges Work with the Public Works Department to identify, prioritize, fund and fix high-priority transportation challenges for visitors entering Spokane Valley. 1.1.8 Increase Regional Publicity Solicit publicity by submitting leads to local and regional papers and magazines that feature Washington state and Pacific Northwest travel destinations. 1.2 EXPAND OUTREACH TO BUSINESS TRAVELERS AND MAINTAIN HIGH CAPTURE IN THIS SEGMENT 1.2.1 Emphasize Business Friendly Image Cultivate a "business friendly' image based on efficiency and amenities. 1.2.2 Use Targeted Advertising Prepare advertisements tailored for business travelers, and distribute materials to the Spokane Airport, Sea -Tac airport and other business travel hubs. 32 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley SUSTAIN SPOKANE VALLEY'S EXISTING HIGH-VALUE & HIGH-VOLUME TOURISM SEGMENTS r• &i►'1il li . • • raninnum► Inr_rImalmmeet. 1.3.1 Capture Business Travelers Work with local hoteliers to improve capture of the business travel segment through collaborative marketing and promotion and targeted specials 1.4 PURSUE TARGETED PROMOTION OF WEEKEND AND OFF-SEASON HOTEL AVAILABILITY WHEN RATES AND OCCUPANCY ARE LOW IN SPOKANE VALLEY 1.4.1 Develop Seasonal Promotions Facilitate partnerships between tourism/marketing agencies and hotels to develop winter "shop and stay" specials and winter - themed advertisements that include Spokane Valley's indoor/retail amenities. 1.4.2 Advertise at Seasonal Destinations Improve distribution of promotional materials at Mt. Spokane, 49 North and other area ski resorts that generate winter traffic. 1.4.3 Promote Hotel Affordability Encourage local hoteliers to tailor weekend advertisements to compete on price, promoting an affordable alternative to downtown Spokane. 33 SUSTAIN EXISTING SEGMENTS SUSTAIN SPOKANE VALLEY'S EXISTING HIGH-VALUE & HIGH-VOLUME TOURISM SEGMENTS SUSTAIN EXISTING SEGMENTS MPROV SPOKAN VA 1.5.1 Improve Wayfinding and Signage Draw on existing regional studies, findings from a wayfinding consultant or local surveys to identify shortfalls in current signage and wayfinding and implement solutions as appropriate. 1.5.2 Fund Needed Maintenance Pending results of 1.5.1, manufacture and install new wayfinding signage throughout the city and at key tourist attractions. 1.5.3 Foster Connections to Trails Connect businesses to the Appleway Trail and Centennial Trail through signage. 34 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley PROJECTS FOR FURTHER STUDY SUSTAIN EXISTING HIGH-VALUE & HIGH-VOLUME TOURISM SEGMENTS 1 See 1.1 through 1.4 - Develop and implement a comprehensive marketing and promotional program through multiple media channels See 1.5 - Design and implement a comprehensive wayfinding system throughout the City in conjunction with City branding and placemaking 35 GROW SPOKANE VALLEY'S PRESENCE IN REGIONAL EVENTS AND PROMOTE LOCAL DESTINATIONS REGIONAL EVENTS & LOCAL DESTINATIONS 2. INCREASE THE CITY'S ROLE IN HOSTING AND FACILITATING LOCAL SPORTING_E_VENTS AND CREAK FAMILY -FRIENDLY NICHE FOR SPOKANE VALLEY WITHIN THE REGION 2.1.1 Improve Plante's Ferry Improve and expand facilities at the Plante's Ferry sports complex. 2.1.2 Maintain and Improve Sports Facilities To the extent possible, work with the Hub and other local sports facilities to maintain and improve offerings. 2.1.3 Expand Existing Sporting Events Work with existing sporting events (e.g. Hoopfest, NCAA basketball tournament) to identify expansion opportunities. 2.1.4 Promote Youth Sports Promote youth sports, host regular events, and match facilities with resources needed to prepare competitive bids for hosting responsibilities. 36 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley _2.3 EXPAND AND PROMOTE EXISTING RECREATION DESTINATIONS IN SPOKAN GROW SPOKANE VALLEY'S PRESENCE IN REGIONAL EVENTS AND PROMOTE LOCAL DESTINATIONS 2.2.1 Improve Access and Signage Identify new access points and improve wayfinding and access signage. 2.2.2 Create North-South Trail Connections Plan for the creation of new north -south trail connections to and from key commercial centers, thriving neighborhoods, existing parks and the Spokane River. 2.2.3 Develop Waterfront Public Space Encourage owners, designers and builders of new riverfront development to provide quality public space with shared access to the river as part of the development plan. 2.3.1 Advertise Recreation Assets Advertise proximity to mountain bike trails, ski resorts, and other regional recreation destinations and develop profiles of Dishman Hills, Camp Sekani, etc. for distribution. 2.3.2 Encourage Package Deals Encourage development of package deals (hotel and fishing, skiing, kayaking, etc.) and connect service providers so that they may negotiate bundled packages. 37 REGIONAL EVENTS & LOCAL DESTINATIONS tro GROW SPOKANE VALLEY'S PRESENCE IN REGIONAL EVENTS AND PROMOTE LOCAL DESTINATIONS REGIONAL EVENTS & LOCAL DESTINATIONS XPANOAND2ROMOTE EXISTING RECREATION DESTINATIONSJN SPOKANE VALLEY 2.3.3 Participate in Regional Efforts Proactively guide content development by regional tourism organizations (e.g. Visit Spokane) to highlight the city's recreation assets. 2.3.4 Produce a Recreation Guide Consider development of a comprehensive, branded recreation resource that inventories and promotes local recreation attractions, as well as hotels and restaurants. 2.3.5 Partner on Trail Expansion Work with the Evergreen Mountain Bike Alliance (East) and Spokane County Parks to identify opportunities for trail expansion; express an interest in linking local attractions with bike and hiking trails. 2.3.6 Repurpose Old Quarries Assess the environmental and financial feasibility of repurposing former quarries as unique parks and recreation areas. 2.3.7 Expand Lodging Options Approach local hoteliers to discuss the market for small-scale, low-cost lodging options (e.g. "adventure hostels") to cater to the recreation -based market segment. 2.3.8 Use Instagram Effectively Recruit a popular Washington state -based athlete to participate in an Instagram "takeover" (or similar social media strategy) to highlight local recreation assets. 38 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley Action 2.3.8 Recruit a popular Washington -based athlete to participate in an Instagram "takeover" to highlight local recreation assets A coherent social media strat- egy can help put new desti- nations on the map and will allow Spokane Valley to reach a new segment of would-be visitors. The photo -sharing app Instagram is an example of a social media platform that is well-suited for telling stories about travel and recreation. An Instagram "takeover" re- fers to a days -long campaign wherein a city, place or or- ganization recruits a popular figure (with a big social media following) to visit and post on the former's account. If the City of Spokane Valley were to undertake a campaign such as the one pictured at right—where Patagonia -spon- sored athlete Caroline Gleich posted for Travel Oregon over several days—the city could reach tens of thousands of fol- lowers with images and stories of local recreation opportuni- ties. traveloregon Table Rack. Oregon FOLLOW 3,675 likes traveloregon Hi everyone. :Hcaroinogleich here. I'm so excited to be taking over the traveloregon instagram this week on a multi -sport outdoor adwn-i: re arrnss the State a,er arriving today. ole decided lc warm .vith a trail run up Table Rcc< in Medford. Whe lute cea_hed it e tuu. lice Lluuds parted aid Uci= rncry nificen[ rainbow revealed itself! at-oveloregon S _Orob.lea andersmJakctsen uzethsen usara5432 Patagonia arrcbnssnder Curoline Gleich g Eesteovertager Benne ret interessante account for en uges hid: -y naniz_adri Love table rock!!! Such a nice hike and view!! brofoto Yeah .acaroiinegleich that's my home stomping grounds.grew up in Log m to like o' comment. '^r 1 GROW SPOKANE VALLEY'S PRESENCE IN REGIONAL EVENTS AND PROMOTE LOCAL DESTINATIONS 'ROMOTE SPOKANE VALLEY'S WINE AND BEVERAGE CLUSTE 2.4.1 Design Wine -Themed Events Assemble a panel of local winery owners and operators to design a "taste of" event or to offer periodic, shared winery tours in Spokane Valley. 2.4.2 Improve Promotion of the Wine Cluster Create branded promotional materials for the wine cluster and related industries (e.g brewing and distilling); distribute regionally. 2.5 IMPROVE THE FAIR AND EXPO CENTER TO PROVIDE NEW PROGRAMS AND INCREASE VISITS 2.5.1 Support the Fair and Expo Center Assess the potential for a Fair and Expo Center expansion and work with Spokane County to identify opportunities to expand programming. ►I •► ► • ':•11• • ► • 2.7 CONDUCT A FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT OF A VISITOR CENTER OR "LAUNCHPAD" 39 REGIONAL EVENTS & LOCAL DESTINATIONS PROJECTS FOR FURTHER STUDY GROW REGIONAL EVENTS AND PROMOTE LOCAL DESTINATIONS See 2.1.1- Work with Spokane County to design and fund an expansion and improvement of Plante's Ferry See 2.2.2 - Design and develop trail connections north and south connecting to river, recreation amenities and neighborhood clusters See 2.2.3 - Identify potential locations for riverfront development opportunities with commercial components See 2.6 - Expand upon and support both Valley Fest and Cycle Celebration so they become financially sustainable tourist attactions See 2.4.1 - Fund a slate of new special events within the City to complement Valley Fest and Cycle Celebration, such as new wine and food events throughout the year See 2.5.1- Redevelop and/or expand facilities on county owned fairground property See 2.7 - Develop and operate a visitor center "launch pad" at a strategic location within the City and 40 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley CREATE NEW ATTRACTIONS THAT ASSERT SPOKANE VALLEY'S POSITION AS A TOURIST DESTINATION -o 1• 3.1.1 Survey Locations and Funding Sources Identify facility location options and explore funding options for a year-round or seasonal multipurpose sports complex. 3.1.2 Analyze the Competitive Market Analyze the competitive market for concerts and large event spaces that could provide opportunities to complex primary business related to sports. 3.1.3 Identify Compatible Functions Identify opportunities for this complex to combine indoor and outdoor and year-round facilities, such as an aquatic center. 3.2 BECOME A LEADING DESTINATION ON THE SPOKANE RIVER 3.2.1 Recruit River -Oriented Businesses Use targeted outreach to existing businesses and entrepreneurs to recruit river recreation businesses (outfitters, operators). 3.2.2 Create a Waterfront Park Create a waterfront park or consistent greenbelt and assess the potential for an art walk to showcase local artists. 3.2.3 Guide Mirabeau Point Development Participate in conversations with the developers of Mirabeau Point to locate commercial activities, especially retail and tourism -related services (e.g. boat/tube and bike rentals, outfitters) within the development. 41 NEW TOURIST ATTRACTIONS CREATE NEW ATTRACTIONS THAT ASSERT SPOKANE VALLEY'S POSITION AS A TOURIST DESTINATION ATTRACTIONS NEW TOURI _ ME A LEADING DESTINATION ON THE SPOKANE RIVE 3.2.4 Construct a Whitewater Course Assess the feasibility of constructing a designated whitewater course on a section of the Spokane River. 3.2.5 Redevelop Public Land Use public-private partnerships in the development of State-owned land (Flora Rd) to encourage tenants that draw visitors to the region. 3.2.6 Promote Existing Whitewater Promote existing, natural water features such as Flora Rapids and Zoo Wave. 3.3 DEVELOP A STADIUM DISTRICT NEAR AVISTA STADIUM 3.3.1 Compile Case Studies Compile case studies of similar development projects near minor league ballparks throughout the United States. 3.3.2 Assess Local Interest Conduct outreach to local landowners to assess interest in the Stadium District concept. 3.3.3 Identify Implementation Opportunities Pending interest from landowners, identify opportunities for public- private implementation partnerships and identify needed land use or policy changes. 42 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley . . J• .14h^J1.L'fi!►�\L!I[Eti ZjIll \.' '!L-llMmo.:♦ Action 3.2.4 Assess the feasibility of constructing a designated whitewater course on a section of the Spokane River. Efforts intended to spur tourism in Spokane Valley should capitalize on the city's natural assets, including the Spokane River. Though por- tions of the river are already well-suited to tubing and paddling, cre- ating a designated whitewater park would instantly make Spokane Valley's stretch of river a regional attraction. These whitewater parks have been extremely successful elsewhere, including in downtown Reno, Nevada (pictured) on the Truckee River. Here, the constructed rapids draw crowds of recreationists daily, and occassionally bring hundreds of visitors to downtown for organized events. 3 NEW TOURIST ATTRACTIONS CREATE NEW ATTRACTIONS THAT ASSERT SPOKANE VALLEY'S POSITION AS A TOURIST DESTINATION '7amiii:iiati daotowommeraur_1:imim i /_1:iniionalwao1a%1ii 3.4.1 Work With Local Partners Work with local and regional organizations that already manage farmers markets to identify opportunities for a farmers market operation in Spokane Valley. 3.4.2 Identify City Property Identify city property that may be suitable for a farmer's market, and consider making public investments to offer a community space for an indoor market. 3.5.1 Support an Arts Venue Work with local arts organizations to explore the feasibility of a local arts and entertainment venue oriented towards local and regional artists. 3.5.2 Develop an Arts Venue Provide a local venue for permanent and temporary art exhibits. 3.5.3 Plan for the Arts Develop a public art master plan for the city, identifying goals, opportunities and funding sources like the National Endowment for the Arts and the Our Town grant program. 44 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley PROJECTS FOR FURTHER STUDY CREATE NEW TOURIST ATTRACTIONS See 3.1.1- Develop a sports complex and/or aquatic center oriented towards youth and family sports and events that is either year round or seasonal in nature See 3.1.2 - Develop an events and concert facility/grounds that can host a diverse set of users See 3.2.2 - Develop a new waterfront park along the Spokane River to include increased river access See 3.2.3 & 3.2.5 - Work with land owners and developers to develop a mixed use commercial facility and public open space on privately owned land See 3.2.4 - Support the development of a whitewater course and venue in the Spokane River See 3.3 - Support and implement a mixed use entertainment and commercial district around Avista Stadium See 3.4.1 - Facilitate and develop a year round farmers market/market hall within the City 45 PROJECTS FOR FURTHER STUDY CREATE NEW TOURIST ATTRACTIONS (CONTINUED) 1 See 3.5.1 - Develop a multifaceted arts and entertainment venue in partnership with local arts organizations, galleries and theatre production companies See 3.5.2 - Develop an arts walk along the river or near the City's civic facilities with permanent and temporary exhibits 46 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley INVEST IN LONG-TERM IMPROVEMENTS TO CREATE A MORE ATTRACTIVE TOURIST DESTINATION SE FEEDBACK LOOPS TO CONSTANTLY IDENTIFY NEEDED IMPROVEMENT' 4.1.1 Harness Visitor Feedback Create a structure to harness feedback from visitors, provide a process for internal review, agile strategy, continued improvement to create repeat visitors. 4.2 DEVELOP AND COMMUNICATE SPOKANE VALLEY'S BRAND 4.2.1 Hire a Branding Consultant Engage a branding/tourism consultant to conduct a branding charrette and development new marketing materials for the city. 4.2.2 Distribute Branded Materials Develop and distribute a branded marketing brochure for local businesses. 4.3 INCENTIVIZE CATALYTIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT CREATE ATTRACTIVE OVERNIGHT DESTINATIONS 4.3.1 Leverage the New City Hall Encourage the establishment of a concentrated business district around the new City Hall building by collaborating with developers and land owners. 4.3.2 Collaborate on the Development of Mirabeau Point Work with the owners of the Mirabeau Point site to develop a vision and plan that will lure new overnight visitors. 4.4 ENGAGE IN LONG-TERM PROCESSES THAT INCREASE "CURB APPEAL" AND SENSE OF PLACE 47 LONG-TERM IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS FOR FURTHER STUDY INVEST IN LONG-TERM IMPROVEMENTS See 4.3 - Identify locations, possible developers and public funding/incentives needed for catalytic development See 4.3 - Identify properties near the proposed City Hall suitable for mixed-use development and explore public private partnership opportunities See 4.3.1- Develop and implement a redevelopment plan for City owned Balfour Park property and consider a wide range of civic uses and potential public-private partnerships 48 TOURISM STRATEGY for the City of Spokane Valley IMPLEMEN IAI ION WORKING TOWARD IMPLEMENTATION: NEXT STEPS This tourism strategy represents Phase One of a larger effort by Spokane Valley to promote economic development through increased tourism in the city and the region. The goals, strategies and actions contained in this document led the project team to identify several projects that require further study prior to implementation. Those projects have been identified for each of the four goals. Phase Two of the tourism promotion effort involves a rigorous assessment of the feasibility and prospective return -on -investment for a selection of these projects. It is expected to kick-off in Spring/Summer 2016, and the results will guide city decision making and investment. 51 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 12/20/16 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: WASPC (Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs) Property Crimes Grant GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: Washington legislators secured $100,000 funding each for Spokane Police, Spokane Valley Police and the Spokane County Sheriff's Office to address auto theft and property crimes in the region. OPTIONS: Discussion RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus from the council to move forward with the plan as presented. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: Chief Werner ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint WASPC PROPERTY CRIMES GRANT • 2016 local Washington Legislatures secured $100,000 in funding each for Spokane Police, Spokane Valley Police and the Spokane County Sheriff's Office to address auto theft and property crimes in the region. • WASPC (Washington Association of Sheriff's & Police Chiefs) is the grant administrator and will deduct 5% from each allocation for indirect costs. • All three agencies got together to discuss how to most effectively utilize this one-time funding opportunity to reduce property crimes in the region. Public Awareness Campaign • $20,000 from each agency ($60,000 total) will be used to hire an advertising firm and coordinate media buys to promote crime reduction through education and hardening of "soft" targets. • A surprising number of vehicle prowlings involve unlocked vehicles, many with wallets, purses, electronics and firearms inside; many burglaries begin with an opportunity presented by an open garage or obvious indicators residents are not home. • Media coverage will reach out to the entire community and educate the public on preventive measures they can use to protect their property from being attractive targets for criminals. • Proactive Property Crimes Task Force • Start up a specialized property crimes task force to specifically target those offenders committing the highest percentage of property crimes. This proactive group would be implemented for a dedicated period of time. • In 2012, a similar unit was created, which resulted in 76 people arrested on 228 felony charges and 284 total charges over a two-month operational period. Technology -Automated License Plate Readers • Between the three law enforcement agencies, we are proposing spending $90,000 to purchase stationary Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR) and supporting software. This potentially allows us to tactically place the ALPRs throughout Spokane County in an effort to reduce property crimes, specifically vehicle thefts. • One of the potential locations is located within the city limits of the Spokane Valley. Automated License Plate Readers • Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR) provide automated detection of license plates. It passively reads the license plates of moving vehicles using LPR optical character recognition technology and compares them with stolen vehicle registry "Hot List." • When a license plate on the Hot List is captured by an LPR camera, the dispatch center is notified and verifies the digital image on the LPR matches the Hot List entry. • The Hot List can include license plates associated with Amber Alerts, Missing Persons, Homicide, Robberies and other criminal investigations. What do LPR Images Look Like? P CeNi w. M1 O/]521)16 5;46 r = ._ r r yjpd .r,r:C.91 9/1V21)1; ]c IG• 1 i J ] b Ei 1 _Ft obtained from a vehicle in public view does not implicate, and thus cannot violate, an owner's or driver's constitutionally -protected expectation of privacy under either the state or federal constitutions. • A license plate reader merely accomplishes, more efficiently, the same task a law enforcement officer may accomplish by reading a license plate and manually entering the number into the database. • It has been well-settled by courts, including those in the 9th Circuit and Washington State, that a law enforcement officer's database search of a specific license plate number Who has access to the data and how long is it retained? • Employees can only access LPR data when the data relates to a specific criminal investigation. • WASPC recommends a 60 -day retention policy, unless it has become or it is reasonable to believe it will become evidence in a specific criminal case. In those circumstances, the applicable data shall be downloaded from the server onto another form of digital media and subject to the same logging, handling and chain of custody requirements as other evidence. been entered into the system. Capturing this license plate and being able to associate it with the suspect vehicle helped facilitate the suspects arrest in Idaho Falls. • Agencies utilizing this technology have had great success in recovering stolen vehicles and identifying direction of travel of Amber Alerts and missing persons. This information is invaluable in reducing the scope of the search area, thereby increasing the chances of a successful outcome. • August 2016: LPR camera captured the suspect of a double homicide in the Spokane Valley traveling eastbound on 190. The suspect vehicle displayed a stolen license plate that had Questions? ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation :10y1N00 ddVIS Michael D. Stone, Director of Parks and Recreation 0-£ co —x / K R 2 0 m® O 5' O § m £ E -i -i -0E 2/� 2z DJ / D q Q 0w0 -D D0� -1 o 0 � ak 0 a® X ® Cn E a) „ q j� k /5 5R G '< D Seeking Council direction regarding the design and uoissnosla :SNOIldO o /D a)x \ $ J n > m =.J0 2< CD o-0 0 k 0 0 0 « 0 0_ 2 m m Q ® O m J- g c kkD g00 5 — o ) B. D ® ® ƒ 0_ w s, (0ƒ¥ 0 - 7\ z a' m $ w ] — § O. 7 m ° ? . z »&$ m 5' \ 0 // ( ¥ a• (DD- -P• � ❑ ❑ 3 5 G. 0 \§ ( 0 2 = e fa 713/ 0 0 cow -0 ] m R _m m S s5 0 G \ m ± ]�� x £� C®0 ( 5 D. g < as) _ )®CD 2 0 )'2§ $c O._� ƒ j / % 0 ° — ° _ os<m 5. wa m 5 7\§ E %© ¥ 7 � k : NOIly1S1931 ONIN2I3AO9 :A1dde faun He joag3 ❑ ❑ o ) \ Z❑ 0- \ // -o (i) :area Eugen' 9 L -OZ .OZ Jegweoaa :Ieno.iddy .101.39.1!a l.uawpedea z xi 0 -< -‹ O 0 Cr) -0 0 D Z O. m 0 D 1- 0 rn si40"kane Appleway Trail Sullivan to Corbin Design Progress Update December 20th, 2016 WELCH-COMER`�fJ ENGINEERS I SURVEYORS B W A BERNARDOWILLS Project Schedule • PUBLIC MEETING #1 — 10/19/16 • Outcomes • Identified Desired Amenities • PROGRESS MEETING WITH CITY STAFF — 11/22/16 • Outcomes • Identified Potential Theming • Identified Potential Opportunity Sites • PROGRESS UPDATE TO COUNCIL - 12/20/16 • PUBLIC MEETING #2 — TBD Intersection Treatments - Crossings WALK SIGNAL HAWK SIGNAL Intersection Treatments -Plantings 1 g 11 -1 -lit • Theme Item/Time Frame ruua ,11111.1t .11101i IN 1 . 1 1 Theme Item/Time Frame.Three Eri:1:4 14.7'4 r saariar..x•r% aur ir-rtr rni A Ai - PagraiNF EARLy • TODAY • rile .Aeoge-ounAair la/1,1044P ,rimewr— APArAlitte.4 • Riivna"047 • SortomeivN „tighq `140i f. 4csecgio Iwuvokior Appleway Trail Theming - Overall FULL LENGTH OF TRAIL - UNIVERSITY TO TSCHIRLEY Taa‘ef • Figlitixe` ca 4 6600 4 - ZsaviA Rao* N41%44 E3 • spoicovvga, I /44 Fria - rim off,— . w w w .NAA -7,444, •Fliftvistoy (,) Tschirley Rd. Theming Opportunities NATURAL AND CULTURAL HISTORY AGRICULTURE RAILROADS :40; 494S 01. # • .4 *010700,1gs 11 OP 040"11.4000 $ Arlo .41+, EARLY SETTLERS SPOKANE RIVER Opportunity Sites wIJ 0 APPLEWAT AVE. �] r L. / r f —r. ! w if - r y t...'ft fl- 4�UC4 f f C •., Opportunity Sites Material Opportunities CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 20, 2016 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Social Media: Twitter launch GOVERNING LEGISLATION: n/a PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: This has been informally discussed by Council on a number of previous occasions but no action has been taken. BACKGROUND: According to the Pew Research Center, "A majority of U.S. adults — 62% - get news on social media." (This is in addition to other traditional sources such as broadcast and print media.) As the use of social media expands by legitimate news providers as well as "citizen journalists," so does the need for sources of credible, factual, and reliable information. That holds true for information about City of Spokane Valley programs, projects and issues. A work group that includes the City Manager and staff members from the City Attorney's office, Public Works, the City Clerk's office, Public Works, HR, IT, Community and Economic Development and the Public Information Officer has been working to conduct research and develop policies, plans and procedures for the City's use of social media. Twitter has been selected as the platform for the City's initial foray into social media. Its format is well-suited to brief, concise, real-time messages known as "Tweets" that are easily read on mobile devices or stationary computers, and are easily shared. The platform provides analytics to gain insight into the results of our messages, such as whether readers "like" them, if the messages are "retweeted" or shared with others, the number of "followers" we have, and other useful data that can help us improve interaction with community members. Community members do not have to have a Twitter account to access information, and the service is free for anyone to use. The name, or "handle" under which the City will send messages or "tweets," is @CityofSV. Anyone who wants to see our messages can search by that name, or City of Spokane Valley. Those who do have Twitter accounts can choose to "follow" us, which means that anything we tweet will show up on their Twitter page, thus increasing the number of people who see the information we originate. Initially, the City's Twitter account will be used to share information about snow removal/deicing, and to provide critical life, health and safety information in emergencies such as the record 2008-2009 snowfall and the 2015 Windstorm. Due to limited staffing, for now use will be confined to outgoing messages. It is expected that use of Twitter and other social media platforms could expand in the future to share information specific to City departments such as Parks and Recreation programs, Public Works projects, Economic Development/Marketing efforts, and general information on city topics. OPTIONS: Discussion RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Staff time plus approximately $5,000 per year to contract for third -party "back-up" services that will retain all City tweets in the event there are any future public records disclosure requests. We anticipate we will be able to cover the cost of each through our existing budget. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun, City Manager; Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer ATTACHMENTS: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 20, 2016 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project #0143 — Final Design Contract with David Evans & Associates GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adopted the 2016-2021 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), which included this project. Admin Report on April 5, 2016 on use of Federal Earmark funds for final design; Info RCA on project status, November 8, 2016; Administrative Report on project status, November 15, 2016; Info RCA, November 22, 2016; Admin Report, December 6, 2016. BACKGROUND: Based on approval from Council, staff issued a Request for Qualifications for Engineering Design Services for the Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project #0143. The selection committee unanimously selected the DEA/HDR team as the most highly qualified firm for this project. The DEA/HDR team and City staff developed the attached Agreement for the design phase of the Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation project. The initial scope of work will provide for much of the preliminary design work and coordination with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF). This Agreement will need to be supplemented in the future with additional scope of work tasks to complete the design phase and prepare bid ready documents for construction. To date, $1,020,000 has been allocated to the project ($720,000 federal earmark funds plus $300,000 of REET funds). Council indicated willingness to increase the REET funding by another $300,000 (to $600,000 total) at its November 15, 2016 meeting. At its December 6, 2016 study session, Council requested additional information on the total cost to complete the design phase, clarity on how far into the design the proposed scope/budget would accomplish, and impacts if budget is reduced to just the $720,000 federal earmark. The fee associated with the current scope of work is $1,274,031. OPTIONS: Discussion. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: An additional $300,000 in REET funds ($600,000 total) will need to be allocated to fully fund the scope of work associated with consultant agreement. STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, P.E. — Capital Improvement Program Manager Eric Guth, P.E. — Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project #0143, Design Services Consultant Agreement 1 Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project City of Spokane Valley Public Works Department December 20, 2016 2 Project Status Reassessment • April 2016 • Use or lose , '10,000 t, leral earmark • Council a' ►rovt. ' addin $300,000 City funds • Thought ti s would let 3 90% design • 30% des. ' comp* • NEPA approvtu • November 2016 • Selected DEA/HDR • Previous effort not at 30% design • Barker Overpass - $31,140,000 estimated construction cost • Typical design costs - 8-12% of estimated construction cost • One Major Goal of This Design Phase - Verify estimated construction cost PE Phase Budget Comparison • Barker Road Bridge Over River • Total Project Cost - $11,152,457 • Construction cost = $9,250,243 • Consultant cost = $920,564 (10.0%) • Other Costs = $981,650 • Right -of -Way (RW) • Construction Inspection/Management • Staff Costs • Public Involvement 3 • Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement • Total Project cost = $15,934,245 (est.) • Construction cost = $13,085,776 (est.) • Consultant cost = $1,637,530 (12.5%) • Other Costs = $1,210,939 • Two Construction contracts - • Phase 1 = Park Improvements • Phase 2 = Bridge Construction Estimated Barker Road/BNSF Budget • Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation • Total Project Cost Estimate: $36,035,000 • Estimated Construction Cost: $31,140,000 • Estimated Consultant Design Fee: $2.49 - $3.74 million (8-12%) 4 Based on 2004 "30%" design escalated to 2016 dollars Proposed Consultant Contract Value $1,274,031 5 What does this contract amount get us? Proposed Consultant Scope/Budget • Project Management Et Control • Capacity Justification Report • Corridor Inventory/Data Collection • Geotechnical Engineering • Confirm Planning Framework • Traffic Modeling Et Analysis • Public Involvement Program • NEPA Documentation • Surveying/Mapping 6 $ 237, 893 15.37% $ 4, 043 0.33% $ 14,613 1.08% $ 49,238 5.18% $ 1, 978 0.14% $ 38, 446 3.39% $ 29,628 2.31% $ 32, 866 3.66% $ 49, 718 5.58% Proposed Consultant Scope/Budget (cont.) 7 • Alternatives Analysis - Interchange Et Bridge $ 83,905 7.39% • BNSF Coordination Et Submittals* $ 64,606 4.31% • Refine BTV 30% Design Et Approval $ 83,247 6.62% • Intermediate Design Documents** $ 522,127 43.77% • Temporary Project Closeout $ 10,771 0.86% • Expenses $ 50,950 Total $1,274,031 * Accomplishes two of three BNSF approvals * Approx. 178 drawings, quantity takeoffs, and cost estimate Consultant Contract Value 5720,000 8 What does this contract amount get us? Likely Scenario with Consultant Budget Reduced to 5720,000 • Project Management Et Control • Capacity Justification Report • Corridor Inventory/Data Collection • Geotechnical Engineering • Confirm Planning Framework • Traffic Modeling Et Analysis • Public Involvement Program • NEPA Documentation • Surveying/Mapping 9 $ 166,525 24.88% $ 4, 043 0.60% $ 14,613 2.18% $ 49,238 7.36% $ 1, 978 0.30% $ 38, 446 5.74% $ 29,628 4.43% $ 32, 866 4.91% $ 49, 718 7.43% Likely Scenario with Consultant Budget Reduced to 5720,000 (cont.) 10 • Alternatives Analysis - Interchange Et Bridge $ 83,905 12.53% • BNSF Coordination Et Submittals* $ 43,092 6.44% • Refine BTV 30% Design Et Approval $ 83,247 12.44% • Intermediate Design Documents** $ 61,340 9.16% • Temporary Project Closeout $ 10,771 1.61 • Expenses $ 50,950 Total $ 720,000 * Accomplishes only one of three BNSF approvals ** Does not provide as much design; no quantity takeoffs or construction cost estimate Percent Complete Discussion • Estimated Construction Cost = $31,140,000 • Design Fee Range 8-12% (10% average) • Design Fee = $2.49 - $3.73 million • $31.14 million construction cost x 10% average fee = $3.1 million design fee 11 Pr oosed dee = $1,274,031 Reduced Fee = $720,000 • $1,274,031 : $3.1 million = 41% complete • $720,000 : $3.1 million = 23% complete As the design fee percent increases, the percent complete decreases 8% fee ($2.49M) = 51% complete 8% fee ($2.49M) = 29% complete 12% fee ($3.74M) = 34% complete 12% fee ($3.74M) = 19% complete Design Fee - Percent Complete Relationship 12 $4,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 E $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $- $720,000 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percent Complete 13 Options • Consensus to bring DEA consultant agreement back to Council for motion consideration on January 10, 2017 with scope valued at $1,274,031. • Consensus to bring DEA consultant agreement back to Council for motion consideration on January 10, 2017 with reduced scope valued at $720,000. • Other appropriate action. Discussion Et Questions? 14 Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Agreement Number: 16-175 Firm/Organization Legal Name (do not use dba's): David Evans and Associates, Inc. Address 908 N. Howard St., Suite 300, Spokane, WA 99201 Federal Aid Number UBI Number 600 227 608 Federal TIN or SSN Number 93-0661195 Execution Date Completion Date 12/31/17 1099 Form Required Federal Participation ❑ Yes ✓ No ✓ Yes ❑ No Project Title Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation - Design Services Description of Work See Exhibit A for the Scope of Services. Total Amount Authorized: $1,274,031 Management Reserve Fund: $0.00 Maximum Amount Payable: ❑ Yes ✓ No DBE Participation ❑ Yes ✓ No MBE Participation ❑ Yes 1 No WBE Participation ✓ Yes HRA ❑ No SBE Participation Index of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J Scope of Work DBE Participation Preparation and Delivery of Electronic Engineering and Other Data Prime Consultant Cost Computations Sub -consultant Cost Computations Title VI Assurances Certification Documents Liability Insurance Increase (Not Applicable) Alleged Consultant Design Error Procedures Consultant Claim Procedures Agreement Number: Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 1 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as shown in the "Execution Date" box on page one (1) of this AGREEMENT, between the City of Spokane Valley hereinafter called the "AGENCY," and the "Firm / Organization Name" referenced on page one (1) of this AGREEMENT, hereinafter called the "CONSULTANT." WHEREAS, the AGENCY desires to accomplish the work referenced in "Description of Work" on page one (1) of this AGREEMENT and hereafter called the "SERVICES;" and does not have sufficient staff to meet the required commitment and therefore deems it advisable and desirable to engage the assistance of a CONSULTANT to provide the necessary SERVICES; and WHEREAS, the CONSULTANT represents that they comply with the Washington State Statutes relating to professional registration, if applicable, and has signified a willingness to furnish consulting services to the AGENCY. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions, covenants, and performance contained herein, or attached and incorporated and made a part hereof, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. General Description of Work The work under this AGREEMENT shall consist of the above-described SERVICES as herein defined, and necessary to accomplish the completed work for this project. The CONSULTANT shall furnish all services, labor, and related equipment and, if applicable, sub -consultants and subcontractors necessary to conduct and complete the SERVICES as designated elsewhere in this AGREEMENT. 11. General Scope of Work The Scope of Work and projected level of effort required for these SERVICES is described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference made a part of this AGREEMENT. The General Scope of Work was developed utilizing performance based contracting methodologies. 111. General Requirements All aspects of coordination of the work of this AGREEMENT with outside agencies, groups, or individuals shall receive advance approval by the AGENCY. Necessary contacts and meetings with agencies, groups, and/or individuals shall be coordinated through the AGENCY. The CONSULTANT shall attend coordination, progress, and presentation meetings with the AGENCY and/or such State, Federal, Community, City, or County officials, groups or individuals as may be requested by the AGENCY. The AGENCY will provide the CONSULTANT sufficient notice prior to meetings requiring CONSULTANT participation. The minimum required hours or days' notice shall be agreed to between the AGENCY and the CONSULTANT and shown in Exhibit "A." The CONSULTANT shall prepare a monthly progress report, in a form approved by the AGENCY, which will outline in written and graphical form the various phases and the order of performance of the SERVICES in sufficient detail so that the progress of the SERVICES can easily be evaluated. The CONSULTANT, any sub -consultants, and the AGENCY shall comply with all Federal, State, and local laws, rules, codes, regulations, and all AGENCY policies and directives, applicable to the work to be performed under this AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT shall be interpreted and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Agreement Number: Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 2 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 Participation for Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) or Small Business Enterprises (SBE), if required, per 49 CFR Part 26, shall be shown on the heading of this AGREEMENT. If DBE firms are utilized at the commencement of this AGREEMENT, the amounts authorized to each firm and their certification number will be shown on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. If the Prime CONSULTANT is a DBE certified firm they must comply with the Commercial Useful Function (CUF) regulation outlined in the AGENCY's "DBE Program Participation Plan" and perform a minimum of 30% of the total amount of this AGREEMENT. It is recommended, but not required, that non -DBE Prime CONSULTANTS perform a minimum of 30% of the total amount of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT, on a monthly basis, is required to submit DBE Participation of the amounts paid to all DBE firms invoiced for this AGREEMENT. All Reports, PS&E materials, and other data furnished to the CONSULTANT by the AGENCY shall be returned. All electronic files, prepared by the CONSULTANT, must meet the requirements as outlined in Exhibit "C — Preparation and Delivery of Electronic Engineering and other Data." All designs, drawings, specifications, documents, and other work products, including all electronic files, prepared by the CONSULTANT prior to completion or termination of this AGREEMENT are instruments of service for these SERVICES, and are the property of the AGENCY. Reuse by the AGENCY or by others, acting through or on behalf of the AGENCY of any such instruments of service, not occurring as a part of this SERVICE, shall be without liability or legal exposure to the CONSULTANT. Any and all notices or requests required under this AGREEMENT shall be made in writing and sent to the other party by (i) certified mail, return receipt requested, or (ii) by email or facsimile, to the address set forth below: If to AGENCY: Name: Chris Bainbridge, Agency: City of Spokane Valley Address: 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 City: Spokane Valley State: WA Zip: 99206 Email: cbainbridge@spokanevalley.org Phone: (509) 720-5102 Facsimile: (509) 921-1008 If to CONSULTANT: Name: Greg Holder, P.E. Agency: David Evans and Associates, Inc. Address: 908 N. Howard St., Suite 300 City: Spokane State: WA Zip: 99201 Email: hgh@deainc.com Phone: (509) 232-8718 Facsimile: (509) 327-7345 IV. Time for Beginning and Completion The CONSULTANT shall not begin any work under the terms of this AGREEMENT until authorized in writing by the AGENCY. All work under this AGREEMENT shall be completed by the date shown in the heading of this AGREEMENT titled "Completion Date." The established completion time shall not be extended because of any delays attributable to the CONSULTANT, but may be extended by the AGENCY in the event of a delay attributable to the AGENCY, or because of unavoidable delays caused by an act of GOD, governmental actions, or other conditions beyond the control of the CONSULTANT. A prior supplemental AGREEMENT issued by the AGENCY is required to extend the established completion time. Agreement Number: Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 3 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 V. Payment Provisions The CONSULTANT shall be paid by the AGENCY for completed SERVICES rendered under this AGREEMENT as provided hereinafter. Such payment shall be full compensation for SERVICES performed or SERVICES rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies, equipment, and incidentals necessary to complete SERVICES, specified in Section II, "Scope of Work". The CONSULTANT shall conform to all applicable portions of 48 CFR Part 31 (www.ecfr.gov). The estimate in support of the Cost Plus Fixed Fee amount is attached hereto as Exhibits "D" and "E" and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. A. Actual Costs: Payment for all consulting services for this PROJECT shall be on the basis of the CONSULTANT'S actual cost plus a fixed fee. The actual cost shall include direct salary cost, indirect cost rate, and direct non -salary costs. 1. Direct (RAW) Labor Costs: The Direct (RAW) Labor Cost is the direct salary paid to principals, professional, technical, and clerical personnel for the time they are productively engaged in work necessary to fulfill the terms of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall maintain support data to verify the direct salary costs billed to the AGENCY. 2. Indirect Cost Rate (ICR) Costs: ICR Costs are those costs, other than direct costs, which are included as such on the books of the CONSULTANT in the normal everyday keeping of its books. Progress payments shall be made at the ICR rates shown in attached Exhibits "D" and "E" of this AGREEMENT. Total ICR payment shall be based on Actual Costs. The AGENCY agrees to reimburse the CONSULTANT the actual ICR costs verified by audit, up to the Maximum Total Amount Payable, authorized under this AGREEMENT, when accumulated with all other Actual Costs. A summary of the CONSULTANT'S cost estimate and the ICR percentage is shown in Exhibits "D" and "E", attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT (prime and all sub -consultants) will submit to the AGENCY within six (6) months after the end of each firm's fiscal year, an ICR schedule in the format required by the AGENCY (cost category, dollar expenditures, etc.) for the purpose of adjusting the ICR rate for billings received and paid during the fiscal year represented by the ICR schedule. It shall also be used for the computation of progress payments during the following year and for retroactively adjusting the previous year's ICR cost to reflect the actual rate. The ICR schedule will be sent to Email: ConsultantRates@wsdot.wa.gov. Failure to supply this information by either the prime CONSULTANT or any of their sub -consultants shall cause the AGENCY to withhold payment of the billed ICR costs until such time as the required information is received and an overhead rate for billing purposes is approved. The AGENCY's Project Manager and/or the Federal Government may perform an audit of the CONSULTANT'S books and records at any time during regular business hours to determine the actual ICR rate, if they so desire. 3. Direct Non -Salary Costs: Direct Non -Salary Costs will be reimbursed at the Actual Cost to the CONSULTANT. These charges may include, but are not limited to, the following items: travel, printing, long distance telephone, supplies, computer charges and fees of sub -consultants. Air or train travel will be reimbursed only to economy class levels unless otherwise approved by the AGENCY. The CONSULTANT shall comply with the rules and regulations regarding travel costs (excluding air, train, and rental car costs) in accordance with WSDOT's Accounting Manual M 13-82, Chapter 10 — Travel Rules and Procedures, and revisions thereto. Air, train, and rental car costs shall be reimbursed in accordance with 48 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 31.205-46 "Travel Costs." The billing for Direct Non -Salary Costs shall include an itemized listing of the charges directly identifiable with the PROJECT. The CONSULTANT shall maintain the original supporting documents in their office. Copies of the original supporting documents shall be supplied to the AGENCY upon request. All above charges must be necessary for the services provided under this AGREEMENT. Agreement Number: Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 4 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 4. Fixed Fee: The Fixed Fee, which represents the CONSULTANT'S profit, is shown in attached Exhibits "D" and "E" of this AGREEMENT. This fee is based on the Scope of Work defined in this AGREEMENT and the estimated person -hours required to perform the stated Scope of Work. In the event the CONSULTANT enters into a supplemental AGREEMENT for additional work, the supplemental AGREEMENT may include provisions for the added costs and an appropriate additional fee. The Fixed Fee will be prorated and paid monthly in proportion to the percentage of work completed by the CONSULTANT and reported in the Monthly Progress Reports accompanying the billings. Any portion of the Fixed Fee earned but not previously paid in the progress payments will be covered in the final payment, subject to the provisions of Section IX entitled "Termination of Agreement." 5. Management Reserve Fund (MRF): The AGENCY may desire to establish MRF to provide the Agreement Administrator with the flexibility to authorize additional funds to the AGREEMENT for allowable unforeseen costs, or reimbursing the CONSULTANT for additional work beyond that already defined in this AGREEMENT. Such authorization(s) shall be in writing and shall not exceed the lesser of $100,000 or 10% of the Total Amount Authorized as shown in the heading of this AGREEMENT. The amount included for the MRF is shown in the heading of this AGREEMENT. This fund may not be replenished. Any changes requiring additional costs in excess of the MRF shall be made in accordance with Section XIII, "Changes of Work." 6. Maximum Total Amount Payable: The Maximum Total Amount Payable by the AGENCY to the CONSULTANT under this AGREEMENT shall not exceed the amount shown in the heading of this AGREEMENT. The Maximum Total Amount Payable is comprised of the Total Amount Authorized, and the MRF. The Maximum Total Amount Payable does not include payment for Extra Work as stipulated in Section XIII, "Changes of Work." No minimum amount payable is guaranteed under this AGREEMENT. B. Monthly Progress Payments: The CONSULTANT may submit billings to the AGENCY for reimbursement of Actual Costs plus the ICR and calculated fee on a monthly basis during the progress of the work. Such billings shall be in a format approved by the AGENCY and accompanied by the monthly progress reports required under Section III, "General Requirements" of this AGREEMENT. The billings will be supported by an itemized listing for each item including Direct (RAW) Labor, Direct Non -Salary, and allowable ICR Costs to which will be added the prorated Fixed Fee. To provide a means of verifying the billed Direct (RAW) Labor costs for CONSULTANT employees, the AGENCY may conduct employee interviews. These interviews may consist of recording the names, titles, Direct (RAW) Labor rates, and present duties of those employees performing work on the PROJECT at the time of the interview. C. Final Payment: Final Payment of any balance due the CONSULTANT of the gross amount earned will be made promptly upon its verification by the AGENCY after the completion of the work under this AGREEMENT, contingent, if applicable, upon receipt of all PS&E, plans, maps, notes, reports, electronic data and other related documents which are required to be furnished under this AGREEMENT. Acceptance of such Final Payment by the CONSULTANT shall constitute a release of all claims for payment, which the CONSULTANT may have against the AGENCY unless such claims are specifically reserved in writing and transmitted to the AGENCY by the CONSULTANT prior to its acceptance. Said Final Payment shall not, however, be a bar to any claims that the AGENCY may have against the CONSULTANT or to any remedies the AGENCY may pursue with respect to such claims. The payment of any billing will not constitute agreement as to the appropriateness of any item and at the time of final audit; all required adjustments will be made and reflected in a final payment. In the event that such final audit reveals an overpayment to the CONSULTANT, the CONSULTANT will refund such overpayment to the AGENCY within thirty (30) calendar days of notice of the overpayment. Such refund shall not constitute a waiver by the CONSULTANT for any claims relating to the validity of a finding by the AGENCY of overpayment. The CONSULTANT has twenty (20) working days after receipt of the final POST AUDIT to begin the appeal process to the AGENCY for audit findings. Agreement Number: Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 5 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 D. Inspection of Cost Records: The CONSULTANT and their sub -consultants shall keep available for inspection by representatives of the AGENCY and the United States, for a period of six (6) years after receipt of final payment, the cost records and accounts pertaining to this AGREEMENT and all items related to or bearing upon these records with the following exception: if any litigation, claim or audit arising out of, in connection with, or related to this AGREEMENT is initiated before the expiration of the six (6) year period, the cost records and accounts shall be retained until such litigation, claim, or audit involving the records is completed. An interim or post audit may be performed on this AGREEMENT. The audit, if any, will be performed by the State Auditor, WSDOT's Internal Audit Office and/or at the request of the AGENCY's Project Manager. VI. Sub -Contracting The AGENCY permits subcontracts for those items of SERVICES as shown in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall not subcontract for the performance of any SERVICE under this AGREEMENT without prior written permission of the AGENCY. No permission for subcontracting shall create, between the AGENCY and sub -consultant, any contract or any other relationship. Compensation for this sub -consultant SERVICES shall be based on the cost factors shown on Exhibit "E" attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT. The SERVICES of the sub -consultant shall not exceed its maximum amount payable identified in each sub - consultant cost estimate unless a prior written approval has been issued by the AGENCY. All reimbursable direct labor, indirect cost rate, direct non -salary costs and fixed fee costs for the sub -consultant shall be negotiated and substantiated in accordance with section V "Payment Provisions" herein and shall be memorialized in a final written acknowledgement between the parties. All subcontracts shall contain all applicable provisions of this AGREEMENT, and the CONSULTANT shall require each sub -consultant or subcontractor, of any tier, to abide by the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT. With respect to sub -consultant payment, the CONSULTANT shall comply with all applicable sections of the STATE's Prompt Payment laws as set forth in RCW 39.04.250 and RCW 39.76.011. The CONSULTANT, sub -recipient, or sub -consultant shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the performance of this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR Part 26 in the award and administration of DOT -assisted contracts. Failure by the CONSULTANT to carry out these requirements is a material breach of this AGREEMENT, which may result in the termination of this AGREEMENT or such other remedy as the recipient deems appropriate. VII. Employment and Organizational Conflict of Interest The CONSULTANT warrants that they have not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT, to solicit or secure this contract, and that it has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. For breach or violation of this warrant, the AGENCY shall have the right to annul this AGREEMENT without liability or, in its discretion, to deduct from this AGREEMENT price or consideration or otherwise recover the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee. Any and all employees of the CONSULTANT or other persons while engaged in the performance of any work or services required of the CONSULTANT under this AGREEMENT, shall be considered employees of the CONSULTANT only and not of the AGENCY, and any and all claims that may arise under any Workmen's Agreement Number: Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 6 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 Compensation Act on behalf of said employees or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims made by a third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of the CONSULTANT's employees or other persons while so engaged on any of the work or services provided to be rendered herein, shall be the sole obligation and responsibility of the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT shall not engage, on a full- or part-time basis, or other basis, during the period of this AGREEMENT, any professional or technical personnel who are, or have been, at any time during the period of this AGREEMENT, in the employ of the United States Department of Transportation or the AGENCY, except regularly retired employees, without written consent of the public employer of such person if he/she will be working on this AGREEMENT for the CONSULTANT. VIII. Nondiscrimination During the performance of this AGREEMENT, the subcontractors and successors in interest, agrees to • Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. Chapter 21 Subchapter V § 2000d through 2000d -4a) • Federal -aid Highway Act of 1973 (23 U.S.C. Chapter 3 § 324) • Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. Chapter 16 Subchapter V § 794) • Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. Chapter 76 § 6101 et. seq.) CONSULTANT, for itself, its assignees, sub -consultants, comply with the following laws and regulations: • Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 (Public Law 100-259) • American with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Chapter 126 § 12101 et. seq.) • 23 CFR Part 200 • 49 CFR Part 21 • 49 CFR Part 26 • RCW 49.60.180 In relation to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the CONSULTANT is bound by the provisions of Exhibit "F" attached hereto and by this reference made part of this AGREEMENT, and shall include the attached Exhibit "F" in every sub -contract, including procurement of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the Regulations or directives issued pursuant thereto. IX. Termination of Agreement The right is reserved by the AGENCY to terminate this AGREEMENT at any time with or without cause upon ten (10) days written notice to the CONSULTANT. In the event this AGREEMENT is terminated by the AGENCY, other than for default on the part of the CONSULTANT, a final payment shall be made to the CONSULTANT for actual hours charged and any appropriate fixed fee percentage at the time of termination of this AGREEMENT, plus any direct non -salary costs incurred up to the time of termination of this AGREEMENT. No payment shall be made for any SERVICES completed after ten (10) days following receipt by the CONSULTANT of the notice to terminate. If the accumulated payment made to the CONSULTANT prior to Notice of Termination exceeds the total amount that would be due when computed as set forth in paragraph two (2) of this section, then no final payment shall be due and the CONSULTANT shall immediately reimburse the AGENCY for any excess paid. If the services of the CONSULTANT are terminated by the AGENCY for default on the part of the CONSULTANT, the above formula for payment shall not apply. In the event of a termination for default, the amount to be paid to the CONSULTANT shall be determined by the AGENCY with consideration given to the actual costs incurred by the CONSULTANT in performing SERVICES to the date of termination, the amount of SERVICES originally required which was satisfactorily completed to Agreement Number: Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 7 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 date of termination, whether that SERVICE is in a form or a type which is usable to the AGENCY at the time of termination, the cost to the AGENCY of employing another firm to complete the SERVICES required and the time which may be required to do so, and other factors which affect the value to the AGENCY of the SERVICES performed at the time of termination. Under no circumstances shall payment made under this subsection exceed the amount, which would have been made using the formula set forth in paragraph two (2) of this section. If it is determined for any reason that the CONSULTANT was not in default or that the CONSULTANT's failure to perform is without the CONSULTANT's or its employee's fault or negligence, the termination shall be deemed to be a termination for the convenience of the AGENCY. In such an event, the CONSULTANT would be reimbursed for actual costs and appropriate fixed fee percentage in accordance with the termination for other than default clauses listed previously. The CONSULTANT shall, within 15 days, notify the AGENCY in writing, in the event of the death of any member, partner, or officer of the CONSULTANT or the death or change of any of the CONSULTANT's supervisory and/or other key personnel assigned to the project or disaffiliation of any principally involved CONSULTANT employee. The CONSULTANT shall also notify the AGENCY, in writing, in the event of the sale or transfer of 50% or more of the beneficial ownership of the CONSULTANT within 15 days of such sale or transfer occurring. The CONSULTANT shall continue to be obligated to complete the SERVICES under the terms of this AGREEMENT unless the AGENCY chooses to terminate this AGREEMENT for convenience or chooses to renegotiate any term(s) of this AGREEMENT. If termination for convenience occurs, final payment will be made to the CONSULTANT as set forth in the second and third paragraphs of this section. Payment for any part of the SERVICES by the AGENCY shall not constitute a waiver by the AGENCY of any remedies of any type it may have against the CONSULTANT for any breach of this AGREEMENT by the CONSULTANT, or for failure of the CONSULTANT to perform SERVICES required of it by the AGENCY. Forbearance of any rights under the AGREEMENT will not constitute waiver of entitlement to exercise those rights with respect to any future act or omission by the CONSULTANT. X. Changes of Work The CONSULTANT shall make such changes and revisions in the completed work of this AGREEMENT as necessary to correct errors appearing therein, without additional compensation thereof. Should the AGENCY find it desirable for its own purposes to have previously satisfactorily completed SERVICES or parts thereof changed or revised, the CONSULTANT shall make such revisions as directed by the AGENCY. This work shall be considered as Extra Work and will be paid for as herein provided under section XIII "Extra Work." XI. Disputes Any disputed issue not resolved pursuant to the terms of this AGREEMENT shall be submitted in writing within 10 days to the Director of Public Works or AGENCY Engineer, whose decision in the matter shall be final and binding on the parties of this AGREEMENT; provided however, that if an action is brought challenging the Director of Public Works or AGENCY Engineer's decision, that decision shall be subject to judicial review. If the parties to this AGREEMENT mutually agree, disputes concerning alleged design errors will be conducted under the procedures found in Exhibit "J". In the event that either party deem it necessary to institute legal action or proceeding to enforce any right or obligation under this AGREEMENT, this action shall be initiated in the Superior Court of the State of Washington, situated in the county in which the AGENCY is located. The parties hereto agree that all questions shall be resolved by application of Washington law and that the parties have the right of appeal from such decisions of the Superior Court in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. The CONSULTANT hereby consents to the personal jurisdiction of the Superior Court of the State of Washington, situated in the county in which the AGENCY is located. Agreement Number: Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 8 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 XII. Legal Relations The CONSULTANT, any sub -consultants, and the AGENCY shall comply with all Federal, State, and local laws, rules, codes, regulations and all AGENCY policies and directives, applicable to the work to be performed under this AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT shall be interpreted and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. The CONSULTANT shall defend, indemnify, and hold The State of Washington (STATE) and the AGENCY and their officers and employees harmless from all claims, demands, or suits at law or equity arising in whole or in part from the negligence of, or the breach of any obligation under this AGREEMENT by, the CONSULTANT or the CONSULTANT's agents, employees, sub consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT may be legally liable; provided that nothing herein shall require a CONSULTANT to defend or indemnify the STATE and the AGENCY and their officers and employees against and hold harmless the STATE and the AGENCY and their officers and employees from claims, demands or suits based solely upon the negligence of, or breach of any obligation under this AGREEMENT by the STATE and the AGENCY, their agents, officers, employees, sub -consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the STATE and/or the AGENCY may be legally liable; and provided further that if the claims or suits are caused by or result from the concurrent negligence of (a) the CONSULTANT or the CONSULTANT's agents, employees, sub -consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT is legally liable, and (b) the STATE and/or AGENCY, their agents, officers, employees, sub -consultants, subcontractors and or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the STATE and or AGENCY may be legally liable, the defense and indemnity obligation shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of the CONSULTANT's negligence or the negligence of the CONSULTANT's agents, employees, sub -consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT may be legally liable. This provision shall be included in any AGREEMENT between CONSULTANT and any sub -consultant, subcontractor and vendor, of any tier. The CONSULTANT shall also defend, indemnify, and hold the STATE and the AGENCY and their officers and employees harmless from all claims, demands, or suits at law or equity arising in whole or in part from the alleged patent or copyright infringement or other allegedly improper appropriation or use of trade secrets, patents, proprietary information, know-how, copyright rights or inventions by the CONSULTANT or the CONSULTANT's agents, employees, sub -consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT may be legally liable, in performance of the Work under this AGREEMENT or arising out of any use in connection with the AGREEMENT of methods, processes, designs, information or other items furnished or communicated to STATE and/or the AGENCY, their agents, officers and employees pursuant to the AGREEMENT; provided that this indemnity shall not apply to any alleged patent or copyright infringement or other allegedly improper appropriation or use of trade secrets, patents, proprietary information, know-how, copyright rights or inventions resulting from STATE and/or AGENCY's, their agents', officers' and employees' failure to comply with specific written instructions regarding use provided to STATE and/or AGENCY, their agents, officers and employees by the CONSULTANT, its agents, employees, sub -consultants, subcontractors or vendors, of any tier, or any other persons for whom the CONSULTANT may be legally liable. The CONSULTANT's relation to the AGENCY shall be at all times as an independent contractor. Notwithstanding any determination by the Executive Ethics Board or other tribunal, the AGENCY may, in its sole discretion, by written notice to the CONSULTANT terminate this AGREEMENT if it is found after due notice and examination by the AGENCY that there is a violation of the Ethics in Public Service Act, Chapter 42.52 RCW; or any similar statute involving the CONSULTANT in the procurement of, or performance under, this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT specifically assumes potential liability for actions brought by the CONSULTANT's own employees or its agents against the STATE and /or the AGENCY and, solely for the purpose of this indemnification and defense, the CONSULTANT specifically waives any immunity under the state industrial insurance law, Title 51 RCW. This waiver has been mutually negotiated between the Parties. Agreement Number: Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 9 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 Unless otherwise specified in this AGREEMENT, the AGENCY shall be responsible for administration of construction contracts, if any, on the project. Subject to the processing of a new sole source, or an acceptable supplemental AGREEMENT, the CONSULTANT shall provide On -Call assistance to the AGENCY during contract administration. By providing such assistance, the CONSULTANT shall assume no responsibility for: proper construction techniques, job site safety, or any construction contractor's failure to perform its work in accordance with the contract documents. The CONSULTANT shall obtain and keep in force during the terms of this AGREEMENT, or as otherwise required, the following insurance with companies or through sources approved by the State Insurance Commissioner pursuant to Title 48 RCW. Insurance Coverage A. Worker's compensation and employer's liability insurance as required by the STATE. B. Commercial general liability insurance written under ISO Form CG 00 01 12 04 or its equivalent with minimum limits of one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence and two million dollars ($2,000,000.00) in the aggregate for each policy period. C. Business auto liability insurance written under ISO Form CG 00 01 10 01 or equivalent providing coverage for any "Auto" (Symbol 1) used in an amount not less than a one million dollar ($1,000,000.00) combined single limit for each occurrence. Excepting the Worker's Compensation Insurance and any Professional Liability Insurance, the STATE and AGENCY, their officers, employees, and agents will be named on all policies of CONSULTANT and any sub - consultant and/or subcontractor as an additional insured (the "AIs"), with no restrictions or limitations concerning products and completed operations coverage. This coverage shall be primary coverage and non-contributory and any coverage maintained by the AIs shall be excess over, and shall not contribute with, the additional insured coverage required hereunder. The CONSULTANT's and the sub -consultant's and/or subcontractor's insurer shall waive any and all rights of subrogation against the AIs. The CONSULTANT shall furnish the AGENCY with verification of insurance and endorsements required by this AGREEMENT. The AGENCY reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies at any time. All insurance shall be obtained from an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Washington. The CONSULTANT shall submit a verification of insurance as outlined above within fourteen (14) days of the execution of this AGREEMENT to: Name: Chris Bainbridge Agency: City of Spokane Valley Address: 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 City: Spokane Valley State: WA Zip: 99206 Email: cbainbridge@spokanevalley.org Phone: (509) 720-5102 Facsimile: (509) 921-1008 No cancellation of the foregoing policies shall be effective without thirty (30) days prior notice to the AGENCY. The CONSULTANT's professional liability to the AGENCY, including that which may arise in reference to section IX "Termination of Agreement" of this AGREEMENT, shall be limited to the accumulative amount of the authorized AGREEMENT amount or one million dollars ($1,000,000.00), whichever is greater, unless the limit of liability is increased by the AGENCY pursuant to Exhibit H. In no case shall the CONSULTANT's professional liability to third parties be limited in any way. Agreement Number: Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 10 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 The parties enter into this AGREEMENT for the sole benefit of the parties, and to the exclusion of any third party, and no third party beneficiary is intended or created by the execution of this AGREEMENT. The AGENCY will pay no progress payments under section V "Payment Provisions" until the CONSULTANT has fully complied with this section. This remedy is not exclusive; and the AGENCY may take such other action as is available to it under other provisions of this AGREEMENT, or otherwise in law. XIII. Extra Work A. The AGENCY may at any time, by written order, make changes within the general scope of this AGREEMENT in the SERVICES to be performed. B. If any such change causes an increase or decrease in the estimated cost of, or the time required for, performance of any part of the SERVICES under this AGREEMENT, whether or not changed by the order, or otherwise affects any other terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT, the AGENCY shall make an equitable adjustment in the: (1) maximum amount payable; (2) delivery or completion schedule, or both; and (3) other affected terms and shall modify this AGREEMENT accordingly. C. The CONSULTANT must submit any "request for equitable adjustment," hereafter referred to as "CLAIM," under this clause within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of the written order. However, if the AGENCY decides that the facts justify it, the AGENCY may receive and act upon a CLAIM submitted before final payment of this AGREEMENT. D. Failure to agree to any adjustment shall be a dispute under the section XI "Disputes" clause. However, nothing in this clause shall excuse the CONSULTANT from proceeding with the AGREEMENT as changed. E. Notwithstanding the terms and conditions of paragraphs (A.) and (B.) above, the maximum amount payable for this AGREEMENT, shall not be increased or considered to be increased except by specific written supplement to this AGREEMENT. XIV. Endorsement of Plans If applicable, the CONSULTANT shall place their endorsement on all plans, estimates, or any other engineering data furnished by them. XV. Federal Review The Federal Highway Administration shall have the right to participate in the review or examination of the SERVICES in progress. XVI. Certification of the Consultant and the Agency Attached hereto as Exhibit "G -1(a and b)" are the Certifications of the CONSULTANT and the AGENCY, Exhibit "G-2" Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters - Primary Covered Transactions, Exhibit "G-3" Certification Regarding the Restrictions of the Use of Federal Funds for Lobbying and Exhibit "G-4" Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data. Exhibit "G-3" is required only in AGREEMENT's over one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) and Exhibit "G-4" is required only in AGREEMENT's over five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00.) These Exhibits must be executed by the CONSULTANT, and submitted with the master AGREEMENT, and returned to the AGENCY at the address listed in section III "General Requirements" prior to its performance of any SERVICES under this AGREEMENT. Agreement Number: Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 11 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 XVII. Complete Agreement This document and referenced attachments contain all covenants, stipulations, and provisions agreed upon by the parties. No agent, or representative of either party has authority to make, and the parties shall not be bound by or be liable for, any statement, representation, promise or agreement not set forth herein. No changes, amendments, or modifications of the terms hereof shall be valid unless reduced to writing and signed by the parties as a supplement to this AGREEMENT. XVIII. Execution and Acceptance This AGREEMENT may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original having identical legal effect. The CONSULTANT does hereby ratify and adopt all statements, representations, warranties, covenants, and AGREEMENT's contained in the proposal, and the supporting material submitted by the CONSULTANT, and does hereby accept this AGREEMENT and agrees to all of the terms and conditions thereof. XIX. Protection of Confidential Information The CONSULTANT acknowledges that some of the material and information that may come into its possession or knowledge in connection with this AGREEMENT or its performance may consist of information that is exempt from disclosure to the public or other unauthorized persons under either chapter 42.56 RCW or other local, state or federal statutes ("State's Confidential Information"). The "State's Confidential Information" includes, but is not limited to, names, addresses, Social Security numbers, e-mail addresses, telephone numbers, financial profiles, credit card information, driver's license numbers, medical data, law enforcement records (or any other information identifiable to an individual), STATE and AGENCY source code or object code, STATE and AGENCY security data, non-public Specifications, STATE and AGENCY non -publicly available data, proprietary software, State security data, or information which may jeopardize any part of the project that relates to any of these types of information. The CONSULTANT agrees to hold the State's Confidential Information in strictest confidence and not to make use of the State's Confidential Information for any purpose other than the performance of this AGREEMENT, to release it only to authorized employees, sub -consultants or subcontractors requiring such information for the purposes of carrying out this AGREEMENT, and not to release, divulge, publish, transfer, sell, disclose, or otherwise make it known to any other party without the AGENCY's express written consent or as provided by law. The CONSULTANT agrees to release such information or material only to employees, sub -consultants or subcontractors who have signed a nondisclosure AGREEMENT, the terms of which have been previously approved by the AGENCY. The CONSULTANT agrees to implement physical, electronic, and managerial safeguards to prevent unauthorized access to the State's Confidential Information. Immediately upon expiration or termination of this AGREEMENT, the CONSULTANT shall, at the AGENCY's option: (i) certify to the AGENCY that the CONSULTANT has destroyed all of the State's Confidential Information; or (ii) returned all of the State's Confidential Information to the AGENCY; or (iii) take whatever other steps the AGENCY requires of the CONSULTANT to protect the State's Confidential Information. As required under Executive Order 00-03, the CONSULTANT shall maintain a log documenting the following: the State's Confidential Information received in the performance of this AGREEMENT; the purpose(s) for which the State's Confidential Information was received; who received, maintained and used the State's Confidential Information; and the final disposition of the State's Confidential Information. The CONSULTANT's records shall be subject to inspection, review, or audit upon reasonable notice from the AGENCY. The AGENCY reserves the right to monitor, audit, or investigate the use of the State's Confidential Information collected, used, or acquired by the CONSULTANT through this AGREEMENT. The monitoring, auditing, or investigating may include, but is not limited to, salting databases. Agreement Number: Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 12 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 Violation of this section by the CONSULTANT or its sub -consultants or subcontractors may result in termination of this AGREEMENT and demand for return of all State's Confidential Information, monetary damages, or penalties. It is understood and acknowledged that the CONSULTANT may provide the AGENCY with information which is proprietary and/or confidential during the term of this AGREEMENT. The parties agree to maintain the confidentiality of such information during the term of this AGREEMENT and afterwards. All materials containing such proprietary and/or confidential information shall be clearly identified and marked as "Confidential" and shall be returned to the disclosing party at the conclusion of the SERVICES under this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall provide the AGENCY with a list of all information and materials it considers confidential and/or proprietary in nature: (a) at the commencement of the term of this AGREEMENT; or (b) as soon as such confidential or proprietary material is developed. "Proprietary and/or confidential information" is not meant to include any information which, at the time of its disclosure: (i) is already known to the other party; (ii) is rightfully disclosed to one of the parties by a third party that is not acting as an agent or representative for the other party; (iii) is independently developed by or for the other party; (iv) is publicly known; or (v) is generally utilized by unaffiliated third parties engaged in the same business or businesses as the CONSULTANT. The parties also acknowledge that the AGENCY is subject to Washington State and federal public disclosure laws. As such, the AGENCY shall maintain the confidentiality of all such information marked proprietary and/ or confidential or otherwise exempt, unless such disclosure is required under applicable state or federal law. If a public disclosure request is made to view materials identified as "Proprietary and/or confidential information" or otherwise exempt information, the AGENCY will notify the CONSULTANT of the request and of the date that such records will be released to the requester unless the CONSULTANT obtains a court order from a court of competent jurisdiction enjoining that disclosure. If the CONSULTANT fails to obtain the court order enjoining disclosure, the AGENCY will release the requested information on the date specified. The CONSULTANT agrees to notify the sub -consultant of any AGENCY communication regarding disclosure that may include a sub -consultant's proprietary and/or confidential information. The CONSULTANT notification to the sub -consultant will include the date that such records will be released by the AGENCY to the requester and state that unless the sub -consultant obtains a court order from a court of competent jurisdiction enjoining that disclosure the AGENCY will release the requested information. If the CONSULTANT and/or sub -consultant fail to obtain a court order or other judicial relief enjoining the AGENCY by the release date, the CONSULTANT shall waive and release and shall hold harmless and indemnify the AGENCY from all claims of actual or alleged damages, liabilities, or costs associated with the AGENCY's said disclosure of sub -consultants' information. XX. Records Maintenance During the progress of the Work and SERVICES provided hereunder and for a period of not less than six (6) years from the date of final payment to the CONSULTANT, the CONSULTANT shall keep, retain and maintain all "documents" pertaining to the SERVICES provided pursuant to this AGREEMENT. Copies of all "documents" pertaining to the SERVICES provided hereunder shall be made available for review at the CONSULTANT's place of business during normal working hours. If any litigation, claim or audit is commenced, the CONSULTANT shall cooperate with AGENCY and assist in the production of all such documents. "Documents" shall be retained until all litigation, claims or audit findings have been resolved even though such litigation, claim or audit continues past the six (6) year retention period. For purposes of this AGREEMENT, "documents" means every writing or record of every type and description, including electronically stored information ("ESI"), that is in the possession, control, or custody of the CONSULTANT, including, without limitation, any and all correspondences, contracts, AGREEMENT 's, appraisals, plans, designs, data, surveys, maps, spreadsheets, memoranda, stenographic or handwritten notes, reports, records, telegrams, schedules, diaries, notebooks, logbooks, invoices, accounting records, work sheets, charts, notes, drafts, scribblings, recordings, visual displays, photographs, minutes of meetings, Agreement Number: Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 13 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 tabulations, computations, summaries, inventories, and writings regarding conferences, conversations or telephone conversations, and any and all other taped, recorded, written, printed or typed matters of any kind or description; every copy of the foregoing whether or not the original is in the possession, custody, or control of the CONSULTANT, and every copy of any of the foregoing, whether or not such copy is a copy identical to an original, or whether or not such copy contains any commentary or notation whatsoever that does not appear on the original. For purposes of this AGREEMENT, "ESP" means any and all computer data or electronic recorded media of any kind, including "Native Files", that are stored in any medium from which it can be retrieved and examined, either directly or after translation into a reasonably useable form. ESI may include information and/or documentation stored in various software programs such as: Email, Outlook, Word, Excel, Access, Publisher, PowerPoint, Adobe Acrobat, SQL databases, or any other software or electronic communication programs or databases that the CONSULTANT may use in the performance of its operations. ESI may be located on network servers, backup tapes, smart phones, thumb drives, CDs, DVDs, floppy disks, work computers, cell phones, laptops or any other electronic device that CONSULTANT uses in the performance of its Work or SERVICES hereunder, including any personal devices used by the CONSULTANT or any sub -consultant at home. "Native files" are a subset of ESI and refer to the electronic format of the application in which such ESI is normally created, viewed, and /or modified. The CONSULTANT shall include this section XX "Records Maintenance" in every subcontract it enters into in relation to this AGREEMENT and bind the sub -consultant to its terms, unless expressly agreed to otherwise in writing by the AGENCY prior to the execution of such subcontract. In witness whereof, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT as of the day and year shown in the "Execution Date" box on page one (1) of this AGREEMENT. Signature Date Signature Date Any modification, change, or reformation of this AGREEMENT shall require approval as to form by the Office of the Attorney General. Agreement Number: Local Agency A&E Professional Services Cost Plus Fixed Fee Consultant Agreement Page 14 of 14 Revised 4/10/2015 Exhibit A Spokane _jValley City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Project No. 0143 Phase I — Design Services Scope of Services Prepared by: David Evans and Associates, Inc. 908 North Howard Street, Suite 300 Spokane, WA 99201 In association with HDR Engineering, Inc. FEZ December 1, 2016 Table of Contents PROJECT DESCRIPTION, DESIGN CRITERIA, AND DELIVERABLES 1 A, Project Description 1 13, Project Coordination 1 C. Design Criteria 1 D, Project Deliverables and Schedule 2 E, Information, Responsibilities. and Services Provided by the CLIENT 2 F, General Project Assumptions 3 G. Change Management 4 TASK 1.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND QUALITY CONTROL 4 1.1 Project Management 4 1,2 ProjectWise and Project Setup 4 1.3 Subconsulttuit Agreements and Coordination 4 1,4 Prepare Project Notebooks 4 1,5 Project Quality :Management Plan 4 1,6 Develop Project CPD Schedule and Updates 5 1.7 Monthly Progress Reports and Invoices 5 1,8. Project Team Meetings and Council Meeting Presentations 5 1.9 Quality Control Qualit\ Assurance Review 6 TASK 2.0 CAPACITY JUSTIFICATION REPORT 7 2.1 Capacity Justification Report 7 TASK 3.0 CORRIDOR INVENTORY / DATA COLLECTION 7 3,1 Obtain A,-13ui1ts and Contract Plan Documents 7 3.2 Assemble Applicable Design Standards and Policies 7 3,3 Update: Verify Environmental and Land Use Constraints 7 3.4 Verify Existing Corridor Utilities and Develop Utility Conflict Matrix (by CLIENT) 7 3,5 Site Visits to Obtain Additional Information as Needed 10 TASK 4.0 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 10 TASK 5.0 CONFIRM PLANNING FRAMEWORK FOR THE PROJECT (CLIENT AND WSDOT) 13 TASK 6.0 TRAFFIC MODELING AND ANALYSIS 14 6.1 Traffic Volumes Data Collection 14 6,2 Develop Project \lethods and Assumptions Document 14 6.3 Travel Demand Forecasting in :\N1 and PM Peak Hours 15 6.4 Operational Assessment ofStudy intersections and Study Corridors in AM and PM Peak Hours (including weaving_ LOS. and queuing=) 15 6,5 Collision History Evaluation Evaluate Safety History of the Intersections and Roadways 15 6.6 Intersection Control ,Analysis for Project Intersections. 16 6,7 Draft -traffic Operational Analysis Report 16 6.8 Final Traffic Operational Analysis Report 16 TASK 7.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM 17 7,1 Public Open House 17 7.2 Property Ossner Connt,ict Meetings 18 TASK 8.0 NEPA DOCUMENTATION 18 8.1 Environmental Studies 18 8,2 Environmental Technical Memoranda 21 8.3 NEPA Categorical Exclusion Documentation (CED) Form. 22 TASK 9.0 SURVEYING 22 9.1 Develop Control Network 22 City of Spokane Valley Page i Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 9.2 Aerial LiDAR Processing 23 9.3 Perform Boundary- Right -of -Way Surveying 25 9.4 Prepare E incl Base Mapping Products 25 TASK 10.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS - INTERCHANGE AND BRIDGE CONFIGURATION 26 10,1 Develop Alternatit c Alignments - Interchange and Bridge Alternatives 26 10,2 Evaluate Alternatives Traffic Impacts 26 10.3 Develop Alternative Costs 26 10.4 Develop an Alternatives Evaluation Matrix 27 10.5 Develop Alternatives Evaluation Report 27 TASK 11.0 BNSF COORDINATION AND SUBMITTALS 27 11.1 Prepare Temporary Occupancy :Application & Safety Plan 27 11.2 BNSF Design Phase :A Package (Concept Railroad Submittal) 28 11,3 B`v'SF Design Phase B Package (30°'n Railroad Submittal) 28 TASK 12.0 PRELIMINARY STRUCTURES AND DESIGN APPROVAL 28 12.1 Refine BTV 30q,I, Design Typical Sections (Deleted) 28 12.2 Refine BT\ 30" , Design SR 290 and Interchange Ramp Plans (Deleted) 28 12.3 Refine BTV 30", Design Local Roadway Plans (Deleted) 28 12.4 Refine B I V 30"., Design Ltility Plans (Deleted) 29 12.5 Refine BTV 30°0 Design Pavement Channelization Plans (Deleted) 29 12,6 Prepare Bridge and Wall Structures Type Alternatives Analysis 29 12.7 Prepare Bridge Preliminary Plan (6 bridge sheets) 29 12,8 Prepare Cost Estimates for Refined BTV 30% Design (Deleted) 30 12.9 Submit Refined BTV 30°. Design Package (Deleted) 30 12,10 Refined BTV 30% Design Review Meeting (Deleted) 30 12,11 Prepare Basis of Design Memorandum 30 12.12 Design Appro\\ al Memorandum 31 TASK 13.0 INTERMEDIATE DESIGN DOCUMENTS 31 13.1 Develop Index/Vicinity Map (2 sheets) 31 13.2 Develop Roadway Typical ectio:i i ' >]tcet; for 15 Typical Sections) 31 13.3 Develop Pavement and Fuel] it} 1,211),,, ill Demolition Plans (Future Supplemental Agreement) 32 13.4 Interchange Plans for Appr, val (3 sheets) 32 13.5 Develop Roadway Paving Plan and Profile Sheets (62 sheets) 32 13.6 Develop Drainage Plans for SR 290 and Local Roadwa._ • 6 sheets 1 32 13.7 Hydraulic Report 33 13,8 Develop Channelization, Pavement Marking, Signing, and Sign Structure Pians (22 sheets) 33 13.9 intersection Control Plans (9 sheets) 34 13,10 Develop Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) Plans (15 sheets) 34 13,11 De\clop Illumination Design and Plans;Future Supplemental Agreement) 35 13.12 Develop Preliminar} Utility Plans (Future Supplemental Agreement) 35 13.13 Develop Bridge Sheets 15 l sheets) 35 13.14 Develop Detail Sheets (Future Supplemental Agreement) 36 13,15 Prepare Itemized Quantity Takeoff and Cost Estimate 36 13,16 Compile and Submit Intermediate Design Package 36 13.17 Intermc,iiine Design Review Meeting 37 TASK 14.0 RIGHT-OF-WAY AND LIMITED ACCESS ACQUISITION DOCUMENTS (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) 37 TASK 15.0 APPRAISE AND ACQUIRE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND LIMITED ACCESS (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) 37 TASK 16.0 TEMPORARY PROJECT CLOSEOUT 37 TASK 17.0 FINAL DESIGN (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) 37 TASK 18.0 PS&E PREPARATION AND SUBMITTAL (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) 37 City of Spokane Valley Page ii Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 PROJECT DESCRIPTION, DESIGN CRITERIA, AND DELIVERABLES A. Project Description The objective of this project is to develop a grade separated facility at the intersection of Barker Road and the BNSF Railway railroad tracks, and an interchange at the intersection of Barker Road and SR 290 (E Trent Avenue). Other major works associated with this project include, realignment of East Wellesley Avenue, removal of the two existing Wellesley Avenue bridges over BNSF Railway tracks and SR 290, and closing the Flora/BNSF Railway at -grade intersection in the City of Spokane Valley, Washington. The design development will expand on the Concept Design and 30% BTV Plans prepared as part of the Bridging the Valley project completed in 2004. The project goals include: • Position the project to obtain future grant funding for right-of-way acquisition and construction. • Remove the existing at -grade railroad crossings at Barker Road and Flora Road • Provide a grade separated interchange at the Barker Road/SR 290 intersection • Provide improved access to the industrial/commercial properties to the south and the residential properties to the north of SR 290 and the BNSF Railway corridor. • Improve safety within the project limits • Limit right-of-way acquisition • Improve mobility on SR 290 • Identify and implement Practical Design Solutions on the already proposed 30% BTV Design Plans • Achieve public support and endorsement B. Project Coordination This scope of work uses the following references for project team members: • CLIENT or the City = City of Spokane Valley - Project Sponsor and owner of facilities within City of Spokane Valley rights-of-way. • BNSF = Burlington Northern Sante Fe Railway (Major Project Stakeholder) • WSDOT = Washington State Department of Transportation - Project coordination with review authority, and owner of facilities within State rights-of-way (Major Project Stakeholder). • CONSULTANT or DEA = David Evans and Associates, Inc. (Prime Consultant on the project) • HDR = HDR Engineering, Inc. Engineering (Major Transportation subconsultant to DEA) • CONSULTANT Team = DEA and HDR • GE = GeoEngineers Inc. (Geotechnical Engineering subconsultant to DEA) • HRA = Historical Research Associates, Inc. (Cultural Resources subconsultant to DEA) C. Design Criteria As part of the design effort on this project, design criteria will be developed and approved by the CLIENT, WSDOT, and BNSF Railway. When developing design criteria, the City's standards will govern within City's rights-of-way, WSDOT standards will govern within State rights-of-way, and BNSF's requirements will additionally be met for portions of the project within its rights-of-way. Additionally, the following publications, standards and guidelines will be used: • WSDOT's Local Agency Guidelines (LAG) Manual, April 2016 • AASHTO's "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets" 2011 City of Spokane Valley Page 1 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 • AASHTO Roadside Design Guide 2011 • AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 7th Edition 2014 with current Interims • AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design, 2nd Edition, 2011. • Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), 2009, with Revisions 1 and 2, May 2012 • WSDOT Design Manual, July 2016. • WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual, 2014 • WSDOT Hydraulic Manual, January 2015 • WSDOT Bridge Design Manual LRFD, June 2016. • WSDOT Geotechnical Design Manual, May, 2015. • WSDOT Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Manual, April 2014 • Spokane Regional Stormwater Manual, April 2008 • Hydraulic Engineering Circular No. 22, Third Edition, September 2009 • WSDOT Standard Plans. • WSDOT Standard Specifications. • Union Pacific Railroad — BNSF Railway Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation Projects, May, 2016 D. Project Deliverables and Schedule Task 2016 - 2017 Project management and Quality Control December, 2016 — December, 2017 CLIENT and WSDOT Coordination December, 2016 - December, 2017 Corridor Inventory and Data Collection December 2016 — January, 2017 Design Surveying December 2016 - January, 2017 Geotechnical Borings December 2016 - January, 2017 BNSF ROE, Design Exception Meeting December 2016 - January, 2017 Confirm Planning Framework December 2016 - January, 2017 Traffic Modeling and Analysis December, 2016 to March, 2017 Public Involvement Tasks January, 2017 to October, 2017 NEPA Documentation December, 2016 to September, 2017 Interchange and Bridge Alternatives Analysis December, 2016 to March, 2017 BNSF Design Phase A Review March, 2017 Basis of Design Memorandum March, 2017 WSDOT Preliminary Bridge Plans Approval May, 2017 Design Approval Memorandum June, 2017 Channelization Plans for WSDOT Approval September, 2017 BNSF Design Phase B Review October, 2017 Intermediate Plans and Estimate Complete October, 2017 Final BNSF Design Phase B Review November, 2017 E. Information, Responsibilities, and Services Provided by the CLIENT The following existing information will be provided by the CLIENT and WSDOT. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list and additional data to be provided by the CLIENT and WSDOT are included throughout the scope of work: City of Spokane Valley Page 2 Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Scope of Services December 1, 2016 • Roadway and utility as -built drawings for adjacent or related projects as are currently available. • Utility meeting minutes from utility coordination meetings • Geotechnical data, boring logs, and as -built drawings showing geotechnical information as are currently available. • Conceptual pavement structural section recommendations based on other area projects (for cost estimating purposes). • Conceptual storm water infiltration rate recommendations based on other area projects (for conceptual storm water management design) • Any available recent ADT data at the locations as identified in the scope will be provided by the CLIENT and appropriately supplemented by counts to meet the requirements set forth in this scope. • Crash data as identified in the scope • Existing right-of-way or plat maps for the project area • Existing right-of-way plans for the project area • Existing aerial photographs F. General Project Assumptions This Scope of Services is based upon certain assumptions and exclusions, identified below and under specific tasks. The following assumptions were used in the development of this scope of services: • LAG Manual Guidelines will be consulted to determine whether WSDOT specifications will govern different aspects of the design or if the City's supplemental specifications and/or special provisions are appropriate. Where possible, the City's requirements will govern. • WSDOT bid items will be used for all items on the project. • WSDOT will review and approve project elements that could impact SR -290. • MicroStation© Version 8i, SELECTSeries 3 will be utilized on the project. • WSDOT workspace will be utilized but plan sheets will bear the CLIENT's Title Block • InRoads© Version 8i, SELECTSeries 2 will be utilized as the project's design platform. • Bentley StormCAD, FlowMaster, CivilStorm, and/or other hydrologic and hydraulic software will be utilized for drainage design • AGI32 software will be used for illumination design • MS Excel will be utilized for spreadsheets. • MS Word will be utilized for word processing. • MS Project will be utilized for scheduling. • MS Power Point will be utilized for presentations. • Synchro version 9 will be used for stop -controlled and signalized intersection operational analysis as well as signal timing optimization. Sidra version 5.x will be used for alterative intersection control operational analysis (if needed). Highway Capacity Software version HCS2010 will be used for the operational analysis of merge and diverge locations. VISSIM software will be used for micro- simulation analysis. VISUM will be used for travel demand forecasting as provided by SRTC. • AutoTurn for MicroStation© Version 8i will be utilized to evaluate vehicle turning movements. • ESRI ArcGIS products will be used for the processing and presentation of geospatial information. • Construction bid estimates and other opinions of cost and schedule are estimates. Therefore, CONSULTANT Team makes no warranty that actual project costs, financial aspects, economic feasibility, or schedules will not vary from CONSULTANT Team's opinions, analyses, projections City of Spokane Valley Page 3 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 or estimates. G. Change Management This is a cost plus fixed fee contract with a not to exceed maximum. If the scope of work increases or decreases as it relates to the following scope of work, then an adjustment to the associated fees and delivery schedule will be implemented once the CLIENT and the CONSULTANT mutually agree on the terms of the change and an agreement to formalize the terms is executed. Task 1.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND QUALITY CONTROL 1.1 Project Management Project management will be on-going during the course of the project. The project manager will maintain communication with the CLIENT, WSDOT, and BNSF and will monitor the project's scope, schedule, and budget, will coordinate and communicate with the project's subconsultants, and other similar project management tasks. ASSUMPTION • For purposes of this scope it is assumed that project management will require 20 hours per month. 1.2 ProjectWise and Project Setup DEA and HDR will set up project files. This will include setting up budget tracking spreadsheets, plan storage areas, preparing the project's financial files, and the project's electronic and hard copy technical filing system. This will also include setting up ProjectWise for the ease of data storage and transfer between all team members: CONSULTANT, CLIENT, WSDOT, BNSF, etc. and preparing file storage and access instructions/protocols. ASSUMPTION • DEA will house the project files on its ProjectWise Server and provide access to the other consultants, CLIENT, WSDOT, and others, as appropriate. 1.3 Subconsultant Agreements and Coordination DEA will prepare subconsultant agreements for HDR, GE, and HRA. This will include developing the draft of the subconsultant agreement, having management from each firm review the agreement, then issuing and executing the final agreements. 1.4 Prepare Project Notebooks DEA will prepare project notebooks for team members (CLIENT, WSDOT, subconsultants, DEA) that include project contact information, the project's work breakdown structure (WBS) codes for invoicing, the electronic filing structure on DEA's ProjectWise server, the negotiated scope of work and labor spreadsheet, the project's Critical Path Diagram (CPD) schedule, the project's Quality Management Plan, and other pertinent data. The notebooks will be updated periodically as approvals are granted and pertinent data becomes available. 1.5 Project Quality Management Plan DEA will prepare a Project Specific Quality Management Plan. The Plan will identify the Quality Management Team, procedures that will be used for quality assurance and quality control, the schedule of quality management tasks, and quality control protocol that will be followed. The plan will be submitted to the CLIENT and WSDOT for review and approval. City of Spokane Valley Page 4 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 1.6 Develop Project CPD Schedule and Updates DEA will prepare a schedule in Microsoft Project. The project team will use the schedule, which will be updated monthly with actual milestone achievements, to check the budget, staffing levels, and where the deliverable schedule might be affected. These tools will be used to adjust staff assignments so that schedule and fee commitments are met. Project team meetings will enforce the schedule and hold team members accountable for progress on their components of the project. Schedule updates will be submitted monthly to the CLIENT as part of the invoice package. DELIVERABLES • Project Schedule • Monthly Project Schedule updates • Quality Management Plan • Project Notebooks • Access to ProjectWise 1.7 Monthly Progress Reports and Invoices The CONSULTANT Team will provide monthly progress reports and invoices in accordance with the CLIENT' s standard procedures. DEA will coordinate the first invoice so that the format is acceptable to the CLIENT. Each progress report and invoice package will include the CONSULTANT Team's invoice showing all labor and direct expenses included for the period, the monthly progress report, and full documentation of labor hours and direct expenses charged for the period for DEA and each subconsultant. A total of 11 progress report and invoice packages (December 2016 to November 2017) will be submitted as part of this initial contract. ASSUMPTIONS • The invoice format for this project will be one that is acceptable to the CLIENT. • Progress Report and Invoice packages will be prepared monthly for 11 months. DELIVERABLES • Monthly Progress Report and Invoice Packages • Monthly Project Schedule update 1.8 Project Team Meetings and Council Meeting Presentations Regular meetings will be scheduled to monitor the progress of the project, to coordinate with team members, and to maintain accountability between all members of the team including the CONSULTANT, subconsultants, the CLIENT, and WSDOT. 1.8.1 City Council Meetings The DEA project manager will attend up to three (3) City Council Meetings as part of this project at appropriate milestones to report progress to the Council and to support CLIENT staff representatives. These milestones will likely be after the project team completes the Bridge and Interchange Alternatives Analysis and when the Design Approval Memorandum is approved by the CLIENT and WSDOT. One other meeting with the City Council will be attended by DEA at the discretion of CLIENT staff. Preparation for the City Council Meeting will include developing graphics and/or a Power Point presentation — using the presentation mechanism that best fits the Council's needs. ASSUMPTIONS • For budgetary purposes, up to three (3) graphics will be prepared. • For budgetary purposes, up to two (2) PowerPoint presentations will prepared. DELIVERABLES • Graphics • PowerPoint Presentation City of Spokane Valley Page 5 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 1.8.2 Project Design Team Meetings The Project Design Team is made up of representatives from the CLIENT, WSDOT, BNSF (when available to participate) and the CONSULTANT Team. The meetings will be face to face and will occur once a month in DEA's offices. Key team members that need to participate but that cannot travel to the meetings will be included by conference call. It is anticipated that there will be 11 Project Design Team meetings lasting about two (2) hours each not including travel. Four (4) DEA staff members (Project Manager, Interchange/Roadway Lead, Bridge Lead, and Traffic Engineer) on average will be in attendance. Three (3) staff members from HDR (Transportation Lead, Bridge or BNSF Lead, and Roadway Lead) will also participate in the meetings. Only staff needed at each team meeting will be invited and the list of invitees will be modified each month. Items covered at the meetings will include: • Environmental Documentation discussion and review • Planning Framework (Methods and Assumptions Document) • Basis of Design review and confirmation • BNSF Coordination and Processing • Bridge and Interchange Alternatives Development and review • Practical Design opportunities and discussion • Technical Reports and Memoranda discussion and review • Quality Control/Quality Assurance Review • Intermediate Design progress and schedule • Change Management DELIVERABLES • Meeting Agenda and Meeting Minutes 1.9 Quality Control/Quality Assurance Review Quality Control reviews will be conducted by the Quality Control Team prior to submittal of major deliverables. Unique task specific QA/QC tasks are additionally included under specific tasks to which they apply. QA/QC tasks include the following: • Draft and Final survey mapping products • Draft and Final Technical Reports • Draft and Final Traffic Operational Analysis • Bridge and Interchange Alternatives Analysis and Recommendations • Draft and Final Environmental Documents • Draft and Final Alternatives Evaluation Report • Draft and Final Public Involvement Materials • Draft and Final Basis of Design Memorandum • Draft and Final Design Approval Memorandum • Draft and Final Hydraulic Design Report • Intermediate Design documents City of Spokane Valley Page 6 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Task 2.0 CAPACITY JUSTIFICATION REPORT 2.1 Capacity Justification Report The CONSULTANT will provide data and supporting information to the CLIENT for the preparation of the Capacity Justification Report as required by SRTC's Congestion Management Process. It is assumed that the CLIENT will prepare and submit this report. Task 3.0 CORRIDOR INVENTORY / DATA COLLECTION The CONSULTANT will collect existing project information and obtain new information needed to proceed with the design documents. Sources of information may include contract plans, as-builts, surveys, field visits to collect information, State and City files and databases, design and policy manuals, transportation plans, previous corridor studies, discussions with City, State and local technical experts, and other sources of information as needed. 3.1 Obtain As-Builts and Contract Plan Documents DEA will request from the CLIENT, WSDOT, and BNSF any as -built construction documents and contract plans for improvements located in the project vicinity. This would include as -built drawings and right-of-way plans for SR 290, Barker Road, N. Flora Road, E Wellesley Avenue, and N. Vista Grande Dr. This would also include as-builts for the Wellesley Avenue bridges at the BNSF and SR 290 crossings. Any existing area boring logs, roadway structural sections or area infiltration rates that were developed for other area projects will also be provided to the CONSULTANT Team for use as reference. ASSUMPTION • The CLIENT will provide the Design/CAD files of the realignment of Wellesley Avenue that has already been agreed to for a land exchange between Raymond Villanueva and Avista Corporation (approximately 2.1 to 2.2 acres). 3.2 Assemble Applicable Design Standards and Policies DEA will prepare a WSDOT Basis of Design Form which will include General Project Information, Project Needs, Context, Design Controls, and Interchange and Bridge Alternatives Analysis Summary This Basis of Design will form the foundation from which the Intermediate Design Plans will be developed. An initial draft of the Basis of Design will be prepared early in the process and circulated to WSDOT and the CLIENT for review. Comments from the review will be updated in the document and changes to the document throughout the development process will be tracked and also communicated to the design team. This form will be finalized and included in the Design Report. 3.3 Update/Verify Environmental and Land Use Constraints Utilizing files and information received under prior tasks and from the original 30% BTV Design effort, environmental and land use constraints will be evaluated and verified for applicability to the project. Land use constraints will be identified and will be placed in a base map for referencing into the design documents, plans, and exhibits. 3.4 Verify Existing Corridor Utilities and Develop Utility Conflict Matrix (by CLIENT) The purpose of this task is to build on the utility contacts that occurred with the 30% BTV Design effort, to notify the utility companies of the proposed project, to identify existing or planned major utility lines that may affect design elements, and to develop a protocol of how to best coordinate with the utility companies. Utility transmission, distribution, and service lines information gathered will be provided to DEA for depiction on project mapping. THE CLIENT will contact utility companies early in the project so that existing and proposed utility facilities are considered throughout the design process. Utility companies will be identified and a search City of Spokane Valley Page 7 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 will be made by contacting WSDOT and known wet and dry utility providers to identify lesser known utilities (small private water, sewer, irrigation or electric utilities for instance). Each company will be contacted and copies of their existing corridor facilities will be requested. THE CLIENT will also develop a utility conflict matrix that will be used in identifying utility constraints for the alternatives considered. The matrix will include the utility company, contact information, type of utility and location, likelihood of a conflict, any compensable property rights an existing Utility may possess, and a preliminary determination of relocation reimbursement with associated costs. Meetings with each utility purveyor will be held to discuss the project and potential relocations, as outlined in the sub -tasks below: 3.4.1 Highland Estates / Spokane County Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) THE CLIENT will coordinate with Spokane County and Highland Estates regarding demolition of the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) that has been taken out of operation. ASSUMPTIONS • The WWTP is not in operation • The WWTP has been abandoned in-place • Demolition of the WWTP will be the responsibility of Highland Estates or Spokane County DELIVERABLES • Copies of information and documents received from County or Highland Estates. 3.4.2 Pioneer Water Company THE CLIENT will meet with Pioneer Water Company to determine the current status of the wells and as - built information. ASSUMPTIONS • The wells are still in operation and will not be impacted due to the project. • THE CLIENT will meet with Pioneer Water Company to determine the current status of the well and main line(s) leaving the wells. DELIVERABLES • Meeting Minutes from the meeting • Copies of information and documents received from Pioneer. 3.4.3 Consolidated Irrigation District Based on the 30% BTV design report from December 31, 2004, there are water lines that will require relocation. THE CLIENT will meet with Consolidated Irrigation District to determine the current status of their water lines within the project area. ASSUMPTIONS • The water line on the east side of Barker will be relocated outside of the proposed construction limits • The relocated line will require a plan and profile sheet(s) that will be developed under a future Supplemental Agreement. • Water pressure calculations will not be required. • Consolidated Irrigation District will provide required specifications for any proposed improvements. • The water line near relocated Wellesley Avenue will be protected in place. • THE CLIENT will meet with Consolidated Irrigation District representative to determine the current status of their facilities. One meeting will include research into the current system and another meeting to discuss a proposed relocation or change to the system functionality. DELIVERABLES • Meeting Minutes from each meeting • Copies of information and documents received from Consolidated Irrigation District. City of Spokane Valley Page 8 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 3.4.4 Telecommunications Based on the 30% BTV design report from December 31, 2004, there are significant telecommunication lines that will require relocation. On the north side of SR 290, fiber optic lines extend east -west from a vault at the NE corner of the SR 290/Barker intersection. There is also an existing fiber optic line south of the BNSF tracks that may require relocation (depending on the final bridge configuration). The report did not mention the number of companies present. ASSUMPTIONS • Two telecommunication utility companies are present in the area • There are fiber optic lines that will require relocation • THE CLIENT will meet with the utility companies' representative to determine the current status of their facilities. One meeting will include research into the current system and another two (2) meetings to discuss a proposed relocation or change to the system's functionality (relocation and conduit needs on the bridges). DELIVERABLES • Meeting Minutes from each meeting • Copies of information and documents received from utility companies. 3.4.5 Avista Utilities (Power and Natural Gas) Based on the 30% BTV design report from December 31, 2004, there are power and natural gas transmission and distribution lines within the project area. Power transmission lines cross over Trent about 500 feet west of Barker Road. Since 2004, the poles appear to have been replaced. There is a single pole on the north side of SR 290 above a rock cut that is presently near the proposed westbound on-ramp for the 30% BTV design interchange. According to information from Avista, the existing clearance over Trent is 36 feet and the minimum is 34 feet. The proposed ramp and profile may reduce this clearance. Also, the structural stability of the pole and its foundation may be impacted by the proposed ramp. Power distribution lines are overhead on the east side of Barker Road. Based on the 30% BTV design, several poles were anticipated to require relocation outside the road construction limits. Also vertical clearances will need to be verified for the eastbound on-ramp and westbound off -ramp. Natural gas transmission main (12 -inch) is on an east -west alignment and may need to be relocated. Natural gas distribution main lines are adjacent to Consolidated's water mains. The mains are on the east side of Barker Road and on the south side of the BNSF tracks, east of Barker Road. On the Barker Road main, it is anticipated to be relocated to the east, outside the toe of the new fill slopes. The east -west main is anticipated to be protected in place. THE CLIENT will meet with Avista utilities to determine the current status of its services within the project area. ASSUMPTIONS • THE CLIENT will meet with the Avista representative to determine the current status of its facilities. One meeting will include research into the current system and another two (2) meetings to discuss a proposed relocation or change to the system's functionality (Transmission line clearance, distribution clearances (two ramps), and gas line relocation). DELIVERABLES • Meeting Minutes from each meeting • Copies of information and documents received from Avista. 3.4.6 Yellowstone Pipeline Company Based on the 30% BTV design report from December 31, 2004, there is a 10 -inch petroleum pipe line along the south side of the tracks. Depending on the final bridge configuration, the pipeline may be City of Spokane Valley Page 9 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 impacted. THE CLIENT will meet with Yellowstone Pipeline Company to determine the current status of its services within the project area. ASSUMPTIONS • THE CLIENT will meet with the Yellowstone Pipeline representative to determine the current status of their facilities. One meeting will include research into the current system and another one (1) meeting to discuss a proposed relocation or change to the system's functionality. DELIVERABLES • Meeting Minutes from each meeting • Copies of information and documents received from Yellowstone Pipeline Company. 3.5 Site Visits to Obtain Additional Information as Needed Technical staff from the CONSULTANT team will perform site visits to obtain additional project information. This may include confirming or reviewing existing surface features, topographical, utility, boundary, environmental and other constraints. It is estimated that a total of two (2) site visits will be required by DEA and two (2) site visits will be required by HDR. It is assumed that two (2) staff will participate in each site visit. DELIVERABLES • None Task 4.0 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING GeoEngineers (GE) is DEA's Geotechnical Subconsultant for this project. The scope of work for DEA and HDR as related to the geotechnical work is as follows: • Coordination with GeoEngineers in developing the work plan - DEA • Coordinating environmental and cultural clearances to initiate the work - DEA • Coordinating with WSDOT to obtain a General Permit to work within the SR 290 right-of-way - DEA • Coordinating with the CLIENT to obtain street obstruction permits - DEA • Quality Control Review of both the Draft and Final Geotechnical Report prior to submittal to the CLIENT — DEA and HDR. ASSUMPTIONS • SR 290 Bridge Work plan coordination will be accomplished by HDR • DEA and HDR will review the Draft and Final Geotechnical Reports • Coordinating with BNSF to obtain a Temporary Occupancy Permit is covered under other tasks (HDR) • Traffic signal and illumination pole foundation evaluation is not included in the current geotechnical scope of work and will be included in a subsequent agreement if necessary. • Sign structure foundation evaluation is not included in the current geotechnical scope of work and will be included in a subsequent agreement if necessary. GE's Scope of Work is as Follows: GEOENGINEER'S WORK TASKS: The City plans to improve traffic flow and safety at the Barker Road/SR 290 intersection by constructing an overpass for Barker Road over the BNSF Railway (BNSF) railroad corridor and SR 290. Access to SR 290 will be via a diamond interchange layout. The Wellesley Avenue "flyover" located east of the interchange will be removed, and Wellesley Avenue will be re -aligned to connect to Barker Road about 500 feet south of the interchange and north to Vista Grande Drive. City of Spokane Valley Page 10 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 The proposed BNSF overpass bridge will consist of an approximately 271 -foot -long, 3 -span bridge. The proposed SR 290 overpass bridge will consist of an approximately 141 -foot -long, single span bridge. Retaining walls will help support proposed SR 290 access ramps at the following locations: between the BNSF tracks and the SR 290 eastbound (EB) ramps; between SR 290 and the SR 290 EB access ramps; and between SR 290 and the westbound (WB) access ramps. The retaining walls likely will consist of a combination of concrete cast -in-place and mechanically stabilized earth walls. The north side of the SR 290 WB access ramps are planned to consist of a combination of fill slopes within the eastern approximate two-thirds of the ramp footprint and a rock cut slope within the western approximate one third of the ramp footprint. Additional improvements will include stormwater management facilities along Barker Road and the proposed Wellesley Avenue alignment. We anticipate proposed Barker Road and SR 290 access ramp embankments will be less than about 30 feet in height. METHODOLOGY Previous explorations, including borings and subcontracted geophysical testing were completed by Budinger & Associates, Inc. in 2003 for preliminary feasibility and conceptual design purposes. In order to meet WSDOT and American Railway Engineering and Maintenance -of -Way Association (AREMA) guidelines for subsurface exploration programs for projects of this scope, GE proposes to supplement the existing subsurface data with additional explorations. GE's research of the existing data and experience in the project vicinity indicates natural soil conditions underlying most of the site could include outburst flood gravel deposits. The outburst flood gravels deposited in the site vicinity also typically contain varying amounts of cobbles and boulders. However, the previous geophysical data also indicates a possible softer zone located about 40 feet below site grade in the project vicinity. For this reason, we propose completing deeper borings to support bridge foundation design by air -rotary drilling methods to reduce the chance of drilling refusal caused by cobbles or boulders and to evaluate the softer soil zone possibly located beneath the bridge foundations. GE proposes completing the remaining shallower soil borings at the currently proposed retaining wall and stormwater pond locations using hollow -stem auger drilling methods. A portion of the site near the proposed WB on-ramp is underlain by gneiss rock. Grade lowering (cutting) for the proposed WB SR 290 on-ramp likely will require excavation of the gneiss. We propose to evaluate the surface condition of the rock through geologic mapping. GE will supplement the geologic mapping and evaluate rock strength by completing a series of wireline rock cores. The results of the geologic mapping and rock cores will be used to evaluate the level of effort required by the contractor to excavate rock in this vicinity. Additional shallow explorations along proposed roadways will be completed by backhoe test pits. To the extent possible, GE will restore the site around each exploration to its pre -exploration condition. GEOENGINEER'S SCOPE OF SERVICES The purpose of the geotechnical engineering services is to provide recommendations for site preparation and earthwork, and foundation design and construction based on site exploration, laboratory testing and engineering analyses. Specific scope of services will include: • Contacting the one -call utility notification system and assisting in coordinating with BNSF, WSDOT and private land owners during siting of the explorations relative to underground utilities. • Supporting DEA in obtaining street obstruction permits for explorations within public right-of-way. • Completing a geologic reconnaissance of the site, including evaluating and mapping the existing rock cut along the north side of SR 290, west of the proposed interchange. • Exploring soil, rock and groundwater conditions underlying the proposed Barker Overpass site by drilling 13 borings, and excavating 10 test pits using a backhoe. Specifically, explorations will be distributed across the site as follows: o Four air -rotary borings at proposed bridge bent and abutment locations, drilled to depths in the range of about 50 to 70 feet below existing site grade. If rock is encountered a depth of City of Spokane Valley Page 11 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 less than about 50 feet below existing site grade, GE will obtain up to 10 feet of rock core. If rock is encountered below about 50 feet, GE will advance the air -rotary borings about 5 feet into apparent rock. o Six hollow -stem borings at proposed retaining wall and stormwater management facility locations drilled to depths in the range of about 25 to 30 feet, or practical auger refusal, whichever occurs first. o Three rock core borings in the vicinity of the WB SR 290 on-ramp, cored to depths in the range of about 20 to 40 feet below existing site grade (depending on grading plans relative to existing site grades). For estimating purposes, a total of 90 lineal feet of coring are assumed. o Ten test pits excavated to depths in the range of about 8 to 12 feet below existing site grade at the locations along proposed alignments and fill slopes associated with the overpass, SR 290 and Wellesley Avenue realignment. Each boring and test pit will be monitored by an experienced engineer or geologist from GE. Soil samples will be collected from the borings at approximate 21/2- to 5 -foot -depth intervals. Continuous rock core will be collected from the rock core borings. Grab and bulk samples of site soil will be obtained from the test pits. Relatively undisturbed (Shelby tube) samples might be collected if fine-grained (silt or clay) soil is encountered during drilling Soil and rock samples will be returned to GE's laboratory for subsequent evaluation. Each boring, following its completion, will be backfilled in accordance with state regulations. Borings completed in public roadways will be patched with like material. Each test pit, upon completion, will be backfilled with excavation spoils, tamped into place, and the ground surface smoothed with the excavator bucket. • Laboratory testing to assess pertinent physical and engineering properties of soil encountered relative to the proposed construction. For budget estimating purposes, the assumed testing program includes: 2 R-Value/CBR tests; 2 modified Proctor tests; 15 gradation analyses; 15 percent fines passing the U.S. No. 200 sieve tests; 10 moisture content determinations; 8 rock point load index tests; and 3 rock unconfined compression tests. Laboratory testing will be completed in general accordance with applicable ASTM International (ASTM) standards. • Recommendations for site preparation and fill placement including: criteria for clearing, stripping and grubbing; an evaluation of the suitability of on-site soil for use as structural fill; gradation criteria for imported fill; guidance for preparation of subgrade soil, which will support pavements; and criteria for structural fill placement and compaction. Recommendations for allowable cut and fill slope inclinations will be provided. • Recommendations for design and construction of conventional shallow foundations for retaining walls including: soil bearing pressures; minimum width and depth criteria; coefficient of friction and equivalent fluid densities for the passive earth pressure state of stress to estimate resistance to lateral loads; and estimates of foundation settlement. Design criteria will be presented in Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) format. Where shallow foundations are not feasible, recommendations will be provided for design of drilled shafts at select bridge bent locations including: capacity versus shaft depth (penetration) for downward and uplift load conditions; estimates of single shaft settlement; and group reduction factors, if appropriate. • Recommendations for lateral earth pressure criteria for design of retaining walls including equivalent fluid densities for the active, at -rest and passive earth pressure states of stress. Soil strength parameters for mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) wall design will be provided including: unit weight; friction angle; and cohesion. Internal stability design of MSE walls will be completed by the wall designer. City of Spokane Valley Page 12 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 • Geotechnical seismic design criteria based on the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) procedures. • Pavement layer thickness design based on vehicle type and traffic volumes provided by DEA, and recommendations for hot mix asphalt (HMA) pavement construction including. criteria for base course thickness, gradation and required degree of compaction; and thickness and compaction criteria for HMA surfacing. • Recommendations for surface and subsurface drainage, as appropriate, including an evaluation of the feasibility of subsurface disposal of stormwater, and design parameters; if appropriate. Analyses will be based on correlations of soil grain -size analyses to permeability found in the Spokane Regional Stormwater Manual (SRSM) and the WSDOT Highway Runoff Manual. • A draft and final written report containing findings, conclusions and recommendations. One round of comments to the draft report from DEA, the City, WSDOT and BNSF is assumed. The final report will address the comments. ASSUMPTIONS • The exploration locations are accessible to truck -mounted drilling equipment. • Fieldwork will be performed during normal daytime hours (Monday through Friday). Street obstruction permits for explorations in public streets and private land access agreements will allow for 8 am to 6 pm work. • Written permission to access explorations on private property (including BNSR and WSDOT right- of-way [ROW]) will be obtained by the CONSULTANT team with assistance from the CLIENT. • BNSF will provide permission to access and drill and/or excavate test pits at proposed boring and test pit locations on BNSF ROW in a timely manner that allow for all drilling services to be completed under a single mobilization of equipment. • A BNSF-approved lookout or flagger, if required to support our field activities, will be scheduled and provided by others. • Underground utilities located on private property will be located by the current property owner. If this is not possible or acceptable, a private utility locator may need to be subcontracted at additional cost. • Temporary road building is not anticipated for truck -equipment access. Hydro -seeding, re -vegetation or other improvements are not included in this scope of work. • Cultural resources and environmental permitting required for exploration work will be coordinated under other tasks. GE will assist with preparing exploration plans, upon request. • It is assumed that contaminated soil will not be encountered during drilling of geotechnical borings or excavation of test pits. As such, GeoEngineers will not provide field screening, which is used to assess possible presence of volatile and semi -volatile compounds in soil. If obvious contaminated materials (based on coloration or odor) are encountered, drilling will be stopped, the drill crew will be put on stand-by and GeoEngineers will notify DEA. • Drill cuttings (non -contaminated) that cannot be returned to completed exploratory borings will be evenly distributed near the borings in undeveloped areas. If on-site disposal is not acceptable to BNSF, GeoEngineers will collect the soil in drums on site and transport them to a facility approved by BNSF within 5 miles of the boring locations. Task 5.0 CONFIRM PLANNING FRAMEWORK FOR THE PROJECT (CLIENT AND WSDOT) Based on the data gathered as part of Task 3, the CONSULTANT, CLIENT, and WSDOT will collaborate to confirm the planning framework items. This effort will be driven by the Methods and City of Spokane Valley Page 13 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Assumptions document development process prepared under other tasks. The planning framework includes but is not limited to the following items: • Traffic Operations Parameters — DEA will work with the CLIENT and WSDOT to determine the design year, the peak hour volume hour forecast, and the operational criteria (including LOS). See Traffic Modeling and Analysis Task for scope definition. • Future Vision and Forward Compatibility within the Corridor - DEA will work with the CLIENT to confirm the City's vision for the area. DEA will work with the CLIENT and WSDOT to confirm the State's forward compatibility plan for the corridor. This information will form a basis for the future project compatibility. • Right-of-way, local area development — DEA will work with the CLIENT to determine future land use and upcoming developments for the corridor. • Pedestrian/bicycle use — DEA will work with the CLIENT and WSDOT to determine pedestrian and bicycle routes and use and appropriate applications for the project. DEA will include the findings from this task in the Methods and Assumptions document confirming these items. The planning framework and related questions will be circulated for review and discussed/confirmed at a Project Progress Meeting. Task 6.0 TRAFFIC MODELING AND ANALYSIS 6,1 Traffic Volumes Data Collection DEA will coordinate the collection of intersection AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts through a traffic count vendor. AM Counts will be conducted between 7AM and 9AM. PM Counts will be conducted between 4PM and 6PM. The counts will be collected at up to 12 intersections which will further be confirmed through the Methods and Assumptions document. Intersections immediately adjacent to the project and identified for counting are listed below: • Barker Road @ Trent Avenue/SR-290 • Barker Road @ Proposed Wellesley Approach (existing commercial approach) • Del Rey Drive @ Trent Avenue/SR-290 • Flora Road @ Trent Avenue/SR-290 DEA will also coordinate the collection of ADT (tube) counts at the 5 locations identified below: • Barker Road south of BNSF • Trent Avenue west of Del Rey Drive • Westbound Trent Avenue north of Wellesley Avenue flyover • Wellesley Avenue west of flyover • Eastbound Trent Avenue east of Barker Road The CLIENT will provide available data to DEA for review. Expected data includes but is not limited to: • Relevant GIS data and files • Copies of recent studies or reports that may impact the study area • Signal timing plans for any traffic signals within the study area • Any recent traffic counts available within the study area 6.2 Develop Project Methods and Assumptions Document The CONSULTANT will develop the project Methods and Assumptions document in accordance with WSDOT Design Manual Section 550.02(1)(b). This will include the project's purpose and need, analysis City of Spokane Valley Page 14 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 methodologies, criteria, traffic analysis tools and approach, etc. The Methods and Assumptions document is a living document and will be updated as new decisions and conclusions are reached. ASSUMPTIONS • A speed study will not be necessary for the project • An Interchange Justification Report (IJR) or partial IJR will not be needed for the project DELIVERABLES • Draft and Final Methods and Assumptions document 6.3 Travel Demand Forecasting in AM and PM Peak Hours Given this determination of travel through the area, DEA will coordinate with the CLIENT for their traffic volume and land use projections in the study area, which incorporates the latest updates to the land uses in the study area through the Comprehensive Plan Update. The CLIENT will provide the land use assumptions and trip growth for the geographic areas included in the study. This growth will be used to project the increase in trips and redistribution of traffic through the project area. ASSUMPTIONS • It is assumed that the CLIENT will provide the travel demand modeling AM and PM projections for the traffic patterns through the study area. Manual adjustments will be made to accommodate the alternative configurations. • Traffic volume forecasts will be completed for the 2040 design year. 6.4 Operational Assessment of Study Intersections and Study Corridors in AM and PM Peak Hours (including weaving, LOS, and queuing) DEA will develop one (1) traffic model to complete the operational analyses of the study area. 6.4.1 Create Synchro Operational Model DEA will create a model using Synchro operational software to calculate the level of service based on Highway Capacity Manual 2010 (HCM2010) methodologies. This model will be used to evaluate the delay and level of service (LOS) of the study area intersections to meet WSDOT design manual requirements and City LOS standards: • LOS D or better at signalized intersections. • LOS E or better at unsignalized intersections or driveways. • Up to three (3) isolated intersection analyses will be completed for alternative intersection control alternatives using Sidra evaluation software. 6.4.2 Ramp Merge/Diverge Analysis DEA will utilize the Highway Capacity Software and the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 (HCM2010) methodologies to evaluate the merge and diverge operations at the ramp gores. The WSDOT standard for regionally significant highways in an urban setting is LOS D. 6.4.3 Trent Avenue (SR -290) Operations DEA will utilize the Highway Capacity Software and the HCM2010 methodologies to evaluate the operations of SR -290 including the reduction in lanes from two to one. The WSDOT standard for regionally significant highways in an urban setting is LOS D. 6.5 Collision History Evaluation — Evaluate Safety History of the Intersections and Roadways DEA will obtain crash data from the CLIENT and WSDOT for 2011-2015. Using methodologies and procedures prescribed in AASHTO's 2010 Highway Safety Manual (HSM), DEA will conduct an analysis of any high accident locations within the study area. This analysis will be used to develop calibration factors for use in the evaluation of design alternatives. City of Spokane Valley Page 15 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 DELIVERABLES • Collision Analysis Memorandum • Summary of Synchro model (in Traffic Operations Report) • Summary of Merge/Diverge Analysis (in Traffic Operations Report) • Summary of SR 290 Operations (in Traffic Operations Report) 6.6 Intersection Control Analysis for Project Intersections Given the alternatives developed in the Alternatives Analysis task and the subsequent volumes derived for the alternatives, the intersection volumes will be evaluated to determine the appropriate intersection control type. This task will include signal warrant analyses based on peak hour volumes at the project intersections, as listed below: • Barker Road at Vista Grande Drive • Barker Road at Eastbound Ramps • Barker Road at Westbound Ramps • Barker Road at Wellesley Avenue For the alternatives based on the 30% BTV design configuration, DEA will evaluate each of the following types of intersection control: • Two-way stop control • Signalization • All -way stop control • One Other Findings will be included in the Traffic Operational Analysis Report. 6.7 Draft Traffic Operational Analysis Report DEA will prepare a draft traffic operation analysis report for the project. The report will include the following items: • Summary of data collection • Traffic forecasting assumptions and results as discussed above • Operational analysis methodology and results as discussed above • Safety analysis methodology and results as discussed above • Findings and Recommendations ASSUMPTIONS • The CLIENT will provide recent ADT data and any recent turning movement counts within the study area as identified in the scope. • The CLIENT will provide crash data as identified in the scope. DELIVERABLES • Draft Traffic Operational Analysis Report 6.8 Final Traffic Operational Analysis Report Addressing the comments received on the draft report, the CONSULTANT will review and respond to each comment and if appropriate, incorporate them into the Final Traffic Operational Analysis Report. DELIVERABLES • Final Traffic Operational Analysis Report City of Spokane Valley Page 16 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Task 7.0 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM The public involvement process will be performed as described below and will be reviewed by CLIENT and WSDOT representatives prior to implementation. ASSUMPTIONS • A formal Public Participation Plan will not be prepared • The CLIENT will conduct meetings with stakeholders and citizen action committees like the Chamber of Commerce, bicycle and pedestrian groups, and other applicable stakeholders. • The CLIENT will send invitations to public meetings and project related events. • The CLIENT will be responsible for any press releases that are issued related to the project. • The CLIENT will be responsible for developing and updating a project website if one is created for the project. The CONSULTANT team will provide necessary information to the CLIENT and the CLIENT will maintain the website. The CLIENT will provide the CONSULTANT team with any feedback from stakeholders/community member use of the website. • The CLIENT will be responsible for developing and distributing Fact Sheets and "Frequently Asked Questions" sheets if they will be prepared for the project. The CONSULTANT team will provide necessary information to the CLIENT so the CLIENT can publish and distribute this information. • This scope of work does not include launching social media tools as a component of communication between the consultant team and the stakeholders. 7.1 Public Open House DEA will arrange, prepare, and attend one (1) Public Open House meeting. The CLIENT will notify the public of this meeting by sending a direct mail postcard to identified stakeholders. The Public Open House Meeting will be held after the Bridge and Interchange Alternatives Analysis has been completed and the preferred alternative has been selected. This scope of work does not include any virtual open houses. DEA AND HDR RESPONSIBILITIES AND DELIVERABLES • Coordinate logistics for the meetings - DEA • Provide sign in sheet - DEA • Provide project displays (a total often (10) displays are anticipated five (5) by each DEA and HDR • Facilitate Public Open House - DEA • Provide a summary of the Public Open House— DEA CITY RESPONSIBILITIES • Prepare, print, and mail postcards to the public and identified stakeholders. DEA will provide the mailing list developed to the CLIENT as part of the Notification of Field Activities. • Provide facility for Public Open House • Advertise the Public Open House in the newspaper • Send open house notifications to local civic organizations • Provide refreshments • Attend Public Open House • Include Public Open House dates in City newsletter and on City website (if one is developed for the project) ASSUMPTIONS • Public Open House will last for five (5) hours including set up and take down. • Three (3) local staff members from DEA and one (1) local staff member from HDR will attend the meeting City of Spokane Valley Page 17 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 7.2 Property Owner Contact Meetings HDR staff will support the CLIENT in conducting owner contact meetings with property owners that will be impacted by the project. 7.2.1 Initial Owner Contact Meetings The CLIENT will set up and conduct the Owner Contact Meetings. DEA and HDR will provide plans prepared under other tasks to support this effort. One staff member from HDR will participate in two (2) owner contact meetings (as requested by the CLIENT) accompanying CLIENT staff to discuss the project with impacted property owners. The purpose of the meetings is to explain design elements that affect the property owners (driveway approaches, fences, right-of-way acquisition, etc.) and to gather information that enables the design team to develop a more context sensitive design. The meetings will be set up by the CLIENT and will occur once the Bridge and Interchange Alternatives Analysis is complete. 7.2.2 Final Owner Contact Meetings The CLIENT will set up and conduct Final Owner Contact Meetings. DEA and HDR will provide plans prepared under other tasks to support this effort. One staff member from HDR will participate in two (2) owner contact meetings (as requested by the CLIENT) accompanying CLIENT staff to discuss the project with impacted property owners. The purpose of the Final Owner Contact meetings is to explain how design elements that affect the property owners that were discussed at the initial meeting were incorporated into the design. The meetings will be set up by the CLIENT and will occur once the Intermediate Design Plans are prepared. DELIVERABLES • Notes from initial owner contact meetings (up to two (2) in-person meetings with direct property owners) • Notes from final owner contact meetings (up to two (2) in-person meetings with direct property owners) CITY RESPONSIBILITIES • Leading and setting up all owner contact meetings — the CONSULTANT Team will only participate in meetings that the CLIENT requests. Task 8.0 NEPA DOCUMENTATION 8,1 Environmental Studies DEA will coordinate with WSDOT Local Programs to determine the type and scope of environmental studies needed. At a minimum DEA will conduct the following studies and prepare the associated documentation for appending to the NEPA Categorical Exclusion Documentation (CED) form prepared in Task 8.3: • Section 106 compliance and APE letter (by third party vender Historical Research Associates) • Section 4(f)/6(f) de minimus determination letter • Environmental Justice letter to file • ESA No Effect letter • Critical Areas Report ASSUMPTIONS • DEA will use Historical Research Associates for Section 106 Compliance/APE Letter. If a cultural resource survey is required it will be included in a supplemental agreement. HRA's WORK TASKS Historical Research Associates, Inc. (HRA), will conduct a cultural resources inventory addressing recent design changes on the Project. The Project is part of the Spokane Regional Transportation Council's (SRTC) Bridging the Valley Project (BTV), implemented to improve traffic safety through the elimination of 75 at -grade rail/roadway crossings with mainline train operations between Spokane, Washington, and City of Spokane Valley Page 18 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Athol, Idaho. The SRTC, in coordination with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), contracted ENTRIX, Inc. (ENTRIX), to conduct a cultural resources study in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and its implementing regulations 36CFR800. ENTRIX (2005) identified a total of 45 resources in Idaho and 77 resources in Washington, four of which are situated within the current project area: 45SP450 (Old Trent Road), 45SP452 (North Branch of Spokane River Canal), 45SP499 (Northern Pacific Railroad), and 45SP502 (unnamed foundation and associated features). All four sites were determined not eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). A National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) Categorical Exclusion (CE) was approved for the entire suite of BTV projects in 2006 by FHWA and WSDOT. Based on WSDOT Local Programs CE guidance (March 2016), NEPA documentation limited to the Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation improvements is needed. The area of potential effects (APE) for BTV projects was separated for the 2005 study: one to address archaeological resources and one to address historical resources. The archaeological APE was defined as all areas of ground disturbance, including all areas of new right-of-way (ROW) and associated construction areas. The APE for historical (i.e., aboveground) resources included a 100 -foot -wide buffer on each side of the BNSF track (measured from the centerline of the outside track); all areas of new ROW; and a 100 -foot - wide buffer around areas of new road ROW at separated crossings, excluding the existing rail within the 100 feet. This general APE description for BTV projects has not changed since the 2005 study; however, the construction footprint for the current Project includes additional areas (e.g., Barker Road Extension and Wellesley Road), encompassing approximately 34 acres in Sections 5 and 6 of Township 25 North, Range 45 East, and Sections 31 and 32 of Township 26 North, Range 45 East, Willamette Meridian.. HRA's PROJECT APPROACH The project approach described below addresses potential archaeological and ethnographic cultural resources and historic -period (over 50 years of age) buildings, structures, and objects (BSOs) that the proposed Project may impact. HRA proposes to survey the construction footprint and conduct subsurface excavation for archaeological resources, and survey for aboveground resources within the 100 -foot buffer described above. Based on a preliminary review of the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation's (DAHP) online cultural resources database (WISAARD), no archaeological sites have been recorded within, or in close proximity to, the APE since the 2005 study. DAHP's predictive model classifies the area's probability for precontact cultural resources as low to very high. A review of Historic Property Inventory Form (HPI) data on WISAARD shows no BSOs dating from the historic period in the project vicinity. HRA TASK 1: PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND AGENCY/TRIBAL COORDINATION Project Management and Coordination includes coordination with the CLIENT regarding the project schedule and deliverables, communications with DEA and the appropriate agency and tribal representatives, and internal management of tasks and products. HRA expects that WSDOT will initiate consultation with DAHP, as well as the interested Tribes, to notify them of the proposed Project and request their comment. HRA staff will be available for telephone consultations with DEA, DAHP, WSDOT, and/or the Tribes as necessary, regarding the project and our findings. HRA TASK 2: HEALTH AND SAFETY COORDINATION HRA's Project Manager and Health and Safety Coordinator will coordinate with the CLIENT and, as needed, BNSF, to determine which safety trainings and clearances are required, as well as appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) and procedures to follow during fieldwork. At this time, it is assumed that BNSF contractor orientation and safety training will be required for each field team member, and that eRailsafe security training and clearance will also be required. HRA will prepare a project -specific health and safety plan (HASP), but it is assumed that HDR will prepare the BNSF-required Safety Action Plan (SAP). A BNSF flagger may also be required, depending on the specifications outlined in the Temporary City of Spokane Valley Page 19 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Occupancy Permit from BNSF. HRA will work with DEA to determine these needs closer to the date of proposed fieldwork. HRA TASK 3: BACKGROUND AND ARCHIVAL RESEARCH Background and archival research includes appropriate research to determine whether cultural resources are located in the APE, whether they are likely to be located in the APE, and to identify the appropriate historical contexts for evaluating the significance of any such resources. Based on maps and descriptions of the proposed Project, to be provided by DEA, HRA staff will conduct an online records search of the DAHP cultural resources database to determine what previous studies have been conducted within and in the vicinity of the project area, as well as to identify previously recorded archaeological sites, NRHP properties, and aboveground resources in the project vicinity. HRA personnel will also review county soil books and aerial photography, as well as historic -period maps including, but not limited to, General Land Office (GLO) plats, historic U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 15 -minute topographic maps, Metsker maps, Sanborn Fire Insurance Company maps, and other pertinent cartographic resources to develop a preliminary impression of the type and number of cultural resources that may be located within the APE and surrounding area. Additional background research will be conducted in HRA's cultural resource reference library, the Spokane Public Library, and the Joel E. Ferris Research Library and Archives, as needed. HRA TASK 4: FIELDWORK HRA will arrange for utility locates to meet the requirements of Washington's Underground Utilities regulations (RCW 19.122). This requires obtaining a locate survey for any kind of excavation on public and private property that will exceed 12 inches in depth. A locate service must be notified by the excavator (HRA) at least 2 business days before digging and the area of proposed excavation must be marked with paint as described in RCW 19.122.030. DEA will mark the location of the area (or provide locations on a map) that will receive subsurface impacts or excavations for the utility locate survey and will notify HRA when the area has been marked, so we can order the locate survey. HRA will not be responsible for marking the area or maintaining the markings. If desired by WSDOT, HRA staff will notify the Tribes about the schedule for the field survey. HRA will conduct a 100 -percent archaeological pedestrian survey of the revised APE area and a visual assessment for any potentially significant aboveground historic -period resources that may be impacted by the proposed development. Survey transects shall be 25 meters apart or less on average for the survey; narrower transects may be used according to the judgment of the Field Director. The surveyor will seek out and examine all ground exposures (e.g., exposed trails, ditches) for evidence of subsurface features and/or cultural materials. All survey areas will be drawn on a USGS quadrangle map at a scale appropriate to the size of the survey area or recorded using a Global Positioning System (GPS) instrument, utilizing HRA's standard Data Dictionary. The character of the landscape and its potential for containing intact archaeological deposits will determine subsurface testing methods. Shovel test probes will be placed in areas where the Field Director determines that a location is of high probability for the presence of subsurface cultural materials (e.g., where there is evidence of archaeological materials on the ground surface unassociated with any of the four existing archaeological sites). Up to 20 probes will be excavated within the APE to examine the subsurface and to identify any areas that might contain buried, intact cultural strata and/or features. Probes will be at least 40 centimeters (cm) in diameter and will be excavated to a depth of at least 50 cm below the surface and terminated after 20 cm of sterile sediments or upon discovery of sediments that clearly pre -date human use of the region. Probes may be terminated at shallower depths if the sediments reveal that substantial ground disturbance has previously occurred at a location. All excavated sediments will be screened through 0.25 - inch mesh to identify any small cultural items that may be present. The identification of any subsurface cultural materials in a single shovel test will result in the excavation of up to four additional shovel tests in a cruciform pattern at a distance of 5 meters, a.k.a. "radial" probes, to determine resource boundaries. All probes will be completely backfilled and their locations will be plotted onto a project map. City of Spokane Valley Page 20 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 If archaeological materials are found, they will be analyzed in the field but not collected. To the extent possible, they will be identified as to type, material, function, and cultural and temporal association. All encountered archaeological materials will be documented on DAHP site or isolate forms, as appropriate. Draft archaeological site and isolate forms will be submitted to DAHP for review and assignment of Smithsonian Trinomials for inclusion with the Final Report deliverable. Site boundary polygons, the locations of all features, and all shovel probe locations shall be recorded using GPS technology and on a site sketch map. Photographs will be taken to accompany the form and a sketch map will be prepared showing any intrasite resource patterns and the site in relation to the surrounding topography and proposed developments. In the event that human remains are discovered during the field survey, the Sheriff, City of Spokane Valley (City), WSDOT, DAHP, and Tribes will be immediately notified. Treatment of the human remains would be coordinated through consultation among these parties. HRA TASK 5: ANALYSIS AND REPORT PREPARATION HRA will conduct data analysis and prepare a Cultural Resource Inventory Report summarizing the results of the investigations which will adhere to the professional standards for format and content as expressed in DAHP reporting guidelines. The draft report and all associated deliverables will be submitted to DEA and WSDOT for comment in electronic format (MS Word). The report will include: • A description of the Project and applicable laws and regulations; • A summary of the results of the background literature and records research; • The methods used during the fieldwork and the results; • A description and evaluation of any cultural resources found within the APE according to national, state, and local registers, as appropriate; • A summary assessment of potential effects to any identified resources based on our knowledge of the resource type, soil conditions, and extent to which the proposed project may affect the resource; • Recommendations for completion of any additional cultural resources compliance obligations stemming from the results of our study; • A summary of project procedures that should be followed in the event of an unanticipated discovery of buried cultural materials or human remains during construction; and • References cited. The report will include such tables, maps, photographs, and other graphics as are needed to depict the scope of the study and results. Archaeological site records for any recorded resources will be included in an appendix to the report. HRA will make any necessary revisions to the Draft report in response to comments by DEA and WSDOT, and will submit an electronic copy that includes the DAHP submittal form inserted (DAHP now only accepts submittals in electronic [Adobe PDF] format). DELIVERABLES • Draft and Final Cultural Resource Inventory Report 8.2 Environmental Technical Memoranda DEA will prepare the following brief (1 to 3 pages) documents that typically are appended to the CED form prepared in Task 8.3: • Air Quality • Noise • Right-of-way • Hazardous waste ASSUMPTIONS • Quantitative air and noise modeling is not required City of Spokane Valley Page 21 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 • Scope includes two NEPA meetings: 1. Site Visit / SEPA Meeting with CLIENT (two (2) DEA staff), and 2. WSDOT Local Agency Program NEPA Kick-off Meeting (one (1) DEA staff) 8.3 NEPA Categorical Exclusion Documentation (CED) Form DEA will prepare the CED form following the WSDOT guidance in NEPA Categorical Exclusions, A Guidebook for Local Agencies (October 19, 2015). • Draft CED form • Final CED form ASSUMPTIONS • The CLIENT will adopt the approved NEPA document to meet SEPA requirements thus fulfilling a truncated SEPA approval process. • The scope includes the Critical Areas Report, which also addresses listed species and habitat. • This scope does not include the preparation of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. • Federal agency consultation related to ESA species will not be required. • The scope includes Area of Potential Effect Letter and research for cultural resources. If a cultural resource survey is required it will be included in a supplemental agreement. • Draft environmental documents will be revised once in response to review comments by the CLIENT and a second time in response to review comments by WSDOT/FHWA. DELIVERABLES • Draft Environmental Studies • Final Environmental Studies • Draft Environmental Technical Memoranda • Final Environmental Technical Memoranda • Draft CED form • Final CED form Task 9.0 SURVEYING 9.1 Develop Control Network 9.1.1 Notifications DEA will create notifications letters that will be approved by the CLIENT and mailed out in advance of any field work to adjacent land owners within the project limits. 9.1.2 Control Network Planning, Research, and Office Preparation DEA will develop a control network plan before performing any field work per WSDOT Highway Surveying Manual M22-97 (Section 13-03). Meetings will be held with the survey team and project manager. Following these meetings, a control plan will be developed. The project surveyor will research CLIENT, previous project control, FEMA Benchmarks, NGS datasheets and WSDOT records to determine the availability of existing control in the project area. The project surveyor will then conduct a meeting with the party chief to develop a plan to recover necessary existing control. 9.1.3 Development of GPS Control Network DEA will utilize Static GPS surveying and continuously operating Washington High -Precision Geodetic Network (HPGN) stations in post processing methods to establish a primary control network throughout the project corridor. DEA will carefully develop a localized projection so that ground distances are maintained throughout the project. WSDOT standard vertical and horizontal datum, NAD83 2011 and NAVD88 Geoid 12B will be utilized Control coordinates will be reported in Washington State Plane North Zone and a conversion factor will be provided for future translations. Distances will be reported in City of Spokane Valley Page 22 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 ground distances. Primary control points will be used to develop the overall static control network placed within the project limits, previously defined, +/- 1000 foot intervals and at interchanges through the entire project site. These points will be monumented with aluminum caps and set in concrete and stamped with corresponding control point number. Up to ten (10) points are anticipated and will be set in locations beyond the anticipated disturbance area to the extent feasible. 9.1.4 Vertical Project Control Network DEA will establish vertical benchmarks on a horizontal control monument during the GPS Control Network effort (previous task) and project this elevation across the previously established control network. 9.1.5 Control Diagram DEA will develop a control diagram per WSDOT Highway Surveying Manual M22-97 (Chapter 13- 06.1). Included, but not limited to, in this control diagram as specified in Chapter 13-06.01, are established horizontal and vertical monument locations, HPGN stations used to establish horizontal project control, a coordinate list in state plane and local datum, and descriptions of each established control point. The project Control Diagram will also be used in the Project Control Report. ASSUMPTIONS • DEA will create a local datum plane for this project which will keep the entire project measurements nearest ground distances using one combined scale factor and will be referenced to Washington State Plane Coordinate System, North Zone, NAD 83 horizontal datum and NAVD 88 vertical datum. • DEA will search for and make ties on at least two nearest, and any other NGS published monuments within the project limits to verify vertical and horizontal accuracies are attained. • DEA will set or utilize existing monumentation on up to ten (10) points throughout the site for establishing primary control. DELIVERABLES • A control diagram and a project control report per WSDOT standards. 9,2 Aerial LiDAR Processing City of Spokane Valley Page 23 Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Scope of Services December 1, 2016 Supplemental topographical field and utility confirmation survey necessary due to potential gaps in the aerial survey will be collected under a supplemental agreement. However, as listed below, obtaining aerial survey data and processing it into the topographical component of the base mapping is included in this task. 9.2.1 Aerial Photogrammetry (Provided by the CLIENT) DEA will obtain high resolution aerial imagery and Lidar topographical point data that can be processed into a topographical map to use on the project. This task will include obtaining the data from the CLIENT. Assumptions • Aerial Lidar topographical data and high resolution imagery will be provided by the CLIENT. • CLIENT provided aerial topographical meta data and digital information will be sufficient to create a topographical map with a 1 -foot minimum contour interval. • Aerial imagery will be used to depict the proposed project for public meeting displays and displays included in the alternatives analysis. 9.2.2 Perform Ground Checks DEA will collect and process ground truthing RTK GPS from primary control network. Perform quality control and assurance checks on ground truthing aerial photography mapping. Process mapping data and prepare data to be imported into MicroStation. Shots will also be taken on the existing railroad tracks 1000 feet each side of the proposed bridge crossing to confirm track plans. This will also include collecting top of rail profile shots for each rail for 1000 feet from the bridge in each direction. 9.2.3 Prepare Aerial Mapping DEA will convert LiDAR point data to a dtm to WSDOT mapping standards using MicroStation. Quality checks will be performed on the line work to ensure accuracy and validity to WSDOT standards. This product will be prepared for proper use through the Intermediate Design phase. ASSUMPTIONS • Aerial topographical mapping will be used for Intermediate Design and will be supplemented by in- fill ground shots that will be included in a supplemental agreement. • Existing utility facility information will not be collected DELIVERABLES • Electronic base map in MicroStation© format. City of Spokane Valley Page 24 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 93 Perform Boundary/Right-of-Way Surveying 9.3.1 Research DEA will research and analyze the following to determine the locations of the existing City, Spokane County, WSDOT and BNSF rail road rights of way boundaries within the project limits: • Transfer Deeds • Right -of -Way Plans • Records of Survey • Subdivision plats • Unrecorded maps • Land Corner Records • Railroad Right -of -Way • Deeds of Record Research will be sufficient enough to place record right-of-ways of BNSF, Barker Road, S. Wellesley Ave., Flora Road, along the project corridor. ASSUMPTIONS • WSDOT, city and county right of way plans will be provided by others. 9.3.2 Field Survey DEA will travel to the site and search for and make field ties on a minimal number of right-of-way monuments (up to 20 monuments) within the project corridor along the BNSF right-of-way, SR 290, and the other roadways listed above sufficient to develop right-of-way lines per record documents recovered during the research task. DEA will also make field ties on adjacent monumentation used to define the Public Land Survey System (PLSS) and minimal right of way monuments (up to 20 monuments). The intent of this field survey will be to identify field evidence sufficient to make a preliminary recreation of the BNSF, Barker Road, S. Wellesley Ave., and Flora Road rights-of-way along the project corridor. These will be used for design purposes with the intent of developing a full retracement record of survey under a subsequent agreement. 9.3.3 Preliminary Right -of -Way Resolution by record documents ONLY DEA will develop a preliminary reconstruction of rights-of-way within the project limits from the researched documents to calculate and prepare an approximate location of existing right-of-way to display on the base map. ASSUMPTIONS • No boundary resolution will be performed and no boundary issues will be resolved. • It is assumed that the preliminary boundary survey in tasks above per state statute (RCW 58.09.090 lb) will be preliminary in nature with the intent of performing a complete retracement record of survey under supplemental agreement prior to further development of the project. 9.4 Prepare Final Base Mapping Products DEA will import the right-of-way lines, parcel sidelines, centerline alignments, and tied monuments into the project's existing base mapping. ASSUMPTIONS • DEA will incorporate the above stated features and elements into the base map. DELIVERABLES • DEA will create a MicroStation DGN file with the completed base map with 1 -foot contour mapping, a DTM (Digital Terrain Model), tied monumentation, and boundary linework for design purposes. City of Spokane Valley Page 25 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Task 10.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS - INTERCHANGE AND BRIDGE CONFIGURATION Based on our meeting with the CLIENT on September 13, 2016, and further internal discussions among the CONSULTANT Team , the following three (3) interchange and bridge alternatives will be evaluated to determine a preferred alternative to advance to design: Alternative 1: The interchange and bridge horizontal alignment as included in the 30% BTV Plans. The vertical profile of Barker Road will be updated based on modern girder types (the interchange ramp profiles will not be updated and roadway modeling will not be performed for this alternative). Alternative 2: The interchange and bridge with Barker Road shifted to the east so that the new bridge over BNSF is not on a horizontal curve. New ramp alignments and profiles will be developed (4 interchange ramps, Barker Road, and SR 290) and the roadways modeled. Alternative 3: The interchange and bridge with Barker Road shifted to the east so that the new bridge over BNSF is not on a horizontal curve with alternative intersection control. New ramp alignments and profiles will be developed (4 interchange ramps, Barker Road, and SR 290) and the roadways modeled. 10.1 Develop Alternative Alignments — Interchange and Bridge Alternatives HDR will prepare alternative alignment layouts for Alternatives 1-3. Roll plots (horizontal and vertical alignment including InRoads modeling (Alternatives 2 & 3 only) will be developed for the project for each of the alternatives including bridge geometrics so that appropriate costs can be developed. ASSUMPTIONS • The alternatives will be evaluated with the typical sections from the 30% BTV design. • The BNSF bridge will accommodate the same number of tracks as in the 30% BTV design • Alternatives 1&2 intersection configurations will utilize signals (Alternative 3 will use alternative intersection control) • Truck turning movements will be performed to verify an adequate design • Detailed intersection control alternatives will not be developed for the geometric layout of the alternatives — instead, general approximate geometry will be used. DELIVERABLES • Roll plots of Alternatives 1-3 10.2 Evaluate Alternatives Traffic Impacts DEA will evaluate the traffic impacts of each of the three (3) alternatives. Since each of the three alternatives will have intersections in different locations, queue lengths, turning movements, and other traffic related elements of the alternatives will be evaluated so that the true impact of the alternatives is understood. Alternative intersection configurations will be evaluated as an alternative to signalized intersections for the diamond interchange alternatives. DELIVERABLES • Traffic Impact Analysis of Alternatives 1-3 10,3 Develop Alternative Costs HDR will develop conceptual costs for the components included in Alternatives 1-3 (with the exception of the BNSF bridge and all the retaining walls, which will be estimated by DEA). This would not be a detailed cost estimate for the entire project, but a comparative cost estimate that only evaluates and compares those components related to the two bridges and associated retaining walls, and related impacts to the highway and roadways. Cost estimates will be developed with present worth prices. ASSUMPTIONS • Alternative costs for bridges will be based on structure costs per square foot from WSDOT's Bridge Design Manual. City of Spokane Valley Page 26 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 DELIVERABLES • Conceptual construction cost estimates of Alternatives 1-3 in MS Excel 10.4 Develop an Alternatives Evaluation Matrix HDR will develop an Alternatives Evaluation Matrix that evaluates and compares each of the three (3) Alternatives to each other. The consultant team, DEA and HDR, will collaboratively evaluate the four alternatives and recommend a preferred alternative. The team's recommendations will be vetted with the CLIENT and WSDOT before developing the recommendation in a report. ASSUMPTIONS • DEA, HDR and the CLIENT will have a meeting to discuss the evaluation components to study (i.e. cost, utilities, drainage, roadway, earthwork, right-of-way, safety, constructability and other pertinent project elements, etc.). Three (3) DEA staff (PM, Bridge Lead, and Traffic Lead) and three (3) HDR staff (Transportation Lead, Roadway Lead, and Bridge Lead) will attend. DELIVERABLES • Evaluation Matrix with weighted scoring evaluating Alternatives 1-3 prepared in MS Excel. 10.5 Develop Alternatives Evaluation Report HDR will summarize the findings from the Alternatives Evaluation effort in a written report. Other potential project impacts will also be evaluated: utilities, drainage, roadway, earthwork, right-of-way, safety, constructability and other pertinent project elements. A draft and final version of the report will be developed and submitted to the CLIENT and WSDOT for review and acceptance. ASSUMPTIONS • HDR will conduct quality control reviews of the Draft and Final Reports prior to submittal to DEA. • HDR will review and incorporate one (1) set of CLIENT comments on the Draft and Final Report DELIVERABLES • One Draft Alternatives Evaluation Report as a PDF • One Final Alternatives Evaluation Report as a PDF Task 11.0 BNSF COORDINATION AND SUBMITTALS DEA and HDR will prepare submittals for BNSF Railway review in accordance with Section 5 Overhead Structures of the Union Pacific Railroad - BNSF Railway Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation Projects as listed above. These submittals will utilize the bridge plans developed under the preliminary and final design tasks and modify them as needed to meet the BNSF submittal requirements. 11.1 Prepare Temporary Occupancy Application & Safety Plan HDR will prepare a BNSF Temporary Occupancy Application & Safety Plan for permission to survey, perform environmental fieldwork, and geotechnical fieldwork within the BNSF right-of-way. The agreement will specify Railroad requirements that must be met to conduct fieldwork within the BNSF right-of-way. ASSUMPTIONS • HDR will prepare the BNSF Temporary Occupancy Application & Safety Plan and provide it to the CLIENT for submittal to BNSF. • The CLIENT will be responsible for the $775 non-refundable processing fee. DELIVERABLES • One Application for Temporary Occupancy as a PDF City of Spokane Valley Page 27 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 11.2 BNSF Design Phase A Package (Concept Railroad Submittal) The CONSULTANT team will prepare the Concept Plans and Site Pictures in accordance with Table 3-1 of the Guidelines for Railroad Grade Separation Projects. HDR will put the plan package together and will coordinate and process the package through BNSF. DEA will provide the bridge plans as that will be included in the package. As part of this task, DEA and HDR will conduct a one -day meeting and site visit with BNSF, CLIENT, WSDOT, and WUTC representatives. The concept will be submitted to BNSF for review. This meeting will also include displays and a discussion about any proposed design exceptions that the CONSULTANT team is proposing as part of the design package. This task includes HDR communication with BNSF to encourage them to provide a meaningful and timely review and acceptance of the Design Phase A Package. The meeting will last for four (4) hours. ASSUMPTIONS • Two (2) DEA staff (PM and Bridge Lead) and two (2) HDR staff (Transportation Lead and BNSF Coordination Lead) will attend the meeting. • The office portion of the meeting will be held at the CLIENT's office • The CLIENT PM will attend the meeting DELIVERABLES • Draft and Final BNSF Railway Design Phase A Package (Concept Railroad Submittal) 11.3 BNSF Design Phase B Package (30% Railroad Submittal) The following items will be developed for the 30% submittal: 11.3.1 Bridge Plans (30% Railroad Submittal Package) (by DEA) The 30% submittal will include responses to BNSF review comments on the concept submittal. The 30% Bridge Plans will show Plan View, Elevation View, and Typical Sections and the CONSULTANT's response to BNSF's comments on the Concept Railroad Submittal. Construction Phasing Plans and anticipated construction methods will also be included. Plans will depict top of rail profile for 1000 feet from the bridge each direction. The plans will include General Bridge Notes, a summary of bridge design criteria, and Crossing Exhibit for crossings that will be closed. This submittal package will also include related Specifications and railroad coordination requirements in draft form. 11.3.2 Hydraulics Summary (30% Railroad Submittal Package) (by HDR) The 30% Railroad Submittal will include a Hydraulics Summary Report for culverts and drainage as it relates to the railroad and a statement that the project will not direct additional drainage along the tracks. 11.3.3 Railroad Profile Grade Diagrams (30% Railroad Submittal Package) (by HDR) Railroad Profile Grade Track Diagrams will be prepared for submittal with the 30% Design Package. 11.3.4 Quality Control (30% Railroad Submittal Package) (by HDR/DEA) HDR will develop most of the 30% Railroad Submittal Package as discussed above but DEA will provide a quality control review along with comments on the package that will be addressed by HDR prior to submittal to BNSF. HDR will review those portions as detailed above developed by DEA. DELIVERABLES FOR 11.3 • Draft and Final BNSF Railway Design Phase B Package (30% Submittal Package) Task 12.0 PRELIMINARY STRUCTURES AND DESIGN APPROVAL 12.1 Refine BTV 30% Design Typical Sections (Deleted) 12,2 Refine BTV 30% Design SR 290 and Interchange Ramp Plans (Deleted) 12.3 Refine BTV 30% Design Local Roadway Plans (Deleted) City of Spokane Valley Page 28 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 12.4 Refine BTV 30% Design Utility Plans (Deleted) 123 Refine BTV 30% Design Pavement Channelization Plans (Deleted) 12.6 Prepare Bridge and Wall Structures Type Alternatives Analysis This task includes a determination of general structure type and size (investigating options that have become feasible since BTV approval in 2004), bridge railing type recommendation, aesthetic considerations, preliminary cost estimates, construction staging concepts, estimated construction durations and required lane closures, and assisting the design staff and project team in evaluating the alternatives included. 12.6.1 Bridge Type Alternatives Analysis Report The CONSULTANT team will develop up to three (3) bridge type alternatives for both bridges, and summarize the findings in the Bridge Type Alternatives Analysis Report. This effort includes a determination of general structure type and size, preliminary cost estimates, construction staging, SR 290 lane closures and assisting the design staff and project team in evaluating the bridge alternatives included. 12.6.1.1 Barker over BNSF (by DEA) 12.6.1.2 Barker over SR 290 (by HDR) ASSUMPTIONS • The Bridge Type Alternative Analysis Report will be approximately five (5) pages in length for each bridge. • Bridge costs will be evaluated on a unit price basis. DELIVERABLES • Draft and Final Bridge Type Alternatives Analysis Report 12.6.1.3 Wall Type Alternatives Analysis Report (by DEA) DEA will evaluate up to three (3) wall options for the walls proposed for the project. The Wall Type Alternatives Analysis Report will summarize the findings of the wall type selection and include a narrative discussing the estimated probable cost, railroad crash wall considerations, constraints (such as available ROW), geotechnical and soil conditions, constructability, and maintenance of traffic. HDR will provide input during the development of the report and will review the draft report prior to submitting to the CLIENT. ASSUMPTIONS • Wall costs will be evaluated on a cost per square foot basis. • Wall types to be evaluated include: o Reinforced Concrete Retaining Wall (WSDOT Std. Plan) o Precast Panel Faced Structural Earth Wall (Supplier Designed) o Permanent Geosynthetic Wall with Concrete Fascia (WSDOT Std. Plan) DELIVERABLES • The Wall Type Alternative Analysis Report will be approximately three (3) pages in length. • Draft and Final Wall Type Alternatives Analysis Report 12.7 Prepare Bridge Preliminary Plan (6 bridge sheets) DEA will advance the preferred bridge type for the BNSF bridge to the bridge preliminary plan stage (which will also be used to develop the BNSF Design Phase A Submittal) and HDR will advance the preferred bridge type for the SR 290 bridge to the bridge preliminary plan stage. Bridge design will be reviewed by the WSDOT Bridge and Structures office and will therefore meet WSDOT's Bridge Design Deliverable Expectation Matrix. City of Spokane Valley Page 29 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 12.7.1 Bridge Preliminary Plan - Barker Rd over BNSF (by DEA) 12.7.2 Bridge Preliminary Plan - Barker Rd over SR 290 (by HDR) ASSUMPTIONS • Bridges included in this project: o One three -span bridge over BNSF (by DEA) o One single -span bridge over SR 290 (by HDR) • Retaining Wall location and plans limits only will be developed. Wall profiles will not be developed. • 11"x17" plan sheets for the preliminary bridge design for CLIENT, BNSF and WSDOT approval. • This submittal will meet the requirements outlined in WSDOT's Bridge Delivery Expectation Matrix, Column "Permitting Submittal" for any structures reviewed by WSDOT. DELIVERABLES • Bridge Preliminary Plan - Barker Rd over BNSF (by DEA) • Bridge Preliminary Plan - Barker Rd over SR 290 (by HDR) 12.S Prepare Cost Estimates for Refined BTV 30% Design (Deleted) 12.9 Submit Refined BTV 30% Design Package (Deleted) 12,10 Refined BTV 30% Design Review Meeting (Deleted) 12.11 Prepare Basis of Design Memorandum DEA will prepare the Basis of Design (BOD) for the project. The BOD will follow the outline shown in WSDOT's Design Manual Section 1100.10(1) (July 2016). DEA will prepare supporting documentation to be included in the BOD Memorandum. This documentation includes the following items: • Basis of Estimate (BOE) • Design Parameter Sheets • Interchange and Bridge Alternatives Comparison Tables • Performance Target Refinement Form • Basis of Design (BOD) Memorandum The outline for the BOD Memorandum is as follows: • Planning Document Summary • General Project Information • Section 1 — Project Need • Section 2 — Context • Section 3 — Design Controls • Section 4 — Interchange and Bridge Alternatives Analysis • Section 5 — Design Element Selection ASSUMPTIONS • WSDOT will provide templates for the following items: BOD Memorandum, BOE, Performance Target Refinement Form DELIVERABLES • Basis of Design Memorandum (Draft and Final) City of Spokane Valley Page 30 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 12.12 Design Approval Memorandum DEA will prepare the Design Approval Memorandum following the outline shown in WSDOT's Design Manual Section 300.04(1) (July 2016). The following items will be included in the Memorandum: • Stamped Cover Sheet (project description) • A reader -friendly memo that describes the project • Project summary documents • Basis of Design • Interchange and Bridge Alternatives Comparison Table • Design Parameters worksheets • Crash Analysis Report • Design Analysis (If Needed) • Design Variance Inventory (If Required) • Channelization Plans, intersection plans, and interchange plans • Alignment plans and profile • Current cost estimate with a Basis of Estimate ASSUMPTIONS • The Design Approval Memorandum will follow the outline shown in WSDOT's Design Manual Section 300.04(1) (July 2016). DELIVERABLES • Draft Design Approval Memorandum • Final Design Approval Memorandum Task 13.0 INTERMEDIATE DESIGN DOCUMENTS The following tasks will be accomplished in preparing the Intermediate Design Documents. The sheet count for this task in included in the table at the end of this scope of work. It should be noted that this Intermediate Design package is NOT inclusive of a complete plan package. It only includes elements of the design that discussed and agreed to between the CONSULTANT TEAM and the CLIENT. 13.1 Develop Index/Vicinity Map (2 sheets) DEA will develop an Index/Vicinity Map showing the project location and a list of sheets included in the Intermediate Design plans. 13.2 Develop Roadway Typical Sections (8 sheets for 15 Typical Sections) DEA and HDR will prepare typical sections for the project with two typical sections on each sheet. The Refined BTV 30% Design Typical Sections will be adjusted as necessary for this task. Roadway typical sections are estimated as follows: • Four for SR 290 - One for existing SR 290 at the westerly tie in, one for SR 290 bridge, one for SR 290 at the existing E. Wellesley Avenue bridge, and one at the existing SR 290 easterly tie in. (by DEA). • Two for SR 290/Barker Road I.C. ramps — one single lane and one for a widened section near the intersection with Barker (by DEA) • Four for Barker Road— one at the southerly end, one at the northerly end, and one at each of the ramp terminals (by HDR) • Two for proposed E. Wellesley Avenue (by HDR) City of Spokane Valley Page 31 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 • One for the N Flora Road cul-de-sac (by HDR) • Two more for other miscellaneous roads as necessary ASSUMPTIONS • Typical Sections for alternative intersection control (if it becomes a part of the project) are not included. 13.3 Develop Pavement and Facility Removal/Demolition Plans (Future Supplemental Agreement) 13.4 Interchange Plans for Approval (3 sheets) DEA will prepare Interchange Plans for Approval including the interchange main line, crossroad, and ramp layouts. Design speeds for main line and crossroads; bearings, grades, curve data for main line, ramps, and crossroads; number and widths of lanes; superelevation diagrams for roads and ramps; existing/proposed right-of-way; finish contours, etc. as detailed in section 1360.07 "Interchange Plans for Approval" of WSDOT's Design Manual will be included in these plan sheets. 13.5 Develop Roadway Paving Plan and Profile Sheets (62 sheets) The CONSULTANT team will prepare roadway paving plan and profile sheets that will also depict drainage elements designed for the project, proposed right-of-way and easements limits, and existing utilities. Separate sheets will be generated for the paving plan and profile views rather than having plan and profile shown on the same sheet. The CONSULTANT team will develop the proposed vertical alignment within the proposed grade separation and interchange project limits. This task also includes developing the preliminary roadway section templates required for the project in InRoads and establishing roadway cross sections. Super - elevation data (shown as super -elevation diagrams on the profile sheets) will be included to meet current WSDOT and AASHTO Standards. This task also includes modeling the project in an attempt to get earthwork to balance as close as possible or to reduce import or export of material, providing roadside design services, and providing the level of effort to determine right-of-way need lines. DELIVERABLES • Roadway paving plan sheets and profile sheets estimated as follows: Street Name Plan Profile SR 290 - DEA 8 8 WB On Ramp - DEA 0 4 WB Off Ramp - DEA 0 5 EB On Ramp - DEA 0 4 EB Off Ramp - DEA 0 5 Barker Road North - DEA 3 3 Barker Road south - HDR 3 3 E. Wellesley Ave - HDR 7 7 N. Flora Road - HDR 1 1 TOTAL 22 40 ASSUMPTIONS • SR -290 and Ramps will be at 1"=40' scale • Barker Road, Wellesley Avenue, and Flora Road and other local roads or approaches will be at 1"=40' scale 13.6 Develop Drainage Plans for SR 290 and Local Roadways (6 sheets) HDR will develop drainage design depicting existing and proposed drainage courses, storm sewer systems, stormwater treatment facilities, ponds, catch basins, etc. Drainage facilities will be designed so City of Spokane Valley Page 32 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 their conceptual limits are established and required right-of-way needs can be factored in to project cost estimates. The final design elements and specifics of the drainage facilities will be detailed under Final Design and PS&E. ASSUMPTION • Drainage facilities (other than grass swales and drywells) will be shown on stand-alone drainage sheets. Swales and drywells layouts will be shown on Paving Plans and detail sheets. • Since most of the drainage facilities are going to be grass swales and drywells, only six (6) Drainage Plan Sheets are anticipated. • Station and offsets, pipe slopes, lengths, invert elevations, and labels will NOT be completed at this stage. 13.7 Hydraulic Report HDR will prepare a drainage report in conformance with the WSDOT Hydraulic & Highway Runoff Manuals and the Spokane Regional Stormwater Manual. HDR will document the existing conditions and delineate the existing drainage basins. HDR will delineate the proposed drainage conditions and document the proposed conveyance, treatment, and flow control of stormwater within the drainage report. DEA will perform a quality control review of the draft and final report prior to submittal. ASSUMPTIONS • Swales with drywells will be the typical treatment and flow control method of stormwater • Detention facilities are not needed for the project • Storm drains may be needed to intercept runoff on the bridges to limit spread width • Storm drain system will not be needed on Wellesley Avenue. Runoff will enter the roadside swales via curb cuts or inlets under the sidewalk. No closed pipe system will be required. • A limited storm drain system may be needed for the ramps to limit spread width and convey drainage to the interchange gore areas. • Existing runoff from the north appears to be conveyed to the south to the existing BNSF right-of- way. This existing condition can be perpetuated by extending culverts under the interchange ramps or new pipes installed to maintain existing drainage pathways. • New treatment and flow control areas for the interchange ramps and bridges will be within the gore areas between SR 290 and the interchange ramps. DELIVERABLES • Draft Hydraulic Report documenting the existing and proposed drainage conditions including hydrologic and hydraulic calculations, basin maps, photos, and details (PDF) • Final Hydraulic Report documenting the final configuration and drainage facilities (PDF) 13.8 Develop Channelization, Pavement Marking, Signing, and Sign Structure Plans (22 sheets) DEA will prepare channelization pavement marking plans indicating locations for channelization and pavement markings. These plans will be created from the paving plan sheets and at the same scale so that the same match lines are carried through the plan set for clarity and efficiency. DEA will include on the plans signing and sign structure design indicating locations for proposed signs, instructions for existing signs (remove, relocate or protect), and locations for sign structures. The signing and sign structure plans will be developed in enough detail to depict sign and sign structure locations along with their legends. ASSUMPTIONS • Signing and Sign Structure Details will not be included in this set of plans but will be developed for Final Design through a future Supplemental Agreement. City of Spokane Valley Page 33 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 13.9 Intersection Control Plans (9 sheets) DEA and HDR will finalize the Intersection Control Plans and Details. Intersection Control Plans will be prepared for the: 1) Barker Road/Wellesley Avenue (HDR), 2) Barker Road/SR 290 EB Ramps (DEA), and 3) Barker Road/SR 290 WB Ramps (DEA) intersections. The Barker Road/N Vista Grande intersection will likely be stop -controlled and additional detailed plans will not be necessary for it. Traffic Signal Plans are proposed at the three (3) intersections and will include: 1) signal equipment layout, 2) conduit and conductors, and 3) illumination, power source(s) as coordinated with electric utility. For the Intermediate Design submittal, the traffic signal plans will include limited wiring or conductor information and detail and will instead focus on the signal equipment layout including signal standards, signal head location, signal controllers and service cabinets, conduit runs, pull boxes, and signal mounted signage. Supporting documentation will be provided including peak hour turning movement volumes, loop placement calculations, left turn phasing analysis, and signal mounting height calculations. Preliminary traffic signal design will be developed on separate Traffic Signal Plan Sheets. ASSUMPTIONS • Limited wiring/conductor design will be completed at the Intermediate Design stage; • Inductive Loop Detection is assumed for signal actuation. • Emergency Vehicle Preemption Detectors will be provided by the City and utilized for this project. • Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) will be utilized for this project. • Traffic Signal locations will be identified and laid out sufficiently so that adequate costs of the facilities can be estimated. • The scope and estimate will be revisited if alternative intersection control becomes the preferred alternative. • This task includes coordinating the power source with the utility provider. 13,10 Develop Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) Plans (15 sheets) HDR will prepare preliminary Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) Plans and staging overview plans in accordance with MUTCD and WSDOT standards, as appropriate. The plans will depict construction stages, construction signing and other traffic control devices required during construction. Construction drawings will be developed for each stage so that sequential construction of the project can be understood. It is assumed that there will be three major stages as detailed below. • Stage I: Relocate utilities and build new Wellesley Avenue and open it to traffic. • Stage II: WB Wellesley traffic will continue using the existing Wellesley Avenue bridge to access SR 290 but would use new Wellesley Avenue to access Barker Road. Barker Road/SR 290 and Barker Road/BNSF bridges would be built and the existing Barker Road/SR 290 intersection and the Barker/BNSF at -grade intersection would be closed. This stage would build the new Barker Road/SR 290 interchange ramps, ramp walls, remaining utility adjustments, pertinent SR 290 lane revisions and connections, and Barker Road from Wellesley Avenue to its northerly terminus. The MOT plans will include detour signing SR -290 will remain open and operational during this stage. • Stage III: Complete the new Wellesley tie in to existing Wellesley. This Stage would remove the two (2) existing Wellesley Avenue bridges over BNSF and SR 290; remove Wellesley Avenue's existing connection to SR 290, and SR 290 WB lanes that curve to the north. This stage would also include widening SR 290 for westbound traffic after the existing Wellesley Avenue bridges are removed. This stage would complete Barker Road from Wellesley to its southerly terminus in two phases. Close the BNSF/Flora Road at -grade crossing and completely open the new facility to traffic. Based on the phasing detailed above, the following sheets are anticipated: City of Spokane Valley Page 34 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Sheet Name No. MOT Index 1 MOT Summary 1 MOT Stage I — Overview sheet 1 MOT - Generic Signing for shoulder work operation (Stage 1) 1 MOT Stage II — Overview sheet 1 MOT — Typical SR 290 Lane Closure for Constructing the Bridge 1 MOT - Typical Advanced Warning and Detour Sheets 4 MOT Stage III — Wellesley tie in and Flora Closure Detail 2 MOT — Typical Barker Lane Closure for single lane operation (Stage 3) 1 MOT —Detail Sheets 2 MOT/Staging Sheet Total 15 13.11 Develop Illumination Design and Plans (Future Supplemental Agreement) 13.12 Develop Preliminary Utility Plans (Future Supplemental Agreement) 13.13 Develop Bridge Sheets (51 sheets) CONSULTANT will develop structural design to the Intermediate Design completion level. This will include incorporating Interchange and Bridge Alternatives Analysis review comments and developing the gross sizes of the main structural elements. In general, concrete reinforcing and other details will not be complete and will be completed under subsequent tasks. 13.13.1 Barker Road over SR 290 Bridge (by HDR) (24 sheets) • Layout (1 sheet) • General Notes and Geometric Data (1 sheet) • Construction Sequence (1 sheets) • Foundation Layout (1 sheet) • Pier 1 Abutment Plan and Elevation (1 sheet) • Pier 2 Abutment Plan and Elevation (1 sheet) • Bearing Details (1 sheet) • Framing Plan (1 sheet) • Typical Section (1 sheet) • Prestressed Girder Details (5 sheets) • Intermediate Diaphragm Details (1 sheet) • End Diaphragm Details (1 sheet) • Pedestrian Barrier Details (3 sheets) • Bridge Railing Type BP Details (2 sheets) • Approach Slab Details (3 sheets) 13.13.2 Barker Road over BNSF Bridge (by DEA) (27 sheets) • Layout (1 sheet) • General Notes and Geometric Data (1 sheet) • Construction Sequence (1 sheets) • Foundation Layout (1 sheet) • Pier 1 Abutment Plan and Elevation (1 sheet) City of Spokane Valley Page 35 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 • Pier 2 Plan and Elevation (1 sheet) • Pier 3 Plan and Elevation (1 sheet) • Pier 4 Abutment Plan and Elevation (1 sheet) • Bearing Details (1 sheet) • Framing Plan (2 sheets) • Typical Section (1 sheet) • Prestressed Girder Details (5 sheets) • Intermediate Diaphragm Details (1 sheet) • End Diaphragm Details (1 sheet) • Traffic Barrier Details (3 sheets) • Bridge Railing Type BP Details (2 sheets) • Approach Slab Details (3 sheets) ASSUMPTIONS • Deck drains will not be necessary and both bridges will drain to catch basins located outside of the bridge structure in the approaches to the bridges. • Both Barker Rd Over BNSF and SR 290 Bridges: o The bridge design and plan sheet count are based on the 30% BTV configuration. o A single design will be used for the abutments based on the most conservative design loading and geometry from both abutments. • WSDOT BDM Type A End Connections will be used for both Bridges. • Pedestrian barrier with a raised sidewalk is assumed with no barrier separation required between sidewalk and travel lanes. • Architectural treatment will be limited to WSDOT Standard formliner finishes and pigmented sealers only. No public art or other architectural features will be required on the bridges. 13.13.3 Retaining Walls (Future Supplemental Agreement) 13.14 Develop Detail Sheets (Future Supplemental Agreement) 13.15 Prepare Itemized Quantity Takeoff and Cost Estimate Quantity takeoffs for the multiple design tasks will be reported by each task lead and a preliminary cost estimate for the project will be developed. The cost estimate will take into account recent construction project bid prices in the project vicinity. The cost estimate will also include right-of-way costs, construction contingencies, construction engineering, and contractor mobilization. 13.16 Compile and Submit Intermediate Design Package The CONSULTANT team will prepare the Intermediate Design Submittal package based on the City's requirements and WSDOT's Design Manual and submit the package for review and comment. The submittal package for Intermediate Design Review will be compiled by DEA and will include for CLIENT and WSDOT review: • Intermediate Design Construction Cost Estimate • The Intermediate Design Plans as described above and as summarized in the table at the end of this document DELIVERABLES: • Intermediate design plans in accordance with the table at the end of this document City of Spokane Valley Page 36 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 • Intermediate design cost estimate 13.17 Intermediate Design Review Meeting DEA and HDR will attend the Intermediate Design Review meeting with the CLIENT and WSDOT staff. DEA will also prepare meeting minutes and distribute to the appropriate recipients by email. Prior to the meeting, DEA will assemble the comments received from the CLIENT and WSDOT in a comment response form. The team will address the comments and identify comments that require further discussion at the Intermediate Design Review meeting. The compiled comment form will be provided to attendees at the Intermediate Design Review meeting and the comment form will be included in the Final Design Review submittal. ASSUMPTIONS • There will be one Intermediate Design Review Meeting lasting eight (8) hours • Four (4) DEA staff will attend (Project Manager, Bridge Lead, Transportation Lead, and Traffic Lead) • Three (3) HDR staff will attend (Transportation Lead, Bridge Lead, Local Roadway Lead) DELIVERABLES • Intermediate Design Review Package Task 14.0 RIGHT-OF-WAY AND LIMITED ACCESS ACQUISITION DOCUMENTS (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) Task 15.0 APPRAISE AND ACQUIRE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND LIMITED ACCESS (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) Task 16.0 TEMPORARY PROJECT CLOSEOUT The task includes saving and storing electronic media and information in a format that is easily retrievable if the project is put on hold for any time. It also includes storing electronic files and data such that the data is easily re -activated for continuation of design according to CLIENT direction. This task also includes archiving hard copy, financial, and other electronic files for storage and easy retrieval if necessary in the future. ASSUMPTIONS: • DEA will keep the project active on their ProjectWise server for seven (7) -years. Task 17.0 FINAL DESIGN (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) Task 18.0 PS&E PREPARATION AND SUBMITTAL (FUTURE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT) City of Spokane Valley Page 37 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Estimated Project Sheet Count Scope of Work Task Number PS&E Anticipated Sheets Estimated No. of Sheets Preliminary Plans Intermediate Plans DEA HDR DEA HDR 12.7.1 Bridge Preliminary Plan - Barker Rd over BNSF 3 12.7.2 Bridge Preliminary Plan - Barker Rd over Barker Road 3 13.1 Index/Vicinity Map 2 9.1.5 Survey Control Sheet 2 13.2 Roadway Typical Sections 0 0 4 4 SR 290 2 SR 290/Barker Road IC Ramps 1 Barker Road 1 1 Wellesley Avenue 1 Flora Rd cul-de-sac 1 Miscellaneous roads 1 13.4 Interchange Plans for Approval 3 13.5 Roadway Paving Plan and Profile Sheets 0 0 40 22 SR 290 Plan 8 SR 290 Profile 8 WB On Ramp Profile 4 WB Off Ramp Profile 5 EB On Ramp Profile 4 EB Off Ramp Profile 5 Barker Road Plan 3 3 Barker Road Profile 3 3 E. Wellesley Ave Plan 7 E. Wellesley Ave Profile 7 N. Flora Road Plan 1 N. Flora Road Profile 1 13.6 Drainage Plans for SR 290 and Local Roadways 6 13.8 Channelization, Pavement Marking, Signing, and Sign Structure Plans 22 13.9 Intersection Control Plans and Details 6 3 Barker Road/Wellesley Avenue 3 Barker Road/SR 290 EB Ramps 3 Barker Road/SR 290 WB Ramps 3 13.10 Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) Plans 0 0 0 15 MOT Index 1 City of Spokane Valley Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Page 38 Scope of Services December 1, 2016 Scope of Work Task Number PS&E Anticipated Sheets Estimated No. of Sheets Preliminary Plans Intermediate Plans DEA HDR DEA HDR MOT Summary 1 MOT Stage I - Overview Sheet 1 MOT - Generic Signing for shoulder work operation (Stage 1) 1 MOT - Stage 11 - Overview Sheet 1 MOT - Typical SR 290 Lane Closure for Constructing the Bridge 1 MOT - Typical Advanced Warning and Detour Sheets 4 MOT Stage III - Wellesley tie in and Flora Closure Detail 2 MOT - Typical Barker Lane Closure for single lane operation (Stage 3) 1 MOT - Detail Sheets 2 13.13 Bridge Sheets 0 0 27 24 13.13.1 Barker Road over SR 290 Bridge 27 13.13.2 Barker Road over BNSF Bridge 24 Total Sheets per Consultant 3 3 106 74 Total Sheets Per Design Stage 6 180 City of Spokane Valley Page 39 Scope of Services Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation December 1, 2016 Exhibit B DBE Participation Historical Research Associates - Small Business Enterprise Agreement Number: WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit B Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit C Preparation and Delivery of Electronic Engineering and Other Data In this Exhibit the agency, as applicable, is to provide a description of the format and standards the consultant is to use in preparing electronic files for transmission to the agency. The format and standards to be provided may include, but are not limited to, the following: I. Surveying, Roadway Design & Plans Preparation Section A. Survey Data The electronic format and standards to be provided for this project are identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. B. Roadway Design Files The electronic format and standards to be provided for this project are identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. C. Computer Aided Drafting Files The electronic format and standards to be provided for this project are identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. Agreement Number: WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit C Page 1 of 4 Revised 10/30/2014 D. Specify the Agency's Right to Review Product with the Consultant AGENCY will provide review comments on all milestone deliverables, as identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. E. Specify the Electronic Deliverables to Be Provided to the Agency The deliverables to be provided for this project are identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. F. Specify What Agency Furnished Services and Information Is to Be Provided The Agency -furnished services and information to be provided for this project are identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. Agreement Number: WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit C Page 2 of 4 Revised 10/30/2014 II. Any Other Electronic Files to Be Provided The deliverables to be provided for this project are identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. III. Methods to Electronically Exchange Data E-mail, FTP site, or CD/DVD. WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit C Page 3 of 4 Revised 10/30/2014 A. Agency Software Suite The electronic format and standards to be provided for this project are identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. B. Electronic Messaging System Email. C. File Transfers Format The electronic format and standards to be provided for this project are identified in Exhibit A, Scope of Work. WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit C Page 4 of 4 Revised 10/30/2014 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Exhibit D City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Phase I - Design Services Project No. 0143 David Evans and Associates, Inc. Classification Project Manager DEA Transportation Lead Transportation QA/QC Senior Transportation Engineer Transportation Engineer Transportation Designer Traffic Engineer Lead Traffic Analyst GIS and Graphics Expert Bridge Task Lead Bridge QC Engineer Bridge Engineer Bridge Engineer Bridge CADD Environmental Planning Lead Environmental Planner Survey Lead Project Surveyor Survey Party Chief Surveyor Mapping Technician Administrative Assistant Accountant Direct Hrs. x Rate = Cost 497 $ 66.02 $32,812 195 $ 66.00 $12,870 82 $ 68.00 $5,576 227 $ 50.74 $11,518 112 $ 35.00 $3,920 517 $ 42.00 $21,714 280 $ 45.50 $12,740 244 $ 37.74 $9,209 108 $ 36.00 $3,888 180 $ 62.84 $11,311 112 $ 66.80 $7,482 204 $ 48.66 $9,927 202 $ 41.40 $8,363 412 $ 41.20 $16,974 64 $ 45.30 $2,899 114 $ 40.30 $4,594 46 $ 44.50 $2,047 112 $ 36.00 $4,032 66 $ 31.00 $2,046 62 $ 28.00 $1,736 193 $ 30.00 $5,790 16 $ 30.60 $490 26 $ 20.50 $533 4071 Salary Cost Salary Escalation Cost (estimated) Escalation - % of Labor Cost Total Salary Cost Overhead Cost @ Net Fee @ Total Overhead & Net Fee Cost $ 192,470 3.5% per year @ 0.75 year(s) $5,052 181.82% of Direct Labor 31.0% of Direct Labor $ 197,522 $ 359,135 $ 61,232 $ 420,367 Direct Expenses No. Unit Each Cost Notebooks 20 @ $15 /each $ 300.00 Hotels 5 @ $120 /day $ 600.00 Parking 10 @ $8 /each $ 80.00 Mail/Deliveries/Fed Ex 8 @ $35 /each $ 280.00 Flights 5 @ $400 /trip $ 2,000.00 Car Rental 5 @ $50 /day $ 250.00 DEA Per Diem (Full days) 5 @ $64 /day $ 320.00 BNSF Processing Fee 1 @ $775 /each $ 775.00 Traffic Counts Vendor $5,080.00 LiDAR Target material 0 @ $200 $0.00 DEA Mileage 610 miles @ $0.54 /mile $329.40 DEA Mileage (Survey) 200 miles @ $0.54 /mile $ 108.00 DEA Mileage (Other) 600 miles @ $0.54 /mile $ 324.00 David Evans and Associates Total Subconsultants $ 10,446 $ 628,336 GeoEngineers, Inc. $ 74,224 HDR Engineering, Inc. $ 561,999 Historical Research Associates, Inc. $ 9,472 Subconsultant Total $ 645,695 Direct Expenses Sub -Total (including Subconsultants) $ 656,141 Total Costs $ 1,274,031 Page 1 of 12 M:\Pursuits\S\Spokane Valley, City of\Won\2016_RaH_Barker Road Interchange\Scope and Fee\2016-11-23 Barker Rd - BNSF Grade Separation Phase 1 Final Budget Estimate.xlsx 11/28/2016 Exhibit D City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Phase I — Design Services Project No. 0143 David Evans and Associates, Inc. z a n s s 8 9 0 „ 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 20 21 22 23 Work Element # Work Element Project Manager DEA Transportation Lead Transportation QA/QC Senior Transportation Engineer Transportation Engineer Transportation Designer Traffic Engineer Lead Traffic Analyst GIS and Graphics Expert Bridge Task Lead Bridge QC Engineer Bridge Engineer Bridge Engineer Bridge CADD Environmental Planning Lead Environmental Planner Survey Lead Project Surveyor Survey Party Chief Surveyor Mapping Technician administrative Assistant Accountant DEA Total hrs DEA Total • Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs 132 32 16 14 10 20 33 194 226 677 26 26 6 15 8 16 45 34 34 8 8 6 13 36 84 24 76 38 4 281 1.0 Project Management & Quality Control 1.1 Project Management 132 $27,774 1.2 ProjectWise and Project Setup 8 4 4 12 4 $5,001 1.3 Subconsultant Agreements and Coordination 8 8 $2,615 1.4 Prepare Project Notebooks 4 2 8 $1,871 1.5 Project Quality Management Plan 2 2 4 2 $1,930 1.6 Develop Project CPD Schedule and Updates 12 8 $3,826 1.7 Monthly Progress Reports and Invoices 11 22 $3,811 1.8 Project Team Meetings and Council Meeting Presentations 88 22 16 22 16 22 4 4 $35,837 1.9 Quality Control/Quality Assurance Review 16 80 110 4 0 8 $46,767 Work Element Total 281 22 82 16 16 22 26 26 112 12 4 12 12 8 26 $129,431 2.0 Capacity Justification Report 2.1 Capacity Justification Report 2 16 8 $3,736 Work Element Total 2 16 8 ' $3,736 3.0 Corridor Inventory / Data Collection 3.1 Obtain As-Builts and Contract Plan Documents 2 2 2 $1,019 3.2 Assemble Applicable Design Standards and Policies 1 4 6 2 2 $2,425 3.3 UpdateNerify Environmental and Land Use Constraints 2 2 4 $1,157 3.4 Verify Existing Corridor Utilities and Develop Utility Conflict Matrix 3.5 Site Visits to Obtain Additional Information As Needed 4 4 4 4 $2,879 Work Element Total 7 4 6 6 2 8 4 8 4.0 Geotechnical Engineering 12 4 8 6 4 $6,083 Work Element Total 12 4 8 6 4 $6,083 5.0 Confirm Planning Framework for the Project (Client & WSDOT) 1 1 4 2 $1,364 Work Element Total 1 1 4 2 $1,364 6.0 Traffic Modeling & Analysis 6.1 Traffic Volumes Data Collection 2 4 $780 6.2 Develop Project Methods and Assumptions Document 1 2 6 4 $1,996 6.3 Travel Demand Forecasting in AM and PM Peak Hours 12 16 8 $4,638 6.4 Operational Assessment of Study Intersections & Corridors 36 48 $11,117 6.5 Collision History Evaluation 12 6 6 $2,937 6.6 Intersection Control Analysis for Project Intersections 8 8 36 24 $10,179 6.7 Draft Traffic Operational Analysis Report 2 2 16 12 6 $5,343 6.8 Final Traffic Operational Analysis Report 2 2 $841 Work Element Total 5 6 20 8 114 108 20 $37,832 Page 2 of 12 M \Pursuits\S\Spokane Valley, City olWon\2016_RaH Barker Road Interchange \Scope and Fee \2016-11-23 Barker Rd - BNSF Grade Separation Phase 1 Final Budget Estimate.xlsx Printed: 11/28/2016, 2:35 PM David Evans and Associates, Inc. Work Element # Work Element Project Manager DEA Transportation Lead Transportation QA/QC Senior Transportation Engineer Transportation Engineer Transportation Designer Traffic Engineer Lead Traffic Analyst GIS and Graphics Expert Bridge Task Lead Bridge QC Engineer Bridge Engineer Bridge Engineer Bridge CADD Environmental Planning Lead Environmental Planner Survey Lead Project Surveyor Survey Party Chief Surveyor Mapping Technician Administrative Assistant Accountant DEA Total hrs DEA Total $ Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs 94 12 106 60 78 40 178 165 75 179 46 465 20 55 8 16 26 125 6 30 44 80 100 130 2 2 42 42 318 7.0 Public Involvement Program 7.1 Public Open House 18 20 20 10 16 10 $16,030 7.2 Property Owner Contact Meetings 4 8 $1,924 Work Element Total 22 20 28 10 16 10 $17,954 8.0 NEPA Documentation 8.1 Environmental Studies 8 26 26 $8,096 8.2 Environmental Technical Memoranda 30 48 $10,605 8.3 NEPA Categorical Exclusion Documentation (CED) Form 40 $5,$5,198 Work Element Total 8 56 114 MIT,899 9.0 Surveying 9.1 Develop Control Network 10 13 20 44 42 36 $17,153 9.2 Aerial LiDAR Collection 4 6 10 10 45 $7,592 9.3 Perform Boundary/Right-of-Way Surveying 13 64 10 10 82 $19,253 9.4 Prepare Final Base Mapping Products 4 10 2 30 $4,871 Work Element Total 10 34 100 66 62 193 $48,868 10.0 Alternatives Analysis - Interchange & Bridge Configuration 10.1 Develop Aternative Alignments - I/C and Bridge Alternatives 8 4 4 4 $3,760 10.2 Evaluate Aternatives Traffic Impacts 2 1 6 18 24 4 $7,288 10.3 Develop Aternative Costs 2 2 4 $1,548 10.4 Develop an Aternatives Evaluation Matrix 8 4 2 2 $3,027 10.5 Develop Aternatives Evaluation Report 6 4 2 4 8 2 $4,217 Work Element Total 26 4 11 6 22 28 12 12 4 $19,840 11.0 BNSF Coordination & Submittals 11.1 Prepare Temporary Occupancy Application & Safety Plan 2 4 $1,223 11.2 BNSF Design Phase A Package (Concept Railroad Submittal) 6 8 16 $4,990 11.3 BNSF Design Phase B Package (30% Railroad Submittal) 4 8 32 $6,694 Work Element Total 12 20 48 12.0 Refine BTV 30% Design and Design Approval 12.1 Refine BTV 30% Design Typical Sections (Deleted) 12.2 Refine BTV 30% Design SR 290 & Interchange Ramp Plans (Deleted) 12.3 Refine BTV 30% Design Local Roadway Plans (Deleted) 12.4 Refine BTV 30% Design Utility Plans (Deleted) 12.5 Refine BTV 30% Design Pavement Channelization Plans (Deleted) 12.6 Prepare Bridge and Wall Structures Type Aternatives Analysis 4 16 36 36 8 $15,533 12.7 Prepare Bridge Preliminary Plan (6 bridge sheets) 6 16 24 24 60 $19,383 12.8 Prepare Cost Estimates for Refined BTV 30% Design (Deleted) 12.9 Submit Refined BTV 30% Design Package (Deleted) 2 $199 12.10 Refined BTV 30% Design Review Meeting (Deleted) 2 $199 12.11 Prepare Basis of Design Memorandum 2 4 10 20 2 2 2 $6,048 12.12 Design Approval Memorandum 2 4 12 20 2 2 $5,972 Work Element Total 14 8 22 40 4 34 60 60 68 8 Page 3 of 12 M \Pursuits\S\Spokane Valley, City olWon\2016_RaH Barker Road Interchange \Scope and Fee \2016-11-23 Barker Rd - BNSF Grade Separation Phase 1 Final Budget Estimate.xlsx Printed: 11/28/2016, 2:35 PM David Evans and Associates, Inc. Work Element # Work Element Project Manager DEA Transportation Lead Transportation QA/QC Senior Transportation Engineer Transportation Engineer Transportation Designer Traffic Engineer Lead Traffic Analyst GIS and Graphics Expert Bridge Task Lead Bridge QC Engineer Bridge Engineer Bridge Engineer Bridge CADD Environmental Planning Lead Environmental Planner Survey Lead Project Surveyor Survey Party Chief Surveyor Mapping Technician Administrative Assistant Accountant DEA Total hrs DEA Total $ Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs 8 42 42 544 24 8 155 91 32 10 600 52 28 56 1692 36 36 13.0 Intermediate Design Documents 13.1 IndexMcinity Map (2 sheets) 2 1 1 4 $1,335 13.2 Roadway Typical Sections (8 sheets for 15 Typical Sections) 3 3 6 30 $6,296 13.3 Pavement & Facility Removal/Demolition Plans (Future Supl. Agrmnt.) 13.4 Interchange Plans for Approval (3 sheets) 3 6 9 24 $6,603 13.5 Roadway Paving Plan and Profile Sheets (62 sheets) 34 68 102 340 $84,034 13.6 Drainage Plans for SR 290 and Local Roadways (6 sheets) 12 6 6 $4,763 13.7 Hydraulic Report 8 $1,683 13.8 Chann, Pavement Mkg, Signing, Sign Structure Plans (22 sheets) 11 1 4 22 11 40 66 $21,054 13.9 Intersection Control Plans (9 sheets) 6 1 4 10 10 30 30 $12,654 13.10 Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) Plans (15 sheets) 8 8 16 $5,968 13.11 Illumination Design and Plans (Future Supl. Agrmnt.) 13.12 Preliminary Utility Plans (Future Supl. Agrmnt.) 13.13 Bridge Sheets (51 sheets) 13.13.1 Barker Over SR 290 (Trent) 10 $2,005 13.13.2 Barker Over BNSF RR 40 140 140 280 $85,721 13.13.3 Retaining Walls 1 through 6 13.13.4 Retaining Wall 7 (Rock Cut) 13.14 Detail Sheets (Future Supl. Agrmnt.) 13.15 Prepare Itemized Quantity Takeoff and Cost Estimate 4 8 8 24 4 2 2 $8,227 13.16 Compile and Submit Intermediate Design Package 8 4 8 4 4 $4,413 13.17 Intermediate Design Review Meeting 8 16 8 8 8 8 $10,030 Work Element Total 107 118 168 40 451 78 100 4 60 140 142 284 $254,785 14.0 ROW & Limited Access Acquisition Docs (Future Supl. Agrmnt.) Work Element Total 15.0 Appraise & Acquire ROW & Limited Access (Future Supl. Agnnnt.) Work Element Total 16.0 Temporary Project Closeout 8 8 12 4 4 $6,376 Work Element Total 8 8 12 4 4 $6,376 17.0 Final Design (Future Supl. Agrmnt.) Work Element Total 18.0 PS&E Preparation and Submittal (Future Supl. Agnnnt.) Work Element Total EXPENSES PROJECT WORK ELEMENTS TOTALS 497 195 82 227 112 517 280 244 108 180 112 204 202 412 64 114 46 112 66 62 193 16 26 4071 .36 Page 4 of 12 M \Pursuits\S\Spokane Valley, City olWon\2016_RaH Barker Road Interchange \Scope and Fee \2016-11-23 Barker Rd - BNSF Grade Separation Phase 1 Final Budget Estimate.xlsx Printed: 11/28/2016, 2:35 PM 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Exhibit E City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Phase I — Design Services Project No. 0143 GeoEngineers, Inc. Classification Associate Senior Engineer Senior Geologist Project Engineer 2 Engineer 3 Engineer 1 Senior Technician Technician GIS Analyst / Developer Administrator 3 Administrator 2 Direct Hrs. x Rate = Cost 22 $ 50.40 $1,109 16 $ 43.69 $699 12 $ 54.50 $654 86 $ 37.26 $3,204 36 $ 29.52 $1,063 92 $ 24.77 $2,279 10 $ 22.60 $226 40 $ 18.27 $731 14 $ 34.85 $488 20 $ 20.00 $400 27 $ 1 Rnn $486 Total Hrs. 375 Salary Cost $ 11,338 Salary Escalation Cost (estimated) Escalation - % of Labor Cost per year @ year(s) $0 Total Salary Cost $ 11,338 Overhead Cost @ Net Fee @ Total Overhead & Net Fee Cost 212.67% of Direct Labor 30.0% of Direct Labor $ 24,114 $ 3,402 $ 27,515 Direct Expenses No. Unit Each Cost In-house Drilling 1 lump $9,194 $ 9,194.00 In-house Laboratory Services 1 lump $5,026 $ 5,026.00 Field Equip. (iPad/GPS/Truck) 1.5 day $100 $ 150.00 Subcontractor Costs Traffic Control 2 days @ $1,000 day $ 2,000.00 Backhoe Services 2 days @ $1,500 day $ 3,000.00 Drilling (Air Rotary) 1 lump $15,000 $ 15,000.00 Markup 0.05 $1,000 GeoEngineers, Inc. Total Page 5 of 12 $ 35,370 $ 74,224 11/28/2016 M:\Pursuits\S\Spokane Valley, City of\ Won\2016_RaH_Barker Road Interchange\Scope and Fee\2016-11-23 Barker Rd - BNSF Grade Separation Phase 1 Final Budget Estimate.xlsx Exhibit E City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Phase I — Design Services Project No. 0143 GeoEngineers, Inc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Work Element# Work Element Associate Senior Engineer Senior Geologist Project Engineer 2 Engineer 3 Engineer 1 Senior Technician Technician GIS Analyst / Developer Administrator 3 Administrator 2 GEO Total hrs GEO Total $ Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs 375 375 4.0 Geotechnical Engineering 22 16 12 86 36 92 10 40 14 20 27 $38,854 Work Element Total 22 16 12 86 36 92 10 40 14 20 27 $38,854 EXPENSES $35,370 PROJECT WORK ELEMENTS TOTALS 22 16 12 86 36 92 10 40 14 20 27 375 $74,224 Page 6 of 12 11/28/2016 M:\Pursuits\S\Spokane Valley, City of\Won\2016_RaH_Barker Road Interchange\Scope and Fee \2016-11-23 Barker Rd - BNSF Grade Separation Phase 1 Final Budget Estimate.xlsx Principal In Charge Transportation Lead (HDR PM) Roadway QA/QC Roadway / Utilities Lead Roadway Design Engineer II Roadway Design Engineer I Civil Designer IV Hydraulic Engineer Maintenance of Traffic Lead Bridge QA/QC Senior Bridge Engineer Bridge Engineer Bridge CADD BNSF Lead ROW Principal ROW Task Lead/Acquisition Agent ROW Relocation Agent ROW Technician Controller Project Assistant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Exhibit E City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Phase I - Design Services Project No. 0143 HDR Engineering, Inc. Classification Direct Hrs. x Rate = Cost 12 431 110 612 319 149 673 104 120 142 406 236 288 126 0 0 0 0 54 42 $ 91.35 $ 53.17 $ 78.66 $ 50.00 $ 37.32 $ 26.65 $ 40.72 $ 70.00 $ 50.47 $ 71.47 $ 61.54 $ 43.75 $ 45.55 $ 94.85 $ 75.17 $ 40.88 $ 45.63 $ 23.36 $ 23.00 S 20.36 $1,096 $22,916 $8,653 $30,600 $11,905 $3,971 $27,405 $7,280 $6,056 $10,149 $24,985 $10,325 $13,118 $11,951 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,242 $855 Total Hrs. 3824 Salary Cost $ 192,508 Salary Escalation Cost (estimated) Escalation - % of Labor Cost Total Salary Cost Overhead Cost Net Fee Total Overhead & Net Fee Cost 3.5% per year @ 0.9 year(s) 149.69% of Direct Labor 31.0% of Direct Labor $6,064 $ 198,572 $ 297,242 $ 61,557 $ 358,799 Direct Expenses No. Unit Each Cost Printing (8.5x11) (B&W) 2000 pages @ $0.05 /page $ 100.00 Printing (11x17) (B&W) 4000 pages @ $0.10 /page $ 400.00 Printing (11x17) (Color) 1000 pages @ $0.32 /page $ 320.00 Printing (22x34) (Color on foam boar( 6 pages @ $37.00 /page $ 222.00 Reports reports @ $15.00 /report $ Plans 0 sets @ $2.00 /set $ Parking 12 @ $40.00 $ 480.00 Mail/Deliveries/Fed Ex 40 @ $5.00 $ 200.00 Airfare (Portland to Spokane) 1 trips @ $300.00 $ 300.00 Airfare (Seattle to Spokane) 2 trips @ $300.00 $ 600.00 Mileage 2,500 miles @ $0.54 /mile $ 1,350.00 Lodging 3 nights @ $159.00 /night $ 477.00 Car rental 3 days @ $60.00 /day $ 180.00 Subtotal HDR Engineering, Inc. Total $ 4,629 $ 561,999 Page 7 of 12 11/28/2016 M:\Pursuits\S\Spokane Valley, City ofWon\2016_RaH_Barker Road Interchange\Scope and Fee\2016-11-23 Barker Rd - BNSF Grade Separation Phase 1 Final Budget Estimate.xlsx Exhibit E City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Phase 1 - Design Services Project No. 0143 HDR Engineering, Inc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 g 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Work Element # Work Element Principal In Charge Transportation Lead (HDR PM) Roadway QA/QC Roadway/ Utilities Lead Roadway Design Engineer II Roadway Design Engineer I Civil Designer IV Hydraulic Engineer Maintenance of Traffic Lead Bridge QA/QC Senior Bridge Engineer Bridge Engineer Bridge CADD BNSF Lead ROW Principal ROW Task Lead/Acquisition Agent ROW Relocation Agent ROW Technician 2 o Project Assistant HDR Total hrs HDR Total $ Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs 88 56 2 4 12 12 33 127 280 614 2 2 4 4 4 18 16 46 26 26 4 4 1.0 Project Management & Quality Control 1.1 Project Management 88 $13,525 1.2 ProjectWise and Project Setup 16 24 16 $5,101 1.3 Subconsultant Agreements and Coordination 2 $307 1.4 Prepare Project Notebooks 4 $615 1.5 Project Quality Management Plan 4 4 4 $1,905 1.6 Develop Project CPD Schedule and Updates 12 $1,844 1.7 Monthly Progress Reports and Invoices 11 22 $3,209 1.8 Project Team Meetings and Council Meeting Presentations 33 28 28 38 $24,373 1.9 Quality Control/Quality Assurance Review 8 4 110 142 16 $57,582 Work Element Total 12 174 110 28 142 28 38 46 36 $108,462 2.0 Capacity Justification Report 2 $307 2.1 Capacity Justification Report Work Element Total 2 $307 3.0 Corridor Inventory 1 Data Collection 3.1 Obtain As-Builts and Contract Plan Documents 4 $615 3.2 Assemble Applicable Design Standards and Policies 4 $615 3.3 UpdateNerify Environmental and Land Use Constraints 4 $615 3.4 Verify Existing Corridor Utilities and Develop Utility Conflict Matrix 12 6 $2,713 3.5 Site Visits to Obtain Additional Information As Needed 8 8 $2,576 Work Element Total 24 14 8 4.0 Geotechnical Engineering 2 8 16 $4,301 Work Element Total 2 8 16 $4,301 5.0 Confirm Planning Framework for the Project (Client & WSDOT) 4 $615 Work Element Total 4 $615 Page 8 of 12 11/28/2016 M:\Pursuits\S\Spokane Valley, City o6Won\2016_RaH_Barker Road Interchange Scope and Fee G016-11-23 Barker Rd - BNSF Grade Separation Phase 1 Final Budget Estimate.xlsx HDR Engineering, Inc. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 i6 19 20 Work Element # Work Element Principal In Charge Transportation Lead (HDR PM) Roadway QA/QC Roadway/ Utilities Lead Roadway Design Engineer II Roadway Design Engineer I Civil Designer IV Hydraulic Engineer Maintenance of Traffic Lead Bridge QA/QC Senior Bridge Engineer Bridge Engineer Bridge CADD BNSF Lead ROW Principal ROW Task Lead/Acquisition Agent ROW Relocation Agent ROW Technician 2 o Project Assistant HDR Total hrs HDR Total $ Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs 2 2 4 60 28 88 4 4 376 32 48 40 496 24 102 156 282 6.0 Traffic Modeling & Analysis 6.1 Traffic Volumes Data Collection 6.2 Develop Project Methods and Assumptions Document 6.3 Travel Demand Forecasting in AM and PM Peak Hours 6.4 Operational Assessment of Study Intersections & Corridors 6.5 Collision History Evaluation 6.6 Intersection Control Analysis for Project Intersections 6.7 Draft Traffic Operational Analysis Report 2 $307 6.8 Final Traffic Operational Analysis Report 2 $307 Work Element Total 4 $615 7.0 Public Involvement Program 7.1 Public Open House 8 16 36 $7,478 7.2 Property Owner Contact Meetings 16 12 $4,197 Work Element Total 24 28 36 $11,674 8.0 NEPA Documentation 8.1 Environmental Studies 8.2 Environmental Technical Memoranda 8.3 NEPA Categorical Exclusion Documentation (CED) Form Work Element Total 9.0 Surveying 9.1 Develop Control Network 9.2 Aerial LiDAR Collection 2 2 $849 9.3 Perform Boundary/Right-of-Way Surveying 9.4 Prepare Final Base Mapping Products Work Element Total 2 2 $849 10.0 Alternatives Analysis - Interchange & Bridge Configuration 10.1 Develop Alternative Alignments - VC and Bridge Alternatives 24 60 50 50 160 32 $46,469 10.2 Evaluate Alternatives Traffic Impacts 10.3 Develop Alternative Costs 4 4 16 8 $4,359 10.4 Develop an Alternatives Evaluation Matrix 8 32 8 $7,281 10.5 Develop Alternatives Evaluation Report 4 32 4 $5,957 Work Element Total 40 128 66 50 160 52 11.0 BNSF Coordination & Submittals 11.1 Prepare Temporary Occupancy Application & Safety Plan 2 2 2 16 2 $5,289 11.2 BNSF Design Phase A Package (Concept Railroad Submittal) 24 24 2 2 16 4 30 $18,270 11.3 BNSF Design Phase B Package (30% Railroad Submittal) 32 32 4 4 20 16 8 40 $28,140 Work Element Total 58 58 6 6 38 16 12 86 2 $50111 Page 9 of 12 11/28/2016 M:\Pursuits\S\Spokane Valley, City o5Won\2016_RaH_Barker Road Interchange Scope and Fee G016-11-23 Barker Rd - BNSF Grade Separation Phase 1 Final Budget Estimate.xlsx HDR Engineering, Inc. 1 2 3 4 6 6 7 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 i6 19 20 Work Element # Work Element Principal In Charge Transportation Lead (HDR PM) Roadway QA/QC Roadway/ Utilities Lead Roadway Design Engineer II Roadway Design Engineer I Civil Designer IV Hydraulic Engineer Maintenance of Traffic Lead Bridge QA/QC Senior Bridge Engineer Bridge Engineer Bridge CADD BNSF Lead ROW Principal ROW Task Lead/Acquisition Agent ROW Relocation Agent ROW Technician 2 o Project Assistant HDR Total hrs HDR Total $ Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs 120 106 6 6 238 100 440 120 204 60 300 536 146 52 26 1984 36 36 12.0 Refine BTV 30% Design and Design Approval 12.1 Refine BTV 30% Design Typical Sections (Deleted) 12.2 Refine BTV 30% Design SR 290 & Interchange Ramp Plans (Deleted) 12.3 Refine BTV 30% Design Local Roadway Plans (Deleted) 12.4 Refine BTV 30% Design Utility Plans (Deleted) 12.5 Refine BTV 30% Design Pavement Channelization Plans (Deleted) 12.6 Prepare Bridge and Wall Structures Type Alternatives Analysis 4 4 60 32 20 $18,543 12.7 Prepare Bridge Preliminary Plan (6 bridge sheets) 4 4 30 8 60 $15,466 12.8 Prepare Cost Estimates for Refined BTV 30% Design (Deleted) 12.9 Submit Refined BTV 30% Design Package (Deleted) 12.10 Refined BTV 30% Design Review Meeting (Deleted) 12.11 Prepare Basis of Design Memorandum 2 2 2 $951 12.12 Design Approval Memorandum 2 2 2 $951 Work Element Total 12 12 94 40 80 $35,912 13.0 Intermediate Design Documents 13.1 IndexNicinity Map (2 sheets) 13.2 Roadway Typical Sections (8 sheets for 15 Typical Sections) 5 40 55 $13,091 13.3 Pavement & Facility Removal/Demolition Plans (Future Supl. Agrmnt.) 13.4 Interchange Plans for Approval (3 sheets) 13.5 Roadway Paving Plan and Profile Sheets (62 sheets) 22 176 25 25 192 $56,377 13.6 Drainage Plans for SR 290 and Local Roadways (6 sheets) 6 16 14 12 24 48 $18,214 13.7 Hydraulic Report 4 20 80 40 20 40 $25,830 13.8 Chann, Pavement Mkg, Signing, Sign Structure Plans (22 sheets) 13.9 Intersection Control Plans (9 sheets) 4 24 4 4 24 $7,694 13.10 Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) Plans (15 sheets) 4 76 100 120 $38,323 13.11 Illumination Design and Plans (Future Supl. Agrmnt.) 13.12 Preliminary Utility Plans (Future Supl. Agrmnt.) 13.13 Bridge Sheets (51 sheets) 13.13.1 Barker Over SR 290 (Trent) 8 8 152 168 200 $77,160 13.13.2 Barker Over BNSF RR 13.13.3 Retaining Walls 1 through 6 13.13.4 Retaining Wall 7 (Rock Cut) 13.14 Detail Sheets (Future Supl. Agrmnt.) 13.15 Prepare Itemized Quantity Takeoff and Cost Estimate 2 40 8 8 40 24 24 $19,663 13.16 Compile and Submit Intermediate Design Package 12 4 4 4 12 4 4 8 $6,879 13.17 Intermediate Design Review Meeting 10 8 8 $4,113 Work Element Total 77 336 211 93 467 88 120 188 196 208 $267,343 14.0 ROW 8 Limited Access Acquisition Docs (Future Supl. Agrmnt.) Work Element Total 15.0 Appraise 8 Acquire ROW 8 Limited Access (Future Supl. Agrmnt.) Work Element Total 16.0 Temporary Project Closeout 8 8 8 8 4 $4,396 Work Element Total 8 8 8 8 4 $4,396 Page 10 of 12 11/28/2016 M:\Pursuits\S\Spokane Valley, City o5Won\2016_RaH_Barker Road Interchange Scope and Fee G016-11-23 Barker Rd - BNSF Grade Separation Phase 1 Final Budget Estimate.xlsx HDR Engineering, Inc. 1 2 3 4 6 6 7 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 i6 19 20 Work Element # Work Element Principal In Charge Transportation Lead (HDR PM) Roadway QA/QC Roadway/ Utilities Lead Roadway Design Engineer II Roadway Design Engineer I Civil Designer IV Hydraulic Engineer Maintenance of Traffic Lead Bridge QA/QC Senior Bridge Engineer Bridge Engineer Bridge CADD BNSF Lead ROW Principal ROW Task Lead/Acquisition Agent ROW Relocation Agent ROW Technician 2 o Project Assistant HDR Total hrs HDR Total $ Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs hrs 17.0 Final Design (Future Supl. Agrmnt.) Work Element Total 18.0 PS&E Preparation and Submittal (Future Supl. Agrmnt.) Work Element Total EXPENSES PROJECT WORK ELEMENTS TOTALS 12 431 110 612 319 149 673 104 120 142 406 236 288 126 54 42 3824 Page 11 of 12 11/28/2016 M:\Pursuits\S\Spokane Valley, City o6Won\2016_RaH_Barker Road Interchange Scope and Fee G016-11-23 Barker Rd - BNSF Grade Separation Phase 1 Final Budget Estimate.xlsx Exhibit E City of Spokane Valley, WA Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation Phase I — Design Services Project No. 0143 Historical Research Associates, Inc. Labor Category Rate Task 1 Project Management and Coordination Hours Total Task 2 Health Et Safety Coordination Hours Total Task 3 Background and Archival Research Hours Total Task 4 Fieldwork Hours Total Task 5 Analysis and Reporting Hours Total PROJECT TOTAL Hours Total Senior Archaeologist - B Hicks $48.62 1 $49 2 $97 3 5146 Project Archaeologist - Dampf 527.58 4 $110 2 555 2 $55 10 S276 32 5883 50 $1,379 Research Archaeologist - 5 Tarman $19.93 2 540 2 $40 4 $80 10 5199 24 5478 42 5837 GIS Coordinator - G Frazier 528.34 2 $57 4 5113 6 $170 Archaeological Technician 520.00 2 540 10 5200 12 $240 Health/Safety Coordinator - J Gilpin $27.99 4 $112 4 $112 Production Asst/Editor - D Vogel $24.04 2 $48 2 $48 Production Specialist - P Cobb 529.00 3 $87 3 $87 Office Manager/Clerical- M Watson $15.00 2 530 1 $15 3 545 Project Administrator - B Curtis $26.58 2 553 2 $53 Information System Specialist - DMuir 535.81 2 $72 2 $72 LaborSubtotar 13 $354 10 $247 6 $135 32 $732 68 $1,722 129 $3,189 Overhead 151.20% $535 $373 $204 $1,106 $2,603 54,821 Fee 30.00% $106 $74 $40 $220 $516 $957 Labor Total 5994 5695 5379 $2,058 $4,841 $8,967 Reimbursable Expense Rate Units Total Units Total Units Total Units Total Units Total Units Total Travel Rental Car 570.00 1 570 1 $70 Rental Car Operating Exp/Mile 50.35 40 S14 40 $14 Shipping 1 Postage 525.00 1 $25 1 $25 Tablet 520.00 1 $20 1 $20 Digital Camera Use / Day 52.00 1 52 1 52 Digital Camera Image 50.10 50 55 50 55 CD Rom Data/CD 55.00 2 510 2 510 Report Production 50.15 200 530 200 530 Photocopy (in-house) 50.10 20 52 20 52 Telephone/Fax $1.00 2 52 1 51 2 $2 2 $2 7 $7 Safety Training (BNSF, eRailsafe) 590.00 3 5270 3 5270 Miscellaneous Supplies 55.00 10 S50 10 $50 Direct Subtotal $2 $270 $1 5165 $67 $505 TASK TOTAL $996 $965 $380 $2,223 $4,908 $9,472 Page 12 of 12 M:\Pursuits\S\Spokane Valley, City o5Won\2016_RaH_Barker Road Interchange\Scope and Fee\2016-11-23 Barker Rd - BNSF Grade Separation Phase 1 Final Budget Estimate.xlsx 11/28/2016 Exhibit F Title VI Assurances During the performance of this AGREEMENT, the CONSULTANT, for itself, its assignees, and successors in interest agrees as follows: 1. Compliance with Regulations: The CONSULTANT shall comply with the Regulations relative to non- discrimination in federally assisted programs of the AGENCY, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, as they may be amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as the "REGULATIONS"), which are herein incorporated by reference and made a part of this AGREEMENT. 2. Non-discrimination: The CONSULTANT, with regard to the work performed during this AGREEMENT, shall not discriminate on the grounds of race, color, sex, or national origin in the selection and retention of sub -consultants, including procurement of materials and leases of equipment. The CONSULTANT shall not participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by Section 21.5 of the REGULATIONS, including employment practices when this AGREEMENT covers a program set forth in Appendix B of the REGULATIONS. 3. Solicitations for Sub -consultants, Including Procurement of Materials and Equipment: In all solicitations either by competitive bidding or negotiations made by the CONSULTANT for work to be performed under a sub -contract, including procurement of materials or leases of equipment, each potential sub - consultant or supplier shall be notified by the CONSULTANT of the CONSULTANT's obligations under this AGREEMENT and the REGULATIONS relative to non-discrimination on the grounds of race, color, sex, or national origin. 4. Information and Reports: The CONSULTANT shall provide all information and reports required by the REGULATIONS or directives issued pursuant thereto, and shall permit access to its books, records, accounts, other sources of information, and its facilities as may be determined by the AGENCY, the STATE, or the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such REGULATIONS, orders and instructions. Where any information required of a CONSULTANT is in the exclusive possession of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information, the CONSULTANT shall so certify to the AGENCY, the STATE, or the FHWA as appropriate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information. 5. Sanctions for Non-compliance: In the event of the CONSULTANT's non-compliance with the non- discrimination provisions of this AGREEMENT, the AGENCY shall impose such AGREEMENT sanctions as it, the STATE, or the FHWA may determine to be appropriate, including, but not limited to: • Withholding of payments to the CONSULTANT under this AGREEMENT until the CONSULTANT complies, and/or; • Cancellation, termination, or suspension of this AGREEMENT, in whole or in part. 6. Incorporation of Provisions: The CONSULTANT shall include the provisions of paragraphs (1) through (5) in every subcontract, including procurement of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the REGULATIONS, or directives issued pursuant thereto. The CONSULTANT shall take such action with respect to any sub -consultant or procurement as the STATE, the AGENCY, or FHWA may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for non-compliance. Provided, however, that in the event a CONSULTANT becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a sub -consultant or supplier as a result of such direction, the CONSULTANT may request the AGENCY enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the STATE and/or the AGENCY and, in addition, the CONSULTANT may request the United States enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. Agreement Number: WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit F Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit G Certification Documents Exhibit G -1(a) Certification of Consultant Exhibit G -1(b) Certification of City of Spokane Valley Exhibit G-2 Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters - Primary Covered Transactions Exhibit G-3 Certification Regarding the Restrictions of the Use of Federal Funds for Lobbying Exhibit G-4 Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit G Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit G -1(a) Certification of Consultant I hereby certify that I am the and duly authorized representative of the firm of David Evans and Associates, Inc. whose address is 908 N. Howard St., Suite 300, Spokane, WA 99201 and that neither the above firm nor I have: a) Employed or retained for a commission, percentage, brokerage, contingent fee, or other consideration, any firm or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above CONSULTANT) to solicit or secure this AGREEMENT; b) Agreed, as an express or implied condition for obtaining this contract, to employ or retain the services of any firm or person in connection with carrying out this AGREEMENT; or c) Paid, or agreed to pay, to any firm, organization or person (other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above CONSULTANT) any fee, contribution, donation, or consideration of any kind for, or in connection with, procuring or carrying out this AGREEMENT; except as hereby expressly stated (if any); I acknowledge that this certificate is to be furnished to the Washington State Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation in connection with this AGREEMENT involving participation of Federal -aid highway funds, and is subject to applicable State and Federal laws, both criminal and civil. David Evans and Associates, Inc. Consultant (Firm Name) Signature (Authorized Official of Consultant) Date Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit G Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit G -1(b) Certification of City of Spokane Valley I hereby certify that I am the: ❑ City Manager ❑ Other of the City of Spokane Valley , and the City or its representative has not been required, directly or indirectly as an express or implied condition in connection with obtaining or carrying out this AGREEMENT to: a) Employ or retain, or agree to employ to retain, any firm or person; or b) Pay, or agree to pay, to any firm, person, or organization, any fee, contribution, donation, or consideration of any kind; except as hereby expressly stated (if any): I acknowledge that this certificate is to be furnished to the Washington State Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, in connection with this AGREEMENT involving participation of Federal -aid highway funds, and is subject to applicable State and Federal laws, both criminal and civil. Signature Date Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit G Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit G-2 Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters - Primary Covered Transactions I. The prospective primary participant certifies to the best of its knowledge and belief, that it and its principals: A. Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal department or agency; B. Have not within a three (3) year period preceding this proposal been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (Federal, State, or local) transaction or contract under a public transaction; violation of Federal or State anti-trust statues or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property; C. Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (Federal, State, or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (1)(b) of this certification; and D. Have not within a three (3) year period preceding this application / proposal had one or more public transactions (Federal, State and local) terminated for cause or default. II. Where the prospective primary participant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, such prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this proposal. David Evans and Associates, Inc. Consultant (Firm Name) Signature (Authorized Official of Consultant) Date Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit G Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exception to the Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and other Responsibility Matters Exception to subsection d. July 1, 2016 David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA) is not debarred from performing any work with any agency. DEA was terminated on a $25,000 task order by the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). Despite the status of that task order, DEA's overall Term Agreement remained in place and was subsequently used for other projects. The DEA lead on this project is no longer with DEA and ITD has initiated over 21 agreements or task orders with DEA subsequent to this task order. Exhibit G-3 Certification Regarding the Restrictions of the Use of Federal Funds for Lobbying The prospective participant certifies, by signing and submitting this bid or proposal, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that: 1. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any Federal agency, a Member of Congress, a officer or employee of Congress, or any employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative AGREEMENT, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of Federal contract, grant, loan or cooperative AGREEMENT. 2. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any Federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan or cooperative AGREEMENT, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form - LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000.00, and not more than $100,000.00, for each such failure. The prospective participant also agrees by submitting his or her bid or proposal that he or she shall require that the language of this certification be included in all lower tier sub -contracts, which exceed $100,000, and that all such sub -recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. David Evans and Associates, Inc. Consultant (Firm Name) Signature (Authorized Official of Consultant) Date Agreement Number: 16-175 WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit G Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit G-4 Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data This is to certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the cost or pricing data (as defined in section 2.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and required under FAR subsection 15.403-4) submitted, either actually or by specific identification in writing, to the Contracting Officer or to the Contracting Officer's representative in support of Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation * are accurate, complete, and current as of November 23, 2016 ** This certification includes the cost or pricing data supporting any advance AGREEMENT's and forward pricing rate AGREEMENT's between the offer or and the Government that are part of the proposal. Firm: David Evans and Associates, Inc. Project Manager Signature Title Date of Execution***: *Identity the proposal, quotation, request for pricing adjustment, or other submission involved, giving the appropriate identifying number (e.g. project title.) **Insert the day, month, and year, when price negotiations were concluded and price AGREEMENT was reached. ***Insert the day, month, and year, of signing, which should be as close as practicable to the date when the price negotiations were concluded and the contract price was agreed to. Agreement Number: WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit G Page 1 of 1 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit I Alleged Consultant Design Error Procedures The purpose of this exhibit is to establish a procedure to determine if a consultant's alleged design error is of a nature that exceeds the accepted standard of care. In addition, it will establish a uniform method for the resolution and/or cost recovery procedures in those instances where the agency believes it has suffered some material damage due to the alleged error by the consultant. Step 1 Potential Consultant Design Error(s) is Identified by Agency's Project Manager At the first indication of potential consultant design error(s), the first step in the process is for the Agency's project manager to notify the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer regarding the potential design error(s). For federally funded projects, the Region Local Programs Engineer should be informed and involved in these procedures. (Note: The Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer may appoint an agency staff person other than the project manager, who has not been as directly involved in the project, to be responsible for the remaining steps in these procedures.) Step 2 Project Manager Documents the Alleged Consultant Design Error(s) After discussion of the alleged design error(s) and the magnitude of the alleged error(s), and with the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer's concurrence, the project manager obtains more detailed documentation than is normally required on the project. Examples include: all decisions and descriptions of work; photographs, records of labor, materials and equipment. Step 3 Contact the Consultant Regarding the Alleged Design Error(s) If it is determined that there is a need to proceed further, the next step in the process is for the project manager to contact the consultant regarding the alleged design error(s) and the magnitude of the alleged error(s). The project manager and other appropriate agency staff should represent the agency and the consultant should be represented by their project manger and any personnel (including sub -consultants) deemed appropriate for the alleged design error(s) issue. Step 4 Attempt to Resolve Alleged Design Error with Consultant After the meeting(s) with the consultant have been completed regarding the consultant's alleged design error(s), there are three possible scenarios: • It is determined via mutual agreement that there is not a consultant design error(s). If this is the case, then the process will not proceed beyond this point. • It is determined via mutual agreement that a consultant design error(s) occurred. If this is the case, then the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer, or their representatives, negotiate a settlement with the consultant. The settlement would be paid to the agency or the amount would be reduced from the consultant's agreement with the agency for the services on the project in which the design error took place. The agency is to provide LP, through the Region Local Programs Engineer, a summary of the settlement for review and to make adjustments, if any, as to how the settlement affects federal reimbursements. No further action is required. • There is not a mutual agreement regarding the alleged consultant design error(s). The consultant may request that the alleged design error(s) issue be forwarded to the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer for review. If the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer, after review with their legal counsel, is not able to reach mutual agreement with the consultant, proceed to Step 5. Agreement Number: WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit 1 Page 1 of 2 Revised 10/30/2014 Step 5 Forward Documents to Local Programs For federally funded projects all available information, including costs, should be forwarded through the Region Local Programs Engineer to LP for their review and consultation with the FHWA. LP will meet with representatives of the agency and the consultant to review the alleged design error(s), and attempt to find a resolution to the issue. If necessary, LP will request assistance from the Attorney General's Office for legal interpretation. LP will also identify how the alleged error(s) affects eligibility of project costs for federal reimbursement. • If mutual agreement is reached, the agency and consultant adjust the scope of work and costs to reflect the agreed upon resolution. LP, in consultation with FHWA, will identify the amount of federal participation in the agreed upon resolution of the issue. • If mutual agreement is not reached, the agency and consultant may seek settlement by arbitration or by litigation. Agreement Number: WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit 1 Page 2 of 2 Revised 10/30/2014 Exhibit J Consultant Claim Procedures The purpose of this exhibit is to describe a procedure regarding claim(s) on a consultant agreement. The following procedures should only be utilized on consultant claims greater than $1,000. If the consultant's claim(s) are a total of $1,000 or less, it would not be cost effective to proceed through the outlined steps. It is suggested that the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer negotiate a fair and reasonable price for the consultant's claim(s) that total $1,000 or less. This exhibit will outline the procedures to be followed by the consultant and the agency to consider a potential claim by the consultant. Step 1 Consultant Files a Claim with the Agency Project Manager If the consultant determines that they were requested to perform additional services that were outside of the agreement's scope of work, they may be entitled to a claim. The first step that must be completed is the request for consideration of the claim to the Agency's project manager. The consultant's claim must outline the following: • Summation of hours by classification for each firm that is included in the claim; • Any correspondence that directed the consultant to perform the additional work; • Timeframe of the additional work that was outside of the project scope; • Summary of direct labor dollars, overhead costs, profit and reimbursable costs associated with the additional work; and • Explanation as to why the consultant believes the additional work was outside of the agreement scope of work. Step 2 Review by Agency Personnel Regarding the Consultant's Claim for Additional Compensation After the consultant has completed step 1, the next step in the process is to forward the request to the Agency's project manager. The project manager will review the consultant's claim and will met with the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer to determine if the Agency agrees with the claim. If the FHWA is participating in the project's funding, forward a copy of the consultant's claim and the Agency's recommendation for federal participation in the claim to the WSDOT Local Programs through the Region Local Programs Engineer. If the claim is not eligible for federal participation, payment will need to be from agency funds. If the Agency project manager, Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer, WSDOT Local Programs (if applicable), and FHWA (if applicable) agree with the consultant's claim, send a request memo, including backup documentation to the consultant to either supplement the agreement, or create a new agreement for the claim. After the request has been approved, the Agency shall write the supplement and/or new agreement and pay the consultant the amount of the claim. Inform the consultant that the final payment for the agreement is subject to audit. No further action in needed regarding the claim procedures. If the Agency does not agree with the consultant's claim, proceed to step 3 of the procedures. Agreement Number: WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit J Page 1 of 2 Revised 10/30/2014 Step 3 Preparation of Support Documentation Regarding Consultant's Claim(s) If the Agency does not agree with the consultant's claim, the project manager shall prepare a summary for the Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer that included the following: • Copy of information supplied by the consultant regarding the claim; • Agency's summation of hours by classification for each firm that should be included in the claim; • Any correspondence that directed the consultant to perform the additional work; • Agency's summary of direct labor dollars, overhead costs, profit and reimbursable costs associated with the additional work; • Explanation regarding those areas in which the Agency does/does not agree with the consultant's claim(s); • Explanation to describe what has been instituted to preclude future consultant claim(s); and • Recommendations to resolve the claim. Step 4 Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer Reviews Consultant Claim and Agency Documentation The Director of Pubic Works or Agency Engineer shall review and administratively approve or disapprove the claim, or portions thereof, which may include getting Agency Council or Commission approval (as appropriate to agency dispute resolution procedures). If the project involves federal participation, obtain concurrence from WSDOT Local Programs and FHWA regarding final settlement of the claim. If the claim is not eligible for federal participation, payment will need to be from agency funds. Step 5 Informing Consultant of Decision Regarding the Claim The Director of Public Works or Agency Engineer shall notify (in writing) the consultant of their final decision regarding the consultant's claim(s). Include the final dollar amount of the accepted claim(s) and rationale utilized for the decision. Step 6 Preparation of Supplement or New Agreement for the Consultant's Claim(s) The agency shall write the supplement and/or new agreement and pay the consultant the amount of the claim. Inform the consultant that the final payment for the agreement is subject to audit. Agreement Number: WSDOT Form 140-089 EF Exhibit J Page 2 of 2 Revised 10/30/2014 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 20, 2016 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: False Alarm Ordinance Amendment GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council Approved False Alarm Program Contract C09-163 on October 13, 2009. Council extended the contract for one year on December 28, 2015. Council provided consensus to move forward with internal false alarm program and amended ordinance on October 16, 2016 BACKGROUND: City started the current false alarm program in 2010 in order to reduce the number of false alarms, improve police response times, increase officer safety, and create more time for proactive policing. Spokane Valley Municipal Code 7.20.010.A states, "The City regulates security alarm businesses to assure that responses to false alarms do not diminish the availability of police services to the general public and to assure that citizens who cannot afford or do not choose to operate security alarm systems are not penalized for their condition or choice." Spokane Valley Municipal Code 7.20.160.A. states, "Causing police to engage in a false alarm response constitutes an appropriation of public police services for private purposes and is subject to a cost recovery fee." In 2015, staff conducted an evaluation of the program, costs and revenues, and dispatch records. Council approved the following changes to the program based upon that evaluation. ■ Extended the contract with Public Safety Corporation one year. ■ Reduced the false alarm rates to $75/residential and $125/commercial (Previously $85/$165). ■ Made the registration renewal rate the same regardless of previous false alarms, $15/residential and $25/commercial (Previously, if the customer had a false alarm in the past year the registration rate was $25/residential and $35/commercial). ■ Eliminated the appeal fee (Previously $25). ■ Suspend registered accounts for non-payment at 60 days past due (Previously 120 days). In October of 2016, Council provided consensus for staff to move forward with the development of an in-house false alarm reduction program that would reduce costs, simplify administration, and reduce government regulation and intrusion. This program does not require registration of an alarm system and makes police response to an alarm trip voluntary for the alarm system owner. The customer may opt -out of that service with the alarm monitoring company. This report is the first touch for Council to review the proposed amended ordinance. Summary of changes to False Alarm Ordinance: ➢ Elimination of all references to registration. ➢ Elimination of false alarm awareness classes. ➢ Consolidation of alarm administrator and appeals officer positions. ➢ Simplification of appeals process. ➢ Consolidation of multiple terms with the same meaning. ➢ Clarification of business registration requirements. ➢ Reduction of ongoing requirements of alarm companies. ➢ Elimination of late fees. ➢ Addition of exceptions for extreme weather events. OPTIONS: Consensus to proceed to a First Reading of the Ordinance Amendment with or without further amendments; or request additional information. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Council consensus to proceed to a first reading of the proposed amended false alarm ordinance as drafted BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Any costs for processing payments will be offset by cost recovery fees. An amended fee resolution will be considered separately at a future meeting. STAFF CONTACT: Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst ATTACHMENTS: Draft Amended False Alarm Ordinance Sections: Chapter 7.20 SECURITY ALARM SYSTEMS 7.20.010 Intent. 7.20.020 Definitions. 7.20.030 Administration and funding. 7.20.040 Alarm sites must be registered.Repealed 7.20.050 7.20.060 Responsibilities of alarm users. 7.20.070 Alarm installation companies shallst have a valid City of Spokane Valley Repealed business registration. .. dispatch requests. 7.20.080 Verified response required in certain circumstances. 7.20.090 Differentiation and reporting of alarm activations. 7.20.100 Alarm dispatch requests. 7.20.110 Duties of alarm installation company and/or monitoring company. 7.20.120 .Repealed 7.20.130 Alarm dispatch request cancellations. 7.20.140 Prohibited devices. 7.20.150 Violations. 7.20.160 Appropriating public police services for private purposes subject to false alarm response cost recovery fees. 7.20.170 Repealed. 7.20.180 Authorization to issue citations and as.,o:r sorvicoassess false alarm response cost recovery fees. 7.20.190 Fee processing. 7.20.200 Suspension. of registration. 7.20.210 False alarm awarene,z classes.Repealed 7.20.220 Appeals. 7.20.230 Authority of alarm nppcal officcruadministrator. 7.20.240 Alarm appeals officeradministrator selection —Qualification and removal. 7.20.250 Improper influence, conflict of interest, appearance of fairness. 7.20.260 Organization Rules flepealed. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, Not Bold, Font color: Black Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, Not Bold, Font color: Black { Formatted: Font: Italic 7.20.270 Exceptions. 7.20.280 Special rules applicable to public schools. 7.20.290 Confidentiality of alarm information. 7.20.300 Scope of police duty — Immunities preserved. 7.20.310 F os f r alarm r gistration and fall alarm of rc m nt.False Aalarm Ptresponse Qcost Precovery fees 7.20.010 Intent. A. The City regulates security alarm businesses to ensureassa e that responses to false alarms do not diminish the availability of police services to the general public and to ensurea:ruro that citizens who cannot afford or do not choose to operate security alarm systems are not penalized for their condition or choice. B. The intent of this -chapter 7.20 SVMC is to encourage alarm businesses and alarm users to maintain the operational viability of security alarm systems and to significantly reduce or eliminate false alarm dispatch requests made to the pPolice dDepartment. C. The purpose of the chapter 7.20 SVMC is to provide for and promote the health, safety, and welfare of the general public, not to protect individuals or create or otherwise establish or designate any particular class or group of persons who will or should be especially benefited by the terms of chapter 7.20 SVMCthis chapter. The cChapter 7.20 SVMC does not impose or create duties on the part of the City or any of its departments, and the obligation of complying with the requirements of this -chapter 7.20 SVMC, and any liability for failing to do so, is placed solely upon the parties responsible for owning, operating, monitoring, installing, or maintaining security alarm systems. (Ord. 09 020 § 12, 2009). 7.20.020 Definitions. "Alarm administrator" means the person designated by the sChief of pPolice to administer the City's security alarm program, to issue citations, hear and decide appeals, and levy false alarm response cost recovery fees pursuant to chapter 7.20 SVMC SVMCthis chapter. related t s rvice foot and registration suspensions pursuant t chapter 7.20 SVMC this chapter. "Alarm business" means any business, by an individual, partnership, corporation, or other entity, engaged in the selling, leasing, maintaining, servicing, repairing, altering, replacing, moving, installing, or responding to security alarms. 1. Alarm businesses also include any person, business, or organization that monitors security alarm systems and initiates alarm dispatch requests, including units or divisions of larger ._�� Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5" businesses or organizations that provide proprietary security alarm monitoring services only to affiliates of the parent business or organization. 2. Alarm businesses do not include persons doing installation or repair work solely on premises they own, lease or rent where such work is performed without compensation of any kind (i.e., "do-it-yourselfers"). "Alarm dispatch request" means the initiating of a communication to the police, via police dispatch, by an alarm business indicating that a security alarm system has been activated at a particular alarm site and requesting pPolice dDepartment response to that alarm site. "Alarm installation company" means a person in the business of selling, providing, maintaining, servicing, repairing, altering, replacing, moving or installing security alarm system in an alarm site. "Alarm site" (also "security alarm cite") means a structure or portion thereof served by a single security alarm system (a "fixed" alarm site). In a multi -tenant building or complex, each portion of the structure or complex having its own security alarm system is considered a separate alarm site. _"Alarm system" (also "security alarm system") moans a device or series of intorc nnected devices, including, but n t limited to, systems interc nnected with hard wiring r radi frequency signals, which aro designed t mit and/ r transmit a rem t r 1 cal audible, visual, r 1 ctr nic signal indicating that an intrusi n may either be in progros., or b ing attempted at the alarm sit . 1. It includesmeans only the equipment located at the alarm site when a system is connected to an Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5 alarm system monitoring company. 2. It door not includoSocurity alarm systems do not include those devices designed to alert only the inhabitants of specific premises and that have no sounding or signaling devices which can be g n rally h and r s n n th xt ri r f th alarm site. It doosSocurity devices do not includo per:, nal al rt d vices w rn nap rs n's b dy that are primarily designed as an alert of a medical c nditi n. "Alarm user" means any person, firm, partnership, corporation, or other entity who/-Ewhich): 1. Controls a security alarm system at an alarm site- and 2. Is named on the alarm registration; and 32. Is financially responsible for the operation of as security alarm system. As used in the chapter, the term "aAlarm user" may mean more than one person, if more than one person is listed n the registrati n and has accepted fmancial responsibility for operation of apt security alarm system. "Burglary alarm" (also "property/intrusion alarm") means an alarm system that is used to detect and report an unauthorized entry or an attempted unauthorized entry upon real property. ._�� Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5" "Call-up dialer alarm" means a security device that is designed to evoke a police response by transmitting a pre-recorded, unverified signal or message to the police E911 system or to any other police telephone. "Chief" means the €Chief of pPolice of the City of Sp kane Valley or his designee. "City" means the City of Spokane Valley and/or the area within the incorporated municipal boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley. _"C ntr 1 number" means the unique number a zigned to each licensed security alarm business by the alarm administrat r that is used to validate alarm dispatch requests. "Departm nt" moans the Spokane Valley pP lice dDopartm nt. Duress Alarm. (See "Robbery alarm.") "Enhanced call verification" means an independent method whereby the alarm monitoring company attempts to determine that a signal from an automatic security alarm system reflects a need for immediate police assistance or investigation._ This verification process will be conducted by the security alarm system monitoring personnel and shall consist of making at least two phone calls to the responsible party or parties and shall not take more than five minutes from the time the alarm signal has boon accepted by the alarm system monitoring company.prior to requesting a police dispatch. "False alarm response" means pPolice dDepartment response to an alarm dispatch request by a commissioned officer of the Police Ddepartment where, in the opinion of that officer, no evidence of the commission or attempted commission of a crime is present that can be reasonably attributed to having€ caused the alarm activation._ A false alarm response is also deemed to have occurred when the responding officer is unable to determine if evidence of a criminal offense or attempted criminal offense is present because the alarm site is inaccessible 1. Within a locked structure, such as an apaitinent building or business complex with a common Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5 entry; or 2. Behind a locked gate and no person is present to provide access to the officer; or 3. Contains a dog and no person is present to remove the dog so the officer can inspect the site; or 4. Contains any type of "protective/reactive" device or contrivance). "False Alarm Response Cost Recovery Fee" means the cost for police responding to an alarm call in which the alarm is determined to be a false alarm. The fee is revenue neutral and recovers only costs associated with responding to the call, invoicing, payment processing, and program administration. This fee is not ,-punitive, and is thus not. "Government facility" means any alarmed location where the primary owner, operator, renter, or lessee is the City of Spokane Valley, county of Spokane, state of Washington, or agency of the United States government. A public school facility is not a government facility. Hold up Alarm (Soo "Robbery alarm.") Intrusion Alarm (Soo `Burglary alarm.") "Monitoring" means the process an alarm business uses to: 1. Keep watch on security alarm systems; 2. Receive alarm activation signals from security alarm systems; 3. Verify alarm activations; 4. Relay alarm dispatch requests to the Police Ddepartment for the purpose of summoning police response to an alarm site; and 5. To cancel alarm dispatch requests (when appropriate). "Multi -unit complex" means any building or group of buildings located/co-located on the same real property and comprised of two or more separately occupied units. "One -plus duress alarm" means a security alarm system which permits the manual activation of an alarm signal by entering on a keypad a code that either adds the value of "1" to the last digit of a normal arm/disarm code (e.g., the normal arm/disarm code "1234" if entered as "1235" automatically activates the duress alarm feature) or that involves entering any incorrect final digit to a normal arm/ disarm code (e.g., the normal arm/disarm code "1234" if entered as "123X" —where "X" is not "4" — automatically activates the duress alarm feature). _Panic Alarm (See "Robbery alarm.") "Person," for purposes of this chapter, means an individual, corporation, partnership, association, organization or similar entity. "Police Department" means the Spokane Valley Police Department. Property Alarm. (Soo `Burglary alarm.") "Protective/reactive alarm system" means security alarm system that is equipped and prepared to produce any temporary disability or sensory deprivation through use of chemical, electrical or sonic defense, or by any other means, including use of vision obscuring/disabling devices. "Robbery alarm" (also " duro:r alarm," "hold up alarm" or "panic alarm") means an alarm signal generated by the manual or automatic activation of a device, or any system, device or mechanism, on or near the premises intended to signal that a robbery (refer to RCW 9A.56.190) or other crime is in progress, and that one or more persons are in need of immediate police assistance in order to avoid injury, serious bodily harm, or death at the hands of the perpetrator of the robbery or other crime. "Security alarm monitoring business" means any person, firm, or corporation which is engaged in the monitoring of security alarm systems and the summoning of police officer response to activations thereof. ._�� Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5" This includes all businesses that are engaged in alarm monitoring for profit, and businesses whichthat have specialized units or subsidiaries that monitor only their own security alarm systems. "Security Alarm system" means a device or series of interconnected devices, including, but not limited to, systems interconnected with hard wiring or radio frequency signals, which are designed to emit and/or transmit a remote or local audible, visual, or electronic signal indicating that an intrusion may either be in progress or being attempted at the alarm site. 1. It includes only the equipment located at the alarm site when a system is connected to an alarm system monitoring company. 2. It does not include those devices designed to alert only the inhabitants of specific premises and that have no sounding or signaling devices which can be generally heard or seen on the exterior of the alarm site. It does not include personal alert devices wom on a person's body that are primarily designed as an alert of a medical condition or other types of alarms such as car alarms. "Subscriber" means an alarm user who is a customer of an alarm monitoring company. "Suspend" ("suspension"), for purposes of this chapter, means the temporary loss for an alarm user of the privileges associated specifically with the registration of a security alarmpolice response to an alarm activation. system in the City (specifically, police resp nso). "Unmonitored alarm system" means ani security alarm system (see "Alarm system") that is not actively monitored by an alarm business and whose function it is to evoke police response solely by means of a generally audible and/or visible signal. "Verified response" ("independent reporting") means a police response that is based on information received from a person physically present at aloc�an alarm site or from real-time audio or video surveillance positively verifying that there is evidence either of a crime or an attempted crime at the location. The verified response by the alarm system m nit ring c mpany may n t tak m ro than fiv minutes from the time the alarm signal has been accepted. (Ord. 09 020 § 13, 2009). 7.20.030 Administration and funding. A. The Chief of Police shall be responsible for administration ofRosponsibility for administration of this. chaptorof chapter 7.20 SVMC is vested with the cChiof of Ppolico. B. The sChief of 12police shall designates an alarm administrator to carry out the duties and functions described in this -chapter 7.20 SVMC. C. The chief f p lice shall designates on r m re persons to serve a alarm appeals officer(s) to carry out the duties and functi ns related to appeals described in this chapter. I3C. Moneys generated by false alarm response cost cervico foos.recovery fees and registration foes. aros,,od pursuant to this chapter shall be paid into the City's general fund. BD. The alarm administrator shall conducts an annual evaluation and analysis of the effectiveness of this chapter 7.20 SVMC and identifyies and implements appropriate system improvements, as warrantod. (Ord. 09 020 § 1'l, 2009). 7.20.040 Alarm sites must be registered. Repealed by Ord 16-*** A. P lice resp nse to private alarm sites in the City, except as specified in SVMC 7.20.080, is a privilege available my to those alarm users who have alarm systems registered with the City. B. N alarm busino:r providing m nit rings rvico to security alarm sites in the City shall activate alarm monitoring service or initiate alarm dispatch requests relativ t any alarm sit in th City that is n t properly registered. C. Failure by an alarm m nit ring or installation c mpany t pr vide its updated customer information at least once a m nth t th City in accordance with SVMC 7.20.110(A) is a clacr ono civil infraction. (Ord. 09 020 § 15, 2009). 7.20.050 Registration terms and fees. Repealed by Ord 16-*** A. Alarm registration is valid for one year. control of an alarm site (i.e., home owner, busino x owner, rentor, leaseholder, etc.) and specifically for that alarm site r address. Alarm registration remains in the name(s) of the alarm user of record until a C. Alarm r gistration is attach d t the alarm us r and the alarm site registration and is not transferable. A new alarm site registrati n must be issued whenever there is a change of ownership or control of an alarm site, D. Tho initial registration application shall bo given to the alarm user at the time of alarm installation and shall be submitted t the alarm administrat r or designee within 30 days. to, the following: 1. Name and addre.z of the alarm user (i.e., the pers n financially responsible f r perati n of the alarm system being registered). 2. Homo, businos,, and cellular toloph n number(s) of the alarm user. 3. Name, address and telephone number of the alarm business providing monitoring service to the system. 4. Alternate tolophono number for verification (cell phone or other telephone designated by the alarm user). 5. Signature of the alarm user verifying that the alarm user agrees to pay the fees a:aociated with false alarms. F. On roc ipt f the application and foot, the alarm administrator (or designee) shall is.,ue a security alarm registration number to the alarm user. G. The security alann r giGtration number as ignod to an alarm user remains the same for a long a tho alarm user c ntinu uGly maintains registration f r the alarm site. H. Registration may be renewed under the following conditions: 1. The alarm site has no past duo foes. 2. The alarm site's regiGtrati n is n t cusp nd d f r xcos„iv fats alarms. 3. The alarm user either updates registrati n inf nnati n r verifies that the current registration information is still correct. 4. The appropriate annual registration foe is paid. I. Renewal inf rmation and fees are submitted t the alarm administrator (or designee) n r bef re the initialregiGtrati n anniversary date ach y ar. J. The rates for security alarm r gistration foes are set f rth in the City's master foe schedule, a set forth in SVMC 7.20.310. The established rates shall azure that the alarm administrat r position and all other costs related to administration and onf rcomont of this chapt r are Supp rt d ntiroly by registration foes. (Ord. 10 003 § 2, 2010; Ord. 09 020 § 16, 2009). 7.20.060 Responsibilities of alarm users. A. Each alarm user is responsible, annually, for: 1. Registering his alarm system; 2. Paying the registration foo; and 3. Providing current registration information. BA. Each alarm user shall beis responsible for ensuringa:rurin_ that his security alarm system is used properly and pursuant toin accordance with the manufacturer's directions and the law. Inherent in this responsibility is ensuringa:zurin_ that all persons with access to the security alarm system shall bear properly trained on correct use of the system, -aim are authorized to cancel accidental activations, and ensuringa:rurin_ that procedures and practices are followed that minimize the risk of false alarms. GB. Each alarm user shall beis responsible for keeping his security alarm system properly maintained and in good working order. I4C. Each alarm user shall beis financially responsible for paying false alarm response cost recovery service fees when police respond to false alarms from his alarm site. If the alarm user does not want a police response for alarm activations, it shall be the alarm user's responsibility to instruct the alarm monitoring company not to request police response without specific authorization by the alarm user. D. Failure to comply wit ---- - - .. • .• • •_ SVMC 7.20.060(A) - (D) listed in subsection A, B, C or D C of this section may lead to suspension or revocation of alarm registration and loss of the privileges ay,: ciated with that registrationof police response to alarm dispatch requests. E. If an alarm user has six false alarms within a calendar year, the person/business responsible for the alarm site shall -may be required to meet with and provide a false alarm abatement plan to the alarm administrator.uppoals officoralarm administrator and provide a false alarm abatement plan to the appeals fficoralarm administrator. (Ord. 09 020 § 17, 2009). 7.20.070 ! . . •• . .. .Alarm installation ... • .. .. . . .. .. . companies required tomo t have a valid Citv_o€ ektme--Valley business registration. Eff ctiv January 1, 2010, and thereafter, the department shall resp nd only to alarm dispatch roquosta fr m alarm bucino:ros that po:ros., a valid City f Sp kano Valley businos., registration and c ntrol number. (Ord. 09 020 § 18, 2009).All alarm businessescompanies that install alarm systems within the shall have a current and valid Cityof Spoka e Valley business registration. Companies that provide monitoring services, but which do not install systems and are not located within the City limits, of Spokane -Valley are exempt from City business registration requirements. 7.20.080 Verified response required in certain circumstances. A. Effective January 1, 2010, and thereafter, tThe Police 4Department mayshall respond to the activation of unmonitored security alarm systems, ... businoros, unregistered alarm systems, and security alarm systems with a suspended registration status only if independent reporting indicates that a crime is in progress or has been attempted at the involved alarm site (i.e., verified response). B. No alarm user or alarm business shall presume, anticipate, or expect that a police response will result solely from the activation of: 1. Any unmonitored security alarm systemalarm system- or 2. An alarm system monitored by an unlicensed security alarm businos.,; 3. An unregistered alarm system; or 42. An security alarm system inter a suspended registrationstatus. (Ord. 09 020 § 19, 2009-} 7.20.090 Differentiation and reporting of alarm activations. A. Effective January 1, 2010, and th reaft r, nNo person shall operate a security alarm system in the City that fails to differentiate burglary/property/intrusionalarm activations from robbery/hold up/panic/duros., alarm activations, or that fails to accurately report such activations independently. B. Eff ctive January 1, 2010, and th reaft r, nNo person shall operate a security alarm system in the City that fails to differentiate police incidents (i.e., burglary/property/intrusion alarm activations, robbery/hold up/panic/duress alarm activations) from fire, medical, or other non -police incidents, or that fails to accurately report such incidents independently. (Ord. 09 020 § 20, 2009). 7.20.100 Alarm dispatch requests. A. Alarm dispatch requests shall be made in the manner prescribed by the alarm administrator and approved by 911 and police dispatch. B. Alarm dispatch requests may shall include, but are not limited to, the following information: 1. Alarm site registration number. 21. Location of the alarm activation. 42. Type of alarm activation (burglary/property/intrusion, or robbery/panic/hold up/duros., or roll over/airbag deployment). 43. Alarm business's incident number (or other official incident identifier). 4 Alarm businos.,'s assigned control number Name and Contact Pphone number of the alarm user. 5. Alarm zone information, including sensor type and location. C. Alarm dispatch requests made to the Police 4Department (or its designee) shall be for police incidents only, and shall accurately indicate the type of alarm activation (burglary/property/intrusion or, robbery i• :: .....• - .., _ ) that is the proximate cause for the alarm dispatch request. D. No alarm business shall initiate an alarm dispatch request if it knows, or reasonably should know, that doing so would cause a law enforcement officer to respond to an alarm site containing a protective/reactive alarm system. E. No dispatch request and subsequent police response to a robbery alarm pursuant to(as defined in SVMC 7.20.0203 may be cancelled by the alarm user._ In every case at least one officer shall respond to affirm that the alarm user is not under duress, of any kind. (Ord. 10 003 § 3, 2010; Ord. 09 020 § 21, 2449). 7.20.110 Duties of alarm installation company and/or monitoring company. A. All alarm installation and/or monitoring companies shall ensure that their customer information is updated with the alarm administrator or designee at least monthly. This information shall include: 1. Customer name and contact information, includine (i. ., all phone numbers); 2. Alarm site address and billing address; 3. Monitoring company name and contact information; and 4. Installation date or date the alarm monitoring ended. B. All alarm installation and/ r m nit ring c mpanios shall ensure that an on site inspection of tho operating systems for the alarm system shall ccur at least once every three years. The rec rds f these inspections shall be made availabl t th alarm administrator up n request. GB. The alarm installation company shall provide written and oral instructions to each of its alarm users in the proper use and operation of their security alarm systems. Such instructions shallwill specifically include all instructions necessary to turn the security alarm system on and off and to prevent false alarms. D. Effective January 1, 2010, and th reafter, alarm installation c mpanios shall not program alarm systems so that they are capable of sending one plus duress alarms. 1. M nit ring companies may continu t rep rt n plus duro:r alarms received from alarm systems pr grammod with no plus duroz, alarms pri r to January 1, 2010. 21. Effective January 1, 2010, and thereafter, when a take ver or conversion occurs, or if an alarm us r roqu sts an alarm system inspection or modification, an alarm installation c mpany must rem v th no plus duro:r alarm capability fr m such alarm systems. BD. Effective January 1, 2010, and thereafter, alarm installation companies shall not install a device t activate a Installation or use of a hold uprobbery alarm which is a single action, non-recessed button is prohibited.- EE. Effective April 1, 2010, the aAlarm installation companies shall, on new installations, use only alarm control panel(s) which meet SIA Control Panel Standard CP-01. §F. An alarm company shall not use aAutomatic voice dialers which call 911 or the pPolice 4Department are prohibited. 140. After completion of the installation of aft security alarm system, an alarm installation company employee shall review with the alarm user the customer false alarm prevention checklist established by Police 4Department policy. L. Tho monitoring company shall make an alarm dispatch request for a police officer response to a burglar alarm signal, including panic, duros., and h ld up signals. A residential alarm user is pr vided ono false alarm resp nee during the first 60 days f 11 wing an alarm system installati n with ut any charge. 34H. A monitoring company shall: 1. Report alarm activations or signals by using the telephone numbers designated by the alarm administrator; 2. Attempt to verify every burglar alarm signal prior to requesting a police dispatch by making at least two phone calls to the responsible party or parties. This procedure shall notdoes not apply to duress r h Id uprobbery alarm signals; 3. Communicate alarm dispatch requests to the Spokane Valley pPolice Department in a manner and form determined by the alarm administrator; 4. Communicate cancellations to the Spokane Valley pPolice Department in a manner and form determined by the alarm administrator; 5. Ensure that all alarm users of security alarm systems equipped with duroc.,, hold up, or panicrobbery alarm(s) are given adequate training as to the proper use of the duress, hold up, or panic robbery alarm(s). Alarm system training should be provided to every alarm user and/ r additional training provided in situations whore the alarm user has established a high incident rate of false alarms resulting from unintentional or accidental activation; 6. Communicate any available alarm zone information (north, south, front, back, floor, etc.) about the location on all alarm signals related to the alarm dispatch request; 7. Communicate type of alarm activation (silent or audible, interior or perimeter); S. Provide an alarm us r r gistrati n numb r wh n requesting an officer dispatch; 38. After an alarm dispatch request, promptly advise the Spokane Valley pPolice Department if the monitoring company knows that the alarm user or the responder is on the way to the alarm site; 449. Attempt to contact the alarm user or responder within 24 hours via mail, fax, telephone or other electronic means when an alarm dispatch request is made; and 44-10. Effective January 1, 2010, mAlarm monitoring companies shallmuct maintain, for e period of at least one year from the date of the alarm dispatch request, records relating to alarm dispatch requests. a. Records must include the: i. Name, address, and telephone numbers of the alarm user; ii. Security Aalarm system zone(s) activated; iii. Time of alarm dispatch request; and iv. Evidence of an attempt to verify. b. The alarm administrator may request copies of such records for individually- named alarm users. c. If the request is made within 60 days of an alarm dispatch request, the monitoring company shall furnish requested records within three business days of receiving the request. d. If the records are requested between 60 days to one year after an alarm dispatch request, the monitoring company shall furnish the requested records within 30 days of receiving the request. K. An alarm installation c mpany and/or monitoring company that purchases alarm system accounts from another person shall notify the alarm administrator of such purchase and provide details as may bo reasonably requested by the alarm administrator. (Ord. 10 003 § 1, 2010; Ord. 09 020 § 22, 2009). 7.20.120 Compliance with monitoring standards required. Repealed by Ord 16-*** All alarm businedies engaged in monitoring alarm systems in the City shall comply with the monitoring standards set forth in SVMC 7.20.110. (Ord. 09 020 § 23, 2009). 7.20.130 Alarm dispatch request cancellations. A. An alarm dispatch request may be canceled only by the alarm business initiating the request prior to the timepoint the responding police officer reports arrival at the alarm site. B. Alarm dispatch requests may be canceled pursuant to procedures established by the alarm administrator and approved by 911, police dispatch, and by the alarm business making the original request. C. Alarm dispatch requests canceled prior to the police officer's arrival on scene shall not beare not subject to false alarm service fees. (Ord. 09 020 § 21, 2009). 7.20.140 Prohibited devices. A. Effective January 1, 2010, and th reaft r, nNo person shall operate an security alarm systemalarm system in the City that has a siren, bell, or other signal audible from any property adjacent to the alarm site that sounds for longer than five consecutive minutes after the alarm is activated, or that repeats the five-minute alarm cycle more than three consecutive times without resetting. This limitation is subject to noise restrictions pursuant to SVMC 7.05.040(L). B. • , 1 !, • . - -. - , _o person shall operate an security alarm systemalarm system in the City that is programmed for one -plus duress alarms. (Ord. 09 020 § 25, 2009). 7.20.150 Violations. A. The following actions constitute unlawful use of a security alarm system: 1. Any person who activates a security alarm system with the intent to report: a. Suspicious circumstances, or b. Any non-criminal incident, or c. A need for fire, medical or other non-police servicesef 2. Any person who violates the provisions of SVMC 7.20.090(A) or (B), or SVMC 7.20.140(A) or (B), shall beis subject to a cost recovery fee for the improper activation of the security alarm system. B. Chapter 7.20 SVMCNothing in this section shall not prevent the installation of a single reporting device for both types of security alarms, fire alarms, and medical alarms„ provided, that such device complies with SVMC 7.20.090 and applicable fire code requirements. (Ord. 09 020 § 26, 2009). 7.20.160 Appropriating public police services for private purposes subject to false alarm response cost recovery fees. A. Causing the Ppolice Department to engage in a false alarm response constitutes an appropriation of public police services for private purposes and is subject to a false alarm response cost recovery fee. B. The alarm user shall beis responsible for payment of hisndfalse alarm response cost recovery fees. C. When, in the opinion of the responding officer(s), an alarm dispatch request mayeaft be reasonably associated with an actual or attempted criminal offense at the involved alarm site, the alarm is valid and the response is considered a basic police service not subject to false alarm response cost recovery fees. D. When, in the opinion of the responding officer(s), an alarm dispatch request can be reasonably attributed to an earthquake, hurricane, tornado wind storm or other unusually violent act of nature, no false alarm response cost recovery fee shall be assessed. E. A residential alarm user shall beis provided one false alarm response during the first 60 days following a security alarm system installation without any charge. F. When, in the opinion of the responding officer(s), an alarm dispatch request cannot be reasonably attributed to the conditions pursuant to SVMC 7.20.060(C) or (D)described in subsection C or D of this section, the incident shall be deemedis a false alarm and the police officer response shall be deemedis considorod an appropriation of public police services for private purposes that is subject to a false alarm response a false alarm response cost recovery. EG. When the responding officer(s) is (are) unable to determine if an alarm is valid or false because of inaccessibility of the alarm site, the response is presumed to be a false alarm response, and is subject to a false alarm response cost recovery fees pursuant tons sot forth in the HiMaster Ffee sSchedule. (Ord. 09 020 § 27, 2009). 7.20.170 Fees for appropriating public police services for private purposes. Repealed by Ord. 10-003. (Ord. 09 020 § 28, 2009). 7.20.180 Authorization to issue citations and assess service fees. A. The alarm administrator shall beis granted a special commission by the eChief of pPolice to issue citations pursuant to this chapter,.- but citations shaliwill not be issued for false alarms as an altemativei lieu of to false alarm response cost recovery fees. B. The alarm administrator is authorized by the cCity cCouncil to assess costs pursuant to SVMC 7.20.310.(Ord. 12 005 § 1, 2012; Ord. 09 020 § 29, 2009). 7.20.190 Fee processing. A. Alarm businesses contracting with customers to provide monitoring services, including (or their agents,4 shall ensureassa e that customers residing in the City complete initial registration forme and remit the required registrati n fee to the City (or its designee) prior to activati n of monitoring service.are provided information nacre ware of the City's false alarm response cost recovery fees in the event of a false alarm. B. All fees are due and payable on receipt. Fees that are unpaid for 460 days or more after the date of initial invoice are considered past due for purposes of this chapter and subject to suspension of police response to alarm activations.- C. A late fee of $10.00 per month or 10 percent of the utstanding balance per month, whichever is greater, may be imposed on past due accounts to cover the cost of processing and collection. (Ord. 09 020 § 30, 2009). 7.20.200 Suspension_-of-fegis#ration. A. Any alarm user having more than three false alarm responses in any calendar year may, on the event of the fourth such incident, have his alarm registration suspendedbe suspended from receiving police response for alarm calls for service for 90 days, or the balance of the year for which the registration is valid, whichever is greater. B. Any alarm user having annual registration and/or false alarm response cost recovery fees 60 days past due in any year shall have his registration suspendedbe suspended from receiving police response for alarm calls for service until all outstanding fees have been paid in full. C. Furnishing false informati n n an alarm registrati n applicati n is pr hibited. 1. On the first offense of furnishing false information, the alarm administrator shall suspend the alarm user's registration for 30 days. 2. On the sec nd ffense f furnishing false inf rmation, the alarm administrat r shall suspend the alarm u„er's registration for the remainder of the registration period. (Ord. 09 020 § 31, 2009). 7.20.210 False alarm awareness classes. Repealed by Ord 16-*** A. The alarm administrator shall ensure that the online false alarm awareneJ' clas,, is available for those, alarm users having f ur or more false alarm activations in any calendar year. 1. Each alarm user eligible for the class shall by contacted by mail or by phone and asked t take th cla r. 2. The letter Gent in those cases will specify the web page addre:r and th user pas,,word t be used that will show that the user has read and pared the class. B. Comploti n f th false alarm awaroneG., clan, conducted by the alarm adminiGtrat r by an alarm us r (i.e., the per n resp nGible for operation of a registered alarm system) may serve in lieu of a rogiGtrati n suspension one time per registered alarm site. This shall apply only in cases of the number of false alarm activations, not for non payment of any as,,es,,ed registration foes or c Gt recovery foes for p lice resp nGo t a false alarm. (Ord. 09 020 § 32, 2009). 7.20.220 Appeals. False Alarm Response Cost Rrecovery Ffees may be appealed to the alarm appeals officeradministrator as follows: A. The appeal process shall be initiated by the alarm user sending a letter to the alarm appeals e€fieeradministrator requesting , that the false alarm response cost recovery fee be waived, and specifying the reasons for the appeal, and submitting the scheduled appeal fee. This letter and appeal fee shallmust be received by the alarm appeals officeradministrator within 30 calendar`. days after mailing of the initial invoice to the alarm owner. Failure to comply with this 30 day requirement shall render any appeal untimely and therefore void. B. Service False Alarm Response Cost Recovery Ffees may be appealed only on the grounds that the incident cited as the basis for the service fee was, in fact, not a false alarm response or that the alarm was activated due to an uncontrollable evert uxtreme weather event or a, natural disaster, or other act of -god. Human error or mechanical/electronic failure of the security alarm system are not valid reasons for appeal. The alarm user shallmust, in his letter requesting an appeal, describe detailed, credible evidence in his possession that supports the assertioncontontion that the involved incident was a valid alarm pursuant to as described in SVMC 7.20.160(C) or (D) an alarm activation due to an uncontrollable extreme weather event or natural disaster.other act of God. C. The alarm appeals officeradministrator may reject requests for appeals that are not supported by detailed, credible evidence of criminal activity or_ for one of the listed reasons in the City'sextreme weather events or, natural disasters., or acts of god of Spokane Valley false alarm appeal guideline form by the appellant. Notice of rejection of a request for this initial appeal shall be sent to the appellant in writing within 10 working days following receipt of the appeal request by the alarm appoalc officoradministrator. D. IfWhenever the first appeal is denied, the alarm user may then file a sec nd written appeal requestin_ an in person hearing. 1. This request shallmust be received within 30 days from the mailing of the denial of the first level of appeal. 2. All hearings shall be hoard by an appeals officer appointed by the chi f f p lice. 3. Tho alarm administrator shall serve as the City's representative in th s hearings. The filing of a request for an appeal conference with an alarm appeals officer, shall act to sta sets aside any ponding s rvic foe or related service susponsion/revocation until the alarm appeals officer ith r rejects the appeal requestpursuant to SVMC 7.20.2200, as described in subsection C of this secti n, r renders a final decision. E. The alarm appeals officer, on receipt of a request for a hearing Tho alarm appeals officer shall c nduct an appeal c nforence within 30 working days aft r receiving the appeal request. Tho alarm administrat r may als c ntact the appellant and offer a resolution or modification of the cost recovery fees pri r t the scheduled hearing. E. At th c of rens , th alarm administrat r shall present evidence on the City's behalf supporting th cave that the applicable c st recovery fees are based on police response to an actual false alarm. _The alarm appeals officer shall consider this evidence and any information present d by any int rostod person(s 1. Because false alarm responses are based on the professional judgment of the resp ndin_ fficor using the facts known to the officer at the tim f th incid nt, th burd n f pr f in appeals is on the appellant. 2. The appellant shallmust establish with credible evidence that there were facts n t consid rod by the officer existing at the time of the incid nt, and that load to the rocs nabl conclusion is that the incident involved was a valid alarm pursuant to as described in SVMC 7.20.160(C) or (D). 3. The alarm appeals officer shall make his decision based on the presence of such facts and conclusions. CCD. The alarm appeals fficer shall render a decisi n and n tify the appellant and the alarm administrator thorn f in writing within 20 working days aft r the appeal c nforonce is hold. The alarm appoalc officoradministrator may affirm, waive, cancel, or modify the false alarm response cost recovery_peiy fees or actions that are the subject of the appeal. A record of any modification of the false alarm cost recovery fee shall be recorded and forwarded to the Police Chief and the City Manager or designee on a monthly basis. 14E. If the alarm appeals fficeradministrator affirms or modifies the amount of a false alarm response recoverycorvico fee due, that amount becomes immediately due and payable. EF Each Aappoal decisions shall b aro rovi w d and approved by the cChiof f pP lice prior to bocomin_ official. The official decision of the alarm appeals officeradministrator shall bei fmal„ and no further app als r remedies are available. (Ord. 09 020 § 33, 2009). 7.20.230 Authority of alarm administrator. The following cases shall be within the jurisdiction of the alarm administrator and the alarm appeals officer(s) under the terms and procedures of this chapter: A. A y—�al (False alarm appeals governed by this chapter. B. Alarm license suspension of any system located within the City or under its jurisdiction governed by this chapter. C. Administration of cervico foes and/or fines related tofalse alarm response cost recovery fees related to or applicable to, any security alarm system authorized by this chapter. D. Any and all other administrative alarm appeals as they may pertain to security alarm systems located within the City. (Ord. 09 020 § 31, 2009). 7.20.240 Alarm administrator selection — Qualification and removal. A. The alarm appeals officer(s) administrator shall be appointed by the €Chief of Ppolice. B. The alarms appeals officeradministrator(s) shall be appointed solely with regard to their qualifications for the duties of the office and wi-llshall have such training and experience as will qualify them to conduct he duties or responsibilities ursuant to chapter 7.20 SVMC. C. The alarm appeals officeradministrator(s) may be removed from office by the eChief of Ppolice. (Ord. 09 020 § 35, 2009). 7.20.250 Improper influence, conflict of interest, appearance of fairness. A. No City official, elective or appointive, shall attempt to influence the alarm appeals officeradministrator in any matter officially before him so as to constitute misconduct of a public office pursuant tom 6chapter 42.20 RCW. or a vi lati n of the appearance f fairnos., doctrine. B. The alarm appeals officeradministrator(s) shall conduct all proceedings in a manner to avoid conflicts of interest or other misconduct. ' . If such conflicts or violations cannot be avoided in a particular case, the alarm appeals officeradministrator shall assign an alarm appeals officeradministrator as a pro tem to act in his absence. (Ord. 09 020 § 36, 2009). 7.20.260 Organization Rules. Repealed by Ord 16-*** A. Tho alarm appeals officer(s) shall be empowered to adopt rules f r the scheduling and conduct of ppeal hearings and other procedural matters related to the duties of his office. 1. Such rules may pr vide for cros., examination of witnos.,os. 2. Further, such rules shall pr vid f r roc rding f th pr c dings and for compliance with pplicablethe state, federal, state, and City laws which may govern such a proceeding. B. In rend ring a decision, the alarm app als ffic r(s) is h roby auth riz d t take judicial notice of all duly ad ptod rules, ordinances, standards, plans, rogulati ns, and p licios f th City and other relevant public agencies.(Ord. 09 020 § 37, 2009). 7.20.270 Exceptions. A. Tho provisions of this Chapter 7.20 SVMC shall not apply to temporary security alarm systems used by the Police Ddepartment or other public law enforcement agencies for investigative or protective purposes. B. Government Facilities. 1. Pursuant to SVMC 7.20.020, Ggovernment facilities as defined in SVMC 7.20.020 are subject to the following special rules: a. Fee Structure. i. Government facilities are subject to annual registrati n rules (i.e., providing annual registration foes established pursuant to SVMC 7.20.310. i. No cost recovery fees shall be charged for police response(s) to false alarms at government facilities. b. Government facilities are exempt from having police response suspended. 2. To qualify for the special rules and exemptions under this section, an alarm site shallmust meet the following criteria: a. The site is located within the municipal boundaries of the City; and b. The site meets the criteria pursuant toas defined in SVMC 7.20.020 "Cgovernment facility." 3. Upon the fourth response to a false alarm in any calendar year, a responsible party for the government alarm site shall meet with the alarm administrator and present a false alarm abatement plan. 4. The alarm administrator may make any other special rules and exceptions as are deemed necessary to ensurearuro that appropriate protection and accountability are maintained at government sites. (Ord. 09 020 § 38, 2009). 7.20.280 Special rules applicable to public schools. A. Public schools shall beare subject to the following special rules: 1. Public ccho is are subject to the following ;;Service fee structure: a. Public sch is are subject to annual registrati n rules (i.e., providing information n th alarm cyst m and c ntact information), but aro x mpt fr m paying th annual registration fees applicable to government faciliti s, as doscrib d in SVMC 7.20.270(B). ba. No fee shallis be charged for the first false alarm in any calendar year. e. Th f of r the second fals alarm in any cal ndar y ar is waiv d, pr vid d th sit administrator (or designee) succeeafully c mpletes the nline false alarm awareness clan.,. db. The third second and all subsequent false alarms in any calendar year shall beare charged at the standard false alarm response cost recovery see fee rate. 2. Public school sites are exempt from suspension. B. To qualify for the special rules and exemptions pursuant to SVMC 7.20.280 under this section, a schools alarm site shallmust meet the following criteria: 1. The site shall beis located within the municipal boundaries of the City; and 2. The site shall beis a public school site serving children in one or more of grades K-12, owned and operated by the East Valley School District, West Valley School District, Central Valley School District, or Spokane Public SchoolsScho 1 District 81; or 3. The site is a public ccho 1 site serving children in no or more of grades K 12, owned and operated by East Valley School District, West Valley School District, Central Valley Scho 1 District, r Sch 1 District 81. C. The alarm administrator may make any other special rules and exceptions as are deemed necessary to ensureassure that appropriate protection and accountability are maintained at public schools regarding use of an security alarm system. (Ord. 09 020 § 39, 2009). 7.20.290 Confidentiality of alarm information. A. All information gathered through alarm registrations, activations of false alarms, submission of customer lists by alarm sales, installation or monitoring companies, and/or through the appeals process shall be treated as confidentia by all employees of the City and its third party administrator, if applicable._ Such information shall beis proprietary and is hereby declared confidential except as otherwise required by chapter 42.56 RCW, the Public Records Act. B. Absent special circumstances or court order, no information gathered through alarm registrations, activations of false alarms, oubmia.,ion of curt m r lista by alarm sales, installation or monitoring companies, and/or through the appeals process shall be released to the public or any other person except as otherwise required by chapter 42.56 RCW, the Public Records Act,. C. This information may be released by the alarm administrator to another law enforcement agency, the applicable alarm user, and/or his installation or monitoring company upon written request of one of those three entities. (Ord. 09 020 § 10, 2009). 7.20.300 Scope of police duty — Immunities preserved. A. Tho ia.,uance of an alarm regictrationThic ordinancoChapter 7.20 SVMC does not create a contract between the City and any alarm user, alarm installation company, or monitoring company, nor does it create any duty or obligation, either expressed or implied, on the pPolice dDepartment to respond to any alarm activation. B. Any and all liability and/or consequential damage or loss resulting from the failure of the pPolice 4Department to respond to an alarm dispatch request is hereby disclaimed and governmental immunity as provided by law is fully retained. C. By applying f r an alarm registration, tTh alarm us r ackn wledgcs that pPolice Department response to an alarm activation may be impacted by the availability of officers, priority of current calls for service, traffic, weather conditions, and staffmg levels. (Ord. 09 020 § 11, 2009). 7.20.310 Recovery Fees. The fees for .False Alarm Response Cost false alarm response cost recovery shall be determined by separate resolution. (Ord. 09 020 § 12, 2009). CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 20, 2016 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative report — Library Ad Hoc Committee GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Governance Manual, Chapter 5, B3 In -House Committees PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: In 2016 Council heard two reports on the Spokane County Library District (SCLD) but no Council action has been taken. BACKGROUND: Following incorporation in 2003, the City contracted with SCLD to provide library services while the City considered various long-term options. In 2005, the City Council submitted the question to the voters of whether to annex to SCLD. The issue was approved by a large majority. In early 2012, the City received a request from SCLD for the City to purchase 8.4 acres of vacant land on Sprague Avenue in partnership with SCLD. SCLD would then purchase part of the vacant land to construct a new centrally -located Spokane Valley library, with the City using the rest of the property for a significantly expanded park area. Pursuant to the interlocal agreement, SCLD would have until October 2017 to pass a bond measure. SCLD subsequently formed a capital facilities area through vote, and submitted two separate proposals to voters for approval of bonds to construct the new library, along with construction of a second new library facility near Shelly Lake, and improvements to the Argonne branch. Both efforts failed, with the first receiving 55% in 2014, and the second 57% in 2015. During an August 30, 2016, presentation the SCLD made to Council, they shared that the SCLD Board of Trustees stated they had attempted twice (unsuccessfully) to obtain the bonds, and as a consequence, approved a motion to request that the City amend the interlocal agreement so that SCLD could immediately receive the funds paid to the City for the 2.82 acres and transfer the property back to the City, rather than wait until October, 2017. Council's response was to ask SCLD Director Nancy Ledoboer to request that the Board reconsider. City staff was contacted by Ms. Ledoboer September 20, 2016 informing us that the SCLD Board had met again and is interested in hearing back from the City about what type of meaningful partnership we might be able to forge together to advance the design and eventual construction of a library structure at the corner of Sprague and Dartmouth. On November 11, 2016, staff from both the SCLD and City met to begin these discussions and we anticipate they will continue through 2017. During the meeting, we discussed the value of forming an Ad Hoc Committee comprised of staff from each agency along with two SCLD Board members and two City Councilmembers. OPTIONS: Council has the choice of whether to participate in the Ad Hoc Committee. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Staff is seeking Council consensus to join the Ad Hoc Committee including a future Mayoral appointment of two Councilmembers who would represent the City. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The fiscal impact should be limited to staff time to participate in the Ad Hoc Committee. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: None DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA as of December 15, 2016; 8:30 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative To: Council & Staff From: City Clerk, by direction of City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings Dec 27, 2016 — No Meeting — Christmas Holiday January 3, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue, Dec 27] ACTION ITEMS: 1. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 17-001 Amending SVMC 7.20 Alarm Systems —M.Koudelka (15 min) 2. Mayoral Appointment: Two Planning Commissioners (3 -yr. terms) (5 minutes) 3. Mayoral Appointment: Two Members for Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (1 or 2 yr. terms) (5 minutes) 4. Mayoral Appointment: Councilmembers to Various Board and Committees for 2017 (10 minutes) NON -ACTION ITEMS: 5. Fee Resolution — Chelsie Taylor 6 Banking Signing Authority — Chelsie Taylor 7. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins (10 minutes) (10 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 50 minutes] January 10, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue, Jan 3] 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 17-001 Amending SVMC 7.20 Alarm Systems — M.Koudelka (15 min) 3. Proposed Resolution 17-001 Amending Fee Resolution — Chelsie Taylor (10 minutes) 4. Proposed Resolution 17-002 Repealing & Replacing 14-001, Bank Signing — Chelsie Taylor (5 minutes) 5. Motion Consideration: Bid Award, Appleway Trail, Pines to Evergreen — Steve Worley (10 minutes) 6. Motion Consideration: Consultant Agreem't Design Barker Rd/BNSF Separation Project — Eric Guth (10 min) 7. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 60 minutes] January 17, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda January 24, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins 3. Info Only: Department Reports [due Tue, Jan 10] [due Tue, Jan 17] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] January 31, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue, Jan 24] 1. Advance Agenda February 7, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue, Jan 31] 1. Advance Agenda February 14, 2017, Special Meeting, Winter Workshop, 8:30 a.m. — 2:00 p.m. Council Chambers February 14, 2017 Formal Meeting, 6 pm: Cancelled Draft Advance Agenda 12/15/2016 2:20:00 PM Page 1 of 2 February 21, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue, Feb 14] 1. Advance Agenda February 28, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins 3. Info Only: Department Reports March 7, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda March 14, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins March 21, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda March 28, 2017, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins 3. Info Only: Department Reports [due Tue, Feb 21] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Tue, Feb 28] [due Tue, March 7] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Tue, March 14] [due Tue, March 21] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) April 4, 2017, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue, March 28] 1. Advance Agenda *time for public or Council comments not included OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: 8"' & McDonald follow-up (April, 2017) Accomplishments Report, 2016 Bidding Info: 3 yr history, bids, awards, etc. General Fund, Fund Balance Discussion Oath of Office SCRAPS Update Second Amendment Sanctuary City Service Dogs Sullivan Bridge Taxi Cabs Term Limits Undergrounding Utility Facilities in ROW Utility Tax Washington State: 2 states Draft Advance Agenda 12/15/2016 2:20:00 PM Page 2 of 2 Spokane Walley City of Spokane Valley Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 11/30/2016 Page Title 1 Cover Sheet 2 Pre -Application Meetings Requested 3 Online Applications Received 4 Construction Applications Received 5 Land Use Applications Received 6 Construction Permits Issued 7 Land Use Applications Approved 8 Development Inspections Performed 9 Code Enforcement 10 Revenue 11 Building Permit Valuations Printed 12/05/2016 08:34 Page 1 of 11 l��Ol.il .0 00.0 Valley Pre -Application Meetings Requested Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 11/30/2016 A Pre -Application Meeting is a service provided to help our customers identify the code requirements related to their project proposal. Community & Economic Development scheduled a total of 11 Pre -Application Meetings in November 2016. 15 10 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Land Use Pre -Application ® Commercial Pre -App Meeting Commercial Pre -App Land Use Pre -Application Meeting Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 6 6 6 11 6 7 7 7 3 3 6 0 5 7 3 3 4 1 6 2 1 2 5 0 Monthly Totals 11 13 9 14 10 8 13 9 4 5 11 0 Annual Total To -Date: 107 Printed 12/05/2016 08:34 Page 2 of 11 l��a.Ile 4000 Valley Online Applications Received Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 11/30/2016 Community & Economic Development received a total of 208 Online Applications in November 2016. 400 200 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Trade Permit e 4l Right of Way Permit Sign Permit Reroof Permit Pre -Application Meeting Request Demolition Permit a., Other Online Applications Approach Permit Approach Permit Demolition Permit Other Online Applications Pre -Application Meeting Request Reroof Permit Right of Way Permit Sign Permit Trade Permit .2 DecJan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 2 3 2 0 1 2 5 2 1 3 0 1 3 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 101 101 102 71 103 67 90 61 48 37 0 24 30 47 45 41 43 44 67 72 69 69 0 2 1 0 1 3 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 47 55 69 54 114 100 78 99 72 97 99 0 Monthly Totals 105 190 223 205 231 250 192 259 212 219 0: Annual Total To -Date: Printed 12/05/2016 08:34 2,294 Page 3 of 11 r��a.Il .000 Valley Construction Applications Received Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 11/30/2016 Community & Economic Development received a total of 409 Construction Applications in November 2016. 800 600 400 200 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Commercial - New Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial - TI Residential - New Other Construction Permits Commercial - New Commercial - TI Residential - New Commercial - Trade Residential - Trade Residential - Accessory Demolition Sign Other Construction Permits } Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 4 3 17 6 20 40 5 9 3 33 15 10 10 15 13 15 7 19 15 *15 10 0 16 19 44 27 15 33 8 15 12 31 11 0 *28 *25 *36 *17 *46 *29 *28 *32 *45 *35 *21 0 *109 *113 *146 *132 *137 *175 *105 *133 *96 *165 *130 0 2 8 *12 22 27 12 18 10 16 19 10 0 *3 *4 *7 *3 *2 *7 4 *3 *6 2 *1 0 *8 *13 6 *10 *14 8 *9 *9 *12 5 5 0 *144 *245 *318 *300 *244 *318 *222 *289 *277 *245 *204 0 17 0 Monthly Totals 329 440 596 532 518 637 406 519 482 550 409 0 Annual Total To -Date: Printed 12/05/2016 08:43 5,418 Page 4 of 11 *Includes Online Applications. I��Ol.ile ,� P Malley° Land Use Applications Received Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 11/30/2016 Community & Economic Development received a total of 60 Land Use Applications in November 2016. 100 50 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec ;Ai Boundary Line Adjustment Short Plat Preliminary fit!! Long Plat Preliminary Binding Site Plan Preliminary Final Platting Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Administrative Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits Boundary Line Adjustment Short Plat Preliminary Long Plat Preliminary Binding Site Plan Preliminary Final Platting Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Administrative Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 3 5 3 4 4 5 2 5 4 5 2 0 0 2 1 3 1 0 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 0 0 3 3 2 3 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 3 3 0 31 53 68 65 50 31 18 50 37 69 51 0 Monthly Totals 37 65 Annual Total To -Date: Printed 12/05/2016 08:43 630 7 Page 5 of 11 .00 Valley, Construction Permits Issued Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 11/30/2016 Community & Economic Development issued a total of 400 Construction Permits in November 2016. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Commercial - New 122 Commercial - TI Residential - New Other Construction Permits Commercial - New Commercial - TI Residential - New Commercial - Trade Residential - Trade Residential - Accessory Demolition Sign Other Construction Permits Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2 4 14 2 16 9 8 10 19 17 27 22 25 20 34 19 104 113 125 122 2 6 12 18 2 4 6 3 6 12 6 10 18 2 3 16 13 11 7 19 20 18 10 18 32 35 23 33 145 137 109 143 21 5 5 12 15 10 0 15 29 17 0 44 26 25 99 161 149 0 0 0 26 13 14 14 13 19 10 0 2 7 4 3 6 2 1 0 14 6 9 10 9 6 5 0 120 181 291 282 230 243 211 250 245 207 178 0 onthly Totals 296 366 523 488 500 472 390 506 464 470 400 0 Annual Total To -Date: Printed 12/05/2016 08:45 4,875 Page 6 of 11 I��Ol.ile ,� P Malley° Land Use Applications Approved Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 11/30/2016 Community & Economic Development approved a total of 57 Land Use Applications in November 2016. 100 50 0 111 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Boundary Line Adjustment Short Plat Preliminary ti Long Plat Preliminary Binding Site Plan Preliminary Final Platting Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Administrative Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits Boundary Line Adjustment Short Plat Preliminary Long Plat Preliminary Binding Site Plan Preliminary Final Platting Zoning Map/Comp Plan Amendment State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Administrative Exception/Interpretation Other Land Use Permits Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2 0 1 1 2 3 1 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 26 50 70 64 46 33 15 47 40 60 54 0 Monthly Totals 29 52 74 66 50 39 18 53 45 64 57 0 Annual Total To -Date: Printed 12/05/2016 08:45 547 Page 7 of 11 .010 Valley Development Inspections Performed Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 11/30/2016 Community & Economic Development performed a total of 1502 Development Inspections in November 2016. Development Inspections include building, planning, engineering and ROW inspections. 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016 2015 2014 2014 2015 2016 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Totals 764 959 1,333 1,390 1,445 1,564 1,284 1,452 1,554 1,527 1,502 0 801 974 1,063 1,243 1,420 1,761 1,624 1,144 1,053 1,060 934 777 601 633 996 1,281 1,323 1,296 1,415 1,225 1,310 1,486 972 1,027 Printed 12/05/2016 08:54 Page 8 of 11 i��a.Ile Walley, Code Enforcement Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 11/30/2016 Code Enforcement Officers responded to 26 citizen requests in the month of November. They are listed by type below. Please remember that all complaints, even those that have no violation, must be investigated. 80 60 40 20 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec ME CE -Stop Work Order Environmental General Nuisance - Property Complaint, Non -Violation CE -Stop Work Order Complaint, Non -Violation Environmental General Nuisance Property Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 2 0 2 1 0 0 0 21 6 1 0 0 12 21 33 37 20 26 48 49 35 4 1 13 14 11 8 6 6 4 0 21 1 0 2 21 3 0 0 0 0 Monthly Totals 18 23 46 51 31 59 62 58 39 24 26 0 Annual Total To -Date: Printed 12/05/2016 08:54 437 Page 9 of 11 .010 Valley Revenue 2016 Trend 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 11/30/2016 Community & Economic Development Revenue totaled $150,902 in November 2016. 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec -w- 2016 2015 Five -Year Trend Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 1 Nov $213,319 $191,658 $383,912 $196,705 $371,319 $243,029 $128,848 $271,684 $252,268 $208,349 $150,902 $77,272 $72,713 $144,159 $149,274 $188,707 $202,096 $153,853 $116,015 $132,681 $131,066 $97,315 $74,775 $108,328 $161,174 $187,199 $123,918 $117,453 $162,551 $162,864 $99,587 $181,791 $99,627 $102,195 $1,581,462 $74,628 $66,134 $198,571 $160,508 $282,086 $152,637 $117,776 $127,540 $153,838 $149,197 $84,442 $97,689 $1,665,046 $158,912 $51,536 $102,538 $106,496 $184,176 $409,592 $277,553 $102,021 $129,174 $133,561 $98,386 $66,559 $1,820,504 $34,204 $60,319 $177,737 $173,932 $268,672 $223,888 $123,137 $103,703 $113,731 $112,542 $108,948 $51,745 $43,842 $77,247 $80,774 $118,237 $84,684 $106,909 $88,247 $83,949 $167,076 $78,237 $95,172 $58,881 Dec Totals ,611,993 $75,414 $1,540,565 Printed 12/05/2016 08:56 Page 10 of 11 1,552,558 .000 Valley Building Permit Valuation Community & Economic Development Monthly Report 01/01/2016 - 11/30/2016 Community & Economic Development Building Permit Valuation totaled $7,756,008 in November 2016. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016 Trend 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec $7.97M $28.14M $55.63M $10.09M $36.76M $19.11M $7.07M $41.60M $33.67M $9.13M $7.76M $0.00M $6.76M $4.80M $6.38M $9.26M $18.09M $18.98M $11.21M $7.48M $10.66M $9.92M $4.89M $3.49M $2.93M $10.71M $8.07M $18.60M $6.73M $7.53M $5.05M $8.06M $5.15M $14.42M $5.86M $5.08M $3.18M $2.45M $9.90M $8.92M $34.58M $7.44M $6.37M $9.47M $12.01M $7.74M $3.60M $6.30M $25.49M $1.92M $3.59M $7.30M $22.22M $41.88M $32.91M $6.52M $8.11M $14.22M $7.25M $2.54M 173.95M'! $0.72M $2.95M $5.29M $5.32M $24.39M $33.08M $7.91M $9.89M $6.47M $8.78M $3.76M $1.66M p110.22M'. $1.46M $5.95M $5.03M $6.15M $2.53M $4.98M $3.83M $3.45M $21.54M $4.46M $3.97M $1.85M Totals $256.93M 111.90M $98.19M 111.96M Printed 12/05/2016 08:56 Page 11 of 11 Siiokane .000.Valley Memorandum 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhall@spokanevalley.org To: Mark Calhoun, City Manager From: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Date: December 14, 2016 Re: Finance Department Activity Report — November 2016 Following is information pertaining to Finance Department activities through the end of November 2016 and included herein is an updated 2016 Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures through the end of November. 2016 Audit of the 2015 Financial Records and Annual Financial Report The 2015 books were closed during April and the annual financial report was completed in May. The State Auditor's Office completed fieldwork for the audit of fiscal year 2015, and the exit conference was held on September 19th for the financial statement and Federal single audit. The State Auditor's Office issued an unmodified opinion on the financial statements for the fiscal year 2015 on September 26, 2016. The fieldwork for the accountability audit was completed in October and the corresponding exit conference was held on November 10. 2016 Budget Amendment As we have progressed through 2016 the need for a number of budget amendments has arisen largely as a result of capital projects. Council review will take place at the following meetings: • October 4 • October 25 • October 25 • November 8 Admin Report Public Hearing First reading on proposed ordinance amending the 2016 Budget Second reading on proposed ordinance amending the 2016 Budget 2017 Budget Development The 2017 Budget development process began in the Finance Department in early March and on April 6th we sent detailed budget requests to all departments to complete by mid-May. By the time the budget is adopted on November 81h the Council will have had an opportunity to discuss the budget on seven occasions including two public hearings. • June 14 Council budget workshop • August 9 Admin report on 2017 revenues and expenditures • September 13 Public hearing #1 on the 2017 revenue and expenditures • September 27 City Manager's presentation of preliminary 2017 Budget • October 11 Public hearing #2 on 2017 Budget • October 25 First reading on proposed ordinance adopting the 2017 Budget • November 8 Second reading on proposed ordinance adopting the 2017 Budget P:IFinancelFinance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports1201612016 11 30.docx Page 1 Lodging Tax The schedule leading to awarding funds is as follows: • August 31 - Letters mailed to agencies that have historically received funding, media release to City website and notice to newspapers. • October 7 - Grant applications due at City Hall. • October 20 - Grant applicant presentations to lodging tax advisory committee. • November 8 - Admin report to Council on results of lodging tax advisory committee meeting. • December 13 - City Council motion consideration: Award lodging tax for 2017. Budget to Actual Comparison Report A report reflecting 2016 Budget to Actual Revenues and Expenditures for those funds for which a 2016 Budget was adopted is located on pages 5 through 18. Because we attempt to provide this information in a timely manner, this report is prepared from records that are not formally closed by the Finance Department at month end or reconciled to bank records. Although it is realistic to expect the figures will change over subsequent weeks, I believe the report is materially accurate. We've included the following information in the report: • Revenues by source for all funds, and expenditures by department in the General Fund and by type in all other funds. • A breakdown between recurring and nonrecurring revenues and expenditures in the General Fund, Street O&M Fund and Stormwater Fund. • The change in fund balance including beginning and ending figures. The beginning fund balance figures are those that are reflected in our 2015 Annual Financial Report. • Columns of information include: o The 2016 Budget as amended. o November 2016 activity. o Cumulative 2016 activity through November 2016. o Budget remaining in terms of dollars. o The percent of budgeted revenue collected or budgeted expenditures disbursed. A few points related to the General Fund #001 (page 5): Recurring revenues collections are currently at 92.95% of the amount budgeted with 91.7% of the year elapsed. • Property tax are paid to Spokane County in two installments each year on April 30 and October 31 and are then remitted to the City primarily in May and November with lesser amounts typically remitted in June and December. Property taxes received thus far in 2016 are $10,768,819 or 93.81% of the amount budgeted. • Sales tax collections represent only 10 -months of collections thus far because taxes collected in November are not remitted to the City by the State until the latter part of December. Collections are currently $16,569,885 or 89.66% of the amount budgeted. • Gambling taxes are at $287,120 or 86.22% of the amount budgeted. Gambling taxes are paid quarterly with fourth quarter payments due by January 31. • Franchise Fee and Business Registration revenues are typically received in the month following a calendar year quarter. So far in 2016 we have received $950,958 or 82.41 % of the amount budgeted. • State shared revenues are composed of State of Washington distributions that include items such as liquor board profits, liquor excise tax, streamlined sales tax mitigation and criminal justice monies. Most of these revenues are paid by the State in the month following a P:IFinancelFinance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports1201612016 11 30.docx Page 2 calendar quarter. Through November we've received remittances totaling $1,617,958 or 79.92% of the amount budgeted. • Fines and forfeitures revenues are composed of monthly remittances from Spokane County with payments made in the month following the actual assessment of a fine and false alarm fees. Through November 2016 we've received remittances through the month of October with receipts of $1,047,671 or 72.58% of the amount budgeted. • Community Development service revenues are largely composed of building permit and plan review fees as well as right of way permits. Revenues are currently at $2,488,476 or 166.84% of the amount budgeted. • Recreation program fees are composed of revenues generated by the variety of parks and recreation programs including classes, swimming pools (in -season), and CenterPlace. Currently, revenues total $660,284 or 108.56% of the amount budgeted. Recurring expenditures are currently at $32,777,768 or 82.55% of the amount budgeted with 91.7% of the year elapsed. Departments experience seasonal fluctuations in activity so they don't necessarily expend their budget in twelve equal monthly installments Investments (page 19) Investments at November 30 total $56,339,747 and are composed of $51,324,477 in the Washington State Local Government Investment Pool and $5,015,270 in bank CDs. Total Sales Tax Receipts (page 20) Total sales tax receipts reflect State remittances through November and total $18,702,988 including general, criminal justice and public safety taxes. This figure is $1,439,042 or 8.34% greater than the same 10 -month period in 2015. Economic Indicators (pages 21 — 23) The following economic indicators provide information pertaining to three different sources of tax revenue that provide a good gauge of the health and direction of the overall economy. 1. Sales taxes (page 21) provide a sense of how much individuals and businesses are spending on the purchase of goods. 2. Hotel / Motel taxes (page 22) provide us with a sense of overnight stays and visits to our area by tourists or business travelers. 3. Real Estate Excise taxes (page 23) provide us with a sense of real estate sales. Page 21 provides a 10 -year history of general sales tax receipts (not including public safety or criminal justice) with monthly detail beginning January 2007. • Compared with calendar year 2015, 2016 collections have increased by $1,289,845 or 8.44%. • Tax receipts reached an all-time high in 2015 at $18,209,568, besting the previous record year of 2014 when $17,440,083 was collected. Page 22 provides a 10 -year history of hotel/motel tax receipts with monthly detail beginning January 2007. • Compared with calendar year 2015, 2016 collections have increased by $19,152 or 3.85%. • Collections reached an all-time high in 2015 of $581,237, exceeding the previous high set in 2014 of $549,267. P:IFinancelFinance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports1201612016 11 30.docx Page 3 Page 23 provides a 10 -year history of real estate excise tax receipts with monthly detail beginning January 2007. • Compared with calendar year 2015, 2016 collections have increased by $159,419 or 8.65%. • Tax receipts peaked in 2007 at nearly $2.6 million, decreased precipitously in 2008 and 2009, and are slowly gaining ground. Debt Capacity and Bonds Outstandinq (page 24) This page provides information on the City's debt capacity, or the dollar amount of General Obligation (G.O.) Bonds the City may issue, as well as an amortization schedule of the bonds the City currently has outstanding. • The maximum amount of G.O. bonds the City may issue is determined by the assessed value for property taxes which for 2016 is $7,748,275,097. Following the December 1, 2016 debt service payments, the City has $13,260,000 of nonvoted G.O. bonds outstanding which represents 11.41% of our nonvoted bond capacity, and 2.28% of our total debt capacity for all types of bonds. Of this amount: o $5,065,000 remains on bonds issued for the construction of CenterPlace. These bonds are repaid with a portion of the 1/10 of 1% sales tax that is collected by the Spokane Public Facilities District. o $995,000 remains on bonds issued for road and street improvements around CenterPlace. The bonds are repaid with a portion of the real estate excise tax collected by the City. o $7,200,000 remains on bonds issued for construction of the new City Hall building. The bonds are to be repaid with General Fund revenues. Street Fund Revenue Sources (pages 25 and 26) The last two charts reflect a history for the two primary sources of revenue in Street Fund #101. These include: • Page 25 provides a 10 -year history of Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax collections with monthly detail beginning January 2007. o Compared with calendar year 2015, 2016 collections have increased by $76,681 or 4.77% o Tax receipts peaked in 2007 at just approximately $2.1 million, and subsequently decreased to a range of approximately $1,857,000 to $1,940,000 in the years 2011 through 2015. • Page 26 provides a 6 -year history of Telephone Utility Tax collections with monthly detail beginning January 2009 (the month in which the tax was imposed). o Compared with 2015, 2016 collections have decreased by $164,823 or 8.68%. o Tax receipts peaked in 2009 at $3,054,473 and have decreased each year since due to what we suspect is the reduction in land lines by individual households. o The 2016 Budget was adopted with a revenue estimate of $2,340,000. It appears that actual 2016 revenues will come in at less than the budgeted amount. o The City has hired a consultant to perform an audit of providers who pay the telephone utility tax. The audit will assess whether providers are accurately remitting all taxes owed to the City, and the consultant will be paid on a contingent basis out of revenues recovered from the telephone providers. P:IFinancelFinance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports1201612016 11 30.docx Page 4 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 #001 - GENERAL FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Budget Year Elapsed = 2016 91.7% 2016 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget November November 30 Remaining % of Budget Revenues Property Tax 11,479,200 4,234,812 10,768,819 (710,381) 93.81 % Sales Tax 18,480,500 1,822,998 16,569,885 (1,910,615) 89.66% Sales Tax - Criminal Justice 1,556,400 151,667 1,372,717 (183,683) 88.20% Sales Tax - Public Safety 867,400 83,596 760,386 (107,014) 87.66% Gambling Tax and Leasehold Excise Tax 333,000 74,018 287,120 (45,880) 86.22% Franchise Fees/Business Registration 1,154,000 8,635 950,958 (203,042) 82.41% State Shared Revenues 2,024,528 0 1,617,958 (406,570) 79.92% Fines, Forfeitures and Penalties 1,443,500 81,194 1,047,671 (395,829) 72.58% Community Development 1,491,500 155,867 2,488,476 996,976 166.84% Recreation Program Fees 608,200 28,850 660,284 52,084 108.56% Miscellaneous Department Revenue 95,900 10,086 107,481 11,581 112.08% Miscellaneous & Investment Interest 104,200 4,932 244,261 140,061 234.42% Transfer -in - #101 (street admin) 39,700 0 33,083 (6,617) 83.33% Transfer -in - #105 (h/m tax -CP advertising) 30,000 0 0 (30,000) 0.00% Transfer -in - #402 (storm admin) 13,400 0 11,167 (2,233) 83.33% Total Recurring Revenues 39,721,428 6,656,655 36,920,267 (2,801,161) 92.95% Expenditures City Council 506,869 23,958 343,181 163,688 67.71% City Manager 717,303 50,845 536,633 180,670 74.81% Legal 494,951 33,849 445,868 49,083 90.08% Public Safety 24,703,749 1,875,119 20,567,532 4,136,217 83.26% Deputy City Manager 737,002 67,149 559,284 177,718 75.89% Finance / IT 1,253,080 100,755 1,071,718 181,362 85.53% Human Resources 255,694 20,434 220,803 34,891 86.35% Public Works 966,870 72,679 675,747 291,123 69.89% Community Development - Administration 272,107 20,723 241,219 30,888 88.65% Community Development - Econ Dev 545,157 72,637 397,408 147,749 72.90% Community Development- Dev Svc 1,486,637 137,714 1,278,129 208,508 85.97% Community Development- Building 1,344,165 102,908 1,165,698 178,467 86.72% Parks & Rec - Administration 281,871 19,287 236,172 45,699 83.79% Parks & Rec - Maintenance 832,043 75,181 754,551 77,493 90.69% Parks & Rec - Recreation 241,197 10,921 215,690 25,507 89.42% Parks & Rec - Aquatics 461,200 58,330 451,118 10,082 97.81% Parks & Rec - Senior Center 95,781 7,598 80,744 15,037 84.30% Parks & Rec - CenterPlace 882,223 62,840 768,671 113,552 87.13% General Government 1,587,500 72,307 1,119,365 468,135 70.51% Transfers out - #204 ('16 LTGO bond debt service) 198,734 0 141,953 56,781 71.43% Transfers out - #309 (park capital projects) 230,300 0 162,119 68,181 70.39% Transfers out - #310 (bond pmt>$434.6lease pmt) 72,500 0 60,417 12,083 83.33% Transfers out - #310 (city hallo&m costs) 271,700 0 226,417 45,283 83.33% Transfers out - #311 (Pavement Preservation) 943,800 0 786,500 157,300 83.33% Transfers out - #502 (insurance premium) 325,000 0 270,833 54,167 83.33% Total Recurring Expenditures 39,707,433 2,885,234 32,777,768 6,929,665 82.55% Recurring Revenues Over (Under) Recurring Expenditures 13,995 3,771,420 4,142,499 4,128,504 Page 5 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 #001 - GENERAL FUND - continued NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Budget Year Elapsed = 2016 91.7% 2016 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget November November 30 Remaining % of Budget Revenues Transfers in - #106 (Repymt of Solid Waste) 40,425 0 33,688 (6,738) 83.33% Transfers in - #310 (Lease in excess of bond pyrr 198,734 0 141,953 (56,781) 71.43% FEMA Grant Proceeds 36,400 0 37,459 1,059 102.91 % Total Nonrecurring Revenues 275,559 0 213,100 (62,459) 77.33% Expenditures General Government - IT capital replacements 108,000 0 87,949 20,051 81.43% Community & Econ Dev (comp plan update) 350,000 193,636 326,413 23,587 93.26% Parks & Rec (upgrade dial-up modem at pools) 15,000 0 10,497 4,503 69.98% Parks & Rec (CenterPlace Roof Repairs) 52,000 0 2,996 49,004 5.76% City Manager Severance 453,116 0 242,561 210,555 53.53% Police Department - CAD/RMS 140,281 0 44,463 95,818 31.70% Police Precinct (security camera upgrade) 6,400 0 6,343 57 99.12% Police Precinct (office construction) 25,000 0 7,930 17,070 31.72% Transfers out - #122 (replenish Winter Weather Res 16,418 0 0 16,418 0.00% Transfers out - #309 (P&R Windstorm damage) 37,225 0 0 37,225 0.00% Transfers out - #312 ('14 Fund Bal > 50%) 1,828,723 0 1,828,723 0 100.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 3,032,163 193,636 2,557,876 474,287 84.36% Nonrecurring Revenues Over (Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (2,756,604) (193,636) (2,344,777) 411,827 Excess (Deficit) of Total Revenues Over (Under) Total Expenditures (2,742,609) 3,577,784 1,797,722 4,540,331 Beginning fund balance 26,045,444 26,045,444 Ending fund balance 23,302,835 27,843,166 Page 6 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS #101 - STREET FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Budget Year Elapsed = 2016 91.7% 2016 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget November November 30 Remaining % of Budget Revenues Telephone Utility Tax 2,340,000 166,784 1,733,654 (606,346) 74.09% Motor Vehicle Fuel (Gas) Tax 2,004,900 165,670 1,678,286 (326,614) 83.71 % Multimodal Transportation 0 0 79,592 79,592 0.00% Right -of -Way Maintenance Fee 50,000 0 56,035 6,035 112.07% Investment Interest 3,000 458 4,794 1,794 159.79% Insurance Premiums & Recoveries 0 3,213 15,737 15,737 0.00% Miscellaneous Revenue 10,000 79 95 (9,905) 0.95% Total Recurring Revenues 4,407,900 336,205 3,568,193 (839,707) 80.95% Expenditures Wages / Benefits / Payroll Taxes 734,604 61,713 697,928 36,676 95.01 % Supplies 111,500 1,302 83,842 27,658 75.19% Services & Charges 2,132,754 68,206 1,831,127 301,627 85.86% Snow Operations 430,000 5,653 317,604 112,396 73.86% Intergovernmental Payments 771,000 60,627 656,018 114,982 85.09% Interfund Transfers -out - #001 39,700 0 33,083 6,617 83.33% Interfund Transfers -out - #501 (non -plow vehicle 71,000 0 59,167 11,833 83.33% Interfund Transfers -out - #311 (pavement preservai 67,342 0 56,118 11,224 83.33% Total Recurring Expenditures 4,357,900 197,502 3,734,887 623,013 85.70% Recurring Revenues Over (Under) Recurring Expenditures 50,000 138,703 (166,694) (216,694) NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Grants 0 0 8,174 8,174 0.00% Insurance proceeds (traffic signal cabinet) 46,000 0 43,688 (2,312) 94.97% Miscellaneous 0 0 38 38 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Revenues 46,000 0 51,901 5,901 112.83% Expenditures Capital 0 40 2,005 (2,005) 0.00% Traffic signal cabinet replacement 46,000 36,437 36,437 9,563 79.21 % Signal detection equipment upgrades 20,000 0 23,258 (3,258) 116.29% Maintenance facility storage unit 5,000 0 4,871 129 97.42% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 71,000 36,477 66,570 4,430 93.76% Nonrecurring Revenues Over (Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (25,000) (36,477) (14,670) 10,330 Excess (Deficit) of Total Revenues Over (Under) Total Expenditures 25,000 102,226 (181,363) (206,363) Beginning fund balance 1,443,077 1,443,077 Ending fund balance 1,468,077 1,261,714 Page 7 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS - continued #103 - PATHS & TRAILS Revenues Motor Vehicle Fuel (Gas) Tax Investment Interest Total revenues Expenditures Interfund Transfers -out - #309 Capital Outlay Total expenditures Budget Year Elapsed = 2016 91.7% 2016 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget November November 30 Remaining % of Budget 8,500 699 7,079 (1,421) 83.28% 0 15 133 133 0.00% 8,500 714 7,211 (1,289) 84.84% 9,300 0 0 9,300 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% 9,300 0 0 9,300 0.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures (800) 714 7,211 (10,589) Beginning fund balance 38,054 38,054 Ending fund balance 37,254 45,265 #104 - TOURISM FACILITIES HOTEL/MOTEL TAX FUND Revenues Tourism Facilities Hotel/Motel Tax Investment Interest 377,000 0 36,179 335,417 (41,583) 88.97% 170 1,115 1,115 0.00% Total revenues 377,000 Expenditures Capital Expenditures 0 Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance #105 - HOTEL / MOTEL TAX FUND Revenues Hotel/Motel Tax Investment Interest 36,349 336,532 (40,468) 89.27% 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% 377,000 36,349 336,532 (40,468) 182,347 182,347 559,347 518,878 580,000 55,660 516,502 (63,498) 89.05% 300 113 1,012 712 337.45% Total revenues 580,300 55,773 517,515 (62,785) 89.18% Expenditures Interfund Transfers - #001 30,000 0 0 30,000 0.00% Tourism Promotion 499,350 72,672 382,278 117,072 76.56% Transfers out - #309 (Browns Park Volleyball Court) 60,650 0 0 60,650 0.00% Total expenditures 590,000 72,672 382,278 207,722 64.79% Revenues over (under) expenditures (9,700) (16,899) 135,237 Beginning fund balance 208,702 208,702 Ending fund balance 199,002 343,939 Page 8 (270,507) P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2016 91.7% 2016 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget November November 30 Remaining % of Budget #106 - SOLID WASTE Revenues Sunshine Administrative Fee 125,000 0 93,750 31,250 75.00% Investment Interest 0 19 142 (142) 0.00% Grant Proceeds 53,500 0 17,677 35,823 33.04% Total revenues 178,500 19 111,569 66,931 62.50% Expenditures Interfund Transfers - #001 Education & Contract Administration Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance #107 - PEG FUND Revenues Comcast PEG Contribution Investment Interest 40,425 0 33,688 6,738 83.33% 138,075 22,463 61,783 76,292 44.75% 178,500 0 42,874 22,463 (22,443) 95,470 16,099 42,874 83,030 53.48% 42,874 58,973 (16,099) 90,000 0 59,596 30,404 66.22% 0 103 600 (600) 0.00% Total revenues 90,000 103 60,196 29,804 66.88% Expenditures PEG Reimburse - CMTV 117,000 14,000 47,638 69,362 40.72% PEG COSV Broadcast Capital Outlay 12,500 0 13,174 (674) 105.39% New City Hall Council Chambers 25,000 0 0 25,000 0.00% Total expenditures 154,500 14,000 60,812 93,688 39.36% Revenues over (under) expenditures (64,500) (13,897) (616) (63,884) Beginning fund balance 301,182 301,182 Ending fund balance 236,682 300,566 #120 - CENTER PLACE OPERATING RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest Interfund Transfer 0 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 0 0 0 0 0.00% Expenditures Operations Total expenditures 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 0 0 0 Beginning fund balance 300,000 300,000 Ending fund balance 300,000 300,000 Page 9 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2016 91.7% 2016 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget November November 30 Remaining % of Budget #121 - SERVICE LEVEL STABILIZATION RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest Interfund Transfer Total revenues Expenditures Operations Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance 6,500 0 1,800 17,272 10,772 265.72% 0 0 0 0.00% 6,500 1,800 17,272 10,772 265.72% 0 0 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% 6,500 1,800 17,272 10,772 5,461,789 5,461,789 5,468,289 5,479,061 #122 - WINTER WEATHER RESERVE FUND Revenues Investment Interest 600 158 1,578 978 262.98% Interfund Transfer - #001 16,418 0 0 (16,418) 0.00% Grant Reimbursement for Windstorm Cleanup 38,510 0 38,511 1 100.00% Subtotal revenues 55,528 158 40,089 (15,439) 72.20% Expenditures Snow removal expenses 500,000 0 0 500,000 0.00% Total expenditures 500,000 0 0 500,000 0.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures (444,472) 158 40,089 (515,439) Beginning fund balance 444,472 444,472 Ending fund balance 0 484,562 #123 - CIVIC FACILITIES REPLACEMENT FUND Revenues Investment Interest Interfund Transfer - #001 700 0 696 (4) 99.39% 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 700 0 696 (4) 99.39% Expenditures Transfers out - #311 (pavement preservation) 559,808 0 466,488 93,320 83.33% Total expenditures 559,808 0 466,488 93,320 83.33% Revenues over (under) expenditures (559,108) 0 (465,793) Beginning fund balance 559,108 559,108 Ending fund balance 0 93,316 Page 10 (93,324) P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS #204 - DEBT SERVICE FUND Revenues Spokane Public Facilities District Interfund Transfer -in - #001 Interfund Transfer -in - #301 Interfund Transfer -in - #302 Total revenues Budget Year Elapsed = 2016 91.7% 2016 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget November November 30 Remaining % of Budget 380,300 282,650 380,300 0 100.00% 198,734 0 141,953 (56,781) 71.43% 83,400 0 69,500 (13,900) 83.33% 83,400 0 69,500 (13,900) 83.33% 745,834 282,650 661,253 (84,581) 88.66% Expenditures Debt Service Payments - CenterPlace 380,300 282,650 380,300 0 100.00% Debt Service Payments - Roads 166,800 148,400 166,800 0 100.00% Debt Service Payments -'16 LTGO Bond 198,734 198,734 198,734 0 100.00% Total expenditures 745,834 629,784 745,834 0 100.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 (347,134) (84,581) Beginning fund balance 4,049 4,049 Ending fund balance 4,049 (80,532) Page 11 (84,581) P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS #301 - CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues REET 1 - Taxes Investment Interest Total revenues Budget Year Elapsed = 2016 91.7% 2016 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget November November 30 Remaining % of Budget 1,000,000 126,519 1,001,604 1,604 100.16% 1,000 811 5,573 4,573 557.33% 1,001,000 127,330 1,007,178 6,178 100.62% Expenditures Interfund Transfer -out - #204 83,400 0 69,500 13,900 83.33% Interfund Transfer -out - #303 742,503 0 62,843 679,660 8.46% Interfund Transfer -out - #311 (pavement preserve 365,286 0 0 365,286 0.00% Interfund Transfer -out - #314 20,000 0 0 20,000 0.00% Total expenditures 1,211,189 0 132,343 1,078,846 10.93% Revenues over (under) expenditures (210,189) 127,330 874,834 (1,072,668) Beginning fund balance 1,594,088 1,594,088 Ending fund balance 1,383,899 2,468,923 #302 - SPECIAL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues REET 2 - Taxes Investment Interest 1,000,000 126,519 1,001,604 1,604 100.16% 1,000 863 6,028 5,028 602.78% Total revenues 1,001,000 127,382 1,007,632 6,632 100.66% Expenditures Interfund Transfer -out - #204 83,400 0 69,500 13,900 83.33% Interfund Transfer -out - #303 382,816 0 40,066 342,750 10.47% Interfund Transfer -out - #311 (pavement preserve 365,286 0 0 365,286 0.00% Total expenditures 831,502 0 109,566 721,936 13.18% Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance 169,498 1,728,297 127,382 898,066 1,728,297 1,897,795 2,626,364 Page 12 (715,304) P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2016 91.7% 2016 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget November November 30 Remaining % of Budget #303 STREET CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 8,149,606 3,163 3,830,841 (4,318,765) 47.01% Developer Contribution 275,087 0 0 (275,087) 0.00% Transfer -in - #301 742,503 0 62,843 (679,660) 8.46% Transfer -in - #302 382,816 0 40,066 (342,750) 10.47% Transfer -in - #312 8th & Carnahan 415,000 0 0 (415,000) 0.00% Transfer -in - #312 Euclid Ave Reconst 50,000 0 0 (50,000) 0.00% Transfer -in - #312 Sullivan Rd W Bridge 1,467,779 0 230,539 (1,237,240) 15.71 % Investment Interest 0 0 29 29 0.00% Total revenues 11,482,791 3,163 4,164,317 (7,318,474) 36.27% Expenditures 060 Argonne Rd Corridor Upgrade SRTC 06-31 0 0 4,355 (4,355) 0.00% 123 Mission Ave -Flora to Barker 332,566 1,736 49,916 282,650 15.01 % 141 Sullivan & Euclid PCC 1,981,060 537 60,331 1,920,729 3.05% 142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan 0 1,145 29,030 (29,030) 0.00% 143 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation 0 836 3,016 (3,016) 0.00% 149 Sidewalk Infill 5,000 0 105 4,895 2.10% 155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement 5,237,650 817,460 4,661,782 575,868 89.01 % 156 Mansfield Ave. Connection 5,000 225 738 4,262 14.77% 166 Pines Rd. (SR27) & Grace Ave. Int. Safety 491,331 2,669 104,063 387,268 21.18% 167 Citywide Safety Improvements 228,127 2,841 86,646 141,481 37.98% 201 ITS Infill Project Phase 1 (PE Start 2014) 271,357 3,759 42,822 228,535 15.78% 206 Sprague/Long Sidewalk Project 5,000 0 235 4,765 4.71 % 207 Indiana & Evergreen Transit Access 0 0 102,684 (102,684) 0.00% 221 McDonald Rd Diet (16th to Mission) 559,200 179,834 426,846 132,354 76.33% 222 Citywide Reflective Signal Backplates 40,500 0 0 40,500 0.00% 223 Pines Rd Underpass @ BNSF & Trent 0 2,127 5,404 (5,404) 0.00% 229 32nd Ave Preservation 0 0 433,297 (433,297) 0.00% 233 Broadway Ave. Street Preservation 0 0 56,085 (56,085) 0.00% 234 Seth Woodard Sidewalk Improvements 361,000 262 393,046 (32,046) 108.88% 238 Pines RD Mirabeau Parkway Intersection 350,000 96,633 400,656 (50,656) 114.47% 239 Bowdish Rd & 11th Ave. Sidewalk 400,000 4,097 51,469 348,531 12.87% 247 8th & Carnahan Intersection Improvments 415,000 3,023 8,873 406,127 2.14% 250 9th Ave Sidewalk 0 3,052 3,315 (3,315) 0.00% 251 Euclid Ave Reconstruction Project 50,000 8,735 13,859 36,141 27.72% Construction - Small Works 0 0 0 0 0.00% Contingency 750,000 0 0 750,000 0.00% Total expenditures 11,482,791 1,128,970 6,938,571 4,544,220 Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 (1,125,807) (2,774,254) (11,862,693) Beginning fund balance 75,538 75,538 Ending fund balance 75,538 (2,698,716) Note: Work performed in the Street Capital Projects Fund for preservation projects is for items such as sidewalk upgrades that were bid with the pavement preservation work. Page 13 60.43% P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2016 91.7% 2016 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget November November 30 Remaining % of Budget #309 - PARKS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Grant Proceeds 410,132 0 98,074 (312,058) 23.91% FEMA Grant Proceeds - Windstorm 21,875 0 21,875 0 100.00% Interfund Transfer -in -#001 237,525 0 162,119 (75,406) 68.25% Interfund Transfer -in - #001 (Browns Park Splashps 30,000 0 0 (30,000) 0.00% Interfund Transfer -in - #103 (Appleway Trail - Univ -I 9,300 0 0 (9,300) 0.00% Interfund Transfer -in - #105 (Browns Volleyball Coo 60,650 0 0 (60,650) 0.00% Interfund Transfer -in #312 (Appleway Trail) 72,940 0 0 (72,940) 0.00% Investment Interest 500 0 723 223 144.69% Proceeds for Loss/Impairment of Capital 0 0 7,857 7,857 0.00% Total revenues 842,922 0 290,648 (552,274) 34.48% Expenditures 176 Appleway Trail - University to Pines 9,300 0 25,325 (16,025) 272.31 % 225 Pocket dog park 400 0 379 21 94.71% 227 Appleway Trail - Pines to Evergree 206,297 4,655 131,253 75,044 63.62% 237 Appleway Trail - Sullivan to Corbin 276,775 11,238 27,944 248,831 10.10% 241 Valley Mission Dog Park - Phase II 81,300 65,964 80,685 615 99.24% 242 Browns Park Splashpad 146,500 423 96,887 49,613 66.13% 243 Browns Park Volleyball Court 60,650 0 58,357 2,293 96.22% 244 COSV Park Signs - Phase II 20,500 0 573 19,927 2.80% 245 TV Playground Equipment Replacement 59,100 0 59,554 (454) 100.77% xxx City entry sign 70,000 0 0 70,000 0.00% Total expenditures 930,822 82,280 480,956 449,866 51.67% Revenues over (under) expenditures (87,900) (82,279) (190,308) (1,002,141) Beginning fund balance 98,461 98,461 Ending fund balance 10,561 (91,847) #310 - CIVIC FACILITIES CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Revenues Investment Interest 1,200 437 4,084 2,884 340.32% Interfund Transfer -in - #001 - Future C.H. Bond P 72,500 0 60,417 (12,083) 83.33% Interfund Transfer -in - #001 - Future C.H. O&M 271,700 0 226,417 (45,283) 83.33% Total revenues 345,400 437 290,917 (54,483) 84.23% Expenditures Transfers out - #001 (Lease pymt in excess of bond) 198,734 0 141,953 56,781 71.43% Professional Services 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total expenditures 198,734 0 141,953 56,781 71.43% Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning fund balance Ending fund balance 146,666 1,182, 548 437 148,964 1,182, 548 1,329,214 1,331,513 (111,264) Note: The fund balance includes $839,285.10 paid by the Library District for 2.82 acres at the Balfour Park site. If the District does not succeed in getting a voted bond approved by October 2017 then the City may repurchase this land at the original sale price of $839,285.10. Page 14 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2016 91.7% 2016 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget November November 30 Remaining % of Budget #311 - PAVEMENT PRESERVATION FUND Revenues Interfund Transfers in- #001 943,800 0 786,500 (157,300) 83.33% Interfund Transfers in- #101 67,342 0 56,118 (11,224) 83.33% Interfund Transfers in- #123 559,808 0 466,488 (93,320) 83.33% Interfund Transfers in- #301 365,286 0 0 (365,286) 0.00% Interfund Transfers in- #302 365,286 0 0 (365,286) 0.00% Grant Proceeds 2,063,000 0 34,418 (2,028,582) 1.67% Investment Interest 0 174 6,692 6,692 0.00% Total revenues 4,364,522 174 1,350,217 (3,014,305) 30.94% Expenditures Pre -Project GeoTech Services 50,000 0 0 50,000 0.00% Pavement Preservation 4,500,000 0 0 4,500,000 0.00% 188 Sullivan Rd Preservation Project 0 0 2,131 (2,131) 0.00% 211 Sullivan Trent to Wellesley 0 0 299 (299) 0.00% 218 Montgomery Ave Street Preservation 0 0 120 (120) 0.00% 220 Houk-Sinto-Maxwell Street Preservation 0 0 58 (58) 0.00% 221 McDonald Road Diet 0 294,345 1,167,206 (1,167,206) 0.00% 224 Mullan Rd Street Preservation 0 0 26 (26) 0.00% 226 Appleway Resurfacing Park to Dishman 0 322,848 955,593 (955,593) 0.00% 229 32nd Ave Preservation 0 261 915,303 (915,303) 0.00% 233 Broadway Ave St Presery - Sulliv to Moore 0 431 406,345 (406,345) 0.00% 235 NB Sullivan Rd Pres 0 0 4,009 (4,009) 0.00% 240 Saltese Road Preservation 0 2,106 17,663 (17,663) 0.00% 248 Sprague Street Pres - Sulliv to Corbin 0 211 320 (320) 0.00% 253 Mission - Pines to McDonald 0 214 214 (214) 0.00% 254 Mission - McDonald to Evergreen 0 214 214 (214) 0.00% Total expenditures 4,550,000 620,631 3,469,502 1,080,498 76.25% Revenues over (under) expenditures (185,478) (620,457) (2,119,285) (4,094,803) Beginning fund balance 2,605,219 2,605,219 Ending fund balance 2,419,741 485,934 #312 - CAPITAL RESERVE FUND Revenues Transfers in - #001 ('14 Fund Bal > 50%) Investment Interest 1,828,723 0 1,828,723 0 100.00% 0 2,032 11,101 11,101 0.00% Total revenues 1,828,723 2,032 1,839,824 11,101 100.61% Expenditures Transfers out - #303 1,932,779 0 230,539 1,702,240 11.93% Transfers out - #309 72,940 0 0 72,940 0.00% Transfers out - #314 500,000 0 0 500,000 0.00% Total expenditures 2,505,719 0 230,539 2,275,180 9.20% Revenues over (under) expenditures (676,996) 2,032 1,609,285 (2,264,079) Beginning fund balance 4,576,597 4,576,597 Ending fund balance 3,899,601 6,185,881 Page 15 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS - continued Budget Year Elapsed = 2016 91.7% 2016 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget November November 30 Remaining % of Budget #313 - CITY HALL CONSTRUCTION FUND Revenues 2016 LTGO Bond Proceeds - Par Value 7,275,000 0 7,275,000 0 100.00% 2016 LTGO Bond Proceeds - Premium 671,088 0 671,088 (0) 100.00% Investment Interest 0 2,703 20,941 (20,941) 0.00% Total revenues Expenditures Capital Outlay - City Hall 2016 LTGO Bond Issue Costs 7,946,088 2,703 7,967,029 (20,941) 100.26% 7,294,400 1,353,292 4,612,920 2,681,480 63.24% 96,515 0 96,515 0 100.00% Total expenditures 7,390,915 1,353,292 4,709,435 Revenues over (under) expenditures 555,173 (1,350,589) 3,257,593 Beginning fund balance 4,789,046 4,789,046 Ending fund balance 5,344,219 8,046,639 2,681,480 (2,702,420) 63.72% #314 - RAILROAD GRADE SEPARATION PROJECTS FUND Revenues Interfund Transfers in- #301 20,000 0 0 20,000 0.00% Interfund Transfers in- #312 500,000 0 0 500,000 0.00% Grant Proceeds 230,000 0 0 230,000 0.00% Investment Interest 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total revenues 750,000 0 0 750,000 0.00% Expenditures 143 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation 250,000 0 0 250,000 0.00% 223 Pines Rd Underpass 500,000 0 0 500,000 0.00% Total expenditures 750,000 0 0 750,000 0.00% Revenues over (under) expenditures 0 0 0 0 Beginning fund balance 0 0 Ending fund balance 0 0 Page 16 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 ENTERPRISE FUNDS #402 - STORMWATER FUND RECURRING ACTIVITY Budget Year Elapsed = 2016 91.7% 2016 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget November November 30 Remaining % of Budget Revenues Stormwater Management Fees 1,870,000 687,589 1,784,122 (85,878) 95.41% Investment Interest 1,500 757 5,931 4,431 395.42% Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total Recurring Revenues 1,871,500 688,346 1,790,053 (81,447) 95.65% Expenditures Wages / Benefits / Payroll Taxes 514,132 39,244 408,389 105,743 79.43% Supplies 15,900 537 11,607 4,293 73.00% Services & Charges 1,113,683 64,109 880,601 233,082 79.07% Intergovernmental Payments 67,000 0 30,564 36,436 45.62% Vehicle Rentals - #501 11,000 0 0 11,000 0.00% Interfund Transfers -out - #001 13,400 0 11,167 2,233 83.33% Total Recurring Expenditures 1,735,115 103,890 1,342,328 Recurring Revenues Over (Under) Recurring Expenditures 136,385 584,456 447,726 311,341 392,787 77.36% NONRECURRING ACTIVITY Revenues Grant Proceeds 223,800 47,553 96,391 (127,409) 43.07% Developer Contributions 0 0 0 0 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Revenues 223,800 47,553 96,391 (127,409) 43.07% Expenditures Capital - various projects 151,100 0 82,360 68,740 54.51 % Maintenance Facility Storage Unit 5,000 0 4,871 129 97.42% Windstorm Related Sweeping 50,000 0 50,000 0 100.00% 193 Effectiveness Study 175,000 13,807 77,546 97,454 44.31% 228 Pines Rd Mirabeau Parkway Intersection 0 0 6,848 (6,848) 0.00% Total Nonrecurring Expenditures 381,100 13,807 221,625 159,475 58.15% Nonrecurring Revenues Over (Under) Nonrecurring Expenditures (157,300) 33,746 (125,233) 32,067 Excess (Deficit) of Total Revenues Over (Under) Total Expenditures (20,915) 618,202 322,492 343,407 Beginning working capital 1,896,925 1,896,925 Ending working capital 1,876,010 2,219,417 Note: Work performed in the Stormwater Fund for preservation projects is for stormwater improvements that were bid with the pavement preservation work. #403 - AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA Revenues Spokane County 400,000 0 172,248 (227,752) 43.06% Grant DOE - Sprague Park to University LID 0 0 0 0 0.00% Grant revenue 0 0 0 0 0.00% Investment Interest 0 242 1,832 1,832 0.00% Total revenues 400,000 242 174,079 (225,921) 43.52% Expenditures 198 Sprague Park to University LID 0 0 0 (0) 0.00% 221 McDonald Road Diet 425,000 9,204 324,028 100,972 76.24% 234 Seth Woodard Sidewalk Improvements 0 0 38,087 (38,087) 0.00% Total expenditures 425,000 9,204 362,115 62,885 85.20% Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning working capital Ending working capital (25,000) (8,962) (188,035) 921,660 921,660 896,660 733,624 Page 17 (288,806) P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Budget to Actual Comparison of Revenues and Expenditures For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS Budget Year Elapsed = 2016 91.7% 2016 Budget Actual Actual thru Budget November November 30 Remaining % of Budget #501 - ER&R FUND Revenues Interfund vehicle lease - #001 24,000 0 20,000 (4,000) 83.33% Interfund vehicle lease - #101 31,000 0 25,833 (5,167) 83.33% Interfund vehicle lease (plow replace) 40,000 0 33,333 (6,667) 83.33% Interfund vehicle lease - #402 11,000 0 9,167 (1,833) 83.33% Investment Interest 1,000 406 3,497 2,497 349.66% Total revenues 107,000 406 91,830 (15,170) 85.82% Expenditures Vehicle Acquisitions 105,000 0 103,928 1,072 98.98% Snow Plow Replacement 225,000 0 0 225,000 0.00% Total expenditures 330,000 0 103,928 226,072 31.49% Revenues over (under) expenditures (223,000) 406 (12,098) (241,243) Beginning working capital 1,248,997 1,248,997 Ending working capital 1,025,997 1,236,899 #502 - RISK MANAGEMENT FUND Revenues Investment Interest 0 60 256 256 0.00% Interfund Transfer - #101 0 0 0 0 0.00% Interfund Transfer -#001 325,000 0 270,833 (54,167) 83.33% Total revenues 325,000 60 271,090 (53,910) 83.41% Expenditures Auto & Property Insurance Unemployment Claims Miscellaneous Total expenditures Revenues over (under) expenditures Beginning working capital Ending working capital 325,000 0 277,298 47,702 85.32% 0 0 6,751 (6,751) 0.00% 0 0 0 0 0.00% 325,000 0 284,049 40,951 87.40% 0 194,383 194,383 60 (12,959) 194,383 181,424 (94,861) SUMMARY FOR ALL FUNDS Total of Revenues for all Funds 78,983,495 8,370,255 62,846,997 Per revenue status report 78,983,495 8,370,255 62,846,997 Difference 0 0 (0) Total of Expenditures for all Funds Per expenditure status report 82,954,325 7,363,840 59,414,892 82,954,325 7,363,840 59,414,892 0 0 (0) Total Capital expenditures (included in total expenditures) 26,232,294 3,230,853 16,280,570 Page 18 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Investment Report For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 Beginning Deposits Withdrawls Interest Ending 001 General Fund 101 Street Fund 103 Trails & Paths 104 Tourism Facilities Hotel/Motel 105 Hotel/Motel 106 Solid Waste Fund 107 PEG Fund 120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve 121 Service Level Stabilization Reserve 122 Winter Weather Reserve 123 Civic Facilities Replacement 301 Capital Projects 302 Special Capital Projects 303 Street Capital Projects Fund 309 Parks Capital Project 310 Civic Buildings Capital Projects 311 Pavement Preservation 312 Capital Reserve Fund 313 City Hall Construction Fund 402 Stormwater Management 403 Aquifer Protection Fund 501 Equipment Rental & Replacement 502 Risk Management *Local Government Investment Pool 12/12/2016 $ 52,208,747.66 $ 2,395,727.14 (3,300,000.00) 20,002.68 3,015,270.10 $ 2,007,483.61 $ 57,231,501.37 0.00 2,000,000.00 4,395,727.14 0.00 (2,010,089.28) (5,310,089.28) 0.00 2,605.70 22,608.38 $ 51,324,477.48 $ 3,015,270.10 $ 2,000,000.03 $ 56,339,747.61 matures: 6/28/2017 rate: 0.45% 11/15/2017 0.40% Balance Earnings UMPQUA Total LGIP* BB CD CD(') Investments $ 52,208,747.66 $ 2,395,727.14 (3,300,000.00) 20,002.68 3,015,270.10 $ 2,007,483.61 $ 57,231,501.37 0.00 2,000,000.00 4,395,727.14 0.00 (2,010,089.28) (5,310,089.28) 0.00 2,605.70 22,608.38 $ 51,324,477.48 $ 3,015,270.10 $ 2,000,000.03 $ 56,339,747.61 matures: 6/28/2017 rate: 0.45% 11/15/2017 0.40% Balance Earnings Budget Current Period Year to date $ 27,285,758.51 1,175,060.92 38,154.23 437,362.30 289,905.67 50,008.38 265,147.38 0.00 4,618,297.98 406,056.98 0.00 2,081,053.83 2,213,760.91 0.00 959.03 1,122, 331.45 447,187.11 5,214,076.51 6,935,831.50 1,942,805.88 620,485.08 1,042,581.97 152,921.99 $ 11,285.17 457.96 14.87 170.45 112.98 19.49 103.34 0.00 1,799.89 158.25 0.00 811.05 862.77 0.00 0.37 437.41 174.28 2,032.08 2,703.10 757.17 241.82 406.33 59.60 $ 111,773.72 4,793.57 132.81 1,115.06 1,012.36 142.41 599.54 0.00 17,271.80 1,577.89 695.73 5,573.25 6,027.83 28.76 723.46 4,083.88 6,691.93 11,100.64 20,940.67 5,931.25 1,831.74 3,496.59 256.46 $ 45,000.00 3,000.00 0.00 0.00 300.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,500.00 600.00 700.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 0.00 500.00 1,200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,500.00 0.00 1,000.00 0.00 $ 56,339,747.61 $ 22,608.38 $ 205,801.35 $ 62, 300.00 (1) CD was previously at Banner Bank. During November, the CD was transferred to Umpqua Bank after staff performed a rate comparison for the investment. Activity shows the transfer from Banner to Umpqua during this period. Page 19 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Council Monthly Reports\2016\2016 11 30 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Sales Tax Receipts For the Eleven -Month Period Ended November 30, 2016 Month Received 2015 2016 February 1,962,820.56 2,109,906.28 March 1,358,307.78 1,488,699.93 April 1,401,618.35 1,555,221.97 May 1,655,903.08 1,852,586.82 June 1,557,740.48 1,768,797.14 July 1,886,262.22 1,848,301.11 August 1,944,085.56 2,013,841.16 September 1,894,514.58 1,963,131.36 October 1,765,807.42 2,044,241.64 November 1,836,885.94 2,058,260.31 17,263,945.97 18,702,987.72 December 1,683,925.38 January 1,633,949.35 20,581,820.70 18,702,987.72 12/12/2016 Difference 147,085.72 130, 392.15 153,603.62 196,683.74 211, 056.66 (37, 961.11) 69,755.60 68,616.78 278,434.22 221, 374.37 7.49% 9.60% 10.96% 11.88% 13.55% (2.01 %) 3.59% 3.62% 15.77% 12.05% 1,439,041.75 8.34% Sales tax receipts reported here reflect remittances for general sales tax, criminal justice sales tax and public safety tax. The sales tax rate for retail sales transacted within the boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley is 8.7%. The tax that is paid by a purchaser at the point of sale is remitted by the vendor to the Washington State Department of Revenue who then remits the taxes back to the various agencies that have imposed the tax. The allocation of the total 8.7% tax rate to the agencies is as follows: - State of Washington 6.50% - City of Spokane Valley 0.85% - Spokane County 0.15% - Spokane Public Facilities District 0.10% * - Criminal Justice 0.10% - Public Safety 0.10% * 2.20% local tax - Juvenile Jail 0.10% * - Mental Health 0.10% * - Law Enforcement Communications 0.10% * - Spokane Transit Authority 0.60% * 8.70% * Indicates voter approved sales taxes In addition to the .85% reported above that the City receives, we also receive a portion of the Criminal Justice and Public Safety sales taxes. The distribution of those taxes is computed as follows: Criminal Justice: The tax is assessed county -wide and of the total collected, the State distributes 10% of the receipts to Spokane County, with the remainder allocated on a per capita basis to the County and the cities within the County. Public Safety: The tax is assessed county -wide and of the total collected, the State distributes 60% of the receipts to Spokane County, with the remainder allocated on a per capita basis to the cities within the County. Page 20 1 4 I CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Sales Tax Collections - October For the years 2007 through 2016 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Sales Tax\2016\sales tax collections 2016 2007 1 2008 1 2009 1 2010 1 2011 1 2012 1 2013 1 2014 1 2015 1 2016 January 1,759,531 February 1,155,947 March 1,196,575 April 1,479,603 May 1,353,013 June 1,428,868 July 1,579,586 August 1,516,324 September 1,546,705 October 1,601,038 1,729,680 1,129, 765 1,219,611 1,423,459 1,243,259 1,386,908 1,519,846 1,377,943 1,364,963 1,344,217 1,484,350 1,098,575 1,068,811 1,134, 552 1,098,054 1,151,772 1,309,401 1,212, 531 1,227,813 1,236,493 1,491,059 963,749 1,018,468 1,184,137 1,102, 523 1,123, 907 1,260,873 1,211,450 1,191,558 1,269,505 1,460,548 990,157 1,015,762 1,284,180 1,187, 737 1,248,218 1,332,834 1,279,500 1,294,403 1,291,217 1,589,887 1,009,389 1,067,733 1,277,621 1,174, 962 1,290,976 1,302,706 1,299,678 1,383,123 1,358,533 1,671,269 1,133, 347 1,148, 486 1,358,834 1,320,449 1,389,802 1,424,243 1,465,563 1,466,148 1,439,321 1,677,887 1,170, 640 1,201,991 1,448,539 1,400,956 1,462,558 1,545,052 1,575,371 1,552,736 1,594,503 1,732,299 1,197, 323 1,235,252 1,462,096 1,373,710 1,693,461 1,718,428 1,684,700 1,563,950 1,618, 821 1,863,225 1,316,682 1,378,300 1,640,913 1,566,178 1,641,642 1,776,653 1,746,371 1,816,923 1,822,998 11/18/2016 2016 to 2015 Difference ok 130,926 7.56% 119,359 9.97% 143,048 11.58% 178,817 12.23% 192,468 14.01% (51,819) (3.06%) 58,225 3.39% 61,671 3.66% 252,973 16.18% 204,177 12.61% Collected to date 14,617,190 13,739,651 12,022,352 11,817,229 12,384,556 12,754,608 13,817,462 14,630,233 15,280,040 16,569,885 1,289,845 8.44% November 1,443,843 1,292,327 1,155,647 1,139,058 1,217,933 1,349,580 1,362,021 1,426,254 1,487,624 0 December 1,376,434 1,129,050 1,070,245 1,141,012 1,247,920 1,323,189 1,408,134 1,383,596 1,441,904 0 Total Collections 17,437,467 16,161,028 14,248,244 14,097,299 14,850,409 15,427,377 16,587,617 17,440,083 18,209,568 16,569,885 Budget Estimate 17,466,800 17,115,800 17,860,000 14,410,000 14,210,000 14,210,000 15,250,000 16,990,000 17,628,400 18,480,500 Actual over (under) budg (29,333) (954,772) (3,611,756) (312,701) 640,409 1,217,377 1,337,617 450,083 581,168 (1,910,615) Total actual collections as a % of total budget 99.83% 94.42% 79.78% 97.83% 104.51 % 108.57% 108.77% 102.65% 103.30% n/a % change in annual total collected 5.36% (7.32%) (11.84%) (1.06%) 5.34% 3.89% 7.52% 5.14% 4.41% n/a % of budget collected through October 83.69% 80.27% 67.31% 82.01% 87.15% 89.76% 90.61% 86.11% 86.68% 89.66% % of actual total collected through October 83.83% 85.02% 84.38% 83.83% 83.40% 82.68% 83.30% 83.89% 83.91% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of October 18,000,000 16,000,000 14,000,000 12,000,000 10,000,000 8,000,000 6,000,000 4,000,000 2,000,000 0 October 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 October September a August ■ July ■ June ■ May ■ April ■ March ■ February Page 21 1 1 • • i CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Hotel/Motel Tax Receipts through - October Actual for the years 2007 through 2016 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Lodging Tax\2016\105 hotel motel tax 2016 2007 1 2008 1 2009 1 2010 1 2011 1 2012 1 2013 1 2014 1 2015 1 2016 January 25,138 February 25,311 March 29,190 April 37,951 May 31,371 June 36,267 July 56,282 August 51,121 September 57,260 October 43,970 Total Collections 11/30/2016 2016 to 2015 Difference 28,947 23,280 22,707 22,212 21,442 24,185 25,425 27,092 31,887 4,795 17.70% 24,623 23,284 23,417 22,792 21,549 25,975 26,014 27,111 27,773 662 2.44% 27,510 25,272 24,232 24,611 25,655 27,739 29,384 32,998 34,330 1,332 4.04% 40,406 36,254 39,463 38,230 52,130 40,979 48,246 50,455 52,551 2,096 4.15% 36,829 32,589 34,683 33,791 37,478 40,560 41,123 44,283 50,230 5,947 13.43% 46,660 40,415 39,935 41,403 43,971 47,850 52,618 56,975 55,060 (1,915) (3.36%) 50,421 43,950 47,385 49,312 52,819 56,157 61,514 61,809 65,007 3,198 5.17% 50,818 50,147 54,923 57,452 57,229 63,816 70,384 72,697 73,700 1,003 1.38% 60,712 50,818 59,419 58,908 64,299 70,794 76,100 74,051 70,305 (3,746) (5.06%) 38,290 36,784 41,272 39,028 43,699 43,836 45,604 49,880 55,660 5,780 11.59% 393,860 405,217 362,792 387,438 387,740 420,271 441,892 476,411 497,351 516,503 19,152 3.85% November 36,341 35,583 34,055 34,330 37,339 39,301 42,542 39,600 42,376 0 December 31,377 26,290 27,131 26,777 32,523 30,432 34,238 33,256 41,510 0 Total Collections 461,578 467,089 423,978 448,545 457,603 490,004 518,672 549,267 581,237 516,503 Budget Estimate 400,000 400,000 512,000 380,000 480,000 430,000 490,000 530,000 550,000 580,000 Actual over (under) budg 61,578 67,089 (88,022) 68,545 (22,397) 60,004 28,672 19,267 31,237 (63,497) Total actual collections as a % of total budget 115.39% 116.77% 82.81% 118.04% 95.33% 113.95% 105.85% 103.64% 105.68% n/a % change in annual total collected 10.67% 1.19% (9.23%) 5.79% 2.02% 7.08% 5.85% 5.90% 5.82% n/a % of budget collected through October 98.47% 101.30% 70.86% 101.96% 80.78% 97.74% 90.18% 89.89% 90.43% 89.05% % of actual total collected through October 85.33% 86.75% 85.57% 86.38% 84.73% 85.77% 85.20% 86.74% 85.57% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of October 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 October 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 • October September • August ■ July • June • May ■ April • March • February • January Page 22 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 1st and 2nd 1/4% REET Collections through October Actual for the years 2007 through 2016 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\REET\2016\301 and 302 REET for 2016 2007 1 2008 1 2009 1 2010 1 2011 1 2012 1 2013 1 2014 1 2015 1 2016 January 228,897 February 129,920 March 263,835 April 211,787 May 222,677 June 257,477 July 323,945 August 208,040 September 165,287 October 206,443 145,963 159,503 133,513 128,367 158,506 178,203 217,943 133,906 131,240 355,656 55,281 45,181 73,307 81,156 77,464 105,021 122,530 115,830 93,862 113,961 59,887 64,122 86,204 99,507 109,625 105,680 84,834 72,630 75,812 93,256 64,128 36,443 95,880 79,681 124,692 81,579 79,629 129,472 68,020 61,396 46,359 56,115 71,730 86,537 111,627 124,976 101,049 106,517 63,517 238,095 56,898 155,226 72,172 90,377 116,165 139,112 128,921 117,150 174,070 117,806 61,192 67,049 81,724 105,448 198,870 106,676 208,199 172,536 152,323 123,505 96,141 103,508 165,868 236,521 165,748 347,421 217,375 202,525 179,849 128,833 104,446 83,583 220,637 205,654 192,806 284,897 248,899 231,200 178,046 253,038 Collected to date 2,218,308 1,742,801 883,592 851,558 12/2/2016 2016 to 2015 Difference 8,306 8.64% (19,925) (19.25%) 54,769 33.02% (30,867) (13.05%) 27,058 16.32% (62,524) (18.00%) 31,525 14.50% 28,675 14.16% (1,803) (1.00%) 124,205 96.41% 820,921 1,006,521 1,167,897 1,277,521 1,843,789 2,003,208 159,419 8.65% November 191,806 147,875 133,265 72,021 74,753 104,886 78,324 172,227 129,870 0 December 179,568 96,086 71,366 38,725 65,077 74,300 75,429 117,682 157,919 0 Total distributed by Spokane County 2,589,681 1,986,762 1,088,222 962,304 960,751 1,185,707 1,321,650 1,567,429 2,131,578 2,003,208 Budget estimate 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 760,000 800,000 950,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 1,600,000 2,000,000 Actual over (under) budget 589,681 (13,238) (911,778) 202,304 160,751 235,707 321,650 367,429 531,578 3,208 Total actual collections as a % of total budget 129.48% 99.34% 54.41% 126.62% 120.09% 124.81% 132.17% 130.62% 133.22% n/a % change in annual total collected 5.22% (23.28%) (45.23%) (11.57%) (0.16%) 23.41% 11.47% 18.60% 35.99% n/a % of budget collected through October 110.92% 87.14% 44.18% 112.05% 102.62% 105.95% 116.79% 106.46% 115.24% 100.16% % of actual total collected through October 85.66% 87.72% 81.20% 88.49% 85.45% 84.89% 88.37% 81.50% 86.50% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of October 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 October 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 October September • August ■ July ■ June • May ▪ April March • February January Page 23 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Debt Capacity\2016\debt capacity 2016 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Debt Capacity 2015 Assessed Value for 2016 Property Taxes 7,748,275,097 Voted (UTGO) Nonvoted (LTGO) Voted park Voted utility 1.00% of assessed value 1.50% of assessed value 2.50% of assessed value 2.50% of assessed value Maximum Outstanding Remaining Debt as of Debt ok Capacity 12/31/2016 Capacity Utilized 77, 482, 751 116, 224,126 193, 706, 877 193, 706, 877 581,120, 631 0 77,482,751 13, 260, 000 102, 964,126 0 193, 706, 877 0 193, 706, 877 13,260,000 567,860,631 0.00% 11.41% 0.00% 0.00% 2.28% Bonds Repaid 2014 LTGO Bonds 12/1/2014 12/1/2015 12/1/2016 225,000 175,000 185,000 135,000 125,000 130,000 360,000 300,000 315,000 0 0 75,000 360,000 300,000 390,000 585,000 390,000 975,000 75,000 1,050,000 12/1/2017 190,000 130,000 320,000 12/1/2018 230,000 135,000 365,000 12/1/2019 255,000 140,000 395,000 12/1/2020 290,000 140,000 430,000 12/1/2021 320,000 145,000 465,000 12/1/2022 350,000 150,000 500,000 12/1/2023 390,000 155,000 545,000 12/1/2024 430,000 0 430,000 12/1/2025 465,000 0 465,000 12/1/2026 505,000 0 505,000 12/1/2027 395,000 0 395,000 12/1/2028 300,000 0 300,000 12/1/2029 245,000 0 245,000 12/1/2030 225,000 0 225,000 Bonds 12/1/2031 180,000 0 180,000 Remaining 12/1/2032 130,000 0 130,000 12/1/2033 165,000 0 165,000 12/1/2034 0 0 0 12/1/2035 0 0 0 12/1/2036 0 0 0 12/1/2037 0 0 0 12/1/2038 0 0 0 12/1/2039 0 0 0 12/1/2040 0 0 0 12/1/2041 0 0 0 12/1/2042 0 0 0 12/1/2043 0 0 0 12/1/2044 0 0 0 12/1/2045 0 0 0 150,000 470,000 155,000 520,000 160,000 555,000 165,000 595,000 170,000 635,000 175,000 675,000 180,000 725,000 185,000 615,000 195,000 660,000 00,000 705,000 05,000 600,000 15,000 515,000 2'0,000 465,000 2-5,000 450,000 23.,000 415,000 241,000 370,000 250 000 415,000 260,100 260,000 270,000 270,000 280,110 280,000 290,010 290,000 305,000 305,000 315,000 315,000 330,000 330,000 340,000 340,000 355,000 355,000 365,000 365,000 375,000 375,000 390,000 390,000 5,065,000 995,000 6,060,000 7,200,000 13,260,000 5,650,000 1,385,000 7,035,000 7,275,000 14,310,000 Page 24 12/8/2016 Road & LTGO Bonds Period Street 2016 LTGO Grand Ending CenterPlace Improvements Total Bonds Total 12/1/2014 12/1/2015 12/1/2016 225,000 175,000 185,000 135,000 125,000 130,000 360,000 300,000 315,000 0 0 75,000 360,000 300,000 390,000 585,000 390,000 975,000 75,000 1,050,000 12/1/2017 190,000 130,000 320,000 12/1/2018 230,000 135,000 365,000 12/1/2019 255,000 140,000 395,000 12/1/2020 290,000 140,000 430,000 12/1/2021 320,000 145,000 465,000 12/1/2022 350,000 150,000 500,000 12/1/2023 390,000 155,000 545,000 12/1/2024 430,000 0 430,000 12/1/2025 465,000 0 465,000 12/1/2026 505,000 0 505,000 12/1/2027 395,000 0 395,000 12/1/2028 300,000 0 300,000 12/1/2029 245,000 0 245,000 12/1/2030 225,000 0 225,000 Bonds 12/1/2031 180,000 0 180,000 Remaining 12/1/2032 130,000 0 130,000 12/1/2033 165,000 0 165,000 12/1/2034 0 0 0 12/1/2035 0 0 0 12/1/2036 0 0 0 12/1/2037 0 0 0 12/1/2038 0 0 0 12/1/2039 0 0 0 12/1/2040 0 0 0 12/1/2041 0 0 0 12/1/2042 0 0 0 12/1/2043 0 0 0 12/1/2044 0 0 0 12/1/2045 0 0 0 150,000 470,000 155,000 520,000 160,000 555,000 165,000 595,000 170,000 635,000 175,000 675,000 180,000 725,000 185,000 615,000 195,000 660,000 00,000 705,000 05,000 600,000 15,000 515,000 2'0,000 465,000 2-5,000 450,000 23.,000 415,000 241,000 370,000 250 000 415,000 260,100 260,000 270,000 270,000 280,110 280,000 290,010 290,000 305,000 305,000 315,000 315,000 330,000 330,000 340,000 340,000 355,000 355,000 365,000 365,000 375,000 375,000 390,000 390,000 5,065,000 995,000 6,060,000 7,200,000 13,260,000 5,650,000 1,385,000 7,035,000 7,275,000 14,310,000 Page 24 12/8/2016 ■ CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Motor Fuel (Gas) Tax Collections - For the years 2007 through 2016 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\MVFT\2016\motor vehicle fuel tax collections 2016 2007 1 2008 1 2009 1 2010 1 2011 1 2012 1 2013 1 2014 1 2015 1 2016 January 172,711 February 162,079 March 156,194 April 175,010 May 173,475 June 183,410 July 178,857 August 183,815 September 191,884 October 180,570 Collected to date 165,698 149,799 159,316 165,574 162,281 176,085 166,823 171,690 176,912 165,842 133,304 155,832 146,264 161,117 156,109 173,954 169,756 179,012 175,965 163,644 161,298 145,869 140,486 161,721 158,119 168,146 164,221 176,869 175,067 164,475 154,792 146,353 141,849 165,019 154,700 158,351 165,398 153,361 173,820 158,889 159,607 135,208 144,297 153,546 144,670 159,827 160,565 164,050 171,651 153,022 146,145 145,998 135,695 156,529 151,595 167,479 155,348 173,983 195,397 133,441 152,906 148,118 131,247 156,269 156,850 161,965 157,805 172,308 173,299 160,539 152,598 145,455 140,999 157,994 156,259 164,872 168,205 186,277 174,505 161,520 11/30/2016 2016 to 2015 Difference ok 163,918 11,320 7.42% 163,037 17,582 12.09% 145,537 4,538 3.22% 167,304 9,310 5.89% 171,829 15,570 9.96% 157,737 (7,135) (4.33%) 177,427 9,222 5.48% 177,567 (8,710) (4.68%) 194,640 20,135 11.54% 166,369 4,849 3.00% 1,758,005 1,660,020 1,614,957 1,616,271 1,572,532 1,546,443 1,561,610 1,571,306 1,608,684 1,685,365 76,681 4.77% November 181,764 193,360 167,340 168,477 160,461 162,324 164,303 165,871 181,771 0 December 159,750 142,230 144,376 143,257 124,714 138,223 142,140 141,298 153,338 0 Total Collections 2,099,519 1,995,610 1,926,673 1,928,005 1,857,707 1,846,990 1,868,053 1,878,475 1,943,793 1,685,365 Budget Estimate 2,000,000 2,150,000 2,050,000 1,900,000 1,875,000 1,897,800 1,861,100 1,858,600 1,858,600 2,004,900 Actual over (under) budg 99,519 (154,390) (123,327) 28,005 (17,293) (50,810) 6,953 19,875 85,193 (319,535) Total actual collections as a % of total budget 104.98% 92.82% 93.98% 101.47% 99.08% 97.32% 100.37% 101.07% 104.58% n/a % change in annual total collected 6.25% (4.95%) (3.45%) 0.07% (3.65%) (0.58%) 1.14% 0.56% 3.48% n/a % of budget collected through October 87.90% 77.21% 78.78% 85.07% 83.87% 81.49% 83.91% 84.54% 86.55% 84.06% % of actual total collected through October 83.73% 83.18% 83.82% 83.83% 84.65% 83.73% 83.60% 83.65% 82.76% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of October 2,000,000 1,800,000 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 October 1 1 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 October September a August ■ July • June • May ■ April • March ■ February Page 25 1 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WA Telephone Utility Tax Collections - For the years 2009 through 2016 P:\Finance\Finance Activity Reports\Tax Revenue\Telephone Tax\2016\telephone utility tax collections 2016 2009 1 2010 1 2011 1 2012 1 2013 1 2014 1 2015 1 2016 January 128,354 February 282,773 March 230,721 April 275,775 May 242,115 June 239,334 July 269,631 August 260,408 September 249,380 October 252,388 Collected to date 234,622 266,041 264,175 254,984 255,056 251,880 250,593 246,261 240,111 238,500 241,357 230,366 245,539 238,561 236,985 239,013 244,191 349,669 241,476 237,111 193,818 261,074 234,113 229,565 227,469 234,542 226,118 228,789 227,042 225,735 217,478 216,552 223,884 214,618 129,270 293,668 213,078 211,929 210,602 205,559 210,777 205,953 208,206 206,038 210,010 210,289 205,651 205,645 199,193 183,767 177,948 212,845 174,738 214,431 187,856 187,412 190,984 185,172 183,351 183,739 182,167 173,971 177,209 171,770 174,512 170,450 174,405 171,909 170,476 166,784 12/8/2016 2016 to 2015 Difference ok 4,219 2.37% (38,874) (18.26%) 2,471 1.41% (42,661) (19.89%) (13,344) (7.10%) (16,962) (9.05%) (16,579) (8.68%) (13,263) (7.16%) (12,875) (7.02%) (16,955) (9.23%) 2,430,879 2,502,223 2,504,268 2,288,265 2,136,638 2,045,529 1,898,476 1,733,653 (164,823) (8.68%) November 254,819 247,848 240,246 225,319 212,947 213,454 175,235 0 December 368,775 236,065 236,449 221,883 213,097 202,077 183,472 0 Total Collections 3,054,473 2,986,136 2,980,963 2,735,467 2,562,682 2,461,060 2,257,183 1,733,653 Budget Estimate 2,500,000 2,800,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 2,900,000 2,750,000 2,565,100 2,340,000 Actual over (under) budg 554,473 186,136 (19,037) (264,533) (337,318) (288,940) (307,917) (606,347) Total actual collections as a % of total budget 122.18% 106.65% 99.37% 91.18% 88.37% 89.49% 88.00% n/a % change in annual total collected n/a (2.24%) (0.17%) (8.24%) (6.32%) (3.97%) (8.28%) n/a % of budget collected through October 97.24% 89.37% 83.48% 76.28% 73.68% 74.38% 74.01% 74.09% % of actual total collected through October 79.58% 83.79% 84.01% 83.65% 83.38% 83.12% 84.11% n/a Chart Reflecting History of Collections through the Month of October 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000,000 500,000 0 October 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 ■ October ■ September ■ August ■ July ■ June ■ May ■ April ■ March ■ February ■ January Page 26 Mark Werner Chief of Police Spokane Valley Police Department Accredited Since 2011 Services provided in partnership with the Spokane County Sheriff's Office and the Community, Dedicated to Your Safety. Ozzie Knezovich Sheriff TO: Mark Calhoun, City Manager FROM: Mark Werner, Chief of Police DATE: December 8, 2016 RE: Monthly Report November 2016 On October 4th, 2016, we went live with a new Mobile and Records computer system called New World from Tyler Technologies. This new system has built-in logic to finally enable the Sheriff's Office and Spokane Valley Police to submit our stats to the state, who in turn sends the data to the FBI, using NIBRS (National Incident -Based Reporting System) standards. Because we are in this transition between the old system and new, the programs that would give us the normal stats in this report are still being written by programmers; therefore, we are unable to provide that information for November. It is expected that we will have data at the beginning of the year, at which time, we'll resume including our monthly stats in our report. ADMINISTRATIVE: In early November, Chief Werner attended a meeting at Lutheran Community Services Northwest reference their Victim Advocacy program. Chief Werner met in early November with some local businesses in the area of University and Sprague along with leaders from New Life Church to discuss recent incidents of crime in the area and what they can do individually and collectively to try to prevent future incidents. The monthly Spokane Regional Law & Justice Council meeting was held in mid-November, which Chief Werner along with other community leaders attended. Sheriff Knezovich and Chief Werner attended the semi-annual Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs (WASPC) Conference in Lake Chelan in mid-November. Each attended various committee meetings and general session speakers during the conference spanning from the Medical Marijuana Program to Force Encounters Analysis: Understanding Human Performance in Critical Incidents. Page 1 Finally, the month ended with Chief Werner attending the Bureau of Justice Grant -Spokane Regional Implementation Discussion meeting, which was held at the Spokane Regional Health District offices. SHERIFF'S COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING EFFORT (SCOPE): In the month of November, S.C.O.P.E. participated in: • Candle Light Vigil/Underage Drinking • East Valley Community Coalition Meeting; Awareness- GSSAC Underage Drinking/Drug Prevention • Bike Helmet Fitting- Greenacres Elementary • Crime Stoppers meeting School- 130 kids • GSSAC Coalition meeting • Safe Kids Coalition meeting • Operation Family ID • GoodGuides Mentoring WVHS November 2016 Volunteers Hours per Station *Includes estimated volunteer service hours that are provided in the City of Spokane Valley. These two locations cover both Spokane Valley and the unincorporated portion of the county. Location # Volunteers Admin Hours L.E. Hours Total Hours Central Valley 9 40.0 37.5 77.5 East Valley* 22 173.5 157.5 331.0 Edgecliff 22 349.0 36.0 385.0 Trentwood 6 147.5 86.0 233.5 University 24 341.0 71.5 412.5 West Valley* 22 588.5 46.5 635.0 TOTALS 105 1,639.5 435.0 2,074.5 Volunteer Value ($22.14 per hour) $45,929.43 for November 2016 S.C.O.P.E. Incident Response Team (SIRT) volunteers contributed 89 on -scene hours (including travel time) in November, responding to crime scenes, motor vehicle accidents and providing traffic control; 42 hours were for incidents specifically in Spokane Valley. There were no Special Events in Spokane Valley in November. Total November volunteer hours contributed by SIRT, including training, stand-by, response and special events is 493; total for 2016 is 6,193. Abandoned Vehicles Page 2 Sep Oct Nov Tagged for Impounding 26 34 28 Cited/Towed 16 6 7 Hulks Processed 6 11 8 Total Vehicles Processed 108 116 88 Yearly Total of Vehicles Processed 827 943 1031 Page 2 SCOPE DISABLED PARKING ACTIVITY REPORT City of Spokane Valley # of Vol. # of Vol. # of Hrs. # of Disabled Infractions Issued # of Warnings Issued # of Non - Disabled Infractions Issued January 2 11 2 0 0 February 2 1.5 2 0 0 March 2 53 4 0 0 April 3 60 8 0 0 May 2 53 7 0 0 June 2 50 5 0 0 July 2 55 7 0 0 August 2 52 2 0 0 September 2 12 0 0 0 October 2 27 0 0 0 November 2 57 0 0 0 YTD Total 23 431.5 37 0 0 Spokane County # of Vol. # of Hrs. # of Disabled Infractions Issued # of Warnings Issued # of Non - Disabled Infractions Issued January 2 26.5 2 0 0 February 2 18 0 0 0 March 1 16 1 10 0 April 2 115 0 0 0 May 2 15 1 0 0 June 2 12 3 0 0 July 3 19.5 3 0 0 August 0 0 0 0 0 September 1 7 0 0 0 October 2 28.5 0 0 0 November 2 14.5 0 0 0 YTD Total 19 272 10 10 0 OPERATIONS: Fleeing Suspect Arrested & Charged with Multiple Felonies after Pursuit — In early November, Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputies arrested a 44 -year-old female for multiple felony and misdemeanor charges after she failed to stop for deputies and fled in a stolen vehicle. The female suspect was booked for Possession of a Stolen Vehicle, Attempting to Elude a Police Vehicle (two counts), Hit and Run Attended Vehicle and Obstructing Law Enforcement. This incident began at approximately 8:40 p.m. when Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputy Ortiz observed a white Ford F350 fail to stop at the stop sign at Cowley and Barker. The truck had paper dealership tags, but no license plates were Page 3 observed. The vehicle accelerated to approximately 60 mph and began changing lanes as Deputy Ortiz attempted to catch up to initiate a traffic stop. The vehicle rapidly accelerated as Deputy Ortiz activated his emergency lights and siren. The female suspect/driver continued to drive recklessly, passing cars and almost lost control as she tried to flee. The pursuit was terminated for safety as the female suspect approached Sullivan Road and heavier traffic. She slowed, but did not stop for traffic on Sullivan causing other motorists to yield to avoid a collision. A few moments later, Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputy Rassier observed the truck turn southbound from Valleyway at a high rate of speed, lose control and enter his lane of travel; he had to take aggressive evasive action to avoid a collision. The female suspect continued at a high rate of speed and lost control again as she turned west on Sprague with complete and utter disregard for the safety of others on the roadway without a deputy pursuing her. Due to her reckless actions, Deputy Rassier re-engaged in the pursuit as she turned south on Evergreen from Sprague. The female suspect continued to flee reaching estimated speeds of 45 to 100 mph as she intentionally ran stop signs and stop lights. Multiple assisting units blocked intersections for the safety of citizens while others attempted to deploy stop sticks ahead of the pursuit in an attempt to end it safely and stop her dangerous actions. East of Pines on Sprague, Sgt. Whapeles successfully deployed stop sticks and in the area of University and Sprague, Deputy Rassier observed smoke coming from a tire as it began to deflate. With the tire deflating, the speeds dropped, and the female suspect lost control as she turned north on Herald and slid into the curb. Deputy Rassier tried to position his patrol car to block any escape, but the female suspect accelerated and struck his vehicle. The female suspect continued to flee as the tire came apart, leaving just the wheel. In the video captured by Air 1, sparks can be seen as the female suspect flees without care or caution. With Air 1 overhead and two tires of the vehicle gone, deputies began to allow the female suspect to gain distance with the hope she would slow down or stop. As she approached Pines, she slowed and lost control; the truck spun and stopped just east of the Pines intersection. As patrol units arrived and deputies exited their vehicles, they observed a male and a female running north, across Sprague, and away from the suspect vehicle. Corporal Thurman gave numerous commands for the fleeing suspects to stop and warned his K9 Partner Laslo would be deployed. The 38 -year-old male and the female suspect ignored the warning and failed to follow commands. Believing the male was the fleeing driver, backed up with radio traffic stating a male suspect was fleeing northeast from the truck, K9 Laslo was deployed and quickly caught up to the male suspect while the female suspect crossed Sprague and then turned east. She stopped at the door of a citizen's vehicle, appeared to try and open the passenger's side door before continuing to flee. Deputies quickly closed in on her and she was safely taken into custody. Additional deputies contacted another female as she exited the passenger's side door of the suspect vehicle. She was detained and later told deputies she had just met the female suspect who was a friend of a friend. The female said she told the female suspect several times to stop during the pursuit, but she refused and said she wasn't going to stop for the police. The female was released at the scene and was not charged. After being advised of her rights, the female suspect declined to answer any questions. As the male suspect was being detained, he started yelling, "Sorry I ran, I'm stoned! Sorry, I'm drunk and stoned!" He was advised of his rights and he stated he would answer questions. He said he wasn't inside the truck and was crossing Sprague at Pines. When he noticed the suspect vehicle approaching with law enforcement in pursuit, he was angry. He said, "I was drunk, high on meth and weed; had just had a few smokes. I was going to handle this (expletive)." He said he ran to the suspect vehicle, threw a plastic bottle he had previously filled with beer and hit the female driver before she ran to a "blue van and tried to steal it too!" When asked why he ran from the K9, he said he was high on meth and weed, that he was just pumped up and couldn't hear anything. The male suspect was advised he was being charged with Obstructing Law Enforcement and deputies explained his actions risked everyone's safety. He again apologized and said he was trying to be the police; he received medical Page 4 attention and was cleared to be transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Obstructing Law Enforcement. Deputies learned the vehicle the female suspect was driving was reported stolen in late October 2016 from the Airway Heights area. The female suspect was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Possession of a Stolen Vehicle, Attempting to Elude a Police Vehicle (two counts), Hit and Run Attended Vehicle and Obstructing Law Enforcement. Meth, Heroin and BB Gun Recovered After Pursuit - Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputies arrested a 25 -year-old male suspect and a 21 -year-old female suspect after a pursuit in Spokane Valley in early November. After both suspects were safely taken into custody, a search warrant was obtained for the vehicle the male suspect was driving, resulting in the recovery of methamphetamine, heroin, a BB gun and drug paraphernalia. In early November, at approximately 5:25 p.m., deputies responded to a report of a male with a gun and methamphetamine in a white Dodge Durango at the Motel 6 located at 1919 N. Hutchinson. Cpl. Jeff Thurman arrived in the area almost immediately and observed a white Durango leaving the parking lot. The Durango, driven by the male suspect, accelerated rapidly as it passed Cpl. Thurman. Cpl. Thurman activated his emergency lights and siren, but the male suspect failed to stop and accelerated rapidly as he attempted to flee. He turned onto the I-90 on-ramp westbound as Cpl. Thurman moved in to attempt a PIT maneuver and safely end the pursuit. As he did, he observed an object in the male suspect's right hand that looked similar to a black -colored handgun. Cpl. Thurman successfully conducted a PIT maneuver, but the male suspect continued to flee before his escape could be blocked. Deputies attempted additional PIT maneuvers, but the male suspect would either block the attempt or flee before his escape route could be blocked. In the area of Stn and Sunderland, Cpl. Thurman successfully conducted a PIT maneuver ending the pursuit. Initially, the male suspect started reaching around and kept his hands out of view despite commands to show his hands. After a few tense moments, he followed commands allowing deputies to safely take him and the female suspect into custody. After a search warrant was obtained for the vehicle, deputies recovered methamphetamine, heroin, a black/silver BB gun and drug paraphernalia. The male suspect was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Attempting to Elude a Pursuing Police Vehicle, Possession of Controlled Substances and a Washington State Department of Corrections felony warrant. The female suspect was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for three misdemeanor warrants. Suspicious Suspect Sleeping in Running Vehicle Flees - Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputies arrested a 34 -year-old male suspect for several charges after he fled in a vehicle and then on foot. K9 Gunnar helped locate the male suspect who now faces charges of Attempting to Elude a Police Vehicle, Reckless Driving, Driving while Suspended and Possession of Stolen Property. The incident began on a Sunday evening in early November at approximately 7:30 p.m. when Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputy Covella and K9 Deputy Jason Hunt arrived to investigate a suspicious vehicle parked in a parking lot located in the 4900 block of East Sprague in Spokane Valley. An employee reported a male had been sleeping in a Toyota Tundra parked in the business' parking lot for several hours. The employee provided a license plate and stated the male was possibly intoxicated or high. When the deputies arrived, they observed a male sitting in the driver's seat of the Toyota with the engine still running The male's head was tilted back and he appeared to be sleeping. They knocked on the window to gain his attention and instructed him to turn the vehicle off. The male opened his eyes and looked at Deputy Covella. He hesitated and appeared to be in a daze or possibly under the influence before removing the key from the ignition, but the vehicle continued to run. The male suspect appeared to become extremely nervous and began looking around as the deputies began to suspect the vehicle might be stolen. Deputy Covella started to open the driver's door to have the male suspect exit the vehicle, but he slammed the door, put the vehicle in reverse and began to back up rapidly. Deputy Hunt jumped out of the way as the male suspect turned toward his direction before speeding away. The Page 5 deputies ran back to their patrol cars and gave chase, with their lights and sirens on, as the male suspect fled southbound on Chronicle at a high rate of speed with his lights off. The male suspect continued to try and evade and turned west on 3rd from Havana, traveling the wrong way on the one-way road. The deputies slowed down and they tried to warn approaching traffic of the suspect driver's extremely dangerous and reckless driving. The male suspect turned onto the eastbound I-90 on-ramp and fled out of sight. As the deputies tried to catch up to him, a citizen pointed toward the Broadway exit. Several patrol units began checking the area for the vehicle. Deputy Covella eventually located the unoccupied Tundra parked on Cataldo east of Bowman Road. A perimeter was quickly established as Deputy Hunt and his K9 partner Gunnar began to search for the male suspect. Gunnar led the deputies to the fenced area near I-90 at the Park Road overpass where they observed the male suspect hiding in the tall grass. They gave him commands to surrender and he was taken into custody with the assistance of a Washington State Patrol Trooper. He was identified and deputies learned his driving privileges were suspended and he had an active warrant for his arrest. After being advised of his rights, the male suspect told deputies he fell asleep in his truck because he was tired and he fled because he knew he had a warrant for his arrest. The suspect was in possession of a laptop and a small suitcase; deputies checked the serial number on the laptop and learned it had been reported stolen during a vehicle prowling on the evening of October 19th. The male suspect said the Tundra he was driving belonged to a male who was driving the suspect's vehicle. The vehicle had not been reported stolen and the registered owner was unable to be contacted to verify the suspect's story. The male suspect was transported and booked at the Spokane County Jail for Attempting to Elude a Police Vehicle, Reckless Driving, Driving with a Suspended License, Possession of Stolen Property 3rd Degree and the misdemeanor warrant. The Spokane Valley Police Department and Spokane County Sheriff's Office would like to remind everyone to document serial numbers on electronics or valuables in the event of theft. This is an example of how providing serial numbers of stolen items allows deputies to identify victims, return their stolen property and charge suspects for being in possession of it. Neighbor Notices Female Stealing Package - A watchful Spokane Valley neighbor reported seeing a 32 -year-old female steal a package from his neighbor's porch. Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputy Brian Hert responded and arrested the female, charging her with Theft 3rd Degree. In mid-November just prior to noon, a citizen reported he was following a female who stole a package from his neighbor's porch in the 11700 block of East Mission in Spokane Valley. Deputy Hert responded to the area of Mission and Pines where he observed the female suspect getting into a vehicle that had just arrived. Deputy Hert contacted the female suspect, who denied any theft. Deputy Hert contacted the witness who explained he observed the female suspect taking items out of a cardboard box and putting them in her purse. He went outside and inspected the box. He noticed it was addressed to one of his neighbors a few houses away and confronted the female suspect, who had walked into a backyard. She told him she was trying to find a friend. The witness followed the female suspect, and provided updated information to responding deputies. During the investigation, Deputy Hert located the stolen items in the female suspect's purse prior to arresting her. It was determined the driver of the vehicle the female was leaving in did not have knowledge of her criminal activities and was not charged. The stolen items were later returned to the victim. The female suspect was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Theft 3rd Degree. The Spokane Valley Police Department and Spokane County Sheriff's Office would like to remind everyone to take precautions during holiday season. Criminals will be out trying to exploit the holidays and victimize our community when they find an opportunity. Page 6 If you are expecting packages and won't be home when they're delivered: 1) Consider having them delivered to a neighbor you trust or a family member who will be home. 2) Insure packages to help protect your purchases. 3) Require a signature for delivery. 4) Utilize in-store pickup if available. 5) Don't leave items in your vehicle unattended, but if you must, secure them in your trunk or at least keep them out of sight. Don't provide an opportunity for a criminal who is looking for an easy opportunity to victimize you. Reckless Driver Crashes after Fleeing from Deputies - Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputies arrested a 30 -year-old male suspect after deputies tried to stop him for driving recklessly. He crashed the vehicle he was driving, striking another vehicle, a traffic signal controller and a power pole before fleeing on foot. After a foot pursuit, deputies arrested the male suspect for Attempting to Elude a Police Vehicle (two counts), Obstructing, Criminal Trespass 2nd Degree, Driving while Suspended 1st Degree -Habitual Offender, Driving Under the Influence Alcohol/Drugs and two warrants. In mid- November, at approximately 7:40 a.m., Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputy Byron Zlateff observed a black Chevy Malibu traveling east on Sprague as he exited the Spokane Valley Police Precinct. He estimated the Malibu's speed at 55 to 60 mph in the posted 35 mph zone. Deputy Zlateff attempted to catch up to the speeding vehicle, but it continued to pull further away. The male driver/suspect continued his reckless behavior by swerving around cars and running the red light at McDonald causing an extremely dangerous situation for other drivers on the roadway. In the area of Evergreen and Sprague, Deputy Zlateff caught up to the male suspect and activated his emergency lights to conduct a traffic stop after witnessing him swerve recklessly to avoid other vehicles. He slowed down to approximately 20 mph and turned into the Safeway parking lot, but failed to stop. He continued through the lot and entered back onto Sprague and accelerated rapidly to an estimated speed of 50 to 55 mph. Deputy Zlateff activated his siren and advised over the radio he was in pursuit. At the intersection of Adams and Sprague, the male suspect blew through the red light, narrowly missing northbound traffic. Fearing for the safety of drivers on the roadway due to the male suspect's obvious disregard for anyone's safety, Deputy Zlateff terminated the pursuit. The suspect was last seen turning south on Sullivan from Sprague. A few minutes later, Deputy Jay Bailey observed the suspect stopped at 4th and Sullivan, northbound at a red light. When the suspect noticed Deputy Bailey's patrol car, the suspect immediately accelerated, ran the red light and began to flee to Sprague. Deputy Bailey activated his emergency lights and siren in an attempt to stop the male suspect. Just before Sprague, the male suspect cut through a parking lot to avoid traffic and turned onto Sprague, eastbound. With his extremely reckless and dangerous driving behavior, Deputy Bailey continued to pursue to warn the public on the roadway and hopefully stop the suspect before he hurt himself or other. The male suspect approached the red light at Conklin and Sprague but again, with complete and utter disregard for anyone's safety, ignored the traffic light. He crashed into a northbound pickup truck, lost control and spun into a traffic light control box and a power pole on the southeast corner of the intersection. The male suspect then bailed out of the wrecked vehicle and fled on foot. Deputy Bailey pulled up and the male suspect stopped, put his hands in the air, and said "I give up." He was safely taken into custody. The male suspect exhibited signs of being under the influence of a stimulant or marijuana and appeared to be paranoid. Deputy Zlateff learned the suspect's driving privileges were suspended 1st degree as a habitual offender and he had an active Washington State Department of Corrections Escape Community Custody warrant for his arrest. The male suspect was transported to a local hospital for medical treatment. While at the hospital, Deputy Zlateff applied for, and was Page 7 granted, a search warrant to obtain a sample of the suspect's blood to continue the investigation for impaired driving. After the male suspect was medically cleared, he was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail for Attempting to Elude a Police Vehicle (two counts), Hit and Run Collision, Criminal Trespass 2nd Degree, Driving Under the Influence, Driving while Suspended 1' Degree - Habitual Offender, Obstructing Law Enforcement and the warrant. The driver of the pickup the suspect had hit also received medical treatment for minor injuries. The vehicle the suspect was driving was not his, however, he had permission to use it. The cost to repair the traffic light control box was estimated at $30,000 and the damaged power pole was estimated at $20,000 to repair. Potential Unidentified Sexual Assault Victims - Spokane Valley Sheriff's Deputies and Spokane County Sheriff's Office Sexual Assault Unit Detectives arrested an 85 -year-old male suspect and charged him with Rape of a Child 1St Degree (two counts), Child Molestation 1St Degree, Child Molestation 2nd Degree (four counts) and Unlawful Imprisonment. Although the male suspect has no known criminal conviction history, investigators believe due to the unreported or uncharged (expired statute of limitations) sexual assault behavior dating back to the mid to late 1950's discovered during their investigation, there are potentially unidentified young victims. In late November, detectives arrested the male suspect after several months' long investigation into allegations of sexual abuse that occurred over the last two years of a now 12 -year-old female victim. During the investigation, detectives learned of past unreported or uncharged sexual abuse by the male suspect, stemming back to the mid to late 1950's. Some of the known sexual assault behavior was reported to law enforcement in Eugene, Oregon, but due to the incidents occurring in the 1950's, charges could not be filed since the statute of limitations had expired. The female victims of this abuse range from approximately 9 to 14 years of age. The victims are family or former family members and/or children living with or in the area of the suspect whose current address is located in the 13900 block of East 6th Avenue in Spokane Valley. Spokane Valley Death Investigation on East Heroy - Spokane Valley Police and Spokane Valley Major Crimes Detectives conducted a death investigation at a residence in the 13100 block of East Heroy in late November. At approximately 6:45 a.m., Spokane Valley Deputies responded to a trouble unknown call at the residence. Responding deputies located a deceased adult male inside the residence and contacted two additional adults at the scene. Spokane Valley Major Crime Detectives and members of the Forensic Unit were called to the scene to continue the death investigation. SCOPE SIRT Team Volunteers assisted with traffic control in the area. Spokane Valley Major Crimes detectives identified the victim's 30 -year-old son as the suspect in what was determined to be a homicide investigation at a residence. After a search warrant was obtained, detectives and Forensic Unit personnel entered the residence and began collecting evidence and processing the scene. Through their investigation, detectives were able to identify the victim's son as the suspect in the violent, fatal altercation that is believed to have occurred during the late evening the previous night. The suspect was not at the residence when deputies arrived. Investigators entered into a national law enforcement database as stolen, the suspect's license plate of a 2004 Ford F150 that he was believed to be driving. They later learned the suspect had been contacted by a Seattle Police Officer earlier in morning around 5:00 a.m., but he was released since the crime here in Spokane Valley wasn't discovered almost two hours later. Spokane Valley detectives were informed the victim's son was located by the Seattle Police Department and safely taken into custody. The vehicle driven by him was also located and held for evidence. The investigation remains on-going. Page 8 Convicted Violent Felon Fights with Deputies and K9 - SIRR Team Investigation Requested - Spokane Valley Deputies responded to a call of an intoxicated male choking his juvenile brother-in- law and arrested a 39 -year-old male suspect for Assault 2nd Degree and Obstructing Law Enforcement. The male, a convicted felon on probation, violently fought with deputies and the K9 who found him hiding in a utility trailer covered with garbage bags and trash. With the level of force used to take him into custody, the Officer -Involved Critical Incident Protocol was enacted. In late November, Spokane Valley Deputies responded to a report of a domestic violence incident involving an intoxicated male who had choked his juvenile brother-in-law at a residence located in the 8500 block of East Alki in Spokane Valley. Deputies contacted the victim, his sister (suspect's wife) and her young child who locked themselves in a vehicle parked in the driveway after fleeing from the suspect to call 911. Deputies were told the male suspect began choking the victim during an argument. The victim stated his airway was obstructed and he felt he would lose consciousness and feared for his life. Red marks consistent with strangulation were observed on the victim's throat and the suspect's wife confirmed the victim's account of the assault. Deputies gave several loud unanswered verbal commands from the front door of the residence advising the male suspect that he was under arrest and to surrender. Dispatch advised responding deputies that the suspect was a convicted felon under Washington State Department of Corrections active supervision for robbery and a violent offender with a lengthy criminal history. As additional units arrived, including a K9, additional announcements were made advising the suspect that a K9 would be used to locate him if he did not surrender, but they went unanswered. The residence was searched, however, deputies did not locate the suspect. Deputies focused their attention on an unattached shop in the backyard. Again, deputies gave several announcements advising the male suspect that he was under arrest and to surrender or a K9 would be used to locate him; the suspect still did not respond. The K9 was deployed and quickly began barking at a utility trailer full of boxes and garbage bags. Deputies moved toward the trailer while continuing to give commands to surrender. The male suspect continued to hide, ignore commands and failed to surrender. The K9 entered the trailer and quickly located the male suspect, who immediately began yelling. The suspect continued to resist arrest and began striking the K9, pulling on the area around the K9's eye as he continued to fight inside the rocking and unstable trailer. While attempting to gain compliance and take the suspect into custody, deputies used force including strikes using a flashlight and a straight stick baton, but he continued to fight. Ignoring deputies' commands to stop fighting and show his hands, the suspect jammed his hand into his pants pocket. Fearing he was attempting to access a weapon and that the deputy's life or the lives of the other deputies were in danger, a deputy drove the end of his straight stick baton into the suspect, making contact with his head. Deputies were able to gain control and place him in custody; he was searched and found not to be in possession of a weapon. Medics were called to the scene to provide medical treatment for injuries to the suspect's leg and head. The male suspect was transported to a local hospital for medical treatment. Initially it was believed he would be treated and released, but he was held for observation for a period of time before he was transported and booked into the Spokane County Jail. None of the deputies or the K9 were injured during the incident. Due to the level of force used, Major Crimes Detectives were called to the scene to investigate. To ensure a complete and independent investigation, the Spokane Investigative Regional Response (SIRR) Team Officer Involved Protocol was enacted. The SIRR Team is comprised of multiple agencies in eastern Washington, including the Spokane Police Department, the Washington State Patrol, the Spokane County Sheriffs Office and Spokane Valley Police. The Spokane Police Department is the managing agency in this incident. All future communications regarding this incident will be sent via the SIRR Team. Once the SIRR Team investigation is complete, the case will be forwarded to the Spokane County Prosecutor's Office for review. Per Spokane County Sheriff's Office policy, the deputy involved was placed on administrative leave pending the outcome of the investigation. Page 9 Scams Continue — Alert Everyone Talk to Family, Friends, Neighbors and Vulnerable Adults - The Spokane County Sheriff's Office and Spokane Valley Police Department continue to ask for your help. We continue to receive reports of scammers calling and sometimes victimizing our fellow citizens. What can you do? Help us spread this information. Make sure your neighbors, churches, groups, vulnerable adults and especially your family and friends know about these scams. We know everyone is tired of hearing about these scams, but that's exactly what the criminal are hoping. Below are two new examples from the last couple weeks of November and both were generated from the same phone number, (509) 237-5229. In both instances, the caller claimed to be an employee of the Spokane County Sheriff's Office. The caller stated the victim had a warrant for their arrest for failing to appear for jury duty. One of the potential victims began asking basic questions the caller could not or would not answer. After the call ended without the victim falling prey to the scam, the victim called the number back, which went to voicemail with a message stating the victim had reached the Sheriff's Office. During the other incident, the victim unfortunately lost $450. The scammer originally told the victim she needed to meet with him and write a statement explaining why she did not appear for jury duty. The scammer also demanded the victim bring a Green.Moneypak card (prepaid money card) for $897.63 to pay the fine. The victim explained she didn't have that much money so the predatory scammer told her to send him $450 instead. The victim, not knowing this was a scam and being afraid she would be arrested, purchased a Green Dot prepaid card in the amount of $450. The criminal convinced the victim to give him the card numbers and information because he wanted to help her settle the warrant over the phone and save her a long drive to meet with him in person. If you work in or are a manager of a store that sells prepaid cards, make sure your coworkers/employees know about these scams. Actively work to inform your customers and possibly identify potential victims who are purchasing these cards for large amounts of money before they are victimized. Please help us get the information out about these scams. Tell everyone you know. Bring this up during church, meetings, group functions, your child's sporting events, holiday gatherings and make sure the uninformed, the elderly and vulnerable adults know: • Law enforcement, the courts, government agencies or reputable businesses will NEVER threaten arrest and demand payments or personal banking information over the phone. • Resist the urge to act quickly. Verify the information by calling the "agency" at phone numbers YOU look up, not ones provided by the scammers. In Spokane County, you can call Crime Check at 509-456-2233 (24 hours a day, 7 days a week) to report this activity before taking action. • Contact family or friends. Tell them about the call; verify information before taking any action. For more information and SCAM Alerts, please visit these websites: Federal Trade Commission Scam Alerts: https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/scam-alerts FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3): https://www.ic3.gov/default.aspx Page 10 Spokane 1 . Valley PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT November 2016 AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICES ADOPTED AND IN OPERATION * Budget estimates ** Does not include November Contract Name Contractor Contract Amount Total Expended of Contract Expended Street Maintenance Poe Asphalt $1,366,663.00 $1,366,663.00 100.00% Street Sweeping AAA Sweeping $490,200.00 $416,896.97 85.05% Storm Drain Cleaning AAA Sweeping $189,990.00 $155,451.29 81.82% Snow Removal Poe Asphalt $70,000.00 $22,444.34 32.06% Landscaping Senske $61,178.00 $60,132.18 98.29% Weed Spraying Spokane Pro Care $19,400.00 $13,857.15 71.43% Emergency Traffic Control Senske $10,000.00 $2,713.13 27.13% Litter and Weed Control Geiger Work Crew $60,000.00 $43,557.90 72.60% State Highway Maintenance WSDOT $265,000.00 $187,425.34 70.73% Traffic Signals, Signs, Striping Spokane County $632,000.00 $542,786.29 85.88% Dead Animal Control Mike Pederson $20,000.00 $9,740.00 48.70% ** ** ** * ** ** ** * 100 80 60 40 20 Citizen Requests for Public Works - November 2016 - Waiting = 30 days+ V Total Req Misc Dead Animal Remov al Gravel Shldrin g Illicit Dischar ge Land- scaping ROW Rpt Pothole Roadw ay Hazard Sign & Signal Reques is Storm Drainag e/ Erosion Street Sweepi ng Traffic Snow Comme nts Submitted 86 8 8 3 1 1 8 12 5 14 12 13 1 In Progress 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Waiting 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 Resolved 80 8 8 3 1 1 8 12 5 8 12 13 1 *Information in bold indicates updates 1 WASTEWATER Status of the process can be monitored at: http://www.spokaneriver.net/, http://www.ecy.wa.qov/geographic/spokane/spokane river basin.htm, http://www.spokanecounty.orq/utilities/WaterReclamation/content.aspx?c=2224 and http://www.spokaneriverpartners.com/ STREET MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY The following is a summary of Public Works/Contractor maintenance activities in the City of Spokane Valley for November 2016: • AAA Sweeping continued with arterial maintenance sweeping and Residential Fall Sweep. • AAA Sweeping Vactor Contract - Cleaned drywells and sidewalk inlets. • Geiger Work Crew mowing dryland grass areas, trimmed trees along with litter cleanup. • Poe Asphalt completed asphalt repairs on Argonne Road and Conklin. Stormwater repairs on Mission, Sullivan and Grace. Concrete panels removed and replaced on Appleway west of Dishman-Mica Road. STORMWATER UTILITY The following is a summary of Stormwater Utility activities in the City of Spokane Valley for November 2016: • Continued work on EW Effectiveness Study Development • Provided cost estimates of storm drainage improvements for 2017 paving projects and proposed sidewalk projects. • Began reevaluation of stormwater action request list for small works and maintenance projects in 2017 and 2018. • Reviewed fall street sweeping and updated "hot spot" map • Began annual update of stormwater utility fee evaluation for new development and property changes. • Outlined annual service contract renewal process for contracts that are paid in part or whole from Stormwater Utility. *Information in bold indicates updates 2 November 2016 Snow and Ice Operations Mag (Gallons) Iceslicer (Tons Snowfall Pre -Treat Deicing Plowing Comments 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 15 5 15 15 /15 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 /15 111111111111111 /15 4/15 1111111111111111111111111 5/15 111111111111111111 11/27/15 11/28/15 1000 •11/29/15 200 0.0 111111111111111111111111.1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 0.0 0.0 0.7 .1111111111.111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 CU) 1 0.0 1 0.0 1111111111111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII111111111111111111111111111111111111 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11111111111111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII111111111111111111111111111111111111 0.0 0.0 0.8 1.6 0.0 Bridges -Hillsides Bridges -Hillsides 11/30/15 100 Totals 3,400 Season Totals 3,400 0.2 3.30 0 3.30 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 Bridges -Hillsides Precipitation Totals 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 Snowfall Precipitation 70 Temperature Graph 20 10 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 "Information in bold indicates updates Ave High Avg Low -A- Act u a I Hi -x- Actual Low 3 CAPITAL PROJECTS Stitikane lleye. Public Works Projects Monthly Summary - Design & Construction November -2016 Street Projects 0123 Mission Ave - Flora to Barker 0141 Sullivan & Euclid PCC 0155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement#4508 0166 Pines Rd. (SR27) & Grace Ave. Int Safety 0201 ITS InfiII Project- Phase 1 0239 Bowdish Rd & 11th Ave. Sidewalk 0249 Sullivan & Wellesley Intersection Improv 0250 9th Ave Sidewalk - Raymond to University 0251 Euclid Avenue Reconstruction Project Street Preservation Projects 0235 NB Sullivan Rd. Pres (Spo Rvr-Flora Pit) 0240 Saltese Road Preservation Project 0248 Sprague Street Pres - Sullivan to Corbin 0253 Mission - Pines to McDonald Traffic Projects 0167 Citywide Safety Improvements 0222 Citywide Reflective Signal Back Plates Parks Projects 0227 Appleway S.U.P. - Pines to Evergreen 0237 Appleway Trail - Sullivan to Corbin FHWA - STP(U) FHWA - STP(U) FHWA - BR HSI P FHWA - CMAQ TIB - SP FHWA - STP(U) STA - FTA/NF COSV COSY COSY FHWA - STP(U) COSY HSI P HSI P 02/02/18 01/27/17 06/27/14 04/07/17 01/27/17 03/03/17 05/03/19 04/07/17 01/27/17 02/17/17 07/18/14 04/28/17 08/19/16 03/17/17 05/24/19 04/28/17 02/17/17 N/A N/A 03/17/17 03/17/17 04/27/18 04/28/17 05/12/17 15 94 100 95 99 90 0 10 33 0 0 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/15/18 12/31/17 05/30/17 10/01/17 10/31/17 08/31/17 12/31/19 07/31/17 12/31/17 33 0 12/31/16 15 0 10/31/17 0 0 12/31/19 0 0 10/31/17 $ 917,700 $ 2,330,475 $ 15,833,333 $ 733,086 $ 350,402 $ 536,342 $ 1,370,000 $ 240,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 65,834 $ 920,000 $ 1,770,000 $ 770,000 07/31/15 08/21/15 100 90 12/30/16 $ 503,424 N/A N/A 0 0 03/01/19 $ 81,000 FHWA - STP(U) 11/11/16 12/09/16 100 0 07/31/17 $ 2,134,057 COSV 03/03/17 03/24/17 10 0 10/31/17 $ 2,130,000 Design Bid Estimated Total Project Proposed Open % Complete Construction Project # Design & Construction Projects Funding Ad Date Date PE I CN Completion Cost Street Projects 0123 Mission Ave - Flora to Barker 0141 Sullivan & Euclid PCC 0155 Sullivan Rd W Bridge Replacement#4508 0166 Pines Rd. (SR27) & Grace Ave. Int Safety 0201 ITS InfiII Project- Phase 1 0239 Bowdish Rd & 11th Ave. Sidewalk 0249 Sullivan & Wellesley Intersection Improv 0250 9th Ave Sidewalk - Raymond to University 0251 Euclid Avenue Reconstruction Project Street Preservation Projects 0235 NB Sullivan Rd. Pres (Spo Rvr-Flora Pit) 0240 Saltese Road Preservation Project 0248 Sprague Street Pres - Sullivan to Corbin 0253 Mission - Pines to McDonald Traffic Projects 0167 Citywide Safety Improvements 0222 Citywide Reflective Signal Back Plates Parks Projects 0227 Appleway S.U.P. - Pines to Evergreen 0237 Appleway Trail - Sullivan to Corbin FHWA - STP(U) FHWA - STP(U) FHWA - BR HSI P FHWA - CMAQ TIB - SP FHWA - STP(U) STA - FTA/NF COSV COSY COSY FHWA - STP(U) COSY HSI P HSI P 02/02/18 01/27/17 06/27/14 04/07/17 01/27/17 03/03/17 05/03/19 04/07/17 01/27/17 02/17/17 07/18/14 04/28/17 08/19/16 03/17/17 05/24/19 04/28/17 02/17/17 N/A N/A 03/17/17 03/17/17 04/27/18 04/28/17 05/12/17 15 94 100 95 99 90 0 10 33 0 0 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 11/15/18 12/31/17 05/30/17 10/01/17 10/31/17 08/31/17 12/31/19 07/31/17 12/31/17 33 0 12/31/16 15 0 10/31/17 0 0 12/31/19 0 0 10/31/17 $ 917,700 $ 2,330,475 $ 15,833,333 $ 733,086 $ 350,402 $ 536,342 $ 1,370,000 $ 240,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 65,834 $ 920,000 $ 1,770,000 $ 770,000 07/31/15 08/21/15 100 90 12/30/16 $ 503,424 N/A N/A 0 0 03/01/19 $ 81,000 FHWA - STP(U) 11/11/16 12/09/16 100 0 07/31/17 $ 2,134,057 COSV 03/03/17 03/24/17 10 0 10/31/17 $ 2,130,000 0142 0143 0205 0223 0247 Street Projects Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation FHWA - STP(U) FMSIB Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvement COSV Pines Rd Underpass @ BNSF &Trent COSV 8th & Carnahan Intersection Improvements Street Preservation Projects 0252 Argonne Resurfacing: Broadway to Indiana 0254 Mission - McDonald to Evergreen Stormwater Projects 0193 Effectiveness Study 0198 Sprague, Park to University LID 0199 Havana -Yale Diversion 0200 Ponderosa Surface Water Diversion Dept of Ecology Dept of Ecology Dept of Ecology Dept of Ecology *Information in bold indicates updates 4 08/31/16 10/31/17 12/31/16 06/30/17 03/01/18 10/31/16 10/31/16 90 0 5 0 0 0 0 65 30 35 35 06/30/17 12/31/19 10/31/17 10/31/17 $ 276,301 $ 720,000 $ 51,619 $ 510,000 $ 250,000 $ 640,000 $ 67,000 600,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Design Total Project Complete % Complete Project # Design Only Projects Funding Date PE Cost 0142 0143 0205 0223 0247 Street Projects Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation FHWA - STP(U) FMSIB Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvement COSV Pines Rd Underpass @ BNSF &Trent COSV 8th & Carnahan Intersection Improvements Street Preservation Projects 0252 Argonne Resurfacing: Broadway to Indiana 0254 Mission - McDonald to Evergreen Stormwater Projects 0193 Effectiveness Study 0198 Sprague, Park to University LID 0199 Havana -Yale Diversion 0200 Ponderosa Surface Water Diversion Dept of Ecology Dept of Ecology Dept of Ecology Dept of Ecology *Information in bold indicates updates 4 08/31/16 10/31/17 12/31/16 06/30/17 03/01/18 10/31/16 10/31/16 90 0 5 0 0 0 0 65 30 35 35 06/30/17 12/31/19 10/31/17 10/31/17 $ 276,301 $ 720,000 $ 51,619 $ 510,000 $ 250,000 $ 640,000 $ 67,000 600,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 TRAFFIC CIP Projects Staff continues to coordinate with traffic related design and study items as part of CIP projects. The installation of countdown pedestrian timers at traffic signals is complete. The sign upgrades and bicycle route installations are mostly complete and being verified by staff. Specific Studies Staff is coordinating with WSDOT on the North Spokane Corridor (NSC) IJR. Development Projects Reviewing traffic impact studies and letters for several projects and assisting Development Engineering with the Comprehensive Plan Update. PLANNING AND GRANTS Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) Capital Programs and Community & Economic Development staff continued to scope out potential sidewalk projects for the upcoming CDBG Call for Projects. This year, staff identified projects a little earlier so an open house soliciting neighborhood comment would be received before presenting the projects to the City Council and ultimately prior to submitting grant applications to Spokane County for these funds. An open house was conducted on October 5, 2016 from 5 - 7 pm. On October 25th, 2016 a Public Hearing was held in Council Chambers and two projects were approved for CDBG application submittal. These projects were: # Proposed CDBG Sidewalk Projects Estimated 1 8th Ave — Dickey to Thierman (north side) 1 a 8th Ave — Eastern to Thierman (Project Alternate) 2 Mission Ave — Bates to Union (north side) $522,000 $348,000 $285,000 Final grant applications for these projects were submitted on November 10, 2016. USDOT FASTLANE II Call for Projects On October 28, 2016, USDOT announced it is conducting a call for projects for FASTLANE II grants. This is the second year of the FASTLANE grant program which was established in the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act to fund critical freight and highway projects across the country. The FAST Act fully funded at $4.5 billion for fiscal years 2016 through 2020, including $850 million for FY 2017 to be awarded by the Secretary of Transportation. The City Council passed a motion on November 22nd for City staff to apply for the Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation and the Pines Rd/BNSF Grade Separation projects. FASTLANE II grants pay up to 60% of the total cost of a project. The funding breakdown for these projects would be: *Information in bold indicates updates 5 Project Project Cost FASTLANE II Grant Request Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation Project $36,000,000 $21,600,000 Pines Rd/BNSF Grade Separation Project $19,800,000 $11,900,000 The deadline for submitting applications is 8:OOPM EST on December 15, 2016. Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) FY 2018 Call for Projects The Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) conducted a TIB Workshop on June 6, 2016 for their Urban Programs call for projects grant opportunity. City staff submitted TIB grant applications on August 19, 2016 for two Urban Arterial grants and one Urban Sidewalk grant. Final Grant funding requests are summarized here: Project Name Total Estimated Cost Final Grant Request City Match FY 2018 Urban Arterial Program (UAP) ($'s in 1,000's) Sullivan / Euclid Concrete Intersection (CN) $2,053 * $658 $218 Mission Avenue Improvement— Flora to Barker $4,333 $2,716 $806 f FY 2018 Urban Sidewalk Program (USP) ($'s in 1,000's) 32nd Ave Sidewalk Project, SR -27 to Evergreen II $472 $377 $98 * Includes $1.2 million in federal STP(U) Construction Grant funds This year, the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) received 366 applications from cities and counties, with requests for more than $345M in funding. TIB awarded 115 street and sidewalk improvement grants to local agencies totaling $121.2M at its November 18th meeting in Bothell, WA. The City was successful on all three grant submittals receiving $3.75M. *Information in bold indicates updates 6 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 20, 2016 Department Director Approval Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ® executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: EXECUTIVE SESSION: Potential Litigation GOVERNING LEGISLATION: [RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)] PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: "I move that Council adjourn into executive session for approximately fifteen minutes to discuss potential litigation, and that no action will be taken upon return to open session." BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell ATTACHMENTS: