The URL can be used to link to this page

2018, 03-13 Regular MeetingAGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL FORMAT MEETING Tuesday, March 13, 2018 6:00 p.m. Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers 10210 E Sprague Avenue Council Requests Please Silence Your Cell Phones During Council Meeting CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION: Pastor Manuel Denning, Fountain Ministries PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT PROCLAMATION: Honoring Nancy Hill, Retiring SCRAPS Director PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except those on this agenda as action items. (Action items include public hearings, and those items under NEW BUSINESS. Public Comments will be taken on those items at the time those items are discussed.) When you come to the podium, please state your name and city residence for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed Amendment, 2018 Transportation Improvement Program TIP) — Colin Quinn -Hurst — PUBLIC COMMENT 2. Proposed Resolution 18-002 Amending 2018 TIP — Colin Quinn -Hurst [no public comment] ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: 3. Barker BNSF Grade Separation Alternatives — John Hohman [opportunity for public comment] 4. 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 March 13, 2018 Request for Council Action Form, Total: $701,696.57 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending February 28, 2018: $441,670.18 c. Approval of February 13, 2018 Council Meeting Minutes, Special Meeting, Workshop d. Approval of February 20, 2018 Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session e. Approval of February 27, 2018 Council Meeting Minutes, Formal Meeting Council Agenda 03-13-18 Formal Format Meeting Page 1 of 2 NEW BUSINESS: 5. Second Reading Ordinance 18-006 False Alarm Code Amendment — Morgan Koudelka [public comment] 6. First Reading Ordinance 18-007, Small Cell — Erik Lamb [public comment] 7. Motion Consideration: CRAVE Contract — Lesli Brassfield [public comment] 8. Motion Consideration: Potential Grant Opportunities (FMSIB) — Adam Jackson [public comment] PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except those on this agenda as action items. (Action items include public hearings, and those items under NEW BUSINESS. Public Comments will be taken on those items at the time those items are discussed.) When you come to the podium, please state your name and city residence for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS 9. Potential Grant Opportunities (SRTC, SRTS, PBP, CSP) — Adam Jackson 10. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins INFORMATION ONLY (will not be reported or discussed):n/a CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT General Meetinji Schedule (meeting schedule is always subject to change) Regular Council meetings are generally held every Tuesday beginning at 6:00 p.m. The Formal meeting formats are generally held the 2nd and 41 Tuesdays. Formal meeting have time allocated for general public comments as well as comments after each action item. The Study Session formats (the less formal meeting) are generally held the 1St 3'=d and 5r'—' Tuesdays. Study Session formats DO NOT have time allocated for general public comments; but if action items are included, comments are permitted after those specific action items. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk at (509) 921-1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. Council Agenda 03-13-18 Formal Format Meeting Page 2 of 2 Spokane Valley rocdomotion of Rppreciation To Panty diff WHEREAS, The City of Spokane Valley incorporated March 31, 2003, and recognized the need 'Idm to contract for quality animal control services; and WHEREAS, The City and the County entered in an interlocal agreement for animal control services in the very first month Spokane Valley was a City; which contract has been re -negotiated and revised over the years, with the City and the County currently in a twenty-year agreement for those services; and WHEREAS, Spokane County Regional Animal Protection Services, or SCRAPS was the logical entity to contract with, and the County and the City realized the need to have someone of high caliber directing that agency; and WHEREAS, Nancy Hill worked for SCRAPS from February 1986 to 1995 as an animal protection officer, and in 1995, it was proper, fitting and wise to promote Nancy to Director of SCRAPS, and thanks to her conscientiousness, Spokane Valley's cost for these services was dramatically reduced; and WHEREAS, Through Nancy's hard work and diligence, the new SCRAPS facility including the remodel, became a reality without the necessity ofa bond measure; and WHEREAS, As Director, Nancy prepared SCRAPS' annual budget, and worked hard to manage the agency, which offers a wide range of programs and services, from animal protection and licensing, to free dog training classes and hosting a thriving volunteer program with over 600 participants. NOW, THEREFORE, 1, Rod Higgins, Mayor of the City of Spokane Valley on behalf of the Spokane Valley City Council and the citizens of the City of Spokane Valley, do hereby proclaim our appreciation to Nancy Hill, SCRAPS Director for her steadfast, dedicated and conscientious work; and we wish her well in her retirement. Dated this 13th day of March, 2018. L.R. Higgins, Mayor Meeting Date: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action 3-13-18 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ['new business ® public hearing ['information ❑admin. report ['pending legislation ['executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: Draft 2018 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Amendment #1 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.77.010 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council adopted the 2018-2023 Six Year TIP on May 27, 2017, Resolution #17-011; On July 25, 2017, Council passed a motion authorizing staff to apply for the Transportation Improvement Board's call for projects for sidewalk improvements on Mission Avenue from Bowdish Rd. to Union Rd. and for intersection improvements on Broadway Ave. from Argonne Rd. to MuIlan Rd. BACKGROUND: The projects and associated expenses listed in the adopted TIP are based upon available information at the time of adoption relative to available funds and how those funds could be allocated. This amendment includes updates to anticipated 2018 expenses for several previously adopted projects. In addition, several ongoing projects from 2017 are continuing into 2018, requiring the addition of these carry-over projects into the 2018 TIP. Finally, after the May 2017 adoption of the 2018 TIP, the City received award letters for grant opportunities from the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB), necessitating the addition of these new projects into the 2018 TIP. Based on this information, it is recommended that the 2018 TIP be amended to include these projects. The summary of proposed changes is attached to the Resolution as part of the next agenda item. OPTIONS: Conduct Hearing RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Conduct Hearing BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The project costs shown in the draft Amendment #1 to the 2018 TIP are based on the award funding letters received from the TIB. There are sufficient funds available to meet the local match requirements for these projects. STAFF CONTACT: Colin Quinn -Hurst, Senior Transportation Planner Mike Basinger, AICP, Economic Development Manger ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint (See next agenda item for Resolution and Proposed 2018 TIP Amendment) 2018 Transportation Improvement Program Amendments SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOM9C DEVELOPMENT 1 Updated Projects • Sullivan -Wellesley intersection improvement project (PE, R0111) • Argonne pavement preservation (PE, ROW, CN) • Barker Road / BNSF grade separation (RW, CN) • Pines (SR27) / BNSF grade separation (PE) SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 2 ■ Euclid reconstruct (CN) ■ Sullivan/Euclid concrete intersection (CN) ■ Appleway Trail - Pines to Evergreen (CN) ■ Appleway Trail - Sullivan to Corbin (CN) ■ North Sullivan ITS project (PE, ROW, CN) ■ 32nd Ave sidewalk (PE, CN) ■ 8th Ave sidewalk (PE, CN) Carry Over ■ Citywide reflective signal backplates (CN) ■ Citywide reflective signal backplates (CN) ■ Pines (SR27)/Grace intersection safety project (PE, CN) ■ ITS infill project (CN) ■ Sullivan west bridge (CN) ■ Wellesley sidewalk project (PE) SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 3 New • Broadway Avenue -Argonne and Mullan Intersections (CN) .gtn Ave. and Carnahan Road Intersection Project(ROW) • Mission Avenue Sidewalk - Bowdish to Union (PE) • Barker Road J' RSPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 4 SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT • 1 • • Meeting Date: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action 3-13-18 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ['new business ® public hearing ['information ❑admin. report ['pending legislation ['executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed Resolution #18-002: 2018 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Amendment #1 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.77.010 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council adopted the 2018-2023 Six Year TIP on May 27, 2017, Resolution #17-011; On July 25, 2017, council passed a motion authorizing staff to apply for the Transportation Improvement Board's call for projects for sidewalk improvements on Mission Avenue from Bowdish Rd. to Union Rd. and for intersection improvements on Broadway Ave. from Argonne Rd. to Mullan Rd. BACKGROUND: The projects and associated expenses listed in the adopted TIP are based upon available information at the time of adoption relative to available funds and how those funds could be allocated. This amendment includes updates to anticipated 2018 expenses for several previously adopted projects. In addition, several ongoing projects from 2017 are continuing into 2018, requiring the addition of these carry-over projects into the 2018 TIP. Finally, after the May 2017 adoption of the 2018 TIP, the City received award letters for grant opportunities from the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB), necessitating the addition of these new projects into the 2018 TIP. Based on this information, it is recommended that the 2018 TIP be amended to include these projects. Attached is a summary of the proposed changes. OPTIONS: Consider adoption of 2018 TIP Amendment #1 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Resolution 18-002 amending the 2018 Transportation Improvement Program Amendment #1 BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The project costs shown in the draft Amendment #1 to the 2018 TIP are based on the award funding letters received from the TIB. There are sufficient funds available to meet the local match requirements for these projects. STAFF CONTACT: Colin Quinn -Hurst, Senior Transportation Planner Mike Basinger, AICP, Economic Development Manger ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 18-002 and proposed 2018 TIP Amendment #1 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 18-002 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE 2018 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the Spokane Valley City Council Adopted the 2018-2023 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) on May 23 2017, Resolution #17-011, with such program acting as a guide for the coordinated development of the City's transportation system; and WHEREAS, changes in certain funding sources and project schedules have occurred; and WHEREAS, the attached Amended 2018 TIP incorporates said changes for year 2018; and WHEREAS, the amendments to the 2018 TIP are consistent with Spokane Valley's adopted Comprehensive Plan. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, as follows: Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the attached Amended 2018 TIP for the City of Spokane Valley for the purpose of guiding the design, development and construction of local and regional transportation improvements for the year 2018. Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Section 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect upon adoption. Adopted this 13th day of March, 2018. City of Spokane Valley L.R. Higgins, Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Resolution 18-002 Amending 2018 TIP City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Adopted 2018 Transportation Improvement Program (Adopted by Resolution 17-011 on 5/23/17) Proj. # Project From To Primary Source City Amount Total 2018 Project Costs 1 0205 Sprague / Barker Intersection Improvements 2 0249 Sullivan -Wellesley Intersection Imp Project 3 0252 Argonne Pavement Preservation 4 0143 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation 5 0259 North Sullivan ITS Project 6 0223 Pines (SR27)/BNSF Grade Separation 7 0248 Sprague Preservation 8 0254 2018 Street Preservation Projects 9 Appleway Trail 11 Argonne Concrete Reconstruction 12 Coleman Road Sidewalk 13 Evergreen Resurfacing 14 0123 Mission Ave. 15 Park Road #2 Funded Projects Planned Projects Sprague @ Sullivan @ Broadway Barker @ 1-90 Pines (SR27) Sullivan Various Evergreen Indiana 4th Ave Mission Flora Rd. Broadway Barker Wellesley Indiana BNSF RR Trent Evergreen CORBIN Various Sullivan Montgomery 2nd Ave Indiana Barker Rd. Indiana City County STP(U) Fed/Other CMAQ Other FED STP(U) City CMAQ Other Other FTA STP(U) TIB STP(U) City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works AMENDED 2018 Transportation Improvement Program Resolution 18-002, (3-13-2018) $ 33,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 77,000.00 $ 668,000.00 $ 109,000.00 $ 955,000.00 $ 203,000.00 $ 2,200,000.00 $ 22,000.00 $ 102,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 680,000.00 $ 22,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 120,000.00 $ 570,000.00 $ 1,400,000.00 $ 804,000.00 $ 1,630,000.00 $ 1,502,000.00 $ 2,200,000.00 $ 164,000.00 $ 512,000.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 32,000.00 $ 3,400,000.00 $ 162,000.00 $5,083,000 $ 12,561,000 $ 5,083,000 $ 12,561,000 Proj. # Project From To Primary Source City Amount Total 2018 Project Costs 1 0205 Sprague / Barker Intersection Improvement 2 0249 Sullivan -Wellesley Intersection Imp Project 3 0252 Argonne Pavement Preservation 4 0143 Barker Road / BNSF Grade Separation (RW) 5 0259 North Sullivan ITS Project 6 0223 Pines (SR27)/BNSF Grade Separation 7 0248 Sprague Preservation 8 0254 2018 Street Preservation Projects 9 Appleway Trail 11 Argonne Concrete Reconstruction 12 Coleman Road Sidewalk 13 Evergreen Resurfacing 14 0123 Mission Ave. 15 Park Road #2 0251 Euclid Reconstruct 0141 Sullivan/Euclid Concrete Intersection (RW/CN) 0222 Citywide Reflective Signal Backplates (PE/CN) 0227 Appleway Trail 0237 Appleway Trail 0259 North Sullivan ITS Project 0258 32nd Ave Sidewalk 0264 8th Ave Sidewalk 0263 Citywide Signal Backplates 0166 Pines (SR-27)/Grace Intersection Safety Project 0201 ITS Infill Project (CN) 0155 Sullivan West Bridge 0265 Wellesley Sidewalk Project (PE) Broadway Ave. 8th Ave and Carnahan Road Mission Ave. Sidewalk Barker Road (Euclid to Garland) PE Sprague @ Sullivan @ Broadway Barker @ 1-90 Pines (SR27) Sullivan Various Evergreen Indiana 4th Ave Mission Flora Rd. Broadway Flora Rd. Sullivan @ Various locations Pines Sullivan 1-90 SR27 Dickey Various Locations Pines (SR 27) @ Various locations Sullivan McDonald Argonne 8th @ Bowdish Euclid Barker Wellesley Mission BNSF RR Trent Evergreen CORBIN Various Sullivan Montgomery 2nd Ave Indiana Barker Rd. Indiana Barker Euclid Evergreen Corbin Trent Evergreen Thierman Grace Ave @Spokane River Evergreen Mullan Rd Carnahan Union Garland City County STP(U) Fed/Other CMAQ STP(U) City CMAQ Other Other FTA STP(U) TIB STP(U) City STP(U)/TIB HS IP STP RCO/COM CMAQ TIB CDBG HS IP HS IP CMAQ TIB SRTS TIB City TIB City $ 35,700.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 25,272.00 $ 267,200.00 $ 77,200.00 $ 572,000.00 $ 668,000.00 $ 2,160,000.00 $ 109,000.00 $ 804,000.00 $ 1,200,000.00 $ 1,200,000.00 $ 203,000.00 $ 1,502,000.00 $ 2,200,000.00 $ 2,200,000.00 $ 22,000.00 $ 175,000.00 $ 102,000.00 $ 512,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 32,000.00 $ 680,000.00 $ 3,400,000.00 $ 87,000.00 $ 162,000.00 $ 200,000.00 $ 300,000.00 $0.00 $ 14,000.00 $ 900.00 $ 81,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 572,000.00 $ 2,215,000.00 $ 101,500.00 $ 750,000.00 $ 83,000.00 $ 415,300.00 $ 32,000.00 $ 464,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 123,850.00 $200,000.00 $525,000.00 $ 74,000.00 $ 403,000.00 $0.00 $ 55,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 450,000.00 $ 2,250,000.00 $ 450,000.00 $ 450,000.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 60,000.00 $ 106,500.00 $ 106,500.00 $7,721,072 $21,333,850 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances, and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Funded Projects Updated Dollar Amounts 2017 Carry Over Projects New Projects CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 13, 2018 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: Barker Road/BSNF Grade Separation Project (Barker Road GSP) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.77.010, Perpetual Advanced Six -Year plans for coordinated transportation program expenditures. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: • May 7, 2013 — Administrative Report, Bridging the Valley • June 23, 2015 — Passed Resolution No. 17-011 adopting the 2016-2021 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), which included both the Barker Road and the Pines Road Grade Separation Projects (GSP) • April 5, 2016 — Admin Report for use of federal earmark funds • November 8, 2016 — Information Report on the status of the Barker GSP • November 15, 2016 — Administrative Report on the Barker GSP status • November 22, 2016 — Informational RCA • December 6, 2016 — Administrative Report • December 20, 2016 — Administrative Report • January 10, 2017 — Motion failed to contract with DEA for project design services • February 21, 2017 — Administrative Report • February 28, 2017 — Passed Resolution 17-006, amending the 2017 TIP • May 23, 2017 — Passed Resolution No. 17-011 adopting the 2018-2023 Six -Year TIP, which included the Grade Separation Project • August 22, 2017 — Passed motion to enter into a contract with DEA for the project's Phase 1 design • October 24, 2017 — Administrative Report to discuss alternatives • January 30, 2018 — Administrative Report to discuss alternatives with Council consensus to move the project forward with Alternative 5 • March 2, 2018 — Administrative Report to discuss alternatives BACKGROUND: The City previously received a federal earmark grant of $719,921 and a $1.5M state legislative appropriation for the Barker Road GSP. These grant funds can be used for the design, right -of way and construction phases of the project. The City has also received a grant from the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Fund (FMSIB) for up to 20 percent of total project cost, not to exceed $10M, which can be used in the construction phase only. In October 2017, the City applied for the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant. The City applied for the National Significant Freight and Highway Projects (INFRA) program in November 2017. In December 2017, the City was notified that it has been awarded $6.0M from the National Highway Freight Program (NHFP). This award requires the state legislature to appropriate the funds in the 2019-2020 biennium. The City must advertise bids no later than September of 2020 to qualify for the NHFP funds. On March 6, 2018, the City received preliminary confirmation that it has been awarded $9,020,149 from the TIGER 2017 program. A diamond interchange was originally proposed for the Barker GSP by SRTC's 2004 Bridging the Valley Evaluation and Study. The high cost of this concept, estimated at $36 million in 2015, made it difficult to obtain support from our regional funding partners. The current cost estimate for the interchange project is $41 million. Staff issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for engineering design services for the Barker Road GSP in 2016 using the diamond interchange concept design. A consultant was selected and a scope of work was developed to design the facility. On January 10, 2017, Council did not pass the motion to award the contract to the Consultant. Since then, other Barker GSP alignments and configurations have been identified that will cost less to implement than the originally proposed diamond interchange. Throughout 2017, City staff worked closely with the Washington State Department of Transportation to develop alternatives to the interchange design in order to implement a practical solution for the intersection. An RFQ was issued for planning and design of the Barker Road GSP in March 2017. David Evans & Associates (DEA) was selected as the most highly qualified firm. Council passed a motion on August 22, 2017 to move forward with the project design in two phases, and awarded the contract to DEA. In the first phase, the Consultant analyzed and compared six alternatives in terms of cost, right-of-way needs, impacts to existing properties, constructability, safety, and other pertinent project elements, so the City could select the preferred alternative. In the second phase, slated to begin in April 2018, the Consultant will complete the preliminary engineering design of the selected alternative. OPTIONS: Discussion only. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion only this evening. Staff will return March 20 seeking Council action on a motion on the preferred alternative. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: $19 Million STAFF CONTACT: John Hohman, Deputy City Manager ATTACHMENTS: Presentation ad / BNSF Railroad Gr de Separation Project at State Route 290 Spokane l0Valley Project Update March 13, 2018 John Hohman, PE, Deputy City Manager Debra Seeman, PE, David Evans &Associates Project Description March 13, 2018 The Barker Road/BNSF grade separation project replaces an existing at -grade crossing with an overpass of the railroad tracks and improves the intersection of Barker Road and State Route 290 (Trent Ave). Project Location March 13, 2018 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation Project Pines Rd!BNSF Grade Separation Project Flora Rd At -Grade Closure S` `"okane P .0.10Va11ey 4 Existing Conditions March 13, 2018 Spokane .000 Valley Northeast Industrial Area March 13, 2018 Local & Regional Benefits March 13, 2018 Improves Safety Eliminates At -Grade Railroad Crossing Improves Failing Level of Service Improves Emergency Access Reduces Train Noise Adds Non -Motorized Facilities Promotes Economic Development Activities Allows Industrial Growth of Area 6 Traffic and Crash Data Existing Trains per Day Vehicle ADT at Crossing Existing Level of Service Proposed Level of Service Daily Train Whistles Acres of Undeveloped Land Total Vehicle Accidents Since 2012 Injury Accidents Since 2012 Property Damage Accidents Since 2012 Crash Risk (fatalities/year) 56 5,500 F A 112 575 17 4 13 0.047 Spokane .0,0s Valley Economic Benefits March 13, 2018 Direct Impact of Project Improvements: $26 in Economic Output for the State 9,800 New Jobs Supported in the State $12.3M in New City General Fund Taxes $50.8M in New State General Fund Taxes Improves Freight Movements SP ""okan Va11ey �s Economic Development Efforts March 13, 2018 Began City Economic Development Program in 2012: Diversify Economy — Focus on Manufacturing Developed Partnerships with GSI and Spokane County Area is a Major Emphasis Of Our Program Future Development is Contingent on the Intersection Improvements 8 Diamond Interchange Evaluation March 13, 2018 Original Concept from SRTC's Bridging the Valley (2004) Revisited as Part of City's 2017 Alternative Evaluation Not the Most Cost - Effective Option Traffic Analysis does not Warrant the Use of Diamond Interchange Opinion of Probable Cost: Approximately $41 Million (Assumes 2020 Construction) 9 KEY ASSIGN (AI USES • Barker Rd overpaf<of RNSF and Trent Ave - $IQP.LV911,5 WIC bicycle Nines on Barker Rd - interchange ramFs 6e'hveem Barker Rd and Trent Ave - cksera of Wsllestep Ave bridge over front Are sr4 $Nsf q{r arc f Fforn Rd+31v%r at -grade eressing to Elle uses( N VISTA GRANDE EPR E„WELLESLEY AVE HAIL J\L ExiaSng nairin' Futra rralr'r --� Future GENERAL LEGEND Future briig& Future rvad;eav No S.. ale Future retaining veil City Council Actions March 13, 2018 10 April 2016 — Diamond Interchange Concept Council Approval to Obligate $720,000 Federal Earmark to Initiate Project Design July and August 2016 — Diamond Interchange Concept Request for Qualifications and Selection of Design Consultant for Engineering Phase November and December 2016 — Diamond Interchange Concept Staff Updates Council Understanding that 30% Design from Bridging the Valley was Invalid Spokane .000 Valley City Council Actions March 13, 2018 11 January 2017 — Diamond Interchange Concept Council Rejects Motion to Allocate $1.27M for Design Concerns with too Many Unknowns for the Project February 2017 — Staff Directed to Pursue Alternative Designs May 2017 — WSDOT Presentation to Council on Roundabouts August 2017 - Phase 1 Contract Awarded Alternatives Evaluation by Consultant October 2017 — Council Discussion on Alternatives January 2018 - Council Consensus to Select Alternative 5 March 2018 — Council Discussion on Project History & Alternatives,,„,,„ pokane Discussion ,_sValtey Design Considerations March 13, 2018 Original BTV Concept Assumed BNSF and Union Pacific (UP) Collated in same Track Rig ht -of -Way Six Railroad Tracks in the BTV Concept UP and BNSF Decided not to Collate Tracks in the same Right -of -Way BNSF Plans to Install Second Track in 2019-2020 Bridge Span will be Coordinated with BNSF to Account for Future Needs Spokane .000 Valley 2017 Alternatives Evaluation March 13, 2018 Phase 1 — Alternatives Evaluation Identify & Compare Several Scenarios All Scenarios Considered the Possible Impacts of Vehicle & Pedestrian Safety, Right -of -Way Needs, Traffic Modelling & Total Project Costs Roadway Alignment Overpass vs Underpass Signal vs Roundabout 13 Evaluate Different Roadway Alignments Affecting Barker Road, SR -290, and Wellesley Avenue Evaluate Grade Separation Alternatives for Barker Road & BNSF Railroad Tracks Intersection Control & Traffic Safety Analyses S`P Okane _ Valley 2017 Alternatives Evaluation March 13, 2018 Alternative 1 $27.3M Alternative 2 $19.8M Alternative 3 $24.2M Alternative 4 $11.4M Alternative 6 $22.0M 14 Spokane Alternative 5 4000 Valley $19.0M Alternative 1 March 13, 2018 New Barker Overpass Connects to Trent West of Existing Raises Trent "21 Feet New Barker N40 Feet Above Existing Grade Trent/Wellesley to East Remain Unchanged Opinion of Probable Cost: Approximately $27.3 Million (Assumes 2020 Construction) 15 uuc i. FEE. 1 • BARKER RD 1 BNSF GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT j ALTERNATIVE 1 PRELIMINARY —mogra— L) Sikilume 1 .tt: d4ldll]MT .T RPM. NOTE LEGEND Alternative 2 March 13, 2018 New Barker Overpass — Shifted to the East Raises Trent N 18 Feet New Barker "35 Feet Above Existing Grade Wellesley Realigned South to Connect to Barker Opinion of Probable Cost is Approximately $19.8 Million (Assumes 2020 Construction) 16 NOTE BARKER RD 1 BNSF GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT ALTERNATIVE 2 PRELIMINARY Alternative 3 March 13, 2018 New Barker Underpass — Shifted to the East Lowers Trent N 18 Feet New Barker "20 Feet Below Existing Grade Wellesley Realigned South to Connect to Barker Opinion of Probable Cost is Approximately $24.2 Million (Assumes 2020 Construction) 17 2. .� SC4; 1. Fsil 7-1 f. r J pI _BARKER RD ! BNSF GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT $ jVaner TF' TOeFR fn _... gPeV ALTERNATIVE 3 PRELIMINARY Alternative 4 March 13, 2018 New Barker Connects to Wellesley Maintaining Existing Connection to Trent Raises Trent N6 Feet Opinion of Probable Cost is Approximately $11.4 Million (Assumes 2020 Construction) 18 uuc i. GEE • rfC'" `fT SflikArke CAM ocro... VIII er_..eu ALTERNATIVE 4 PRELIMINARY BARKER RD 1 BNSF GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT LEGEND Nowa NOTE ;ev10£Yra I-)' '^.4CI.tf8r- Alternative 5 March 13, 2018 New Barker Overpass — Slightly Realigned to the East Raises Trent N 10 Feet New Barker "32 Feet Above Existing Grade Opinion Of Probable Cost is Approximately $19.0 Million (Assumes 2020 Construction) 19 SCALE. IN fFEI ICO LEGEND NOTE BARKER RD 1 BNSF GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT ALTERNATIVE 5 PRELIMINARY �9dvla�v„Hs �� '^.4CI.tf8r- Alternative 6 March 13, 2018 Combination of Alternatives 2 & 5 Maintains Barker Alignment Raises Trent N 10 Feet New Barker "32 Feet Above Existing Grade Wellesley Realigned South to Connect to Barker Opinion of Probable Cost is Approximately $22.0 Million (Assumes 2020 Construction) 20 NT AVE STA 10.1912 ARK. R[LSTA 003 AC WEI LE LET IIWELHEL,, TRENT NEL,SLEY ROI STA_ rs93+, CURVE TRENT 1 CURVE TRENT 2 CURVE'TRENT 2 D eka= 6°4315" Dean= 14°22'41" Doha. 15°2414 R. 2024.00' R. 70020' R. 1580.00' T= 12012' T= 80.81' T. 213.76' L. 24036 Ft. L. 17668 Ft. L. 424.94 Ft. 0%= 4.453 'i50MPH) e%- 8.0% '145320X0 0%= 6.015 150MPH) CURVE EB TRENT 1 CURVE EB TRENT 2 CURVE BARKER 1 Deka. 38°21'09" Deka= 25°5759" 00114• 15°50'26" R. 400-00' R. 81220' 301 400.00 T- 139.11' T- 187.89' T. 55.65' L A 26] 75 FL L= 367.16 F1_ L= 110.59 Ft. e %= 2.0% 13032053 a%= 5.8% 145MPH3 OA. NC OOMPH) BARKER & TRENT ALTERNATIVE 6 CURVE WELLESLEY 1 CURVE WELLESLEY 2. Delo= 10'2r10" DAM= 30'31'25" R. 510.00' R. 510.00' T= 177.86' T= 178.27 L• 342.20 Ft. L0 342,91 Ft. 015= NO (35MPH) 0%= N0 3540APH3 "SUPERELEVATION RATES BASED ON OPEN ROADWAY DESIGN NOTE: AREAS LISTED ARE Public Outreach March 13, 2018 21 October 4, 2017 — Meeting & Bus Tour with Secretary of Transportation Sponsored by Senator Padden October 18, 2017 — Public Meeting November 15, 2017 — Meeting & Bus Tour with Washington State Transportation Commission November 16, 2017 — Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce January 22, 2017 — SRTC Transportation Advisory Committee February 28, 2018 — SRTC Transportation Technical Committee Ongoing Outreach Meetings with Local Businesses & Agencies Police & Fire Departments, Spokane Industrial Park , Centennial Properties, Local Property Owners Spokane _ Valtey Public Meeting March 13, 2018 October 18, 2017 Meeting Date Meeting Attendees = 123 Most Favor of the Project Most Prefer Alternatives 1 & 5 Most Did Not Like Alternative 4 Most Other Common Concerns: Closing of Flora Impact of Roundabout to Traffic Flow Longer Trips for Wellesley Traffic with Alternatives 2 and 3 22 A large percentage of the people attending were from the Highland Estates neighborhood in Spokane County Have Concerns with Impacts to Del Rey Drive Want a Second Access to Their Neighborhood Hope this Project will Solve Their Problems with Access onto Trent Spokane .000 Valley Preferred Alternative —Alternative 5 March 13, 2018 January 2018 Basis of Design (WSDOT Requirement) 3 -Leg Roundabout Does NOT Preclude Connection to North Estimated Total Cost: $19.0 Million IF 0 200 5COLE IN FEET ,00 HIGH EST LLC •11°1 Pve se HIGH -EST. LLCr HIGH EST LLC EMIPANSF HART 8 HART ENTERPRISES, LLC, JUN COMMERC.L. LLC LEGEND JOVI LLC MEADOWHILL PROPERTIES. LLC ��el1Qv ... DATE OCTOBER 2017 ll` BARKER RD / BNSF GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT ALTERNATIVE 5 BY! RPOU PRELIMINARY I NOTE 4"0155OCI11 E5 .4c. FD� DAVID EVC. Intersection Safety March 13, 2018 Roundabouts Outperform Signals: 37% Fewer Collisions 40% Fewer Pedestrian Collisions 75% Fewer Injury Collisions 90% Fewer Fatalities 24 f 4#•. f 4 4 * 4 Roundabout ] Spokane ii Vattey Project Specific Safety Analysis March 13, 2018 Existing Intersection (2012-2016) 3.4 Crashes/Year 0.8 Fatal & Injury Crashes/Year Signalized Intersection (2040) 3.7 Crashes/Year 1.3 Fatal & Injury Crashes/Year Roundabout (2040) 2.3 Crashes/Year 0.3 Fatal & Injury Crashes/Year 25 mow TRENT . VF, 5 T 1C1-19 t' = LHAI-:14ER RD. ST.A. 1008e.35 O Merging Conflict (7 Total) Diverging Conflict (3 Total) Roundabout vs Signal March 13, 2018 Additional Roundabout Benefits Level of Service Roundabout LOS — A/B Signal LOS — C Reduced Annual Maintenance $5,000-$10,000 Less Reduced Congestion, Noise, and Air Pollution (Less Idling) 26 mow TRENT 0)F 5 T 1C1-19 t' = F:'r;1•: P 1 1 RD. ST.A . 1008e.35 O Merging Conflict (7 Total) Diverging Conflict (3 Total) Roundabout Perception March 13, 2018 Shifting Public Opinion Prior to Construction 65% Have a Negative Opinion Toward Roundabouts After Construction Nearly All Opinions are Neutral or Positive Towards Roundabout 27 45% 40% 35% -` 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% fj Federal Highway Adm:nisvaLion Public Attitude Towards Roundabouts (Before and After Construction) Very Negative 1 t i3efore After Negative Neutral Positive Very Positive Source: NCHRP Synthesis 264 Source: NCHRP Synthesis 264 Project Funding March 13, 2018 28 2018 Estimated Total Project Cost: Secured Funds: Federal Earmark WA State FMSIB (20%) * WA State Legislative Appropriation (Must Spend by 06/2019) National Highway Freight Program (NHFP) (Obligate by 09/2020) BNSF Contribution (Estimated) TIGER 2017 City Funds Budgeted Total Secured Funds * NOTE: FMSIB Award — 20% of Total Cost, $10M Limit, Construction Only $19,000,000 $ 720,000 $ 3,800,000 $ 1,500,000 $ 6,000,000 $ 300,000 $ 9,020,149 $ 3,630,000 $ 24,970,149 Spokane .0.10Valley State Traffic Concurrency March 13, 2018 29 Washington Administration Code — WAC 365-196-840(6)(a) In the case of transportation, an ordinance must prohibit development approval if the development causes the level of service on a locally owned transportation facility to decline below the standards adopted in the transportation element of the comprehensive plan unless improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of development are made concurrent with the development... Spokane .000 Valley State Traffic Concurrency March 13, 2018 30 WAC 365-196-840(6)(a)(ii) "Concurrent with development" means that improvements or strategies are in place at the time of development, or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six years. Spokane .000 Valley Local Traffic Concurrency March 13, 2018 31 SVMC 22.20.0206 A finding of concurrency requires that adequate facilities are available when the service demands of development occur, or in the case of transportation "concurrent with development" shall mean that improvements or strategies are in place at the time of development, or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six years. The cumulative impact of development should be considered when making this determination. Spokane _ Valley Summary March 13, 2018 32 Bridging the Valley Interchange Concept not a Practical Solution Coordinated Planning Efforts with WSDOT, Stakeholders, Public Full Suite of Alternatives Developed & Evaluated Identified a Fiscally Responsible and Attainable Project Solution Ensures Adequate Infrastructure for all Anticipated Growth Spokane ii Valley Next Steps March 13, 2018 33 Complete Conceptual Work (Early 2018) Alternatives Evaluation Report Conduct Additional Public Outreach Seek Council Approval for Phase 2 Consultant Contract Design Documents Right -Of -Way Services Construction Documents Complete Phase 2 Elements (2018 — 2020) Phase 3 Elements Construction (2020 — 2021) Project Closeout (2022) Spokane .000 Valley Questions March 13, 2018 zao SCALE IN FEET a � S111)I�dELC jValley DATE: OCTOBER 2011 8Y' RPBU BARKER RD / BNSF GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT ALTERNATIVE 5 PRELIMINARY NOTE Spokane .000 Valley CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: February 13, 2018 Department Director Approval: l/1 Cheek all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers: VO[TCflI R LIST VOUCIIER NUMBERS 02121/2018 43986-44007 02/21/2018 7557-7562 02/22/2018 021221201.8 02/28/2018 03/01/2018 03/0212018 03/06/2018 44008-44024 6194; 6205-6206; 6208; 6210; 44025 44026-44075 (-44036) 7563-7569 44076-44080 6207, 6209, 6211, 6219-6221, 6232, 44081-44082 GRAND TOTAL: TOTAL AMOUNT $67,856.38 $1,133.50 $25,492.97 $72,401.33 $208,446.61 $1,151.00 $12,785.58 $312,429,20 $701,696.57 Explanation of Fund Numbers found on Voucher Lists #001 - General Fund 001.011,000.5 1 L City Council 001.013.000,513. City Manager 001.013,015,515. Legal 001.016.000. Public Safety 001.018.013.513. Deputy City Manager 001.0]8.01'1,514. Finance 001.018.016.518. Human Resources 001.032.000, Public Works 001.058.050.558. CED - Administration 001,058.051,558. CTD— Economic Development 001.058.055.558. CED — Development Services -Engineering 001.058.056.558. CEI) — Development Services -Planning 001.058.057.558 C'F:D — Building 001.076.000.576. Parks & Rec Administration 001.076.300.576. Parks & Rec-Maintenance 001.076.301.571. Parks & Rec-Recreation 001.076.302.576. Parks &. Ree- Aquatics 001.076.301.575_ Parks & Rec- Senior Center 001.076.305.571. Parks & Rec-CenterPlace 001.090.000.511. General Gov't- Council related 1)01.090.000.514. General Gov't -Finance related 001.090.000.517. General Gov't -Employee supply 001.090_0{]0.518. General Gov't- Centr•a[ized 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 & Economia. 001.090 000.56(1_ General Gov't -Social Services 001.090.000.594. General Gov't -Capital Outlay 001.090,000.595, General Gov't-Paveinent Preservation Other Funds 101 — Street Fund 103 Paths & Trails 105—]1otcUivintelTax 106- Solid Waste 120 - C..entcrPlace Operating Reserve 121— Service Level Stabilization Reserve 122 — Winter Weather Reserve 204 — Dehrt Service 301 REET 1 Capital Proiects 302 — REST 2 Capital Projects 303 — Street Capital Projects 309 — Parks Capital Grants 310—Civic Bldg Capital Projects 311 Pavement Preservation 312 —Capital Reserve 314 — Railroad Grade Separation Projects 402—tormiter Management 403 — Aquifer Protection Area 501— Equipment. Reulal & Replacement 502 — Risk Management 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 vch1ist 0212112018 10:19:173AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 43986 2,21/2018 006402 ARAMARK UNIFORM & CAREER 43987 2/21/2018 006491 AUTOMOTIVE RENTALS, INC 43988 2121/2018 000030 AVISTA 43989 2121/2018 001169 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 43990 2121/2018 003795 CLEARWATER SUMMIT GROUP 43991 2121/2018 000795 EARTHWORKS RECYCLING INC. 43992 2/21/2018 002308 FINKE, MELISSA 43993 21211/2018 003188 GENERAL FIRE EXTINGUISHER SERV 43994 212//2018 001635 ISS FACILITY EVENT SERVICES 1990565741 1990576123 CSV REFUND Jan 2018 Jan 2018 Jan 2018 16-085 Retainage 357234 February 2018 February 2015 0071672 1261134 1261135 1261136 1263109 1263112 1263113 43995 2121/2018 006415 MARMON. TONY BLD -2018-0388 Fund/Dept 001.076.305.575 001.0 76.305.575 001.0 00.000.321 001.0 76.300, 576 101.042.000.542 001.040.043.558 309.223.40.00 001.076.305.575 001.078.301.571 001.070.301.571 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.0 76.305.575 001,076.305.575 001.078.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.040.043.322 Description/Account Amount SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE Tota[: CSV ENDORSEMENT REFUND Tota[: UTILITIES: PARKS MASTER AVISTA UTILITIES: CFW MASTER AVISTA J. Toter: PETTY CASH: 16318,19,29 Total : RETAINAGE RELEASE: BROWNS F Total: RECYCLING COLLECTION AT CPI. Tota[ : INSTRUCTOR PMT INSTRUCTOR PMT Total : FERE EXTINGUISHER SERVICE ANI Tota[: EVENT SVCS AT CENTERPLACE EVENT SVCS AT CENTERPLACE EVENT SVCS AT CENTERPLACE EVENT SVCS AT CENTERPLACE EVENT SVCS AT CENTERPLACE EVENT SVCS AT CENTERPLACE Total : 445.21 445.21 890.42 13.00 13.00 9,875.28 28.786.67 38, 662.15 8.C2 8.02 7,354.22 7,354.32 35.00 35.00 65.25 225.00 290.25 178.02 178.92 89.55 52.68 52.68 52.68 42.14 31.611 321,34 PERMIT REFUND BLD -2018-0388 50.00 Pace: 1 vch rist 02/2112018 10:19:03AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 43995 2/2112018 006415 006415 MARMON, TONY 43996 2,21/2018 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC V+ATER CO {Continued} 19423835 19423836 43997 2121/2018 000709 SENSKE LAWN & TREE CARE INC. 8245373 43998 2121/2018 003231 SHERWINIWILLIAMS COMPANY 43999 2121/2018 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST #3 44000 2/2112018 001992 SPOKANE HOTEL MOTEL ASSOC 44001 2/21/2018 000420 SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DIST 44002 2121/2018 001281 SPOKANE VALLEY ARTS COUNCIL 44003 2/21/2018 000492 $TINTZI INSURANCE INC 44004 2/21/2018 001969 SUNSHINE DISPOSAL 3780-6 378"-4 4096-3 Feb 2018 1721 Feb 2018 Feb 2018 CSV REFUND 1256010 44005 2/21/2018 000167 VERA WATER & POWER 005338-007 028004-000 Fund/Dept 309.000.227.595 300.000.227.595 001.033.000518 001, 076,305.575 001.07'8.305.575 001, 076.305.575 a escriptionfAccount Amount Total UTILITIES: APPLEWAY TRAIL UTILITIES: APPLEWAY TRAIL Total CITY HALL WINTER SVCS Total SUPPLIES AT CENTERPLACE SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE Total 402.402.000.531 WATER CHARGES FOR FEB 2018 Total 001,076,305.575 2018 ALLIED PARTNER DUES Total 001.013.015.515 CERTIFIED DEATH CERTIFICATES Total 001.090.000.550 2016 LODGING TAX GRANT REINIB Total 001.000,000.321 CSV ENDORSEMENT REFUND Total : 't01.042.000.542 TRANSFER STATION: CPV+ JAN 20. Total : 309 ,000,227.595 309.000.227.595 UTILITIES: APPLEWAY TRAIL UTILITIES: APPLEWAY TRAIL Total 50.00 40.80 56.56 97.36 859.52 869.52 20.82 13.76 183.73 218.31 79.48 79.48 350.00 350.00 60.00 60.00 11.000.00 11,000.00 26.00 25.00 913.23 913.23 26.00 58.88 84.88 44006 2121/2018 003175 VISIT SPOKANE Jan 2018 105.000.000.557 2018 LODGING TAX GRANT REIMB 5,833.34 Page; 2 vchlist 02/21/2018 10:19:0 3AM Voucher List Page: 3 Spokane Valley Bank code: aPbank Voucher Date Vendor invoice FundWDept DescriptioniAccount Amount 44006 V21/2018 003175 003175 VISIT SPOKANE (Continued) Totat : 5,833.34 44007 212//2018 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 0603193-2681-9 402.402.000.531 VVASTE MGMT: MAINT SHOP JAN 2 179.05 0604829-2681-7 001.033.000.515 WASTE MGMT: CITY HALL JAN 201 351.79 Tatar : 530.84 22 Vouchers for bank Code : apban`c 22 Vouchers in this report r. the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perju?y, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the Inbar performed as described herein end that the claire is just, due and an unpaid obrigation against tfie City of Spa%acne Vairey, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Council Member Date Date Sank total : £.7,855.38 Total vouchers : 67,856_3B Page: 3 vchrist 02/21/2018 2:51:03PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : pk-re Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 7557 2/1412018 005385 KONZAL KRYSTAL PARKS REFUND 001.237,10,99 DEPOSIT REFUND: ROOM 216 52.00 Total : 52.00 7558 2/14/2018 006489 NEIN HOPE CHRISTIAN CENTER PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND' GREAT ROOM1I 175.00 Total : 175.00 7559 2/14/2018 006485 R.APASEY, ROY PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM 149.50 Total : 149.50 7560 2114/2018 005490 RATCLI FF. ROBYN PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM/; 500.00 Total : 500.00 7561 2114/2018 006494 ROSS, DAVID PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 RESERVATION FOR ROOM 110 138.00 Total : 136.00 7562 2/14/2018 000597 VALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOL PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND; GREAT ROOW 121.00 Total: 121.00 6 Vouchers for bank code : pk-ref Bank totai : 1,133.50 6 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 1,133.50 vchlist Voucher List 02/22/2018 11:12:01AM Spokane VaFey Page: Bank code : atbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 44008 44009 44010 44011 2122/2018 000168 BLACK BOC NETWORK SVC 2/22/2018 000571 CODE PUBLISHING COMPANY 212212018 002804 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 2/22/2018 005315 DILLON,JACOB SPO -163169 59183 79356451 EXPENSES 44012 2122/2018 003615 DLT SOLUTIONS 51362808 51382818 44013 212212018 000278 DRISKELL, CARY 44014 2?22120118 003274 EXCHANGE PUBLISHING LLC 44015 2/2212018 001926 FARR, SARAH 44016 2/22/2018 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC EXPENSES 481363 481364 481365 481367 481383 481369 EXPENSES 48260 48261 48262 48263 48264 48265 Fund/Dept 00t090.000618 0011.013.000.513 001.090.000,548 0010113.015.515 001.040.041.543 001,940.041 543 001.011015.515 001,040.043.558 001.040.043.558 001.040.041558 001.040.941558 001.040.043.558 091.040.041558 001.018.014.514 001.040.043.558 001.011000.513 001.040.043.558 001.940.043.558 001.040.043,558 001.040.04 3.558 DescriptionlAccount IT SUPPORT Amount Total ELECTRONIC CODE UPDATE Tota! COMPUTER LEASE 3050 MICRO Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : AUTODESK SUBSCRIPTION RENE' ARCHITECTURE ENGINEERING CC Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION Total : EXPENSE REITARURSEMENT LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION Total 1,089.90 1,089.90 425.30 425.30 231.68 231.68 21.80 21.80 9,931.50 2,317.27 12, 248,77 44.72 44.72 25.26 120.67 82.95 82.16 67.15 56.06 4-34.47 44.15 44.15 265,60 28.90 96.90 96.05 77.35 64.60 Page: vch1ist 02/22/2018 11:12: Q1 AIV1 Voucher List Spokane Valley r Page: Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 44016 212212018 001447 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC (Continued) 44017 212212018 006493 IDAHO WASHINGTON AQUIFER 2017-28 44018 212212018 000696 MITEL BUSINESS SYSTEM INC 99388321 44019 212212018 004850 NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS, HRA PLAN 10120933 44020 212212018 000852 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 191583934001 1933714850411 103728 324001 105443787001 99841165311001 44021 212212015 000031 ROYAL BUSINESS SYSTEMS 1N76297 44022 2/2212018 002835 SCS DELIVERY INC 11204 44023 212212018 002597 -MISTED PAIR ENTERPRISES LLC 1302018 252018 44024 2/2212018 000087 VERFZON WIRELESS 17 Vouchers for bank code : apb3nk 17 Vouchers in this report 9800118555-1 9800118555-2 Fund/Dept 402.402.000.531 001.090.000.518 001.018.016.518 001,018,014.514 001.090.000.518 001,090,900.518 991.090, 000,518 001.090.000.518 0011.040.043.558 001.011, 000.511 001.011.000 511 991.011.000.511 001.075.302,576 001.040.041.558 Description/Account ONE-YEAR MEMBERSHIP MITEL SUPPORT RENEWAL Amount Total Total : Total: FLEX SPENDING ADMINISTRATION Total : OFFICE SUPPLIES: IT COMPUTER HARDWARE - NON -CA COMPUTER HARDWARE NON -CAF OFFICE SUPPLIES: EXECUTIVE & COMPUTER HARDWARE NON -CAF Total : JANUARY 2018 COPIER COSTS Total : BROADCASTING Total : BROADCASTING COUNCIL MTGS ADDT'L TASKS Total : JANUARY 2018 VER!ZON CELL PH MS SURFACE FOR INSPECTORS Total : 629.40 1,500.00 1,500.00 1,335.50 1.338.50 360.00 360.00 14,01 44.02 44.02 '07.38 27/5 237.18 1,355.30 7,35E_30 100.00 100.00 1,522.00 150.00 1,672.00 1,965.63 1,795.17 3,760.80 Bank total : 25,492.97 Total vouchers : 25,492.97 Pace: vchlist Voucher List 02/2212018 11:28:42AM Spokane Valley Papa: — Bank code: apbank Voucher Data Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description1Account Amount 6194 2/2012018 002227 IDAHO TAX COEv1MISSECN Ben7E46555 001.231.50,03 IDAHO STATE TAX BASE: PAYMENT 2.169.95 Total : 2,1G9.95 6205 212Di 7015 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A PLAN Ben78661 041.231.14.00 401A. PAYMENT 31.724.40 Total : 31,724,40 6206 2120!2016 000682 EFTPS E3rn78663 001.231.11,00 FEDERAL TAXES: PAYMENT 29,351.28 Total : 29,3 51.28 6208 2+20+2015 000145 VANTAGE POINT TRANSFER AGENTS_ 457 PLr Eien76665 001.231.18,00 457 DEFERRED CQMPENSATIQN. PAYI 8,312.35 Total : 8.312.34 6210 2/20/20/8 000162 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A EXEC PE Ben78867 001.231.14.00 401 EXEC PLAN: PP.YMENT 637.50 TolaI : 637.5D 44025 2/2012018 006466 EMPLOYMENT SECURITY COLLECTION Ben78657 101.231.20.00 PAYMENT: JASEN STANLEY— 205.51 Total : 205.81 4 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 72,401.33 .6 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 72,401.33 vchlist 02/2812018 8:32:22AIVI Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 44023 2/28/2018 000648 ABADAN REPROGRAPHICS 44027 2/2612018 002543 AER ELECTRIC EQUIPMENT & TOOLS 225764 44028 2/2812018 000334 ARGUS JANITORIAL LLC Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 86275 001-040.041.543 SUPPLIES INVO1910 44029 2/2812018 003337 ARROW CONSTRUCT:ON SUPPLY INC 208958 44030 2/28/2018 001122 CAMERON-REILLYLLC 4403: 2/2812018 002562 CD'A METALS 44032 2/2812018 000322 CENTURYLINK 44033 44034 44035 44036 2/28120/8 001888 CD1/1CAST 2/28!2018 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION #19 101-000.000.542 001,033.000.515 101.042.000, 542 RE-AIi AGE RELEASE 402.223.40.00 298435 297204 297404 299885 300271 FEBRUARY 2018 FEBRUARY 2018 101.000.000.542 101.001000.542 101,000.000.542 101.000.000,542 101,000.000,542 001.075.000,576 001.090.400.518 SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS Total Total JANITORIAL SVCS: CITY HALL, PRE Total SUPPLIES: STREET Total : SMALL WORKS RETAINAGE BELE} Total SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS Total : 2018 PHONE SVCS: ACCT 509 Z14 - CITY HALL PHONES Feb 18 -Par 17 2015 001.090.000,5118 INTERNET CITY HALL Feb 2018 2/2812018 000503 CONTRACT DESIGN ASSOCIATES INC 42111 2/2812018 001880 CROWN WEST REALTY LLC MARCH 2018 001- 078-305.5575 001.0 40.042.558 101-042-000.643 UTILITIES: CP Total Total : Total FURNITURE: ECONOVIC DEVELOP VCI Total COMMON AREA CHARGES FOR M/ 182.70 182.70 11.42 11.42 9,11 5,45 9,11 5.45 46,75 46-78 9,065.00 9,065.00 177.18 202.91 144,74 189.66 73.72 788.21 538.79 239.29 778.08 116.17 116.17 75.35 75.35 1.635-4 1,835.4 7.33 Page=' vchClst 02128/2018 8:32:22AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page:' Bank code : apcar.k Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 44036 2/28/2018 001880 001880 CROWN WEST REALTY LLC 44037 2/28/2018 003255 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS 44038 2128}2018 002604 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 44039 2128/2018 0(11194 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 44040 2/28/2018 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 44041 44042 44043 44044 21281.018 002920 DIRECTV INC 2/28/2018 000278 DRISKELL, CARY 2/28/2018 000999 EASTERN WA ATTORNEY SVC INC 2/28/2018 003274 EXCHANGE PUBLISHING LLC 44045 212812018 001232 FASTENAL CO 44046 2128/2018 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC (Continued) 899694 79394881 79396449 2017 -WAR 0465 07 2018-WAR048507 R E-313-ATB80213039 R E-313-ATB80213047 33463891575 EXPENSES 112711 481366 481775 IDLEW127315 IDLEW127704 I D LEW1 27792 Fund/Dept 101.042.000.543 001.093.000.548 001.3 9 3.000.548 402.402.000.5 31 402.402.000.631 101.042.000.642 101.000.000.542 101.042.000.543 001.013.015,515 001.013.016.515 106.000,000.537 10 6.000.000.5 37 101.042.000.542 101.042, 000.542 101.042.000.542 48287 106.000.000.537 Description/Account Amount TOWER RENTAL Total Total COMPUTER LEASE: 001-8922117-0 COMPUTER LEASE 3050 MICRO Total STORMWATER PERMIT REMAINDE MUNICIPAL STORMWATER PHASE Total REIMBURSE TRAFFIC SVCS REIMBURSE SNOW & ICE MAINTEI Total CABLE SERVICE FOR MAINTENAN Total: EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADVERTISING ADVERTISING SUPPLIES: STREET DEPT. SUPPLIES: STREET DEPT. SUPPLIES: STREET DEPT. Total Total Total 7.33 212.33 212.33 862.93 231.66 1,094.61 15, 87813 33, 964,56 49, 943. 29 2,935.04 15,71924 18,654.28 80.14 80.14 341,62 341.62 85.00 85.00 26.07 24.75 50.82 8.74 114.66 20.49 143.91 ADVERTISING 56.00 Total : 56.00 Page; vchlist 62/2812018 8:32:22AN] Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 22) —3— Bankcode_ apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 44047 212812018 000007 GRAINGER 44048 2128/2018 002568 G RA N I C U S I KC 44049 2128/2018 000692 GUS ,:CHNSON FORD 44050 2123/20'18 000002 H & H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. 44051 2/2812018 002538 HYDRAULICS PLUS INC 44052 2/2812018 002810 INLAND NW PARTNERS AS SO C 44053 212812013 001104 MCCAIN INC. 44054 2/28/2018 005037 MZF ICAN CQNTRtJCTICN INC 44055 212812018 002203 NAPAAUTO PARTS 4-4056 212812018 000307 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER 4-4057 212812018 004621 O RE I LLY AUTOMOTIVE STORES INC 9702345902 94893 498129 877759 AR53439 AR63440 AR63441 AR63442 AR64246 AR64247 22164 SPRING 2018 1NV0226752 1NV0225754 PAY APP 20 0538-849401 JANUARY 2018 2862-247846 Fund/Dept 101.000.000.542 CC1.011 000.511 101.042.000.542 402.402.000.5 31 001,4't 8.014.514 001.01 6.016.518 001.013.015.515 001.01 3.000.513 001.01 1.000.511 001.040.043,558 101.000.000.542 001.040.042.558 303.000.26 3.542 303.000,222.595 313.000.2 15.594 101.000.000.542 001.016.000.589 101.000.000.542 Description/Account Amount SUPPLIES: SNOWPLOWS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Total Total: REPAIR & MAINT_ SUPPLIES - #5-21 REPAIR #5-400 - 2011 F250 Total COPIER COSTS - FINANCE COPIER COSTS - HR COPIER COSTS - LEGAL COPIER COSTS - OPS/ADMEN COPIER COSTS - COUNCIL/CITY M COPIER COSTS - PERMIT CTR Total : SLJPPL[ES FOR SNOWPLOWS Total : SPRING 2018 MEETING REGITRA Total: 0283 -YELLOW LEDS 0222-YELOW LEDS Total: 0215 -CITY HALL CO?.ISTRUCTION C Total SUPPLIES FOR SNOWPLOWS Total STATE REMITTANCE Total SUPPLIES FOR SNOWPLOWS 59.90 69.90 775.79 775.79 223.32 237,26 460.58 14.13 63.33 339.59 316.49 297.34 93.17 1,124.08 690.04 690.04 81.00 80.00 4,700.16" 1,740.83 6,440.96 9,572.66 9,572.66 92.58 92.68 42,528.23 42, 528.23 130.43 Page: vchlist 0212812018 8:32:22A1'd1 Voucher List Spokane Valley Page; Bank code; apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 44057 2/2812018 004621 ORE:LLYAUTOMOTIVE STORES INC (Con1;inued) 2862-248519 2862-248587 2862-248869 2662-248876 2862-248895 2862-246949 2862-246951 2862-249065 2862-250199 44456 2/28120/16 0011604 PACIFIC NW PAPER 44859 2/28/2018 002193 ASCEND TECHNOLOGES INC 44060 2128/2018 042816 ROADWISE INC 44061 212812018 006424 SCHREINCL, JEREMIAI o 44062 2125/20/8 002531 SIX ROBSLEES INC 44063 2/26/2018 000090 SPOKANE CO INFO SYSTEMS 44064 2/28/2018 000308 SPOKANE CO PROSECUTING ATTY 44065 2/28/2018 000658 SPOKANE CO SUPERIOR COURT 44066 2/28/2018 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 187657 8874 5732.4 57325 EXPENSES 5-519009 50317129 JANUARY 2018 3550, 345 51504191 Fund/Dept 101.042.0 0 0.542 001 040.041.543 001,040.041.543 001.040.041.543 001.040,041.543 001.040.0411.543 001.040.041.543 101,042.000,542 101,042.000.542 00 1.040.041.543 001.0118.01 3.513 101.000.000.542 101 000.000.542 001.440.041.558 101.000.000.542 001.411.000.511 001.016.000.589 001.013.015,5115 101.042.000.642 Description/Account Amount REPA]RIMAINT, SUPPLIES: 5-200 - REPAIR/MAINT_ #2-302 - 2004 OAK( REPAIRIMAINT #2-302 - 2004 DAK( REPAIR/MAINT: #2-302 - 2004 DAK( REPAIR/MAINT: #2-302 - 2004 DAK( REPAIR/MAINT: #2-302 - 2004 DAK( REPAIR/MAINT: #2-302 - 2004 DAK( REPAIR/MAINT. SUPPLIES: #5-202 SUPPLIES FOR MAINTENANCE SH Total : OFFICE SUPPLIES: COPY PAPER Total : SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE & SUP Total LIQUID FREEZGARD CI PLUS LIQUID FREEZGARD CI PLUS Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : SUPPLIES FOR SNOWPLOWS Total COUNTY IT SUPPORT JANUARY 2C Total : CRIME VICTIMS COMPENSATION F Total : FILE COMPLAINT Total : 16.85 45.23 41.76 40.02 54.39 -41.76 -54.39 27.73 39.15 299.4'l 126.75 128.75 604.00 600.00 6,143.66 6,150.78 12,294.44 27.61 27.81 129.20 129.20 13,085.58 13,085.58 646.32 848.32 240.00 240.00 WORK CREW INVOICE FEBRUAR1r 167.50 Page: --- vchlist 02/28/2018 8:32:22AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 44055 212812018 000001 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 44067 2/28!2018 002540 SPOKANE HOUSE OF HOSE INC. 44066 212612018 000003 SPOKESMAN -REVIEW, THE 849918 65769 £51880 401101 (Continued) 44069 2/28/2018 002555 T. LARIVIERE EQUIPMENT &, EXCAVATK Pay App 2 44070 2/28/2018 000335 TIRE-RAMA 44071 2128/2018 000087 VERIZON WIRELESS 44072 2/28/2018 006329 VESTIGE GPS 44073 2/28/2018 002363 WESTERN STATES EQUIPMENT CO 44074 2126/2018 002497 WILBERT PRECAST INC 44075 212812018 004741 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES INC 50 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 50 Vouchers in this report 8040083741 8040083798 8601826486 INV -004080 IN0000583705 1N000585058 1074290 1759 Fund/Dept 101,000.000.542 101.000.000,542 101.000.000.542 101.042.000.542 311.000.220.5 95 101.042.000.642 101.042, 000,542 001.076.302.576 101.000.000.542 10'1,000,000.542 101.000,000.542 402,402,000.531 101.042.000.542 Des c ri p ti onfAccou nt Amount Total : SMALLTOOLSIMINOR EQUIP; MACK SUPPLIES FOR SNOWPLOWS SUPPLIES FOR SNOWPLOWS Total : ADVERT:S[NG ACCT 42365 Total : 0220-HOUK SINTO MAXWELL SIRE Total ; SERVICE FCR #5-202 - 2009 F550 WHEELALIGNMENT #5-202 - 2009 Tota! _ FEBRUARY 2018 VERIZON CELL PI Total: -"RACKING SOLUTION -ANNUAL SI Total : ROAD GRADER RENTAL SUPPLIES FOR SNOWPLOWS Tota[: CURB INLET Tota[: MEGA MARKERS AND BASE PLATE Tota[: 167,50 214,32 6.24 5.10 225.66 430.00 434.00 1724829 17,248.29 7,248.29 104.45 102.22 206.67 1,879.19 1,876.18 559.98 559.98 5,406.49 88.92 5,495.41 217.60 217.60 2,183.62 2,1.83.62 Bank total : 210.082.07 Toth( vouchers : 2. -1 -07C7•82 -.CEL O; / Page: vchlist 03101/2018 7:46:18AM Voucher List Page: Spokane Valley Bank code : uk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description1Account Amount 756: 3?1/2018 006445 HARPER, TELARA PARKS REFUND 00'.237.110.99 DEPOSIT REFUND FIRESIDE LOUD 500.00 Total ; 500.00 7564 3/1/2018 406337 INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC PARENT ASSN PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 REISSUE DEPOSIT REFUND: BRO% 75.00 Total : 75.00 7565 311/2018 000498 KASPARIAN, RORY PARKS REFUND 001,237.10,99 DEPOSIT REFUND: FIRESIDE LOUI 210.00 Total : 210.00 7566 3/1/2018 005381 PLANET TURF PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 RESERVATION REFUND: ROOM 10 52.00 Total : 52.00 7567 311/2018 000391 SPOKANE VALLEY FIRE DIST. #1 PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DEPOSIT REFUND: ROOMS 108, 11 52.00 Total : 52.00 7568 3/1/2018 006499 TALLMAN, JUDI PARKS REFUND 001,237,10,96 DEPOSIT REFUND; GREA7 ROOM': 210 00 Total : 210.00 7569 3/1/2418 004930 WHALEN, KIM PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 REISSUE #2 DEPOSIT REFUND: ME 52.00 Total : 52.00 7 Vouchers for hank code : pk-ref Bank total : 1,151.00 7 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers = 1,151,00 Page; vchlist 03/0212018 12: 03: 05R111 Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 44075 3/212018 001606 BANNER BANK 44077 312/2018 001606 BANNER BANK 44078 3/212018 001606 BANNER BANK 6368 Feb 2018 6368 Feb 2018 6368 Feb2018 6368 FEB 2018 6368 FEB 2018 6368 FEB 2018 6388 FEB 2018 6368 FEB 2018 6368 FEB 2018 6368 FEB 2018 6388 FEB 2018 6368 FEB 2013 9713 FEB 2018 9713 FEB 2018 9713 FEB 2018 9713 FEB 2018 9713 FEB 2418 9713 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 3557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 FundlDept 001.018,016,518 001.018.016.518 101, 042, 000.542 001, 090, 000.518 001.090.000.517 001 .013.000.513 001.040.041.543 001.018.016.518 001.040.042.558 001.013.015.515 001.013.015.515 001.013.000,513 001,033.000.518 001.033.000.518 001.044.043.558 001.040.043,558 001.040.043.558 001.040.043.558 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 001,411.000,511 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 001.011 _{1{10.511 001.011,000,511 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 DescriptionfAccount ALASKA AIRLINES ACE HARDWARE BEST BUY DROPBOX INC SIGNATURE PRDMCTIONAL GROU UNITED AIRLINES AMAZON.COM AMAZON.COM CONSTANT CONTACT MRSC WSBA SURVEYMONKEY_COM LOWE'S STORE LOWE'S STORE OFFICE DEPOT GREATER SPOKANE [NC WA B 0 LOWE'S STORE Amount Tota l : Total: BUDGET CAR RENTAL ALASKA AIRLINES ALASKA AIRLINES ALASKA AIRLINES ALASKA AIRLINES AWC GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY CHAF FISHBOWL BREW PUB STATE OF WA CAPITOL ARCO BUDD BAY CAFE RED LION HOTEL QUALITY INN QUALITY INN 292,60 3.04 652.79 2,448.00 298.00 1.101.99 43.51 64.18 868.32 95.00 490.98 360.00 6,718.41 216.86 60.90 48.95 40.00 1.500.00 76.12 1,94183 191.35 236.60 236.60 240.60 240.60 t000.00 000.00 -55.00 39.90 4.00 15.32 111.29 57.51 164.28 164.28 Page: vCh1ist 03102/2018 12:03:05PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbenk Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 44078 3la12018 001606 BANNER BANK 44079 3/2/2018 001606 BANNER BANK 44080 312/2018 001606 BANNER BANK 5 Vouchers for bank code : apbar 5 Vouchers in this report (Continued) 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8557 FEB 2018 8573 FEB 2018 8573 FEB 2018 8573 FEB 2018 8573 FEB 2018 8573 FEB 2018 8573 FEB 2018 8599 FEB 2018 8599 FEB 2018 8599 FEB 2018 8599 FEB 2018 8599 FEB 2018 Fund/Dept 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 001.011,000,511 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 001.018.016.518 001.090.000.519 001.0401.041.558 101.042.000.542 001.040.041.543 001.018.018.518 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.5 75 001.076.305.575 001,076, 305.575 001.076.266.594 Description/Account Amount QUALITY INN QUALITY INN QUALITY INN OYSTER HOUSE INC GREATER SPOKANE CNC Total : CRAIGSLIST.ORG A?w1AZON.COM ASCE AMAZDN.COM WA DEPT OF ENTERPRISE SERVIC SHRM HOBART SERVICE HOME DEPOT MY CABLE MART AMAZON.COM CREDIT: BEST BUY Total : Total : Bank total : 12,785.58 Total vouchers : 12,785.58 164,28 184,28 154.28 94.29 80.00 3,314.96 25.00 101.23 274.00 47.84 54.45 209.00 707.62 187.24 101.99 19.34 32.61 -239.32 101.86 Pace: apCkHist Check History Listing Page:7-- 03/06/2018 11:35AM Spokane Valley Blink code: apbank Check # Date Vendor Status ClearNoId Data Invoice Inv. Date Amount Paid Check Tota[ 6207 03/05/2018 000165 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYST Ben78889 0310512018 102,; 91.85 102,791.85 6209 0310512018 000699 WA COUNCIL CO/CITY ENA PLC Ben78891 03/0512018 2.657.05 2,657.05 6211 03105/2018 006345 IDAHO CHILD SUPPORT REC Ben78893 03105+2018 163.33 163.33 6219 03/06/2018 000048 401A PLAN VANTAGE TRAIN5[ Ben78895 03/0512018 30,748,36 30,748.36 622Q 0310512018 000882 EFTPS 9et179897 03/0512018 29,957,84 29:857.84 6221 03/05/2018 000145 457 PLAN VANTAGEPOINT TR Ben78699 03/05/2018 8,480.78 8:480.78 6223 03/05/2018 000162 401A EXEC PLAN VANTAGE T 6en76901 03105/2018 637.50 637.50 6232 03/05/2018 000682 EFTPS Ben78905 03/0512018 1,026.08 1:028.08 44081 03 05,2018 000120 AWC Ben76885 03/05/2018 125,683,28 Ben78903 0310512018 9,802.85 135,486.13 44082 0310512018 006468 EMPLOYMENT SECURITY CO 0en78887 05/05/2018 580.28 580.28 10 checks in this report apbank Total: 312,429.20 Tota[ Checks: 312,429.20 Pagel CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 13, 2018 Department Director Approval : Item: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ['new business ['public hearing ['information ❑admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Payroll for Pay Period Ending February 28, 2018 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Budget/Financial impacts: Employees Council Total Gross: $ 266,888.62 $ 5,475.00 $ 272,363.62 Benefits: $ 164,516.26 $ 4,790.30 $ 169,306.56 Total payroll $ 431,404.88 $ 10,265.30 $ 441,670.18 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to Approve above payroll. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri DRAFT Attendance: Councilmembers MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING WORKSHOP Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley, Washington February 13, 2018 Staff Rod Higgins, Mayor Pam Haley, Deputy Mayor Brandi Peetz, Councilmember Linda Thompson, Councilmember Ben Wick, Councilmember Sam Wood, Councilmember Arne Woodard, Councilmember Mark Calhoun, City Manager John Hohman, Deputy City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney Mike Stone, Parks & Rec Director Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Eric Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Bill Helbig, City Engineer Mark Werner, Police Chief Gloria Mantz, Engineering Manager Mike Basinger, Economic Development Mgr Adam Jackson, Planning & Grants Engineer Jenny Nickerson, Assistant Building Official Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer John Whitehead, Human Resources Manager Carrie Koudelka, Deputy City Clerk Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. ROLL CALL: Deputy City Clerk Koudelka called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. Overview of Discussion Topics: Mark Calhoun City Manager Calhoun thanked everyone for coming and explained that today's focus brings topics forward that don't necessarily require any follow-up; however, he said there are a few items on the agenda that Councilmembers can plan to see again at future meetings where the public will be more likely to attend and comment. Information Items: 2018 Business Plan City Manager Calhoun said the Business Plan drives the budget and the priorities revolve around public safety, pavement preservation, transportation and infrastructure, and economic development. 1. Legislative Update: Chelsie Hager of Gordon, Thomas, Honeywell Government Affairs Consultants Via telephone conference, Ms. Hager said the legislature is in its short session, which is expected to end March 8t11. She said she anticipates the session will complete on time and pointed out that February 23rd and 26th are policy -end deadlines followed by budget negotiations the last two weeks of the session. Transportation priority update — Ms. Hager said Senator Padden is discussing advancing the Barker Grade Separation project as one of the projects designated by the Department of Transportation for advancement if additional funding becomes available and she said he is advocating to get the project included in the Senate transportation budget. Capital Budget — Ms. Hager said the capital budget passed quickly by the legislature and will move forward. She said the 2017-2019 capital budget included $540,000 in funds for the Appleway Trail and she mentioned House Bill (HB) 2952 would change the name of the Appleway Trail to the Senator Bob McCaslin Trail. She said the bill will go to the house floor and that there has been a change to the language of the bill with respect to who is responsible to pay for the new trail signage, specifying that the City would Council Special Meeting Workshop: 02-13-2018 Page 1 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT not. Councilmember Woodard asked if there is any flexibility to have the McCaslin name added to the current name rather than renaming it solely after the senator. He asked, for example, if it could be the Appleway/Bob McCaslin Memorial Trail. Ms. Hager said currently the language is proposing the name change to the Senator Bob McCaslin Trail, she said she can talk to Representative Shea about amending the name, but she said it is challenging to bring an amendment to the floor at this stage but she can check into it. Councilmember Woodard asked her feeling as to the bill and the amendment getting to the floor, he said he would like the bill pulled altogether until the City has a chance to go through its process. He said, absent that, his opinion is for a shared, combined name, keeping Appleway in the name and the history that goes with it. He said he would like Council to have the opportunity for feedback from the community and further discussion. Councilmember Wood said he thinks the proposed name change should go through the Council first and he said he thinks the bill is premature. Ms. Hager said because of where the bill is at this point, it is in the City's best interest to have her and Ms. Murray talk to Representative Shea in person to discuss options. She said the City has received a great deal of grant money for the project and may request more so we should keep a good relationship with our representatives. She said she and Ms. Murray will work on that issue and provide updates to the Council. State -shared Revenues — Ms. Hager said that the City receives over $500,000 each year from the state's streamline sales tax mitigation funding and that when the law changed in 2007 the understanding was that it would not be permanent and it would only last until another source of sales tax revenue increased enough to make cities whole again. She said last year the legislature implemented the Marketplace Fairness Act which is the collection of sales tax on remote sales in hope that the new stream of revenue would allow cities to no longer need mitigation. She said after conducting a study, they have implemented a change to occur over the next year that will make the City whole again from the shortfall due to the change. She said last session the figure listed in the bill was different from the amount to be distributed to the jurisdictions. They found the inequity and they are asking the legislature to include $2 million, thereby receiving all the funding the jurisdictions were supposed to get. She mentioned that conversations are taking place about liquor revenues and the 2011 cap on funding due to privatization. She said they have not been able to change or remove the cap but there is potential for a change this year as discussions are taking place. City Manager Calhoun said if this were resolved, it would be great for the City because it would give the City more buying power. Abandoned/Foreclosed Homes — Ms. Hager said there are two bills working through the legislature, Senate Bill (SB) 6484 and HB 2057. She said Representative Horwall sponsored the bill and has led the issue for a number of years, holding weekly meetings along with Ms. Murray as the City's lobbyist to advance legislation. She said the bill hearing is on February 15th. Indigent Defense Funding — Representative Shea has a bill that will increase indigent defense spending across the state. Ms. Hager said the funding amount is not a large figure and they are working to advance additional funding improvements. She said HB 8627 would have increased the indigent defense funding but it did not pass the house. However, she said the bill has been turned into a study to develop recommendations for cost savings and the hope is to have better data to provide to the legislature with regard to the high cost to cities to provide this service. She said she is hoping we will find success in incremental changes each year. Recreational Marijuana Home -growing — Ms. Hager said HB 2559 allows local jurisdictions to decide if they want to allow for homegrown marijuana; the bill is no longer under consideration this session but she said there are a couple other bills they are tracking and opposing. She said HB 2653 is one that many oppose because it impedes local authority. Parental Rights — She said the legislature has had many conversations around this topic and SB 5598. She said the City has taken its position against this bill and she said they will record the City as "Opposed" on the 15th when the bill is heard in session. However, she said the bill will likely pass the session along with a few others the City has taken a position on, partly due to the change in political dynamics. Council Special Meeting Workshop: 02-13-2018 Page 2 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT Councilmember Thompson asked if there are any legislators in particular the City Council should express gratitude to. Ms. Hager said the 4th, 5th, and 6th district legislators have been broadly supportive on Spokane Valley issues for a number of years. Councilmember Thompson asked if there are people outside of our district that have been particularly helpful to Ms. Hager and Ms. Murray. Ms. Hager mentioned the local government committee has been helpful to them and she said she will provide contact information for that group to Council. 2. Street 0 & M, Pavement Preservation and Street Construction — John Hohman, Chelsie Taylor City Manager Calhoun discussed the decline of funding from the telephone utility tax, stating that in 2018 the funds are likely to come in below what we had budgeted and he said we can expect this to be an ongoing problem. Deputy City Manager Hohman said the City has wrestled with this topic for a number of years and the numbers vary through history. He said they are looking to identify the issues and move forward in a positive manner, and revisiting the numbers is the first step. He said in 2017, we contracted with a consultant to scan the City's roads and the contract was amended to include splitting the road network between arterials and local access roads. He said the City can receive grants for arterials, but local roads are funded entirely by City funds. Mr. Hohman said the numbers were reviewed to determine the need for repairs, and they analyzed areas for capital improvements and maintenance. He said currently we have a reactive pavement management program rather than proactive, and we are complaint driven. He said he would like to have a more proactive program. He mentioned that the data provided does not include potential bid opportunities or evaluation of staffing needs, and he said there may be cost savings with other options of maintenance, such as chip seal, but those numbers are not included in this set of numbers. Finance Director Taylor gave an overview of the street funds as presented in the packet, fund 101 Street O&M, fund 303 Street Construction, and fund 311 Pavement Preservation show the funding sources and how the revenues are used. She said we are looking for a different funding source in fund 101 because we are facing a shortfall. City Manager Calhoun said assuming the revenue doesn't change, we are looking at a shortage of $400,000. Councilmember Woodard asked if it would make up the $400,000 shortfall if we were to replace the lost telephone utility tax fund dollars. Mr. Calhoun said if we could replace the lost telephone utility tax funds it would make up for the shortfall. Ms. Taylor advised Council to keep in mind the three funds are distinct and separate funds with different funding sources. Planning Engineer Jackson went through his Powerpoint presentation and said the first steps in moving forward are to determine what we have currently with our roads, what we want and how we achieve that. He said the City has 450 miles of roadway with a net value at $410 million and the City's program is to keep good roads "good." He said our network of roads is surveyed every six years, giving us the PCI (Pavement Condition Index) score and the backlog, which he explained is the percentage of roads that are at or nearing failure. Councilmember Wick asked if all of our roads have been scanned and Planning Manager Basinger responded that they have. Councilmember Wick asked if the backlog of roads are those that need reconstructing. Mr. Jackson explained that if a road has a PCI of forty percent or lower, it is failing. He said the City is currently in a PCI range of 61-70, indicating a good network, and he said we are closer to the 70 range. City Manager Calhoun said our overall PCI rating is a 71 and asked Mr. Jackson how that rating compares to other jurisdictions. Mr. Jackson said our rating is good, but we should plan for the storm. Councilmember Wick asked what funds we use to pay for road preservation. Mr. Calhoun and Ms. Taylor said preservation comes out of different funds based on the quality of the road and the extent of the maintenance or construction. Ms. Taylor said the majority of roads that are in good condition are funded from the 0 & M fund while roads that are poor are funded out of construction and she said those funds will seep into each other. Mr. Jackson went on to explain that roads with a PCI from 41 - 70 are roads that are optimal for fixing because the dollars go further to maintain the roads rather than reconstruct the roads below a 40 PCI which is more costly. He said road maintenance versus road reconstruction is the difference between a $1 - $2 project versus an $8 - $9 project. Councilmember Wood said that if we operate under that logic, we would never fix the terrible roads. Mr. Basinger said the program would target the fair to good roads first and we would work in the poor roads a little at a time. Mr. Jackson said that currently our network of roads has a PCI of 71 and a backlog of five to six percent. Council Special Meeting Workshop: 02-13-2018 Page 3 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT Finance Director Taylor said our current spending is approximately $1 million from the general fund, $1 million from the O&M fund, grant funds are estimated at $1.5 million (for arterials only), and REET matching funds and street wear funds bring the total to $5.2 million. Mr. Jackson said that if we project spending $7 million per year for twenty years, our PCI would be 70 with a two percent network backlog. He said this would be the ideal scenario and our consultant will recommend this scenario. Mr. Calhoun said that while our consultant may recommend this scenario, it is a local decision to be made by Council. Mr. Hohman said the inflation costs will need further analysis and discussion. Councilmember Woodard said we need to look at the impact $7 million a year worth of roadwork has on citizen transportation disruption, especially on the north/south running roads. In 2017, the City spent just under $6 million on all pavement activity from all three funds and in 2016 we spent just over $6 million. In that time, the City dropped from a 72 PCI to a 71 PCI. Mr. Calhoun said today's discussion begins the conversation on what the goal is for Council and the community going forward by giving a sense of where we are now. Mr. Hohman said staff needs to do more analysis and work to get a better feel of a comprehensive program and its costs before bringing this item back to Council for further discussion. 3. Appleway Trail Update — John Hohman Planning Manager Basinger provided Council and staff with a corrected brochure for the Appleway Trail and said he met with SRTC (Spokane Regional Transportation Council) yesterday and they discussed the trail. He said in 2010, the City received stimulus dollars for the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan, hired a consultant, adopted the plan and it was included in the transportation section of our Comprehensive Plan along with autos and freight. He said when the City surveyed the community for input on the Bike and Pedestrian plan, the feedback was that the citizens wanted a safe way to travel through the City and Appleway Trail is good opportunity to provide that to the community. Parks and Recreation Director Stone said the trail has been a positive project in the community and he said our citizens are talking about the trail and asking about future plans. He said it took a leap of faith in spending the City's own funds for the first leg of the trail, but he said we have had positive feedback and we are now looking at different amenities to add to the trail. He said the State has been supportive of the project and we find ourselves with one gap left to fill after we complete the Corbin to Sullivan leg. He said we have visions for expanding the trail beyond that as well, and he said as time goes on, he would like us to think about a developing a Master Plan for the trail. Engineering Manager Mantz said the Evergreen to Sullivan and University to Balfour trail sections have received some funding but after updating the estimates for those projects they determined they are severely underfunded. The estimate for Evergreen to Sullivan is $2.3 million and is underfunded by $698,000; the University to Balfour estimated cost is $1.6 million and is currently underfunded by $900,000. She said we are looking to secure funds through grants, but one of the projects is scheduled for construction in 2019 and the other in 2020 so she said we need to secure the funds prior to that. Ms. Mantz said one option they are considering in the University to Balfour leg is to stop the trail at City Hall rather than crossing Sprague Avenue to Balfour since there is no library there yet. She said another option is to combine the two funding sources for both projects and apply them to the Evergreen to Sullivan portion and only move forward with that project; however, she said that would need SRTC approval. She said SRTC seemed excited about the idea to complete the trail to Sullivan, giving 5.2 miles of trail to the public, and holding off on the University to Balfour section at this time. Councilmember Peetz asked about the trail landscaping. Mr. Stone said the plan is to continue the theme of native grasses at intersections and trees throughout the trail. He said landscaping is something the public would like to see but they also want some of the other amenities. Mr. Basinger said the main objective is to get the main path surface down that can be used by the citizens as well as accommodate maintenance crew vehicles. Councilmember Wick said he likes the idea of combining the funding sources to get one of the projects done. Councilmember Woodard said he would like to see us incorporate some of the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan into the section where the Centennial Trail and Appleway Trail would connect at Flora Rd and the bridge over the freeway. He said that would add connection to fifty-five miles of trail and might also help us get grant funds to make that connection. Mr. Calhoun said he thinks that is a natural evolution to the trail system in the Valley. Mr. Basinger said they Council Special Meeting Workshop: 02-13-2018 Page 4 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT are also discussing ideas to connect the trail to Dishman Hills, but he said any future expansion should all be done as part of the public process. Councilmember Wick asked if it makes sense for the City to pursue the Balfour to University leg or if it would be better to look at something else. Ms. Mantz said we have not obligated any funds for that project yet and Mr. Calhoun said we should carry this item back to Council in short order and think about our other options. Councilmember Thompson asked if there are options for the community to donate amenities or other items that become part of the trail to help with funding, such as pavers or other options. Mr. Stone said there are pros and cons to those types of funding options, and he said there are multiple opportunities for those types of ideas that we can look into. 4. General Fund — Fund Balance — Mark Calhoun City Manager Calhoun said in the budget process, the goal is to maintain a fifty percent reserve balance and we anticipate the 2018 General Fund fund balance to be 62.73 percent of recurring expenditures. Mr. Calhoun walked Council through the information included in the Request for Council Action, showing how the calculations are made. He said he recommends having a three-month operating reserve in the bank and explained that when the fund balance exceeds fifty percent, that excess portion is transferred into the Capital Reserve fund 312. He said that since 2013, we have transferred approximately $17.9 million to fund 312 and the money has been used to finance a variety of Council approved projects, such as the Sullivan Bridge Replacement project, Appleway Trail, City Hall, and others. He said the City carried an A3 bond rating until 2014, then went to an Aa3 rating which was maintained through the issuance of the bonds for City Hall. He said we have since been upgraded to an Aa2 rating which, he said, is a great bond rating. 5. Potential/Pending Projects — Chelsie Taylor Mr. Calhoun referred Council to the pending/potential projects spreadsheet in the packet and Finance Director Taylor described the makeup of the spreadsheet so Council understands what they are reading. Last year, we transferred $3.3 million into this account and staff will be coming to Council in April with a recommendation as to how much to move over this year. Mr. Calhoun said it helps if Council prioritizes the projects they want to use the funds for to discuss how the funds are allocated at the June budget workshop. Councilmember Thompson asked if the City Hall punch list has been completed and Mr. Calhoun said they are working on the punch list but that in no way affects this list of potential/pending projects. 6. Generator at City Hall — Jenny Nickerson Mr. Calhoun said the City Hall design process included the idea of adding a generator and a gas line was included in the construction of the building; however, he said the generator was not built into the budget for City Hall and there is no money set aside for a generator. He said staff will be looking for Council direction on whether we want to allocate funds to a generator and, if so, what kind of generator and how much of the building we want it to operate. He said currently the first floor is set up to be operated by a generator, including the permit center, Council chambers and the server room on the second floor. Assistant Building Official Nickerson said the generator would not include operation of the elevator. She said the type of generator we select, and its fueling, will affect the concrete pad needed to support the generator. She discussed the options proposed by DEI Electrical Consultants and the costs associated with each as outlined in the packet materials. She said we are sized and plumbed for a natural gas generator, but a diesel generator would be the most cost effective option to power the whole building. She said Spokane Valley Fire department utilizes a diesel generator and it has a backup tank; however, she said she doesn't think this option will meet setback requirements for our building. Ms. Nickerson mentioned it could be located in the basement but we would need to get it down there somehow. She said if we went with a propane generator, we would need to modify our parking area and there are some minimal requirements for seismic bracing of the tank. Councilmember Woodard asked if there is a noticeable noise difference between diesel and natural gas generators and Ms. Nickerson responded that diesel is a little louder but we can include acoustic enclosures for all types of generators. Mayor Higgins asked how long each will last, then clarified that he is referring to the life of the fuel in the tank. Ms. Nickerson said propane will last longer than diesel. Mayor Higgins said propane is easier to work with but it is more expensive and Ms. Nickerson added that a propane tank would need to be above ground. She said to determine cost and efficiency, we need to look at capacity, Council Special Meeting Workshop: 02-13-2018 Page 5 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT how much of the building we want to power and for how long. Councilmember Wick asked if they have looked at contracting with a generator company because, he said, we will also have costs of maintenance. Mr. Calhoun said this is our first discussion about this topic, primarily to get a sense from Council if they want staff to pursue researching options for a generator. Councilmember Woodard inquired as to what and who would need to be moved around in order to operate three floors of operations on just one floor. Mr. Calhoun said ideally, we would power the entire first and second floors. Councilmember Wick asked what kind of emergency services we would be providing and Mr. Calhoun said staff is working to put together an Emergency Operations Plan. Ms. Taylor said during Windstorm there was a great deal of coordinating with street staff to clear and remove trees, but City Hall did not lose power during that storm. It was the consensus of Council that staff bring this topic back for further discussion. 10. Budget Development Calendar — Chelsie Taylor With the meeting ahead of schedule, this agenda item was pushed up to discuss before breaking for lunch. Ms. Taylor pointed out the budget calendar for 2019 and said the budget workshop is scheduled for June 12, 2018, and adoption of the budget scheduled for November 13th. She said departmental business plans are due to the City Manager in April and the budget process will be in full swing beginning April 5, 2018. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley, seconded and unanimously agreed, to adjourn for lunch. The meeting adjourned at approximately 11:50 a.m. Mayor Higgins reconvened the meeting at 12:30 p.m. 7. Economic Analysis of Tourism Related Venues and Events — Chelsie Taylor, Mark Calhoun City Manager Calhoun said that in 2015 the City entered into an interlocal agreement with Spokane County and Liberty Lake for tourism venues and in 2016 we contracted with CSL to do a feasibility study of a sports complex at Plantes Ferry and potential development of a ballfield complex at Liberty Lake. He said the City also contracted with Community Attributes (CAI) for a tourism enhancement study that looked at six different venues. He said the results were reviewed and on November 17, 2017, CAI presented to Council the six venues plus the two proposals from CSL. After those studies, he said, we also looked at the economic impact in adding the CenterPlace West Lawn Expansion Project. Ms. Taylor discussed the impact each venue would have on Spokane Valley funding and operations as detailed in the packet materials. She said the estimated capital costs are based on midpoint costs from the studies and the ranges of those actual capital costs is dependent on the amenities that are included. She said the remaining capital costs would be funded by LTGO bonds and Mr. Calhoun explained that when the bonds are issued, the City is borrowing that money and it is typical the bonds are for a thirty-year period. With the HUB complex, there are fields that would only have a ten-year life and even though the HUB building has a longer life, we are assuming the bonds for the HUB complex would be a twenty-year bond. Lodging tax funds of 1.3 percent can be applied toward bond payments. Mr. Calhoun pointed out the annual gains and losses that go along with the venues, highlighting the losses and noting that these are "community amenities" that the City would be spending dollars to earn nickels. He said he wants Council to be sure they are making a decision with their eyes wide open to the costs and impact to the City's budget and what level of services may need to be cut to do so. He said the figures all come from the studies that were done and Ms. Taylor said with that in mind, the CenterPlace numbers are new and have not been analyzed yet but, she added, those numbers will be refined. Mr. Calhoun said we have enough funds set aside to pay for that project and be done with it, but he is not steering Council in that direction, only pointing it out. Councilmember Peetz asked if we have looked at other areas for a complex. Mr. Calhoun said Spokane Valley is limited on land availability and the CSI study was done with the understanding that we would be putting money into another community. Deputy Mayor Haley asked how much money is needed to finish Browns Park and Mr. Stone said we have spent approximately $600,000 to date and we probably need another $2 million to finish the project. He said the eight volleyball courts without design are $400,000 and he mentioned that when constructing in phases, the smaller the amount of work we do, the higher the cost is per court. He said we have eight courts now and eight more to build as well as a large shelter, five small shelters, a restroom, slack line and skate park elements, park lighting, benches, landscaping, irrigation, and pump house aesthetics. When a project is piecemealed, we see higher costs for mobilization and construction. Councilmember Wick said Spokane is planning a lot of downtown venues and they are replacing Joe Albi and a sports complex and he said Council Special Meeting Workshop: 02-13-2018 Page 6 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT there is less spillover from Spokane to Spokane Valley for hotels. He said Plantes Ferry ball fields are not a priority, the focus is on soccer instead and softball is played at East Valley. But, he said, with the Bigelow Gulch project the East Valley ball fields may disappear as well. He said he would like us to bring something to the Valley, a sports venue is a good idea, but he said he is not sure if he wants to bond the project; he said he likes the idea of phases. Mr. Wick suggested that perhaps the LTAC would be more in favor of putting funds toward a project if we had a plan with which to go forward. He said we may be able to partner with other agencies for funds and make the dollars go further. Councilmember Woodard said he likes the idea of having something in the Valley, but he would like to see something that serves the entire community and the schools, allowing them to use the facility first and allow other groups to come in and use the facility secondarily to them. He said he thinks we have to buy land with the intent to do something with it and build the facilities. He then asked how the Council is to sell support for a complex to Valley citizens that benefit neighboring communities rather than Spokane Valley. Mayor Higgins said there seems to be interest from Council in finishing the sand courts in Browns Park. Mr. Stone said there are additional development costs and we need to address the restrooms, he said those alone are $600,000 for design and construction. Mr. Calhoun said it sounds like Council wants to develop Spokane Valley property and events rather than spend money for venues and events outside of our community. He said the next step is to convince LTAC to release some of the lodging tax funds to fund these types of events or projects. He said this topic will be carried forward to a Council meeting so the community will be involved in the discussion of these nine projects as well as Browns Park. Deputy Mayor Haley asked if LTAC is more apt to approve funds for CenterPlace and City Manager Calhoun said while he could not answer that question, a joint meeting would be a good opportunity for that discussion. Councilmember Wick said if the City proposed matching funds to an LTAC allocation, it might make funding more appealing to LTAC. Mr. Calhoun said in looking toward the budget meeting, we will look at estimates for the Browns Park project and presume how much the City can contribute and how much LTAC might allocate and set a priority from Council. Councilmember Wick said he would also like to look at land acquisition to use toward a future large project. Mayor Higgins said in order for Spokane Valley to compete with other cities, we need to have our own land. It was the consensus of Council to look toward pursuing the Browns Park development, acquiring land, and coming up with other ideas. 8. Lodging Tax Distribution — Initiate Joint Meeting with LTAC? — Chelsie Taylor Finance Director Taylor said we are looking to initiate a joint meeting with the LTAC. She said LTAC is not obligated to follow Council goals and priorities as they make recommendations. She said there has been a disconnect in the past and it may be helpful to schedule a joint meeting for Council to discuss the goals and priorities before LTAC makes a recommendation for funding to Council. Mr. Calhoun said the end goal is to avoid the conflict between the recommendations and Council goals and we may be better served if LTAC hears directly from Council rather than staff what the goals are. Councilmember Wick said he doesn't think we've ever expressed that Council wants their focus to be on Valley events and suggested Council retool their goals to express self -sustainability. He said there seems to be a lot of focus on Valleyfest and it may be better if we address our goals up front rather than later in the process to remove the contention at the onset. Mr. Calhoun said Council goals could be discussed at a meeting after the budget meeting in June. Deputy City Attorney Lamb said there are a couple different options in looking at Valleyfest or the budget in general and he can make some suggestions to make the process smoother. Mr. Calhoun said this topic will come back to a future Council meeting. 9. Outside Agencies — Increase the Amount to be Distributed in 2019? — Chelsie Taylor City Manager Calhoun said Councilmember Woodard suggested increasing the allocations to outside agencies by $50,000. Ms. Taylor detailed the history of the allocations, which began at $100,000 in 2004 and increased over the years to approximately $150,000 in 2008 through 2016. In 2016, she said $43,000 was pulled from the outside agency funding and allocated to GSI under contract and separate from the outside agency allocations; $150,000 was still the total amount allocated for 2016. She said in 2017, funding allocations raised to $193,000 with the $43,000 to GSI. Councilmember Woodard said generally the total allocation amount hasn't changed in his time on Council other than the $43,000 pulled out to GSI, but operating costs have increased due to inflation and he said he thinks an increase will put more dollars to Council Special Meeting Workshop: 02-13-2018 Page 7 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT those agencies and also give the City more options as to what is funded. He said he hopes to have further discussion around this and he said he thinks the Spokane Valley Chamber is trying to impact our economy and he thinks they should be looking for support from us. Councilmember Thompson asked if the money allocated has been spent each year and Ms. Taylor responded that it has. Councilmember Thompson said she would like to see half of the funds go to economic development and half to social services, saying that social service agencies do a lot for our community. She said she would also like to know what GSI has done for Spokane Valley because it doesn't seem to her like she sees as much from GSI for Spokane Valley as she sees for Spokane. She also said she would like to know how the Arts Council contributes to economic development and overall wants a better understanding, such as if we get reports back as to what agencies are doing, or have site visits. Ms. Taylor said we receive a report from the agencies. Councilmember Thompson said she would like Council to be more hands-on to see what we are getting for our funds. She asked how allocations are determined by Council without community input. Mr. Calhoun said this is the way it has been done since incorporation and the process has been carried forward in the same manner. He said agencies submit applications for Council review and determinations. He said we have not done site visits due to staffing limitations, but we do get reports from the agencies. Councilmember Wick asked if Council might have a goal as to what they want to see for social services. Councilmember Woodard said he thought the Council had a goal for social services but that it was recently dropped. Mr. Calhoun said we can bring this back for public discussion at a future Council meeting to include discussion of allocations between $150,000 - $200,000, and how the funds are distributed between economic development and social services. He said Council could establish goals within each category and the applicant would express how those goals would be met in their application. Mr. Hohman said staff will also include the contract and history with GSI and their role. Mr. Calhoun said we might try to tailor a scope of services for the Spokane Valley Chamber and possibly carve out funds for them separate from the outside agencies funding and in doing so, that would increase the total amount of funds allocated. 11. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins Councilmember Woodard said he would like to discuss a basic Spokane Valley neighborhood restoration program that would be a series of days throughout the year to collect debris from neighborhoods such as construction materials, cars, appliances, and drug take -back. He said it could be funded by increasing the tonnage rate at the transfer station and could be administered by SCOPE using volunteers from the community. There was consensus of Council to bring this forward to a future meeting. Councilmember Thompson asked if formal Council meetings can be rescheduled when they are cancelled due to Councilmembers attending conferences. City Attorney Driskell said there are limitations in the statutes as to identifying when formal meetings are but he will look into it. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley, seconded, and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 2:10 p.m. ATTEST: L.R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Special Meeting Workshop: 02-13-2018 Page 8 of 8 Approved by Council: DRAFT Attendance: Councilmembers MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL MEETING STUDY SESSION Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley, Washington February 20, 2018 Staff Rod Higgins, Mayor Pam Haley, Deputy Mayor Brandi Peetz, Councilmember Linda Thompson, Councilmember Ben Wick, Councilmember Sam Wood, Councilmember Arne Woodard, Councilmember Mark Calhoun City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Mike Stone, Parks & Rec Director Bill Helbing, City Engineer Gloria Mantz, Engineering Manager John Hohman, Deputy City Manager Morgan Koudelka, Sr. Admin. Analyst Henry Allen, Senior Engineer Rob Lochmiller, Sr. Engineer Project Mgr. Mike Basinger, Economic Dev. Mgr. Deanna Horton, Administrative Assistant Colin Quinn -Hurst, Sr. Transportation Planner Erica Amsden, Engineer 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. Mayor Higgins announced that Myrna Gothmann, wife of former Councilmember Bill Gothmann, passed away this weekend, and he asked for a few moments of silence. ACTION ITEMS: 1. First Reading Ordinance 18-005, Spokane Housing Authority Reauthorization — Erik Lamb After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to advance ordinance No. 18-005 reauthorizing the joint Spokane Housing Authority, to a second reading. Deputy City Attorney Lamb said this item came before Council as an administrative report at the February 6 meeting, at which time SHA Director Pamela Tietz was in attendance and explained the need for the ordinance, and gave a brief background of some of the functions of the SHA. Mr. Lamb also stated that this ordinance represents no financial obligation for our City. Councilmember Wick asked if a future council wanted to go in a different direction, could they, and Mr. Lamb said yes they could; that the Authority operates under state law but we could set up our own, although it would be somewhat challenging as the SHA has significant assets in the valley. Mr. Lamb mentioned we have two Spokane Valley representatives on the board which were appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by our Council. Mayor Higgins invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. Council Study Session: 02-20-2018 Page 1 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT 2. Mayoral Appointment: Councilmember to Board of Health — Mayor Higgins Mayor Higgins explained that Councilmember Peetz was previously appointed to the Board of Health, but her schedule prevents her from attending the meetings, and he is therefore recommending Councilmember Arne Woodard be appointed in her place. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to confirm the Mayoral appointment of Councilmember Arne Woodard to the Health District Board for the remainder of 2018. Mayor Higgins invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. NON -ACTION ITEMS: 3. Saltese Floodplain Update — Henry Allen, Deanna Horton, Spokane co. Engineer Ben Brattebo Senior Engineer Allen explained that the purpose of this agenda item is to give Council an update on the Saltese Creek/Shelley Lake floodplain study that has been going on for the last six years; he briefly outlined the information contained in his February 20, 2018 Request for Council Action, and said there is obviously a lot involved in redoing a floodplain study. Mr. Allen then introduced Spokane County Water Reclamation Engineer Mr. Ben Brattebo, and Spokane Valley Administrative Assistant Ms. Deanna Horton who is also a certified floodplain manager. Mr. Brattebo discussed the Saltese flats wetland restoration project, reasons for the flood hazard restudy, and the study's results, including an overview of the watershed, that the project included restoration of 580 acres within an historic lake area; he also noted the current mapped flood area doesn't match the actual topography. Mr. Brattebo noted the flood hazard analysis, conducted by the County Environmental Services in coordination with the County Public Works and City of Spokane Valley, has completed a draft restudy of the existing flood hazards in the watershed, and that the County intends to notify property owners near or inside the special flood hazard areas, and will submit the draft analysis for FEMA review, and noted the community appeal period will occur after the FEMA review. Mr. Brattebo showed a map of the proposed flood hazard within Spokane Valley. Ms. Horton then went over the maps showing affected parcels, and where the floodplain narrowed in some places and increased in others. There was brief discussion about the parcels and whether there is a need to have flood insurance; mention from Councilmember Woodard that it is sometimes necessary to prove that one is outside the floodplain, and flood insurance is very expensive. Ms. Horton noted that if a property owner is not in a risk situation, it is important to be able to remove that from their structure, adding that the longer one continues without an elevation certificate, the higher the FEMA rate. 4. Functional Classification of City Streets — Mike Basinger, Colin Quinn -Hurst Mr. Basinger introduced the City's Senior Transportation Planner Colin Quinn -Hurst, who will be coordinating several transportation planning projects, including the six-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Via his PowerPoint, Mr. Hurst explained about principal and minor arterials, collectors, and local access streets; the purpose for classifications, the federal classification of categories compared with our classification of categories; he mentioned the composition breakdown of streets in our City, with local access streets making up the greatest percentage of streets at 68%; he briefly mentioned funding eligibility, and showed examples of our street standards for local access streets, collectors, and principal and minor arterials. Mr. Hurst also explained a little of the classification history since our City's incorporation, as well as the classification process through the various state agencies, and showed a map depicting the reclassifications since incorporation. There was brief Council discussion about this process, and Mr. Basinger noted we are not moving toward reclassification streets at this point; he said our consultant looks at our streets keeping in mind we must adhere to certain standards. There was also brief discussion about speed limits on various streets, mention that lanes are private streets; and that streets must have a minimum pavement width for fire vehicle access, and if that width is not adhered to, we would post "no - parking" signs. Council Study Session: 02-20-2018 Page 2 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT 5. Sprague Avenue Preservation Project: Sullivan to Corbin — Erica Amsden, Gloria Mantz Ms. Mantz introduced Ms. Erica Amsden, PE Project Manager, who then went through the background of this preservation project as noted on her Request for Council Action form and the accompanying PowerPoint; explaining the project location, existing conditions, project design, temporary traffic control, project cost and funding, as well as the tentative schedule for bid advertising and Council's award of the bid contract. 6. Wellesley Sidewalk Project Update — Gloria Mantz, Rob Lochmiller Ms. Mantz explained about this project, including the project location, scope, history, and existing conditions, followed by Mr. Lochmiller going over the several alternatives shown in the PowerPoint presentation. As noted in the material, Ms. Mantz gave some pros and cons for each alternative, and the reason why staff is not recommending option 1 or 2, which is due to lack of funds; she said staff recommends alternative 3 but at this point we do not know how neighbors will react to not parking on the roadway, but that this alternative would allow pedestrian improvements to Wellesley without having to remove curb and gutter. Discussion included mention from Mayor Higgins that since alternative 3 would put is in the hole, he recommends alternative 4. Councilmember Woodard said that we need to meet our own standards, and he would like to discuss how to come up with the $129,000 shortfall; that he feels the projects warrants being done, but if we are not going to do it, we should give the money back; adding that he feels the projects needs more research. City Manager Calhoun said it is frustrating to have this come up; that engineers have struggled how to move this forward as it is favorable to have sidewalks for the kids; said if we go with alternative 1, he would speak with our Finance Director as perhaps the $129,000 shortfall could come from REET (real estate excise taxes) or from the capital reserve fund 312, adding that that topic will be discussed with Council as we move into April. Ms. Mantz said there is enough right-of-way with alternative 1; that the width is sufficient for travel but not for separated sidewalks; and that we don't have an estimate on how much it would cost to acquire the right-of-way, which would be extremely expensive. Councilmember Wood said he likes alternative 2 as it would give a place for putting snow. As a matter of disclosure, Councilmember Wick said his family has property along that area, but he does not personally; but he would like to make a case to preserve the rest of the asphalt, and perhaps look at the ending fund balance to complete alternative 1. It appeared that there was consensus to move forward with option 1 but would appreciate staff coming back with some specifics of options to fund that shortfall. 7. False Alarm Code Amendment — Morgan Koudelka Senior Administrative Analyst Koudelka explained that the City started a false alarm program to reduce the number of false alarms, improve police response times, increase officer safety and create more time for proactive policing; that in October of 2016, Council approved a new in-house false alarm reduction program that reduced costs, simplified administration, and reduced government regulation and intrusion; he said this new program does not require registration of an alarm system and makes police response voluntary for the alarm system owner, and that the customer has the option of not participating in that service with the alarm monitoring company. Mr. Koudelka said the draft code revision will clarify the duties of the alarm administrator, including the ability to mitigate a cost recovery fee up to 25% if the administrator believes the facts and circumstances warrant it. After brief discussion on the system, including mention that the fees associated with the program are included in the City's Fee resolution, there was Council consensus that staff move this forward for a code amendment as explained. 8. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins Councilmember Thompson said that based on the recent shooting event, she would like to see if perhaps the Association of Washington Cities (AWC) representative Micki Harnois who represents Rockford, and/or perhaps Councilmember Woodard, as part of their legislative agenda, would advocate for mental health services to help deal with some of these criminal issues, and Councilmember Woodard said he would Council Study Session: 02-20-2018 Page 3 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT be happy to do that, and will bring that up at their first quarter meeting to see what others are doing in that regard. 9. Council Check-in — Mayor Higgins There were no comments from Council. 10. City Manager Comments — Mark Calhoun City Manager Calhoun said Council heard a report at the January 16 Council meeting regarding the ITS in- fill project; and at that meeting it was estimated to cost $328,000 for the project, but in the area where the loop would go under the railroad, the cost would be significantly greater; he explained that the choices then were to stop the project and repay the $50,000 grant, or pay that toward the project and ask for another $100,000 from the SRTC, or ask that the SRTC permit us to scope back the project. Mr. Calhoun said a new option has come up as the Washington State Department of Transportation said they would handle that $100,000; he said we will pull the $50,000 from REET; that the project is on the TIP (Transportation Improvement Program), and at this point, there is nothing Council needs to do, and once this goes out to bid, this will come back to Council for a bid award consideration. Mr. Calhoun noted that SB 6414 concerns population -based representation on the governing body of public transportation benefit areas; and of how that would affect counties with a population of more than 400,000; he explained that this would require proportional representation to the cities based on ridership; which means the City of Spokane would have four representatives compared with our City having two, thereby giving the City of Spokane disproportionate control to the STA board; and he asked if Council would like to support or oppose this bill; he said staff is leaning toward opposing, and if Council agrees, he will ask Mr. Driskell to draft a letter for the Mayor's signature to send to the delegation. Councilmember Wick asked how the STA was created and Mr. Driskell said he would have to research that question, but it was likely created by ballot vote. There was consensus to oppose this legislation. On another legislation issue, Mr. Driskell said he learned that the abandoned homes bill, dealing with "zombie" homes, passed out of committee unanimously. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. ATTEST: L.R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Study Session: 02-20-2018 Page 4 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Formal Meeting Format Tuesday, February 27, 2018 Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Rod Higgins, Mayor Pam Haley, Deputy Mayor Brandi Peetz, Councilmember Linda Thompson, Councilmember Ben Wick, Councilmember Sam Wood, Councilmember Arne Woodard, Councilmember Staff. Mark Calhoun, City Manager John Hohman, Deputy City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Mike Stone, Parks & Rec Director Bill Helbig, City Engineer Henry Allen, Senior Engineer Marty Palaniuk, Planner Mike Basinger, Economic Dev. Manager Gloria Mantz, Engineering Manager Adam Jackson, Planning/Grants Engineer Lesli Brassfield, Economic Dev. Specialist Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION: Pastor Mike Szott of Living Hope Community Church gave the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council, staff, and the audience stood for the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Councilmember Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the agenda. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: n/a COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS Councilmember Wood: said he attended an STA (Spokane Transit Authority) meeting where they did a recap of 2017 showing an increase of approximately 9,000 new rides, and that they are within budget; he also mentioned the STA van grant, and that the deadline to apply has passed; and said that sales tax revenues are up 9% over last year. Councilmember Peetz: reported that she attended the 9-1-1 Board meeting where they discussed the migration of the community building for fire and police dispatch, and that they hope to get this completed in April. Councilmember Woodard: said he attended a community leader luncheon where Multicare representatives explained about their business; attended some Chamber of Commerce events; mentioned the Health Board meeting and continued discussions about vaccinations and that the Board is trying to decide if they want to ask for a state law to eliminate the exemptions. Councilmember Thompson: said she attended her first Health District meeting, and is now on the Outreach and Education Committee working with other jurisdictions about Health District policies; said she also attended a Human Rights Task Force meeting, that she will be a conduit for information from them, and Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 02-27-2018 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT they talked about education; attended two Washington Policy Center legislative luncheons and spoke with several state legislators about Spokane Valley issues; said she attended the Chamber of Commerce Gala and it was a fun event and she enjoyed seeing and celebrating the teachers of the year; said she also attended the Association of Washington Cities (AWC) legislative meeting in Olympia where they had great classes as well as a reception for newly elected officials. Councilmember Wick: gave a lengthy report on several transportation issues including a Chamber of Commerce Transportation Committee meeting where they discussed the I-90 Liberty Lake Vicinity, and he distributed copies of the accompanying PowerPoint prepared by WSDOT's Regional Administration Mike Gribner, which included information about Barker to Harvard, the Barker Road Interchange, Henry Road, and the Harvard Road Interchange; said he attended some SRTC (Spokane Regional Transportation Council) meetings and that they will be issuing a call for projects and they can take certain projects off the top and one he mentioned was associated with the SRTMC (Spokane Regional Transportation Management Center) which manages the fiber optic signals; he mentioned the idea of a study concerning what to do with Division when the North/South Corridor is complete; and another study on the Colfax Pullman Highway interchange that is not doing well; he mentioned that Commissioner French is now the chair of the SRTC and that Mr. Wick is the vice chair; he also noted the Secretary of Transportation will be in Spokane next Thursday to talk about transportation issues. Mr. Wick noted he also met with the Good Roads Association and they have renewed the effort to bring back the concept of a regional TBD (Transportation Benefit district) and they are interested to hear Spokane Valley's views; he mentioned he also went to Olympia. Deputy Mayor Haley: said since the last formal Council meeting, she attended six STA board meetings, and she is on three different boards, and is chair of their External Relations; said they discussed the Central City line and it looks like they might not receive federal funding; she noted the van grant program where they give away eight to twelve vans and she encouraged people to apply for this program, and said that this year they will give a van to a group who picks up homeless people willing to work. Deputy Mayor Haley said she also went to the AWC Legislative meeting in Olympia where the she attended very informative and important classes. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Higgins reported he attended Fire District #8' s annual award banquet held at CenterPlace; went to a Chamber of Commerce lunch; and spoke with the WSU Chancellor about how Spokane Valley might fit in with their plans; said he attended a GSI (Greater Spokane, Inc.) meeting where Mr. Hohman and Mr. Basinger gave a notable report on business development. PROCLAMATION: Developmental Disabilities Awareness Month After Mayor Higgins read the proclamation, it was accepted with thanks from Ms. Darci Ladwig of the Arc of Spokane PUBLIC COMMENTS: After Mayor Higgins explained the process, he invited general public comments. Mr. Rocky Sanson, Spokane Valley: said he has Checker Cab, auto sales and other businesses and that his business has grown since he started here four years ago; he extended kudos to Spokane Valley's Receptionist Roxanne Crafton for her exceptional customer service in helping him with the business license process; said it appears things are now changing and our City is becoming less friendly; and mentioned that maybe Spokane would be better for his business. Ms. Jane Sebert, Spokane Valley: spoke of a subdivision near 8th and University; said she was at the hearing last week for that subdivision #18-004; said if the area allows commercial, traffic will be terrible in the neighborhood; that she would welcome duplexes or single family residential, but not commercial. Mr. David Jackson, Spokane Valley: he thanked the Mayor for coming to CenterPlace's Senior Center and having lunch with him, that it was a fun time and he encourages Councilmembers to take a friend to the Senior Center. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 02-27-2018 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT 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 Feb 27, 2018 Request for Council Action Form, Total: $3,962,840.05 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending January 31, 2018: $519,185.11 c. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending February 15, 2018: $329,560.63 d. Approval of January 30, 2018 Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session e. Approval of February 6, 2018 Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda. NEW BUSINESS: 2. Second Reading Ordinance 18-003, Street Standards- Henry Allen, Micki Harnois After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to approve Ordinance 18-003, amending street standards. Senior Engineer Allen explained about the need to update our Street Standards, which is mostly due to the FHWA's (Federal Highway Administration) request to have us update the maintenance responsibility section to ensure infrastructure funded with federal funds is adequately cared for, but also to addressee changes to implementation of the Standards, and to account for our City's organizational structure change. Mr. Allen noted that there have been no changes in the ordinance since the first reading. Mayor Higgins invited public comment; no comments were offered. Councilmember Wick again mentioned his desire to have a future agenda item to discuss street lighting. There were no objections from Council. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 3. Second Reading Ordinance 18-004, Subdivision Regulations- Marty Palaniuk After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to approve Ordinance 18-004 updating subdivision regulations. Planner Palaniuk explained the background of this amendment, that it clarifies and defines "legal lot" and adds language to allow development on a non -legal lot by an innocent purchaser; eliminates the width requirement for corner lots and the ratio of lot width -to -depth requirement; eliminates language requiring the arrangement of lots and streets in conformance with approved plans; modifies the requirement for a minimum 15' border easement; and amends the definition of a flag lot. Mayor Higgins invited public comment. Mr. Bruce Forman, Spokane Valley: spoke about an agenda listing 18-004 and of his inability to find information on our website concerning that; said he finally found the first reading but couldn't follow it and said he thinks it is referring to some sort of CTA number; said he saw a posting in the paper about it and said he would like to have more time to read it and see what it is all about. City Manager Calhoun said there might be some confusion; that during the public comments section, Ms. Sebert talked about an item that our Planning Commission addressed in a public hearing this past Thursday night; he explained that Ordinance 18-004 and that particular comp plan amendment share the number 004, and said there is no connection between what Council is doing tonight and last week's Planning Commission hearing. Mr. Palaniuk said that CPA (comp plan amendment) 2018-0004 concerns a land use map amendment; and said he will give tonight's concerned citizens his contact information in case they have further questions. There were no further public comments. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 4. Second Reading Ordinance 18-005 Spokane Housing Authority (SHA) Reauthorization — Erik Lamb After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to approve Ordinance 18-005 reauthorizing the joint Spokane Housing Authority. Deputy City Attorney Lamb re -briefed Council on this ordinance, which will give more flexibility and efficiency to the SHA in their operations; and again making note that this would represent no financial obligation to Spokane Valley. Mayor Higgins invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 02-27-2018 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT 5. Motion Consideration: Appleway Trail — Mike Basinger, Gloria Mantz, Mike Stone It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to authorize the City Manager to pursue Option 4. [Option #4: As suggested by the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC), repackage the two projects to completely fund the design and construction of the Evergreen to Sullivan segment as initially conceived, and forgo the University to Balfour Park project. By combining the funds from both projects, there will be $2.4 Million available which can fully fund the Evergreen to Sullivan segment. This option will allow the City to evaluate the trail extension west of University through a Comprehensive Plan Amendment in 2019. This option will require pursuing additional grant opportunities to fund the trail west of University which could range from $860,000 to $1,650,000, depending on the location of the western termini of the Appleway Trail.] Mr. Basinger began the PowerPoint presentation by explaining a little of the project's background and description, followed by Parks and Recreation Director Stone going over the scope of the project in the University to Balfour Park, and Evergreen to Sullivan areas. Mr. Stone also noted that although development has been limited to date, it has only been a few years and we are already transforming that overgrown area to a linear City park; said he also hopes in the near future to achieve a theme for the sections; said for the one section not yet constructed between Evergreen and Sullivan, he hears from some members of the public about getting from one end of the trail to the other, and tonight he hopes to talk about an option to close that gap a little more. Ms. Mantz then went through the various stated options; said staff has frequent meetings with SRTC about funding; said once we begin a phase, we have ten years to get into the next phase; adding that we currently do not have enough funds to construct those two sections. Ms. Mantz again explained Option 4, noting that is the option suggested by SRTC; said staff will do some planning and pursue additional funding, and that staff recommends option 4. Mayor Higgins invited public comments. Ms. Nina Fluegal, Spokane Valley: said she lives along that trail and walks it often and she is still disappointed about what it doesn't have; not enough garbage cans or benches; and there are beer and liquor bottles and growing weeds, as well as huge puddles where the snow has melted; said she feels we should forgo that University to Balfour Park section as it is very premature since we are still trying to get the library in place, which may or may not happen; asked who maintains the trail and keeps it clear in the winter; said people can only use the trail eight months out of the year. There were no further public comments. Council discussion included budgeting and finance, and Councilmember Wick asked about including snow plowing and trail maintenance in the next budget. Mr. Calhoun said this issue will be addressed more at the June budget workshop and Council can discuss about coming up with more money for snow removal; said he approached Senske about snow removal, and for liability reasons, they have no interest in clearing the trail. Mr. Stone added that he is not aware of any public trail that is plowed throughout the year, and Mr. Basinger agreed adding that even if the trails are not plowed, they are still used. Councilmember Woodard said he is willing to discuss this more at the June budget workshop, including the idea of running a plow down the trail, but that he is not interested in increasing the budget at this moment. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS: After Mayor Higgins explained the process, he invited general public comments. Mr. John Harding, Spokane Valley: said as a taxpayer he wants to propose that each year Council tell people what projects will be coming up that taxpayers will have to pay for so the taxpayers can prioritize the projects and decide whether or not to have a bond levy; said he would like reports to tell what projects are important, the costs, and how they would be funded so citizens can make more informed decisions on how best to prioritize projects. There were no further public comments. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 02-27-2018 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS 6. Potential Grant Opportunities (FMSIB) — Adam Jackson Planning and Grants Engineer Jackson went through his PowerPoint explaining about the potential grant opportunity through FMSIB, which is the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board, which Board facilitates freight movement between and among local, national and international markets which enhances trade opportunities, and that they work toward solutions that lessen the impact of freight movements on local communities. Mr. Jackson explained some of the criteria to receive a FMSIB grant, as well as some of the history of City projects awarded and not awarded; the 2018 recommended projects and a summary of those projects and the projects funding. There was some Council discussion about sidewalks and bike lanes, and of a shared use pathway instead of those; with Mr. Jackson further explaining that staff will be applying for grants for both the Argonne Road and Barker Road projects; and that a motion for these projects will be coming to Council in two weeks. 7. Crave Contract — Lesli Brassfield, Mike Basinger After Ms. Brassfield went through the PowerPoint describing some of the facets of tourism strategy, including event development, themes, goals and actions, Spokane Valley events, Crave 2017 and the planned Crave 2018, Council discussion included cost or affordability of attending the event, broadening the event to include other activities, projections for attendance, ticket sales so far, and hotel data. Ms. Brassfield mentioned that Vision Marketing received $30,000 through the City's Lodging Tax revenue appropriation to support this year's Crave event, and the City proposes to supplement those funds with $20,000 in currently budgeted 2018 Economic Development marketing funds. Council concurred to move this forward for a motion consideration at an upcoming meeting. 8. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins Councilmember Wood voiced his concern with the nationwide opioid epidemic, said this was discussed at the Health Board meeting, but he would like Spokane Valley to do its share to educate the public on this, and suggested having a presentation from the Health Board or putting something in our Hot Topics newsletter. Mr. Calhoun explained that we have no staff with experience on this other than Chief Werner, and said we can work with the Spokane Regional Health Board to have someone come in and make a presentation. After brief Council discussion on this topic, it was agreed to this put this item on the pending items on the Advance Agenda. Councilmember Wick mentioned that Burlington Northern is planning a second track and perhaps we could review that topic. Mr. Calhoun said he will work with Councilmember Wick and report back to Council. Councilmember Wick also mentioned about having Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers to attend a meeting and Councilmember Woodard said he has been trying to do that. 9. Department Reports Department Reports were for information only and were not reported or discussed. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS City Manager Calhoun had no additional comments. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:03 p.m. ATTEST: L.R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 02-27-2018 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 13, 2018 Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ information ['admin. report Department Director Approval: ❑ • new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 18-006, False Alarm Code Amendment GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council approved the False Alarm Program contract C09-163 on October 13, 2009, which became effective January 1, 2010, and ended December 31, 2012, and which included up to three additional, one-year contract renewals. Council extended the contract for one year on December 29, 2015. Council provided consensus to move forward with an internal false alarm program and amended ordinance on October 18, 2016. Council approved an amended False Alarm Ordinance 17-001 on January 10, 2017. Council heard an administrative report on this topic on February 20, 2018 and a First Reading of Ordinance 18-006 on March 6, 2018. BACKGROUND: The 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 7.20.130.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 several changes to the program based upon that evaluation, including lowering the cost recovery fees. In October of 2016, Council approved a new in-house false alarm reduction program that reduced costs further, simplified administration, and reduced 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. The accompanying draft code amendment language presented will clarify the duties of the alarm administrator, including the ability to mitigate a cost recovery fee up to 25% if he believes the facts and circumstances warrant it. Additionally, after suspending the false alarm reduction program while an in-house program and accompanying database were developed, the program is scheduled to restart on approximately March 15, 2018. The City is sending letters out to all known alarm companies and publishing an article in the Hot Topics Newsletter to inform people of the program reinstatement, lower costs, and fewer requirements. OPTIONS: Move to approve the ordinance, with or without further amendments. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Ordinance 18-006, amending the False Alarm Code. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Approximately $500 in cost for online payment services. All costs are included in the cost recovery fee. STAFF CONTACT: Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst, John Pietro Administrative Analyst ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance 18-006, False Alarm Code Amendment Draft DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 18-006 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 7.20 OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO FALSE ALARMS, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley previously adopted chapter 7.20 Spokane Valley Municipal Code in 2009, to be effective January 1, 2010; and WHEREAS, the purpose and intent of adopting the original chapter 7.20 SVMC was to ensure that responses to false alarms did not diminish the availability of police services to the general public; and WHEREAS, through implementation and use of chapter 7.20 SVMC over the years, staff and the Spokane Valley Police Department have become aware of several issues that should be clarified through amendments to the Code, particularly relating to the authority and process for mitigating false alarm response cost recovery mitigation fees; and WHEREAS, Article 11, section 11 of the Washington State Constitution allows local governments to make and enforce within their jurisdictional limits, local laws and regulations not in conflict with the general laws of the State; and WHEREAS, the City Council, in enacting this Ordinance, seeks to promote the City's interest in protecting the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington ordains as follows: Section 1. Amendment. Chapter 7.20 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: 7.20.170 Mitigation and Appeals. (A) Mitigation of Fees. False alarm response cost recovery fees may be mitigated in certain circumstances as follows: (1) The mitigation process shall be initiated by the alarm user contacting the alarm administrator in person, by mail, or by phone and identifying any mitigating circumstances pertaining to the incident resulting in the false alarm. This request shall be received by the alarm administrator 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 mitigation request untimely and therefore void. A request to mitigate the fees shall not toll the 30 -day appeal period pursuant to SVMC 7.20.170(B). (2) The alarm administrator is authorized to mitigate the false alarm response cost recovery fee by up to 25% if, in the alarm administrator's discretion, the facts and circumstances warrant mitigation. If mitigation is approved, the alarm user waives any further right to appeal. (B) Appeals of False Alarm Response Cost Recovery Fees. False alarm response cost recovery fees may be appealed to the alarm administrator, as follows: Ordinance 18-006 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 1 of 2 DRAFT (1)A, The appeal process shall be initiated by the alarm user sending a letter to the alarm administrator requesting that the false alarm response cost recovery fee be waived, and specifying the reasons for the appeal. This letter shall be received by the alarm administrator 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. B7(2) False alarm response cost recovery fees may be appealed only on the grounds that the incident cited as the basis for the false alarm cost recovery fee service fco was, in fact, not a false alarm response or that the alarm was activated due to an extreme weather event or a natural disaster. Human error or mechanical/electronic failure of the security alarm system are not valid reasons for appeal. The alarm user shall, in his letter requesting an appeal, describe detailed, credible evidence in his possession that supports the assertion that the incident was a valid alarm pursuant to SVMC 7.20.130(C) or (D) an alarm activation due to an extreme weather event or natural disaster. (3) The alarm administrator may reject requests for appeals that are not supported by detailed, credible evidence of criminal activity or extreme weather events or natural disasters. Notice of rejection of a request for this initial appeal shall be sent to the appellant in writing within 10 calendarwefking days following receipt of the appeal request by the alarm administrator. P(4) The alarm administrator may affirm or, waive, cancel, or modify the false alarm response cost recovery fees or actions that are the subject of the appeal. A record of the determination on each a. .eal re.uestany modification of the false alarm cost recovery fee shall be recorded and forwarded to the police chief and the city manager on a monthly basis. &(C) If the alarm administrator affirms or modifies the amount of a false alarm response recovery fee due, that amount becomes immediately due and payable. A record of the determination on each appeal and mitigation request shall be forwarded to the police chief and the city manager on a monthly basis. F7(D) The official decision of the alarm administrator shall be final and not subject to further appeal. Section 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley this day of March, 2018. ATTEST: L.R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 18-006 Amending Chapter 7.20 SVMC — False Alarms Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 13, 2018 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ['admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: First Reading of Proposed Ordinance No. 18-007 to adopt small cell deployment regulations. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Various Federal laws; chapter 35.99 RCW; RCW 35.21.860; chapter 22.120 SVMC. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: At its February 14, 2017 workshop, Council heard an administrative report on small cell deployments generally. On December 19, 2017, Council heard a report on the proposed amendments. On March 6, 2018, City Council heard an administrative report. BACKGROUND: Wireless telecommunication facilities are subject to a number of increasing federal and state laws. Further, wireless telecommunications are ever evolving, with new technologies and new business models continuing to be implemented. Currently, the wireless telecommunication providers are in the midst of rolling out "small cell" technology to meet growing bandwidth and data needs of their customers. The City has been working with the providers, a consortium, and internally to develop appropriate draft franchises and draft regulations to allow implementation of the small cell technology. The proposed regulations were presented to Planning Commission. Planning Commission considered the proposed regulations during its meetings on January 11, January 25, February 8, and February 22, 2018. The Planning Commission received substantial input from three small cell facility providers - Mobilitie, Verizon, and T -Mobile — through the Planning Commission's public hearing. Generally, the providers were supportive of the proposed regulations, although there were some comments to certain Planning Commission recommendations, as detailed below. Ultimately, the Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend the proposed amendments with several modifications for City Council consideration and approval. On March 6, 2018, City Council gave consensus to move the proposed amendments forward to a first reading. Of note, staff determined that an old version of the permitted use matrix was inadvertently used in prior drafts of the proposed amendments. Accordingly, proposed Ordinance No. 18-007 contains the updated permitted use matrix and associated amendments to SVMC 19.65.030 to provide that small cell deployments are subject to the supplemental regulations set forth in chapter 22.121 SVMC. Pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(G), City Council may modify the amendments recommended by Planning Commission and may determine to conduct a public hearing if the modification is "substantial." City staff believe that the modification is not substantive since it effects the same proposed change as before and thus is not substantial. History Wireless Technology. Historically, wireless communications have been provided through antenna arrays located on private property, either attached to large "monopoles" or attached to existing structures, such as tall buildings or water towers. Monopoles can be upwards of 150 feet Page 1 of 5 tall. An example of a monopole is the pole located east of City Hall adjacent to the Appleway Trail. The primary array is referred to as a "macrocell" and it delivers wireless transmissions to a large area. However, as one gets further from the macrocell, the signal gets weaker and becomes less reliable. Additionally, with the advent of smart phones, there has been an exponential increase in the demand for wireless data, and the macrocells have limits on the amount of data they can transmit. Accordingly, wireless telecommunications providers have developed technology to assist with the transmission of data from the macrocell and to boost the signal of the macrocell within the primary coverage area. This technology is referred to as "small cell" technology. It consists of smaller antennae located in various sites around the macrocell. It is referred to as "small cell" because the antennae generally are small and could fit within an imaginary enclosure of no more than three cubic feet. These cells are located on smaller structures, such as light poles, power poles, and other smaller poles between 30-60 feet tall. The small cells collect the wireless signals and retransmit those signals to the macrocells wirelessly (which requires line of sight) or through fiber. This "backfill" boosts the capacity, reliability, and speed of the macrocells for all customers. Legal Framework. Since historically wireless telecommunications were provided through macrocells, the City developed appropriate local regulations addressing the placement of macrocells on monopoles or existing private structures. These regulations are included in chapter 22.120 SVMC and provide for appropriate height limitations based upon the zone where the facility is located. There are also design standards that primarily involve stealth shrouding to minimize the aesthetic impact of the facilities. Federal law provided that cities could not effectively ban all wireless facilities through local regulations. Recent Federal law changes authorized providers to place certain facilities with public rights-of- way (ROW) and provided that cities could not preclude all wireless facilities. Additionally, the changes provided for specific timelines for local review of permit applications. Such timelines are in some instances different than existing permitting timelines under state and local law. With the recent federal changes, chapter 35.99 RCW is now applicable, as it governs placement of wireless telecommunication facilities within the public ROW. It allows cities to require master use permits for placement of wireless facilities within the public ROW. It also allows cities to require "use permits" in addition to the master use permit. It further provides that wireless facilities shall not interfere with the normal use of the public ROW and shall not interfere with the public health, safety, and welfare. Finally, it provides that cities cannot regulate services based upon content or the kinds of signals used, and cities cannot prohibit placement of wireless facilities within the City. Additionally, RCW 35.21.860 provides that cities may require site-specific charges for placement of certain new wireless facilities, replacement wireless facilities over 60 feet tall, and personal wireless facilities on city -owned structures, when such facilities are in the public ROW. Actions to date. In late 2015, the City was contacted by Mobilitie regarding placement of its small cell technology in the City's ROW. In 2016, the City joined a consortium of numerous cities in order to assist it with development of appropriate regulations. The consortium also provided education and assistance with development of draft wireless franchises. In 2017, the City was also contacted by Verizon and MCI Telecom regarding placement of small cell technology in the City's ROW. The City has been working with Mobilitie, Verizon, and MCI Telecom on negotiating a draft franchise. Proposed Ordinance No. 18-007 contains the results of all of the efforts to develop small cell regulations. Page 2 of 5 Draft Small Cell Regulations In developing the draft franchise and small cell regulations, City staff considered numerous factors. State and federal law prevents the City from prohibiting wireless facilities within the City's ROW. The City currently has a large number of varied facilities already existing within its ROW. These range from smaller power and light poles to large primary poles carrying lines from substations. There are numerous signs and trees throughout the ROW. Further, there are already existing power and cable boxes on the ground within the ROW. Thus, the addition of small cell facilities is not likely to create significant additional aesthetic impact. However, staff believes it is appropriate for the City to maintain some restrictions to ensure the ROW remains available for its intended use and that such facilities do not negatively impact the public health, safety, or welfare. Finally, staff was cognizant that specific state and federal timelines apply to processing of wireless facility permits, so ease of permit processing was important. Draft Small Cell Regulations. Specific changes are discussed below. Appendix A: Definitions were added related specifically to the small cell and timeline provisions. SVMC 17.80.030: Table 17.80-1 — Permit Type and Land Use Application was modified to provide that small cell permits are Type I permits subject to the permit processing requirements of chapter 17.80 SVMC except as otherwise required by federal and state law and as subject to any applicable time periods as set forth in newly proposed chapter 22.122. SVMC 19.60.050: The permitted use matrix was modified to permit "small cell deployments" in all zones subject to the supplemental regulations set forth in newly proposed chapters 22.121. As described above, staff determined that an old version of the permitted use matrix had inadvertently been used in prior drafts of the proposed amendments. Proposed Ordinance No. 18-007 contains the correct permitted use matrix. SVMC 19.65.030: As described above, staff determined that an old version of the permitted use matrix had inadvertently been used in prior drafts of the proposed amendments. To effect the same change as occurred in prior drafts, the amendment to SVMC 19.65.030 provides that small cell deployments are subject to the supplemental regulations set forth in newly proposed chapters 22.121 SVMC. Chapter 22.120 SVMC: Chapter 22.120 currently exists and governs all wireless telecommunications within the City. It primarily address macrocell and monopole siting. The proposed amendments to chapter 22.120 SVMC remove small cell services from chapter 22.120 SVMC. Further, the amendments update Table 22.120-1 — Tower Height Limitations to address the zone changes that occurred in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update process to remove nonexistent zones and update zone name changes as appropriate. Newly proposed chapter 22.121 SVMC: A new chapter 22.121 SVMC is proposed to govern all small cell services and facilities. • In accordance with state law, the amendments provide regulations for applying for "master use permits," which are in the form of franchises. Franchises are agreements between the utility provider and the City and are approved in ordinance form by the City Council. However, by having them as "master use permits," it allows the City to better control its ROW and ensure there are not unknown utility providers trying to place small cell deployments in the ROW. • In addition to the master use permit requirement, the deployment of specific small cell facilities requires a small cell permit. Small cell permits are designated as a Type I permit. The provider may include up to 30 small cell facility locations per small cell permit application. Small cell permit applications require: Page 3 of 5 - Sites to be located with a description of the facilities to ensure compliance with design standards; - A copy of the valid franchise or evidence that it is being processed concurrently; - Elements of the small cell deployment that are "collocations" or "eligible facilities requests," which are subject to the unique review periods must be identified; - A declaration from an RF Engineer regarding conformity with applicable FCC regulations on frequencies used; - Necessary environmental checklists for SEPA; and - Evidence of authorization from other utility providers if the small cell facilities will be located on the other providers' utility poles or facilities. Planning Commission also voted to include requirement for applicant to provide evidence that the small cell facility design will not impact the structural integrity of the utility pole on which it is placed. • Small cell facilities are subject to design and concealment standards. These include: - For new poles, integration into the new pole unless technically infeasible. - For existing poles, integrated into the existing design of the pole, with external projections limited to the greatest extent technically feasible. Vertical projections are limited to fifteen feet above the pole. Antenna and antenna enclosure size is limited to three cubic feet in volume. Planning Commission also voted to allow the use of "unified design enclosure" that contains both the antenna and equipment in one enclosure in a unit that is up to six cubic feet in volume. - External projections shall be painted a color to resemble and match the pole. - Small cell facilities shall not interfere with the normal use of the pole and shall not interfere with the normal use of the ROW. - Planning Commission voted to require that small cell facilities be located at least 20 feet above grade unless technically infeasible. - Primary enclosures shall be no larger than seventeen cubic feet except for certain metering and other equipment which may be allowed on the outside of the enclosure. - Ground based enclosures shall be buried or locked and integrated into the surroundings unless technically infeasible, shall not be located in an improved street or sidewalk, and shall not be located in a stormwater facility, including stormwater swales. - Advertising is not allowed on small cell facilities and no artificial lights are allowed, unless required by the FAA. - Small cell facilities are not permitted in public parks. - Planning Commission voted to require that small cell facilities be located at least 250 feet apart unless technically infeasible. If required to be within 250 feet, the provider is required to use a good faith effort to collocate the new facility on the pole with the existing facility. If collocation is not possible, then new facilities within 250 feet would be allowed. Newly proposed chapter 22.122 SVMC: A new chapter 22.122 SVMC is proposed to provide for appropriate permit review timelines for certain wireless telecommunication facilities. • Specifies the City must review and approve an "eligible facilities request" within 60 days of receipt of a complete application. Eligible facilities are defined under federal law and Appendix Page 4 of 5 A as "request for modification of an existing tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station." • Specifies City must review and process an eligible "collocation" application within 90 days of receipt of a complete application. Eligible collocations are defined under federal law and Appendix A as "mounting or installation or transmission equipment on an eligible support structure for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals for communication purposes." • Specifies that new wireless communications facilities shall be processed within 150 days of receipt of a complete application. As a note, SVMC 17.80.130 requires the City to issue decisions on Type I permits within 60 days and Type 11 and Type III permits within 120 days after fully complete applications are received. Washington Legislative Amendments As of the date of this RCA, no small cell bill had been passed. Staff continues to monitor possible small cell legislation. OPTIONS: Move to advance proposed Ordinance No. 18-007 to a second reading, with or without further amendments. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to advance Ordinance No. 18-007 adopting small cell deployment regulations to a second reading. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Unknown, but likely not applicable as small cell facilities are privately owned, installed, and operated. STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney; Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney. ATTACHMENTS: 1. PowerPoint presentation. 2. Proposed Ordinance No. 18-005 3. Planning Commission Findings and Recommendations 3. Staff Report to Planning Commission 4. Minutes from January 11, January 25, and February 8 Planning Commission meetings 5. Written comments from Mobilitie, Verizon, and T -Mobile Page 5 of 5 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 18-007 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING SMALL CELL FACILITY REGULATIONS BY AMENDING SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 17.80.030, 19.60.050, AND 19.65.030, AMENDING APPENDIX A, AMENDING CHAPTER 22.120 SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE, AND ADOPTING CHAPTERS 22.121 AND 22.122 SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE; AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 11, Section 11 of the Washington Constitution, the City of Spokane Valley (City) has authority to "make and enforce within its limits all such local police, sanitary, and other regulations as are not in conflict with general laws;" and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35A.11.020, the City Council "shall have all powers possible for a city or town to have under the Constitution of this state, and not specifically denied to code cities by law," including, but not limited to, "acquisition, sale, ownership, improvement, maintenance, protection, restoration, regulation, use, leasing, disposition, vacation, abandonment or beautification of public ways...;" and WHEREAS, chapter 35.99 RCW authorizes the City to adopt a system for permitting use of public right-of-ways by telecommunications service companies, including authorizing master use permits, use permits, and adopting certain other necessary regulations; and WHEREAS, federal law and regulations set time limits on the processing of applications for eligible facility requests to expand new and existing wireless communications facilities; and WHEREAS, the City has previously adopted chapter 22.120 SVMC to regulate wireless communication facilities; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined adoption of regulations governing placement of small cell facilities is in the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare of its citizens and such regulations are necessary and desirable; and WHEREAS, such regulations are authorized pursuant to chapter 36.70A RCW; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, on December 28, 2017, the Washington State Department of Commerce was notified at least 60 days in advance of the City's intent to adopt amendments to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, on January 11, 2018, the Planning Commission held a study session; and WHEREAS, on January 5, 2018, and January 12, 2018, notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was published in the Valley News Herald; and WHEREAS, on January 25, 2018, and continued to February 8, 2018, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, received evidence, information, public testimony, and a staff report followed by deliberations and provided a recommendation; and WHEREAS, on February 22, 2018, the Planning Commission approved the findings and recommendations; and Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 1 of 25 DRAFT WHEREAS, on March 6, 2018, City Council reviewed the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on March 13, 2018, City Council considered a first ordinance reading to adopt the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, the amendments set forth below are consistent with the goals and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the amendments bear a substantial relation to the public health, safety, and welfare and protection of the environment. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, ordains as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend SVMC Appendix A, 17.80.030, 19.60.050, and 19.65.030, chapter 22.120 SVMC, and to add new chapters 22.121 and 22.122 SVMC to add regulations to govern installation, placement, and permitting of small cell facilities within the City. Section 2. Findings and Conclusions. The City Council acknowledges that the Planning Commission conducted appropriate investigation and study, held a public hearing on the proposed amendments and recommended approval of the amendments. The City Council has read and considered the Planning Commission's findings. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. Growth Management Act Policies - Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) provides that each city shall adopt a comprehensive land use plan and development regulations that are consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan. B. City of Spokane Valley Goals and Policies - The City of Spokane Valley has adopted goals and policies consistent with the GMA and adopted County -Wide Planning Policies, set forth below. Goal ED -G1: Support economic opportunities and employment growth for Spokane Valley. Policy ED -P8: Provide and maintain an infrastructure system that supports Spokane Valley's economic development priorities. Policy ED -P15: Pursue technology-based solutions that improve assistance to businesses. Goal LU -G1: Maintain and enhance the character and quality of life in Spokane Valley. Goal LU -G2: Provide for land uses that are essential to Spokane Valley residents, employees, and visitors. Goal CF -G1: Coordinate with special districts, other jurisdictions, and the private sector to effectively and affordably provide facilities and services. Goal U -G1: Coordinate with utility providers to balance cost-effectiveness with environmental protection, aesthetic impact, public safety, and public health. Policy U -P1: Promote the efficient co -location of new utilities. Policy U -P2: Promote the development of citywide communication networks using the most advanced technology available. Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 2 of 25 DRAFT Section 3. hereto. Policy U -P5: Require the placement of cellular facilities, substations, and antennas in a manner that minimizes adverse impacts on adjacent land uses and utilizes existing structures. Policy U -P6: Coordinate with utility providers to ensure that sizing, locating, and phasing of utility systems are appropriate for planned growth. Policy U -P8: Encourage the construction and maintenance of utility, communications, and technology infrastructure that will help attract business and industry. C. Conclusions The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment. The proposed text amendments are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the approval criteria pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(F). The proposed City -initiated Code text amendments are consistent with the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan and the approval criteria pursuant to SVMC 17.80.150(F). Amendment. SVMC Appendix A is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit "A," attached Section 4. Amendment. SVMC 17.80.030 is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit "A," attached hereto. Section 5. Amendment. SVMC 19.60.050 is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit "A," attached hereto. Section 6. Amendment. SVMC 19.65.030 is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit "A," attached hereto. Section 7. Amendment. Chapter 22.120 SVMC is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit "A," attached hereto. Section 8. Adoption. Title 22 SVMC is hereby amended by adding a new chapter, to be designated "Chapter 22.121 Small Cell Deployment," as set forth in Exhibit "A," attached hereto. Section 9. Adoption. Title 22 SVMC is hereby amended by adding a new chapter, to be designated "Chapter 22.122 Wireless Communications and Small Cell Facility Review Periods," as set forth in Exhibit "A," attached hereto. Section 10. Other sections unchanged. All other provisions of the SVMC not specifically referenced hereto shall remain in full force and effect. Section 11. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 12. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after the publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. Passed by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley this day of , 2018. Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 3 of 25 DRAFT City of Spokane Valley ATTEST: L.R. Higgins, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 4 of 25 DRAFT EXHIBIT "A" APPENDIX A — DEFINITIONS Radio/TV broadcasting studio: Facilities serving the broadcast media. See "Communication facilities, use category." Repeater facility: A facility for the noncommercial reception and retransmission of radio signals. See "Communication facilities, use category." RF Engineer: A person who is qualified with education, training and experience in wireless communication services, radio frequencies, and FCC and other applicable governmental regulations to provide the necessary certification(s) required pursuant to chapter 22.121 SVMC. Telecommunications: The transmission, between or among points specified by the user, of audio and/or visual information and data of the user's choosing, without change in the form or content of the information as sent and received. • Alternative mounting structure: A water tower, manmade tree, clock tower, church steeple, bell tower, utility pole, light standard, freestanding sign, flagpole, or similar structure designed to support and camouflage or conceal the presence of telecommunications antennas. • Antenna: Any exterior apparatus designed for telephonic, radio, data, Internet or other communications through the sending and/or receiving of radio frequency signals including, but not limited to, equipment attached to a tower, pole, light standard, utility pole, building or other structure for the purpose of providing wireless services. Types of antennas include: - An "omni -directional antenna" receives and transmits radio frequency signals in a 360 -degree radial pattern; - A "whip antenna" is an omni -directional antenna that is up to 15 feet in height and no more than six inches in diameter; and - A "directional or panel antenna" receives and transmits radio frequency signals in a specific directional pattern of less than 360 degrees.A structure or device used to collect or radiate radio, television, or microwave electromagnetic waves, including directional antennas, such as panels, wireless cable and satellite dishes, and omni directional antennas, such as whips, but not including satellite earth stations or noncommercial antennas installations for home use of radio or television. • Antenna Height: The vertical distance measured from average building elevation to the highest point of the antenna, or if on a rooftop or other structure, from the top of the roof or structure to the highest point of the antenna. For replacement structures, antenna height is measured from the top of the existing structure to the highest point of the antenna or new structure, whichever is greater. • Approved small cell facility: Any small cell facility that has received all required permits. • Array: An arrangement of antennas and their supporting structure. • Base Station: A structure or equipment at a fixed location that enables FCC -licensed or authorized wireless communications between user equipment and a communications network. The term does not encompass a tower as defined herein nor any equipment associated with a tower. Base Station includes, without limitation: - Equipment associated with wireless communications services as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul. - Radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, regular and backup power supplies, and comparable equipment, regardless of technological configuration (including Distributed Antenna Systems ("DAS") and small-cell networks). Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 5 of 25 DRAFT - Any structure other than a tower that, at the time the relevant application is filed with the City, supports or houses equipment described above that has been reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning or siting process, or under another State or local regulatory review process, even if the structure was not built for the sole or primary purpose of providing that support. The term does not include any structure that, at the time the relevant application is filed with the City, does not support or house equipment described above. • Collocation: The mounting or installation of transmission equipment on an eligible support structure for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals for communication purposes.A single telecommunications tower and/or site used by more than one telecommunications service provider. • Concealment technology: Transmission facilities designed to look like some feature other than a wireless tower or base station or which minimizes the visual impact of an antenna by use of nonreflective materials, appropriate colors and/or a concealment canister or enclosure. • Dish: A parabolic or bowl shaped device that receives and/or transmits signals in a specific directional pattern. • EIA -222: Electronics Industries Association Standard 222, "Structural Standards for Steel Antenna Towers and Antennas Support Structures." • Electric transmission: A self-supporting structure in excess of 50 feet in height designed to support high voltage electric lines. This does not include local utility or distribution poles (with or without transformers) designed to provide electric service to individual customers. • Eligible Facilities Request: Any request for modification of an existing tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station, involving: - Collocation of new transmission equipment; - Removal of transmission equipment; or - Replacement of transmission equipment. • Eligible support structure: Any tower or base station as defined in this section, provided that it is at the time the relevant application is filed with the City, houses or supports an antenna, micro cell or small cell deployment. • Equipment structure: A facility, shelter, cabinet or vault used to house and protect electronic or other associated equipment necessary for processing wireless communications signals. "Associated equipment" may include, for example, air conditioning, backup power supplies and emergency generators. • Existing: A constructed tower or base station is existing if it has been reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning or siting process, or under another state or local regulatory review process, provided that a tower that has not been reviewed and reviewed because it was not in a zoned area when it was built, but was lawfully constructed, is existing for purposes of chapter 22.122 SVMC. • Guyed, tower: Any telecommunications tower supported in whole or in part by cables anchored to the ground. • Height: The distance measured from grade to the highest point of any and all components of the structure, including antennas, hazard lighting, and other appurtenances, if any. • Microcells: Has the same meaning as set forth in RCW 80.36.375, as now adopted or hereafter amended. • Monopole: A self-supporting telecommunications tower, which consists of a single vertical pole, fixed into the ground and/or attached to a foundation. Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 6 of 25 DRAFT • Other support structure: A structure used to support small cell facilities or equipment structures, excluding buildings, utility poles, and water reservoirs. Examples of "other support structures" include flagpoles and ball field light standards. • Panel: An antenna which receives and/or transmits signals in a directional pattern. • Prior approval: Certification of approval(s) from the City authorizing the initial installation of a specific wireless carrier's small cell facilities on a base station or tower. Prior approval may also include the subsequent approval(s) from the City authorizing modifications to the initial installation that have resulted in the existing state of the small cell facility including, but not limited to, the number and location of equipment structures, antennas, antenna support structures, and ancillary equipment. • Self-supporting lattice tower: A telecommunications tower that consists of an open network of metal braces, usually triangular or square in cross-section. • Service: The offering of telecommunications for a fee directly to the public, or to such classes of users as to be effectively available directly to the public, regardless of the facilities used. • Service provider: Has the same meaning as set forth in RCW 35.99.010(6) as now adopted or hereafter amended. Service provider shall include those infrastructure companies that provide telecommunications services or equipment to enable the deployment of personal wireless services. • Small cell and small cell deployment: Have the same meaning as set forth in RCW 80.36.375, as now adopted or hereafter amended. • Stealth: A telecommunications antenna that is effectively camouflaged or concealed from view. • Substantial change: A modification substantially changes the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure if it meets any of the following criteria: - For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, it increases the height of the tower by more than 10% or by the height of one additional antenna array with separation from the nearest existing antenna not to exceed twenty feet, whichever is greater; for other eligible support structures, it increases the height of the structure by more than 10% or more than ten feet, whichever is greater; - For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, it involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of the tower more than twenty feet, or more than the width of the tower structure at the level of the appurtenance, whichever is greater; for other eligible support structures, it involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the structure that would protrude from the edge of the structure by more than six feet; - For any eligible support structure, it involves installation of more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, but not to exceed four cabinets; or, for towers in the public rights-of-way and base stations, it involves installation of any new equipment cabinets on the ground if there are no pre-existing ground cabinets associated with the structure, or else involves installation of ground cabinets that are more than 10% larger in height or overall volume than any other ground cabinets associated with the structure; - It entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site; - It would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible support structure; or - It does not comply with conditions associated with the siting approval of the construction or modification of the eligible support structure or base station equipment, provided, however, that this limitation does not apply to any modification that is non-compliant only in a manner that would not exceed the thresholds identified above. • Telecommunications antenna: An antenna used to provide a telecommunications service. This excludes lightning rods, private mobile radio systems, amateur radio antennas less than 35 feet in height Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 7 of 25 DRAFT in residential districts and 50 feet in height in nonresidential districts, and whip antennas less than four inches (10 cm) in diameter and less than 10 feet in height. • Telecommunications service: Has the same meaning as set forth in RCW 35.99.010(7), as now adopted or hereafter amended. • Tower: Any structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any FCC -licensed or authorized antennas and their associated facilities, including structures that are constructed for wireless communications services including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul and the associated site. A "tower" shall not include a replacement utility pole as authorized by a lease with the City, a franchise or a Small Cell Permit.A self supporting or guyed structure more than 20 feet in height, wind turbine support towers. • Transmission equipment: Equipment that facilitates transmission for any FCC -licensed or authorized wireless communication service, including, but not limited to, radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, and regular and backup power supply. The term includes equipment associated with wireless communications services including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul. • Unified design enclosure: Concealment of antennas and equipment within a single enclosure. • Utility pole: A structure designed and used primarily for the support of electrical wires, telephone wires, television cable, traffic signals, or lighting for streets, parking areas, or pedestrian paths. • Whip antenna: An omni directional dipole antenna of cylindrical shape which is no more than six inches in diameter. • Wireless: Having no wire or wires, operating by means of transmitted electromagnetic waves. Tower, ham operator: A structure less than 75 feet in height above grade used for two-way communication for hobby or emergency service purposes by private individuals. See "Communication facilities, use category." Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 8 of 25 DRAFT Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures 17.80.030 Assignment of development application classification. A. Assignment by Table. Land use and development applications shall be classified pursuant to Table 17.80- 1 below: Table 17.80-1— Permit Type and Land Use Application Type Land Use and Development Application SVMC Cross - Reference Type I Accessory dwelling units 19.40 Administrative determinations by city manager or designee or building official Multiple Administrative exception 19.140 Administrative interpretation 17.50.010 Boundary line adjustments and eliminations 20.80 Building permits not subject to SEPA 21.20.040 Floodplain development 21.30 Grading permits 24.50 Home business permit 19.65.180 Shoreline letter of exemption 21.50 Record of survey to establish lots within a binding site plan 20.60.040 Right-of-way permits 22.130.100 Site plan review 19.130 Small cell permit 22.121; 22.122 Temporary use permit 19.160 Time extensions for preliminary subdivision, short subdivision, or binding site plan 20.30.060 Type II Alterations — preliminary and final subdivisions, short subdivisions, binding site plans 20.50 Binding site plan — preliminary and final 20.50 Binding site plan — change of conditions 20.50 SEPA threshold determination 21.20.060 Shoreline conditional use permit 21.50 Shoreline nonconforming use or structure review 21.50 Shoreline substantial development permit 21.50 Shoreline variance 21.50 Short subdivision — preliminary and final 20.30, 20.40 Preliminary short subdivision, binding site plan — change of conditions 20.30 Wireless communication facilities 22.120 Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 9 of 25 DRAFT Type III Conditional use permits 19.150 Planned residential developments 19.50 Plat vacation 20.70.020 Preliminary subdivision — change of conditions 20.50 Subdivisions — preliminary 20.30 Variance 19.170 Zoning map amendments (site-specific rezones) 19.30.030 Type IV Annual Comprehensive Plan amendments (text and/or map) 17.80.140 Area -wide zoning map amendments 17.80.140 Development Code text amendments 17.80.150 B. Assignment by City Manager or Designee. Land use and development applications not defined in Table 17.80-1 shall be assigned a type based on the most closely related application type by the city manager or designee, unless exempt under SVMC 17.80.040. When more than one procedure may be appropriate, the process providing the greatest opportunity for public notice shall be followed. C. Shoreline letters of exemption, shoreline substantial development permits, shoreline conditional use permits, shoreline variances, and shoreline nonconforming use or structure review shall be processed pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 17.80 SVMC, subject to any additional or modified procedures provided in Chapter 21.50 SVMC, Shoreline Regulations, including submittals, completeness review, notices, hearings, and decisions. D. Small cell permits and wireless communication facilities shall be processed pursuant to the procedures set forth in chapter 17.80 SVMC except as may otherwise be required pursuant to federal and state law, including but not limited to 47 U.S.C. § 1455(a) (Section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012) and chapter 35.99 RCW. Chapter 22.122 SVMC specifies applicable time periods for review and processing of eligible facilities requests, collocations, small cell permits, and new wireless communication facilities. DE. Except as provided in Table 17.80-1, change of conditions for permits shall be processed the same as the original permit type. Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 10 of 25 DRAFT SVMC 19.60.050 Permitted uses matrix. Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 11 of 25 Residential Mixed Use Commercial Industrial Parks and Open Space R-1 R-2 R-3 MFR MU CMU NC RC MU I POS Communication Facilities Radio/TV broadcasting studio P P P P Repeater facility P P P P P P PP Small cell S S S SS S S SSS S deployment Telecommunication wireless antenna array S S S SS S S SS S Telecommunication wireless support tower S S S SS S S SS S Tower, ham operator S S S SS S S SS S Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 11 of 25 DRAFT SVMC 19.65.030 Communication Facilities. A. Small Cell Deployment. Small cell deployments shall comply with the provisions of chapter 22.121 SVMC, Small Cell Deployment. AB. Telecommunication Wireless Antenna Array. Telecommunication wireless antenna arrays shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 22.120 SVMC, Wireless Communication Facilities. DC. Telecommunication Wireless Support Tower. Telecommunication wireless support towers shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 22.120 SVMC, Wireless Communication Facilities. CD. Telecommunication wireless support towers located in a residential or multifamily zoning district require a conditional use permit pursuant to Chapter 19.150 SVMC. DE. Tower, Ham Operator. 1. A building permit for the private tower is required; 2. The applicant shall submit a site plan showing the height and location of the private tower; 3. The applicant shall furnish a copy of the tower manufacturer's construction and erection specifications; 4. The private tower shall be erected in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications; 5. The applicant shall demonstrate the impact area (that area in all directions equal to the tower's height above grade) is completely on his/her property. Up to one-half of the tower's impact area in distance may be administratively approved if located on adjacent property pursuant to the administrative exception process contained in Chapter 19.140 SVMC or if the applicant has secured the appropriate easements for all property within the tower's impact area if not entirely within his/her ownership. Such easements shall be recorded with the Spokane County auditor with a statement that only the City may remove the recordation; 6. A residence shall be on the same site as the private tower, except for a private repeater facility or remote base operations; and 7. The height limitation of the zone shall not be exceeded without approval of a variance or administrative exception as either may respectively pertain. EF. Tower (does not include wireless communications support tower), provided: 1. A conditional use permit pursuant to Chapter 19.150 SVMC is approved; 2. The tower base shall be enclosed by a fence not less than six feet in height with a locking gate; 3. The tower shall have a locking trap door or the climbing apparatus shall stop 12 feet above the ground; Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 12 of 25 DRAFT 4. The tower collapse or blade impact area shall lie completely within the applicant's property or within an adjacent property for which the applicant has secured and recorded an easement(s) for all property in the tower's impact area; and 5. Before issuance of a conditional use permit, the applicant shall have demonstrated all the applicable requirements of the FCC, FAA and any required avigation easements can be satisfied. Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 13 of 25 DRAFT Chapter 22.120 SVMC Wireless Communication Facilities 22.120.010 Purpose and intent. These standards were developed to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, and minimize visual impacts on residential areas, while furthering the development of wireless communication services. These standards were designed to comply with the Telecommunication Act of 1996. The provisions of this sectionchapter 22.120 SVMC are not intended to and shall not be interpreted to prohibit or to have the effect of prohibiting wireless communication services. Chapter 22.120 SVMC shall cover all wireless communication services other than small cell services, which are regulated pursuant to chapter 22.121 SVMC. 22.120.020 Permits and exemptions. Where a transmission tower or antenna support structure is located in a zoning district which allows such use as a permitted use activity, administrative review, and a building permit, shall be required, subject to the project's consistency with the development standards set forth in SVMC 22.120.040. In instances where the use is not allowed as a permitted use activity, a conditional use permit and building permit shall be required in addition to a demonstration of consistency with all required development standards. Exemption: Wireless radio utilized for temporary emergency communications in the event of a disaster is exempt from the provisions of this section and shall be permitted in all zones. 22.120.030 Required application submittals. All applications for wireless antenna arrays and wireless communication support towers shall include the following: A. A letter signed by the applicant stating that all applicable requirements of the FCC, the FAA, and any required avigation easements have been satisfied. B. A scaled site plan clearly indicating the location, type and height of the proposed tower, antennas, on- site land uses and zoning, adjacent land uses and zoning, adjacent roadways, proposed means of access, setbacks from property lines, elevation drawings of the proposed tower, the equipment structure, fencing, buffering and the type of stealth technology which will be utilized. The full, detailed site plan shall not be required if the antenna is to be mounted on an existing structure. C. The applicant shall have performed and provided a photographic simulation of the proposed facility from all affected properties and public rights-of-way. D. The applicant shall provide copies of any environmental documents required by the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). E. The applicant shall have demonstrated effort to co -locate on an existing support tower or other structure. New support towers shall not be permitted within one mile of an existing support tower unless it is demonstrated that no existing support tower or other structure can accommodate the proposed antenna array. The City reserves the right to retain a qualified consultant, at the applicant's expense, to review the supporting documentation for accuracy. F. Evidence to demonstrate that no existing support tower or other structure can accommodate the proposed antenna array may consist of the following: 1. No existing support towers or other structures are located within the geographic areas required to meet the applicant's engineering requirements. Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 14 of 25 DRAFT 2. Existing support towers or other structures are not of sufficient height to meet the applicant's engineering requirements. 3. Existing support towers or other structures do not have sufficient structural strength to support the applicant's proposed antenna array and related equipment. 4. The applicant's proposed antenna would cause electromagnetic interference with the antenna on the existing support towers or other structures, or the antenna on the existing support towers or other structures would cause interference with the applicant's proposed antenna. G. The applicant of a new tower shall provide a signed statement stating the applicant has provided notice to all other area wireless service providers of its application to encourage the co -location of additional antennas on the structure. H. A signed statement from the owner and/or landlord to remove the facility or obtain another permit for the facility within six months of when the facility is no longer operating as part of a wireless communication system authorized and licensed by the FCC. I. Proof that all the necessary property or easements have been secured to assure for the proper construction, continued maintenance, and general safety of the properties adjoining the wireless communication facility. 22.120.040 Design standards. The support tower, antenna array, and supporting electrical and mechanical equipment shall be installed using stealth technology. Stealth technology applies to all personal wireless service facilities, including, without limitation, antennas, towers and equipment structures. For any facility, stealth technology means the use of both existing and future technology through which a personal wireless service facility is designed to resemble an object which is already present in the local environment, such as a tree, streetlight, or traffic signal. It also includes: A. For personal wireless service support towers: 1. If within existing trees, "stealth technology" means: a. The tower is to be painted a dark color; b. Is made of wood or metal; and c. A greenbelt easement is required to ensure permanent retention of the surrounding trees. 2. Stealth technology for towers in a more open setting means that they must have a backdrop (for example, but not limited to, trees, a hillside, or a structure) on at least two sides, be a compatible color with the backdrop, be made of compatible materials with the backdrop, and that architectural or landscape screening be provided for the other two sides. If existing trees are the backdrop, then a greenbelt easement is required to ensure permanent retention of the surrounding trees. 3. Antennas shall be integrated into the design of any personal wireless service tower to which they are attached. External projections from the tower shall be limited to the greatest extent technically feasible. 4. For rooftop antennas or antennas mounted on other structures: a. For omni -directional antennas 15 feet or less above the roof, stealth technology means use of a color compatible with the roof, structure or background; b. For other antennas, stealth technology means use of compatible colors and architectural screening or other techniques approved by the City. B. For antennas mounted on one or more building facades, stealth technology means use of color and materials such that the facility has architectural compatibility with the building. It shall be mounted on a Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 15 of 25 DRAFT wall of an existing building in a configuration as flush to the wall as technically possible and shall not project above the wall on which it is mounted. C. For equipment structures, stealth technology means locating within a building, or if on top of a building, with architecturally compatible screening. An underground location, or above ground with a solid fence and landscaping, is also considered stealth technology. D. Advertising or display shall not be located on any support tower or antenna array; however, the owner of the antenna array shall place an identification plate indicating the name of the wireless service provider and a telephone number for emergency contact on the site. E. No artificial lights other than those required by FAA or other applicable authority shall be permitted. All security lights shall be down -shielded, and installed to be consistent with Chapter 22.60 SVMC. F. The facility shall be enclosed by a site -obscuring secured fence not less than six feet in height with a locking gate. No barbed wire or razor wire shall be permitted. G. The support tower foundations, equipment shelters, cabinets or other on -the -ground ancillary equipment shall be buried below ground or screened with a site -obscuring secured fence not less than six feet high. The requirement for a site -obscuring fence may be waived provided the applicant has secured all on -the -ground ancillary equipment in a locked cabinet designed to be compatible with and blend into the setting, and the means of access for the support tower is located a minimum of 12 feet above the ground. H. All support structure(s) for wireless communication antennas shall have their means of access located a minimum of eight feet above the ground unless the requirement for a fence has been waived. I. The support tower shall meet the minimum primary structure setback requirements for the underlying zone. J. Support towers shall not be permitted inside a public park, public monument or private holding located within a public park or public monument. K. The height of the support tower or antenna array above grade shall not exceed the maximum height identified in Table 22.120-1 below. The height of a support tower shall include antenna, base pad, and other appurtenances and shall be measured from the finished grade of the parcel. Table 22.120-1— Tower Height Limitations Zone Antenna Array Support Tower R-1, Single -Family Residential Estate 20 feet above the zoning height limitation or 16 feet above existing structure 60 feet R-2, Single -Family Residential Suburban R-3, Single -Family Residential Urban R 11, Single Family Residential Urban MFR-, Multifamily Residentialedium Density Residential Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 16 of 25 DRAFT Table 22.120-1- Tower Height Limitations Zone Antenna Array Support Tower MF 2, High Density Residential Mixed Use Ccntcr 20 feet above the zoning height limitation or 16 feet above existing structure 60 feet (MUG) Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) City Ccntcr (CC) Garden Office (GO) Office (0) Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Community Commercial 20 feet above the zoning height limitation or 20 feet above existing structure 20 feet higher than the maximum height allowed in the zone or 80 feet whichever is less* (C) Regional Commercial (RC) Light Industrial Mixed Use (IMU-1-) Heavy Industrial (I-4) *An additional 20 feet in height for each additional antenna array co -located on the support tower, up to a maximum tower height of 100 feet, including the height of all antennas. 22.120.050 Landscaping. Refer to Chapter 22.70 SVMC for landscaping requirements applicable to the underlying zoning district. Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 17 of 25 DRAFT Chapter 22.121 SVMC Small Cell Deployment 22.121.010 Overview. In order to manage its right-of-way in a thoughtful manner which balances the need to accommodate new and evolving technologies with the preservation of the natural and aesthetic environment of the City while complying with the requirements of state and federal law, the City adopts chapter 22.121 SVMC for the deployment of small cell and microcell technology. Service providers who seek to utilize the public right- of-way for small cell deployment in order to provide wireless communication, data transmission or other related services to the citizens of the City shall receive a valid franchise to provide the specific service seeking to utilize the small cell deployment. Entities with franchises who wish to utilize a small cell deployment to upgrade or expand their existing services shall utilize the processes set forth in chapter 22.121 SVMC and implementing small cell permits to deploy their technology and obtain design approval of specific installations. A. Nothing in chapter 22.121 SVMC revises or diminishes the rights and obligations of an existing franchise. B. The term "small cell deployment" shall include the deployment of small cell facilities, micro cells and small cell networks as those terms are defined by RCW 80.36.375 as now adopted or hereafter amended. Small cell deployment elements which require SEPA review may utilize these processes only in conjunction with SEPA review. 22.121.015 Administration. The City Manager is charged with administration of small cell deployment permitting and other wireless communication review processes established under chapters 22.120, 22.121, and 22.122 SVMC. 22.121.020 Small Cell Deployments. A. Small Cell Deployments in Rights -of -Way. Small cell deployments in the public rights-of-way shall only be made pursuant (1) to a valid franchise with the City, and (2) in compliance with all federal, state, and local small cell permitting requirements. B. Small Cell Deployments outside of Rights -of -Way. Small cell deployments outside of the public rights- of-way shall only be made in compliance all federal, state, and local small cell permitting requirements. 22.121.030 Franchise Application. A. Franchise Application. Service providers that desire to deploy small cell deployments in public rights- of-way shall apply for a franchise using the City's franchise application form and submit a fee deposit commensurate with the estimated administrative costs of processing on application for a franchise. Service providers seeking to utilize City rights-of-way for small cell deployments shall specify geographic boundaries for the small cell deployment described in the application and provide detailed schematics and visual renderings of the proposed facilities to be utilized. Phased development is permitted and an applicant is encouraged to specify at least the initial small cell deployment in its application. B. Designation of Facilities. All applicants for franchises seeking to utilize small cell deployment shall provide the following information. Existing franchisees that seek to utilize a small cell deployment to expand, assist or implement an existing franchise may provide the information as a part of a small cell permit application for small cell deployment. The applicant shall specify in the franchise application: Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 18 of 25 DRAFT 1. whether and where small cell facilities are proposed to be located on existing utility poles; 2. whether and where small cell facilities are proposed to be located on replacement utility poles, new poles, towers, and/or other structures and the type of replacement poles to be installed; 3. the conduit and/or ground -mounted equipment necessary for and intended for use in the small cell deployment, regardless of whether the additional facilities are to be constructed by the applicant or leased from an infrastructure provider, 4. any facility which is eligible for or subject to the applicable federal review time periods under an eligible facilities request or as a collocation. C. SEPA Review. Any application for a franchise which contains an element which is not exempt from SEPA review shall simultaneously submit an environmental checklist pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW and chapter 21.20 SVMC. D. Completeness. The City Manager shall review a small cell franchise application for completeness and notify the applicant within 30 days of submission whether the application is complete, provided, however, that an applicant may consent to a different completeness review period. A service provider may resubmit an application determined to be incomplete within 30 days of notice by the City Manager. Failure to resubmit an application within the 30 day period shall be deemed a withdrawal of that application. No application shall be deemed complete without the fee deposit set by the City Manager. 22.121.040 Small Cell Permit Application. A. Concurrent small cell permit application and franchise application. Rights granted under the franchise for construction, installation, and placement of small cell facilities shall be implemented through the issuance of small cell permits. The franchise application may be accompanied by one or more concurrent applications for a small cell permit to deploy small cells. B. Small cell permit application. A small cell permit application shall contain the following: 1. All small cell facility sites shall be specified. Up to 30 sites may be specified in one small cell permit application for processing. The application shall include sufficient information about each site and facility in order for the City to determine that it complies the design and location standards set forth in SVMC 22.121.060. 2. If the application includes small cell deployment in the public rights-of-way, a copy of the franchise application or reference to approved existing franchise shall be included. Approval for a small cell permit to install a small cell deployment shall be contingent upon approval of a small cell franchise or the possession of a valid small cell franchise. 3. If more than one application for a small cell permit is submitted by an applicant, they shall be considered in the order received. If multiple applications are submitted on the same date, the applicant shall indicate which application shall be considered first. 4. Any element of a deployment which qualifies as either an eligible facilities request or a collocation shall be specifically designated by the applicant and may be addressed separately by the City Manager in order to comply with the applicable processing requirements established by federal law, state law, and chapter 22.122 SVMC. 5. Any application for a small cell permit which contains an element which is not exempt from SEPA review shall simultaneously submit an environmental checklist pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW and chapter 21.20 SVMC. 6. The applicant shall submit a sworn declaration under penalty of perjury signed by an RF Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 19 of 25 DRAFT Engineer with knowledge of the proposed project affirming that the small cell deployment will be compliant with all FCC and any other applicable regulations in connection with human exposure to radio frequency emissions for every frequency at which the small cell facility and associated wireless backhaul will operate. An existing franchisee applying for a small cell permit for small cell deployment shall provide an RF certification for all facilities included in the deployment. 7. The applicant shall provide proof of FCC and other regulatory approvals required to provide the service(s) or utilize the technologies sought to be installed. 8. As applicable, the applicant shall provide written proof from any utility provider authorizing the applicant to use the utility provider's utility poles for a small cell deployment. The applicant shall also provide evidence of a professional engineer certification or other form of formal approval that the small cell deployment meets applicable structural standards for any impacted utility pole. C. Completeness; Small Cell Applications. The City Manager shall review an application for completeness and notify the applicant within 30 days of submission whether the application is complete, provided, however, that an applicant may consent to a different completeness review period. A service provider may resubmit an application determined to be incomplete within 30 days of notice by the City Manager or designee. Failure to resubmit an application in a timely manner shall be deemed a withdrawal of that application. No application shall be deemed complete without the fee deposit set by the City Manager. D. The City Manager may approve, deny or conditionally approve all or any portion of the sites proposed in the small cell permit application. 22.121.050 Small Cell Franchise and Permit Review Process. The following provisions relate to review of applications for a franchise or small cell permit for small cell deployments. A. Review of Facilities. Review of the site locations proposed by the applicant shall be governed by the provisions of 47 U.S.C. 253 and 47 U.S.C. 332 and applicable case law. Applicants for franchises and the small cell permits which implement the franchise shall be treated in a competitively neutral and non- discriminatory manner with other service providers utilizing supporting infrastructure which is functionally equivalent, that is, service providers whose facilities are similarly situated in terms of structure, placement or cumulative impacts. Franchise and small cell permit application review under chapter 22.121 SVMC shall neither prohibit nor have the effect of prohibiting the ability of an applicant to provide telecommunications services. B. Design Review and Concealment. Small cell facilities shall conform to design, location, and concealment standards and be subject to design review as set forth in SVMC 22.121.050. C. Franchise approval. Franchises shall be approved in the form of a City ordinance, and franchises may only be approved by the City Council pursuant to its standard ordinance approval process; provided however, that the City shall meet any applicable federal or state time processing requirements in reviewing and approving or denying a franchise application. D. Other conditions of approval. Approval of a franchise, small cell permit and/or other approval referenced in chapter 22.121 SVMC are conditioned on the following requirements: 1. Satisfy all applicable bulk requirements including but not limited to height, noise, light, and any other applicable zoning requirements. 2. Provide written proof of the approval of the owner of any utility pole for the installation of its Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 20 of 25 DRAFT facilities on such utility pole. Approval of a franchise does not authorize attachment to City -owned utility poles or other structures. 3. Unless specifically provided for in a franchise, obtain a lease from the City or provide proof of a lease between the City and the utility owner on whose poles the applicant is placing small cell utilities authorizing the utility owner to utilize the City's ground space for the installation of any new pole, a replacement utility pole over 60 feet or to locate any new ground based structure, base station or other attendant equipment on City right-of-way or City property; 4. Comply with applicable City approval processes for the co -location of facilities, or the installation of any new or replacement utility poles in the right-of-way; and 5. Comply with all City construction standards and state and federal codes when operating in the right-of-way and obtain a required permit to enter the right-of-way. 22.121.060 Design and Concealment Standards. Small cell facilities shall be installed using stealth or concealment technology. Stealth or concealment technology applies to all small cell facilities, including, without limitation, antennas, towers and primary equipment enclosures. For any small cell facility, stealth or concealment technology means the use of both existing and future technology through which the small cell facility is designed to resemble or blend into an object which is already present in the local environment, such as a tree, streetlight, or traffic signal. It also includes: A. For those portions of small cell facilities attached to or part of light, power, sign, or other poles: 1. For new poles, integrated within the pole unless technically infeasible. New poles shall be subject to any applicable City or industry standards; 2. For existing poles, integrated into the existing design of the pole to which it is attached, with external projections limited in size and scope to the greatest extent technically feasible, including but not limited to being as flush as possible to the pole, not projecting more than fifteen feet vertically above the pole, and having architectural compatibility with the pole; 3. External projections shall be painted a color to resemble and match the pole so that they appear to be part of the pole; 4. Shall conform to any structural standards so as not to degrade the structural engineering of the pole to which it is attached; 5. Shall not interfere with the normal use for which the pole is intended, including but not limited to blocking any light designed to be dispersed from existing lighting fixtures installed on light poles. interfering with power lines on power poles, and obscuring any portion of the applicable sign -face on signs; and 6. i. Antennae for small cell facilities shall be located inside of an antenna enclosure no more than three cubic feet in volume, or in the case of an antenna that has exposed elements, the antenna and all of its exposed elements could fit within an imaginary enclosure of no more than three cubic feet. ii. In lieu of antennae and primary equipment enclosures, unified design enclosures are permitted, provided that the overall dimensions of such designs shall not exceed six cubic feet in volume. iii. Antennae and unified design enclosures shall be located at least 20 feet above the base elevation of the ground unless technically infeasible. B. Primary equipment enclosures shall be no larger than seventeen cubic feet in volume. The following associated equipment may be located outside the primary equipment enclosure and if so located, are not included in the calculation of equipment volume: electric meter, concealment, telecomm demarcation box, Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 21 of 25 DRAFT ground-based enclosures, battery back-up power systems, grounding equipment, power transfer switch, and cut-off switch. Primary equipment enclosures shall be buried below ground or locked and integrated into the surroundings unless technically infeasible. This shall include incorporating the facilities into the base of the pole, integrating into existing surrounding fixtures, such as garbage containers or other power boxes, and/or use of materials and colors that blend into the surrounding setting. Ground -mounted facilities shall not be located in an improved street or sidewalk. Ground -mounted facilities shall not located in a stormwater facility, including stormwater swales. Unified design enclosures are permitted pursuant to SVMC 22.121.060(A)(6). C. For small cell facilities mounted on one or more building facades, stealth or concealment technology means use of color and materials such that the facility has architectural compatibility with the building. It shall be mounted on a wall of an existing building in a configuration as flush to the wall as technically possible and shall not project more than three feet above the wall on which it is mounted. Unified design enclosures are permitted pursuant to SVMC 22.121.060(A)(6). D. Advertising or display shall not be located on any small cell facility; however, the owner of the small cell facility shall place an identification plate indicating the name of the wireless service provider and a telephone number for emergency contact on the site. E. No artificial lights other than those required by FAA or other applicable authority shall be permitted. Any security lights shall be down -shielded. F. Small cell facilities that are not within the right-of-way shall meet the minimum primary structure setback requirements for the underlying zone. G. Small cell facilities shall not be permitted inside a public park, public monument or private holding located within a public park or public monument. H. Location. Small cell facilities shall not be located within 250 feet of any other small cell facility unless the applicant demonstrates that no other location can accommodate or is sufficient to meet the wireless service needs. In the event a small cell facility is required to be located within 250 feet of another existing small cell facility, the applicant shall make a good faith effort to collocate the new facility on the same pole or structure as the existing small facility in order to minimize impacts from new small cell facilities. The City may require applicants to provide evidence of efforts for collocation. An applicant may demonstrate good faith efforts to collocate by providing written evidence from the other wireless provider(s) that they are unwilling or it is technically infeasible to collocate, or from pole or structure owners that they will not allow collocation or that it is technically infeasible to allow collocation. 22.121.070 Small Cell Permit and Minor Deviations. A. The City Manager shall review applications for small cell permits for small cell deployments approved by a franchise or small cell permit. The City Manager may authorize minor deviations in the small cell permit from the dimensional design and concealment technologies referenced in the exhibits to the franchise or design standards where such deviation is necessary to allow the applicant to provide coverage and where such deviation either does not materially differ from the City's design and concealment standards or achieves equivalent or better integration. B. Deviations in the dimensions or volume of small cell facilities which do not exceed the cumulative total provided by the definition of a small cell or microcell facility in RCW 80.36.375 shall be considered a minor deviation; provided, however that they do not defeat the concealment features set by City's generally applicable design and concealment standards. Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 22 of 25 DRAFT C. Small cell permits to install facilities including approval of minor deviations shall be processed within 60 days of receipt of a complete application and final approval of a franchise, whichever occurs last. 22.121.080 Significant Deviations. Any request for significant deviations from the approved small cell facilities design designated in the franchise, small cell permit or City's design standards shall be require a conditional use permit and shall be considered under the provisions of chapter 22.120 SVMC and pursuant to the timelines established in SVMC 22.122.030 and SVMC 22.122.040. A significant deviation is not a substantial change. See Appendix A of the SVMC. 22.121.090 Compliance with State Processing Limitations. Review of franchise and small cell permits shall comply with the provisions of RCW 35.99.030. Applications shall be reviewed, completeness determined and the timeframe tolled as provided in chapter 22.122 SVMC. Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 23 of 25 DRAFT Chapter 22.122 SVMC Wireless Communications and Small Cell Facility Review Periods 22.122.010 Purpose. Congress and the Federal Communications Commission have, pursuant to the authority granted by 47 U.S.C. 253(c) and 47 U.S.C. 332(a), required local governments to act on wireless communication facility applications within a reasonable period of time and have established time limits for local review. The Washington State Legislature has also adopted similar limitations under the provisions of chapter 35.99 RCW. Accordingly, the City adopts the following time limits for review of applications for eligible facility requests, small cell permits, and other approvals for service providers of telecommunication services. 22.122.020 Eligible Facilities Request. A. Application Review. 1. Application. The City Manager shall prepare and make publicly available an application form which shall be limited to the information necessary for the City to consider whether an application is an eligible facilities request. The application may not require the applicant to demonstrate a need or business case for the proposed modification. 2. Type of Review. Upon receipt of an application for an eligible facilities request, the City Manager shall review such application to determine whether the application qualifies as an eligible facilities request. 3. Timeframe for Review. Within 60 days of the date on which an applicant submits a complete eligible facilities request application, the City Manager shall approve the application unless it determines that the application is not covered by this SVMC 22.122.020. 4. Tolling of the Timeframe for Review. The 60 -day review period begins to run when the complete application is filed, and may be tolled only by mutual agreement by the City Manager and the applicant or in cases where the City Manager determines that the application is incomplete. The timeframe for review of an Eligible Facilities Request is not tolled by a moratorium on the review of applications. a. To toll the timeframe for incompleteness, the City Manager shall provide written notice to the applicant within 30 days of receipt of the application, specifically delineating all missing documents or information required in the application. b. The timeframe for review begins running again when the applicant makes a compliant supplemental submission in response to the City Manager's notice of incompleteness. c. Following a supplemental submission, the City Manager shall notify the applicant within 10 days if the supplemental submission did not provide the information identified in the original notice delineating missing information. The timeframe is tolled in the case of second or subsequent notices pursuant to the procedures identified in paragraph 4 of this section. Second or subsequent notice of incompleteness may not specify missing documents or information that was not delineated in the original notice of incompleteness. B. Determination that Application is not an Eligible Facilities Request. If the City Manager determines that the applicant's request does not qualify as an eligible facilities request, the time periods established by the applicable state or federal law and chapter 22.122 SVMC begin to run from the issuance of the City Manager's decision that the application is not an eligible facilities request. To the extent additional information is necessary, the City Manager may request such information from the applicant to evaluate the application under other provisions of this chapter 22.122 SVMC and applicable law. Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 24 of 25 DRAFT C. Failure to Act. In the event the City Manager fails to approve or deny a request for an eligible facilities request within the timeframe for review (accounting for any tolling), the request shall be deemed granted. The deemed grant does not become effective until the applicant notifies the City Manager in writing after the review period has expired (accounting for any tolling) that the application has been deemed granted. D. Remedies. Both the applicant and the City may bring claims related to Section 6409(a) of the Spectrum Act to any court of competent jurisdiction. 22.122.030 Collocation. Eligible collocations shall be processed within 90 days of receipt of a complete application. The City Manager shall notify the applicant within 30 days of receipt of an application whether it is complete or if additional information is required. The term collocation shall not apply to the initial placement of a small cell facility on a utility pole or on any other base station or tower that was not constructed for the sole or primary purpose of an FCC licensed antenna and their associated facilities. 22.122.040 New Wireless Communication Facilities. New wireless communications facilities shall be processed within 150 days of receipt of a complete application. The City Manager shall notify the applicant within 30 days of receipt of an application whether it is complete or if additional information is required. Ordinance 18-007 Small Cell Regulations Page 25 of 25 SMALL CELL DEPLOYMENT Cary Driskell City Attorney, City of Spokane Valley Erik Lamb Deputy City Attorney, City of Spokane Valley March 13, 2018 City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney r Small Cell Deployment: Simulation for Seattle (equipment in base) verizonv Coo fiderf and moridari rrodoiSo for air:oozed *mon parsonoci did colskt x.4ormozo onty. LISQ. drmIcome C.5 tret,JocA of the eratarg ootperomod to my u r mow persons Of 11105 parim m000tty %onto agrearrowit Small CeII Deployment: Simulation for Bellevue (with cabinet) verizonv Caltdmbil aid mproelaryrnalaugs fce mifoucc€ You. aces only. flee, deadvsveor 6n1€tihltixl of tis male ss nat7emne6 to a unaunompins az 1hrod 7a6es exam by wRla1 agree nt 13 Clearwire Microcell Application • Clearwire deployment is similar to what is required for a `small cell' on a power pole • Typically, 'small cell' antennas would be smaller and battery back-up may be optional Clearwire Antennas C.2012 &T inceilerual P!operr allrg,tsreserelai&r and Meal&r log care trademark, ofnr&ilntelleaualvroperm Proposed Ordinance No. 18-007 Appendix A amended to add definitions related specifically to small cell deployments and the new timeline provisions. SVMC 17.80.030 amended to provide that small cell permits are Type I permits subject to the permit processing requirements of chapter 17.80 SVMC except as otherwise required by federal and state law and chapter 22.122 SVMC, which contains those different review periods. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Proposed Ordinance No. 18-007 The permitted use matrix was amended to allow small cell deployments in all zones. Staff determined an old version was used in prior drafts of amendments, Updated table. Also added amendment to SVMC 19.65.030 to provide that small cell deployments subject to supplemental regulations in SVMC 22.121. No substantive change. Council may modify Planning Commission recommended amendments. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Proposed Ordinance No. 18-007 Chapter 22.120 SVMC currently exists and governs all wireless telecommunications facilities. It primarily addresses macrocell and monopole siting. Proposed amendments remove small cell services from chapter 22.120 SVMC since they will be covered by proposed chapter 22.121 SVMC. Table 22.120-1 is updated to address the zone changes that occurred in the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update process. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Pf�j5d Ordinance No. 18-007 New chapter solely limited to small cell deployments. Provide for "master use permits." These will be franchises. Require application or franchise approval. Provide for "small cell permits." Type I permit - reviewed and approved administratively. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Proposed Ordinance No. 18-007 Application requirements: Up to 3o sites per application. Locations identified and description of facilities to ensure compliance with design standards. Copy of valid franchise or concurrent franchise approval being processed. Elements that are "collocations" or "eligible facilities requests" must be identified. Declaration from RF Engineer regarding conformity with applicable FCC regulations on frequencies used. Environmental checklists as required per SEPA. Evidence of authorization from other utility providers if the small cell facilities will be located on other providers' utility poles or facilities. Applicant to provide evidence that the small cell facility design will not impact the structural integrity of the utility pole on which it is placed. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney oposed Ordinance No. 18-007 Small cell design and concealment standards: For new poles, integration into the new pole unless technically infeasible. For existing poles, integration into existing design of pole. External projections limited to greatest extent technically feasible. Vertical projections are limited to fifteen feet above the pole. Antenna and antenna enclosures limited to three cubic feet. External projections painted to resemble and match the pole. Small cell facilities shall not interfere with normal use of the pole or ROW. Primary enclosures shall be no larger than seventeen cubic feet. Allow the use of "unified design enclosure" that contains both the antenna and equipment in one enclosure in a unit that is up to six cubic feet in volume. Small cell facilities be located at least 20 feet above grade unless technically infeasible. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Prbjiosed Ordinance No. 18-007 Small cell design and concealment standards continued: Ground based enclosures shall be buried or integrated into the surroundings unless technically infeasible. Enclosures shall not be located on improved street or sidewalk. Enclosures shall not be located in stormwater facilities. Advertising not allowed. No artificial lights, unless required by FAA. Not permitted in public parks. Small cell facilities must be located at least 250 feet apart unless technically infeasible. If required to be within 250 feet, the provider is required to use a good faith effort to collocate the new facility on the pole with the existing facility. If collocation is not possible, then new facilities within 250 feet would be allowed. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Related to federal and state mandated permit review times "Eligible facilities request" - 6o day review period Eligible facilities are defined under federal law and Appendix A as "request for modification of an existing tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station." Eligible "collocation" - 90 day review period. Eligible collocations are defined under federal law and Appendix A as "mounting or installation or transmission equipment on an eligible support structure for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals for communication purposes." Specifies that new wireless communications facilities shall be processed within 150 days of receipt of a complete application. As a note, SVMC 17.80.130 requires the City to issue decisions on Type I permits within 6o days and Type II and Type III permits within 120 days after fully complete applications are received. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney VtibTic comments during public hearing Extensive written comments and public testimony from industry representatives. Generally supportive of amendments. Opposed to 250 foot limitation and collocation. Opposed to buried facilities. Opposed to prohibition in public parks. Proposed "unified camouflage design" concept. Provided other general technical information. Copy of written comments included in Council packet. City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney Questions? City of Spokane Valley - Office of the City Attorney 14 FINDINGS AFD RECOMMENDATIONS OF TUE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMM1SSTON FOR CTA-201.1-01OS February 22, 2418 The f{ flowing findings are consistent with the Pf iiring Commission's decision to recoin need approval, fisc lrgrou ud C'ii v of Spokane Valley Comprehen: ive Plan and related develop -nowt regulations have been adopted and amended and updateai from time to time, with the most recent major update in. December, 2016. 2. CTA -2017-0005 is a City -initiated text amendnient to amend Title. 22 SVMC, SVIVIC 19.660.054, :3VMC 17.V.),030 and Appendix A to update wireless isicality regulations to address siting of small cell wire I C:SS racslitsc3:1 ki"ithitl the public rights-of-way (I{OW), i hr Planning Commission held a prope.rlynoticed public hearing on January 25, 2018 and February 8, :e[:lt and Conducted deliberations on February 8, 2018. 'Tho Planning Commission voted 6-0 to r: c iiim old approval as modified to City Council. Planning Commission k1ndiiigs: 1. Rcccmmencleri Delndirt i tions Die I`[: ri . ri r. r,s1112_i "est: r c.:+::r]3;]:uzd2,1 sis;+rcr',a 1,4 the Illronosed amendments as provided during the r}}L.b :c beano ilio following modifications to CTA -2017-0005: Maintain. a requirement 1;7r -;1 s partition of250 feet between 4nlsirl c I1 f'ricil.t'C."•.. ititaintairl the requireme:ii I iRd. if Ll-..: aeparatiou is not passib[c, for t:, lriake a good faith attempt to collocate facilities on. the €i'nie po.k. If collocation is not pcssiblt . rev." fAci lities within the 250 feet would he allowed. c. Maintain requirement that U1r,all cell facilities be located at least 20 (cot above grade unless technically infeasible. c1" Maintain requirement far providers to bury or integrate facilities i:rlo surroundings unless technically ii]f'si,ihIii. c. Add rc(Liircinent that applicant provide ovi4.1cnco that the small cell facility design. will not impact the structural integrity of the 41t.ility pate on a uch it is placed. F. Add allowance for " rin[Fied design enclosure" co ;limo comhincd at]te,nna and equipment enclosure of up cr, six cubic feet in volume in lieu of separate antenna and equipment g. 2._1. i_[,e such oiher minor grammatical and minor c'Orreotiosi9 recommended from public comment., 2. Compliance with SVMC 17.80.150(F) Approval Criteria a. Tile proposed toxt amendment is co.nsisslout'.i'ith tli{21 l:3'i. Flincs(s): i. Goal ED -GI; Support economic opportunities and employment growth f,.ir 4tao1 i.0 k'z,+lw}; ii. Policy ED -P8: Provide and maintain an infrastructure system that suppoit Val le -y'; economic d4evelopment priorities. [ii. Policy ED -Pi 5: Pursue technology-based schitions that improve assistance to uuaules5wi. Fimthigs and Recommendz3oDq o rthe spnlunc V;iLTty F3arsrtiing Cci m i sston. C7A-2017-0405 Page 1 of iv, Coal LU. -U1: Maintain and enhance the character and s ualiry of fife in Spokane Valley. v. Goal LU -02: Provide for land uses that ate cs4erl'i..: Sp,[ a,.c Valle_' resicii5nts, en-ipL };.'[' , and visitors. vi. Gulp! (*-C1: Coordinatewith special districts, otlrer°.iurisrliciiflns, Intl thr pla'a1u set'.t4r to effectively and affordably provide facilities and services. vii. Goal U-01: Coordinate with utility providcr, to b;ditnc c-cff{.ctivei ess awl`;: env ironmen.i a[ protection, aesthetic impact, pubic afcty, and public health. viii. Prorrlot the efficient co -location of new utilities. ix. Policy U -P2: Prc uoto the deve]opnrent of citywide corn n-Htitio.:mo-t advanced technology oval [able, x. Policy 1-P : Retluir]to placement of cellular facilities, substations, and ,.rrt; u -tar :st a l.]at ni;i° that rrtirtirrlizcs adverse impacts on adjacent land uses grid trtilizcs exiRtitt ?°_2--lcttlres. xi. Policy U-136: Coordinate with utility providers to ensure that ,. irii p, icsr;rti:tg, and liras t];.4 of utility systems ogre appropriate for planned growth- xii. Policy U -P8: Encourage the construction and maintenance of utility, onar-rymic_o:i:�Yt : .ri°Ed teehnalo y infittstruotru'e that will help attract business and industry. b, The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety„ 7.'c] dare and piot_.crion date. environment. Fi iding(s): The mendnStant boars substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment. The amendments allow wireless telectirnmuniea[ion providers to locate their small cell deployments within she ROW whi miniraia,ing aesthetic impacts as allowed by law, Further, the normal ,l -e c,F the [t()VG i5 maintained and the no i.ia] use of otheT ut]I]tics ]s ma]Iltrtincd° 3. Cenelusion(s): a. the proposed teat ar n cn d tr] ent is consistent with the. C:it''s std optedi Cornprehettsive Man and the npp:cviIcritctial cottta[iled ittSIINIC [7,$O.150(F), h. The (rowel, hlanakcaient Act ° reiliti1°c5 that the comprehensive land use plan and development repilatiorrs , uhjcct to continuing review and evaluation by the City, Recommendations: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends the City Council approve CTA -2017- 0005 with modifications specified above. Apgraved bits 22 day o`February, 201S Michelle Rasmussen, Chair Deanna 1fortop, Arial] C'.:F.z iratry-tarn Findings and RixiJirtmentlahots$of;h^Spokane V:SI]eyslannln L=m;ssLor,LTA-2,017-UULls Paje2or2, *01am' .000Valley. COM.M.1010 AND PUBLIC WORRS & PLANNING STAFF REPORT AND RECOrvi M iiNDATIoN TO THE PLAN NI N1,- COMMISMON CT A-20 17-0005 .STAFF IIVPORT DATE: kinnry 2, 2018 IlEAluNG. War ANTi 1,1/CATION: January 25, 2.01X, bi2gi rifling at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Vl110, City Hall CoLitIcii Chambers, 1.0210 East Sprzw!.!E.'. A mil lc, Spokane Val Ley, W.L.Vrp.71.,....- PRorOSAL DCSC:RiPTTriN!. A city-Thitiated text RIIM1(IITIL7T11 1411.:C:::' .12 9.60,050. SVIVIC. 17.80.010 and Append iN A to updaw facilities-will-1in the public! !:ROW). APPROVAL CRITERIA: Vi 1 le.2. C4 nlip:Ctl'oellSive. S timmARV OF RFCOMMENDATION: Staff rei:on.:ricTi;k h.ppr4ro.1.1 r chi:. 17.80.030, SVMC [9.6C.050, chapi..1. 22.1.20 SVMC, chapttr 22..271 Appendix A. S TAFT CONTACT: Erik Dq11.11..!, A Itorliev ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Proposed zinwrithiluiB LC. Y,YMC 17.80.030, SVMC 14,60,050, chapter 22.120 SVMC, chapter 22.121 SVNIC, 22,122; SVMC, and Appendix A. Exhibit 2: Presentation BACKGROUND 1AIiON A110 1. APPLIGVINON PIWCESSING: 8\avie ChapteT 17,80, Permit .E)roceing Procedures. The following table .1.1TKIlliari-.7.cs the procedural steps Iorlhe Timpomal. Process Kthlis1led Notice of Public Hearing: Date .11•:111.1...ry 5, 2018; .1mimrry 12, 20 i Sentlsfotice of Public Hearinj;,, to staff/agencies: JiiiI1r .5, 209 SEPA - Konted staff and agencies on Decembv..] 7.017 1kpiii 11:lulu cif Commerce 60 -day NoLicxiif Intent to Dec.embtr 2 2017 duiot 111 order c meet rectiii. 1aw arid 1Lls\OJTk. prciVidC'S' teCb.11010g0mil pror-osing LpdLic. 111 Specifically,ili ti icscI tic. .;o arocz-ising, CA" Llew StaffRcparL and Rec hoot ricl kt.ion CTA -2.(}17-()0O.5 model directions to place "small cell" lechnoloo in public right4-ofwa_y (ROW), and to update existing regulations to fill ly account for tlscsc changes. .f-ofr'.'frrr G: R71.0 #s,' OCIP1oIo1,7y, Historicarllv, wireless cs)ininunicati(?ns have been provided through antenna array IQL,L tit ,} I:I'i : utC property, rt}r, either attached t`d t l 1.11 e Illutl4}p..=l{:S}' or aaI Idt:!}c:si I; 1 '.:\i- li rI: structures, suc]i cis tall buiidinis c+r ',','tit„ '.c''; , [ s, ''I(}1'171,s71';,s .;i71, [lc I.zi}'.4,1"rls of I _if.) 1;2er I I. T: c pri maty array is ix f('rr.:(! '-i-I;,ti.1 .TM'. P I' 3:'d it cl.;l I`e'CI'S wireless = `a115:1115.si gin= 107 a I;:ii ! dicu. 1-1+:)'t4 L'v.:r, ;ice ono r,L.iS. fl.lr'tlit:' f1'r.;ri the Itl.cro,,7el., the ltl'iial t vts '.d1;2;.',' and !3t`i:.{}lilt - IL: - r'cPi ,l)!e. ti 'Itll [hu advent (}f smart pili _.es, there I1ai.; b.e. rt an ('\pc do' il ....vireleSS da.t:L, at1LL the 1mc]'ocetls nave, I.11nits till 1!ic of data !13e-,. cat': 1E1115E1!t. eco1s,r .11...icall ons providers have developed technology to assist ',\i111 liiL: 1r,,''Is111is i{},r ti,f (luta from the macrocell and to boost the signal 7: til,' ii iiicrtrc.cll 1.he l?:'iiii r: coverage r11.a This tech nolc} _., iv referred t(Ifiw - III ill1 C.C1l"1t:ca111{111'L),V.. It consists of5in l!et' anter,hae located ill C° Itiail'ti7ll7a. II''C: ' 1l;zl:l"t,tiL l I. It is refc:'..ed to a5 '-511'17.11 Cell' because the aintenria nirall ;:",r? t;;}ii!cl fit within a1] i1rai:naly enclr_'':'1 ,:' c}]. ".(•' Ini.:I ' 111211 1' "rc cubic feet. T'hc: c C?'Iti :t=.,-r:(:ltt4'i' 1.'i! °}l;tai l'.'7' `;11I1i:1;;1'C:ti, !‘i1Iighi p...!L`. pC!''. er li{',.e5.:t1iti. other sJrltt]Ier poles between 7ti-[il.' r:. i IEi11. file Sifted[ cells C ;Y'Lel 1h1 retrilnstn1.l!1 C7:+1' :+1 n 1I I{} Il1C inacrocc11S ll's'lc I I`7'iiic]i requires line of tiAvtit) o'.' 1111'i71101 I:1JL1. 1Ili5i'-1}36:11il' hitx1=.r5 the capacity, reliability, and speed '. teleco..in1]]LUi!C0tLJJls .'.'Ci? pz.o `1+.%c'.LI II1!'Ullsrll I}}Litt rt}+. !I•;. 'Iu' ( it` tl�'bC1171}'t:l a;?Iir(i1)riatt :ocal re2utations :tCldre. sing_ the pIrii;C:17.i!ir L'I 157.Jcru..:II:_ ir"' lit.:.•o! yles: {''' C.:JtitLn! i3t'1 Lit till tl{"I 1 e: I I'Ic `;. 1'('!'l l Ei' I+71'.. ,:I''_ ' FIC.I rtdc. Ill c1-1apcier 22. ! 20 S'vrIv1C and pi'ovic.lc 166 $l l� t}P,'i,iic I"I. Iii lir.lilaltit.li4, h _s .ci 11I•:c.r, the zone v.11ere the facility is Icr. i;t>(J, '1'iac:rt dic tic•;iwi standa_cls that prill,aisil}r invc7l',r' st. 11111k;kroilihig r.o iuiitilrlize the,t.5tlit-ic iii pactofthe til:.iii°ic=-, i :;ci(:r;lI I;i pvtivided that t,Itic could not effectively !,t`.j- asll Wireli<•s!a Ili{,liiic3 II.!'-'.:-`rll Ii7C::JI I72r'kililt1t'};'.S. Recent F•'c.([er'til law c },,111 U l t111?i11'i; `r; pro-,iclers to place cel'l.tl:. =tiff i]ii es r'ith in [I7' ]k(Pc s1 id pruvit:e.l that cities cou[d not preclude i!I n'ire!e°ys facilities. !1(".ti=1 Ls1 alI Uio changes provided for 5l oc fic timelines kw Incl:I review of permit applications, which insoJne cases is shorter than our tilrintl;.rtl processing tiinelines. With Zhu 1'2eCiltfeder'al changes, chapter 3599.RCV,' Lipp! ii:.0hie, its..1iient of'Wil'eless te]etti'JL1rnuii(>ailion facilities wiillin Ibo pul?lit 1,1.0ti,`, . It :t.1,n s cities to require 1r!_uter use perliliL facilities ;.'Itl'I"Il the puL'1ic R01\/, [1. 141 )cri.iiis 11' addition '.t the master '-_- s;erl lit, 11 lurlll:'I lil'',7'41LIt `, 111,11 'Sw' !':;lt r•.r, "''Jrili-ie slim! clot inre!'fe:'e with the ow-r1a1 Li -e of Ilii pIIh,;L 1...0A.0 and shall r]!7. i:1;erfele u'Ltli the pL1l. ]1 llertl;: call tj, aiI'.(! 'tLt'll!'.1'{' IIi71I i 'Jr Ilr;lv.d45 that ca.tuiot regulate sercic'.e. hri cid upon c.untLl'1 cif si^lir..!, used. a:_d cities 4ainn0I pr 'll.il t l,lsit_s:inr.2., ,i or vitt lis i;i ill"115 4 1;111". the Ctri,'. .-=.''tiotlti[['r. RCVv" i 5.21. trlr l}rrrki:i:i L.'Lat cities ,ll2i ' ICCILLife. lur '3111' t'171{:Il. of replacement fireless ta]ci]itie:s flyer 6r' ,_I7:`-CswI1'C] structures. ,,v1 -,en. sLI('ll 1.1;2S :Are iii ills' 'labile ROW. r.?r,o. 11. L,1[2::17! rho Cir!: Vas cnnrrcted l}' i lalyili;le ..rep! -drug placci''icil1 of 'is ti1Y}.:J!1 LCsI teC]111o.c.'i;• Il- tile City 1 f:}s,`r, In 71,.11 (l, 1 t` ('ilk' Ji1111c 1 a (':.:ilwi i ]iuin (Jirl)uIi)2'.:C^Lts cities .11 order to assist it ;;"t11 41t'b'::I(mI,'1 1'It t}I ;ip1i1'i7pri..JLt .re..ii.,.I.t!o:ts. The coil orttllnl also provided :Cli:(:;i 11:7n Lin(: with ':log;el(lpii ei-:i. of rats'' _reless franchises, In 20 17, 11,c t,.iL' hv 'v`'21i7.0r1 and MC 'IcIEto11? 15011di1]L'.pla.ce'I'<'_1it,:?f sinal] cel]teclln.clo:'�.v in the ti R(.)\'+;. 11'ic'.(''I_v lie Pei:1, 4a'4.1rki1ir.v'ttli h�l(ll,il itis -Verizon, and [~r'1t::I TeieJL:l1 on r1...‘..izot:ii;ilri ,i :irai-i I-1'<Jncllisti ,rll_:'L:I I1 the C.its' will authorize their use, of .i'c li1}t\ ft?. 1111':1 ..'iIiiie.. Additionally, [he City Ilasbevel clevelopiri its small cell de'~(:Ir.ipiiici11 Page 2 01-6 SLuI.I Report and It cx:+.11 ;th"1ra;"11i+.11' CTA -2017-0005 .f)1.#a{1 Srarrrf1 (.'1.f! 1?e eiteriio t.4 ]r. wl: , e.l t1[)i11 1111' dr J fttnall t:.d reg. I tions, City stat-conSideved farme1.0I1-. (, :arr5. State alit! fe,..t,ttra i Isla C. its' from pro}1.ibiiiltic ...fi.thir. the City's fR(_)1yV', ..[ow Disk r111111c1' dcfi,cs ''.17111.. tell technology as I-wr :dial ti'.'i1'.2IC55 Si`i'S'!Ces facilities Mat have ;in i'illtl'l,llkr 11. flll Cille:i `SLIre of 11r Iritic:. l.,ti:lrl three CLLbiC #eta. Iil',`olurl:, i:,'t:l '4.1` rii'1I11ril': C,"l LIl!Iren. enclosure of pc, I i,'I;C'."' 111; i1 cubic feet in VO[LI1D ., .; t11 y,;111t piu,2t:.; {}i CL7'.°.11?I:lCllt zilo! edl C'Lrt;1(I:: (5.1.161. t itj' CL1LJ'entl'' has riLLl rll Cl' Cal '.'91'i ^t[ f:7ti P[Ltl + :LJI"?Lt4�1' .151111 ' '1.41111111 t l)}� These ese range 11'.711! and 1ird.ltt poles to ]aro from `-;1.'.l]Stations. Theft airf' Ili;,'..!C:I'I}.,ti and trees C[1roii,!.li•Liof the ;;;:..OV,.' F111'li1'_I" _l1Clc a"C Eilfeady ;illl.l L,JI,'c t7i} ,CS i711 the .1.o L1 L1 'tir'11l71,1 1IIL.. ttl 1%.)./. J 17,,2: rhe t..Jdit.io i (}1 Sl;'.:iil c',t:11 lig,2i11L SIS 1'ilf likely to c ettt`."�i n.1i('=t:,'il .iildi}I011;11 ac'.:.tl'itiC t LIll�3titi'-. 110\,,'ever. ,I<,C; i'.. ' :v it is ;I;:,,:..t priate for the C:i:y to ImliT1!t:in 7..on 's::ict ions to ensure the .P.OW :L'n1,,illS available. fir its intended use rrnd rhAl solar Facilities dr rio: negtatii.3Iy iilll?1.a l !Iii. ;}i:1 tic health, safetk', or welfare, l ii .'.11..:, yadrat specific shite and fe(ier.l Ii.,TLLvlirl,2 a1}11i;' to processing {j1 44'IP'+u1,2ti facility permitz, 5.0 ease 01 ptrInii l71'00..:ssiri+, was1Jnportailt. 1.)1^0 Sou r?l Cell Ro ulafiotrs" Specific change:, m -e. discussed below. Appendix A: Dernitions were added related specifically Io the srn il.i tell send timeline provisions. SVMC 17 il.(l;fl' Table 17.80-1 - Permit l'ypG i r1.{[ Land. 1;sc Application was modfl- 11.n nr,;7vide that Jtltlll cel[ perm il: ant 1 ,.pt, 1 l,; rlrlirs quh_jccttothe permit recurred by federal tint1 61.ttle law and as sul;.iect to any forth in ilk'th [;. [:; ol,'o`t,' i {:I I'i'}IC:I' 22.122, ` V \'11:; 19.60.05.(1: The p nni ed use mttlriN was modified to perm.t `'smd i wel l lel"'li7', Il IL.,}Iri5 in all zones Sul? ect to the 5L1pplein '•,.'I:i 1 regulations set forth in newly proposed (:11'ij,lc:r:. 22.121 ;_I id 22.122 S\'MC. ('.hap:L1' 22. i 2 .1 SVMC: Chapter 22.120 ctlr,'t'.T.Ily t; .t:(:1"•11111,1 'IL't!ll(}Ilw ),•vit]i.n the (_ ilv'. 11 primarily tJtt{11''_. s :llacrocell ;:lir[! J"1 }J1Lvi (?li; Shill;'. 1 111' 1 !'i,,:;'ti<._t: l 1l0_11:1^;c11ts. to chapter 77 1 2':1 S 'fk'I{ !'L;1:tir7't'e small c.eH serviee..2 [runt C1'.1p:cr 22.1 20 Y.. ,.1:. ., 111'.1'" tllll':'tia17(:i'I".`- .1-pdaiL' Table 22.120-1 Tower wer Heii,111 .,itaitations t.; a:Idr..:s 11 y.' {c't•:' .. ';91e,' I; o_: t},2c;.;rl'cd in the 21.):(.... Compr-Lli..,.,ive Plan 1ipdate process to reLri:)'., ,'i;IIL'\ i,:l!L ..:,!I."; ,,1.1,[ ,:.ptiI:te zone name appr.'opH te. Newly l!.r0l,uwc,1 cI1^.littir 22.121 SVMC: A nes'~ {. ui:. '.'1 22.; 2 ';','`'.''i proposed to govern all sm.aJI cell services anc: facilities. - Iti ai;cr'rdance with ='_t.iie Itl7,, i11,y it111E'llt-1T':r11.`i 1:,, tr,,`idc Legh .-.1011. for applying li;r -`1.1.1!1wl,•ro. L.rsu permits," icice in l' 1.' i }1'IT1 i7 i' li';±,'1'_1'1, C:S. 1" I'an':71i5?5 are a.itreetaa.ent', 1:,:tbAce.:1 1.11,2IiiY I'1. provider and the Ott,. 'i':1r:n by the t..,l'- { .ii"I}_iI. I Ie)\'i'L'Ver. Ji :t1V!Il? tllern as ' ]rla:S('1" kikSt perm its, It a'J1L''r_,. thft C. .. 1.0 i'.1111'; 1 Ilw It{) 1 arid there art nor tl;lil11:1v,1 '.Ililiiy providers trying to phaci:. 1 ihn ROW. ▪ 1n addition to ,Ice lTl.:i':,1(!r use pcnT i1. requirement. the ceploy lent of sp :i fie: SIMJ11 well facilities requires to small veli 17.21Il:it. the may includ.:., 'i17 1;7 ,1 ,,,Ii, 1 cell facility locations per drill tell permit application, Snit311 c±]i "xi -16i ,i'.);7liealions rt'.Iu:i v Sites to he 1i -rutted witch a description of the facilities to ensure compliance with design standards: •;4: L{}[,v of t]'i valid franchise or evident e that it is being processed concurrently; 01;111sysalai] cell deployment are "c:oll+l+zta1ions" or"eligible facilities requests,'' I -Itch ,Iu �o.Ihjvct to the L1::ioue review periods must be identified; -A de.(::oi5;ili: i1 CR1r11 • i1 i !' 1?rlg:Meer regarding conl'1jrrni1 ' will; ,:i iplicablc FCC regulations on rrL:ti11. oneiCS used; PLL +c' 3 01;6 Staff Report and RewmIncn{laalion d' I•, -2117-0005 - Necessary environmental chock ists for SEPA; and - 1-'.viclt:ni;c of authorization from her utility providers if the snmlI cell facilities will be lc}ci�t4c1 illi the azhcr providers' [uiliLY poise or facilities. ▪ Small cull ffci litics are subject to deli r and concealment standard, These. include: - For neva poles, int el ration into the new pole unies technically infeasible. For t ix'.i l; pales" integrated ink) Inti e rsting design of 117e pr,,lc:, 5:4i.h external proiec't[r.ans limited to the ie.asi ]e, ';'l c:.,1i I,rs,je: ions are ]united icy above the .L"":Ce11na iallt1 SiZe :S Ji'ii.Lil 10 r}l:'cc CLIbLC f2E`1..n 1 i71iin• :. - External pr ojec:LAo''i ,hall he painted a color to rc.i I]ll1ie End match the pole. Small cell facilities shall noL interfere with the normal. usu of the pole and shall not interfere wilt' 'Hie normal use of the ROW. Primary enclosures shall be no larger than seventeen cubic feet. cxc:cpt for certain metering and other equipment which may he allowed on t]le .}ut iiia: r7I +. + . L nclosure. (.round based enclosures slrz,li ;)52 in.Iricd C'r lu,,'i•:e'.i: i,.ui1 inicgrrs1.d int:7.! tilt SLIrroundin tc the maximum extent liettsible, N Bill not be Located in i'.T) i'II.1r0'v_LI sirrcct orS[d ''::i1�K, 1U \1 Ilii°� not he located in a stormwaler faeil Iily, includingstorinwaler sv iI� - Advertising is not al cell t;ic i i I v ..,l id Ilk- artificial lights arc: allowed, unless required by the FAA. - Small cell facilities .arc not permitted in publiti 11. irks_ Newly proposed chapter 22.122 SVMC: A new c]idpler 22.122 S\'rv1C is proposed to provide for appropriate permit review 9irrlcHILes for certain fad Il',ie.s, • SIpet iIles the City must review and approve an'el[ II.N`.'.1:o:iIiiieNI"L't'Met"Within 60di',)io['receipt. ; c'iInplete application, Eligible facilities are defined 11;),:1.:'. i ci:C;. l lav and Appe ndi:N r1 s, r, ''reclucsr for I17. 3c1; I it:ariclll of an existing tower or bass station that does riot I Iy change the physical 4ji]1[ Il0culw of such tower or base station." - Specifies City nlust review ;arid 1 rniic,ws an eligible .o] lociir+.I" application within 90 el;zj' of receipt of a cn[iipiele aippIC.ligible c' rll c:e.li:}I :; :JIC ,I. iinLCC udder ;edera]l ppend:x A. as "motr.:li]i;4 or installation or transmission 1>,.{II',Iii1ii i l on an •&siippci1 trurtitre for rhe purpose of transmitting and 0]' rrltlii'i Il`ti .... IlCI: SI[L.Ili[J7 rot (.0IniSI,0 iCii.tiOJl iiLlrposes." • Soc i ic's Cllr = tetk wireless coiniIIIJili..a_ir'^'f.`. facilities shall bc:processed with n I f,i) ay s of reccipt of a cf!:fl IeT;: J 'pIic::.lr:.oi, As a Tlli"_.SV1,..1C 17.80. [30 rc,luire!-; [he, City to issue decisions on l pc T permits within 60 days and Type 11 and Type 111 pe]Tniis within 120 days after fully e.(rrnpletc applications are received. A, F1.Ni11INGS AND CONCLUSIONS S7'>N;C`LTIC TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE TEXT AMENDP4'IENT I. Compliance with Tide 17 (General Provisions) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code SVMC 17"8{}" 13O(F) Municipal Code'1'e;'xt AnlcndmentApprovatl Criteria r. The City may zipprovc Municipal Code Text amendment, if it finds that (t) 'I"hc proposed text amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; Page 4 of fl Statl-Report kind tteoulrirnealdat1L511 1:TA-2017-011L)5 Staff Anil,lysirl: The. proposed amendment is supported by the Comprehensive Plalia and is consistent with [he fol Iuwlrig goals and policies: Goa! E1.)-01: Support economic oppLkrtunilies and emplo}meat growth for Spokane ►,+a99cy_ Policy J'','I)•-I- Provide and maintain an in£rtisLr1Lcturc system that supports Spirk;itic Valley's economic deVelopiL'I1111. priorities. Polio El) -P15: Pursue technology -basal solutions that improve aasssistAn c tri h LLsi nesses, Goal 1,1J-01: Maintain and enhance the character and quality of life in Spokane \Tal I cv- (IDA L9J-U2; Provide for land uses that arc eswclitial to Spokane Valley residents, ,111 1�, erys, and visitors. 001 (:F 1 , • Cocir5 nate 5.v il11 other jurisdictions, and Lht private scct.or ro effectively ani.1 til-I-Lrrdalil. provide facilities and serviceK. (Jo,i1 Coordinate with balance ..c t-efrec:ivclIL. w with environmental protection, alc;sIllc.Lr4 i1rll cL, pubiic safety, and public health. Policy LI -PI _ Promote the efficient co-local!io9` new utilities._ Policy t_I-P.2; cL_ elk—. intent of Cary... icle (Om11-1iuiicaiiO11 networks using thy. n Ladvancedtecchnologyciv;aiIlihtc- 1.1-P57 Require the S Iaccn'en` of i'e1[ti i' ficl'llli,.�- Ili's{,lic l�i'4, z..1C::l3'tenr. ITl Mat minimizes adverse imp;1c:l..ti sill r3djaccnt land uses and �.nLIL✓c; cai ;lily , structuL a. Policy I. -P1 Coordinate with utility providers to ensure tliat sizing, locitiliE, and phasin. �r . ;ili . wy-1ein are appropriate thrplanned go rLirr- I'nlicy. J -F ; LncourageUx conslriieLion and maintenance ofutility, corn ntiinic.ations, and 1..411;7f-Ic;_w „oI'..:tii1 LCLrLrethat will help attract bosirress and industry. 1,2i i.i1. 111•1:posc;c amendment bears a will>storiEial relation to public heldth, sal`cly, welfare, and protection taflhc environment; 4i I., 11 .Analysis: The amendmerLl bcrirs 11!,:;1::1111 ; I cclatton to public he 11' 11 :.;arcty, 't1i'I;1 of the environment, 1. ..`:iiii.:: `:11i1;2T .1allow '.vJeiess I.:;Ic o;iii-iii i.cation pr:Dv:ders io locate Lllcir s1r,>...1 C II dcp'.0 ] 1Cnts',', i111in the ROW ':rrl[7aCts as allowed I ' ILi',', . I- :'orma[ use of ii J1Litia111•vd and rile normal. use L71 a,IIiL l' tLtll ;it s I inLirtalneC1. b. C`.{i>nctu iion(s): The pil_Tpaxsed text amendment is consistent with the approval criteria contained in the SV MC, 2, Winding and Conclusions Specific. to Public Comm. lents pkntlii1s: No public eornxnR,:11Ls haver been received to date, b, CauiClu:ioii(s): In itte baurwil orpuEilic comments, staff mntelces n conclusions- Vae 5 srf li S� E R rad Recommendation CTA -2017.0005 3. FnammdConclusions ecmrb AgotcyCo,m B m Findings: No agenycmmcnts received to k Conclusion(s): In the absence ofagency st±mkes c il m OVERALL CONCLUSION 'Me proposed code text amendment.ic i gqiw6hi} Comprehensive Plan policies and goalzi,. C. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends m» Planning Commission recommend approvolthe code exL dm lm city imd|with 7 without chaS. Page 6b !t21naltL.d wl}{,Ic slia i+.sita a' Y'YL.III11,I i " .ktiIFI 1 i�;t'� { riatticit C'lirrin11ci.: - -Cite 1t<a11 .Mllrt,trJI••r .2.1.111i 1. Vice c,11iYil'Join ison cielli t ill •1,4-:'rin8 1 . Ort11 I' r.k r'i;t'9, rrr. Coin ir.i!-;11,11.1i. III',;k . kltlieitue stand for die pledge or ril]CgLk1 I. -L". c L'Lt:tt!I Y` t 11:li15:!a I t. ,Yc n ;ors!: rc,I1 r,n.l tl,t fol I,'-:Inliers i,nd stair were present: JiirnM Joh anon Danielle KAsa n iL cr, lthaiirl, exeunt Ll 'I'irn Kelley, absent, excused Mike Pliillips Michelle lt11smLassnn Suinto Sli11hL f Matt i IMP' fuik I,nIrib, Deputy i..": t;4':1..tt�tiI. ti Lori li riow,.Senkcs: 1°IIaIaI!�. Prlanink, Planner Henn iiIlt',ra, k'.a1oineet t/1'Iy'L11, Senior Tr:11 !:,e ; nt [Isl_vr Citcr:r: 1r -fir.?. er,ior f a1 il7�crittght.7l; i i.i- itCi!I .'.I'i a 4, ?_nor l,l'FallirFi Hor10n, Scotia ry ILsr the Ctwinvi':iS'iuli NDA r:iarnmissirrner Rnr..mns en moved in accept t o January 1 1, 2018 7JgL'iitli lin pRI3i. uied. i in the moliem }i r m' fiiv .le+a'ur, .;r'c! ON,Efires1 and the tr'aotion passed It. MiN`1iTTS; Conititlmiut1L"r liltxliiusnen moved to approve filo 11—)nc .iii,,i'.t' 14, 2047 rnl°IILt.s xis presorns_d, the vrrris MI the DI01100 ivus Jive in ]'I'rlr, aro 7JJr. tfrrr, ors, i r : Csslrorl REI,O, #TS: The Ct3nh issicrni rs badrhcl rirpot Es. \r. $Lr'i'L ENISrI;A,'FIVE IMPORT] Senior Planner 144 Barlow noted I_};Irfi1:I1L. t(1.1,I.F,,,,ith.l ik,ILI ILLtn rlppr:"inted to lilts PI sn i ing Comin6 suit iu replace Mather i.iraJiiiiii a tfiic; lSafaiInr' 41..7f11 �.d 'i r; 17:oancil. L_]eeiing, She riign shared the advanced agenda with tha Ctkutulissionurs L,tn.' sliix-I,l s;rci ,;11)04sli iij soli:rC::t s_'Ii h ;};441 appear before thein: ettrtprelterrslvc flan a ttsieatdlrturtk k Jsncl ra kr:r nr,IL-IIrlutent lr t 1,:1rig tt:� Eire3..r rcquiremenl I`rrr auitnaIkctlplug bilutf to 40,000 squa r fa t•t x,IIi.^.I, ".4'rl: r15I/1,8Cd I11 LILt; 4111Sti` C" Lc the tleveiopme]1t regulatiion% 11 PUBLIC f'O ilIdErt1't Rod Higgins, Spokane Valley Mayor — Mr_ Higgtn5 thanked the C:nI11JLsi`;Sioricis I'i<1r {° job wit 11cxi,L Inst year. Ile said the had lic:ard Commissioncis felt they ]Bight Live. been Luiderwvaartced, hint las:, LISSLII't:al °Inn their milsi{Iii was very irnpnrhnr• I le x9i t the Job or the Comini icon in to semen titin for the City Council find it mikes their jobs easier. Ile uasninta:i>.tcd tIWE Iatoty the Council Iris followed thti r'e iiiritenda1inns Df the Planning Commission, which Iirt.Ilca i.s L1ruy Lira+utr none u thorough job, VI t. COMMISSION BUSINESS: FIi etinrl trF(F o1'.at Ste2etiny I lrilltl Milton reminded the Coniruinsltm LiiLLl Only CominiEsionels viho had served iiinre than oitL` ycaL' would lie eliigibio tar sa the ns Clip L;iiiiir nr taLr. Viae Chair of Iilc CaIllinlis ion. 1-iar'tut1. 1Itt ii a:rdled for nalnirantikng for IIie office of Chair.. Mr, Phillips nominated Ms, l,taNltlussen, win) accepted the iioinirtriYion, Ms. Rasmussen iimniiiat :d Mr, Johnson, be declined the nomination, 1 laving no taller nralriil1Dtirms voting by 11 :+1htiw a,6 11011SIS, fairs in favor and one n tJi sl,Mn. Ritsu,(L ierr dissenting, M';. ICasnius.'--n wrts volcd 10:1 the office of Manning CTttnmigskn Chair for 2018, Ms. Horton then riccepted rlrintirlations IN' tiro posiiiori, of Vice Chnh'. Mr. Phillips iCklrli ilar;•1t Mi . JoliiLSCa]l, YAW ttwceplk:tl lh rlcamircµtitrr, 1 iaviiig no rttlilea• 110111inatLi01,s, lag by i1 fila ,•ti y>'I IR:tintIS, fig i in favor rlliri nt against, Mr. Johnson was elected to the pusi;ic i of Vice Chair ir.I' ;?ti1I n. MR. lt;r .a,tllsserr lherr rrltiniced to letid the meting. kr. 1'Irtnniiig Commission Ttndingi ail' 1yaet I'tii' CTA -2017-0003, rt,r S`xink ink Vaney ?Annieipral Cade regarding subdivision geaer;.l l,a, wit;itrll.s. .2kalH-qt-1 t rIoninl .couIiiilsslenARirutcs 1 t,; , Manner Many JPalaulukexplained Ikle Findingsofl act thiel I ,:cn (114:,[11::d changes the Planning Collamission had voted rra1 at lhG Iruliliw lli'a: HI± ttiid then incerp;..m:ed the rttrtendiuent. to wove forward to the City Craarncii. G'orarrxafssr`ruao+'.Joiiartxara moved fat apprtillie rhenaalrrg t,'fimmilsioo Villeinage of! ,C1 flrr CM - 2017 -0003. The w k ifra rrrntrnx ii i.r fiva dpi fit 'm, Zara ogal.r 1, rrrn/furl paved aii, 1Pniilieile rinr a*ltrcet sitaildartlsUptl,rte Clufu Riisiriusien opened life public lit al 6:1.7 via. Engineer Henry A lien explained the City's Street Standards, which are the sfnrlciards that alk& ti•,= developtaent of public and private infrasiruchite. Mr. Allen explaaitud ails c1i,11 cs to OK.S;Ii• • Standards were initiated to address the Vederal Highway Adrrunistrotior's collicr_, Chapter 10,2.1 and the G'ity'aa nbfli{y to nrati.ntttin is sidewalk if the property ,,srri ,r should f6iS 1 + ui' ~o, The Street Standards ere oho being updated to eliminate City positions whie11 uq lriugur rxiM rrnd Change them to refer Ito the Ciiy Manage', who has iaitimaile uarthtarity hat aleleKate ii thr c,lirra staff members in rho City to periform. Some oft! i a oilier changes include eliminating The vlil ifllu!t; process, FAA and Myler rexird drawings, no longer requiring streets to connect in filtnine, development, frontage improvements tndy whore a project ittuetcses Ir aalrlaut. Chapter 3 ig tieing updated to allow limited traffic impact analysts for SFPA iti1U1 areas. There are e.lso proposod changes to the Spokane Valley A+l miciparl Code (SVMC) 20..81).010 and 22,]30 to remove refeeenees tr, future acquisition areas and revise SV1,1Ci 27.,130 to iasplii c e.Iimllinted positioItis- Commissioner Rilsintlsml questioned why on paagc 3-14 whIeli l'elereitecs collision tire word 'past' was being struck. Senior Traffic Eafgiueer itffy WrigLi exphiined the Ciiy provides than ct]IJdsitlti History 10 the oritsitk: engin t'ra %OM" tiu;ytwo/ to do a traffic ;ill clysis Lind the City always provides the must current information. She aka noted drat on page O-3 the word `ousts" deeds to be changed to call . on page 1-2 adopted Ise in the sentence (Wise. Chtrir Rftsrrlu at- :Iit rf 0pUri 1110 hearing up for the public la a:ommeni, Vicki Donahue, 323 S Elowdislr: Ms. IDOniltiltU Suited she l i os rtt LIN dutcrsCvllon oi-4' Ave acrid ftowdlalt Rd. 1 his is a busy intersection and there arc many accidents c..ccur there. She is also contented ented Flout the school children walking along tliese favids. She fvw15 there should be a trail[lc ociatr0l (-avit ; 4.11 llris utter$ Ci0l1, slowing people on f a\wcllsli, .4't' Ave, She also stated sheIiadreceived aletterregarding snow a:emoval. Sim Hwi'Ji';t ;.iliavelhilt then the plow curates idling atnd puts the, it right back on the sidew,11I:, Puu] Lulu r, 323 S 13ai►1ri1Ialir: v.'Taiylor n•aift this IWff3Ys,lf].I ti1t, Iltturs did not ffeC cILaaattFd out along the road, an when t1ir FIiti7W 11111Adi there 1st i4o puceo for ;he v.^aatcr to go. Ito coierinolatcd lied; i5 tut.) mLIAh trai ! un {fold (13uwdish) told, is lit.u.ti a aunty cunt -c31 t$_ ti ff'::. 1-h 5tiicl il. is lf[it. ono we have fft, it is do aciii1„tllligi Piton t, it. Seeing, no one else who wished to testify, Chair Rasmussen closed thr, fa ltl tis- hf!5ii Coninkis....tiniwr Studios Stated :ti11C. ealald sec t1'•le corninentcr'E �rnRlt 9 i 1. l'"'w'.' I;........:t V' A v .VIUC hofs .stir fill Iliu titin. Shu would like to sss'. AMMO*ry sk pIi lttz ulurl.�, °+. ;i , ,� ,t I ' !� °o o. ac 1s ovc.ynnn nvniad; Sprint]; hit wltlh all dm ailaatlnellts along it CICIV,U i ct97i 1010]sl,fi 3ffitl Iii: ilgl oect regarding iI'l' Avenue_ Cvu mission -a Philips commented 10.1 s,,ys life City is not rekpunsible fur mEarlenarnre of the sidewalks. He commented he lies a problem with n cul la lutieltig to replace the sidcwnik if it lr�tifa.ues damaged, He feels it shoplift be part 'Atha City in:riratenance program to repair the aoval ks, uspucially i i'they are inside the right-of-way or ti order easement. He felt maintenance r.I i:lulii Iae Eexpta hied better. Ilealso commented fie lies ri problem with s1lovcliiigthc sidewalks and IP IOW comer along and p1itx the mow lnwi; grill the City turlling tirotind and fining someone tl,vrc iL snow on the sidewalk, Ms. Barlow reminded Vie Col.niuiusionors the: ri:aas n for rlf „ t';11.1n1,;0 in the language in tills section i8 Flue to the i ninhmeren ier;e'1vefl from the Federal i t;,; pi,..„ ,, r tlftii,ti�traattaulp and velChait {t, Il ca]rrlil Ilrrirat the City -'a d iliiy to receive grants in the 201a,nI-I[ I%unl,rlagCOM lar6s[ms 1inu1 Mr. Allen stilted dolt whim Ihi_ Street Slnntlard,': wore iidup[tll, []wy spoke 5'. rl°.iri"J ]iIRSSI9G'Il�rr regarding the Gama of sidovvolio,, ursd tiers atria of citizens ii illtQiiiiii n: of ih'*ib limn or businesses is not Belk[ I1. to our City. 'Me City inittri.tltrcl Ilyi Jrtu I.c{;tte rim Spil,ks'.Is{ County but many other juri xliotiorns hi and around the state have the as IsC rco:.a;romt.'ir{. i x°c lrltl ben huge expense a1tc1 truly Inking sou° theeity Co have in 5iirrinhos i I1LInilii2LE o1 Commissioner Wslio11 CO1fltritiCll l}is snow shoveling Was uut in the Street Slanditalf sepzrrate ordinance Priem wv]iat was Ct1rrelltly being {:tlrilidereel. ti.. 4','+: rrl;lCl'e91 Is;,w repairing err rep]ac iawg ii sidewalk was sl!eierroiFru{l. M.. Lamb oxplilrtetl ills. +.:it). i:; relti'sr•r..ii t'.l F .r bads for its ptihliewoSrks prajcels and rc'illtitcrl l.i nocc..}tf latae[ bid_ brisi[l on tlai. du: c:i[iic'rt would only he billed for the actual work and we would huv' till luunioe for the Ivor!: performed. Calllrrila�s]inii.f Iiillllps fell Clint maintenan'e vl;Is not olemly dotfinsxd in so:c:ainrt 10.2.1. Caisailsiss[oiier• Johnson ;stated flint I1c also felt it did not clearly Celine =intermit= however fell ehmigi git,tilultt be better ha ni!tccl in c fu[urc update. Mr. Lamb otTered nrirlil,'s tothe ;oris of the ntriiIce 'property owner ;l,.e responsible for the innintcnattee of thew fi;.:Virus r desc'i-ihed below, ' Thaw euruai ISSioii to 3 a3 t•.ieed this c him goy tw1 aid satisfy their. concerns. Corrrrruiss$ooner Jcra'iri wr moved (sniff ow rhe staff d'eemin [ended c.'twinges. to trete rrlirltici al come and tine .511ca'lcctrf c Valley Sfr ecrr . I: arirlcrr'r .w a s pnoiuscrl with thefollowing rlra• urges°, Strict Statidat'ais sec art 11)_2.1 changing the :wand olrra+ ,so +r,rort'a aj' rtes ,ret rind /am .ei ruph by (OAT Ws (*3 cr'ia [ d b!}lort°' fc+ rfxe end qf i?w xenienve, . lrea l Stoonfor eb s'ecrlaaar l.3.2, /AIM Irroliet erase+rt prtlblic°/ircilitie,w ;reset level of ,aeri.ke standar* crrirl,r;7ii fir 'he (.'tra'ff ►rcherx5°11Y.' Pfirrr, ,gller 22.130 c°hang rli'v hp.p J rt m errit..e i senior t%igiiider ki Ciify 114 imager. The vote nit they ortotion ivuSJf ire ir1Alm, ween against, st, Arae oration passed. iv. Htud' Sessinn —1'r+ireiesc Small Cel] ToehttoIt gyDclr]nyrnenls Mr, Lomb gave a fat saiitatlon to explain to the Comm ;' }Birt wire_ess stmt colt lei hnoti gy, Mom wireleSS nett pilone turtle is curraattly handled by the apnles. Historically tho (lily bets c nI' f s ct]t with I1ias i uttaspol+:s wv+tlicit have been iu;:alted un private property. The City vas carr4;rrted Iry n Prtnk,llita, eoinpairy cnrnrilectod with Sprint, regarding , srnali cell sale in laic 20 f 5. y,:rl. ?O 1 G, The City Joined a consortium/ of 9111lf1MOUS cities 111 2016 to heenllie niruc wlant a1;4 hrm)ttll Celt technology Is, and how it will affect us. The con rti iw clevr,14Y1) d lr:s, lel Fr:i' i hib t�' !Ig.toments Anil "model development regnIJStic-ne for the deployment of r'utaall cc] The City haNlsewir working with Vcrircn, MCI Tolueu1ri, and Mobility regarding lire LIS! of Spd iris Vasllev tigh:s•ofWuy for small cell deployment. 'file City lies developed draft frai elle o: ag[k eine[rls [snot iegnllilions ielalttl to small cell deployments, Curren[ 3 or 4G (generolion) lccllnolojy is when ii bond held device communicates with the large snoroiinie. The farther )tett get from the monopole the less reliable R1tu signal f$. Munopol 5 eitn O;lly nccc [ria } t,! els ;hail at one time, $tl'raxl I [;ell technology wow rid ho adding antennas ire the right cf-v..2ys.;esti h p g data Perini Clink]. out to the Tiger monopoles. dlskea ,cd to sCt incests; timelines for proccssing'hose ~shills cull permits, Thew .inti: rl ;w I;.4r3 i!i puree which stop cities Prions prohibitingmailcell deployment, Stop iow taItows Otic C ii y t, 1:21.;;i 12. oI mirtster PPS( pC/Mil, the City is °slog fittsto:hisc agfUelilniS his these luui.! itlt' porrrtlts, lrllowaxl site specific permits for the small cell installations in addition to the rooter IY�:.,,,1 i�.•l. ilea toles filum Industry cannot interfere with the notxnd use of the rit;[atF.infsw'rty. °tics o+ 1 ILric t� i.t,l[uc services hatred an anntcnt or kind; of signals, C.rfriiint prohibit plttcvnt,.I1'. of v. it{:lL tai li11 ;4°i thin the city. Since elle City does not awu11 any of the lighting fixtures i+l till: , ke.l7c '.'2b-', til.:• c1.nIA lritlpi€l04llavC signitm ;Igrecnrwnlrr wimp cath c:fthe puwet-prtavicliA tits use I91",it l;e;:i4itiTy. Tltc City j!... expct=liat II arrrtall t rill Ice ba nit amerino of no MIND than three cubic feet In valor h,::,rd 1'.1c+, :ralil 1.1{.I1t box '.Viiuld lila; nn larger than 54Veiiteen Pubic rect. Mr. I..4? stile for the small cull deployment to look like. The City : o .r t°F;tire's rip.: 2i11t-L 1-I I I'Ilil ntrr: r,rnirr,i^ roll yWirri ri!F I`igi 4 ot'4 Lfli zoning loc'�1i<I11, illipLrse some design slilrldards 1t.liclt m1t11i Inc11J{1c ntealkli 511.ouding requirement;.511d IDI1dscupin,I,Sforrm714c frtcilitles, Mr. Lamb x;:il',ir"e c1 the }1lvposed atnendments; • AgiimlidiN. A, ;;Edd L'ulitte[I spt ifl -tdIy Iu srtiitll cel] dcplisyri1urls uric] i]ir ncn' tin Yr.;Ilrli puovislr'tLs. + G'MI 17.R13,030 ttL1tl I.; ail, !anal) t cI1 portal's orLx a Typo 1 pc. milt and slu II Ifc prcoc scd SIIcl1, ': c apt s uiirc! wise: ►+cgtlrreil by fcdcmf aiul state law. • SViwic 19.60.050 =ad ilia pormittcd use imtr-hc to allow small cell deployments iii oil Subject to the supplemental rcgulatfa11s proposed in new chapters SVMC 22, l21 and 22,122 • SVM'I(C 22.1 7.(1 rtI rso ve tiny relfcrekrcts 11) snrll.11 call sltrvaws • S' '1{' :?a,1 1 tle'.'r chapter providing Ir,r 1pli7r.1 t tlsc j�411ltills, cicfbyr icclt 0.011 I'liL'lli4iC 4 ilt? I ,}'` Lt[. Ti?c_ 1 C!' Il t ''civjls'.:.It ikts and small celr do,iigii 11YILl cunc;l:u1,1ILm i! st.int;lot'trs. • S / eiC 22.in Ilv'1': proyid1IL8 lulu aa' L.4;ati'LI i r rule] r:t;1IIL1Js.";'.i-Sll�l' ,I{,:111t,.L'I'L *Cij plL responsible it f'Ils_ �r� t'r,: [i¢, 5i1'.ti I.'I!I1II�_�'?I. P,ir. Lri4t1; rt:ti:il 1t i'::}111.1 be' handlet, is ;is it 1t wit:, luwur PIA 137 f i'jl ;)t', 'I: °hi. Ilr_.I`I• ,I -t': I 1".'uSI otb5itThe °, asked if Ipr_';.:1.:r,? ]) 1+_4]4Idi'l't1 to t'{,•1„l1': Ca:l >!I}•' •iii ' 11r;1i ('SII°. have loprr,'.rathr1tib'{ililypaliacc !hey CAD jarf.lr!ll'CF::i4WF1L;li:Li. v'c4'l1i4ttt'1ul:iit�r 1 eil c sl'.lila?1::n:. `Cinrii]i i;1SIErS L" Ii aticl CoaaGirllls I �k':tYtitrl�'; G"pis ;IC':•+lit tl;,� o1 having kut`it% i=11L7i1'lllelsl ill tllc' 1 1'.i',S-1>1'-m'.1:s'S, • LIOSDtogelllerfacllltic u111:1 'mu] kJ be lou:i',Iae.', • Y'',t;.e,' 44' !-ro waft: liatld land fnt;llitie:i. W]Li.i( i'iould the }1`eltii:lic. dr. to 1 _ t,LayI1uLSS, 11.11611i1 ES IILSiI. 45CU1111±- ■ thielititi would dEllIrgi -1;1; w'riria},. • rudiatlnn frnrn tl"+ ' I; II':is 614''.'7 i'.'..LI off 11952:S'.1l.,tku,s,tI :I.L11L'll.ill:k`+. • the pli3lti;'.'tu d a: iutjtld vkillr tun ' .ie Irsin,::IL1 w. ill :riot. like. I\ir. Lir id) Amu.' iI t':I ! ::JAI ie I11®±iri iir, FI 1l , ii I ;'_t Cs:I s Js .'lug°ls±:°aLt 'wag scheduled for .r11nuttry 25, 2{118. 1( I,G "CM41i41j7 111. 15o1,1,.:,. I y aiI1:I 17415 ,I,1+=."''1' I13' i?If' ;rlol+I IC. did!}LY1.1. Villi. GOOD 01' THF. ORDER: iT rllni.i. `;i,.:I:%rS coli~rifiminted Cllnlinisgloncr RJISoltt1S5¢L1 n11 her uppointputat to the office of C11:.ir innd wi.il:tid leer Inch. IX. ADJ4lURNMIi NTt Cor411,ii!:t;i•:lner .1ca11ILsol1 0 -laved to adjourn Idle meeting at x:12 p.m, The vote vrl the nlufrrarr mos lifillanhOIUris' 1'0011'01, a'hEr xIUl'LU1f ravel Cm. 4� J N1'1,11o11c, ttisiuuN Lct1, CI1�jr uAite signed .� )4k)L' Deanna Hanoi!, Seciete + APPROVED AjEiintR' i Simko tie Valley Pt8IL1IiThF7 ':€ipllilYlydl!!r1 Connell ]IJIl?il Ol,4 City 1I sli Clio Ir. itinsontse,1Gi1Eniithe meeting toorder atPr:(l},*Iai i161[il'C'- '.I1.Cstoo{I for JI,[ ILTt'+.li;l .71 :Illi 1:1!?u„ u4:hirli�i Deanna Hur rpn lock ;17II ;Ind. the FPlldsw111r; 1;i;'I'Iilc:i';i kind sinfr1}~i'rt~ 1I1t1IL„ 1.-d Limn Pill( 1limb, D4piiky City Allt iti y i),ral]L:l,s l ,l_; J=1r1_Jl-'1 1.crri 13/414.01, K, iii L`. Nal 111{11 Fiii1 Pk MY 1-1i.Ier ^ A[le!], .L11;'L:r 1,'Cil.la k'i4i11ipss �.,Ti :ihcIic f ricL1:1J's. u' \', t;Itt," Ii: if lrl�.L I !tpr!L>t1. wt:. ., .:I.li I.i�s II,t s-.'�Lll:llissitJn Ti, Aint7+47 C'clo16hind tic: ,!'.'ISII`,'{Ili JLL.I',';il t;} ll t'[, li'.: !;iitll[LL}' 2f.. 2011.; ',L'_Lidit ].;s preser.i(f L vote' .,�; f1r,° !:1.!+i r; hL': 5 v4'_ • :it 1�i I'ra;'- _:^1'"ei Ce tai�F.Cf :"tdhr I/ r) ,'ii7�i1• , l [+,'. ?' : �. III, !11N .11 Mill 'lies to npprr't•c. W. CO_aII 2!SSIO'ti REPORTA: I'3:'fliu .dr:i.rlisisi IscLs had Ina 1tiJ'':iILs, V. .LiE111/1INk'91CCAI1VJ; A1IT,IS1ishntive f,ir..cr, ,itilil:dt d '.ttll';ti r ssiainin 1'Ifil'W I'i' Lets, MS. HciL . ii ;HT: Itti hi of ti'.,' t•; lir LI)le. to IE;1rrl t it I1rLr,:Lass 11. ti's F i r511r;alai !' 'I iE1114A:' r,t II. J II, °';I:i +:yl {Ip'14't.tis'a ell L.IL% J lhi Lii . VI. PUBLIC' ( {J11IRII.N.'T.'; L;71;,111LSIi, 1<t. C0111KISSInN IIITSMIFS9; Planning Coini11.w:li4Yl, oftenet tor C'.I'A•2I11.741Ii i.1,Prupin,edrtpatl.:rf;'.Iti IJlL' 3ji,flLlilli' VoilL ' Street 1201? LlibIdl' .11ldi t11e SpnkrriIle Vt,llc' NIlalridl]pni C'ildB. I fioi'iP,'I' ET .ns�t° �s.ilr.;1 c7tip°,I;iilia k,} IIIc f'11IL11nissiohl 111x: Fiodi,n,.'4 drrlfMi i1 bused can reroii1ll 'oiled f''1.i111i' 11%,• i.",,rrlliIi I-urlll;li"tsi•)n had 'oad 011 LSI the 11u1,Li; I1fiar1rig1 J1Ihdi L1h4Il i'' !:1rf r i;':il Lill ' II1 ' .ntounlinent to I6t4Lvt p;Y';lrcl iu lhl iv'it Cn!u1t iI, �,'o17i1!!J;'.tilf :1L'1' , r.: tr!S{Frt moved 10 [Xjpi'fi1'r ilia• PT?:;7Ji't71; f-r,1J1MF,iSI !J7 1['lFr:1;7J' .'i i , h'iw. • fo 7A - )Qi 7. in,. . IrL: ' rafc° rp1 elle 11Fditism tiI"U;': °St'1-'C"18 dl'; 4..1'0r.. ; oro.If T if' Fir?1trc•+J prai'd',;rl, ii. i'nhlie hearing, CTA •7,{]117,71105, A propane(' Lrr1L4dLL{LrLell I hu faptai,:nle 1'.slli it 1Uiinieilta'i Cady (SV C) TItiil 2 2,, 1{a,6(i,1170. SiVL%7C_ 17.h11.0311 iLiaLJ l'LI1IsL:rillix A (0 update wireless frlciiily regiiiitiivria fu II':dLtrt"ss sii1 J' ,rF 4iiiirll r:t91 ♦,tr'a, k.s7.4 I'>LL I1 tie2; t ;illso the public riellls-i I. way. LYelluly City +1ILO11'.e). kik i.;urlb fe,L.' ;- trim:6:1L1 (i0LI lu the Commission tep.r-.li;lf, ;I,= vim -lens SIl1;lI1 t 11 !,.:1.)noiegy. Mr. I:7, til', t`k111fiil1 Ise '.'r ;i ld try to atis). C. $4r11 I,1i11-1ILUt#'ere1VpierelllativCstient some ofllteearfii,:YSinthe 2SI f7id. 11• 1 !', 4 !4:..Ic,!u11_d .1a t�retl as ati:l;-iI l i ] i111swer seine eftlle tittesiloit5 the Cijn11i1Ii ioi1,.'I;,11;"I. I,:mi;. s ellae l.rsl ihle Counnistisnier IIQId their dlhlesiioJls until atter his p iese l{rrllor7 in (aider 1:or ta'e J1'9 lD r,c: start or Il1c teenrdl, k -la then witllitlnetl mutl4 flab' Irtr.11) irttLadl1ed liy 1114 bU.g111.6110pOICS c;:lied 11ac.roc.el!s. Thein farther roomy from the irracxncell ri device gena the weaker the signal gots. SmiiIL 1l t!upiny r;lent i moving smaller nnkeoune to fpaWar and OIgI1I polos width rlri alrondly 104111 11 iii I16i litre are coiled; micracells, :r'1 „k' lI liLa: iIL °1L,. ilk Chiming Commission should consider when . viPwilpl31111] proposal," rr:gulyltk irtY ;Jr17 rl,^lr tlrn ft. ItLi°gc Miro big uI vnr]lidi fucil'iii IocLiLr cl in Lira Cily'o rights-of-way. Some of C,rr palet, 11gin. hellos, power otherMoe:turres u:1 Iln+k;runl,rl, sigtrs, end {ayes. The Lotlsider Unlit,oil INOlgtit,acstlictic impacts design slander& witifor sL,:ldtitAtururldlug, -C.11 e.'iltorttin't.1119 Ii' 'i5 explairmi.1 tIr propo-7,711-0!•.....)11.1111.•110.: ▪ Appendi.....: adcl.M.2. lo F7T111 LLIJ1.1piuynounis mid I1 new tuldiriy. 611 ,-oi,;111,,-4111),,,iiitik.5 !No proc.,...s,,ed tn. tahel.wis.e P...11los141si..Awkw. lc..60.050 amori,l'il.4 111E. [....:11.111Nd Lost.. 111;11,11,% 1.1 Eillow deployments in all to the Ruppl.....wilk.11 IpLL.I n'MAY ulmplLrs. VMC 22. 21 4ind 22,122. • El V polc 4101"5111y1IIIVIOS %very. )0111 cINLIOL:' noLl oi.y SPObli • SViVIC J3 611';:1r!i Efr101 :pkuyiliunr, 11 provii:t°!,firr;;1.14 use perm.; Is, which tne,Cfiy1135 d uteri »! ri!.ii wilt be our Ira Fin itgreement which is approved by the City C:Y:Lncil. rniilIrrel! iicpJoympcnt ft1- mall CC11 ratliitte for Lip to 30 sties kit 011U time and ff t. requirements for each plATOEICIMUM have f diIscNrcernent with, Ihe. Cit., ...1a;11 ih providet I hey are Lie small cell on. This also lays out any tiesign nal weal m cut standatd5, :=ry: r. -v. ilmost be. Integrant into the pole. For existing poles: integration into the 11 nu poolble. It i5 b,eka,g papposeti the atitenfat Aol O.N1.01.1{1 11101:elOan tett from Cie 10p 01 1I1 pole, and limit oti it) three cubit! L. The ei.pii0J1LcOl Oli Ci111311)1 Man 17 cob] fuel, LItilets !Jo Nasibto, Ih qI.iprneiiL 1.111.131.1::w. 0IL.dill i°1e grotaidot 1:11.f.6.111eti Into the surroundings. Cannot be located on An improved ::ria..21water Theilittes. They WV RCA allowed in public parks. ▪ MI:AC 22.122 i n new ehripter providing For mondined neonli review times aq statl in ;L1 tijF‘s?dertill I-v.2:11160ns, If the City tiiih to meet the timing requimori2ats then L11,2 puma( 1; 1,10:nn.....1 prtiM1vd, :Vit. Lomb s;lici Lit' would tryarn1 answer some of the quesitons which came fvi oo re tecludwil he would t1t.t to the provideis wishing to te.so • C.4)1dd there be a requited distance limit hetween new siteg7 The legni offi,T fort iliiq rt.d bni there W4IS some question as to whether this would not be rompett h2catts.e it would benefit whomever came into to the area first SrnhII I,i7.071!,,,7 limi141..1, SOO-1MM feet. 'Arcing an additional sNeing requiv.?Illero. 0.r.1111 LTE!:11?ifliniriqetifl tic! piId1ng their service. Coiikl !here be 11 requirement for co -location on one pole? From a legal stand 000ld p preetien1 stu mlonint. the poles UV not very hiv Find there is a sweet spot in 17M Whi101hr OlIcell mods tulliudiltd,, Ville utility pi ovicler ewn ;Allows more than one nr.A..ide.2 15ole, w1)11111 sonic will lint Allow, 111„) said lie noted mos', .L.11!"d'l deitSiiL1 nai ret.v.%i ri .i.0- /CCE1t1011. COLIld tele hP17.: requirement as to how iligh the notenne. I71qV 1...:owclorr(ISQ 1414:1.11LO 1j ott.A:e feels it would be a qualified yes- Unless it beEnri jiii.c Uui techanlnLy. 111o2. pSLO(.111.liAt 20 fuel would be 41 good .11.7` higher thin this, rsid it roam Interfertng iii affie and pc(10.9trians, • ti rue lie a requirement to bury the ground based foci iitieS::"•71:2.3. It would lie llowever, there. could be limitations to this. There could. hf. bet-weeu the. sit -remit and. 71';;: rigla-of-way, they can't be located in the sidewMk. iies hard that based on the in the Pne.ifie Northwerd11 ean cause ISSLRII with iii LLII. pr1l.mIP the in the ▪ Crin we 1 cLIFc the. small cellstt transmit to the macroccils cells umuls-imInting by tibits, hime..vei this tvoolta Lr. trying to reiulatz the teetinolory would • Tic ft...Ny..110y ; n' ivrn.l ly PC id[iiws, and the ides lire required to comply wi • 1Ie had 01.1 .ev1nay c. cri 51101 CCU! 61110. .7rn 5Vif F:f]vjrf, r". • rr: 11.11€!ndy lii a1nN011 rii.l riici, b t.ein'l [Aix rill 010 'D!I.s 1'1-15 t't 11id1 _+_=aii'.ili, :,:.1r Minutcs PaiEa aa5 t 1..:1147 ,_411;!1I`.'.11L zr,:,:•ls{•"#I whiir.h WCLU 1e,L''civr:Ll just today from tlitii. rat llic ILA., .1 nn.V ;",1r'.,il!1ii:. 'rho legal L?f11Le IYiis not ilatl a c118tic to review Yf:' wl• i;;11'1111!111:;. 'Lire b„ 1:!,2. 1_ca!1r1!',Is laial' ninnahers ill 1.110 anetiting. !.fr!iISSE11openedthepribIli �1.ert, lot°I llri'wiv, Lyne Curr.";LL11iarl firr VC!!LIMIL \Virelessi Mr, Arrow .trilc7.I itis+ lu i 111 ie~t;L1lrIiiF1} of fu.:;LLiaP. r+',.:'. die. 20 toot height ;lois nue with than", l lowester, hie said brat t11'-.0„v do not 1 ctLarl: 11_111,! Lt1: L_r1.11Aa!1L: log of ctlililinaa:.ia1- 1.11 sad if they L:OLald place rho audios 01L the they pi..i .1' It. ;1': i .lp ;1r.; rLr,t !allow ll]eii in place lite unliu 411 the. pallia!, :-0o it lalst'ei':i 10 bIr ata 1lti° f'1 e.:1i; 11 1_uIe. Issues with undergrolindlr1q illy mgartIuneot ▪ Water ba•:is !roc. iI'.Ls vault, 1f the radio gels we1, !hen it hill Thee. is [kw ntirt'1t 1r_uistiarV urL thr Pacific Northwest rind the vault ti I1L get wet. • The vault traps gases which art ti""salefor'the workers to broattio. * Conslructohility. Jk is :a siguid't4:aant fool prion !br an uncles °r,.1mi] '.?f1!" plus Ito:: 0511.A requlreniE4IN mak it h rgur, e Service re. kio9rilily When wsicr gots halo 1114 vatilik, Lhen the aStdk �si s. ill.. !cropw w01.!; not. reculit.incl!Ilsepia [too reiiiiirehlerits, Wimp h,- it tivi1 1'1 i c. V 1]k, he trvino 1n Iris :dim; 750 10 1,0[1(1 CO:1 la +lar{. [Frail have :L 25111 foul iklry,5':.NL t,1: 1 e. ;111 i, :'.atrenti the lost Iaave to (Wank liaiie. irylno to find silent L}Ia:y von dim 1cfv'1w1r i'r,. tis+ ':: util t i11so ncl }t rrtt,:ti,z isl :]i',- 00-1000100 requirrmetat, a4vlsto will not aliow co-Ioiestlir'ri °}i,}',s:=,', r. A1' 11 1,2400S ti ,C.1, 11 °pi 11, SILL it !here would he the equipment boxes 1111 located :mod one 15:riy pier l ;i a Irotes would ill"i4t- Conilnissioner )(Hanson aisked \vital produced tate gases and 'whtaltthey were. Mr. Arrow 1iid LLr 1 know Atli. said l,r would Ilaivu to noel aLaL, J rihtis . i} aaxked ttlt+uul Lhw radio which is user! sites. 'The radio is the IN r,ir s:f 1]u:, 7.11211 cell site, t:'r: ealr'ol:,r:i:,rr'1 Kelley cunfiranctlids 'mod rlatlrintlingOno lrupulatiun.;!! d rr1x;;L:r;titlalSWOUI€1tieCcaiirliii t11 r` 1�'I LLIL I ..r° ritnkl co11;t rites, Mr. Meow awllsli shy tlYLia consilriip 'is.`11 w-„AI dr Eva: it ns.\viral, no more 1,.`�i1r!L", yt,u Rravc, lice, more small cells you will need. to two different Carrli.r prole, Cotnanissiouer Kelley asked haw large ail 4utderground vault wot Id he. Mr. Arrow said they would need to have enough space for 1 tecliniciaitto Ix mile to get ut] the 115'2 ° £nou]id foie e_gltilirneril, instead ofcolivim; a mall !ecce sized box dialog above grotLild. Commissioner Shitho5 1VLiatll Ll lel Luny if itis: instillation of the. sniDll call "ire; 1�rriiij io1:.t;111L:a1 !ni p4.1i31. ,.ciitcl brairlt41Lyu115t1iI1 I`y power. NIP, Arrow said lie c i tri pintnpr-,ir IN III At :7,r-iii water wuclld Ila aY problem for "'lova grolw:ti ocpli};rrtenl, and Mr. Ani .v ;Lid It is ii 7,11i•.1111L` Ir site on t]1( Cquiprtment!Ind thin radi❑,ittat 11Q 1*i.pi dry. i ,']L.rr3i4 i t;r r .T.11tott corliir led the provider, at 90 aasl Ver an, v.'ilial like lir i€e!,11 of! Hie same ro-e at least I5 feet In the lilt or to llstafirate IL into the Mast of 111L: trr:1 01L the pole, filen it ]trust lie located within slit feet ni'the hole the ante n1' = k ira -k'1!.:'s 3!I11.1 l.'. V.-.UL.tl! prefer to 1.1se whatever Wilily pole is ouiLilabkc. !I'there Is no po!e, (I4';1 I,ri;l,:.t.L i f1 ii 1t_ ratll�l9 light polo sl;antlaral, CurornIsNloner L°43Ll111Te]ed :ltuSI ui 1.11, clrp]Ly;rlerta, t.ate:L3 ! 11'ir:i idi_t1 Honcho.. But cillos do as well, it Glepelitta tail 4ti'1Ytis- 111{.!1.10.1. CCA1711I ::inrterPI}illips staled 111 91 concern with Il riving another lalllily lo 1710rye 'iiiLIM :L ile.vekrl,stl F.{1 improve 11 piece of Property: Mr. P1i'IIL is risked ;how providers handl( conic rari;it ier< who a1L1'Iv1t-1tt1. Lid itl.liltes. Mr. Arrow saki in Those siIini1Laiis they prc}tusea sh1...ecan isiernn liar r;rrl nl' Li leak 1:,'_: sic ruin) des=igns whish 4;in bo uncal to kelp in diose tiesghborlioods. Mr. 1)161ilrs [:.1n aL'':Lirwtl our community (loos nut jC:i 1bC nairrle umuwil of waled. Lt;i he L.rel on the coast. Mi. Arra>•w snit! Click radio is very svnsitivc 10 walgr and orajansarion. 411",-1 1iL asks ilial Lh}Cot :!Tirq n t to reaid ilia comments submitted by Verizon. C011Y111ISil:rirc'I' 4tL 111nai asked wtllrsut a°ca114L1c Irnrt.t11Y c:t:ltatL.oiia9: 11i lou;l 11t. \'c:rirc,1. 1:1rr;lit 1:1114.1''.;1".1:{t 1.11r'1i iS' 1r'."2s 1;td]iitt{Y] tlLLill a b:Lby monitor. Mr. Arrow Auld 111iS_ ]I:'vaia'_ti 1h'illrkl' FCC f :t',I1,1,1r°7.:1,1114 i' i-ioii d for the raw that I1tai pct; might bd' X111 B' 1)1,-25 Haim I u a _,uI4411')S I l'n r5 iI i Ltl'3 i'=0.:• -1..1 17 1'.'r'i1Nl[!li!1 r4's, i :a r iinliSitulii! I,;;al ":S 1=r; '_Cr 111nLCILtCiI [1I] thu radU. i]IL rnfd +'I'.i, I[,1'1:, I I! 1•.' I161'; r111it ti Y.141 WI1.5 LIILIkiiijj iJU7 inictownve. 1 r.:INIIeIL ?S{JrIK� ):rhuscln inked if line of site Would he en issite. Mr. Arrow w vs^a5 rel plc to answer iho „t .stniturh,Mobllitle,Coeur d'Aterm 1E1;Mr, Birkcwoiksfar iobltftleand stated they are orc. {if t11c ft, l i[rfFaslruCtlnc prodders in ilio country, 'Working In all 30 stales. Currently theT, nr' '.V?1,a 11'.x' t'; rih prGll[ as a pravlder. ML', Burke stated hu felt It i%utiltI Lew i['It't!! t[,rLL to have it ub.- [ r ruselLt providers like hint who services caiellts: Mobiltic s jiri11111..::I; 7c011;(ISLS w1111 A vista Lul:": (. -!u4Fryl.i.Llk Mr, Burke provhI the Conunissinol with pictures nf1',, c;Iuii7rntiiir on all Avrista link'. I L said les oinlb1 r lin everything needed to run the egtli;ii .rr i^7 it. tie said Iit look:; for wlllw:ti Illi needing replacement. lie would replace the pole, ma till: cnnistrr r_•1] lop 1,411{1 t','hre:Ii 11L NC992ii reel full. Mr. Burke said the 1ibtelula l5 within. !-r:.(' oridelinL.a and the si;u!LLi IL1]t Llrikimweiti., 110 E k.I Moro 15 tl da:dia:aleJ.l power tir t;'. tIL 4:,!LIi_;1L:=.' ;raid it dors 1]9I [�+!E;I'.J171 I}[liw"Isr t[] It1 tL3n.sm1111t. rv1Lallnl1111t_15 CouI I handle plt4lr11; calk; 7a!1L1 now averyoitu ., ;'I] _' ]L iLtl ruutlia, twltehmg TV unit t thhe cal !minim l9 L1 ii! a]Ii�I,+:. t.; i.r9ntilllor ;1;1'. r1;,iiL over itlr' ;1J:I', `LI I•, Ii smuill Iw}1Ia 11111111 pugilism la to IL'uYlipmt data. t1ob11it ' 1'v= bail( palos. lot Spokane', and aro ,ull % to IISsiII1 Mum on sIr e1 LJg'_Lts soon, tic i:; t'.ori:l;lig ;'.Citi L2i.+ cit'' of Spokane to ithstill them nu cltgt owned &keel i6 v.; mr,.; ':1i !�aliLiv s,a]LLIrI Ille to seg Spokane Valley become crrllnected :Iy. rr,' ,..r4 is ree.7lri::ICI;1! the 1,1 I I Iu. In t]n I 1p;Lt 4tltlk', Ihis isthe Wllj' t#1H]l;.r Ci I'lq $vj1 V inly butter sliggust{cutting the review Ij]i front `-o .31:0 tv:r[balllt.i', 1;Ilt'i jr111I1$OIi asked what the optimum spL1clog would ix. Ile iuiCI J.:; !:i14.=!l't have an oy,LIaim n ;}] 14 4!Iy nut tllc.y lank where. peapin ark; having the arlos1 ;an!t' ;rLL Li tLL„IL},t' 841.1 il'1g their data JCIv'vi: lIc L:Llrr.:Jllly kinking litsires airing Pines Road, r1 Olt rr.;ti• lt7a:'s+';,s'c .'tauisoe2 or d kills from. etch oi[tun t_'omtrtissiooer1R-a5mnssenasked whatthe !text fora' rafterllrrialogy1'1'411,11+L°.1;411 +f;. Mr.I;Ios1 stilted the more the l:ov5umers want the 1er`hnoln y, wrint more data, rho, I';1.:}' t�'rl; rli it; ir. Thri.. t•;ill 1'i' lrldt ' S.'.Ml�'r'v they will be needed rot -coverage. Jwir. Arrow crlm]rr1+°Is .i 1' :';r'' rIt:Lt n rnnfer°elscr [] the [hall trsaka is ri± higher than it i5 in the LIF. :6'I' I r'f'l trl.iy 7ti i'{pd15iiii er” rl� 1.7 LilLIcaSr51.8 hot 11111011111e in machine eflrr11711JnialtiOnn" Phones tr+Ikklr'--' 1'+ 1:,'r::, 1L' IIILI!'s+; Locke's., t : rc.r. 'rlrr]lllitg the lights and furnaces, driverless gars. Irl c',;li-w::<; ti -:L ''i :III; �',,r:N11' L[p t,r. [ riva:n: Con insissloI cl ttv.51iiitsita asked Wires I' A) orislhlllty it 1i to repair Claiiiii!j.e.I soon would It gel 1i:- 1, Mr. Arrokvcffll.11tnuik°allili i.rfLL1lNIi,eJIItInaLllir]I_Iiia'Il;;tlitki+l,uIrlgutrt1"uir+:[JriJ;llt away. TM`it i i It!tnLL]gi.aP than apprt,priaeta J uveri1illi! tivutryrswiiut [ C I,1U ilLira eft;cri. �[Ijrjlili55_ila, I tat hus confirmed the equipment bellig Lased was not proprietary. Caeh provider uscR for (hem.. She yts+get.the lna>•k of;ILL fvlot)GlLL:i; system and wonders wily the other °•'Itiers e'mi't 1L5e the sa1oc equip:netit- 'nr.'rlrai Walton enrlfirlru*.c1 pcoasty who 'l: i[I I bs...:".€slaw ac =_r r;]r.a+: Ilcll't, commented `flip' Wm -airs are. for L:ntls o;,+1 L. 11 yo l t5'Lm' Li4 I,g ,l i'1 70 115L" tllC I�et; I cl riola}gy: it will 1 QULL Somtp/ aerie. =..117'rl',11StiIP;tl'-l' fJN9711L15!iill G.iiiII]'nicd that the pawl den. w lI t O Supp I1'I!]„.'vll.lt''i"8 i t ;IP1a s'w;:: !i� !.;h 4e it'r'.: 1.11121 ;Li LI! ihey will. tai install lag equlp1nert on Mill be able to hsPltil, h.. a� r,Ill lr it=J;11':r�. Ir°;!'"air: !+rr if tt]is L;view was part of flus permitting process. MI". Land] 31ot 1 lli t ltd"' did ;lot I'+%L'',`. eo). 1`:un+cntly, k]LiL n r,quiremalt of LL ceitlfietitlal'It could v'L iJL]]r: Into File process, ML` .,r4°+'.v L+.0?e'! flay submit a stnrcttar]al :1lac1y4i fur Ovary polo they II...Atli.] if 11 is tt srualt cell site .^11' L}!1.5'IL..753i..'. Mr.- Lamb stated. idol aridity providers lac 'lewdly 1 . tii..;l;:cl her' Fruth:. Lv: 4::lI;hS7:-�L'.IIu, jk1�. litoke sik'tLlCentu1',yLlltk itLju.ilesi iu 11Ota: toikilpI Lr.[r:; l)'..}„ 1'L`r,11i:. 1I!v}' .il?ia l';.a", 1lLL. a1°":•.tutlr,iitFl: (111I'c Il LW equipment, Mr. l titub wanted to remind the Commission i.atder Vedeiu1 law. traI1slnission ty'J-c- We can ask for sep;trsalion hosed on naniltctic COM', 711 I!s bIit :11=' {},p 11c,sl¢ll rn1ir,=rrI:. alae regulations need to consider some of the pr<]viclars whr. 1n.4'. :iat ill}lr Le 111 +Lmt 211 F:''r equipment on the pone. We cannot regolrith the tichnoingy, so we 4;Inr:...It 1..%)!:.II.11.0 L11�11 ;iiI; irwc',°sd:'; usu the tilin]e kiiltl orIlecauloingy another J]rovid'er is !P,4illg- 111 Sri.} WFr i'. 4V' a1 ir'tl tot erth. 3 'J1 III i1I. f. iiIty. The pachig iequirement is dtfMre ench the 277.1) itifqi ii1S1 Sfig'::2:.-.S6011, in the proposed reprai..t kr. 1111 IinIr pov..'zr it neecis to. be 'nub e (1154111;i1 brl en htCIIISMI.'111:i it !"11:1 11E11. 1riid'0:1111.%!IVO!... 01411111gRiorice uskod. 11 it NY85fasih1c t ;i- F. 1...1vc.h: LIcIIlli Lc-located. Mr. TArell %yDultl Writ to look into that and i v.iIl h7 ryviders. commissioner Waltan u . pcJi b] OJ rctj 11 j p 11 IU Lii tha ri4il.-01:-wily if li iteeds to be moved lir Ii .1)1 v.trzur3d. [Nh, 4411.1.114.1 have to into. the opilswor. commissioner if lir?. ILliy would 11,70/:: 1r 1LiviI,CI !ate of. sight. !Lou technology 1,vi-t9 kliffy,seti and it viTsLJ1 n line of sight. Mt. oal 1.110111PN ir:".1:1:71Mlion. Ce.1-4111^,:irriwi C ;1 Ly, it I hc piiviJor ale he hid IZSpinfRible 10 move their eqii.piiiL:oc to hark Iiiu it.s. bk. Burko corriimoted ii It !Leta (20-90 day's li jrd.ico find 111.101.11ef SOiLaiOn, .171•A:rd )2f/Ci/Ig l'efirilary 8, 7018. T/r ii fil(PC S6'1;01 'I; A4.1, (11i.LI.1'nbilk. Mr. i431' Lind h.'!".11"Cling Recu.-th A'r!. Opt° I'. lLJLfy i — 1.)rtiepi Spatc The p...isipone this study 3essiott In ri rx" VIII for rib.! gum.' of riu.1 IX. ito..)veti L Lv‘ly.avr) ,,1 //FL, /0.1(1.,:iNirna fiR2 01+01712/ Mic[icIii RaSMUSSeil, Chzir Dalirfil:41 Donatua Ho) ten, Secretary •i•nri, '11j Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers — City Hail February 8, 2018 i. Vice (:hair Johnson calk:d the meeting to order at :07 p.m. Commissioners, staff and audietic stood for the pleLlge of allegiance_ Secretary Deanna Horton took roll and the following members. and staff were present: LL .larrlos .roll lison Uzanicllc J t chrrl iner Tire Kelley Mike Phillips Michelle Rasmussen, absent cxcrlscd Srr7anne Stathos Matt Waltori Cary Driske11, City Attorney Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney i.or'i Barlow, Senior Planner Karen Kcndall, Planner Micki f larnois, Planner Marty la:rlaniuk, Planner Deanna 1 iorton, Secre%i-v Commission moved to inFL-meeting, The vote on ll'tLV • ix in /d: -AY—, ,z4'iO again_stirnff the 7'7:;;1?.Id; A.GF:-7}; : Commissioner Wrdton rrioverl to n.eeept rl 1•ebrual5, `.; , ':.018 agenda as 1,resented. the yore On the !)?iJrlrJli u'fdJ r)J JUMP, zero C(garnSi (IJE'- MINUTES! Vii! CCommissiu cr Walton moved to approve tl'rc T;=':1 ray 1 l _ 2018 minutes as presscnlcd_ Thai :r; 1:7.' ;7;1",,,Tor, jd„ �i:.}�'','� ..... t., }Efil;'',YI` `•15111 IN altar, movtd to °.I''prove the Jt._'.11{,: '. 'iy 14 , ',I; .:t4:h i''w Eil" : z .1'... l'Fe.' .m' . .;., ;f?r;a?;a -,vas six ..10'4'01; Z'ro IV. COMMISSION REPORTS: ilc' r_:.iIa,Jrd.sir iters had 1141 reports. V. ADMINISTRATIVE IU 1'i.)tff; lil::r. las rt4r_I{Lrainistratit•e report. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT: There -was no public comment_ VII. COM11'II SION:13T 1NCSS: I Confirmed Public 'fieariu ; J 4 017-20(1,53—Aproposed amendment Iu Spokane Valley mInlicilio_tf' (5 TI 'ii1 22 C-19.GU.05 , SVW.' 1.7.80.030 and Appendix A to uptilite wire a '- blit r regulations to taciaress siting orstraall cell wireless facilities within tiie P rd I l i c rights-ert _ _ )LI;,_I V City Attorney' k Lamb s'4 ed the Commission continued the hr:ar'ing from January 25, 2018. M r. M ..i m) answered sorrinf the gliestinns raised at that meeting: Can the• City I :mire a specific distmce between ric.n.v poles? Mr. Lamb said this ways fe asibtc The iq Stry'suggestecl this 4:rr,Id prove' ,.]r4 1}Ierllatic the ni�or � pcoplc who entered r the L ii-I:et, 1,'Fe industry said the distance requirement t.::4.H.Jki make it difficult to find a I1+.:,u1011 wv'ifith worked with the technology, + Can the City require the to co -locate? '511. legally theCir.,: ccu]ci require '.o-locaticvl Ir:kv.c\c.r some of the u[ lit> alloy., it. I le noted s0il.u: work il' !hon.! I! IrwC than ':',..r ;'r',', i..1rr on Lift. .-11TeL' pole ▪ frill the Cit:, i`4 Yjl 1r5' .1 ITIinia'lllr>} height tr!1" LLiLI11'.il:'.:lll said to Mc. extent [hii i{ :10c—'r interfere v...ith the t'0lilt'J1':J11 . A ;l`. 'I.IIi: Il'eL li 4:30 Icel. Y+011[11 HoI pose a prolslenl, but a ['kiwi, 112vel_ ,.lova 60-80 0 teci may t':aus : d st:c: ;I:: l 2 tCC.h20lo 1 standpoint. • Clan Clic City require the ground hr+sc. J ioiIil ics to he buried? Mr. Ltii:lb slril.cri 14.,aliv the City could require it, although iher'e !3 practical considerbolt-.. Th t lS]liStry provided a significant number of Cojnnients regarding how ds:ltimee:T;iI to the, equipment u11grourldiiig can be, 2o1a-o2-og Prioilig commission Minutm Pii.g7 of 5 • c he (zip,: tr! iILI1It ti.oni the I ed I to [Iic macro cell •••••ia fiber'? N.tr I the the. IL.T..11rol4gy. ny requiring !inc.., would be rcguldiittp their tedinology. Ions ,...egarcli lig Fad iation loviLqs, 1.3ipe dth, possible impacts on people. kir_ Lamb SU J under federai law we entinot regulaite based on type of siVal, which would be regulating the technology_ T le said these items arc.. regulaied by the Federal Communication Corn in iss ion i FCC) and as long LiS the equipment meets FCC criteria the City cannot regulate them. a 'Yhe Commission requested crime statistics on trround based theilities. Mr. Lamb said aucording to the industry comments these J1.111 u [10 UM have an impact on evime. • Could the City tax wirels M. Lamb said the Cily already has a tax on telephoneiwur- i-Te said cities can do [tits Lipka- fed...:1-11 law', however we cannot lel Lira, • COLLId te City recuire z.i.ibrnit U etwillecring certification of the pole 111.1L:ttire.s.? 1Ani h ci the City 1-Tc said this relates to the public st5 rei ,. nf.a2i 1 tie placec in the o: the City does not have any pole standards,. (he utility ecimpanies do. [he providers. .would already be supplying this information ri-] the utility providers so il. wool d rlol hint. to ask fo—rFa_c-opy of i wth Itis typlication. • 1iu iE.c.,sponsible for the cost of retocation 2] polcs wit1 i112 1 cc 11 facilities on them? 1 ::;Ifil:Cd the cost of reloeation k he i.e!.,ponsibliiD. of the party making I I 1.c: n241 leSt Relocation costs are 11o,: I.41011:-..illility of the utility Company if 11 i capir:.,.11 project. ILoiilioireos i ai c. the responsibility of the clevelOper when it is a private developirmit, • is; lino of site a. probtem.'? Mr TaT said aceordingto testimony at the last tnccting, line of site ...Yds not an i,S1..10. Trie said in Spokane Valley (110 tOpograp!iyis not pose a problem because or rho nature of the. malley.—The City not have issues siiii tai to downtown Seatie with all thi2 hilELl and bit ildi ngs. 'industry has 3'epresQuLtaLivas who can provide more clarilivatiou, Mr. Lamb said sta4nci the Commission receivcd cominents at the last meeting from the I id, Bir' oro ide. 1 le has ro.iewed and offered comments on some of 11:1 e topics which were brought:tip, • '1'he induscry rewicsicii. to have the undergrouncling Facilities requirement. removed. Mr. cg211r the. City .L.:an require i. How..c.vcr, there are considerations to (he size Ile1ES.. 'a .1 ;val. location,. as pic-hlres supplied by the vendor- — • '1 removing the requircmen( CAM ti011 oi a nt Lfl imum d neo: LaKth said [i ft does riot gee an issue with those tegstirein..2111-;. The 7 ...mould hinder the last. comport:, into the market. .1 he expressed coJ.....ern someone's house may have 3, 1 or 5 poles pliwer.1 IL aiu 2 OtTcrcct n front of city hall there is a pole on llie edge of Citv I :all zmoiiicr 20-3u feet 'ciWity • -; I IC iticittry requested shormiing permit processing time from 60 to 30 days. Mr_ i ,amb said 60 cays is requ I II idii state and federal law. The C.'ity's permit processing time is much shorter th:a; that: however he rceororuct ids keeping (10 days. • T M;1iiI. requested the City oliov., omit ed camouflage design. Mr.. Lamb said ilijs .would h facility that LLOS. F.i1 i l'oe antenna and control equipmept ill 011c et IL.losure. 1-Mobile Eii!-...1,..,Q.ested a unit which i.vould not that! six clibk. feet. This is smalkr til ..sive rhati the size of the ariti.2.1111U ;,1111:1 control box %together. Mr. Lumb said ili i%) as a reasonable request: a id the Commission could consider this, ever staff si:igested a name change lirn it ,o0fusiort • 'Hie industry yeti tJLIl allowing small cell fact l i u ciiy parks, Mr. 1 said given 11K: prcximi1ylhe I ly i here is no need For a facility in the park. ile iicel to clean up the overhead in is parks. Tt would be inappropyLne to al small cell facilities within lite boilltdarte.9 of the park. 2018-02-08 Planning CQnitrFi sit n Mir111te,4 Page 3 of5 The industry requested increasing Lhe eciriutI JI Srrlissions structure from 50 to 60 feel. Mr. Lamb stated this rented t : the large macro-poies and he r>`eOnlilwcnde4l not making tris changge- • The industry requested increasing thc a1] v ahIe deviation before an action is viewed as ti substantial change, Mr, Larnh said this is the amount of deviation allowed bete re a C,nnrlitional Use Permit is required. He said i]:e (_:its rcgulai.ions are relatively flexible and open, he wcaulcl not recommend this change. Commissioner Johnson and PhiIli.ps e).. presscrl concerns r°e. idiiig the requirerncut for private developer paying to move ofthe when ti.c:c: ; ;: °:"r°, 11... development. Commissioner Johnson shared his fear that line of' wi1.: ,:."t'. l t,;. I:i :'i"I"''n when a new building is crreeteil. Mr. Lamb said it is the responsibility the c:.; Fier s t,•" determine if t]i it equipment was aisle to column n icate. Vice -chair Johnson asked for public comment Jcrel .�irn Urdu: ('oil:suiting for Verizon: Mr. Aro w;tiL1 he 4k't,s addressing a couple of questions which iltosc. lac s itc;c3 ihcre are naturally t ccurring gases in ar:i'IlldergruLILLd vault. The equipment (Lehi li(Ll I11 1] u vault does not emit :Ln`:` kind of gas. He: corrrlIICili_ti 110w damaged the equipment heccives if it is required to be 1.}I!Ii1'rl. Ile requests the Citi' eiintinaLC CI11S r(:quirtiiricisl. .,c.i7idT?Ii,'*.4'itmer 87[00] i -,•r Y±dL[a1cabi et 1'fe."1:0?7 ri4"f'.5'., Mr- Aro said he ".did vc the specifications Vvith Iu]n, Mr. An", .aicl i1 WOO Id he thc resronsibiIity (Ai the carrier for making sure that rile cor1111111nicatis,rl with their o\vn ,cilities, c_'ca+lra yr.k,sin+;r:'r .{„l,�r•: ,r; c(Juf: Pied 70.1=01t ?+'yJ±I:i`.4 pi""f)K:/ and that extensive rlrfiarcr,re, as STTOWf VL?I'tzon's caused by putting the eept pT ncrrat arrarl :+'gf•c,urrr.J Steven Burke, Mobilitie, Coeur d'Alene. ne. TTI: Mr. Burke Skid lie felt the legal cIel;t,l irnc:L11 •:;;,1 done to good job ;:It.}7 the regulations and he Ivarited Lo enC%C}L91-i4}-e II'Iti T'1rl _ r :-,incnrssio.` 1� forward. them to the City Council. .I -f~” wt ic.c1 Mohilit.ic has a e.":l ;P:ae".: _Lrl.e::JLt1 and e,vr1",Tul equipment in one unit. He said dime will_he difficult stating [hat rl" i ,',tl t,l;,l 4 :"'11ryi,ink require i {jIIijiiricnl tci he ten feet off the ground. 74], iii,i'1 ,' i:,ic; ',\i1[.; L. ,=Ii 11 '..,.. '-.'. ._orrip,a'1': would move their own equipment. City Attorney Caiy iwli,l'ifled licA..c J* 15r1ingt.i,r .;,..tate .statutes rez.uliLt;''� who pays to move a 416194y 11Ly1� :crated in the right-o-`,tid}H , e said under I ?L liiiiii.. wl 111e {,iii' is doing a capital project and utility pole needs to be moved, i he cosi i .:• 111.1iry company. 1 L is beim:, moved for the public:: ii.i.:Ial, The 1Itlll Trade fission (l.I 1 L- i ;1..+ ":Tip 1wL:l! i; If L}II I!.li1i1:>.• rates which �.li1y Ir}r these :Moves. lite tJ'1C ddc..'rminI it that tl::: i:.:':s4hi. iLeE314111 he .rCC`Llewt pays I -Ur the gnitaveinent. If it is a private development, tllerl the dei t o r pays. Cohiplissioner \\ {i[ttli tail c:(l 11t} lri; iw sites each of 'the carriers preserll were looking to deploy, Sfc:vc.n Burke for F.1cibi Iitie stated they had six, Mr. Aro :i<rl. i Verizon 'was Looking at three at this tiI11e. Commissioner Surlily.}s confirmed [lie...%(piipIT1LrT1 would be labeled for safety as required Dennis Crapo, Spukan& Valley: Mr. Crap stated he wanted the Cornmission to be aware of the unintended ('4}11s,NL,Crices of Lallsiwing 9l1or6 poles in the right-of-v.ay. He said it would set. a precedence. and could keep someone from bLirig ,able to develop a property_ 110 one else who wished ed to tes't+lit Vice -Chair Johnson clo.s :1 the public hearing ng at 6: 54 pan. Mr. Ltirr b suggested. the Commission begin with the proposed a mc:ndlll"_i rs ...vhich were presented at the January 25 meeting. "Then move to the- proposed changes to thrll. prs;p,7:.sill: • the 20 foot minimum height requirement, • the facilities must be buried in the ground Unless technically ilifetIsil?le„ 201g-02-08 Pinning Commission Minutcs Page 4 of 5 ▪ not located within a (:(.: (currently bracketed with 250 in this, holding spot) of olher small cell 7:FiCiric-sU e the applicant dcinottiratcs that no other location can accommodate or k sutlicien 11101X1 fli Wiitle;SS service need_s, g t the prov;:ier cannot mix: 1..he d nee: then they must make kin alletript to co- -wthy it is not poEsiblu. M. 1.1n -in aidtattl-L ec.ulit seta are required !.o ;•• the whieh [1.-.1 th. 7ill„ffqiii1eL...1 PrOperty, bat ;:!! will' that pi i.,.a(e 010:1.:2.• Thu Commission began deliati,J.12s of the issuCs which had !leen p.:).•:-.sc:!Ited for change (0 the Comr-,ii::Tiers agreed to add Ei 250-fo(:, i)etween h i t uud demonstratc at this distanee_ can chlan:2,..- it. I :le to ac!d 1:....T...,iretrient for co-loeation, ir 7,1 „,fi .:It all fepsible. "Itic requiri..1!1 .11 21:l -foot miiiimon1 and agreed to this 'Theii ILL_ I'd iiICtT1Cfl t tuldergri..y.siding the eir,illrol equirT!erit. ....li!...1_11....-,.,...11;.]);:.ComunisiFicriers:agreed, to aiddiug tint; 1 rcquiinin:2 transn-Ussion by :11.Der would itof. he added, bcc...9.1.;:c re:..-2ti1 ate the tectinolog,y, Coiriii 1 i cs a.A.rced to adding the requir.":„...11;IiL certification 10] 11 IC 111 (Fom.rnissioner Johnson frit pitrc....A.4 with a _c.fl. looT eNempl li•om new pc:les. (..!onimissioner Phillips rce.k.i.he c.a 'Tier shol;_c! '_:ti ].is, Lamb -.Aid rvirii practical standpoint he was suR: it. C.,...orriini..,,s(k)nor Walton confirmed 1.'nciv. iS DO public of a new utility polL:. fvfr, T ,ainb 2.,.;1<cd the (.....onruissi,::! 111,2 mei i he from 6{} -days. The (._:.r.rmin.is:Jiou.Q2.:•,4irreed to the (1 i.2.1e line. C.c...!"]m,c:siorieF ;.1!_tecl to [ow for a L',011)bl1C:([ ci)1211::611re v1i ic.h rnight be a bit the. for t:p.•i i1iii ij ilone. The Commissioners agreer tI ii.v did not sniai I IiI:ii. ILILS. I ',he Ciin-rmissioners agreed n01. t!lc: h .L:11 !I'll it'dil011:2 -:11] CLOCLACEL; C::11irriissi.oners agreed to no Lamb said oh should rnake a motion to approve the clanpres.cnted ori ,1aii 25 along with were discussed 1.c.1111! up211,;IL: with the co-1....-,(Ttion requirentcnt.a :iii -feet, retain the orr ground Yau.1(s. addition of a structural engineer Lelti iLL1iO1i with orii Fled camoutlage fac.i I it -y with a differeta p;i1-1 cri- lose changes. 1..1o11611 fuoveLi (o'reconn.i?ci,i'd k.1 Citv r r.proposed aviendment -with Ihe c!'iaisges -which 'had I.Je7.7210, L'ity Aitol7tey. The voic on 'I'M,' inotioR zepo and the im:;.!.,y Senior Planrieti,ori '411.2 cilanging ag.......u.dt!. to Triiyo2 '.11.2 Com prchen7jve Ilan study session ahead of The t41.1.11 clne 1.0 the nunlher of. people i11 attenclan.ue who were interested in the iopics. YrtitnissIC1Ei glivC consensus to proceed_ ii. Study Scion 21)11] Curnpirehensive. Plan a/nem:line/Its: Ms. Barlow oreseritt.,..!, an overview of (.7..om7r,.:5herr..7-.....e Plan pro.:-:tH, .lL•1,2 orignia[ty rour thr....t- City after the doekei L'iitheed ;inicnclivicnts :ity hold off makiii il. dL 1 !) their p' al. ir..•.r Planner?, I r larnois (..%0 500- rteast o1 Pines rad on zIi e of ,lipproximaLrly two fron) Sing;_t !es.i4.ientia1 and k -.i 0:ar. ion arid ; I i; — by 1,1 and south Lrid Corcidor Mixed 11,.: 71_,:LAV:Ltd For this axiericfdyient. 21118-02-08 Pr' ruiirt. C'orninissinn minutes Page 5 of 5 Jv1s, 1-larnoi* r{ lniii Ic':I the Csimr.Yissioners that CP.A-7 r) .-rY{Y(:'^ I•i! i withdrawn. by the property 1.1,Vi I 112.1"_. PJ; niter +tE{r'(y P i]; iuulc'_.rfi:_ainal t.:PA-:J? 8-0003 :'s It1c' {t.'c' <{1 I L144'il` IY ' d Sands Roads, The request •..Ll Cl'.aili?c the Slug[ 1'i3177J1 t.l(;ylipl'I;;li;lii I'll:l Ii -2 Corridor Mix.ed 1_:'' (( desii,.natiori located acrus: id t)ishnlart 15,1i• r+l.111.1, Ile said t`Ic: lot aricr a sl:bdivision ol. tli;° pr{periy in 2010, w itch divided the properry lw ;in the sow]] skit' or the original final lot, This lot was created as a LIr1airi i L' i:E{`vl'Ir'rl1 which ':'•as beett dedicated to til{: (:.ill. '1 he j`:'i?I1C1't' is surrCrt?17dCd on three r'lolllll residential and the f".'.,llro%{r.l LJ2i4:1,s to .tki, north. The p.onerty lju:r.Ir:j'. (. IIL.':s1L'I' �.1'L:ti'n, i`o loeatvt in a rlkloiph'.,n7, has :.1 I_ [}t' 1- jl'�kifri. }l. biologist has repc:'rrecl the: site. .CHrlmiss U:ler \L:'ti.toll ask i;c. it Itis property would have been allowed 1.Lr I1 i4icicci irt11c rl c;iIYr. eeasementhard i..I :`c:.:1 r; oirL of it Mr, Palaniuk started he would IJiivc to defer to cngineeI r_.s,'..i. [vh. 1';iliinii�lc elated the Commissioners already laud nil comment which was provided Llp. Iv' lime or 11I:li.1 the aci;eL Any comments received slats.; iiicti had Peen provided to the Conunis ic.Ytic;r., that. c. c-ning_ -- ry1r. 13:11 anfLik discussed CP.A-2018-0004 is located iI the c.orncs` rr r ± I' Avenue arc1 University Road. i lli request is t( CIY2:iL e the [l s'ILin I1I.Y{Sli '','+.til'' SIriL..IC Family Residential :1;7'.1 R-7. . I;ir;ITYI' Ll? Neighborhood CU:.7i7 :!oii11, lac L': ?I.,inL'.] il;_' wul',JeC ;:.aire1 abutted another l'r;lfx.:rly owned h ° the same prvp :: ['WI .:r. which ki::, cIYc,ngc:J to Neighborhood Couarne ial during the 2016 �.`sides_v sir ]e C]117�!]'�(i�:li'y..., l' 13�i�'II ril��:JfL:C'. �'1•I. �'tt.l:l^I�Yl4 st.r.] t17? }7'T{;�13�'rIY �4'diS Sisllrrtls�tadcd Or'I'Ot}7Cl` ;" T tciriiily. I I 4;�c is h..-;.-.1c-red by 1J7i1Erw I'- 1t.,.a;1 wflic:: i -i a tnin..r arterial. ]'ilii=Palauituk said the t.,:471T1uIL Ii?lit;'S 1yao. tally comments stall ha. v4: Planner Karen Kendall was beginning her discussion of CF -A-20 18-i,C"' 5_ '. hen. Comrlissi mer I'i ii ll.ipS recused himself regarding this ainendriiint, and left the col_u_ci] chambers. amendments are both correcting wrapping cruors. The property for CPA -201-000:s i iocaied at the confer of Prop -;ss and I orkcr Road: The parcels are split a and Single tinnily Residential. The amendment is to d sigNitc: 1111' mirth 'aid cast edge of ogle parcel as Neighborhood Commercial and another along the _BP.A ti.1?,crncliL. LoinFiissioJler Stathos commented the area could not handle any 11.1oio I.ra [lis 11'11 was developed,_ Kendall explained the change proposcd li}r (:PA -2011-00(J6. The property is located on .Trent Avenue apprt'xiivat .1'‘.)11Lt a-nd nnu hair mite east of Sullivan_ The parcel is clevelupcd and there is a stormwater s',kt lv {lc: i IIS,,. 1.s 1-L.".f: to be rezoned. The parcel is split toncd with I he 1.5 feet Oil the east side of 11me runcva fir; iL:°+I _;1 Sisig.ly Family Residential while the mot is Itnllistrial Mixed Use. The .proposed change is tO..7QllC the easterl,? r.!de 1Jsc_ The n .K1 Sl4.la k the ?YJf;lic, hcari11.g, which is scheduled for February 22, 2018_ iii. Study ,Session, Open Siar,11 Feipiirements in MixedUs.c zones. The Commission ag,rced 10 pomporietlre discussion of open space regaiireinents to another rtrccting. 'lI1. G001) OF -1HE ORTIFR° Them was no irg fr the good of the: order, IX. AIM 0t1-ItNNI N'T°- Colnrmm issloner Walton muted to adjourn tJic meeting at 815 p.m. The vole oh the +lrrafr(,re rim ,tr1:.7Oimmis 111 fin'OY, IJ7t! 111C0S1O11 passed, A1`rclielle Rasmussen, Chair Date signed Deanna Holton, Sect -00y Spokane Val ley. Mobilite Comments Re: Planning Commission CTA 2017-0005 Draft lf3/1s- MOB1LME COMMENTS- HIGHLrGOE0 IN gig DRAFT APPENDIX A DEFINITIONS HadlotTV broadcasting studio; Facilities serving the broadcast media. See "Communicelion facilities, use category." Repeater facility: A facility for the noncommercial recctWlion and retransmission o- radio signals. See "Communication facilities, use category.' RF E aineer A person who h tfte opinion of Ilse C+ ftlariacer, has appropriate educe iorl trai i orad ex a vs in wi'elr:s co mptu mcation services. radso Frequencies, and FOCd olher ai icab e move r C c r,t l rE.nu la tions to provide the pwecessanr oertih stion s re imd Qursuanl to cha'o?er 22:'fi ' Vr.1C. TelecornmuntcatIons, The transmission, between or among paints spezifled by the user, of audio andior visual information arx1 data of the user's citooslrig, without change in the forma or content of the information as sent and received. • Alternative mounting struct.irc ,A water Foyer, menrnade tree, clock tower, church steeple, hell tower, utility pole, fight standard, f-eestandinJ sign, tiagpoe. or sirnilar structure designed to support and camouflage or conceal the presenoe of telecommunications antennas, • Antenna: Any-exte�;of �tirr, r tis deSf;;nsd for;l' te;: honic r„j iia, data, Internet - other ci rn r:unications 1 Og1- !-re:Se Jir;q ;- n,Vcr r iwlfig radio fre�islr ricY jgnals, ludire, but not I i<d to n4.r101ent epoch+ d_10 a tom; bolt, light standar t, poke. i)ui:Ong or other raciu:a for t1e u-poSe of p,co di no wireless se ices. Niles cff gntenrtas rH Iuri,c • till in reChpriaerdenne" reu' i'oas nsnslls lad CI -d gree. radia. G t arj, =1! enC S teals In Ad:* aritennl' .S.811o sir w+irerrtional en nnatliatis ur to 5 eetlr.1iel■1iL an iaL7' 1tore than si t ricbesiii%idiarnet a; and - A "diPg6tiorV or panel Buten rip' receives aJ3O..,ransrxi lis radia f enquench signal§ In e st:eri°:c: irectior :.iptt?rn Of iesUhart3B0 degree-A-strwetr Pdevise to colic&ja-ramie_ t stay veafe agraetic waves, kr udir g d rest] nnas,-so4Fasp,sr s;-w,firetless•sable ead-sateake Reotieraat-aRtisonoc., cub s5 Mips, but not indludnig sflell11 riew&dosFellatiel-lIOf -lose cf radica car tele+Jisief , • antenna Neta p he vatic - di-ta ce mea- -d from avera ■ - building etevati ■ to the Mc:hest. poLnt of ttie antenna. Or If or r09'100 or o1rler structure- fi 1T tfri,too of the roof or structure to the tt`ohest point of the antenna. For reptacearstrnt structures antenna ie••h i rr1 s x-• i .mtf,5 o - =xisti r s w ura to a hl±hes,t Dint of the antenna or new aucture j hichavei Is.greraterr- 1 CTA 201.7-0DOs Draft J/Wa - MOBILITIE COMMENTS -HIGHLIGHTED IN Mg • Approved small cell 4ciltty: A v smell 091I Wilily that has recOved all required pc 7nits. • Array: An arrangement of antennas and their supporting structure_ Base S : fon: A structure o e. ui.mewl at e. ed location tha : hies FCGiicen =d qr Authorized wireless pom rnut hcatiot«s between user equipment and a communications network The term does rro e_ ncompass a Viwer as defined hereiru gr any eouton' aril associated with LigAer. Base Station Includes, without IimiteLion, E ui merit associated with "reless communications services as well gnhicensed Wifeless services and fr O wireless senticesigoh as microwave - Radio lfanscervers, antennas, coaxial or Ipeprialic cable reoula and bacKur power pun plies, and comparable equip-reg..reoa'rdless Cif teefanoloo:cet con rinuration (includirrc Distributed AltrIfilha Svstaru `DAS'i and small-cell net r sI Anv sUUGture stilet than e trn/6 ire .cat the rime Iticle;eyarrt ai OlicatiOr1 is Bled iii l e Git sus M • its or ouses e ! u i+ "s hide : ed above t at Frac beer: reviewed and an roved u a Fs...Ili:aij sir. ir sit no ."OC.ess. o :.rider anal State or focal m r__ ar . cuts, , - en if the built for the sole or 'nm5 +'.airy' .f *ravidi ?�.,li - su 'ort. The term does not Incl,ide an strud tha14 a lire {fife relevare ak lication is filed • vial the CO, dues riotgiJlaoH or Lugar`:+ 4ou3rifiO attave. • Collocation: Tn ,gintn4 ri instellat�fifirsniS$Itequipment On at eligv Ipoort structure fe puroo $ f transl eaIQr ivinr iadio frestuenov slan=ts for contmu nicato pu 'ses. r'nrrl+n dloFs-fte r-by-rEff-#i:-dee—e, asFGOprovider_ ' • ConclalYent f4ti tologr = TTansrniSsl. j olesianed to look lik scene feature other Orin a wireless �r or • stationinirtilzes th': v e `u+acl Dien r7lc�nr.a iii" use or nonrsL t've -• f• a. re Nate GAI+rs andtor a oonceaiment can * Dish: A parabolic or bowl shaped device that receives aridfor transmits signals in a specific directional pattern. - EIA -222: Electronics Indus tries Association Standard 222, 'Structural Standards for Steel Antenna Towers and'Ailtennas Support Structures_" • Electric transmission: A self-supporting struc(ure In excess of III feet in height designed to support high voltage efectrlc lines. This does not Include Il utility tx distribution poles (with or without transformers) designed to provide electric service to Individual customers_ • Eligible Facilities Reikuest: An re e for rnodifhcati n tan existiris' tower r . se feat dirnorrsiorts. S tSitt'h tower or . base ste ipn, invohi ri is - Ctll,cation of new lransgrlssiori eguiPITIo 2 CTA 2Q37-0005 Draft 113/18 — MOBIl911E COMMENTS — HIGHLIGHteD rN - Redlkpv1 of transmissiarrr equipment, or Re IncemaUttransricil ▪ be SLI . • , rt s - re;. An $,r, : of base sta i a as define±, 1 .ls section provided that it iii at the lime ttie relevant efipticalion is filed with the City, hoouses_gf supports in antenna, w c a ce1l or srq l call deoloymeait_ • Equipment structure., A fecih1' shglbar cabinet_pr vault used to house and proteid nic or oth essaolate l mein nec?ssary for pro Ging wireless communications si inets. 'Assoc° ed : u ui *meg' ma ude for exat • le. 21.1r conditiarsing, backuo tower supplies anderncrcency ueftetetofs. • Exiatirrg: A cert t ,ted time +, base st.ltons ,,{ sL �d it has been reviewed and ppr rayed under # a ,licabl• onina or Minia Lh+} ar undo a other slate or local r-+utato vew process .rovid'edthat - awe "asg ,t.been reviewed and as b(i1I .but was lawfully reviewgd because t s not to a z+ 1 - r are -.A constructed, is existing for nu rp❑ses ofct d o- + 22A 22 SON R Guyed, tower: Any telecammanications tower supported in whole or in part by cabtes an:llored to the ground. • Height: The distance moasu red from grade to me highest point of any and all. components of the structure, including antennas, hazard fighting, and other appurtenances, if any. • Microcells: Fjas tr,e. nme'noanin+ 3S set fo h,. -I Ft 4i .,313.375, as now adopted or tiereerft ensk a Monopole: A sell! -sup; nrting lecommLi lit tions towerM-itch c insists of a single vertical pole, fixed into the ra ti di arrdfor atl9Ctied to a foundation, Eitherst,+Gtrd i!RRr esed.t 1.11pertsrriafl .L1.0islit.esol, 1�iiCtu :, exc1 'i? b Lldin. t,titl 'peas, and water reservoirs Exp -limes of `atrter.s?tpport s ' *` µroc Zrii fiide flagpoles and ball field Ciotti standards * Panel; An an tonna isrtit i recei s sndIor transmits signals in a directional pattern. • Prior a a rOvaI. ertiflca *r sol a...ver s r rn the Cit = h. '21n the iryi ial installation of e _yo- ciFr 'Niro ` carne small call f,-li'es on a ba n station c tower., • j • as't[ival ri? k=tso Incl t. e subses + 1 a. novels rom the City authorzirio have res tad in the exis , a stale of the srjJ her arid location of eouiI men( s ructures. structures a ■ = Gills i. ant. ca Lions to the acilrty lrrcludi antennas ail, :hna s ttutni3 l, 4,1111 i u ation o the n ▪ Self-supporting lattice tom r: A tetecammunicatiaris tower that consists of an open network of motel braces, usualy triangular or square in cross-sectIon. a Service: The offering of telecommunications fora fee directly to the public, or tc such classes of users as to be effec:lvely available directly to the public, regardless of the facilities used. • - rvice .. : 1 H-5the sa ie meanie' a sat forth n f 35.93.01Q(fi) zunw adapted or hereafter amended Servi rovtder shall i elude tt case I r IT...structure 3 CIA 2017-0405 Draft 113118- Momuf1IE COMMENTS - HIGH LTG Faro IN I. companies that rovide teleWrnmunIt [iOrr& services Or equipment to enable the deployment of personaI wireless services + Small cell and small cell del:Arnolenl: Have the sa a eanin es set forth in R_Q a - 5.375 as n yr eduptesl or hereafter rime • Stealth: A telecommunications antenna that is effectively camouflaged or concealed tram view. • Substalittai cttanae: A mod.ib tion substantial1ychanrteslhe ohyslc t div nsions of 811 eli lih1 support structure if it sheets any of the folio g cdtefie: Far Ii ie s other than tawers in the ubric ri ht f a It increas s the trelcfht or the tower by more than 10% r by the i• of one addit nal• enker«r asset? v,� h separation tr rui the nearest xisti efwtenna nal, to exceed twenty fes, whictever is Greater, for nihei eIs i a;..a . off 'VuctUrp I creases tate ftelatit of the structure by mre than 1 rmore th .feel ichever is grgater, ff� - For lowers other than towers in he o ri• t k Iii °" . as addirt+ an a..ur'lerrance tit], the bOrl o the tows' I :. nu k .w f., `3I e ed•e .f the Rowlir were than twenty fe :or snore th6rite of Ilse lomat' Vnucture al t9L levet of the apou•torr sur Lv;rlciivrcr i-, treater;: or other eligible supero istmot.rres, it Involves add ir q r el urlir agGeSp jre body -of the structure that would projrude from the vdue of the. s.!tiucture hY:fOrtaf than six feet For any eligi �� jj( ` , tI LILIUie Ill l v st l..• of more than Ma standar u of n two, en i rr~r ji' ca, it fr r # to nolody Involved, but not to exceed f ifeabinets,..rnr. for tower. ire rhr_publt -tlohts-o -waY and base sta[ions„ 1U 1 s cia of an-°. - w e6u + t cabinets on tarrturrd lF jt ii~ reriopr i tin4-9a,}ricabi'dto. associated with lihes[nactured eine latiort'T?(••Ciitid j GCs tet are more than 10% larger in Ire ditit or .s;k io1uTr19;v.ne .her.ro'i bll `associated tah the strLuCtµro; 'r° • entmi[s any ek[i tioif &.4ep1$ mens outside the current slte; • It;"kb s t= -t the' + • r e -Irrht t ele tints of the eligible support structure; DT - It does riot coma[vy Cofrd itrons asst i ted ryttlt the alliin approval of thio conorvctirr +fr niothri an oche El ■ihlesu+ +o s uctufeorbbse station e• 1• ent, +rix r -i1 ..y s - :t. this limitation does not a• al b err modification that 9 j,t ani 1 a manner that would not exceed the thresholds id'enii 't above. • Telecommunications antenna: An antenna used to provide a telecommunications service. This excludes lightning rods, private mobile radio systems, amateur radio antennas less than 35 feet in height in residential dish -lots and 50 feet in height In nonresidential districts, and whip antennas less than four inches (10 cm) in diameter and less than 10 feet In height • Te • nnunlca. • r aeri(ILe; i lie 6a me me nin as se h in RCVti+ 35.09-O101171h.. now edDpittqpr hereafter amended 4 CTA 2017-0005 vra[t 1,13/1.a — /VOMIrTE COM MENT5— FII0E LlGHTEO IN MI • Tower: Anv s1Vuctur9 bui:t for Lhe Sqi$ a licensed tar out' ■ rhzed entenn - and tht -lr associat are pqnstructed foril1ess cum o- nvote •IC-dcast and r rimerse of Su fl CC- F d fixes wireles d facilities ncludirl. Str4J 1 ural ' tower" ohall not indudg.R.3rd than CO, a tranctjl a cora Smell ti permit.A�rg-rx h r ry0 4g rily-Le--or,ippuct-one-tales ammunications anteF aao- Does nekool e -h am eratar-or nd-tu Fe- tewe • 7ransmission,. iUIpmerlI; _Equipment flat tacilhtekes G iss licensed pr authorized wireless r7om mu r l . do SIM - radio transc:eiverp. Entennas, civgia1 or fiber -o ali p:fm' Cr;SU e m hoax] uh rnent asso seryLtdg, icersIncIjbutnotlir to .rivate well as unlicensed wirelesp services and ackha3ul, din + but not r ited to :end r0quier and backup ppm 100.1 comma i -tions *- e cast.. ;Ind ut c safe se OS ireless services.such as rrlicrowabe • Utility hole: A Jrtticture design d a3nd us ally for the 8u4?it cf e'.ecdrlca. wires telephq[is wires, tefeu _ an .; Me tra 'rls, .p .bin. for sh• ,parkin€ areas, or pedestrian palhs- . ul;lp aF er a;-M.omRi direct ca al di ntei rra of.lFnd-r-irs.al-s;!ra -ia. rite more than-F,ix in c a• 1 . ■ Wireless: Halving t"iirefeePlivlres, operating by Means of transmitted a 3leetromasgnebc waves. Tower, ham operator: A sU Jo.re less Man 75 feet In height above grade used far two- way communication For• Nobby Or emergency service purposes by private individuals. Soo 'Communication realities.: use Category " CIA 2017-CO45 Draft OM- M4111L111E COMMER75- 1IGHLIGIITED IN MI DRAFT SVMC 19.5U.O6U UserCaNgory Type Camminhtblloo Facllhtisa RI R2 Ft R4 Irk 1 kl.JC CMU Radio/TV broadcasting siudlq 0 NC C RG Repeater radial+ P P P P P POS P W P P Smai, cell deoIownortl. s TelEttlmmUrllc6Uon wiieIe antenna array Teleccmrn nri.a6dn wireless support lower TaAier, ham ope •plor S S 5 9 G C 0 s 5 h1 12 P P chasm PVM 5 Chap.or 22.120 SVMC C C s 5 S Chapaer 21120 SVMC: 5 5 S 59,44,11 Off;} CTA 20174X75 Drat 1/3/1$ - MOBIL TIE COMMENT$ - HIGHLIGHTED IN= DRAFT Chapter 22,120 MVAC 22.120.010 Purpose and !Merit. These standards were developed to protect the public health. safety, and welfare, and minimize visual impacts on residential areas, while furthering the development of wireless co mmuniCatlon servic .s, These standards were designed to comply with the. Telecommunication Act of 109E. The provisions ofncha r 22.120 are -lot intended to and shall not be interpreted to prohibit or io.tlave the effect of prohibiting wireless communication services, to 'ter 22.1 -1V er all ,irs noMmuniea1n se rulces h r i -an sate' :11 •;:,s ..are re . ul- ad . ursua: chapter 22.121.5Y i1 C- 22.120,020 Permits and exemptions. Where a transmission tower or antenna support structure is located in is zoning district which allows such, use as a peoi fitted USE aclivitti, administrative review, and a building permit, strati be required, sub}mct to the proj&.Vs consistency with the developnlert standards set forth in SVMC 22.120.0.10. In instances Where the use is not allowed as a permitted use ec city, a_ onditional use perm;t and bLJ Idin9 permit shall be required in addition to a demon li, l ivrt.ol. consistency win) ell required development staridares, Exemption: Wireless id—to utilized for temporary emergency communications In the event of o d:sasterti axernpt {rnm the provisaorls of this section and shall be permitted in all zones. 22, 120.030liequ1re-d.opplicfIon aufa�rtels:`. All applications for wirele*S pritenna arrays and wireless communication support towers shall inclUde the follcnwfng. :... A. A letter signed by the app nt stating that all applicable requirements of the FCC, the FAA, and any required s tion easements have been satisfied. P. A scaled site plan dearly Indicating the location, type and height of the proposed tower, antennas, on-siteland uses and zoning. adjacent land uses and zoning, adjacent roadways, proposed means of access, setbacks from property lines, elevation drawings of the proposed tower. the equipment structure. fencing, buffering end the type of stealth technology which will be utilized. The full, detailed site plan shall not be required if the antenna is to be mounted on en existing structure, C. The applicant shall ttave pe rfornied and provided a photographic simulation of the proposed facility from all affected properties and public rights-of-way. 7 CTA 2017-0005 Draft 1/3/1S -MO ILmECOMFMNf5 HLGHLIGHTED. IN b. The applicant shall provide copies of any environmental documents required by the Stale Environmental Policy Act ISEPA). E. The applicant shall have demonstrated effort to co•lacate ort an existing support towel. or olf}er structure, New sLpport towers shall not be permitted within one mile of an existing supper! tower unless it is demonstrated that no existing support tower ar other stauoture can accommodate the proposed antenna array. The City reserves the right to retain a g;Jail fied consultant, at the applicant's expense. to review the supporting documentation for accuracy. F. Evidence to demonstrate Ma'. no existing support to rerkir other structure can accommodate the proposed ant-enna array may c❑riefal.,01the following; 1. No existing support towers or other4raJttalres ere located within the geographic areas required to meet theapplicant's engineering requirements. 2. Existing support lowers or pfkler structures ere not of sufficient height to meet lie applicant's engineerng requirements. 3, Existing support towers or outer structures do not have sufficient structural etrerlglfr tb.support the appliCsn9bs proposed anterlris array and related equipment. 4. The applicant's proposed antenna would cause elecErornagnetic Interference with the antenna on the exislingg support towers or other structures, or the antenna on the existing sorppvrt towers or other structures would cause interference with applicant's proposed antenna. G. The applicant of a nee. tower shall provide a signed statement stating the appli_:ant has provided notice to all other area wireless service providers of its application tc encourage the co -location of additional antennas on the structure. I -L A signed steteanetrt fToirm the owner andfor landlord to remove the facility or obtain an,other.p mit for the facility w llrlra six months of when the facility is no longer operating as part of Eiwiretess cornununicatioh system a°uthorized end licensed by the FCC. I, Proof that all fhe necessary repelty or easements have been secured to assure for the proper constrtaction, continued maintenance, and general safety of the properies adjoining he wireless comrtiurication facility. 22.120.040 Design standards. The support tower, antenna array, and supporting electrical and mechanical equipment shall be installed rising stealth technology. Stealth tecfno`ogy applies to all personal wireless service facilities, Including, without limitation, antennas, towers and equipment structures, For any facility, stealth technology means the use of both existing and future technology through which at personal wireless service facility is designed to resemble an °bled which is already present in the local environment, such as a tree, streetlight, or traffic signal, It also includes - 8 CTA 2017-0005 draft la/x8- MOGILrrIE CON1MEr{r5 - HIGHLIGHTED IN= A For personal wireless service support towers, 1, If within existing trees, 'stealth technology' means: a. The tower is to be painted a dark color; b. Is made of Vvo d or metal; and c- A greenbelt easement is required to ensure permanent retention of the surrounding trees. 2, Stealth technology For towers in a more open setting means that trey must have a backdrop (tor example, but not limited to, trees,, a hillside, or a structure) an at least two sides, be a COrripatiblle..color with the backdrop, be rnade of compatible materials with the back.d fbP, and that architectural or landscape screening be provided for the i Uiier two sides, If existing trees are the backdrop, then a greenbelt ealOrneri# is required to ensure permanent retention of the su rrounds lg (race. 3. Antennas shall ba integrated into the design of Ony personal wireless service tower to wT o1i May are attached, External projections from i.ha tower shell be limited to the [neatest extent technically teaslble. 4. For rooftop antennas or antennas mounted ori other struc#uress7 a For omni-dimr tional antennas 15 feet or Tess above the roof. stealth technology rneans`use of a color compatible with the roof, strucAu-e or background; b. For other an'leniia , stealth technolaogy means use of cornpelibie colors arid a rchitectdral screening or other techniques approved by the B. For antennas mounted on one or more Wilding facades, stealfn technology means use of calor and materials suer that the facility has architectural compatibility with lho building. ft shall be mounted or. a wall of an alanine building in a canflguration es flush Ito the wall as techlyiclly pbsslble and shall not project above the wall on Which it `s mount'!. C. For equipment structures, stealth technology means locating within a building, or if on top of a building, with ambit: cturalty'rompalible screening_ An underground location, or abovo grourid with a solid (thou and landscaping, is also considered stealth technology. D. Aduerlising or display shall not be located on any support tower Of antenna array. however, the offer of the antenna array shall place an kdentiification plate indicating the Warne of the wireless service provider and a telephone number for emergency contact on the site. E No artifidal lights other thar those required by FM or other applicable authority shall be perrrltted, All security Tights shall be down -shielded, and installed to be consistent with Chapter 22-60 SVMC. 9 CTA 2017-0005 Ura ft 1/3/1.13- mo s1 L TIE COMMENTS - H IG IHLIGHTED IN; F. The facility shall be enclosed by a site -obscuring secures fence not less then SIX feet in height with a locking gate, Ne barbed wire or razor wire shall be permitted. G. The support tower foundations. equipment shelters. cabinets or other on -the -ground ancillary equipment shall be hulled below ground or screened with a site -obscuring secured fence not less than sixfeet high. The requirement for a site -obscuring fence may be waived provided the apollcent has secured all on -the -ground ancillary equipment in a locked cabinet Designed to be compatible with and blend Into the setting, and the means of ac ass for the support tower is located a minimum of 12 feet above the ground. H. All support structure(s) for w reless comrfrurriCatlop. antennas shall have their means of access Located a ml nlrnurn a- eight feet above i:bund unless the requirement for a fence has been waived. I -The support tower shall meet the rninirrtuirwptimery structure setback requirements for the underlying zone. J. Support towers shall not be permitted Inside a public park, public monument or private holding located within a putatic park or public mon LIME nt K. The height of the support tower ak ante a Array above grade shall not exceed the maximum height Identified in Table 20.20-1 Wow. The height of a support tower shall Include antenna, base 'pad, and other a'ppurtertances and shall be measured from the • finished grade of the parcel. Table 22.1120-1 — Tower Height Urn Rations Tone Antenna Array Support Tower R-1, Single -Family Residential Estate 210 feet above the zoning re]ght limitation or 19 feet e-bave existing structure :6Cr feet R-2, Single -Family Residential Suburban R-3, Single -Family Residential tfrban R -h, S4FlJIc Fluty Resktantial Urban MF 4. Mal tifami1g Residenlialedl.6m Wen Siii+ l eOdent-at MF 2- lig ,' Reelele-at4 Mixed Usenear-{MIG) 60 feet Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) 10 CTA 2017 -MOS Draft 1I371B • MOBIL TRE COMMENTS - 111G I I LtG HTED IN Table 22.'120-1—Tower Height Limitations Antenna Array Zona CHyCente C) Oifiee-R Neighborhood Commercial (NC) 20 feet above the zoning height (imitation or Ito feet above exi'stIng structure niun y C m i 4-Q4 Regional Commercial (RC) Light industrial I1ed Ldse (iM ti -1) 1-Ioavy Industrial (1-2) Support Tower 20 feet above the zoning 20 feet higher than the height limitation or 20 feet maximum height allowed in the above exisllag structure lean or &0 feet +htc ewer is fess' "An additional 20 feet in height for each additional antenna array co -located on the. support tower, up to a rnaxlmum tower height of 100 feat, including the height of E 11 antennas. 22,120.050 Landscaping, Refer to Chapter 22.70wmC `or fandspaping rktitir+ernan(S appiicabfa to the underiyin zoning district. 11 • Formaalte® Table CTA 2017-13005 Draft 1/3/18- maaru-ri E COMM ENTS-H16HL1SHTED 111 DRAFT Chapter 22121 SV MC - Srna11 Ceil Deployment ;2121.0.10 Oyerview. Jn order to manaoe Its figt}t-0f + In a flirgghtful rit8Huatr, which balances the need to Eltzw rm ate new a d evolvl • t_chnolo les h he rese ariOn of the natural and aesthetic environment of the City while •• •l in+ w .,ie re.uif•.it:nts of state nd federal 1- t e Cit r do ■ts that• .121 SVMC • .;+ += I.. malt all sfia1i cell and rn411 techr►o o Servl reviders who, seely .t25 uhirize the public right -of -wear for small cell deplowrieryt in order 1-0 pro'. wireles . rrnunicalion, eta lrensmis€iQr10f other : - d cervi - s o the cltaz • ns of he Ci '' 1f receive a vntid franchise ! provide 11-48 specific se}yjce.seeklrn to utilize the .i hell deploy.nelt Entities with francfjfses who wig to utlfize rnaIL cell : ❑ rneit j,- r•. : 1 e or ekp T3rJ Ikreir existing servlces shall utilize e .rooessas s t ',Will 11 A - tos 2.121 SVMC aid implomentino small cell vi -ti of spec €iti` insiallatic-ns. Nothin. a ter 22.:. S 1M-v'ses or d*l f}es the ricthts and abtioalgns of an exis1nSl franchise. B. The te=rn 'small mica cells acid s arlooted or 1 -Tea +r,- ..:.10 rnen: s *1 1 4.MMIL- = .Tw OV de kb rna'nl of srnalt cp:ll facilities fined b RCVV ;9.3 .376 as nu gym; pks which fegLlire SERA SEPA re'rit cell de lo ant .errnitti .g establiske under cheers '2 120, A Sural! Ce De • I+iia7� ++hts o a S all cell d o'nVmr nts h the Rublic bahts- of-wa - 1 r n1 +• ,i poi + r -n 1' lo a vetid franc..hisr w'rith the Glty, and 521 Ir roinplience wltfi all fader end lv_c l small cell _ormiitino requirements. small Ce11_pep'.pynrent outside of Bights-of-VUai Sinal! cell deplgynents outsktit21 the s u . c r'+hts-of- : hall oft ri ade In + m r fiance a ll f , . era1 sta -, ■ •! small cell permitting feOulferrl- tis. 2-121.4 rarrchtss Haat on. A Franchise ApRll tion. Ser. ice providers that desire to doplov small mAisleplcnnmet§ 12 GTA 2,917.Wab Draft 1/3/15- MOfIJTIE COMMENTS - HIGHLIGHTED !NM In L uti ibhis-of-way -hall a.DI f• a franchise farm and submit a fee deposi? commensurate with the estimated administletiye casts:of n❑ ori application fore tragi rise- Servimiiroviders seeking to ulllkze City lghls- af-wav foF small cell deployments shall se clry rLeograP iic boundarie r the small cell rfeplayrn€nt des -bed in the a is tion And r.v!{e detailed chemetics • visual rendetir Q 111 -ie proposed lacibties to be utilized. Pha$jd dewelotsrnen_l,is, permitted and 21 Iicanf coma ed +s.eclf al le. -t Itie initial Srtlatl cell deploymarit in its 8pp1fC?jion- �1� t: Ise a ton po$itinalion of, Fa iiities. ;I -..Iiia is f+r franchi _ s= -king to utili .egrail oel6 deployment shall ii:ovide [ie hollowing informaticxt R iin� franchisees that seek to utli a amalt cell dc ■ F t e.lio -F +and assns e 'slin ira is°e may of :mal! .c:c., 11:4-11n" rovide it r or nation deplwrnent- or small l 1ICE1. -.lall eci frail -'13 licatio whether and where small cell fecIR' iire.p p0_s,nd to be 1,*1.90 on existing LAM), i pales; 2. wiieher and where Oall , i fa ilitie5 re prop sed to be jpcaied on replacement unity Motes pew pole, to+ ef,.andkor plher slruchtres and the IYpa o re lade n .olesto .e' stalled a. the .,1. 1 _ i •rGuntigr�tri d �tiupted aPt nr tekserw for and intended for oyrilen$ re rate wrr r to e additional facilities ar. to be .icanl a leased froi i1 'nfras[rucl�;ifeprovider, 13219 far 112(.544:1:.6C1 j.6ot to the 8 lira to fedaral EW iime rials a eli Ible s iei.Alos1 or as c 4:c 14o 1ipr1. C. Sf 0'ftevlew. + tW avol; cob or. fora fran4tise which ntelns an efejilertit which is not exemptilwri SEPA rrmultanews1v submit an eri t1rorirnenia checklist pursuant fo:; anter 432 •CiA,' Sri h_uiter 24.20 SVMC. 0. Cornplelenr;ss- The City Mai ghah review .t3 snirli cell frac hise application lar oampleteness nnd_ n:rtifr ti rrplicartt syithln 30 days of submissionwhether the a+.italic is corn lac •-11 Ins dad h4 4 ver that : applicant may c,oasent to a c Ifla:ent completeness revii w 6.,•• 6,1+ service praviiidel-tmilned to be iricam■fete within n days of nglice the City,M$na0er, Fgllure to resu m l an -cation wi i, the 34 da 1€'riod shall b t =emed a wi j + rawal of that application. No application shall be deemed crsjn stele without he fee deposit sit by Ure City lolsirager. 22.i21.040 Srnall Cell Farmil Application. A. nt sinal I emit a • 'on and franchise a • 13 CT/ 2017-40(15 ()raft 1/3{18 -1'4a L TLE COMMENTS-11IGHLUG4rrEd i i€this grantedenderthefro orconsttuc installation,andylacement of small cell - ' ies shal r■ eme , e • a the issu Dca of small call pan -nits - et rnore concurrent aabflliSFt;ans lie franrhlse tion ma 1._ hied b for a small ceLjerm[t tqdgplov small calm. B. amalf oeli permit ap I lication. A scull call permit appligation shall contain the follow 1. All small cell f acilitY srtes sh 11 b9 specified. 1)1 to 3U sites. e s eci fi in one 6maIf 11 permit a ll ❑u for plod The a - Minh shell yrrcloie surficI 1l information about each site and facility In order To; thl t to determine That It complies he desi n sta arils set fo n SVMC 22,11 [�60,r 2. if The application inr des small cellklabli5ymant"§rk.the pubIsc (lofts-01-vgakr. a cop]twof the franchise application txr. aferene►. a5 approyei' itIsting franctilse sl Sit be Included. _Ppvat fors s cell e� install a sntarriteII deployiggigl shall be cooling-enl upon approval of a small cell rst ctaistx ar the t ossesS Qlpf a valid small cell franchise. 3, Umpire than one appl fOiykora smoltfm5tj submitted -bike an applicant, they shell PS considered VI he o+ , -i'ed- If mui .1e ar.licatio _ :re s.Jbmilted_o Il -15 carne date, the applicant shall h io&i± , r.. oon side rg,t rat. 4.ri I e.c.. kyLriaJ 1 nr;ri;h.qu I;fiab as:_eittier an eligible fac.11ties reams( 4r a colloAlliOin sh F[ be s ecIfi2I clesie�ritted try the applicant and may x ressed separaE=$.. b [he'-, Man t:In order lo comply with the aufictibte processino reoulremerat established by elOral law, state law, and chapter. 22-122 SVMC. f;y applitaliol fora small cell lath which elinins an element Milch is ngt examPA r.. w ha itnulten si suhmil an environrnenjal checklist pursuant Wchariter 43 24 ' iCW 610 c tester 21,20 VMC E. The do nt sha11f, flail a sworn decteraliarb ur ler nenn11V or perlufp §igne€i b, an RF E r,gi, e ;l ith of tha iroe •sed •T•ti n :ffirmin± that h- small cell deployment will be':;;,5.1 s w` r all FCC a ' an other a+r.irable reru" dons In cennec[iony-'I h iJRl r9' t,P�i�L(� io rat * e. Lien e 1Oa7S for v it uen at xvfl;t 17 he Small ce11far 11 and as ted wwiral "ss backha;il wit operate. Ari a isrf n� franchisee; plyiir r rr a sm-11 cell erm- ' small ce 1 d ° uta ((tent shall r ❑v'de an RF c of cation for all acilities inc. ed to the { :.{ +a ii ent. The a L -au 0 1 yr rovide Iican -_ s all (Nice ro 5 bru .root .f CCnd other regulatgry approvals Iize the tech ,■ pores Sought to k Installed. 14 CTA 2017-0005 Draft Ilaps— NIOBIUM COMMENTS —111,GFILIG1-1TED IN Ng 11 AS applicable, Cie atitlicant :1 mvide wt . it, all an j rrcvider auftrOrto the apdonl to use the utillit Omloyin•rerit. Corn kite ess• Small Cell Aibtlica 0 s The Ci ria er s aH review an Bp:tailors for completeness and notify the appliczni, within al) days of submission whethaT the application iscomplete„ pr • eg.j4..-ipy ever, that as applicant may consent LP a different corriplotanass review period. A service provider niay rest.p.,..1 lication determined la beincom vp, .12111.dvs of nojce b he Clv Mraerr dad, n Failure ID lamed ilhdrawal of that resubmit an application in a timely manner shall P pollcation, No, sipplicalligarned comale - 'ut the fee deopsik sel bv the City fska pager. D The Cil a er niy 2rove, den• croveaIItir gy parlior of the sites proposed in the sok& ieII permil 22,1,a45a Small Cell Franchise and kinty,I. Re vievw process. , . Tie foil °wino provisions relatpio.oview 0fappl inlij•DS for a Irani se 64.-iinirallsel I -permit forsrit A Review of Facilities, Reyiew of tile sitalocati:;;ris Pro.polet) by theappt• ,fllall oveme1 UE' shr v i V I . of U.SIO 2534hd 4.•' 1.! 5 c2 arid a plicable catp law. 1 tek •-•lioarits lirfro .OPMEM - 11 t i Its wil.ch int menl the fOrachiSe Stialj be treated ln a .04Milrlarirrirrlif8 i 0, I . tit 5,, man, Lr with o 1.. service providers plilizin! en), irlint In p.lacture 1V sfuncti ma 1 that is a ce providers wild e faAgk.' ,are 'airal rl si ;7E1 .4 errns 0 structure, pLapernent _2r cur:::114k1"a s. rattcribi _.,,r .. ,n - I FIX ter aLtlicailo review under chapter , 22 • thOr,neither!' itiOh101 LIM. .1,1.11 - effect of prehlbilirip the &lib of sn Apacept to lai'ovide•1410pon1 rrIt.thicatio nsP A : fOces. ID Desion Reviih-, ard Corictialrieri small cell,fadIie5 shall wrvilo cliEtkign, acid Doricealmentsl,p-Idardsariddt subjerct10 deslon review as set trt5h in SVM D 22.121.050 • ..... C, Franchise 1300yal, Frarz.,hises $h211 be approved ki the fprm of a Clhisrdinance .. and frani i es ma Aii1 4 i roved by the GIN CQ pili oursuaht, t6 Its siandard FOV • = • hoieve ja he Cit - kali meet P a i n or d and a franchise apPlipaliOn. 11 Other condLtions of provaL ppfIa1corAa franchise, small cell perm4 ador ermvel nineed ?1 SVMC are conditiQin re 4: uirements: 1 Salisf k :tuffto :ntsinclu IahL andn 0_ her a blE,qypf?repuLremenLs 15 I 11. F 1 0 t 1• 4 hel LP CiAx.017-acoSMan 1f3/18 MosILrrlt COMMENTS - HIGHLIGFiTEOINMI Insta at 2. Provide ii.itten proof Qf ae approval of thc.. owner of env u5lity pole fpr the o of Its teolai.i-.s +n such uii rage-. A..+a'+. a r e ranchise doeg not authorize o eni to CI gall ed unlit. 1• es o er structures 3, Unless_ioecfncalyt tura utilize k + `s . rru + ='.. ►= For the to pole over S' Net or to locate aryl attendant aiclu[urxient a n City rla'n.-car-v vided for in a franchise, obtain a lease frpjn the City to la ion of en • •le ere -cement utility new round be structure. base station or o#her lav ar Cit proiDerh O.: 4. Com+i 'a aalicable Cl or .the Inst'on of eri re !eminent uIf};t a3rda end 1 roces r the co-locatigri of facilities, 5. Comply with all City situations#= +.■ te arid federal hen operating jg, the rloht-of-wv and obtain a re i ermit to ` r the ri • 2,1?1-it80 Design and Concealment Standards, Small cell facilities shalt be installed stealt ;or racralmant Leda.'4o St€ 'th or Banc ealment lerhno1 as lig s` ici el, • mall cel/ Hies, w lout lint:talon antennas, Iowa's and orirr><ary luip`'1. ht r m ural ; :.car any sire: cell fac i., stealth orconsgelmerfttechnplogyrtiesresthc+ exisfiii1RndfLotureter aolcagythrough } Ich the small cell Ia Iity Is de4gncd L,eseftrbi r bfenil je10 an oblect whtch rS.2Ireadv preserlt_}p the localAn.ylrinent. such as a tew4Watili4ht, or traffic signal. It also 1 4pdes:• et. Far those porlions of small XII rfacllikes6t1El J1ed to or part Qf light, now.'er, > nor other pa'e,s_ •Fir new pc.les., trsl,xcrated MINit the -'t to unless technscally infeasible- New oles•_;,xr. 1 be sub'et t ' , .n ' "I'ceble c Itjk•lar-industry standar . ',fir exkstjrlg pots, lnlegr rd into the existing desion of Ilia pole to which it is altaohed, tnexlerrral p cti ri tirili`Ed in size and scope to the greatest extent el t't ll fe ..0ie .a .,= 1 not Tilted to being as flysh as possible to the Dote, not proiectlrig tnortithen rifles,r el vertically above (he I and hawin rc l4ectural eompatlbLIII ' wither le' x mal . a f_ that they apt3tif- to e- t. \j . Shat confo al 6 ani slruc a I - aridard. s +t to dera - 'te structural en • Ineeri f the oleo it is et#ach 5. Shall natrterfare with the a1 usefor Ich theble.,,,_p_Eigagicied Ltnclu but not r ` - d to blocky ± = u I + ht from li h1 ■ c►les interferinwith bower Iittati on power galas and obscurin4 env r drkipn of the ,a II le sten-face on gigns; and 6. Antennae ■ r small cell lutes shall . - + . = d inside of elEltQfitelnna enc1Q5u1re rag] raMo than three cubIc,feet In volume, qr bb the case of an,,,jntenna that has arx nosed elements. the antenna and all or Ili exposed elernerrkg, could fat withl51n imaginary enCto ra aIr no more tki aa1 #t_a wbfc feet ..* - h of fed a calor to resemble and Matt the mole So 16 CTfS 2017-000s or a ft f 3 f 18 T M0eIL IlE COMMENTS - H1G I4LIC,HTEt rry 8. Primary equipment enclosures shall toe fra_farger ilial sayenteen cutacieet In vdurne. Me following X s§ociated ent m b crated of t -da the trrirnary eguiament ericiOSOpLarrd if so logged, are not Included In the calcination or, aguipment ie: electric meter, concealment, telecomm dernarcallon box, grg,nd•based enclosures, br 4ter r back- . +ower s feKns. r ro . rdine. ulna' en ■aver transfir awitch. and cutroff witch. Primary. equipment. erclasures shall be buried below "ground.or J.oched and integrated into the eurroundlnq.s to the maxlmunl 1 gent feasible, "This small ircdude incorporating the facilities into the base of he pole, integrating into exiStl y §urroLndirtg fixtures, such BS. 4arba le containers or other power troxes, argtar use of FIaterials ai d colors that blend Into the §urrogndinq senina. Gran +oarged ilacdljee shall not be located In en improved street or sidewalk. larva per pled foci I ties shall not toted in a siorrnwateJ facllltV, inoludino store /W.2s swaies C. For s ,Il cell facitilia eunted o more b 'Irl. fa es stealth .r con ; -'merit to i' 1'• near' =e df y*. "end materials .8C,Iik.that the facility has rdiitectural eo .atlbllit i r e bvildini=; shah be nl'purrted OW:a.waft of an existing bulldirrgj� a carbfigrdiVlen as flush kiltawe 1 sus .t Cbn, ossihir "a• shall not > rojed ore an tier= } - et abo _ . I on vwhictj `is rho Oil : s41mai.Ca? I [aril ly. h[1a4ev f, IM0W1101- of the small cell facility shall pia tification plate indicatingjhe name of_the wireless servkre prnvi eer and stOlerrt rie rluipl r.for &nema,iry contact on Ina site. g No artificial Ilghl [52?`1er tt1 ase re f Afk ti t Ther appl c�Ib1 aLithorily shall be permitted. Any `ly liol i .4shall be di ll+ i stklelded. mt es Ian Ftrucluiy aCk4guirerne G. Sad'.•rw 1I-cilihe9. r' Zt private lib 22-121.070 S locat-d w t in the rtt1 I,rIowa s17a11 fa cr tht` tljZfe. zone. the minimum primary t no" be• errniltod inside a pubis_ark u nurnent r LR a uhFl6 *ark OT tlErFurqent. Cell Pend Mllror Deviations. k The CIty agar sl 1l' review apalicaLOfls for $rrratl cell permits Iat small oil gqp merits an• e`' S b inch se or - i '4 cell rrni The City Manager ma' autho - e minor de .. 0.P. An U3- ; pall cell s -r I, ro the dirpen,s artel design and concealment Itachnotooleit referenced in iri4 er�hIIblts to the fiartL ise er deem standard,§ where such deviation-- -cess.a o -1i% aa+ Ii 3- o Mrovi;• ;,.vera +e and he such devigon does not_ materially differ horn the CO's, design end concealment standards. B. Deviations in the dirtiensions or volume of small reit facilitie whichh do notexceed the simulative totril protirid$d by the def-Frliticn of a small cell or rn1crocell facility h RC.:1 80.38.375 shall be cronbred a minor deuiatiOn: [arQv d. hnwevet they do not defeat the •nee Irnent = ures se. Ci 's e II a,.1'O2 . -si, n and LTA 2017.00O5 Draft 1/dJ11e -W MO®ILITIE COMMENTS — HEN LIGATED IN - cpnceeirnent standards. C. Sinal i cell paint's tg jp$tpll fac I Ues Inctjding approval 4f minor deviations shall be processed claw of r€ oeiP of a coin lefe aplEcatl nal s I of o franchise. whichever occurs gas' 22.121180 Significant Deviations, Any rawest tot si lnitcant deviatiori£r }ream the Atrprov9d small call !acilities dem designated in the franchises 11 celhiehriiistaridards shall be resuire a cp_nditiona1 use permit and shall ,09 considered Unde.4 rGllrl sof cha ler 2.12U SVII1C Bract pursuant to the I relines asl b isheC 22.122,Q39 and EVMq j22.o4Q. A Si nitrcant devi ,titin is not a sub.. =:~ i ii 'ttiarrge. .see Amen* A of the SVMC„ 22.521 d. + Cont . Hance with Stage P ., elh, L I Itatians. Reyiew o rrnchise austral bell permits shall COM+@ th the *r+ on of 99030. Arrollcations aha ILLe reviewed. corn areas #et r fined and t timeframe 1n11e�i.� s provided In mater' 22,122 SVMC.`' 18 CIA 701.1-0005 ar o rt 1/3/18 - mond. TIE CI3M M E NTS - kI a H L1G HTP!] SP! DRAFT Chapter 22.122 SVMC— Wireless Communications and Small Cell Faclltty Review Periods. 22,122.010 Purpose. cp:-raress and the Feder @ cu¢nmurilc.3tLQns Commission have. r rl uant to the authority rantedloreaugj local novemmerit5 to an 'Wireless pprrlmunldsti2 aclii *Ito -4.3. . inns withi r ESb rind o -u = nd have established time limits fo o. -I r'e rle he :7.1 1 on SO islature i also Adopted similar limitations under a ,rov'ston i;* er 5.90 RCWU, cl' City adopts the toliprip n tim limits for review arspliratini- for e&ia+t facility requests, all milts • an. d other approvals If r 'icer�rovld „ „_of eca tel+munsca'�unAerVICes- 2i22.020 EI @tate Facllltte Re ueet. p, pliatiorr Review - J. Apptii ion. T1ie Cit Manan - shall sr• *- - and mak = ' bli I available prr application form labia steal, be it ted to the j ■ stun j =sa for e City to consider whether ther an a> plicatio T is an etieatior1 may_r14t tggd, ret e , pi 'cant to dentionstra a need + business c se for the . nraposed modificati?n. -. Type of Review. Llnon receipt of ars a?rrToli; lion for an eticrible faGitiiies request the . i MarlElaer shall evi such aonlrcation to determine'bather the e..tleali.' .ualifies =s: n ell+s.1; facilities r resL 3 Tirnefrerne for Review. WithirLaCI days of the dale OR which an abulic rl bruits a ca nista eliQi4tisi radii les f :wuest aoolica#i n the ity Mansoer shal��ppr the a ti tiorI uT s It deteInes that the application is_no cawed d b+r this S! M 22.122.0211 d, Totllrro of the Tdneffame for Review. The SO-dav review period ctioji2 run when] the complete af#pl'scoiiorr S Paled and r1Ta++ be tolled 13y mutual ,greement b p ■ Cit Me . + er and y.li cant or 1 cases tare the Ctty Manaoe r determines #feat the ap.plication is lnr rnptete. The tirnefrern for reviewf Eli ibf . les e Is not to tad b a rnu r< 1 rium on I e eview of ..' 1 ticatims a To to . s tlrnefra = for Inez] rt nes tn- ti Mann , r shall moitsde written notice to the aa , olfc 1a ...;hln 30 d yts of receipt 15f Ii a aprovaaLL r iEcalt elineati r 'II is w.a. is or ink rmatlora re ufr. d In the ap@I tlan. 1: I0 CTA 201741005 Draft S/ i.& - MOe1t!TIE COMMENTS—r4GtILIGHP D IN NI The iriz makes a cornrxNertl sur}dternenlall ubmisslon kri response to the City Mana;m( nolle of jncompletenlss c. FoLowin0 2 sup emental submi soon me i Manager s1]eIInotify !ha applicant within 10 days ff the slip, jemental submission clicilicit urovIde t, e inf4tT�latiorr identified in tyre ilrighal notice detirxjna Missing Information. The timefraIrre is tolled in the case of eQonI or subsequent notices.pursuar.t to the proceduresid kti!ied are ra4o1 this sec-eoonda uent na i of rico le Hess may n s, * r Issin. + + ren s 0 I 'in —ion that wajPa1 dellneat.dln the original notice of • erne for r iris ill till e,a In the a loan incompleteness. C. ti Iletermina191an that A at r r E I is ii 1 an dele rmine jnat Me a 1 cant's re u itis time .eriod- established x the a SVMC begin to run from the issuance Is r-ol $n eli.ibtrr fa 'lilies re, oust. To t sod Worm koibie Facilities Request jf the City Maria_g91 does not uafify EIS an eligible facilities reguet licab e s ate or eder, law and chapter 22.122 of the City Manager's decision title/ the a01:11:01 the ode!' -■ditional ireormalion Is neciessanii, the ro thea + ■ i =nt to evalu eTthe applications Lite ta..v, ._ Marta m uride r other p acs iisions of this, r; to 22.12 C F aiiure to ct [n Ilhe a ant the City f�lanager fsilsyto ar prove or deny .a �gu est fo ear etici bila irneframe for tovlew (accounting (Or any tollirlvi, Ihs aeguest shall be deemed gran _.rt The deem -d .rant does I. become a Wive until the anoIicant notifies the City Manager in +rritin5t eftff the i e+tr period has px iv red coounlirl an Io11ih • i : t thea io i has be gaerr`ed granted. f ems �€1i Itte ap ■I•rant and t of the Spectrtrrn. Act to ant coot ofvan-oaten( jsdi cunni. 2.122,034 tie iocatlo Cit rna Orin + ai s relate■, 9 Section C-4( (a) gIigible coUgcatoons snail be processed Within 90 da>_s of receipt of a cornple*e appli'on The tr' Mannsxe' hE 11 ncrtifi the pppIicant within 34 days or raceiat of an a..lice -•n whether 1 i- corn'lete + if addition.1 infarrnation Is reziireo. Th2 term Ilocaklon than not a 4141 a he initial la a enl of a sma cell facility an a ubli.v pole or hat W. "rI CO s roc. = 1 0 the wale or primary an arty other base ose of - FCC locen antenna a d leirasso 'a ac Blies. 22 122 040New YYireiea a Crmuni a - rt FacIlltle New wireless communications facilities shall by processed WGthin 150 dove t of Complete a rolIcaligft.er sh The City t4iag al l n k thea Il I - Ir 30 of receipt or an japlication whether 11 Is cmqiete of 11 Bddilior1sl Infoimatio is reorrirpd 20 CTA 2017.Q00.5 Draft 1I3{18 — b+1L19ILIIIE COMMENTS—HEGHLIGHTED tN11111 DRAFT Chapter 17.80 117.80.030 Assignment of development application classification. A. Assignment by Table- Land use and deveopment applications shall be cassihed pursuant to Table 17.80-1 below. Table 17-80.1 - Permit Type and Land Use Application Typo Land Use and Development Application Accesso1y dwelling uniSs SVMC Cr s- RQrerence 10.4.0 'Administrative determinations by city manager or designee or building official Administrative excep-ian Administrative Interpretation Multiple 19-140 17.50 010 Boundary line Lidjuctments and eliminations Building permits not subject to SEPA Floodplain developrncnt Grading permits Home business permit 20-00 21-20-040 21.30 Shoreline letter of a mpbon 24.50 19.65-1180 21.50 Record of survey to establish lots within a binding site plan 20.60.040 ;Right-of-way permits 22.1 30-100 Site plan review Small cell permit 19-'a 30 Ternporary use permit 22,121: 22.122 19.150 Time extensions for preliminary subdivision, short subdivision, or binding site plan Alterations -- preliminary and fioial subdivisions, short subdivisions, binding site plans 20.314.060 20.50 Type 11 Binding site plan-prelhair~ary and linal 20 50 Binding site pten - change of conditions SEPA threshold determination 20-50 21.20,060 Shoreline conditional use permit 21.01 21 ETA 2017-0005 graft 1{3{18—'ylosiu TIE COMMENTS —H1GHLIGHTED1N 1111 B. Assignment by City Manager or Designee" to nd use and development applicat ons not defined in Table 17.80-1 shall be assighed a type based on the most closely related application type by the Cilie manager or designee, unless exempt under SVMC 17,80 0 Q. Wherr more than qn a prudedure maybe appropriate, the process providing rhe gre eSt oppoitttnity for public noliceshall b6 followed. C. ShWiline tetters of eXerrtptian, shoreline Substantial development permits, sho-eline conditio`rti Luse parrrlite, st'naraline it ii tnces, and shoreline nonconforming use or structure review shall be praoessed pilq`suant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 17.60 SVMC,'Object to any 1a ditinnal or modified procedures provided In Chapter 21.50;3VMC,. Shoreline Fiegulalions,. including submittals, completeness review, notices, hearings, and deasiots. D. , mall cell .r i� ,;:'I : s omroun;c.tron facilities s : I be ■ Messed ', r ant to the procedures set lei in chapter 1L,B0 SVMC a tempt as niav otharkise be required s?ursuant to rode ral and slate_taw, tni;ludinct_but trot limited o 47 U.S.C, 155 a i ectiant t io f $1 of the Middle C L; s Tax Relief end Job CreatiortAit of 2012} aril �haoter 35.89 RC . C11e1 ter 22. V22 SVMC specifies agr�licabfe tithe p2teds for review and .rocessin! F1 aI'ibief: II a e■uests co ■-tia+`Is sm. cat .ermits a +' new wirefes.$ oprrttnunlc4on FaGifit+ . BE, Except as provided In Table 17,80-1, change of conditions for permits shall t:e processed Ihe aaine was the original permit type. 22 Shoreline nonconforming use or structure review 21"50 Shoreline substantial development permit 21.50 Shoreline variance 21.511 Shortsubdivialon— preliminary end final 20.30, 20,40 Preliminary short subdivision, binding cite plan—change of conditions 2030 Wireless communication facilities 22"120 Type 111 Condillonai use permits .10.160 Planned residential developments 19"50 Plat vacation 20.70 O20 Preliminary subdivision —change of conditions 70.150 Subdivisions — preliminary 20,30 Variance 19"170 Zoning map amendments (site?speci iic rezones) 19,30.0 50 _ Type IV Annual GampretlenOre plan amendments (text aodlor map) 17.80-140 Area -wide zoning map amendments 17.60,140 levetoprnent Cade text amendments 17,80,150 B. Assignment by City Manager or Designee" to nd use and development applicat ons not defined in Table 17.80-1 shall be assighed a type based on the most closely related application type by the Cilie manager or designee, unless exempt under SVMC 17,80 0 Q. Wherr more than qn a prudedure maybe appropriate, the process providing rhe gre eSt oppoitttnity for public noliceshall b6 followed. C. ShWiline tetters of eXerrtptian, shoreline Substantial development permits, sho-eline conditio`rti Luse parrrlite, st'naraline it ii tnces, and shoreline nonconforming use or structure review shall be praoessed pilq`suant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 17.60 SVMC,'Object to any 1a ditinnal or modified procedures provided In Chapter 21.50;3VMC,. Shoreline Fiegulalions,. including submittals, completeness review, notices, hearings, and deasiots. D. , mall cell .r i� ,;:'I : s omroun;c.tron facilities s : I be ■ Messed ', r ant to the procedures set lei in chapter 1L,B0 SVMC a tempt as niav otharkise be required s?ursuant to rode ral and slate_taw, tni;ludinct_but trot limited o 47 U.S.C, 155 a i ectiant t io f $1 of the Middle C L; s Tax Relief end Job CreatiortAit of 2012} aril �haoter 35.89 RC . C11e1 ter 22. V22 SVMC specifies agr�licabfe tithe p2teds for review and .rocessin! F1 aI'ibief: II a e■uests co ■-tia+`Is sm. cat .ermits a +' new wirefes.$ oprrttnunlc4on FaGifit+ . BE, Except as provided In Table 17,80-1, change of conditions for permits shall t:e processed Ihe aaine was the original permit type. 22 Sp"b7cane jUalley. Verizon Comments Re: Planning Commission Erik Lamb From: Sent: To: Cc: Suvj ct: Attachments; HI Erik - Kim Allen <kirriallen@wir&esspolicy.com Tuesday. January 23, 2018 1013 AM Erik Lamb Ju[ei Campos (pcamposC lynxcr nsulting_arcgi, 'Joel Aro' Ciaru©lynxcnnsultino.orcg); 'Haley Giver'; Cary Driskell; Vaga, Lelal7 1 I; Barrett, Donna B Re: Spokane Valley --Verizon Comment Letter for Planning Commission tonight Fent Sheet-_Wireless_TrerYds_Sep'f7I1).pdf; RF exposure.Ixlf; Why Vaulted Equipment Is Not Feasiblel1].docx I have prepared some responses to your questions from the Commission In blue br'low. I also attach some resource materials for you and the Commission_ I will look forward to meeting you in person on Thursday. First, they indicated o desire to limit wireless providers to having too many poles within o close proximity to one another, which could create clatter and block the right-of-way. They indicated a desire to limit the distonce between pole sites and to require collocation if possible when two sites have to be right next to each other, The rano of small cell radios is approximately between 500 to 1000 feet, depending on terrain, adjacent objects f like trees and buildings), and the strength and site of the radios. This is typically the spacing of Verizan's small cell facilities. While there is some flexibility in which pole to select, the 250 foot separation requirement proposed in the cocle could present problems In areas with terrain challenges, few existing poles and/or large vegetation. The optimal height for placement of small cel antennas is between 25-35 feet. Radios are typically placed below the antennas, but above 15 feet in height to prevent public access, Collocation of two carriers on a single pole would be difficult because most utility and Tight pales are between 25-45 feet In height and there would be separation required between the carriers' antennas, It would be extremely difficult to accommodate two carriers, who each need their antennas in that optimal 25-35 foot height. However, because each carrier's network is configured differently from the others, it is unlikely that a small cell would need to be placed directly next to an existing small cell, The 500-1GGO foot range allows some limited flexibility in location of a small cell node. Verizon site acquisition consultants are instructed to select the least intrusive pole in the search area and to try to avoid selecting a pole directly in front of windows or views, 1 Additionally, they indicoted a desire to have a minimum height for the facilities so G5 to limit impact on people an the ground. The small cell facilities have radiofrequency emissions at levels that are equivalent to many devices found in the average home, such as wireless routers and baby monitors. Questions regarding the technical aspects of the radio frequencies used. Federal law prohibits municipalities from regulating the choice of transmission technology. The FCC has preempted local regulations in this area. See New York SMSA Ltd, Partnershi v, Towra v Clearkstown 6 3 F,Supp.2d 715 (5.D.N,Y. 2009) Radiation levels from those frequencies and the other supporting devices (such as power sources) and possible impact on people. Small cell facilities are fully compliant with the FCC limits for radiofrequency emissions and proof of compliance can be required by local jurisdictions. Whether there was any federal lirnit on the amount of data that may be allocated to Spokane Valley. There are no federal limits ori data that may be provided to a given community. Cr)rne statistics with the small cell sites. Verizon is unaware of any issues Involving crime at small cell sites. The equipment is small and out of reach of passersby on the ground. 2 l 'r ►v Kimberly Allen Senior Vice President, land Use Entitlements and Strategic Planning wireless Policy Group LLC Box 34628, 05604 St aitic WA 98124 425-623-26D6 Ot*':e ki m . a l Ien)vrirc l res S po', i cy, C() IT1 This (message any attachments to it may contain PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT INFORMATION AND/OR ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT exclusively for intended recipients. Pease DO NOT FORWARD OR DISTRIBUTE to anyone else. If you receive this message in error, please contact Kinn Allen at 425-62B-2666 or kini.alItm@wirelesspo(icy,com From: Erik Lamb ‹elamb snokarrevaiIev.0rg> Date: Tuesday, January 1.6, 2018 at 9:53 AM To: Kim Allen‹tiro,allen@wirelessoallv,com> Cc: Victoria Chenauit <victoria.chena4rltalairelesscotrnsel.ram>, " ulei Campos (IcarnIosfr'!...r,:;cC su't,iir.4.Ir ; ' ‹jcampos{"]a lynxoonsultinr~"c , "'Joel Aro' sorZ. Ivrixrnfsult;n ,Qra4'. '!-.;a! _,y Gauer' ‹Iigever@}1vnxransuitinf,org:, Cary Driske;l :'Cbriskell spolcanevalley.orp Subject: RE; Spokane Valley--Veriza n Comment Letter ;or Pernrir1g Commission tonight HI Kim and Jule[, l wanted to let you know that we hada pr:niuctive meeting with the Plarxrii'f t� ;`r17i .,ir, , 'DO hursday, They did have some fallow -up questions and I wanted to let you know these may come up a „ t I-. ;';.59c hearing. I've included the questions hetow. First, they indicated a desire to limit wireless providers to having too many poles writhln a. close proximity to one another, which could create clutter and block the right-of-way. They indicated a desire to limit the distance between pole sites and to require collocation if passu '.= two sites have to Lie right not to each ether. Additionally, they indicated a desire to have a min(murn height 'or ti'"fi iv.-).1111PE.. so as to limit impact on people on the ground. We are Looking at the legal issues with both su; ustin, r,s, hot there is some vaLic11l ' to having the providers work with each other if situ are in very close. pro.xin-, ofy to ee cis ctl c.r end to require a minimum heiEht so :s riot to impact normal use of the ROW. Secondly, there were questions regarding tine technical aspects of the radio frequencies used, radiation levels from those frequencies and the other supporting devices (such as power sources) and possihlr imt;.tact on people, and whether there was any federal limit on the ..rrnount of date that may be allocated to Spokane Valle . L indicated l dict not believe there Was any limit on data, but I did not have any of the other technical Information. I did let therm know that representatives would likely be at the public hearing and so they could ask those questions Eli: that time. Further, I will convey to them that we really do not regulate any of the transmission or transmission technul:rgy. Finally, a Commissioner asked about cri•;,e statistics with the small cell sites_ 1 wondered if you had any information I could provide or that you could airing to the public hearing, 3 t I ank vole tnu i I look. fcwi rd to seei rg you On the 2Srh. E•6k F,;k. Lamb 1 f'rpu y City ft.t(erncy 1021C' F:. Spraaje!. !wanly; 1S'p:�l4.a=ie>1 Votley, WA 90706 (b0q) 72a L.)S3 I ramb s r*,nnewa!I_r. l ti l:y email and any attachments may be subject to discl;,y a ri pursuant to Washington Strit n'e Public Record Act, cha,ptor 42.513 RCM. ;ruatirla;ttio'ity hlotl} Thna'Ion contatocc.' In Phis email and any a3cc:vinponying rItt ctlrncnl(s) Is intended only for the use of the Intended r 1p;rnt and may bo corrfider:ti.iI and/of IDT-NlIEgei. If any.rr.Ddei ofthlscommunication 18 not the Int,anded recipient, unouthorlaod use, d1sclosurc or c.ol,ytng is strictly pr^h:bitedr arid may be uniewrol. If you have received tills communication In error, please immediately notify the sunder by roturn email, and dbLete ttu3 originaI message and al', ropiesfrern yam system. Thank you. From: Kim Allen jmailto;kirtt.ailen (Owlreie sspoiioy,cOrnl Sent: January RI, 20181:31 Prvl To: Erik Lamb ‹elambEospok rrevalle .orrt> Cc: Victoria Ci-icnatilt <victoria.+'jte41ault v,+frelesscaunsel.com> Subject: Spoka.rie VaSlcy—Verizon Coniment fetter for ['Lanni erg Commiss:Or7 tonight h? l Erik - Victoria Chenault forwarded your errsasl with a link to tonIght'S materials. Vcrizon's comments RIC ,1t ':teed and we would appraclate it if yaw could forward the letter -to the PiannIn Commissioners. I also shared the link vrith AT&T. As you will seg, Verizon has no requested c},ar3gcs to this coda. It is entirely workab;c and we appreciate the efficient pracs.7 that will make it easy to deploy small cells in your rorremunity. The only strgEeston we have is a request to rethb" the spall cell prohibition in public parks. I see that provision is ails() present for macro facilities that are much larger and neige rlsu ally in:rash: e. Small cells can provide benefits to park users and have a ver ± er.inimal visual impact when attachad to existing poles and right standards. Vprizor wit: no: have a r pre sent ativc. at the meeting tonight due to short notice. We would appreciate being added to the ciztrjbutir,rr list for this itern going forward, as v: would typically send someone to the next meetings to ailswer questions. Th1714 you for your assistance Kimberly ACIen Senior Pr.;.;lri4ert, Land Use ts and Strategic Planning, Wireless Pok-? Group LLC Box 3462Ji, #75604 Sewattlie WA. 98124 425-618-26,56 Office kirtr.aI1ary(crwlrelesst:.c1 cy,coee7 4 This message and tiny attachments to it may contain PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT INFORMATION AND/OR ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT exclusively for intended recipients. Please DO NOT FORWARD OR DiSTR1 sLITE to anyone else. if you receive this rncssage in error, please contact Kim Allen at 425-628-2556 or kirn,allen :v irele$spolicv.corri verizonv( Wire.s'f TreA4113, 20-7 In 2015, the overage srnarlphone in North America consumed 3.7 GB of data per month, and this is expected to increase to 22 GB per month by 2021. (Ericsson Mobility RE port, June 2016) Around 52 percent of American households are now wireless only for voice service. (GDC's 2016 Wireless Substitution: Early Release of Estimates From the National Health Interview Survey, July -December) For Millennlals (those born between 1982 and 2004), the number Increases to over two-thirds who live in mobile -only households. That number i$ another significant jump up km 10.5% in 2006 arid 31.6% in 2011. (FCC, Annual Report and Analysis of Competitive Merkel Conditions with Respect to Mobile Wireless., Nineteenti Report, DA 16-1061 (Sep. 23, 2016) More than 7Q% of ail adul--s aged 25-34 and of adults renting their harries were living in wireless -only households, (National Health Interview Survey, Wireless Substitutior: Early Release of Estimates From the National Health lrteraiew Survey, July -December 2016) In 2016, wireless data traffic reached yet another record high, In all, traffic totaled 1372 trillion MBs --the equivalent of 1.58 million years of streaming HD video - an increase of 4,07 trillion megabytes over 2015. Over the past two years, data use has increased 238 percent, (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017 8 Based on estimates from the U.S. Cellular Monthly Data Usage Estimate tool, available at https'ffwwv .uscellular.comldataf data-estimator,html) 2015 mobile data use is 35 times the volume of traffic in 2010. (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017) There are now more wireless devices then Americans, with about 1.2 devices for every person in the country. That makes the wireless platform nearly ubiquitous: 95 percent of U.S, adults own a cellphone. Compare that :o the 78 percent of Americans who own a computer. (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017 & pew Research Center, "Mobile Fact Sheet" (Jan. 12, 2017), available at htipoliwww,pewintemet.orgIfect- heetimobilef Wireless -powered smart city solutions could produce $160 billion in benefits aux savings from lower energy use, reduced traffic congestion, and decreased fuel costs. (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017 & Accenture, smart Cities: How 56 Can Help Municipalities Become Vibrant Smart Cities (January 2017) available el littps:Jf waves,accerrture,comfus-enfinsight-smart-cities,) Connected devices coulc create $305 billion in annual savings for the healthcare industry. (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017 & Daviel H. Roman and Kyle D Conlee, The Digital Revolution Comes to US Healthcare: Technology, lncentives Align to Shake Up the Status Quo, Goldman Sachs Equity Report, Internet of Things Volume 5 (June 29, 2015) available at http:// rnassdigitalhealth,orgi digital -revolution -canes -us -healthcare. Self -driving cars could sa,re 21,700 lives and $447 billion per year. (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017 & Daniel J. Fagnan`. ;i,4 Kra Kcokelman, °Preparinu a Nation for Autonomous Vehicles: Opportunities, Barrdes and Fo".icy Rerjorrimendal.ors fo: Capitalizing on Sell'-Driven Vehicles,' Eno Center for Transportat,on (2013), available at https:fr'ti:r..,.w. anotrans.o.141 ll-mateli8l!preparIng- a-Walion-for-autonomous-vehicles-oppo,girlitles-barren-and-poy-recdrnme'r7d ;roar?; The nurrlbl:r of Ia :Vices worldwide 4+,rll conservatively surpass 20 billion by °he year 2020. (2) ane thi . increase in colneOvity stands ID add roughly $2.7 triliior t;) U.S. `_) by 2030, (2017 CTIA V'ire1es4 Snapshot, May 2017 & Dr. Michael Mandel, Progresa,ve Policy Incttuto, Long "faro; U.S. PGodUctiVI;y Gr'Dwih and Mobile Broadband: The Road Ahead (March 2016) ava+lt ble at 1ittp iv, w. rogressi+repoiicy,ar0hwp-coptenti'uploarisl20161O31201h.0-Mandel_Lung- tcmG-US-I rocitictivityr-uro5 h-and-hylobill -Broadband he-foal-Ahead,pdf) 202',, fide° will ;;count for arcund 70% of inab';!e data traffic. (Ericsson Mobility Report, June 2016) Prnss Income ko,rels, a significant ma joriiy of Americans now Bove srnartplrores, wTh x;44 percent of people FIT ain.p. loss :0':2'=1:000 a year and 93 percent of people yarning more thart $75,000 a year owning s'nce 2011, the n.,.rnbK of In.1 .'duals making under $30,000 pe.- year who own a 'las gown by 42 percent. f :it1 =W Wf~elcss Snapshot, May 2017 Si. Few Research Fact sheer (Jan, 12, 20 7), ''. '.ItJ'eathft;;a'r`4v,rAi�.pevrinterrret.ora?fact- meet+molnalet) jusover half-50Z `.• percent—of Arrr.ifioan hcusei-tcAs only ;lame a i'noNl$ voice conn :lian.1 For t'.i' number In.:!-E-ans to over r,"d:-thl=ds whc. II'ary In tyke:Dile-only households, That Dui-ober to Irc.rr. - l.v.,o in 22c06 and 31,6% 2C.111, (2017 C: lA V' Iroloss Snapshot, May 2017 and �''�.Y+Sysis of Competitive hMlarket Cor diIians with Respect to Mobile V'4ireless. iain'v Gc=,,I I F e,r�:,r,, DDA. 16-1061 (Sep, 23, 20101, si-ri rh`,0-12 acicr.;rlorl, percent orf 1B-2O yra: uldls having o smariphorle, to»Mowed E',' erccill. `-1u. ' '"l? 7L Joel..,', of .50-64 year d,ds. WIIh respect to race, smar1phone c: Writ`, ''i' ..'loin ' 72 c c rit of Afrinn4iniencarts, 75 percent of r.,FL ,1J 77 p Writ of whitey n the U.S.n...:t srr',artphonc1:, (2017 CTIA Vtil.`ctf ss Snapshot, May 201 r 4 Pew Research Center, °hfeude Fact Sheet" (Jan. 12, 2017), available at .',gifactsheati oEl.er T have increased 5rnartp torte TV/video viewlnc 85% in 4 years. (Ericsson Mobility Report, June 2016) Teen usage of cellular data for srnartphone video has grown 1279 in 15 months, (Ericsson Mobility illnrie 2016) 76% of 911 Ca% originate from (t 1brlal Highway Traffic Admin! ! tic: 1, Feoru fry, 201(3) .'tore than 75% of prospective.. prefeTstrong cellular connections ;Roofkte rias, Rune 20 ;5) 35% of Amerians reach for their smartpirone first in the rilorning (CTIA, July 2015) 2 Machin-t+-rnac.hine cc;•nnecticns are projected to rise from a6 miIion in 2013 to 263 million in 2018. (Ciscar MINI Mobile forecast Highlights 2013-201E1, at 'United Stags - 2018 Forecaat Highlights and 201 Year ireIReView) By 202C, more thrnn 34 billion lnternet-connected davites will be ins€ailed globally — t t t`n more than. tiievices for every human on earth, (Business insider, May 20, 201 5 RF Exposure Near the Antenna Occupational exposure limit within —2 feet of the antennas. Untrained workers cannot enter this envelope without proper RF safety training. General population exposure limit within -.5 feet of the antenna horizontally. Safe within this envelope for -0 0 minutes and still remain within er- Max. ground level exposure from any node is 0.021 m jem or .1 % of the FCC general public exposure limit Why Vaulted Equipment Is Not 1.7 1-tsibie Safetyt Tlus is the rralln reason not to vault as at poses a significant sali'e.ty hazard to technicians, contractors and utility crews. - Gas 1"r porn build up inside tlre va:a11t despite. the ventilation. syscems installed especially wh it, !hose systems kill, 1f a tech enters an vr.aa}l before the air is purged, it could result in serioa,s =resrm to :3rltacic death. Verizon Wireless will not pl;:c . pe toni:1cl in this position, l ;e a :ei. tocx poop."e to he onsite. One tech ii_- the vault acid tb.e other is tui above ground attendant maintaining co21Lxiunie atiof wi i r., -ie tech making sure a hazard does not expose the tech. to i rj !fly. Due to the increased ri-k, OSHA r.e luir,szs a:<'1.:litinnf7 and more, stringent policy, procedure and g,aarclehnes, Coustructian: Approximately four times more. G4J_a,e i; required to vaalli than. installing a.bovc ground. o Need to accotrltuockte alivigiiig out and placement of back/S.11 as well as zlihoring the excavation, site. o May pose an =:a uc '.;.':tai atili vt -ance setback requirements. o No access around the vault .;.:sing disruption to pedestrians (sidewalk) and traffic (lane closares). o Rcquires a flatbed trailer trail. a large crane with outriggers which have the potential of interfering with r,a,,, er lines. Soil Cuuctiti nn —Extensive due diligen e is requiTecl to test the the cquiprnent .arrad, .rground to include and noi. bc liax;iteci tn' • Expansive Soil — Sor. will "swell" in volume v/h.eri wet and s r ri nk when dried causing the vault to heave, setae and 5)-1 ft. ▪ Sexili,ic1ucfactian—.Aphenomenon whereby re1,y ca saturated or partially saturated sail substantially loses srrctrgth an:i siifiness in 1T:s;us- se to an applied stress, usually earthquake slltj :xc or other sa:clden chane in stress condition, causing it to Ctieh...we like a liquid. o Hazardous Waste, — Sol. that was pre s'io1.1,'y contaminated. by toxins requiring cleanup before work can cat-Ainue or caau.siix , taro situ to be completely abatndoned. W.in•� w4cirr..Lk can prohibit thci Lg. d more intensive proces,:,i that i .kcs more time to complete, 1n marl,/ , rbr n case, 1t is not piactic..- due to space constraints. Service Reliability: - Vaulting increases the chance for service disruption. - High risk of flooding and overheating damaging tare equipment. It increases the distance betwcctk the radios and the antennas resulting in path loss in the coaxial cable. This in turn reclaices the range of the antennas. other: It is a major expense, to build and keep maintained. Photos of Vault e: WPGWIRELESS POLICY GROUP Li C January 11, 20 I R Via Email cio Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney e1 arnkispokarteval ley .org Spokane Valley Planning Commission Heather Graham .Tames Johnson Tim Kelley Mike Phillips Michelle Rasmussen Suzanne Stathos Matt Walton Chair Graham and Commissioners: Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on the draft wireless code before you. Verizon appreciates the city's careful and deliberate approach to revising the wireless code to accommodate small cell technology. Verizon generally supports the proposed code and appreciates how well it addresses the industry's concerns. It is important to get it right in adopting regulations for wireless facilities in a community that is growing as dynamically as Spokane Walley. We are in a period of tremendous growth in wireless data use. To put it simply, more people are using more wireless devices to do more things in more places than ever before. ■ In 2016, mobile data use was 35 times the volume oftraffic in 2010, • In 2015, the average smart phone used 3.7GB of data each month. That is expected to increase nearly 6 fold by 2021, when average use PQ Bax 34620.- #15644 Seale, WA 96124 kirrr,aller Mrelesspolicy,Oorn Arnw.wirele spolicmom t 425.626,2666 f 206,219.6717 January 11, 201g Page 2 is expected to be about Z2GB per month. . u. it isn't just our phones. IvvIachrne-[ -Machine connections are proj e 2.ted to increase from 365v1 in 2013 to 2. J 1 in 2018. That is a 7- foid iki.rease is just 5 years. This 2,rowth is haplpening because. the ways that WO use cur wneiess data are changin; . Our phones are. not just phones anymore. "[hey are the remote controls 16r t ur.Iives. And it isn't just Facebclolc, and streaming video. lvtore and more people are using wireless data to stay connected from m atiy location. • Devices that have ti n.'er been wireless before arc \.vizeicss nowt' and require cxpandin;71li c.apaLi[y in the existing network to function �c liahly. Some exarh.471; s ;re smart lights, smart cameras, and smart watches, smart traffic signis, smart tr tsltenrts, smart refrigerators, and smart horn c. heating, Rcliabie and robust wi :•; ass services etre essential to effective telecommuting which reduces traffic congestion and improves duality of life. People use wireless service to stay connected with friends and family locally, nationally, arid around the world, Home automation is allowing people to contol lights, appliances, and securit , systems remotely. Smart Communities solutions are improving ,.ff:9\° and alloying our cities to operate more efficiently. • Wireless data is important for public health and safety, 76% of 9l calls originate from cell phones, and it is now common for first responders to use wireless data networks from devices in their vehicles and on their person when responding to a crisis. • Wide ranges of medical devices are connected to wireless networks, helping doctors to more effectively treat their patients. Devices include smart heart monitors and smart insulin pumps. • 52% of American households are wireless only for voice service. More tlian 70% of all adults aged 25-34, and QC adults renting January 11, 2018 Page,3 their home.s, are living in wireless -only households. People are using mobile devices more than ever before, and that trend is expected to continue.' With such a pressing need for additional capacity, the city's small cell code will facilitate deployment of this much-needed infrastructure. ilcrizon supports the code as proposed, The only suggestion world be to reconsider the prohibition against siting small cells in public parks, set forth in 22.121.060(G) an p. 17 of the draft code. This, restriction appears to echo the prohibition on siting tower's in public panes. However, Verizon would note that small cell facilitic°.s are much smaller than macro facilities and are useful to boost data and user Gapacit v where there are lots of people gathered for sporyi] g events, concerts and other similar activities where people are using their phones to share photos and video. Public parks often host flreve'typos cif` e,,retrts, The very reduced visual impact makes small cells a good solution for existing lighting or utility poles already present in many public parks_ Thank you for the opportunity to comment and we look forward to continuing to work with the city to develop a code that preserves the look and feel of your community, while providing an efficient and workable process to deliver the service your residents, visitors and businesses have come to expect. Kim Alien, Wireless Policy Group, LLC, Representative for Verizon Wireless Linc. The attached fact sheet contains the sources of the data points listed here. verizorvi W .rte Tre44.44 5 wit-444,er .O1-, In 2015, the average smartphone in North America consumed 3.7 GB of dela per month, and this is expected to increase to 22 GB per month by 2021. (Ericsson Mobility Report. June 2016) Around 52 percent of American households are now wireless only for voice service. (CRC's 2016 WirelessSubstitution! Early Release of Estimates From the National Health Interview Survey, July -December) For Millennials (those born between 1982 and 2004), the number increases to over two-thirds who live in mobile -only fiousehotds. Thal number is another significant jump up from 10.5% in 2006 and 31.6% in 2011. (FCC, Annual Report and Analysis of Competitive Markel Conditions with Respect to Mobile Wireless, Nineteenth 'Report, DA 16--1081 (Sep. 23, 2016) More than 70% of all adults aged 25-34 and of adults renting their hones were living in wireless -only households. (National Health interview Survay, "Wireless Substitution: Early Release of Estimates From the National Health lrrterview Survey, July -December 2016.) In 2016, wireless data traffic reached yet another record high, In all, trafft totaled 13,72 trillion MBs --the equivalent of 1.58 million years of streaming HD video • an increase of 4.07 trillion megabytes over 2015. Over the past two years, data use has increased 238 percent. (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017 & Based on estimates from the U.S. Cellular Monthly Data Usage Estimate tool, available at https,Nww .us liular.corn dotal data-esti mator,hlmI) 2015 mobile date use is 35 limes the volume of traffic in 2010. (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017) There are now :more wire"ess devices than Americans, with about 1.2 devices for every person in the country. That makes the v6reless platform nearly ubiquitous: 95 percent of U,S, adults own a cellphone. Compare that to the 78 percent of Americans who own a Yomputer, (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017 & Pew Research Center, Mobile Fr3ci Sheet' (Jan. 12, 2017), available at http:Awvirw.pewinlemet.ergifact-Streetimobilef) Wireless -powered smart city solutions could produce 150 billion in benefrts and savings from lower energy use, reduced trafficcongestion, and decreased fuel costs. (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017 & Accenture, Smart Cities: How 5G Can Help Municipalities Become Vibrant Smart Cities (January 2017) available al htlps:I1 www,accenture,corn us-enrinsight-smari-cities.) Connected devices could create $305 billion In annual savings for the healthcare industry. (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017 & David H. Roman and Kyle D. Conlee, The Digital Revolution Comes to US Healthcare: Technology, Incentives Align to Shake Up the Status Quo, Goldman Sachs Equity Report, Internet of Things Volume 5 (June 29, 2015) available at http:// rnassdigitalhealth.orQ/ digital -revolution -comes -us -healthcare. Self -driving cars could save 21,700 lives end $447 billion per year_ (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017 & Daniel J, Fagnant and Kra Kockelrnan, °Preparing a Nation for Autonomous Vehicles: Opportunities, Barriers and Policy Recommendations for Capitalizing on Self -Driven Vehicles,` Eno Center for Transportation (2013), available at https: w vw, enotrans,orgfell-materialfpreparing- a-nation-for-autonomous-vehicles•opportunities-barriers-and-policy-recomrrendationsr The number of 1QT devices worldwide will conservatively surpass 20 billion by the year 2020, (2) and this increase in connectivity stands to add roughly $2,7 trillion to U.S. GDP by 2030. {2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017 & Dr. Michael Mandel, Progressive Pcticy Institute, Long Term U.S. Productivity Growth and Mobile Broadband: The Road Ahead (March 2016) available at http:itimem.progressivepolicy.org1wp-eonteftrupl0adsJ2016d03)2016.03-Mandel_l-orlg- term-US-Productivity-Growth-and-Mobile-S road band he -Road -Ahead -pd f. In 2021, video will account fDr around 70% of mobile data traffic. (Ericsson Mobility Report, June 2016) Across income levels, a sigr ifcanl majority of Americans now have smartphones, with 64 percent of people making less than $30,000 a year and 93 percent of people earning more than $75,000 a year owning smartphenes.9 And since 2011, the number of individuals making under $30,000 per year who own a srnartphone has grown by 42 percent. (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 20117 & Pew Research Center, "Mobile Fact Sheet (Jan. 12, 2017), available al hItp:,/hww.pewin:ernei,orgIfact-sheetdmobiler) Today, just over half ---50,8 percont —of American households only have a mobile voice connection.'' For Miilennials, the number Increases to over two-thirds who live in rnobile-or=ly households. That number is up from 10.5°I° in 2006 and 31.6% in 2011. (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017 & FCC, Annual Report and Analysis of Competitive Market Conditions with Respect to Mobile Wireless, Nineteenth Report, DA 16-1061 (Sep. 23, 2016)) MilLennials Lead smartphone. adoption, with 92 percent of 18-20. year olds having a smartptione, followed by 88 percent of 30-49 year obis, and 74 percent of 50.64 year olds, With respect to race, smartphone ownership arks across the board, with approximately 72 percent of African-Americans, 75 percent of Hispanics, and 77 percent of whites In the U.S. having smartphones. (2017 CTIA Wireless Snapshot, May 2017 & Pew Research Center, "Mobile Fact Sheet" (Jany, 12, 2017), available at http,ahwmw.pewiniemet.org;fact-sheetfrnabilel) Teens have increased smartphane TVlvideo viewing 85% in 4 years. (Ericsson Mobility Report, June 2016) Teen usage of cellular data for smartphone video has grown 127% in 15 months, (Ericsson Mobility Report, June 2016) 76% of 911 calls originate from a cell phone (National Flighway Traffic Administration, February, 2016) More than 75% of prospective home buyers prefer strong cellular connections (RootMetrics,,June 2015) 35% of Americans reach for their srnertphhone first In the morning (CTIA„ July 2015) Machine -to -machine connections are projected to rise from 35 million in 2013 to 203 million in 201 B. (Ciao, VN( Mobile Forecast Highlights 2013-2018, at `United States — 2018 Forecast High1igh[s and 2013 Year In Review) By 2020, more than 34 billion internet connected devices will be instailed g[obally that's more than' 4 devices for every human on earth. (Business Insider, May 20, 2016) 5 w GflO'J s. P0-1CY I Lf 1 January 25, 2018 Via Email c/o Erik Lomb, Deputy City, Attorney k elamb spokanevalIf y.org Spokane Valley Planning Commission Heather Graham Janes Johnson. Tian Kelley Mike Phillips Michelle leasmussen Suzanne Stathos Matt Walton Chan` Graham and Commissioners: Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on the rc-vised draft wireless code Ihrefore you. Vcrizon appreciates the city`s careful and deliberate approach to revising the wireless code to accommodate small cell technology. Whiff Verizon generally supports the proposed code, there are a few late revisions we would like to address. 22.12/ .060 A. Antennae shall be located at least 20 feet above the brise elevation of the growrrtd unless technically infeasible, No objection. ■ 22.121.0013 Primary equipment enclosures shall bs buried below gond or locked awl integrated into the surroundings finless technically infeasible. in the Pacific Northwest, the rainy weather makes for damp, and often waterlogged vaults and equipment, which is damaging to electronic equipment, particularly for radios. Safety: This is the main reason not to vault as it poses ;a significant safety hazard to technicians, contractors and utility crews. PG ax 34628-075604 eatll, WA 98.124 kim.allea wirelesspoky.com virtu. irelesspdcy,c4rn t 425,628.2666 1206,219.6717 January 25, 2018 Page 2 Gas vapors build rola inside the. vault despite the ventilation systems install s] especially when those systctrls fail. If i tech enters a vault before the air is purged, it could result in serious harm to include death. Verizon Wireless will not place personnel. in this position., Requires two people to he onsite. One tech in the vault and the other as an above ground attendant maintaining communication with the tech snaking sure a hazard docs not expose the tech to injury. Dut. to the increased risk, ° ilA requires addition] and more stringent policy, procedure and guidelines. Construction: Approximately four times more space is required to vault than installing iihovc ground.. o Need to accommodate digging out and plaooin nt of back#i] i as well as shoring the exca 'aLiotr site.. o M©y pose ars issue with uti lity clearance setback requirements. o No access around the viatih causing disruption to pedestrians (sidewalk). and traffic (lane closures).. c. Requires ., fla(bc.d trailer truck aid a large eranc w]th oLlitig er5 which have the p•iterltial of interfering with. pacr lines. Sc]i Conditioi1— Extensive cl;te diligence is required to test the soil prior to vaulting the c't uipment and r ,roi_:nc, to include and not be Rip o Buxpa:: ivc Soil — Sell will "swell" in valiant w -Jen wok t wiilen d iti.L CaJsitlg the vault tit heavo, stale shift.. o Soil Liquefaction—_ phenomenon m.11e:eN-r s, S:,i„L,rated or partially saturrlLcc1 soil substantially ,,,,s~s strength i.o_f 4tif.i'rir.ss in response to an .a.,op.'ed srre35, usually earino .. akc slir [ ii lr ,4,tti '.: ddrin change in stre,s9 i;C`ndir,ion, causing it lo behave c llaaerr l4 tl .Waste— Soft_ t rit was prcv....p.. i . by o:,.,ns requiri : - Lt —:roup before work can curti1V..,.....?.c fob:: comp:t ly a] todoned, Hitting bedrock can prohibit the dig. Js a toil .r and more intensive process that takes more. titin to complete, - In man -urban of ses, it is not practical due to space constraints. Ser ice Reliability= Vaultin i:t::r4:t{:4es the chance for service disruption. High risk of flooding ; and overheating damaging the equipment. it increases t!, L' ° tr.noc between the radios and thc antennas resulting in path foss in tibe cca:.i it 1_L.1-rle. This in turn reducer} the range of the antennas. Verizon request* that the undergratindin.g requirement be removed. January 25, 2018 f ag 4'. 3 22,171. 060 1 Location, Snia11 frwafrties shall not bo located .r'rr, fr, 12501 feet of any other s'mri.0 cofacliay ±;r�r'e.s-� thv appliccrtit clemons?r'ate,s inn/. ,,..; Oihr.r ?C1catio7i owl accommodate pr i3' ,57..i1 :..tient. (1) meet til. '-'4.14-.1@'i .serace ! ne61.1. !i the a:'VMe Ci Caval) ffr[','Iity is reafir.'! ? Il; +?' i;'() ''1f ::r.' "''ttltti 25L�' feet of anot.hot fTdSr1-1gSfIil cell,fuCf1t , �G(}�tv_i7t agood faith L;,"i.-r to C'[JilCJC{rlte the new facility on the same pole. Ud ...1.m, (;.rFt:' smah r.:'!?i }' tri order tc PFinimize hnpactsvfrfm'? fc.b1' The. City may P6gUire a pliCantS lv pr'cvrde evidence of e06.,-fs f .;;':,tis l uri:ran. An applicant may demonstrate goodfaith efiL'�'F,% (o cCJikR.,�j'.` ".J p.'-oviaing sritiu t evidence from the r , other wirelesspl'01Hds. r(a) that they arc] tri, 1'.:.:;ii? or 11 !.t' technically fn easibl'o LL'1 collocate, nr from pok or sit'tti;tur'{' r?,i r1E'1`r 1 ..'ii they will ?1 71 allow • Loco OYd cw that it fs technically inJA si ale to allcw Many pole owners are also restricting eolloctatic n by only a1 [L wing one carrier per pole. Regardless of the collocators, poles would still na 'xi ;o conform to NEC, or NESC code and pass structural for all instaaliaii .ns. 1.1 -_at (lox.; become for complicated with additional c;olloc'ato: s. It will be virtaW sum[... cases, but not in others. 'There are alre.,ady many practical consttai is that narrow our peic eholees. ;ali[ity providers have pole types that we eannot [Dew upon. The i tilliy and NESC code clearances requirements also lirnit the of collocaling more than one carrier an ti single pole, Our RF engineers fire. 1onking.for available poLr. iL= z; w''_ t' small footprint 1:hr..och node.. Tat aii, tLlal distance 4:x11[ ?'ail ' haascd on scvera[ tactoi , lD,LL ':" C l'l ll ':.. ' Sl.. I'- '=''.I ::i .. tr have a cascading effect on orh .7' ru) e5. The separation requitement c'..uI.r pecccrved F;5 c.lisfir[ninato?y, by favoring those who enter the xr_arlcct first and bur:icnir1 rte carriers who deploy later in any. given area, the. number of virhic and be greatly reduced. The primly issues with small. cells is that the antenna range k short and - variable, The range of a small. cell depcnc:w on the frequencies being used srnd the power of the radios and tntennf . That range t} pii;t.[iy v ±.ria s from 400 ft. to l ,000 ft. It is unlikely that eacE+ carriers target rune will be lie same rm. any ; iitgl ' deployment arca, Nodes too clDJ�. will creaiein'texfcrcncL;, Nodes too farapac[ Yr.to.'e capacity gaps. In ;idditinn, the places where we neem capacity uro different becaarrse the locations and ranges of ci it macro sites arc different. Them will be sonic s1t iatikns where collocations could make sense, but it will need to be evaluatc.case by wai n. Many pole owners are also restricting collocation by only allowing ono. i:hrrierr per pole. Regardless of the oollocators, poles would still need to conform to.: ,C; or NESC code and pas structural for all installations. That does become for cornpl icated with additional coIlocators. There are already many practical constraints that naw our pcia: choices, The utility providers have pole types that we cannot loc ala, opoo. ilie utility and NESC code clearances requirements also limit the viability ofcollocotingmore than one January 25, 2418 Page 4 carrier on a single pole.. Finally, the. proposal language could be percelved to discriminate against carriers who d :ploy later, by narrowly limiting t}lc available poles, Verizon suggests that this section be removed and that the code simply suite the city's 'Inference that small cells Dot be dcpl+i} celo i adjacent poles. !dank you, la!' the. opportunity i& eon -it -nem and'4'l. conArardto co_otinuinl to work With the city, Sincerely, Kim Alen, 'Wireless Tolley Group, LLC, Representative J.or Verizon 'i'ircicss Elle, Photos of Vault Dam a S�i> j�alley T-Moblle Comments Re: Planning Commission DavisWright I■! 1 re acne LLP January 25, 2018 Suite 2300 777 19I1th Avenue hiE De lewuc. WA A0G1-5149 Linda Whilt Alklns (125)646.6115 tel 425) 646=6199 dux Iindastk1 dw4-nwn Spokane Valley Planning Commission Spokane Valley City Hall 10210 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley, \VA 99206 Re: CTA -2017 -0005 -Wireless Telecommunications Arncncintent — T-Mohile Comltients for Public Hearing Comtel fission Members: On behalf of T -Mobile, we are submitting these written comments on the proposed Wireless Communications Facilities code amendments for your consideration at this evening's public hearing. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on these proposed changes which address the siting of small cells. Small cells are a particular type of wireless facility installation that are intended primarily to address network capacity needs and management of network truffle, , particularly in dense urban areas. Unlike the traditional macro cell (tower) wireless facility which is designed to provide primary coverage to a defined geographical arca, small cells are designed to work with macro sites to manage heavy wireless traffic in dense areas in circler to provide optimal riot work functionality and to ensure that wireless customers have access to the high quality and reliable wireless service they have come to expect. In order to eesure that all wireless communications users have access to an optimal network, it is particularly important that regulations for permitting small cell deployment be flexible enough to accommodate a range of small cell locations and aesthetic solutions, and to allow for technological evolution- Each wireless carrier has small cell designs that are customized according to the carrier's network frequency and design and its anticipated capacity needs. Further, all carriers' technologies are continually evolving, Thus small coil regulations should avoid inadvertently forcing carriers to choose specific technologies or equipment, effectively discriminating among carrier technologies in violation of federal neutrality requirements. Federal telecommunications law requires that local governments manage the use of the public right of way for telecommunications purposes on a cottnetitively neutral and 4841.16414427w.1 0048172.4011795 AnchOrdogrt. I Fww WI* 1I Lsalll1a eIe e I f 6L7rd 1St rrplk'l Lesiloge,ns I SerfRanc`{A Wm/gram-1, 0,C Wtv',,d.'.tean January 25, 2018 Page 2 nondiscriminatory basis. 47 (NC. C. §253. Federal. law fUrther prcthil3its regulations that unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivai n!. services. 471 SC §332(c)(7)(13)(I). In addition to }roliii ti.,g diserimination, Fc lcrnil law also precrript, municipalities from dictating t, witefe•ss provider' s clac}iee of teelino]nE1' zdnc� cl4uirt77et;t, ,367 New York SMA LP v. Town 0!CIarkTrowna, 61217.3(197 (2d Cii, 2010), With these principles in mind, we recommend the changes outhrtc(1 it} the artached redline of the draft ordinance. In particular, v.'e urge the Commission to modify the. ordinance to expressly recognize aunified camouflage desiba as an acceptable. criitiott for small cell design. T - Mobile Fins developed this design to in,_`.,r sorate loth the antennas and associated equipment into a si°:E.ie enclosure cal'approximatc:h7 three cub:[:. f:'.4 in order to standardize and mini i7..e the aestlletic7 impel of small cull i',ista.Iat,otis_ ire incl _;.ie p1..::lographs and more detailed information concerning this unified design v -.mala our cc,r,in nts. Pot addition:] detail regarding our oommenrs, pY4ase see the attached redlined ordinance, and the attached photographs a! N1nbiJe's t!nixiw L'anionttagc small cell design. Thank you again for this opportunity to GUT., rnent carr the draft wireless faultless ordinance. Very truly yours Davis Wright Trernairie• U 1' Linda White Atkins ce: T -Mobile 4M(-4641-4427v_i 0,54$t72-QX79.5 T -Mobile has been working with our vendors to create an enclosure that holds all of our technology. These pictures depict our updated design, We believe it is important to create uniformity and a sleek design that blends with infrastructure. k PLA nfro L J1 44-1n4 C.6 PR 1- r •-Mobile- NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT T • •Mobile• January25, 2018 Re. T-Mablte Small Celt Shroud Size City of Spoknne Vatley: Ina purpose of this letter Is to provide more details about the size of T-hte,bila's small oe!I shrDLtl. This shroud Is destined to enclose both the small cell antennas and the primary equipment associated with the antennas. Thus, the rough exterior dimensions all this Shroud Pr x 12' x 12.31 are well beim the volumetric thsasholds established under Washington State lay. RCN 80.36.375(2)(d), With this shroud design the antennas ere at the very front of the shroud (farthest away from the side where the shroud would attach to a polo), The antennas have a slim profile and are attached in front of the radios. The antennas only occupy about 20% of the farm factor. The remainder of the shrard contains primary equipment- Under the definition of a "small cell facility" in the Y!lashington State statutes, the antenna enclosure (whether real or imaginary) end the primary equipment enclosure are subject to separate size htmltntinns. See Id. The statutory antenna enclosure size limlLotion is 3 cubic feet, while the primary equipment s ze limitation Is 17 cubic feet. 141. The total volume of the 7 -Mobile shroud complies with these limits based on the proportion devoted to antennas (roughly 4.6 cubic feet) .and the proportion devoted to primary equipment (roughly 2.4 cubic feeI).l In addition, although the shroud appears to be an even rectangular prism, there are various indentations around the box. These Indentions aro part of the desiiiln sod mean the actual volume Is smaller than the volume calculated using the rough exterior dimensions. 11 you have any questions, please tee free to contact Marfa Emig in our local Seattle Market, al 425-39$-7614 el. Marie.Emlq?n Ulohile.oarrr, s As caulemplated unda :he statuio, the antro e rtIcsuro can be alum ar "magi rani. .10.1 7-000,0-7515....1 00413172-01.13795 5a��arr^L't�l? T-Mabii42corri.m.:1t.1/22/.E (1,A 2017-4005 Draft 07/18 DRAFT APPENDIX A R DEFINITIONS Radio/TV broadcasting studio: Facilities serving the broadcast media, See "Communication fatalities. use category." Reporter facility: A Facility for the noncommercial reception and retransmission of radio signals See 'Communication facilities, use category,' RF Enginee=r: A person iA#►ter-it-oolanlon-v#-the-C'v Manacie arAria1ej education, erleno 'n v�ri(eIess- c mmimipatian services radia are uerlcies rocs FGC rend ctl7e icable oc\,lernmental recrulat ons to pro de the necessary certifi kionfs) required pursuant to Clraptur; 2,121 SVC. Telecommunications: The transmission, between or among pofrtts specified by the user, of audio and/or visual nfcrmation and data of the user's choosing, without change in the form or content of the Information as vent and received. Alternative mounting structure, A water tower, manmade tree, clock tower, church steeple, bell tower, utility pole, light standard, freestanding sign, flagpole, or airniLar structure designed to suppxt and camouflage or conceal the presence of telecommunications antennas, Antenna: Any exterir ! aovaratu°; destoned for telephonic, rsd.o data, Internal or other communications through the sending and/or receiving of radiofrequency slonals includi a but not hniited to, ec,utrarnent attached to a tower. polo, li ht standard, AMY - ;role, buiidino or otl•icr struclure for the burpose of oravidin:i wireless sgrvices. Types of antennas include: Jai 'onrrri directional antenna' reoeLv es and transmits radio frequency sir reals in a 560-:tecree radial pattern, - A `whip nter1 a• Is an °mini -direction -a! antenr ha! is up to 15 feel in h jaht and no more Iha7 sly inchr 5 in diameter; and - A "direttici lac 1717 )coal antenna' receives an tray smils radio fre.uenc sinnels Ina SQeifiCCtirewti r- al pattern of less than :9 6C defes-A.EtiuottgeoIevi kC�i-;.-a llE#E C17t�i�¢ielopilsienraHi}iFk.kav€-EJ8C4f4r1agjf;tGr W.^-4+eS gr�clud;no die 1,etr•at- l lel eed s ea Efi.e r ^. pyil_drastixteagafi - 44-as-whi s, t .a?. R2 1Aillk+t1iV-Ea £' t£ acute-stationo-or-none mr"erciol-ante'+nos install; icne for1wme true of-fo o of ICIcvieion, • Antenna kit chill: The Ye-ticat distance measured froin average building Elevation to the hlrghest paint of the Eintertirra or if ren a•rooftop or rachet SLrgrit j „frotm the top of the roof or structure tlibLELtikhest nclrtt of the antenna. For replaremeril struotares, - hel.tit Is Treasured front the to of the existing. structure to the hiest oinl rat the antenna or new structure, whichever js oreater. 1 I 462R-2.473-685134.3 001817Z•907795 Onmrraot ILMI: rretammtrd medah+eg tht Fhraan to vaiJeve an. DEfettdi* AMdtrd. torniritak.tu+ninp,rt'ro+irrl,db? { fenha,tted: rrgwkrrt_. j5.2okane Val InY T' -Md ile narume-its. i/22}14 CTA 2017- X1Q5 Draft 1/17/113 • Approved small cell, faciI W: Anv small cell facltlty that has received all re iu1reet permits. • Array: An an-angement of antennas and their supporting structure - Base Station: A ntructure or eoraiprnerLat a fixed location that a abies FCC-ldcerised or authorized wireless commuFicatlo s be en user -•ui. erxtand a communications network. The term does not encompass a tower as definedherein nor any a dpmen! associated with a tower. Base Station InclkEdes w thojt 1i i tion: - Equi merit as. •"ialad with tivire ess *Mit 'cation ices as ww{lias unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless Services span as microwave backhoul- - R - i a transceivers antenna Iles and comoara wer su conn ration network. i1 coaxlat or f bar -o Distribute• d A tenr a Svs!ems (•[AS'} and small . tic cable e. a rdIess o aa,1 u1br ai d bactcuP nolo IU^8 - Any structure other than a tower lha at the time the relevant iu IIc.allo in filed with tuses es>,uipjnent desCrihed above libel has been eviewed god raved oder the a 'ica`ale toning or 5t6)11 process or under another Sale ar.lecal fetaulaXory revi��wa ,racryss ever lfthe structure was riot built for the sole or olrnary pupose of providing that support. The errndoes of include env struvture ih s' �t the time the relevant ao lralicalis filed with be City- does not Signori or house equiprnenl described above, • Collocation:Tlie 1 auntic+or'nstallatioa or ransralssiv , •ul, Clan o an eligible nu rt strr.rGture for_the purpose: of transmitting andfor receivine F Flo trete r?a sdgnoisfor cornmunicatiala purooses.AI:ngli-tolecom+rtiunle t: i nc,4 i os -ed Prue-e-thWJEr otne.t laz-famfl nl. itkns pl*V1tIer. • Corrceatment tettinolotty: Transmission facilities da slimed to rook like sante feature other than a wireless tower or base station or which minimizes the v'istaal impae't of an anten a b use of nnrrre1 ive a trials ei.r+state colors andror a concealment riiste'ri 1111 • Dish: A parabolicor bowl shaped device that receives andior transmits signals in a specific directional pattern. • EIA -222: Electronics Industries Association Standard 222, "Structural Standards for Steel Antenna Towers and Antennas Support Structures." i Electric transmission: A elfr supporting structure in excess of 5Ci feet in height designed to support high voltage electric lures. This does not include local utility or distribution poles (with or tiyi'thout transformers) designed to provide electric seruloe to individual custnri r . • Eti.'rtrle Facititia-- Re nest: An ru ue t for modification of a exisli ower it base sl, tin,r shot does not substantially chance the pliwslc:at Efirnerrilpns pr such kowe r Dace station. invoivtno: - Colloc,-rtton of new Ironsmission eou':omerot. 2 AM -7473-685.8v COC1172.0 C4i'hment tLA3 : Ada •Of.rwimun' ,Spaione V,tixlev, T.Mcklle enrr,mEras, 112211$ CrA 2017-OOos I ra ft 1/17/9.a - Removal of transmission equipment: or - Reh10ccn-ient of transmission eu IDrrwentn Eligible support structure: Anv lower or base station as defined In this section provided that it lsRt the time tlle_r varlt apolicalion is filed with the G!tp, 1OU3Es [gig u.srorts are ante na 'cro cell o • srnal cell de Flo ent. • EgraiLan>lent slrLrcture: A *acilitv, sheltercabinet electronic or other as crated e uloment ecessa cornmunIca ions sl conditioni acltu nal& • ssoclaterf e ower 5 uo vault user' to house and Ptu1ecil. i inlent- Ole ies and emeooerlcv e air • Exlstiri u A conslruated tower or lase Ialian Is exist' 'f It has been ravieiwed end aoLfrcved under the a ,t'cabte zu irm or satin rcGess o under gni ttyer s1 -le or local regulatory review,ozocess, provided that.+ lower that has not been reviewed and reviewed because it was in a zoned are en It was u t but w as [8 WfulLY corrstn c,.�71. i "6 lino for i;ttrposes of chal5"ter 22.122 SWAG. • Guyed, tower: Any te'ecornmurtiratiorls tourer supported In whole or in part by cables anchored to the ground. a Height,: The distance measured from grade to the highest paint of al iy and all components of the structure, Including antennas, hazard lighting, and other appurtenances, if any. • Mierocells: Has the some meaning} as set bah h in RQ/A' 80.38.275, as now adopted or hereafter a-rnendeci. • Monopole: A self-supporting telecommunications tower, which consists of a single vertical pole, fixed into the ground andfor attached to a foundation. • Gather subpart structure: A stru,.'ure used lo suowrt small cell facilities or egjipn ent sir Jctures, exr It ciin' euildin s ulilit +ole an water reservoirs. Ekeinu;es cif "other support structure • include (lei:moles arid ball field fight standards • Panel; An antenna whichuecelves and/or transmits signals in a directional pattern. • Prior a' rr+ nal: Certifica, On of aw oval s frrarn tine Cit aulhorizirt_ the initial carrier's small ceff fa ilitieson a base static Cily�car tower. e subseu8nk aor+r�vai{s) fro m the autha e Lifted 1 the exlstin■ . ate of the s all L.. installation of a a,;pecific wireless Prior apclrou f ma/ also indudelh_ odiFrcations o he initial 19 al -tion tical nava includ;'n but n cal 1 facill ted to the nu r and location of e ulprlrerit St11Ctures antennas antenna SOO ructureS eutal amen' • Serif -supporting lattice tower; A telecommunications tower that consists of an open network of metal braces, usually triangular or square in cross-section. ▪ Service: The offering of telecommunications for a fee directly to the public, or to such classes of users as to be effectively available directly to the public, regardless of the facilities used- • Service provider: Has the Came niearaina as set forth in R W 35- 9.J11C(6) as now adopted or hereafter amended. Seri * +vider shall Ind o•. + . = n6as11.1161re 3 437$-2/73-685Ev.3 D048172 -00071s !rkanPWil t, -Mo bile corn rmvnss,1/2V1g Q-A 2017-0005 Draft 1/1.7/1 coftlpanies t 18t prc�r?�de teleconxniunications services or egolgrnent_to_Hri. b1e the deployment 0 perso;rat wire ess services. • Small coil and ma I call 1e 10 i ant: Have the same ntieani ias set fo h In RC Sl].3G.375 es now adapted or hereattr:r amended. ■ Stealth: A telecommunications antenna that Is effectively camouflaged or Cancealed from view. Substantial chin e: A ntiad"sfrcetion, slrt}slar?loll c -ri. es the teal dime signs of an alioible support struchre df it rnee[s rry ❑f Ih� feIIovvina tlxeria: - For towers other than towersITL the Mu •Gi ri+hts-0f It lncrea ar the Icv.Yer lati' more :hen 10% or 1 with separation from 11re nearest existing antenna not to exceed twenty feet, wfaic.hever Is . r Ater for ath eligible sl]pl ort structures, it Increases fhe Iteitlt1t of the structure by Tore than 'LD% or more than ten feet, ~whichever Is greater; Fos lowr'rs otlie then towers in the,public rights of-vraw, it inyolaes adding a,B aoouitenannce to the body of the Iowet that would protrude horn the edclg of lh tower more than twenty feel, or more ttxarLthe width of the tower strucluire et the of tele appurtenance.. wh cheger Is greatar frar €�tl ar ell ib_11 ort aures, it 1ryotu'es adding an aoptirtenanoe to ttro hod of Lhe structure That would pre+crude from Ilse edee of the structure by more than six feet, For dr Y elicrlble support structure, It involves i,ist,aliatiorp oI more than 13 -le spa and num 1 -r of new e u •rnent cabinets for the hnot rove! • ed. but not to exceed foul cabinets_ or, for lowers In tha publ I c rl,ghtslof-waw and .pass St tions it i 'vo veliristallelion of any new egsiprrlent cabinets on the around it there are no pr existintr around cabinets associated with thj tructure, or else Involves Installation of orounrIcahanets lhet aro more than 101ep lamer in beiaht or nuerall volume than a otlder round cabinets associate h the structure; 11 errtai s n ,exceveti. nor de. 1s3 ht outside fhr cdlrren site. - It would defeat the coirceorment elements of the etiolnio support strrreluuuei,or the ar he het tit of one additional a na air - Il does of cora *1 with candilions assodated -th the sibnr as ■ • al mod i1ction of the el 1. a bl a su' • ructure or ba; ; Ion equ43rneril ouided however, that this limitation does not ?only t4 anY modification th04 Is nnp•cnrn Iiant only Ina manner that would riot x sed the thresholds identified t'beve. a Toloccmmunicatlons antenna: An antenna used lo provide a telecommr nicatians service. This excludes lightning rods, private mobile radio systems, amateur radio antennas less than 35 Feet In freight in residential districts and 50 feet in height In nonresidential districts, anc whip antennas less than four inches (10 cm) In diameter and less than 10 feet in height, • Till commu rlitnfl on service: Ha the carne i e ;+r',rr cis get foil!) in - C.1.%1 35,99 eft o(7). as now ado r r hereafter amended. crnstru•° nr 4 a zo-24173 6r1SN19Qas172-DCC?$ Formaried; [Eye dight spo reT-Mobilecorn mPc;s,ili2/16 CTA 2017-oaa5 Draft 1/17}18 ■ Tower: Arty structure built For the sole or rune a ose of su i an FCC - lice dor authorized antennas and their ssedated facilities Inciud n stnictures that are con;,Nrtic d far wi• less ; but not rlrn, ed to, private broadcast, and public sa!eht services, iasi as unt. need wirelesses r and Ixes!u,+sreless services such as rnicrowa a ckhaut a socia e r - A "towel` ahall.J .ot include a r lace erttIuGAit o as sutAroria a lease ih tae co, a 11-ariLhise ora Small 0e11 Permlt.A-erelf-s t+ra r '^` i+e—FR E ha'n 20 fo - b 91: x116414 .iii, t ufdport one tx rr'aora Ieieee a gaR r, �a not includo-xis-aperator aFP 4' rh n upp.,rt I • Transmit sic n r=Sna cion toi any FC - licensed or authorized wireless communication service, {nckudin2 but not limited to, (actin Ira nsceiVers, antennas coaxial or fiber-optic cable. and tegtrler and backup ix5wer St f D V, The° term includes eauFpnlentiassoclales kith vuireleas amenrtnicaticns services incrudino- but not hmjled to rivate roadcasl and ub is Wel sewi s as well as uriliGen ed wireless seryls and fixed wireless services such as microwave bacichaul. it.Jnified Camouflage Design- Gonvealmerit of antennas and eguippe,t wiAAtin a_s Hale enlosrttr+el . _ _ Mitt ole• A structure.de -a+nevi and used aril for the s rt of el l wires, telephone wire, television cable, trafficstarjls; or Milting for streets, oafkinq area& or pedestrian �a niiP"fil paths. •' T7lR� J1.e-4rav'r�t,'P d. mor -fn -an GI i-nr-ha5+rF4aFFretec- Wireless: Having no wire or wires, operating by means of transmitted electromagnetic waves, Tower, ham operator; A structure Ness than 76 Net in height above grade used for two- way t* anarnunicatian for hobby or emergency service purposes by private individuals. wSee "Communication f ,P114ti s : Lit . use category.' 5 r e,rh-2473-6858'f.3 00.48.172.00D.7.5 Cantu [mak Nod 1 to+mment[LIM: imoe#gd 1 lCum mat NM' iglaciated 1. r�arrmat dr rrghlig1ut 1 •Cair m.nt[LATJ.wannewdekiNiai Pei erre Va11eyLLMabile corn mrrats, 1127J1R CTA 2017-0005 draft 1/17/18 !DRAFT SVMC 19D6O.O50 Um:40alegaryType. R1 P2 F3 R4 MF1 MF2 MUC CMU GO 0 NC C 'RC P108 11 12 Communication Facilities Red:wTJ broadcasting utradio P P P P P P' Repeater facl ay PPPP P P PPPP P P fi S S =s 22 121 'SAKI itteP.rz,Ytripr-1 TelecommunitiOn wireless antenna i 2rray 5 S 8 8 S S S S C C S S 5 S Chapter 22.120 SVMC TaleCorraivniCaion avreless suppurI. tore C C C S S C C 5 S S S 8 Chaptaar 22.120 SVMC "rawer, barn opeidtor S S S S 5 5 5 S C C S S S E S SVMC 19-40-11O10) G 1 G R2 E -2473-6S E EN.3 011,41177.1 0795 I, rjrC.:1!1 L',V °'.i T-!'v:ah i [°:1om its; 1!1211, LTA 2017-0)05 orart 1/17/1$ DRAFT Chapter 22.120 SVhic 22.120.010 Purpose and Intent. These standards were developed to protect the public health, safety, and we°fare, and minimize visual impacts on residential areas, whine furthering the development of wireless communication services, Those standards were designed to comply with the Telecommunication Act of 1990- The provrsicrts of tii:!&-seGlieavh9pter 22.120 are not intended to and shall riot be interpreted to prohibit or to have the effect of prc habiting wireless communication services. Chaolor 22.120 shat! cover 21! 4vioelr.: communication services alhvr tI parr Mniall cell seNices which 2'o requlated F'•irsu3'rt to chaptef 22 121 SVhiC. 22.120,020 Permits and exemptions. Where a transmission tower or antenna support structure is located in a zoning district which allows such use as a permitted use activity, administrative review. enc a building permit, shall be required. subject to the project's consistency with the development standards set forth in SVMC 22,120,040. In Instances where the use is not allowed as a permitted use activity, a conditional use permit and building permit shall be required in addition to a derr7onstratiorr of consistency wkth all required development standards. Exemption; Wireless radio Ltilized for temporary emergency communications h the event of a disaster is exempt from the provisions of this section and shall be permitted in all zones. 22.120.030 Required application subrnittals.. All applications for viireless-antenna arrays and wireless communication support towers shall include the following: A, A totter s-sgned by the applicant staling that all applicable requirements of the FCC, the FM, and any required avigation easements have been satisfied. B. A scaled site pian clearly Indicating the location, type and height of the proposed tower, antennas, oto -site land wises and zoning, adjacent land uses and zoning, adjacent roadways, proposed means or access. setbacks from proporty lines, elevation drawings of the proposed tower, the equipment structure, ferocing, buffering and the type of stealth technology which w iI be utilized. The full, detailed site plan shall not be required if the antenna is to be mounted on en existing Structure. C. The appiioant shall have performed and priurdad a photographic simulation of the proposed facility from all affected properties and public rIglits•of-way- 7 eisas.24/3-6,6CPa,18i7x-0000..2. SooOne Valleyr, iNlob11g 2rnpentl. 1/22/1A CTA 2j)17-oaas Draft 1/17/15 D. The applicant shall provide copies or any environmental documents recruited by the State Environmental Policy Act (SE1l'A). E. The applicant shalt have demonstrated effort to coo -locate on an existing support tower or other Structure. New support towers shall not be permitted within one mile of an existing support toWer unless it [s demonstrated that no existing support tower or either structure can acc❑mrnodate the proposed antenna array- The City reserves Itte right to retain a qualified consultant, al the applicant's expense, to review the supporting documentation for accuracy. F. Evidence to demonstrate that no existing support tower or other structure can accommodate the proposed antenna array may consist of the following: 1- No existing support towers or other structures are located within, the geographic areas required to bleat the applicant's engineering requirements. 2- Existing support towers or other structures are not of sufficient height to meet the applicant's engineering requirements. 3- Existing support towers or other structures do not have sufficient structural strength to support the applicant's proposed antenna array and related equipment 4. The applican: s prcpased antenna would cause e'ectramagnetic Interference wit-' the antenna on the existing support towers or other structures, or the antenna on the existing support towers or other structures would cause interference with the applicant's proposed antenna. G. The applicant of new tower snail provide a signed statement stating the applicant has provided notice to all elher area wireless service providers of Its application to encourage the co-local]on cif additional antennas on the structure. 11. A signed statement from the owner andfor landlord to remove the facility or obtain another permit for the facility within six months of when the facility IB no longer operating as part of a wireless communication system authorized and licensed by the FCC. L Proof that all the necessary property or easements have been secured to assure for the proper construction; continued maintenance, and general safety of the properties adjoining the wireless communication focality, 22.720,040 Design standards.. The support tower, antenna array, and supporting electrLCal and mechanical egtilpnlent shall be installed using stealth technology- Stealth technology applies to all personal wireless service facilities. including, without [imitation, antennas, towers and equipment structures, For any facility. stealth technology means the use of boat existirg and future technology through which a personal wireless service fac2flty is designed to resenit le an object which is already present in the kcal environment, such as a tree, streetlight, or traffic signal. It also includes: s 1 Asla•2473-6o-`SV-3re411z-Oi•7755 ,a/alone Val!ey, T b'r,biI cow mtnts, 1/22018 CTA 2017-OOO5 Draft 1/17/1B A. For personal wireless ser -vice support towers: 1. If within existing trees, "stealth technology" means: a The tower is to be painted a dark color; b. Is made of wood or metal: and c, A greenbelt easement is required to ensure permanent recentian of the surrounding trees. 2. Stealth technology for towers in 2 more open setting means that they must have a backdrop (for exarnpte, but not limited to, trees, a hillside, or a structure) on at least two sides, be a compatible color with the backdrop, be made of compatible materials with the backdrop, and that ::srchitrctural car landscape screening be provided 'for the other two sides, if existing troes are the backdrop, then a greenbelt easement Is required to ensure permanent retention of the surrounding frees. 3, Antennas shell be integrated Into the design of any personal wireless seniice tower to which they are attached. External projections tram the tower shall be limited to the greatest extent technically feasible.. 4. For rooftop antennas or antennas mounted on other structures: a. For omni -directional antennas 15 feet or less above the roof, stealth technology means use of a color compatible with the roof, structure or background; b, For other antennas, stealth technology means use of compatible calors end architectural screening or other techniques approved by the City. B. For antennas mounted on one or more building facades, stealth technology means use of dolor and materials such that the facility has architectural cornpatibllitd with the building. It shall be mounted en a wall o; an existing building in a configuration as flush to the wall as technically posslbfe and shall not. project above the wall on which it is mounted, C. For equipment structures, stealth technology means locating within a brtllding, or if on top of a buhlding, with architecturally compatible screening. An undsrgroL nd location, or above ground with a solid fence and landscaping, is also considered stealth technology- f . Advertising or display aha11 not be located on any support lower Or antenna array; however, the owner of the antenna array shalt place on Identification plate Indicating the name of the wireless service provider and a telephone number for emergency contact en the site. E. No artificial tights other t:ian those required by FAA or other applicable authority shell be permitted. At1 security Iighls shalt be down -shielded, and installed to be consistent With Chapter 22.50 SVIVIc. 9 1 4E28.2473.5ELEv.3 EQ4 172.000745 EUkane VaIIi y, T-Mnhile cornmefti,.10211 E CIA 2017.0005 Draft i/17/18 F. The facility shall be enclosed by a. site -obscuring secured fence not less than six feet In height with a locking gate. No barbed wire or razor Wire shall be permitted. G. The support tower foundations, equipment shelters, cabinets or other on -the -ground ancillary equiprirbi`1t shall be burled below ground or =maned with a site obsiGurIng secured fence not less than six feet high- The. requirement for s site-obscurlrg fence may be ti -waived provided the applicant has secured all on -the -ground ancillary equipment in a locked cabinet designed to be compatible with and blend Into the setting, and the means of access for the support tower is located a minimum of 12 feet above the ground. All support structure(s) for wireless cornrnunhCatiarl antennas shall have fir gleans of access located a minimum of eight feet above the ground unless the requirement for a fence has been waived. I. The support tower shall meet the minimum primary structure setback requirements for the underiyirkg zone. J. Support towers shat) not be permitted inside a public. park_ public monument or private holding located within a puibllc park or public monument. K. The height of the support tower or antenna array above grade shall not exceed the maximum height identified In Table 22.120-1 below- The height of a support tower shall include antenna, base ped, and other appurtenances and shall be measured from the finished grade of the parcel. Table 22.120-1 — Tower Height Limitations Zone Antenna Array Support Tower R-1, Single -Family Residential Estate R-2, Single-Fam1ly Residential SubUrbari R-3, Single -Family Residential Ur§pp 20 feet above the zoning 14-4-T-Sirigle—Farn4 height limitation or 16 feet 60 feet ! _r iderAi 'a Y above existing structure MFR4, Multifamily ResidenVale korl-Qensi,=/ Rcoidcntial liF 2 r.eiiy `T Ree -Ido nti 24 Mixed Use Cer'leF (MUG) 20 feet above the zoning &Ct feet Corridar Mixed Use (CMU) height IimLtatIon or 16 feet 10 4828-1473-Ga58v-3 0174&1T looc 795 1kpnkaneT•Molbilecommerkt5, 1/21116 CTA 2017.0005 draft 1/17/18 Table 22.120-1 — Tower Height Limitaltiona Zone Antenna Array Support Tower a r( ) Neighborhood Commercial (N C) above existing structure Regionai Cornrnerdal (RC) Light Industrial Mixed Use (1M0-1-) He wy Industrial (L4) 20 feet above the zoning height limitation or 20 feet above existing structure 20 feet higher than the maximum height a lowed in the zone or 80 feet whichever Is less' "An additional 20 feet In height for each additional antenna array co -located un the support tower, up to a maximum tower height of 100 feet, including the height of ail antennas. 22,120.050 Landscaping. Refer to Chapter 22.70 SVMC for landscaping requirements applicable in the underlying zoning district. 11 1 028.2473-5415ay..3=*177•CX Formatted "rabic 5.pakane Vs11ev,T-Mobile commelIS,1(22f18 CIA 2017-0005 Draft 1/17/as DRAFT Chapter 22.121 SVMC — Smal I Cell Deployment 22.121.010 Overview, In order to man - ■,e its ri.ht-of-ww In a thou fitful r -nner which balances the need to accommodate new and evolving technoloraies earth❑reservatlori of the natural anti aes hetic enrlronrnent of the City while comptyina with lhn reouirements of slate and ederal lawthe Ci -da.ts cha.ter 22-121 SVMC for Ii = de lo men Hall cell and microoet to hrio"oqy, Service providers who seek to ytilize the public. right•of-waw for small cell .e.lc. ment iri order to .rovide wireless comrrrurkrca'.lon, data traa mi sloe crr other related services to the citizens of the City shall receive a valid franchise to provide the soeoific reprice, seeking to utilize the small cell deployment, , Entities wit -t franchises rr o wish to utilize a steal; cell de lo merit to U■or- de. or ex and their existing services shall utilize the ►recesses set forth In chapter 22,121 SVMC and iniFlementin small cell permits to deploy their technolooy and obtain design approval of soeci4ic installations. . Within in r ter 22.'421 VMG revises or dirriinlshes the rights and cbliaations of an existing franchise. B. The lerrn `small .0411 deploy'ment' shall Include the deployment of small c tl facilities, micron cells and small cell rielWorks ass those terms are defined by 13,CW EL1.36-375 as Pow adopted pr hereafter .amended. Small cell c]eoioyrnent elements width require SEPA rexrie+rw rnav utilize thhese processes only in conjunction with SEPA review. 22,1.21.016 Admfrr1stratiotti. The City naaer is charged wi"h administration of small Dell deployment perrnitttng and other £r$ s cammun1ca .n revi .roc es establishe i •er chin. err 22 G 22-121, grid 22.122 SV1MC- 22.121;020 Smell et1 De Irsme rrts. Srna11 Ce 1 C7e.Io ants i rig rts-ot-wav tsFfall only be made pursuant (1i to a valid franchise with Ira ^C iv, and (2) incornyliencewthall federal slate and local small oelI aerrnittin. re.uire -Pts. hits -of - a Sn all cell de lo men s n he .ublc 6, S -1i Cell De:#11, pen outside of i is-of-Wa Srna deli deployments outside of to r utri4r, riohls of w shall only be rade in oomo fiance ail federal stake. aridLaca1 small cell pet-10t1ng reQuirernents. 22,121,.031) Franchise Appiiication. 12 1 4628-2473- 1,121d 724OrlW 5notans%/Allel',T-' abwletorwtrI ry5.1 04.118 CTA 2017.0405 Draft 1117/16 A rarchise Asp+lica ion. Se ice deli!oyrrt nts In public Eights-or-wa ' sha'I a** ■r a french' _ u In the CI 's franchise application form and submit a fee deposit commenstarpte with Iha estlrnated E ntlnisiratlyf casts of r r ssinp on DI for tranchlse. Service r eiders sacking tc Olio City di:lilts-of-way for small cell de sto me is shall . s -c: eci r- •hic boundaries for the srnal! [ell deblo.yrriebt described in the application and provide detailed schematics and vis; ' renderings of the proposed facilities to be utilized. Phased development is nerriiled and an applicant Is encouraged to specify at least the wna11 cell deptoyrnent in its apolicatlon. B. Designation of facilities. All applicants far fraichtses xrekinct to Litili2e small cell devlo rent shall-rovide the rollpwin. inrormatio ExIstinn fra'ichlSees fret seals to utilize a small ice!', deplurnent to expand. assist r' lernen', an existinfr___!;,2LLsoa provide tha information as a part pf a smell coil perrnit application for small cell deployniDF+t- Tete app"icant shall specify. In the franchise apPlicatiett 1. whether and where small cell Willies are proposed to be Icated on existin rrtillt}' poles. 2. whether and Ill' ere small cell facilities we proposed to be located or7 replacerr1ent ti#IIity pcfes. snow plates. towers, aridtrr other structures and the Wile of replacement poles to be i+rstalled� 3. the conduiterect' ground -mounted oauirrnerit neck:ssary for andintended for use In tha small cell deolnymE t ret7acctless of vhether the additional facilities are to he constructed by lhE aonlicant or leased from an infrestruoLsre provider 4. any facility Which is eligible for or subject to t`ie applicable fedora review time periods under ars eligible facilities request or as a collocation. ravi d that desire to deploy small cel! CEPA Review. An a npl exempt from SEPA review shall simulta ous1 submit an environm checi;list pursuant to clia+xter 4;3..21C RCVV and chapter 21,?0 SVMC- D. Completwr ss. The Cilv.Manager sfiali review a small call franchise application for corMipletensss aracl npkii the applicant within 30 days of submission whether the apoticalion Iscorncrietg proyid oyilaow,'ever- that an a vast mwY consent to a different corn ieteness eri0Id. A serv[ a provider pr resubmit an 8 lioelk determi,rred to be Incon+ ate within 30 dans of notice a Clt Maria .Er. Failure to resubmit an a plication wi;hln the 30 day perin.J shall be deemed a withdrawal of that application. No applisalwior shall be deenredcornolete w• put the fee deposit set by the City rolariacter. ticalion for a can±Ise wWlifch cJnlains ai et enl which is at 22.121.040 Small Cell peErni l An! lcation. A. Concurae rt s.mali cell n?rmit a+alio tion and frEi chile R, lrcetir,n. Ri nig s =rated under the franchise for r,c,rrstruction. Installation- and placement of srr+all pell facilities shall he implemented through the issuance of small cell permits The francfiiet 40.Z$-2473-585tv,3QC4172•a0o?y5 I :ipakaneN,,a1 y, T-maLtle wmmrts. 1727f1SS crA z017-Cr305 Malt 1(13/18 applicator may be accomraanxied by one or More c+ancorrent applicatiops for,a Mall cell penrnil to deploy' small cells. 13. Small ;ell permit aorilacatiorL A small twit 11 a ica iar1i shall oo11t$1n irr fnl nkwiria- 1. All small cell (a;:lli;y sites shafs ire specified, Up to, 30 sites may kre specified in one small cell ttierniit Epplicatiern for processing,_ The application shall Include sufficient Infam7atiorw abn'l earl site and facility in order for the Dilly to de:te-Mine that it comclies the [lesion prid location standards set forth In SVlC)!2,121.D00. 2. tf the aoolicakian Includes small cell dei to. ,+ment in the pubiio ri' 61t3 0,` Awa . a c pv or the franchise application Cr reference to approved existing (ranch se shat) be included. Approval for a Truitt cell be.rrnit o Install a sl SII desl Tient shall be contincent ucrorl aparoval of a small tell trarjrise or Ihe._possession of 2 valid small cell cell franchise, 3. if ntcrre than one a„pal catirn for a small reit permit is subri;itked by an appiicant, they shall be considered iii the order received if multiple lyupli lions are submitted on the same date, the ,aorjI cant shall, indicate which application shall b considered first. 4, Any element of a deolovme.nt whiJs wattles as enter an eligible facilities request ora collocation shall be s1]e: i sal j designated by the applicant and may be -IdrEs.sacl separates to the City Manager In order to comply with the applicable f; ocQssinci recuirements established i 'v federal lake, state lawti'- and ch ter 22,122 SVMC. Arw a lication for a smell cel1_perrrliiwhich contains an, element which Is ilbt exern tram EPA revierJ shall simultaneously submit an environmental checklist pursuant toctlaoter43.21CRCN end chapter 21,20 4� 6. The applicant shall submit a swam declaration udder penalty of cerium signed by an RF Enprnaer with know ed a of the ro ased ro'etit of irrrir that tie small cell clIployment •rill be COrn31.ant with all FCC and an other ars licable reiulatiois Err connection with human exb'osure to radio treguerl,cy emissions for every Frequency at which the small cele tacllliw arid associated aiAreless backhaul w1I`• operate. An existing franchisee a +l in for a spiait cell errnit or small oeii de lo ment shall p-ovide an RF con fication for all }acs'+hies nc:luded In the deployment. 7. The gp,, ,licant shall provide proot of FCC and other requiatc+y aeorovals rer aired to prpvlde the serwlcels or utilkze the teo]lnolo ins soy 'rpt lc be 'nskallecl. E#, As a,ppltable, ih applicant shall provide ,r EtNen nrQ t{ori an lizjitkr pr + authorizing the applicant to use ,line krtilit irowider's Lrtllt1 cies for A = 'mill cell eplo meat. 14 4826-?473-635t11v.9 (V40172 -1X-0795 Formatted; iii3lillght 5pokar Varlesr 7 Ma`aiI rainf,tent5 3f has CTA 2017-0065 Dram 1/17/18 C. Completeness; Small Call A' 11 :ions. The Gil ana•er review an application for compleiw-e§s and notify the applicant within 34 days of submission why -r h• i..licaEo _ •tete..rovided however that a a.+lican! =e consent A service 'roa'der ma @submit an apprication determined to b€ incomplete within 30 dews of noCiae b the City Maniaaer or designee. Failure to rasub nit fin aoplicatton in a timerunanner shaft€ deemed a withdrawal of that 2trxplic tio r,. No application shall be deemed torr Zeta without the fee deposit s51 by the City MarnP4er. D. The City Manager may approve, deny or condlionallw aimove all or any rortior of the sites proposed In the small cellpermit appiiraltan. iffe cnt worn review 22.121.050 Small Gail Franchise and Porrrall Review process, The yin.rowisions ,data; to revle, c a..licatio s a franchise all cell permit for small cell deployments. A Review of Facilities. Review pt the siteiacatioTas pia ,used bw 1he aapnlicant shall be governed bw tl�e_Rvls{ons dt7 Lt_S-C. 253 a • 4 U.S.C, 33 and a..Lica+, pass Caws_ Applicants for franchises and the small cell shall be treated in a ceras - service providers Utitizin i5, service .rcwiders •se facilities ate smiler &iar.fed to terms •f structure placement or cumulative Impacts, Franct-,Ise and small cellperrn1t ap 'Icarian review Linder chapter 22.121 $V1i0 shall neither . rohlbli nor have the effect of 'ro ribitin. the abiti o -n a. dean' to Fronde letecommunications services. rs nfra structure Bivalent, that Ei Design. Realew and Concealment. Small cat facilities shall conform lo design, teat .n and conceal a'standards and b r-ub'ect iia des review as se fo in rarmelteds Hl9hRghr. SVMC 22,' 1.150- C. Franchise ..royal. Franchises shall be a.. roved in the form of a Cit ordinance and franchises may only be approved by the City Council pursuant to its standard ordinance approval process;. provided however, that the City shalt meet arts applicable federal or slate time pear Ssinq requirements in revi wimp and approving or denvinti franchise application. D. Other pored. ions o ■•novel_ approval referenced in chap_Ler 22.121 reouirerlue°rlts_ a oval of 2 5V C nchl se s are CO al di ell .errnit ar,d4 other ed on the rlk 'n, 1, Satisfy all explicablehulk re uirernants Including but not limited to height, noise. ti ht. and a other a. icalat. o i •. re•uiremer 2. P ovide wriite of of the ao •ro ala the owner of a - utility pole fir .the, 15 48 2°A-247 3-15.ai5t3,r. 001$17 x -0Q0785 1 501ani Va1!ev 7-FAb1reQ±Lt"�ts,1f22J1 i CTA 2i117-Of105 draft 1/17/18 installation of ills facjiities nit stir dildo pole. ,Aaprciyal of a franchise does nal guthorize attachment City -awned utiI y poles or other structures. 15- Unless s9ec 1-1, provtdecl for In a franrtdse, lob laln a lease from the Cit ' do lie 1, a Cit s ,rim For the installs,ion or an ire ,1e a reElarerncn utiiil e an new around aased stwctu e base station or other e Over 6a feel attendant ezgbrhent on Cit is t -of -way or CT/ pro, 4, Goni.I will a■.licabie Cit aoval .messes OF the co-kic?iton oR (acilities, or the installation many new or replacement utility pales In the r~cth).-pf•Nav,. and 5. Comply with' all City construction staiidarda and stole and kE jerah codes when operating in Che right-of-y1a and obtain - resuired ierrnil to e ter the i'1tht-a`-, aye 2.121,060 Design and Concealment Standards. Small cell facilities shall be nslalled using stealth or concealment teoiGnoloq{. Stealth or concealanent technolaq applies to all small cell facilities. lncludirr[I. IIrnitatirkn, nas_ towers a • . is a eau'. ent enclosures. Fier any small cell f?citity, stealth means the use a both exit tin and future 1echnologw throu lch the small cell facilit is des'! non ID resemble or blend into an ab'act which is atreadv present In the Racal environntent, such as a tree streeIlic,hl, ar traffic signal. 11 also InctAgc A For those porlio+i ..af small dell facilities rittached to or part of'loll, power. slon or gather poles_ 1. Far new rnent technol ales shall be les laateoraled within ho .ole orifi' technicatt Infeasible_ New ubact toan a•.A 1afeCit nrl;must standards' 2. r rsxistl:tn.poles, jnteurated Irito the exislina design of the vale to whicli.lt is ttadied, with exte , . i .",r6 -cifo i ited lrt size d - ■.. a 10 t}te a !eSI extent technically feasible. lncludinq but not limited to beinq as flush as l;-ossible to the pole, not pralectirwi'Torre than fifteen feet vertically above the gale, end having architectural compatibility w}th the pole. 3. External prp[eclions shall be painted a color to resemble and match the pole so that thea oeasr to be part of the tole; 4, shall conform to any stru turaidI standards so as not to do trade the struotta enoineerlrl9 of the pale to which It is attached, 5. Shahlpot Interfere with the r rmal use tor pylnich the pole ie intended, including but not limited to b'od'ing any light'front light pa s. Interfering with power lines on dowel poles, and obscuring. any portion of tire. appLcable cion -face ori glens- and _ tennae fcx sn>Ia1I cell facilities shall be located Inside of an antenna enclosure no more than Thrice cubic feet In volume, or In the case of an antenna that has exposed elerpenjs, the erdertrta_and all of Its exp9 ani elements could]' within an irnaq;ha enclosure of n4 more than three cubic feel. nlfied uf1age designs are permitted r rowrided t11af itke jpveratI dimensions of such designs shall rtct exceed six la 4.628-2471.68S8w.3 904172-003795 Comment [racy. Clarify th4 di6Cien. FAUN pl�likY pinks mined and G➢s+'il,d klyi. numbly e?ecuftu+l 4.11114 such .s Milk,. k7m41J 1. puvemad hy9h■ flieriseineernenke: th,riattachmentis Euck1 a vt{it yikb utnipiid, replacement roil pr 4F required For s tr,M1y ii1 Ir, t a r it ■ ndlo r n directed 6r khn 4U% provider. etlirliMitinklLAkl]iSVL nkutr'desiredto6e & i i rse d nrern Nesting nen deg Munn installed on' Sppt.,ine Val:cy, LMobllra corrilylent$. it lih1A CTA 2t717•C005 Draft 1/17/18 cubic feel in votwr}el Antennae shall be located at least 20 feet above the base elevation of the ground unless technie llu In#easit74e. B. Prima eau'endosule shall be ti artier thsn seven e5n cubic In volurr a The following associated c:lignien; may be located oulslde the p irtiaryt equipment encIcSLIre and if so Iocatediare not included in the cn!orll ion al a rs rrlFni volume gjectric niter, concealment. telecomm demarcation box_ ground-based enclosures, battery back-tio power systems, wounding equipment, power transfer switch, arid cut-off syeltc'h. Primary equipment enclosures shall be Pulled blow oravnd Dr Locked and integrated ifltiko the surroundings uqless, Iechnica1Iy InfeasIblHa xlmt.y- �ti�� This shall inchoate incorporating the facilities into to base of the 09 i lFeorr54slrq ll�ta eri3tinCl surrounding fixtures.. sirc;h as herbage cantainers� q other power I�nxes- andlor ase of mete -nets reg d:.colors that blend Into the surrounding, setkinp. G7.ound•mounted facilites shall not be located in an Improved street or sidewakk. Ground•rnounte l facilities shall nrSt. Icrceled lrl stnmir rater faciti-rl, Inducting stzrmweter swales.. Jniflec oalnoiifla'q l rJrslons are permitted p rrsusrit060 ;A [Bp C. For small cell, facilities tnov,rited on one a; ttiorr~ building facades stealth_ or concealment technology rriear,s use of co r asod rrlaterj Is such lat the faci`it5. has arcl-itectural con atihitit >,aith the buijdir^tq. ll shalt be mounted on a wall o- an existing hu:Idine In a coeifiCruwatiprr as flush to the well as technically possible and shat) not proiect more tela three feet above the wale on ja.rnaunled bilfied camouflage design= bre Detrnittecl autst, alt to .2 2.i f?4j.Lb - a. Aduertlsina ar dis, Shalt net 17e b ated Pr) any small cell facility., ivwever, the owner of the small cell. facility shall place en Identification plate indic;etinn the norm of the wifeless service provide; {a;1d a telephone number for emergency contact on tic site E, EJa artificial ljohts other than those required by FAA or ether applicable eAcuity shall be ermitled Any security liahta shall tie down -shielded. F. '; mail cell fa Cities that •re not wit in the ri ht af-wa shall meet the minimum prmar . structure setback requirements for the undorI in,� zone, 0. s.Rrill ^e!J Jiacili,ies shah q t e-afitmlttcd insidientimonl of Fivale--ha. '4F - _ e imasialJ H. Location. &nail cell facilities snail riot be located within 12501 feet of any other small cell fadiiity unless the applicant demansttales th " no otli_r lc gran Lan aucuillinglate or Is sufficient to; meet the wireless service neede Irl II,a evr}I1t small tl fa iGli„ ecllllteri Iia be located within 260 feet. of another rv.xls"I'q ^_,snail calf fardlrty,The q„poilcanl snail rrake, d Ellia.d t®g9it rattcatt to, colIor.Carc la new incilrsj cm Ilhe sAinr tante or ittrLlc.taar.r trie existing ng smell ttculits` iii carder t9 e Imp2c15 fairiu Ii w srrr€rli 0411 17 1 ds2a-2173-6$5 v.aoo fi72- 7S5 {{Min./ant f LFM'MG] I Insert Its,: i Formatted, Hylirgnt { Formatted: HIglrll IM Cunato rut IL1411JIIrwrtteiL Comment flAlak Mart tEd [comment 11A53I raenft:t,YiinnanlIminabn SI,I in, FIrISSIClS 5m.) Deny Fi7,6Iwd bnpraaed co pun ■rnd spwarge In areas of high fiatwarrs USE; p4'Ls aind 1:,Wlilicmanurner9ts Will Iclulne Shlsten110 lrgy L(.1540 pnrve w`releIFNrelu users. 9 p64a b'aIr -Mobs Emmy t5. ] /2211E UP 2417-1X005 Draft 1/17/18 1Ita City may require aIol:.an1s lo_provide evidence of effoiis for 0:41 atlan II iicant m3°denlorislrate googjaith 0011= t4 collozate ktyr provir nq. wrIft'-n eviden:4 Inarn the otno• \NITales5 pinvi larfsl that ltiei are unwllliit GI it is IeCkl.ealhe itreabliglrr IG eollaale r horn le or st u Lee owners tai e will rr�t ,fl. !location or 11731 it i� 1e. hrl1 Ily infeasit]le to alis*.v Call[7C FI n 22.121.070 Small Coll Por It and Minor Deviations. A. The City Manager shall review applications for small cell permits far small cell deIc_p_ym,E,t1 b n fro ch se or small rJ1l�aern�i# Thi? Cily Mangier out l riz- minor cl ewlatlons in the -m Il cel 1 ernii from the dimensional deslon and concealment technologies referencojln the emitsto the fytrtchise or design standards where such deviation is necessary to abIc e a licant i rovide ccavere e and where such deviation does not materially differ from the City's desio'r and concealment standards or ar.hieyee eouivalent or title; inteagratioai. - - fit. Deviations in the dimensions or volume of 6rnnil cell facilities wiich do not exceed the cumulative tofaI provided b the definition of a small cell or micaocell facility irLRCVV 60.35.375 shall be considered a m1ogr deviation; provided, however that they do not defeat th cancealmen features sel C' "s se erail a Siwabledes'+n and n;.ealrnent sta_rards- C. Small cell permijs to install facilitiestncludin ap grove! or minor deviations shall be processed within 'ED clays Of recelptaf a Complete application grid final apPrnv for franchise, w'hichever ccqurs. last. 22,121.480 Slord OrontDeviations, Any request for 89grsifrcarr. deviations frcatr the approved small cell facilities .desizyn desF e- din the f chise small c=II aermit o; Cil,` ' slat standards shell #?e raauire a, conditional use permit anJ shall be considered under the orovielons of chapter 22.120 SVMC and pursuant to the lirrteiines established in SVMC 22,122.030 and SVMC 22.122,040- A significant cevlatian ie not a substantia change. See _pperIciixA or the SVfv1 C, 22,12I.O 0 amaliance 4+11 State Processing Llmltatiorrs. Review of franchise and sITlatl cell t s shall co .1 'with Ovisions of FCV'I 35-99,430. fipplica#ions sha',I be reviewed, completeness determined and the timefrema tolled as provided inchapter -122 SV1 C. 18 1426 -?47.6851v-3 00461)2• 000795 "vent [uti14]rirmnteat 1 Spas npVaI1 Y,T-I1'tcbilernmm n1.:. CTA 2417.4005 Draft 1117/18 DRAFT Chapter 22,122 SVMC—tiliireles5 Communications and Small Cell Facil`ty Review Periods, 22.122..010. Purpose. Crogress and the Federal Com0nunications Commission ITave. pursuant to lie authprily granted by 47 LI S C. 253tc) and 47 U.S.C. 332(aL rgguired local governments to ac1 on wirel F,s communication, facility aPpIk ations within a reasonable period of time and have established time limits far local review. Tina Wastiinotor, State, G.ecaislatu•e has 21sp aclopfad s3intlar finita inns under the rl�p1'j bps aFchaplr~r 35.99 RCW. fkcc:ordini' I1f, the Cily adopts the following time limits for review eaf apalicttions for eligible (aciltyf requests, small cell _per -nits, 2nd other approvals for serv'ir.e otaVidels of telecommunication sorvit es 22.122020 EGlOble Faciliit.es Reque«sk, A. M plica,„ ioru Review. 1. AppliDalion. the City Manager shall prepare and make publish available pn application form which shall be limited to tie nformatiorb i cessa for 'ti 0 consider carie her ns Iic lion Is aii eliulble facilities revuesl The adolica1tvnl m not reu!re the applicant to rQmo strote a aired or business case for the ro Dried modification. Type of Review Upon reuelU`. of an a Ilya re.u- . he Cit Manaoer shall reVte'.V applicatiion qualifies as an etia�lble taallities 3. Timeframe for Review. Within submits a complete eligible facilities rectu' the aa'Itrcalion ,i. less it & 1 al the arnll tion for an elitlibsc r u il.h such an Bratton to €let ine whether tlw 1uest. SLl dJ of the data on which an applican' est app'ic cion; the Cit h't�r]at�er Loll approve cation is Gr 1 CS not covered by This pVhv1C 22,122.020. 5. ToIIV q of the Timefrarn for Review, The 60 -da review arlod bealns to run wtteri iihe ooilicolrete application is Filed rd mav� be tailed only Wy rntaktoal -s reernenl by the c leader and the a�ilpbc2rtt.ercases wham the City C larlap cfeterrrlirtes that (ht anolbcalion inccrnplete. The timefrarrie for rcvow of an Elielofe Facilities Reouest is not tolled_ a moratorium on the review of apphcatio,t . a, To, toll the 1 elrame fcf Vicon .Ieterress. the Cit Marla rr shall of zeceipt of IN aPelication, *rovide written notice s:peciflcallw delineating all missing documents of IITrfomTation required in the aoalrtattotn. to the a Irani hin 30 da 19 1 3 o0d5172-0 7 5 N sookalLyTillei, T.I4Aobre. t mrients, 117 i E CIA 2U17-flO145 Draft V17f18 b. The timatrae lar review begins Rrnrling again whe3n.tFe aDplacant makes. a complm compliant. su• •t t l subniis to n es nse io the Ci , in er's notice of incornpioleness. c Following a suppiamental suhrnission, the C_itylaratier shall notlf the au 'leant wi nth 0 da s f lie = • ■lernental ubrnisEion did not .rwvide._ he Information identified in the original notice delineating missino Friormation, The I mefrarrte: is Idled in the case of seocand or subsequent notices purstrartt Ito the prr edures iderG ified irr + r h 4 of this section. Sec ntr or subsequent Mtice of into rTT�letenees nn y not &p1< i • rrttssin. docurnerit 0 lriformatia that was not delineated in the original n+ 1i of Incompleteness. E7. Determination t at licatiori is not n Eli ILiI FaciGities Re cost. 9r the C. na ter dete ir�rres that IhR a,gplicant's request does not qualify as an eyliaihie facilities ,dues the ti •ee .eriocls est_ h1'shed h t a .lic.able sta e or federal law?rut chapter. 22.122 SVMC begin to rein from_ Ale Issuantasf the City Manager's deci$ion that the cation is na an ell Fbla faatitles re vest To the lextent aktitional information Is nedess ry, the Ci.l? Manager may request such information from the appliugnt to evaluat€� fire aoplicatipn under other,„provisions of this chapter 22-122 SVMC and sooFicable law. C, Failure to Act in the event the Cit M-na.er fails to a•+roue or den a reouest for an eligible facilities request within the tirnefrarrle for review t ocountln i For any totlincix. e.uest sTia( be deeme' +ranted. The ti erned rant do =s , of become effective unlllihe aortlicant-niptifies the Gifu Manager in writing alter the rciviewperiocf has expired (accounting for any tolling) that the.annlir<•ation has been dee'nedram„ rated, L . Remedies, Both the a pt,tjn1 and the City may bring da'inis related to_Section 0409(a]. of the Spectrum Act to any court of competent jurisdiction, 22.122.130 Collocation, It+ible coiloca ons shall be licati n. a Git Mann er she notif the a ▪ p lication whe her it is con tete or if additional Information is required. The term collocation shall not aooltr 'ia the Inttral pia rrrent of a smaq cell facility on a utility pole or n an other base station ar fewer thrat as not constructed for the so'e or prirnerV purpose of an FCC licensed a lenna and the'r associated fecilities- rocessed within ¶ 0 da s of recd +•t of a conn+ ete cant Al Inda sofrace' .tofan 22.122,040 N4 relessComrnunloa "o Facilltles. New Wireress corn lege a r'ece'ipt of nil r0 u lttions facilities shall be .rocessFd within 150 da of recei.t of tii�n, Trt Ch Mane er ebelr notifv the applicant with* 30 days of bather it is orn,tete or It add'st+anal information is required 24 1 4Z17-sa P 12-O 7 5 y kan 7-Moblte nits 1 22118 LTA 2017-DE105 Draft 1/l7/1s DRAFT Chapter 17.80 17,00.030 Assignment of diEevolopntent application classification. A. Assignment by Table. Land use and devoiopment applications shawl be classified pursuant to Table 17.00-1 below' Table 17.80-1 — Permit Typo and Land Use Application Type Land Use and DEveloprnent Application Type I Type II Accessary dwelling units SV MC Cross - Reference 19.40 Administrative deterrnlnatiam by city manager or designee Multiple or building official Administrative exception Administrative interpretation 1 9,1 40 17.50, 010 L3oundary line adjustments and eliminations 20.80 Building permits rot subject to SEPA 21, 20.040 Fioodplaln develcprnent Grading permits 21.30 24.50 Home business permit 19.65,150 Shoreline letter of exemption 21.50 Record of survey to establish Tots within a binding site plan 20,&}_040 22.130.100 Right -of -Way perrriits Site plan review 19,130 Small cell permit Temporary use pemlit 22.,121- 22.122 19.180 Time extensions for preliminary subdivision, short subdivision, or binding site pian A4teratiarts — preliminary and final subdivisions, short subdivisions, binding site plans Binding site pian—preliminary and final Binding site plan—change of conditions 20,30.0150 20.50 20.50 20.50 SEPA threshold determination 21,20,0& Shoreline conditional use permit 21 48.28.24?i704-0O 795 21,50 15vpkai o Valley, T -Mobile comintai$. 10211$ CIA 2017-0445 Draft 1/17/18 Shoreline nonconforming use or structure review Shoreline substantial development permit 21.50 21.50 Shoreline variance Short subdivision — preliminary and final Preliminary short srrbdivisinn, binding site plan change of conditions Type 111 Type 1V Wireless vemmunicaUor facilities Conditional use permits Planned residential developmen's Plat vacation 21.54 24,30, 20.40 20.30 22.120 19.150 Preliminary subdivision — change of conditions Subdivisions — preliminary 10.50 20,70.020 20,50 20.30 Variance 19-170 Zoning map amendments (site-specific: rezones) 19,30,030 Annual Comprehensive Plan amendments (text andlor map) Area -wide zoning map amendments Development Code text amendments 17.80.140 17,80.140 17.80.150 8. Assignment by City Manager or Designee. Land use and development applications not defined in Table if.7.13L0 shall be assigned a type based ors the most closely related application type by the city manager or designee, unless exempt under SVN.0 17.80.040. When more than one procedure may be appropriate, t?}e process providing the greatest opportenlly for public notice shall be followed. C. Shoreline letters of exerrplion, shoreline substantial development permits, shoreline conditional use per MRS, shoreline variances, and shoreline nonconforming use or structure review shall be pressed pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 17.80 SWAG, subject to any additional or modified procedures provided in Chapter 21.50 SVl11C, Shoreline Regulations, including submittals, completeness review, notices, hearings, and decisions. Small Dell rm`ts anci.v. e s raananur1lcaation tacII t es shall be ro}cesse[i ursuaar !o the,procedures set forth In c .- r er 17.80 SVMC exce t as ma .therwlse be reri re_d pursuant to federal and stale law, includini but not limited to 47 U.S.C. § 1455(a) {S.ecji❑n 0409{a1 of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Ad of 20' ri and cb ap,ar 55.09 RCW. Chapter 22.122 SVMC specifics applicable tirpeperiuds for I'eview LR,d_pLpuessinni of elio ble facilities reouesls, collocati❑ns_ small colt permits.. Aird new yvlreless coma irlipatian facilities, QE. Except as provided In Table 17.80-1. change of conditions for permits shall be processed the same as the original permit type. 22 1 ae213-z413•ta@58v DoaeX72.0M/ 5 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 13, 2018 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: Renewal of Economic Development funds for Crave! 2018 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 3.46, Contracts for Service PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: In February 2017, the City Council approved a partnership with Vision Marketing and Adam Hegsted to host Crave! on June 15-18, 2017, at CenterPlace. 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 studied was the development of new events and festivals based in Spokane Valley that complement ValleyFest and generate tourism. In 2017, the City entered into a contract with Vision Marketing and Adam Hegsted regarding Vision Marketing's Crave! event on June 15-18 at CenterPlace. The City procured marketing services through the contract for up to $50,000 for 2017, but a portion of these funds was returned to the City through the rental fees associated with CenterPlace. The contract was renewable up to four annual extensions. Ticket sales for Crave! were very strong for an inaugural event — attended by more than 2,000 from 11 states and Canada; 40 regional chefs showcased; more than 235 reported hotel stays; and there was significant media coverage and digital media interest. In 2018, Crave! is scheduled for July 12-15. The event was moved to July to take advantage of warmer weather and the anticipated Phase 1 improvements to the west lawn at CenterPlace. Ticket sales so far are strong and the number of chefs featured will increase to about 60. The selection of food and artisans will be increased at the Grand Tastings on Friday and Saturday. It is anticipated that attendance and local hotel stays will only grow as the event gains momentum in its second year. Vision Marketing received $30,000 through the City's Lodging Tax revenue appropriation process in January 2018 to support this year's Crave! event. The City proposes to supplement the lodging tax dollars with $20,000 in currently budgeted 2018 Economic Development marketing funds. On February 27, 2018, the City Council heard a proposal to award $20,000 in economic development marketing funds for sponsorship of the 2018 event, and indicated a consensus to bring the contract renewal back for approval consideration. OPTIONS: Move to authorize the City Manager to execute a Letter of Renewal in substantially the form provided as recommended or amended related to Crave! in 2018. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute a Letter of Renewal in substantially the form provided, related to Crave! in 2018. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Cost of sponsorship in 2018 is $50,000: $30,000 from the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) and $20,000 from the currently budgeted 2018 Economic Development marketing funds. The City's cost in subsequent years could come from a combination of Lodging Tax funds, depending on the outcome of future LTAC meetings, and Economic Development marketing funds. STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger, Economic Development Manager Lesli Brassfield, Economic Development Specialist ATTACHMENTS: Crave! Presentation Draft Letter of Renewal City of Spokane Valley Economic Development Division City Council Presentation ar — ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Attendance & Lodging SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ■2018 attendance goal • More than 3,000; closer to 4,000 ■Hotel stays ■ Identified about 235 stays in 2017 ■ Continue to collaborate with Spokane Valley hotels in 2018 2 Local Chefs & Eateries Spokane Valley invited: ■ Craft & Gather ■Ambrosia ■ MAX at Mirabeau Park Hote ■ Christopher's Catering LA SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 3 KREM2 chef Chad White talks Crave! Food and Drink celebration Advertising ` ! •4 11113=a$`...'-', Eimhamfar. edbo.r hem.atnweular — c.,hl— — BWWNW}LOWNt2 AN EXPERIENCE FOODIES WILL CRAVE CRAVE! FOOD & DRINK CELEBRATION STARTS TMRW urny nn..swxane nru I...-.a< e. n pwwmemw Crave NW Food & Drink Celebration, Spokane Valley Crave Neeisa thawin showcase mre <a event e talents of visionary chefs fmmamund the Northwest. -heavens Makature awlde wneIy aim., inward and r int 'nal flavors from Nash seafood andranch-raisedmeats to farm -to - table pradueeand inventivedewerts Culinary highlights forthelene event include a Grand Tasting Tent.. Global Street foods Carnival¢. Seafacd Bash, Gee Si Smoke Fare and a father's Day Brunch, In addition to artisan food samplings. Crave kW offers wine, craft beer and specialty cocktail tastings. with an emphasis on Northwest producers and Ingredients. Adistinguished group Of award-winning brewmasters. CO00r roasters.wineenekers, distillers and mixel kseswill .r<sant a bountiful arra northwest TRAWELpLIFE The culinary and creative farce behind Crave NW s Spokane chef and restaurateur AdamNegsled,Chef- owner of The Wandering Table, The Gilded unicorn. Cards Bruncheon and going On rightness hnaurreglon, and Crave NW will Help us germ thereat levet" Crave NW wi0 he helafane 15 to., 2017, eerplace Regional Event Center, a 54000-s uare-root event • Early stages: Focus on earned media and social media to reach broad audiences and generate "buzz" in early stages of event. • Engage traditional media through sponsorships (iHeartMedia, Sizzle Magazine, retail sponsors) as event nears SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ■ Visit Spokane providing outreach 4 Transportation Options ■ Encourage local hotels to offer shuttle services ■ Maintain a location for Uber, Lyft and taxi pickup/ drop off ■ Can assist if necessary SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 5 City Sponsorship: Crave! ■ 2017: City contributed $50,000 in economic development marketing funds to help launch the event. ■ Contract was renewable for up to five years, depending on other funding ■ 2018 January: $30,000 lodging tax revenue was awarded to Crave. • City proposes renewal of economic development funds in 2018, with reduction to $20,000. SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 6 SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 7 0'N, jaiy March 13, 2018 Vision Marketing LLC P.O. Box 85 Newman Lake, WA 99025 10210 E Sprague Avenue • Spokane Valley WA 99206 Phone: (509) 720-5000 • Fax: (509) 720-5075 • www.spokanevalley.org Email: cityhall@spokanevalley.org Re: Implementation of 2018 option year renewal for Agreement 17-020 with Vision Marketing LLC, executed March 6, 2017 Dear Tom: The City executed an Agreement for provision of marketing services related to Crave! on March 6, 2017, by and between the City of Spokane Valley, hereinafter "City", and Vision Marketing LLC, hereinafter "Consultant" and jointly referred to as "Parties." The original Agreement states that it was for one year, with four optional one-year terms possible if the parties mutually agree to exercise the options each year. This is the first year of four possible option years that can be exercised and runs through December 31, 2018. The City would like to exercise the 2018 option year of the Agreement. The Compensation as outlined in the Agreement, shall not exceed $50,000. Consultant has sought and obtained $30,000 in lodging tax revenue funding and the City will directly pay the remaining $20,000. The history of the annual renewals, including dollar amounts, is set forth as follows: Original contract amount .$50,000 2018 Renewal $50,000* *$30,000 in lodging tax revenues and $20,000 in direct City funds All of the other contract provisions contained in the original Agreement shall remain in place and remain unchanged in exercising this option year. If you are in agreement with exercising the 2018 option year, please sign below to acknowledge the receipt and concurrence to perform the 2018 option year. Please return two copies to the City for execution, along with current insurance information. A fully executed original copy will be mailed to you for your files. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Vision Marketing LLC Mark Calhoun, City Manager Name Title ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 13, 2018 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Potential Transportation Grants — Call for Projects: Washington State Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.77.010 six-year TIP; RCW 47.06A Freight Mobility PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Administrative Report on 2018 FMSIB call for projects, February 27, 2018; Resolution 17-011 - Adoption of the 2018-2023 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), May 23, 2017; Approved motion to apply for Surface Transportation Preservation (STP) funds for the Argonne Road — Indiana to Montgomery Concrete Reconstruction Project, March 25, 2014. BACKGROUND: On January 15, 2018, the FMSIB issued a Call for Projects that improve the movement of freight and/or mitigate the movement of freight through local communities. The program funds will be available for two construction windows: $10 million between 2019-2021 and $15 million between 2021-2023. Awarded funding can only be spent on the Construction (CN) phase of the project. The minimum match is 20 percent. Due to the scale of the identified projects discussed below, multiple funding sources are anticipated in order to fully fund any given project. Funds are awarded based on the presumption that the project will be completely funded by the designated award biennium. Generally, the City has used awarded FMSIB funds as the first funding source to large projects. Awarded funds are typically leveraged to secure additional grant funds from other sources. For example, FMSIB awarded a $2 Million grant to the Sullivan Road West -Bridge Replacement Project (10% of total project cost) and up to $10 Million to the Barker Road Grade Separation Project (20% of the total project cost, with a maximum award of $10 Million). The FMSIB program has historically served as the first funding source for the City's larger capital improvement projects. A specific City -match value is not required at the time of application or at the time of award. Alternatively, FMSIB has typically funded a fraction of the total project cost (i.e. 10%-20%) and the City is then required to identify alternative funding sources, such as City funds, State or Federal grants, in order to fully fund a project. FMSIB applications are due March 30, 2018. Staff has reviewed the grant scoring criterion and compared it to the City's 2018-2023 TIP, Pavement Management Program, Comprehensive Plan, and other elements of the City's transportation network. Staff anticipates that the projects proposed below will score well and have potential to receive funding. Please note that estimated project costs are planning -level preliminary estimates and are anticipated to change as more information becomes available and the grant applications are finalized. Projects identified in Table 1 are included in the City's 6 -Year TIP. TABLE 1. Potential FMSIB Projects List FMSIB Project Name Total Estimated FMSIB Request Secured Funds Cost (%) Amount ($) Source Argonne Road — Indiana to Montgomery Concrete Reconstruction' $5,800,000 $1,160,000 (20%) $0 Barker Road Widening — Spokane River to SR 2902(20%) $8,400,000 $1,680,000 $106,5003 City 'Project has been included in the City's 6 -year TIP since 2013. 'Project has been included in the City's 6 -year TIP since 2014. 'The Engineering phase (PE) is City -funded at $106,500 from Fund 303, to initiate the Euclid to Garland phase. OPTIONS: 1) Approve the list of recommended projects for FMSIB grant applications as presented, 2) take other appropriate action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize the City Manager or designee to apply for FMSIB grants for the Argonne Road — Indiana to Montgomery Concrete Reconstruction project and the Barker Road Widening — Spokane River to SR 290 project. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None at this time. STAFF CONTACTS: Adam Jackson — Planning & Grants Engineer Mike Basinger — Economic Development Manager ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation Potential Grant Opportunity Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) March 13, 2018 Adam Jackson, P.E. Planning & Grants Engineer Economic Development Division SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 1 2018 FMSIB FUNDING $10 Million available 2019-2021 $15 Million available 2021-2023 • Applications Due • Preliminary Award Interviews ■ Final Project Awards • Max Award SPOKANE r VALLEY — ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT March 30 May 1 June 1 80% y® �® YOpanm0IH401n404MMI0n Phaas R. 000411 Deane rel Co Local /agency Federal Ald ProJncl Prospectus W .F CHT MOBILITY 1ISAIEGIC INVESTMENT BOND a Pm:N.11,1019 Mr. Blll ILINy City o[sn spiio V,II:y secs]. veer, Wasb r_, Suite 105 sp^e000v.Ilzx a�,�nmxeor 992.06,74 n'^Barter Road....F Grade 4.n.r.ua^ rev sots trusses! Highs, Pr.i¢Ll Pro,rnm Yo Endo 'alt Luaing aparil Penni!, 11q;,- T P in;;d N.`.plcnied 1 N aclo,_no., "MHPpJ �ia kd F Oe0. � Pc am c..lh.v4 lme ofoksPara, ru.A a�a ms sz _un ord. to - mck reulb e �blc 1 __ 2 2018 RECOMMENDED PROJECTS Argonne Road Indiana to Montgomery ARGONNE - PROJECT SUMMARY • Estimated Total Project Cost $5.8 Million • FMSIB Requested Amount: $1,180,000 (20% of total) • T-1 Corridor Designation • Average Daily Traffic (ADT): 36,000 • Project Length: Approx. 1,400 Ft • Project Scope: • Full width replacement of existing asphalt with reinforced concrete pavement. • Sidewalk curb ramps and street crossings will be updated to comply with current regulations as applicable. • Funding window: 2021-2023. SPOKANE VALLEY — ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT E Buckeyetve e eucrceyenv� QY Yerk Ave z P�a •'• •� Z n • E Mcntgcmery Ave E Montgomery Avu E Mentgomory Ave z� Z z 2 E Mansfield Ave z Nara Ave LSO z bnn i M 5s9N'i��i gp ivy 9LE287(TFkamP Ave ,n EMission AacE Mission Ave 7 E Mnntgome y A' E Shannon AveE E 190 W287 OFF Ra mP EI��v Et£y9�25�ONRa�p E Nora E Nl ssionA 4 BARKER - PROJECT SUMMARY ■ Estimated Total Project Cost $8.4 Million ■ Garland to Grade Separation - $2.1 Million ■ Euclid to Garland - $2.5 Million ■ Spokane River to Euclid - $3.8 Million ■ FMSIB Requested Amount: $1,680,000 (20% of total) ■ T-2 Corridor Designation (Spokane River to Euclid) ■ T-3 Corridor Designation (Euclid to SR 290) ■ Average Daily Traffic (ADT): ■ 13,000 (Spokane River to Euclid) & 6,600 (Euclid to SR 290) ■ Project Scope: Widen to 3 lane arterial, provide 10' wide shared -use path; partner with County to install sewer. ■ Funding window: 2019-202 irAoLKilEy - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 4111%. sow usimm.•- WI,- .4, PROJECT FUNDING SUMMARY Project Name Total Estimated Cost FMSIB Request Secured Funds Amount($) Source Argonne Road - Indiana to Montgomery Concrete Reconstruction $5,800,000 $1,160,000 (20%) $01 Barker Road Widening - Spokane River to SR 290(20%) $8,400,000 $1,680,000 $106,5002 City 'Match dollars may be from sources other than City funds, such as other grant programs. 2The Engineering phase (PE) is City -funded at $106,500 from Fund 303, to initiate the Euclid to Garland phase. SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOM/C DEVELOPMENT 6 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 13, 2018 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Potential Grant Opportunities Potential Transportation Grants — Call for Projects: • Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) federal funds for Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG), Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality (CMAQ) and Surface Transportation Block Grant — Set Aside (STBG-SA). • City Safety Program (CSP) • Pedestrian & Bicycle Program (PBP) and Safe Routes to School (SRTS) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.77.010: Six-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: March 25, 2014: Approved motion to apply for Surface Transportation Preservation (STP) funds for the Argonne Road — Indiana to Montgomery Concrete Reconstruction Project. May 23, 2017: Passed Resolution 17-011 - Adoption of the 2018-2023 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) BACKGROUND: SRTC FUNDING PROGRAMS On March 9, 2018, SRTC is expected to release a call for projects allocating federal transportation dollars for the STBG (formerly STP), CMAQ, and STBG-SA (formerly TAP) funding programs. The following information is based on multiple coordination meetings between staff and SRTC. Program specific details are not official until the formal call for projects is released on March 9. Applications for all funding programs are due May 11, 2018. STBG funds are the most flexible source of federal funds used for nearly all project types: construction, reconstruction, preservation, safety, multimodal projects, or planning projects. Total available funds from the STBG program are $27 million for the years 2020-2023. In order to fund various regional projects, SRTC has identified "off the top" dollars that are taken from the STBG funds prior to the competitive application/award process. Further, STBG funds are distributed across three agency types: Rural -Small, Urban -Small, and Urban. Spokane Valley is an Urban agency and competes with neighboring jurisdictions, most notably the City of Spokane and Spokane County. After all considerations, it is estimated that Spokane Valley will be competing for approximately $18 million of STBG funds. Page 1 of 4 CMAQ funds are typically applied to transportation projects or programs that improve air quality and ultimately contribute to the maintenance of the national air quality standards in the Spokane region. CMAQ funding can be used for projects that reduce carbon monoxide (CO) and coarse particulate matter (PM10) emissions. Eligible project types include multimodal projects, intelligent transportation systems (ITS), or intersection improvements to improve the flow of traffic. Available funds from the CMAQ program total $10 million for the years 2021-2023. STBG-SA funds on -and -off road facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians and other enhancements to surface transportation. Eligible projects include sidewalk and bicycle facilities, traffic calming projects, or multimodal projects. Available funds from the STBG-SA program total $2 million for the years 2021-2023. Given the City's total request amount of over $11 million, it is unrealistic to assume the City will receive funding for all proposed projects. When accounting for other regional considerations and likely projects that will be awarded to neighboring agencies, a Spokane Valley award amount between $3 million and $6 million can be anticipated. CSP FUNDING PROGRAM On January 8, 2018, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) issued a Call for Projects focusing on engineering countermeasures and strategies that help reduce fatal and serious injury crashes through the City Safety Program (CSP). The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) funds the CSP and administers the program to the states under the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP). The CSP will award $25 Million as part of the 2018 call for projects. The minimum match is 10 percent across all three phases of the project; preliminary engineering (PE), right-of-way (RW) and construction (CN). If a project commits to obligating the CN phase by April 30, 2021, then the 10% match is waived for the CN phase. The CSP has two subprograms: Spot and Systemic. Spot location projects address specific safety issues indicated in crash history and generally receive about 2/3 of the funding allotment. Systemic projects are typically widespread, lower-cost treatments that usually receive about 1/3 of the funding allotment. CSP applications are due April 16, 2018. To focus current funding efforts, staff prioritized CSP -eligible elements taken from the projects identified in Table 1. Staff intends to submit a parallel application for these eligible elements. If the eligible elements are awarded funds, those dollars will reduce the overall project need from SRTC. • Citywide Signal Backplates: Order and install retro-reflectorized borders on traffic signal back -plates to increase traffic control visibility and visual cues for drivers at night. • Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvements: Eligible elements: curbing, concrete medians and traffic control. • Barker Road Corridor: Eligible elements: 10 -foot asphalt shared -use pathway. • Pines and Mission Intersection Improvements: Eligible elements: turn lanes, striping and signal adjustment. Page 2 of 4 PBP & SRTS FUNDING PROGRAMS On January 15, 2018, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) issued a Call for Projects for the PBP and SRTS that aim to improve safety and increase the number of people walking or bicycling. Both programs utilize the City's 5 -year pedestrian and bicycle crash history, as recorded and provided by WSDOT. The PBP will award $18.4 Million and the SRTS will award $19.2 Million as part of the 2018 call for projects. There is no minimum match required by applicants but preference will be given to projects with matching funds. Both funding programs share the same application. SRTS applications are due April 27, 2018 and PBP applications are due May 11, 2018. To focus current funding efforts, staff prioritized PBP/SRTS-eligible elements taken from the projects identified in Table 1. Staff intends to submit a parallel application for these eligible elements. If the eligible elements are awarded funds, those dollars will reduce the overall project need from SRTC. • Sprague/Barker Intersection Improvements: Eligible elements: sidewalks, pedestrian ramps and crossings, and traffic control. • Barker Road Corridor: Eligible elements: 10 -foot asphalt shared -use pathway. • Wilbur Road: Boone to Maxwell Eligible elements: 75% of project is on a designated Safe Routes to School. TABLE 1. Projects List' # Project Total Cost Secured Funds Funding Request Fund Source City Match (13.5%) Comment 1 2 3 Barker Corridor (3 Projects) $8,400,000 $106,500 $5,812,800 STBG $907,200 STBG + $1.68 M from FMSIB CSP/PBP Apps 4 Sprague & Barker Intersection $1,300,000 $140,220 $1,124,500 CMAQ $175,500 CSP/PBP/SRTS Apps 5 Argonne Reconstruction $5,800,000 - $2,900,000 STBG $391,500 20% FMSIB + $1,348,500 Need 6 Pines & Mission Intersection $1,400,000 Developer Funds $1,211,000 CMAQ $189,000 CSP Apps 7 Wilbur Road Sidewalk $535,000* - $462,775 STBG-SA $72,225 *SRTS may fund up to 75% ($401,250) 8 Citywide Signal Backplates $180,000 - $162,000 CSP $18,000* *Indicates a 10% match, not 13.5% TOTAL $11,673,075 - $1,753,425 'Note that estimated project costs are planning -level preliminary estimates and may change as more information becomes available and the grant applications are finalized. Page 3 of 4 OPTIONS: Discussion. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: No action required this evening, but staff will return to the March 27, 2018 Council Meeting seeking Council action on a motion consideration. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: SRTC funds require a minimum City -match of 13.5%. CSP funds require a minimum match of 10%. If a project is able to obligate CN funds by April 30, 2021, the 10% match for the CN phase is waived and is funded at 100%. For estimation purposes, City -match calculations included the 10% match for the CN phase. PBP and SRTS programs do not require a City match. STAFF CONTACTS: Adam Jackson — Planning & Grants Engineer Colin Quinn -Hurst — Sr. Transportation Planner Mike Basinger — Economic Development Manager ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation Page 4 of 4 Potential Grant Opportunities Highway Safety improvement Program Data Driven Decisions Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) STBG - Set Aside (STBG-SA) Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) City Safety Program (CSP) Pedestrian & Bicycle Program (PBP) Safe Routes to School (SRTS) 464 U.:. partrrent of Transporialion F-ed roi Highway Administration A SPOKANE A VALLEY — ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT March 13, 2018 Adam Jackson, P.E., Planning & Grants Engineer Colin Quinn -Hurst, Sr. Transportation Planner Economic Development Division SRTC Program Details Funding Window Total Funds Eligible $ Est. City Award STBG 2020-2023 $ 27 Mil $18 Mil $3-6 Mil Total STBG - Set Aside 2021-2023 $ 2 Mil $ 2 Mil <$1 Mil Total CMAQ 2021-2023 $ 10 Mil $10 Mil <$3 Mil Total ■ Pre -Application eligibility worksheets are due April 6th ■ Applications are due May 11th ■ One application for all programs, but supplemental info provided for STBG-SA and CMAQ ■ Preliminary award list announced in July, 2018 ■ Project awards announced in August, 2018 SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 2 2018 CSP Funding $25 Million available ■ 2/3 for Spot Location projects ■ 1/3 for Systemic projects ■ 10% City match required ■ 90% funding from CSP for preliminary engineering (PE) and right-of-way (RW) phases. ■ 100% funding from CSP for construction (CN) phase if CN funds are authorized by April 30, 2021 ■ Applications Due April 16 ■ Project Awards Fall 2018 SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT tl V 311i0 3 2018 PBP & SRTS Funding Pedestrian & Bicycle Program • Expected Funding Amount ■ Applications Due • Final Project Awards Safe Routes to School Program • Expected Funding Amount ■ Applications Due • Final Project Awards SPOKANE VALLEY�.EoEN $18.4 M May 11 June 2019 $19.2 M April 27 June 2019 y® �® oe 1',7,, H el TraneneHatlen �ram aouc I', il rel Lcf rut Local /agency Federal Aid PrOpel Prospectus ERF GHT MO fiILITY f I liAlEGIC INVESTMENT ROAD �I�r�.s,are DocemAa 11 Mr. MI II�IbI@ City of Spo,,,allay 11.707 Frit spriiguenur, Suite l05 Syoemevailxx a'asdlnumn 992o6fi 9k Railcar to.avrvsF Grad. SE, rad nri FFV±tlzd v.rioeal mein, Preighl Pnigrnm !Ma'alruuJing 1lem Mr. Il�Iprg' 1rv�1 F tltl da � cr vo Ims of DN., ray rin: uuo SR Sl railroad in opilor mcd,tate ryx imck reunbwse>r..et i 1=gblc� 1 nu_� 4 2018 Recommended Projects Argonne Concrete Reconstruction Pines & Mission Intersection Improvement Wilbur Road Sidewalk Project "■ ■■Y*■ 1 • im Iri 06 ■ .4 • 4 • • + Tteni Ave cis0z es- andield Ave I gp F tvy E 190 Fwyr E190Fwy E 1 90 F' E SpregueAve r ...el..; 4- • *. Legend , • . 1 cu • *•. 4 ■� - -Z-- I i 1115 MV * 1) ■ 4 Li F UU sac FOS FC- sF • i $ f.■ r - ECONOM4C DEVELOPMENT E 8th Ave 0 E, 4Th Pyre ''. ,,# _ 9. • .ASI■■■■1% •. ■E �., • cra r o__I L. Ta rrA AVP ■.+f nn nn E 32nd Barker Road Corridor 1 Sprague & Barker Intersection Improvement Citywide Signal Backplates Project Barker Road Corridor - 3 Projects STBG Funding Request: $5,812,800 City Match: $907,200 (13.5%) Project Scope: Widen existing two lane road to a 3 -lane arterial with a 10' shared -use path; partner with Spokane County for sewer installation. Actual project limits will stop at that southern extent of proposed grade separation. Fund Source Amount % Comments STBG Request $ 5,812,800 69% FMSIB Request $ 1,680,000 20% 2019-2021 Funds City $ 907,200 11% STBG match 13.5% Other - - CSP/PBP Total $ 8,400,000 100% SPOKANE - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Sprague & Barker Intersection (CMAQ) CMAQ Funding Request: $1,124,500 City Match: $175,500 (13.5%) Project Scope: Intersection capacity improvements (signal or roundabout) with consideration to WSDOT proposed improvements at the Barker/I-90 interchange. Fund Source Amount % Comments CMAQ Request $ 1,124,500 86.5% 2021-2023 Funds City $ 175,500 13.5% Other - - CSP/PBP/SRTS Total $ 1,300,000 100% SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 2018-2023 TIP #1 7 STBG Funding Request: $2,900,000 City Match: $391,500 (13.5%) Project Scope: Remove and Replace (R&R) 7 -lanes of asphalt with reinforced concrete pavement. Signal modifications and turning improvements proposed at Montgomery intersection. All sidewalk curb ramps and street crossings will be updated to comply with current regulations as applicable. Fund Source Amount % Comments STBG Request $ 2,900,000 50% 2018 FMSIB Partnership FMSIB Request $ 1,160,000 20% 2021-2023 Funds City $ 391,500 7% STBG match 13.5% Other $ 1,348,500 23% Total $ 5,800,000 100% 2018-2023 TIP # 11 Average Daily Traffic (ADT): 36,000 Pines & Mission Improvement (CMAQ) MEW CMAQ Funding Request: $1,211,000 (All Phases) City Match (CMAQ ONLY): $189,000 (13.5%) Project Scope: Add Pines southbound right turn lane onto Mission, add Mission eastbound duel left on to Pines, reconfigure Mission westbound to left turn, through, and right turn lanes, reconfigure signal as applicable. Fund Source Amount % Comments CMAQ Request $ 1,211,000 86.5% 2021-2023 Funds City Match $ 189,000 13.5% Other - - Developer/CSP Total $ 1,400,000 100% SPOKANE VALLEY — ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT z_ .1111 01 _! 'E'Missio� Ave. E Miss 6n Ave • Ii 2018-2023 TIP #27 aI`aIMENMEMMINI- 111.ilii", Average Daily Traffic (ADT): 33,000 (Pines) & 9,000 (Mission) 9 Wilbur Road Sidewalk (STBG-SA) STBG-SA Funding Request: $462,775 (All Phases) City Match (STBG-SA ONLY): $72,225 (13.5%) Project Scope: From Boone to Mission, provide new 6' adjacent sidewalk, curb and gutter, existing stormwater upgrades, and limited asphalt widening to one side of the road. Fund Source Amount % Comments STBG-SA Request $ 462,775 86.5% 2021-2023 Funds City Match $ 72,225 13.5% Other - - PBP/SRTS Total $ 535,000 100% SPOKANE VALLEY - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Safe Routes to School 10 Citywide Signal Backplates (CSP) CSP Funding Request: $162,000 City Match: $18,000 (10%) Project Scope: Order and install retro-reflectorized borders to traffic signal backplates to increase traffic control visibility and visual cues for drivers at night. Project assumes 15 intersections at $12,000 each. Locations to be determined. Fund Source Amount % Comments CSP Request $ 162,000 90% City Match $ 18,000 10% Match for CN phase waived if unds authorized by 04/30/2021 Other - - Total $ 180,000 100% LASPOKANE VALLEY ECONOM/C DEVELOPMENT a�a • ka�ea LeOena • POS MI PC SF �i a14� ie SPEED LIMIT 45 E 1.lanstiel d Ave E 190Fv,y EI AC FwyE Oop, E Hh Ave E Sprague Ave E 4th Ave E SpragueAve E 4th Ave E1E0Fwy E19OF 11 Project Funding Summary Project Total Cost Secured Funds Funding Request Fund Source City Match (13.5%) Comment Barker Corridor (3 Phases) $8,400,000 $106,500 $5,812,800 STBG $907,200 STBG + $1,680,000 of 20% FMSIB Partnership CSP/PBP Apps Sprague & Barker Intersection Improv. $1,300,000 $140,220 $1,124,500 CMAQ $175,500 CSP/PBP/SRTS Apps Argonne Reconstruction Indiana to Montgomery $5,800,000 $2,900,000 STBG $391,500 20% FMSIB Partnership + $1,348,500 Needed Pines & Mission Intersection Improv. $1,400,000 Developer Contribution $1,211,000 CMAQ $189,000 CSP Apps Wilbur Road Sidewalk $535,000* - $462,775 STBG-SA $72,225 *SRTS App may fund up to 75% ($401,250) Citywide Signal Backplates $180,000 - $162,000 CSP $18,000* *Indicates a 10% match, not 13.5% TOTALS $11,673,075 - $1,753,425 12 Questions? Highway Safety Improvement Program Data Oriven Da4'ISIOn$ U:UMhportment of Trans of Federal Highway Administration VALLEY — ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 13 To: From: Re: DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA as of March 8, 2018; 1:00 p.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative Council & Staff City Clerk, by direction of City Manager Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings March 20, 2018, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue Mar 131 ACTION ITEM: 1. Motion: Barker BNSF Grade Separation Alternative — John Hohman (30 minutes) NON -ACTION ITEMS: 2. 8th Ave. Sidewalk — Thierman to Dickey - Erica Amsden, Gloria Mantz (10 minutes) 3. Floodplain FEMA Process — Henry Allen (15 minutes) 4. Painted Hills Update — John Hohman, Cary Driskell, Erik Lamb (25 minutes) 5. Street O&M Pavement Preservation & Street Construction — Adam Jackson, Mike Basinger (60 minutes) 6. Franchise Agreements with Cell Carriers — Cary Driskell (20 minutes) 7. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 165 mins] March 27, 2018, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Second reading ordinance 18-007 Small Cell — Erik Lamb 3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 18-008 w/Cell Carrier MClmetro — Cary Driskell fdue Tue Mar 201 (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (10 minutes) 4. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 18-009 w/Cell Carrier Verizon — Cary Driskell (10 minutes) 5. Motion Consideration: Barker BNSF Grade Separation Design Contract — John Hohman (20 minutes) 6. Motion Consideration, Bid Award, Sprague Ave.: Sullivan to Corbin — E.Amsden, Gloria Mantz (15 min) 7. Motion Consideration: ITS Infill Phase 1 Project, Bid Award - G. Mantz, C. Aldworth (10 minutes) 8. Motion Consideration: Potential Grant Opportunities: (a) SRTC, (b) SRTS, (c) PBP, and (d) CSP) — Adam Jackson, Colin Quinn -Hurst (20 minutes) 9. Admin Report: Legislative Update: Chelsea Hager, Briahna Murray of Gordon Thomas Honeywell (45 min) 10. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 11. Info Item: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: 155 mins] April 3, 2018, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. 1. Airport Update — Larry Krauter 2. GSI Contract — John Hohman, Mike Basinger 3. Outside Agency, Allocation History/Discussion — Chelsie Taylor 4. Economic Analysis of Tourism Related Venues & Events — Chelsie Taylor 5. Advance Agenda April 10, 2018, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 18-0908 w/Cell Carrier MClmetro — Cary Driskell 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 18-009 w/Cell Carrier Verizon — Cary Driskell 4. Advance Agenda [due Tue Mar 271 (15 minutes) (15 minutes) (20 minutes) 45 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 100 mins] [due Tue April 31 (5 minutes) (10 minutes) (10 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: mins] April 17, 2018, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue April 101 ACTION ITEMS: 1. Motion Consideration: 8th Ave. Sidewalk, Thierman to Dickey- Erica Amsden, Gloria Mantz NON -ACTION ITEMS: 2. Quarterly Police Department Report — Chief Werner 3. Advance Agenda — Mayor Higgins Draft Advance Agenda 3/8/2018 11:10:56 AM (10 minutes) (10 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: mins] Page 1 of 2 April 24, 2018, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Advance Agenda 3. Info Item: Department Reports May 1, 2018, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. 1. Spokane Regional Health District Opioid Epidemic — Dr. Lutz 2. Advance Agenda Mav 8, 2018, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. Proclamation: Lemonade Day, May 19, 2018 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Advance Agenda May 15, 2018, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda Mav 22, 2018, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Advance Agenda 3. Info Item: Department Reports May 29, 2018, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda *time for public or Council comments not included OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: Animal Control Regulations (SVMC 7.30) BNSF 2nd Rail Camping in RVs Citizen Recognition (city keys) City Hall Generator Donation Recognition Duplex/Single Family Dwellings Definition Governance Manual ITS/SRTMC Discussion Legislative Remote Testimony (Chambers) Naming City Facilities Protocol Neighborhood Restoration Program Police Dept. Quarterly Rpt (April, July, Oct, Jan) Police Precinct Lease Renewal (Nov '18) Retail Recruitment Follow-up Sign Ordinance Street Illumination (ownership, cost, location) Tobacco 21 Resolution Draft Advance Agenda 3/8/2018 11:10:56 AM [due Tue April 17] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: mins] [due Tue April 241 (25 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Tue May 11 (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Tue May 81 (5 minutes) [due Tue May 151 (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Tue May 221 Transportation & Infrastructure SV Youth Voices Utility Facilities in ROW 2018 Budget Amendment Page 2 of 2