2021, 02-02 Study Session AGENDA
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION FORMAT
Meeting Held via ZOOM
Tuesday,February 2,2021 6:00 p.m.
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
10210 E Sprague Avenue
(Please Silence Your Cell Phones During the Meeting)
NOTE: In response to Governor Inslee's March 24, 2020 Proclamation concerning the COVID-19 Emergency, which
waives and suspends the requirement to hold in-person meetings and provides options for the public to attend remotely,
physical public attendance at Spokane Valley Council meetings are suspended until the Governor's order has been
rescinded or amended. Therefore,until further notice,a live feed of the meeting will be available on our website and on
Comcast channel 14.Public comments will only be accepted for those items noted on the agenda as"public
comment opportunity,"will be accepted via the following links, and must be received by 4:00 pm the day
of the meeting.
• Sign up to Provide Oral Public Comment at the Meeting via Calling-In
• Submit Written Public Comment Prior to the Meeting
• Join the Zoom WEB Meeting
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
ACTION ITEMS:
1. Motion Consideration: Potential Grant Opportunity,National Hwy System Asset Mgmt—Adam Jackson
[public comment opportunity]
NON-ACTION ITEMS:
DISCUSSION LEADER SUBJECT/ACTIVITY GOAL
2. Adam Jackson Streets Sustainability Committee Update Discussion/Information
3. Bill Helbig Barker Grade Separation Project Discussion/Information
Bid Award Update
4. Cary Driskell Proposed Amendments to Spokane County Discussion/Information
Library District Interlocal Agreement
5. Cary Driskell Proposed Amendments to CH 8.25 SVMC, Discussion/Information
Solicitation from Vehicle Occupants
6.John Hohman, Cary Driskell City Hall Update Discussion/Information
7.Mayor Wick Advance Agenda Discussion/Information
8.Mayor Wick Council Comments Discussion/Information
9.Mark Calhoun City Manager Comments Discussion/Information
ADJOURN
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: February 2, 2021 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 Grant Opportunity — National Highway
System Asset Management Program
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: January 12, 2021: Administrative report discussing
WSDOT's National Highway System Asset Management Porgram.
BACKGROUND: Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) is anticipating
$50 to $75 million of National Highway Performance Program federal funds for preserving
roadways that are part of the National Highway System (NHS). The program will evaluate an
agency's use of pavement management strategies and an agency's level of investment to
preserve and maintain their roadway system, thereby focusing on cost-effectiveness,
emphasizing pavement rehabilitation over reconstruction. The following are key dates:
Applications Due: February 8, 2021
Award Date: Summer 2021
Funds Authorized By: August 31, 2023
There is no minimum match requirement for NHS funds and the "local match" is not part of the
scoring criteria. However, applicants providing a match will likely score better in the "Cost
Effectiveness" scoring category because utilizing local funds reduces the requested amount of
NHS funds. During the last call for projects in 2017, the NHS awarded 22 projects and they had
a median award of$1,377,661 and an average award of$1,876,753, ten of the 22 awards were
under $1,014,000.
Upon evaluation of funding program requirements, staff identified two projects for final
consideration: Broadway Avenue from Yardley to Fancher Road and Sullivan Road from
Sprague to 8th Ave.
Staff recommends submitting one application for Sullivan Road between Sprague Ave. and 8th
Ave. The overall project includes NHS-eligible pavement preservation, a variety of stormwater
upgrades, and ITS improvements. The preservation project will provide full depth patching of
failed street sections then will taper-grind the outer travel lanes in order to match curb lines and
driveways, followed by a 2" asphalt overlay thoughout. The stormwater scope is partially funded
by the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) and will install new catch basins, piping,
and necessary swales along the west side of Sullivan. Stormwater upgrades on the east side of
Sullivan will replace existing storm structures with specialized treatment systems (Silva Cells)
that improve stormwater quality prior to discharging into the aquifer. ITS improvements provide
conduit and junction boxes that will allow for future installation of ITS fiber and associated
equipment. Full ITS improvements are cost-prohibitive at this time but by installing the conduit
with this project, the City can efficiently install fiber in the future with minimal disruptions.
The overall cost, including pavement preservation, stormwater, and ITS, is estimated below:
Preservation $ 2,213,058 NHS Grant and City Fund #311
Stormwater $ 650,000 Department of Ecology Grant ($ 350,000)
City Fund #402 ($ 300,000)
ITS $ 430,000 City Fund #303
Total Project Cost $ 3,293,058
The pavement preservation elements of the project have the following estimated costs:
Preliminary Engineering (PE) $ 153,952
Construction (CN) $ 2,059,106
Total Preservation Costs $ 2,213,058
The PE phase was initiated in 2020 and is funded with City Fund #311. Staff recommends an
application request of $1,029,553 for the construction phase of the pavement
preservation project elements, a 50% grant request. It is worth noting again that only
pavement preservation elements are eligible for the NHS grant funds.
OPTIONS: 1) Proceed with the proposed project grant request and motion as written, 2) take
other appropriate action.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize the City Manager or designee to
apply to the NHS Asset Management Program for the Sullivan Road from Sprague to 8th
Avenue preservation project.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: For NHS grant application purposes, staff is proposing a 50%
local match on the construction phase of the project's pavement preservation elements. City
funds for the pavement preservation work will be from Fund #311.
Sullivan Road Preservation Elements—Application Breakdown
Project NHS Grant Request Local Match (%)
Project Name Phase NHS-Eligible Total Cost (%) (Fund #311)
PE $ 153,952 $ 0 (0%) $ 153,952 (100%)
Sullivan Rad CN $2,059,106 $1,029,553 (50%) $1,029,553 (50%)
(Sprague to 8th) Total $2,213,058 (100%) $1,029,553 (47%) $1,183,505 (53%)
STAFF CONTACT: Adam Jackson, Planning & Grants Engineer
ATTACHMENTS: None
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: February 02, 2021 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 —Streets Sustainability Committee Update
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.11.020— Powers vested in legislative bodies of
noncharter and charter code cities.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Street Operations and Maintenance, and pavement
preservation, have been topics of discussion for each City Council since shortly after the City's
incorporation, having discussed the topic at least 51 times.
On January 19, 2021, City Council provided consensus to the City Manager to bring forward a
motion consideration for the creation of the Streets Sustainability Committee (Committee),
including a proposed Committee membership roster for consideration and appointment.
BACKGROUND: The following information is provided as a follow-up to the January 19, 2021
City Council meeting.
The proposed Committee will be comprised of community stakeholders that represent a wide-
range of citizens and businesses within the City. The Committee will serve as staffs primary
resource to connect with the community at large. Stakeholders on the Committee will represent
leaders in their respective category and will help staff gather input from their respective "base."
The Committee will use a variety of public outreach methods to gather feedback from the
community, including public meetings, community surveys, and social/print/digital media. The
Committee will receive and evaluate input to formulate a recommendation to City Council.
The recommendation will be based on the initial goal of the Committee, which is to:
1. Evaluate citizens' interest and support for maintaining city streets and suggesting
pavement condition goals.
2. Identify preference for maintaining city streets, types of treatments used, and long-
term levels of service.
3. Investigate current revenues and potential future funding sources for maintaining city
streets at the recommended level of service.
Staff is currently working with Mayor Wick to create a Committee roster that will be presented to
City Council in March 2021. The following categories and applicable number of participants for
each category are proposed:
(2) General Business
(3) Business - Large
(2) Business —Small
(2) Utility Companies
(1) Schools
(1) Hospital
(3) Transportation
(1) Freight
(2) Social Services/Non-Profits
(3) Citizen Representatives
Three positions are proposed to be "Citizen Represenatives." In order to fill these three
positions, staff proposes advertising to the public requesting Spokane Valley residents to apply.
The Mayor would then evaluate applicants and select three to seve on the Committee, who
would be confirmed by City Council at the same March 2021 meeting that would also confirm
the complete Committee membership roster.
The following 2021 milestones are applicable to the three Citizen Representative positions:
Application Window: February 3rd to February 26th
Advertise in local papers: February 5th, 12th 19th
Close Application Window: 3:00 PM on February 26th
Mayor Application Review & Appointment: February 26th to March 17th
City Council Consideration & Confirmation: March 23rd
Staff initially suggested that the Committee include two City Councilmembers. Moving forward,
Staff recommends filling these positions with two additional community stakeholders instead.
This provides the opportunity for additional representation from key individuals in the utility and
social service segments of our community.
OPTIONS: Discussion.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Staff requests Council consensus to continue to
develop the Streets Sustainability Committee as discussed herein and to return in March 2021
for a motion consideration for the creation of the Streets Sustainability Committee, including a
proposed Committee membership roster for consideration and appointment.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Serving on the Streets Sustainability Committee will be
voluntary. Costs to the City would include staff time and materials necessary to manage the
Committee and to advertise and manage the application process for "Citizen Representatives,"
and also associated costs for involvement from the City's pavement management consultant.
STAFF CONTACT: Adam Jackson, P.E. — Engineer-Planning & Grants
ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint Presentation
City Council Update :
Streets Sustainability Committee
A Stakeholder Group Working to
Maintain Our Streets Over Time
February 2, 2021
Adam Jackson , PE
SÔk' e Pavement Management Program Coordinator
Committee Goals : >Milley
-
1 . Evaluate citizens' interest and support for
maintaining city streets and suggesting Streets
Sustainability
pavement condition goals. ommitte-
2 . Identify preference for maintaining city
streets, types of treatments used, and , Public Meet • .= �� Community
& Worksh. .s Surveys
long-term levels of service.
3 . Investigate current revenues and potential
future funding sources for maintaining cityMedia Releases
Social/Digital/Print
streets at the recommended level of
service.
2
Committee Stakeholder Categories **me
Ualley
IN Invite 20 stakeholders to participate from the following categories :
(2) General Business ( 1) Hospitals
(3) Business — Large (3) Transportation
(2) Business — Small ( 1) Freight
(2) Utility Companies (2) Social Services/Non-profit
( 1) Schools (3) Citizen Representatives
• No City Councilmembers on the Committee
• Open Application for (3) Citizen Representative positions
3
Citizen Representative Application *dime
Ualley
IN Application Milestones
m Application Timeframe February 3rd to February 26th
■ Advertise in Local Papers February 5tnl 12cnl 19th
Close Applications 3 : 00 PM February 26th
m Mayor Application Review/Appointment February 26th to March 17th
■ City Council Consideration/Confirmation March 23rd
'''''''''' The complete Committee membership roster will be presented for
City Council consideration at the March 23rd meeting .
4
Spokane
ntici ateCommittee Schedule
..,,.*valley
PROJECT PHASE STARTING ENDING COMM.Er,TS
CITY COUNCIL: COMMITTEE SELECTION Jan 19 char 23 Feb 23 may he adjusted. Use Feb ',Mar to create program content/format.
COMMITTEE MEETINGS 1 Apr 13 Sept 14 Content/Format TBD. Intro to topic, surveys, feedback, other?
PUBLIC MEETINGS (EST. 4-7 TOTAL?) -4.rJun 16 Sept 8 Public meetings with Committee Members' group/base. Date/time TBD
CITY COUNCIL: ADMIN. REPORT Aug 24 Aug 24 Progress Report (opportunity for public comment?)
CITY COUNCIL: RECOMMENDATION Nov 16 Dec 7 Committee Recommendation to City Council Et City Council Discussion
JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE
S to T W T F S S M T W T F S SMTWTF S SMTWTF S S ;", T T F S S MTWTF S
■ 2 1 ■ 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 1 1 2 3 4 5
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 14 ■ 16 17 18 19 20 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 11 12 ■ 14 15 16 17 9 10 ■ 12 13 14 15 13 1.4 ■ 16 17 18 19
1 ■■ 20 21 22 23 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 21 22 ■ 24 25 26 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1.6 17 18 19 20 21 22 20 21 22 ■ 24 25 26
24 25 26 27 28 29 30 28 28 29 30 31 25 26 27 28 29 30 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 27 28 29 30
31 SCO
JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
SMTWTF S SMTWTF S MTWTFF S SMTWTF 5 SMTWTF S SMTWTF S
1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4
4 ■ 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 ■ 12 13 14 5 ■ a ■ 9 10 11 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 7 8 lir10 ■ 12 13 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
11 12 ■■ 15 16 17 15 16 ■ 18 19 20 21 12 13 . 15 16 17 18 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
1 S 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 ■ 26 27 28 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 21 22 23 24 ■■ 27 19 20 21 22 23 ■ 25
25 26 27 28 29 30 31 29 30 31 26 27 2S 29 30 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 28 29 30 26 27 28 29 30 ■
31 5
Holiday ■
Going >Milley
■ Comments or Questions? condition
Excellent 111 Staff seeks Council Consensus -4�
to presented as roceed herein . VeryGoop
Good
Fair 111
Poor
University & 16th
Very PPON
oaf„
Conklin & 22nd 6
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: February 2, 2021 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ information Z admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative Report: Barker Road/BSNF Grade Separation Project—
Bid Award
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: None
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 contract with DEA for the project's Phase 1;
• 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;
• March 13, 2018 —Administrative Report to discuss history and alternatives;
• March 16, 2018 —Administrative Report for Council and Chamber of Commerce;
• March 27, 2018 — Passed motion to select preferred alternative for advancing project;
• April 10, 2018 — Passed motion to execute supplemental agreement with DEA for the
project's Phase 2 design;
• December 4, 2018 —Administrative Report to discuss project status;
• September 10, 2019—Adoption of Ordinance 19-012 authorizing use of condemnation for
property acquisition with regards to three property owners;
• November 12, 2019—Adoption of Ordinance 19-020 authorizing use of condemnation for
property acquisition with regards to a fourth property owner;
• January 14, 2020— Passed motion to execute supplemental agreement with DEA;
• January 21, 2020— Passed motion regarding property acquisition;
• March 31, 2020— Passed motion to execute Avista Utility Construction Agreement;
• May 12, 2020 — Passed motion to execute BSNF Overpass Agreement; and
• June 30, 2020 — Passed motion to execute an Interlocal Agreement with WSDOT for Project
Construction and Construction Administration.
BACKGROUND: Over the past three years, the City has been working with David Evans &
Associates (Consultant) to develop and bring to fruition the Barker Road/BNSF Railroad Grade
Separation Project. In the first phase of the project, which began in 2017, the Consultant
analyzed and compared six alternatives in terms of cost, right-of-way (ROW) needs, impacts to
existing properties, constructability, safety, and other pertinent project elements, so the City
could select the preferred alternative. In the second phase of the project, which began in 2018,
the Consultant developed final design and construction documents for the project.
The City and WSDOT recognized the benefits for WSDOT managing the construction and
construction contract administration for the project. On June 30, 2020, Council passed a motion
to execute the Interlocal Agreement between WSDOT and the City. The following are
significant items contained within the Agreement as the project moves forward.
• WSDOT will Bid, Award, and Execute the Construction Contract;
• WSDOT will be the lead agency in the administration of the Construction Contract;
• Change Orders during construction in excess of$100,000, and when cumulative change
orders exceed $350,0000, will require City review and approval;
• The City will be part of WSDOT's Final Inspection and Project Acceptance procedures;
• The City will have the sole discretion to issue a Letter of Acceptance to WSDOT at the
final project closeout, until it is fully satisfied with the project;
• The City will reimburse WSDOT for all costs associated with project construction and
construction administration.
WSDOT advertised the project on November 23, 2020 and opened five bids on January 13,
2021. The Engineer's Estimate was $13,885,811.80. The bids ranged from $11,637,134.00 to
$15,946,317.16. The lowest, responsive, responsible bidder was Max J. Kuney Company with
a bid of$11,637,134.00. WSDOT awarded the project on January 28, 2021.
The current project costs are estimated at:
Preliminary Engineering Phase $ 3,000,000
Right of Away Phase $ 3,500,000
Construction Phase $ 17,800,000
Total Project Costs $ 24,300,000
Total project funding is:
Federal Earmark $ 720,000
WA State FMSIB (20%) $ 4,860,000
WA State Legislative Appropriation $ 1,500,000
National Highway Freight (NHFP) $ 6,000,000
BNSF Contribution $ 300,000
TIGER 2017 $ 9,020,149 (TIGER funds shall be spent last)
City Funds Budgeted $ 3,630,000
Total Secured Funds $ 26,030,149
OPTIONS: Discussion only
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion only
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: To date, the City has secured funding for the project from
seven sources in excess of$26,000,000.
STAFF CONTACT: Bill Helbig, PE — City Engineer
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: February 2,2021 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 — proposed amendment to Spokane County Library
District interlocal agreement relating to purchase of City property at Balfour Park.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Chapter 39.34 RCW.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of the interlocal agreement in 2012; amendment
in 2017 to increase the time for performance by the Spokane County Library District(SCLD)from October
2017 to October 2022; January 26,2021 report from SCLD Executive Director Patrick Roewe.
BACKGROUND: The City entered into this interlocal agreement with the SCLD in 2012 shortly after the
City purchased 8.4 acres of property from Pring Corporation in anticipation of SCLD constructing and
operating a new central library facility within Spokane Valley. Pursuant to that interlocal agreement, the
City sold a total of 2.82 acres to SCLD so that SCLD could build its new facility,which was anticipated to
occur within a five year period. In 2017,the interlocal agreement timeframe for completion was extended
from 2017 to 2022,with a possible additional extension to October 2024. SCLD submitted a bond proposal
to the voters in 2013 and 2014,both of which failed to reach the required 60% approval threshold to pass,
although the 2015 effort received 57.57% positive vote. An important feature of the interlocal agreement
is that if SCLD fails to get funding and construct the facility by the expiration of the agreement, the City
will purchase the property back from SCLD at the same price paid by SCLD.
As explained by Mr.Roewe on January 26,2021,SCLD has identified funding options other than just going
for a voted bond. As such,it is necessary to amend the interlocal agreement to account for other potential
funding mechanisms. Additionally, staff for the City and SCLD have identified several other proposed
changes to clarify various things. Additionally, staff is recommending adding two years to the agreement
instead of having a mutual option for two additional years,to expire in October 2024.
SCLD staff is in agreement with these changes, and their Board is anticipated to vote on these proposed
changes on February 16,2021.
OPTIONS: (1)Place on future agenda for motion consideration; or(2)take other action as appropriate.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to place on the February 9, 2021 agenda for
motion consideration.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS The City previously committed to investing$1.3 million in joint site
areas and frontage improvements related to the new library facility. The $1.3 million consists of$839,285
that is being held in the Civic Facilities Capital Projects Fund #310 and an additional $460,715 that is
earmarked for this purpose in the Capital Reserve Fund #312. The $839,285 in Fund #310 represents the
proceeds from the sale of the 2.82 acres of land to SCLD, as described above.
STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney; John Hohman,Deputy City Manager.
ATTACHMENTS: Proposed 2021 amendment to the interlocal agreement with SCLD.
2021 ADDENDUM TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ACQUISTION OF REAL ESTATE
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY AND THE SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY
DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley (the City) and Spokane County Library District (the
Library District) (referred to jointly as the Parties) executed an interlocal agreement (the Agreement) on
September 27,2012. The purpose of the Agreement was for the City to sell the District certain real property
located on the north side of Sprague Avenue,between Balfour Road and Herald Road,with the intent that
the Library District would design and construct a new library facility that would serve as the primary library
facility in the City; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, the City sold 2.5 acres to the Library District, Spokane
County parcel number 45174.9063 (the Site), with the transaction closing on or about October 31, 2012.
The Parties agreed to an additional transfer of property pursuant to the Agreement, which was dependent
upon the needs of the Library District as determined in a collaborative joint needs analysis/conceptual site
plan prepared by the Parties. The total property acquired by the Library District from the City was 2.82
acres,with the total closing price,including land and apportioned costs,of$839,285.10; and
WHEREAS,Section 10 of the Agreement contains a requirement that"in the event that the Library
District has not,within five years following the Closing, secured voter approval of a construction bond for
the library building and ancillary improvements in such amount as shall be determined necessary by the
Library District,that thereafter the Library District shall reconvey all of the Property back to the City at the
same price paid by the Library District to the City."
WHEREAS, the conceptual site plan process took place largely in 2013, and included significant
technical input and analysis by the Parties,consultants,and the public. This extensive public participation
has been integral to the plan to develop the Site as the main library facility in the City,including identifying
the functions desired and needed by the community in a modern library facility; and
WHEREAS,in April 2014,the Library District put two ballot measures before the electorate in the
greater Spokane Valley region. The first measure was whether to create a capital facilities area which was
a subset of the entire Library District,and which would primarily benefit from the proposed improvements.
The second measure was whether to approve construction of the new library at the Site,a second but smaller
library facility near the intersection of Sprague Avenue and Conklin Road, as well as improvements at the
Argonne Branch, located at Argonne Road and Upriver Drive. The creation of the capital facility area,
which required a simple majority,was approved. The vote to approve construction of the facilities,which
required at least a 60% approval, failed,although it received 54.84% approval; and
WHEREAS, in August 2015, the Library District again requested that the voters in the capital
facility area approve the proposed construction. The capital facility area is legally valid for up to two
election attempts, so did not need to be approved as part of the 2016 effort. This effort received 57.57%
approval,falling just short of being successful; and
Page 1 of 4
WHEREAS,the Parties mutually recognize the importance of having a modern, functional library
facility to support the educational needs of the citizens of the City,including children and adults; and
WHEREAS,the Parties mutually recognize the economic development benefits of co-locating the
new library facility with the City's proposed renovations of Balfour Park, which are also adjacent to City
Hall. The Parties assert these combined improvements will act as a magnet for private development in the
area; and
WHEREAS, the Parties prepared a Joint Site Plan which identified certain right-of-way
improvements or site-wide improvements (collectively referred to as "frontage improvements") that are
necessary for the respective proposed projects on the site. Said improvements will benefit the multiple uses
planned for the combined site. The Parties wish to work together to provide the necessary site
improvements while keeping the cost manageable for the citizens; and
WHEREAS, the Library District continues to seek ways to fund the new library site, including
through application for funding from various entities as an alternative or in addition to a voted bond; and
WHEREAS, the Parties agreed to an Addendum in 2017 (2017 Addendum) that extended the
duration of the Agreement for an additional five years,with an additional optional three years if the Parties
agreed. Additionally, the 2017 Addendum contained additional minor modifications regarding the
approximate size of the building, and included a financial commitment by the City to the project in
recognition of the important public benefits that would be achieved once completed; and
WHEREAS, the Parties agree that a continuing and enhanced partnership between the Parties is
crucial for success in jointly developing the Site.
NOW THEREFORE,the Parties agree to make the following amendments to the Agreement:
6. Joint Site Development Plan.
A. An approximately 30,00025,000 square foot building on one or more floors,that will
serve as a destination facility with programming intended to draw participants from the
Spokane County region. The ultimate size of the facility shall be determined following
appropriate public engagement.
C. Site requirements:
• Building footprint of approximately 30,00025,000 square feet.
• Vehicular access required for rear service entrance.
• Appropriate parking to meet the City's code minimum requirements for a
public library,with a 100 seat meeting room.
• Require frontage on or clear visibility from Sprague Avenue but not from
behind a parking lot.
Page 2 of 4
• At least one side of library building adjacent and open to landscaped park area.
The Parties agree to contribute the following amounts to the frontage and/or site improvements on
the Library Site which have been identified in the Joint Site Development Plan.The Library District
shall contribute its investment of $1.3 million to purchase the two library construction sites,
including the Library Site, as well as the second library site near Sprague Avenue and Conklin
Road, and will no longer seek reimbursement for the land costs through a subsequent bond. This
Library District obligation is separate from and in addition to any amount sought in bond proceeds,
and represents the actual expenditure amounts to purchase both sites. The City shall contribute
$1.3 million in frontage and/or joint site improvements on the Library Site. This amount includes
the$839,285.10 paid by the Library District to the City for the Site. This City obligation is separate
from and in addition to any frontage or site improvements the City would already be responsible
for in developing and constructing Balfour Park. The intent of these contributions by the Parties is
to accomplish the mutual goals set forth in the recitals to this Addendum, above, and to reduce the
amount of outside funding needed for the project.bond or other proceeds that would be requested
from the voters. Exhibit B,previously attached to this Agreement is deleted.
The Parties shall, wWithin 3044 days of the District executing a contract for architectural
services,validation of the passage of ballot measure approving construction bonds,the Parties shall
form a joint site development project team.
9. Failure of Joint Site Development Plan. In the event that, despite their good faith best
efforts, the Parties are unable to agree on a Joint Site Development Plan as described above, and
absent an agreement between the Parties to extend the deadline for developing such Joint Site
Development Plan,then City shall,within 60 days after the final deadline for developing the Joint
Site Development Plan, reimburse the Library District the full amount of that portion of the
Purchase Price together with the pro-rata share of any survey,title,recording,closing, and phase I
environmental audit costs paid by the Library District and from that point in time this agreement
would be considered void. Each Party shall pay one-half of the costs of the Joint Site Development
Plan if the project does not go forward, either due to failure to agree on a Joint Site Development
Plan or because the District does not obtain fundingpass its bond as set forth in pursuant to Section
10.
10. Re-Purchase by City. In order to construct a library building and ancillary improvements on
the portion of the Property acquired by the Library District,the Library District will need to secure
outside funding.it is anticipated that the Library District it ed to s oter appfe-va of
bond levy covering the Library Site and the Sprague and Conklin site projects. Without voter
approval of such bond, the Library District will not be in a position to develop its portion of the
Property. The Parties agree that in the event that the Library District has not,by October 31,20242,
secured necessary fundingvoter approval of a construction bond to design and construct for the
library building and ancillary improvements on the Property in such amounts as shall be determined
necessary by the Library District, that thereafter the Library District shall reconvey all of the
Property back to the City at the same price paid by the Library District to the City, with payment
to be in cash. The Parties may, by mutual written agreement after October 31, 2021, extend the
timeframe for reconveyance by an additional two years,to October 31, 2021. Such payment shall
be paid all in cash.The Library District,in such event, shall convey title to the City with the same
type of instrument as it received the Property from the City, and from that point in time this
agreement would be considered void. Onceln the event full funding is achieved,the construction
Page 3 of 4
bond is approved, the Library District shall commence construction within two years.one year of
the date of voter approval of the construction bond.
12. Use of Property. The City agrees that its portion of the Property will be dedicated to
public use and will not be sold to any third party. A deed restriction shall be recorded by the Library
District no later than December 31, 202 Iwithin a reasonable amount of time from voter approval
of a construction bond that would limit the use of the Site to a library facility for a minimum of 50
years from date of opening. The Library District agrees that its portion of the Property will be
developed into a public library facility provided that funding for such project is secured as provided
above in Section 10.
The City, at its expense,will be allowed to use the entire site for civic purposes until the District
provides the City with a notice that the District will commence construction activities in 30 days.
The City agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the District from and against all claims,causes of
action, and damages arising out of the City's use of the Property for any such civic purposes.
This Addendum shall become effective upon the date of the signature of the last party signing this
document.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY
LIBRARY DISTRICT
Mark Calhoun, City Manager Patrick Roewe,Executive Director
Approved as to form: Approved as to form:
Office of the City Attorney Brian Werst, Attorney for SCLD
Page 4 of 4
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: February 2,2021 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—Spokane Valley Municipal Code section 8.25.025 —
Solicitation from vehicle occupants prohibited.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Chapter 8.25 SVMC; First Amendment,United States Constitution.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of chapter 8.25 SVMC in 2003; adoption of
SVMC 8.25.025 in 2010 to regulate solicitation within the rights-of-way; and amendment of SVMC
8.25.025 in 2012,changing the definition of"prohibited roadway."
BACKGROUND: The City has previously adopted provisions regulating solicitation within the City's
rights-of-way in an effort to promote and protect public health and safety. These regulations prohibit
individuals from entering certain roadways for the purpose of soliciting goods, services,publications, and
signatures from those in cars. The main goal of the existing regulatory framework is to increase public
safety regarding interactions between pedestrians and the motoring public due to the substantial risk of
catastrophic injury moving vehicles pose to pedestrians.
However,recent United States and Washington State Supreme Court decisions state that the prohibition on
solicitation,especially if ordinances are targeted towards preventing or restricting begging and panhandling,
may infringe upon an individual's First Amendment right to freedom of speech or expression. The United
States Supreme Court,in Reed v. Town of Gilbert,addressed a local ordinance that regulated the display of
outdoor signs by placing signs into different categories based upon what the signs said. The Town of
Gilbert then placed requirements upon the signs that depended upon which category the signs fell into. The
Court held the ordinance unconstitutionally violated the First Amendment because it regulated speech in a
traditional public forum, in this case sidewalks,based upon the content of said speech.
The Washington State Supreme Court,in City of Lakewood v. Robert Willis,applied the Reed decision and
struck down two provisions of a City of Lakewood ordinance that barred solicitation at freeway ramps and
major intersections,which are also considered traditional public forums,for the purpose of obtaining money
or goods as a charity. "Begging" or"panhandling"is protected under the First Amendment, and therefore
may only be subject to a reasonable time,place,and manner restriction when conducted in traditional public
forums. Because the ordinance did not prohibit solicitation generally, but instead only addressed the
solicitation of money and goods,it was deemed content based and therefore unconstitutional.
The City's current Code provisions regulating solicitation are somewhat different than those at issue in
Lakewood, and we believe they are likely constitutionally valid. However, we are cognizant of the
Lakewood decision and potential challenges that could be raised, so staff believes that changes to the Code
can be made so as to ensure compliance with the First Amendment and to more accurately reflect the
purpose of the regulation, which is not to prevent solicitation but rather to promote traffic safety by
preventing interference with vehicular traffic and by preventing encouragement of interference with
vehicular traffic.
A summary of the proposed revisions is below:
1. Any reference to the prohibition of solicitation is replaced with a prohibition on interfering
with vehicular traffic;
2. Adding a prohibition on inducing someone to enter a roadway and interfere with vehicular
traffic;
3. Remove the definition of solicit from the Code.
OPTIONS: (1)Place on a future agenda as drafted; or(2)take other action as appropriate.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to place on a future agenda for an ordinance
first reading.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None anticipated at this time.
STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney; Aziza Foster,Legal Intern.
ATTACHMENTS: Draft of proposed changes to SVMC 8.25.030; Arterial Streetplan.
8.25.020Aggressive solicitation.
A. Any person who engages in aggressive solicitation in any public place in the City as those terms are defined by
this section is guilty of a misdemeanor.
B.As used herein:
1."Aggressive solicitation"means to solicit with intent to intimidate another person into complying with the
solicited request.
2."Solicit"means:
a.Either orally or in writing,directly or by implication,to ask,beg,request or plead for employment,
goods,services,financial aid,monetary gifts,or any article representing monetary value,for any purpose;
b.Either orally or in writing,to sell or offer for immediate sale goods,services,or publications;
c.To distribute without remuneration goods,services,or publications;or
d.To solicit signatures on a petition or opinions for a survey.
3."Intimidate"means to coerce or frighten into submission or obedience.
4."Public place"means any road,alley,lane,parking area,sidewalk or any place,private or otherwise,adopted
to and fitted for vehicular or pedestrian travel that is in common use by the public with the consent,expressed
or implied,of the owner or owners;and any public playground,school grounds,recreation grounds,parks,
parkways,park drives,park paths and rights-of-way open to the use of the public. (Ord. 16 014 § 2,2016;Ord.
10 01H §2,2010;Ord. 16§ P1,2003).
8.25.0320S Interference with vehicular traffic.;
A. The purpose of this section is to promote the City's fundamental interest in public peace,health,and safety,by
regulating acts of interference with vehicular trafficsolicitation that occur at locations and under circumstances
specified herein which pose substantial risks to vehicular and pedestrian safety.
B.No person shall solicit from the occupants of any vehicleinterfere with vehicular traffic byand being physically
present within or subsequently entering a prohibited roadway.
C.No person or occupant of any vehicle shall induce another to be physically present within or enter a prohibited
roadway and therefore interfere with vehicular traffic.
DC. As used in this section:
1."Enter"means to cross the vertical plane of the edge of a prohibited roadway.It includes crossing the
vertical plane by any part of a person's body or any extension thereof.-
2."Prohibited roadway"means a state route,on ramp or off ramp to Interstate 90,or principal arterial,and also
the first 100 feet of a road that intersects a state route,on ramp or off ramp to Interstate 90,or principal arterial,
as measured from the edge of the state route,on ramp or off ramp to Interstate 90,or principal arterial.
"Prohibited roadway":
a.Includes any portion of a road traveled by vehicles;
b.Includes paved shoulders and bike lanes;
c.Includes medians,which may be denoted by a physical barrier or solid yellow pavement markings;
d.Excludes all sidewalks and curbs.
3."Solicit"means:
goods,services, financial aid, monetary gifts,or any article representing-monetary value, for any purpose;
b.Either orally or in writing,to sell or offer for immediate sale goods,services,or publications;
c.To distribute without remuneration goods,services,or publications;or
d.To solicit signatures on a petition or opinions for a survey.
ED.Prohibited roadways,with the exception of roadway within 100 feet of a state route,on ramp or off ramp to
Interstate 90,or principal arterial,established herein are delineated upon the official map,entitled"Prohibited
Roadways as dEtefined by SVMC 8.25.025(D)(2)C2 and referenced in SVMC 8.25.025D(E)"and areas adopted as
part of chapter 8.25 SVMCthis code as if contained herein.
The official map shall be filed in the office of the city clerk.It shall be the duty of the city attorney to cause the
official map to be updated and maintained by having-changes entered that the city council may approve.
FE.Any person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor.
GE.A person summoning aid in an emergency situation is not ina violation of under this section. (Ord. 12 020§ 1,
2012;Ord. 10 01H §3,2010).
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: February 2, 2021 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 — City Hall update.
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Not applicable.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Multiple meetings relating to the design and approval of the
City Hall contract, including bid award to Meridian Construction as the low bidder pursuant to Washington
law on May 3, 2016. The building was substantially completed in early September, 2017, the City received
a certificate of occupancy on September 5, and staff began moving in on September 6, 2017. March 19,
2019 administrative report to Council; September 24, 2019 administrative report to Council regarding the
micro -pile installation; February 4, 2020 administrative report to Council regarding the temporary wall and
proposed inspection plan; February 18, 2020 administrative report to Council regarding status update.
BACKGROUND: The City moved into City Hall in early September, 2017. Shortly after, staff began
noticing a number of issues relating to apparent construction defects. Staff made the builder, Meridian
Construction, aware of the issues, and Meridian or its various subcontractors made some repairs. Of more
concern, and which was brought to Meridian's attention, were a number of issues that indicated a significant
issue with the construction of the curved east wall to the Council Chambers. After attempting to work with
Meridian to resolve this, the City filed a claim against Meridian relating to the construction defects.
After filing the claim, the City continued to work with Meridian in attempting to identify the full scope of
construction defects. Those efforts resulted in assertions by Meridian that the blame should instead lie with
various other firms related to the design or construction of City Hall. As a consequence, the City filed suit
in Spokane County Superior Court against Meridian Construction, Architects West, All -West Testing, and
Eight-31 Consulting on May 5, 2020 to ensure all potentially liable parties were included in a full resolution
of the issues. The City is represented by outside counsel Shane McFetridge of the firm Randall Danskin.
Following the filing of the lawsuit, the City has worked with legal counsel for the various defendants to
continue to determine the full range of defects to be remediated. This has involved hiring a structural
engineering firm and forensic architect firm that specialize in construction defect analysis. This analysis
was delayed for some time from spring until this past fall due to travel limitations and other restrictions
imposed by orders from the Governor's office. A final report is currently being drafted, which will include
a full scope of repair. This will result in an engineer's estimate of the cost for full repair.
Once the City knows the full cost of repair, Mr. McFetridge will attempt to negotiate a resolution. If that
is not successful, the City will prepare to move forward with trial. Following this process and after the City
receives the funds, the City will contract with a highly qualified contractor to perform the necessary repairs.
The City has maintained from the beginning that it has no fault in this matter, and that part of any resolution
will require that the City receive full payment for any consultants and repairs that need to be done to put
the City, and its citizens, in the position they contracted for — a municipal building that will last for
generations without defect.
Unfortunately, the timeline for getting closure on these issues has taken longer than anticipated due to
several important factors, most notably the discovery of additional defective construction items, and then
the impact of the pandemic on work schedules for all involved. Although the length of time to finish this
matter is important, it must take a back seat to having the project done correctly this time.
A table has been provided so Council can see the amount of City funds expended to date, for which the
City is seeking full reimbursement from the Defendants. Council authorized staff to expend up to $500,000.
This forensic analysis work, outside legal costs, and initial repairs are likely to exceed authorized amounts,
and staff may need to come back to Council for additional authorization at a later date.
OPTIONS: Not applicable.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Not applicable, information only.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Unknown at this time.
STAFF CONTACT: John Hohman, Deputy City Manager, Cary Driskell, City Attorney.
ATTACHMENTS: Summary table of expenses to date.
City Hall Repairs
Vendor Legal Consultants Outside Consultants Supplies Wages
Amento Group 102,650.31
ATS Acoustics 2,162.67
Budinger and Associates 5,736.12
City Staff Wages/Benefits 4,259.70
Construction Services 57,967.65
Crimson Hearth 58.00
Darcy's Restaurant 53.33
Dibble Engineers 80,865.31
Donald Bender 5,540.32
Evco Sound & Electronics 307.65
Herc Rentals 1,458.07
Intermountain Materials 3685.06
LSB Consulting 7151.77
Paine Hamblen LLP 29,632.30
PNW Building Forensics 26,387.12
Pondera Architecture 20,900.00
Pressler Forensics 10,519.64
Randall Danskin 34,286.60
Rodda Paint Co 12.26
RSD Spokane 3,081.89
Satterlund Testing 5,748.72
Simpson Engineers 7,854.90
Star Rentals 784.08
Totals 63,918.90 339,842.98 3,081.89 4,259.70 411,103.47
To:
From:
Re:
DRAFT
ADVANCE AGENDA
as of January 27, 2021; 10:20 a.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
Feb 9, 2021, Formal Meetin2, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue Feb 2]
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes)
2. 1st Reading Ord 21-003 Amending SVMC 8.25, Solicitation from Vehicle Occupants — CDriskell (10 mins)
3. Motion Consideration: SCLD Interlocal Agreement — Cary Driskell
4. Open Government Training — Erik Lamb
5. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
(10 minutes)
(30 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 60 mins]
Feb 16, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. 2nd Reading Ord 21-003 Amending SVMC 8.25, Solicitation from Vehicle Occupants
NON -ACTION ITEMS:
3. Flashing Beacons and School Signage — Bill Helbig
4. Abandoned Vehicles / Parking in the ROW — Caitlin Prunty, Bill Helbig
5. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
Feb 23, 2021, Formal Meetin2, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
3. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
Mar 2, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
[due Tue Feb 9]
— CDriskell (10 mins)
(10 minutes)
(30 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 55 mins]
[due Tue Feb 16]
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 10 mins]
[due Tue Feb 23]
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 5 mins]
Mar 9, 2021, Formal Meetin2, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Admin Report: Potential Grant Opp — SRTC Preservation Call for Projects
3. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
— Adam Jackson
[due Tue Mar 2]
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 20 mins]
Mar 16, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue Mar 9]
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick (5 minutes)
Mar 23, 2021, Formal Meeting, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue Mar 16]
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes)
2. Motion Consideration: Potential Grant Opp — SRTC Preservation Call for Projects — A. Jackson (10 minutes)
3. Motion Consideration: Streets Sustainability Committee Membership — Bill Helbig, Adam Jackson (20 min)
4. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick (5 minutes)
5. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
[*estimated meeting: 40 mins]
Mar 30, 2021, Study Session, 6:00 p.m. [due Tue Mar 23]
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick (5 minutes)
Draft Advance Agenda 1/28/2021 11:39:42 AM Page 1 of 2
April 6, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
April 13, 2021, Formal Meetin2, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
April 20, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
April 27, 2021, Formal Meetin2, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
3. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
May 4, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
May 11, 2021, Formal Meetin2, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
May 18, Study Session, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
May 25, 2021, Formal Meetin2, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Advance Agenda — Mayor Wick
3. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
*time for public or Council comments not included
OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS:
Appleway Trail Amenities
Arts Council Sculpture Presentations
Artwork & Metal Boxes
Core Beliefs Resolution
Health District Stats
Mirabeau Park Forestry Mgmt.
Park Lighting
PFD Presentation
SREC Report/Update
SRTC Interlocal Agreement
[due Tue Mar 30]
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 5 mins]
[due Tue Apr 6]
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 10 mins]
[due Tue Apr 13]
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 5 mins]
[due Tue Apr 20]
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 10 mins]
[due Tue Apr 27]
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 5 mins]
[due Tue May 4]
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 10 mins]
[due Tue May 11]
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 5 mins]
[due Tue May 18]
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[*estimated meeting: 10 mins]
St. Illumination (owners, cost, location)
St. O&M Pavement Preservation
Vehicle Wgt Infrastructure Impact
Water Districts & Green Space
Way Finding Signs
Draft Advance Agenda 1/28/2021 11:39:42 AM
Page 2 of 2