Loading...
2010, 07-20 Study SessionAGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION FORMAT Tuesday, July 20, 2010 CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11707 East Sprague Avenue, First Floor (Please Silence Your Cell Phones During the Meetin 6:00 p.m. DISCUSSION LEADER SUBJECT /ACTIVITY GOAL ACTION ITEMS: 1. Cary Driskell First Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending Advance Ordinance to Commute Trip Reduction Plan Second Reading [public comment] 2. Mike Stone Greenacres Neighborhood Park Funding Motion Consideration [public comment] 3. Mike Connelly Code Text Amendment (CTA 04 -10), Motion Consideration Nonconforming Uses [Because this proposed action is the result of a public hearing, there will be no public comments on this item.] NON - ACTION ITEMS: 4. Marion Lee, Spokane Bike Helmets Discussion /Information County Health Dept 5. Steve Worley Transportation Improvement Board Call Discussion /Information For Projects 6. Steve Worley Smart Routes Discussion /Information 7. Mike Basinger Subarea Plan (SARP): Neighborhood Centers Discussion /Information 8. Mike Jackson Law Enforcement Interlocal Discussion /Information 9. Mike Jackson Legislative Agenda Discussion / Information 10. Mayor Towey Advance Agenda Discussion /Information 11. Information Only (will not be discussed or reported): Avista Home Energy Audit 12. Mayor Towey Council Check in Discussion /Information 13. Mike Jackson City Manager Comments Discussion /Information 14. EXECUTIVE SESSION: To Evaluate the Qualifications of Applicants for Public Employment [RCW 4230.110(1)(g)] ADJOURN Note: Unless otherwise noted above, there will be no public comments at Council Study Sessions. However, Council always reserves the right to request information from the public and staff as appropriate. During meetings held by the City of Spokane Valley Council, the Council reserves the right to take "action" on any item listed or subsequently added to the agenda. The term "action" means to deliberate, discuss, review, consider, evaluate, or make a collective positive or negative decision. 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) 92 1- 1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. Study Session Agenda, July 20, 2010 Page 1 of 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 20, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: First Reading Ordinance: Commute Trip Reduction Code Amendments - SVMC 10.20 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 10.20; RCW 70.94 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: The City adopted a Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) code in 2003 as required by state law. BACKGROUND: The City contracts with Spokane County to provide state - mandated CTR services to all affected employers, as does every other city and town in Spokane County that is required to comply with the state requirements. In short, Spokane County runs the entire CTR oversight operation in the County. This is done to realize efficiencies that individual jurisdictions could not achieve. Spokane County, as the lead agency, recently made amendments to its CTR program. The various signatory jurisdictions, including Spokane Valley, need to adopt appropriate changes to their codes to maintain consistency with Spokane County's program. The changes reflected in this proposed ordinance would bring the City into compliance with Spokane County's needs as our service provider. OPTIONS: (1) advance proposed ordinance to a second reading; (2) request that staff make additional changes. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move that we advance this ordinance amending SVMC Chapter 10.20 to a second reading on a future agenda. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney; Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst ATTACHMENTS: Proposed ordinance amending SVMC 10.20. DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 10 - * ** AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON AMENDING SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 10.20 AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City has the duty and authority to maintain and protect the health, safety and welfare of its citizens; and WHEREAS, RCW 70.94.524 -551 establishes the requirements that certain counties and cities must comply with to reduce commute trips in an effort to reduce air pollution: and WHEREAS, Spokane Valley is a jurisdiction required under RCW 70.94.527(1) to adopt and maintain a commute trip reduction ordinance, and a program designed to reduce commute trips; and WHEREAS, Spokane Valley needs to revise its Code from time to time to maintain consistency with Spokane County, which actually operates the City's CTR Program. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, ordains as follows: Section 1 . Purpose and Intent The purpose and intent of this Ordinance is to comply with the requirements of RCW 70.94 regarding reduction of commute trips. Section 2, pefinitions.. SVMC 10.20.220 is amended as follows: Formatted: No underline Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 10.20.220 Dernutions. 11 pt, Not Bold Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, Affected Employee" means a full -time employee who i �'� begins his or her regular 11 pt, No underline work day at a single worksite covered by the Commute Trip Reduction Plan between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. (inclusive) on two or more weekdays for at least twelve 12 continuous months who is not an independent contractor. _Seasonal agricultural employees, including seasonal employees of processors of agricultural products, are excluded from the count of affected employees. "Affected Employer" means an employer that employs X100 (100) or more full -time employees at a single worksite covered by the Commute Trip Reduction Plan who are scheduled to begin their regular work day between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. (inclusive) on two or more weekdays for at least 4444 continuous months. Construction worksites, when the expected duration of the construction is less than two years, are excluded from this definition. (Also see definition of employer.) "Alternative Mode" means any means of commute transportation other than that in which the single- occupant motor vehicle is the dominant mode, including telecommuting and compressed work Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, s schedules if they result in reducing commute trips. 11 pt, strikethrough Formatted: Rght Page 1 of 21 updated 7/1 5/2010 DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold ' .4Iternative Fork Schedules" mean programs such as compressed work weeks schedules that eliminate work trips for affected employees. "Base Year" means the 12 -month period errwhich commences when a major employer is determined by the jurisdiction to be partici Patin within the CTR Program. The City uses this 12 -month Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, a ~ _.�r.:,.,� .,, Period as the basis upon which it develops Commute Trip Reduction g oal s :I .,. . ~,.,.._I , ,d ., ,,.4S 41:1,.,1. .,t.,04i X801') a-1.,. S 4 a ll I,_, 1,.,..e -1 11 pt, Font color: Red " Base Year Survey or "Baseline Measurement means the survey, during the base year, of employees at a major emplover worksite to determine the drive -alone rate and vehicle miles traveled per employee at the worksite. The jurisdiction uses this measurement to develop commute trip reduction Roals for the major employer. The baseline measurement must be implemented in a manner that meets the requirements specified by the City. " Caipool' means a motor vehicle, including a motorcycle, which is occupied by two (?}to six people of at least 16 years of age traveling together for their commute trip #a4- resulting in the reduction of a minimum of one motor vehicle commute trip. "Commute Trips" mean trips made from a worker's home to a worksite with a .,..1 t:.,,.. t M .,. ..,.1,,..1..1 ; * t:.,,.. 44 -PP Fi m f n.nn ,..,, (inclusive) on weekdays. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough a TU loii• mean Sp r M an d „ ~,c.,,. „,.O t., FOM an d ,.,1.,,:.,: ter 41 40 r'rn Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman o f a ff i a ....,1 e -, af ...- :t1,:., it j f isdi e ii - l 11 pt, Italic Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman "CTR” is the abbreviation of Commute Trip Reduction. 11 pt, Strikethrough J "CTR Program" means an employer's strategies to reduce a€€estec employees' SOV4s �drive alone commutes and average VMT per employee. "Commute D112 i "ehicle Hiles Traveled Per Em to ve means the sum of the individual vehicle Formatted: Font: Not Italic commute trip lengths in miles over a set period divided by the number of full -time emplovees during that Formatted: Font: Not Italic period. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman b 4 pl 4 „! 4 e44S i - ,.F a- ,..,qa ....L -:., .. l 11 pt, Italic J Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman ..v,.,..,,.,,..t:.., t N, ~ l 11 pt, Italic Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman "Compressed Work Week" means an alternative work schedule, in accordance with employer l 11 pt, Strikethrough J policy, that regularly allows a full -time employee to eliminate at least one work day every two weeks by working longer hours during the remaining days, resulting in fewer commute trips by the employee. This Formatted: Right Page 2 of 21 Updated 7/1 5/2010 - D RAFT definition is primarily intended to include weekly and bi- weekly arrangements, the most typical being four 10 -hour days or 80 hours in nine days, but may also include other arrangements. "Custom Bit s.'BuspooI' means a commuter bus service arranged specifically to transport employees to work. "Dominant Mode" means the mode of travel used for the greatest distance of a commute trip. " Drive Alone means a motor vehicle occupied by one employee for commute purposes, including a motorcycle. " Drive -4 lone Trips means commute trips made by employees in single occupant vehicles. " Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC) means a person who is designated as responsible for the development, implementation and monitoring of an employer CTR program. "Employer" means a sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, unincorporated association, cooperative, joint venture, agency, department, district, or other individual or entity, whether public, non - profit, or private, that employs workers. "Exemption" means a waiver from any or all CTR pyrogram requirements granted to an employer by the ON or its contractor based on unique conditions that apply to the employer or employment site. "Flex- Time" is an employer policy that provides work schedules allowing individual employees sex flexibility in choosing the start and end time but not the number of their working hours to facilitate the use of alternative modes. Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Indent: First line: 0 ", Tab stops: 0 ", Left + Not at 0.31" Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Indent: First line: 0" Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough "Full -Time Employee" means a person, other than an independent contractor, whose position is scheduled n a continuous basis for 52 weeks for an average of at least 35 hours per week. "Good Faith Effort" means that an employer has met the minimum requirements identified in RCW 70.94.531 and this Chapter and is working collaboratively with Sp °ff gu pthe City or its contractor —to continue its existing CTR PPProgram or is developing and implementing program modifications likely to result in improvements to its CTR pPProgram over an agreed -upon length of time. Implementation" means active pursuit by an employer of the CTR goals of RCW 70.94.521 -5-5-1-555 and this tF&fia+ioe as evidenced by appointment of Arran employee Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, transportation coordinator (ETC) distribution of information to employees regarding alternatives to 90;1 11 pt, Not Strikethrough drive alone commuting, and commencement of other measures according to its approved CTR program and schedule. LI for Employer: means a private or public employer, including state agencies, that Formatted: Font: Not Italic emplovs4os 100 or more full -time emplovees at a single work who are scheduled to begin their regular Fr-,ttBd- Font : Not Italic work day between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. on weekdays for at least 12 continuous months. Formatted: Right Page 3 of 21 updated 7/1 5/2010 DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold reservations, or other locations as designated by the City or its contractor, at which there are one hundred or more affected emplovees. "Mode" refers to the means of transportation used by employees, such as single - occupant motor vehicle, rideshare vehicle (carpool, vanpool), transit, ferry, bicycle, walking compressed work schedule and telecommuting. "Notice" means written communication delivered via the United States Postal Service with receipt deemed accepted three days following the day on which the notice was deposited with the Postal Service unless the third day falls on a weekend or legal holiday in which case the notice is deemed accepted the day after the weekend or legal holiday. "Peak- Perioct' means the hours from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. (inclusive), Monday through Friday, except legal holidays. "Peak Period Trip" means any eH+pjt trip that delivers the employee to begin his or her regular workday between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. (inclusive), Monday through Friday, except legal holidays. Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Font: Not Italic "Proportion of wg" nee.._ f?? V,.- �Drive Alone Trips" or " AAA !Drive Alone Rate" means the Formatted: Font: Not Italic number of commute trips over a set period made by aft employees in mss- single occupant vehicles Formatted: Font: Not Italic divided by the number of potential trips taken by mployees working during that period. "Ride llatchin Service" means a system which assists in matching_ commuters for the purpose of Formatted: Font: Not Italic commuting together. Formatted: Font: Not Italic "Single - Occupant T'ehicle (SOT)" means a motor vehicle occupied by one (}employee for commute purposes, including a motorcycle. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Italic Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, "Single Work-site" means a building or group of buildings on physically contiguous parcels of land 11 pt, Strikethrough or on parcels separated solely by private or public roadways or rights -of -way occupied by one or more affected employers. "Teleworkn " or "Telecommuting" means the use of telephones, computers, or other similar Formatted: Font: Not Italic technology to permit an employee to work from home, eliminating a commute trip, or to work from a work Formatted: Font: Not Italic place closer to home, reducing the distance traveled in a commute trip by at least half. Formatted: Right Page 4 of 21 Updated 7/1 5/2010 -/ DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold "Transit" means a multiple- occupant vehicle operated on a for -hire, shared -ride basis, including bus, passenger ferry, rail, shared -ride taxi, shuttle bus, or vanpool. z` 4aosit tfip esoi4 as wrs (94 vekie4g Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, s' ' , ' it pt, Italic Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, ril 4 oo doa 4 r a4; d . ,- o.. dOR4..4a 9 4 4 44e S ,...o.r • 11 pt, Italic Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, "Transportation Management Associatio (T_114 means a group of 11 pt, Strikethrough employers or an association representing a group of employers in a defined geographic area. A TMA 4 49 Formatted: Font: Not Italic may represent employers within the City limits or may have a sphere of influence that extends beyond 9euff�r limits to include Cities cities within Spokane County -; and within areas of unincorporated Spokane County. " I anpool" means a vehicle occupied by 7Tfive to fifteen 44- traveling together for their commute trip 4 °* --�resulting in the reduction of a minimum of one motor vehicle trip.A Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Strikethrough ' Tehicle Miles Traveled (i - .IIT) Per Employee" means the sum of the individual vehicle commute trip lengths in miles made by employees over a set period divided by the number of *ft;a ed employees during that period. "Weep" means a seven -day calendar period starting on Monday and continuing through Sunday. "Weekday" means any day of the week except Saturday, Sunday and legal holidays. " Triting," "Written" or, In Writing" means original signed and dated documents. Facsimile (fax) Formatted: Left, Indent: First line: 0.5 ", Tab or electronic mail (e -mail) transmissions are a temporary notice of action that must be followed by the stops: 0.31 ", Left original signed and dated document via mail or delivery. Formatted: Font: Not Italic Formatted: Font: Not Italic Section 3 . City Plan SVMC 10.20.230 is amended as follows: Formatted: Font: Not Italic 10.20.230 City CTR Plan. Formatted: Left Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, The 11 pt, Not Bold goals established for the jurisdiction and affected employers in the City Commute Trip Reduction Plan set Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, forth in Attachment "A" are incorporated herein by reference. Citv staff is directed to make anv corrections 11 pt, No underline for typographical errors, include anv graphical materials for information, and complete the Commute Trip Formatted: Left Reduction Plan. Formatted: Left Section 4 Responsible City Department SVMC 10.20.240 is repealed. Page 5 of 21 updated 7/1 5/2010 Formatted: Right DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold Prqg1:Rfflr SVMC 10.20.240 is adopted as follows: 10.20.240 CTR Goals. A. Commute Tin Reduction Goals The Ci ' s goals for reductions in the proportions of drive -alone commute trips and vehicle miles traveled per employee by affected employers in the City jurisdiction, major employment installations, and other areas designated by the City are hereby established by Spokane Valley n v4i CTR Plan adopted through SVMC 10.20.230 above. These goals establish the desired level of performance for the CTR Program in its entirety in the Ci The Citv or its contractor will set the individual worksite goals for affected emplovers based on how the worksite can contribute to Spokane Countv overall goal established in the CTR Plan. The goals will appear as a component of the affected employer - s approved implementation plan set forth in SVMC 10.20 240.13. B. Commute Tiro Reduction Goals for Emplovers Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Bold, Underline Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5" Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Bold Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Underline Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 Dt. Bold 1. The drive -alone and VMT goals for affected emplovers in the Citv are hereby Formatted: Indent: First line: 1" established as set forth in the CTR Plan adopted in SVMC 10.20.230. 2. If the goals for an affected emplover or newly affected employer are not listed in the Formatted: Indent: First line: 1" CTR Plan, thev shall be established by the City or its contractor at a level designed to achieve the City overall goals for the jurisdiction and other areas as designated by the Citv or its contractor. The Citv or its contractor shall provide written notification of the goals for each affected employer worksite by providing the information when the City or its contractor reviews the emplover proposed program and incorporating the goals into the program approval issued by the City or its contractor. Section 6 . Applicabilitv SVMC 10.20.250 is amended as follows: 10.20.250 Applicability. The provisions of this 9rdifiatice -Chapter shall apply to any affected employer at any single worksite within the geographic limits of the CTR Plan adopted in SVMC 10.20.230. Employees will only be counted at their primary area worksite. _It is the responsibility of the employer to notify °p�he City or its contractor -of a change in status as an affected employer. Al Notification of Applicability Formatted: Indent: First line: 0" Formatted: Right Page 6 of 21 Updated 7/1 5/2010 - D RAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold 1. In addition to City of Spokane Eet4}1 s established public notification for- Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: 1" adoption of an ordinance, a notice of availability of a summary of this ±F44i-ase a notice of the requirements and criteria for affected employers to comply with the eChapter fdift&wse, and subsequent revisions shall be published at least once in City of Spokane ; = - s official newspaper R44R+w° 2. Affected employers located in the City are to receive- Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: 1" written notification that they are subject to this eChapte: - aie�° . Such notice shall be addressed to the company's chief executive officer, senior official, or CTR Program manager or registered agent at the worksite. Such notification shall '° ° *' ° *' �provide 90 days ^ -j-­ fl­ a••° a°*° 4)r °••hmd44R 4� for the affected employer to perform a baseline measurement consistent with the measurement requirements specified by the City or its contractor. 3. Affected employers that, for whatever reason, do not receive notice within 30 days of Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: P' passage ef the the effective date -and are either notified or identify themselves to Spekftxe C the Citv or its contractor - within 4$490 days of 4 he passage , ..444, Mii;anepordinance will be granted an extension to provide up to 440--90 days within which to davelap a nd submi ° CT r perform a baseline measurement consistent with the measurement requirements specified by the City or its contractor. 4. Affected Employers that have not been identified or do not identify themselves within- Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: 1" 4"4 90days of the effective date and do not Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, perform a baseline measurement consistent with the measurement requirements specified by Spokane 11 pt, Strikethrough Valley within 90 days from . the adoption are in violation of this e0rdinance. 5. If an affected employer has alreadv performed a baseline measurement, or an alternative acceptable to the City or its contractor. under previous iterations of this Chapter, the employer is not required to perform another baseline measurement. - B. Newly Affected Employers 1. _Employers meeting the definition of "affected employer" in this eChapterR4H*oL--° must identify themselves to S the City or its contractor - within 4-9490 days of either moving into the boundaries of unineorparated Spaltana Cauny outlined in the CTR Plan adopted in SVMC 10.20.230 or growing in employment at a work to 100 soe, 1 4oi4 -e4 ' 100 r more affected employees. 914e4 OH4f49­Of:S '44all be L-4044 19W dR_Vq 4 4140 C_ PUB-A 44940P 44M Uh-A"' R-fle . Employers t'At who do not identify themselves within 45490 calendar days H4: 1• _pm~J••- aft i rc t a � ~• ' are in violation of this eChapter fd*NHw,e ten to m oot 4 r � 2. Newlv affected employers identified as such shall be given 90 days to perform a baseline measurement consistent with the measurement requirements specified by the City or its contractor. Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", First line: 1" Formatted: Indent: First line: 0" Formatted: Indent: First line: 0 ", Tab stops: 0.75 ", Left Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5 ", No bullets or numbering Formatted: Right Page 7 of 21 Updated 7/1 5/2010 DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold Employers who do not perform a baseline measurement within 90 days of receiving written notification that thev are subject to this Chapter are in violation of this Chapter. 3. Not more than 90 days after receiving written notification of the results of the baseline Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.25 ", No measurement, the newly affected emplover shall develop and submit a CTR Program to the City or its bullets or numbering contractor. The program will be developed in consultation with the City Commute Trip Reduction Office staff or its contractor to be consistent with the goals of the CTR Plan adopted in SVMC 10.20.230. The Program shall be implemented not more than 90 days after approval by the Citv or its contractor. Employers who do not implement an approved CTR Program according to this schedule are in violation of this Chapter and subject to the penalties set forth in SVMC 10.20.300.D. C- - Change in Status as an Affected Employer.- Formatted: Indent: First line: o" Any of the following changes in an employer's status will change the employer's CTR program Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: o. s" requirements: 1. If an employer initially designated as an affected employer no longer employs exe Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: 1" 4H*4t-e4 (100) or more affected employees and expects not to employ �d100 (199) or more affected employees for the next e I2 � m onths, that employer is no longer an affected employer. It is the responsibility of the employer to notify and provide documentation to Spa the City or its contractor that it is no longer an affected employer. The burden of proof lies with the emplover. 2. If the same employer returns to the level of one "�� auanandrad (100) r more affected Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ,First line: 1" employees within the same 4wok& -12 0_ *month period, that employer will be considered an affected employer for the entire 4-?12 months and will be subjectto the same program requirements as other affected employers. 3. If the same employer returns to the level of mie hwidrad 09&)-or more affected Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: 1" employees 12 (�- or more months after its change in status to an "unaffected" employer, that employer shall be treated as a newly affected employer and will be subject to the same program requirements as other newly affected employers. Section 7 . Requirements for Employers SVMC 10.20.260 is amended as follows: 10.20.260 Requirements for employers. An affected employer is required to make a good faith effort, as defined in RCW 70.94.534(2) and this eFdiff Chapter to develop and implement a CTR pPProgram that will encourage its employees to reduce VMT per employee and'- drive alone commute trips. T he amplaver sh r' °�° a °a� R144 PfPgrOSS 49V--fd H4H4004149 tke an', , F,..-r i se 4 6 4- 4- ao 6 ,.-941;., Thou .J �h..h ,, erse egure, .,,J ,.;ro,:,. i TS',. St G,... Trip R04H.4814 ir4DA G..:., fi &s. The CTR pPProgram must include the mandatory elements as described below. Formatted: Right Page 8 of 21 Updated 7/1 5/2010 DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold A. Mandatory Program Elements Each employer's CTR Program shall include the following mandatory elements: 1. Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC) The emplover shall designate an Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC) to administer the CTR Program. The ETC and /or designee name, location, and telephone number must be prominently displaved phvsically or electronically at each affected work The ETC shall oversee all elements of the enplover CTR Program and act as liaison between the employer and the City. The objective is to have an effective transportation coordinator presence at each worksite; an affected employer with multiple sites may have one ETC for all sites. The Transportation Coordinator must complete the Basic ETC Training Course offered by the Citv or its contractor within six months of assuming ' designated Transportation Coordinator status. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 2. Information Distribution 11 pt, Strikethrough Information about alternatives to drive alone commuting as well as a summary of the emplover CTR Program shall be provided to employees at least once a vear and to new emplovees at the time of hire. The summary of the emplover CTR Program shall also be submitted to the City or its contractor with the emplover Program description and regular report. B. Additional Program Elements In addition to the specific program elements described in this section, the Emplover CTR Program shall include additional elements as needed to meet CTR goals. Elements may include, but are not limited to, two or more of the following: 1. Provision of preferential parking for high - occupancy vehicles: Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman 2. Reduced parking charges for high - occupancy vehicles: Formatted: List Paragraph, Numbered + 3. Instituting or increasing parking charges for drive alone commuters: Level: 1 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... + Start 4. Provision of commuter ride matching services to facilitate employee ridesharing for at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 1" + commute trips; Indent at: 1.25' 5. Provision of subsidies for rail, transit, or vanpool fares and /or transit passes: 6. Provision of vans or buses for emplo- ee ridesharing: 7. Provision of subsidies for carpools, walking, bicvchng, teleworking, or compressed schedules 8. Provision of incentives for emplovees that do not drive alone to work: 9. Permitting the use of the employer vehicles for carpooling or vanpoohng; 10. Permitting flexible work schedules to facilitate emplovees use of transit, carpools, or vanpook 11. Cooperation with transportation providers to provide additional regular or express service to the worksite: 12. Constriction of special loading and unloading facilities for transit, carpool, and vanpool users; Formatted: Right Page 9 of 21 Updated 7/1 5/2010 DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold 13. Provision of bicycle parking facilities, lockers, changing areas and showers for emplovees who bicycle or walk to work: 14. Provision of a program of parking_ incentives such as a rebate for employees who do not use the parking facilities: 15. Establishment of a program to permit employees to work part-time or frill -time at home or at an alternative worksite closer to their homes which reduces commute trips: 16. Establishment of a program of alternative work schedules, such as a compressed work week, which reduces commute trips: 17. Implementation of other measures designed to facilitate the use of high - occupancy vehicles, such as on -site daycare facilities, emergencv taxi services, or guaranteed ride home programs: 18. Charging employees for parking and /or the elimination of free parking: and 19. Other measures that the emplover believes will reduce the number and length of commute trips made to the site. C. CTR Program Report and Description contractor in accordance with the format provided by the City or its contractor. _The CTR pPProgram dDescription fe� outlines the strategies to be undertaken by an employer to achieve the commute trip reduction goals for °°� the reporting period. Employers are encouraged to consider innovative strategies and combine program elements in a manner that will best suit their location, site characteristics, business type, and employees' commuting needs. Emplovers are further encouraged to cooperate with each other to implement program elements. V a 44; 2c4 P,1 s A R- n am4 t a ll o W eO , ,..-4 04yah-P.o Hho;r. #xr-1`io"�r'rio- At a minimum, the employer's CTR Program Report and Description must include: 1) a general description of the employment site location, transportation characteristics, employee parking availability, on -site amenities and surrounding services, including unique conditions experienced by the emplover or its employees; 2) the number of employees affected by the CTR ,pPProgram and the total number of employees at the site 3) documentation of compliance with the mandatory CTR kPProgram elements (as described in subsection B of this Section 6.1): 4) description of anv additional elements included in the emnloyer's CTR D. Biennial Measurement of Emplovee Conunute Behavior In addition to the baseline measurement, emplovers shall conduct a Program evaluation as a means of determining worksite progress toward meeting CTR goals. As part of the Program evaluation, the emplover shall distribute and collect Commute Trip Reduction Program Employee Questionnaires (surveys) at least once every two years and strive to achieve at least a 70% response rate from employees at the worksite. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Font color: Red Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Tab stops: 0.25', Left Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough Formatted: Tab stops: 0.25', Left Formatted: Tab stops: 0.25', Left Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Right Page 10 of 21 DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold A. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Bold F fle .,,,,, BN . e ,. CT ..1.,111 : „a 1 414 c�n .,,: a +,.,., l m 1144.. Formatted: Numbered + Level: 1 + T Numbering Style: A, B, C, ... + Start at: 1 + 1 T........�....A..4:.... l•,.,..,d:.,.,4,... . Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0” + Indent at: 0.25 ", Don't allow hanging punctuation, Font Alignment: Baseline Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.25" Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Bold as I 4 .,I. - ,.,,4 Spk;l G;P., :P s bj ee 4i; ve is +,. I,...,o R 046,.ti.,o 4 Formatted: Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... + Start at: 1 + 4414 a,.- 4, ,.:.o. T :Fra.4..,.,.rta4:,,,, (4,40.a:,,,.4 I . .h n rr Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5 ", Don't allow hanging punctuation, Font 4414.• Alignment: Baseline 9'...,.....ti.... il.'.d.dh..ti.... Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Bold • Formatted: Numbered + Level: 1 + n+ 44 : F.. -.,, +: ., . o a,,.... n a, , , ed p re Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5% Don't allow hanging punctuation, Font Alignment: Baseline Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Bold, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, Strikethrough t Formatted: Indent: Left: 0" ' Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, Strikethrough 3. . 4�neei ��ee�'esse�e�i Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, The GTR f3reRrAM HAW-4 i146111d'4 F144 F144141181 e8ffifHti4iffil� HHEI flr8ffaSS Mid 988EI faith ' Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, GP44qi'4R4# V4 *14P. CTR T-HJ_ FlOrGe "IidOlkl all dp each of 44;R GTR Strikethrough Formatted: Normal ,. 44 . r.,1 4 ., „1, ..F,e•,,,,I,..,o r:,..,,.r:,, 41 :14 ! �L�:N,:., Or Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Bold Formatted o l :fl- 1140 , A F ,, .h Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5" 91391 44;1_ 44-P, Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Bold Formatted F. Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5" Formatted: Right Page 11 of 21 Updated 7/1 5/2010 DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Strikethrough 1:.4,:iad 48 ,. . q4: *14 f..n,....:.4,.. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Strikethrough 10 Provision of 1.:... e l e . ,. «7-: f l ..1,,.. a a nd ,.1,.....,a«s .. ;,,. hjp-.,.I,....... - t...- .,..1-. 1\ . «�,..I.: ,.f 44 44 04afki :. t :.. ,. . ,.tom f,... .,I,...eeS V449 ,1,..,,.t,1..P the S t..1.1:,,4 +H04 4 ,.f R t.., ,:t o f 4 a - t.. 944 .,,..-t .- +4111 t;.,,o a t I, ,.,,,o e a t .. ,.I,.,...« t,. 414,4:« 1 ..\ Establishment ,.f . R f ,.I ton; ,.ti. o af 4 .,,.I e ,.1, a a od . ,.r1- . 001- .,,1,:..1, .,1.O.,4.P.,4n4:,444 ,.f ,.N,o« ., g He 4 t. f,., 44 ffto 44e , ,.f 4i,44 ,...,.I, ,.,, r!. 44:41 . 14,. ,..4. „ «4444 «4444 ,. . -it. 4 ,.,.«,. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, � F or - a S tlted: roug Section 8 . Record Ke eping SVMC 10.20.270 is amended as follows: ont: (Default) Times New Roman, rough 10.20.270 Record Keeping. Affected employers shall ' @444° maintain ja 444 4 to « . «a a'°° will l ieep ar t 4 to GT-. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman 11 pt, Strikethrough 1.«,.,...°,,, a.« ° . : .r11 0- 924 .,• a copy of their approved CTR Program Description and Report, their � Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, CTR Program Employee Questiotmaire results and all supporting documentation for the descriptions and 11 pt, Strikethrough J assertions made in any CTR Report to Spokane Valley for a minimum of 48 months. &pe kft Formatted: Right Page 12 of 21 Updated 7/1 2010 DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold of Spokane Valley and the employer shall agree on the record keeping requirements as part of the accepted CTR PProgram. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough Section 9 Schedule and Process for CTR Program Description and Report SVMC Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 10.20.280 has been amended as follows: 11 pt, Strikethrough Formatted: Font: Not Bold 10.20.280 Schedule and process for CTR Program description and report. A. Document Review Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5" The Citv or its contractor shall provide the emplover with written notification if a CTR Program is Formatted: Indent: First line: 0 ", Tab stops: deemed unacceptable. The notification must Rive cause for any rejection. If the employer receives no 0.25 ", Left written notification of extension of the review period of its CTR Program or comment on the CTR Program or annual report within 90 days of submission, the employer program or annual report is deemed accepted. The City or its contractor may extend the review period up to 90 days. The implementation date for the employer CTR Program will be extended an equivalent number of days. B. Schedule Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5" Upon review of an emplover s initial CTR Program. the City or its contractor shall establish the Formatted: Indent: First line: 0 ",Tab stops: emplover regular reporting date. This report will be provided in a form provided by the Citv or its 0.25 ", Left contractor consistent with 10.20.270. C. Modification of CTR Proaram Elements 4 Formatted: No bullets or numbering, Allow hanging punctuation, Font Alignment: Auto I- anv affected emplover may submit a request to the Cite or its contractor for modification of CTR Formatted: No bullets or numbering, Allow requirements. Such request may be granted if one of the following conditions exist, hanging punctuation, Font Alignment: Auto, Tab stops: 0.25 ", Left 1. The emplover can demonstrate it would be unable to comply with the CTR Program Formatted: Font: Bold elements for reasons beyond the control of the emplover; or Formatted: No bullets or numbering, Allow 2 , hanging punctuation, Font Alignment: Auto 2. The emplover can demonstrate that compliance with the Program elements would Formatted: No bullets or numbering, Allow constitute an undue hardship. hanging punctuation, Font Alignment: Auto The Citv or its contractor may ask the emplover to substitute a Program element of similar trip reduction potential rather than grant the emplover request. D. Extensions Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5' An emplover may request additional time to submit a CTR Program Description and Report, or to Formatted: Indent: First line: 0 ", Tab stops: implement or modify a Program. Such requests shall be via written notice at least 30 days before the due 0.25 ", Left date for which the extension is being requested. Extensions not to exceed 90 days shall be considered for reasonable causes. The City or its contractor shall grant or deny the emplover extension request by written notice within 10 working days of its receipt of the extension request. If there is no response issued to the emplover. an extension is automatically anted for 30 days. Extension shall not exempt an emplover from any responsibility in meeting program Roals. Extension granted due to delays or difficulties with any Formatted: Right Page 13 of 21 Updated 7/1 5/2010 DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold pro,,gam element(s) shall not be cause for discontinuing or failing to implement other Program elements. An emplover reporting date shall not be adjusted permanently as a result of these extensions. An employeC s annual reporting date may be extended at the discretion of the City or its contractor. E. Implementation of Emplover CTR Program Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5' Unless extensions are granted, the emplover shall implement its approved CTR Program, including Formatted: Indent: First line: 0 ",Tab stops: approved program modifications, not more than 90 days after receiving written notice from the Citv or its 0.25 ", Left contractor that the Program has been approved or with the expiration of the Program review period without receiving notice from the City or its contractor. Section 10 Recognition of Transportation Management Efforts SVMC 10.20.290 is amended as follows: 10.20.290 Section 11 . Enforcement SVMC 10.20.300 is amended as follows: 10.20.300 Enforcment. A. , Compliance For purposes of this section, compliance shall mean: in airthe approved CTR Program Description and Report and satisfying the requirements of this Ordinance. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Bold Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Bold Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Bold Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Bold Formatted: Normal, Indent: Left: 0.25 ", No bullets or numbering Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, Bold Formatted: No bullets or numbering 2. Providing a ee�completer CTR Program Description and Report on the regnlar Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5 ", No bullets reporting date: and or numbering 3. Distributing and collecting the CTR Program Employee Questionnaire during the Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5', No bullets scheduled survey time period. or numbering The following criteria for achieving goals for VMT per employee and proportion of drive alone trips shall be applied in determining requirements for emplover CTR Program modifications: Formatted: Normal, Indent: Left: 0.25 ", No bullets or numbering Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, Bold Formatted: Right Page 14 of 21 Updated 7/1 5/2010 _/� DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold 1. If an emplover meets either or both goals, the emplover has satisfied the objectives o Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5', No bullets the CTR Plan and will not be required to improve its CTR �Prouam; or numbering 2. If an emplover makes a good faith effort, as defined in RCW 70.94.534(2) and this Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5', No bullets Ordinance. but has not met or is not likelv to meet the applicable drive alone or VMT goal. Spokane or numbering Vallev smav deem it necessary to make required modifications to its CTR Program while working collaboratively with the employer. m8 .__,.' - ecle 4 4,. 6 ,:+ P Flt + *,; 4 GmR After agreeing on modifications, the emplover shall submit a revised CTR Program 4-Description to Spokane Vallev for approval within 30 days of reaching agreement. 3. If an emplover fails to make a good faith effort as defined in RCW 70.94.534(2) and this ordinance, and fails to meet the applicable 49 alone or VMT reduction goal, the City or its contractor shall i f 4e the d ffie difi e 4eii. direct the emplover to revise its Prouam to the recommended modifications, the emplover shall submit a revised CTR p-Program 4 and Report, including the requested modifications or equivalent measures, within 30 days of receiving written notice to revise its Program. The City or its contractor shall review the revisions and notify the emplover of acceptance or resection of the revised i4--Program. If a revised Program is not accepted, the City or its contractor will send written notice to that effect to the emplover within 30 days and, if necessarv, require the emplover to attend a conference with y-Program review staff for the purpose of reaching a consensus on the required t� Prouam. A final decision on the required trProgram will be issued in writing by the City or its contractor within 10 working days of the conference. Page 15 of 21 updated 7/1 5/2010 Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5, No bullets or numbering Formatted: Right DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold C. Violations The following constitute violations if the applicable deadlines are not met: Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.25 ", Don't allow hanging punctuation, Font Alignment: Baseline 1. Failure to a V 1 "" Mid 8" S44444 "" `""" ° 6 G ""'L' °"' "" " self Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: 1 ", identify as an affected emplover, Tab stops: 1.25 ", Left + Not at 0.75" 2. Failure to perform a baseline measurement, including: Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: 1 ", Tab stops: 1.25 ", Left + Not at 0.75" L_Employers notified or that have identified themselves to gp�r the Formatted: Indent: Left: o ", First line: 1.5" Citv or its contractor within 440- 90 days of the 044 ° effective date of the enacting ordinance g adopted and that do not perform a baseline measurement consistent with the requirements specified by the Citv or its contractor within 90 days from the notification *4-or self - identification: tt)hlEmployers not identified or self - identified within 45-90 days of the Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: 1.5" effective date of the enacting ordinaneerdi'°"e° "oing ad * °' and that do not ffeef&i+rperform a baseline measurement consistent with the requirements specified by the Citv or its contractor within 4$4-90 days from 4 "° adsp4iso 444- • °ffective date of the enacting language - . 1 - 3. Failure to ^ H^!rH4en' an apK -9 *e develop and /or submit on time a complete CTR 2 Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: 1 ", Program "" a ^a.,,.a :.. nnm -�n nn c� n ,..,a .�.:,. ��..a:..,..,,.,. Tab stops: 1.25 ", Left + Not at 0.75" 3-4. Failure to implement an approved CTR program, unless the program elements that are Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: 1 ", carried out can be shown through quantifiable evidence to meet or exceed VMT and drive alone goals as Tab stops: 1.25 ", Left + Not at 0.75" specified in this Chapter; 5. Submission of false or fraudulent data in response to survey requirements; 46. Failure to make a good faith effort, as defined in RCW 70.94.534 and r`f:a"iaiie (240 ter or -5-7. Failure to revise an unacceptable CTR Program as defined in RCW 70.94.534(4) tliis F`°''�•." °chapter. A— D. Penalties Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: 1 ", Tab stops: 1.25 ", Left + Not at 0.75" this Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", First line: 1 ", Tab stops: 1.25 ", Left + Not at 0.75" Page 16 of 21 Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: 1 ", Tab stops: 1.25 ", Left + Not at 0.75" Formatted: Indent: Left: 0 ", First line: 0 ", Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: A, B, C, ... + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.25 ", Don't allow hanging punctuation, Font Alignment: Baseline Formatted: Right DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold Any affected employer violating any provision of this (4a Rnee Chapter shall be guilty of a civil infraction and subject to the imposition of civil penalties. 1. Whenever Tthe tom= City or its contractor makes a determination that the affected employer is in violation of this 9rd-iiiat3se 4hGarr The City or its contractor shall issue a written notice and order and send it registered mail, return receipt requested, to the chief executive officer or highest ranking official at the worksite. The notice and order shall contain: a) The name and address of the affected employer. b) A statement that °13� -the City or its contractor has found the affected employer to be in violation of this 9rdixaxeor with a brief and concise description of the conditions found to be in violation. c) A statement of the corrective action required to be taken. If Spo City or its contractor has determined that corrective action is required, the order shall require that all corrective action be completed by a date stated in the notice. d) A statement specifying the amount of any civil penalty assessed on account of the violation; and e) A statement advising that the order shall become final unless, no later than 4 ("10 working days after the notice and order are served, any person aggrieved by the order requests in writing an appeal before the City Hearing Examiner as well as the name and mailing address of the person with whom the appeal must be filed. 2. Each day of failure to implement the Program or violating any provision of this Chapter shall constitute a separate violation subject to penalties as described in RCW 7.80. The penalty for a first violation shall be $100 per working day. The penalty for subsequent violations will be $250 per working day for each violation. 3. Penalties will begin to accrue 15 working days following the official date of notice from °••�4-,the City or its contractor _In the event an affected employer appeals the imposition of penalties, the penalties will not accrue during the appeals process. Should the designated Hearing Examiner decide in favor of the appellant, all or a portion of the monetary penalties may be dismissed by the Hearing Examiner. 4. No affected employer with an approved CTR Program which has made a good faith effort may be held liable for failure to reach the applicable SON' drive alone or VMT goal. 5. An affected employer shall not be liable for civil penalties if failure to implement an element of a CTR r_Program was the result of an inability to reach agreement with a certified collective bargaining agent under applicable laws where the issue was raised by the employer and pursued in good faith. Unionized employers shall be presumed to act in good faith compliance if they: Formatted: Right Page 17 of 21 Updated 7/1 5/2010 DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold a) Propose to a recognized union any provision of the employer's CTR Program that is subject to bargaining as defined by the National Labor Relations Act; and b) Advise the union of the existence of the statute and the mandates of the CTR p Program approved by Spskmxe Ge� City or its contractor and advise the union that the proposal being made is necessary for compliance with state law (RCW 70.94.531). Section 12 Exemptions and Goal Modifications SVMC 10.20.310 is amended as follows: 10.20.310 Exemptions and goal modifications. A. Worksite Exemp tions Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough An affected employer may request Spa katie Gatio4t he City or its contractor to grant an exemption Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5" from all CTR Program requirements or penalties for a particular worksite. The employer must demonstrate that it would experience undue hardship in complying with the requirements of 44e rdinance Chapter as a result of the characteristics of its business, its work force, or its location(s). An exemption may be granted if and only if the affected employer demonstrates that it faces extraordinary circumstances, such as bankruptcy or a protracted labor strike, and is unable to implement any measures that could reduce the proportion of drive alone trips and VMT per employee. Exemptions may be granted by the City or its contractor at any time based on written notice of request provided by the affected employer. The notice should clearly explain the conditions for which the affected employer is seeking an exemption from the requirements of the CTR r- Program. The City or its contractor shall grant or denv the request within 30 days of receipt of the request. Spe ° he City or its contractor shall review annually all employers receiving exemptions, and shall determine whether the exemption will be in effect during the following program year. .-_Employee Exemptions Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Not Strikethrough Specific employees or groups of employees who are required to drive alone to work as a condition of Formatted: Indent: First line: o. s" employment may be exempted from a worksite's CTR -Program. Exemptions may also be granted for employees who work variable shifts throughout the year and who do not rotate as a group to identical shifts. Spoliaae gooHNthe City or its contractor will use the criteria identified in the CTR T ��,.° Board Administrative Guidelines to assess the validity of employee exemption requests. I4;dor *'• : 0 ,4;a H thr _ The City or its contractor shall grant or deny the request within 30 days of receipt of the request. Npp okfffit-�the City or its contractor shall review annually all employee exemption requests, and shall determine whether the exemption will be in effect during the following program year. C. - _Modification of CTR Program Goals Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, Bold 1. An affected employer may request that the °per; City or its contractor modify its Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.25 ", First line: o" worksite CTR program goals. Such requests shall be filed in writing at least 60 days prior to the date the worksite is required to submit its program description or annual report. The Formatted: Right Page 18 of 21 Updated 7/1 2010 - D RAFT goal modification request must clearly explain why the worksite is unable to achieve the applicable goal. The worksite must also demonstrate that it has implemented all of the elements contained in its approved CTR program. Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold City or its contractor will review and grant or deny requests for goal- Formatted: Numbered + Level: 2 + modifications in accordance with procedures and criteria identified in the CTR T" °'�, rop Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... + Start at: 1 + Board Guidelines. An "'" " ' ' "` " ' "' " medif of " t he "' ' '' " "' '" " "'" "' ""` " " Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.75" + Tab ", r1 after: 1" + Indent at: 1 Don't allow hanging #e e.,..l -".,., (;;4­ . .,1 ..F :4„ 1,4: 1 1 ......:...:.... punctuation, Font Alignment: Baseline 2 An employer may not request a modification of the applicable goals until one year after- Formatted: Numbered + Level: 2 + Spe ' - "li - 4 _'the Citv or its contractor approval of its initial program description or Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... + Start at: 1 + annual report. Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.75" + Tab after: 1" + Indent at: 1 ", Don't allow hanging punctuation, Font Alignment: Baseline "4a T1 4P P .,1 e. H g.eR4914..44."4P 414"4 :4q . ,4 isiie : .44:6..4.,..q v .. Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt, Strikethrough Section 13 . Appeals SVMC 10.20.320 is amended as follows: 10.20.320 Appeals Formatted: Not Highlight Any affected employer may appeal administrative decisions regarding exemptions, modification of goals, CTR Program elements, and violations and penalties to the a°°i n ° Hearing Examiner pursuant to SVMC Chapter 17.90 Appeals shall be filed within 15 working days of the administrative decision. X111 Formatted: Not Highlight appeals shall be filed with the City' Clerk Rf 414" D,. "`a ,.F C.. e f S pa l cane n,.'•..`•' wit Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, _ 1 _;1 tefitie, Spekaiie, Washiiigt8ii 992 1707 Ras4 11 pt Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, being a a well as th .. ac ifi. b f... th a eal 11 pt A. Criteria on Appeals Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5" The designated Hearing Examiner, upon notification of a timely appeal by the Clerk of the Board of Countv Commissioners of Spokane County, will evaluate the appeal to determine if the decision is consistent with the CTR Law and the CTR Guidelines. The designated Hearing Examiner may schedule a meeting between the affected emplover and the County. The decision of the designated Hearing Examiner shall be reduced to writing. It shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the affected employer. Formatted: Right Page 19 of 21 Updated 7/1 5/2010 DRAFT Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold B. Appeal to the Board of County Commissioners Any affected employer may appeal the written decision of the designated Hearing Examiner to the Board of County Commissioners. Appeals shall be filed within 15 working days of the designated Hearing Examiner written decision. All appeals shall be filed with the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County. The Board of County Commissioners shall consider only testimony and written documentation submitted to the designated Hearing Examiner on any matter appealed to the Board. No additional evidence shall be considered by the Board of County Commissioners. Upon receipt of an appeal, the Board of County Commissioners will set a date no later than 30 calendar days, at which thev will render their written decision on the appeal. C. Judicial Appeals Any decision of the Board of County Commissioners, as provided for in Section (B) herein, shall be final and conclusive, unless not later than twenty (20) calendar days from the date of the written decision, the affected employer appeals to the Superior Court pursuant to RCA' 36.32.330. Section 14 . Responsible City department SVMC 10.20.330 is added as follows: 10.20.330 Responsible City department The City Manager shall designate the City department responsible for implementing this Chapter, the CTR Plan, and the Citv of Spokane Valley CTR Program. In the alternative, the City may enter into an Interlocal Agreement with Spokane County whereby Spokane County would implement a City CTR plan and CTR program. Section 15 . Severabilitv If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 16 . Effective Date This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of the ordinance, or a summary thereof, occurs in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council this day of 1 2010. ATTEST: City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Mayor, Thomas E. Towey Formatted: Right Page 20 of 21 Updated 7/1 2010 - D RAFT Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Page 21 of 21 Updated 7/1 5/2010 Formatted: Font: 14 pt, Bold Formatted: Right DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 10-*** AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON AMENDING SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 10.20 AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City has the duty and authority to maintain and protect the health, safety and welfare of its citizens; and WHEREAS, RCW 7094.524 -.551 establishes the requirements that certain counties and cities must comply with to reduce commute trips in an effort to reduce air pollution; and WHEREAS, Spokane Valley is a jurisdiction required under RCW 70.94.527(1) to adopt and maintain a commute trip reduction ordinance, and a program designed to reduce commute trips; and WHEREAS, Spokane Valley needs to revise its Code from time to time to maintain consistency with Spokane County, which actually operates the City's CTR Program. follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, ordains as Section 1 . Purpose and Intent The purpose and intent of this Ordinance is to comply with the requirements of RCW 70.94 regarding reduction of commute trips. Section 2. Definitions SVMC 10.20.220 is amended as follows: 10.20.220 Definitions. "Affected Employee" means a full -time employee who begins his or her regular work day at a single worksite covered by the Commute Trip Reduction Plan between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. (inclusive) on two or more weekdays for at least 12 continuous months who is not an independent contractor. Seasonal agricultural employees, including seasonal employees of processors of agricultural products, are excluded from the count of affected employees. "Affected Employer" means an employer that employs 100 or more full-time employees at a single worksite covered by the Commute Trip Reduction Plan who are scheduled to begin their regular work day between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. (inclusive) on two or more weekdays for at least 12 continuous months. Construction worksites, when the expected duration of the construction is less than two years, are excluded from this definition. (Also see definition of employer.) "Alternative Mode" means any means of commute transportation other than that in which the single- occupant motor vehicle is the dominant mode, including telecommuting and compressed work schedules if they result in reducing commute trips. "Alternative Work Schedules" mean programs such as compressed work week schedules that eliminate work trips for affected employees. Page 1 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 DRAFT "Base Year" means the 12 -month period which commences when a major employer is determined by the jurisdiction to be participating within the CTR Program. The City uses this 12 -month period as the basis upon which it develops Commute Trip Reduction goals. "Base Year Survey" or "Baseline Measurement" means the survey, during the base year, of employees at a major employer worksite to determine the drive -alone rate and vehicle miles traveled per employee at the worksite. The jurisdiction uses this measurement to develop commute trip reduction goals for the major employer. The baseline measurement must be implemented in a manner that meets the requirements specified by the City. "Carpool" means a motor vehicle, including a motorcycle, which is occupied by two to six people of at least 16 years of age traveling together for their commute trip resulting in the reduction of a minimum of one motor vehicle commute trip. "Commute Trips" mean trips made from a worker's home to a worksite (inclusive) on weekdays. "CTR" is the abbreviation of Commute Trip Reduction. "CTR Program" means an employer's strategies to reduce employees' drive alone commutes and average VMT per employee. "Commute trip vehicle miles traveled per employee" means the sum of the individual vehicle commute trip lengths in miles over a set period divided by the number of full -time employees during that period. "Compressed Work Week" means an alternative work schedule, in accordance with employer policy, that regularly allows a full -time employee to eliminate at least one work day every two weeks by working longer hours during the remaining days, resulting in fewer commute trips by the employee. This definition is primarily intended to include weekly and bi- weekly arrangements, the most typical being four 10 -hour days or 80 hours in nine days, but may also include other arrangements. to work. "Custom Bus /Buspool" means a commuter bus service arranged specifically to transport employees "Dominant Mode" means the mode of travel used for the greatest distance of a commute trip. "Drive Alone" means a motor vehicle occupied by one employee for commute purposes, including a motorcycle. "Drive Alone Trips" means commute trips made by employees in single occupant vehicles. "Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC)" means a person who is designated as responsible for the development, implementation and monitoring of an employer's CTR program. "Employer" means a sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, unincorporated association, cooperative, joint venture, agency, department, district, or other individual or entity, whether public, non- profit, or private, that employs workers. "Exemption" means a waiver from any or all CTR Program requirements granted to an employer by the City or its contractor based on unique conditions that apply to the employer or employment site. Page 2 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 DRAFT "Flex- Time" is an employer policy that provides work schedules allowing individual employees flexibility in choosing the start and end time, but not the number of their working hours to facilitate the use of alternative modes. "Full -Time Employee" means a person, other than an independent contractor, whose position is scheduled on a continuous basis for 52 weeks for an average of at least 35 hours per week. "Good Faith Effort" means that an employer has met the minimum requirements identified in RCW 70.94.531 and this Chapter, and is working collaboratively with the City or its contractor to continue its existing CTR Program or is developing and implementing program modifications likely to result in improvements to its CTR Program over an agreed -upon length of time. "Implementation" means active pursuit by an employer of the CTR goals of RCW 70.94.521.555 and this Chapter as evidenced by appointment of an employee transportation coordinator (ETC), distribution of information to employees regarding alternatives to drive alone commuting, and commencement of other measures according to its approved CTR program and schedule. "A Major Employer" means a private or public employer, including state agencies, that employs 100 or more full -time employees at a single worksite who are scheduled to begin their regular work day between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. on weekdays for at least 12 continuous months. "Major Employer Work-site" or "Affected Employer Work-site" or "Worksite" means the physical location occupied by a major employer, as determined by the local jurisdiction. "Major Employment Installation" means a military base or federal reservation, excluding tribal reservations, or other locations as designated by the City or its contractor, at which there are one hundred or more affected employees. "Mode" refers to the means of transportation used by employees, such as single - occupant motor vehicle, rideshare vehicle (carpool, vanpool), transit, ferry, bicycle, walking, compressed work schedule and telecommuting. "Notice" means written communication delivered via the United States Postal Service with receipt deemed accepted three days following the day on which the notice was deposited with the Postal Service unless the third day falls on a weekend or legal holiday in which case the notice is deemed accepted the day after the weekend or legal holiday. "Peak Period" means the hours from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. (inclusive), Monday through Friday, except legal holidays. "Peak Period Trip" means any commute trip that delivers the employee to begin his or her regular workday between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. (inclusive), Monday through Friday, except legal holidays. "Proportion ofDrive Alone Trips" or "Drive Alone Rate" means the number of commute trips over a set period made by employees in single occupant vehicles divided by the number of potential trips taken by employees working during that period. "Ride Matching Service" means a system which assists in matching commuters for the purpose of commuting together. Page 3 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 DRAFT "Single- Occupant Vehicle (SO V)" means a motor vehicle occupied by one employee for commute purposes, including a motorcycle. "Single Worksite" means a building or group of buildings on physically contiguous parcels of land or on parcels separated solely by private or public roadways or rights -of -way occupied by one or more affected employers. "Teleworking" or "Telecommuting" means the use of telephones, computers, or other similar technology to permit an employee to work from home, eliminating a commute trip, or to work from a work place closer to home, reducing the distance traveled in a commute trip by at least half. "Transit" means a multiple- occupant vehicle operated on a for -hire, shared -ride basis, including bus, passenger ferry, rail, shared -ride taxi, shuttle bus, or vanpool. "Transportation Management Association (TAM)" means a group of employers or an association representing a group of employers in a defined geographic area. A TMA may represent employers within the city limits, or may have a sphere of influence that extends beyond city limits to include cities within Spokane County; and within areas of unincorporated Spokane County. " Vanpool" means a vehicle occupied by five to fifteen people traveling together for their commute trip resulting in the reduction of a minimum of one motor vehicle trip. "Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Per Employee" means the sum of the individual vehicle commute trip lengths in miles made by employees over a set period divided by the number of employees during that period. "Week" means a seven -day calendar period starting on Monday and continuing through Sunday. "Weekday" means any day of the week except Saturday, Sunday and legal holidays. "Writing,"" Written, " or "In Writing" means original signed and dated documents. Facsimile (fax) or electronic mail (e -mail) transmissions are a temporary notice of action that must be followed by the original signed and dated document via mail or delivery. Section 3 . City CTR Plan SVMC 10.20.230 is amended as follows: 10.20.230 City CTR Plan. The goals established forthe jurisdiction and affected employers in the City's Commute Trip Reduction Plan set forth in Attachment "A" are incorporated herein by reference. City staff is directed to make any corrections for typographical errors, include any graphical materials for information, and complete the Commute Trip Reduction Plan. Section 4 Responsible City Department SVMC 10.20.240 is repealed. Section 5 . CTR Goals SVMC 10.20.240 is adopted as follows: 10.20.240 CTR Goals. A. Commute Tip Reduction Goals Page 4 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 DRAFT The City's goals for reductions in the proportions of drive -alone commute trips and vehicle miles traveled per employee by affected employers in the City's jurisdiction, major employment installations, and other areas designated by the City are hereby established by Spokane Valley's CTR Plan adopted through SVMC 10.20.230 above. These goals establish the desired level of perfonnance for the CTR Program in its entirety in the City. The City or its contractor will set the individual worksite goals for affected employers based on how the worksite can contribute to Spokane County's overall goal established in the CTR Plan. The goals will appear as a component of the affected employer's approved implementation plan set forth in SVMC 10.20.240.13. B. Commute Trip Reduction Goals for Employers 1. The drive -alone and VMT goals for affected employers in the City are hereby established as set forth in the CTR Plan adopted in SVMC 10.20.230. 2. If the goals for an affected employer or newly affected employer are not listed in the CTR Plan, they shall be established by the City or its contractor at a level designed to achieve the City's overall goals for the jurisdiction and other areas as designated by the City or its contractor. The City or its contractor shall provide written notification of the goals for each affected employer worksite by providing the information when the City or its contractor reviews the employer's proposed program and incorporating the goals into the program approval issued by the City or its contractor. Section 6 . Applicability SVMC 10.20.250 is amended as follows: 10.20.250 Applicability. The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to any affected employer at any single worksite within the geographic limits of the CTR Plan adopted in SVMC 10.20.230. Employees will only be counted at their primary area worksite. It is the responsibility of the employer to notify the City or its contractor of a change in status as an affected employer. A. Notification of Applicability 1. In addition to City of Spokane Valley's established public notification for adoption of an ordinance, a notice of availability of a summary of this Chapter, a notice of the requirements and criteria for affected employers to comply with the Chapter, and subsequent revisions shall be published at least once in City of Spokane Valley's official newspaper. 2. Affected employers located in the City are to receive written notification that they are subject to this Chapter. Such notice shall be addressed to the company's chief executive officer, senior official, or CTR Program manager or registered agent at the worksite. Such notification shall provide 90 days for the affected employer to perform a baseline measurement consistent with the measurement requirements specified by the City or its contractor. 3. Affected employers that, for whatever reason, do not receive notice within 30 days of the effective date and are either notified or identify themselves to the City or its contractor within 90 days of Page 5 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 DRAFT ordinance will be granted an extension to provide up to 90 days within which to perform a baseline measurement consistent with the measurement requirements specified by the City or its contractor. 4. Affected Employers that have not been identified or do not identify themselves within 90 days of the effective date and do not perform a baseline measurement consistent with the measurement requirements specified by Spokane Valley within 90 days from the adoption are in violation of this Ordinance. 5. If an affected employer has already performed a baseline measurement, or an alternative acceptable to the City or its contractor, under previous iterations of this Chapter, the employer is not required to perform another baseline measurement. B. Newly Affected Employers 1. Employers meeting the definition of "affected employer" in this Chapter must identify themselves to the City or its contractor within 90 days of either moving into the boundaries outlined in the CTR Plan adopted in SVMC 10.20.230 or growing in employment at a worksite to 100 or more affected employees. Employers who do not identify themselves within 90 calendar days are in violation of this Chapter. 2. Newly affected employers identified as such shall be given 90 days to perform a baseline measurement consistent with the measurement requirements specified by the City or its contractor. Employers who do not perform a baseline measurement within 90 days of receiving written notification that they are subject to this Chapter are in violation of this Chapter. 3. Not more than 90 days after receiving written notification of the results of the baseline measurement, the newly affected employer shall develop and submit a CTR Program to the City or its contractor. The programm will be developed in consultation with the City Commute Trip Reduction Office staff or its contractor to be consistent with the goals of the CTR Plan adopted in SVMC 10.20.230. The Program shall be implemented not more than 90 days after approval by the City or its contractor. Employers who do not implement an approved CTR Program according to this schedule are in violation of this Chapter and subject to the penalties set forth in SVMC 10.20.300.D. C. Change in Status as an Affected Employer Any of the following changes in an employer's status will change the employer's CTR program requirements: 1. If an employer initially designated as an affected employer no longer employs 100 or more affected employees and expects not to employ 100 or more affected employees for the next 12 months, that employer is no longer an affected employer. It is the responsibility of the employer to notify and provide documentation to the Citv or its contractor that it is no longer an affected employer. The burden of proof lies with the employer. 2. If the same employer returns to the level of 100 or more affected employees within the same 12 month period, that employer will be considered an affected employer for the entire 12 months and will be subject to the same program requirements as other affected employers. 3. If the same employer returns to the level of 100 or more affected employees 12 or more months after its change in status to an "unaffected" employer, that employer shall be treated as a newly Page 6 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 DRAFT affected employer and will be subject to the same program requirements as other newly affected employers. Section 7 . Requirements for Employ SVMC 10.20.260 is amended as follows: 10.20.260 Requirements for employers. An affected employer is required to make a good faith effort, as defined in RCW 70.94.534(2) and this Chapter, to develop and implement a CTR Program that will encourage its employees to reduce VMT per employee and drive alone commute trips. The CTR Program must include the mandatory elements as described below. A. Mandatory Program Elements Each employer's CTR Program shall include the following mandatory elements: 1. Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC) The employer shall designate an Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC) to administer the CTR Program. The ETC and /or designee's name, location, and telephone number must be prominently displayed physically or electronically at each affected worksite. The ETC shall oversee all elements of the employer's CTR Program and act as liaison between the employer and the City. The objective is to have an effective transportation coordinator presence at each worksite, an affected employer with multiple sites may have one ETC for all sites. The Transportation Coordinator must complete the Basic ETC Training Course offered by the City or its contractor within six months of assuming "designated Transportation Coordinator" status. 2. Information Distribution Information about alternatives to drive alone commuting as well as a summary of the employer's CTR Program shall be provided to employees at least once a year and to new employees at the time of hire. The summary of the employer's CTR Program shall also be submitted to the City or its contractor with the employer's Program description and regular report. B. Additional Program Elements In addition to the specific program elements described in this section, the Employer's CTR Program shall include additional elements as needed to meet CTR goals. Elements may include, but are not limited to, two or more of the following: 1. Provision of preferential parking for high- occupancy vehicles; 2. Reduced parking charges for high- occupancy vehicles; �. Instituting or increasing parking charges for drive alone commuters, 4. Provision of commuter ride matching services to facilitate employee ridesharing for commute trips; 5. Provision of subsidies for rail, transit, or vanpool fares and/or transit passes; 6. Provision of vans or buses for employee ridesharing; 7. Provision of subsidies for carpools, walking, bicycling, teleworking, or compressed schedules; 8. Provision of incentives for employees that do not drive alone to work; 9. Permitting the use of the employer's vehicles for carpooling or vanpooling; Page 7 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 DRAFT 10. Permitting flexible work schedules to facilitate employees' use of transit, carpools, or vanpools; 11. Cooperation with transportation providers to provide additional regular or express service to the worksite; 12. Construction of special loading and unloading facilities for transit, carpool, and vanpool users; 13. Provision of bicycle parking facilities, lockers, changing areas and showers for employees who bicycle or walk to work, 14. Provision of a program of parking incentives such as a rebate for employees who do not use the parking facilities, 15. Establishment of a program to permit employees to work part-time or full -time at home or at an alternative worksite closer to their homes which reduces commute trips; 16. Establishment of a program of alternative work schedules, such as a compressed work week, which reduces commute trips; 17. Implementation of other measures designed to facilitate the use of high- occupancy vehicles, such as on -site daycare facilities, emergency taxi services, or guaranteed ride home programs, 18. Charging employees for parking and /or the elimination of free parking; and 19. Other measures that the employer believes will reduce the number and length of commute trips made to the site. C. CTR Program Report and Description Affected employers shall review their program and submit a yearly progress report with the City or its contractor in accordance with the format provided by the City or its contractor. The CTR Program Description outlines the strategies to be undertaken by an employer to achieve the commute trip reduction goals for the reporting period. Employers are encouraged to consider innovative strategies and combine program elements in a manner that will best suit their location, site characteristics, business type, and employees' commuting needs. Employers are further encouraged to cooperate with each other to implement program elements. At a minimum, the employer's CTR Program Report and Description must include: 1) a general description of the employment site location, transportation characteristics, employee parking availability, on -site amenities and surrounding services, including unique conditions experienced by the employer or its employees; 2) the number of employees affected by the CTR Program and the total number of employees at the site; 3) documentation of compliance with the mandatory CTR Program elements (as described in subsection B of this Section 6.1); 4) description of any additional elements included in the employer's CTR Program (as described subsection B of this Section 6.2); 5) schedule of implementation, assignment of responsibilities, and commitment to provide appropriate resources; and 6) a statement of organizational commitment to provide appropriate resources to the program to meet the employer's established goals. D. Biennial Measurement of Employee Commute Behavior In addition to the baseline measurement, employers shall conduct a Program evaluation as a means of determining worksite progress toward meeting CTR goals. As part of the Program evaluation, the employer shall distribute and collect Commute Trip Reduction Program Employee Questionnaires (surveys) at least once every two years and strive to achieve at least a 70% response rate from employees at the worksite. Page 8 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 DRAFT Section 8 . Record heeping SVMC 10.20.270 is amended as follows: 10.20.270 Record Keeping. Affected employers shall maintain a copy of their approved CTR Program Description and Report, their CTR Program Employee Questionnaire results and all supporting documentation for the descriptions and assertions made in any CTR Report to Spokane Valley for a minimum of 48 months. City of Spokane Valley and the employer shall agree on the record keeping requirements as part of the accepted CTR Program. Section 9 Schedule and Process for CTR Program Description and Report SVMC 10.20.280 has been amended as follows: 10.20.280 Schedule and process for CTR Program description and report. A. Document Review The City or its contractor shall provide the employer with written notification if a CTR Program is deemed unacceptable. The notification must give cause for any rejection. If the employer receives no written notification of extension of the review period of its CTR Program or comment on the CTR Program or annual report within 90 days of submission, the employer's program or annual report is deemed accepted. The City or its contractor may extend the review period up to 90 days. The implementation date for the employer's CTR Program will be extended an equivalent number of days. B. Schedule Upon review of an employer's initial GTR Program, the City or its contractor shall establish the employer's regular reporting date. This report will be provided in a form provided by the City or its contractor consistent with 10.20.270. C. Modification of CTR Program Elements Any affected employer may submit a request to the City or its contractor for modification of CTR requirements. Such request may be granted if one of the following conditions exist: 1. The employer can demonstrate it would be unable to comply with the CTR Program elements for reasons beyond the control of the employer; or 2. The employer can demonstrate that compliance with the Program elements would constitute an undue hardship. The City or its contractor may ask the employer to substitute a Program element of similar trip reduction potential rather than grant the employer's request. D. Extensions An employer may request additional time to submit a CTR Program Description and Report, or to implement or modify a Program. Such requests shall be via written notice at least 30 days before the due date for which the extension is being requested. Extensions not to exceed 90 days shall be considered for reasonable causes. The City or its contractor shall grant or deny the employer's extension request by written notice within 10 working days of its receipt of the extension request. If there is no response issued Page 9 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 DRAFT to the employer, an extension is automatically granted for 30 days. Extension shall not exempt an employer from any responsibility in meeting program goals. Extension granted due to delays or difficulties with any program element(s) shall not be cause for discontinuing or failing to implement other Program elements. An employer's reporting date shall not be adjusted permanently as a result of these extensions. An employer's annual reporting date may be extended at the discretion of the City or its contractor. E. Implementation of Employer's CTR Program Unless extensions are granted, the employer shall implement its approved CTR Program, including approved program modifications, not more than 90 days after receiving written notice from the City or its contractor that the Program has been approved or with the expiration of the Program review period without receiving notice from the City or its contractor. Section 10 Recognition of Transportation Management Efforts SVMC 10.20.290 is amended as follows: 10.20.290 Recognition of Transportation Management Efforts. As public recognition for their efforts, affected employers who meet or exceed the CTR goals as set forth in SVMC 10.20.240 will receive a Commute Trip Reduction certificate of leadership from the City or its contractor. Section 11 . Enforcement SVMC 10.20300 is amended as follows: 10.20.300 Enforcment. A. Compliance For purposes of this section, compliance shall mean: 1. Fully implementing in good faith all mandatory Program elements as well as provisions in the approved CTR Program Description and Report and satisfying the requirements of this Ordinance. date; and 2. Providing a complete CTR Program Description and Report on the regular reporting 3. Distributing and collecting the CTR Program Employee Questionnaire during the scheduled survey time period. B. Program Modification Criteria The following criteria for achieving goals for VMT per employee and proportion of drive alone trips shall be applied in determining requirements for employer CTR Program modifications: 1. If an employer meets either or both goals, the employer has satisfied the objectives of the CTR Plan and will not be required to improve its CTR Program; 2. If an employer makes a good faith effort, as defined in RCW 70.94.534(2) and this Ordinance, but has not met or is not likely to meet the applicable drive alone or VMT goal, Spokane Valley may deem it necessary to make required modifications to its GTR Program while working collaboratively Page 10 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 DRAFT with the employer. After agreeing on modifications, the employer shall submit a revised CTR Program Description to Spokane Valley for approval within 30 days of reaching agreement. 3. If an employer fails to make a good faith effort as defined in RCW 70.94.534(2) and this Ordinance, and fails to meet the applicable drive alone or VMT reduction goal, the City or its contractor shall direct the employer to revise its Program to the recommended modifications, the employer shall submit a revised CTR Program Description and Report, including the requested modifications or equivalent measures, within 30 days of receiving written notice to revise its Program. The City or its contractor shall review the revisions and notify the employer of acceptance or rejection of the revised Program. If a revised Program is not accepted, the City or its contractor will send written notice to that effect to the employer within 30 days and, if necessary, require the employer to attend a conference with Program review staff for the purpose of reaching a consensus on the required Program. A final decision on the required Program will be issued in writing by the City or its contractor within 10 working days of the conference. C. Violations The following constitute violations if the applicable deadlines are not met: 1. Failure to self identify as an affected employer; 2. Failure to perform a baseline measurement, including: a) Employers notified or that have identified themselves to the City or its contractor within 90 days of the effective date of the enacting ordinance adopted and that do not perform a baseline measurement consistent with the requirements specified by the City or its contractor within 90 days from the notification or self - identification; b) Employers not identified or self - identified within 90 days of the effective date of the enacting ordinance and that do not perform a baseline measurement consistent with the requirements specified by the City or its contractor within 90 days from effective date of the enacting language; 3. Failure to develop and /or submit on time a complete CTR Program; 4. Failure to implement an approved CTR Program, unless the program elements that are carried out can be shown through quantifiable evidence to meet or exceed VMT and drive alone goals as specified in this Chapter; 5. Submission of false or fraudulent data in response to survey requirements; this Chapter. 6. Failure to make a good faith effort, as defined in RCW 70.94.534 and this Chapter; or 7. Failure to revise an unacceptable CTR Program as defined in RCW 70.94.534(4) and D. Penalties Any affected employer violating any provision of this Chapter shall be guilty of a civil infraction and subject to the imposition of civil penalties. 1. Whenever the City or its contractor makes a detenmination that the affected employer is in violation of this Chapter, the City or its contractor shall issue a written notice and order and send it Page 11 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 DRAFT registered mail, return receipt requested, to the chief executive officer or highest ranking official at the worksite. The notice and order shall contain: a) The name and address of the affected employer. b) A statement that the City or its contractor has found the affected employer to be in violation of this Chapter with a brief and concise description of the conditions found to be in violation. c) A statement of the corrective action required to be taken. If the City or its contractor has determined that corrective action is required, the order shall require that all corrective action be completed by a date stated in the notice. d) A statement specifying the amount of any civil penalty assessed on account of the violation; and e) A statement advising that the order shall become final unless, no later than 10 working days after the notice and order are served, any person aggrieved by the order requests in writing an appeal before the City Hearing Examiner as well as the name and mailing address of the person with whom the appeal must be filed. 2. Each day of failure to implement the Program or violating any provision of this Chapter shall constitute a separate violation subject to penalties as described in RCW 7.80. The penalty for a first violation shall be $100 per working day. The penalty for subsequent violations will be $250 per working day for each violation. 3. Penalties will begin to accrue 15 working days following the official date of notice from the City or its contractor. In the event an affected employer appeals the imposition of penalties, the penalties will not accrue during the appeals process. Should the designated Hearing Examiner decide in favor of the appellant, all or a portion of the monetary penalties may be dismissed by the Hearing Examiner. 4. No affected employer with an approved CTR Program which has made a good faith effort may be held liable for failure to reach the applicable drive alone or VMT goal. 5. An affected employer shall not be liable for civil penalties if failure to implement an element of a CTR Program was the result of an inability to reach agreement with a certified collective bargaining agent under applicable laws where the issue was raised by the employer and pursued in good faith. Unionized employers shall be presumed to act in good faith compliance if they: a) Propose to a recognized union any provision of the employer's CTR Program that is subject to bargaining as defined by the National Labor Relations Act; and b) Advise the union of the existence of the statute and the mandates of the CTR Program approved by the City or its contractor and advise the union that the proposal being made is necessary for compliance with state law (RCW 70.94.531). Section 12 Exemptions and Goal Modifications SVMC 10.203 10 is amended as follows: 10.20.310 Exemptions and goal modifications. A. Worksite Exemptions Page 12 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 DRAFT An affected employer may request the City or its contractor to grant an exemption from all CTR Program requirements or penalties for a particular worksite. The employer must demonstrate that it would experience undue hardship in complying with the requirements of this Chapter as a result of the characteristics of its business, its work force, or its location(s). An exemption may be granted if and only if the affected employer demonstrates that it faces extraordinary circumstances, such as bankruptcy or a protracted labor strike, and is unable to implement any measures that could reduce the proportion of drive alone trips and VMT per employee. Exemptions may be granted by the City or its contractor at any time based on written notice of request provided by the affected employer. The notice should clearly explain the conditions for which the affected employer is seeking an exemption from the requirements of the CTR Program. The City or its contractor shall grant or deny the request within 30 days of receipt of the request the City or its contractor shall review annually all employers receiving exemptions, and shall determine whether the exemption will be in effect during the following program year. B. Employee Exemptions Specific employees or groups of employees who are required to drive alone to work as a condition of employment may be exempted from a worksite's CTR Program. Exemptions may also be granted for employees who work variable shifts throughout the year and who do not rotate as a group to identical shifts. The City or its contractor will use the criteria identified in the CTR Board Administrative Guidelines to assess the validity of employee exemption requests. The City or its contractor shall grant or deny the request within 30 days of receipt of the request. The City or its contractor shall review annually all employee exemption requests, and shall determine whether the exemption will be in effect during the following program year. C. Modification of CTR Program Goals 1. An affected employer may request that the City or its contractor modify its worksite CTR program goals. Such requests shall be filed in writing at least 60 days prior to the date the worksite is required to submit its program description or annual report. The goal modification request must clearly explain why the worksite is unable to achieve the applicable goal. The worksite must also demonstrate that it has implemented all of the elements contained in its approved CTR program. 2. The City or its contractor will review and grant or deny requests for goal modifications in accordance with procedures and criteria identified in the CTR Board Guidelines. 3. An employer may not request a modification of the applicable goals until one year after the City's or its contractor's approval of its initial program description or annual report. Section 13 . Appeals SVMC 10.20.320 is amended as follows: 10.20.320 Appeals. Any affected employer may appeal administrative decisions regarding exemptions, modification of goals, CTR Program elements, and violations and penalties to the Hearing Examiner. Appeals shall be filed within 15 working days of the administrative decision. All appeals shall be filed with the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County with offices at West 1116 Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260. All appeals shall be in writing and must specify the decision being appealed as well as the specific basis for the appeal. A. Criteria on Appeals The designated Hearing Examiner, upon notification of a timely appeal by the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, will evaluate the appeal to Page 13 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 DRAFT determine if the decision is consistent with the CTR Law and the CTR Guidelines. The designated Hearing Examiner may schedule a meeting between the affected employer and the County. The decision of the designated Hearing Examiner shall be reduced to writing. It shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the affected employer. B. Appeal to the Board of County Commissioners Any affected employer may appeal the written decision of the designated Hearing Examiner to the Board of County Commissioners. Appeals shall be filed within 15 working days of the designated Hearing Examiner's written decision. All appeals shall be filed with the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County. The Board of County Commissioners shall consider only testimony and written documentation submitted to the designated Hearing Examiner on any matter appealed to the Board. No additional evidence shall be considered by the Board of County Commissioners. Upon receipt of an appeal, the Board of County Commissioners will set a date no later than 30 calendar days, at which they will render their written decision on the appeal. C. Judicial Appeals Any decision of the Board of County Commissioners, as provided for in Section (B) herein, shall be final and conclusive, unless not later than twenty (20) calendar days from the date of the written decision, the affected employer appeals to the Superior Court pursuant to RCW 3632.330. Section 14 . Responsible City department SVMC 10.20330 is added as follows: 10.20.330 Responsible City Department. The City Manager shall designate the City department responsible for implementing this Chapter, the CTR Plan, and the City of Spokane Valley CTR Program. In the alternative, the City may enter into an Interlocal Agreement with Spokane County whereby Spokane County would implement a City CTR plan and CTR program. Section 15 . Severability If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Section 16 . Effective Date This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of the ordinance, or a summary thereof, occurs in the official newspaper of the city as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council this day of 1 2010. Mayor, Thomas E. Towev Page 14 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 DRAFT ATTEST: Cite Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attomev Date of Publication: Effective Date: Page 15 of 15 Updated 7/15/2010 City of Spokane Valley Commute Trip Reduction Plan September 2007 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION.......................................................................... ..............................1 I. BASELINE ASSESSMENT ..................................................... ..............................4 II. AND III. BASELINE AND GOALS FOR 2011 ......................... .............................47 IV. STRATEGIES FOR ACHIEVING GOALS AND TARGETS . .............................48 V. REQUIREMENTS FOR MAJOR EMPLOYERS .................... .............................54 VI. FINANCIAL PLAN ................................................................ .............................56 VII. IMPLEMENTATION STRUCTURE ...................................... .............................62 VIII. DOCUMENTATION OF CONSULTATION ......................... .............................64 List of Appendices Appendix A: City of Spokane Valley Vicinity CTR Work Sites Appendix B: City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Map Appendix C: City of Spokane Valley Zoning Map Appendix D: City of Spokane Valley Transit Services and Facilities Appendix E City of Spokane Valley Non - Motorized Facilities Appendix F: Commute Trip Reduction Workshop Summary Appendix G: Summary of Policies That Support CTR Appendix H: Glossary of Terms City of Spokane Valley i September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan INTRODUCTION In 2003, the City of Spokane Valley adopted the Commute Trip Reduction Ordinance (Spokane Valley Municipal Code 10.20 V). The purpose of this ordinance was to comply with the Commute Trip Reduction Law RCW 70.94.521 adopted by the Washington State Legislature in 1991. This law requires employers of 100 or more employees who arrive between 6 and 9 a.m. to develop and implement a program to encourage their employees to reduce vehicle miles traveled and single occupant vehicle trips. In 2006, the Washington State Legislature passed the Commute Trip Reduction Efficiency Act which amended the requirements for local governments in those counties experiencing the greatest automobile - related air pollution and traffic congestion to develop and implement plans to reduce single- occupant vehicle trips. This plan has been prepared in accordance with these revisions to RCW 70.94.521. The Commute Trip Reduction Plan is a collection of City- adopted goals and policies, facility and service improvements and marketing strategies about how the City will help make progress for reducing drive alone trips and vehicle miles traveled over the next four years. Building upon the success of the existing commute trip reduction program, the City strives to meet the goals of the plan for the future by working in partnership and coordination with other agencies and employers. The CTR Plan focuses on reducing drive alone trips and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) among employees that work for major employers. The City has set a goal of reducing drive alone trips by 10% and VMT by 13% for all major employers by 2011. The City may consider some of the following set of strategies that have been identified as potentially effective to achieve the reduction goals: • Improve system for notification and enforcement of CTR law. • Develop ETC training programs and guidelines. • Amend Comprehensive Plan to include CTR Efficiency Act. • Work with STA to provide transit service to CTR- affected work sites. • Increase number of vanpools at CTR- affected work sites. • Work with CTR- affected work sites to provide bicycling and walking amenities. • Develop telework program. • Work with employers to allow employees to work alternative schedules. • Provide guaranteed ride home program. • Offer assistance to employers to implement programs. • Increase management support for CTR program. • Work with CTR- affected work sites to offer incentives. • Develop programs for marketing and education of CTR. • Conduct transit fairs at CTR- affected work sites. • Increase networking opportunities among major employers. City of Spokane Valley 1 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Current CTR- affected employers include the following: Work Site Address Appleway Automotive 8500 E. Sprague Avenue ASC Machine Tools 900 N. Fancher Road City of Spokane Valley 11707 E Sprague Avenue Suite 106 Columbia Lighting 3808 N. Sullivan Road General Dynamics Itronix 12825 E Mirabeau Parkway Honeywell 15128 E. Euclid Avenue ICT Group, Inc 10220 E. Sprague Ave. #46 Kaiser Aluminum Fabricated PO Box 15108 Key Tronic Corporation -R & A 4424 N. Sullivan Road Key Tronic Corporation -SIP #17 Spokane Industrial Park B17 Pristina Pine, LLC 3014 N. Flora Road Purcell Systems, Inc. 16125 E Euclid Avenue Servatron, Inc. 15520 E. Fairview Avenue Spokane Industries 3808 N Sullivan Road #1 Valley Hospital & Medical Center 12606 E. Mission Avenue WA State DSHS -CSD Region 1 8517 E. Trent Avenue WA State ESD Telecenter - Valley PO Box 14857 Wagstaff, Inc. 3910 N. Flora Road West Corporation 9317 E. Sinto This proposed Plan has been developed through extensive involvement by employers, transit agencies, organizations and individuals from throughout the jurisdiction who helped identify strategies and ways for successful achievement of the goals. This plan helps to support the achievement of the jurisdiction's vision and the goals of its comprehensive plan. Benefits of the CTR Program to Spokane Valley Although the Commute Trip Reduction Program only applies to a few sites in Spokane Valley, the CTR program will continue to grow and address a variety of transportation and environmental issues. Several trends are increasing the value of CTR in Spokane Valley, particularly as an alternative to expanding roads and parking facilities. Those trends include: • Rising facility costs. The cost of expanding highways and parking facilities is increasing. In many cases it is more cost effective to manage demand than to continue expanding supply. If the CTR program is successful, it will help reduce the demand on state, regional and local streets. This in turn helps to reduce the need to expand the roadway system. • Demographics. As the population becomes older and more mature, it will become more important to increase the availability of quality travel options for non - drivers. Senior citizens will be more dependent on transit and non - motorized travel options. • Energy Costs. Vehicle fuel costs have risen dramatically and are projected to increase in the future due to depletion of oil supplies and environmental constraints. Rising costs have increased City of Spokane Valley 2 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan the demand for non -drive alone travel alternatives. The vanpool market, in particular, has exceeded demand and there are currently waiting lists for available vanpools. • Consumer preferences and market trends. CTR is addressing current consumer preferences in which more consumers want to live in more multi -modal communities where it is possible to walk and bicycle safely, use neighborhood services, and have access to quality public transportation. • Environmental concerns. CTR helps to address concerns over air pollution, sprawl and other environmental impacts by reducing the demand for automobiles. Automobiles comprise 55% of air pollutants. For each car that is taken off the road, there is a significant benefit to the environment. In summary, the CTR program is a cost - effective program that addresses a number of issues in Spokane Valley. Although CTR has been applied to only a few work sites, the program will continue to grow and expand as solutions are needed to complex transportation and environmental issues. City of Spokane Valley 3 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan I. BASELINE ASSESSMENT Affected CTR Work Sites Under the CTR ordinance, there are 19 affected work sites in the City of Spokane Valley. Those work sites include the following: Work Site Address Appleway Automotive 8500 E. Sprague Avenue ASC Machine Tools 900 N. Fancher Road City of Spokane Valley 11707 E Sprague Avenue Suite 106 Columbia Lighting 3808 N. Sullivan Road General Dynamics Itronix 12825 E Mirabeau Parkway Honeywell 15128 E. Euclid Avenue ICT Group, Inc 10220 E. Sprague Ave. #46 Kaiser Aluminum Fabricated PO Box 15108 Key Tronic Corporation -R & A 4424 N. Sullivan Road Key Tronic Corporation -SIP #17 Spokane Industrial Park B17 Pristina Pine, LLC 3014 N. Flora Road Purcell Systems, Inc. 16125 E Euclid Avenue Servatron, Inc. 15520 E. Fairview Avenue Spokane Industries 3808 N Sullivan Road #1 Valley Hospital & Medical Center 12606 E. Mission Avenue WA State DSHS -CSD Region 1 8517 E. Trent Avenue WA State ESD Telecenter - Valley PO Box 14857 Wagstaff, Inc. 3910 N. Flora Road West Corporation 9317 E. Sinto The attached map of the jurisdiction shows the locations of the CTR work sites (see Appendix A). City of Spokane Valley 4 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Appleway Automotive - 85500 E. Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99212 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the Sprague Ave Corridor, in an area zoned Corridor Mixed Use. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located on E Sprague, a principle facilities: arterial, between N Argonne Rd and N Park Rd. The streets have sidewalks and bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a shared path on Appleway Blvd. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by one Spokane Transit bus facilities: route, including local service to Downtown Spokane and Pence -Cole Valley Transit Center. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 5 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Appleway Automotive - 85500 E. Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99212 Parking Lot Roadway Sidewalk Entrance City of Spokane Valley Appleway Automotive ID Number: E30312 Total Number of Employees: 305 Affected CTR Employees: 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 66.4% 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: 6.9 Miles /day Services Available: Bus Bus Routes: #90 Parking: Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 6 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan ASC Machine Tools, Inc - 900 N. Fancher Road, Spokane Valley, WA 99212 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the west end of the city in an area zoned heavy industrial. There are no proposed changes to the land use in this area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located on N Fancher Rd, a minor facilities: arterial, near E Broadway Ave, a principal arterial. The streets have sidewalks but no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on E Broadway Ave. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by one Spokane Transit bus facilities: route, including local service to Edgecliff Park and the Spokane County Fair & Expo Center. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 7 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan ASC Machine Tools, Inc - 900 N. Fancher Road, Spokane Valley, WA 99212 Bus Stop Parking Lot Sidewalk Parking Lot City of Spokane Valley ASC Machine Tools, Inc ID Number: E30163 Total Number of Employees: 174 Affected CTR Employees: 149 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 76.4% 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: 9.4 Miles /day Services Available: Bus Bus Routes: #94 Parking: Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 8 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan City of Spokane Valley -11701 E. Sprague Avenue Suite 106, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located along Sprague Ave, in an area zoned Corridor Mixed Use. There are no proposed land use changes in this area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located on E Sprague Ave, a facilities: principle arterial, between N University Rd and N Pines Rd. The streets have sidewalks but no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on E Sprague Ave. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by one Spokane Transit bus facilities: route, including local service to Downtown Spokane. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 9 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan City of Spokane Valley -11701 E. Sprague Avenue Suite 106, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Bus Stop Parking Lot Bike Rack Sidewalk City of Spokane Valley City of Spokane Valle ID Number: E31112 Total Number of Employees: 63 Affected CTR Employees: 63 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 76.9% 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: 10 Miles /day Services Available: Bus Bus Routes: #90 Parking: Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 10 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Columbia Lighting - 3808 N. Sullivan Road, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the Heavy Industrial zone on the east end of the City. There are no proposed changes to the land use in this area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located on N Sullivan Rd, a principle facilities: arterial, near E Trent Ave. The street has sidewalks but no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on N Sullivan Rd. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by two Spokane Transit bus facilities: routes, including local service to Downtown Spokane, Liberty Lake, Mirabeau Park & Ride, and Spokane Industrial Park. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 11 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Columbia Lighting - 3808 N. Sullivan Road, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Parking Lot Parking Lot City of Spokane Valley Columbia Lightin ID Number: E30627 Total Number of Employees: 561 Affected CTR Employees: 458 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 74.9% 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: 9.1 Miles /day Services Available: Bus Bus Routes: 96,72 Parking: Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 12 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Bus Stop General Dynamics Itronix -12825 E. Mirabeau Parkway, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the north end of the city in an area zoned light industrial. This area is designated to be Mixed Land use in the future. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located on E Mirabeau Parkway near facilities: N Pines Rd. The street has sidewalks and bicycle lanes. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on N Pines Rd. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is not served by Spokane Transit. facilities: Spokane Transit has no plans to add service to this area. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 13 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan General Dynamics Itronix -12825 E. Mirabeau Parkway, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Parking Lot p Main building, sidewalk and parking -W. , 7 City of Spokane Valley General Dynamics Itronix ID Number: E32797 Total Number of Employees: 560 Affected CTR Employees: 457 2011 Drive Alone Goal: N/A 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: N/A Services Available: None Bus Routes: N/A Parking: Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 14 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Crosswalk and sidewalk Parking Lot, driveway and crosswalk Honeywell -15128 E. Euclid Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the Heavy Industrial zone on the east end of the City. There are no proposed changes to the land use in this area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located on E Euclid Ave,a minor facilities: arterial, near E Trent Ave. The street has sidewalks but no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on N Sullivan Rd. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by two Spokane Transit bus facilities: routes, including local service to Downtown Spokane, Liberty Lake, Mirabeau Park & Ride, and Spokane Industrial Park. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 15 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Honeywell -15128 E. Euclid Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Bus Stop Entrance Intersection F L Roadway City of Spokane Valley Honeywell ID Number: E30601 Total Number of Employees: 390 Affected CTR Employees: 273 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 72.6% 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: 9.9 Miles /day Services Available: Bus Bus Routes: 72,96 Parking: Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 16 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan ICT Group, Inc. -10220 E. Sprague Ave. #46, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located along Sprague Ave, in an area zoned Corridor Mixed Use. There are no proposed land use changes in this area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located on E Sprague Ave, a facilities: principle arterial, near S Evergreen Rd. The streets have sidewalks but no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on E Sprague Ave. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by one Spokane Transit bus facilities: route, including local service to Downtown Spokane. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 17 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan ICT Group, Inc. -10220 E. Sprague Ave. #46, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Bus Stop Parking Lot Bike Rack Sidewalk City of Spokane Valley ICT Group, Inc. ID Number: E31138 Total Number of Employees: 904 Affected CTR Employees: 275 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 60.5% 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: 6 Miles /day Services Available: Bus Bus Routes: #90, #96 Parking: Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 18 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Kaiser Aluminum Fabricated - PO Box 15108, Spokane Valley, WA 99215 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the Heavy Industrial zone on the east end of the City. There are no proposed changes to the land use in this area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located on E Euclid Ave, a minor facilities: arterial, near E Trent Ave. The street has sidewalks but no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on N Sullivan Rd. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by two Spokane Transit bus facilities: routes, including local service to Downtown Spokane, Liberty Lake, Mirabeau Park & Ride, and Spokane Industrial Park. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 19 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Kaiser Aluminum Fabricated - PO Box 15108, Spokane Valley, WA 99215 Bus Stop Roadway 4 S 4 Parking Lot Entrance City of Spokane Valley Kaiser Aluminum Fabricated ID Number: E30825 Total Number of Employees: 636 Affected CTR Employees: 455 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 69.5% 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: 7.7 Miles /day Services Available: Bus Bus Routes: #72, 96 Parking: Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 20 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Key Tronic Corporation -R &A - 4424 N. Sullivan Road, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the Heavy Industrial zone on the east end of the City. There are no proposed changes to the land use in this area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located on N Sullivan Rd, a principle facilities: arterial, near E Trent Ave. The street has sidewalks but no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on N Sullivan Rd. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by two Spokane Transit bus facilities: routes, including local service to Downtown Spokane, Liberty Lake, Mirabeau Park & Ride, and Spokane Industrial Park. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 21 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Key Tronic Corporation -R &A — 4424 N. Sullivan Road, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Sidewalk Parking Lot Parking Lot 6L Now I I I" RE =E�HCH KEY TRONIC e�.,�s,R4rop Entrance City of Spokane Valley Key Tronic Cor oration -R &A ID Number: E3O262 Total Number of Employees: 123 Affected CTR Employees: 123 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 77.7% 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: 9.5 Miles /day Services Available: Bus Bus Routes: #72, 96 Parking: Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 22 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Key Tronic Corporation -SIP #17 - Spokane Industrial Park B17, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the Industrial Park, zoned heavy industrial. There are no proposed changes to the land use in this area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located in the Spokane Industrial facilities: Park. The street has no sidewalks and no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on N Sullivan Rd and N Flora Rd. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by two Spokane Transit bus facilities: routes, including local service to Downtown Spokane, Liberty Lake, Mirabeau Park & Ride, and Spokane Industrial Park. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 23 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Key Tronic Corporation -SIP #17 - Spokane Industrial Park B17, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Bus Stop Roadway Parking Lot Entrance City of Spokane Valley Key Tronic Corporation-SIP #17 ID Number: E30254 Total Number of Employees: Affected CTR Employees: 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 69.5% 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: 9.3 Miles /day Services Available: Bus Bus Routes: #72, 96 Parking: Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 24 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Pristina Pine, LLC - 3014 N. Flora Road, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the Industrial Park, zoned heavy industrial. There are no proposed changes to the land use in this area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located at the intersection of N Flora facilities: Rd, a collector arterial, and E Euclid Ave, a minor arterial. The street has no sidewalks and no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on N Flora Rd. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by two Spokane Transit bus facilities: routes, including local service to Downtown Spokane, Liberty Lake, Mirabeau Park & Ride, and Spokane Industrial Park. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 25 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Pristina Pine, LLC - 3014 N. Flora Road, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Main facility road City of Spokane Valley Pristina Pine, LLC ID Number: E71795 Total Number of Employees: Affected CTR Employees: 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: Services Available: Bus Routes: Parking: 71 51 88% 8 Miles /day Bus #72, 96 Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 26 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Purcell Systems, Inc. -16125 E. Euclid Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the Industrial Park, zoned heavy industrial. There are no proposed changes to the land use in this area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located at the intersection of N facilities: Rotchford Lane and E. Euclid Avenue, a minor arterial. The street has sidewalks but no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on N Sullivan Rd. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by two Spokane Transit bus facilities: routes, including local service to Downtown Spokane, Liberty Lake, Mirabeau Park & Ride, and Spokane Industrial Park. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 27 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Purcell Systems, Inc. -16125 E. Euclid Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Bus Stop Parking Lot Entrance Sidewalk City of Spokane Valley Prucell Systems, Inc. ID Number: E32813 Total Number of Employees: Affected CTR Employees: 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: Services Available: Bus Routes: Parking: 141 136 73.7% 9.5 Miles /day Bus #72, 96 Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 28 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Servatron, Inc. -15520 E. Fairview Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the Industrial Park, zoned heavy industrial. There are no proposed changes to the land use in this area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located at the intersection of N facilities: Sullivan Road, a principle arterial, and E. Fairview Avenue. The streets have sidewalks but no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on N Sullivan Road. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by two Spokane Transit bus facilities: routes, including local service to Downtown Spokane, Liberty Lake, Mirabeau Park & Ride, and Spokane Industrial Park. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 29 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Servatron, Inc. -15520 E. Fairview Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Bus Stop Sidewalk Entrance Parking Lot City of Spokane Valley Servatron, Inc. ID Number: E31013 Total Number of Employees: 143 Affected CTR Employees: 143 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 71.5% 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: 9.6 Miles /day Services Available: Bus Bus Routes: #72, 96 Parking: Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 30 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Spokane Industries - 3808 N Sullivan Road #1, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the Heavy Industrial zone on the east end of the City. There are no proposed changes to the land use in this area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located on N Sullivan Rd, a principle facilities: arterial, near E Trent Ave. The street has sidewalks but no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on N Sullivan Rd. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by two Spokane Transit bus facilities: routes, including local service to Downtown Spokane, Liberty Lake, Mirabeau Park & Ride, and Spokane Industrial Park. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 31 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Spokane Industries - 3808 N Sullivan Road #1, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Bus Stop Parking Lot City of Spokane Valley Spokane Industries ID Number: E32151 Total Number of Employees: Affected CTR Employees: 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: Services Available: Bus Routes: Parking: 287 201 71.7% 10.2 Miles /day Bus #72, 96 Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 32 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Valley Hospital & Medical Center -12606 E. Mission Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the Downtown area, within the Central Business District of the New Tacoma neighborhood, in an area zoned Downtown Mixed Use. This area is designated as Downtown Mixed Use within the Central Business District, which plans for a focus on educational uses, and includes retail, office and residential uses. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located at the intersection of E. facilities: Mission Avenue and N. Pines Road, principle arterials. The streets have sidewalks but no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on E. Mission Avenue. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by one Spokane Transit bus facilities: route, including local service to Downtown Spokane, and Spokane Industrial Park. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 33 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Valley Hospital & Medical Center -12606 E. Mission Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Sidewalk Sidewalk Bus Stop Parking Lot City of Spokane Valley Valley Hospital & Medical Center ID Number: E30486 Total Number of Employees: Affected CTR Employees: 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: Services Available: Bus Routes: Parking: 510 219 79.1% 7.7 Miles /day Bus #96 Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 34 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan WA State DSHS -CSD Region 1 - 8517 E. Trent Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99212 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the northwest area of town, in an area zoned Urban Residential. This area is designated to be a low density residential area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located on E Trent Ave, a principle facilities: arterial, between N Argonne Rd and N Park Rd. The street has sidewalks and bicycle lane. There are no roadway improvements planned near the site. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by two Spokane Transit bus facilities: routes, including local service to the Pence -Cole Valley Transit Center and Spokane Community College. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 35 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan WA State DSHS -CSD Region 1 - 8517 E. Trent Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA 99212 Bus Shelter Parking Lot Sidewalk Entrance City of Spokane Valley WA State DSHS -CSD Region 1 ID Number: E31047 Total Number of Employees: Affected CTR Employees: 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: Services Available: Bus Routes: Parking: 112 17 76.7% 9.8 Miles /day Bus 95,32 Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 36 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan WA State ESD Telecenter - Valley - PO Box 14857, Spokane Valley, WA 99214 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the Industrial Park, zoned heavy industrial. There are no proposed changes to the land use in this area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located near N. Sullivan Road, a facilities: principle arterial, and E. Euclid Avenue, a minor arterial. The street has sidewalks but no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on N. Sullivan Road. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by two Spokane Transit bus facilities: routes, including local service to Downtown Spokane, Liberty Lake, Mirabeau Park & Ride, and Spokane Industrial Park. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 37 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan WA State ESD Telecenter - Valley - PO Box 14857, Spokane Valley, WA 99214 Parking lot Entrance Sidewalk Entrance air a City of Spokane Valley WA State ESD Telecenter - Valle ID Number: E30999 Total Number of Employees: 142 Affected CTR Employees: 142 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 76.9% 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: 10.2 Miles /day Services Available: Bus Bus Routes: #72, 96 Parking: Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 38 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Wagstaff, Inc. - 3910 N. Flora Road, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the Industrial Park, zoned heavy industrial. There are no proposed changes to the land use in this area. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located on N Flora Rd, a collector facilities: arterial, near E Trent ave. The street has no sidewalks and no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on N Flora Rd. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by two Spokane Transit bus facilities: routes, including local service to Downtown Spokane, Liberty Lake, Mirabeau Park & Ride, and Spokane Industrial Park. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 39 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Wagstaff, Inc. - 3910 N. Flora Road, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Parking Lot Entrance City of Spokane Valley Wagstaff, Inc. ID Number: E30478 Total Number of Employees: 268 Affected CTR Employees: 153 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 74.4% 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: 10.4 Miles /day Services Available: Bus Bus Routes: #72, 96 Parking: Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. City of Spokane Valley 40 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan West Corporation - 9317 E. Sinto, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Existing and planned land use conditions: This work site is located in the northwest area of town in an area zoned Community Commercial. Existing and planned transportation This work site is located at the intersection of E Sinto facilities: Ave and N Stout Rd. The streets have sidewalks but no marked bicycle lane. The city plans to add bicycle facilities in this area, including a path on N Vista Rd and E Broadway Ave. Existing and planned transit services and This work site is served by two Spokane Transit bus facilities: routes, including local service to Downtown Spokane, and Pence -Cole Valley Transit Center. Spokane Transit has no plans to increase service to Spokane Valley. Existing parking conditions: The site contains free parking for employees and visitors. City of Spokane Valley 41 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan West Corporation - 9317 E. Sinto, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Bus stop Bike rack Parking lot Sidewalk City of Spokane Valley West Corporation ID Number: E32680 Total Number of Employees: 342 Affected CTR Employees: 342 2011 Drive Alone Goal: 60.4% 2011 VMT /Employee Goal: 7.2 Miles /day Services Available: Bus Bus Routes: #73, #95 Parking: Parking is free and there are no apparent capacity constraints at this work site. In addition to the work sites above, another CTR work site has been identified in the City of Spokane Valley. Kim Hotstart mfg. has been added to the City's CTR program and research is being conducted to identify the qualifications of this work site. City of Spokane Valley 42 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Supporting Comprehensive Plan Policies As part of the baseline assessment, the City reviewed its existing Comprehensive Plan to identify policies that support the CTR Law. The most current version of the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2006. Key goals and policies that support CTR include the City's vision for Downtown which includes mixed -use that is supportive of transit, pedestrian, and bicycle use. The City's policies also support pedestrian- oriented streetscape environment for residential and commercial activity. Plans are in place to establish pedestrian oriented neighborhoods in Spokane Valley by: • Encouraging non - motorized improvements which minimize the need for residents to use motorized modes • Provide sidewalks on both sides of all arterial streets as funding allows • Develop street, pedestrian path and bike path standards that contribute to a system of fully connected routes The City's Transportation Plan includes working with STA on ways to improve its service to community residents. The following policies are identified in the transportation plan as ways to promote transit ridership. Ensure that street standards, land uses and building placement support the facilities and services needed along transit routes to make transit viable Support the continued planning and development of a high- capacity transit system Plan and develop bus pull -out bays on the far side of intersections The Appendices include an analysis of the comprehensive plan goals and policies that support CTR. The CTR Planning Guide included a list of goals and policies that CTR- affected jurisdictions should incorporate into their comprehensive plans. The analysis shows that there are a number of goals and policies that are not yet incorporated in the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. During the next update cycle, the appropriate steps could be taken to create a stronger basis for the City's CTR program. Supporting Transit Plans and Programs The Spokane Transit Authority (STA) is responsible for the development, implementation and maintenance of public transportation services in Spokane County. The 2008 — 2014 STA Transit Development Plan identifies a number of programs that support CTR activities. Fixed Route Services STA provides fixed route services to many of the CTR- affected work sites. The focus for the years 2008 — 2014 will be to provide as much service as financial capacity allows. Passenger Amenities City of Spokane Valley 43 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan STA's passenger amenities program includes the following elements: 1) shelters; 2) bicycle lockers; 3) park and ride lots; 4) transfer /transit centers. A brief description of the shelter, bicycle locker and park and ride programs are described below: Shelter Program Passenger waiting shelters are located at major boarding points and transit /transfer locations based on passenger demand and boarding patterns. All shelters purchased should meet ADA requirements. Currently, there are 117 shelters in place throughout the Public Transportation Benefit Area. Bicycle Locker Program Beginning in 1992, a pilot program was initiated to test the efficiency and determine the demand for bicycle lockers in the Spokane area. Twenty -two double units were placed at general locations throughout the STA service area and are available for lease to the general public. As community awareness grows, it is estimated that usage will continue to increase as well. With continued marketing efforts and placement of lockers at park and ride lot locations, opportunity and choice of alternative transportation modes increase for our passengers. Park and Ride Program STA has identified a list of potential sites for future park and ride lots. Potential park and ride lots include the following locations: • Mission & Greene Community Transit Center • Liberty Lake (in addition to current site) • Palouse Highway (area of 57 Ave.) • SR2 (area of Farwell Road) • Post Falls /Coeur d'Alene • Indian Trail • Seven & Nine Mile area • Area north of Hastings Park and Ride • 190 /SR902 Exit • Medical Lake Exit • Highway 2 and Farwell Road STA conducted a cooperative study to identify several possible locations and ranking them on the basis of cost, need, and ease of use. Also, the need for phased development of lots and the location of appropriate descriptive signage and passenger amenities at each lot and potential funding sources and agencies which could share both the burden of costs and benefits associated with park and ride facilities were outlined in detail. STA also has a program to develop Cooperative Park and Ride lots, which was originally identified for church parking, Transportation Services - Ridesharing City of Spokane Valley 44 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan STA's rideshare program has proven to be a valuable addition to a coordinated package of public transportation services offered by STA. Because vanpool operations so closely complement transit operations, rideshare services are closely integrated with operational and marketing programs within Spokane Transit Authority. The focus on destination or employment center -based marketing, rather than origin or home -based marketing, will continue. State - mandated commute trip reduction plans, generous employer subsidies, incentive programs, fleet expansion grants, statewide marketing and the implementation of a new online ride - matching program will affect vanpool demand. Emphasis for the next seven years will continue to focus on major employers. The rideshare program will also continue to identify opportunities for providing service for areas outside the PTBA such as Deer Park, Riverside, Suncrest /Nine Mile, and southern areas of the county such as Spangle and Latah, as well as northern Idaho. Spokane Regional Light Rail Project The Light Rail Steering Committee was formed in 2000 to advise the STA Board on building a light rail system. The group's charter charged it to: • Develop a detailed project definition and strategies for implementation. • Work with the Project Management Team to guide project through design, construction, and start -up. In April 2006, after studying alternatives for high- capacity transit, such as Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) the group recommended a diesel light rail system, running between downtown Spokane and Liberty Lake. The STA board accepted the group's track alignment, but avoided any action on determining the type of system until more information about funding and building a system was provided. In an effort to gauge the public's interest in a light rail system, the Board placed two advisory measures on the ballot concerning the use of existing funds and the creation of a funding plan for the project. Proposition No. 1 Vote Results: No 54% Yes 46% Should Spokane Transit Authority identify regional funding sources and local taxing alternatives and develop a funding plan to build a $263,000,000 Light Rail project, in 2006 dollars, to run from Spokane City, through the City of Spokane Valley, to the City of Liberty Lake and bring that funding plan to the voters at a future election? Prop No. 2 Vote Results: No 52% Yes 48% Should Spokane Transit Authority use existing resources to fund preliminary engineering / design and environmental analysis for a future Light Rail system to run from Spokane City, through the City of Spokane Valley, to the City of Liberty Lake? The Spokane Transit Board of Directors voted unanimously at its Dec. 14, 2006 meeting to dissolve the Light Rail Steering Committee, effectively ending STA's current plans for a high- capacity light rail system from Spokane to Liberty Lake. The Board did set aside $5 million to purchase right of way land for a possible future high- capacity transit project. North Spokane Limited Access Corridor (NSC) STA is working with VIISDOT to improve the North Spokane Limited Access Corridor (NSC). The NSC is located in the northeast quadrant of Spokane County and the city of Spokane. This project will improve transportation safety and mobility through the city of Spokane and Spokane County between Interstate 90 City of Spokane Valley 45 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan (1 -90), northeastern Washington, and Canada. This project will ultimately provide a four to eight -lane fully controlled access. The length of the North Spokane Corridor (NSC) is approximately 10 miles and includes up to seven interchanges. In addition, about 3.5 miles of 1 -90, centered around the NSC /1 -90 Interchange connection, will require new construction. The project will provide a transportation facility that will accommodate high volume traffic movements, including high capacity transportation systems, between 1 -90 and areas north. This will help reduce the congestion and related operational problems on city streets and county roads such as Division Street and Market Street, and will remove regional trips from local streets. Planning Coordination and Cross Boundary Issues The Commute Trip Reduction plans in Spokane County were coordinated between the Cities of Spokane, Spokane Valley, Airway Heights, Liberty Lake, Cheney, Medical Lake and Unincorporated Spokane County. Between May 2006 and July 2007, representatives from the CTR- affected jurisdictions met on a regular basis to coordinate their CTR plans. Discussions were also held with the Spokane Transportation Council to coordinate the CTR plans with the regional transportation plan. CTR- affected jurisdictions in Spokane County worked together on various CTR issues and agreed to do the following items: • Develop a consistent framework for preparing the CTR plans. • Pool resources together to hire a consultant to prepare the draft CTR plans for all CTR- affected jurisdictions. • A joint workshop for CTR Employers to discuss the CTR Efficiency Act was held on June 14, 2007. • Prepare common strategies for achieving the CTR goals. • Prepare a joint financial plan for implementing the CTR plans. • Agree to contract with Spokane County to administer the entire CTR program for Spokane County CTR- affected jurisdictions. CTR- affected jurisdictions also compared their Comprehensive Plan policies and attempted to identify any inconsistencies that would affect their CTR plans. Many of the goals and policies of the CTR- affected jurisdictions are consistent with each other and the Spokane Regional Transportation Plan. All of the CTR - affected jurisdictions in Spokane County contain goals and policies that support mixed -use that is supportive of transit, pedestrian and bicycle use. They also support pedestrian- oriented streetscape environment for residential and commercial activity. The Cities and County are also planning to work with the Spokane Transit Authority to improve its service to community residents. The CTR- affected jurisdictions also identified cross boundary issues that affect the CTR plans. Because of Spokane County's proximity to Idaho, many commuters travel from Idaho to Spokane County. This cross boundary issue has created the need for STA to coordinate transit and vanpool services that cross state lines to serve these commuters. City of Spokane Valley 46 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan II. and III. BASELINE AND GOALS FOR 2011 The goal of the CTR program is to reduce drive alone vehicle use and vehicle miles traveled among employees who work in CTR- affected work sites by 10% and 13% respectively. The targets are based on the 2005 work site surveys which are the most recent CTR work site drive alone and vehicle miles traveled rates available. Once the survey data is available, the plan will be updated to reflect the more current information. For the overall target rate, the City aggregated the results of the individual CTR work sites to develop a combined rate for the area. Area of Jurisdiction 2005 SOV 2011 SOV 2005 VMT 2011 Target Appleway Automotive Rate Target Rate 7.9 VMT Spokane Valley 77.4% 69.7% 9.6 8.4 Employer 2005 SOV Rate 2011 SOV Target Rate 2005 VMT 2011 Target VMT Appleway Automotive 73.8% 66.4% 7.9 6.9 ASC Machine Tools, Inc. 84.9% 76.4% 10.8 9.4 City of Spokane Valley 85.4% 76.9% 11.5 10.0 Columbia Lighting 83.3% 74.9% 10.5 9.1 General Dynamics Itronix (formerly Itronix Corp - DT) NA NA NA NA Honeywell 80.7% 72.6% 11.4 9.9 ICT Group, Inc. 67.2% 60.5% 6.9 6.0 Kaiser Aluminum Fabricated 77.2% 69.5% 8.9 7.7 Key Tronic Corporation - R & A Buildin 86.3% 77.7% 11.0 9.5 Key Tronic Corporation SIP #17 77.2% 69.5% 10.7 9.3 Pristina Pine, LLC 63.9% 57.5% 10.6 9.2 Purcell Systems, Inc. 81.9% 73.7% 10.9 9.5 Servatron, Inc. 79.5% 1 71.5% 11.1 9.6 Spokane Industries 79.7% 71.7% 11.7 10.2 Valley Hospital & Medical Center 87.9% 79.1% 8.9 7.7 WA State DSHS -CSD Region 1 85.3% 76.7% 11.2 9.8 WA State ESD Telecenter - Valley 85.5% 76.9% 11.8 10.2 Wagstaff, Inc. 82.6% 74.4% 12.0 10.4 West Corporation 67.7% 60.4% 8.3 7.2 City of Spokane Valley 47 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan IV. STRATEGIES FOR ACHIEVING GOALS AND TARGETS Gaps in Services and Facilities To develop a set of strategies that will help the CTR work sites achieve their goals, the City identified a number of gaps that discourage commuters from using non -drive alone modes of travel. Based on the gaps that have been identified, a set of strategies are recommended for helping CTR- affected work sites achieve their goals and targets. • Transit- Transit service in Spokane County is provided primarily by the Spokane Transit Authority (STA). STA provides fixed route service to many of the CTR work sites. For the majority of the CTR- affected work sites there is transit service that operates at least every thirty minutes. Many of the sites are served by greater frequencies and some have peak hour express service. The City should continue to work closely with STA to make improvements such as scheduling and stops that will result in increased transit ridership. • Parking: The majority of CTR- affected work sites have ample parking availability and do not charge commuters for parking. With free and ample parking available, commuters are deterred from using drive alone alternatives. To address the issue of parking, the City could review its parking policies and identify strategies for working with employers to implement parking management strategies. Parking management could include reducing available parking capacity, set aside preferred parking spaces for carpools and vanpools and consider parking charges. • Local Networking Opportunities: Local networking with other CTR- affected employers and businesses can offer opportunities for major employers to discuss CTR and transportation issues, conduct joint commute option promotions, and coordinate ridesharing activities. To increase local networking opportunities, the City can help to create various networking opportunities. • Land tke Developing land uses that support transit, pedestrian and bicycle use will help CTR- affected work sites achieve their goals. The City can encourage higher densities in some areas to increase the market for transit and ridesharing activities. It can also implement urban design guidelines that support transit and non - motorized activities. • Employer Assistance To help CTR- affected and other business work sites achieve their goals, the City will continue to provide assistance to employers with implementing their programs. The City will work with Spokane County to help promote transit services at work sites through on -site promotions and preparing public information materials. City of Spokane Valley 48 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan • Management Support and ETC training Management support is critical for a successful CTR program. Not all of the CTR work sites have strong management support which contributes to poor results. The City could work with the Chamber of Commerce and other business organizations to increase support for CTR programs. It will also develop guidelines for Employee Transportation Coordinators and provide training to help them implement their programs. • Subsidies Subsidies for transit and ridesharing can help a work site reduce its drive alone trips and vehicle miles traveled. However, not all CTR work sites offer subsidies to their employees. The City could work with employers to offer subsidies that will encourage employees to shift to non -drive alone modes. Subsidies could include transit pass discounts, reduced fare for vanpools and rewards for carpooling, bicycling and walking. • Work with Employers to Develop Telework and Compressed Work Week Programs Telework has become a popular option among employees for reducing drive alone trips. However, most of the CTR- affected employers do not offer telework to their employees. The City could work to create telework and compressed work week education programs for employers that could inform employers on how to implement these programs at their work site, if applicable. The programs may include education on human resource policies and information technology assistance to allow employees to work from home. City of Spokane Valley 49 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Recommended Strategies to Achieve Goals Based on the gaps in services and facilities that were identified, the following strategies are planned that will help the CTR- affected work sites in City of Spokane Valley make progress towards their 2011 goal. These strategies will be performed in coordination between Spokane County, STA and the cities of Spokane, Spokane Valley, Airway Heights, Liberty Lake, Cheney and Medical Lake. Strategy Description Policies and Regulations Implement the City's vision of providing an efficient, effective transportation system catering Implement City's Vision for Spokane to motor vehicles, encouraging public transit Valley users, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Under contract with Spokane County, the City will work with Employee Transportation Coordinators (ETCs) to implement successful CTR programs. ETCs will be responsible for attending training and networking opportunities, coordinating annual fairs, conducting promotions, distributing information, notifying the jurisdiction about program changes, and meeting program reporting and surveying requirements. The City will require ETCs to attend mandatory training sessions and ETC Training attend available networking opportunities. Under Contract with Spokane County, the City will review existing parking requirements that may discourage drive alone vehicle use. The City will work with employers to implement parking management strategies such as setting aside preferred parking spaces for carpools and vanpools, reducing parking supply and restricting Review Parking Policies on- street parking spaces. Amend Comprehensive Plan to The City will review its Comprehensive Plan and include language about the CTR add new policies to correspond with its CTR plan, Efficiency Act if necessary. City of Spokane Valley 50 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Services and Facilities STA will continue to provide transit services to CTR work sites, where service is currently available. STA will make service enhancements based on its updated Six -Year Transit Development Plan. These enhancements may Transit Services include flexible transit service. The City will work with STA to implement capital facilities that will help improve transit. Capital facilities may include transit signal priority projects, Transit Capital Facilities exclusive bus lanes, bus stops and shelters. The City will work with STA to increase the capacity and quantity of park and ride lot facilities. These facilities may include both leased and Park and Ride Lots permanent facilities. Under Contract with Spokane County, the City will work with STA to increase vanpool participation. STA will target adding 20 new vanpools over the Van pool Services next 4 years. Under Contract with Spokane County, the City and STA will continue to help commuters find ridematching partners through the use of www.rideshareonline.com The City will also provide mapping services to affected work sites to Carpool Services help them identify the origins of their commuters. Under Contract with Spokane County, the City will work with major employers and developers to encourage the provision of amenities such as bike lockers, access to shower facilities, and changing facilities to increase usage of non - motorized Bicycling and Walking Amenities transportation. The City will work to improve its system of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. This may include adding Enhance Bicycle and Pedestrian new bike lanes, trails and signage to improve the Facilities pedestrian and bicycling environment. Under contract with Spokane County, the City will work to create a telework education program that would educate employers on how to implement telework at their work site, if applicable. The program may include education on human resource policies and information technology Telework Program assistance to allow employees to work from home. Under contract with Spokane County, the City will work with employers to encourage employers to Alternative and Flexible Schedules offer alternative and flexible work schedules for City of Spokane Valley 51 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan City of Spokane Valley 52 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan their employees, including compressed work weeks. Under contract with Spokane County, the City will provide assistance to affected employers to help them meet the requirements of the CTR Efficiency ACT and implement their programs. Assistance may include individual meeting with employers or workshops that focus on specific topics, i.e. CTR survey workshops, marketing and promotions, etc. The City will also provide commuter information Employer Assistance boards to the work sites. Under contract with Spokane County, the City will work with affected employers to offer the Guaranteed Ride Home program to their Guaranteed Ride Home Program employees. Marketing and Incentives Under contract with Spokane County, the City will work with CTR work site managers and owners to educate them about the benefits of CTR to their organizations. The City will develop a public relations campaign to encourage management to Management Support give stronger support for CTR. Under contract with Spokane County, the City will encourage employers to offer subsidy programs to persuade employees to shift to non -drive alone commute modes. Examples include six - months of free vanpool participation, transit pass subsidies, and a one -time payment or gift card for starting a Subsidies carpool. Under contract with Spokane County, the City will work to expand education efforts to CTR employees about alternative commuting including web site, workshops, information brochures, and Marketing and Education posters. Under contract with Spokane County, the City will work with major employers to conduct on -site promotions, transportation fairs, and activities to increase awareness and use of commute Promotional Events alternatives. Under contract with Spokane County, the City will work with the CTR- affected employers to create networking opportunities to discuss CTR issues, coordinate ridesharing programs, and conduct Networking Opportunities joint promotional efforts. City of Spokane Valley 52 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Under contract with Spokane County, the City will work to develop partnerships with other agencies that have similar goals to reduce automobile Partnerships with Other Agencies travel, i.e. clean air agencies and health agencies. City of Spokane Valley 53 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan V. REQUIREMENTS FOR MAJOR EMPLOYERS The Washington State CTR Law requires that affected employers participate in the CTR program and perform actions that will help their employees reduce drive alone travel and vehicle miles traveled. Through intergovernmental agreement with Spokane County, the County will be responsible for administration of requirements for major employers. Employers that are affected by the CTR Law will be required to implement the following program elements: Required Element Description The Employee Transportation Coordinator is the point of contact Designate Employee between the employer and its workforce to implement, promote and Transportation administer the organization's CTR program. He /she is also the point of Coordinator contact between the employer and the local jurisdiction to track the employer's progress in meeting CTR requirements Affected employers will be responsible for providing adequate training for the ETC, allow them to attend networking meetings, and provide them with the necessary time to administer the program. Information about commute alternatives will be distributed at least Regular Distribution of monthly to employees. Information packets will be distributed to new Information to employees at CTR- affected work sites. Examples of information that Employees will be distributed will include: • Description of the employer's commute options program • Transit system maps and schedules • Vanpool rider alerts • Weekly traffic alerts CTR Reporting Once a year, the employer is required to complete the Employer Report and Program Description Form to determine if progress is being made towards achieving the goals. Reports will be submitted to the City. CTR Survey Biennially, the CTR affected employers shall distribute and collect Commute Trip Reduction Program Employee Questionnaires (surveys) to achieve at least a 70 percent response rate. Implementation of a Set The employer is required to implement at least two effective measures of Measures that are designed to increase the percentage of employees using some or all of the following modes: • Transit • Vanpool • Carpool • Bicycle or walking City of Spokane Valley 54 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Required Element Description • Telework, Compressed Work Week, or Flexible Work Schedule • Other non - single occupant vehicle modes Measures to reduce drive alone trips and vehicle miles traveled include, but are not limited to: • Provision of preferential parking or reduced parking charges for high occupancy vehicles • Instituting or increasing parking charges for single- occupant vehicles • Provision of commuter ride matching services • Provision of subsidies for transit fares • Provision of vans for vanpools • Provision of subsidies for carpooling or vanpooling • Provision of car sharing services • Permitting the use of the employer's vehicles for carpooling or vanpooling • Permitting flexible work schedules • Cooperation with transportation providers to provide additional regular or express service to the work site • Construction of special loading and unloading facilities for transit, carpool, and vanpool users • Provision of bicycle parking facilities, lockers, changing areas, and showers • Provision of a program for parking incentives such as a rebate for employees who do not use the parking facility • Establishment of a program to permit employees to work part or full time at home or at an alternative work site closer to their homes • Establishment of a program of alternative work schedules such as compressed work week schedules (such as 4/40 or 9/80) • Implementation of other measures designed to facilitate the use of high- occupancy vehicles such as on -site day care facilities and emergency taxi services • Employers or owners of work sites may form or utilize an existing transportation management association or other transportation- related associations by RCVV 35.87A.010 to assist members in developing and implementing commute trip reduction programs City of Spokane Valley 55 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan VI. FINANCIAL PLAN The CTR- affected jurisdictions prepared a financial analysis of the revenues and expenses associated with the CTR program. The Spokane CTR program is a partnership between Unincorporated Spokane County, Spokane, Spokane Valley, Airway Heights, Liberty Lake, Cheney and Medical Lake. The CTR program receives funding for program activities from a variety of different sources, including VVSDOT, federal grants and local contributions. Described below are the funding sources, expenses and funding gaps that have been identified for the countywide CTR program. Funding Sources The CTR programs administered in Spokane County are funded by a number of sources, as described in the following table. Source of Responsible Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Funding Agency Amount for Amount for Amount for Amount for 2008 2009 2010 2011 CTR Base VVSDOT $177,759 $170,000 $170,000 $170,000 Funding CMAQ Funds for Spokane $70,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 Education County CMAQ Funds Spokane $200,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 For GTEC County Planning Local Funds Spokane $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 from Spokane County County Contributions Spokane $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 from Local Regional Clean Partners Air Agency, Clear Channel, American Lung Association, Motion Auto Contributions Employers $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 from Employers located within all seven Spokane County jurisdictions TRPP Funds Spokane $52,500 $52,500 $50,000 $50,000 County Contributions Cities of $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 from Local Airway City of Spokane Valley 56 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Jurisdictions (in- Heights, kind staff) Cheney, Medical Lake, Liberty Lake, Spokane, Spokane Valley & Unincorporated Spokane County Subtotal $760,259 $632,500 $630,000 $630,000 *Services Spokane $2,800,000 $2,800,000 $2,800,000 $2,800,000 provided by Transit Spokane Transit Authority Authority for transit services to CTR- affected employees* *Services Spokane $346,000 $346,000 $346,000 $346,000 provided by Transit Spokane Transit Authority Authority for vanpool services to CTR- affected employees TOTAL $3,906,259 $3,778,500 $3,776,000 $3,776,000 *(Calculated using cost per passenger trip per worksite, operating cost, capital and program administration cost) City of Spokane Valley 57 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Program Expenses The cost of implementing the CTR program is shared primarily by Spokane County, Spokane Transit Authority, and the affected employers. The following is a summary of the types of expenses incurred throughout Spokane County. Expense Responsible Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Party Annual Annual Annual Annual Cost 2008 Cost 2009 Cost 2010 2011 Prepare local CTR All CTR- Affected $25,000 $0 $0 $0 ordinances Spokane County Jurisdictions Administer CTR Spokane County program (contract $135,000 $141,700 $148,700 $154,700 management, annual reporting, program review, surveys, trainings, identifying newly - affected worksites, compliance monitoring, record keeping, reporting to the state, manage CTR Office & staff, GRH program, technical services, website, budget and accounting, grant writer, coordination of meetings) Conduct outreach Spokane County $114,835 $134,100 $135,100 $136,100 to CTR work sites (CTR Coordinator) Conduct outreach Spokane County $53,300 $58,300 $63,300 $68,300 to general public Special projects Spokane County $52,500 $52,500 $50,000 $50,000 (TRPP) Offer marketing & Spokane County $133,300 $136,600 $153,200 $169,600 promotional in partnership materials /incentives with Local to CTR work sites Partners City of Spokane Valley 58 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Expense Responsible Estimated Estimated Estimated Estimated Party Annual Annual Annual Annual Cost 2008 Cost 2009 Cost 2010 2011 and public Educational Spokane County $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000 materials in partnership (Commuter Options with Boards, brochures, Local Partners media, posters, incentives) GTEC Planning & Spokane County $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 Implementation in cooperation w/ City of Liberty Lake and City of Spokane Subtotal $744,135 $758,200 $790,300 $817,700 Provision of STA $2,800,000 $2,800,000 $2,800,000 $2,800,000 supporting STA services Provision of STA $346,000 $346,000 $346,000 $346,000 supporting vanpool services TOTAL $3,890,135 $3,904,200 $3,936,300 $3,963,700 City of Spokane Valley 59 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Financial Gaps The following table summarizes program areas that are not currently funded. However, some potential funding sources have been identified for the applicable organization to target. Service or Target Market What Strategy Will Financial Gap Strategy Accomplish (annual amounts) Telework Start Up CEOs, ETCs Offer $10,000 grants to $100,000 Program individual employers to encourage them to start up telework programs for their employees. Transit, vanpool Commuters at Offer incentives to $350,000 and carpool CTR- affected encourage commuters to incentives work sites shift to transit, vanpool and carpools Marketing and Commuters at Increase awareness of $150,000 Promotions CTR- affected transit and ridesharing work sites programs. Management CEOs and Develop campaign to $50,000 Training Workshop Program increase management Managers support for CTR. Commuter Commuters Offer commuter $25,000 Information Boards information boards to affected employers that will help them post information about commuter alternatives. Bike racks and Commuters Provide bike racks and $100,000 lockers lockers to affected work sites to encourage commuters to use bicycles. MyCommute.org ETCs, Update commuter $25,000 Website commuters and calendar the public TOTAL $800,000 The following funding sources have been identified that potentially could be used to fund CTR programs: • Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Grants • Surface Transportation Program Grants • Trip Reduction Performance Program • Washington State Construction Mitigation Funding City of Spokane Valley 60 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan • Transit Agency Funds • Local Jurisdiction Funds • Major Employers Summary The following table shows the amount of money necessary to implement all of the proposed strategies listed in the previous tables. There are insufficient funds at this time; however, some potential funding sources were identified in the previous table for the jurisdiction or transit agency to target. Budget Summary Estimated Annual Cost 2008 Estimated Annual Cost 2009 Estimated Annual Cost 2010 Estimated Annual 2011 Total Existing Funding $3,906,259 $3,778,500 $3,776,000 $3,776,000 $15,236,759 Existing Expenses $3,890,135 $3,904,200 $3,936,300 $3,963,700 $15,694,335 Unfunded Programs $800,000 $824,000' $848,720' $874,182" $3,346,182 Needed Funds - $783,876 - $949,700 - $1,008,300 - $1,061,882 - $3,803,758 = Calculated using a 3% rate of inflation City of Spokane Valley 61 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan VII. IMPLEMENTATION STRUCTURE The CTR programs of the Cities of Spokane, Spokane Valley, Airway Heights, Liberty Lake, Cheney, Medical Lake, along with Unincorporated Spokane County are administered by Spokane County. Spokane County, through an interlocal agreement with the Cities, conducts employer notification, enforcement, outreach, and reviews the annual program reports as well as a number of other services. Listed below are the different activities that are associated with the CTR program and the party responsible for administering the activity. Organization Responsibility City of Spokane Valley The City will be responsible for developing and implementing their local CTR plan. It is responsible for ensuring that CTR plan is Update Comprehensive Plan consistent with its local comprehensive plans. As part of its CTR 2008 plan, the City will set the goals and targets for the affected Spokane County employers. Spokane County Under contract with the Cities, Spokane County will be responsible On -going for administering the CTR program. Spokane County will conduct City of Spokane Valley employer outreach, review annual program reports, and conduct the biennial employee survey and numerous other services. Spokane County will also coordinate local networking meetings and serve as the lead for coordinating CTR programs. Spokane Transit Authority STA will be responsible for providing transit and vanpool services to CTR- affected work sites. It will also be responsible for coordinating transit service and capital improvements with the Cities and County. Major Employers Employers that are affected under the CTR law are responsible for notifying the City when they are affected. Employers are responsible for implementing their CTR program requirements, including information distribution, designating an ETC, submitting program reports, delegating adequate time for ETCs to perform duties and implementing program elements. CTR Program Activities Program Strategy or Service Agency Responsible for Administering Scheduled Date for Implementation Policies and Regulations Update Comprehensive Plan City of Spokane Valley 2008 CTR Program Enforcement Spokane County On -going Implement Vision of Downtown City of Spokane Valley On -going Review Parking Policies City of Spokane Valley 2008-2011 City of Spokane Valley 62 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan Services and Facilities Transit Services STA On -going Transit Capital Facilities STA On -going Park and Ride Lot Facilities STA On -going Vanpool Services STA On -going Ridematching Services STA On -going Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities City of Spokane Valley On -going Marketing and Incentives Incentive Programs Spokane County On -going Parking Management City of Spokane Valley On -going Marketing and Education Spokane County On -going Promotional Events Spokane County On -going City of Spokane Valley 63 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan VIII. DOCUMENTATION OF CONSULTATION The City's CTR Plan was developed in consultation with the following organizations: • Spokane County • Spokane Transit Authority • City of Spokane • City of Spokane Valley • City of Airway Heights • City of Liberty Lake • City of Cheney • City of Medical Lake • Spokane Regional Transportation Council The dates of the consultations with these jurisdictions occurred on: • May 24, 2007 • June 14, 2007 • July 26, 2007 During these consultations, the following issues were discussed: the goals of the CTR Plan, CTR strategies, a financing plan, an implementation plan, and coordination of CTR services. On June 14, 2007, a CTR Employer Workshop was held for all affected employers at the Spokane Teachers Credit Union. At this workshop, staff reviewed the CTR employer requirements with affected employers and discussed various strategies to reduce drive alone travel and VMT. A summary of the workshop can be found in Appendix F. City of Spokane Valley 64 September 2007 Commute Trip Reduction Plan APPENDICES Appendix A CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY VICINITY CTR WORK SITES Appendix B CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - - - - - - - - - - 2643 4 ? kx AE F 0 8 - V 19 Lake a. 1 :D L ----------- -A T' � R'} r S 7 !h,��+s 1 ' Fa ' 1 - ' ., � M' v.... r !I I ' r Ir 1 I 'e2443 2� LcL Map Location Medium lknin Residemlal Light NXI-Irial highj)VOIII% Pt�-IkdVn%IA lira,', Industrial. Mixed t'v Park Orvn Spxe Coni,br %I iuxl I l,c (.)tlwr NItmicilmliti,s OI of SpAme valloy ej �.r 01% touter kto tx- doermitwd P I 0—i (1-,,i11 Awj Public- Quwm-llublic awr B,AiL� '1I46thK*K)od Comimr6al o Communiqv Comnlempal Aunt 71r rul+r,rxrthxl City of Spokane Valley CTR Plan CrA 11?19- 1.' M1111 ......... A. ,111d City of Spokane Valley CTR Work Sites r 1-hda, &,r I II 1-J 1-1 1111 1. ILI 011911111 2006 Comprehensive Plan Peteet r el". ie� �Wk CI—nw fhwhy.ww I XI—owm. A., —1 4 )frlj 9 - 71 - ION, Map Source Date: 611212006 Ma 14, 2007 Figure B Appendix C CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ZONING MAP City of Spokane Valley CTR'Vllork. Sites Interim Zv n i n g Cily of Spokane Valley Zoning Map P'erteet Map Source Date 121812006 May 14, 2007 Figure C Appendix D CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY TRANSIT SERVICES AND FACILITIES Appendix E CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY NON- MOTORIZED FACILITIES ........ [ "ity or y .. Spokane. .,1. • t r Y -- #$ a r n..r.. 1Q .... - -.- 1 Id. 'f 14 4 i-- , -• - -3 ,.. M, 'Up..o` I .. a 12 �J�` �, s. 16 L 17 f - ..�r........_. .... t in or � y 7 I ibcr[y Lake -i k Ii 1 list • 3 I r mp 1 " I .lil I kk �: i \r r Pa rc 1 Y a. C'- �.J rr � .� � Ali: nvr•.I•�... Bike and Pedestrian System Map Location i I .Qgelld Existin;i. tsike I.:ns .......• PI'W­ d R.ke I..r rn� 5iiaiY;J Path Fxal6ng P.I..ian Falh i4oPc icb Pe&vri- Path frail t1ads — — inlrreAxc 96 'drools I.i n, Olhrr M- kipali[i-s fSlx df Sllak: nc: vnllc±; ® 1hAm liror�lh .Amn Pads %,' twk$ Perteet June 7, 2007 E - r vtuc) City of Spokane Valley CTR Plan City of Spokane Valley CTR Work Sites Non - Motorized Facilities Map Map Source Date: 619!2007 Figure E Appendix F COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION WORKSHOP SUMMARY Spokane County CTR Employer Workshop Workshop Summary June 14, 2007 The following individuals attended the workshop: Participant A enc /Or anization Diane Folland Airway Heights Correction Center Doug Meyers Alsco Amy Pereyda ASC Machine Derek Marquez City of Airway Heights Craig Wahl City of Cheney Fran Litzinger City of Medical Lake Morgan Koudelka City of Spokane Valley Ed McIntire Eastern Washington University Teresa Krueger EVVU /VVSU Riverpoint Alison Burcham Fairchild Air Force Base Cindy Heitstuman Getronics Ron Prindle Gonzaga University Erin Kinney Group Health Keith Vilhauer Hollister -Stier Laboratories Gary Warrick Huntwood Industries Ginny Hill Huntwood Industries Phyllis Dunlap Inland NW Health Services Stacey Weimorts Inland NW Health Services Linda Bowman Itron Vicki Bell Kaiser Kathy Bagley Kaiser Adrian Mayou Lakeland Village Pam Deaver Lakeland Village Pam Mims NW Farm Credit Services Lynn Eaton NW Farm Credit Services Dawn Steinmetz NW Orthopedic Specialist, P.S. Erin Green PAML Bonnie Munden Pine Lodge Correction Center Faith Gardner Pine Lodge Correction Center Erica Markham Pitney Bowes Emily Laughlin Premera Patricia Felske Principal Financial Group Barb Bunkers Principal Financial Group Sara Hite Purcell Systems Brita Fuglevand Purcell Systems James Hicks Red Lion Hotels Corporation Lori Allen Rockwood Clinic Lori Barschig Sacred Heart Medical Center Tracy Struble Spokane Community College Laurie Slonecker Spokane Teachers Credit Union Alisha Birchall Spokane Teachers Credit Union Anne Irmer Spokane Transit Kathy Wilson Spokane Transit Ryan Stewart Spokane Transit Tammy Henderson Spokesman Review Jim Miller St. Luke Rehab Institute Linda MacNaughton WA State Department of Ecology Jana Augenstine VVSDOT Nadine Grady WA State Department of Licensing Grace Elverum WA State DSHS — CSO Sally Kagele WA State DSHS — DCFS Debra Triplett WA State DSHS — DDDS Stephanie Holten Washington Trust Bank Sharon Polello Zaks Designs Lynette Ellis Safeco Insurance Tim Willoughby WA State ESD Telecenter WORKSHOP AGENDA The agenda of meeting consisted of the following items: I. Welcome and Introductions II. Overview of the CTR Efficiency Act III. Group Discussions IV. Workshop Wrap Up SUMMARY OF GROUP DISCUSSIONS What are the benefits of having a CTR program? The CTR program helps an employer manage its parking better and helps to reduce parking congestion. The program helps employees to save on gasoline consumption and money. Employees appreciate having a CTR program because it gives them some alternatives for their commute. Other benefits for some employees include reduced bus fares and parking fees. What aspects of the CTR program are working well? Participants all agreed that offering incentives are working to help increase participation in non - drive alone modes. The online ridematching system is working to help people find carpool partners and vanpool participants. The vanpool program is working extremely well with some of the work sites. Carpooling is the most popular choice for getting people out of their cars. Some work sites offer reduced parking fees and preferred carpool spaces. What are some of the barriers for having a successful CTR program? The availability of free and abundant parking are major barriers for a successful CTR program. Other barriers include a lack of funding and management support, lack of shower facilities for bicyclers and lack of transit service to the work sites. ETCs expressed frustration that they do not have enough time to perform their CTR duties. Not all managers support the CTR program which makes it challenging for ETCs to find the time to conduct their duties and make their CTR program successful. For employees that would like to participate in the carpool program, it is sometimes difficult to find ridematching partners. It is also often difficult for employees to participate in transit and ridesharing programs because of schedules and overtime issues. What are some improvements that are needed for the CTR program? • More bus service to work sites, particularly in the areas of span of service and frequency. • Provide more educational and promotional materials. • Create more flexibility in filling out the commute calendar, particularly for employees who have rotating shifts. • Develop small networking meetings to allow ETCs to share ideas. • Hold transportation fairs for all employers in a similar area. • Develop a system for distributing materials, i.e. campaign posters, monthly prizes. • Have CTR staff discuss program with work site managers to develop stronger support for program. • Offer more incentives such as bus pass subsidies, reduce parking fees etc. • Provide education on how to develop a compressed work week program. • Provide education on how to develop a telework program. • Develop recognition program for employers that are doing well in the CTR program. • Increase messages to employees about the need to change their travel behavior. Appendix G COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION SUMMARY OF POLICIES THAT SUPPORT CTR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES ANALYSIS This section provides a list of CTR supportive comprehensive plan goals and policies that the City of Spokane Valley either has or doesn't have. The right hand column identifies the policies that the jurisdiction has in place relating to the recommended goals and policies in the left hand column. If the jurisdiction doesn't have some of the recommended goals and policies listed below, then they may want to consider adding some of these recommended goals and policies to their comprehensive plan during the next update. Example Commute Trip Reduction & Goals & Policies Growth Management Planning Policies in Current Plans Land Use Element Inter - Agency Coordination Work with transit providers to provide transit that is fast, frequent and None, but covered reliable between urban centers, urban villages, GTEC's and accessible to in Transportation most of the city's residences and businesses. Element, TG -10. Urban Growth Areas Enter into agreements and establish procedures for setting priorities, Recommended, programming, maintaining and financing for countywide, regional and but no specific state transportation facilities and services consistent with the GMA policy. current federal transportation legislation Land use and transportation goals and decisions should be integrated LUP -1.1 with one another and coordinated with adjacent jurisdictions and with the Regional Transportation Plan to determine the types and levels of transportation facilities to be provided within the unincorporated county. The county /city should use future land use projections to identify and Recommended, provide for adequate safety, structural, rights -of -way and other possible but no specific improvements that support vehicle transportation, non - motorized and Policy. transit needs of the region plus use alternative transit modes as areas develop. Integrate Commute Trip Reduction land use planning by requiring non- Recommended, motorized pedestrian connections between retail, living, and work places. but no specific Non - motorized connects shall include, but not be limited to: transit policy. connections, bus stops, sidewalks, bike facilities, trails and encouraging employers to participate in ride sharing programs. When evaluating land use changes to the Comprehensive Plan, None proposals should include an analysis of how the development furthers the goals of Commute Trip Reduction planning. Example Commute Trip Reduction & Goals & Policies Growth Management Planning Policies in Current Plans Pursue transportation demand management (TDM) strategies at the None, but covered local /regional level by coordinating with regional and state partners so in Transportation customers see their travel choices and the various TDM promotions as a Element, TG -6, TP -6.1. coordinated, integrated system that makes a difference in the community. Example: Regulations to influence travel behavior Marketing Improvements in services and facilities Require the integration of non - motorized and transit connections when LUP -16.2, LUP - planning and developing urban centers or GTEC's. 18.1 Establish urban centers and /or GTEC's where they can be served by LUP -14.1 regional transit agencies, or work with the appropriate transit agency to expand service to the urban center within a reasonable timeframe. Urban Design Encourage new housing developments to be located in urban growth LUP -1.6, LUP -2.3, areas and small towns to help provide a sense of community and safe, LUP -16.1 non - motorized transportation to community facilities and public transit modes. Discourage transportation improvements that would trigger development LUP -6.5 that is premature or not consistent with applicable comprehensive plans, policies, or zoning. Provide aesthetic and functional amenities along pedestrian facilities, LUP -4.6 such as water fountains, benches, trash receptacles, public art, and open spaces (such as seating plazas). Provide pedestrian, and bicycle connections in newly developing areas of LUP -4.2 the city, promoting both internal access and linkages with the rest of the city. Incorporate transit - supportive and pedestrian friendly design features in LUP -7.3 new development through the development review process. Examples include: Provide pedestrian pathways that minimize walking distances to activities and to transit stops. Provide weather protection such as covered walkways or arcades connecting building developments, and covered waiting areas for transit and ridesharing. Incorporate guidelines for addressing that sidewalks and walkways are LUP -14.2 separated from the roadway by a landscaping strip or drainage swale. Example Commute Trip Reduction & Goals & Policies Growth Management Planning Policies in Current Plans Adopt pedestrian friendly design guidelines, especially in high pedestrian LUP -7.2, LUP -8.2 activity zones, such as wide sidewalks, landscape buffers or strips, street trees, adequate lighting, traffic calming measures (such as traffic circles, curb bulbs, raised medians, speed tables and chicanes), special pavements, and bollards. Adopt development design standards that promote a pedestrian friendly LUP -4.8, LUP -7.4 environment. Such standards may include reduced building setbacks, requirements for display windows, building entrances oriented toward the street, and locating parking lots to the rear or side of buildings. Secure bike lanes and trail improvements or easements through the LUP -16.2 development review process to develop portions of the bicycle and pedestrian system. Require new developments to incorporate non - motorized features or LUP -9.1, LUP -10.3 programs designed to promote use of alternatives to single- occupant vehicles, such as; • Preferential parking for car pools and van pools • Special loading and unloading facilities • Transit facilities, including comfortable bus stops, and waiting areas, adequate turning room, and where appropriate, signal preemption and queue -jump lanes • Bicycle parking and related facilities Inter - Agency Coordination Pursue strategies that make transit safe, secure, comfortable, and None, but covered affordable. in Transportation Element, TG -10. Integrate multiple access modes, including buses, carpools, and LUG -7 vanpools, bicycles, and pedestrians. Integrate transit - oriented development opportunities with the private and None public sectors. Zoning Discourage the development of major, stand -alone park and ride facilities None with city limits. Situations where additions to park and ride capacity could be considered include: At the terminus for a major, regional transit system. When opportunities exist for "shared parking "(e.g., where transit commuter parking can be leased from another development. Such as a shopping center, movie theatre, church, etc.) Areas where alternatives to automobile uses are particularly inadequate (e.g., lack of direct transit system, or pedestrian and bicycle access) or cannot be provided in a cost - effective manner. Allow a reduction in the number of required parking spaces if a None development provides ride -share programs, car pool parking spaces, bike racks, lockers or other approved non - motorized parking options. Example Commute Trip Reduction & Goals & Policies Growth Management Planning Policies in Current Plans Encourage transit oriented development and pedestrian friendly land use LUP -2.1, LUP -2.2, characteristics through zoning and land use policies that encourage LUP -9.1 mixtures of land uses, increased densities in targeted areas with design standards. Adopt a parking credit program that allows developers to reduce the None number of required parking spaces if they provide an alternative transportation program to single occupant vehicles. Housing Element Work with other jurisdictions to achieve a jobs /housing balance that Recommended, makes it possible for people to live closer to where they work. but no specific policy. Promote quality, community - friendly residential development, through LUP -2.4, LUP -16.1 features such as enhanced open space and pedestrian connectivity. Capital Facilities Element Explore the possibility of encouraging cooperative funding for bicycle None trails. Implement a methodology for public - private partnerships when it would CFP -1.4 result in a more efficient use of public resources. Aggressively seek funding opportunities for safety, mobility, intermodal, None bicycle, pedestrian, neighborhood, and transportation demand management improvements Provide adequate and predictable funding to construct and maintain None pedestrian and bicycle capital projects. Effectively link pedestrian project funding and approval decisions to None priorities identified in the CTR plan, as well as the Non - Motorized element of the jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. Support a greater investment in pedestrian enhancements, and ensure None that all new transportation projects include funding for pedestrian improvements. Continue programs to construct, maintain, and repair sidewalks. Recommended, but no specific policy. Assign high priority to pedestrian and bicycle projects that provide access None, but covered to major employment areas and activity centers, provide linkages to in Transportation transit, complete planned bicycle facilities and provide system Element, TP -9.10. connectivity. Effectively link TDM program funding and approval decisions to priorities None identified in the CTR plan, as well as the transportation element of the jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. Utilities Element Secure sidewalk and trail easements over existing utility lines where ever None feasible Example Commute Trip Reduction & Goals & Policies Growth Management Planning Policies in Current Plans Transportation Element Carpools, Vanpools, & Ride Share Ensure that the city as an employer sets a positive example by None maintaining a strong transportation demand management program for its employees. Pedestrian System Connectivity The county should ensure that continuous and /or direct bicycle lanes are TP -9.10, TP -11.5 provided between all jurisdictions and major activity centers. Consider pedestrians along with other travel modes in all aspects of TG -9 developing the transportation system. Provide safe and convenient pedestrian access in all new and improved transportation projects, unless exceptional circumstances exist. Remove barriers and deterrents along the existing pedestrian system to TP -9.9, TP -16.1 create better access between employment facilities, residential and other uses. Coordinate the local jurisdiction's existing and planned pedestrian system TG -9 with adjacent jurisdictions to provide a continuous, coordinated system, especially when major employment and activity centers are nearby. Secure sidewalks and trail improvements or easements through the TP -9.10 development review process to develop portions of the pedestrian system. Pedestrian Safety and Security Adopt and use national (American Association of State Highway and None Transportation Officials, AASHTO) design standards for pedestrian facilities. Address the special needs of citizens with various degrees of mobility in Recommended, planning, designing, implementing and maintaining pedestrian facilities. but no specific policy. Provide consistently designed pedestrian activated signal crossings, and Recommended, consider technologies that enhance pedestrian safety at crossings, such but no specific as longer crossing times and audible crossings. policy. Consider access management to reduce the number of conflict points TP -16.1 (driveways) between pedestrians and vehicles, thereby improving pedestrian safety. Ensure that pedestrian facilities are designed and monitored to improve TP -9.5 security and safety, through lighting, openness, vegetation upkeep and security features such as panic buttons at key locations. Example Commute Trip Reduction & Goals & Policies Growth Management Planning Policies in Current Plans Design midblock crossings with safety as a high priority, and consider TP -9.5 improvements such as pedestrian crossing signals, flared curbs (bulbouts), pedestrian refuge islands, medians, and adequate sight distance around parked vehicles. Pedestrian and Bicycle Convenience Conduct periodic analyses of bicycle and pedestrian environments in and None around urban centers and regional transit stations to identify deficiencies and to plan access improvements. Include bicycle facilities in the six -year capital improvement program (for None trails that will be utilized by bikes) or the six -year transportation program (for widening shoulder projects that will accommodate bikes). Implement way- finding (signage) along sidewalks and trails that direct None pedestrians to key locations or destinations, such as major activity centers, business districts, institutions, major medical facilities, parks or recreational facilities. Provide internal pedestrian circulation systems within and between TP -9.1 existing, new or redeveloping commercial, multi - family or single family developments, and other appropriate activity centers. Provide convenient connections to frontage pedestrian systems and transit facilities. Encourage transit use by improving pedestrian and bicycle linkages to the None, but covered existing and future transit and school bus system, and by improving the in Land Use security of and utility of park- and -ride lots and bus stops. Element, LUP -7.6. Provide bicycle connections and secure bicycle parking and storage TP -9.7, TP -9.10 convenient to major transit facilities; increase the number of secure parking areas for bicycles. Conduct bicycle transportation studies to improve safety and overall None quality of bicycling. Cooperate with the public and private schools, bicycle clubs and other Recommended, interests groups to provide education and strategies to promote safe but no specific riding skills and the transportation and recreation opportunities of policy. bicycling. Improve mobility and safe access for walking and bicycling, and create TP -9.5 incentives to promote non - motorized travel to employment centers, commercial districts, transit stations, schools and major institutions, and recreational destinations. Update and review the Pedestrian and Bicycle transportation Plan every None five years. The updates should consider the existing and future role of the single- occupant vehicle in relation to non - motorized and public transportation modes, as well as newly annexed areas, areas experiencing unforeseen development and /or redevelopment, and other emerging issues. Example Commute Trip Reduction & Goals & Policies Growth Management Planning Policies in Current Plans Develop an effective "share the road /share the trail" concept for None pedestrian and bicycle education programs for the motorized and non - motorized public. Accessibility Sidewalks or pedestrian facilities should be located along both sides of all TP -9.2 arterials, collectors, and at least one side of most local streets. Pedestrian facilities should be wide enough to allow the disabled, such as Recommended, wheelchair users, to access them, usually a minimum of 5' to 6'. A wider but no specific facility should be provided along principal arterials (generally a minimum policy. of 8'), or in business districts that attract more pedestrians. Direct pedestrian linkages should be considered whenever possible, to None connect between internal land uses and arterials. This reduces walking distances to transit stops and commercial uses. Public Transportation Encourage interconnections and time coordination of public transportation TP -16.3 modes (bus, coach and rail) to increase level of service and ridership. Work with transit providers to provide transit service that is fast, frequent, TP -11.5 and reliable between urban centers and urban villages and that is accessible to most of the city's residences and businesses. Pursue strategies that make transit safe, secure, comfortable, and affordable. Support development of an integrated, regional high capacity transit TP -11.3 system that links urban centers within the city and the region. Develop partnerships with transit providers to implement projects TP -11.5 providing neighborhood -to- transit links that improve pedestrian and bicycle access to transit services and facilities. Coordinate with regional, state, and federal agencies, local governments, TP -11.2, TP -11.4 and transit providers when planning and operating transportation facilities and services in order to promote regional mobility for people and goods and the urban center approach to growth management. Design transit access into large developments, considering bus lanes, None stops, shelters, non - motorized lanes & facilities as part of the project design Coordinate with transit providers and the private sector to develop and None implement compatible transportation demand management regulations and strategies that are consistent with the Commute Trip Reduction Act. Work with car share companies to provide car share opportunities at key None locations, such as major employers, business districts, and high density residential areas. Example Commute Trip Reduction & Goals & Policies Growth Management Planning Policies in Current Plans Provide preferential lanes, such as High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes None on roads which will benefit commuters the most, such as those with major transit routes, and those experiencing the greatest congestion. Education and Encouragement Educate the general public and public officials about the economic, None transportation system performance, environmental, health and social benefits of walking and biking and develop improved programs to encourage increased levels of walking and biking. Educate drivers and pedestrians about pedestrian safety issues, and None enforce pedestrian related laws. Consider the formation of a pedestrian advisory committee to provide None input to the jurisdiction (staff and elected officials) on pedestrian related issues and needs, as well as review of major transportation projects to ensure that pedestrian needs are adequately addressed or considered. Develop a pedestrian walking /biking map that is focused on major activity None centers, such as business districts or major employment areas. The map should identify sidewalks, trails, bike routes, transit corridors and bus stops /transit centers, and key activity centers such as institutional uses and government centers, major employers, commercial or retail areas, parks, and other points of interest. Monitoring Ensure that the local government monitors the results of its TDM None programs and policies, and continually evaluate changes needed to improve mode split goals. Continually evaluate large employer CTR program effectiveness and None reduce the employer threshold if needed to achieve the jurisdiction's mode split goals. Economic Development Element Funding Mechanisms Promote public awareness of the impact travel choices have on None household finances, personal quality of life, society, and the environment, and increase awareness of the range of travel choices available. Employment Require large employers to implement a commute trip reduction program Recommended, for employees, as mandated by the Commute Trip Reduction Act. but no specific policy. The county /city should encourage employers in urbanized areas to offer TG -6 staggered work hours or flextime and other Transportation demand Management programs such as parking management, ride match services and preferential parking of vanpools, carpools, covered bike racks, lockers and showers at work sites. Example Commute Trip Reduction & Goals & Policies Growth Management Planning Policies in Current Plans Encourage employers to provide information and marketing on commute TP -6.1 alternatives, such as transit schedules, rideshare information, and guaranteed ride home programs. Encourage employers to develop telecommuting options, which allow TP -6.1 employees to work one or more days at home or at a "satellite work center" closer to their homes. Encourage employers to allow flexible work schedules or compressed TP -6.1 work weeks to help reduce the number of vehicles using local and regional roadways. Encourage major employers to provide daycare opportunities onsite or None nearby. Encourage employers to provide subsidies to employees who commute Recommended, using other modes, such as free or reduced prices for transit passes, or but no specific discounted parking for rideshare vehicles. policy. Parks & Open Space Element Provide for adequate roadway, pedestrian, and bicycling connections in PRP -2.5 newly developing areas of the city, promoting both internal access and linkages with the rest of the city. Identify areas to be designated as pedestrian promenades, with None pedestrian friendly environments. Provide for uniform bicycle and pedestrian markings and design None standards for travel along city bikeways and walkways. Appendix H GLOSSARY OF TERMS GLOSSARY OF TERMS Affected Employee: Under the Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) law, an affected employee is a full -time employee who regularly begins work between 6 a.m. and 9 a.m., at a single work site, on two or more weekdays for at least 12 continuous months. Affected Employer: An employer is "affected" under the CTR law if there are at least 100 "affected" employees at a single work site. Alternative Work Schedules: AWS programs offer alternatives to the typical eight -hour work day. Options include flex -time, a compressed work week, and staggered work hours. Automobile Dependency: Transportation and land use patterns that result in high levels of automobile use and limited transportation alternatives. In this case, "automobile" includes cars, vans, light trucks, SUVs and motorcycles Base Year: The CTR law requires affected employers to measure the results of their employee trip program against base year values for VMT and drive alone vehicles. The goal year is 2011. Bus Rapid Transit: Special lanes dedicated to transit buses, often incorporating other features to insure high quality transit service. Carpool: Two to six people age 16 and older, sharing the ride in an automobile to and from the work place. Commute: The trip made by an employee between their home and work locations, regardless of the distance or mode used. Compressed Work Week: A work week that is compressed from the typical five -day, 40 hour work week into a shorter work week but maintaining the same number of hours. Commute Trip Reduction Program: A CTR program is comprised of strategies used by an employer to reduce employee use of single- occupant vehicles (SOVs) and the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per employee. The CTR program specifies the measures to be used that will achieve the target goals. Drive Alone Vehicle: A vehicle that is occupied by one person. Employee Transportation Coordinator: The CTR law requires employers to appoint an employee transportation coordinator, or ETC. The person is a personal change agent who provides the "human touch" needed to remedy traffic congestion and air pollution problems. An ETC is the organization's key contact person providing commuting information to employees and liaison activities with transit agencies and local jurisdictions. The ETC creates marketing strategies, administers employee ridesharing programs, and measures results. Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH): GRH programs provide an emergency ride home for employees who commute to work in a ridesharing mode and have an illness or emergency. Typically, an employee can take a cab ride home and charge the ride to their employer's account or be reimbursed for the expense. High - Occupancy Vehicle (HOV): a passenger vehicle carrying more than a specified minimum number of passengers. HOVs include carpools, vanpools, and buses. HOV requirements are often indicated as 3+ (three or more passengers required) or 4+ (four or more passengers required). HOV Lane: This is a traffic lane limited to carrying high occupancy vehicles (HOVs) and certain other qualified vehicles. HOT Lanes (High Occupancy Toll Lanes): HOV facilities that allow lower occupancy vehicles, such as solo drivers, to use the facility if they pay a toll. This offers users three options: drive alone on an unpriced but congested general purpose lane, drive alone and pay to use a less congested lane, or rideshare (carpool, vanpool or ride transit) to use a less congested lane without any additional fee. Mobility: The movement of people and goods. Mobility Management (Also called Transportation Demand Management): Various strategies that change travel behavior (how, when and where people travel) in order to increase transport system efficiency and achieve specific objectives such as reduced traffic congestion, road and parking cost savings, increased safety, improved mobility for non - drivers, energy conservation and pollution emission reductions. Non - motorized Transportation (also known as Active Transportation and Human Powered Transportation) includes Walking, Bicycling, Small - Wheeled Transport (skates, skateboards, push scooters and hand carts) and Wheelchair travel. Parking Management: Strategies aimed at making better use of available parking supply. Parking management strategies include preferential parking or price discounts for carpools and /or short - term parkers, and disincentives, prohibitions and price supplements for those contributing more to congestion. Parking Pricing: Strategy to reduce automobile use by requiring motorists to pay directly for using parking facilities. Time variable parking pricing can be used as a congestion reduction strategy. Parking Cash -Out: This means that people (typically commuters, and sometimes residents of multi - family housing) who are offered a free parking space are also offered the cash equivalent when they use alternative transportation modes and so do not impose parking costs. Ridesharing: Ridesharing is any cooperative effort of two or more people sharing a motor vehicle traveling to a common destination, such as a work site. Carpools and vanpools are common forms of ridesharing. Smart Growth: Land use development practices that create more resource efficient and livable communities, with more accessible land use patterns, an alternative to sprawl. Sprawl: Dispersed, low- density, single -use, automobile dependent land use patterns. Stakeholder: Individuals or groups that are affected by a decision and have an interest in its outcome. Teleworking: Teleworking involves the use of telephones, computers, and other technology to work from a location other than a conventional office. Transportation Demand Management (TDM): Various strategies that change travel behavior (how, when and where people travel) in order to increase transport system efficiency and achieve specific objectives such as reduced traffic congestion, road and parking cost savings, increased safety, improved mobility for non - drivers, energy conservation and pollution emission reductions. Also called Mobility Management. Transportation Management Association (TMA): A TMA is a partnership or organization that brings interested parties together to work on transportation issues. Vanpool: A vanpool consists of seven to fifteen people sharing their commute in a passenger van, generally riding to the same place of employment. Vehicle Miles Traveled: Number of miles a vehicle has traveled for a commute. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 20, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: MOTION CONSIDERATION: Greenacres Neighborhood Park Funding PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: Staff has worked with the Greenacres neighborhood to complete a master plan for Greenacres Neighborhood Park. A state Recreation and Conservation matching grant was obtained in 2007 for the purchase of the 8.3 acres that currently makes up the park. To date, the City has received $500,000 in direct appropriations from the state legislature for the development of Phase 1 back in 2008 and 2009. Funding for the completion of Phase 1 is not currently available. There is a concern that the state funding may be in jeopardy if the City is unable to show substantial progress towards the completion of Phase 1 of this project. Currently the bidding climate has been very favorable and therefore the sooner this project could be bid would of benefit to the City. Phase 1 is estimated to cost $1,580,000. This issue was discussed last week with the City Council. There is a Parks Capital Fund balance of $1,300,000. Staff is recommending that we utilize the $500,000 state funding, $200,000 from the Civic Facilities Fund and the remaining balance from the Parks Capital Fund to complete the development of construction drawings and proceed with construction of the Greenacres Neighborhood Park. OPTIONS: 1) provide additional direction to staff. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize the use of $200,000 from the Civic Facilities Fund to provide the necessary funding and complete the design and construction of Greenacres Neighborhood Park. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This project would utilize $200,000 from the Civic Facilities fund, $500,000 from state grants and the remainder from the Parks Capital Fund. STAFF CONTACT: Mike Stone, Parks and Recreation Director ATTACHMENTS: Funding Proposal City of Spokane Valley Parks Capital Project Fund #309 06/24/2010 Balance in fund at 12 -31 -09 $ 1,300,000 State Grant $ 500,000 Use Parkland Acq. Dollars from 2010 budget (included in $1.3 milln) Use Civic Facilities $ $ 200,000 Expenditures in 2010 through 6 -24 -10 Discovery Est amount for Disc park yet to pay Greenacres Phase I Phase I contingency Terrace View Shelter Estimated bal. at 12 -31 -11 End of Phase I Phase 11 $ 183,408 $ 75,000 $ (258,408) $ 1,364,000 $ 216,000 $ (1,580,000) :1 111 $ 81,592 ---------------------------------------- ??? $ 900,000 North Greenacres Neighborhood Park - G o-Mr ttee _ - ^ } �P1tw Ni July 20, 2010 Honorable Mayor Towey and City Council, apologize I cannot be here as we are out of town this week. Thank you for reading our public comment into the record. I've had the privilege of serving as North Greenacres Chairwoman for the past 5 years and we appreciate the time Council and staff has given in creation of the Greenacres Park. This has been an exciting project that's been accomplished over the last five years. Mike Jackson was Park Director when this started. He had just completed the City's Master Park plan, a huge task, when he chose to meet the intensive work it would take to meet the grant application deadline in 3 weeks. Neighborhood involvement played a big part in grant criteria and the city was awarded state matching funds to purchase the parkland. Our current park director, Mike Stone is equally committed and we have loved the collaborative spirit and success of the visioning and informational meetings. The neighborhood also thanks Mike Terrell who worked with us when we first began visioning a park in January of 2005. His creativity, talent for park design and ability to keep us focused has brought us to this final step. We cannot urge you enough to find a way to approve funding of Greenacres Park today. The neighborhood population has dramatically increased. I've seen families barbecuing under the cover of their garage, toddlers playing in driveways for lack of space, or straying into the street. The close proximity to the Centennial Trail is wonderful but also dangerous along the Spokane River. Our neighborhood is geographically caught between the river and the freeway. Families need a safe place for their children to play. There couldn't be a better time to finish this park. Please approve the funding to build Phase One of our park. Best Wishes, Mrs. Mary Pollard North Greenacres Neighborhood Chairwoman 17216 E. Baldwin Ave Spokane Valley, WA 99016 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 20, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion consideration on CTA- 04 -10, a privately initiated amendment to Title 19 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC), proposing to allow the expansion of nonconforming uses onto adjacent property. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 19.30.040 - Development regulation text amendments. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None. BACKGROUND: The Applicant proposes to amend the nonconforming use provisions contained in Section 19.20.060 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. Current regulations allow nonconforming uses to expand to adjacent properties under the same ownership at the time the use became nonconforming. The proposed amendment would allow nonconforming uses to expand to adjacent properties without regard to ownership. On June 24, 2010, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed amendment. By a 5 -2 vote, the Planning Commission recommends that the application be disapproved On July, 6, 2010, Council received an informational report on the proposal. OPTIONS: 1. Accept the Planning Commission recommendation and disapprove the proposal. 2. Approve the proposal (must make findings to support approval). 3. Modify the proposal 4. Send proposal back to the Planning Commission for further consideration. RECOMMENDED ACTION /MOTION:: Move to accept the Planning Commission findings and recommendation and disapprove proposed text amendment CTA- 04 -10. (Because this proposed action is the result of a public hearing, there will be no public comments on this item) BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Scott Kuhta, AICP, Senior Planner; Mike Connelly, City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Findings 2. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 3. Application 4. Staff report to Planning Commission 5. Comparison chart of nonconforming regulations 6. PowerPoint Presentation RCA CTA -04 -10 1 of 1 Spokane`" ,,;,o0Va11ey Memorandum 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.92.1.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhatt@spokanevaltey.org To: Mayor and City Council From: John Carroll, Chair - Spokane Valley Planning Commission Date: July 8, 2010 Re: Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation: CTA -04 -10 BACKGROUND On June 24, 2010, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider a privately initiated text amendment to Section 19.20.080 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) which addresses the expansion of nonconforming uses. The current code allows expansion of nonconforming uses onto adjacent parcels but the parcel must be under the same ownership at the time the use became nonconforming. The proposed text amendment would allow the expansion of nonconforming uses onto adjoining property without regard to ownership. After considering public testimony and reviewing the staff report, the Planning Commission voted 5 -2 to recommend disapproval of the proposed text amendment. The Planning Commission's findings and recommendation on CTA -04 -10 are summarized below: FINDINGS 1. Notice for the proposed text amendment was placed in the Spokane Valley News Herald on June 2, 2010. 2. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA — RCW 43.21 C) an environmental checklist was required for the proposed text amendment. 3. Staff reviewed the environmental checklist and a threshold determination was made for the proposed text amendment. An Optional Determination of Non - significance (DNS) was issued for the proposed text amendment on June 18, 2010. 4. The DNS was published in the city's official newspaper consistent with the City of Spokane Valley Environmental Ordinance, 5. The Spokane Valley Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on June 24, 2010, to consider the proposed text amendment. After hearing public testimony, the Commission made a recommendation on CTA- 04 -10. Section 17.80.150(F) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) provides approval criteria that must be considered when the City amends the SVMC. Planning Commission Findings; Section 17.80,150(F) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) provides approval criteria that must be considered when the City amends the SVMC. 1 of 3 I . The proposed text amendment must be consistent with applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; Planning Commission Response The Comprehensive Plan does not provide specific policy direction toward the treatment of nonconforming uses. However, the most basic principle of land use planning is to separate incompatible uses, such as industrial from residential, by locating them in different parts of the community or buffering them from each other. The following policies relate to this principal. LUP -1.1 - Maintain the character of existing and future residential neighborhoods through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. LUP -1.2 - Protect residential areas from impacts of adjacent non - residential uses and /or higher intensity uses through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. LUP -111 - Commercial, residential and recreational uses should be limited or not allowed in areas designated for industry, except for small -scale ancillary commercial and recreational uses intended to primarily serve the industrial area. LUP -11.3 - Provide appropriate buffering, landscaping and other development standards for industrial areas. NP -2.1 - Maintain and protect the character of existing and future residential neighborhoods through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. NP -2.6 - Establish appropriate design guidelines with buffer zones and transition requirements to protect residential neighborhoods from incompatible land uses and adverse impacts associated with arterials, freeways and rail corridors. Allowing nonconforming uses to expand onto adjacent properties without restriction is not consistent with the overall intent of the Comprehensive Plan to protect neighborhoods from incompatible uses. 2. The proposed amendment must bear a substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; Planning Commission Response: Zoning is a police power that allows the City to exercise reasonable control over the use of property in the interest of the health, safety and welfare of the community at large. Zoning is also the regulatory means to implement the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. Zoning separates uses that are incompatible, thereby protecting the general health, safety and welfare of the community. Chapter 19.20.0606 (4), SVMC, currently allows the expansion of nonconforming uses to adjacent property under the same ownership when the use became nonconforming, subject to certain criteria. Compared to many other jurisdictions, this allowance is uncommon and extraordinary. This provision is provided in the SVMC to avoid economic hardship to property owners who may have made plans to expand a legal use onto adjacent property purchased for that purpose but was made nonconforming by new zoning regulations. The proposed amendment would expand this provision to land not under ownership at the time the use became nonconforming. It would apply to existing nonconforming uses and nonconforming uses that replace another nonconforming use. The concern is that if the proposed amendment is adopted, . incompatible uses may expand to adjacent properties without limit, thereby rendering the zoning code somewhat meaningless. For example, if a use that would otherwise be permitted only in the Heavy Industrial zone is allowed to expand in the Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) zone, then it has the potential to negatively impact adjacent uses, such as schools, residences and retail shops, all permitted uses in the CMU zone. If 2of3 the use is compatible with the zoning and does not interfere with the use of adjacent property, then the appropriate mechanism to address the situation is to either allow the use outright, or require a Conditional Use Permit, which then allows public scrutiny via a public hearing process. A review of random zoning codes from cities and counties around Washington Stake and Idaho found only one other jurisdiction that allows expansion onto adjacent property not under ownership at the time the use became nonconforming by administrative approval. That jurisdiction, the City of Spokane, allows expansion of nonconforming uses onto adjacent properties only in industrial and higher intensity commercial zones. Spokane County allows expansion of nonconforming uses onto adjacent property with a conditional use permit, subject to a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner. Some jurisdictions only allow nonconforming uses only to expand within the structure it occupies; most other jurisdictions allow that expansion restricts the expansion to the parcel the nonconforming use occupies. ADOPTION OF FINDINGS: The Planning Commission is required to adopt findings of fact when recommending changes to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission, by motion to disapprove the proposal, adopted the findings of fact for CTA -04 -010. Approved this July 8, 2010 n G. Carroll, Chair of Spokane Valley Planning Commission tine Spokane Valley Planning Commission DRAFT Minutes Council Chambers — City Hall, 11707 E. Sprague Ave. June 24, 2010 L CALL TO ORDER Chair Carroll called the meeting to order at 6:00 pm. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance III. ROLL CALL Commissioners Carroll, Eggleston (arrived at 6:02) Hall, Mann, Sands, Sharpe and Woodard were present. Staff attending the meeting: Kathy McClung, Community Development Director, Greg McCormick, Planning Manager; Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner; Christina Janssen, Assistant Planner; Deanna Griffith, Administrative Assistant, Dean Grafos, Councilmember. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA It was moved by Commissioner Sands, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the June 24, 2010 agenda as presented. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Commissioner Woodard and seconded to approve the minutes from the May 13, 2010 as presented. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. VII. COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Woodard stated he had been attending Council meetings, Commissioners Hall and Sands reported they had attended the Mixed Use Avenue Community Meeting, Commissioner Carroll reported he had attend the Council meetings as well as the Spokane Valley Business Association meeting. VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Director McClung reported that on June 16, 2010 the City held its first Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan workshop. She stated that it was well attended, approx. 45 people who were split up into groups for an interactive exercise. Everyone was engaged and supportive. The Director also reported that the Council retreat is scheduled for July 13, at CenterPlace from 10- 4 and will cover the budget. 06 -24 -2010 Planning Commission Minutes Page 1 of 10 IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS A. New Business: Public Hearing —Code Text Amendment CTA -03 -10 Assistant Planner Christina Janssen: Commissioner Carroll opened the public hearing at 6:09 p.m. Assistant Planner Christina Janssen gave a presentation to cover the three amendments that are being proposed in CTA- 03 -10. • Chapter 19.140 (Administrative Exceptions)- Add language which gives the Community Development Director authority to grant administrative exceptions for minor design changes to the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan. • Chapter 2.2.2 (Building Use) Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan -Allow vehicle sales with the Mixed Use Avenue Retail zone with a Conditional Use permit and allow Full Service Restaurants as a permitted use. • Table 2.2.2 Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan -Allow restricted access to "Other Streets" in the Mixed Use Avenue zone. Ms. Janssen explained that full service restaurants were limited to the City Center but a shift in Council direction has made this restriction less critical. The proposed amendment would all them as a permitted use in this zone. Secondly the prohibited uses section would be removed and vehicle sales would be allowed in the Mixed Use Ave zone, with a conditional use permit. Ms. Janssen also stated that after staff began to process this amendment they also received a privately initiated amendment to allow all vehicle sales in the Mixed Use Ave zone, and that the Commission could expect to see it at a future meeting. The next amendment would allow restaurants to take access from other streets where currently they are only allowed access from Sprague Ave. This amendment would only apply to full service restaurants in this zone. The third amendment in CTA -03 -10 is to 19.140. It has become noted that with the adoption of the Subarea Plan that in some cases minor design changes to the plan would help business owners to locate within the corridor while also meeting the intent of the plan. This amendment will add language to the Administrative Exceptions section of the code to allow the Community Development Director to make these kinds of changes. Commissioners asked for a definition regarding a full service restaurant, for clarification regarding the access issue in Table 2.2.2, this would mean all vehicle sales, would require a conditional use permit. Mr. McCormick clarified that vehicle sales in the Subarea Plan encompassed all types of vehicles, including boats. It is an inclusive term. Commissioner Woodard asked if this would take care of the issues we had in the Mixed Use with the Elephant Boys. Commissioner Sands asked if that was the driver for this amendment, that one boat sales place, if so could we not find another way to handle their problem. Commissioner Eggleston questioned a `grandfather clause.' Director McClung clarifies the issues and responds: Elephant Boys was the initial driver of the Council's direction to take this back to the Planning Commission to have a look at it. It would be up to the Planning Commission to determine if they think there is another way to handle the issue. In reference to Commissioner Eggleston, Elephant Boys moved from their original location to the lot next door, and that is what caused the issue. Commissioner Hall asked if this 06 -24 -2010 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 10 would be a conditional use permit that would require a public hearing? Yes, that is correct. Commissioner Carroll, would this not allow vehicle sales in almost every aspect of Sprague, would there be any place they could not go? Ms Janssen answered it would be the majority of the corridor. Director McClung stated that a conditional use permit is not used to deny a use to go into a zone, it is a device to put restrictions or extra conditions to help mitigate impacts to the community. Discussion of where the Mixed Use zones are, what would be covered under the word vehicle. Commissioner Hall asked for justification as to why this was considered during the adoption of the plan and it was decided not to place this in the Mixed Use area and now we are changing gears and adding it back in. Why this change in direction. Director McClung car dealerships would be all focused in the Auto Row area. Only new car sales would be allowed there, but then the determination became that if you were going to allow new car sales you had to allow used car sales. Senior Planner Scott Kuhta stepped up to the microphone to assist in the clarification. Mr. Kuhta stated that when the Public Hearing draft of the Plan went before the Planning Commission, it was originally written to allow used car sales in the Mixed Use areas to compensate for the fact that they would not be allowed in the Gateway areas, only new car sales would be allowed there. However through the process and the Planning Commission recommended that all the vehicle sales would go in the Auto Row area and be prohibited in the other areas. A conditional use would allow some mitigation factors like display of boats. Originally a business owner complained about the boats that were blocking their business from being seen and another business did not like the fact that there were boats being displayed everywhere so one mitigating factor could be the way the boats are displayed. Maybe you could limit the number of boats you could display. You could allow the business to locate there but still make it more compatible with the adjacent land owners. Mr. McCormick also added that before the Subarea Plan, the zoning was Corridor Mixed Use, which did new and used vehicle sales. Commissioner Mann asked if a conditional use permit could be used to deny a permit Director McClung stated she had never seen a conditional use denied. Commissioner Sands then asked if restaurants would also be appropriate for a conditional use permit and Director McClung stated she did not feel that restaurants did not have the same impacts, also that the limitation for restaurants to the City Center and Neighborhood Centers only was to be a temporary limitation in the Plan. Commissioner Carroll opened the public testimony at 6:27 p.m. Ben Goodmanson, Whipple Consulting Engineers: Mr. Goodmanson stated he was attending to encourage approval of this amendment. Mr. Goodmanson also stated his form also had an amendment that would be coming before the Commission soon and is very similar to what is before the Commission now. He also stated that it was not just for vehicle sales but it also allows for a conditional use where one did not apply before. Mr. Goodmanson offered that the firm felt it was a ideal while the City goes through the transition phase of the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan. This would allow business to continue to operate Mr. Goodmanson said he would appreciate if the Commission would approve this conditional use, and as such staff has recommended that Whipple Consulting withdraw their request once the City sponsored text amendment is approved. Richard Behm, 9405 E Sprague Ave.: Mr. Behm stated he owns Behm Center. Mr. Behm stated he was both a proponent and an opponent. Mr. Behm said that the 06 -24 -2010 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 10 discussion on allowing auto sales in the Mixed Use Avenue area began as a effort to resolve the problems with the Elephant Boys Marina and Boat Sales being non - compliant under the Mixed Use zoning. At the present time, the City has auto sales and boat sales under the same category, which does create this problem. Therefore it would seem a simple solution to separate auto and boat sales into separate categories and allow boat sales in Mixed Use zoning and not have to change the zoning requirement for auto sales in the whole City. Mr. Behm stated he was confused as to why the City put boat and auto sales in the same category, the state does not license them as the same. Mr. Behm said that sometimes a hasty decision to resolve one problem can lead to many more down the road and that this could have consequences in the Auto Row area that were not thought of now. Mr. Behm said he has no interest in any auto or boat sales business, his only concern is a reasonable implementation of the new zoning requirements. Mr. Behm said he would rather be a neighbor to boat sales than car sales, he feels they would make a better neighbor. Now Mr. Behm stated he would like to address the restaurant issue. Mr. Behm has a restaurant on his property that is now non - compliant. He stated this fact does not bother him, his creamery has been non - compliant for 30 years and has never bothered him. Mr. Behm stated it would only be a problem if it was completely destroyed, the insurance would not cover to relocate the restaurant. The only issue the restaurant has is that the one -way street took away 40% of the business and it has ever come back. Mr. Behm said that if the two -way street comes back between Argonne and University the properties in between will begin to develop. Mr. Behm said there has to be a plan, there has to be something that the builders, developers and property owners can hang their hats on and know is going to be there. Seeing no one else who wished to testify Commissioner Carroll closed the public testimony at 6:35 p.m. Commissioner Woodard made a motion to recommend approval of CTA- 03 -10, second by Commissioner Sharpe. Commissioner Sands asked staff for an opinion regarding Mr. Behm's suggestion about separating the auto sales from the boat sales. Mr. McCormick addressed the question. Mr. McCormick stated that he felt that it would further the intent of the Subarea Plan by focusing auto sales in the Gateway Commercial area and address the issue that has been brought up before Council related to the specific situation. Commissioner Sands also asked if the Commission were to split the car sales from other kinds of vehicles, could it still be considered as a conditional use so that conditions could be placed on the uses? Mr. McCormick answered in the affirmative. Discussion began as to how far separating out the vehicle categories would have to be broken out, ORVs, RVs, motorcycles, boats? If these are not broken out and allowed or not allowed will this become an issue down the road that will need to be addressed? Commissioner Carroll stated what he understood was that the Commission is being asked to open Sprague up to all vehicle sales, the alternative is to limit it to a specific type of vehicle. One consideration that goes along is how big does the Commission want to open this? Would allowing auto sales up and down Sprague, do a disservice to the Auto Row people? Another thing to consider would be the service departments that need to be with each dealership. There are vacant auto lots on Sprague already, do we want to open this subject up a little bit or all the way? Commissioner Woodard commented that the motion is all inclusive to all vehicle types, not being restrictive. Commissioner Woodard stated 06 -24 -2010 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 10 that if it was all inclusive, it would allow the lots already in the Mixed Use Avenue to become conforming instead of non - conforming. Mr. Woodard also stated he was concerned about property rights and being able to use property as an owner wants. He also stated he was concerned about the City's image. Commissioner Woodard said that maybe the boat sales was driving the amendment but that all vehicle sales should be considered. Commissioner Eggleston commented that amending to only allow boat sales would in fact fix the current problem and not change the intent of the Plan in general. Commissioner Mann stated he felt it would be better to deal with one business' issues as a separate problem and not open the whole code so that another type of business could not come back and say later, `you did it for them, now do it for me.' Director McClung stated that this amendment is not just for one business, it would affect the entire Mixed Use Avenue area of the Subarea Plan. The Commissioners stated that they did understand that. Commissioner Sands also stated that all of the current auto dealers we legal non - conforming uses and can stay and continue to do business without a change for as long as they would like. Commissioner Hall stated he would like to see the amendment for the vehicle sales returned to staff for further consideration and move forward with the other two amendments which do not seem to be causing issue. Mr. Hall stated he wondered what Auto Row's plans were for the area and Mr. Behm's suggestion to split the boat sales out and what it would mean to the plan. Commissioner Eggleston concurred with Commissioner Hall's suggestion. Mr. McCormick noted that in the municipal /uniform development code auto sales were broken out from boat sales, so he did not feel it would cause a problem to make that distinction in the Plan. Commissioner Eggleston made a motion to amend vehicle sales to read boat sales. Commissioner Sands second the motion. Vote by show of hands: In Favor: four. Opposed: three, Sharpe, Mann and Woodard Abstentions: None. Motion passes Commissioner Sands made a motion to remove item #2 regarding vehicle sales along Sprague Ave for further discussion and research. Commissioner Eggleston seconded the motion. Vote by show of hands: In Favor: four. Opposed: three Sharpe Mann and Woodard Abstentions: None. Motion passes. Commissioner Carroll asked if there was any further discussion on the original motion as it had been amended. Vote by show of hands: In Favor: four. Opposed: three, Sharpe., Mann and Woodard Abstentions: None. Motion passes Director McClung requested that the Commission to give specific direction on what they would like staff to come back with. Commissioner Carroll stated they would like staff to come back with how to categorize vehicles, new vs. used, cars vs. others (all other vehicles) Commissioner Sharpe stated he would like to go on the record that he is not opposed to the amendment, what he is opposed to is the redefining, redefining, redefining. Commissioner Mann stated he would concur with Commissioner Sharpe's statement, every business deserves the right to conduct their business, but changing the entire code and coming back and redoing and redoing, over and over again. Mr. Mann stated he would rather deal with these issues on an individual basis. Commissioner Sands asked if it was possible to deal with these things on an individual basis? Based on the code the Hearing Examiner would look at black and white and say it came in after the code and it is not allowed. Commissioner Carroll stated that the Commission's business is not to look at the individual business it is to look at City wide uses in general. Mr. 06 -24 -2010 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 10 Carroll also stated he agreed with Commissioners Sharpe and Mann that `we' cannot keep redefining but it came up here as a suggestion, do we open it up a little, a lot or shut it down completely. Commissioner Sands said she would like to have legal's opinion on the ability to split car and boat sales. Commissioner Carroll closed the public hearing at 7:00 p.m. B. Public Hearing — Public Hearing Code Text Amendment CTA -04 -10 Sr. Planner Scott Kuhta. Commissioner Carroll opened the public hearing at 7:00 p.m. Senior Planner Scott Kuhta introduced the amendment to the Commission. This is a privately imitated amendment concerning the expansion of non - conforming uses to adjacent properties. The proposal is to allow non - conforming uses to expand onto adjacent properties without regard to the ownership of the adjacent property at the time the use became non - conforming. A non- conforming use is a use that is not permitted in the current zone. There is a difference between legal non - conforming use and a illegal non - conforming use. A legal non- conforming use is a use that was permitted in the zone at the time it was established on the property. Subsequently the zoning may have changed to make the use non- conforming, but it is still a legal use but a legal non - conforming use. Another word for it is grandfathered. Why do we care about non - conforming uses? Land uses change over time, either by the nature of the changes in the area, for example an industrial use which stayed around for a long time and then residential developed around it. Land transitions over time and the zoning will transition with it. The new uses become incompatible with some established uses and the new zoning regulations. The non - conforming provisions allow for the continuation of that legal use. The City does have very liberal non- conforming provisions. Over time the intent is for as those uses transition out, uses that are more compatible and conforming would move into the area. Allow them to continue on until such time that a conforming use becomes viable in that location. The current rules for expanding a non - conforming use are as follows: 4. A nonconforming use may be expanded only within the boundaries of the original lot or tract and any adjacent lot or tract that was under the same ownership as the lot or tract at the time the use on the original lot or tract became non - conforming, if: a. The expanded use does not degrade the transportation level of service greater than the original use; and b. The expanded use does not adversely affect or interfere with the use of neighboring property; and c. Any transfer of ownership or interest on adjacent lots or tracts was made contemporaneously with the transfer of ownership of the lot or tract on which the nonconforming use is located as part of a single transaction; and d. The expansion does not create additional development opportunities on adjacent tracts that would not otherwise exist. This would be an administrative decision made by staff, not something that would go before the hearing examiner. The proposal is a fairly simple one it is to remove the ownership requirement. This proposal would allow the expansion of a non - conforming use at any time onto adjacent property if it meets the other criteria. Mr. Kuhta did review non - conforming regulations for other jurisditctions, knowing the City's regulations were already liberal, this is the other city regulations that were found: 06 -24 -2010 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 10 City Expanding Nonconforming Use Provisions Cheney May not expand non - confonning use. Clark County Onlv within existing structure Kennewick No provision to expand non - confonning use. Liberty Lake May not expand use or structure. No additional structures. May not move use to a p ortion of lot other than that occupied by such use. Omak May not enlarge, relocate or rearrange non - confonning uses unless CUP is granted by Hearing Examiner. Post Falls May not be expanded or extended in any way. Richland May not expand use in any way, even in building where use occupies a portion of the building. Spokane Some allowance for expanding onto adjacent property not under ownership, limited to some commercial /industrial zones Spokane County Expansion discouraged but is possible with CUP approved by Hearing Examiner. Vancouver Cannot expand Use outside existing buildin Walla Walla May expand non - conforming use one time not to exceed 20% of floor area or land area which it occupied when use became non - confonning with CUP. Expansion of an enclosed non - confonning use to land outside the building is not pennitted. Yakima May expand non-conforming use outside of structure on existing lot w /admin approval if strict criteria are met. Some jurisdictions only allow expansion in the same building, some don't allow expansion in the portion they are using, some allow expansion on the lot, very few jurisdictions allow expansion on the lot adjacent. The exception is Spokane, there is some exception for expanding to the adjacent property not under ownership, but they do limit it to the more heavy commercial and industrial areas. They do not allow it in the Mixed Use zones, or residential zones. Spokane County the expansion is discouraged, which is what the language says in their code but it is possible with a conditional use permit which is approved by the Hearing Examiner, it does not differentiate between ownership. If you wanted to expand a non - conforming use in Spokane County, it does not matter if you own the property, however it does require a conditional use permit that needs approval from the Hearing Examiner. Mr. Kuhta stated that staff believes that this proposal is inconsistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan which speaks about protecting neighborhoods from incompatible uses. Zoning is a police power that is afforded to cities and counties to protect the public safety, health and welfare of its citizens. Zoning implements the Comprehensive Plan and it separates incompatible uses staff believes that the proposed amendment goes too far and does not further the public safety, health or welfare of the community. The recommendation from staff is that this is an uncommon zoning practice based on staff's experience and review of jurisdictions around this area, other parts of the state and in Idaho, the change is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan to protect neighborhoods, it begins to render zoning meaningless. There are other approaches which could be taken, possibly a conditional use permit, maybe the use should be allowed maybe the use chart should be changed. Based on these reasons and the more detailed 06 -24 -2010 Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 10 reasons in the staff report, Mr. Kuhta stated staff is recommending denial of this proposed amendment to the municipal code. Commissioners ask clarifying questions to make sure they understood the current code and the proposal before they continued. Commissioner Carroll opened the public testimony at 7:12 p.m. Dwight Hume, 9101 Mt View Lane: Mr. Hume stated he was the applicant requesting the change. Mr. Hume stated he has read the staff report and disagrees with it for the following reasons: • It is not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Non - conforming uses by their nature cannot be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, that is what makes them non - conforming. If they were consistent with the Comprehensive Plan it would not be non - conforming. Because it is there and you changed your Comprehensive Plan it is a fact, not a fault. The statement by staff is that it is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan is overlooking the nature of the beast. • We are trying to split hairs and broaden the benefit package. If I own parcel A, and I don't own parcel B, and I acquire parcel B but I had a non - conforming right on parcel A and I would like to expand it, that privilege exists today if I already owned parcel B. However if I buy it now but did not own it before, that gives me the privilege just like the guy who happen to have it, under the current formula. That is only a distinction of who owned it when. It is not a land use issue. You could have expanded, had you owned it, and therefore had an expanded non- conforming use. You have a very finite number of people out there that would have that benefit. • Another aspect of the staff report is that the proposal does not meet criteria, and we do. We left the other criteria in there except to take out the limitation of ownership. The other criteria that is still in place. As long as you have already met the criteria and can continue to exist, then you can expand. • To address a comment that was made earlier which was that this was for only to benefit is exclusively to the applicant. These types of changes come up in the land use world when we find that the zoning code does not fit the circumstance. Mr. Hume stated he does not bring them before the Commission if he does not see benefit citywide. For example, Elephant Boys problem. The White Elephant is non - confonning use now and boat sales are not permitted, and this amendment would allow them to expand to the adjoining property. It could go from White Elephant to Elephant Boys next door and be allowed as an expansion of a non- conforming use and would not require and exclusive zoning code change for boats. Mr. Hume stated he did not feel this would open Pandora's Box because there was not a lot of expansion of non-conforming uses. Non - conforming uses are allowed now, not withstanding ownership type. Mr. Hume did state that he did think of a couple of things that were triggered by the staff report and he is suggesting that additional criteria be added: 06 -24 -2010 Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 10 • The expanded use must be located within the same zone, as the adjacent non- conforming use. Mr. Hume said that staff was talking about it going into any zone. Mr. Hume stated he felt that the expansion should stay in the same zoning district and should not be allowed to expand into a more restrictive zoning district. This could be a suggested addition. Mr. Hume had a question for staff, he stated he did not understand the last criteria already established in the code, 4) d) "the expansion does not create additional development opportunities on adjacent tracts that would not otherwise exist. " Mr. Kuhta stated he did not quite understand that requirement. Mr. Hume said he would like to suggest language that everyone could understand. • No additional expansion except within this combined parcel and subject to the criteria of a -c above. Mr. Hume would like to suggest removing criteria d and adding in his two additions as well as striking the ownership language to the amendment. Mr. Hume stated that if business went well and the business needed to expand more, it could do so, but only on those two parcels, or site, but not onto any other additional parcels. This would keep you from being able to expand to the next piece and the next piece, which we all agree is not what we are trying to do. Commissioner Sharpe asked Mr. Hume if he as proposing to change or alter `d'? Mr. Hume said it was a suggestion to replace `d' with his earlier suggestion, "the expanded use must be located within the same zone, as the adjacent non - conforming use. No additional expansion will be permitted except within these combined parcels, subject to a- c above." Seeing no one else that wished to testify, Chair Carroll closed the public testimony at 7:22 p.m. Commissioners had some clarifying questions regarding options other than changing the non - conforming provisions, the ability to amend and add Mr. Hume's suggestions, the reasoning behind the current non - conforming language. Commissioner Sharpe made a motion to recommend approval to the City Council of the proposed expansion of non - conforming rules under 19.20.060 (B). Commissioner Woodard seconded the motion. Commissioner Mann asked to clarify that Commissioner Sharpe was asking to not accept staff s findings. C. Mann also asked for clarification regarding when you had to own the adjacent parcel, or if the adjacent parcel had to be owned by the same owner of if it could be owned by someone else. Commissioner Woodard stated he was in favor of Commissioner Sharpe's motion, because he feels people should be able to expand if they choose no matter when they bought property. Commissioner Hall stated that he felt that the City's were already very liberal and that if we were not going to defend the zoning code then we don't have much. If non - conforming doesn't mean much then why do we have that term? C. Hall is concerned that someone could take advantage of this amendment. Commissioner Eggleston stated that he is concerned this is that this will be a City -wide issue. Commissioner Sharpe stated that as many people that could use this as taking advantage, there are limiting criteria but there would be just as many people who this could be a benefit to and allows their business to continue. 06 -24 -2010 Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 of 10 Commissioner Woodard stated he would like to amend the motion striking the current language in item `d' and replace it with `the explanation could occur only in the same zone as current non - conforming parcel is located in and it could only stay the original adjacent property to that original property regardless of ownership. Motion fails for lack of a second. Commissioner Sharpe asked who makes the final determination on these decisions, Mr. Kuhta answered that these are administrative decisions, made by the Community Development Director. Commissioner Sands stated she felt it was wrong to make a change that would affect 90,000 people to benefit one party and that if the business was that viable where it was then maybe rezoning the area would be more appropriate. Commissioner Sharpe countered with he felt that it was only one now but others would benefit in the future. Commissioner Carroll stated he felt that at one time or another through growth every parcel in the city could become non - conforming, and that non- conforming was a way to ease though those changes. Good zoning protects the ethical business man, therefore he would vote against the motion. Commissioner Carroll called for the question. Vote by Show of Hands: In Favor: Two. Sharpe, Woodard Opposed: Five, Abstentions: None. Motion fails Commissioner Sands made a motion to recommend denial of CTA -04 -10 to the City Council, second by Commissioner Mann. Vote by Show of Hands: In Favor: Five Opposed: Two. Sharpe, Woodard, Abstentions: None. Motion fails X. GOOD OF THE ORDER There was nothing for the good of the order. XI. ADJOURNMENT The being no other business the meeting was adj ourned at 7:44 p.m. SUBMITTED: Deanna Griffith, Administrative Assistant APPROVED: John G. Carroll, Chairperson 06 -24 -2010 Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 of 10 Oka iddoo vallev. W Y MMU"Ity Development - Planning Dlvisi ©n SPQKANE VALy _ ,+1703 E Sprague Ave Suite B -3 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 QL i1 .720.5026 1 Fax: 509.688.0037 ♦ ptanningGspokaneval ley. org, CQ :9i.'ILI�!42Y DEVELCP1 CrACn 11cr nkii v DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT RECEIVE��ENDMENT APPLICATION SVMC 17.80.150 VIl 11 WVV YI 1V1 _ t f nt Date Submitted: Received by: Fee: PLUS #: File #: '_o c l I il r, PART I — REQUIRED MATERIAL _�A THE PLANNING DIVISION WILL NOT ACCEPT YOUR APPLICATION IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED' �° -�' i ❑ Pre - Application 'Meeting Request (include copy of staff worksheet from meeting) !- Completed Application Form ■❑ Application Fee K SEPA Checklist: one (1) copy of completed State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Environmental Checklist, including option Non- Project Action supplemental form. (Note: Any previous environmental documents that are relevant to this project should be included and may be adopted by reference.) PART II - APPLICATION INFORMATION A PPLICANTNAME: Dwight J Hume MAILING ADDRESS: 9101 N Mt. View L ane CITY: Spok STATE: A 1 zip: 99218 PHONE: 435 -3 FAX: 467 -022'9 CELL: 435 -3108 EMAIL: dhume @spokane- landuse.com SECTION(S) OF CODE PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED (INCLUDE CODE CITATION): See Attached SUMMARY OF REQUESTED CODE AMENDMENT(S): See Attached REVISED 2126110 Page 1 of 2 So a.ne ,;,OValley TEXT AMENDMENT APPLICATION REASON(S) FOR CODE AMENDMENT(S): See attached IS THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT CONSISTENT WITH THE APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Yes, see attached DOES THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT BEAR A SUBSTANTIAL RELATION TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE, AND PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT: Yes, see attached PART III - AUTHORIZATION (Signature of applicant) 1 Dwight J Hume made tfuthfally and to the best of my STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) 5 /y'/ ( Date) NOTARY SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this NOTARY SEAL ee �A I f�� w z •.M. 1 Ieu$ g � 1\ I 3 'k day of L9 .20 k l ) -4 NOTARY SIGNATURE Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at: lc t' i 0 (print name) swear or affirm that the above responses are My appointment expires: 4 "h I REVISED 2126110 Page 2 of 2 D V HUME Land Use planning Services 9101 N. MT. VIEW LANE Spokane, WA 99218 509 - 435 -3108 (V) 509 -467 -0229 (F) 5 -13 -1 Greg McCormick AICP Community Development Department E. 11707 Sprague Avenue Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Ref: Text Amendment Non - conforming Use Dear Greg: RECEIVED SPOKANE VALI EY DFPARTMEN T oP COMMUNITY DEyr LO:' JI��Jr Enclosed herewith is the completed Development Code text amendment for the non - conforming use expansion. As you will see, it is changing the language of the code to allow expansion onto adjacent property regardless of when it was purchased. As you or staff will see, there are several ways this can be written and /or administered for protection against impacts. Personally, I feel that Spokane Valley has the best approach to have it as an administrative review and approval vs. a CUP process, since there is little benefit form holding public hearings just to determine what the criteria already requires. 1 &M cer ly, Dwight J Hum Enclosure: Application, Fee, SEPA Checklist Text Amendment Non - Conforming Use Supplement SPOKANE VAUEY Sections of code to he amended: Chapter 19.20.060 B 4 Non- Confonning Use Expansion Adjoining Parcel Summary of Requested Code Amendment: The current language restricts the expansion onto an adjoining parcel only when that parcel was of the same ownership at the time non - conformity occurred. This request would allow expansion under the same criteria on an adjacent property whenever it is purchased, regardless of ownerships status at the time of non- conformity. Accordingly, Chapter 19.20.060 B (4) would be amended as follows; Existing: 4. A non - conforming use may be expanded only within the boundaries of the original lot or tract and any adjacent lot or tract, that was under the same ownership as the lot or tract at the time of the use on the original lot or tract became non - conforming if: a) The expanded use does not degrade the transportation level of service greater than the original use; and b) The expanded use does not adversely affect or interfere with the use of neighboring property; and c) Any transfer of ownership or interest on adjacent lots or tracts was made contemporaneously with the transfer of ownership of the lot or tract on which the non- conforming use is located as part of the single transaction; and d) The expansion does not create additional development opportunities on adjacent tracts that would not otherwise exist. Proposed: 4. A non - conforming use may be expanded only within the boundaries of the original lot or tract and any adjacent lot or tract, if: a) The expanded use does not degrade the transportation level of service greater than the original use; and b) The expanded use does not adversely affect or interfere with the use of neighboring property; and c) The expansion does not create additional development opportunities on adjacent tracts that would not otherwise exist. Reasons for Code amendment The Code currently allows expansion onto adjacent property within criteria intended to protect neighboring property owners and does not lessen the transportation level, what difference does it make when that property was purchased? Spokane County allows expansion of non-conforming uses by Conditional Use Permit and has, since 1986 without regard to purchase or ownership date, presumably without adverse consequences since it remains as a zoning provision to this date. The City of Spokane allows non - conforming use expansion within the commercial and industrial zones but not the more restrictive office and residential zones. Liberty Fake does not allow expansion onto other property. As stated above, there are a variety of ways to regulate non - conforming uses within this region. Either it becomes extremely restrictive so as to force the use into extinction, or the regulations become generous in their accommodating the use. Spokane Valley chose the latter approach of being somewhat accommodating and yet has language that only allows one kind of ownership pattern the opportunity to expand, that being the one where the owner of the non- conforming use somehow, had the foresight to purchase an adjoing parcel for his future expansion and that is discriminating at best. I believe it is the Iegislative will of this city to loosen the shackles on non - conformity and allow it a fair chance to survive, so long as it doesn't create an adverse impact upon roads and surrounding land use. Is the-proposed amendment consistent with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan ?: To the extent that existing non - conforming use language is consistent with the comprehensive plan, so is this. The amendment merely eliminates when you purchased the adjoining property. To the extent that current language expansions are consistent, so will these be. Does the proposed amendment bear a substantial relation to the public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment? Yes, the criteria for expansion requires adherence to the following criteria: a) The expanded use does not degrade the transportation level of service greater than the original use; and b) The expanded use does not adversely affect or interfere with the use of neighboring property; and c) The expansion does not create additional development opportunities on adjacent tracts that would not otherwise exist. End of supplement COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT S -1OF 000 � PLANNING DIVISION 6i]e STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE 0 V alley PLANNING COMMISSION CTA -04 -10 — NONCONFORMING USE EXPANSION TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES STAFF REPORT DATE: JUNE 17, 2010 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION June 24, 2010, beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley- City Hall Council Chambers, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 101, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION A privately initiated amendment to Section 19.20.060 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) proposing to allow the expansion of nonconforming uses onto adjoining property not under the same ownership at the time the use became nonconforming. This proposal is considered a non - project action under RCW 43.21C. PROPOSAL LOCATION The proposal affects the entire City of Spokane Valley. APPLICANT: Dwight J. Hume APPROVAL CRITERIA Title 17 (General Provisions) and Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the SVMC. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Division recommends that the Planning Commission disapprove the proposed text amendment to the SVMC. STAFF PLANNER: SCOTT KuHTA, AICP, Senior Planner, Community Development Department ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Draft Amendments Exhibit 2: SEPA Determination Exhibit 3: Nonconforming Use Comparison Chart BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. APPLICATION PROCESSING Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures in the SVMC. The following summarizes key application procedures for the proposal. Notice of Application Issue Date May 28, 2010 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: June 4, 2010 Issuance of an Optional Determination of Non-Significance (DNS): June 18, 2010 End of Appeal Period for DNS: July 2, 2010 B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO SEPA Findings: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC), the lead agency has determined that this proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030 (2) (c). The Planning Division issued Staff Report to Planning Commission CTA -04 -10 Page 1 of 5 a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) on June 18, 2010, for the proposal. This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. Conclusion(s): The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act and Title 21 of the SVMC have been fulfilled by the submittal of the required SEPA Checklist, and the issuance of the City's threshold determination consisting of a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS). No appeals have been received at the time of this report. The appeal period will close July 2, 2010. C. STAFF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE CODE TEXT AMENDMENT 1. COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE 17 (GENERAL PROVISIONS) OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE Findings: Section 17.80.150(F) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) provides approval criteria that must be considered when the City amends the SVMC. The criteria are listed below along with staff comments. 1. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; Staff Response The Comprehensive Plan does not provide specific policy direction towards the treatment of nonconforming uses. However, the most basic principle of land use planning is to separate incompatible uses, such as industrial from residential, by locating them in different parts of the community or buffering them from each other. The following policies relate to this principal. LUP -1.1 - Maintain the character of existing and future residential neighborhoods through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and oint planning. LUP -1.2 - Protect residential areas from impacts of adjacent non - residential uses and /or higher intensity uses through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. LUP -11.1 - Commercial, residential and recreational uses should be limited or not allowed in areas designated for industry, except for small -scale ancillary commercial and recreational uses intended to primarily serve the industrial area. LUP -11.3 - Provide appropriate buffering, landscaping and other development standards for industrial areas. NP -2.1 - Maintain and protect the character of existing and future residential neighborhoods through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. NP -2.6 - Establish appropriate design guidelines with buffer zones and transition requirements to protect residential neighborhoods from incompatible land uses and adverse impacts associated with arterials, freeways and rail corridors. Allowing nonconforming uses to expand onto adjacent properties without restriction is not consistent with the overall intent of the Comprehensive Plan to protect neighborhoods from incompatible uses. 2. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; Staff Report to Planning Commission CTA -04 -10 Page 2 of 5 Staff Response: Zoning is a police power that allows the City to exercise reasonable control over the use of property in the interest of the health, safety and welfare of the community at large. Zoning is also the regulatory means to implement the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan. Zoning separates uses that are incompatible, thereby protecting the general health, safety and welfare of the community. Chapter 19.20.06013 (4), SVMC, currently allows the expansion of nonconfonning uses to adjacent property under the same ownership when the use became nonconforming, subject to certain criteria. Compared to many other jurisdictions, this allowance is uncommon and extraordinary. This provision is provided in the SVMC to avoid economic hardship to property owners who may have made plans to expand a legal use onto adjacent property purchased for that purpose but was made nonconforming by new zoning regulations. The proposed amendment would expand this provision to land not under ownership at the time the use became nonconfonning. It would apply to existing nonconfonning uses and nonconfonning uses that replace another nonconforming use. The concern is that if the proposed amendment is adopted, incompatible uses may expanded to adjacent properties without limit, thereby rendering the zoning code somewhat meaningless. For example, if a use that would otherwise be permitted only in the Heavy Industrial zone is allowed to expand in the Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) zone, then it has the potential to negatively impact adjacent uses, such as schools, residences and retail shops, all permitted uses in the CMU zone. If the use is compatible with the zoning and does not interfere with the use of adjacent property, then the appropriate mechanism to address the situation is to either allow the use outright, or require a Conditional Use Permit, which then allows public scrutiny via a public hearing process. Upon review of random zoning codes from cities and counties around Washington State and Idaho, staff has found only one other jurisdiction that allows expansion onto adjacent property not under ownership at the time the use became nonconforming (see Exhibit 3, Nonconforming Comparison Chart) by administrative approval. That jurisdiction, the City of Spokane, allows expansion of nonconforming uses onto adjacent properties only in industrial and higher intensity commercial zones. Spokane County allows expansion of nonconforming uses onto adjacent property with a conditional use permit, subject to a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner. Some jurisdictions only allow nonconforming uses only to expand within the structure it occupies; most other jurisdictions allow expansion on the parcel the nonconforming use occupies. Conclusion(s): The proposed text amendment to the SVMC is not consistent with the approval criteria contained in the SVMC. IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Division, after review and consideration of the proposed text amendment and applicable approval criteria, recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial of CTA- 04 -10. V. PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS The Planning Commission is required to adopt findings of fact (Sections 17.80.140 & 17.80.150) when making recommendations to the City Council. At the conclusion of the hearing for the text amendment to the SVMC, the Planning Commission, by separate motion, should adopt findings of fact. Background: A. The Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) was adopted in September 2007 and became effective on October 28, 2007. B. Chapter 1930.040 of the SVMC allows code text amendments to be submitted at any time. Staff Report to Planning Commission CTA -04 -10 Page 3 of 5 C. The SVMC is permissive in its treatment of nonconforming uses by allowing nonconforming uses to be replaced with another nonconforming use and by allowing expansion of nonconforming uses to adjacent parcels under the same ownership at the time the use became nonconforming. D. Allowing nonconforming uses to expand to any adjacent property in any zone is an extremely uncommon zoning practice. E. The text amendment is intended to address a site specific issue. The Planning Commission must consider the text amendments potential affect on the entire community. F. The Planning Commission conducted a study session on June 24, 2010, prior to the public hearing. Findings: Staff has prepared the following findings for the Planning Commission in the event there is concurrence with the recommended approval. The Planning Commission finds the proposed text amendment to be consistent with the applicable provisions of the Growth Management Act, Countywide Planning Policies (CUPP) and the City's Comprehensive Plan; GMA Policies a. The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) provides the following guidance applicable to the Environment and Property Rights: I. Protect the environment and enhance the state's high quality of life, including air and `eater quality and the availability of water. ii. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation having been made. The property rights of landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions pursuant to state and federal law. b. The County Wide Planning Policies provide the following guidance applicable to the Environment and services: I. Policy Topic 3 — Promotion of contiguous and Orderly Development and Provisions of Urban Services. — Policy 5 All jurisdictions shall coordinate plans that classify, designate and protect natural resource lands and critical areas. City of Spokane Valley Goals and Policies c. The City of Spokane Valley has adopted goals and policies consistent with the GMA and adopted CWPP. I. LUP -1.1 - Maintain and character of existing and future residential neighborhoods through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. ii. LUP -1.2 - Protect residential areas from impacts of adjacent non - residential uses and /or higher intensity uses through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and joint planning. Ili. LUP -11.1 - Commercial, residential and recreational uses should be limited or not allowed in areas designated for industry, except for small -scale ancillary commercial and recreational uses intended to primarily serve the industrial area. iv. LUP -11.3 - Provide appropriate buffering, landscaping and other development standards for industrial areas. v. NP -2.1 - Maintain and protect the character of existing and future residential neighborhoods through the development and enforcement of the City's land use regulations and j oint planning. Staff Report to Planning Commission CTA -04 -10 Page 4 of 5 vi. NP -2.6 - Establish appropriate design guidelines with buffer zones and transition requirements to protect residential neighborhoods from incompatible land uses and adverse impacts associated with arterials, freeways and rail corridors. 2. The Planning Commission finds the proposed text amendment is detrimental to public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; Supporting Statements a. It is clear that the SVMC is exceptionally accommodating in its treatment of nonconforming uses. The intent of zoning is to separate incompatible uses. Over time, nonconfonning uses would ideally relocate to appropriately zoned property. This code amendment allows nonconforming situations to expand without restriction if certain criteria are met. Zoning must be administered to protect the community at large. This amendment is not consistent with the intent of zoning to separate incompatible uses and is therefore considered detrimental to public health, safety, welfare and the protection of the environment. Recommended Motion: The Planning Commission adopts the findings in the staff report and recommends denial of CTA- 04 -10, a code text amendments to allow nonconfonning uses to expand onto adjacent property not under same ownership at the time the use became nonconforming. Staff Report to Planning Commission CTA -04 -10 Page 5 of 5 Exhibit 4: Nonconforming Use Expansion Comparison Chart Expanding Nonconforming Use Provisions Cheney May not expand nonconforming use. Clark County Only within existing structure Kennewick No provision to expand nonconforming use. May not expand use or structure. No additional structures. Liberty Lake May not move use to a portion of lot other than that occupied by such use. May not enlarge, relocate or rearrange nonconforming uses Omak unless CUP is granted by Hearing Examiner. Post Falls May not be expanded or extended in any way. May not expand use in any way, even in building where use Richland occupies a portion of the building. Spokane Some allowance for expanding onto adjacent property not under ownership, limited to some commercial /industrial zones Expansion discouraged but is possible with CUP approved by Spokane County Hearing Examiner. Vancouver Cannot expand Use outside existing building May expand noncoforming use one time not to exceed 20% of floor area or land area which it occupied when use became Walla Walla nonconforming with CUP. Expansion of an enclosed nonconforming use to land outside the building is not permitted. May expand nonconforming use outside of structure on existing Yakima lot w /admin approval if strict criteria are met. Spoke Department of Community Development Planning Division City Council Presentation July 20, 2010 Text Amendment to the SVMC CTA-04-1 0 "TYHA "«5PQ'A'4" Department of Community Development Planning Division Proposed Amendment • Allow nonconforming uses to expand to adjacent property without regard to ownership. "TYHA "«5PQ'A'4" Department of Community Development Planning Division What is a Nonconforming Use? • Use that is not permitted in current zone — Commercial use in residential zone • Legal nonconforming uses are uses that were permitted at the time the use was established — Became nonconforming under subsequent zoning • "Grandfathered" "TYHA "«5PQ'A'4" Department of Community Development Planning Division Why do we care about nonconforming uses? • Land uses transition over time • New uses become incompatible with some established uses and new zoning regulations. • Nonconforming rules allow continuation of legal nonconforming uses. • Overtime, nonconforming uses transition to conforming uses. "TYHA'L@5PQ'A'4" Department of Community Development Planning Division Current Nonconforming Expansion Rules Chapter 19.20.060 B (4) 4. A non-conforming use may be expanded only within the boundaries of the original lot of tract and uy adjacent lot or tract, that waS Under the same ownership as the lot or tract at the tiIIIC Of the LISC on the original lot or tract became non-conforming If.. a) The expanded use does not degrade the transportation level of service greater` than the original use, and b) The expanded use does not adversely affect or ititcrfere with the use of n6ghboring property, and c) Ai transfer of ownership or interest on aqiacent lots or tracts was made contemporaneously with the transfer of ownefshlip of the lot or tract on which the non- conforming Use is located as part of the single tratisaction; and d) The expansion does not create additional development opportunities on adjacent ti-acts that would not otlici-wise exist. "TYHA "«5PQ'A'4" Department of Community Development Planning Division Proposed Nonconforming Expansion Rules Chapter 19.20.060 B (4) 4. A non- conforniing use may he expanded only within the boundaries of the original lot or tract and any adjacent lot or tract, I1ial if a The expanded use does not degrade the transportation level of service greater thain the original use; and b The expanded rise does not adversely affect or interfere with the rise of neighboring property; and is 3 c) The expansion does not create additional development opportunities on adjacent tracts that would not otherwise exist. Expanding Nonconforming Use Provisions Cheney May not expand nonconforming use. Clark County Only within existing structure Kennewick No provision to expand nonconforming use. Liberty Lake May not expand use or structure. No additional structures. May not move use to a portion of lot other than that occupied by such use. Omak May not enlarge, relocate or rearrange nonconforming uses unless CUP is granted by Hearing Examiner. Post Falls May not be expanded or extended in any way. Richland May not expand use in any way, even in building where use occupies a portion of the building. Spokane Some allowance for expanding onto adjacent property not under ownership, limited to some commercial /industrial zones Spokane County Expansion discouraged but is possible with CUP approved by Hearing Examiner. Vancouver Cannot expand Use outside existing building May expand nonconforming use one time not to exceed 20% of floor area Walla Walla or land area which it occupied when use became nonconforming with CUP. Expansion of an enclosed nonconforming use to land outside the building is not permitted. Yakima May expand nonconforming use outside of structure on existing lot w/admin approval if strict criteria are met. "TYHA "«5PQ'A'4" Department of Community Development Planning Division Proposed Findings 1.Cornp Plan Consistency — Inconsistent with intent of Comprehensive Plan to protect neighborhoods from incompatible uses. 2. Public Health, Safety and Welfare — Zoning implements Comp Plan and separates incompatible uses, thereby protecting the general health, safety and welfare of the community. Propose amendment does not accomplish this objective. "TYHA "«5PQ'A'4" Department of Community Development Planning Division Conclusion and Recommendation • Proposal is an uncommon zoning practice • Change is not consistent with intent of comp plan to protect neighborhoods • Renders zoning somewhat meaningless Therefore; Planning Commission Recommends "TYHA "«5PQ'A'4" Department of Community Development Planning Division Quest1*011s? CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 20, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Bike Helmets GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Ms. Marion Lee, Public Health Educator of the Spokane Regional Health District, will discuss the value of helmets. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: BEFORE THE BOARD OF HEALTH SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DISTRICT RESOLUTION: # 2010 RE: HELMET ORDINANCE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, wheeled sport activities; bicycle riding, skateboarding, scooter riding and inline skating, are enjoyable and healthy forms of recreation and transportation; and WHEREAS, in 2007 there were 1,299 Spokane County residents treated in hospital emergency rooms for wheeled sport related injuries; and WHEREAS, individuals riding a bike, skateboard, scooter, or inline skates that went to the ER were two times more likely to have a head injury than non riders; and WHEREAS, the average cost for an emergency room visit for wheeled sport head injury is $7,400, creating a total cost of 9.6 million dollars in 2007 alone; and WHEREAS, more than 26% of individuals in the emergency room with wheeled -sport head injuries were admitted to the hospital; and WHEREAS, the average cost of hospitalization for a wheeled sport head injury in 2007 was $22,200, creating a total cost of 7.5 million dollars; and WHEREAS, it is estimated that the cost to care for one brain - injured child over his / her lifetime exceeds 4.6 million dollars; and WHEREAS, according to the 2008 Healthy Youth Survey, 90% of students report never or rarely wearing a helmet when biking and ER data shows 78 % of head injuries occur to school aged children under 17 years old; and WHEREAS, helmets are 85 -88% effective in mitigating head and brain injuries; and WHEREAS, the single most effective safety device available to reduce head injury and death from wheeled vehicle crashes is a helmet; and WHEREAS, every dollar spent on a helmet saves this country $30.00 in direct medical costs and other costs to society; and WHEREAS, adults wearing helmets sets an excellent example for children; and WHEREAS, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration supports the enactment of bicycle usage laws; and WHEREAS, 22 states require helmets for children; and WHEREAS, 35 cities throughout Washington state have helmet ordinances; and WHEREAS, various studies show that bicycle helmet legislation is effective in increasing bicycle helmet use and reducing bicycle- related death and injury among people covered under the law; and WHEREAS, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recognize that "Laws mandating helmet use supplement and reinforce the message of an educational campaign, requiring people to act on their knowledge "; and WHEREAS, the Journal of American Medical Association identified that legislation increased helmet use among cyclists; and WHEREAS, the American Public Health Association research concluded that legislation combined with education appears to increase bicycle helmet use substantially more than does education alone; and WHEREAS, the Spokane Regional Health District recognizes the value of helmet use and supports best practice interventions to reduce injuries to protect and promote the health and safety of the residents of Spokane County; and WHEREAS, the Spokane Regional Health District is committed to educating the community about helmet use and proper fit, including the `Head Smart' campaign in partnership with law enforcement and first responders and free helmet distribution projects. NOW THEREFORE BET IT RESOLVED that the Spokane Regional Health District Board of Health supports an all age helmet ordinance for individuals riding bicycles, scooters, in line skates or other recreational wheeled sport equipment to better protect and promote the health of the Spokane County residents. Signed this _day of MONTH YEAR in Spokane, Washington. SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DISTRICT BOARD OF HEALTH Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member Board Member SPOKANE REGIONAL H LT H Injury Prevention Program I Spokane .'s Helmet Ordinance Helmets save lives. it's an unarguable absolute — you absolutely need one when you absolutely need one and no one knows when that moment may come. Being prepared for that moment is essential to the health and safety of our community. AKNOWLEDGMENTS: City of Spokane for adopting a helmet ordinance in 2004 • City of Spokane Valley for adding a budget line item for helmets • City of Liberty Lake for incorporating complete streets concepts into their city infrastructure • Sheriff Community Oriented Policing Effort (SCOPE) for their commitment to bike rodeos and helmet safety • Area public school districts for integrating bike safety education into physical activity courses and supporting Safe Route to School initiatives • Spokane Regional Health District's Physical Activity Program and partners for promoting and implementing infrastructure improvements • Spokane Police Department for enforcing the policy when appropriate and educating people when a citation isn't the best strategy WHO GETS HEAD INJURIES: • 67% are school aged, under 17 years old • Males are more likely to suffer a head injury KIDS ARE NOT WEARING HELMETS According to the 2008 Healthy Youth Survey: • 78% report never wearing a helmet when biking • 12% report rarely wearing a helmet when biking COSTS: Medical expenses: • Emergency room visit for a wheeled sport injury = $7,400 • Hospitalization for wheeled sport injury= $22,200 Educational expenses: • Cost to educate a student without a head /brain injury = $8,200.00 per year • Cost to educate a student after a helmet preventable head /brain injury = $29,200.00 per year (over) SPOKANE ra NAL H H Marion Lee PUBLIC HEALTH EDUCATOR 2 INJURY PREVENTION PROGRAM mrlee @spokanecounty.org 1101 West College Avenue Spokane, WA 99201 -2095 509.324.3613 DIRECT 509.324.1599 FAx www.SRHD.org Spokane Regional Health District, Injury Prevention Program • Helmet Ordinance What is needed? POLICIES: • City of Spokane's Helmet Ordinance • Area school district policies requiring helmet use ENFORCEMENT: • Provide public education • Widely disseminate discount coupons for helmets; reward kids for helmet use • Citations when necessary (ability to dismiss tickets with proof of safety device possession) EDUCATION & SKILLS TO RIDE: • PE class integration • Bicycle advisory board • Spokefest • Summer parkways • Safe Routes to School • Statewide efforts to integrate cyclist awareness into drivers' education programs FREE OR REDUCED PRICE HELMETS: • Spokane Regional Health District • Sherriff Community Oriented Policing Effo rt • Community Oriented Policing • Big 5 coupons INFRASTRUCTURE CHANGE: • Regional pedestrian plan • Regional bike plan • City of Spokane master bike plan • Complete streets movement • Spokane County connectivity policy Why an ordinance? Research shows that adopting an ordinance increases helmet use, even without enforcement. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's research proves that, "Laws mandating helmet use supplement and reinforce the message of an educational campaign, requiring people to act on their knowledge" Knowledge alone doesn't always move people to action. • People know how to lose weight, yet obesity rates rise dramatically every year • People know how to prevent gum disease, but many people do not floss every day Some parents use "it's the law" as leverage to increase safety behavior. • Not driving with friends (Graduate Driver's License initiative) • Riding in a booster seat until 8 years old or 4'9 Reduce costs for everyone. • Taxpayers bear the burden of uninsured medical costs • Insurance pools are greatly impacted by excessive medical expenses CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 20, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2010 TIB Call for Projects GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Info RCA in 7/13/10 Council Packet BACKGROUND: On May 26, 2010 the Washington State Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) issued a 2010 Call for Projects for allocation of Urban Arterial Program (UAP) and Urban Sidewalk Program (SP) funding. The anticipated funding levels are: UAP- $4.3 M for the Northeast Region; SP - $209,000 for the East Region. Project applications are due Tuesday, August 31 2010. Staff has been evaluating the TIP grant criteria and working to identify projects that will have the highest potential to receive funding. We have reviewed the adopted 2011 -2016 Six Year TIP, the Pavement Management Program, recent results from a structural analysis of several city arterials, and several other elements of the city's transportation network. Based on this review, staff has come up with the following preliminary list of projects for submitting to TIB for the 2010 Call for Projects. UAP Projects: Bowdish Road Improvements — Sprague Ave to 16 Ave This project will would upgrade existing sidewalk facilities from Sprague Ave to 8 th Ave and construct safety improvements at 4 th Avenue to help reduce the number of collisions. It will also reconstruct Bowdish Road from 8 th to 16 to a 2 -lane section with sidewalks, bike lanes, curbs /gutters and upgraded stormwater facilities as needed. This project will provide needed safety improvements for the many students that use Bowdish Road to access Opportunity Elementary School and Bowdish Middle School. 2. Mission Avenue Improvements - Flora Rd to Barker Rd This project will reconstruct the roadway to a 3 -lane section with sidewalks, bike lanes and new stormwater facilities to accommodate the increased traffic from the new Indiana Ave Extension project and the rapid development in the North Greenacres and Liberty Lake neighborhoods. This request to TIB would be for construction funding only since design and right -of -way funding has already been acquired for this project through a federal STP(U) grant from SRTC. 3. Park Road Improvements - Broadway Ave to Indiana Ave This project would reconstruct the roadway to a 3 -lane section with sidewalks, bike lanes and new stormwater facilities. This request to TIB would be for right -of -way and construction funding only since funding for the design phase has already been received through a federal STP(U) grant from SRTC. SP Projects: 1. 24 Avenue Sidewalk - Adams Rd to Sullivan Rd This project fills in several gaps in the sidewalks that serve Sunrise Elementary School and the surrounding neighborhood. 2. 8 th Avenue Sidewalk - Calvin Rd to Adams Rd This project fills in a large gap in the sidewalk serving Adams Elementary School. 3. 4 th Avenue Sidewalk - University Rd to Pierce Rd This project fills in a large gap in the sidewalk connecting several large apartment complexes to the Valley Transit Center and commercial district at Sprague and University. OPTIONS: Discussion only RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion only BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The city's match on TIB funded projects is typically 20% of the total project cost. The federal grant funds previously received for both the Mission Ave Improvement Project and the Park Road Improvement Project counts towards the 20% TIB match. As the proposed TIB applications are developed, staff will coordinate with the Finance Department to ensure there are sufficient city funds to provide the needed match for the proposed TIB projects. STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, PE — Senior Capital Projects Engineer Neil Kersten, AIA — Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: Preliminary Scoring Sheet; Presentation CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY TIP APPLICATION SCORING MATRIX EVALUATION UAP Criteria Max. Pnts O N N ii CD O 6 E .N � m O � 5 2 m a Y 0 O 6 O T m 4 O r � a � O 0 T a Q y m a N M N L O N 6I N (n N Safety (45 max) Correctable Accident History 25 5 5 10 5 5 5 5 15 Correctable Safety Hazards 20 5 10 10 5 10 5 10 15 Provides Access Management 5 Add non - traversible median >50% of project length -3 Add c -curb at intersections or <50% project length - 1 Reduce Access points - 2 Eliminate Existing At -grade Crossing 2 Sub -Total 10 15 20 10 15 10 15 30 Mobility (20 max) Capacity Improvements 10 Intersection Control 2 3 3 5 5 2 3 3 Increased Capacity 2 41 31 51 5 31 31 4 Truck Route 3 T3 through T1, 1 to 3 1 1 1 1 1 Traffic Signal Interconnection 1 Connect 3 or more signals - 1 Network Development 5 Extends Improvements - 3 3 3 3 Completes Gap - 5 5 5 New network connection - 0 to 5 5 5 Peak Hour Busses, 1 pt per 2 busses, 0 to 3 2 3 3 1 1 3 3 2 Access Improvements 6 Improves access to CBD or Acitvity center, 0 to 3 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 3 Improves circulation within CBD or Activity Center, 0 to 2 Improves access to Freight Facility, 0 to 3 3 Sub -Total 10 18 18 17 18 10 16 16 Pavement Condition (15 max) Visual Inspection of Existing Pavement - 0 to 15 15 Pavement Ratings less than 70 5 5 5 7 5 New Route - 10 10 10 Rehabilitation Projects - 7 Sidewalk Condition, 0 to 5 5 5 5 5 2 5 5 5 Sub -Total 5 12 10 12 10 7/7/2010 Spokane Valley TIP 4:10 PM CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY TIP APPLICATION SCORING MATRIX EVALUATION UAP Criteria Max. Pnts O N N ii CD O 6 E .N � m O � 5 2 m a Y O 0 6 O T m 4 O r � a � O 0 T a Q y m a N M N L O N 6I N (n U Sustainability (15 max) Adopted GH Gas Policy 3 Modal Measures 15 Completes Gap in HOV system. 3 Adds HOV Lane, 2 Adds Queue Jump or Transit Only Lane, 1 Improves non - motorized access to Park & Ride or Transit Center, 1 1 Completes Gap in Bicycle Route, 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Construct 10 -ft seperated path or (2) 5 -ft striped lanes. 2 2 2 21 21 2 2 2 2 Install more than one bike parking facility, 2 2 Sidewalk wider than TIB min. ( >5 -ft?), 0 to 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 Planter Strip (3 -ft Min.), 3 1 Energy 9 Replace or Install LED lights, 0 to 3 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 Replace or Install LED traffic signals, 0 to 2 1 1 2 1 1 Install Solar panels or on -site power generation, 1 Emerging Technologies, 0 to 3 Environmental 7 Eliminate SW through LID Practices, 100% of Impervious Surfaces, 3 Eliminate SW through LID Practices, 25 to 75% of Impervious Surfaces, 0 to 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Native Vegetation Undisturbed or Native Plantings, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Hardscaping or climate appropriate plantings, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Emerging Technologies, 0 to 3 Recycling Measures 9 On -Site Reuse of Pavement, 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 On -Site Reuse of Subsurface material, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 On -site Reuse of other Materials, 0 to 3 Use of recycled pavement (Imported), 2 Use of recycled sub - surface materials (Imported), 1 Use of recycled organic materials (Imported), 1 Use of other recycled products, 0 to 2 Sub -Total 15 15 15 15 14 15 15 14 Local Support (5 max) Local Match, 1 pt per 5% over min 4 1 Previously Completed Work 3 Environmental Permits Approved - 1 1 Design Complete - 1 1 1 Right-of-Way Acquisition Complete - 1 Sub -Total 0 01 31 0 0 0 0 0 Total Estimated Score 40 58 66 57 59 45 58 70 'Note: Based upon previous funding Cutoff scores, projects need an estimated score above 60 pts to be competitive for funding. 7/7/2010 Spokane Valley TIP 4:10 PM �� '��� f , F � '� .�ae�`�; ,��: �p4� bl� aa F ��.1 (� b� , ` 1'Y rr /, ��� A ��4Ar Y . �r�r' "�` �� ,�; -�� �� �. Overview > 2010 TIB Call for Projects .Urban Arterial Program (UAP) - $4.3m Northeast Region .Urban Sidewalk Program (SP) - $209,000 East Region > Applications due August 31, 2010 UAP Programs — 5 regions No�rt�hwest P- u -g -e -t Sound � west r Sidewalk Programs — 3 regions Southie4st'�, I Overview continued Evaluated TIP grant criteria UAP Safety - 45 Mobility - 20 SP Ped Safety - 45 Ped Access - 35 Pavement Condition - 15 Sustainability- 15 Local Support - 5 Local Support - Sustainability - 10 10 Identified projects with highest potential to receive funding Reviewed adopted 2011-2016 Six Year TIP Prepared preliminary list of projects -&)owdish Road Improvements S Ave to 1 6 Ave Pedestrian improvements for community and students of Bowdish Middle and Opportunity Elementary schools Upgrade existing sidewalk facilities - Sprague Ave to Sth Ave Construct safety improvements at 4th Ave — Reduce collisions E. Sprague Ava 14� 511ague Avr. ` Y " " " ' Reconstruct Bowdish Road to e11Ava 2 -lane section with sidewalks, E3111Avre bike lanes, curbs /gutters and upgraded stormwater facilities - Sth Ave to 16th Ave E 3111 Ave m EAth Aw E gth Cf 06 b � L 41h Avo V ath. Ave n 5• rs E 0th Av! c E E1h A- E Ftrt Ave E 7th Ave € B1h A- E "i Aw E ¢1h Ave er. E 1Cth Ara 'e n C 10thhva 11y} L° u E 11th Are E 12111 Ave f ti?Iht^ g � s W 'Y E rStlt Avs � a 0 ^ E 1BtirAv+? ° K rA e A a w E 8th Ara E Bt�rA E 10th Ave E f1tt[Ave A I t E $h Ave E I LTh Avg+ 7 N vi v ' om A N E 174a Ava g _ g A �i a F 15rrr, Ave E TMAve n c 4 and Bowdish intersection 8th & Bowdish facing south 16th & Bowdish facing northeast Mission Avenue Improvements,- Flora Rd to darker Rd To accommodate increased traffic from the new Indiana Ave Extension project and rapid development in the North Greenacres and Liberty Lake neighborhoods, this project will... Reconstruct roadway to 3 -lane section with sidewalks, bike E IPanig m.cy Ave E Mnntgm wy Ave A lanes and new stormwater facilities a T E Maftsl *ld Aae w E Knox Ave n E frgyna AY: E IWQna Are E Bik'Mn RVs �+& k Z C, Nora Aya �Onle Ln X Z € M ssicn Ara W Y y E Bnvn. Ava X x E M7essnrn Am z f Raana Aya �iftshati �S E BWr84, € C.Wd0 AJa Cn P� �°nr A" E Indiana Aw G z a o E Nms un Ave E ldAAt MAw z �i � E SinW AVa 3 E S4MpA- M E E ©one Ave E € € —et qv Cn Mission & Barker facing wes - Park R Improvement Broadway A to | Ave Requesting right and construction funding only Since funding for the design phase has already been received through a federal ST P ( U) grant from S RT C Reconstruct roadway to 3 - lane section with Sidewalks, bike lanes and new Sƒormwaƒer facilities . £�� I u & / .. W, __ _ _ E ®' A� r Baldwin AVE f y . 8 41dwin w _. Ave { E E@,_ ,_ Em__ ! I_ ( re_•_ \ ! r _m m r � ! ,_ HImIrIG A'� - � t ?©. + � ! z £ , f k d< £ £� Brea ¥_ £ «.Ave Ems__ } \ k r__+ § ECat_1%,fi / E DID3 (May Aw Park & Broadway facing north Indiana facing Sidewalk Projects 24thAvenue - Adams Rd to Sullivan Rd This project will fill in several gaps in the sidewalks that serve Sunrise Elementary School and the surrounding rA E,6lhAVa neighborhood. - y u � I o � E,ancr 1 E 20 €h Ave 2c E 20th Ave 13 t I. 4.110 C, E 2 Poi ',flA n n E 215 Ave n F So O F ?Jrp E 22nd Ave E 22nd Ave E 2a�u1 CI E 221 N J � � e - amaAva �'9 a E ha rro ntaw � I 4ve E 24th Ave E 241h Ave E 24th Ave �U a t : S1h to E 25th Ave E E 20th Ave Z i 9 a rRq G 6�hgve ®2010 G000le - Mae data 02010 GOOOIe - 24 Avenue - Adams Rd to Sullivan Rd il� 20 1 D GwU I H Sidewalks continued 8thAve - Calvin Rd to Adams Rd µ This project will fill in a large gap in the sidewalk serving Adams Elementary School. F Avu J 9,*w , P. - -- --- COMIM 01 cNe n n. S,.K n. Park c� Assitwo LM4 _. 7 p Eleanent S€ho01 a VnOey E fah Ave •:::i nwl4s +rvc1 p r +ens 6 ia�7n i 9 �j °I f 1C11h Ave rartr — 'E�9lhLn r L�. G 8th -Ave E $Ih Av 07 z 02010 000910 - Map data 02010 Goodie - Ave - Calvin Rd to Adams Rd Sidewalks continued 4thAve - University Rd to Pierce Rd �5 This project will fill in a large gap in the sidewalk connecting several large apartment complexes to the Valley Transit Center and commercial district at Sprague and University Rm "emRd SEQm� Z1 n nppleway i.stAm,�'innn LIR¢RiYIR L 2,d AII:1 - . - -__ _ L Ud AVe 4duess�ty � Chtgywctic n E 4th Av¢ .. E41a1 AVe _ U.N""ny - 'J; C E514 GI a: !" �r:l'SV isle , LAIN Lf.R4M!I' Chad 5 E 61h Ave E 61h Ave -` 02010 Gao I - Map data 02010 Goc le - 4 1 " Ave - University Rd to Pierce Rd 1 Questions.? CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 20, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Smart Routes Call for Projects GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Info RCA in 7/13/10 Council packets BACKGROUND: On June 4, 2010, the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) announced a Call for Projects for the Smart Routes program. The Smart Routes program promotes regionally significant non - motorized construction and planning projects that affect walking, bicycling and access to transit. Project Applications are due Friday, July 22n 2010. An initial list of projects was developed in 2008 through a multi- agency effort with the Cities of Spokane Valley, Spokane, Airway Heights, and Liberty Lake and Spokane County and SRTC in anticipation of future federal funding. The program has broad support within the community with numerous businesses, civic groups, bicycle groups and public agencies and officials supporting the program. Federal funding is anticipated to become available for the Spokane region in the next federal transportation act to fund the proposed projects. The program would fund up to 100% of eligible project costs. The City would not have to provide any matching funds for these projects if fully funded. Since the Call for Projects was announced, staff has been evaluating projects previously identified for the Smart Routes program, reviewing the adopted 2011 -2016 Six Year TIP, and preliminary feedback from the recent Bike and Pedestrian Master Program Workshop to identify projects to include in the Smart Routes Plan. Based upon this review, staff has come up with the following list of projects for submission to SRTC for the 2010 Smart Routes Call for Projects. Spokane Valley /Millwood Trail A multi -use shared pathway along the old Great Northern Railway ROW and Spokane County sewer between Fancher Road and Mirabeau Parkway. The project proposes an urban trail that connects Spokane Community College, Millwood, numerous schools and parks, to the Indiana Avenue Park and Ride lot and connecting bike /pedestrian corridors including the Centennial Trail. This would be a joint project with the City of Millwood. Spokane County is discussing turning the right -of -way over to Spokane Valley and Millwood. 2. North Greenacres Trail A multi -use shared pathway along old Great Northern Railway ROW beginning just east of Sullivan Road and ending at Barker Road. This proposed trail provides connections to the Centennial Trail, the Spokane Valley Mall, the future Greenacres Park, and Central Valley School District's future elementary School at Mission Ave and Long Rd. A future connection to Liberty Lake east of Barker Rd could be constructed as well. The ROW is currently used by Spokane County for a sanitary sewer, but they have recently discussed turning this ROW over to Spokane Valley. 3. University Road Pedestrian Bridge A study to determine the feasibility and suitable locations for a bicycle /pedestrian overpass over Interstate -90 in the vicinity of University Road. The proposed project would provide a safe access route for pedestrians and bicyclists traveling from the south valley to the Centennial Trail and other destination north of 1 -90. The Argonne Road, Pines /SR -27 and Sullivan Road corridors are heavily travelled and are not safe for bicyclists. The proposed bridge would provide a safe route to access destinations north of 1 -90. 4. Dishman -Mica Road Shared Use Pathway - Appleway Ave to South City Limits A 10 -ft wide multi -use pathway along west side of Dishman Mica Road. The pathway would provide a safe travel route for existing pedestrian and bike users along the west side of Dishman -Mica Road, and would provide connections to SR -27, the Ponderosa Neighborhood, and the Dishman Hills Recreation Area. 5. Centennial Trail Bicycle /Pedestrian Connectivity Study A planning study to determine suitable routes for connecting the north -south arterials of McDonald Rd, Evergreen Rd, Sullivan Rd, the proposed Spokane Valley /Millwood Trail, and the North Greenacres Trail to the Centennial Trail. Currently, it is very difficult for bicyclists on the south side of 1 -90 to connect to the Centennial Trail and destinations north of 1 -90. The proposed study will identify feasible routes and recommend projects to safely connect non - vehicle traffic to desired destinations. 6. Sidewalk Infill Program Inventory, design and construct missing sidewalk segments throughout Spokane Valley. The proposed project would connect neighborhoods with services, parks, activity centers, schools, and businesses. 7. Ben Burr /Carnahan /South Hill Bike /Ped Connector Study A joint study with Spokane County and the City of Spokane to identify possible bike /ped routes for connecting the existing Ben Burr trail on the South Hill through the City of Spokane to the west side of Spokane Valley. The trail projects listed above have been previously listed in the bicycle /pedestrian map of the comprehensive plan as possible future trail routes. If council members have any questions or comments regarding this proposed list of projects, feel free to contact us. OPTIONS: Discussion Only RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion Only BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: If the Smart Routes Program is selected for funding as part of the next federal Six Year Transportation Bill, a local match will likely not be required for these projects. As other grant opportunities become available to fund these projects, staff will work with the Finance Department to ensure there are sufficient city funds to provide the local match if required. STAFF CONTACT: Inga Note, Senior Traffic Engineer Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Steve M. Worley, Senior Capital Projects Engineer ATTACHMENTS: SmartRoutes Case Statement, June 30, 2008; Presentation SmartRoutes Case Statement 201 O Active Transportation Campaign Spokane, Washington SmartRoutes S P O K A N E PREPARED BY: al Alta Planning + Design 1638 NE Davis Street Portland, OR 97232 PREPARED FORT SRT C Spokane Regional [� Transportation Council .+hof4'+rrr irurr!! June 30, 2008 Acknowledgements The bicyclists and pedestrians of Spokane County wish to thank all who have worked and will continue to work on the SmartRoutes Initiative to make active transportation easier and safer in the Spokane Region. Their vision to plan cooperatively for the future and their dedication to making these plans a reality will increase the quality of life, enhance the economic strength of the region, and create a healthier population. We specifically want to thank Commissioner Todd Mielke, Honorary Chair of the SmartRoutes Steering Committee, for his leadership and commitment to establishing an active transportation network before it is too late for our community. We want to thank Lunell Haught, Chair of the SmartRoutes Steering Committee and Chair of the Inland Northwest Trails Coalition, for creating the right path once again to increase access to better walking and bicycling throughout our area. The ink was barely dry on the Regional Trails Plan, the culmination of four years of work by the INTC, when she initiated SmartRoutes as another giant step in our region's movement toward active transportation as commonplace. This effort could not have been accomplished so well without the unending enthusiasm, thoughtfulness, and guidance of Spokane City Councilman Richard Rush who bike commutes almost every day and was instrumental in the City Council's intent to hire a Bicycle/ Pedestrian Coordinator to pursue and leverage the SmartRoutes opportunities. SmartRoutes would not be possible without the broad direction and support of the Spokane Regional Transportation Council. We want to thank Glenn Miles, Transportation Director, for his wisdom and guidance, this document would not have been possible without him. Thanks are not enough for the hours of coordination and leadership Eve Nelson, Senior Transportation Planner, Spokane Regional Transportation Council, put into this project. Her commitment to actualizing an effective non - motorized system that benefits the largest number of people in our community is unyielding. This document is clearer and more interesting because of the care Sylvia Ferrin put into the graphics. Thanks are also extended to Jeff Selle, Manager of Government Affairs, for his guidance in this effort. Our gratitude is extended to the Spokane Regional Health District for their unique collaboration with regional transportation agencies to advocate for health and well -being as an essential part of transportation decisions. In particular, this effort would not have been possible without the considerable time, energy, and dedication of Cindy Green, Program Manager, who fully recognizes the intrinsic connection between active transportation options and a healthy community. Bicyclists deeply appreciate Dr. Bob Lutz, Chair of the Spokane Bicycle Advisory Board, for his leadership and tenacity in advocating for the development of the Spokane Master Bicycle Plan, incorporation of lane striping into street renovation projects, funding, and personnel. The resounding success of the 2008 Bike To Work Week is the responsibility of its Chair, Barb Chamberlain, and her committee that created outstanding visibility and numerous media coverage for the largest BTW event in Spokane's history. We deeply appreciate the advocacy of Ross Kelley, former Spokane County Planner and Spokane City Parks and Recreation Board Member; Dr. Kerry Brooks, Washington State University; Mike Peterson, Executive Director, The Lands Council; Dr. Dan Schaffer, Chair, Fish Lake Trail Action Group; Erin Vincent, Public Policy Coordinator, Greater Spokane Incorporated; and Paul Kropp, Secretary, Neighborhood Alliance in sharing the SmartRoutes vision with the business community, elected officials, realtors, home builders, and non - traditional bike and pedestrian audiences. Many thanks are extended to Loren Dudley, long -time bike advocate in our region for his insights, broad knowledge, and personal expertise he brings passionately to making our community more livable. And lastly, we want to thank Alta Planning + Design for their skill and abilities to apply science to the dreams of our community and to express them so well in this document. SmartRoutes 2010 Spokane Committee Members Steering Committee Commissioner Todd Mielke, Honorary Chairperson; Spokane County Lunell Haught, Chairperson; Chair, Inland Northwest Trails Coalition Richard Rush, Spokane City Council Richard Kuhling, Attorney, Paine Hamblen Paul Kropp, Secretary, Neighborhood Alliance Board Dr. Bob Lutz, Chair, Spokane Bicycle Advisory Board Barb Chamberlain, Chair, Bike to Work Campaign Erin Vincent, Public Policy Coordinator, Greater Spokane Incorporated Dr. Dan Schaffer, Chair, Fish Lake Trail Action Group Jon Rascoff, Chair, Friends of the Centennial Trail Mike Peterson, Executive Director, The Lands Council Technical Committee Develop selection criteria and ranl< projects Kerry Brooks, Chairperson, Inland Northwest Trails Coalition Ross Kelley, City of Spokane Parks Board Loren Dudley, Friends of the Centennial Trail Paul Kropp, Neighborhood Alliance Spokane Regional Active Transportation Technical Committee Develop and submit projects Albert Tripp, Airway Heights Doug Smith, Liberty Lake Melissa Eadie, City of Spokane Elisa Rodriguez, Cheney Barry Greene, Spokane County Inga Note, City of Spokane Valley Katherine Miller, City of Spokane Ken Pelton, City of Spokane Mike Basinger, City of Spokane Valley Ron Edgar, Clean Air agency Ron Kusler, Commute Trip Reduction Ryan Stewart, Spokane Transit Authority Rebecca Smith, Washington State Department of Transportation Staci Lehman, Spokane Regional Transportation Council Steve Davenport, Spokane County Contents ExecutiveSummary ................................................................................ ..............................1 TransportationSystem Needs .................................................................. ..............................2 Need for Transportation Alternatives ........................................................................... ..............................2 Opportunities to Strengthen Transit Use through Integration ........................................ ............................... 2 TransportationEquity .......... .................................................................................... ..............................2 A ctive Transportation Track Record & Assets ........................................... ..............................3 Planning and Implementing Capabilities ..................................................................... ..............................3 Current bicycle, pedestrian, and transit mode shares ................................................... ..............................3 Past Accomplishments & Data Collection ................................................................... ............................... 3 Non - Motorized Master Plans ...................................................................................... ..............................4 Rights -of -Way for Non- motorized Transportation Systems ........................................... ............................... 4 Active Transportation Plan ...................................................................... ..............................5 Plans to Develop Active Transportation Systems & Programs ........................................ ............................... Potential to Create Interconnected Active Transportation Systems ................................. ............................... 7 FundingOpportunities ............................................................................................... ..............................7 Plan Benefits ........................................................................................... ..............................7 ModeShift ............................................................................................................... ............................... 7 Public Health /Environmental Benefits ......................................................................... ............................... 7 EconornicBenefits /Equity .......................................................................................... ............................... 8 LifestyleChanges ..................................................................................................... ............................... 9 Appendix A— Letters of Support Appendix B —Map of Improvements Appendix C— Spokane SmartRoutes Project List Appendix D— Spokane SmartRoutes Program List Appendix E— Demand Model Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement Executive Summary Contact: Eve Nelson, Spokane Regional Transportation Council (enelson @SRTC.ORG) f illi ° 30, ?trig; Home to nearly 325,000 residents, the Spokane, Washington metropolitan area includes the City of Spokane, the City of Spokane Valley, the urban area of Spokane County, Airway Heights, and Liberty Lake. In the past decades, the region has steadily grown by attracting a high -end workforce that specializes in technology, health services, and education. With its vibrant downtown, popular Riverfront Park, historic neighborhoods, and five colleges, the Spokane area attracts those interested in the active lifestyle afforded by the County's rivers, lakes, and mountains, helping to give the region its motto "Near Nature Near Perfect." As with elsewhere, however, the prevalence of personal automobile use has created persistent congestion, and bicycling and walking are not common or comfortable ways to get to home, work, shopping, and school. As a result, the Spokane region has lower rates of pedestrian and bicycle travel than the national average, a fact highlighted by Spokane's voluntary inclusion as the control group for the Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program (NTPP) study funded by the 2005 federal transportation authorization bill. As part of its continued effort to connect the community with non - motorized infrastructure, local political and business leaders, community activists, and walking and bicycling advocates formed the SmartRoutes 2010 Spokane Initiative. By leveraging the region's successful active transportation efforts the SmartRoutes Initiative identified 18 construction, 12 planning, and 13 education projects that will nearly triple bicycling and walking trips, address escalating transportation problems, and improve residents' health. With a dynamic and aware population, strong political leadership, and community commitment, Spokane is poised for a significant return on investment in active transportation projects and programs. Through full implementation of the SmartRoutes Active Transportation Projects the region anticipates tripling active transportation trips and saving approximately 91 million vehicle miles peryear — equivalent to nine days of vehicle traffic - by Adding 15.2 miles of infill sidewalk to connect neighborhoods to transit, employment centers, shopping destinations, schools, and entertainment Installing new bicycle /pedestrian bridges to increase mobility and safety Extending and connecting non - motorized facilities in under - served communities Implementing SmartTrips, a proven marketing campaign that increases active transportation use by 10 -13% Completing crucial gaps and removing hazardous crossings along the paved Centennial Trail, the spine of the bicycle commuting network Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign 1 Spokane's Centennial Trail Transportation System Needs Need for Transportation Alternatives Spokane's surface transportation system has not kept pace with the growth the area has experienced in the past several decades. Over- reliance on automobiles as the primary means of transportation has created congestion on many of the arterials and collectors, and in response, vehicle lanes have been maximized within the existing rights -of -way. Multi -lane corridors with high vehicle speeds and volumes, coupled with frequent driveway accesses, are a major barrier to walking and bicycling. These factors have combined to increase the average commute time for Spokane residents, resulting in decreased air quality, increased fuel consumption, and a requirement by the jurisdictions to spend more funds maintaining and improving the system. "I knew we needed better options when I rode my bike from my house to downtown: it was confusing and there was often no separation from cars traveling at high speeds." — Todd Mielke, Spokane County I Commissioner Opportunities to Strengthen Transit Use through Integration The Spokane region's greatest opportunity to decrease vehicle miles traveled is through the transit system. As such, a main component of SmartRoutes is sidewalk infill projects in the cities of Spokane, Spokane Valley, Cheney, and Airway Heights targeted at maximizing accessibility to transit stops from the surrounding residential neighborhoods. Spokane's current transit system will be greatly enhanced in the near future if a proposed streetcar route is implemented in the core urban area. The streetcar system will connect downtown, the medical community to the south, and the universities, arena, and government buildings to the north. The fully integrated system will provide for increased opportunities for users to walk or bicycle to the perimeter of the downtown and then use transit to access the primary retail, commercial, institutional, educational, and civic opportunities inside the core. Transportation Equity Spokane's transportation system, with its historic focus on accommodating single- occupancy vehicles for mobility, has disadvantaged a large percentage of the area's population that does not or cannot operate a motor vehicle including low- income residents and children. Many of SmartRoutes' projects and programs will directly enhance the active transportation opportunities for these residents. Low- INCOME RESIDENTS Operating a vehicle consumes a considerable portion of a low- income family's monthly income, but for many workers having a vehicle is imperative to safely and efficiently commute in a city where infrastructure for bicycling and walking is poor. For residents living at this income level it is often a decision between purchasing gas or another necessities such as food, rent, clothing, health care, or utilities. The State of Washington estimates that 410 of persons leaving welfare were not working due to inability to arrange for transportation.' Only 75% of the individuals living at or below 100% of the Federal Poverty Level in Spokane County in 2000 regularly used a personal vehicle for transportation. They were much more likely to use transit (11%), walk (10%), or ride a bike (4%). A key SmartRoutes project to address this inequity is the creation of the Ben Burr Trail along an abandoned rail line. This trail will connect to the Centennial Trail to the west and parks and recreation to the east and will directly access the East Central neighborhood, an area which contains a high concentration of households in poverty. The neighborhood is currently isolated from the core location of jobs in the CBD by Interstate 90, freeway I Special Needs Transportation Study —Final Report to the 2001 WA State Leg, the Agency Council on Coordinated Transportation and the Developmental Disabilities Council 2 Spokane Regional Health Survey 2001, Spokane Regional Health District 2 Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign interchanges, interstate rail lines, and congested, high -speed feeder streets, which combine to create a significant barrier to safe walking and bicycling. CHILDREN Spokane -area children, because they cannot drive a personal automobile, rely on their parents to transport them to schools, parks, and friends' homes, which contributes to congestion on surface streets and denies children needed physical activity and independence. Several of the proposed facility improvements and programs are targeted specifically at increasing walking and bicycling opportunities for school -aged children. Active Transportation Track Record & Assets Planning and Implementing Capabilities To capitalize on the robust opportunities to significantly improve the region's non - motorized transportation system, a SmartRoutes Steering Committee was created and supported by a Technical Committee and an Active Transportation Technical Committee. Elected officials, representatives from the area jurisdictions, and interested stakeholders have worked diligently to identify projects and programs, ensure equitable distribution of improvements, estimate impacts and costs, create an inclusive public process, and determine project priorities. The SmartRoutes Steering Committee is supported in large part by the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC), a federally designated Metropolitan Planning Organization that provides for the safe and efficient movement of people for the City of Spokane, City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, the Washington State Department of Transportation, and small cities and towns, in order to assure cohesive connectivity. The SRTC has the authority and capacity to coordinate the efforts of the various jurisdictions to ensure implementation of the proposed SmartRoutes improvements, and it enjoys a high degree of cooperation from the cities, County, and State. The SRTC also maintains a close relationship with the Spokane Regional Health District, which is interested in seeing more residents walk and bicycle as part of a healthy lifestyle. With 61 of the County's residents being overweight or obese and therefore at higher risk for stroke, heart disease, and diabetes, the Health District would like more non - motorized transportation and recreation opportunities for people. This partnership between a regional transportation agency and a public health department is outside the norm, and it typifies the progressive thinking of the community of Spokane. Current bicycle, pedestrian, and transit mode shares The lower participation rates for pedestrians and particularly bicycles detailed in the NTPP study point to an opportunity to obtain a significant shift from vehicle use to non - motorized modes. Share of total person trips by mode Vehicle Rideshare Walk Bike Transit Spokane 85.0% 2.0% 8.5% 0.8% 4.1% NTPP Average 82.0% 2.1% 10.7% 1.4% 4.1% Source: NTPP Evaluation Study (February 23, 2007) Past Accomplishments & Data Collection Spokane already enjoys a significant bicycle/ pedestrian resource: the 37 -mile paved Centennial Trail along the Spokane River forms a critical east -west connection through the heart of the downtown. With 1.75 million walkers, bicyclists, runners, and rollerbladers annually the Centennial Trail is the pride of the community and a valuable non - motorized asset. With the proposed crossing improvements and extension to the facility, some of which are already funded, and the additional connections provided to it by other proposed pathways, the Centennial Trail will gain even greater importance in providing healthy recreation and transportation options. The region has a very successful Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) program that includes trip 3 Friends of the Centennial Trail Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign 3 reduction education, encouragement programs, and a biennial evaluation. The program focuses on educating major employers and working in small groups and one -on -one to assist commuters on overcoming barriers to reducing their commuting impacts, with a special emphasis on non - motorized transportation through the Travel Green sub- program. In 2007, the CTR program saved approximately 4 million vehicle miles traveled, with Spokane achieving a greater than average shift away from drive -alone trips when compared to the other jurisdictions in the program.' "1 recently contacted the Bike Buddy network for information on the safest and best routes to travel from work to home. Thanks in part to that information, our office racked up over 160 miles biked during Spokane's Bike to Work Week!" — Spokane Bike Buddy program participant 1 Since 1992, more than 10,000 primary and secondary students in the Spokane area have learned bicycling basics through their physical education classes. A Transportation Enhancement grant (2004 -06) enabled the program to expand and educate 4th — 12th grade Spokane Public Schools PE teachers in the League of American Bicyclists 4 Washington State Department of Transportation Road 1 class. The Spokane Bicycle Club assists with bicycle maintenance and raises money for this enormously successful program that is likely responsible for Spokane having a higher than average percentage of children who ride their bicycle to school (8% versus the NTPP average of 6 %). Non - Motorized Master Plans In recent years the Spokane region has aggressively pursued the development of non - motorized transportation plans. The research and public involvement required of these plans provide the basis for the proposed improvements described within this document, thereby ensuring that the projects will meet the needs of the citizens. The plans focus on increased bicycle and pedestrian connectivity, intersection safety, integration with transit, and improvements to existing facilties, and include: • Spokane County Regional Trails Plan • Spokane Regional Bike Plan • City of Spokane Bike Master Plan (anticipated adoption in December 2008) • Spokane Regional Pedestrian Plan (anticipated adoption in December 2008) To implement these plans, SRTC employs a Transportation Planner who addresses bicycle and pedestrian planning and the City of Spokane recently authorized hiring a complementary position. Rights -of -Way for Non - motorized Transportation Systems Spokane is rich with opportunities to convert abandoned or under- utilized rights -of -way (ROWs) to enhance the existing non - motorized transportation system. The following projects have been identified within this document as being a priority for development: • The Ben Burr Trail will utilize an abandoned rail line, including a rail bridge over the Spokane River, to connect the Centennial Trail, local universities, and the CBD with underserved neighborhoods to the southeast 4 Spokane Smart Routes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign The Centennial Trail next to the Spokane River. • • of downtown Spokane. The trail will replace a dangerous and convoluted route that currently requires navigating an interstate underpass, active rail line, and major arterials. The East Central Neighborhood has committed $117,000 towards project implementation. While much of the existing Fish Lake Trail has been improved, a critical 7 -mile section in the middle of this abandoned rail line is missing; when completed, it will provide a crucial paved bicycle /pedestrian route from the City of Spokane to the southwest. The Post Street Bridge connects the CBD with institutional, civic, and commercial uses on the north side of the Spokane River. The bridge will be closed to vehicles in the future and will provide an excellent pedestrian and bicycle facility across the city's namesake waterway, as well as connecting to 4,000 residents in the proposed Kendall Yards development. The City of Spokane Valley lacks non - motorized facilities that connect residences with employment centers both within the city and in adjacent Spokane. A combination of abandoned rail line and Spokane County sewer ROW, which will be known as the Millwood Trail, stretches for five miles through Spokane Valley and provides an excellent opportunity for a paved, separated facility. Active Transportation Plan Plans to Develop Active Transportation Systems & Programs Eighteen construction projects and twelve planning projects (see Appendix C) are currently proposed to implement a highly connected active transportation system within the Spokane metro area. The projects have been reviewed and ranked by the Spokane SmartRoutes team members and provide improvements that will positively impact every community within the region: • A large -scale enhancement of pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the urban core area, including a new network of bicycle lanes and signage, a new bicycle /pedestrian bridge connecting the University District to the CBD, and a bicycle /pedestrian skyway linking a university campus with new student housing. • The Millwood Trail, a five -mile separated pathway on abandoned railroad ROW and Spokane County sewer ROW to connect the cities of Spokane and Spokane Valley. • Replacement of 15.2 miles of missing sidewalk segments throughout the region to improve access to schools, parks, commercial districts, and transit facilities. Spokane Transit has a comprehensive inventory of sidewalks within the transit service area. The Millwood Trail will connect the City of Spokane Valley with the core urban area of the City of Spokane as well as provide access from neighborhoods to schools and local employers (detailed map in Appendix B). Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign 5 Fells Field Airport a! w' SouthRiverway nn iTrail Cente 'a • • Liberty v ° Spokane River EM ite o TO LIBERTY LAKE ,€� • ° `� • Euclid Dalton o Mirabeau • Millwood - TO CITY OF o . Utah. School SPOKANE ° ` CITY OF MILLWOOD �i \a. ^ Fairview Trent L E mentary Grace v, Mirabea ' t .° Park m Orcard West Valley a h 'b : utter �� Center Senior High F ^ 3 > m v Centennial Community Trail Head o• Elementary St. Paschal' s Mont omer' Center School 3• = Trent - o - ansfield Mip Knox wOpdTrail _ ° Shannon . F Indiana • ° _. Nora e � � ° _ CITY OF POKANE VALLE Valley Mission :Vera w Park Mission 0 0.4 0.8 LEGEND I 0 -- Employment 'o C w Sinto o �' i LL Sharp MILLWOOD TRAIL Sent chools Miles i Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign 5 N movement in and through downtown Spokane (detailed map in Appendix B). � while classes, events, guided rides and walks, North River and newsletters will help residents try walking, that are currently isolated because of high College volume/high speed surface streets. — o l _ YMCA / o m The construction and planning projects will be / Gonzaga augmented by thirteen education, promotion, regional bicycle /pedestrian coordinator. These and enforcement programs enhancements (see two positions will administer the programs >_ identified in this proposal; their shared status University TO RIVERSIDE STATE PARK informed community. Programs include: trends and needs, and will allow them to • A SmartTrips program to reach 150,000 Spo River residents with an intensive three -month O 7 Ide District's current Bicycle Safety Education to transit use while decreasing drive -alone trips by Riverfront Park an anticipated seven percent. Every household with a goal of educating every sixth -grade child, every year. In addition, a detailed outreach and a customized information packet, / \ Convention Center Olive Q University District o I � S okahe Falls � �TOnt Riverpark °1 Square Main a TO HIGH BRIDGE PAR - 5 t c; � Riverside �C Sprague 1st Davenport _ Hotel ® IL _ 1st LJ Railroad Transit Plaza _. ... Intermodal - Center a c °1 E Pacific N Pacific y , Short .N a � 2nd TO FISH LAKE TRAIL l 3rd Lewis & Clark ® High SchoolA Discovery School TO BEN BURR TRAILAND 4th UNDERHILL PARK 5th e Bishop s c `O d 6th a TO SOU HEASTL 6th CParky m BOUL ARD N 3.: Hartson 0 0.1 0.2 7th - Lincoln - -- DOWNTOWN SPOKANE Miles ,r�., Improved bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure will facilitate non - motorized movement in and through downtown Spokane (detailed map in Appendix B). • Dedicated bicycle /pedestrian connections while classes, events, guided rides and walks, between downtown and close- inneighborhoods and newsletters will help residents try walking, that are currently isolated because of high bicycling, and transit. volume/high speed surface streets. Funding for two full -time bicycle /pedestrian coordinators who will serve as shared resources The construction and planning projects will be for all the jurisdictions and assist the SRTC augmented by thirteen education, promotion, regional bicycle /pedestrian coordinator. These and enforcement programs enhancements (see two positions will administer the programs Appendix D) to help ensure that money invested identified in this proposal; their shared status in infrastructure is utilized by a confident and will give them unique insight into regional informed community. Programs include: trends and needs, and will allow them to • A SmartTrips program to reach 150,000 coordinate efforts among the jurisdictions. residents with an intensive three -month Expansion of the Spokane Public School campaign to increase walking, bicycling, and District's current Bicycle Safety Education to transit use while decreasing drive -alone trips by reach every elementary school in the region, an anticipated seven percent. Every household with a goal of educating every sixth -grade in the target area will receive personalized child, every year. In addition, a detailed outreach and a customized information packet, evaluation will be performed to determine if the number of children riding bicycles to 6 Spokane Smart Routes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign school is increasing as a result of the program. • A series of trainings held by national experts in bicycle and pedestrian issues, both for the general public and for professionals (planners, engineers, and elected officials). The community workshops will focus on creating a shared vision of active communities; tools to create great communities for walking and biking; and Safe Routes to School. Potential to Create Interconnected Active Transportation Systems Spokane is fortunate in that the "spine" of the non - motorized system is already in place: the Centennial Trail provides excellent access east- to-west and runs through the core of the urban area. Many of the proposed improvements focus on providing connections to the Centennial Trail from all points or in fixing deficient intersections or sections of the Centennial Trail. The result will be several new multi -use paved pathways, reaching in many directions, that will connect with an improved Centennial Trail and thus providing an excellent separated bicycle /pedestrian experience. This system of separated facilities will be integrated into an enhanced network of sidewalks and bicycle lanes. The infill of critical missing sidewalks, particularly those linking to transit facilities, will be coupled with the development of a bicycle lanes and "bicycle boulevards" to enhance residential neighborhood access and movement around the downtown surface street system. On a larger scale, the proposed improvements will allow the more complete development of a regional and interstate trails system. The Centennial Trail currently runs east from Spokane to the border of Idaho. The Fish Lake Trail will enable cyclists to travel south to Oregon. Together, these trails will effectively create a bikeway connection from western Idaho to the Pacific Ocean. Funding Opportunities The federal Transportation Enhancement (TE) program has been used consistently by Spokane to develop non - motorized improvements. Over the last five years approximately $2.6 million in TE funds have been used for non- motorized improvements such as separated paths in the Little Spokane River Trails area, bike lanes, and sidewalks and pedestrian bridges, as well as bicycle user education for schoolchildren. The Centennial Trail and the Fish Lake Trail have been recipients of various grants, particularly the state Nonhighway and Off -Road Vehicle Activity (NOVA) and federal National Recreational Trails Program (NRTP) grants, which combine for approximately $5 million annually in the state. Separated bicycle /pedestrian facilities that provide a recreational experience will continue to be competitive applicants for these grant funds. The community has shown its willingness to support cost- effective transportation improvements with a recent bond measure to provide permanent funding for transit operations passing with 66% of the voters' in support. There also exists in Washington the capability for communities to create transportation local improvement districts (LIDs). Liberty Lake, an unincorporated portion of the Spokane metro area, successfully utilized a transportation LID to assess property owners to fund trail improvements within the district, and this precedent indicates that LIDs may be a promising future funding option. An example of the partnership that exists between the transportation and health interests in the community is the Spokane Regional Health District's (SRHD) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant. This grant provides the SRHD with $150,000 to assist with the development of healthy transportation alternatives, as well as a separate $250,000 grant used in part to help fund the City of Spokane Bike Master Plan. SRHD plans to continue securing funds for active transportation initiatives. Spokane Smart Routes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign 7 Plan Benefits Mode Shift The proposed infrastructure projects and program enhancements will have a significant positive impact on the ability of Spokane residents to walk or ride their bicycle for work, errands, and school. Professional analysis of the proposal and comparison to previous case studies indicate that bicycle commuting will nearly triple from 0.60 % to 1.67 %, and non -work destination bicycling will increase by the same factor from 1.34% to 3.73 %. This will be coupled with an increase in the miles traveled per bicycle trip to result in an annual net savings of over 18 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT) (Appendix E). Although the percentage gains are slightly less, pedestrian use is forecast to obtain even greater reductions in VMT. A more - developed sidewalk network and better connections to pathways will increase commute walking from 2.80% to 7.70 and double non -work destination walking from 12.90% to 25.80 %. A slight increase in the miles walked per trip is forecast to save nearly 28 million VMT annually (Appendix E). Immediate benefits will be accrued through program implementation and are not dependent upon infrastructure improvements. Based upon the success of previous implementations, the SmartTrips program is conservatively estimated to reduce drive -alone VMTs by 7% annually for the target population, for a total savings of almost 45 million VMT per year (Appendix E). The proposed project, planning, and program enhancements will save Spokane more than 91 million VMT per year. Public Health /Environmental Benefits A multitude of studies have linked increased physical activity from walking and bicycling to decreased health risks associated with, among other issues, diabetes, heart disease, obesity, osteoporosis, and risk of stroke. The greatest public health gains will be through the inducement of currently sedentary individuals to walk and bicycle instead of drive. A conservative estimate is that an additional 60,000 residents per year will become active because of the improved non - motorized system, which will result in a savings of approximately $1.7 million in health care costs (Appendix E). Improved facilities will also eliminate dangerous interactions between motor vehicles and bicyclists and pedestrians, especially where high - traffic roadways intersect with popular walking and bicycling routes such as the Centennial Trail. Providing grade- separated intersections has been proven to reduce the likelihood of injury or death from collisions between motorized and non - motorized users. Spokane's estimated additional annual emission savings will be: PM10 = -1.7 million tons NOX = -45.4 million tons ROGs = -6.6 million tons CO2 = - 58,000 tons The considerable reduction in VMT will concurrently reduce vehicle emissions. Spokane's basin topography is susceptible to air quality inversions, as the region was listed as a carbon monoxide and PM -10 non - attainment area until 2005. While currently in compliance and committed to continual improvement, additional reductions in tailpipe emissions will enhance the area's ability to maintain clean air standards. Economic Benefits /Equity Those with lower household incomes spend a disproportionate amount of money on purchasing, maintaining, and operating a motor vehicle. With limited safe and efficient non - motorized opportunities in Spokane, however, many low - income residents are putin a situation where driving is the most rational choice. Improving bicycling and pedestrian infrastructure, particularly for low - income neighborhoods, will decrease the amount of household income residents must dedicate to personal vehicles. 8 Spokane Smart Routes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign The personal income savings of walking or bicycling in place of driving will, of course, accrue to all people who make such choices. Based upon the number of reduced VMT it is estimated that Spokane -area residents will save $46 million annually in reduced fuel vehicle expenses. This is significant because most money spent on motor vehicles leaves the community to purchase fuel, auto parts, and new vehicles, whereas other types of personal spending tend to remain within the region and be used for local goods and services.' Lifestyle Changes Creating the physical and civic environment where it is possible, and desirable, to walk and bicycle to school, work, the store, and to visit friends and family is commonly recognized as a key ingredient of a livable community. Decreased air and noise pollution and increased personal health, mobility, and property values are the proven results of a transportation system that includes more opportunities for non- motorized users. Spokane has many assets that draw and retain people to the region, and having active, healthy lifestyle opportunities will continue to ensure that the area grows in a positive direction. 5 Portland's Green Dividend, CEOs for Cities, 2007 Spokane Smart Routes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign 9 Append 61�- Spokane SmartRoutes Project List Spokane SmartRoutes Project List Note: All projects are identified in accepted jurisdiction plans. Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Appendix C — 1 Draft Construction Descriptions Projected Cost in Projects 2011($) Establishes a network of bicycle lanes and signage in the Spokane Central Business Downtown Spokane Bicycle District that connects to the University District 1 Network with Pedestrian via a new bike /pedestrian bridge. Also creates 14,000,000 Improvements a connection across Hamilton Street from the Gonzaga Campus to student housing. Network also provides many opportunities to access transit. Dedicated bicycle and pedestrian facilities (class 1 separated path and bike lanes) connecting the Centennial Trail east of Spokane Central Business core with lower south 2 Ben Burr Trail connection to hill homes, Liberty and Underhill Parks. These 2,750,000 the Centennial Trail facilities provide the only means of connection under the interstate, railroad line, and major arterials. All bridges currently in existence. Route follows abandoned rail line. Connects to the Iron Bridge near Gonza a University. Constructs an underpass to connect the Centennial Trail through Mission Park to Centennial Trail: Mission Upriver Drive avoiding a dangerous 3 Street Underpass intersection at Mission Avenue and Upriver 1,100,000 Drive and avoiding a railroad crossing. Creates safety in one of city's most injury -prone intersections. A variety of treatments to achieve a clear and 4 Kendall Yards to Boone & simple alignment of the Centennial Trail 400,000 Summit between the intersection of Boone and Summit and the proposed Kendall Yards development. Class I separated path, pave and construct the 7 -mile section from the current paved trail in Spokane County north to the City of Spokane. `g Fish Lake Trail Trail will connect into Centennial Trail. 2,000,000 Construct as much of the remaining sections as possible. Links one of fastest growing housing areas to city. New pats are showing connections to the trail. Inventory and replace missing sidewalk City of Spokane Sidewalk segments in the City of Spokane. Connects 6 Infill Program neighborhoods with services. Completes 3,000,000 incremental progress over past decade toward this goal Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Appendix C — 1 Appendix C — 2 Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Draft Construction Descriptions Projected Cost in Projects Class 1 separated path connecting Moran Trail from Ben Burr to Moran Prairie Elementary School with a neighborhood 7 Prairie Elementary School via Ben Burr Trail, eliminating 2 school buses 250,000 and including a crosswalk in front of the school. Five miles of separated path over old BNSF railroad right -of -way and Spokane County 8 Urban Trail: Millwood to sewer between Fancher Road to Evergreen 4,870,000 Spokane Valley Road. Provides route though much of City of Spokane Valley connecting 2 elementary schools, middle school, and high school. Mixture of Class IV, shared -use lanes and infill 37th Avenue Project from missing sidewalks connecting neighborhoods to 9 Grand to Regal on the South elementary, middle school, and retail. 37 is 1,000,000 Hill key bike ped connection across Spokane's south hill. Project completes bike /ped projects along 37 "'. Pedestrian and bike improvements to refurbish 10 Post Street Bridge existing vehicular bridge slated to become a 2,000,000 non - motorized bridge. Develop bicycle boulevards to aide in bike 1 1 Bicycle Boulevards in City of transit and traffic calming throughout 1,000,000 Spokane neighborhoods connecting people, businesses, arks, and schools. New sidewalk at Cheney Research and 12 Cheney Bicycle and Sidewalk Industrial Park and sidewalk and bicycle lane 256,000 Improvements improvements on highly used Cheney Spangle Road. Class 1 separated path in the Gleneden area in North Spokane. Path connects critical links to 13 Gleneden trail paving North Spokane Aquatic Park, Midway 1,400,000 project Elementary and Pine River Park. Puts final links in a complex project to connect fast growing nei hborhood with services. City of Airway Heights Infill existing sidewalk vacancies in the most 14 Sidewalk Infill Program urban parts of Airway Heights to provide safe 528,000 mobilit to services. 15 Little Spokane Trail Completion of 5 -mile loop, soft trail project in 555,000 Completion the Little Spokane Area. Mission Avenue 1/2 mile separated path from Liberty Lake to Valley Way: Sprague Avenue separated path from Liberty Lake to Valley 16 Liberty Lake Trails Way: Lakeside separated path from Valley Way 710,000 south one mile: Indiana separated path Hodges to Harvard Road. Completes separated path network connecting housing, services, recreation Appendix C — 2 Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Project Planning Projects Descriptions JkL Projected Cost in � Rank 2011 Identify potential location of a separated path Centennial Trail Connection: from Spokane Falls Community College to the Boone Avenue & Summit Centennial Trail system at Boone Avenue and 95,000 Avenue to Spokane Falls Summit Avenue. Three options proposed in Community College Centennial Trail Gap Plan, narrow to final o Lion and produce full plans. Develop potential location for a trail link from Trail Link from Little Spokane the Little Spokane River Trail system to 2 Wandermere retail area. Will connect fast Trail System to Wandermere 294,000 growing residential area to retail and provide Retail safe active transportation away off state hi hwa 395. 3 Connection to Fairchild Air Project provides a bike route through the Airway 500 Force Base to Airway Heights Heights community to FAFB entrance. Five Mile Prairie Connection Develop a Five Mile Prairie Loop Trail to Cedar Road and further connecting to Cedar Road and providing 4 development of Five Mile connections to Holmberg Conservation Area, 250,000 Non - Motorized System Sky Prairie park, Austin Ravine Conservation Area, and the Little Spokane River Natural Area. Airway Heights Project provides a system of paths throughout 5 Comprehensive City Wide the City to interconnect and provide usable 5000 System Plan non - motorized links. Potential park & ride adjacent to the Non - Motorized Connections North /South Corridor with a trailhead. N/S 6 to Farwell Park and Ride corridor will have separated bike and 5000 pedestrian trail, on -off connection and link to transit Glenrose Prairie link to the Potential connection from the Glenrose Prairie 7 Centennial Trail on the South Hill to the Centennial Trail. 250,000 Establish link and identify ROW. Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Appendix C — 3 Project Planning Projects Descriptions Projected Cost in Rank Separated path over old BNSF Railroad right - 8 North Greenacres Trail of -way and Spokane County sewer between 210,000 Sullivan Road to Liberty Lake. Airway Heights Connection Project provides a bike path along Craig & 902 9 to Medical Lake that will connect to Medical Lakes existing non- 7000 motorized system. 10 Airway Heights Connection Project locates a connection to Centennial Trail 2500 to the Centennial Trail that is north of city limits. Pedestrian Crossings across 1 1 HWY 2 in Airway Heights at Overhead or below grade pedestrian bridges 168,000 Russell, king and Ziegler avoiding Highway 2. Streets University Road Pedestrian Pedestrian bridge over 1 -90 including bicycle 12 Bridge in the Spokane Valley facilities from Millwood /Spokane Valley Trail to 480,000 Valley Mission Park. Total Planning Estimate 1,767,000 Sub -Total Construction Estimate 1 38,974,000 Total Planning and Construction 40,741,000 Appendix C — 4 Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Append " M �A Spokane SmartRoutes Program List Spokane SmartRoutes Program List Subject Personal Travel Additional Information As a complement to infrastructure improvements, Spokane proposes an Planning /Individualized ambitious plan to reach 150,000 residents with proven individualized Marketing marketing techniques. Based on the successful Portland SmartTrips model, this program will launch an intensive three -month campaign to increase walking, bicycling, and transit use while decreasing drive -alone trips by an anticipated seven percent. Tools include personalized outreach to every resident, home delivery of customized information packets; classes, events, and guided rides and walks; small business outreach; newsletters, flyers, and other communications; and rigorous evaluation to determine modeshift. This high - profile program is friendly, encouraging, and effective, and participants in similar programs report their enthusiastic support and gratitude at the close of the program. Cost is between $20 - $50 per household in the target area, and the program will be administered by the p roposed Pedestrian/Bicycle Planners see below). Pedestrian /Bicycle Planners While the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) currently funds a regional bicycle /pedestrian coordinator, the individual jurisdictions in the Spokane region do not have on -staff bicycle and pedestrian coordinators. The SmartRoutes 2010 effort will fund two full -time bicycle /pedestrian planners who serve as shared resources for jurisdictions around the region. These planners will assist with long -range planning; facilities design; code and development review; funding and grant applications; project management; interagency coordination; training and education; and programs (education, enforcement, encouragement, promotion, Safe Routes to School). These two positions will work closely with the regional bicycle /pedestrian coordinator, and will be responsible for administering the Spokane SmartRoutes 2010 effort, as well as coordinating the SmartTrips program. Their shared status will give them unique insight into regional trends and needs, and will allow them to coordinate between jurisdictions and SRTC. Spokane Schools Bicycle Over the past 8 years Spokane Public Schools fitness and health program Program has provided bicycle safety education curriculum to 4th -6th grade students. Bikes, helmets and maintenance are funded by grants and volunteers. Last year, the program reached 2025 elementary school students and 4320 secondary school students. The SmartRoutes effort proposes to expand the successful Spokane Schools Bicycle Program by reaching every sixth -grade student in the Spokane Public Schools district. In addition, a detailed evaluation will be performed to determine if the number of children riding bicycles to school is increasing as a result of the program. This effort will not only increase safety for Spokane students, but it will also augment the work currently being performed under the Safe Routes to School program. Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Appendix D — 1 Subject Technical /professional Additional Information At the outset of the SmartRoutes 2010 effort, a series of trainings held by training national experts in bicycle and pedestrian issues will be held, both for the general public and for professionals (planners, engineers, elected officials). The community workshops will focus on setting goals, developing tools to create great communities for walking and biking, Safe Routes to School, and active living by design. Potential national trainers include Mark Fenton, Dan Burden, Michael Ronkin, Barbara McCann, and Mia Birk. Training for active professionals (planners and engineers) and planning students will cover bicycle and pedestrian planning principles; the history of multimodal planning; estimating demand, facility types, and user profiles; standards and guidelines, liability, Complete Streets policies; and Safe Routes to School programs. Professional courses will be taught by experts who have experience in planning and engineering for public agencies. Bike Maps The SRTC produces a bike map for the region, although it is currently out of print. The SmartRoutes effort will allow for updating and reprinting of the regional bike map, as well as expanding it to include regional trails connections and recreational opportunities. In addition, SmartRoutes staff will develop a robust distribution strategy and work regularly to distribute and promote the map. Bike to Campus Programs SmartRoutes staff will work with Spokane region universities and colleges to develop a bicycle promotion program; staff will also support the implementation of these programs and provide materials and trainings. Each institution will develop a tailored plan based on an overall "menu" that includes the following: providing resources (maps, bike shop resources); developing a loaner bike fleet; providing attended bike parking and /or bike lockers; teaching repair workshops or classes; fun rides; racing team support and training; on- campus bike shop; campus bicycling resource website; free or at -cost lights and locks; legal training; and bike buddies. Depending on the institution, policy changes that support Transportation Demand Management may also be included such as increased parking costs and /or decreased parking spaces. Wayfinding signage Kiosks and signs showing area bikeways. First priority is signing the regional trail network, then the next priority is signage at transit stops, bike p arking locations, shopping hubs, and on common bikeways. Drivers Education Training Work with Washington DMV and drivers' education providers in the region to increase training about bicycle and pedestrian laws and safety principles. Walk /Bike Spokane website Develop a website with walking bicycling information (such as www.walkbikespokane.org This website will inform the public about the progress of the SmartRoutes effort. It will also provide "one -stop shopping" for residents looking for walking and bicycling information such as maps, legal and safety information, events, groups, local resources, and program staff. The website may also contain interactive content such as map order forms, bike parking request forms, surveys, searchable maps, and route p lanning assistance. Appendix D — 2 Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Subject Evaluation program Additional Information SmartRoutes will develop an annual program to track progress on key bicycle and pedestrian benchmarks. Goals will be set and baseline data collected. Annual user counts and surveys (automated and manual) will be performed at key locations, based on the National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project. In addition, attitudinal information will be gathered on a regular basis (possibly via the community scan performed by the Health Dept). An annual report template will be created, and a summary report will be published annually and presented to SRTC and local j urisdictions. Install bike racks and lockers SmartRoutes will provide a subsidized bike rack installation program available to local private and public property owners. Bike parking needs will be identified through an initial web survey of residents as well as interviews with local jurisdiction staff. A list of key initial needs will be developed, and racks provided to property owners at 40% of cost; installation will be provided. An online bike parking request form will also be produced so community members can request bike racks. Bike Week / Month / Season Spokane already hosts a popular and thorough Bike to Work Month program, run by the Spokane Bicycle Advisory board and supported by many businesses, organizations, and governmental agencies; this effort will continue under the SmartRoutes program. Earn a Bike The SmartRoutes effort will assist Pedals2People in developing a program that allows kids and adults from low- income families to "earn" a bike through learning to repair and maintain a bicycle. Participants are required to complete a given number of service hours and complete a bike safety and legal course. Total Program Estimate: 9,259,000 Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Appendix D — 3 Demand Model Introduction A variety of demand models are often used to quantify usage of existing bicycle facilities and to estimate the potential usage of new facilities. The purpose of these models is to provide an overview of the demand and benefits for bicycling and walking in Spokane County, particularly as they relate to the proposed SmartRoutes Active Transportation projects and programs. As with all models, the results will vary based on a number of assumptions and available data. The models used for this study incorporated information from existing publications as well as data from the U.S. Census. All data assumptions and sources are noted. Bicycle Demand & Benefits The Spokane County bicycle demand model consists of several variables including commuting patterns of working adults, and predicted travel behaviors of school children. For modeling purposes, and to be consistent with the Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program (NTPP) study funded by the 2005 federal transportation authorization bill, the study area included all residents within Spokane County. The information was ultimately aggregated to estimate the total existing demand for bicycle facilities in the County's study area for the predicted build -out year of 2011. Most data was from the NTPP study, the 2000 U.S. Census, or as provided by the resources available to the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) or Spokane Regional Health District (SRHD). Other studies provided calculations for economic benefits to the community and are so noted. Table 1 summarizes the combined bicycle commuter, destination, and school trips for the study area and estimates that 18,288,997 vehicle miles traveled (VMT) will be saved if the SmartRoutes projects and programs are implemented in 2011. Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Appendix E — 1 Destination m Table 1 - Spokane Bicycle Demand 1.34% n Item Variable Figure Calculation Note 4.08 Commuter p Baseline destination V\IT per day saved by bike 19,201 a Current bike commute mode share 0.60% 5,011,453 1 b # of employed adults for County 216,016 (ii -cc) 2 c Estimated reduction in auto use due to bicycling 4.81 t 3 d Baseline commute ti AIT per day saved bybike 6,234 (a*b *c) 5.43 e Baseline commute y MT per year saved by bike 1,627,132 (d "261) 4 f Future bike commute mode share 1.67% (v *261) X g Difference between current and future (factor) 2.78 (f /a) h # of employed adults for County 216,016 6 i Estimated reduction in auto use due to bicycling (build -out) 6.41 7 j Projected commute VAIT per day saved by bike 23,124 (f*g*i) k Projected commute 'VMT per year saved by bike 6,035,329 (j *261) 8 1 Difference in commute V MT per year saved by bike 4,408,197 (k -e) Destination m Current bike mode share (for destination) 1.34% n # of adults for County (2011 estimate) 351,203 (y *z *aa) o Estimated reduction in auto use due to bicycling (2006 -07) 4.08 p Baseline destination V\IT per day saved by bike 19,201 (m *n *o) q Baseline destination ti NIT per year saved by bike 5,011,453 (p *261) r Future bike destination mode share 3.73% (ii -cc) s Difference between current and future (factor) 2.78 (s /m) t # of adults for County 351,203 u Estimated reduction in auto use due to bicycling (build -out) 5.43 v Projected destination VAIT per day saved by bike 71,132 (x *t *u) W Projected destination ti AIT per year saved by bike 18,565,531 (v *261) X Difference in destination VMT per year saved by bike 13,554,078 (w -9) School -aged Children y Current school trip bike mode share z # of school -aged children in County (ages 5 -14) as Estimated reduction in auto use due to bicycling bb Baseline school trip VMT per day saved by bike cc Baseline school trip VMT per year saved by bike dd Future school trip bike mode share ee Difference between current and future (factor) ff # of school -aged children in County (ages 5 -14) gg Estimated reduction in auto use due to bicycling (build -out) hh Projected school trip VMT per day saved by bike ii Projected school trip VMT per year saved by bike jj Difference in school trip V NIT per year saved by bike kk Difference in V1lT per year saved by bike 8.00% 30,252 2.00 4,840 (y *z *aa) 871,258 (bb-180) 10.0W 1.25 (dd /y) 30,252 2.20 6,655 (dd *ff *gg) 1,197,979 (1,1,*180) 326,722 (ii -cc) 18,288,997 (1 +- +ll) 9 10 11 L 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Appendix E — 2 Spol<ane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Notes: 1. NTPP: % of all workers who commute (Table 4.2), 2006 -07. 2. SRTC: 45.7% of total 2011 population (same % as 2000 Census). 3. NTPP: Total daily miles per bicycle commuter (Table 4.4),2006-07. 4. 261= commuter days per year. 5. Model projection at full build -out. 6. SRTC: 45.7% of total 2011 population (same % as 2000 Census). 7. NTPP: average daily miles per bike commuter (Table 4.4), 2006 -07. 8. Additional savings will be achieved through SmartTrips program. 9. NTPP: % of all adults who ride to non -work destinations (Table 4.2),2006-07. 10. SRTC: 74.3% of total 2011 population (same % as 2000 Census). 11. NTPP: Total daily miles per bicycle commuter (Table 4.4), 2006 -07. 12. Daily rate X 261 destination days per year 13. Model projection at full build -out. 14. SRTC: 45.7% of total 2011 population (same % as 2000 Census). 15. NTPP: average daily miles per bike commuter (Table 4.4),2006-07. 16. Additional savings will be achieved through SmartTrips program. 17. NTPP: % of school -aged children who ride to school (Table B.21), 2006 -07. 18. SRTC: 6.4% of total 2011 population (same % as 2000 Census) 19. 2000 U.S. Census (RT) 20. 180 = average school days per year 21. Model projection at full build -out. 22. SRTC: 6.4% of total 2011 population (same % as 2000 Census) 23. Estimate based on improved facilities (RT) 24. Additional savings will be achieved through SmartTrips program. Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Appendix E - 3 Pedestrian Demand & Benefits The Spokane County pedestrian demand model consists of several variables including commuting patterns of working adults, and predicted travel behaviors of school children. For modeling purposes, and to be consistent with the Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program (NTPP) study funded by the 2005 federal transportation authorization bill, the study area included all residents within Spokane County. The information was ultimately aggregated to estimate the total existing demand for pedestrian facilities in the County's study area for the predicted build -out year of 2011. Most data was from the NTPP study, the 2000 U.S. Census, or as provided by the resources available to the Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) or Spokane Regional Health District (SRHD). Other studies provided calculations for economic benefits to the community and are so noted. Table 2 summarizes the combined pedestrian commuter, destination, and school trips for the study area and estimates that 27,942,003 (VMT) will be saved if the SmartRoutes projects and programs are implemented in 2011. Appendix E — 4 Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign M Table 2 - Spokane Pedestrian Demand 12.90% n Item Variable Figure Calculation Note 1.27 Commuter p Baseline destination VMT per day saved by walking 57,538 a Current walk commute mode share 2.80% 15,017,310 1 b # of employed adults for County 216,016 (bb *180) 2 c Estimated reduction in auto use due to walking 1.38 t 3 d Baseline commute V\IT per day saved by walking 8,347 (a *b *c) 1.48 e Baseline commute Vi1 -IT per year saved by walking 2,178,530 (d *261) 4 f Future pedestrian commute mode share 7.70% (v *261) 5 g Difference between current and future (factor) 2.75 (f/a) Difference in school trip V NIT per year saved by walking h # of employed adults for County 216,016 Difference in Vi1IT per year saved by walking 6 i Estimated reduction in auto use due to walking (build -out) 1.61 7 j Projected commute VAIT per day saved by walking 26,780 (f *g *i) k Projected commute VMT per year saved by walking 6,989,450 (j *261) 8 1 Difference in commute V1VIT per year saved by walking 4,810,920 (k -e) M Current pedestrian mode share (for destination) 12.90% n # of adults for County (2011 estimate) 351,203 o Estimated reduction in auto use due to walking (2006 -07) 1.27 p Baseline destination VMT per day saved by walking 57,538 (m *n *o) q Baseline destination VMT per year saved by walking 15,017,310 (p *261) r Future pedestrian destination mode share 25.80% (bb *180) s Difference between current and future (factor) 2.00 (s /m) t # of adults for County 351,203 (dd /y) U Estimated reduction in auto use due to walking (build -out) 1.48 v Projected destination VMT per day saved by walking 134,103 (r *t*u) w Projected destination VMT per year saved by walking 35,000,975 (v *261) X Difference in destination VMT per year saved by walking 19,983,665 (w -c)) 9 10 11 1'_ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Appendix E — 5 School -aged Children y Current school trip walk mode share 17.00 % z # of school -aged children in County (ages 5 -14) (2011 estimate) 30,252 as Estimated reduction in auto use due to walking 1.00 bb Baseline school trip VMT per day saved by walking 5,143 (y *z *aa) cc Baseline school trip VMT per year saved by walking 925,711 (bb *180) dd Future school trip walk mode share (model projection) 34.00% ee Difference between current and future (factor) 2.00 (dd /y) ff # of school -aged children in County (ages 5 -14) (2011 estimate) 30,252 gg Estimated reduction in auto use due to walking (build -out) 2.20 hh Projected school trip VMT per day saved by walking 22,628 (dd*ff*gg) ii Projected school trip VMT per year saved by walking 4,073,129 (hh *180) jj Difference in school trip V NIT per year saved by walking 3,147,418 (ii -cc) kk Difference in Vi1IT per year saved by walking 27,942,003 (1 +x +jj 9 10 11 1'_ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Appendix E — 5 Notes: 1. NTPP: % of all workers who commute (Table 4.10), 2006 -07. 2. SRTC: 45.7% of total 2011 population (same % as 2000 Census). 3. NTPP: Total daily miles per pedestrian commuter (Table 4.11), 2006 -07. 4. 261= commuter days per year. 5. Model projection at full build -out. 6. SRTC: 45.7% of total 2011 population (same % as 2000 Census). 7. NTPP: average daily miles per pedestrian commuter (Table 4.11), 2006 -07. 8. Additional savings will be achieved through SmartTrips program. 9. NTPP: % of all adults who walk to non -work destinations (Table 4.10) 10. SRTC: 74.3% of total 2011 population (same % as 2000 Census). 11. NTPP: Total daily miles per pedestrian (Table 4.11) 12. Daily rate X 261 destination days per year 13. Model projection at full build -out. 14. SRTC: 74.3% of total 2011 population (same % as 2000 Census) 15. NTPP: average daily miles per destination pedestrian (Table 4.11), 2006 -07. 16. Additional savings will be achieved through SmartTrips program. 17. NTPP: % of school -aged children who walk to school (Table B.21) 18. SRTC: 6.4% of total 2011 population (same % as 2000 Census) 19. 2000 U.S. Census (RT) 20. 180 = average school days per year 21. Model projection at full build -out. 22. SRTC: 6.4% of total 2011 population (same % as 2000 Census) 23. Estimate based on improved facilities (RT) 24. Additional savings will be achieved through SmartTrips program. Appendix E - 6 Spol<ane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign SmartTrips Benefits The benefits of the SmartTrips program warrants specific calculations as they are accrued independently of the other projects and programs because they have a discrete target audience and because their effectiveness has been specifically calculated. Most reviews of SmartTrips programs indicate a 8% 12% decrease in drive -alone trips; because of unknown variables relating to Spokane the program's effectiveness for the case study is conservatively estimated at 7 0 0. Table 3 summarizes the impacts of the program on the target population and estimates that 44,813,885 VMT will be saved if the SmartTrips program is implemented in 2011. Because this program is not dependent upon facility improvements the benefits of it will accrue immediately upon implementation; specific VMT reductions, therefore, have been calculated for the 2000 US Census population estimates. (Table 3 - Spokane SmartTrips Benefits Item Variable Figure Calculation Note a # of adults for County 310,439 1 b Share of total person trips made by drive -alone vehicle 85.0% 2 c Total daily mileage per person by drive -alone vehicle 25.9 3 d Total VMT per day 6,834,315 (a *b *c) e Targeted population 150,000 f Targeted adult population 111,418 (e *0.743) 4 g Current daily VMT for targeted population 2,452,867 (b *c *f) h Reduction % of drive -alone trips 7.0% 5 i Saved daily VMT from program 171,701 (g *h) j Saved amoral Vi\fT from program (fully implemented) 44,813,885 (i *261) 6 Notes: 1. 2000 U.S. Census. 2. NTPP: per adult resident (Table E.3), 2006 -07. 3. NTPP: per adult resident (Table EA), 2006 -07. 4. 2000 U.S. Census: 74.3% of total population (same % as 2000 Census). 5. Based results for other programs and calibrated for Spokane. 6. 261 commute days with school day overlap. Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign Appendix E — 7 Air Quality Benefits The reduction of VMT alone is not a specific benefit: it is the effect of reduced VMT that creates benefits for the community. Less VMT means less tailpipe emissions and improved air quality for humans and for the environment, particularly for carbon dioxide, particulate matter, and emissions that, when exposed to sunlight, create photochemical smog. With a combined total VMT reduction of 91,044,885 the Spokane SmartRoutes projects and programs will accrue the following additional air quality benefits. it ante 4 - Air Quanty i5enetits Variable Figure Calculation Note Reduced P1\I10 emissions (tons /year) 1,675,226 VMT *0.0184 1 Reduced NOX emissions (tons /year) 45,413,189 VAIT *0.4988 2 Reduced ROG emissions (tons /year) 6,609,859 VMT *0.0726 3 Reduced CO2 emissions tons /rear 58,269 See note 4 Notes: 1. Particulate matter (10 micrometers or less). 2. Mono- nitrogen oxides (combusion by- product /smog precursor). 3. Reactive organic gases (unburnt hydrocarbons /smog precursor). 4. ((15 MPG average * 19.2 lbs of CO2 per gallon) *(VMT per year saved)) /2000 lbs per ton; lbs of CO2 per gallon provided by EPA. Economic Benefits According to a review of available studies performed in the Transportation Research Board's Cooperative Highway Research Program "Guidelines for Analysis of Investments in Bicycle Facilities Final Report" (August 2005), each additional person in a community that goes from zero to one day of physical exertion reduces their health care costs by $27.99. The number of annual active transportation system users who would otherwise not have partaken of exercise without the SmartRoutes projects and programs is calculated by determining the new non- commute bicyclists and pedestrians (commuters are removed from the calculations because it is assumed that there is 100% cross -over between bicycle or pedestrian commuters and non - commuters). With an estimated new -user population of 59,447, the community will achieve an annual health care savings of $1,663,916, not accounting for inflation. Cost savings also accrue to individuals when they opt to walk or ride a bicycle instead of driving a vehicle. Using the 2008 U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) personal vehicle mileage reimbursement rate of $0.505 per mile it is estimated that Spokane area residents will save a collective $45,977,667 annually. This number is conservative as it assumes a per gallon gasoline price that is lower than current and future expected prices. Appendix E — 8 Spokane SmartRoutes Case Statement 1 2010 Active Transportation Campaign 000 SmartRoutes S P Q K A N E SmartRoutes Inga N PE Steve Worley, PE July 20th,2010 Spokane Walley 000 SmartRoutes What is SmartRoutes? 5 P 0 K A N E • SAFETEA -LU history • Goal - $50 million for Spokane region in next federal transportation bill — 2012( ?). Spokane Walley q 000 SmartRoutes 2008 Case Statement S P O K A N E • Partners /Supporters: Project Examples: — S RTC — Health District — Ben Burr Trail connection to Centennial Trail — Local agencies — Political leaders — STA — Greater Spokane Incorporated — Spokane Association of Realtors — Bike /ped advocacy groups — Centennial Trail Mission Street underpass — Fish Lake Trail — Sidewalk infill — Airway Heights to Fairchild Air Force Base — Liberty Lake bike /ped bridge — Park and Ride Connections S pokan�� jUalley 000 2010 Update of SmartRoutes 5 P 0 K A N E SmartRoutes Why update the plan? • Some projects were funded • Keep current with agency bike /ped plans • New projects to add Spokane Walley 000 2010 Update of SmartRoutes 5 P 0 K A N E SmartRoutes Spokane Valley Projects 1. Spokane Valley /Millwood Trail 2. North Greenacres Trail 3. University Road Pedestrian /Bike Bridge 4. Dishman -Mica Road Shared Use Pathway -NEW 5. Centennial Trail Bike /Ped Connectivity Study -NEW 6. Sidewalk Infill Program 7. Ben Burr /Carnahan /South Hill Bike /Ped Connector Study Spokane Walley 0SmartRou es #1 - Spokane Valley /Millwood Trail 5 P 0 K A N E L� t 0 0. 0. Alf tes w SCAM) %e vaa n Liberty � Euclid LEGEND ® Er®plstymrwt Center Schools TO LIBERTY LAKE MILL WOOD TRAIL • 4.5 mile Multi -use pathway on the old Great Northern Railway ROW — parallel to Union Pacific tracks. • County owned for existing sewer interceptor. • In Spokane Valley TIP, Comprehensive Plan and Millwood Comprehensive Plan. • Commuter trail vs. Recreational trail 906rane � ,;oo0F%11ey 0SmartRou es #1 - Spokane Valley /Millwood Trail 5 P 0 K A N E Connects: — Downtown Millwood — Numerous Schools and Parks — Indiana Ave. Park and Ride — Neighborhoods and businesses — Possible extension to Valley Mall — City of Spokane extension to Spokane Community College and Centennial Trail Spokane Walley Looking west of Park Rd. � #1 - Spokane Valley /Millwood Trail 5 P 0 K A N E k�O T rA,_ _ e7" Near Trent in Millwood Near University Road right of way Aftft wee SmartRoutes #2 —North Greenacres Trail 5 P g K A N E • Multi -use pathway on the old Great Northern Railway ROW. • County owned for existing sewer and possible future reclaimed water • In Spokane Valley TIP and Comprehensive Plan. 90611ne � ,;oO%fley� 000 SmartRoutes #2 —North Greenacres Trail S P O K A N E Connects: — Centennial Trail — Spokane Valley Mall — Future Greenacres Park — Future CV elementary school at Mission and Long — Businesses on Indiana extension — Possible extension to Liberty Lake's Telido Station development Spokane Walley 000 SmartRoutes 5 P 0 K A N E #2 —North Greenacres Trail Looking east from Indiana Extension to Flora Looking west from Flora Spokane W alley 000 SmartRoutes #3 - University Rd Pedestrian Bridge 5 P 0 K A N E • A study for the feasibility and suitable locations for a bicycle /pedestrian overpass over I -90. et � I OW • Connect south valley to Millwood /Spokane Valley Trail and other locations north of I -90. • Ties in with overall study of this area. • Provides safer access over 1 -90 instead of using existing arterials. a. University alignment looking north across 1 -90 Spokane Walley. 000 SmartRoutes #4 - Dishman -Mica Road Trail S P O K A N E 10 -ft wide multi -use pathway along west side of Dishman -Mica Road Connects: • Sprague- Appleway couplet • Ponderosa Neighborhood • Dishman Hills Recreation Area Spokane Walley 000 # 5 - Centennial Trail Connectivity Study SmartRoutes S P O K A N E • Study to find ways to safely connect new bike /ped routes north -south to the Centennial Trail. • Try to keep trail users off major arterials. Centennial Trail connection behind Walt Worthy Building on Indiana Ave Spokane Walley 000 SmartRoutes 5 P 0 K A N E Project: • Inventory • Design • Construct #6- Sidewalk Infill Program Connect neighborhoods to: • Services • Parks • Activity centers • Schools • Businesses Spokane Walley 0 00 #7 - Ben Burr, Carnahan, South Hill Bike SmartRoutes and Pedestrian Connector Stud 5 P 0 K A N E E HaflSon Aare T 1 7th A" encolin IIhtS T Xn E 251h Avo E 25irmAve Ml F 3OLn A, m 40 et ` 1h Avc. 37411 Ave W F 371y Ave m X 0* g � 07enr Rd wan P aide Planning Protect iSM Ave Existing Patriway T Gonstructen Project • Partners — Spokane County — City of Spokane — City of Spokane Valley • Find best bicycle routes and connections between Ben Burr pathway, South Hill, and Spokane Valley Spokane Walley 000 SmartRoutes 5 P 0 K A N E Summary • May be used to determine project funding when available • Alternatives to Centennial Trail • Connect areas south of I -90 to Centennial Trail • Connect neighborhoods to commercial areas • Safer than bikes on major arterials Sodjgoe�- j Val ley 000 SmartRoutes 5 P 0 K A N E Questions? S Walley 000 SmartRoutes Funding Opportunities 5 P 0 K A N E • SmartRoutes — next Federal Transportation bill (2012 ?) — 6 year funding • Transportation Enhancement Grant (2010) — Typically no local match • Tiger II /Community Challenge Grant (2010) — Joint with Spokane, Spokane County 9060"e � ,;o0%fley CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 20, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Neighborhood Centers Zoning District within the Sprague and Appleway Subarea Plan. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: N/A BACKGROUND: The Council has requested that the Sprague /Appleway Sub -area Plan be revisited zone by zone with property owners involved in the process. The attached report is the fourth zoning district to be reviewed as part of the comprehensive review process. Council previously reviewed the Gateway Commercial Center, Gateway Commercial Avenue, and Mixed Use Avenue Zoning Districts. A community meeting to discuss the Neighborhood Center Zoning District is scheduled for July 22, 2010 from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m. in Council Chambers. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Not Applicable STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger, AICP, Senior Planner, Community Development Dept. ATTACHMENTS Staff Report Neighborhood Center Zone Code Use Chart Comparison Zoning Analysis Map PowerPoint Presentation This report provides information to assist City Council, the public, and property owners to understand the regulations applicable to the Neighborhood Center Zoning District (NC), adopted as part of the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan (SARP). This report identifies and compares the zoning districts and uses allowed prior to the SARP, effective October 2009, and prior to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) which became effective October 2007. Non - conforming uses created under the existing zoning classifications are identified and regulations pertaining to those non - conforming uses are discussed. Finally, the report provides an overview of site developments, architectural and signage regulations. Overview of the Neighborhood Center Zoning District Location The Neighborhood Center Zoning District is distributed throughout the corridor at major intersections. These areas are characterized by neighborhood serving retail and services. The Neighborhood Center Zoning District is shown in pink on the Sprague Appleway Zoning Map (see Figure 1). Figure 1: Sprague Appleway Zoning fv a- rt .AMo r u f r a r r 1l—L k}LJ..1 r te — ' f I¢ i } M. an r � �.�� Oi artricx Zama _ _ L� ly � $.3�. � �, �C�y G.n4..r 11 r nla �43J a C sI Cs.Iv��Fr nm � IMM r .+m a�•1 nl F Li z 0.11, Mlln e - � $ 4 Ir" ro 'r a ni- alp .. �. 'd `p 4n ! DI S.YfICi.�Of]E'S sl..ei,r s:x: ra0l+ p P d S' r� C91y C-t- AgaB' yf;Mle -- c.a>,I.. haegrwporhxti CgFhprg ri4, Ism �� v tt i S Y O Ga[euaAr Cnm w'cml hve M—d U—A—U. (:om.m!unRY EROUlcvara Gateway Commercial Avenue and Gateway Commercial Centers Review Report Page 2 Planning Division This report provides information to assist City Council, the public, and property owners to understand the regulations applicable to the Neighborhood Center Zoning District (NC), adopted as part of the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan (SARP). This report identifies and compares the zoning districts and uses allowed prior to the SARP, effective October 2009, and prior to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) which became effective October 2007. Non - conforming uses created under the existing zoning classifications are identified and regulations pertaining to those non - conforming uses are discussed. Finally, the report provides an overview of site developments, architectural and signage regulations. Overview of the Neighborhood Center Zoning District Location The Neighborhood Center Zoning District is distributed throughout the corridor at major intersections. These areas are characterized by neighborhood serving retail and services. The Neighborhood Center Zoning District is shown in pink on the Sprague Appleway Zoning Map (see Figure 1). Figure 1: Sprague Appleway Zoning fv a- rt .AMo r u f r a r r 1l—L k}LJ..1 r te — ' f I¢ i } M. an r � �.�� Oi artricx Zama _ _ L� ly � $.3�. � �, �C�y G.n4..r 11 r nla �43J a C sI Cs.Iv��Fr nm � IMM r .+m a�•1 nl F Li z 0.11, Mlln e - � $ 4 Ir" ro 'r a ni- alp .. �. 'd `p 4n ! DI S.YfICi.�Of]E'S sl..ei,r s:x: ra0l+ p P d S' r� C91y C-t- AgaB' yf;Mle -- c.a>,I.. haegrwporhxti CgFhprg ri4, Ism �� v tt i S Y O Ga[euaAr Cnm w'cml hve M—d U—A—U. (:om.m!unRY EROUlcvara Gateway Commercial Avenue and Gateway Commercial Centers Review Report Page 2 Neighborhood Center Zoning District Description The Neighborhood Center zoning district is designed to support neighborhood - serving convenience uses (including supermarkets) regularly distributed throughout the corridor at major intersections. The Subarea Plans states that Neighborhood Centers should have smaller setbacks and wider sidewalks to complement these activity centers. The NC zone promotes upper floor housing and office over retail uses. Neighborhood Centers may also have larger scale mixed -use buildings that are compatible with the adjacent neighborhood serving retail development. Zoning History Since incorporation in 2003, the Sprague Appleway corridor has been regulated by three separate zoning codes, herein referred to as Interim Zoning, Pre -SARP Zoning, and SARP Zoning. Figure 2 shows the history of zoning for properties within the NC areas. Following is a general discussion of the uses permitted within the area currently zoned NC under the SARP. SARP Zoning — Neighborhood Center Permitted Uses: Figure 2: Zoning History General uses allowed in the NC zone include medium to large scale grocery stores or supermarkets not exceeding 65,000 sf. per use. Neighborhood - serving retail and services, featuring smaller scale uses up to 5,000 sf. per use, including small grocery stores, pharmacies, banks, hair and nail salons, beauty or barber shops, shoe repair, cafes and food sales. Convenience uses such as video rental and sales, florists, dry cleaners, laundromats, or business convenience uses such as copy shops, office supply, or photo developing. The NC zone also permits restaurants serving alcoholic beverages, fast food, health and exercise clubs, banks and financial institutions, office and high density residential uses. Pre -SARP Zoning Prior to the effective date of the SARP, the zoning for the properties in the discussion area were consistent with the City of Spokane Valley's Comprehensive Plan, adopted April 26, 2006 (see Figure 3: Pre -SARP Zoning Map). The effective date for the City Zoning was October 28, 2007. Zoning districts implemented throughout the discussion area from October 2007 to October 2009 included the following districts: Community Commercial: Small scale retail, service, and office establishments to serve several neighborhoods; Corridor Mixed Use: Retail, office, light manufacturing, and high density residential. Office: medium to high -rise office development with limited commercial and retail uses. Multifamily -2: High Density residential, 22 units per acre. SARP Zoning (Existing Zoning) Pre -SARP Zoning (Nov 2007 - Oct 2009) Interim Zoning (2003 -2007) 01 L � Community Facilities: Civic, cultural, educational, and institutional uses that address social needs. The Community Facilities zoning district was removed through the 2009 Comprehensive Plan Amendment process. An accompanying amendment to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) was made allowing these uses in all zones. Neighborhood Center Review Report Page 3 Figure 3: Pre -SARP Zoning Map PRE,SARP ZONING .2007 NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER PARCELS: ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS: NON - CONFORMING PARCELS; • u� r ? t 'F ■f� Irr � �, .x� �l Tq_ Interim Zoning Upon incorporation in 2003, the City adopted Spokane County's zoning on an interim basis (see Figure 4: Interim Zoning Map). This zoning was effective from 2003 to October 2007. Zoning districts implemented throughout the discussion area include the following: B -1, Neighborhood Business: Small scale retail, services, and office uses serving the immediate neighborhood. B -2, Community Business: Various retail, service, and office uses grouped at one location serving several neighborhoods B -3, Regional Business: Wide range of retail and service activities that serve the county at large and greater areas, UR -22, Urban Residential: High density residential zone that allows offices; generally used as a transition zone, Figure 4: Interim Zoning Map INTERIM ZONING - 2003 (COUNTY) NEIG.HBORHOOE) CENTER PARCELS: ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS: NONCONFORMING PARCELS: qy L J� �� •' i 'F ■f� Irr � � `S= r ged from different intensities of commercial, office, and residential uses. Many retail uses permitted under the Interim and Pre -SARP zoning are still permitted under the NC zone. The main difference is that auto related uses, such as gas stations and vehicle sales (boats, autos, an d motorcycles) are no longer permitted. These uses are directed to the Gateway Commercial Avenue and the Gateway Commercial Centers. Another significant difference between Neighborhood Center zone and Interim B -1, B -2, and 13-3 zones inherited from Spokane County is that residential uses are permitted by the SARP zoning on the ground floor where the B- 1, B -2, and B-3 zones only allowed retail or office uses on the ground floor with housing at the second floor and above. Neighborhood Center Review Report Page 4 An economic analysis conducted by EcoNorthwest in 2006, and reconfirmed by EcoNorthwest in 2010, reports that the corridor has the capacity for an additional 1.8 million square feet of commercial space over the next 20 years, or 90,000 square feet per year. The demand for new commercial space is estimated at only 21,000 square feet per year, resulting in lower land values due to over- supply. The Sprague Apple`vay plan recognizes that the supply of land zoned for retail well exceeds the anticipated demand over the next 20 years. Therefore, the SARP encourages residential and office uses to integrate into the corridor over time and the regulations permit ground floor residential uses. Non - conforming Uses Existing legal uses that became non - confonning upon adoption of the SARP are now considered legal non- conforming uses. Earlier this year staff conducted a field inventory of land uses located within the SARP area to determine the number of non-conforming uses (see Attachment 2, Non-conforming Use Map). Approximately 0.4 % or five businesses within the NC zone are non - conforming. Typical non - conforming uses within the NC zone are vehicle sales, gas stations, and single family homes. Non - conforming use regulations Pursuant to the Subarea Plan, Section 2.0.1(7) legal Non - conforming uses are regulated by Title 19.20.060. Non- conforming uses are allowed to continue indefinitely unless the use is discontinued or abandoned for a period greater than 24 months. Non - conforming uses are allowed to expand so long as the following criteria are met: 1. The expanded use does not degrade the transportation level of service greater than the original use; and 2. The expanded use does not adversely affect or interfere with the use of neighboring property; and 3. Any transfer of ownership or interest on adjacent lots or tracts was made contemporaneously with the transfer of ownership of the lot or tract on which the non - conforming use is located as part of a single transaction; and 4. The expansion does not create additional development opportunities on adjacent tracts that would not otherwise exist. The right to continue a non - conforming use runs with the property. Therefore a non - conforming use may be sold or leased and still be allowed to continue. In some cases non - confonning uses that are detennined to be similar in nature to the existing or previous non - conforming use, may replace a non - conforming use. The one instance where non - confonning uses would not be allowed to continue is, if the use or structure were destroyed more than 80 %. In that case, rebuilding of the structure or resurrection of the use must meet the current regulations. Site Development Standards Site Development standards dictate not only the type of uses allowed within a zoning district, but also building height and setbacks. Since the regulatory part of the subarea plan includes a form based code, it addresses elements that will achieve the desired form. While many of the site development standards are self - explanatory, several introduce concepts specific to form based codes and are new to this community. This includes building orientation, public and private frontage improvements, frontage coverage, maximum building length and minimum and maximum setback limits. Street orientation dictates which regulations apply to new development. Sprague Avenue has different regulations than Figure 5: NC Form Use and Disposition "Other" streets, which includes all other streets present in the NC g P zone. An example of the desired form is shown in Figure 5. Chart 2.2 Site Development standards for the NC zone is attached to this report. Neighborhood Center Review Report Page 5 Building Placement and Setbacks On Sprague Avenue, the minimum setback is 0 feet and the maximum is 10 feet from the back of sidewalk. Buildings oriented to "Other" streets must be set back between 5 and 15 feet from back of sidewalk. Building Orientation to streets and public open spaces: Orienting buildings to streets and /or public open spaces is a required element of NC zone. A building may have other entrances, but the front entrance must be the most prominent. Public Frontage Improvements: Public frontage improvements are required on Sprague Avenue in the NC zone. Public frontage is the area between the curb face and the back of sidewalk line, including the sidewalk and any sidewalk landscape areas as shown in Figure 2.2.5 Public Frontage. Improvements must be coordinated with Private Frontage /Front Street Setback area treatments. In the NC zone, the future curb and back of sidewalk will correspond to the existing curb and back of sidewalk in some areas and to new street configurations in other areas. Private Frontage Improvements: Area between back of sidewalk and primary building facade and building facade up to the top of the 1 or 2" d floor. Permitted Private Frontage types are specified in the Zoning District Table and include Shop front, Corner Entry and Grand Entry. Private frontage standards regulate a building's primary entrance treatments, encroachments, setback areas, and property edges. Private frontage regulations apply to full length of property frontage, even where there is no building. FIG.2.2.5. P1'BLic FRONTAGE - Mwim - fJOS Frontage Coverages This is the minimum percentage of the length of the frontage coverage zone that shall be occupied by a primary building facade. The area is defined as the space between the minimum side yard setback lines. The NC zone requires 60% coverage for buildings fronting Sprague and no minimum coverage on Other Streets. Build to Corner: Corner parcels must meet this requirement by placing a building at its street corner. This is required only for all corner properties in the NC zone. The building must be located within the minimum and maximum setback of both the front street and the side street. Architectural Standards: The architectural standards within the SARP identify general architectural characteristics that must be present on new construction, and if applicable, renovated buildings. The purpose of the regulations is to ensure that the human scale of the buildings is maintained consistently along the corridor. The Architectural Regulations contain both standards and guidelines. Standards are required elements, while the guidelines are optional elements. The chapter deals with building massing and composition, height and length massing, and architectural elements. Building massing and composition deals with the physical presence of the building and identifies the street wall, sidewall, and rear wall of the building. The height massing and composition section address the vertical elements of the building which include base and top elements for both street walls, side � `r . Figure 8 Massing and Composition Neighborhood Center Review Report Page 6 14 MACK OF SWWXA walls, and rear walls. Length massing addresses the horizontal appearance of the building and provides examples of how the length of a building may be broken up by using architectural treatments such as pilasters or notches. The architectural elements section addresses certain elements or treatments that must be included in the building design. The vast majority of this section is comprised of guidelines which are optional elements. The district zone regulations chart identifies when a regulation is applied. The chart indicates that buildings in the NC zone are required to meet the height massing and length massing requirements. Therefore, buildings must provide both top and base elements, and if the building exceeds the street wall increment length, must provide articulation in the building to reduce the appearance of a long building. Building designers may either use the type of elements suggested in the plan, or provide a design that meets the intent of the code which is to maintain human scale of the buildings. Since the most significant architectural requirements involve base and top elements, a description is provided. Base Element: The base element is a substantial horizontal articulation of the street wall applied within the first floor to form a horizontal "base" of the fagade. This horizontal articulation defines the pedestrian -scale space of the street and is well integrated into the overall fagade composition. Generally, the base treatment should be between 9" and 6', or the entire 1s floor if it is a multi -story building. Examples of element options include changes of material, color changes, or a belt course to name a few. Top Element: A substantial horizontal articulation of the street wall applied at the top of the uppennost floor of the fagade, to result in termination of the fagade that provides an attractive fagade skyline and a completion of the upper fagade composition. In simpler terms, it provides a cap to the top of the wall. Examples of element options include cornices, canopy elements, shaped parapet, or fagade offsets. Architectural Elements The architectural elements address the building fagade and roof. This section is made up predominantly of guidelines. A summary of the elements with applicable standards is provided: Facade Building Requires building base element, see discussion above. Wall Cladding anti graffiti coating is required on ground floor and accessible areas above ground floor. Facade composition Requires street wall to contain a minimum of 20% glazing, but not more than 80% allowed. Windows: curtain -wall windows and ribbon windows restricted. Main Entrances: Building entrances must be prominent, mixed use buildings must have distinguishable entrances for retail, residential and office. Secondary Entrances May not be more architecturally prominent than the main entry. Loading and Service Entry Requires service entrances to not be visible from the street, or incorporate attractive and durable materials into structure. Roo s Roof Types: Flat or shallow pitched roofs, and mansard roofs are allowed, but specific guidelines must be met. Roof Materials: wood shakes shall be fire resistant Roof equipment and screening: roof mounted equipment must be screened or enclosed; - light colored roofs shall be screened to reduce glare. One example of roof screening is a - - - parapet wall. Sijzna ze Standards: Permanent sign within the NC zone are regulated by section 2.6 of the SARP. The sign Wall Sign types allowed within each zoning district are identified in the Signage Regulations Neighborhood Center Review Report Page 7 Chart. A review of this chart indicates that all signage types, including animated signs, are allowed in the NC zone with one exception — freestanding signs. The most common signs are wall signs, monument signs, and freestanding signs, this section of the report will focus on these signs. A definition for each sign type is provided: Wall signs: Wall signs are located on and parallel to a building wall. Freestanding Signs: Freestanding signs are constructed on or affixed to the ground by columns, or poles Monument signs: Monument signs are mounted on the ground and are flush, or have a clearance from the ground of not more than 2 feet, supported by a solid base, one or more uprights, braces, columns, poles, or similar structural components. The following conclusions were made pertaining to the relevant Pre -SARP sign regulations: • Wall sign area is reduced from 25 %0 of the wall area to 15% of the total wall area Im- I f., Monument Sign • Freestanding signs are not permitted in NC zone • One Monument sign per arterial street frontage is allowed per parcel as compared to two per arterial street frontage • Monument sign height limits were reduced from 7' to 6' • Monument sign area is essentially the same Neighborhood Center Review Report Page 8 Freestanding Sign Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan Adopted June 16, 2009 Le end: - -- . Not Permitted U: Upper Floors Only G: Ground Floor Only Permitted: These elements are allowed by right unless otherwise specified in Section 2.2.2. Required: These are Required elements of all new development as Building Use indicated. Limited: These frontages may only be applied to access lobbies for upper floor uses that are (A): For Anchor Stores- (A3): larger than 50,000 sf - parking type is different from the ground floor use permitted, (A4): larger than 50,000 sf - special regulations apply (see section 3.1.1 (3)) 2.1.2 Nei hborhood Center District 2.2. Site Development Standards Street / Street Category Zone Sprague Other Ave. Streets 2.2.1.Building Orientation to Streets and required required or not required regmued regrured 2.2.2.Building Use requied 1) Retail 5 acres 5 acres a) City Center Retail - -- - -- b Neighborhood Center Retail permitted permitted c Mixed -Use Avenue Retail N/A - -- d Corner Store Retail - -- - -- e Gateway Commercial Avenue Retail N/A permitted Gateway Commercial Center Retail - -- - -- 2 Civic Quasi-Civic, & Cultural permitted I peinitted 3 Office permitted permitted 4 Light Industrial - -- - -- 5) Lodging (w /common entry) permitted permitted 6) Live -Work - -- permitted 7) Residential a) Multi - Family w/ Common Entry permitted permitted 1)) Attached Single-Family w/ Individual - -- permitted c Detached Single- Family Housin 2.2.3.Building Height minimum height 1 floor /20ft 1 floor /20 ft maximum height 4 floors/ 53 ft 4 floors/ 53 ft 2.2.4.Relation to Single Family Homes required or not applicable r lnio,d regrilr 1 2.2.5.Public Frontage Improvements rep uired or not req uired regrured not regrmed 2.2.6.Private Frontage 1) Sho pttont permitted permitted 2) Corner Entry permitted permitted 3) Arcade permitted permitted 4) Grand Portico permitted permitted 5) Forecourt permitted permitted 6) Grand Entry permitted permitted 7) Common Lobby Entry lin ited limited S) Stoop permitted permitted 9) Porch 10) Front Door - -- - -- 11) Parking Structure Entry permitted permitted 12) Vehicle Display: Option 1 - -- - -- 13) Vehicle Display: Option 2 - -- - -- 14) Edge Treatment: Fenced permitted permitted 13) Edge Treatment: Terraced permitted permitted 14) Edge Treatment: Flush permitted peinifted 2.2.7.Front Street Setback minimum / maximum 0 11, 10 ft 5 ft 1 15 ft 2.2.8.Side Street Setback minimum / maximum O ft/ l0 ft 5 fl / li ft 2.2.9.Side Yard Setback minimum w/ living space windows 101 101 minimum w /out living space windows 5fl 5 fl 2.2.10.Rear Yard Setback minimum setback loft 10 ft 2.2.11.Alley Setback minimum setback 5fl 5 1 2.2.12.Frontage Coverage minimum percenta ge covered 60 no nwr. 2.2.13.Build -to- Cornet re( uired or not required required ­limed 2.2.14.Maximum Building Length 2.3. Street and •. 2.3.1.Street Standards Sprague Other 1) Street Provision required required 2) Pre - Located Street required requied 3) Maximum Block Size 5 acres 5 acres 4) Street Configuration required required 5) Street Type 2) Parking Structure a) Core Street N/A - -- b) City Street N/A permitted c) Neighborhood Street N/A permitted (1) Neighborhood Green Street N/A permitted e) Service Street N/A - -- f) Allev N/A g) Passage N/A --- 2.3.2.0 en Space Standards gee section 2.3.3 2.4. Parking Standards 2.4.1.Parking Types Sprague Other 1) Surface Parking Base regrmed a) Front lot 2.5.3.Length Massing & Composition permitted b) Side lot pennitted permitted c) Rear lot permitted permitted 2) Parking Structure a) Exposed permitted permitted b) Wrapped - Ground Level permitted permitted c) Wra pped - All Levels pernitted permitted (1) Partially Submerged Podium permitted permitted e) Underground Parking permitted permitted 2.4.2.Parking Standards see section 2.4_° Other 2.5. Architectural Sprague Standards Ave. 2.5.2.Height Massing & Composition Top re1771 required Base regrmed required 2.5.3.Length Massing & Composition Streetwall Increment 1001 801 Sidewall & Rearwall Increment N/A NA 2.6. Signage Standards Sprague Other Streets Ave. Book II - 2.1 District Zone Regulations Page 38 of 20.1 Neighborhood Center Zone Code Use Chart Comparison July 20, 2010 USE SARP Zone Pre -SARP Zones Interim Zones i W-717 . .. Automobile /light truck sales NC C X CF CMU X O MF2 131 132 133 X UR 22 Automobile /taxi rental X X X X X Automobile /truck /RV /motorcycle painting, repair, body and fender works X X Boat sales /services X X Car wash X X X X Gas Stations X X X X X X RV sales and service X X I" Adult Retail Use Establishment X X X Ambulance Service X X X CU X X Animal clinic /Veterinary X X X X X X Antique Stores X X X X Apparel /Tailor Shop X X X X X X X Appliance Sales /service X X X Art gallery /studio X X X X X X X Automotive parts, accessories and tires X X X X Bicycle Sales /services X X X X X X X Book /stationary store X X X X X X X Building supply /home improvement X X X Candy and Confectionary X X X X X X Catalogue and mail order house X X X X Cemetery and Crematories X X X Ceramics Shop X X X X X X Clothes, retail sales X X X X X X Communication service /sales X X X X X X Computer services X X X X X X X Convenience Store (no gas station) X X X A X X X Department Store X X X X Drug store X X X X X X X X Dry Cleaners X X X X X X Equipment Rental Shop(not including industrial oriented equipment) X X X Film Developing X X X X X X X Film Camera sales service X X X X X X X Florist shop X X X X X X X Food sales /specialty butcher shop /meat market /specialty foods X X X X X X Gas Stations X X X X X X Gift Shop X X X X A X X X Greenhouse /nursery, garden center, retail X X X Grocery Store X X X X X I X Neighborhood Center Zone Code Use Chart Comparison July 20, 2010 USE SARP Zone Pre -SARP Zones Interim Zones NC C CF CMU O 11 131 132 133 UR 22 Hardware Store X X X X X X Hobby shop X X X A X X X Home furnishings X X X X Landscape materials sales X X Liquor Store X X X X X X Locksmith X X X X X X X Manufactured Home Sales X X Outdoor Market T T T T T T Medical, dental, and hospital equipment supply. sales X X Music Store X X X A X X X Office and computer supplies X X X A X X Pawnshops X X X X Pet Shop X X X A X X Print Shop X X X X X X Radio /TV Sales /Service X X X X Second Hand Store X X X X Sign Painting Shop X X X X Storage, self- service facility X X X X Storage, general- outdoor X Upholstery shop X X X X Warehouse scale retail /buying club. X X X X � retail r X X X X X X X verns X X X X Drive in, Drive up, Fast Food SC X X A X X Espresso stand X X X X X X X Micro - Brewery X X X X X X Mobile Food Vendors X X X X X X Restaurants, full service X X X X X X X Adult Entertainment X X X Bowling alley X X X X Carnival, circus T T T X X X Casino X X X X Entertainment and Rec facilities indoor X X X X Entertainment and Rec facilities, outdoor X X Golf Courses X Racetrack Cu RV Campground C X X Theatre - indoor X X X X X zz I I Neighborhood Center Zone Code Use Chart Comparison July 20, 2010 USE SARP Zone Pre -SARP Zones Interim Zones NC C CF CMU O MF2 131 132 133 UR 22 Bank /savings loan, other financial institutions X X X X X X X • Church, etc X X X X X X X X X X Colleges /Universities X X X X X X X X Community facilities X X X X X X X X X X Community hall, club, lodge or rec facility X X X X X X X X X X Government Offices X X X X X X X Hospitals X X X X X X X X Museum X X X X X X X Park and ride facilities X X X X X X X X X Public Park X X X X X X Post Office X X X X X X X X X Public Pay Parking X X X X X Public Utility Distribution facility X X X X X X X X Schools X X X X X X X X X Transit Center X X X X X X X Assembly— light X Carpenter shop X Electrical /electronic /computer component and system manufacturing /assembly X X X Jewelry, clock, musical instrument assembly, sales /service X X X X Laboratories medical and diagnostic X Machine Shop, small Plastic Injection Molding, thermoplastic X Bed N Breakfast X X Hotel /motel X X X X X Assisted Living Facility X X X X X Community Residential Facility X X X X Convalescent home, nursing home X X X X Day care; adult X X X A X X Day care child X X X X X X X X X X Dwelling, congregate X X X X X X Dwelling, Single Family attached X X X Dwelling, Single Family detached X X X X X Dwelling, Multifamily X X X X X Family Home Adult X X X X X X Neighborhood Center Zone Code Use Chart Comparison July 20, 2010 USE SARP Zone Pre -SARP Zones Interim Zones NC C CF CMU O MF2 131 B2 B3 UR 22 Family Home, child X X X X X Manufactured Home Park X X Barber /beauty shop X X X X X X X Exercise facility /gym /athletic club X X X X X X X Funeral Home X X X X X Kennel, indoor kennel, doggie day care facility X X X X Laundromat X X X X X X X Massage Therapy X X X X X X Photographic Studio X X X X X X X Vet clinic X X X X X X Medical /Dental clinics /office X X X X X X X X X Office, business, professional X X X I X X X X X NC = Neighborhood Center B2 = Community Buisiness B3 = Regional Business CMU = Corridor Mixed Use 0 = Office B1 = Neighbhorhood Business C = Community Commercial CF = Community Facilities UR22 = Urban Residential 22 MF2 =Multifamily 2 HOW THE SARP'S - NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS ZONE RELATES WITH THE INTERIM AND PRE -SARP ZONES N NOTE: THE SARP'S - NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS ARE IDENTIFIED WITH A BLACK OUTLINE w h . S 0 250 500 1,000 Feet I I I I I I I i INTERIM ZONING - 2003 (COUNTY) NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER PARCELS: Q ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS: NON - CONFORMING PARCELS: • �� mil' �` �1`l' J PRE -SARP ZONING - 2007 NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER PARCELS: ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS: i` NON - CONFORMING PARCELS: G �J G 0 Main Main ° Main Main Main p _ F I rslde Riverside 0 Valleymiay Valleyuvay Valleyway 3 m g d o Riverside = c u _ c c Riverside m 1 Hi Village a d y Sprague 3 r �m m Valley Au[o 61 riquida[ors `y > W U� _2 to 7 j to Spragueoiscounc S r F �? Spra Sprague Sprague Sprague N, N : o C Sprague S Sprague Sp J Residence d ( e Sprague la' S R k M a 2 U d Fatirid — hho o 1s1�t st 1st 0- > w a 1st j PRE -SARP ZONING - 2007 NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER PARCELS: ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS: i` NON - CONFORMING PARCELS: G �J G 0 • 111 dlill] 91 [6I6I• RMU 11 KzJ MWA• All L 11 1 1 1 1 maimaL NO T�r E4atrict Zones Lk-p Cullwl cawwwy cam ftl leawl C�I�o 16 , mi—y 41,11. ed LJ.. A".y. = q—m—dy H-1—,�rd LL L L. f31p.c INK Alk L W- e -Y -r. W ui;:in k gem NVA WWI 13po I'm c! I ISO in al 13 F vnra� MMMW� 4an lal - Imi Mil r Fill gap 71' n weir ww E4atrict Zones Lk-p Cullwl cawwwy cam ftl leawl C�I�o 16 , mi—y 41,11. ed LJ.. A".y. = q—m—dy H-1—,�rd LL L L. f31p.c INK Alk L W- e -Y -r. W ui;:in k gem NVA WWI 13po I'm c! I ISO in al 13 F vnra� MMMW� 4an lal - Imi Mil }6. 14h X 3h �h dip 7H p. T*' 01 wm Zones Crrrh Llp� r Fill gap 71' n }6. 14h X 3h �h dip 7H p. T*' 01 wm Zones Crrrh Llp� NC Permitted Uses "Neighborhood- serving retail" Pharmacies, banks, beauty or barber shops Eating and drinking establishments Fast food, beverage vendors, restaurants serving alcohol Health and exercise clubs Business services Offices Multi - family residential Civic, Quasi -Civic 0 17, INTERIM ZONING - 2003 (COUNTY) NEIGH20RHOOD CENTER PARCELS: NON-CONFORMING PARCELS: 0 ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS PRE-SARP ZONING - 2007 NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER PARCELS: ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS: NON-CONFORMING PARCELS: Zone Use Comparison - conclusions No longer permitted Auto sales Adult retail use establishment Gas Stations Self storage Casinos Light Industrial Now Permitted Residential Multifamily Single - family attached SI MEMMOI 1V II Spragu Hicc vii liac% Discount Miiffl Sprague mo C Valley l uto liquidators due PO U — Ow L La 111 0 �^ s .s idene Har6 r ff� IZ Fk Sprague r C 33 Li nr u Site Development Standards Smaller setbacks Wider sidewalks Height (20 ,- min - 53' max) Building Orientation Streets & open space Public and Private Frontage Frontage Coverage 60% Sprague Ave Maximum Building Length Other streets 240' Neighborhood Center Form NJo7Y�Id rers Interim /Pre SARP Development Standards Walgreens Parking typically le� a� CO 0 Preferred location of stormwater treatment Swale Buildings Built to the Street 12' Sidewalk 8' Landscaped Buffer T On- Street Parking Architectural Standards Immm 1 �� re� Arr-mitprturai stanciarc Sign Standards -Wall Signs SARP Regulations Pre -SARP Regulations -Wall signs cannot exceed 15% of wall area -Must be mounted below 2nd floor Wall signs cannot exceed 25% of wall area Sign Standards - Freestanding SARP Regulations Pre -SARP Regulations • Freestanding signs are not permitted • One per parcel • Height: 30 ft • Copy area: 100 ft2 Sign Standards - Monument SARP Regulations • One per parcel • Height: 6 ft • Copy area: 90 ft Pre -SARP Regulations • Two per parcel • Height: 7 ft • Copy area: g0 ft2 Questions? Mike Basinger, AICP 720 -5331 m b a s i n g e r@ s p o ka n eva I I ey. o rg CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 20, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Law Enforcement Interlocal Agreement GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: No action to date. Council is aware the City Manager and Staff, Spokane County and Spokane County Sheriff's Department have been negotiating a new Interlocal Agreement for Law Enforcement Services. BACKGROUND: City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County and the Spokane County Sheriff's Office initiated contract discussions in January 2010, and concluded negotiations with a tentative agreement on July 2, 2010. The Interlocal Agreement now comes to City Council for review and eventual motion consideration. This agreement combines the law enforcement and communications agreement. OPTIONS: Consensus to place this item on a future agenda for motion consideration, schedule additional administrative reports, or provide other direction to staff. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The increase to the Law Enforcement Contract from 2009 to 2010 is $1,338,287. The Summary of Cost Increase is as follows: Additions to Chargeable Services $675,715; Cost of Living Allowance and Medical Inflation Escalator $684,078; Change in Allocation Method ($21,506). The total estimated contract amount for 2010 is $16,540.021. The City has budgeted $16,581,860 in 2010 for both law enforcement and communications. STAFF CONTACT: Mike Jackson, Mike Connelly, Morgan Koudelka ATTACHMENTS: Interlocal Agreement for Costs Incident to Law Enforcement Services in the City of Spokane Valley DISCUSSIONS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR COSTS INCIDENT TO LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into among Spokane County, a political subdivision of the state of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 1116 West Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY," the Spokane County Sheriff, a separate. elected official of Spokane County, having offices for the transaction of business at 1100 West Mallon Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, hereinafter referred to as the "SHERIFF" and the City of Spokane Valley, a municipal corporation of the state of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at the Redwood Plaza, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206, hereinafter referred to as the "CITY," jointly hereinafter referred to as the 'Parties" and individually referred to as "Panty ". TAW 4128 The COUNTY, SHERIFF and the CITY agree as follows. SECTION NO. 1: RECITALS AND FINDINGS 1.1 Under RCW 36.32.120(6), the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, acting on behalf of Spokane County, has the care of County property and the management of County funds and business.TA'4 /28 1.2 Under chapter 39.34 RCW (Interlocal Cooperation Act), public agencies may contract with each other to perform certain functions which each may legally perform. TAW 4128 1.3 Under chapter 36.28 RCW, the Spokane County Sheriff is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer and Conservator of the Peace of Spokane County, TA'd 4128 1.4 The City of Spokane Valley desires to utilize the services of the Spokane County Sheriffs Office to provide law enforcement services. TA'd 4128 1.5 The direct and indirect costs for law enforcement services will be set forth in the Law Enforcement Cost Allocation plan (T -FLAP) which is attached lrefeto as E it iibit 3 and by this reference incorporated irc res1 � -��. - /1/0 SECTION NO. 2: DEFINITIONS TAW 4128 .��'"�' lju, 2.1 Agreement: "Agreement" means this Inte local Agreement arnong Sheriff, City and County regarding law enforcement services. 2.2 City: "CITY" means the City of Spokane Valley. C04py Page 1 of 19 2.3 County: "COUNTY" means Spokane County. 2.4 Services: "Services" means those services identified in Exhibit 1. 2.5 Sheriff: "SHERIFF" means the duly elected sheriff of Spokane County possessing those general duties set forth in chapter 36.28 RCW. 2.6 Uncontrollable Circumstances: "Uncontrollable Circumstances" means the following events: riots, wars, civil disturbances, insurrections, acts of terrorism, external fires and floods, volcanic eruptions, lightning or earthquakes at or near where the Services are performed and/or that directly affect providing of such Services. SECTION NO. 3: PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to reduce to writing the Parties' understanding as to the terms and conditions under which SHERIFF will provide Services to the CITY. The services will be consistent with the City's council/manager form of management. RCW 35.A13 TAW 4128 SECTION NO. 4: DURAT El 4.1 Initial term and '%i b initial 12.01 A.M. or r ,,P 2010, and run tliroi this Agrcernetr rtomatically renew f. process outlined laetein is involved. TIO � liis Agreement shall coinnience as of dnight, December 31, 2013. Thereafter, year time frames, rn1less the termination 4.2 Process for Termination. This Agreemcn -1 may be terminated by any Marty by providing written notice on or after June 30, 2012 to all other Parties. COUNTY :shall cougull with the SHERIFF prior to providing written notice of ten under this subsoction. Sl - 1F-RTFF shall co cult with COUNTY priar to providing written notice of termination under this subsection. This termination will be effective eighte en 11iontils alrte= written not is provided as long as such written notice is provide( prior to 1V1iclnig: t" Decembcr 31, 2013. The same time intervals for terniinations sliall apply to future terms the termitation process is not involved dur°iiig the initial contract period, 4.3 Implementation of Termination. When notice of termination r.- r and CITY agree to jointly prepare a Transition Plan. 4.3.1 Transition Plan. The Transition Plan shall identify and address, among other items (i) personnel issues; (ii) workload; and (iii) on going case assignments. If the SHERIFF and CITY cannot mutually Page 2 of 19 No agree to the terms of the Transition Plan, either Party can request arbitration as provided in Section No. 18, The SHERIFF and CITY shall equally share the cost of said arbitration.. TA'd 4/28 4.3.2 Implementation of Transition Plan. Parties agree to use all best efforts to create and effectuate a inutual implementation of the Transition Plan. TA'd 4/28 4.4 Termination of the Agreement - Vehicles and Equipment. At the termination of this Agreement, CITY shall have the option to purchase, subject to agreement of SHERIFF and COUNTY, COUNTY owned vehicles and /or equipment used to provide Services. TA'd 4/28 4.5 Waiver of Statutory Terms. 'To the extent that it is applicable to law enforcenient services, the Parties licreby waive thc statutory termination rights of 1 . RCW 39,34, 180( and elect instead to follow these; contractual termination procedures gas the sole method of terminating this Agrcctaae.nt, the terms of which air detailed in this sub3cetion. 4.6 Termination of the Agreement and Settle and Adjust. Th6 Pffi Pa -ties recognize that Cost f6r S er vices under the Agreement is calculat utili�ifig LI:CAP. Tile f EP is istseci urn actual costs fi °o.z two years prier to the cti� contract year. As such, in the event this Agreement is t,, minated as provided for in Stab- section 4.2 hercinabove, the A will be subject to a settle; and adjust for the last two years of the term of the Agreement based upon the Cost Allocation Model for the two subsequent years allcr termination. In the event of terminatioii, the Parties shall follow the IrroCcss set forth ill Section No. 6 to deternaine the adjust and settle for each- of (lie last tNvo years of the Agrec ment its - %vel l as the process to object to the filial adjustinctit determined for each of the last INVO yc;ar•s to melt €de disptIte tesolutiota as set forth in Subsection 6.6 set fortlt hereinafter. SI:CTIOI® NO, 5: SERVJCES 5.1 Services Provided and Service. I.,evels. The Sheriff shall provide those Services set forth in Exhibit L(Cominissioned Officer Worksheet) attached hereto and by this rererenee incorporated iaerein. The CI'T'Y naay unilaterally, on ail annual basis, aditist the service level FTE's set foilli in Category One of Exhibit I . Writteta 11('111ce of such in aciiustment to Category Oiie shall be provided by the CITY to (lie COUNTY and SHElUFF no rater than November 30` with tlae adJusittnents to be effective on January I s oftlie followitzg year. lftlac COUNTY fails to provide the third quarterly report or changes to the LFCAP allocation as set forth in Section 5.2 below, said notice is required to occur 30 days after this infoniiation is provided, My other adjtisttrients in Category " One services taaay occur by mu tual agreement as Set f orth in Section 6.5. Page 3 of 19 The CITY and SHERIFF, by inutual agreement may also adjust t: FTE's set B orth in Ctaiegory'1'wo of Exhibit 1. Such agreement sl than November 30 of the preceding contract year. F , A Govel of service 1 be executed, do later ter --�, Any adjustnicrits in services under this section shall only be oM by after rcicva lit � notice and trnpacrt bargair7ing negotiations for reductions info r f j -'- y� Mist c;cl wiliitlre relevant Collective Bargaining Units but in do event shall th�'tlela in i lilt) lemeatatioil exceed 60 days. t � Notwithstanding the alcove, the SHERIFFS ability to fulfill hi �/ to ry(shhgdiion to provide law enforcement. services to the COUNTY and the tialt not I)Q-- iinlltod: -. � 5.2 Periodic Reporting Requirements. �l`he SHE F 1�1' CO , V c� the '�T p g � ; quarterly repoils, within 30 days from the end of each quart6r•,�t identify statistics 11s.e � to calculate the CITY "S cost in the L FCAP referenced in Soetion No. 6 below, '[hose statistics which are only available to CCOIJFNTY on aat1�tKatmai basis s hall be provided mirmally within ail days of the end of each calendar year. Hc)�vevcr, record t anei property roon statistic #s shall be provided within 15 days after• they are provided by the City of Spokane. "i'liesv reports will allow the CITY to monitor service consumption and cost accrual throughout the year. , {' The COUNTY will further provide to the CITY, prior to the begiruiing of the fourth quartei of each year preceding their effective date, any changes ill the ;allocation of law enforcement services set forth in tltc tidopteri rf1 CAP which is incorporated her i ° - rN i it l SECTION NO. 6: COST OF SERVICES 6.1 Basis. Cost for services shall be based upon the Law Enforcement Cost.Allor on � Plan (LFCAP) as pieviotasly identified and incorporated hcrc ri 6.2 Methodology. Costs ;Fear Service i will be calculated uti 1j ang - Tic , Cost Calculation } � Model (CCM) a s shown in Exhibit 2 which is attached heret rl1icorporated herein by t reference. F 6.3 COWCAP in([ LECAP. Once the COWCAP and LECAP sir rrt -izc(, no changes will be niade to any department cost or allocation basis until`tl +efollowing year other than N as indicated in the III -YEAR FULL TIME EQUIVALENT FT13 ADJUSTMENTS defined ill scab - section 6.7. Each year, departments within the Sheriffs Office will be reviewed to deturinine if the costs are being appropriately allocated. Each allocation basis will bo reviewed to det(miline if it is the best basis for allocating the costs. Any clianges in allocating department costs or changes in allocattion basis will be provided to Page 4 of 19 C the CITY with explanations for any deviation froaii (lie initial ply 4ater tliaii the erica of��� th,, third quarter. Both the COWCAP and t he LEC will be pre pared i n accordance t with ONJ Circular A -87. Ho tlig, LECAP refercn - - -rei n shall not cont �,!j ' -_ - ..� ] 1 COUNTY costs as set fo rth in Colum Four of Exhibit 1. a &I farther the COW shall d A not contain COrI�!?�lf y costs for treasurer• tax co lic c.tioirs% �� -� Thy, COWCAP and the LECAP will be completed by S pteriibe ° t # r' determining (lie actual costs for the prior year. For example, l c actual cast for the calendar year 2009 would be completed by September 30, 2 10. 6.4 CCM. Costs for Services shall be calculated irtilizing the LECAP. The LECAP will b � based. on acnial costs. It will he used to estimate Inter'lo�cal agreement costs for a a,gr'eenient year LAvo years subsequent to the year of the LECAP. The model based on the LECAP costs fr•oni two years erica � 9fniaate costs for the l current ; agreemcnt year. The Pet Commissioned Officer the dollar amount €err Other Allocations for the contract year will be multiplied by (1) any cost of living o� wage changes) granted commissioned deputics under any collective bargaining agreermn for the calendar year irmnediately rollowing the LECAP year; and by (2) a 1.25% multiplier for the calendar year ininiediate;ly following the LE year; and by (3) any cost of living or tvage cliange.(s) granted commissioned d dcpaties trader any collective bargaining agreement for the calendar year two years subsequent t the LECAP year; and by (4) ra 1.25% imiltiplier° for the calendar year two yeas subsequent to the LEti AP year. After generating the Per Commissioned Officer rate for the int::rlo . F'��_ rnent year usil the Coirrniissioned Officer Worksheet (Exhibit 1), the nuinbs f "rate= tie and Two officers will be updated to reflect. crrr year staffing level; ` i. total contract costs [lien swill [ }e arttonl,aticalty calculated. This model can also be edl for any MD -YEAR FULL - TI vM EQUIVALENT (FTE) ADYUS`l "1VIIENT:S. Thl o, CCM .shall be provided by th COLT TY to the CITY by September 30 for fire following year. 6.5 Metro- Active Salary Adjustments. Should .any applicable bargaining agreement not lie .settled in time, to inctude any salary tadjustarrr nts granted conimis:sioned deputies Lander any collective bargaining agreement in the contract calculation model for it given year, and that colleetive bargaining agrcenient is settled during that year, and the settlement contai ns retroacti� salary adjustment, the COUNT TY will Lill the CITY for the hill Minoru., of the CITY'S portion of the retroactive payment. '1`lae CITY wiji be responsible for paying the COUNTY within thirty clays of the bilfiarg date. Additionally, the COUNTY will recalculate the estimated interlocal agreement aniount employing the cost of living or wage increase(s) granted commissioned deputies under any collective bargaining agreement and adjust the Tern airing monthly payments. { v rage 5 of 19 Mp '{' 'v� +T nt f �I�1ti '1�event the Parties 6.6 Mid -Year Full Time l.,ciur . �alerrt (� C)1�d�ustiare a negotiate a change in full time positions, wid- year, such atige, for purposes of calculating costs tinder the LECAP, car, occur only c1t1 z tiering; ally intclIocal agreorilo t year and in aaiy event rio later than August 30th of + Lich year. Additionally, t he COUNTY will reco ttlate the estimated ir l!1e1lQgI t a - cemcait amount �talci_.�(I,jtps the r monthly y �aynien Any reduction: would become operative only �itter the relevant notice and ini �ac�t bargaining g obligations for reductions in force are satisfied yy�� 1� g. g g +�1 With the effected Collective Bargaining unit but in no event shall the delay ill implementation exceed 60 days. " 6.7 Settle and Adjust. The LECAP will be used to settle anti , �tfs� flip c- �til��tcted �Zi�ic for the year for which it is calculated. After co the KyO Calculation Model For current agreement year, any overage or underage from t and adjust will be app: to the total amonrit, This c nil rterl l gore drill follow t Wlling procedure. The COUNTY shall orcrvide the CITY with its final aadjtas[rrfelat/ 1xt. ��rifirig iio` - la eTitlian' � September _301h of any calendar year. The adjustment will �lud'e a copy of the fitlj A t LECAP. 'Be CITY will have thirty (0) calendar clays f° its receipt of (lie written adjustment to provide the COUNTY with any wrtten obj ons to the amounts set forth therein. The COUNTY agrees to consider all written objections received from the CITY and reply to the CITY no hater than fifteen (15) calendar days of receipt of the CITY'S objections. In the event that. the Parties cannot imitually resolve any written objections(s) submitted by the CITY within an additional fifteen (15) calendar day tinge li•aine, or such other time frame aas the Parties may mutually agree, to, the objections sliaatl be resolved , pursuant to the Dispute -Resolution provisions set forth in Section No. 18. � 6.8 Capital Purchases. Capital. items deemed necessary for l`or a11 � c�irrt rsSiomcd' a IP 1� �� 't excluding vehicles, with a cost b teaIer than the Coaant.y cal�rta :tli c �- s,` old (currently $2,000) and. less than $10,000, as well as capital items w tI f"" cast equal to or greater than $50,000, will be 1'±Iled to tile; CITY at the time of purchase contingent upon prior CITY authorization. The CITY will be billedl according to the CITY's current usage percentage of the items. Tlie COTJNTY will ball the Cfl'Y for this cost at tile, tune of the purchase wid pay.mcnt will bo due within 30 days of the billing dame. After the LECAP is f completcd for the year of the purc:liase(s ), the COUNTY will give the City of �_S cane i Valley credit for (lie full alnowit: paid in that year. .Al l capital items purchased will become the property of C U 6itft14tel'WLtha - halve been purchased vitli grant Bands by e ithe r the CITY or ti COUNTY or otliei funding sonrces, sand capital items that are not utilized in oviding law enforcernent service to the CITY, WilI not be charged to the. CITY. A Lrcapital items that are utilized in providing law enforcement service to the CITY and Kat were not purchased with other funding sources will be incorporated as fixed assets in the County-wide Cost Allocation Page 6 of 19 Plan COCA') and reimbursed through depreciation. The C Ct`AV - -i -s a-cost �vitliirr thc:�u � �'� LECAP, "�, � 1 6.9 Billing Procedna•e. The COUNTY will bill the CITY for one -tw" ini t l COUNTY'S calculated contract amount as determined in contract c eI culation model during the first week of the month. Regular monthly payments by the C 1'�� will be due by the en of the month in which they are billed. 6.10 Penalty. At the sole option of the COUNTY, a penalty rnay�e as � e on a _lat . 1a malt ortlre nronthl c�lccalatcd contact �mourlt owed b the�`l ='fan anaoarartt e ual . I d to Id75t interest earnings had the payment been timely paid a17:r `t iii the Spokane County veasove,r's Investment Pool. _ Any resolution. of a dis rUted amount throe h usC of the a/bhrati�q � es �r red i'i V ' � l� g 1 t Section No.1 S shall include at the request of tiny P €arty illation of whether interest is appropriate, including the amount. SECTION NO. 7: MUNICIPAL POLICE AUTHORITY The CITY shall retain all powers p olice and b virtue of this A , aien r oait?r t� 1 Y _ - municipal police authority on the SHERIFF. �! - ' � '� � SECTION NO. 8; OFFICER ASSIGNMENT, RETE1rTWON DISCIPLINE AND HIRING. The COTINTY is acting hereunder as an independent contractor as to: _ 8.1 Hiring, The SJITERIFF shall hire, assign, rcga —aia €l rj�litt X11 ` era? �loyceslde �utie.;s according to the. collective bar ai ' agVecarrent, civil service 1 l g g�� � .g? �. males, ,and state and federal laws. �� � 8.2 Standartls of performance Governed by the 1SHERIFF. Control of personnel � standarcl,s of per•iormance, discipline and all other aspects of performance shall b P by the SI[EFUFF Provided however that only iivalilicd trained pen;oinie 8.3 1 meeting all of the regLrirern.ents of applicable state laws be � utilized in the performance of Services. Assignment of Deputies. SHEIJFIa shall rise, when er possible, deputies who volunteer for duty within CITY. In thosc instances m there arc an insufzrcient number of deputies w110 volunteer fbr duly withiei CITY, then S1-1[ shall determine who shall be assigned fbr dirty. SHERIFF and CITY will w .11C. together to encourage deputy retention to provide continuity of service. Ala Ln Page 7 of 19 8.4 Patrol Districts. CITY S Police Chief will establish patr iNi�.rtcts within th �� CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY in order to assure accurate c • flcction of data relate to criminal traffic activity. The patrol districts Neill coinc 4active within CITY limits as t closely as possible without comprintising efficient use of patrol deputies. A petrol district: is a geographical arty of a size and configuration designed to mijiimize 4 t times to citizen's calls .tar services. Response is typically measured froin the tirne a call is received to the titn.e the unit arrives on the scene. 8.5) Dedicated Patrol Units. Sheriff- recognizes that it is ptcrV11(fil f_sworn -pol1c� service's dedicated to CITY. in so doing, (lie law enforcement serv'�?cs shall be dedicated to CrrY and shall nor bo used elsewhere within Spokane COI; Y: _ Provided lhowever, in the event of an erne%ency or a call by a deputy for assis«Ence, mutual aid may be rendered. SECTION NO. 9: CITY POLICE CHIEF AND PRECINCT COMMANDER SELECTION, REMOVAL AND DUTIES, AS WELL AS CITY MANAGER'S RESPONSIBILITIES THERETO. 9.1 Selection of Police Chief or Precinct Commander. When, for any reason, there occurs a vacancy in the position of Police Chief or Precinct Commander, the SHERIFF shall designate three or more SHERIFF Deputies of the rank of Lieutenant or higher, or as otherwise agreed by the parties, as candidates for each of the positions of CITY Police Chief or Precinct Commander. The positions of Police Chief or Precinct Commander shall be appointed from said lists of qualified candidates by the City Manager. TA'd 4/28 9.2 Removal of Police Chief or Precinct Commander. 9.2 (a) Removal by SHERIFF. The SHERIFF may remove the Police Chief or Precinct Commander at any time after consultation with the CITY MANAGER. TA'd 4/28 9.2(b) Removal By City Manager. The SHERIFF shall remove the Police Chief or Precinct Commander at any time after the written request and consultation of the CITY MANAGER. TA'd 4/28 9.2(e) Reduction of Precinct Commander's Rank Due to Economic Conditions. A reduction in Sheriffs Office Civil Set-vice Rank due to economic necessity shall not be the sole basis for the removal of the appointed Precinct Commander by either the City Manager or the SHERIFF. TA'd 4/28 9.3 Duties of Police Chief. The Police Chief shall report to CITY Manager or his/her designee and to the existing command structure within SHERIFF's OFFICE. TA'd 4/28 Page 8 of 19 �it If The duties of the Police Chief shall include: 9.3.1 Working with the CITY Manager or his/her designee to establish goals, , objectives and performance measures for CITY police services which reflect specific needs within CITY; TA'd 4/28 9.3.2 Coordinating police activities within CITY, including hours of operation and CITY specific protocols and procedures, attending meetings and providing reports as requested by the City Manager and such other duties common to a City Police Chief including enforcement of CITY codes and ordinances; TA'd 4/28 9.3.3 Reviewing the performance of deputies assigned to CITY. Reporting to CITY Manager or his/her designee and SHERIFF any serious recommendations for performance improvement; TA'd 4/28 9.3.4 Identify duties of deputies assigned to CITY as specific needs arise or as requested by CITY Manager or his/her designee within the context of established policies and procedures. Reporting to SHERIFF any changes in duty of CITY assigned deputies;TA'd 4/28 9.3.5 Overseeing im plementation within CITY of S. 1 all 1 �7-r Bess anc procedures. Maintainin a copy of SHERIFF' pro �i�i 5e5� on file at C Hall lu l g lr� pro { for CITY'S reference. SHT'RIFF small be notified - of any public disclosure requests to view or obtain a copy of the poll iei0eand procedures can file, 9.3.6 Notifying CITY Manager or his/her designee of any change in SHERIFF procedures or policies, or resource as permitted by this agreement; TA'd 4/28 9.3.7 Identifying areas of supplemental training for deputies assigned to CITY. Making recommendations to SHERIFF for supplemental training. Making recommendations to the CITY Manager or his/her designee for training not provided by SHERIFF; TA'd 4/28 9.3.8 Providing supervision and direction to the Precinct Commander, Lieutenants and Sergeants assigned to CITY as well as other assigned personnel, and acting as liaison with SHERIFF Command Staff; TA'd 4/28 9.3.9 Maintaining communication between CITY Manager and SHERIFF command structures to ensure that changes in SHERIFF policies are agreeable to CITY and that change in CITY policies are agreeable to SHERIFF. In the event a CITY procedure, policy, goal or operation differs 7_ Page 9 of 19 EJ Lvry from the SHERIFF'S, CITY Manager or his/her designee, SHERIFF and COUNTY shall meet and mutually determine which policy will prevail; and TA' 4/28 9.3.10 Notifying the CITY Manager or his /her designee of any significant criminal occurrence or civil emergency within CITY or Region that would impact the public safety or operations of the CITY. TA'd 4128 9.4. Duties of the Precinct Commander. The Precinct Commander shall act as Chief in his/her absence and under the Chief as the CITY Police Department's primary administrative assistant,TA'd 4/28 9.5 Duties of City Manager. City Manager or his /her designee shall have the responsibility of providing general direction and supervision to the assigned Police Chief relative to the furnishing of law enforcement services to CITY as set forth in chapter 35A.13 RCW and the terms of this Agreement. T 'A4/28 9.6 Quarterly Meetings - Sheriff and City Manager .ter �S1 ;t f" r l the City ` Manager sl�ril meet on a quarterly basis to er�srrr� rr corr1r11unication and t seek" oinL consideration of all natters of concer•ii're ardrng the law on force1tlerzt contract, Esther party may invite representatives' n their respective organizations to attend. It is intended tiia[ the parties in then x ketings review the Interlocal Agreement an diiscuss matters of mutual int --sst; monitor cost trends, -,vork jointly on potential cost savings, revenue sources and ether budgetary matters that inay impact service: levels; seek long - term sustainabili!y of contract terms; consider c hanges in Labor contracts, allocation of resources or otlre r potential cost changes and change; to the cost allocation plan that may impact either party. The elates or M1 thcse. rneetiuQs will be determined ley .mutual agreement but should coiric.ide with a the budget +cycles of each (arty. ° 9.7 Ouarterly rr neeting — Finan cial Rem Rem �7, I l:at vc; Car- the °Cl J "Y A4 alld the C01. NT Y shall niec cl armes to the cost allocatio: Ian. the COWCAP SECTION NO. 10: OBSERVATION OF LABOR '� ti �'eost`rarl and AP or the C CM., TIONS The CITY may participate with other cities that contract with the COUNTY for law enforcement services to select no more than two (2) representatives from the contracting cities to observe labor negotiations between the COUNTY, SHERIFF and the Collective Bargaining units representing the employees of the SHERIFF, provided that such observers adhere to rules established by the COUNTY, SHERIFF and the bargaining units for the negotiations. TAW 4/28 Page 10 of 19 SECTION NO. 11: PROPERTY, EQUIPMENT AND TRAINING 11.1 Ownership of Property and Equipment. The ownership of all property and equipment utilized in association with either SHERIFF or CITY meeting their responsibilities under the terns of this Agreement, shall remain with the original owner at all times to include termination, unless otherwise specifically and mutually agreed upon in writing by the Parties to this Agreement. TA'd 4128 11.2 Stationery, Notices and Forms. CITY shall supply at its own cost and expense any special supplies, logos or patches, stationery, notices, forms where .s h -must be issued in the name of CITY. TA'd 4128 }; 11.3 Additional 'Technology. C rY desires to ina rrtairr a loo Ce swee•'ilrf is t a I Ile ' \ S 0 and equipped with the latest teclrtiology, SHERIFF re� W provide pol,ica o service, personnel providing services under this .agreq t A who are trained �rnrl equipped with such technology as is customarily pr d to deputies providing law entorcenrrent services in the unincorporated and of Spokane Courrrty. Any technology not currently in use or not customarily provided to patrol deputies, may be requested b CIT or SHERIFF. Parties agree to meet and confer over the need for the acgUisitiorr, trainin& or use of new technology with the final dccision regarding the acqui ition and use of new technology resting solely Nvirh [lie S14ERII+ f :so long as the CITY arid COUNTY have the necessary financial resources to acquire such toclvlology and train deputies in its use. Such costs shall be incorporated into the LECAP. 11.4 Training. CITY has indicated that it may desire to have the deputies providing Services to CITY under the terms of this Agreement attend additional or supplemental training. The SHERIFF agrees not to unreasonably withhold approval of any written request(s) by the CITY for deputies providing Services under the terms of this Agreement to attend additional or supplemental training. The SHERIFF may also require staff assigned to provide Services to the CITY under the terms of this Agreement to participate in necessary state and federal training and conferences that focus on the prevention of crime and the protection of the CITY citizens. The costs of any additional or supplemental training requested by the CITY under this section and approved by the SHERIFF, or determined necessary by the SHERIFF shall be born solely by the CITY. TA'd 4128 11.5 Police Department Building, Maintenance, and Janitorial. The CITY will provide offices, to include sufficient parking, for the CITY Police Department located at 12710 E. Sprague Avenue, City of Spokane Valley, 99216 or at such Wage 11 of 13 other location mutually agreed to between the CITY and SHERIFF. CITY shall provide all operation , maintenance and janitorial services for said offrces.TA'd 4128 SECTION NO. 12: COMMUNITY IDENTITY 12.1 Patrol Vellicles. Patrol vehicles that are a.ssigied to CITY may identif ication and other logo of CITY at CITY'S sole expense. vehicles will indicate that they are SHIJ~1UFF vehicles. SIIEI detennine the form of identification jointly. 12.2 Uniform. SHERIFF maintains a uniform directed by state law. It is a uniform that carries a great deal of pride. CITY recognizes that the assigned personnel will retain the uniform of the Spokane County Sheriffs Office; however, SHERIFF agrees that assigned personnel may wear additional identification in the nature of a pin, patch, uniform items, or other like identification indicating affiliation with CITY. The nature and design of any additional identification will be determined jointly by SHERIFF and CITY and provided to SHERIFF by CITY at CITY'S sole expense.TA'd 4128 SECTION NO. 13: RECORDS All records prepared, owned, used or retained by the COUNTY or SHERIFF in conjunction with providing Services under the terms of this Agreement shall be deerned COUNTY property and shall be made available to the CITY upon request by the City Manager subject to the records retention schedule set forth by the Washington State Secretary of State, the attorney client and attorney work product privileges set forth in statute, court rule or case law. The parties agree to cooperate in complying with the provisions of Chapter 42.56 RC. W/ TA'd 4, SECTION NO. 14: UNCONTROLLABLE CIRCUMSTANC.1��-/MI1 OSSIBILkTy-,,. �Pr A delay or interruption in or of performance of all ' s Agreement � resulting Vrom Uncontrolfiable Circumstances shall be deemed Y a def�rult under this P 1 - ' x Agreement. i' A delay or interwptioxr in or failure of performance of al'or any part of this Agreement resultillp from any change in or new law, order, rule or regulation of any nature which renders providing of Services in accordarIce with the terns ofthis Agreement legally impossible, and any other circumstances beyond the control of'the SAFRIF-' Nvhich "'1 - N) Q I I Page 12 of 19 �..� � render legally itrapossibl'e the performance by the SHJ - of its obligations under this Agreement, shall be deemed not it dcfauIt under this Agreement. SECTION NO. 15: RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES For the purpose of this, section, the terininology COUNTY p al.l also include SHERIFF. The PAT -MFS intend that an inde:13e tdent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. The COUNTY shall be alt independent contractor and not the agent or employee of the CITY, that the CITY is interested ortly in the results to be achieved a td - iliac the right to control the particular man ter, method and ttteans in which the Services are performed is solely within the discretion of the SHH,RIFF. Any and all employees who provide Services to the CITY under this . Agreement shill be deemed enlployces solely of the SHERIFF. The SHERIFF shall be solely responsible, for the conduct and actions of all employees unt %er this Agreement and any liability that inlay alta ch thereto. Likewise, ito agent, employee, servant or representative of the CITY shall lie deemed to be art employee agent, servatrt or representative of the SIITRIFF or COUNTY for any putposr, } SECTION NO. 16: LIABILITY;- � For the put�posc of this Section, the terminology "COL TT�?'�� S llli also ineira.cle the �� "PROSECUTMG ATTORNEY." { (a) The COUNTY shall inde unify and hold harmless the CITY .ail °it 0rffim -S, agents, t and employees, front any acid all claims, a ctions, shits, liability, l � costs, exlaetlses, acid daniages of any natLire, whatsoever, by aiv reason of or arising out of any negligent act or omission of the COUNTY, its officers. agents and employees, relating to or {arising out of performing Set pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, actiort, lass, or damages is brought against the CITY, the. COUNTY shall defend the saine at its sole cost and expense, and if fitaal jt1dgt11er1t in said ,slit be rendered against the CITY, and its officers, agents, and employees, or jointly against the CITY and [lie C OUNTY and their respective officers, agents, ,:and employees, the COUNT 'shall the Sallie. " (b) The CITY shall indemnify and hold harmless the CO LINT JUL artd Is "6ffcers, agents and employees, front any and all claims, actions, ,wits, liability, lo. i c bsts, expensets, arttl,��p damages of any nature whatsoever, by any reason of car arising out of any negligent act of otiaission of the CITY, its oftiicers, agents and employe3; s, relating to or arising out of performing ServieeS pr,trsuant to this Agreement. In the event that any suit based upon such claim, action, loss:, or damages is brought against the COUNTY, (lie CITY .stroll defend flit: same at its sole: cost and cxps nse and if final jud€ inctit in said suit be rendered against f.heR COUNTY, and its officers, agents:, and employees, or Jointly against the COUNTY .and the CI'T'Y attd their respective officers, agents, and c iiiPloyces, the CITY shall sal ii L , - - � , , i �:'- .; Page 13 of 19 i ' e (c) !rf the comparative negligence of the Parties and trip officers r111d er7rployees is aL cause of such clania,ge or Injury, the liability, loss, ' co., or expense shall be shared�'�,� between the Parties in proportion to thei relative dept of negligence and the right 0A inden - uiity shat l apply to such proportion. ' (d) Where an officer or employee of a Party is acting under the di 'ction land controls ? � - of the ntller• Party, the Party directing, and controlling the officer , or ilrp oyee in they , activity rrticl /car cr1rtiiSS1011 giving rise to liability small accept a�[ ' i��[bilit.y for the other Party's officer or Err plo ice's negligence. - t' Party (e) Each s 1 survive { c� �i atr n of lr duty to rndenurrfy shall the terrarrrr���st 1 r o � iy Agreement. _ (f} The foregoing indenurity is specifically intende o constitu aNVe o� each Party's inrvr7unity under Washington's Industrial lnsrrrance Ac chapter 51 RCW, �� 4 respecting the other par only �. � 1 g 1 ys acrd only to the extent nccc,sary t provide the indemnified A\ res Party with a fall and complete indenlnity of claims made by tll `indenmitor's cin1floyees. , The PARTIES a luiowledge that !Ilese provisions were specifically negotiated and agreed upon by theta. () 'I COUN'T'Y and the CITY agree to either self insure insurance covering the tliutters contained In this Agreement with cc $5,000,000 per occurrence with $5,000,000 aggregate lirr7:is irlcl Ir and auto. y X �r Li . 1.11 1111 ices n "diages of Ilot less tha g professional liability SECTION NO. 17: INITIATIVES AND LOCAL BUDGET DEDUCTIONS The PARTIES recognize that revenue - reducing initiative(s) passe by��lye voters o Washington and /or' local revenue reductions (i.e. Toss of sales tax /or Eocal ,govern- juent? mandates play substantially reduce local operating revenue for the � T COUNTY or both parties. The PARTI> S .ag -e that it is necessary to have flexibia'[y to reduce; the contracted amount(s) in this Agrcernc it iii response to budget constnaints from the passage of State -wide revenue - reducing initintive.(s) and/or local revenue roductions rind /or local governiizent mandates. Tf such an event occurs, the PARTIES agree to negotiate in good faith to achieve a r usually agrceable resolution in a tirrrely fashion. SECTION NO. 18: DISPUTE RESOLUTION TA'd 4/28 Any dispute regarding the interpretation of,failure to perform, or the costs for services assessed under the terms of this agreement between the SHERIFF, COUNTY or CITY which cannot be resolved between the respective parties shall be subject to arbitration. Except as provided for to the contrary herein, such dispute shall first be reduced to writing and considered by the COUNTY CEO and the City Manager if it is a monetary dispute. If it 1 Page 14 of 19 I I ' I II is a non - monetary dispute, it shall be reduced to writing and considered by the SHERIFF and City Manager, If the COUNTY CEO or SHERIFF respectively and the City Manager cannot resolve the dispute it will be submitted to arbitration. The COUNTY or SHERIFF respectively and the CITY shall have the right to designate one person each to act as an arbitrator. The two selected arbitrators shall then jointly select a third arbitrator. The decision of the arbitration panel shall be binding on the PARTIES and shall be subject to judicial review as provided for in chapter 7.04A RCW. The costs of the arbitration panel shall be equally split between the respective parties. SECTION NO. 19: ASSIGNMENT TA'r14128 No Party may assign in whole or pant its interest in this Agreement without the written approval of the other Parties.Nothing in this section shall prohibit the COUNTY or SHERIFF from contracting with third parties for services provided for in this agreement. SECTION NO. 20: NOTICES TA'd 4/28 All notices called for or provided for in this Agreement shall be in writing and must be served on any of the Parties either personally or by certified mail, return- receipt requested, sent to the Parties at their respective addresses herein above given. Notices sent by certified mail shall be deemed served when deposited in the United ,States mail, postage prepaid. SECTION NO. 21: VENUE STIPULATION TA'd 4/28 This Agreement has been and shall be construed as having been made and delivered within the State of Washington and it is mutually understood and agreed by each Party that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington, both as to interpretation and performance. Any action at law, suit in equity or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement, or any provision hereto, shall be instituted only in courts of competent jurisdiction within Spokane County, Washington. SECTION NO. 22: COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS TA'4/28 The PARTIES shall observe all federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, to the extent that they may be applicable to the terms of this Agreement. SECTION No. 23: DISCLAIMER TA'5 14 Except as otherwise provided, this Agreement shall not be construed in any manner that would limit either Party's authority or powers under law. Page 15 of 19 SECTION NO. 24: HE' ADINGS TA'd 4128 The section and subsection headings appearing in this Agreement have been inserted solely for the purpose of convenience and ready reference. In no way do they purport: to, and shall not be deemed to, define, limit or extend the scope or intent of the sections to which they pertain. SECTION NO. 25: ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREIN TA'd 4/28 This Agreement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the Parties. No other understandings, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement shall be deemed to exist or to bind any of the Parties. Parties have read and understand the whole of the above Agreement and now state that no representations, promises or agreements not expressed in this Agreement have been made to induce either to execute the same. SECTION NO. 26: COUNTERPARTS TA'd 4/28 This Agreement may be executed in any number of multiple signed originals, each of which, when so executed and delivered, shall be an original, but such counterparts shall together constitute but one and the same. SECTION NO. 27: AGREEMENT TO BE FILED TA'd 4128 The COUNTY shall file this Agreement with such offices or agencies as required by chapter 39.34 RCW. SECTION NO. 28: TIME OF ESSENCE OF AGREEMENT TA Id 4128 Time is of the essence of this Agreement and in case any Party fails to perform the obligations on its part to be performed at the time fixed for the performance of the respective obligation by the terms of this Agreement, the other respective Party may, at its election, hold the other Party liable for all costs and damages caused by such delay. SECTION NO. 29: CHAPTER 39.34 RCW REQUIRED CLAUSES TA'd 4128 A. Purpose See Section No. 3 above. B. Agreement to be Filed. See Section No. 27 above. C. Duration. See Section No. 4 above. D. Termination See SectionNo. 4 above. Page 16 of 19 E. Organization of Separate Entity and Its Powers No new or separate legal or administrative entity is created to administer the provisions of this Agreement. F, Responsibilities of the Parties. See applicable Sections within Agreement. G. Property pon Termination. See Section Nos. 4.4 and 11 above. ,SECTION NO. 30: SEVERABILITY TA'd 4128 The PARTIES agree that if any parts, terms or provisions of this Agreement are held by the courts to be illegal, the validity of the remaining portions or provisions shall not be affected and the rights and obligations of the PARTIES shall not be affected in regard to the remainder of the Agreement. If it should appear that any part, tern or provision of this Agreement is in conflict with any statutory provision of the State of Washington, then the part, term or provision thereof that may be in conflict shall be deemed inoperative and null and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith and this Agreement shall be deemed to modify to conform to such statutory provision. SECTION NO.31 THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES. TAW 4/28 This Agreement is intended for the benefit of the COUNTY. CITY and SHERIFF and not for the benefit of any third parties. SECTION NO. 32. SURVIVAL Without being exclusive, Section 16, 20, and 21 of this Agreement shall survive any termination, expiration or determination of invalidity of this Agreement in whole or in part. Any other Sections of this Agreement which, by their sense and context, are intended to survive shall also survive, SECTION NO.33. MEDIA RELEASES TA'd 4/28 Media releases concerning law enforcement activities covered under this Agreement will be prepared by the SHERIFF'S Public Information Officer. Any such release of information to the media that is deemed to be sensitive or likely to cause concern or alarm shall be provided to the City Manager before its release, The CITY shall not issue any media releases regarding law enforcement activities covered under this Agreement without prior approval of the SHERIFF unless otherwise agreed by the parties. Page 17 of 19 f� ,V . of �a SECTION NO. 34: MODIFICATION "phis Agreement may only be modified in writing by the mutt PARTIES. (This space intentionaft left blank.) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date and year opposite their respective signatures. DATED: ATTEST: CLERK OF THE BOARD DANIELA ERICKSON DATED: DATED: x k N BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE, COUNTY, WASHINGTON MARK RICHARD, Chair BONNIE MA.GER, Vice -Chair TODD MIELKE, Commissioner SPOKANE COUNTY SHERIFF: OZZIE KNEZOVICH CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY: Page 18 of 19 MIKE JACKSON, Interim City Manager Attest: KEN THOMPSON City Finance Director Approved as to form only: MIKE CONNELLY City Attorney 17( Page 19 of 19 EXHIBIT 1 � 1 Sheriffs Office - 2010 Commissioned Officer Worksheet Total Commissioned FTE: 236.00 Total included in Commissioned Officer Charge: 217.67 Excludes those allocated along with administrative costs and those shot are County responsibifity. Migence Led Policing ies c /Search Rescue ies 1.75 les S Investigative /Support Sery 45.67 City 2010 CCM 06 -30 -10 Comm Officer Worksheet Category 3 Allocated with Administrative Costs Command Staff Undersheriffs 2 PIO _ Sergeant 1 Training /OPS Lieutenant 2 Sergeant _ Deputies I 2 Total Administrative 8 Category 4 County Responsibility! Other Cost Recovery Method Civil Lieutenant Deputies I Marine Patrol _ Deputy AEA DetectivelCorp 1 DTF Detective/Corp Deputies 0.75 Sex Off_ Res. Verif. Detective/Corp 0.16 Sex Off. Res. Verif. SA03 Detective /Corp 1.00 WA Meth Grant _ Detective/Corp 0.67 Child Sex Pred Grant Deputy 1 10.33 Category 9 Dedicated FTEs Note: "Unincorporated" here includes small cities. Investigative/ Unincorp Valley Medical Lk Deer Park Total Admin Major Crimes _ Chiefllnspector Captain 1 Sergeant I Lieutenant 1 Lieutenant 0.25 R 0-75 Sergeant 1 Patrol — Detectives 5 Captain _ Sex Crimes 1 Lieutenant 2 Sergeant 4 Sergeant Detectives 13 Detective/Corp. r _ Property Crimes TF 10 Deputies _ = 103 TrafficlCVEO Detectives a 4 Sergeant 1 Deputies 1 Detective/Corp. ? 1 ISUICIUIDECIJTTFIMeth %IDTF % 3 Deputies 5 Lieutenant 12 Property Crimes Sergeant l 1.00 Sergeant - Detectives 1 Detective/Corp. Deputies 9 Community Services Gang Enforcement Deputy Sergeant 2 Domestic Violence Detective/Corp 2 .00_ Detectivetcorp. — Deputies 1 Deputy 1 Total Investigative 1 SRO - Deputies L 3 1 a Total Dedicated FTEs 83.25 80.75 5 3 172 Dedicated FTEs excluding SROs 80.25 76.75 5 2 164 Migence Led Policing ies c /Search Rescue ies 1.75 les S Investigative /Support Sery 45.67 City 2010 CCM 06 -30 -10 Comm Officer Worksheet Category 3 Allocated with Administrative Costs Command Staff Undersheriffs 2 PIO _ Sergeant 1 Training /OPS Lieutenant 2 Sergeant _ Deputies I 2 Total Administrative 8 Category 4 County Responsibility! Other Cost Recovery Method Civil Lieutenant Deputies I Marine Patrol _ Deputy AEA DetectivelCorp 1 DTF Detective/Corp Deputies 0.75 Sex Off_ Res. Verif. Detective/Corp 0.16 Sex Off. Res. Verif. SA03 Detective /Corp 1.00 WA Meth Grant _ Detective/Corp 0.67 Child Sex Pred Grant Deputy 1 10.33 jYJ Zategory 2 ahared Services Investigative/ Community Services/K-9 Major Crimes _ Captain 1 Lieutenant 1 Sergeant 1 Detectives 5 Sex Crimes Sergeant _ 1 Detectives S.d te Property Crimes TF _ Sergeant 1 Detectives a 4 Deputies 3 ISUICIUIDECIJTTFIMeth %IDTF % Lieutenant Sergeant l 1.00 Detectives &163 Deputies 225 Gang Enforcement Sergeant 1_00 Detective/Corp 2 .00_ Deputies 1.00 Total Investigative 37.92 Migence Led Policing ies c /Search Rescue ies 1.75 les S Investigative /Support Sery 45.67 City 2010 CCM 06 -30 -10 Comm Officer Worksheet Category 3 Allocated with Administrative Costs Command Staff Undersheriffs 2 PIO _ Sergeant 1 Training /OPS Lieutenant 2 Sergeant _ Deputies I 2 Total Administrative 8 Category 4 County Responsibility! Other Cost Recovery Method Civil Lieutenant Deputies I Marine Patrol _ Deputy AEA DetectivelCorp 1 DTF Detective/Corp Deputies 0.75 Sex Off_ Res. Verif. Detective/Corp 0.16 Sex Off. Res. Verif. SA03 Detective /Corp 1.00 WA Meth Grant _ Detective/Corp 0.67 Child Sex Pred Grant Deputy 1 10.33 Exhibit l Services The COUNTY will provide law enforcement services cons; t ie following: Category ] — Dedicated FTE's • Valley Police Administration • Patrol ® Traffic Investigation ® Property Crimes ® Community Services • Domestic Violence Unit • School Resource Officer Category 2 — Shared Services Investigative /Community Services/K -9 • Major Crimes • Sex Crimes • Property Crimes Task Force • Investigative Support Unit • Criminal Intelligence Unit ® Drug Endangered Children Detective • Joint Terrorism Task Force _ f Meth Detective • Drug Task Force • Gang Enforcement • Intelligence LED Policing • Marine /Search and Rescue • K -9 Category 3 -- Allocated with Administrative Costs • Administration - Undershcriff and Staff • Public Information Officer • Office of Professional Standards and Training Category 4 -- County Responsibility or Other Cost Recovery Method • Civil Process • Marine Patrol Grant • DEA Grant • Drug Task Force Grant • Sex Offender Registration • Sex Offender Residency Verification Grant • WA Meth Grant • Child Sex Predator Grant • Sheriff Law Enforcement Services Allocated by Various Basis • SCOPE /SIRT • Radio Dispatch • Helicopter • Forensics • Crime Check • Records Management • Property Room • Explosive Disposal • Communications Law Enforcement Services included in the Per Commissioned Officer Rate • LEIS • Crime Analysis Unit • Garage • Firing Range • Fleet • SWAT/Hostage Negotiation • Extra Duty Employment CO • Reservist and Explorer Units • Countywide Indi-rect Costs — OMB A -87 • Annual Changes in Accrued Leave EXHIBIT 2 Commissioned Officer Rate 125,295 4,072 1,617 130,984 4,257 1,691 136,932 City 2010 CCM 06 -30 -10 2008 Actuals to 2010 w Multplrs Spokane County Sheriffs Office Type of Allocation: Law Enforcement Cost Allocation Model A -87 Summary of Client Charges Based on 2008 Actuals Other ActualAllocations V3.2 Surnrnary - Budget Other Allocations Total 3.25% 1.250% BUDG1.250% BUDGET Other Charge 2009 2009 2009' 2010 2010 Allocations for 2008 COLA MULTIPLIER CON OA'bT COLA MULTIPLIER CONTRACT Spokane 1,562,405 1,562,405 50,778 20,165 1,. 3,348 53,084 21,080 1,707,512 Spokane Valley 2,189,664 2,189,664 71,164 28,260 2,289,088 74,395 29,544 2,393,027 Deer Park 112,040 112,040 3,641 1,446 117,127 3,807 1,512 122,446 Millwood 60,011 60,011 1,950 775 62,736 2,039 810 65,585 Spangle 4,036 4,036 131 52 4,219 137 54 4,410 Rockford 10,615 10,615 345 137 11,097 361 143 11,601 Airway Heights 68,715 68,715 2,233 887 71,835 2,335 927 75,097 Fairfield 7,543 7,543 245 97 7,885 256 102 8,243 Liberty Lake 73,889 73,889 2,401 954 77,244 2,510 997 80,751 Medical Lake 43,760 43,760 1,422 565 45,747 1,487 590 47,824 Latah 2,280 2,280 74 29 2,383 77 31 2,491 Waverly 1,648 1,648 54 21 1,723 56 22 1,801 Cheney 15,213 15,213 494 196 15,903 517 205 16,625 Fairchild AFS 3,073 3,073 100 40 3,213 104 41 3,358 Unincorporated County 3,231,984 3,231,984 105,039 41,713 3,378,736 109,809 43,607 3,532,152 Total 7,386,876 7,386,876 240,073 95,337 7,722,286 250,974 99,666 8,072,926 County Responsibility /Other Cost Recovery 41,541,344 41,541,344 1,350,094 536,143 43,427,581 1,411,396 560,487 45,399,464 Total Costs Net of Revenues 48,928,220 48,928,220 1,590,167 631,480 51,149,867 1,662,371 660,153 53,472,391 Commissioned Officer Rate 125,295 4,072 1,617 130,984 4,257 1,691 136,932 City 2010 CCM 06 -30 -10 2008 Actuals to 2010 w Multplrs Spokane County Sheriff's Off lee Law Enforcement Cost Allocation Model } v T of Allocation• Allocation of Commissioned Officers Between Unincorporated and Small Cities Based on 200B Actuals Ype A - 87 % of Regular Population Total Officers Unincorp. Unincorporated - District 8 s,: "': 86 °9% 5 °22 5.22 Millwood i,t ~c; { 13.1% 0.78 Total District 8 12,731 ' -6.00 Unincorporated - District 10 Unincorporated - District 11 Total Unincorporated -Dist 10 & 11 Spangle Rockford Fairfield Latah Waverly Total Districts 10 and 11 Unincorporated - Districts 8,10,11 Unincorporated - other than Dist. 8,10,11 Total Unincorporated without small cities Population numbers used ; .1, -3 ti 25,5 - -^ 93.8% 11.25 275 1.0% 0.12 499 1.8% 0.22 6,03 2.2% 0.27 1 94 0.7% 0.09 27 0.5% 0.06 27,261 100.0 %1 12.00 1 2008 statistics 11.25 1bAt 62 °25 78 °72 i� City 2010 CCM 06 -30 -10 Small Cities I� f � City 2010 CCM 06 -30-10 2010 Comm Officer Summary Spokane County Sheriffs Office T c of Allocation: Law Enforcement COSt Allocation Model A_B7 Commissioned Officer Summa Based on 2008 Actuals Commissioned Officers Dedicated to Local Jurisdictlons 5 olcane Valle Over Park Millwood San le Roldord Airway Hof hts Fairfield Liberty Lake Medical Lake Labhh Waverly Chenov Fairchild AFB Unlncorporate d Counly Total Costs CommLsioned Offlcer Rate Total FTE Dedicated FTFs exdudinq SROs 7635 2.00 0.78 0.12 0.22 0.27 5.00 0.09 0 -06 78.72 164.00 School Resource Officers 4.00 1.00 3.00 8.00 Total Dedicated FTEs 80.75 3.00 0.78 4.12 022 - 0.27 I 5.00 0.09 0.06 81.72 17290 0.09 4 734.80 1 0.87 44 344. 20 0.08 - 4 072.95 _`+,00 '101 823.65 12 0.04 240.12 Statlsf c: Avg RMS & Cases 4 9.41 2 515349.51 i 203 103 96 D.44 i 0.75_i_ 38132-96 1 0.42 I 4 6,70 2.377.429.38 101.989 1 Total Invostgafive Dollars - 5 192 445.87 6 37.92 K -9 Sta6sNc:K-9 2570.00 26.00 31.00 - 1.00 4.00 2.00 5.00 1.04 - 2CD 1.00 1139.00 3,78200 Total K-9 Dollars 465 248.79 4 706.80 5 511.95 - 181-03 724.12 36206 905.15 181.03 362.06 181.03 206193.92 684 657.95 136,932 5.00 I Intellelli ence Led Pollcin Dedicated FTEs oxcluding SROs 76.75 2.00 0.78 0.12 0-22 0.27 &CC 0.09 0.06 78.72 164.00 Total Community FTEs 176 226.36 4 1,801.75 277.95 504.35 - 609.47 - 11 1 196.08 128 36 - - 180 744.78 376 561.87 136,932 2.75 I Total Investl aolvefK- 91Communi Services Costs 3156 824.66 112 398.46 45,547.44 5 45 029.80 724.12 5 044.74 905.15 113A90.22 2436,29 1.35030 36206 181.43 2, 764,449.80 217.67 Statislics for Avp RMS & Cases and K -9 from 2006 Acuals Estimated Medical Lake I� f � City 2010 CCM 06 -30-10 2010 Comm Officer Summary Spokane County Sheriffs Office Law Enforcement Cost Allocation Model Commissioned Officer Rate and Ahocation Based on 2008 Actuals 2010 Allocation of Commissloned Officer Charge `U Type of Allatalicn: A•67 City 2010 CC 06 -30-10 2010 Commissioned Offccar Alloc Dedicated Investigelive Schaal SRO Total Dedlcetod Commissioned Community Sery Resource SRO Contract Net SRO Commissioned Officers Officer Charge K -9 Charge Officers Charge Revenue Charge Officer Charge Spokane Spokane Valley 76.75 10,509,499 3,156,825 4.00 547,728 67,056 460,670 14,146,995 Deer Park 2.00 273,663 112,398 1.00 136,932 16,784 120,168 506,429 M #hvood 0,78 107,450 45,547 - 152,997 Spangle 0.12 18,578 5,013 - - 21,569 Rockford 0.22 30,078 45,030 75,707 Airway Heights - - 724 724 Fairfield 0.27 36,346 5,045 4 1, 391 Liberty Lake - - 905 905 Medical Lake 5.00 684,656 113,490 798,148 Latah 0,09 11,694 2,436 14,130 Waverly 0.06 7,655 1,350 9,005 Cheney - - 362 362 Fairchild AFB - 181 - - 181 Unincorporated County 78.72 10,778,982 2,784,450 3.00 410,795 50,292 360,503 13,903,874 Total All Jurisdictions 164.00 22,458,781 8,253,757 8,00 1,095,453 134,4t2 981,341 28, 671,,878 Commissioned Officer Rate Total Commissioned Officers Serving Local Jurisdictions 217.87 2008 Actuals for Commissioned Officer Rate with Multipliers 136,932 City 2010 CC 06 -30-10 2010 Commissioned Offccar Alloc r� City 2010 CCM 06 -30 -10 2008 Settle and Adjust Spokane County Sheriff's Office Law Enforcement Cost Allocation Model _ Summary of Client Charges Based on 2008 Actuals Actual Settle and Commissioned Total Adjust Officer Other Charge PAID 2010 Charge Allocations for 2008 2008 ,CONTRACT 1,562,405 15,207,683 - - 582,681 203,154 24,149 83,944 69,377 45,505 74,717 43,925 15,340 9,947 15,545 3,238 F7 Spokane - 1,562,405 Spokane Valley 13,018,019 2,189,664 Deer Park 470,641 112,040 Millwood 143,142 60,011 Spangle 20,113 4,036 10,615 Rockford 73,329 Airway Heights 663 68,715 Fairfield 37,962 7,543 Liberty Lake 828 73,889 Medical Lake 166 43,760 Latah 13,060 2,280 Waverly 8,299 1,648 Cheney 331 166 15,213 3,073 Fairchild AFB 1 r� City 2010 CCM 06 -30 -10 2008 Settle and Adjust Spokane County Sheriffs Office Law Enforcement Cost Allocation Model Summary of Client Charges Based on 2008 Actuals Summary - Charges to Clients Spokane Spokane Valley Deer Park Millwood Spangle Rockford Airway Heights Fairfield Liberty Lake Medical Lake Latah Waverly Cheney Fairchild AFB Type of Allocation: A -87 Commissioned Total Officer Other Contract Budget Charge Allocations for 2010 - 1,707,512 1,707,512 14,146,995 2,393,027 16,540,021 506,429 122,446 628,875 152,997 65,585 218,583 21,589 4,410 25,999 75,107 11,601 86,708 724 75,097 75,821 41,391 8,243 49,634 905 80,751 81,656 798,148 47,824 845,972 14,130 2,491 16,621 9,005 1,801 10,807 362 16,625 16,988 181 3,358 3,539 2008 Settle & Adjust Total Monthly Carry Forward Contract Budget Billing 2010 Including Carry Forward 2010 - 1,707,512 - 16,540,021 1,378,335 - 628,875 - 218,583 - 25,999 - 86,708 - 75,821 - 49,634 - 81,656 - 845,972 - 16,621 - 10,807 - 16,988 - 3,539 City 2010 CCM 06 -30 -10 Total Budgetfor 2010 r OP ShorifFs Office - 2010 l] i l ✓! Y Commissioned Officer wori=.. --¢ Total Commissioned FTE: 236.00 Total included in Commissioned Officer / 217.67 Excludes those allocated along with admin' 1 of j/e costs and those that are County resportsibitity. Category 2 gory 1 Shared Services J 1 Investigative! Dedicated FTlcs Community ServiceslK -9 Major Crimes Note. 'Unincorporated" hero includes small cities. Captain 1 Lieutenant Unincorp Valley Modica] Lk Deer Park Total Admin 5 Sex Crimes _ Chief /Inspector 1 Detectives 1 Sergeant I Sergeant 1 Lieutenant I 0.25E 0.75 ~ 1 Patron Lieutenant 01 Captain 1.00 Detectives 6.83 Lieutenant 22 5 Gang Enforcemont 4 Sergeant 7 { _., 3 ; Detective /Corp 13 Detective/Corp, f 6 j 10 Deputies -- – .qq ` 5 1 2 i 103 Traffic/CVEO Deputies 7 Sergeant Deputies 1 Detective /Corp. t _ 3 Deputies _ '. ?..,1 _ _ 12 Property Crimes Sergeant Detective /Corp. Community Services Deputy 2 Domestic Violence Detectivelcorp_ Deputy 1 1 SRO Deputies F 4 i 1 8 Total Dedicated FTEs 83.25 80.75 5 3 172 Dedictited FTEs excluding SROs 8025 76.75 5 2 164 Category 2 Shared Services J 1 Investigative! Community ServiceslK -9 Major Crimes Deputies Captain 1 Lieutenant 1 Sergeant 1 Detectives 5 Sex Crimes _ Sergeant 1 Detectives 't . .5.84 s Proporty Crimes TF i 1 Sergeant I 1 Detectives 4 Deputies 3 1SU /C1UIDEClJTTFlMKh %1DTF % Lieutenant 01 Sergeant 1.00 Detectives 6.83 Deputies 22 5 Gang Enforcemont Sergeant ; 1.00 Detective /Corp 2.00 Doputies 1.00 Total Invesu jative 37.92 intellelligence Led Policing Deputies �� — 1 MarinelSearch Rescue Deputies 7 K -9 Deputies I 5 Total InvestigativelSupport Sery 45.67 Category 3 Allocated with Administrative Costs Command Staff Undersheriffs I_ 2 P10 Sergeant 1 Training /OPS Lieutenant 2 Sergeant 1 Deputies I 2 Total Administrative 8 Category 4 County Responsibility/ Other Cost Recovery Mettnod Deputies Marine Patrol Deputy 1 1 0.25 DEA Defective/Corp J 1 DTF DetectivelCorp 1. 50 Deputies 0.75 Sox Off. Res. Vcrif. DetecbvelCorp 0.10 Sex Off. Res. Verif SAW DetcctivelCorp I 1.00 wA Meth Grant _ Detective /Carp 0.67 Child Sex Pred Grant Deputy i 1 Adrnin Sheriff 1 10.33 City 2010 CCM 06 -30 -10 Comm Officer Worksheet Draft Law Enforcement Interlocal Agreement July 20, 2010 Mike Jackson, Acting City Manager Mike Connelly, City Attorney Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst Contract Language Changes and Additions Ability to Adjust Service Level and Cost Cost Methodology Commissioned Officer Worksheet and Services Provided Added Chargeable Services Actual 2010 Costs Next Step IN Fixed number of Full Time Equivalents (FTE) City has unilateral control over these positions. Valley Police Administration Patrol Traffic Investigation Property Crimes Community Services Domestic Violence Unit School Resource Officer I The following services are charged based upon usage Level of service FTE's changed by mutual agreement of City and Sheriff's Office. Major Crimes Sex Crimes Property Crimes Task Force Investigative Support Unit Criminal Intelligence Unit Drug Endangered Children Detective Joint Terrorism Task Force • Meth Detective • Drug Task Force 1 Gang Enforcement Intelligence LED Policing • Marine /Search and Rescue ■ K -9 = New Chargeable Services 12 Level determined by Sheriff Allocated to commissioned officer rate Command Staff Public Information Officer Training /Office of Professional Standards 19 Services that grant - funded, City. Civil are the Sheriff's responsibility, or do not provide service to the Marine Patrol IDEA DTF Sex Offender Registration WA Meth Grant Child Sex Predator Grant Sheriff I Shared services for some units, cost based on usage. Some services previously identified as regional shifted to chargeable services. Chargeable services added DEC /Meth /Gang investigations Admin Lt. Intelligence Led Policing Marine /Search Rescue All costs flow through a cost allocation plan that allocates costs based upon usage. Cost plan completed by financial consultant utilized by County. Estimated costs are calculated by utilizing actual costs from two years prior and applying a cost of living adjustment (COLA) multiplier and a health insurance multiplier for each of the two years following the actual cost year. (2008 actual costs X 3.25% COLA X 1.25% Health Insurance X 3.25% COLA X 1.25% Health Insurance added to 2008 actual costs = 2010 estimated costs) Estimated costs will be divided into twelve equal monthly payments Estimated costs will be reconciled to actual costs Beginning in 2012, the reconciliation amount from two years prior will be included in the total billing amount for the year. I Per Officer Cost is $136,932 (includes equipment, supplies, and support positions) Spokane Valley Officer FTE 104.18 (80.75 Dedicated FTE and 23.43 Shared) Shared FTE fluctuates from year -to -year based upon usage SV FTE under old contract 102.77 (including precinct commander) it $10,990,169 Dedicated Officers $ 3,156,825 Shared Officers (Investigative) $ 2,393,027 Other (Radio, Property, Records, Forensics, Crime Check, SCOPE, etc.) $16,540,021 Total 2010 Law Enforcement Cost ux 2010 County Estimated 2009 County Estimated Increase $16,540,021 $15,201,734 $1 Annual Increase ( %) from 2004 -2009= 5.1 2010 City Budget (LE &Comm) $16,581,860 01 Additions $ 237,142 Communications Contract (calculated separately previously) $ 102,699 Addition of Administrative Lieutenant (3/4 of year) $ 102,699 Addition of .75 FTE for DEC /Meth /Gang Officers $ 176,642 Addition of 1.29 FTE for Intelligence Led Policing & Marine /Search Rescue $ 56,533 Shift of Regional Services, Explosives, Regional Drug Task Force, Extra Duty Employment, Reservist and Explorer Unit, and Sheriff Adm. Assistant $ 675,715 Total Additions $15,864,306 Total Cost less Additions ($16,540,021-$675,715) 4.36% Percentage Increase from 2009 to 2010 less Additions Inflationary Increase $684,078 COLA and Medical Multiplier (4.5% of $15,201,754) Change in Methodology $ (21,506) Change in Allocation Method (Fixed FTE to Shared FTE) Summary of Cost Increase $675,715 Additions to Chargeable Services (4.4 %) $684,078 COLA and Medical Inflation Escalator ((4.5 %) $(21 Change in Allocation Method ( -.1 %) $1,338,287 Total Cost Increase from 2009 to 2010 in Replaces original contract Retains dedicated officers (service level control)for the majority of officers (Patrol, Traffic, etc.) Shares services (usage control) for Investigative Services and Community Services. Utilizes a Law Enforcement Cost Allocation Plan (LECAP) to precisely allocate costs according to use. Four year length, January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2013 Automatically renews unless termination notice is provided prior to the expiration of the term. Termination date is effective eighteen months following termination notice. Total cost increase from 2009 to 2010 is $1,338,287 H9 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 20, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2011 Legislative Agenda GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: The 2011 Legislative session in Olympia will convene on January 10, 2011. In the past, the City Council has considered various legislative items to promote with the Legislature. The City Council viewed the 2010 Legislative Agenda at the February retreat. A copy of that Agenda is attached as a starting point to consider legislative items that Council deems important to the City of Spokane Valley. OPTIONS: 1) Initiate anew Legislative Agenda 2) Revise the 2010 Legislative Agenda 3) Other actions desired by City Council RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Mike Jackson / Mayor Towey ATTACHMENTS: 2010 Legislative Agenda j� 2010 Legislative Agenda Adopted by Council October 13 .2009. Amended by Council Feruary 16. 2010 The following is the draft amended legislative agenda for consideration of Council adoption: Principle Items of Interest: 1.) Street utility enabling legislation: Council has seen several presentations regarding Spokane City Councilman Al French's proposed street utility legislation and has previously shown support of the legislation. The proposal enables legislation to allow local control and detennination by city councils and local electorates to decide if it is a tool they want to use in their community to attend to street maintenance functions. 2.) Increased state funding for the 911 system: Rates applied to telephone and other bills that generate revenue for the 911 systems are set by state legislature and have not been revised for a long time. Many 911 centers are advising their constituents that they are not able to hold a budget below the current revenues and have expressed a need for state relief. 3.) Seek $300,000 for the acquisition of park land adjacent to the Park Road pool and Centennial Middle School. Spokane Valley has a population of 89,440 people but only 172 acres of public parks — drastically below the 6.25 - 10.5 acres/ 1, 000population (559 – 938 acres) specified in the Parks Master Plan. Spokane Valley has successfully partnered with the State Legislature in the acquisition and development of Greenacres Park, adjacent to Central Valley School District's future elementary school. We want to ask the Capital Budget Committee for support in replicating our success in co- locating public assets in under- served and economically distressed neighborhoods. 4.) Law Enforcement District enabling legislation: Law enforcement needs and resources vary in jurisdictions across the state like those for fire prevention and suppression. More tools are needed to best consolidate, deploy and pay for law enforcement services. Use of fire districts has proven to be a viable system for the provision of essential public services and many jurisdictions may derive benefit from providing law enforcement services under a similar system. 5) Securing state funding for statewide communications interoperability infrastructure: Locally the citizens have approved a sales tax increase that includes 1/10 "' of 1% for communication equipment; however, the revenue is insufficient to fund all five items within that initiative. Interoperability is a statewide concern and according to the Association of Washington Cities, there is a $400 million problem to be resolved. 6) Reasonable legislation related to the "cap and trade" provisions of climate control regulations under consideration: Council has heard repeated reports on the climate control and change regulations being discussed in Olympia as well as Washington D.C., using the tern "cap and trade" in reference to efforts to reduce our carbon footprint. We want to be aware of the options under consideration for regulatory enactment. 7) Access to enhanced state fuel purchasing power. We have a desire to determine if there is a way to access enhanced state fuel purchasing power related to the large amount of fuel purchased by state, county and city organizations to operate government vehicles. Exploration of methods that aggregate governmental purchasing power that may drive down the cost of the fuel purchases is warranted. 8.) Provide support for the Association of Washington Cities' legislative agenda items that serve the best interests of the City of Spokane Valley. Spokane l alley 2010AMended Legislative Agenda Page I of 2 9.) Support Public Records Request legislation. This legislation would allow the citizens who make public records requests to be directed to an internet address where the responsive records can be found on the City's website while making provisions for citizens without internet access. The legislation would provide for a voluntary conference between the City and its citizens to clarify the request, which could be considered by the court in any subsequent litigation. Spokane l alley 2010AMended Legislative Agenda Page 2 of 2 DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of July 15, 2010; 8:00 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative To: Council & Staff From: City Clerk, by direction of Acting City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings July 27, 2010, Formal Meeting Format 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, July 191 1. Consent Agenda: Claims, Payroll, Minutes (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending Comcast Franchise - Driskell (20 minutes) 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending CTR Plan - Driskell (15 minutes) 4. First Reading Proposed Ordinance, CTA 03 -10 Code text Amndmnt (Sprague /Appleway)- C. Janssen (15 min) 5. Motion Consideration: SRTC (Spokane Regional Transportation Council) Interlocal - M.Connelly (10 min) 6. Motion Consideration: Transportation Improvement Board Call for Projects - Steve Worley (10 minutes) 7. Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appt to SC Housing & Community Dev. Committee - Mayor Towey (5 min) 8. Motion Consideration: Law Enforcement Interlocal - Mike Jackson (15 minutes) 9. Motion Consideration: Avista Home Energy Audit Request - Mary May (10 minutes) 10. Motion Consideration: Broadcasting - Mike Jackson (10 minutes) 11. Motion Consideration: Subarea Items to Send to Planning Commission - Kathy McClung (10 minutes) 12. Admin Report: Ballot Measure (one vs. two -way Sprague) - Mike Jackson /Steve Worley (20 minutes) 13. Admin Report: Animal Shelter- Morgan Koudelka (15 minutes) 14. Admin Report: 2011 Council Budget Goals - Mayor Towey (20 minutes) 15. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 16. Info Only: (a) Dept Reports ; (b) Response to Public Comments; (c) Response to Permit Ctr Comments [ *estimated meeting: 185 minutes] August 3, 2010, (CONFIRMED) No Meeting, 6:00 p.m. (National Night Out) August 10, 2010 Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. jdue date Mon, Aug 2]] 1. Consent Agenda: Claims, Payroll, Minutes (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance, Panhandling - Cary Driskell (15 minutes) 3. Second Read Proposed Ordinance, CTA 03 -10 Code Text Amdmnt (Sprague /Appleway)- C.Janssen (15 mins) 4. Motion Consideration: Setting Prelim. Budget Hearings 9 -14 & 9 -28 - Ken Thompson (5 minutes) 5. Admin Report: Transportation Benefit District - Mike Connelly (15 minutes) 6. Admin Report: Estimates of 2010 & 2011 Revenue /Expenditures - Ken Thompson (10 minutes) 7. Admin Report: Subarea Plan (SARP) Report to Council re Public Mtg - S. Kuhta - (45 minutes) 8. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: 115 minutes] August 17, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Aug 9] Action Item: 1. Motion to Consider Adopting 2011 Legislative Agenda - Mike Jackson (20 minutes) Non - Action Items: 2. Subarea Plan (SARP) Zone Discussion: City Center - Mike Basinger (30 minutes) 3. 2011 Budget - Property Tax Levies - Ken Thompson (15 minutes) 4. Admin Report: CTA -05 -10 Code Text Amendment (vehicle sales in Mixed use Zone) - C. Janssen (10 minutes) 5. Street Preservation Program - Steve Worley (30 minutes) 6. Advance Agenda [ *estimated meeting: 105 minutes] August 24, 2010, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Aug 16] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2011 Budget Revenues - Ken Thompson (10 minutes) 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance adopting 2011 Property Tax Levy- Ken Thompson (15 minutes) Draft Advance Agenda 7/20/2010 8:02:44 AM Page 1 of 4 3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance property tax confirmation - Ken Thompson (10 minutes) 4. First Read Proposed Ordinance CTA -05 -10 Code Text Amdmt (Vehicle Sales in Mixed Use Zone)- C.Janssen (15 min) 5. Admin Report: Outside Agency Presentations - Ken Thompson (60 minutes) 6. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 7. Info Only: Department Reports [ *estimated meeting: 115 minutes] August 31, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Aug 23] 1. Advance Agenda 2. Info Only: Preliminary Budget [ *estimated meeting: minutes] September 7, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Aug 30] 1. Code text amendments (GCA & GCC Zone) - Lori Barlow (25 minutes) 2. Presentation of Preliminary Budget - Mike Jackson (30 minutes) 3. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: minutes] September 14, 2010 Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. jdue date Fri Sept 3] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2011 budget - Ken Thompson (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Ordinance adopting 2011 Property tax Levy - Ken Thompson (15 minutes) 3. Second Reading Ordinance property tax confirmation - Ken Thompson (5 minutes) 4. Second Read Ordinance CTA -05 -10 Code Text Amdmnt (Vehicle Sales in Mixed Use Zone) - C. Janssen (15 minutes) 5. First Reading Ordinance Code Text Amendments (GCA & GCC Zone) - Lori Barlow (15 minutes) 6. Motion Consideration: Allocation of Funds to Outside Agencies - Ken Thompson (25 minutes) 7. Subarea Plan (SARP) Plan) - Update to Council - Mike Basinger (30 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: 110 minutes] September 21, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Sept 13] 1. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)- Greg McCormick (15 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda [ *estimated meeting: minutes] September 28, 2010, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Sept 20] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: 2011 budget - Ken Thompson (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Ordinance Code Text Amendments (GCA & GCC Zone) - Lori Barlow (10 minutes) 3. First Reading Ordinance to adopt 2011 Budget - Ken Thompson (15 minutes) 4. Subarea Plan (SARP) Zone Comm. Blvd - Lori Barlow (45 minutes) 5. Info Only: Department Reports [ *estimated meeting: 85 minutes] October 5, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 mm. 1. Advance Agenda October 12.2010 Formal Meeting Format. 6:00 D.M. 1. Consent Agenda (Claims, minutes, payroll) 2. Second Reading Ordinance to adopt 2011 Budget - Ken Thompson 3. Admin Report: Fee Resolution Proposed Changes - Mike Jackson 4. Advance Agenda October 19, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. SARP Report to Council - Kathy McClung 2. Advance Agenda [due date Mon, Sept 27] (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: minutes] jdue date Mon Oct 4] (5 minutes) (15 minutes) (15 minutes) (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: 40 minutes] [due date Mon, Oct 11] (45 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: minutes] Draft Advance Agenda 7/20/2010 8:02:44 AM Page 2 of 4 October 26, 2010, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (Claims, minutes, payroll) 2. Proposed Resolution Amending Fee Resolution — Mike Jackson 3. Advance Agenda 4. Info Only: Department Reports November 2, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 mm. 1. Advance Agenda November 9, 2010 Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (Claims, minutes, payroll) 2. Advance Agenda November 16, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 mm. 1. Advance Agenda 2. Hotel /Motel Grant Proposals for 2011 November 23, 2010 Thanksgiving Week (tentative, no meeting) [due date Mon, Oct 18] (15 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] [due date Mon, Oct 25] (5 minutes) [estimated meeting: minutes] jdue date Mon Nov 1] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: minutes] [due date Mon, Nov 8] [ *estimated meeting: minutes] November 30, 2010, Tentative No Meeting: Council attends NLC in Colorado (Nov 30 -Dec 4) December 7, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda [due date Mon, Nov 29] December 14, 2010, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m [due date Mon, Dec 6] 1. Consent Agenda: Minutes, Claims, Payroll 2. Motion Consideration: Allocation of Hotel /Motel Grant Proposals for 2011 — Ken Thompson (15 min) 3. Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointments (Planning Commission, etc.) (15 minutes) December 21, 2010, Christmas Week (tentative, no meeting) December 28, 2010, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. January 4, 2011, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. OTHER PENDING AND /OR UPCOMING ISSUES /MEETINGS Affordable Housing Participation Alternative Analysis (contracts) Area Agency on Aging Bidding Contracts (SVMC 3. — bidding exceptions) Broadcasting Business Registration Ordinance Amendments Capital Projects Funding [due date Mon, Dec 20] [due date Mon, Dec 27] Draft Advance Agenda 7/20/2010 8:02:44 AM Page 3 of 4 Cattlemen Clean Air Agency Code Amendments (Kathy McClung) Concurrency Contract Ordinance Amendment East Gateway Monument Structure # Industrial Pre - treatment Interlocal w /City of Spokane Jail Update Maintenance /Construction Inspector- Mechanic New Position Milwaukee Right -of -way ■ Overweight /over size vehicle ordinance Paving Options Planned Action Ordinance Public Records Policy (Ordinance) Amendments Shoreline Master Program "Inventory & Charac.Rpt" (from May 11 meeting) Solid Waste Amended Interlocal Speed Limits Sprague Appleway Corridor Environ. Assessment Sprague Avenue: One -way vs. two -way Street Maintenance Facility Street Superintendent Position Transportation Benefit District Interlocal Transportation Benefit District: (a). Establish ord.; (b) set public hearing; (e) draft resolution; (d) ballot language Transportation Impacts WIRA, Water Protection Commitment, public education 0 — request for Council's early consideration # = Awaiting action by others * = doesn't include time for public or council comments Draft Advance Agenda 7/20/2010 8:02:44 AM Page 4 of 4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 20, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ® information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Energy Efficiency Block Grant Update GOVERNING LEGISLATION: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Information Item June 2 and 9, 2009; March 30, 2010 BACKGROUND: The City Council approved several projects under the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant ( EECBG) program. One of the projects is a partnership with Avista Utilities for residential and commercial energy audits, whereby the full cost of the audit is supplemented by EECBG dollars to encourage owners to identify potential energy efficiency improvements. The City and County of Spokane have allocated EECBG funds for the same program. Avista serves as the lead in marketing and conducting the overall program. Launched by Avista in the spring of this year, participation has been minimal. Only five Spokane Valley households have participated. To generate more participation, Avista has requested approval to increase the amount of EECBG dollars per audit from $87.50 to $138 so that the cost to the homeowner is $99 rather than $150. Similar requests have been approved by the City and County of Spokane. The City has allocated $88,000 for the Utility Partnering project. EECBG projects must be implemented and completed within 36- months, or by November 2012. OPTIONS: Not applicable. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None required or requested. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: There is no impact to the City of Spokane Valley budget. Increasing the EECBG funding amount per audit would result in a lower maximum number of audits. However, the reduced cost to homeowners is hoped to increase the actual number of participants. STAFF CONTACT: Mary E. May, AICP ATTACHMENTS: None CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: July 20, 2010 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ® executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: EXECUTIVE SESSION: To Evaluate the Qualifications of Applicants for Public Employment GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 42.30.110(1)(9) PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to adjourn into executive session for approximately thirty minutes to evaluate the qualifications of applicants for public employment and that no action is anticipated thereafter. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: