Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2010, 11-09 Regular Meeting
AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL/REGULAR MEETING FORMAL MEETING FORMAT Tuesday, November 9, 2010 6:00 p.m. Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers 11707 E Sprague Avenue Council Requests Please Silence Your Cell Phones During Council Meeting CALL TO ORDER: INVOCATION: Pastor John Vanderwalker, Community of Christ Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: ROLL CALL: APPROVAL OF AGENDA: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: MAYOR'S REPORT: PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject not on the agenda for action. When you come to the podium, please state your name and address for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. 1. CONSENT AGENDA Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. a. Approval of the following claim vouchers: VOUCHER LIST DATE WNOUCHER NUMBERS: TOTAL AMOUNT 10 -22 -2010 21302 -21320 $53,396.48 10 -25 -2010 21321 - 21361; 1021100008 $1,297,185.05 10 -29 -2010 5181 -5189 $1,096.00 11 -02 -2010 21362- 21392; 1026100081 $1,439,469.08 GRAND TOTAL $2,791,146.61 b. Approval of Payroll for Period Ending October 31, 2010: $333,587.37 c. Approval of City Council Formal Format Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2010 d. Approval of City Council Study Session Fonnat Meeting Minutes of November 2, 2010 NEW BUSINESS 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending Special Event Permits (SVMC 5.15.080) — Cary Driskell [public comment] First Reading Ordinance Amending Mixed Use, Code Text Amendment (CTA 08 -10) — Micld Harnois [public comment] Council Agenda 11 -09 -10 Regular Meeting Pagel of2 4. Proposed Resolution 10 -017 Extinguishing Easement— Cary Driskell [public comment] 5. Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointment of Representative to Public Transportation Improvement Conference (PTIC) — Mayor Towey [public comment] PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject not on the agenda for action. When you come to the podium, please state your name and address for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS 6. Fee Resolution — Ken Thompson 7. Budget Amendment for 2010 — Ken Thompson 8. Advance Agenda — Mayor Towey INFORMATION ONLY: (will not be reported or discussed) 9. Council CommitteesBoards /Commissions 10. Alki and Pines School Zones EXECUTIVE SESSION 11. Pending Litigation [RCW 42.30.110(1)] ADJOURNMENT General Meeting Schedule (meeting schedule is always subject to change) Regular Council meetings are generally held every Tuesday beginning at 6:00 p.m. The Formal meeting fonnats are generally held the 2nd and 4th Tuesdays. Formal meeting have time allocated for general public comments as well as comments after each action item. The Study Session fonnats (the less fonnal meeting) are generally held the 1st 3rd and sometimes 5 Tuesdays. Study Session formats DO NOT have time allocated for general public comments; but if action items are included, comments are permitted after those specific action items. NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk at (509) 921 -1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made, Council Agenda 11 -09 -10 Regular Meeting Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 11 -09- 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: Approval of the Following Vouchers: VOUCHER LIST DATE WIVOUCHER NUMBERS: TOTAL AMOUNT 10 -22 -2010 21302 -21320 $53,396.48 10 -25 -2010 21321 - 21361; 1021100008 $1,297,185.05 10 -29 -2010 5181 -5189 $1,096.00 11 -02 -2010 21362- 21392; 1026100081 $1,439,469.08 GRAND TOTAL $2,791,146.61 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve claims for vouchers as listed above. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS Voucher Lists Vchlist Voucher List Page; 1 10/2212010 2:40:33PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO ## Description /Account Amount 21302 10/22/2010 000030 AVISTA Oct 2010 UTILITIES: PARKS MASTER AVISTP 11,279.81 October 2010 UTILITIES: PW MASTER AVISTA 20,962.68 Total : 32,242.49 21303 10/22/2010 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 9160300 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY 180.19 Total : 180.19 21304 10/22/2010 000572 CARTER, CAROL Expenses EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 238.08 Total : 238.08 21305 10/22/2010 002469 COMMUNITY MINDED ENTERPRISES 3410 AUGUST BROADCASTING SERVICE 3,000.00 3429 SEPTEMBER BROADCASTING SER 3,000.00 Total : 6,000.00 21306 10/22/2010 002507 FASTENERS, INC S2900138.001 SUPPLIES FOR WINTER FACILITY 920.71 Total : 920.71 21307 10/22/2010 000858 FOOD EQUIPMENT IN7L, INC. 8213 SUPPLIES CENTERPLACE 18.59 Total : 18.59 21308 10/22/2010 002196 HOLTEN, MELISSA Expenses EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 31.11 Total : 31.11 21309 10/22/2010 000070 INLAND POWER & LIGHT CO 94202 -010 ANNUAL UTILITIES: 3415 S. UNIVEE 276.07 Total : 276.07 21310 10/22/2010 000388 IRVIN WATER DIST. #6 October 2010 UTILITIES: PW 166.96 Total : 166.96 21311 10/22/2010 000662 NAIL BARRICADE & SIGN CO 70671 SIGNAGE FOR STREETS 1,339.73 Total : 1,339.73 29312 10/22/2010 001295 NICE Oct 2010 SEMINAR REGISTRATION: HVAC 9 30.00 Total : 30.00 21313 10/22/2010 001084 PAPICH, JENNIFER Expenses EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 77.61 Page: 9 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 10122/2010 2 :40 :33PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #E Description /Account Amount 21313 10/22/2010 001084 001084 PAPICH, JENNIFER (Continued) Total : 77.61 21314 10/22/2010 000935 SERVICE PAPER CO 110378472 SUPPLIES CFNTFRPI ACF 12398 Total : 21315 10/22/2010 000896 SPOKANE VALLEY MEALS ON WHEELS October 2010 OUTSIDE AGENCY REIMBURSEME Total 21316 10/22/2010 001444 UNITED LABORATORIES 28641 SUPPLIES CENTERPLACE Total 21317 10/22/2010 000167 VERA WATER & POWER 0000081 FIRE HYDRANT PERMIT AND CON: Sept 2010 UTILITIES: SEPT 2010 Total 21318 10/22/2010 002519 WAFM 2010 MEMBERSHIP TO WAFM Total : 21319 10/22/2010 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 0052033 - 1518-8 WASTE MGMT: PW SEPT 2010 Total 21320 10/22/2010 000347 WORLEY, STEVE Expenses EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total: 19 Vouchers for bank code . apbank Bank total : 19 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 123.98 6,500.00 6,500,00 403.86 403.86 1,809.64 1,093.11 2,902,75 60.00 60.00 1,192.34 1,192.34 692.01 692.01 53,396.48 53,396.48 Page: 2 vchlist Voucher List Page: 10/25/2010 7:44:19AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 21321 10/25/2010 000958 AAA SWEEPING, LLC 44705 44705 - REVERSAL 45006 -B 45007 21322 10/25/2010 001081 ALSCO LSP0867410 21323 10/25/2010 001816 BENTHIN & ASSOCIATES 1681 21324 10/25/2010 002517 BROWN BEARING CO INC 72583 72585 21325 10/25/2010 000796 BUDINGER & ASSOC INC M10179 -2 M 10278 -1 M 10288 -1 M 10289 -1 M10290-1 21326 10/25/2010 000143 CITY OF SPOKANE REFUND 21327 10/25/2010 000235 DATA BASE RECORDS DESTRUCTION 59664 21328 10/25/2010 001926 DAVENPORT, SARAH EXPENSE 21329 10/25/2010 002385 DKS ASSOCIATES 46339 21330 10/25/2010 000278 DRISKELL, CARY EXPENSE PO # Description/Account Amount 42563 2010 AAA VACTORING CONTRACT 18,796.54 42547 2010 STREET SWEEPING CONTRA - 18,796.54 42547 2010 STREET SWEEPING CONTRA 14,839.32 42563 2010 AAA VACTORING CONTRACT 14,376.53 Total: 29,215.85 FLOOR MATS: CITY HALL 27.21 Total : 27.21 42627 0088 ON CALL PROFESSIONAL SEI 310.00 Total : 310.00 WINTER MAINT SUPPLIES 727.76 WINTER MAINT SUPPLIES 473.29 Total : 1,201.05 42628 0054 MATERIALS TESTING SERVIC 4,297.34 BOWDISH PAVING 1,124.89 16TH AVE PAVING 963.75 EUCLID PAVING 1,045.58 PARK ROAD PAVING 1,134.30 Total : 8,565.86 CRYWOLF PAYMENT 165.00 Total : 165.00 SHREDDING CHARGES 158.10 Total: 158.10 MILEAGE & TRAINING: SARAH DAV 80.30 Total: 80.30 42621 ARGONNE CORRIDOR SIGNAL & D 5,757.27 Total: 5,757.27 TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT: DRISKJ 661.85 Page: 1 T vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 10/25/2010 7:44:19AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher _ Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 21330 10/25/2010 000278 000278 DRISKELL, CARY (Continued) Total: 661.85 21331 10/25/2010 002157 EUAY OIL COMPANY 0626765 OIL PRODUCTS FOR SNOW PLOW 1,453.30 0626797 OIL PRODUCTS FOR SNOW PLOW 879.00 0627288 OIL PRODUCTS FOR SNOW PLOW 50.00 Total : 2,382.30 21332 10/25/2010 000746 EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT 217156-002 3RD QTR 2010 6,434.16 Total : 6,434.16 21333 10/25/2010 002507 FASTENERS, INC S2900138.002 NAIL BRUSH 1.40 S2902265.001 PRIMARY WIRE: PW 132.58 Total : 133.98 21334 10/25/2010 000106 FEDEX 7 -260 -00829 SHIPPING CAHRGES: LEGAL 77.05 Total : 77.05 21335 10/25/2010 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 35021 LEGAL PUBLICATION 69.70 35022 LEGAL PUBLICATION 69.70 Total : 139.40 21336 10/25/2010 000007 GRAINGER 9360607296 42528 2010 SMALL TOOLS & EQUIP 65.06 Total: 65.06 21337 10/25/2010 000002 H & H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. OCTOBER 2010 COPIER COST 1,960.71 Total : 1,960.71 21338 10/25/2010 002520 HUSKY INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS 40143 WINTER MAINT SUPPLIES:.TRUCK 131.17 40172 WINTER MAINT SUPPLIES: TRUCK 54.56 40286 WINTER MAINT SUPPLIES: TRUCK 270.27 Total : 456.00 21339 10/25/2010 002518 INLAND PACIFIC HOSE & FITINGS 443052 SUPPLIES: PW 33.50 443539 SUPPLIES: PW 376.99 Total : 410.49 21340 10/25/2010 000864 JUB ENGINEERS, INC. 0066653 42623 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN 4,932.41 0066654 42624 TIP DATA MAINTENANCE AND UP❑ 7,903.73 Page: 2 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 1012512010 7:44:19AM Spokane Valley Bank code: epbenk Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 21340 10/25/2010 000864 000864 .IUB ENGINEERS, INC. (Continued) Total 12,836.14 21341 10/25/2010 002221 MAY, MARY EXPENSE TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT: M. MAl 150.00 Total : 150.00 21342 10/25/2010 000696 MITEL NETWORKS, INC 92714849 42566 MITEL 3300 SOFVIIARE RENEWAL 676.26 Total : 676.26 21343 10/25/2010 002388 MJM GRAND INC Pay App #f2 42631 0088 BROADWAY MOORE TO FLOF 346,510.91 Total : 346,510.91 21344 10/25/2010 000662 NAIL BARRICADE & SIGN CO' 70610 42532 2010 SMALL TOOLS & EQUIP 89.13 Total : 89.13 21345 10/25/2010 001035 NETWORK DESIGN & MANAGEMENT 18747 SEPTEMBER 2010. SYSTEM MA1NT 7,515.00 Total : 7,515.00 21346 10/25/2010 002243 ORBITCOM 000388886 EITHERNET: OCTOBER 2010 590.00 Total : 590.00 21347 10/25/2010 000881 OXARC SSM2483 SUPPLIES: PW 296.37 Total : 296.37 21348 10/25/2010 002424 PITNEY BOWES GLOBAL 1428301 -0T10 POSTAGE METER RENTAL 275.00 Total : 275.00 21349 10/25/2010 001089 POE ASPHALT PAVING, INC. September 2010 2010 STREET & STORMWATER MA 594,647.39 Total : 594,647.39 21350 10/25/2010 002516 SACKETT CONTRACTING &EXCAVATING Pay App 41 42647 DISHMAN MICA STORMWATER PR 41,016.73 Total : 41,016.73 21351 10/25/2010 001892 SKILLINGS CONNOLLY INC 6893 42572 ON CALL ACQUISITION & APPRAIS, 4,105.93 Total : 4,105.93 21352 10/25/2010 002317 SPECIALTY ASPHALT & CONST ORD14109 STREET PATCH MIX 872.25 ORD14110 STREET PATCH MIX 872.25 Total : 1,744.50 Page: 3 vchlist Voucher List Page: 4 10/25/2010 7:44 :19AM Spokane Valley Bank code apbank Voucher hate Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount 21353 10/25/2010 000172 SPOKANE CO ENGINEER VLY1009 COUNTY SERVICES 58,378.94 Total : 58,378.94 21354 10/25/2010 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 11001848 WATER LINE INSPECTION: TRENTI 129.56 51500377 SEPTEMBER 2010: WORK CREW 4,723.10 925000032 ,JAG 2009: PROSECUTING ATTORN 5,152.37 Total : 10,005.03 21355 10/25/2010 000898 SPOKANE PROCARE 2009 -09 42538 2010 LANDSCAPING CONTRACT #1 16,811.43 Total : 16,811.43 21356 10/25/2010 000257 STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE L85440 AUDITORS 6,122.20 Total : 6,122.20 21357 10/25/2010 001875 STRATA S100261 -IN 42629 0088 MATERIAL TESTING SERVCEI 9,971.12 Total : 9,971.12 21358 10/25/2010 001895 TAYLOR ENGINEERING INC 4 42590 TAYLOR ON CALL PE AND CN CON 3,491.26 4 42588 TAYLOR ON CALL PE AND CN CON 8,968.00 42588 4 42589 TAYLOR ON CALL PE AND CN CON 209.00 42589 5 42588 TAYLOR ON CALL PE AND CN CON 12,665.67 Total ; 25,333.93 21359 10/25/2010 000676 WEST 821448051 LEGAL SUBSCRIPTION 615.57 Total: 615.57 21360 10/25/2010 002363 WESTERN STATES EQUIPMENT CO MS0601000426 42611 2010 CAT 420E BACKHOE 99,372.45 PC060623843 WINTER MA1NT: TRUCK PARTS 36.76 Total : 99,409.21 21361 10/25/2010 001885 ZAYO BANDWIDTH LLC October 2010 DARK FIBER LEASE 22827 Total : 228.27 1021100008 10/22/2010 002244 AOT PUBLIC SAFETY CORPORATION SPKVLY -10 CRY WOLF CHARGES: SEPTEMBEI 1,654.35 Total : 1,654.35 Page: 4 vchlist Voucher List Page: 5 10/25/2010 7:44:19AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor 42 Vouchers for bank code: apbank 42 Vouchers in this report I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that am authorised to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Mayor Council Member Date udRn Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount Bank total : 1,297,185.05 Total vouchers : 1,297,185.05 Page: 5 vchlist Voucher List Page: ! 10/2912010 3:03:18PM Spokane Valley Bank code: pk -ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount 5181 1012912010 000277 AWC REFUND DEPOSIT REFUND: ROOMS 205,21 10.00 Total : 10.00 5182 10/29/2010 002524 BRUS, TIFFANY REFUND DEPOSIT REFUND: FIRESIDE LOUD 210.00 Total : 210.00 5183 10/29/2010 002530 CROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION REFUND DEPOSIT REFUND: MIRABEAU ME) 257.00 Total : 257.00 5184 10/29/2010 002527 JONES, DIANE REFUND DEPOSIT REFUND: VALLEY MISSIC 52.00 Total : 52.00 5185 10/29/2010 002529 KEEN, RACHEL REFUND DEPOSIT REFUND: FIRESIDE LOUP 210.00 Total: 210.00 5186 10/29/2010 002528 L1BEY, JERRY REFUND DEPOSIT REFUND: GREAT ROOM /I 210.00 Total : 210.00 5187 10/29/2010 002526 MONVILLE, LORRAINE REFUND DEPOSIT REFUND: VALLEY MISSIC 52.00 Total : 52.00 5188 10/29/2010 001186 SCHOONOVER, KIM REFUND CLASS CANCELLATION 43.00 Total : 43.00 5189 10/29/2010 002525 SPOKANE YOUTH SPORTS REFUND DEPOSIT REFUND: BROWNS 52.00 Total : 52.00 9 Vouchers for bank code : pk -ref Bank total : 1,096.00 9 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers • 1,096.00 Page: 7 vchlist 11/02/2010 9:36:51AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 21362 11/2/2010 001012 ASSOC BUSINESS SYSTEMS 440785 COPIER COSTS: LEGAL 133.00 440887 COPIER COSTS: CD 526.92 Total : 659.92 21363 11/2/2010 002517 BROWN BEARING CO INC 72918 WINTER MAINT SUPPLIES 194.46 Total: 194.46 21364 11/2!2010 000101 CDW -G TKQ4966 CREDIT - 139,92 VDQ1809 42645 REPLACEMENT MONITORS 1,577.56 VDQ5651 42644 REPLACEMENT MONITORS FOR PI 3,15513 Total : 4,592.77 21365 11/2/2010 000571 CODE PUBLISHING CO 36598 MUNICIPAL CODE UPDATE 91.98 Total: 91.98 21366 11/2/2010 001888 COMCAST NOVEMBER 2010 HIGH SPEED INTERNET: MAINT FA 64.90 Total : 64.90 21367 11/2/2010 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION #19 Oct 19,2010 ANNUAL WATER USE PERMIT: 201 984.70 Total: 984.70 21368 11/2/2010 001290 DEPT OF PERSONNEL 60204 SEXUAL HARASSMENT AWARNES; 70.00 Total : 70.00 21369 11/2/2010 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION RE- 313- ATB00914060 STATE ROUTE ROADWAY MAINT. 8,038.91 RE- 313- ATB00914062 SIGNAL & ILLUMUNATION MAIN 3,755.72 RE- 313 -ATB- 00914068 INTELLIGENT TRAFFIC SYSTEMS 277.62 RE- 313- ATB01012067 STATE ROUTE ROADWAY MAINT. 128.11 RE- 313- ATB01012072 SIGNAL & iLLUMUNATION MAIN 3,008.10 Total : 15,208.46 21370 11/2/2010 000912 DEX MEDIA WEST OCTOBER 2010 ADVERTISING: CP 38.10 OCTOBER 2010 ADVERTISING: CP 229.70 Total : 267.80 21371 1112!2010 000278 DRISKELL, GARY EXPENSES MILEAGE: DRISKELL 62.00 Page: 1 vehlist Voucher List Page: 2 1110212010 9:36:51AM Spokane Valley Bank code ; apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 21371 11/2/2010 000278 000278 DRISKELL, CARY (Continued) Total : 62.00 21372 11/2/2010 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 35074 LEGAL PUBLICATION 27.20 35079 LEGAL PUBLICATION 34.00 35080 LEGAL PUBLICATION 90.10 Total : 151.30 21373 11/2/2010 000007 GRAINGER 9376147402 42528 2010 SMALL TOOLS & EQUIP 396.21 Total : 396.21 21374 11/2/2010 001723 HEDEEN & CADITZ, PLLC 6569 PROFESSIONAL SVCS 907.50 Total : 907.50 21375 11/2/2010 002181 HEWLETT- PACKARD 48393120 42646 NEW SQL SERVER 6,898.25 Total : 6,898.25 21376 11/2/2010 001728 HP FINANCIAL SERVICES CO 600265563 PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX 525.12 Total : 525.12 21377 11/2/2010 002520 HUSKY INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS 40741 WINTER MAINT SUPPLIES: TRUCK 5.44 40745 WINTER MAINT SUPPLIES: TRUCK 2.09 40750 WINTER MAINT SUPPLIES: TRUCK 15.12 Total : 22.65 21378 11/2/2010 000022 INLAND BUSINESS PRODUCTS, INC. 57754 EMPLOYEE PHOTO ID'S 23.91 Total : 23.91 21379 11/2/2010 002518 INLAND PACIFIC HOSE & FITINGS 4413972 SUPPLIES: PW 22.07 Total : 22.07 21380 11/2/2010 001016 ITE 32572 ITE 2011 DUES: INGA NOTE 292.00 Total : 292.00 21381 11/2/2010 000265 JACKSON, MIKE EXPENSES LUNCH EXPENSE 34.57 Total : 34.57 21382 11/2/2010 002522 KOEGEN EDWARDS LLP 1234 Police Services Contract Dispute for 325.00 1235 PROFESSIONAL SVCS 2,827.50 Page: 2 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 11102/2010 9:36:51AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount 21382 11/2/2010 002522 KOEGEN EDWARDS LLP (Continued) 1236 PROFESSIONAL SVCS 3,258.05 1237 PROFESSIONAL SVCS 205.00 Total : 6,615.55 21383 11/2/2010 002259 MENKE JACKSON BEYER EHILS 499 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,015.00 511 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES— Spoke 368.13 Total : 1,383.13 21384 11/2/2010 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 537919768001 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 79.72 Total : 79.72 21385 11/2/2010 000322 QWEST OCTOBER 2010 OCTOBER PHONE SERVICE 358.93 Total : 358.93 21386 11/2/2010 002285 SKINFILL, LINDSEY EXPENSES WELLNESS PRIZES: SKINFILL 17.96 EXPENSES POSTAGE EXPENSE: SKINFILL 9.62 Total : 27.58 21387 11/2/2010 000090 SPOKANE CO INFO SYSTEMS 50306104 COUNTY IT SUPPORT 14,690.92 Total: 14,690.92 21388 1112J2010 000658 SPOKANE CO SUPERIOR COURT October 2010 FILING FEES: LEGAL 230.00 Total : 230.00 21389 11/2/2010 000311 SPRINT 326088106 -035 WAPS FOR LAPTOPS 439.89 959698810 -035 SPRINT CELL PHONES 999.89 Total : 1,439.78 21390 11/2/2010 002254 TOWEY, TOM EXPENSES MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT: TOWE 93.00 Total : 93.00 21391 11/2/2010 000717 TRANSPO GROUP, INC. 13437 42630 0133 SPRAGUE ITS CONSULTANT, 4,288.05 Total : 4,288.05 21392 11/2/2010 000087 VERIZON WIRELESS 0915986504 AIRCRAFT CARD FOR SHERIFF 43.01 Total : 43.01 Page: 3 vchlist Voucher List Page: 4 1110212010 9 :36 :51AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 21393 11/2/2010 002521 WASHINGTON RIGGING & SUPPLY 2010 -4154 /026100018 10/31/2040 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 33 Vouchers for bank code: apbank 33 Vouchers in this report I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Mayor Council Member Date Date OCTOBER 2040 PO # Description/Account Amount WINTER MAINT SUPPLIES 413.72 Total : 413.72 OCTOBER 2010 SHERIFF SERVICE 4,378,335.12 Total : 1,378,335.12 Bank total : 1,439,469.08 Total vouchers: 1,439,469.08 Page: 4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 11 -09 -10 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Payroll for Period Ending October 31, 2010 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Budget /Financial impacts: Gross: $ 217,536.37 Benefits: $ 116,051.00 Total payroll $ 333,587.37 STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri ATTACHMENTS DRAFT City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Formal Meeting Format Tuesday, October 26, 2010 Mayor Towey called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Attendance: City Staff Tom Towey, Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager Gary Schimmels, Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, Acting City Attorney Rose Dempsey, Councilmember Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Ken Thompson, Finance Director Dean Grafos, Councilmember Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir. Brenda Grassel, Councilmember Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief Bob McCaslin, Councilmember Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner Lori Barlow, Associate Planner Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION: Pastor Al Hulten of Valley Assembly Church gave the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Towey led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the agenda. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: n/a COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Councilmember Gothmann said he attended an SVBA (Spokane Valley Business Association) Meeting; a Carrington College Ceremony to celebrate their name change; went to the AWC (Association of Washington Cities) Spokane Legislative meeting; a Chamber breakfast meeting where they heard about the pros and cons of the ballot initiatives; a Spokane Regional Health Department Executive Committee Meeting, and said that the ABCD Program (Access to Baby and Child Dentistry) has received national recognition for its impact in confronting dental disease among medicade -insured children under six; went to the fifth year /open house at CenterPlace; attended a 9-1 -1 - Board Meeting where they continue to work with Motorola to develop the radio system around the county which will service all the first responders; and said he went to the Housing Community Development Advisory Committee Meeting, which group is responsible for distribution of HUD (Housing and Urban Development) grants, and CDBG funding (Community Development Block Grant). Councilmember Gothmann said Spokane Valley has three members on that 18- member committee, and he explained some of the uses and purposes of those funds; he said on infrastructure grants, there was previously decided to set aside 20% of funds for Spokane Valley projects; and said an upcoming decision will be Whether Spokane Valley will be its own entitlement area or continue with the County, and said he recommends staying with the current system through the County, and he said that 20% set -aside will likely soon be re- evaluated. Councilmember Dempsey said she also attended the SVBA meeting; the CenterPlace Open House; and said the Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency will soon have its bi- annual audit and she attended their opening business for the audit, and said there was a change in the program that the treasurer was using but Council Regular Meeting 10 -26 -2010 Page 1 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT otherwise, nothing extraordinary is coming up; said she also attended a Wastewater Advisory Committee meeting, and said decisions will be upcoming regarding the stonnwater rates, and discussion on how to keep those rates low; said she met with Joe Tortorelli concerning the TBD (Transportation Benefit District) option that the County is working to form, which would likely raise the car tab fees, and said that this Council has decided not to do anything in that regard without a vote from the citizens, and said that Mr. Tortorelli said that the municipalities working regionally on this issue could accomplish more together than individually. Councilmember Grafos said he went to the Growth Management Board meeting; the STA (Spokane Transit Authority) Board meeting where they presented their 2011 budget and their projected cuts of three to seven percent through 2015, and said his priority would be to minimize the impact of these cuts to the Spokane Valley citizens; and he attended the fifth year anniversary celebration at CenterPlace. Deputy Mayor Schimmels reported that he went to the AWC Regional meeting; and went to a HUB meeting with the Freight Mobility Board; went to a Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) Board meeting: participated in a Solid Waste Advisory workshop last week, and said that Spokane County has put out an interlocal about the governance issue at the Waste -to- Energy Plant. Councilmember Grassel said she went to the AWC Regional meeting; the GMA meeting to hear an update on the process of the Growth Management meeting through the planners; said she chaired the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee regarding the funds which come to the city through lodging taxes, and that she will be brining a report and recommendation to council on funding disbursing during an upcoming December council meeting; and reported that she went to the CenterPlace open house. Councilmember McCaslin no report MAYOR'S REPORT: reported that he attended the AWC Conference here in Spokane; went to "HireAbility Day" where the community honored businesses hiring employees with disabilities; that he was invited by the Washington State Attorney General to listen to a presentation regarding gang and gang - related activities; and that he went to the Fifth Anniversary Celebration at CenterPlace. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited general public comments. Chris Wetherell, 7712 E Utah Avenue said he's looking out for the safety and health of the community; that he has been plagued with train horn noise, and said people are tired of the noise; said that Union Pacific Railroad is breaking the law and he asked whose responsibility is it to enforce these rules, said that Union Pacific has been caught sitting for hours at a time, although they disagree; he said the trains block intersections to homes snaking kids cross in an unsafe manner; he asked why we don't have improved safety measures that are at other crossings; said last January he started a petition for the establishment of quiet zones and got 172 signatures; and said if nothing else happens, they need alternative safety measures; that the newspaper previously reported that Park Road got a grant to build a median so cars wouldn't go around it and said he is curious what happened to that situation. Mike Dixon, 2805 N Ella Road: said he lives in the West Valley School District just outside Millwood; said years ago he didn't have an issue with railroad tracks with the Union Pacific; that the railroad companies were cautious and slow in the past, but during the last five years there has been a significant increase in the noise, including train horns at 3:00 a.m. with them holding down the horns from Millwood to the Police Academy; he said it wakes up everyone, and during the day while kids are playing on the playground, they have to hold their ears when the train goes by; he said he asked them why they hold the horn down and the response was they thought it was funny; he said he witnessed on at least two occasions where emergency vehicles were not able to get through, and he asked Council to consider the quiet zones. Council Regular Meeting 10 -26 -2010 Page 2 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT Erick Erickson, 1111 N Bowdish; said he works for the railroad and they hold the horns down not because they want to, but federal law says they have to Hold the horn for 22 seconds; he said he's losing some of his hearing; said the other day he turned in an STA bus that went in front of him while he had the lights going; he said federal law dictates how to honk the horn. He said he's not trying to upset people, but if he doesn't do it, he could lose his job. He also mentioned there are "blue signs" on all crossings giving information about how to contact someone regarding the railroad. Mike Dixon, 2805 N Ella Road said he agrees that this is the law, but said there is a difference between holding the horn down from Millwood to the police academy versus the short blasts required by law; said he doesn't see this happening during the day but more during the night. Chris Wetherell, 7712 E Utah said the law is to blow the horn twenty seconds before the intersection; but with the establishment of quiet zones, it would make the intersection safer so they would not be required to born the horn; and said whatever the City did with the previously established quiet zones, he would like that done in this case as well. Wayne Harlow, 8115 E. Euclid said noise is a factor as when they blow the horn they blast it and the houses shake and said if there is any way to make the area a quite zone, it would be greatly appreciated. Mark Bohn, 7720 Utah said he lives between Park and Vista and that the train traffic has increased quite a bit in the last two years making it almost ridiculous now to live there; said the trains are longer, and louder and when they vent out their brakes "it'll blow your eardrums out," and he said pictures on the walls in his house shake, and that the train was left running outside his house for twelve hours. Henry Valder, homeless said he wanted to speak regarding the panhandling ordinance, said he has a copy of a brief from the Center for Law and Justice, said an officer spoke to him about panhandling and asked him for his discharge papers; said he feels those questions are not relevant and are of a personal nature; said the officer kept his hand on his taser the entire time he was speaking with him; said the officer told him he'd go to jail if he stayed out there; said you'll be seeing him on Pines and another spot and said he would like the opportunity to address this to a judge and state attorney if he goes to jail. Mike, homeless said he agrees with what the previous speaker just said; that the intent is not to put homeless people in jail; and he would come back and talk more to council one -on -one to give them a special invitation to a fundraiser for the area homeless. John Howard, 11616 East Jackson regarding the roundabout on Mansfield and Montgomery and Wilbur, he said that this is very unsafe; that no one yields and drivers are crossing through the center; he'd like it taken away and have a four -way stop installed. Jan Eastman, 11608 East Jackson voiced her concerns about the above- mentioned round- about, said kids play on it in the middle of the night and they have to call the police to remove the kids; said on the way here tonight two cars in front of her failed to yield; she said is it not safe and she would like it removed. John Howard, 11717 East Jackson wanted council to know that it was he who turned in the petition to do away with the roundabout. 1. CONSENT AGENDA Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Council Regular Meeting 10 -26 -2010 Page 3 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT a. Approval of the following claim vouchers: VOUCHER LIST DATE WNOUCHER NUMBERS: TOTAL AMOUNT 10 -07 -2010 3317, 3318, 3320, 3321, 3333, 21151 21169 -21173 $220 621.57 10 -08 -2010 21174 - 21215, 93010029, 1005100018 $1,911,777.66 10 -08 -2010 21216 -21217 $160.00 10 -08 -2010 21218 -21249 $71,980.66 10 -13 -2010 21250 -21278 $144,867.33 10 -13 -2010 21279 $75.00 10 -15 -2010 21280 -21301 $76,739.66 10 -18 -2010 3335 -3338 $56,089.09 GRAND TOTAL $2,482,310.97 b. Approval of Payroll for Period Ending October 15, 2010: $246,432.32 c. Approval of City Council Formal Format Meeting Minutes of October 12, 2010 d. Approval of City Council Study Session Format Meeting Minutes of October 19, 2010 It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the consent agenda. NEW BUSINESS 2. Motion Consideration: Elimination of Subarea Plan as Dart of Comprehensive Plan Process — Kath McClung It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to pursue option 4'1 in the form of a recommended option to the Planning Commission which will eliminate SARP from the Comprehensive Plan. [Note: Option 41 is "Revoke the SARP and go back to the 2007 pre -SARP zoning. "] Community Development Director McClung explained that last month Council discussed a range of options on how to handle the comprehensive plan, and the options ranged from eliminating the SARP plan to doing nothing; and after discussion at that previous council meeting, the majority of council preferred pursuing option #1. Director McClung said this is not the final decision, but is a kick -off for looking at the SARP when we look at the comp plan update and that it gives staff a place to start; or she said staff could be working for the next eighteen months and still not be where council prefers. Director McClung explained that this is just the beginning of the public process; that the comprehensive plan deadline is November 1 so this will be the last time before that deadline for items, although she said that the ftill SARP plan is already on the docket. Director McClung said that one item not discussed previously but was raised by Public Works in previous discussions concerns the extension of Appleway and how the removal of the SARP could potentially influence the environmental assessment for the extension of Appleway; and said that Public Works Engineer Worley is available for any questions. There were no questions from council and Mayor Towey invited public comment, and asked those making comments to try to keep their remarks to three minutes. Dennis Johnson, 4149 S Sundown Drive said she has lived here since 1950; that there have been lots of changes and most not positive and said he is starting to feel the same way about incorporation; that he voted for the present council based on their campaign to get rid of SARP. Rich Munson 12404 E 27 Avenue: said he thinks it is appalling that Council is not doing anything to replace SARP; he questioned if perhaps Council was being asked to do this to appease a special interest group, or if it is too much work to consider resigning; said council needs to invest in the City's future, with this plan or another option. Barbara Rogers, 18 N Oliver Road: said traffic has been increasing and now they have to stop at every light; said she wants the road to stay the way it is. Council Regular Meeting 10 -26 -2010 Page 4 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT Dick Behm, 9405 E Sprague Avenue he read from his prepared statement and explained he was speaking for himself and his family; that he feels this Council is acting irresponsibly if they get rid of SARP; he said hasty decisions have unintended consequences; and that it is obvious some councilmembers don't do their homework or read the packet material before the meeting; he said making snap decisions to please one person is not acceptable, and said the City needs a plan. Chuck Hafner, 2417 S Sunnybrook Lane: said he received an e -mail that said the City was doomed, said he doesn't like scare tactics, that we have to work together, that he is not for continuing SARP; that five councilmembers were elected to eliminate SARP; and that he wants to make sure we are financially sound and then move forward. Carla Kalev, 10516 E Main Avenue: said she'd like to help council focus more as it seems we're off track and myopic and thinking way too small; that we have to have patience with change, and need to stick with something long enough to have it pay off, said she believes if we don't carry this out this City won't make it. Carlos Landa, 12019 E Sprague: said he developed one of the first shopping centers; said he won't take his money and run but he re -built his shopping center; that his building is now about 80% vacant and the couplet didn't do anything to improve it, he said that SARP might, but if Council eliminates that with no future and no planning, we'd still be looking at vacancies and it might even create urban blight if nothing is done. Todd Whipple, Whipple Consulting Engineers said he supports the motion to send SARP back to the Planning Commission, that hundreds of people participated in the plan but many complained about SARP and were told throughout the process that they didn't understand; he said SARP has over 1,000 properties and 7.5 miles is too great of an issue for a plan of that scope; said he doesn't believe any other city ever tried a plan with such a large scope. Steve Neill, 10820 E 18 Avenue: said a decision was made last November when the former councilmembers were voted out; and said the special interest group is the group of people who voted those other guys out; and he said he is asking council to end it. Shana Reynolds, 4921 N Lucille Road: said she feels it is not appropriate to continue with SARP, said nothing is wasted if we learned from it, but said she can't open a business the way things are now and that the plan doesn't encourage new businesses, especially from young people; and said meeting the conditions of the SARP is almost impossible. Mark Henderson, Pool World, 13524 E Sprague said he supports ending SARP; said the plan split his property into two zones and jeopardized his ability to get adequate financing on building purchase or expanding the value of his property; he suggested we start small with U -City area and do SARP at the city center and show everyone what it will look like, and if it is so great, others will want to follow. Mike Dixon, 2805 N Ella Road: said the couplet killed the businesses and has created an eyesore; said maybe it is easier now to get to the freeway but that's all it's used for, said SARP and the couplet need to be resolved, that the first priority is to preserve businesses, and the second is travel to the freeway; and he asked council to do their homework and make sure making they are making the right decisions. Dwight Hume, 9101 N Mountain View Lane, Spokane: said he supports the recommendation to have SARP re- visited and to pull it from the citywide plan and from ongoing debate. Council Regular Meeting 10 -26 -2010 Page 5 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT Robert Olson, H & H Molds, 119 S Adams said he favors going with option #1; said they have fire codes, building codes, federal regulations from DOE, EPA, etc. and choosing option 1 would really Help; said that some businesses that complained the most were zoned out of it; he asked what does the city want to do, said it is a business environment and not a walking environment; and that Council shouldn't make special deals for one parry and not the other; and he suggested council set the direction of where they want to go and don't make it look like a Portland. Phillip Rudy, 5647 N Ella, with business at 720 N Argonne: said he wants it returned to two -ways; said businesses that developed there came because of the advantages of being on a couplet. Steve Wineinger, 10021E Knox, with Pro -Sign voiced his support of the motion to put SARP back on the table for discussion; said he was part of forming this city and that he contributed money and time and sat in on the original planning and zoning committee, said when SARP was first addressed, he put his concerns into writing about how it would play out and said his worst fears have been unfolding; said he doesn't understand why we would hire someone from California to tell us how to live. Mayor Towey called, for a short recess at 8:00p. m., and reconvened the meeting at 8:15p. m. Milt Neumann, 903 S Blake Road said he and his wife Alice are the founders of A -Z rentals; that they own several store locations; that he is concerned that council is considering killing this; he said study after study shows this should be two -way, said they can take Appleway separately; but Sprague is not pedestrian friendly; that he likes this area but it seems the atmosphere in Idaho is a little better; said he doesn't want to move as this is his home, and asked Council not to kill SARP unless have an absolutely alternate plan that makes sense. Grant Rodkey, 424 S Sullivan Road: said he doesn't like SARP plan; said if businesses want to expand they'll have to spend money; that Council should not force their views on others; that councilmembers were sworn to uphold the rights of property owners; that the marketplace should determine the survival of a business instead of an edict from an oligarchy. Dennis Johnson, 4149 S Sundown Drive: said Sprague has been fading but the couplet didn't kill it; said the University Mall was fading before the Valley Mall was ever developed; said Tidyman's is closing because they couldn't come to agreement with their landlord; he suggested Council try to attract some small niche -type manufacturing business. Mike King, 9300 E Sprague, commercial realtor: said if SARP is killed, Council needs to have some kind of a plan; said he's asking council to come up with a plan to re- develop Sprague Avenue; that he conducted a survey this spring and the number of years of vacancies between University and Argonne are 184 years of accumulated vacancies in just that small stretch; said one -way kills small businesses which is the lifeblood of a community, and he asked council to put a plan together and create something and look to the future. Susan Scott, 205 S Evergreen Road: in reading her statement, said the final SARP public hearings drew overwhelming public opposition but the prior Council ignored it, so the citizens voted them out; pursuing a city center she said is moving into hallucination territory, that SARP is responsible for non - conformity on numerous business owners and she urged the elimination of SARP. Dan Geiger, native of Spokane and owns property in the Valley said he painfully read the SARP; the parts that affect private property rights is ridiculous, and said he feels it is not a bad thing if we have to throw away the $1.2 million already spent on this. Council Regular Meeting 10 -26 -2010 Page 6 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT Barry Curry, 8022 E Sprague Avenue: stated that forty different uses were taken away suddenly with SARP and that SARP is very restrictive on property rights. Laura Durkey, 10917 E 17 Avenue said if you can't use your own property as you see fit, then you don't own that property in the fullest sense, and said that SARP should go. Jean Repp, 3120 S Raymond Circle: said her property was re -zoned down to B 1; that she fought to get B2 restored; that she has a small choice of what she can do on her own property, she urged Council to vote against this plan and give back the rights of property owners on property they paid for. James Magnuson: (City Clerk Bainbridge read his letter into record); stated he writes on behalf of University City, Inc., and he urged repeal of SARP and to restore the pre -plan zoning. There were no fiirther public comments Councilmember Gothmann said that regarding a comment of Mr. Hafner, that there was an agreement with Mr. Magnuson, but it was an agreement not to purchase but to continue to negotiate and that agreement was signed; he said several have said we need to run a city like a business but said we can't run a city like a business so that when a recession comes we shut it down, as the city has to continually provide services; he said he also heard we don't want high - density businesses, and said to him, that is equivalent to saying we don't want high density businesses like Millwood or Coeur d'Alene or anyplace else around here has; he said he feels we can support high density businesses in a city center, he said many speakers have assumed that SARP is a one or two -way solution or curse, we said whether SARP is repealed or not, it does not take care of the one - way /two way question; said in hindsight, he feels council tried to develop a plan for the entire corridor instead of doing it one segment at a time in said the part of Sprague that still has the most vibrant businesses is the part between I -90 and University; said it is a fact that small businesses prefer two -way streets, he said nonconformity will continue to exist `with or without SARP; said he thinks we need a plan and objects to the motion because it does not address the surplus of retail uses in the City, it doesn't address the appearance of the corridor, that it may deter some retailers, there is no requirement for aesthetic improvement, and that we may have to repay $300,000 because we would not complete the environmental assessment; and said if we don't have SARP, we need another plan. Councilmember McCaslin said the alternative plan is called private enterprises system; and that it is the private sector driven by the profit motive, and that government should step out of the way of the investors; and that government continually gets involved in the private sector creating hurdles for the private investment; and said Sprague will continue to die as long as there are sixteen different zones. Councilmember Grafos said a simple solution to the one way /two way is to put it on the ballot and let taxpayers decide; regarding traffic, he said when Spokane County created that couplet there were about 28,000 cars a day traveling that stretch, and now there's about 42,000 cars, and said if you like the congestion and the delays before the completion of the couplet in 2000, then people will really love it in 2011. Councilmember Dempsey said there were 23,000 cars before but that was on one road, and now there are two roads and said we don't have the congestion referred to; said she was initially not fond of SARP as she felt it went too far; that she was in favor of a city center and thought U -City was the best spot; then when SARP came out she said she was shocked, but said the plan passed and it was in effect for six weeks when the new council came on board; and said that's all the time the plan had to work when it was starting to be dismantled, she said this is a plan we can work with and it can be altered, and there have already been a number of changes, and stressed that we need a plan. Council Regular Meeting 10 -26 -2010 Page 7 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT At 9:00 p.m., it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to extend the meeting for one hour. Councilmember Grassel said she feels SARP might have had good intentions, but it has created unnecessary dissention and it defies common sense, said she feels it was great to have taken this year to review the comp plan and invite business and property owners to come review it, and said that many of those owners told her they had no idea of the number of sub - categories they would have to adhere to, and said she finds it interesting that members of this council who have spoken against this plan, have no concept of running a business; that they have never taken money out of their life savings to open a business or ever spent time running a business, or signing the front of a paycheck or not taking a pay check so you can pay your employees; and as policy makers she said she finds it appalling that this plan went through without understanding the consequences that were being directed to business owners; and said as council goes through this process, she hopes a number of ideas will be developed; and said that 85% of people told her that they went to those previous meetings and were basically shut down as the plan was in place and there was no opportunity for members of the public to invest their ideas. Deputy Mayor Schimmels said he has had conflicts with this plan for the last one and a half years; that he didn't vote for it; that he could see somewhat of the stance that we may be in today and said we are there deep; said you can't treat business as council tried to treat them and succeed; said he feels we tried to do too much too soon; that regarding the couplet, said he has always said leave Sprague alone but would never offer to spend any of our city money on anything west of Argonne/Mullan; that he thinks there is a natural intersection there for the one -way in all directions; that it was the original county plan and said he feels it should stay that way; said Council does have a plan and the number one thing is to reverse SARP; and said the bottom line is to enable business to survive in the valley. Mayor Towey said that SARP has been around for quite a while and lots of discussion held on its pros and cons; that his concern is the health of the small business, not twenty years from now but right now; and asked if council is putting road blocks in front of those businesses that wake up every morning and go to work and "pound it out every day." Mayor Towey asked if we are putting obstacles in front of them or encouraging them to make a profit. He said he started as a candidate a year ago February and made his view known that he intended to end the SARP, and said he is going to honor all those who voted for him and that he will vote for the process to begin regarding repealing SARP. At the request of Councilmember McCaslin, City Clerk did a roll call vote: In Favor: Mayor Towey, Deputy Mayor Schimmels, and Councilmembers McCaslin, Grassel, and Grafos. Opposed: Councilmembers Gothmann and Dempsey. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 3. Motion Consideration: Emergency prehensive Plan Amendment for City Center Zone — Kathy McClung It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to refer an amendment of the Comprehensive Plan to the Planning Commission for consideration to delete all provisions of the Subarea Plan, Book One, that relate to the City Center designation as well as an amendment of the Uniform Development Code to delete all provisions of the Subarea Plan, Books Two and Three, that relate to the City Center District Zone, and to re- designate the properties affected, as Mixed Use Corridor in the Comprehensive Plan (book One) and the Uniform Development Code (Book Two), and to amend the Comprehensive Plan Map and Official Zoning Map to reflect the same. This motion is made on an emergency basis pursuant to RCW 36 70A. 130(2). Attorney Connelly said that this is the motion to begin the public process to consider an emergency amendment to amend the comp plan and the Uniform Development Code to repeal the city center designation in its entirety and replace it with a mixed use zone; he said this is brought forward separately as an emergency plan, because it would have become effective, if the process was completed, sometime around the end of the year as opposed to being a part of the annual Council Regular Meeting 10 -26 -2010 Page 8 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT comprehensive plan changes that will become effective some time in the spring of next year when the annual comp plan process is complete. Mr. Connelly said the council packet material lists the state regulatory statutes dealing with this issue, as well as a previous memorandum he supplied about a month ago outlining the legal basis for this approach. If this process goes to the Planning Commission and comes back to Council, he said, the findings in an ordinance will be based in large part on the record that is being developed; and said a number of findings that could be included are also listed in the council packet materials, and gave as an example the revenue forecasts that we anticipated a few years ago will not be realized, that sales and property tax will be significantly lower; and that there doesn't appear to be funds for significant development at this time, and that the assumed public contributions to a city center, i.e. a City Hall, infrastructure improvements, and other public buildings that were going to form the catalyst for this downtown center, are not happening and are not included in the 2011 budget; and what's left are the restrictions without the benefits, which in some opinions creates an economic hardship and could create an emergency if that is council's choice. Mr. Connelly said his materials identify exactly what would have to change, what would have to be removed from the comp plan and from the development code so the Planning Commission can examine the specific language and make a decision for a recommendation to Council; and said council's options are not to take this action and deal with city center as part of the overall review, which is probably the safety option in terms of potential challenges; or approve this motion which would send the matter to the Planning Commission on a fast track to then be returned to Council with the Commission's recommendation for final consideration; and he said the emergency provisions of the comp plan have been used by several communities in circumstances similar to that which is before council tonight, but they have not been tested, so there is no court of record case, and said it is always a bit of a question without that court guidance. Mayor Towey invited public comment, no comments were offered. Councilmembers Dempsey and Gothmann said they object to this process being called an emergency, and each said they would vote against the motion. Vote by Roll Call: In Favor: Mayor Towey, Deputy Mayor Schimmels, and Councilmembers McCaslin, Grassel, and Grafos. Opposed: Councilmembers Gothmann and Dempsey. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 4. Motion Consideration: Legislative Agenda — Mike Jackson It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to adopt the 2011 Legislative Agenda. City Manager Jackson mentioned that the items were re- ordered to reflect budget and policy requests, and he briefly went over the titles and issues, after which Mayor Towey invited public comment. No comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Towey, Deputy Mayor Schimmels, and Councilmembers Grafos, Gothmann, Dempsey and Grassel. Opposed: Councilmember McCaslin. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited general public comments Grant Rodkey, 424 S Sullivan Road regarding law enforcement, he said it is becoming evident we have a problem developing with "light fingers on triggers." He said apparently the Creach family has hired investigators; mentioned an article he read about "sour grapes" and the increase of $3 million for law enforcement; and asked with the recent shootings should some of this be funneled to use tasers instead of live bullets where the officer's life is not threatened; said regarding a question of if we need more law enforcement in the valley; said every time he turns around he sees officers; and said he is concerned with them "serving and protecting" or "shooting and intimidating." Deputy Mayor Schimmels mentioned that the $3 million dollar figure is very bogus and not the case with our budget. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS 5. Planning Commission Work Program — Kathy McClung Community Development Director McClung said that Council had asked for a schedule of items which had been discussed for the past weeks, and said that schedule is included in the council packet materials; she said she prioritized them as she thought Council wanted; said the two scheduled November planning commission meetings fall on holidays but the Commission has agreed to hold a special meeting Council Regular Meeting 10 -26 -2010 Page 9 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT November 18; she said the code amendment which has already gone to the Planning Commission will come to Council in November; then the emergency comprehensive plan amendment begins, which goes to the Planning Commission November 18, with a December 9 public hearing, and assuming that ends in one meeting, it would come to Council in January, she said the chicken code amendments is noted to go to the Commission in January and Council in February; then we would move to the big comprehensive plan amendment, and assuming the Commission finishes it in one or two settings, it should come to Council in March or April; and she said regarding the remaining code amendments, which are minor, by the time we get them to the Planning Commission, will come after the comprehensive plan amendment, and said she recommends we hold off on those and get the other items done, and she asked for comments from Council about switching the rest of the Sprague Appleway code amendments with the chicken code amendments, or any other suggested changes. Councilmember Dempsey said she feels the chicken code amendment should be done before spring. Councilmember Grafos said he has no objection to leaving that chicken code amendment as scheduled; and there were no other council comments or suggestions. 6. Easement Extinguishment Request — Cary Driskell Acting City Attorney Driskell explained that prior to incorporation, Spokane County obtained a right -of- way easement across property that was to be developed as the Healing Lodge of the Seven Nations, a youth alcohol and drug treatment facility just east of McKinnon Road; that the city inherited this easement upon incorporation, which easement was intended to provide access to property further south, which is no longer needed as that access is provided by the subsequent construction of East 14 Avenue; and said that the United States Department of Health and Human Services has requested this extinguishment and our public works department has determined that the right -of -way easement is not needed and agrees the extinguishment is appropriate; and therefore, if there are no council objections, Mr. Driskell asked that we place a resolution on an upcoming agenda to extinguish the agreement and easement. There were no objections from council. 7. Overview of Lodging Tax Process — Ken Thompson Finance Director Thompson briefly explained the process for disbursing lodging tax grant funds and that each year the City puts out a call for proposals to use local lodging tax receipts to promote tourism, and he referenced state law and our Municipal Code; and said applications for next year's funding have already been presented to the committee and this matter is scheduled to come before Council later this year. 8. Advance Agenda Councilmember Gothmann suggested putting the quiet zone issue on an upcoming agenda; and there were no council objections. INFORMATION ONLY: The following items were for information only and were not reported on or discussed: 9) Department Reports; 10) Railroad Quiet Zones; 11) Spokane County Library District Third Quarter Report; 12) 2011 BudgetMessage. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Council Regular Meeting 10 -26 -2010 Page 10 of 10 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STUDY SESSION FORMAT Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley, Washington November 2, 2010 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Tom Towey; Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager Gary Schimmels, Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, Acting City Attorney Rose Dempsey, Councilmember Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir. Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director Dean Grafos, Councilmember Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief Brenda Grassel, Councilmember Scott Kuhta, Planning Manager Bob McCaslin, Councilmember Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Micki Harnois, Associate Planner Greg Bingaman, IT Specialist Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk 1. Electronic Cigarettes Krista Panerio, Spokane Regional Health District Specialist Spokane Regional Health District Health Specialist Krista Panerio, via her PowerPoint, explained the background on the electronic cigarettes, and passed around two sample cigarettes. Ms. Panerio explained how the nicotine is purchased in a vile, which usually does not include a label explaining content, and that the nicotine can be in different concentrations, from low to medium to high; she said the caps are not child -proof and the product is not FDA approved, despite the advertisement she showed stating otherwise; she said the e -cig is inhaled so it is not like an NRT (nicotine replacement therapy) patch; and that there is no federal or state legislation at this point regulating the sale of these products, nor banning their sale to minors. In response to council question, Acting City Attorney Driskell explained that he and several municipal attorneys have discussed this topic and are researching what other jurisdictions are doing, and said that once the federal government gets more involved, the states will likely follow but there is nothing in place yet; he said they Have been working on a draft ordinance and that he could bring that to council in a few weeks. Councilmember Gothmann noted that the Health Department's resolution encourages jurisdictions to prohibit the marketing, sale, distribution and use to /of minors, and to facilitate enforcement of those prohibitions, he suggested this council consider doing likewise. Mayor Towey agreed and said he feels this jurisdiction should work with other jurisdictions in formulating a draft ordinance and take the lead of the Health District and follow up on this. Attorney Driskell said he will keep council informed on when that issue is moving forward as other jurisdictions will need to be informed in order to have a coordinated effort. 2. Spokane Transit Authority (STA) Update — Susan Mever /Molly Myers Spokane Transit Authority Chief Executive Officer Susan Meyer and Director of Planning Karl Otterstrom gave a presentation on the proposed STA service reductions; they went over their budget figures and projections, and said that this is the third year that STA has seen a significant reduction in sales tax revenue, and even if the economy started to recover next year, STA would not return to 2007 sales tax revenue levels until approximately 2016, they explained the timeline of 2011 service reductions of which routes are proposing to be eliminated, include Medical Lake and Latah and two routes affecting Council Study Session Minutes, November 2, 2010 Page 1 of 3 Approved by Council: Spokane Valley, and said that these proposed changes also affects paratransit riders, adding that a paratransit boundary is three - fourths of a mile from fixed routes and that riders living in or traveling to areas affected will be notified of these proposed changes. Mr. Otterstrom mentioned that they are examining possibilities of consolidating Liberty Lake routes with others and both he and Ms. Meyer said that opinions matter and they encourage people to give them input by calling or completing an online survey. Ms. Meyer mentioned that they are meeting with other mayors, councils, citizens, and representatives from entities such as Eastern State Hospital to try to preserve some of the services of Medical Lake. In response to question from Mr. Jackson, Ms. Meyer said the service reduction model was based on assumptions that sales tax will be down in 2011, flat in 2012, grow 2% in 2013 and 3% thereafter, but that their projections are adjusted each year as needed. 3. Code Text Amendment — Mixed Use (CTA 08 -10) — Micki Harnois Associate Planner Harnois went through the PowerPoint presentation explaining the five issues associated with the Mixed Use area and the code text amendment proposal (CTA 08 -10); that the issues include: (1) consider options to address the 50% threshold for additions, expansion or reconstruction; (2) adding existing single - family dwellings as a permitted use; (3) front and side street setbacks where easements may make the requirement not feasible; (4) consider options for street requirements such as pre - located streets; and (5) consider options for maximum block size. After Ms. Harnois explained the proposed language changes, there was council consensus to move forward with a first reading at a future council meeting. 4. Broadcasting Options — Greg Bingaman Via his PowerPoint presentation, Information Technology Specialist Mr. Bingaman explained some of the options for council consideration concerning broadcasting of council meetings; that option #1 would have a $36,000 annual re- occurring cost, but the internet voice -on- demand, initially thought to be $9,000 annually, was determined to be $7,700 which is the cost to have the meeting hosted, similar to a cost when one subscribes to an Internet service; and that option #2 includes $28,000 annually for transferring the file or DVD, with the same $7,700 hosted video on demand service, and said that Channel 5 indicated they could replay this on Saturday or Sunday around noon at no charge. In response to questions about the actual airing of the meeting and that it has been occasionally preempted, Mr. Bingaman said while we pay Community Minded TV (CMTV) for their recording, we don't have full control over the airing on channel 14, as that is a public channel, and if our meetings run long, or there are other extenuating circumstances, our meeting could be preempted or moved; and said he would recommend we get these types of details included in an amended contract if we continue to use Community Minded Television. There was other discussion about difficulty in getting the media (DVD) from CMTV late in the week, us purchasing our own equipment using the PEG ftmds; problems which could arise if we were to share Channel 5 with the City of Spokane; having our own "City of Spokane Valley Channel 5" for Spokane Valley citizens, and showing the meetings and other programming on cable in addition to using the internet, thereby reaching more of the city population. Mr. Bingaman mentioned the idea of having the equipment set up in the small conference room next to the main reception area, which would be ample space and be in close proximity for running wires, and for the person operating the cameras to actually see into the council chambers. Several councilmembers agreed with us purchasing our own hardware, and working toward option #2, but to take this one step at a time and per City Manager Jackson's suggestion, to first have a recommended motion drafted for official council action at a later meeting. Mayor Towey called for a short recess at 7:54 p.m. During the recess, it was noted that Councilmember Grassel left the meeting. The meeting was reconvened at 8:10 p.m. 5. Advance Agenda — Mayor Towey Mayor Towey mentioned he received a letter from STA seeking the Mayor's appointment of a Councilmember to the Public Transportation Improvement Conference, and that since STA needs this Council Study Session Minutes, November 2, 2010 Page 2 of 3 Approved by Council: DRAFT information by November 10, it was agreed this will be a mayoral appointment set for next week. Councilmember Gothmann offered his availability for such appointment. Mayor Towey also asked Council for their preference in meeting during the week of Thanksgiving, as well as the following week when three councilmembers will be out of town attending the November 30 National League of Cities conference in Colorado. Council concurred not to meet November 23 as well as not meet November 30. 6. Information Only Greater Spokane, Inc. Third Quarter Report was for information only and was not reported or discussed. 7. Council Check In — Mayor Towev Councilmember Grafos distributed copies of newspaper articles from the Seattle area which discussed a Burien Town Square project, similar to Riverpark Square, that recently fell into bankruptcy and said that town square project was only about eight miles from downtown Seattle, and compared that project also to the city center project of this city. Mayor Towey said it is recognized that cities are having difficulties and are discovering that their ten and twenty -year plans are not working out as they had hoped. Councilmember McCaslin asked if staff know how many of the 281 cities in Washington State are in the red, and Mr. Jackson said he will see if he can find those figures. Councilmember Gothmann gave some brief statistics on unemployment figures dropping slightly and other figures dealing with the financial status of Washington state. 8. City Manager Comments — Mike Jackson City Manager Jackson mentioned that an executive session is scheduled and after council reconvenes into open session, council can decide whether to make a motion. 9. EXECUTIVE SESSION Pending Litigation [RCW 42.3 0.110(1) It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into Executive Session for approximately ten minutes to discuss pending litigation, and that action would likely be taken upon return to open session. Council adjourned into executive session at 8:20 p.m. At 8:24 p.m., Mayor Towey declared Council out of Executive Session. It was then moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded to approve settlement of this matter pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Memorandum of Agreement in Mediation attached, and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute any necessary settlement documents. After brief discussion, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to amend his motion to include the words "settlement of the matter relative to Skyline and Valley Mission Park. " Mayor Towey invited public comment on the amendment; no comments were offered on the amendment or the fully amended motion. Council voted unanimously in favor of the amendment. Tote by Acclamation on the amended motion to "move to approve settlement of the matter relative to Skyline and Valley Mission Park-pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Memorandum ofAgreement in Mediation attached and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute any necessary settlement documents " was unanimously in favor. It was then moved by Councilmember Gothmann, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Council Study Session Minutes, November 2, 2010 Page 3 of 3 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: November 9, 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 Proposed Ordinance amending SVMC 5.15.080 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 5.15.080(J) PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adoption of Spokane Valley Municipal Code 5.15.080 establishing procedures for Special Event Permits. BACKGROUND: In 2008, SVMC 5.15.080 was adopted which, among other things, established conditions for issuance of a Special Event Permit where participants would be seeking charitable solicitations in City -owned rights -of -way. One of the conditions of issuance was that there be "sufficient documentation to demonstrate that all persons who will be entering the roadway in any manner related to the event have successfully completed the Spokane County Incident Traffic Control Program or its equivalent and that certification is current." SVMC 5.15.080(J). At the time of passage of SVMC 5.15., City staff misunderstood the public availability of the Spokane County Incident Traffic Control Program. Staff has recently learned that this training is generally limited to volunteers of the Sheriff Community Oriented Policing Effort (SCOPE). Fire District One has taken the training materials from the SCOPE training and has adapted them for purposes of internal training. Neither the SCOPE training nor Fire District One's training is open to the public. Staff recommends that SVMC 5.15.080(J) be amended to specifically list the Washington Department of Transportation Flagger Certification as satisfying the safety training requirement. Such an amendment will give effect to Council's original intent in adopting Spokane Valley Municipal Code 5.15, which was to allow citizens the ability to apply for Special Event Permits where the activity includes charitable solicitation in the rights -of -way. It also ensures that those soliciting in City -owned rights -of -way receive adequate traffic flow and safety training to further the City's fundamental interest in traffic flow and safety. A Council member asked about cost and duration of flagger training: 8 to 8.5 hours and $50 or $60, depending on the provider. OPTIONS: 1) motion to advance to a second reading; 2) Request that additional changes be made to proposed ordinance. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move that we advance this ordinance to a second reading. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A STAFF CONTACT: Cary P. Driskell, Acting City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance amending SVMC 5.15.080 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 (SVMC) 5.15.080 REGULATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL EVENT PERMITS, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes, as evidenced by its prior adoption of SVMC 8.25.025 Solicitation from Vehicle Occupants Prohibited, SVMC Chapter 5.15 Special Events, and the Model Traffic Ordinance, that there are inherent traffic flow and safety risks associated with pedestrian- vehicle interaction; and WHEREAS, the City has a fundamental interest in traffic flow and safety; and WHEREAS, the City's fundamental interest in traffic flow and safety is furthered when special event participants seeking contributions in the rights -of -way receive traffic flow and safety training; and WHEREAS, SVMC Chapter 5.15 allows, if certain conditions related to traffic flow and safety are met, issuance of special event permits where participants seek contributions in City rights -of -way; and WHEREAS, one such condition related to traffic flow and safety is successful completion of the Spokane County Incident Traffic Control Program or its equivalent, and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes Washington State Department of Transportation Flagger Certification as equivalent to the Spokane County Incident Traffic Control Program for the purposes of SVMC 5.15.080(J). NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, ordains as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to clarify that, for purposes of SVMC 5.15.080(J), Washington State Department of Transportation Flagger Certification is equivalent to the Spokane County Incident Traffic Control Program. Section 2. Amending Spokane Valley Municipal Code Chapter 5.15.080. Spokane Valley Municipal Code Section 5.15.080 is amended as follows: 5.15.080 Permit — Issuance standards. The parks and recreation director shall not issue a special event permit if A. The time, route, or size of the event will unreasonably disrupt the movement of traffic along streets, B. The size or nature of the event requires supervision by a significant number of police officers that causes unreasonable expense or diversion of police duties; C. The applicant has failed to remit all fees, documents, or proof of bonds Ordinance 10 -_ (SVMC 5.15)_ Page 1 of 3 DRAFT D. The applicant has failed to conduct a previously authorized special event in accordance with law or the terms of a pen or both; E. The police department or City traffic engineer fails to sign the permit due to traffic or other safety concerns; F. The applicant has failed to provide sufficient safety, health or sanitation equipment services, or facilities; G. The applicant has not provided sufficient off -site parking or shuttle service, or both, when required to minimize substantial adverse impacts on general parking and traffic circulation caused by the event; H. The special event will substantially interfere with any other special event for which a pen has already been granted or with the provision of City services in support of other scheduled special events or governmental functions, I. The special event would block traffic lanes or close streets during peak commuter hours on weekdays between 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on streets designated as arterials by the City's public works department; J. Anv of Tthe following provisions for charitable solicitation in the rights -of -way occur: 1. The applicant or organization represented by the applicant has been granted a special event permit by the City to engage in charitable solicitation in the City rights -of -way within the preceding 12 months;. - 2. The applicant has failedg to provide sufficient documentation to demonstrate that all persons who will be entering the roadway in any manner related to the event have successfully completed the Spokane County Incident Traffic Control Program or its equivalent including Washington State Department of Transportation Flagger Certification, and that certification is current or- 3. The applicant has failedfi to provide sufficient documentation to demonstrate that all persons who will be entering into the roadway in any manner related to the event are at least 18 _years of age on the day of the event. Section 3 Remainder of SVMC 5.15 Unchanged The remaining provisions of SVMC 5.15 are unchanged by this amendment. Section 4 . 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 5 . Effective Date This Ordinance shall become effective five days after publication of the Ordinance, or a summary thereof, in the official newspaper of the City. Ordinance 10 -_ (SVMC 5.15)_ Page 2 of 3 DRAFT Adopted this day of 1 2010 City of Spokane Valley Thomas E. Towey, Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 10 -_ (SVMC 5.15)_ Page 3 of 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: November 9, 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 proposed ordinance -- Amendments to the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan (SARP) as follows: Chapter 2.0.1 (Applicability). Redefine the definition for new construction and raise the threshold to 80% for additions, expansion or reconstruction of existing buildings to meet the SARP regulations. Chapter 2.1.3 (Mixed -Use Avenue District Zone). Amend Chapter 19.20.060 (Nonconforming Uses and Structures) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code to allow existing legally established single - family dwellings located in any nonresidential zoning district as a permitted use. Chapter 2.2.7 (Front Street Setback). Clarify setbacks where easements may make the requirement infeasible. Section 2.2.8 (Side Street Setback). Clarify setbacks where easements may make the requirement infeasible. Section 2.3.1.2 (Pre - located Streets). Clarify potential streets and replace maximum block size with maximum block length requirement. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 19.30.040- Development Regulation Text Amendments PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: A study session was conducted on November 2, 2010 in which it was a consensus of the Council to move the proposed amendments to the first reading of the ordinance. BACKGROUND: See RCA from November 2, 2010 attached. The Council conducted a study session on November 2, 2010 and discussed the amendments. OPTIONS: 1. Move to advance the ordinance to a second reading, with or without modifications 2. Provide staff with further direction RECOMMENDED ACTION: "I move to advance the ordinance amending the Subarea Plan Chapter 2 concerning the Mixed Use Zone, to a second reading." BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Micki Harnois, Associate Planner ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Ordinance November 2, 2010 Request for Council Action 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 (SVMC) TITLE 19.20.060(A) NONCONFORMING USES AND STRUCTURES: SECTIONS 2.0.1, APPLICABILITY; 2.1.3 MIXED - USE AVENUE DISTRICT ZONE TABLE; 2.2.7 FRONT STREET SETBACKS; 2.28 SIDE STREET SETBACKS; FIGURE 2.3.1.2 PRE - LOCATED STREETS MAP; 2.3.1 (2) AND 2.3.1 (2 & 3) STREET STANDARDS; AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan was adopted on June 16 2009 and became effective on October 15'', 2009; and WHEREAS, these amendments are consistent with the goals and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Book 1 of the Sprague and Appleway Corridor Subarea Plan; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the Environmental Checklists, the city issued a Determination of Non - significance (DNS) for the proposals, published the DNS in the Valley News Herald, posted the DNS at City Hall, and mailed the DNS to all affected public agencies; and WHEREAS, the City provided a copy of the proposed amendment to Washington State Department of Commerce (DOC) initiating a 60 day comment period pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106; and WHEREAS, the amended ordinance as set forth bears a substantial relation to the public health, safety and welfare and protection of the environment, and and WHEREAS, on September 9, 2010, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received information, public testimony and a staff report and recommendation at a public hearing on October 14, 2010; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission deliberated on October 14, 2010; the Planning Commission provided a recommendation, and WHEREAS, on November 2, 2010, City Council reviewed the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on November 9, 2010, City Council considered a first ordinance reading to adopt the proposed amendment. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIFICALLY ORDAINS AS SET FORTH BELOW: Section One The Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan shall be amended as follows: Book II — Section 2.0.1 Applicability Page 13 of 123, Orientation of the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan 1) City Center District Zone. These regulations shall apply to: a) New construction. Ordinance 10- Page 1 of 5 DRAFT b) Additions greater than 20% of the building floor area. c) Exterior Improvements ( "facelifts ") costing more than 20% of the assessed or appraised value of the building and land. Such exterior regulations shall conform to the architectural regulations contained in Section 2.5. 2) All Other District Zones. These regulations shall apply to: a) New construction. b) Exterior Improvements ( "facelifts ") costing more than twenty percent (20 %) of the assessed or appraised value of the building and land. Such exterior improvements shall conform to the architectural regulations contained in Section 2.5. 3) New Construction. New construction is defined as an entirely new structure or the reconstruction, remodel, rehabilitation or expansion of a building costing more than 44tt eighty percent (I�80 %) of the assessed or appraised value of the existing structure and land. In addition, the applicant shall comply with all the regulations within the Subarea Plan, except those that would require moving an existing building. Section Two: The Spokane Valley Municipal Code shall be amended as follows: 19.20.060 Nonconforming uses and structures. A. Applicability. Legal nonconforming uses and structures include: 1. Any use which does not conform with the present regulations of the zoning district in which it is located shall be deemed a nonconforming use if it was in existence and in continuous and lawful operation prior to the adoption of these regulations; 2. Any permanent structure in existence and lawfully constructed at the time of any amendment to this code, which by such amendment is placed in a district wherein it is not otherwise permitted and has since been in regular and continuous use, 3. Any permanent structure lawfully used or constricted that was in existence at the time of annexation into the City and which has since been in regular and continuous use; 4. The provisions of this chapter do not apply to strictures or uses deemed nonconforming only pursuant to the Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 RCW) and the Spokane Valley Shoreline Master Program (Chapter 21.50 SVMC); 5. Existing legally established single familv residential uses located in an-, nonresidential zoning district shall not be deemed nonconforming and shall be permitted as a legal use. Section Three The Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan shall be amended as follows: Boole II — Section 2.2.7 Front Street Setback, page 40 of 123, Site Development Standards of the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan. FRONT STREET SETBACK Front Street Setback is defined as the required distance from the back of sidewalk line along a Front Street to a primary building fagade. This is illustrated in Figure 2.2.7 Front Street Setback. Section 33 of Book III: City Actions are adopted as part of these development regulations. Along streets with approved street reconfiguration plans, Front Street Setback distances shall be measured based on either 1) the back of sidewalk location following street reconfiguration, or 2) approved City plans for street reconfiguration that relocate the back of sidewalk. Front Street Setback areas must be landscaped according to the principles set forth in Section 23. Street and Open Space Regulations except where exceptions are noted within the Private Frontage Standards for a Ordinance 10- Page 2 of 5 DRAFT particular Frontage Type or in Section 2.1.1 District Zones Regulations. Several Frontage Types' plan and section illustrations depict the front setback dimension with an "x ". The minimum and maximum number for that setback dimension shall be as specified in Section 2.1. District Zones Regulations. At required setback areas, arcades, awnings, entrance porticos, porches, stoops, stairs, balconies, bay windows, eaves, and covered entrance overhangs are permitted to encroach within the required front street setback as shown in the frontage type illustrations. Encroachments may extend up to a maximum of six (6) feet into the private frontage. At zero- setback areas, building overhangs such as trellises, canopies and awnings may extend horizontally into the public frontage up to a maximum of six (6) feet. These overhangs must provide a minimum of eight (8) feet clear height above sidewalk grade. In an existing easement is located in the required front street setback, the Community Development Director has the discretion to establish a reasonable setback from the outer edize of the easement. Section Four: The Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan shall be amended as follows Book II- Section 2.2.8 Side Street Setback, page 40 of 123, Site Development Standards of the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan. SIDE STREET SETBACK Side Street Setback is defined as the required distance from the back of sidewalk line along a Side Street to a primary building fagade. This is illustrated in Figure 2.2.8 Side Street Setback. Side Street Setback areas must be landscaped according to the principles set forth in Section 23. Street and Open Space Regulations except where exceptions are noted within the Private Frontage Standards for a particular Frontage Type or in Section 2.1.1 District Zones Regulations. Several Frontage Types' plan and section illustrations depict the setback dimension with an "x ". The minimum and maximum value for that setback dimension shall be as specified in Section 2.1. District Zones Regulations. In an existing easement is located in the required side street setback, the Community Development Director has the discretion to establish a reasonable setback from the outer edge of the easement. Section Five The Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan section 2.2.2.1(e) shall be amended as follows: Book II- Figure 2.3.1.2 Pre - Located Streets Map, Page 43 of 123, Street and Open Space Regulations of the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto. Section Six: Book II- Section 2.3.1.2 Pre - Located Streets, Page 43 of 123, Street and Open Space Regulations of the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan. The pre - located street map (see Figure 2.3.1.2) above) shows preferred alignments for future streets within the corridor. The pre - located street map (see Figure 23.1.2) above) shows potential alignments for future streets within the corridor. It is desirable to have additional access points into new development. The exact location of new streets will be determined at the time of development. Wea4e -d show en the pFe laeated street map The new street alignments are also considered future acquisition areas. To ensure that new streets can be constructed in the future, buildings may not be constructed on a pre- Ordinance 10- Page 3 of 5 DRAFT located street and buildings must be set back the minimum distance shown on the district zone charts located in Section 2.1. The street or future alignment may be relocated at the discretion of the Community Development Director/Designee if the applicant can show that the proposed new configuration satisfies the same traffic requirements and establishes an equivalent interconnected street network. 3) MAXIMUM BLOCK LENGTH ■- • IN In He ease do alle�-s er- passrwes b b Week passa size, alle�,-s and The maximum intersection spacing for local access streets is six hundred sixty (660) feet per Table 7.5 (Chapter 7 Street Elements) of the City of Spokane Valley Street Standards adopted December, 2009. Section Seven The Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan shall be amended as follows: Book lI, Section 2. 1. Mixed -Use Avenue District Zone, page 22 of 123, Table 2.2. Site Development Standards of the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan as depicted in Exhibit B attached hereto. Section Eight All other provisions of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code and the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan not specifically referenced hereto shall remain in full force and effect. Section Nine Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrases 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, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Section Ten Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after the 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 Ordinance 10- Page 4 of 5 DRAFT Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 10- Page 5 of 5 Fxttibit A F 1 1l f ly' I L - •.{��,.��____ amu p —, --•— �� IL i�—ry �i Y i 4 TI - - T T - r t . ^ - 1 v m r k -• m ,... dD FlG.2.3. 1 . 2) PR - LOC ATED STREETS MAP - - Pre - located Streets The pre - located street map (tire lugure 23.12) above) shrews preferred alignments for future streets within the corridor, Required new streets shall be constructed in the located shown on the pre- loented street map. The ne•w street alignments are also considered future acquisition areas. To ensure that new streets can be constructed in the future, buildings may not be constructed on a pre- located street and buildings most be set back the minimum distance shown on the district zone charts located in Section 2.1. The street or future alignment may be relo=Ld at the discretion of the Community Development Director'Designee if the applicant can show that the proposed new configuration satisfies the sarric traffic requirements and csttblishes an equivalent inten:onnected street network. �) Maximum Block Size Block size is a measure of the total arcs in acres. bounded by the property lines that define a parcel or assembled parcel. The lvlaximtmr Block Size specifically regulates the toCt area ofcontiguous properties that ultimately form a city block. Maxnnum BIock Size regulations result in limitations on amount of contiguous property that may be developed within the boundaries of publicly accessible Sestets. Development increments - that is properties or assemblages OfContigeoutg pmpertics to be developed - that exceed the specified M. Block Size standard (aflcr providing any required pre - located stints) must construct additional new publicly accessible struts in locations that result in the creation of city blocks that do not exceed the Maximum Block Size. New streets must be designed. configured. std located in accordance with the standards specified in the following sections. Nlmmmtun Block Size standards are specifrcd for each District Zone in the Development Standards clmrts.. In no care des u!ley:r or passages grealifi• as de finlnq er4�Tv ofa bloc* For the fnrrl"es ofderermimm; block-size, rtlfewx and jxraaagcs must alwmi -- be considrrra as fiat of the ini rior nfa hlock. 4) Street Configura a) Connectivity MA-P LEGEND Pfe3oetA Potential Streets , rtttrre - Sfree3 (ice section 2.1.1. 1)) i) All new streets shall connect with casting streets and be configured to allow for future extension whenever possible. ii) New private, internal streets and cul -de -sacs longer than two hundred (200) feet are not permitted (dead end roads over one hundred and filly (150) feet need an approved fire apparatus turn - around). iii) New dead -end streets are permitted so long as tlhcy are configured to allow for future extenn_sion onto ndjaccnt properties and could not otherwise connect to an e xisting street, b) Abandonment In order to maintain the accessibility provided by the block struchuc of the corridor, existing public streets or alleys may not be closed permanently unless the closure is part of the provision of a network of new sh'eet's that satisfy all street regulations. s) Access Management Regulations for Sprague and Appleway These regulations arc intended to supplement those in the City's adopted size,t shmdards in order to preserve the functionality of tlucsc principal Arterials and to mmimize conflicts between access points and future high - rapacity transit in the corridor In the event of conflict between the sub - nr'ca plan and the street standards. the more restrictive regulation will apply. a) Appleway Avenue (one - way sections) Access tc Applcway Avartat one -way sections shall be regulatedby access hierarchy in the parking Chapter, Section 2.4.2.1). Direct access to Applcway from properties — - - — Plan Area Boundary Parcel Line along either side of the tight -of- -way will be temporary and may be revoked if the access conflicts with future high capacity transit alignment. b) Appleway Boulevard (ttvo - wny sections) Access to Applewa Boulevard two-way sections shall be regulated by the hierarchy in the Parking Chapter. Section 2.4.23). Access shall be right in;rigltt out only. Direct access to Appleway from properties along the south side of the right -of -way will be tempornry ;red unary be revoked if the access conflicts with fnturc high capacity transit alignment. i c) Sprngue.hvenne from Thierman toTschirley_ Access to Sprague Avenue shall be regulated by the hierarchy in the Parking Chapter, Section 2,4,2,S), d) Commercial, industrial. and multifamily developments: Shall provide parking lot travel lane connections con_sidtmt with S VMC 72.1 10 019 and gent easements to adjacent properties. e) Restrictions on changing, street access: Applicants may not use land use actions, such as boundary line adjustments, short plats, subdivisions or binding site plans, to eliminate access to a parcel from a side sheet or alley an order to gain direct ncccss from Sprague or Appleway. c k V cn w O 1 V) V) a ;r Peas 4i EXHIBIT B 2.1.3 Mixed Use Avenue District Zone Regulations Legend: - -- Not Permitted U Upper Floors Only G. Ground Floor Only Penrtted These elements are allowed by right unless otherwise specified in Section 2.2 ^_. Budding Use Required These are Required elements of all new development as indicated. Limited These frontages may only be applied to access lobbies for upper floor uses that are different from the ground floor use (A)' For Anchor Stores: Al lar er than 25,000 s fl , 1 floor / 20 ft is enrutted, (A2) larger than 50,000 sq ft , regulation does not apply A3) largerthan50,000sq ft,parlangtypeispentritted 2.2. Site De velopment Standards Street / Street Category Sprague Ave. Other Streets 2.2.1.Building Orientation to Streets and Public Open Spaces 1) Street Provision required or not required regnied —1—d 2) Pre - Located Street 2.2.2.Building Use iequiied 1 Retail --, --, 660 feet S - ae+e. 660 feet a City Center Retail required iequied b Neighborhood Center Retail a) Exposed C) Mixed -Use Avenue Retail permitted b) Wrapped - Ground Level d Corner Store Retail N A c) Wrapped - All Levels e Gateway Commercial Avenue Retail N A permitted Gateway Commercial Center Retail N A penuitted 2 Civic uast -Civic & Cultural permitted permitted 3 Office p- nittod permtted 4 Light Industrial permtted permtted 5) Lodging (w /common entry) pernitted permitted 6) Live -Work permitted permitted 7) Residential a) Multi - Family w/ Common Entry permitted permitted b) Attached Single-Family w/ Individual Entry - -- permitted C) Detached Single-Family Housing --- - -- 2.2.3.Building Height minimum height 1 floor / 20 fl 1 floor / 10 8 maximum height 4 floors/ 53 it 4 floors/ 53 ft 2.2.4.Relation to Single Family Homes required or not applicable required regi r d 2.2.5.Public Frontage Improvements required or not required regnmed notre(jnmed 2.2.6.Private Frontage 1) Shopfront penmmtted permitted 2) Corner Entry permitted permitted 3) Arcade permitted - -- 4) Grand Portico permitted permitted 5) Forecourt perrtW permitted 6) Grand Entry permitted permitted 7) Common Lobby Entry knifed limited 8) Stoop permitted permitted 9) Porch - -- - -- 10) Front Door - -- - -- 11) Parking Structure Entry permtted permitted 12) Vehicle Display: Option I - -- - -- 13) Vehicle Display: Option - -- - -- 14) Edge Treatment: Fenced - -- pennmtted 13) Edge Treatment: Terraced - -- permitted 14) Edge Treatment: Flush permitted permitted 2.2.7.Front Street Setback minimum / maximum 10 fl/25 8 10 fl /'0 b 2.2.6.Side Street Setback minimum / maximum 5 ft / 15 8 10 ft / 10 ft 2.2.9.Side Yard Setback minimum w/ living space windows 10 it 10 R minimumw /out living space windows 5 fl 5 fl 2.2.10.Rear Yard Setback minimum setback 10 ft 10 fl 2.2.11.Alley Setback minimum setback 5 fl 5 fl 2.2.12.Fronta a Coverage minimum percentage covered 60 no min. 2.2.13. B u i l d - to - Corner required or not required regmred regnmed 2.2.14.Maximum Building Length 2.3. Street: O pen Spac andards 2.3.1.Street Standards Sprague Ave. O ther Streets 1) Street Provision req—d required 2) Pre - Located Street required iequiied 3) Alaximum]31.eksi� 3) Ma rnum Block Length --, --, 660 feet S - ae+e. 660 feet 4) Street Configuration required iequied 5) Street Type a) Exposed a) Plaza Drive N/9 b) Wrapped - Ground Level b) City Street N A c) Wrapped - All Levels c) Neighborhood Street N A permitted d) Neighborhood Green Street N A penuitted e) Service Street NA 2.4.2.Parking Standards f) Alley N/A see sectimn 2 42 g) Passage N/A 2.3.2.Open Space Standards see secflon 1.3 .3 2.4. Parking Standards 2.4.1.Parking Types Sprague O ther Ave. Streets 1) Surface Parking —inured Base a) Front lot - -- penutted b) Side lot permitted permtted c) Rear lot permitted permtted 2) Parking Structure N/A a) Exposed pe witted pentinted b) Wrapped - Ground Level penmitted per anted c) Wrapped - All Levels pemntted permitted d) Partially Submerged Podium permitted permitted e) Underground Parking penmitted penmmtted 2.4.2.Parking Standards see sectimn 2 42 O ther 2.5. Architectural Sprague Standards Ave. Streets 2.5.2.Height Massing & Composition Top required —inured Base requmed I egimed 2.5.3.Length Massing & Composition Streetwall Increment 1508 808 Sidewall & Rearwall Increment N N/A 2.6.Signage Standards Sprague Other Ave. Streets P. \Clerk\AgendaPackets for Web \agendapacket 11 -09 -10 \Item 3 Exhibit B - 2.1.3 Mixed Use Matrix Page 1 0A of 13 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: November 2, 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: Administrative Report on proposed amendments to the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan (SARP) as follows: Chapter 2.0.1 (Applicability). Consider options to address the 50% threshold for additions, expansion or reconstruction of existing buildings to meet the SARP regulations. Chapter 2.1.3 (Mixed -Use Avenue District Zone). Amend Chapter 19.20.060 (Nonconforming Uses and Structures) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code to allow existing legally established single - family dwellings located in any nonresidential zoning district as a permitted use. Chapter 2.2.7 (Front Street Setback). Clarify setbacks where easements may make the requirement infeasible. Section 2.2.8 (Side Street Setback). Clarify setbacks where easements may make the requirement infeasible. Section 2.3.1.2 (Pre - located Streets). Consider options for street requirements, specifically the 5 -acre requirement. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 19.30.040- Development Regulation Text Amendments PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: The Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan was adopted on June 16 1 ', 2009 and became effective on October 15' 2009. Earlier this year council directed staff to conduct a zone by zone review of the Subarea Plan to determine if changes are necessary to better serve the public interests. The review process for each zoning district included a study session with the council, a public meeting with the property owners, and a follow -up meeting with council to determine which changes staff should proceed with. The second zoning district to be reviewed was the Mixed -Use Avenue District Zone. Council review was conducted on June 15, 2010, and a public meeting was conducted on June 24, 2010. The meeting was attended by approximately 38 people. As a result of the comments received at the meeting, the changes outlined above were forwarded to the Council on July 13, 2010 where Council directed staff to proceed with the formal code text amendment process. A motion formalizing the direction was passed on July 27, 2010. The code text amendments under consideration are a result of this process. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on October 14, 2010 and has recommended that the amendments, with one modification, be approved as proposed as indicated above and in the attached exhibits. The Commission recommended that the amendment to Section 2.0.1 (Applicability) be modified to read "New Construction is defined as an entirely new structure or the reconstruction, remodel, rehabilitation or an expansion of a building costing more than 80% of the - assessed or appraised value of the existing structure and land, where the threshold is 80% and the applicant will comply with all the regulations within the Subarea Plan that would not require moving an existing building ". ANALYSIS: See attached Staff Report OPTIONS: Consensus to proceed to first reading of the ordinance or provide staff direction regarding modifications. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to proceed with first reading of ordinance BUDGETIFINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Micki Harnois, Associate Planner ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report 2. SARP Chapter 2.0.1 (Applicability). 3. SARP Chapter 2.1.3 (Mixed -Use Avenue District Zone), 4. SARP Chapter 2.2.7 Standards (Front Street Setback) 5. SARP Section 2.2.8 Standards (Side Street Setback) 6. SARP Section 2.3.1.2 Standards (Pre - located Streets) 7. Power Point Presentation CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: November 9, 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: Proposed Resolution 10 -017: Extinguishment of Agreement and Grant of Easement — United States Department of Health and Human Services — Parcel numbers 35234.9083 and 35234.9076 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Administrative report October 26, 2010 BACKGROUND: Prior to incorporation, Spokane County obtained a right -of -way (ROW) easement across property that was to be developed as the Healing Lodge of the Seven Nations, a youth alcohol and drug treatment facility near the south edge of the City, south of 8 th Avenue, just east of McKinnon Road. (See Attachment 1) The City inherited this easement upon incorporation. The easement was intended to provide access to property further south, which is no longer needed for access to the south as that access is provided by the subsequent construction of East 14 Avenue and South Kahuna Drive. It includes an obligation to maintain drainage facilities, which neither Spokane County nor Spokane Valley have done. This extinguishment has been requested by the United States Department of Health and Human Services. (See Attachment 2) The Public Works Department has determined that it does not need the ROW easement and agrees that this extinguishment of agreement and easement is appropriate. A proposed resolution extinguishing the applicable agreement and grant of easement has been prepared for Council consideration. OPTIONS: Approve resolution extinguishing agreement and easement; do nothing RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move to approve Resolution 10 -017 relating to the Extinguishment of Agreement and Grant of Easement — United States Department of Health and Human Services — Parcel numbers 35234.9083 and 35234.9076, and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute any documents related thereto. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: NA STAFF CONTACT: Cary P. Driskell, Acting City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: 1. Map of area that includes easement. 2. Letter from DHHS requesting extinguishment of easement. 3. Proposed Resolution extinguishing easement with Exhibits A and B. r- 0 8th c.� Ali i 10th y w SERVI% 5 J DEPARTMEN O F HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES o r ti SEP 0 9 2010 Neil Kersten Public Works Director City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague, Suite 106, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Dear Mr. Kersten: Public Health Service PORTLAND AREA INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE 1414 NW NORTHRUP, Suite 800 PORTLAND, OREGON 97209 Enclosed are two signed copies of the "EXTINGUISHMENT OF AGREEMENT AND GRANT OF EASEMENT," which extinguishes the right -of -way easement described below. Please sign both copies, keep one for your records and return the other to the Portland Area Office, Attention CDR Mathew Martinson, 1414 NW Northrup Ste #800, Portland, Oregon 97209. Extinguishment of: Easement: 4739718 (re- recorded June 18, 2002, original record 4177003 Spokane County Engineering Easement #) Subject: 60 -foot Wide Road Grantor: U.S.A. / DHHS Grantee: City of Spokane Valley (Spokane County original easement holder) Legal Description: 60 foot wide strip of land lying within NW 1 /4, SE 1 /4, Sec. 23, T. 25N, R. 43E, WM, Spokane County, WA and further described in the Easement Assessors Parcel Numbers: 35234.9083 & 35234.9076 Date: December 16, 1997. Thank you for your help in this process. Sincerel , CDR athew J. Martinson, P.E. Director, Division of Health Facilities Engineering Enclosure 4739716 I GNi 2002 y es 47A 0"IvTv eu l00 0110 CIO srti nn rnnh zno r� wa Return to Coun Engineer Right i0f Way Department Title AGREEmE N T AND GA T 'OY BASEMENT Reference Number THIS INSTRUMENT IS BEING RE- RECORDED TO CORRECT THE PAIRCEL NUMBERS, ADD AN EXHIBIT AND CORRECT A. TYPOGRAPHI ERROR TO DOCUMENT N AND SHALL RENDER SAME NULL AND VOID. a��k,t,t�k�rkir�sFsk�rri *4 #fie k�CJcx*! e�*+ k*, tkie�ktcik* + 4��*^ rrk�F# ��le�� * #rr�F * * * *�r:rt * * * *sk�rie ** * *t�kt* Grantor U. S. Ad DEES Grant GOVERNMENT, COUNTY OF SPOKME Legal Description SE 1/4, SE C'. 23, TWN. 25N, RG. 43 EAST W -M- .Assessors parcel Number 35234.9075 AND 35234.9083 Additional Legal Description on Page 4 4739718 4177003 pat; I F 8 1200 2 2 o f 47A 01,4911998 Q 04 31F AMIRLTV -iw P turra efW ria d M 4*Ak A A WA �f'nvn1hA en. 8 Tide a f I L &, Reference Number Grantor r A- zz� Grantee Legal Description Assessors parcel Number 3222�-<- 2-026 4- ��" .Additional Legal Deseri tion on Page IMAGED 91689 II ## 4739718 to 06 1$'2002 � 08:47A prilloV cloy kirra or NO Ctl rJ} 4nnYen Pn lill Unnamed County Road - RF No. 2565 PortxQn of Assessors Parcal Nos.; 35234,9076 & 35234,0063 AGREEMENT AND GRANT OF EASEMENT TINS AGREEMENT AND GRANT OF EASEMENT made and entered into this day of 4 aER , 1997, by and between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, acting by and tlhrnugh the Department of Health and Human Services, Indian Health Service, hereinafter referred to as the Grantor, and Spokane County, a political subdivision of the State of Washington, hereinafter referred to as the Grantee. 'WHEREAS, the Grantor is in need of road access for it's Youth Primary Regional Treatment Center which it is required by law and the public interest to operate;. and. WHEREAS, the Grantee has requested the grant; of a certain easement in, under, upon, and across real property of the United States under the custody and control of the Department of Health and Human services, located in the County of Spokane,. State of Washington, hereinafter more particularly described, said easement site to be used as a right of way, in lieu of a right of way vacated by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington, in proceedings on May 16, 1995, on County Engineer's Road File No. 2565 which vacated right of way filed as Document No. 9105030173, Volume 1187, Page 1928 in the Office of the Spokane County Auditor in accordance with County Cotmmissioners' Document No. 92 01352, the Findings of Fact, Decision and conditions adapted in County Zahe Reclassification File No. 5E -33 -91 which required vacation of a road right of way subject to the dedication of a replacement road right of way; and WHEREAS, the Portland Area Indian Health Service of the Department of Health and Human. Services has made an environmental assessment of this project in accordance with Section. 1+02 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. § 4332), and has found there would be no significant impact on the quality of the human environment and 4'177003 11 c 2 01�G9 #i%8 X 04 N szakantl Co. K WHEREAS, the Department of Health and Human Services has custody and control of the aforesaid property and the undersigned, acting pursuant to delegated authority under 40 U. S.G. § 319, has determined that the grant of said easement; will not be adverse to the interest of the United States, but will promote and enhance the ability of the United States to provide health services. R. ciseTax Fxealf S R. F. Excise Tax Exer�lpt Cute 10. q WAGED M X1739718 4177003 Pa f1 4 o Q9 0iA 01IN11 � 04 31P nnnmr nwrrarca l our rar en nn c...b�na rn w� 5vAd178 Co. W1+ Page 2 NOW THEREFORE WITNES,SETH THAT The Grantor in consideration of the premises and other good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant, bargain, sell, and convey unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns, subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter stated, an easement for a right of way and related purposes, including utilities as authorized by R. C. W. 36.55, in, on, aver, under, and across real property of the Grantor situated in Spokane County, State of Washington, and more particularly described as follows and as shown on the attached site plan, exhibit 1, which is hereby attached and incorporated by reference: A 6d foot wide strip of land 30.00 feet wide on either side of the following described centerline, lying within the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4) of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of Section 23, Township 25 North, Range 43 East, W. M., Spokane County, Washington, more particularly described as follows: COMMENCING at the Northeast corner of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of Section 23, Township 25 North, Range 43 East, W. M.; thence S.89 937.02 feet along the North line of said Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4�, said line also being the centerline of 8th Avenue; thence S. 0 0 33 1 56"E., 30.00 feet to a point on the Southerly right of way of said Sth Avenue, said paint being the Point of Beginning; thence S. C1 ° 33 `56 tE. , 790.03 :feet to a point of curvature; thence 546.78 feet along a curve to the right having a radius of 738.18 feet and an included angle of 39 said curve being-concave to the Northwest, to a point of tangency; thence S.39 47.18 feet to the Point of Terminus, said point lying N. 89 °58 "E., 177.33 feet from the Southeast 1/16 corner of said Section 23, and coincident with the centerline of an unnamed county night of way in the West 22 rods of the },North Half (N %) of the Southeast Quarter (SE 1/4) of Section 23, as shown on Record of Survey recorded in Book , page 94. Said parcel contains 1.851 acres more or less. TO HAVE AND TO 14OLD the same, unto the said Grantee for the purposes of a public road subject to the terms and conditions below. SUBJECT TO all easements, liens, reservations, exceptions of interest of record now existing on the above- described easement site. WL687 s • " 4739718 4177003 Fae: 6 of 10 4i4,1B a 4 3P Cfi 08:47A Pffln V CPATOen 6IV CI Ss�Bkil Page 3 ENVIRONMENTAL COVENANT Pursuant to section 120 (h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CER.CLA) , 42 U.S.C. section 9620 (h), the Indian 'Health Service advises that a search of agency files shows that no known hazardous substance activity within the meaning of 40 C.F.R. part 373 has takers place on the Property subject to the easement described herein. If, after transfer to Grantee, it is found that such hazardous substance activity occurred during the time the Property subject to the easement has been owned by Grantor, Grantee shall terminate its use of the easement, and cease the admission of any and all persons into or upon all affected portions of the easement for any purposes until Grantor conducts any and all additional remedial actions, in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Grantee covenants and agrees on behalf of it, its successors and assigns, that Grantor shall have access to the Property that is subject to the easement in any case in which remedial action is found to be necessary after the date of such transfer. By acceptance of this easement, Grantee further acknowledges and agrees that Grantee, it successors or assigns, shall be solely liable for all costs relating to any damage to property, personal injury, illness disability or death, of the Grantee, or of the Grantee's successors, assigns, employees, invitees, or any other person, including members of the general public, arising from or incident to the purchase, transportation, handling, storage, use, release, or disposal or other activity by Grantee causing or leading to contact of any kind whatsoever with hazardous or toxic substances, as defined by CERCLA and applicable regulations, during use of the property subject to the easement by said Grantee,.its successors or assigns. PROVIDED, however, that the said easement is granted under and subject to the following terms and conditions which the Grantee hereby accepts; 1. The said easement shall be utilized for the purposes of a public road, including the right, privilege and authority to install, operate and maintain a public road and to grant franchises for public; utilities as authorized by R. C. W. 36.55 and for no other purpose. 2. The Grantee will neither conduct mining operations nor remove any mineral substances from the easement area. 3. The Grantee will, at its sawn expense, construct, keep and maintain in good condition and repair, any improvements it makes or causes to be made can the property, and will at its sawn expense keep and maintain in good condition and repair IMAGED 4177003 • - 4739718 P� e. § of 8 e: 6 o� 41A 01�0909M NOP 060 M11MV rMU D;W cae 0 An 0� NMA OA WA Skak rB CO, W4 , Page 4 any improvements made by the Grantor which are now designated a private road if and when such private road becomes a public road. 4. The Grantor reserves the righ't to use aad enj oy that property which is the subject of this easement for other purposes which will not interfere with the Grantee's full enjoyment of the rights hereby granted., and which will serve the Grantor's facility ( such as, for example, additional utility lines), and reserves the right to enter can occasion the premises which are the subject of the grant to assure that the terms of the grant are being complied with. S. The Grantee shall give written notice to Grantor prior to the onset of construction, renovation, or any extensive maintenance work in said easement site and shall cooperate in scheduling and locating such activities so as to cause the minimum possible disruption to Grantor's health service activities. Routine maintenance and emergency repairs are excluded from advance notice requirements. 6. The Grantee accepts full responsibility for operation and maintenance of the roadway upon acceptance as a public road. The Grantee will indemnify and save the United States harmless from any liability or responsibility what ever arising directly or indirectly from the Grantee's use of the easement and activities on the premises. 7. The {Grantee will minimize damage to the scenic and aesthetic values of the premises and otherwise protect the environment. 8. The Grantee will comply with air and water quality standards established by or pursuant to Federal or State Law. 9. The Grantee will otherwise protect Federal property and economic interests and the public interest in the lands traversed by the right -of -way or lands adjacent thereto. 10, The Grantee will comply with State standards for public health and safety, environmental protection, and the siting, construction, operation, and maintenance of or for rights - of -way for similar purposes, if those standards are more stringent than applicable Federal standards. 11. Upon termination or forfeiture of the grant, the Grantee, if sc requested by the Granter, will remove from the premises al structures or other improvements belonging to the Grantee and otherwise restore the premises to the satisfaction of, and at no cast to, the United States. 1MAGEQ 91685 lit 4739718 4177003 ?tgt: 6 Of 8 Pa c 7 of 10 o1l lm 44:31? nr + +u c s ry �T t rre K10002 09.47A ` soobfie Co y Page 5 12. The Grantor is constructing the necessary drainage retention basins for this right of way on the Grantor's property outside of the easement hereby granted, and the Grantee agrees that its use of the right of way will not adversely affect the Grantor's drainage retention basins, The Grantor agrees that the use of its drainage retention basins for the purpose of containing drainage from the right of way hereby granted is not an adverse affect. The Grantee will correct at no expense to the Grantor any other drainage conditions adversely affecting the Grantor's land or improvements thereon resulting from the Grantee's use and enjoyment of the easement, within a reasonable time after the occurrence thereof, to the satisfaction of the Grantor. 13. Any notice required by this easement shall be sent to the following persons; Gary J. Harts, P.E. Indian Health Service, DHH5 Twinbrook Metro Plaza, #504 12300 Twi.nbrook Parkway Rockville, Maryland 20$52 Director Youth Primary Regional Treatment Center ' East 56o4 Eighth Avenue Spokane, Washington 99260 Regional Engineer, IHS /DHHS Engineering Services - Seattle Mail.stop RX 24 2201 Sixth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98121 -1833 Spokane County Engineer office of the County Engineer Spokane County Public Works 1026 West 'Broadway Avenue Spokane, Waohington 99260 -0170 in the event of the Grantee's failure to comply with any of the foregoing terms and conditions whether caused by legal or other inability to perform the same, or the Grantee's abandonment of the easement, the easement shall terminate in whole or in part at the opt of the Grantor, which shall' have the right to so terminate in addition to all other remedies for such, breach, and the Grantee shall forfeit all rights under the said easement. Written notice of such termination shall be given to the Grantee and shall he effective as of the date of such notice. Upon termination, all right, title, and interest to and in the land shall revert to the United States or its assignee, and if requested by the Grantor, the Grantee shall deliver a Quitclaim Deed to the rights arising hereunder. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, that the failure of the Grantor to insist in any one or more instances upon complete performance of any of the terms, covenanta, or conditions of this grant shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment of the future performance of any such terms, covenants, or conditions, but the Grantee's obligation with respect to such future performance shall continue in full force.. IMAGED Mr ' ` 11 4177003 4739718 jjj�j Page; i Of 8 016ris of 10 sob�egCo. A'34P �rUllis4 rur Irrh 6119 tae d nn M.l�,w� Page 6 The Grantee further covenants and agrees that by execution and acceptance of this easement, Grantee assures compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. of 1964 (P.L. 88 -352) , section 584 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (P.L. 93- 112), The Age Discrimination Act of 1}75 (P.L. 94 135), and G rantort s regulations issued pursuant thereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be executed as of the day and year first above written. UNITED S'T'ATES OF AMERI Acting by and through the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services By: Gary J. , P.E. Assistant urgeon eneral Director, Division of Facilities and Environmental Engineering Office of Public Health Indian Health Service Department of Health and Human Services STATE OF MARYLAND COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY SS on this day of 199`1, before me the undersigned officer, personally appeared Gary J. Hartz, P. E. known to me to be the Director, Division of Facilities and Environmental Engineering, office of Public Health, Indian Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services, and known to me to be the person who executed the foregoing instrument an behalf of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, for the United States of America., and acknowledged to me that he subscribed to the said instrument in the name of the Secretary of Health and Human Services and on behalf of the United States of America. Witness my hand and official seal. ► # ► ,ti ►► ►t k��r����� � CHRISTOPHE R. JONES 11l[7lrary Pub 4 N . Urmy Ex Tres NoYember 10.2001 0 ammissicr+ ° My Commission expires: IMAGED 8739718 4177043 . Pa e, 9 of io Qi1 1SM o 04 3iP 0018' 2W2 08,47A 5 ;akane ml ury TWITI CD DIV [KC n nn CMAIA* Page 7 = C Spokane County, acting through the Board of Commissioners of Spokans County, hereby accepts this deed and thereby accepts and agrees to all the terms, covenants, conditions and restrictions contained therein.. By' rj6hn Roskel.l.ey J airman, Board cif Commissioners of Spokane County State of Washington 7 ) SS County of Spokane ] On this Ar—m day of 1997, before Fee a Notary Public in and for the 'City of Spokane, County of Spokane, State of Washington, personally appeared John Roskel.ley, known to me to be the person who executed the foregoing instrument on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners, Spokane County, Washington and acknowledged to me that he executed the same as the free act and deed of said Grantee. Witness ray hand and seal. IMAGED Notary Public • my Commission expires: - ) �WAI 1 > >� IMAGED III hill111111111111 � ��¢A rni�rw tWILM Ory CIO !n " firw • i , , f 1 ! l i I r I r , r r s I. r i i r I i r , s i , r. Unnamed County Road — RAF' No. 2565 Portion of Assessors Parcel Nos.: 35234.9076 and 35234.9083 EXTINGUISHMENT OF AGREEMENT AND GRANT OF EASEMENT This EXTINGUISHMENT OF AGREEMENT AND GRANT OF EASEMENT made and entered into this 31 day of Ptd & US T , 2410, by and between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, acting by and through the Department of Health and Human Services, Indian Health Service, hereinafter referred to as the Grantor, and the County of Spokane, a political subdivision of the State of Washington, hereinafter refenred to as the Grantee. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantor and Grantee have mutually agreed to extinguish the Grant of Easement under County Reference Number 4739718, re- record June 18, 2002. The grant of easement was re- recorded to correct easement parcel numbers, add an exhibit and correct a typographical error on the original record reference number 4177003, dated December 16, 1997, WHEREAS, the Grantee determined that easement for access to undeveloped was not utilized and consequently not needed by the County, Further, the Grantee acknowledges that upon extinguishment of the easement, all rights, title, and interest in the land shall revert to the United States or its assignee for said property situated in Spokane County State of Washington, and more particularly described as shown on the attached re- recorded agreement and grant of easement, reference number 4739718. WHEREAS, the Director, Portland Area. Indian Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services, has made an environmental assessment of this action in accordance with Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332), and determines action belongs to Categorical Exclusion 1, under 40 CFR 1500 - 1508. Further, the undersigned, acting pursuant to authority under 40 U.S.C. 1314, has determined that extinguishment of said easement will not be adverse to the interests of the United States. The termination shall be effective as of the date of receipt of sech entice. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be executed as of the day and year fu-st above written.. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Acting by and through the Secretary of the Department of Health ftkcd Human Services BY: Kevin J. D'Ama Ada, P.E. Acting Director, Division of Facilities Operations Office of Environmental Health and Engineering Indian Health Service Ply- Spokane Easement Page 3 oft ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF MARYLAND ) COUNTY OF MONTGOMERY) SS On this 31 day of AM 5 , before me the undersigned officer, personally appeared Kevin D'Amanda, known to me to be the Acting Director, Division of Facilities Operations, Office of Environmental Health and Engineering, hidian Health Service, and known to me to be the person who executed the foregoing instrument on behalf of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, for the United States of America, and acknowledged to me that he subscribed to the said instrument in the name of the Secretary of Health and Human Services and on behalf of the United States of America. Witness my hand and official seal. L #d Notary Public My Commission expires; 0) ©►� A C CEP TANCEIAC KNO WLEDGNMNT The State of Washington hereby accepts this extinguishment of easement and thereby accepts and agrees to all the terns, covenants conditions and restrictions contained therein. Chairman, Board of commissioners County of Spokane, Washington STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF ) SS On this day of , 20 before me, a Notary Public in and for the City of , County of , State of Washington, personally appeared known to me to be the person who executed the foregoing histl ument of behalf of the , State of Oklahoma, wid acknowledged to me that the executed the same as the free act and deed of said Grantee. Witness my hand and official seal. Notaiy Public My Commission expires: PO- Spokane Easament Page 2 of 2 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 10 -017 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, EXTINGUISHING AGREEMENT AND GRANT OF EASEMENT FROM THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES FOR RIGHT -OF -WAY PURPOSES, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, Washington is the successor in interest to an easement that was granted to Spokane County prior to the City's incorporation, which burdens property owned by the United States Department of Health and Human Services; and WHEREAS, the easement in question is located on Spokane County Assessor's parcel numbers 35234.9076 and 35234.9083, located immediately south of and adjoining 8 th Avenue, with a residential address of 5600 East 8 th Avenue. The easement was recorded June 18, 2002, Spokane County Auditor's recording number 4739718; and WHEREAS, the easement was originally requested by Spokane County to provide access to then - vacant property south of the property owned by the Department of Health and Human Services. Two separate roads, South Kahuna Drive and East 14 Avenue, were later constructed to provide this necessary access; and WHEREAS, City staff has analyzed the request in terms of future need for access to the parcels south of the subject property, and determined that the easement is not necessary for public needs. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, as follows: Section 1. Relinquishment of Agreement and Grant of Easement Burdening Spokane County Assessor's parcel numbers 35234.9076 and 35234.9083 The City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, as the successor in interest, hereby relinquishes that Agreement and Grant of Easement granted by the United States Department of Health and Human Services to Spokane County for public right -of -way purposes, over a portion of Spokane County Assessor's parcel numbers 35234.9076 and 35234.9083, Spokane County Auditor's recording number 4739718. The Agreement and Grant of Easement are set forth as Exhibit A to this Resolution, and includes the full legal description. The Relinquishment of Agreement and Grant of Easement are set forth as Exhibit B to this Resolution. Section 2. Authorization for City Manager to Execute Relinquishment of Agreement and Grant of Easement The City Council of the City of Spokane Valley authorizes the City Manager to execute the Relinquishment of Agreement and Grant of Easement, attached as Exhibit B to this Resolution, and all other documents necessary thereto. Section 3. Effective Date This Resolution shall be in full force and effect upon adoption Resolution 10 -017 Relinquishment of Easement — Department of Health and Human Services Pagel of 2 DRAFT Adopted this day of November, 2010. ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Resolution 10 -017 Relinquishment of Easement — Department of Health and Human Services Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 11 -09 -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: Mayoral Appointment: Public Transportation Improvement Conference (PTIC) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN BACKGROUND: Staff was contacted by a representative of the Spokane Transit Authority to inforin us of the need to appoint someone to represent the City at the November 10 Public Transportation Improvement Conference to discuss the composition of the Board (required eveiy four rears. OPTIONS: Confirm the Mayor's Appointment; or take other appropriate action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Confirm the Mayor's appointment of Councilmember to the PTIC review committee. BUDGETIFINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS October 20, 2010 Letter to Mayor Towey from Susan Meyer, STA Chief Executive Officer r Amok SpoNaneTransit October 20, 2010 Mayor Tom Towey Spokane Valley City Hall 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 Dear Mayor Towey: RECEIVED OCT 21 2010 City of Spokane Valley Pursuant to RCW 36.57A.055, a special meeting of the Public Transportation Improvement Conference (PTIC) will be held on Thursday, November 17, 2010, at 4 :30 pm at the City Council Chambers, 808 West Spokane Falls Blvd, Spokane, Washington 99201. The purpose of the meeting is to review the composition of the PTBA Board, also known as the Spokane Transit Authority Board, in conformance with the statutory requirement of review every four years. This review will help determine whether a change in the composition of the STA Board is necessary, or appropriate. Pursuant to RCW 36.57A.050, each of the governing bodies of the component cities within the PTBA and the county legislative authority shall each select one elected official serving at the pleasure of the governing body to sit on this review committee. Please provide notice of action taken by your City Council designating your representative at the Public Transportation Improvement Conference to the attention of Jan Watson, Clerk of the Authority, 1230 West Boone - Avenue, Spokane, WA 99201, by November 10, 2010. Jan's email is jwatson@spokanetransit.com If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, E. Susan Meyer Chief Executive Officer 328 -RIDE spokanetranslt.com 1230W BooneAvenue 509.325.6000 T TTY 456.4327 5pokane,Washtngton 99201 -2686 1 509 F CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: November 9, 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: Changes to the fee resolution for 2011 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: The current resolution is 10 -009 which was passed and became effective April 14, 2010. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Each year the council passes a resolution to adjust fees so that most city costs can be recovered for services provided to others. Staff also recommends the deletion and addition of fees when conditions warrant the change. The following fee changes are proposed for 2011: 1. Pipe and drape rental at CenterPlace: $100 per day [new fee] 2. Chair cover rental at CenterPlace: $3.00 per day [new fee] 3. Community Development would like to drop their fee for a binding site plan alternation from $1,474 to $278.00 4. Clarify that a commercial Site Plan Review (now $550) is: a. $275 for one division review (planning or engineering) b. $550 for two division reviews 5. Single family /duplex site plan review: $50 [new fee] 6. The 30 -50 ton fee shown on page 8 of the current resolution under mechanical permit fees for heat pump /air condition fee, should be $37 instead of $437, which was a typographical error. 7. Public Record Requests Fees (which are currently listed in the adopted ordinance): a. copies of more than 6 pages shall be at $.15 ¢ per page b. "26 x 36" or larger maps shall be $3.00 each or the actual cost of producing the map c. hourly rate to transfer scanned records to electronic disc: $19.00 [new fee] d. more than one DVD or CD per request: $1.00 each [new fee] e. a deposit of 10% may be required BACKGROUND: Staff has reviewed the proposed fee changes and recommends the fee resolution be changed for 2011. OPTIONS: Options include: 1.) Proceed with an updated resolution for fee changes; 2) Proceed with some of the fee changes; 3) Do not make any changes RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Staff recommends we proceed with the proposed changes. This matter is currently set as an action item on the December 7, 2010 council agenda. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: These changes are expected to have no significant impact in revenues. STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance Director CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: November 9, 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: Proposed Amendments to the 2010 Budget. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: State law requires a public hearing and an amendment to our budget when the City expects to exceed appropriations. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The City budget for 2010 was adopted in November of 2009. BACKGROUND: Amendments to the 2010 Budget are needed to: 1. Recognize the increase in premiums for Liability, Unemployment and Property Insurance for 2010 2. Adjust for the accrual of December's Debt Service expense to be paid in 2011. A more detailed listing of the proposed budget amendments is below: Fund (Branch) Revenue Expenditure Account Number Increase Increase Explanation 204 Debt Service LTGO 03 204.204.000.397.00.02 $25,000 Real Estate Excise Tax 204.204.000.591.95.71.01 $25,000 Accrue portion of 2011 payment into 2010 502 Risk Management 502.502.000.397.95.00 $60,000 Transfer from General Fund 502.502.000.514.76.46.01 $60,000 Increase in liability, unemployment & property Insurance premiums GRAND TOTAL $85,000 $85,000 OPTIONS: Options include amending the budget, amending the budget for some of the changes, or making no amendments. The budget should be amended to comply with Washington State law. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Council consensus to move forward with amendments to the 2010 budget as recommended. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: There are adequate funds available to pay for these amendments. STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance Director DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of November 3, 2010; 10:30 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative To: Council & Staff From: City Clerk, by direction of City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings November 16, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Nov 8] Action Items 1. Second Reading Proposed Ord. Amending Special Event Permits (SVMC 1. 15.080) — Cary Driskell (10 min) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ord. Amend Mixed Use, Code Text Amdmnt CTA 08 -10 — Micki Harnois (20 min) Non - Action Items: 3. Street Maintenance Facility Site Discussion — Neil Kersten (15 minutes) 4. Snow Removal Plan — Neil Kersten (15 minutes) 5. Site Selector Update — Scott Kuhta (15 minutes) 6. Amendment to Public Record Ordinance (SVMC 2.75) — Cary Driskell (15 minutes) 7. Amendment to Adult Retail Ordinance (SVMC 5.10) - Cary Driskell (15 minutes) 8. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: 110 minutes] November 23, 2010 Thanksgiving Week (confirmed no meeting) November 30, 2010, Confirmed No Meeting Council attends NLC in Colorado (Nov 30 -Dec 4) December 7, 2010, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Nov 29] ACTION ITEMS: 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Amending 2010 Budget — Ken Thompson (10 minutes) 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending Public Records (SVMC 2.75) — Cary Driskell (10 minutes) 3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending 2010 Budget — Ken Thompson (10 minutes) 4. Proposed Resolution Amending Fee Resolution — Ken Thompson (15 minutes) 5. Motion Consideration: Purchase of Broadcasting Equipment — Greg Bingaman (10 minutes) NON - ACTION ITEMS: 6. Poe Contracts — Neil Kersten (15 minutes) 7. AAA Sweeping Contract — Neil Kersten (10 minutes) 8. AAA Vactoring Contract — Neil Kersten (10 minutes) 9. Lodging Tax (Hotel /Motel Grant) Proposals for 2011 — Ken Thompson (20 minutes) 10. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 11. Info Only: Department Reports (normally for the Nov 23 meeting) [ * estimated meeting: 115 minutes] December 14, 2010, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m [due date Mon, Dec 6] 1. Consent Agenda: Minutes, Claims, Payroll (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending Public Records (SVMC 2.75) — Cary Driskell (10 minutes) 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending 2010 Budget — Ken Thompson (10 minutes) 4. Motion Consideration: Approval of Poe Contract — Neil Kersten (10 minutes) 5. Motion Consideration; Approval of AAA Sweeping Contract — Neil Kersten (10 minutes) 6. Motion Consideration: Approval of AAA Contract, Vactoring — Neil Kersten (10 minutes) 7. Motion Consideration: Allocation of Lodging Tax (Hotel/Motel) Funds for 2011 — K.Thompson (15 min) 8. Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointments (Planning Commission, etc.) (15 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: 85 minutes] December 21, 2010, Christmas Week (tentative, no meeting) Draft Advance Agenda 11/5/2010 8:18:24 AM Page 1 of 2 December 28, 2010, Formal Meetine Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda: Minutes, Claims, Payroll 2. Info Only: Department Reports January 4, 2011, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Emergency Comp Plan Map Amendment — Karen Kendall 2. Advance Agenda [due date Mon, Dec 20] (5 minutes) [estimated meeting: minutes] [due date Mon, Dec 27] (15 minutes) (5 minutes) ['estimated meeting: minutes] January 11 2011, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Jan 3] 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 2. First Reading Proposed Emergency Ordinance Amending Comp Plan Map — Karen Kendall (10 mins) 3. First Reading Proposed Emergency Ordinance Amending Comp Plan Zoning Map — K.Kendall (5 minutes) [ *estimated meeting: minutes] January 18, 2011, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Jan 10] 1. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [estimated meeting: minutes] January 25, 2011, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, Jan 17 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending Comp Plan Map — Scott Kuhta (10 minutes) 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending Comp Plan Zoning Map — Scott Kuhta (5 minutes) 4. Info Only: Dept Reports [ *estimated meeting: minutes] OTHER PENDING AND /OR UPCOMING ISSI Affordable Housing Participation Alternative Analysis (contracts) Area Agency on Aging Bidding Contracts (SVMC 3. — bidding exceptions) Budget 2012 (August/Sept 2011) Capital Projects Funding CDBG (Fall 2011) Chickens in Residential Areas (Feb 2011) Clean Air Agency Coin p Plan Amendments 2011 (March /April) Concurrency East Gateway Monument Structure 4 Jail Update Lodging Tax Funding for 2012 (Oct 2011) Milwaukee Right -of -way Outside Agencies 2012 (August 2011) Overweight /over size vehicle ordinance Parking/Paving Options (for driveways, etc.) Quiet Zones (railroad crossings) Reimbursement Assessment Amendment Retreat, Summer 2011 Retreat, Winter (Dec 2010 or Jan 2011) Signage (I -90) Solid Waste Amended Interlocal Special Events Permit Training Speed Limits Sprague Appleway Corridor Environ.Assessment Sprague Avenue: One -way vs. two -way Street Maintenance Facility Transportation Benefit District Interlocal Transportation Benefit District: (a). Establish ord.; (b) set public hearing; (c) draft resolution; (d) ballot Transportation Impacts Transportation Improvement Plan (six -year, May /June 2011) Wastewater Treatment Plant WIRA, Water Protection Commitment, public education 4 = Awaiting action by others * = doesn't include time for public or council comments Draft Advance Agenda 11/5/2010 8:18:24 AM Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: November 9, 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: Councilmembers Boards and Committees GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Various ordinances, resolutions, and state statutes PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Annually, the Mayor makes appointment recommendations to place councilmembers on various regional boards and committees; as well as makes recommendations of citizen appointments to committees such as the Planning Commission, and Lodging Tax Advisory Committee, all of which are tentatively set for the December 14 council meeting. The following lists shows which councilmembers are associated with what boards and committees, as well as which voluntary positions are open for citizens: COUNCIL COMMITTEES /BOARDS /COMMISSIONS: Mayor Towey 1. Greater Spokane Incorporated (GSI) 2. Spokane Valley Finance Committee 3. Spokane Valley Governance Manual Committee 4. Mayor's Association of NE Washington 5. TPA (Hotel /Advisory Committee) Tourism Promotion Area 6. Wastewater Policy Advisory Board Deputy Mayor Schimmels: 1. Spokane Valley Finance Committee 2. Spokane Regional Transportation Council 3. Spokane Transit Authority 4. Solid Waste Liaison Board 5. Solid Waste Advisory Committee (this appointment made by Board of County Commissioners) Councilmember Dempsey: 1. Spokane Regional Health District Board 2. Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency 3. Wastewater Policy Advisory Board Councilmember Gothmann: 1. Emergency Communications Board 911 2. Spokane Valley Governance Manual Committee 3. Spokane Regional Health District Board 4. HCDAC (Spokane Housing & Community Development Advisory Committee) Councilmember Grafos: 1. Spokane Valley Finance Committee 2. Growth Management Steering Committee of Elected Officials 3. Spokane Transit Authority Councilmember Grassel: 1. Chamber of Commerce Board 2. Convention Center & Visitor's Bureau 3. Growth Management Steering Committee of Elected Officials 4. International Trade Alliance 5. Spokane Valley Lodging Tax Advisory Committee 6. Spokane River TMDL Implementation Advisory Committee Councilmember McCaslin: Spokane Valley Planning Commission Two openings (incumbents Art Sharpe and Craig Eggleston not seeking re- appointment) Terms are for three years. Ads have been placed announcing these vacancies. Lodging Tax Advisory Committee of Spokane Valley Committee consists of 2 members required to collect tax; 2 involved in funded activities, one Councilmember. Terms are for one or two years: Cal Clausen (re -app't 12- 30 -08) 1 -1 -09 to 12 -31 -10 [required to collect the tax] Lee Cameron (re -app't 12 -31 -08) 1 -1 -09 to 12 -31 -10 [required to collect the tax] Peggy Doering (re -app't 12- 30 -08) 1 -1 -09 to 12 -31 -10 [involved in funded activities (All three citizens plan to seek re- appointment) Ads have been placed announcing these vacancies. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: By reviewing committee commitments now, this gives the Mayor and councilmembers an opportunity to determine Councilmember committee preferences prior to the actual committee appointments scheduled for the December 14 council meeting. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Chris Bainbridge ATTACHMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: November 9th, 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: Revised Speed Limit Code GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: Changes to School Speed Zones The City has received two requests to establish new 20 mph school zones from the Central Valley School District. City staff has completed the engineering analysis of these two locations and recommends them for a 20 mph zone based on Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 468 -95 -330. Applicable to state highways, county roads, or city streets, the reduced school or playground speed zone shall extend for 300 feet in either direction from the marked crosswalk when the marked crosswalk is fully posted with standard school speed limit signs or standard playground speed limit signs. Applicable to county roads or city streets, the school or playground speed zone may extend up to 300 feet from the border of the school or playground property when fully posted with standard school speed limit signs or standard playground speed limit signs. However, the speed zone may only include the area consistent with active school or playground use. School Request #1 — Alki Avenue - Install a 20 mph school zone on Alki for North Pines Middle School. Numerous students cross Alki Ave to walk south on Pines or are picked up /dropped off on the south side of the road. In addition, students walk to and from school along gravel shoulder on Alki Avenue. Since this section of Alki Avenue has numerous children walking along and crossing the street at random locations, installing a 20 mph school zone will help enhance safety by reducing the speed limit and alerting drivers that it is an area where children might be present. The proposed zone would be located on Alki Ave and be from 400 feet west of Pines Rd, which is near the end of the parking lot, to Pines Rd. School Request #2 — Pines Road - Install a second 20 mph school zone on Pines Road for South Pines Elementary School. The school currently has a 20 zone with flashing beacons located between 22n and 24 Avenues. But a second school crosswalk exists up the hill at 19 This crosswalk was never signed as a school crosswalk, but it is part of the school's walk route and this appears to be the only reason to have a marked crosswalk at that location. We are proposing to establish a 20 mph zone with 300 feet on each side of the crosswalk. The 20 zone would extend approximately between 18 and 20 Avenues. This location would be signed with "when children are present ". Having two school zones that close together is not ideal. However, we expect it to be a short term solution. Public Works recently applied for Congestion Management and Air Quality grant funding to install sidewalk on the east side of Pines to complete the gap between 16 and 23` This would provide a safe walk route down to the manned crosswalk at 24 and eliminate the need for the crosswalk and 20 zone at 19 Based on the initial scoring, the City is likely to receive funding for this project. Changes to Arterial Speed Limits Modifications to arterial speed limits are based on the Washington Administrative Code section 468 -95 -045. Standard: Speed Limits (R2 -1) signs shall display the speed limit established by statute; or, by an ordinance or regulation adopted by the authorized agency, based on the engineering study or traffic investigation required by RCW 46.61.405 46.61.410 and 46.61.415 The speed limit shall be set in multiples of 10 km /h or 5 mph. Guidance: Authorized agencies should reevaluate speed limits on segments of their roadways that have undergone a significant change in roadway characteristics or surrounding land use since the last review. No more than three speed limits should be posted on any one Speed Limit sign or assembly. When evaluating speed limits, the following factors should be considered: A. The 85th percentile speed of vehicles traveling on the road; B. Road characteristics, shoulder condition, grade, alignment, and sight distance; C. The pace speed; D. Roadside development and environment; E. Parking practices and pedestrian activity, - F. Reported crash experience for at least a 12 month period; and G. Other factors such as route development or comprehensive plans. Arterial Request #1 — Mansfield Avenue - Public Works has received numerous requests from citizens to raise the speed limit on the newly widened portion of Mansfield between the roundabout and Pines. It is currently posted at 25 mph, while Mansfield- Montgomery to the west is posted at 30 or 35 mph. The speed studies completed in 2009 on Mansfield showed an 85th percentile speed of 35.1 mph. A 35 mph speed limit would match with the 85th percentile speed and also be consistent with Montgomery west of the roundabout and the design speed for the future extension east of Pines to Mirabeau. OPTIONS: Please let us know if you have questions or would like additional information. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Staff recommends that these changes to the speed limit code be approved. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten, Public Works Director; Inga Note, Senior Traffic Engineer ATTACHMENTS: None CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: November 9, 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: Pending Litigation GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 42.30.110(1) PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: "I Move that Council adjourn into executive session for approximately minutes to discuss Pending Litigation and that no action will be taken upon return to open session." BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: ATTACHMENTS: