The URL can be used to link to this page

2011, 01-25 Regular Meeting AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL/REGULAR MEETING FORMAL MEETING FORMAT Tuesday,January 25,2011 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: 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 W/VOUCHER NUMBERS: TOTAL AMOUNT 01/05/2011 21847-21866; 104110018, 1230100019 $1,577,718.93 01/06/2011 21867-21878 $466,804.80 01/07/2011 3408, 3409, 3411, 3412, 3420, 21846, 21879—21883 $220 456.30 01/14/2011 5201 (2010 Parks &Rec Refund) $500.00 04/14/2011 21884-21923 (2010 expenses) $93,951.76 GRAND TOTAL $2,359,431.79 b. Approval of Payroll for Period Ending January 15, 2011: $249,309.82 c. Approval of City Council Formal Format Meeting Minutes of January 11, 2011 NEW BUSINESS: 2. Second Reading Proposed Emergency Ordinance 11-001 Amending Comprehensive Plan and Map (City Center)—Kathy McClung [public comment] 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 11-002 Amending Zoning Code and Map (City Center)— Kathy McClung [public comment] Council Agenda 01-11-2011 Regular Meeting Page 1 of 2 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: 4. Solid Waste Update—Neil Kersten/Deputy Mayor Schimmels 5. Procedure for Filling Council Vacancy—Mike Jackson 6. Advance Agenda—Mayor Towey INFORMATION ONLY: (will not be reported or discussed) 7. STEP(Sewer Tank Elimination Program) Paveback 8. Fire Department Quarterly Report 9. Department Reports EXECUTIVE SESSION: n/a 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 formats 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 formats (the less formal meeting) are generally held the 1St 3rd and sometimes 5th 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 01-11-2011 Regular Meeting Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 01-25- 2011 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 W/VOUCHER NUMBERS: TOTAL AMOUNT 01/05/2011 21847-21866; 104110018, 1230100019 $1,577,718.93 01/06/2011 21867-21878 $466,804,80 01/07/2011 3408, 3409,3411,3412, 3420,21846, 4:220,456.30 21879—21883 01/14/2011 5201 (2010 Parks&Rec Refund) $500.00 04/14/2011 21884-21923 (2010 expenses) $93,951.76 GRAND TOTAL $2,359,431.79 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve claims for vouchers as listed above. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS Voucher Lists vchlist 01/05/2011 1:22:54PM Voucher List Page: 1 Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount 21847 1/5/2011 001081 ALSCO LSP0899974 FLOOR MATS FOR THE CITY HALL 27.21 Total : 27.21 21848 1/5/2011 001012 ASSOC BUSINESS SYSTEMS 453463 COPIER COSTS: CD 450.13 Total: 450.13 21849 1/5/2011 000168 BLACK BOX NETWORK SVC SPO-007843 SESRVICE CALL 145.67 Total: 145.67 21850 1/5/2011 002572 CINTAS CORPORATOIN 606640994 OVERALLS: PW 6142 Total: 61.42 21851 1/5/2011 000508 CONOCOPHILLIPS FLEET 24598966 REPLACEMENT CARD FEE 12.00 Total: 12.00 21852 1/5/2011 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 35545 LEGAL PUBLICATION 48.00 Total : 48.00 21853 1/5/2011 000587 GRIZZLY GLASS CENTERS WO S0005678 WINDSHIELD REPAIR:2003 MINI Vi 32.56 Total: 32.56 21854 1/5/2011 000002 H&H BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC. 100042 PRINTER CARTRIDGE 73.70 Total : 73.70 21855 1/5/2011 001723 HEDEEN&CADITZ,PLLC 6621 PROFESSIONAL SVCS 2,61230 6622 PROFESSIONAL SVCS 110.00 Total: 2,722.50 21856 1/5/2011 002571 METAL ARTS 378812 LE 11 ERS FOR PRECINCT SIGN 519.00 Total: 519.00 21857 1/5/2011 000662 NATL BARRICADE&SIGN CO 70967 WHITE MARKING PAINT 50.87 Total: - 50.87 21858 1/5/2011 001604 PACIFIC NW PAPER 119405 COPY PAPER 138.91 Total: 138.91 Page: vchlist 01/05/2011 1:22:54PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor 21859 1/5/2011 001140 SPECIAL ASPHALT PRODUCTS 21860 1/5/2011 000230 SPOKANE CO AUDITORS OFFICE 21861 1/5/2011 000391 SPOKANE VALLEY FIRE DIST.#1 21862 1/5/2011 000093 SPOKESMAN-REVIEW 21863 1/5/2011 000311 SPRINT 21864 1/5/2011 000014 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 21865 1/5/2/ 011 000087 VERIZON WIRELESS 21866 1/5/2011 002569 104110018 1/4/2011 000001 1230100019 12/31/2010 000001 GRANITE POINT APT LEASING SPOKANE CO TREASURER SPOKANE CO TREASURER 22 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Invoice INVC052799 INVC052800 December 2010 November 2010 4TH QTR 2010 219005 326088106-037 959698810-037 180381 0933794541 0933795313 65178243251 PO# Description/Account CRYWOLF DECEMBER 2010 DECEMBER 2010 STREET PATCH MIX STREET PATCH MIX RECORDING FEES RECORDING FEES Total: Total : 4TH QTR 2010: FIRE CODE FEES Total: ADVERTISING WAPS FOR LAPTOPS SPRINT CELL PHONES W-2 ENVELOPES Total: Total: Total: AIRCARD FOR SHERIFF AlRefbEer CARDS FOR POLICE DE AIR 'CARDS FOR ST MAINT( Total: CRYWOLF REFUND Total : SPOKANE COUNTY SERVICES Total: DECEMBER 2010 SHERIFF SERVIC Total : Bank total : Amount 87225 87225 1,744.50 307.00 467.00 774.00 6,403.00 6,403.00 350.30 350.30 440.97 94722 1,388.19 152.86 152.86 43.01 1,319.40 215.05 1,577.46 165.00 165.00 182,546.53 182,546.53 1,378,335.12 '1,378,335.12 1,577,718.93 22 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 1,577,718.93 Page: 2 vchlist 01/06/2011 11:09:38AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account 21867 1/6/2011 000277 AWC 21868 1/6/2011 000497 BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON 21869 1/6/2011 000109 COFFEE SYSTEMS INC 2011 111-1463968 3820:069705 21870 1/6/2011 000086 INLAND EMPIRE UTILITY,COORDINATIK 2011 21871 1/6/2011 000265 JACKSON, MIKE 21872 1/6/2011 000012 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS INC. JANUARY 2011 2011 21873 1/6/2011 000193 NORTHWEST CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC January 2011 21874 1/6/2011 002193 QSCEND TECHNOLOGES, INC 21875 1/6/2011 000273 SRTC 21876 1/6/2011 000014 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 21877 1/6/2011 000098 WA CITIES INSURANCE AUTHORITY 4196 January 2011 39439 10123 21878 1/6/2011 002111 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE January 2011 2011 MEMBERSHIP FEE Total : BOND SERVICE ANNUAL FEE Total : SERVICE COMPONENT FEE Total : 2011 UTILITY MEMBER DUES Total : MONTHLY AUTO ALLOWANCE Total : JOURNAL OF BUSINESS SUBSCRIF Total : CITY HALL RENT Total : WEBSITE SUPPORT AND HOSTING Total : SRTC BUDGET FOR 2011 Total : TYLER TECH SERVICE AND SUPPC Total : 2011 ASSESSMENT Total : 42680 2011 LEASE ON MAINTENANCE FA Total : 12 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total : Amount 61,026.00 61,026.00 301.75 301.75 32.61 32.61 1,000.00 1,000.00 300.00 300.00 39.95 39.95 37,300.83 37,300.83 7,380.00 7,380.00 34,300.00 34,300.00 38,509.66 38,509.66 282,419.00 282,419.00 4,195.00 4,195.00 466,804.80 Page: 1 vahlist Voucher List Page: 1 01/07/2011 8:04:52AM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount 3408 1/5/2011 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS,401A PLAN Ben36404 401A:Payment 23,227.07 Total: 23,227.07 3409 1/5/2011 000682 EFTPS Ben36406 FEDERAL TAXES:Payment 30,025.88 Total: 30,025.88 3411 1/5/2011 000145 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS,457 PL Ben36408 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION:Payn 4,093.12 Total: 4,093.12 3412 1/5/2011 000162 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS,401A EXEC P Ben36410 401 EXEC PLAN:Payment 1,026.67 Total: 1,026.67 3420 1/5/2011 000682 EFTPS Ben36414 FEDERAL TAXES:Payment 1,296.92 Total: 1,296.92 21846 1/5/2011 000165 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS Ben36396 PERS:Payment 44,241.21 Total: 44,241.21 21879 1/5/2011 000120 AWC Ben36394 HEALTH PLANS:PAYMENT 96,254.19 Ben36412 HEALTH PLANS(COUNCIL):PAYMENT 5,932.31 Total: 102,186.50 21880 1/5/2011 002227 IDAHO TAX COMMISSION Ben36398 IDAHO STATE TAX BASE:Payment 1,466.63 Total: 1,466.63 21881 1/5/2011 000164 LABOR&INDUSTRIES Ben36392 LABOR&INDUSTRIES:4TH QTR 10 PA 10,255.36 Total: 10,255.36 21882 1/5/2011 000658 SPOKANE CO SUPERIOR COURT Ben36402 Chris Berg Garnishment:Payment 429.33 Total: 429.33 21883 1/5/2011 000699 WA COUNCIL CO/CITY EMPLOYEES Ben36400 UNION DUES:Payment 2,207.61 Total: 2,207.61 11 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total: 220,456.30 11 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 220,456.30 Page: 1 ;cm.) 90( s whilst 01114/201/ 3:52:12PM Voucher List Page: 1 Spokane Valley Bank code: pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 5201 1/14/2011 002575 FORSTER, ROBERT REFUND 001.076.305 FIRESIDE LOUNGE REFUND 500.00 Total : 500.00 1 Vouchers for bank code: pk-ref Bank total : 500.00 1 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 500.00 I,the undersigned,do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished,the services rendered,or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just,due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley,and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: 1 vch l ist 01/14/2011 3:22:49PM Voucher List Spokane Valley 2.0 cs Page: 1 Bank code: apbani Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 21884 1/14/2011 002573 ALL-AMERICAN PUBLISHING 21885 1/14/2011 001081 ALSCO 21886 1/14/2011 000334 ARGUS JANITORIAL LLC 21887 1/14/2011 000694 AVISTA UTILITIES 21888 1/14/2011 000841 BC!CREATIVE INC 21889 1/14/2011 002468 BEECHWOOD METALWORKS INC. 21890 1/14/2011 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 21891 001103 CAREER TRACK 21892 001169 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 21893 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION#19 21894 1/14/2011 001603 DEMPSEY, ROSE 21895 1/14/2011 000912 DEX MEDIA WEST 1/14/2011 1/14/2011 1/14/2011 0439482-1 December 2010 1NV005666 23049 23491 10033 1497 9180962 9183233 S9181008 Dec 2 2010 December 2010 December 2010 Expenses December 2010 Fund/Dept 001.076.301 001.016.000 001,016.000 001.090.000 001.090.000 001.076.000 001.076.300 001.076.305 001.076.305 001.076.305 001.058.055 001.090.000 001.076.305 001.011.000 001.076.305 Description/Account CENTERPLACE ADVERTISING Total: FLOOR MATS:PRECINCT Total: JANITORIAL SVCS: DEC 2010 PRE( Total: HOME ENERGY AUDITS HOME ENERGY AUDITS Total: PRINTING:PARKS AND REC LETTE Total: LARGER THAN LIFE OBJECTS FOR Total : LINEN SERVICE:CENTERPLACE LINEN SUPPLY:CENTERPLACE LINEN SUPPLY:CENTERPLACE Total : EVENT#102343 DEAL DIFF PEOPI Total : PETTY CASH:8743,44,45,46,48,49 Total: UTILITIES:PARKS EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT ADVERTISING: CP Total: Total: Amount 300.00 300.00 39.52 39.52 2,165.23 2,165.23 276,00 690.00 966.00 323.93 323.93 11,346.05 11,346.05 156.95 16028 6.22 323.45 447.00 447.00 59.69 59.69 82.88 82.88 109.95 109.95 233.15 Page: 1 vchlist 01/14/2011 3:22:49PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept 21895 1/14/2011 000912 000912 DEX MEDIA WEST 21896 1/14/2011 000278 DRISKELL, CARY 21897 1/14/2011 001232 FASTENAL CO PURCHASING 21898 1/14/2011 002308 FINKE,MELISSA 21899 1/14/2011 000858 FOOD EQUIPMENT INTL, INC. 21900 1/14/2011 002196 HOLTEN,MELISSA 21901 1/14/2011 000070 INLAND POWER&LIGHT CO 21902 1/14/2011 001635 ISS FACILITY/EVENT SERVICES 21903 1/14/2011 000275 KERSTEN, NEIL 21904 1/14/2011 000252 LOWE'S BUSINESS ACCOUNT 21905 1/14/2011 001684 MARKETING SOLUTIONS NW 21906 1/14/2011 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. (Continued) Expenses IDLEW72039 December 2010 8304 8304 B Expenses December 2010 24486 24516 Expenses DEC 2010 CP 12/22/2010 Media CP 12/23/2010 P&P 544815884001 Description/Account Total: 001.013.015 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total: 101.042.000 SUPPLIES FOR PUBLIC WORKS Total : 001.076.301 DANCE LESSONS 001.076.305 001.076.305 001.018.014 101.042.000 001.076.305 001.076.305 001.032.000 001.076.000 001.076.305 001.076.305 001.076.305 Total: SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE SUPPLIES AT CENTERPLACE Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT UTILITIES:PW DECEMBER 2010 EVENT SVCS:CP EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT OPERATING SUPPLIES:CP Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : ADVERTISING FOR CENTERPLACE ADVERTISING FOR CENTERPLACE Total: OFFICE SUPPLIES:CP Total: Amount 233.15 43.70 43.70 181.93 181.93 53.95 53.95 579.33 347.84 927.17 9.70 9.70 485.66 485.66 7,136.00 78.80 7,214.80 383.50 383.50 267.17 267.17 6,847.00 1,565.00 8,412.00 24.66 24.66 Page: 2 vchlist 01114/2011 3:22:49PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 3 Sank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor 21907 1/14/2011 001904 OVERHEAD DOOR, INC 21908 1/14/2011 001604 PACIFIC NW PAPER 21909 1/14/2011 002534 PEAK SOFTWARE SYSTEMS 21910 1/14/2011 001860 PLATT 21911 1/14/2011 000119 PLESE PRINTING 21912 1/14/2011 000019 PURRFECT LOGOS, INC. 21913 1/14/2011 002193 QSCEND TECHNOLOGES, INC 21914 1/14/2011 000064 SCHIMMELS, GARY Expenses Expenses Invoice 204737 118297 011504 8608508 8783044 8783086 1330047686 26889 4232 21915 1/14/2011 000709 SENSKE LAWN&TREE CARE INC. 3751769 4022421 4111205 4111205-B 21916 1/14/2011 001971 SITELINES PARK*PLAYGROUND 13199 21917 1/14/2011 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST#3 Dec 2010 Fund/Dept 001.016.000 001.090.000 001.076.305 001.016.000 001.016.000 001.076.305 001.058.057 101.042.000 001.018.013 001.011.000 001.011.000 101.042.000 001.076.300 001.016.000 001.016.000 309.309.144 001.076.302 Description/Account DOOR REPAIR: PRECINCT COPY PAPER Total: Total : REMAINING BAL FOR SOFTWARE I Total: SUPPLIES FOR PRECINCT SUPPLIES FOR PRECINCT SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE Total: BUSINESS CARDS CAR MAGNETS: PW WEBSITE CHANGES Total : Total : Total EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total: 2010 EMERG TRAFFIC CONTROL S 4022421 CONTRACT MAINT: PRECINCT SNC CONTRACT MAINT: PRECINCT SNC Total: TERRACE VIEW SHELTER WATER CHARGES: PARKS Total: Amount 181.53 181.53 1,433.75 1,433.75 186.87 186.87 67.18 71.74 53.48 192.40 98.21 98.21 154.35 154.35 2,970.00 2,970.00 103.00 94.00 197.00 530.46 14,908.21 760.92 951.13 17,150.72 21,556.30 21,556.30 65.90 Page: 3 vchlist 01/14/2011 3:22:49PM Voucher List Page: 4 Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account 21917 1/14/2011 000324 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST#3 (Continued) Total: 21918 1/14/2011 001083 STANDARD PLBG HEATING CONTROLS 28832 00t016.000 DECEMBER 2010 MONTHLY MAINT 28863 001.076.305 LABOR FOR WORK AT CENTERPL/ Total: 21919 1/14/2011 002212 STANLEY SECURITY SOLUTIONS 7862524 001.016.000 MONITORING&MAINTENANCE: PF Total: 21920 1/14/2011 002306 TERRELL, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, MIC 535 309.309.079 GREENACRES PARK PHASE I DES 537 309.309.144 TERRACE VIEW SHELTER ARCHITI Total: 21921 1/14/2011 000167 VERA WATER&POWER December 2010 101.042.000 UTILITIES:DECEMBER 2010 Total : 21922 1/14/2011 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 2855905-2681-2 001.076.305 WASTE MANAGEMENT: CENTERPL 2855906-2681-0 001.016.000 WASTE MGMT: PRECINCT 2855907-2681-3 101.042.000 WASTE MGMT:PW Total: 21923 1/14/2011 001409 WORLD CLASS COMMUNICATIONS 101201342 001.076.305 ANSWERING SERVICE FOR CENTE Total: 40 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total : 40 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: Amount 65.90 521.83 435.34 957.17 81.53 81.53 11,093.60 1,033.87 12,127.47 971.43 971.43 734.98 285.27 173.79 1,194.04 32.00 32.00 93,951.76 93,951.76 Page: 4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 01-25-11 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 January 15, 2011 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Budget/Financial impacts: Gross: $ 219,420.12 Benefits: $ 29,889.70 Total payroll $ 249,309.82 STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri ATTACHMENTS DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meetings Formal Meeting Format Tuesday, January 11, 2011 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 Ken Thompson, Finance Director Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir. Dean Grafos, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks &Recreation Director Brenda Grassel, Councilmember Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Absent: Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Bob McCaslin, Councilmember Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION: Pastor Jerry Sponseller of Opportunity Baptist Church gave the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: At Mayor Towey's request, members from Boy Scout Troop 419 led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all councilmembers were present except Councilmember McCaslin. It was then moved by Councilmember Grafos, seconded and unanimously approved to excuse Councilmember McCaslin from tonight's meeting. 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: reported that he attended Al French's swearing-in ceremony; attended former Mayor Munson's funeral and memorial service, and Councilmember Gothmann spoke about Mr. Munson's various avenues of expertise and dedication, adding that we will miss him, and later said that Janet Munson was overwhelmed with the amount of support from the City. Councilmember Dempsey: stated that she attended the Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency meeting,that she served as chair last year and has now turned that responsibility over to the new chair; and said she attended Mayor Munson's memorial service and echoed the sentiments expressed by Mr. Gothmann. Councilmember Grafos: said he had no report, but has been speaking with the citizens regarding our snowplow operation and the feeling is we have done pretty well,and can always do better. Deputy Mayor Schimmels: said he attended a solid waste liaison board meeting last week and a few days later the County Commissioners met regarding the waste-to-energy plant, and reported that they are planning a summit meeting the first of February; he attended a regional transportation committee special meeting last week; last night he and Mayor Towey went to the Spokane City Council meeting where that Council discussed a car tab initiative to raise fees for road maintenance, and said Spokane City decided not to implement that now; and said he also attended former Mayor Munson's memorial service. Council Regular Meeting 01-11-2011 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT Councilmember Grassel: reported that she attended a Kiwanis Club meeting last Tuesday where she was asked to speak from a new councilmember's perspective about past, present and future zoning issues for Spokane Valley. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Towey stated that he went to Mr. Munson's memorial, and said that the city is saddened with the news of his passing. Mayor Towey also extended congratulations to Eastern Washington University for their football victory. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited general public comments. Geoff Webb, 13303 East Mission Avenue #173: said he is pleased with the plowing in the streets but less pleased with the state of the sidewalks; that he rides the bus everyday and is forced to stand in the streets due to snow accumulation; said a lot of sidewalks are icy and some places are almost impassable so people end up walking in the road, which is dangerous; asked why the ordinance to keep sidewalks clear is not being enforced; said most businesses don't clear sidewalks at all and that the only places that reliably clear the sidewalks are the nursing homes and the hospital. City Manager Jackson said that staff will come back to council with an update and report on the sidewalks, adding that the city has been strongly encouraging citizens to clear the sidewalks, and said we are currently address code violations of this type are addressed on a complaint basis. Steve Neill, 10820 East 18th Avenue, 99206: regarding SARP; said it is time for people to come to grips with the realization that SARP is illusive, dangerous and nearly impossible to kill; he said that those "clamoring for and feeding this beast have been busy pushing their agenda on us; my response to those who are endlessly trying to force this upon us are a series of questions: we have been treated to an endless array of full-page ads of questionable honesty demanding the return to a two-way Sprague. We make Sprague two-way again,they say, and poof,the businesses will magically appear and be filled with happy little customers with unlimited credit cards. This is what I call the field of dream syndrome. Can anyone really believe this will happen with the Valley Mall, Wal-Mart, and Sullivan shopping only a few miles away?At the City Planning and City Council meetings there is a realtor who has on at least two occasions told the audience that she and her husband moved here because we love it here;then goes on and on about the city not having a vision; demands a city center at Sprague and University, and the adoption of SARP because the future is passing us by. My question to her is, did you move here for what the city is, or what you are requiring it to become. A local paper certainly seems to be promoting SARP by giving former Mayor Munson and other proponents many opportunities to speak for it. Not long ago,the Valley Voice asked five respondents the following question: How do you feel about returning Sprague back to two- ways? All five were in favor of it. Amazing. Would those same people say yes to a more appropriately asked question, knowing it will cost the Valley taxpayers $5 million with a direct benefit to only a few people, are you still in favor of returning Sprague back to a two-way street; or another way to put it would be to ask, businesses prosper all over America on one-way streets, including Argonne and Mullan, but a few businesses on Sprague feel they can't. So, they are expecting you to pay for their shortfall. Is this a good thing to do in today's economy? A possible follow-up question would be, do you feel that the businesses who directly profit from returning Sprague to a two-way should be required to pay the additional travel expenses and give a travel allowance to those who are required to crawl down Sprague again as traffic backs up to pre-couplet levels. City Councilwoman Rose Dempsey also had a recent piece criticizing those who are not in favor of SARP. As for the realtor, those who oppose SARP are treated like as being anti-visionary. In this particular case, I could not agree more. I do have a vision problem. I'm having a hard time seeing why her vision should cost me money and the people of Spokane Valley future debt. Reality says that by implementing SARP you will not bring Sprague into the promised land of happy shoppers with lots of credit, nor will you line it with pedestrians basking in the shopping oasis. If these people insist in living in a fantasy, then let them pay for it." He then asked Council to "enforce the will of the people and end all possibilities of SARP in the most expedient and legally defensible means at its disposal." Council Regular Meeting 01-11-2011 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT John Tiersma, 105 N Skipworth Road, 99206: said he just recently found out they're now in a different zone since they're in the city center; he said he was fine with that until a couple months ago he wanted to refinance his house and had it appraised, and said he was told the bank will not loan on his house or let him refinance because of the zoning because they are a single family dwelling; and it says if the house burns down over 80%, it can't be re-built, and said a bank won't loan on something like that. He said he is in limbo because he can't refinance and can't sell it since no bank will loan anyone the money. He said he heard Council is considering repealing the City Center, and he'd like to know the status of that. Mayor Towey said that staff can get back with Mr. Tiersma about the difference of the city center zoning and what Council is doing regarding that evaluation; and Mr. Jackson said that topic is scheduled for next week's council meeting as well. Arne Woodward, 2511 S Best Road; said he is a real estate broker; said that December was a better month than he would have anticipated; 336 people bought homes and closed in December, which is an increase from 279 in November. 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 W/VOUCHER NUMBERS: TOTAL AMOUNT 12/17/2010 21666-21747, 1217100005, 1217100006 $755,240.49 12/21/2010 21748-21780 $50,797.28 12/23/2010 21781-21786 $93,435.06 12/29/2010 21787-21843 $207,045.65 12/30/2010 5198, 5199, 5200 $258.00 01/04/2011 21844-21845 $9,353.05 GRAND TOTAL $1,116,129.53 b. Approval of Payroll for Period Ending December 31, 2010: $357,913.77 c.Approval of City Council Formal Format Meeting Minutes of December 28, 2010 d. Approval of City Council Study Session Meeting Minutes of January 4, 2011 It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the consent agenda. NEW BUSINESS: 2. Proposed Resolution 11-001 Amending Resolution 08-024 Petty Cash—Ken Thompson It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to approve Resolution 11-001 amending Resolution 08-024, Petty Cash and Change Accounts. Finance Director Thompson said this was discussed a week ago, and that the purpose of this amendment is to increase petty cash by $100 so that staff won't be in a position to have to weekly reimburse the petty cash. Mayor Towey invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 3. Motion Consideration: 2011 Senske Park Maintenance Contract—Mike Stone It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to authorize the City Manager or his designee to finalize and execute the 2011 Senske Park Maintenance contract, entitled "2"d Amendment to Park Maintenance Contract," in the amended contract amount of$606,477.88. Parks and Recreation Director Stone explained that this also was discussed in some detail last week; that Senske was the low bidder and had reduced their previous year's bid by almost $85,000; he said the contract allows for six additional one-year renewals based on satisfactory performance, which has been the case. Mr. Stone said that the Discovery Playground was added to the contract in 2010, and that the contract represents about 1.5% Council Regular Meeting 01-11-2011 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT increase. Mr. Stone also noted that Appendix B concerning prevailing wage information is included in the packet information. Mayor Towey invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 4. Motion Consideration: Appleway Courts Senior Housing Support Letter—Mayor Towey It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to authorize Mayor Towey to sign and send the attached letter in support of the Appleway Courts Senior Housing Project, second phase, known as Appleway Court II " Mayor Towey said that staff received an e-mail on January 4, 2011 from Community Frameworks, requesting council to consider sending a letter of support for the Appleway Courts Senior Housing Project; in the letter of support, the Rockwell Retirement Community is seeking an award of $14 million in low-income housing tax credit to complete a second phase of their development. Mayor Towey said receiving the letter of support will enhance their scoring ability and for them, could include $4 million in tax credits, and for the City of Spokane Valley, it would enhance 60 jobs during the construction phase of the project. Mayor Towey said he recommends Council approve the letter of support. Councilmember Gothmann said he called the principle man regarding this request, who emphasized that the competition will be steep and who told him that it is essential they get all the points possible; one of the reasons they feel it will score high is because the Sprague/Appleway Revitalization Plan is in effect, and that if it were not in effect, that man felt he would probably lose and be unable to do the project. Councilmember Gothmann said this is typical of numerous private and public sources of funds that they want to see a plan; and said he is encouraged it could bring $4.5 million to our city, and favors sending a letter of support. Councilmember Grassel asked Councilmember Gothmann if he was suggesting that if we don't have the SARP plan that this would not go through; and Councilmember Gothmann said it was not a suggestion, but a statement, and that was what he was told by the gentleman applying for the funds that they could get additional points since they were within a revitalization project, and that without those points, he would not be as competitive. Councilmember Grafos said that the SARP plan is an overlay of the comprehensive plan, and if we eliminated SARP we would still have the comprehensive plan which calls for the low-cost zoning; and said what would be eliminated are the restrictions that are hurting our citizens, like the man who spoke earlier about not being able to re-finance his home. Councilmember Dempsey asked for a point of order: she said the letter is the topic of discussion and not SARP. Mayor Towey said the point of order is well taken; and council should concentrate on the letter of support and recognize that there are many factors that contribute to the points available for this project's funding. Councilmember Gothmann said that one of those points is that we have revitalization and not just a comp plan, but revitalization is the key term used by the gentleman he spoke with concerning this project. Councilmember Grassel asked if the letter were approved, would this council be "held hostage later" to say since we signed this letter therefore we have to approve all the regulations in the current zoning. Councilmember Gothmann responded that he asked, and was told that the City of Spokane Valley would not be further obligated in any way; but that the issue is of timing, and since SARP presently exists, it would allow them extra points. Mayor Towey invited public comment. Chris Venne, Development Finance Manager of Community Frameworks, 315 W Mission Avenue: he said he is the one requesting the letter; that this is a state-wide competition, and the funding will be awarded until they run out of money, and that it will be awarded to those who apply based on scores,that there are about 250 points available; no one gets all points; there are seven points available that is mentioned in his original letter: five points from being in an area targeted for affordable housing, and two points if in addition to that, it is part of a revitalization plan. Mr. Venne said if he could get those entire seven points,he feels more confident in receiving funds, and if he received no points, it would be difficult to compete. He said the current letter addresses the first, which is the five-point category, which is very helpful. Mr. Venne said neither he nor the Community Frameworks takes a position on SARP; the only point he was making is that there are two possible points out there;that he wants the money to come here Council Regular Meeting 01-11-2011 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT and not elsewhere; and mentioned that this project is at 95%completion as of last Friday, and they expect a grand opening in about six to eight weeks; and he said if the zoning were to change, it is not known what impact that might have as he is applying for grants based on what is in place at this time; keeping in mind that many things included in the application could change over time. He said he submits his application tomorrow. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 5. Advance Agenda—Mayor Towey Suggested additional topics for future agendas included sidewalks, and solid waste, and it was decided to include solid waste was an "information only" item on the l8t'' agenda, and to have an administrative report on January 25th INFORMATION ONLY: n/a 6. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pending Litigation It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed by council to adjourn into executive session for approximately 45 minutes to discuss pending litigation, and that no action will be taken upon return to open session. Council adjourned into executive session at approximately 6:50 p.m. At approximately 8:03 p.m., Mayor Towey declared Council out of executive session, after which it was moved by Councilmember Dempsey, seconded, and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:03 p.m. ATTEST: Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Regular Meeting 01-11-2011 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 25, 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: n consent n old business Fl new business n public hearing n information n admin. report n pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Second reading of draft ordinance 11-001 amending the comprehensive plan for the emergency comprehensive plan amendment. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A.130 (1)(d), (2)(a) and (b); Section 17.80.140 Type IV applications - Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide rezones and Section 19.30.010 Comprehensive Plan text and map amendments of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Matter was referred to Planning Commission on October 26, 2010. See October 26, 2010 Council packet for additional information. BACKGROUND: On October 26, 2010, the Spokane Valley City Council passed a motion to forward an emergency comprehensive plan and zoning code amendment to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation. The proposal is to change the City Center (CCT) comprehensive plan and zoning designation to Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) and remove all language referencing City Center in the Sprague Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan (Subarea Plan)from Book 1: Community Intent, adopted as part of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan; and Book 2: Development Regulations and Book 3: City Actions, adopted by reference in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). The City Council discussed the following basis for the emergency amendment as follows; 1. In the last 12 months, since the adoption of the Subarea Plan, the City's revenue forecast has continued to deteriorate. Specifically, sales taxes are projected to decrease by $400,000 from 2010 to 2011, and property taxes by $100,000 from 2010 to 2011. Funds available from the real estate excise tax have decreased from a high of approximately $2.2 million in 2007 and 2008 to approximately $900,000 for 2010 and 2011. 2. Funds for significant private development are not available and significant failures of large commercial investments within the City have occurred. 3. The economic development anticipated by the Council when the Ordinance adopting the Subarea Plan was passed in June of 2009 has not occurred. 4. The restrictions on development within the City Center zone, as well as the design requirements, contemplate significant public investment involving both the purchase of property and construction of a City Hall as well as adjacent infrastructure improvements. The projected 2011 budget does not contemplate the purchase of any property within the City Center zone and funds available for the construction of City Hall are projected to be reduced by $2.2 million to fund other capital projects. 5. Because there is little likelihood that any significant investment will occur by the City, the City Center zone, as currently configured and restricted, creates significant immediate economic hardships for the property owners within that zone. Based upon these facts an emergency exists and an immediate change to the Comprehensive Plan pursuant to the RCW 36.70A.130 (2)(b) set forth above may be appropriate. RCA—Second Reading of Draft Ordinance(Comprehensive Plan) January 25,2011 Staff presented the proposed amendment to the Planning Commission at a study session on November 18, 2010. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on December 9, 2010. Following the public hearing the Commission voted 5 to 2 to recommend denial of the proposed amendment. The City Council received the Planning Commission's recommendation at their January 4, 2011 study session. Following staff's presentation and discussion, Council directed staff to proceed forward with the emergency amendment as proposed and prepare an ordinance for consideration. On January 18, 2011, the Council conducted a first reading of the ordinance. Following public comments and council deliberations, the Council voted 4 to 2 to advance the ordinance to a second reading. APPROVAL CRITERIA: Section 17.80.140(H) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code provides approval criteria for comprehensive plan amendments to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. The criterion stipulates that the proposed amendment must be consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and bear a substantial relation to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment. OPTIONS: 1. Approve ordinance; 2. Disapprove ordinance; 3. Modify the ordinance. If modification is substantial, the council must either conduct a public hearing on the modified proposal; or 4. Refer the proposal back to the planning commission for further consideration. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council's discretion. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Kathy McClung - Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS: (1) Draft Ordinance Amending the Comprehensive Plan (clean) (2) Exhibit A Book I Comp Plan Amendments (3) Exhibit B Comp plan Map (4) Draft Ordinance Amending the Comprehensive Plan (redline version) (5) December 9, 2010 Findings and Recommendations of Planning Commission (6) November 9, 2010 Staff Report and Recommendation to Planning Commission (7) Amendment Application (8) Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) (9) Aerial Map (10) Vicinity Map (11) Transportation Map (12) December 7, 2010 letter to Mayor Towey from James Magnuson (13) Written Comments submitted to Planning Commission (14) Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of December 9, 2010 (15) Comments from August 19, 2010 City Center Community Meeting RCA—Second Reading of Draft Ordinance(Comprehensive Plan) January 25,2011 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 11-001 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE SPOKANE VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DELETING REFERENCES TO THE DESIGNATION "CITY CENTER" AND AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP CHANGING THE DESIGNATION "CITY CENTER" TO "MIXED USE AVENUE," AND AMENDING ORDINANCE 09-022 AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, (The "City") is a noncharter Code City organized under the laws of Title 35A RCW; and WHEREAS, the City has the authority to amend the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, (The "Comprehensive Plan")pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130; and WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b) allows amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to be considered outside of the annual review process, "whenever an emergency exists" and after "appropriate public participation; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, (the "City Council"), adopted Ordinance 09-022 on September 15, 2009 amending the Comprehensive Plan and adopting the Spokane Valley Sprague Appleway Subarea Plan, (the "Subarea Plan"); and WHEREAS, on October 26, 2010, the City Council passed a motion to forward an emergency Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code amendment to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed this request, as well as the recommendation of the Community Development Department to approve this request, at a study session on November 18, 2010 and conducted a public hearing on December 9, 2010; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Findings and Recommendations and the same were presented to the City Council on January 4, 2011; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered this Ordinance and the Findings and Recommendations of the Planning Commission on January 18, 2011, for the first reading and on January 25, 2011, for the second and final reading with public comment received at both City Council meetings; and WHEREAS, one of the land use designations contained within the Subarea Plan was the "City Center" designation; and WHEREAS, at the time the City Center designation was approved, the City of Spokane Valley intended to make significant investments in the City Center area through the purchase of Ordinance 11-001,Amending Comp Plan Deleting Reference to City Center Page 1 of 7 DRAFT property on which it would construct and operate a new City Hall as well as construct improvements to streets and streetscapes adjacent to the new City Hall; and WHEREAS, the plan for the development of the City Center property also included the construction of a Library within its boundaries; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan envisioned that certain uses within the City Center area would be restricted and limited to encourage the development of a City Center that would provide the community with, "its symbolic, social and geographic heart," the "center of its civic and social life" and provide services such as shops, cafes, restaurants, community services and the offering of"comfortable public streets and public places," and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan further envisioned that the new City Hall was intended to "preside over the City's main outdoor gathering space and its vista will be the iconic image that stands for Spokane Valley," and spur development including a new regional center including retail, office and residential development; and WHEREAS, the City Center designation in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations did not allow a number of specific uses including vehicle sales, convenience stores, gas stations and thrift stores; and WHEREAS, the Mixed Use Avenue designation in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations does allow such uses; and WHEREAS, the City Center designation in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations, once the development of the "core" City Center Main Street commenced, restricted retail development in areas adjacent to Main Street until specific development thresholds were met; and WHEREAS, the City Center designation in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations imposed certain design restrictions and construction requirements that were unique to the City Center area; and WHEREAS, in the last sixteen months since the adoption of the Subarea Plan, the City's revenue forecast has continued to deteriorate. Specifically, sales taxes are projected to decrease by $400,000 from 2010 to 2011; property taxes are projected to decrease by $100,000 from 2010 to 2011, and funds available from the real estate excise tax have decreased from a high of approximately $2.2 million in 2007 and 2008 to approximately $900,000 in 2010 and 2011; and WHEREAS, funds for significant private development are not as available as they would have been at the time the initial ordinance was passed, and major commercial investments within the City have had financial difficulties; and WHEREAS, the City is not able and does not intend to make any significant investment in the Center area as was contemplated at the time the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations comprising the Subarea Plan was adopted. Specifically the City Council has, by motion, ended negotiations for the purchase of property on which to locate a new City Hall, and Ordinance 11-001,Amending Comp Plan Deleting Reference to City Center Page 2 of 7 DRAFT adopted a 2011 budget that does not include sums for the purchase of such property, and further reduced funds available for the construction of a new City Hall by $2.2 million to fund other necessary capital projects; and WHEREAS,the voters of the City rejected a bond proposal to construct a Library within the City Center property; and WHEREAS, the property owners within the City Center designation are burdened by the restriction on allowable uses outlined above, the further restrictions that would be in place if and when a development plan for the core was adopted, and the design restrictions and requirements unique to the City Center designation, without the City investment and infrastructure improvements; and WHEREAS, the City has been made aware of potential development that could occur within the City Center area that currently is precluded by the current designation; and WHEREAS, a number of uses, buildings and signs have been made non-conforming by the adoption of the City Center designation and development regulations implementing the same; and WHEREAS, testimony before the City Council and Planning Commission has demonstrated both the economic hardships and the desire to remove the current limitations as is set forth in the findings of fact below; and WHEREAS, the issues and factors concerning the creation of the City Center designation has been the subject of three years of study and analysis, and public meetings and testimony, specifically as set forth in Ordinance 09-022 and in additional public hearings and meetings identified in the Findings of Fact below; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 2006, prior to the adoption of the Subarea Plan, recognizes the goal of identifying and creating a City Center for the City, and the City Council wishes to continue to pursue this goal with staff, taking into consideration the existing economic situation and the City's current financial circumstances, in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommendations fail to take into account the specific factors set forth in the findings of fact below; and WHEREAS, an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan through the annual process set forth in RCW 36.70A.130 would delay any change in zoning to the designated City Center property until May of 2011 or later preventing any planning or application for future construction for at least another full calendar year; and WHEREAS, adoption of this amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Map must comply with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA") as set forth in RCW 43.21C; and Ordinance 11-001,Amending Comp Plan Deleting Reference to City Center Page 3 of 7 DRAFT WHEREAS, the City is required to notify the Washington State Department of Commerce of its intent to adopt this amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Map at least 60 days prior to final adoption pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The facts set forth in the recitals above are incorporated by this reference as Findings of Fact. 2. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Map has been provided to the Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106 on November 3, 2010. 3. The City of Spokane Valley has complied with the requirements of RCW 43.21C and issued a Determination of Non Significance ("DNS") for the proposed amendment on November 12, 2010 in a manner consistent with the City of Spokane Valley Environmental Ordinance. 4. At the time the City Center designation was approved, the City intended to make significant investments in the City Center area through the purchase of property on which it would construct and operate a new City Hall as well as construct improvements to streets and streetscapes adjacent to the new City Hall. 5. The plan for development of the City Center property also included plans for the construction of a Library within the City Center boundaries but the voters rejected a bond proposal to construct that Library. 6. In the last sixteen months, since the adoption of the Subarea Plan, the city's revenue forecast has continued to deteriorate. Specifically, sales taxes are proj ected to decrease by $400,000 from 2010 to 2011; property taxes are projected to decrease by $100,000 from 2010 to 2011, and funds available from the real estate excise tax have decreased from a high of approximately $2.2 million in 2007 and 2008 to approximately $900,000 in 2010 and 2011. 7. Funds for significant private development are not as available as they would have been at the time the initial ordinance was passed, and major commercial investments within the City have had financial difficulties. The City Council has, by motion, ended negotiations for the purchase of property on which to locate a new City Hall, and adopted a 2011 budget that does not include sums for the purchase of such property, and further reduced funds available for the construction of a City Hall by $2.2 million to fund other necessary capital projects. 8. The City has been made aware of potential development that could occur within the City Center area that currently is precluded by the current designation. Ordinance 11-001,Amending Comp Plan Deleting Reference to City Center Page 4 of 7 DRAFT 9. An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan through the annual process set forth in RCW 36.70A.130 would delay any change in zoning to this designated property until May of 2011 or later, preventing any planning or application for future construction for at least another full calendar year. 10. Public testimony has favored and opposed the change. Specific comments at the City Council meeting of October 26, 2010 supporting the amendment include comments that businesses were struggling, vacancy rates were high, and that the property owners within the City Center designation support removal of the current restrictions; further testimony at the Planning Commission meeting on December 9, 2010 supporting the amendment indicated that the city Council has, since taking office in January of 2010, reviewed the Subarea Plan in detail, reviewed each zone classification, and heard testimony concerning the impacts of the current regulations on development and how the current economy is affecting properties within this designation, as well as the desire of property owners for additional flexibility for development within this designation, as well as testimony by a property owner within the City Center designation requesting more flexibility to enable redevelopment to increase the tax base and create more jobs; Further, public comments at the City Council meetings of January 18, 2011 and January 25, 2011, supporting this change included comments that current restrictions stymied business growth and development, created a significant percentage of non-conforming uses and buildings, resulted in little or no building applications since the designation was established; further that City investment and major tenant interest has not materialized, that the City is suffering the effects of a serious economic downturn, and that investment opportunities may exist if the restrictions on use and development were removed. 11. The City of Spokane Valley has provided notice and engaged in a public process to ensure citizen participation pursuant to RCW 36.70A.035, RCW 36.70A.130 and RCW 36.70A.140, providing the public an opportunity to be heard on October 26, 2010, December 9, 2010, January 18, 2011 and January 25, 2011. The notice provided and meetings identified constitute early and continuous public participation in the consideration of this proposed amendment to the comprehensive plan and map. 12. The City Council does not accept the Findings of the Planning Commission for the reasons set forth in these Findings of Fact as well as the following: a. The public has had an appropriate opportunity to be heard. Public notice was provided and public comment on this issue was taken on October 26, December 9, 2010, January 18, 2011, and January 25, 2011. There further is no evidence in the record that the current designation, without the anticipated City investment, provided any guidance or stability for future economic investment, on the contrary, economic development has not occurred due to the restrictions currently in place. Ordinance 11-001,Amending Comp Plan Deleting Reference to City Center Page 5 of 7 DRAFT b. The change is not inconsistent with the remaining portions of the Comprehensive Plan including Chapter 2.2.1-City Center, and Goals and Policies LUG-6 and LUP-6.1.11. The City Council is not abandoning the concept of a future City Center and is actively exploring alternatives to this site. All remaining provisions of the Subarea Plan contained in the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations are still in place. c. The City Council finds that the economic threat to existing property owners within the City Center designation is immediate and a result of the restrictive development standards imposed. 13. The inability and decision of the City and other public entities to invest in the City Center area as contemplated by the Comprehensive Plan, and the current and ongoing economic hardships suffered by both the City and its constituents, along with the code restrictions contemplated by the City Center designation of the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations set forth above in the recitals and incorporated herein, as well as the significant delay that would occur if this matter were reviewed as part of the annual Comprehensive Plan review process, creates a significant and ongoing economic hardship for property owners within the City Center designated area, and constitutes a legitimate and sufficient basis to declare an emergency requiring immediate action by the City Council amending the Comprehensive Plan pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b). BASED UPON THE RECITALS AND FINDINGS OF FACT SET FORTH ABOVE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Declaration of an Emergency The City Council of the City of Spokane Valley hereby declares that an emergency exists, as is described in the findings above, allowing the amendment of the Comprehensive Plan and Map as is set forth below pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130(2) (b). Section 2: Amendment of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is herby amended as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. Section 3: Amendment of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Map. The Comprehensive Plan Map is hereby amended as is set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 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 lack of constitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 5: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley as provided by law. Ordinance 11-001,Amending Comp Plan Deleting Reference to City Center Page 6 of 7 DRAFT Passed by the City Council this day of January, 2011. Thomas E. Towey, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved As To Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 11-001,Amending Comp Plan Deleting Reference to City Center Page 7 of 7 Exhibit A Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment INTRODUCTION'. i.1 PURPOSE This Subarea Plan is established in response to the community's desire to reverse the visual and economic decline of the Sprague and Appleway corridors, and restore the beauty and vitality of these corridors, and instigate the creation of the City of Spokane Valley's first City Center. It presents the community's vision for the future of these corridors. It establishes the primary means of regulating land use and development within the Plan Area(see Fig.i.1. Plan Area). Finally, it describes the City actions and public investments that will support the corridors' 1 revitalization and creation of the City Center. The Subarea Plan is intended to implement the broad policies established in the Spokane Valley Comprehensive IPlan for a new City Center and the development/redevelopment of Sprague Avenue/Appleway Boulevard corridor into an area of quality commercial and mixed-use development. The regulations contained within the Subarea Plan replace land use and development regulations previously contained within the City Zoning Ordinance for this portion of the City. In the instance of conflicting regulations with other municipal planning documents containing policies for land use and development within the Plan Area, the Subarea Plan shall prevail. The Subarea Plan document does not replace or augment regulations pertaining to issues of building safety codes or other non-planning related codes. All applications for new construction, substantial modifications to existing buildings, and for changes in land use, shall be reviewed for conformance with the policies contained in the Subarea Plan. BOOK I 1.2. INTENT Spokane Valley was incorporated in 2003, and does not contain an existing or historic downtown district. The Spokane Valley community intends to see to it that a new City Center is constructed. A City Center is defined, in this context to mean a compact and synergistic cluster of activity generating shops, services and eateries sharing a WallkaMe scaled pct sefe .._ .• - - - .- organized around public space and pedestrian oriented street environments. 1.4. THE ENVISIONED FUTURE CORRIDORS Figure 1.1 Urban Design Concept Map — remove City Center - Core and add Mixed Use Avenue designation From Commercial Strip to a Pattern of Centers and Segments: During the period of time in which development is guided by this Subarea Plan,the Sprague Avenue Corridor will begin its transformation from commercial strip to a pattern of Centers and Segments (see Figure 1.1). Whereas the commercial strip is undifferentiated—a linear pattern of exclusively commercial buildings,typically one-story (with very few notable exceptions), surface parking lots, and pole signs, —the future corridor will be increasingly characterized by emerging structural differentiation: there will be clusters of shops, activity, mix, and intensity - Centers, and there will be longer linear portions distinguished by cohesive building types, frontage landscaping, and dominant uses— Segments. Whereas the commercial strip caters to a narrow segment of market demand(the demand for commercial goods and services), the emerging Centers and Segments will have differentiated market Ifocus. Neighborhood Centers will specialize in serving the needs of neighborhoods within a short drive; the City Exhibit A Page 1 of 5 Center will offer community services as well as commercial goods and services that cater to the entire City in a lively pedestrian friendly environment; Appleway Boulevard will ultimately be lined primarily with large residential buildings facing a landscaped boulevard; the Gateway Commercial Segment of Sprague Avenue will continue to enhance its position as a regional Auto Row, and the Mixed Use Avenue Segments of Sprague will focus on a synergistic mix of workplace,commercial and high density residential uses. 1.4. THE ENVISIONED FUTURE CORRIDORS 1) The City Center What is now the new City of Spokane Valley was long a collection of undifferentiated suburban developments anchored by their relationship to the urban center of downtown Spokane and to recognizable features of the beautiful natural terrain of the Spokane Valley. It is the dream and intention of this community to complete the formation of their City by establishing its Center. The City Center will provide the community with its symbolic, social, and geographic heart. The City Center will be,more than anywhere else in Spokane Valley,the place that tells you where you are,that you are in much more than a City defined only by legal jurisdictional boundaries. The City Center will provide the community with the center of ite, civic and social life. Citizens will be drawn to their center by shops, cafes,restaurants, community services, and by the offering of comfortable public streets and plaza spaces to linger in when the weather is fine. And the busy streets and public places will be presided over by the first City Hall built to house the government of the new City. The new City Center will be the antithesis of the linear strip: development in the City Center will not sprawl outward, low to the ground, it will be compact and clustered; it will not be only one type of land use, but a mixture of uses and destinations retail, entertainment, civic,residential, and ultimately places of work and lodging will be found there. The shopping core will center on a main street with curbside parking and slow moving traffic reminiscent of historic downtown districts, but featuring contemporary businesses and accommodating the parking and services that they require. The Civic Center will preside over the City's main outdoor gathering space and its vista will be the iconic image that stands for Spokane Valley. The City Center will be built in the vicinity of the region's first shopping mall a prominent location for successful retail anchors lying at a major community crossroads and close to the precise geographic center of the City. Its main entrance and its most visible frontage will occupy the very central point along Sprague Avenue, the City and region's primary arterial. The Sprague Avenue frontage will provide the new district with the unmistakable identity of the City's most urban and lively district, offering a hint to passing travelers of what is available inside the district(Fig.1.9.). like to walk. The City Center will provide businesses with a prominent address while offering workers and customers nearby places to lunch, shop, see and be seen. More than anything else, the district will attract people with its lively pedestrian activity and comfortable environment for walking and lingering, featuring a generous assortment of sitting places, warmly lit sidewalks and attractive window displays. Walking and bicycling will be made easy by the district's mixture of uses, concentrated development pattern, and its fine grained network of streets shared by vehicles and pedestrians alike (Fig.1.2.). Along these streets, offices, housing, and lodging will easily mix in attractive buildings built right up to the sidewalk,forming a consistent "street wall"that creates the feeling of an outdoor living room(Fig.1.3.). a) The City Center Core Near term development activity will take advantage of the large areas of vacant and underutilized land around the University Rd. intersection to plant the seeds that will grow into City Center's entertainment, shopping, and dining core. Larger retail establishments will anchor new boutique retail,restaurants with outdoor dining, and entertainment uses in mixed use buildings featuring continuous ground floor shop fronts. Shop windows and doors will adorn buildings with a high level of finish and detail (Fig.1.1.). Above these shops, residents, workers, and visitors will enjoy the excitement and convenience of the entertainment environment below while the soft,yellow light coming from their windows will add to the convenient parking spaces at the curb,with more spaces tucked behind buildings in lots and structures. Exhibit A Page 2 of 5 The backbone of the City Center Core will be a new "Main Street," featuring continuous ground level shops, cafes, and small restaurants built close to the sidewalk that enhance the street's appeal for walking (Fig.1.6.). New public open spaces will provide ample opportunity for people to gather, relax, and experience the hustle and bustle of City Center life (Fig.1.7.). Buildings such as a City Nall and Public Library terminating prominent views and presiding over civic spaces will add to the long list of amenities that the Spokane Valley community will enjoy far into the future(Fig.1.8.). Landmark features will celebrate the City Center and make the core highly visible and easy to reach from both Sprague Avenue and Appleway Boulevard(Fig.1.7.). b) The City Center Sprague Avenue The character of Sprague Avenue within the City Center will create a notably unique atmosphere that distinguishes this portion of Sprague Avenue as obviously different from other portions of the Corridor. Streetscape improvements will feature a unique parallel access lane on the south side of the street with slow moving traffic and amenities that buffer the sidewalk from the fast moving center of Sprague. Pedestrians will be able to stroll, eat outdoors when the weather is nice, and window shop. This main street like environment along Sprague will also create a comfortable pedestrian zone for upper stories of housing;lodging and/or offices that will help make the City Center successful. c) The City Center Neighborhood The urban neighborhood surrounding and supporting the City Center will be a City neighborhood with a difference. The City's widest range of housing types, the greatest mixture of homes, offices, and lodging, will begin to concentrate within walking distance of the City Center Core's theaters, shops, restaurants, cafes, nightlife, and amenities. Building off of the existing STA Plaza and potential future most extensive concentration of transit facilities(Fig.1.10.). This neighborhood will consist of artfully designed buildings built closer to the sidewalk featuring grand scale entrances,facades with richly detailed windows and doorways, building forecourts, terraced urban activity to the sidewalk(Fig.L 11.). Remove figures 1.2-1.11 1) Neighborhood Centers An even distribution of supermarkets and neighborhood serving convenience uses currently punctuate the corridor at major intersections along Sprague Avenue. As the corridor transitions, development in these neighborhood centers will introduce mixed-use buildings and line grocery anchors with shops that will be located closer to the sidewalk(Fig.1.12.). New mixed-use development in these locations will be larger scale with parking lots that are screened from nearby housing in order to ensure compatibility with adj acent development (Fig.1.13.). A combination of new infill development and streetscape improvements with wide sidewalks and on-street parking will provide nearby residents with a safe and convenient pedestrian environment(Fig.1.14.). In contrast to the unique,entertainment oriented City Center,Neighborhood Centers and their services will continue to be distributed throughout the Plan Area. These centers, with their close proximity to surrounding neighborhoods,will supply nearby residents with all their daily needs(Fig.1.15.). 2) Sprague Avenue—Between the Centers b) Gateway Commercial Avenue The community intends to maintain the specialty segment between I-90 and the railroad overpass as the region's premier destination for automobile sales. The Gateway Commercial Avenue will be a"themed" stretch of Sprague Avenue,home to a busy cluster of vehicle dealers and supporting services(Fig.1.21.). In this District, Sprague Avenue will provide easy access and on-street parking to all dealers and other businesses in the district. A unique streetscape design with special treatments will include architectural vehicle display spaces that reinforce the district's generally auto oriented character. Sprague Avenue's Exhibit A Page 3 of 5 new streetscape improvements, with modern boulevard-scale streetlights, will be complemented by well designed signs advertising the District's brands and services. Interspersed with the automobile dealers, compatible uses such as "medium box" commercial sales and services will line Sprague Avenue, taking advantage of the District's clear identity and proximity to I-90 (Fig.1.22.). Gateway features and coordinated signage will announce a revitalized Sprague Avenue and the new City Center to passing motorists on I-90. 3) Appleway—The Community Boulevard The undeveloped Appleway right-of-way provides an immense opportunity to improve the Sprague- Appleway corridor and the City as a whole. Appleway Boulevard will be extended East of University Road, creating a lush, pedestrian friendly environment. This new "Grand Boulevard", with continuous planting strips along the sidewalk featuring street trees, decorative lighting, and pedestrian amenities will provide the perfect opportunity for previously undevelopable deep parcels to build new grand scale housing and sensitively designed residentially compatible office buildings(Fig.1.24). This new housing corridor will help transition between Sprague Mixed Use Avenue development and the single family residential neighborhoods South of Appleway (Fig.1.25.). As it passes through the City Center, Appleway Boulevard will build upon the rest of the corridor's Grand Boulevard character with attached housing that takes on a more urban character along the City Center's tree lined streetscape. This housing will be complemented well by similarly scaled office buildings in the City Center(Fig.1.2.). Down the Center of this Community Boulevard, a wide, landscaped central parkway median with large, leafy trees accommodates multi-use pathways for biking or strolling(Fig.1.26.). This prominent open space is also located to maintain the potential to accommodate a future transit line. The transit line will take advantage of the existing bus transit center to provide easy access to the City Center to Spokane valley residents, workers, and visitors, from throughout the City and the region while further increasing the development potential of Appleway as a mixed-office/residential boulevard. 1.5. CORRIDOR REVITALIZATION STRATEGY a) Move swiftly To leverage current investor preferences for City Center development projects and to take advantage of the region's lack of urban center projects to date, move as swiftly as possible to instigate the development of at least a substantial first phase City Center Core that contains a sufficient critical mass of shops, restaurants, civic buildings, public space and ambiance to begin functioning as a primary destination for the larger community. b) Public private partnership development of the first portion of the City Center. c) City Center must come first The successful delivery of a City Center for the City of Spokane Valley will create not only a district that functions as the Heart of the Community,but it will provide a substantial armature for beneficial change that will radiate out in ever increasing rings from the Center. Therefore, notwithstanding the various needs clamoring for attention along the Corridors,place highest priority on actions and expenditures that .stimulate and support investment in and delivery of a City Center district in the selected location. Exhibit A Page 4 of 5 d) Flexible entitlements Provide a policy framework specific enough to insure that new investment adheres to the fundamental principles of the formation of lively pedestrian oriented city centers, but flexible enough to respond to changing opportunities. More specifically, provide a policy framework that accommodates both all at once City Center development as well as incremental development; and provide a policy framework that can accommodate the development of a City Center Core on either side of University Road, or on both sides of University Road. 1) Provide a Policy Framework that accommodates the market's preference for retail concentrations at major crossroads,while building on the patterns of value already in place. b) Refocus retail development over time to foster a mutually supportive hierarchy of retail-driven centers and mixed use segments Transition from miles of"anything goes retail" to a pattern that clusters mutually supportive types of retail in centers or segments with differentiated market focus. Use land use & development policies to focus city center retail types in the selected location for that special district;fFocus neighborhood center retail at the designated crossroad locations; cluster auto-row serving retail and services in convenient clusters, and limit retail in between crossroad-located centers to non-competing retail types that thrive on visibility and that make less sense in pedestrian-oriented districts. 2) Reverse creeping disinvestment by identifying the long term "highest and best uses"for the Corridor as a whole. b) Replace entitlements for retail types suited to city center and neighborhood center clusters with residential entitlements Exhibit A Page 5 of 5 Exhibit B Comprehensive Plan .w ensity esil entia I— I - f _ �� I : 11 1 1 Iay 1 111 Hd Broadway Broadway Broadway Broadway Broadway Broadway Broadway Broadway Broadway-Gethsemane�Broadway�Broadway T -t - Broadway ■ Neighborhood Commercial o 1 Lutheran lU ��D :Elementary= I 3 w Sprin field r 3 Low Density __Springfield = M ��--'b M -3[ Spr-i�ngfiield— ri l I .Ig eIld Residential m -, - -i w o' Sprin .IIGr o St John x �� `Alki Alki1 Alkill Allis A1 �w Allis w X111111 1 Vianney Low-Density Residential-'� -_ _ o- I ©lice d0-liue �- ;d— Low Density w of �a- o - Residenti�al ,— L__i m- I - 1 zNeighborhoodi€ommercial Valleyway V_ lleyway V_alile_y aye� alileyivay-Valleywayl Valle-y_way Valle-y_way V_alle-y_way Valley-way- I' Medium am�y f 9 'r mil. .•..1. '-, �P.� High Density i d �Nlxon Densih LE a- b 11♦ Residential a I I I I I I1 Nixon f w� I —o t — k°' ,, ° Fson o oj - x ? m ° - _Main— = b ii■�■ _,a _„ Mann =Main,� ° Main ��. ,M'a _ Main o Main ,, b = Ii l'El Balfour \ "�� i_ . �. ii �J \ Park o LKicerSide \' —` • o 4 -■ 4. iii �� I ■ \ .� \ c7 %— ' ■ ir �Avenue ��ll ��a.F.D.1 .■ •' r FA Sprague Sprague ■Spragu�Sprague Sprague Sprague Sprague a Sprague Sprague Sprague Sprague u _ I !I Coutract•Based�Education • -� . ill iliir�� : P. Ci Center \ ■l fixed 3- Use L ECPA-01-10 \\S 2nd CG il o:e`e Comniunit.. \ 1X \ti\ �.■ may APP1e �� V � _ 1 Boulevard wa, ay .r1 �� JAppleway b��IL:�ii� b�� im se w 3rd - o_4th-ION 4th w _ __ . !IP 4th4 _ 4 � ,-4th �..,:�z:r.. - _ _ 4th---==__-=- _'-= __'-•_'- Neighho rh uil- '=• _ . . _ �� High Density Residential .'I '•I-- 1.1 lIl•U t iii 3 Medium_ _ : :I Oi)mMertial- _ _ i! !IC _ 1 Density ;b 1 �" 5th 1'' �'_■ ��ResidentialI II mil „, 5ith 11 � o ��Poth '� I II`II= 6th— f� 1 6th ■ a 6th `x 6th M� 3 6th•• �� 6th -6th 6th■ 1��1��11! 1 —�yH ■o 11lU111111� • 11 �th1Il��P a 7th b. ME M P� 11111 „if it 1 ' 1 1■ . .: IPI.P . 111 11 t L 8th 18th 8th d_8th a 8th 4_8th ull111■ I■ii. a I■1 t h 1�".■1111 3 3 11 x w 11111 9th th 9thi II 9th II I 9th■.: MI 9thJ EINIII 9th 1111 Low Density o •e f�`I D n.l i _R(side I ti 11 3 o x Residential b a t J- 1-0th 19thl_ ° 1 1 1 4-oth1 1 1 1 1-0th I� 1-o h� c� (0 10th-5 10th-t �, f4 - ' b University g Ir ■IIhh1 b �I Center e II,__ • MN= la i....... ••• -1_ixh ECPA-01-10 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map designation from City of Spokane Valley CCT to MUA; subsequent Zoning change from CCT to MUA. Community Development Department DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 11-001 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE SPOKANE VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DELETING REFERENCES TO THE DESIGNATION "CITY CENTER" AND AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP CHANGING THE DESIGNATION "CITY CENTER" TO "MIXED USE AVENUE," AND AMENDING ORDINANCE 09-022 AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, (The "City") is a noncharter Code City organized under the laws of Title 35A RCW; and WHEREAS, the City has the authority to amend the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, (The "Comprehensive Plan")pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130; and WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b) allows amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to be considered outside of the annual review process, "whenever an emergency exists" and after "appropriate public participation; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, (the "City Council")-, adopted Ordinance 09-022 on September 15 , 2009 amending the Comprehensive Plan and adopting the Spokane Valley Sprague Appleway Subarea Plan, (the "Subarea Plan"); and WHEREAS, on October 26, 2010, the City Council passed a motion to forward an emergency Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code amendment to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed this request, as well as the recommendation of the Community Development Department to approve this request, at a study session on November 18, 2010 and conducted a public hearing on December 9, 2010; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Findings and Recommendations and the same were presented to the City Council on January 4, 2011; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered this Ordinance amending the Zoning Code and Map-and the Findings and Recommendations of the Planning Commission on January 18, 2011, for the first reading and on January 25, 2011, for the second and final reading with public comment received at both City Council meetings; and WHEREAS, one of the land use designations contained within the Subarea Plan was the "City Center" designation; and WHEREAS, at the time the City Center designation was approved, the City of Spokane Valley intended to make significant investments in the City Center area through the purchase of Ordinance 11-001,Amending Comp Plan Deleting Reference to City Center Page 1 of 7 DRAFT property on which it would construct and operate a new City Hall as well as construct improvements to streets and streetscapes adjacent to the new City Hall; and WHEREAS, the plan for the development of the City Center property also included the construction of a Library within its boundaries; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan envisioned that certain uses within the City Center area would be restricted and limited to encourage the development of a City Center that would provide the community with, "its symbolic, social and geographic heart," the "center of its civic and social life" and provide services such as shops, cafes, restaurants, community services and the offering of"comfortable public streets and public places," and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan further envisioned that the new City Hall was intended to "preside over the City's main outdoor gathering space and its vista will be the iconic image that stands for Spokane Valley," and spur development including a new regional center including retail, office and residential development; and WHEREAS, the City Center designation in the comprehensive Comprehensive plan Plan and subsequent development regulations did not allow a number of specific uses including vehicle sales, convenience stores, gas stations and thrift stores; and WHEREAS, the Mixed Use Avenue designation in the comprehensive Comprehensive plan Plan and subsequent development regulations does allow such uses; and WHEREAS, the City Center designation in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations, once the development of the "core" City Center Main Street commenced, restricted retail development in areas adjacent to Main Street until specific development thresholds were met; and WHEREAS, the eitt—City center Center designation in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations imposed certain design restrictions and construction requirements that were unique to the City Center area; and WHEREAS, in the last sixteen months since the adoption of the Subarea Plan, the City's revenue forecast has continued to deteriorate. Specifically, sales taxes are projected to decrease by $400,000 from 2010 to 2011; property taxes are projected to decrease by $100,000 from 2010 to 2011, and funds available from the real estate excise tax have decreased from a high of approximately $2.2 million in 2007 and 2008 to approximately $900,000 in 2010 and 2011; and WHEREAS, funds for significant private development are not as available as they would have been at the time the initial ordinance was passed, and major commercial investments within the City have had financial difficulties; and WHEREAS, the City is not able and does not intend to make any significant investment in the Center area as was contemplated at the time the Comprehensive Plan and development Ordinance 11-001,Amending Comp Plan Deleting Reference to City Center Page 2 of 7 DRAFT regulations comprising the Subarea Plan was adopted. Specifically the City Council has, by motion, ended negotiations for the purchase of property on which to locate a new City Hall, and adopted a 2011 budget that does not include sums for the purchase of such property, and further reduced funds available for the construction of a new City Hall by $2.2 million to fund other necessary capital projects; and WHEREAS,the voters of the City rejected a bond proposal to construct a Library within the City Center property; and WHEREAS, the property owners within the City Center designation are burdened by the restriction on allowable uses outlined above, the further restrictions that would be in place if and when a development plan for the core was adopted, and the design restrictions and requirements unique to the city hallCity Center designation, without the City investment and infrastructure improvements; and WHEREAS, the City has been made aware of potential development that could occur within the City Center area that currently is precluded by the current designation; and WHEREAS, a number of uses, buildings and signs have been made non-conforming by the adoption of the City Center designation and development regulations implementing the same; and WHEREAS, testimony before the City Council and Planning Commission has demonstrated both the economic hardships and the desire to remove the current limitations as is set forth in the findings of fact below; and WHEREAS, the issues and factors concerning the creation of the City Center designation has been the subject of three years of study and analysis, and public meetings and testimony, specifically as set forth in Ordinance 09-022 and in additional public hearings and I meetings identified in the findings Findings of fae -Fact below; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 2006, prior to the adoption of the Subarea Plan, recognizes the goal of identifying and creating a City Center for the City—ef Spokane Valley, and the City Council wishes to continue to pursue this goal with staff, taking into consideration the existing economic situation and the City's current financial circumstances, in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommendations fail to take into account the specific factors set forth in the findings of fact below; and WHEREAS, an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan through the annual process set forth in RCW 36.70A.130 would delay any change in zoning to the designated City Center property until May of 2011 or later preventing any planning or application for future construction for at least another full calendar year and Ordinance 11-001,Amending Comp Plan Deleting Reference to City Center Page 3 of 7 DRAFT WHEREAS, adoption of this amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Map must comply with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA") as set forth in RCW 43.21C; and WHEREAS, the City is required to notify the Washington State Department of Commerce of its intent to adopt this amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Map at least 60 days prior to final adoption pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The facts set forth in the recitals above are incorporated by this reference as Findings of Fact. -2.The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Map has been provided to the Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106 on November 3, 2010. 23.The City of Spokane Valley has complied with the requirements of RCW 43.21C and issued a Determination of Non Significance ("DNS") for the proposed amendment on November 12, 2010 in a manner consistent with the City of Spokane Valley Environmental Ordinance. 4. At the time the City Center designation was approved, the City intended to make significant investments in the City Center area through the purchase of property on which it would construct and operate a new City Hall as well as construct improvements to streets and streetscapes adjacent to the new City Hall. 1-5.The plan for development of the City Center property also included plans for the construction of a Library within the City Center boundaries but the voters rejected a bond proposal to construct that Library. 46.In the last sixteen months, since the adoption of the Subarea Plan, the city's revenue forecast has continued to deteriorate. Specifically, sales taxes are proj ected to decrease by $400,000 from 2010 to 2011; property taxes are projected to decrease by $100,000 from 2010 to 2011,. and funds available from the real estate excise tax have decreased from a high of approximately $2.2 million in 2007 and 2008 to approximately $900,000 in 2010 and 2011. 7.Funds for significant private development are not as available as they would have been at the time the initial ordinance was passed, and major commercial investments within the City have had financial difficulties. The City Council has, by motion, ended negotiations for the purchase of property on which to locate a new City Hall, and adopted a 2011 budget that does not include sums for the purchase of such property, and further reduced funds available for the construction of a City Hall by $2.2 million to fund other necessary capital projects. Ordinance 11-001,Amending Comp Plan Deleting Reference to City Center Page 4 of 7 DRAFT 8. The City has been made aware of potential development that could occur within the City Center area that currently is precluded by the current designation. eT9.An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan through the annual process set forth in RCW 36.70A.130 would delay any change in zoning to this designated property until faMay of 2011 or later, preventing any planning or application for future construction for at least another full calendar year. 710. Public testimony has favored and opposed the change. Specific comments at the City Council meeting of October 26, 2010 supporting the amendment include comments that businesses were struggling, vacancy rates were high, and that the property owners of property wherowithin the City Center designation was planned to be located, supports removal of the current restrictions; further testimony at the Planning Commission meeting on December 9, 2010 supporting the amendment indicated that the city Ceouncil has, since taking office in January of 2010 reviewed the Subarea Plan in detail, reviewing reviewed each zone classification, and has heard testimony concerning the impacts of the current regulations on development and how the current economy is affecting the properties within this designation, as well as the desire of property owners for additional flexibility for development within this designation, as well as testimony by a property owner within the City Center designation requesting more flexibility to enable redevelopment to increase the tax base and create more jobsi- Further, public comments at the City Council meetings of January 18, 2011 and January 25, 2011, supporting this change included comments that current restrictions stymied business growth and development, created a significant percentage of non-conforming uses and buildings, resulted in little or no building applications since the designation was established; further that City investment and major tenant interest has not materialized, that the City is suffering the effects of a serious economic downturn, and that investment opportunities may exist if the restrictions on use and development were removed. &11. The City of Spokane Valley has provided notice and engaged in a public process to ensure citizen participation pursuant to RCW 36.70A.035, RCW 36.70A.130 and RCW 36.70A.140, providing the public an opportunity to be heard on October 26, 2010, December 9, 2010, January 18, 2011 and January 25, 2011. The notice provided and meetings identified constitute early and continuous public participation in the consideration of this proposed amendment to the comprehensive plan and map. 12. The City Council does not accept the Findings of the Planning Commission for the following reasons set forth in these Findings of Fact as well as the following: a. The public has had an appropriate opportunity to be heard. Public notice was provided and public comment on this issue was taken on October 26, December 9, 2010, January 18, 2011, and January 25, 2011. There further is no evidence in the record that the current designation, Ordinance 11-001,Amending Comp Plan Deleting Reference to City Center Page 5 of 7 DRAFT without the anticipated City investment, provided any guidance or stability for future economic investment, on the contrary, economic development has not occurred due to the restrictions currently in place. b. The change is not inconsistent with the remaining portions of the Comprehensive Plan including Chapter 2.2.1-City Center, and Goals and Policies LUG-6 and LUP-6.1.11. The City Council is not abandoning the concept of a future City Center and is actively exploring alternatives to this site. All remaining provisions of the Subarea Plan contained in the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations are still in place. c. The City Council finds that the economic threat to existing property owners within the City Center designation is immediate and a result of the restrictive development standards imposed. 9-13. The inability and decision of the City and other public entities to invest in the City Center area as contemplated by the Comprehensive Plan, and the current and ongoing economic hardships suffered by both the City and its constituents, along with the code restrictions contemplated by the City Center designation of the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations set forth above in the recitals and incorporated herein, as well as the significant delay that would occur if this matter were reviewed as part of the annual Comprehensive Plan review process, creates; without immediate action by the City Council, _a significant and ongoing economic hardship for property owners within the City Center designated area, constituting an emergency requiring action by the City_and constitutes a legitimate and a sufficient basis to declare an emergency requiring immediate action by the City Council for amendment of amending the comprehensive Comprehensive plan Plan pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130-(2)-(b). BASED UPON THE RECITALS AND FINDINGS OF FACT SET FORTH ABOVE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Declaration of an Emergency The City Council of the City of Spokane Valley hereby declares that an emergency exists, as is described in the findings above, allowing the amendment of the Comprehensive Plan and Map as is set forth below pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130(2) (b). Section 2: Amendment of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is herby amended as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. Section 3: Amendment of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Map. The Comprehensive Plan Map is hereby amended as is set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. 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 lack Ordinance 11-001,Amending Comp Plan Deleting Reference to City Center Page 6 of 7 DRAFT of constitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 5: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley as provided by law. Passed by the City Council this day of January, 2011. Thomas E. Towey, Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved As To Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 11-001,Amending Comp Plan Deleting Reference to City Center Page 7 of 7 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION December 9,2010 Background: The Sprague Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan(Subarea Plan) was adopted in June 2009 and became effective on October 15, 2009. City Council passed a motion on October 26, 2010 to initiate an emergency comprehensive plan amendment as follows: 1. Change the City Center (CCT) comprehensive plan and zoning designation to Mixed Use Avenue (MUA); and 2. Remove all language referencing City Center in the Sprague Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan(Subarea Plan); a. Book 1: Community Intent, adopted as part of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan; and b. Book 2: Development Regulations; and c. Book 3: City Actions, adopted by reference in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 9, 2010. After hearing public testimony and deliberations, the Planning Commission recommends denial of the proposed amendment to the Sprague Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan (Subarea Plan). The Planning Commission findings, conclusions and recommendation ace summarized below: Findings: 1. SVMC 17.80.140(H) states that the City may approve Comprehensive Plan amendments, based on the following findings and factors. The Planning Commission's findings are italicized. Findings a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of environment; The Planning Commission finds the proposed amendment was processed too quickly and without sufficient public input. There wasn't sufficient statistical information and/or survey of the community to gauge citizen support for the City Center to be removed from the SARP. The Commission believes the City Center district zone provides guidance and stability for future economic development; and that a City Center is necessary for the long term viability of Spokane Valley; and it is not in the public interest to move forward without a plan to implement one. b. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; The City's Comprehensive Plan includes goals and policies that support the creation of a City Center. The proposal removes all SARP language concerning the City Center but leaves in place language in the Comprehensive Plan that generally supports creating a City Center. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission Page 1 of 3 c. The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; The Commission believes that a lack of vision and indecisiveness for a City Center is contributing to economic problems and the Subarea Plan and City Center zone has not been given enough time to develop and provide guidance on its function. The plan has been implemented for just over one (1)year during a time of economic difficulty for all development in the region. d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; and The amendment does not correct an obvious mapping error. e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission has not identified a deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Factors: a. The effect upon the physical environment; Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the City of Spokane Valley Municipal Code, the lead agency has determined that the proposed amendment does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. b. The effect on open space, streams,rivers, and lakes; The proposed amendment is a non project amendment and will not affect open space, streams, rivers, and lakes. c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; The City Center designation is compatible with the adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods. d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation,parks,recreation and schools; There is no appreciable difference between the Mixed Use Avenue and City Center designations in terms of impacts to community facilities. e. The benefit to the neighborhood, city and region; The removal of a City Center zoning designation strikes the ability for the City of Spokane Valley to have an identifiable area with retail shopping, open space, residential and cultural, civic and quasi civic uses. Changing the zoning to Mixed Use Avenue will allow vehicle sales and other auto oriented uses to develop adjacent to established residential neighborhoods. f The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density, and the demand for such land; The Mixed Use Avenue zone district allows less density when compared to the City Center zone district. However, residential and commercial projections have been fairly conservative compared to maximum allowed density. g. The current and projected population density in the area; and The projected residential density would not significantly change under the Mixed Use Avenue designation. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission Page 2 of 3 h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission finds the proposal would eliminate the designated City Center within the City's Comprehensive Plan which is designated to serve as a social, cultural and economic focus for the City of Spokane Valley. Elimination of City Center zone gives the perception there is no City, specifically the absence of the City Center gives no basis or guidance for economic development. Conclusions: The Commission concludes that the proposed amendment is not in the interest of the citizens of Spokane Valley and is inconsistent with the goals and policies of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. Recommendations: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends to the City Council that the proposed emergency comprehensive plan amendment to change the City Center(CCT) comprehensive plan and zoning designation to Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) be denied. The Planning Commission further recommends that the proposal to remove all language referencing City Center in the Sprague Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan(Subarea Plan)from Book 1; Community Intent, adopted as part of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan; and Book 2: Development Regulations and Book 3: City Actions, adopted by reference in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) also be denied. Findings and Conclusions reviewed and approved on this 20th day of December, 2010 P_ fhn G. Carroll, Chairman A SST /] A A Dept na Griffith, Administ . .iv- Assistant Fuiduigs and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission Page 3 of 3 0. CO'~IN#I.'-i I 'YDEYI:':Ior !ENT DErART iENTC PLANNING DIVISION Spokane STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE .Valley PLANNING COMMISSION ECPA-01-10 STAFF REPORT DATE: November 9, 2010 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: December 9, 2010, beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, Valley Redwood Plaza Building, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 101, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: City initiated, site specific emergency comprehensive plan amendment to change the City Center (CC) comprehensive plan and zoning designation to Mixed Use Avenue (MUA); remove all language referencing City Center in the Sprague Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan (Subarea Plan) from Book 1: Community Intent, adopted as part of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan; and Book 2: Development Regulations and Book 3: City Actions, adopted by reference in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). PROPOSAL LOCATION: The amendment area is boarded by Walnut Road to the west, Bowdish Road to the east, Main Avenue to the north and 4tl'Avenue to the south. APPLICANT: City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department, Karen Kendall; 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley, WA 99206; (509) 720-5026 APPROVAL CRITERIA: Chapter 2 (Urban Land Use) of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Title 17 (General Provision), Title 19 (Zoning Regulations), Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) and Sprague Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan (Subarea Plan) from Book 1: Community Intent, adopted as part of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan; and Book 2: Development Regulations and Book 3: City Actions, adopted by reference in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Division, after review and consideration of the submitted application and applicable approval criteria, recommends that the Planning Commission approve ECPA-01- 10. STAFF PLANNER: Karen Kendall, Assistant Planner, Community Development Department REVIEWED BY: Scott Kuhta, AICP, Planning Manager, Community Development Department EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: Application Materials Exhibit 2 SEPA Determination Exhibit 3: Comprehensive Plan Map Exhibit 4: Zoning Map Exhibit 5: 2009 Aerial Map Exhibit 6: Vicinity Map Exhibit 7: Transportation Map Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for ECPA-01-10 Page 1 of 6 I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION APPLICATION PROCESSING: Chapter 17.80 Permit Processing Procedures in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). The following summarizes key application procedures for the proposal. Pre-Application Meeting: N/A Application Submitted: N/A Determination of Completeness: N/A Issuance of Determination of Non-Significance (DNS): November 12, 2010 End of Appeal Period for DNS: November 26, 2010 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: November 12,2010 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: November 12, 2010 Date of Public Hearing: December 9, 2010 PROPERTY INFORMATION: Size and Characteristics: The site is approximately 225 acres in size. The site is relatively flat. Comprehensive Plan: City Center Zoning: City Center(CCT) Existing Land Use: There area is comprised of developed and undeveloped land with one Park (Balfour Park). SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,ZONING,AND LAND USES: North Comprehensive Plan— Low, Medium and High Density Residential Zoning—R-3, MF-1 and MF-2 Existing Land Uses— Single-Family and Multi-Family Residential South Comprehensive Plan— Low, Medium and High Density Residential Zoning—R-3, MF-1 and MF-2 Existing Land Uses— Single-Family and Multi-Family Residential East Comprehensive Plan — Mixed Use Avenue, Community Boulevard and High Density Residential Zoning—Mixed Use Avenue (MUA), Community Boulevard (CB) and MF-2 Existing Land Uses— Commercial, Office and Residential West Comprehensive Plan—Mixed Use Avenue and Community Boulevard Zoning—Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) and Community Boulevard (CB) Existing Land Uses— Auto oriented uses, Commercial, Office and Residential II. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO SEPA Findings: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC), the lead agency has determined that this proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). The Planning Division issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the proposal. This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for ECPA-01-10 Page 2 of 6 Conclusion(s): The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act and Title 21 of the SVMC have been fulfilled by the applicant's submittal of the required SEPA Checklist, and the issuance of the City's threshold determination consisting of a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS). III. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT A. COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE 17 (GENERAL PROVISIONS) OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE Findings: Section 17.80.140 H. (Comprehensive Plan Amendment Approval Criteria) Spokane Valley Municipal Code 1. The following are responses to the proposed comprehensive plan amendment; a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; The City proposes an emergency amendment due to the deterioration of the economy and the resulting decreasing sales tax and decreasing property taxes. It is likely not possible to have a large investment company to contribute to build in the City Center. The proposed amendment offers additional opportunities to achieve economic growth by expanding the land uses available for further diverse development. This proposal supports the safely, health and welfare of the community by encouraging mixed uses that foster community identity with pedestrian, bicycle and regional transportation services. b. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; The state-wide planning goals and policies provide the basis for the City's Comprehensive Plan and guidance in the development of goals and policies. The proposed amendment will allow services to be expanded for appropriate in-fill development with the City of Spokane Valley. The City has adopted development regulations that are designed to address specific impacts related to new development such as off-street parking, landscaping, lighting, setbacks and height. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Growth Management Act. Adjacent land use designations are consistent with the proposed amendment. c. The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; The proposed amendment responds to the economic hardships of business to locate within City Center due to limited permitted uses. The crashing economy has also limited the interest in mixed use/town center developments on a national level by large scale investment companies and developers. The economic climate has lead to a substantial change in conditions. d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for ECPA-01-10 Page 3 of 6 The proposed amendment alleviates the restrictions placed upon the area by the current zoning of the Sprague Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan (Subarea Plan). 2. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: a. The effect upon the physical environment; The comprehensive plan amendment is a non project action under SEPA. At the time of the submittal of the building permit application, an additional SEPA review would likely be required to evaluate the impacts of the use(s) and proposed structure(s) on the physical environment. b. The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes; There is no surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of site. Balfour Park is the only designated open space within the proposed amendment area. c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; The proposed amendment is contiguous to a Mixed Use Avenue Comprehensive Plan designation on the east and west. To the north and south High, Medium and Low Density Residential as well as Community Boulevard Comprehensive Plan designations border the area. At the time of development, standards relating to fencing, screening, and landscaping will reduce impacts on adjacent low density residential designated properties by providing visual separation and physical buffers between land uses. d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation, and schools; The City of Spokane Valley addresses adequacy of community facilities on a citywide basis through capital facilities planning. Policy CFP-9.1 of the Comprehensive Plan recommends a concurrency management system for transportation, sewer, and water facilities. The City of Spokane Valley's Parks and Recreation Plan outlines an implementation strategy including a capital facilities plan, which identifies costs and revenue sources for new parks. At the time of the submittal of the building permit application, an additional SEPA review would likely be required to evaluate the impacts of the use(s) and proposed structure(s) on the physical environment in regards to transportation and schools. e. The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; The proposal would be consistent with the existing character of the neighborhood. This is an appropriate location to allow for infill mixed use development that can utilize services such as alternative transportation methods (public transportation)provide an opportunity to live and work in a close proximity and the beneficial location of commercial, auto oriented retail and office uses to serve the area. f The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; The Mixed Use Avenue zone district allows less density when compared to the City Center zone district. However, residential and commercial projections have been fairly conservative compared to maximum allowed density. g. The current and projected population density in the area; and Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for RCPA-Dt-ID Page 4 of 6 The current population of 736 dwelling units is projected to increase to over 3,000 dwelling units as calculated in the City Center Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)for the Planned Action Ordinance. This projection would translate to the Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) designation. h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal would eliminate the only'napped area designated City Center within the City's Comprehensive Plan designation designated to serve as a social, cultural and economic focus for the City of Spokane Valley. B. COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE 19 (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE Findings: Section 19.110.020 (Sprague Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan) Spokane Valley Municipal Code The Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment is from City Center to Mixed Use Avenue and corresponding zoning map amendment from City Center (CCT) to Mixed Use Avenue(MUA). Conclusion(s): The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment is contiguous to other mixed use development. ECPA-01- 10 is consistent with the intention of the.Mixed Use Avenue designation. C. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive plan states that Mixed Use Avenue is characterized by multi-family housing mixing with commercial, office and lodging uses. Staff analysis is italicized. 1. Mixed Use Avenue is intended to transition older strip commercial development into a mix of vertical and horizontal mixed use developments, Development intended to orient to a vegetation enhanced street. 2. LUG-3 of the Comprehensive Plan states; "Transform various commercial business areas into vital, attractive, easily accessible mixed use areas that appeal to investors, consumers and residences and enhance the community image and economic vitality." Staff Comment: The Mixed Use Avenue designation is consistent with the surrounding parcels. 3. LUP-3.1 of the Comprehensive Plan states; "Encourage transformation of Sprague Avenue RegionaUC.ommunity Commercial corridor into a quality mixed-use retail area. Retail development along the corridor, exclusive of the City Center should be concentrated at arterial intersections and designed to integrate auto, pedestrian, and transit circulation. Integration of public amenities and open space into retail and office development should also be encouraged." Staff Comment: The proposed area has several arterial intersections along the Sprague and Appleway corridor. The proposed amendment area is served by Balfour Park located on Balfour Street and Main Avenue across from University City Development. StafReport and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for ECPA-01-10 Page 5 of 6 D. FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS Findings: Staff has received no public comment concerning the proposal to date. Conclusion(s): Adequate public noticing was conducted for ECPA-01-10 in accordance with adopted public noticing procedures. E. FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS Findings: Staff has not received any agency comments to date. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted. IV. OVERALL CONCLUSION The proposed Comprehensive Plan designation to Mixed Use Avenue and change in zoning classification to Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) is consistent with the Comprehensive Plans goals and policies. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Division after review and consideration of the submitted application and applicable approval criteria recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of ECPA-01-10. Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for ECPA-01-10 Page 6 of 6 Spokane Valley. COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted: 10-27-10 Received by: Fee: City Initiated (NIA) PLUS #: File#: ECPA-01=10 PART II - APPLICATION INFORMATION ® Map Amendment; and ® Text Amendment APPLICANT NAME:City of Spokane Valley, Community Development Department MAILING ADDRESS: 11707 East Sprague_Avenue, Suite 106 CITY: Spokane Valley STATE:WA ZIP:99206 PHONE: 509-720-5334 Scott Kuhta FAX:509-921- EMAIL:skuhtanspokanevalley.orq 509-720-5026 Karen Kendall 1008 kkendall cr spokanevalley.org PROPERTY OWNER: N/A STREET ADDRESS: CITY: - STATE: ZIP: PHONE: FAX: CELL: EMAIL: SITE ADDRESS: See attached PARCEL No: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: City Center PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION:Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) ZONING DESIGNATION: City Center PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION: Mixed Use Avenue(MUA) BRIEFLY EXPLAIN REASON FOR MAP OR TEXT AMENDMENT(attached full explanation on separate sheet of paper): City initiated,site specific emergency comprehensive plan amendment to change the City Center (CC)comprehensive plan and zoning desi Use Avenue(MUA);remove all langge referencing City Center in the Sprague AUpleway Corridors Subarea Han ,Subarea Plan)from Book 1: Community Intent,adopted as part of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan; and Book 2: Development Regulations and Book 3: City Actions,adopted by reference in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC). REVISED 212610 Page 3 of 4 I ( Spokane Valley- COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PART III -- AUTHORIZATION (Signature of legal owner or applicant) 1, 1)6k\reir\. jaki , (print name) swear or affirm that the above responses are maVtr thfully ado the b-s if my, owledge. i dd (1 1 1 0 (Si atu/e) (Date) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day of j`liCaltrA10.C, 2016 NOTARY SEAL �� / NOT i A.U A., „_____ ``.\``��t��1�5}I'lt?/ Notary Public in and for the S a e Washington `r lj _a oT S , g4 �C U �s �'��q'� � Residing at: cc-46\"\a/1Q �C cc\ ��;,,,`pg,.�A. ��`' _- r' 0/ IIIIIIl55\111�>>�'�'`O I`l'AS0k\S1 ,•-' My appointment expires: 9 9 ) 11 LEGAL OWNER AUTHORIZATION: If the applicant is not the legal owner(s), the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; I, , owner of the above described property do hereby authorize to represent me and my interests in all matters regarding this application. REVISED 2/2610 Page 4 of 4 Comprehensive Plan Application Questions: 1. The following are responses to the proposed comprehensive plan amendment; a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment; The City proposes an emergency amendment due to the deterioration of the economy and the resulting decreasing sales tax and decreasing property taxes. It is likely not possible to have a large investment company to contribute to build in the City Center. The proposed amendment offers additional opportunities to achieve economic growth by expanding the land uses available for further diverse development. This proposal supports the safety, health and welfare of the community by encouraging mixed uses that foster community identity next with pedestrian, bicycle and regional transportation services. b. The proposed amendment is consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW and with the portion of the City's adopted plan not affected by the amendment; The state-wide planning goals and policies provide the basis for the City's Comprehensive Plan and guidance in the development of goals and policies, The proposed amendment will allow services to be expanded for appropriate in-fill development with the City of Spokane Valley, The City has adopted development regulations that are designed to address specific impacts related to new development such as off-street parking, landscaping, lighting, setbacks and height. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Growth Management Act, Adjacent land use designations are consistent with the proposed amendment. c. The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; The proposed amendment responds to the economic hardships of business to locate within City Center due to limited permitted uses. The crashing economy has also limited the interest in mixed use/town center developments on a national level by large scale investment companies and developers. The economic climate has lead to a substantial change in conditions. d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendment alleviates the restrictions placed upon the area by the current zoning of the Sprague Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan (SARP). 2. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: a. The effect upon the physical environment; Page 1 of 3 The comprehensive plan amendment is a non project action under SEPA. At the time of the submittal of the building permit application, an additional SEPA review would likely be required to evaluate the impacts of the use(s) and proposed structure(s) on the physical environment. b. The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes; There is no surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of site. Balfour Park is the only designated open space within the proposed amendment area. c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; The proposed amendment is contiguous to a Mixed Use Avenue Comprehensive Plan designation on the east and west. To the north and south High, Medium and Low Density Residential as well as Community Boulevard Comprehensive Plan designations border the area. At the time of development, standards relating to fencing, screening, and landscaping will reduce impacts on adjacent low density residential designated properties by providing visual separation and physical buffers between land uses. d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities,roads, public transportation,parks,recreation, and schools; The City of Spokane Valley addresses adequacy of community facilities on a citywide basis through capital facilities planning. Policy CFP-9.1 of the Comprehensive Plan recommends a concurrency management system for transportation, sewer, and water facilities. The City of Spokane Valley's Parks and Recreation Plan outlines an implementation strategy including a capital facilities plan, which identifies costs and revenue sources for new parks. At the time of the submittal of the building permit application, an additional SEPA review would likely be required to evaluate the impacts of the use(s)and proposed structure(s) on the physical environment in regards to transportation and schools. e, The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; The proposal would be consistent with the existing character of the neighborhood. This is an appropriate location to allow for infill mixed use development that can utilize services such as alternative transportation methods (public transportation) provide an opportunity to live and work in a close proximity and the beneficial location of-commercial, auto oriented retail and office uses to serve the area. f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; The Mixed Use Avenue zone district allows less density when compared to the City Center zone district. However, residential and commercial projections have been fairly conservative compared to maximum allowed density, g. The current and projected population density in the area; and Page 2 of 3 The current population of 736 dwelling units is projected to increase to over 3,000 dwelling units as calculated in the City Center Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)for the Planned Action Ordinance, This projection would translate to the Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) designation, h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal would eliminate the only mapped area designated City Center within the City's Comprehensive Plan designation designated to serve as a social, cultural and economic focus for the City of Spokane Valley. Page 3 of 3 poliane = GOMMSUNiIN.: VJ !�OPMIN1 DEPA RTME F • • ..00,- y Deter niunation.of*i Ign ca ice (DIN‘2).:. PROPOSAL:ECPA-01-10 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: City initiated, site specific emergency comprehensive plan amendment to change the City Center (CC) comprehensive plan and zoning designation to Mixed Use Avenue (MUA); remove all language referencing City Center in the Sprague Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan(Subarea Plan) from Book 1: Community Intent, adopted as part of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan; and Book 2: Development Regulations and Book 3: City Actions,adopted by reference in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC). APPLICANT: City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department, Karen Kendall; 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley, WA 99206; (509)720-5026 LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: The amendment area is boarded by Walnut Road to the west, Bowdish Road to the east, Main Avenue to the north and 4th Avenue to the south. LEAD AGENCY: Spokane Valley The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement(EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. DETERMINATION: ❑There is no comment period for this DNS. ®This DNS is issued rising the optional DNS process in WAC 197-11-355. There is no further comment period on the DNS. ❑This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2);the lead agency will not act on his proposal for 14 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Kathy McClung, Community Development Director; 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106; Spokane Valley,WA 99206; (509)720-5300 DATE ISSUED: November 12, 2010 _ SIGNATURE: -ebdit 11,L ,c,I.G APPEAL: An appeal of this determination shall be submitted to the Community Development rtment within fourteen(14) calendar days after the date issued. The appeal must he written and make specific factual objections to the City's threshold determination. Appeals shall be conducted in conformance with Section 17,90 (Appeals) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code, and any required fees pursuant to the City's adopted Fee Scheduled shall be paid at time of appeal submittal. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680, appeals shall be limited to a review of a final threshold determination. THIS DNS WAS MAILED To: CIty of Liberty Lake,Community Development Spokane County,Fire District No.8 City of Spokane,Planning Services Spokane County,Regional Health District Spokane County,Boundary Review Board Spokane Transit Anthority(STA) Spokane County,Building and Planning Spokane Regional Transportation Council(SRTC) Spokane County Division of Utilities—Info Svc Washington State Department of Ecology(Spokane) Spokano County,Clean Air Agency Washington State Department of Ecology(Olympia) Spokane County,Fire District No, I Exhibit 5: 2009 Aerial Map .,ri "',. '! _-["' T� ^- - 1 _ .-.r_----_- -'— -.. ., rTit,,-- ' —.• r _, _I, ry A_. _ a.. r air' k • Ir �y, r' ,3g{retksesultnd d lrz.t.- I 'i...l , " .:-,*4.J(M - :s.i •" � .▪ t' k ;7 - '1, ,1 Ji9f1, is1 . r '� a�1' -3L.•>. [` �VS6_Yd . u,r-'r'. 4,,,,..-0„Q....-§e.,,Q:�L•;!-+!I 'f7�} a , is ++tr. - '7 h:r!4' L, L,_ 4,._[ff ! 7b1_lr�.V .9 Je4'II , •..al ''('*III L.LIItIFAT.Tjr :&•61 ;A,1�.r�'r 'L.ir1+ r+M.- r{1 � i 'S '!• I li €. i _.. -w". �� ''� s � �y la:.�F� f I � t E� ,,3 1.7 L ,r,- h,rfra■o0 ': 'L 1. M. ;�!i+'tit 9 ;ji;.-,. w ''- Y.', '. ,rt KILT ,! '7T s tl, ; i, rii.ovlJt E- gBi.e„m �RI""•,�[� �Jp11. ► `� ,��L. I�; • ili tl AltAfA tiaYin';.d,•' il.::s.r siatA�y sa iB18 d}3',•v+`P3: -iY1Q1-'Y M1f� - ... r C-;' , ,di•a:► .rv )�' f uf�! n4g ,o�'� .a9 • Il �1f Bd iy { 1,�{' . �'.. {' f IV,11 s�,:r VIP' ,, F•r i }- t'.,;•tr � 1 ,,,�:vv-r p 'l' - 'B i''k fdlt '� - 17[f,�� rd, { 'w.T d rt. ' e�i8d� �• mil[7J Y` „ ,'ICI 1�'�I.[8l,}} 1!47 `+'IWKS[, 'Pre�.�.r{yy�5s,r...„, �i'i]..,1 ,..1 �Y�. l�' Ul't�ie v, 15 L � r 1�4 .:,j. , ,..f a•• ')}i; f$ykOli al(': nt i.,14 .-� G'illd ii 7'. .' }y T itl - ] ,;t 1J '1 t ry r�' f! r.. j�� lJ ►; Z �i; t ::._iiI 1.' 1.4 ��ITAilirk r r ° r ,�I *l ':i i:[f t �. J�, L'!]t�lllVll'ti'[f[}v Ir' Ll1 t r � Jfr , �v C�t°� (-7,11•_,..°,41k=�~� 5 vY�.?p�! �. ��a' '� I`i�,�atl: . L� � � �ll ,�.--..�-- Pf' ' ! L' g '`� °�S`plrngfelc€„ !, L� s�� " r�s►, ►^ :` � ii�[5� .a �(�5 ta �;�€ ;.I, �j' at-gc 1'P ce i�� Ds/4. '.1',1�r41 �rgif -, u -t rci.ifi fi �1( '`p IF4 }.,f kk” ''''1,'' „07,i,; i ItA,C` 1 li1,2.1 .. -' F+lA3tT4'i pe;eg1 i G a▪ it'`''_�d1 F;. . '-'55 t' 1 . 1114L€ � jj l.� \ ;i ,-1 ' >ol NI 1r t John -"- w?. F -4•. . lrr"''':- ly 3.'•••-1.'•7•11. .f5 147. W1,=..tr I f1 [ J�_s war 1,r ti - IC=9 , i aiefrP i*i �+ Oy!, , f', 1 _tip -;� i1I[.� .r �,` p7w.: A,f-i, i t .. • 4 rli ,t• ;�'.{ t 'I,4-al..0 jg � �-- �'y;i}Fka � ;�°�`.al EyN sr�' ,sl *1''++I � �F-? �+:1°`tr ,,kaki"_, I:. , 1 i :ti,_�`'��r � i t t c ��. I, i1' s- r ,T' L'-r 0.1S:c0. "°1•1l e.,pi 4`' lit I111p.• .:+' 'ii' ''E F,:, r- " ` i I y *-.Ear L ! iF�t'L`4; Ks _ - y , L r. 'i i •`)�'"'' i"is s; T�li,�. { 'F" i{,,1 -TA6',-" is rl ,f J^+ ,—_,2!•F�.,,• .,�, 1 r l i!}, ' s`•+ }Ti- . ,,, LL+ ► J rs•-l~C,r1 7..4• k 1,>.2l € , - � ' .1�s� - .{,.:. .i .f.-' rr .p {-��8y� ':::C. `A { p�+P ��`"}�. 1�['-'} ]' + aiv�- !^�Ih' •.?�rl''.• s .�I'g s..n.'.�1 ,%F:1: -r j!. f" :FA,e�.. ..,4••'' 1f Ls *,a. ■1. �;S '� Hrl. A t_7•3• `„t.L •'}'j �I L7;,. 1,L.. 'L f1A }:S � s� I��+ �V} � S''�” 9I i �i Iti. '•lS `Iiii12-1'' +' ''c_, .in "ik_'1ir lNsf kil�x V7r7',I � r e�Y sir �;,& , r0[..11i.'0'4,! -2 4!1" -- .ka •.. a ,i L F,l�alll�L11,h r r► .li 'V�/,111ev�ti►�a� V<allc`':Ha�4 �rall '''',.•..•�►'�a� :��ra11e�L ni,,, ;pv.wi� g .1\al! :y3'+�•rlll �}�r„iv '` I pt,14.-Y -IIPii ={' - '-' Ia "?'�` r• r�� d ir1 r, ,fit 41,11;n,.j 1-1 ..{..(gii , f f5" 111 =.tip;- lap ,14.-'AJt''7•i'II-Lit.) litir NritrIRJ„ II. 1 Lc I' {q `sgsg�T1 r� r14 CtkN s Frl ��'°•� 'v 9f If , ■ �f :•"'- '1 I, -" :w . �-' � + ,` ..-1 pf' y��'.��lDlj� "ej l-: F a � a1 . r �J I�i11. .. =i: '` I `+ _i .' .alr.�i ' ;i 1 =�.2� • k "L:•.;;:�:{.I:._ pL' s �B1k' ii[':,� ,�.� i'. 11�.;fi,,,. '. . .I +.~yffyC91+} ,J_.5,_• 'f V.-Ai�,_,s_',, '�+r-+7�'i. '� I `�•� L_ d�S_• _- �� I1a1! •L. .-''.•; .__ . S`.011Dl'. ',L _1ti;i!.: i1i an $, ZSLHiyI! Y* : f�{II[�it FYOIi€+-: r .- iTr49�1�1JF.,J' ....•.-.L....,__I � ; t ,1. ,,.1 ryi ,1 a,l',. � rf',.`'s'-- '. 1-- 'Ft 1l r K• M'NAE:11[r f'� +.. T; - oS {f '1y1'DI Y 1..r, :l f r., •'I,.r.�1 4 1-.0111,•.'1.1a r - w'f� G�'1 ,•,...,..,, I '•�� CO]riY q;r.-v!•-•74 �pn ,s � . #@� k}'I'', ,�JrJ'1001:-1..,•rrAS 1.,'Irani ' h�{ l J 1dr 1s• .••• +- . .1• 11 A-0: 'g.# 10 I 1 l 1[[Y' '•'3 '}� 1 ? 41 F1 r rr._,;k. •* ! . -- I'aur, �'iT Si7110 + 1 1! sipDlr![.dQQ' •yti. +, I 1• • '1.•,. +I]'� 1• ,� , ,..,_-7•!. � � - --{y� �LI�.V• L- I.. „', 1 ffi.�ilICILIi I.`;1.'It _ ;•'•'.. ry ,'°} � E' L.. k'. ' d ., >p� i14.1I111L�r'.I •''--. ' 4,,,..; 1 rti 6�'i .. r , y�7 ? - ■I.�•° _•1 *'•••.1'lis - "i , ' _ ' 1 4 1r s 4t1 L1!.t .'� �x }, y1pf,.k OJ,P.-' .I ' .Q?-'�!r' %'--`T :+- '` `}r - ' _II'll i - a1111',My'• � F sl ' ! �L • �!gg,IL-n *°s: .i.' �u 17.•.; .'.1•...- • -• , ti �C ' r�Y I�- Dili K ,I `mac ! � 1' �� i: -[ r 7 #' 4,110/,',e,(, L..75-..1:::,;4Ii ' I , ..� .'- i-1: '1_>;n• C i + _,./li.:„ti L`, s:�.y " .I••1'&'U`' • 6 ss']]L'. 'ue—�..4�ii'k F11~ `�Y l: ppr:,,,,r , [LR [I.._ __ �# �!- - ..•• ,?-•. v _:u•et r.--t,' ,,—, t,,,,rube ': �.,. .{� ,11. r _ti '�� .�" apt• • } r'_4. C`nllflBC l :lSfi{l'l [lilr:tl i;ii[1 ,. I ' t � :. + L.L. r I.. •r 1%'=:. 6l'� ECPA-01-10 I �1 1 1x ', • �-_ i — 1-- �' 91 ►t,!fin ; 3q? �l• �II• �., i I. i' ;VII,� C :1 •• ,' 1.>/:7.•+ rt•#1 i 1 .:1f lii - �~ — ti 1 i �I ., . y' �--5 1• ,r I' -7JZ' kw. _ ?P7.J � f: R - f1L1 ,r � • f k ✓• } tie .+.._ 4, �. /� ,`k , I �.�s 1 ,'L i,1� t fsi i ..� -.' _ , ;.'1*; Er 7124 , .11. r' r , �i �l a• i�., ;,..',', - ';1i..l$,. €I t1t� :a fi -_ W'` I - I r • -- .r x }j • d't7l �-;611t1 D ,• 1'l■i�Cp .I'- 11 :I,�) I 40^_: ■ I !.. .1.-:. .`,;• .-1 I , !'• pI+�'1 7.I �'1JJ ^'' {� { r ZR + LLis,lp ,[ L ..!.• j I �� ,} �� r... i t:i • .• ! -'yii viii i4X ; z::f 1 1 k ,y `nf i7%9 61,!1• '�.r}-R r7 L�h ' ��. x" 3fJ e t °� "� � ±� p!�'t . 1 .+ � ��Vi'ti:sl:•, •1 1 � lei ., 1i1- '-• .ji. 1 / I`,��n . ro. -S �. >_ n. cS-t• _1G 1 '7 '�.'�' L- 'y r�f:4 Diii ' ' f 24:i 1-• E l+l1 I . "rit�n• • r9.tiL . api. igir Id i'�.`- "5 '4143':_+ 2.., ' '' [� _ VAlli i_ 14:4tli '_,I"!.! 1.1J.- 0 ,:°� 11 � � •�._,�' I o 'j wit^' s:h L• „ q I _ a -Il i : - , �. -. 1, - F_'` �j gliw. `G.`T V,-��I€�e_,.ejy�.1Cr,�'y' '�' M#n �I�}i �!. �fr,4 � � 4� u�rf4i�lt'� i � �,r• J 1 1 'C.5..,... .I▪ 1 ''. — i ' Mi tli- .- U-1 e• _ , ,� , r ;3'' Ifo. .,;! ; r�1 dF j, 1 d 1`, Iw9J,�`�`sS r`�►°7 S �( �} �l F? 3Anita; •r i'4y :]' V. ' .74- X31 ►Ip�"6[!I1c4'' :1`.:4;-' �,i. P`'[`tr �F,I~P�v��,il�ll�Ykl�}�i�:'.',l5li- �13, ',I o . , f ,.I? {� �'''�'�� •P M, '�,[�"•�ar!I ( ,LI.E l I'jl'_- '�f - ,r:Il��t� ��'.i4� C J fy d�yl ,`hie s r,e �,I:`,CC�,.. ,�`�3" 'I.:4 __ f I�r" �z7 t ' .E>i +� .g1 i "RIPv-r4 �l :7 "40?';4-in•j 1"1..dr'� ' •{1., 1 4,..r it� L`" i-f'o,I,i .' A ii�� y!! ,d1.Jk�r1 I tr. 'y � if kt'ij 1.7 hi :. +7,'tlLp__?'I;r v :,� ,,k17't'lt 1 ,L rs .,. Ir1 } i• 'Y,r�`'O��11'iy� 't �,:-{ , ,r .^1I �f''3 '-�'i'•:A. I� v '". L� i'. .„--,,pi, �'1rr: air -!. 4,7 h I-,i 1 '• �.#,�n :tip- ,' 1� -.,.±�'-I; cJ FA :+: , �-•� .. s `•'?1' ► to,€' -, ,L,,, 1I1.'d�►. ilk. i� r+, r1 li:i_ ,- �. 1a' t+.d[ i '.fain J66i ,Lr- � �4ri 'Y,4R1era3f[t]! ' 1 1 lf.iij. .---, .iF,,1 op ��5'y�{�Y' �6`I'?'6D'...-.( �*'1i��/,'(�1r�{ 'I '�f 11 IL ,. . rt 1'�1 J[ €•i0 I JAL �.!r+1t 1' r��CF,1 :�l 2.,"*1f.: "LYE II_ }F 11".1•14L II 51 A: ri"/si--1: i'l�tl1,l 91"A' �1.,1gv--it l_ fl, T iYak ' I'1. fn ..a1 �t r ,f S`+! !•``3r�.� 1 „_� -`,.� ry�6q l42r11 1L.L�'�. �I11.. 1 t1t - ■B-4 t q S It J al..-1 Y►,'. h.L ++ .7_ . ',4-,r.:,,,•' Qqi , L` • +1. P-�:D,- •l ~1,it s af� Cf },,: C F,"„••;,.... 'rJ I * c',L",�.`g >r Y �''a!'= [J ' 0w..C, Lai•�.�f Fka ,:. #3.1 r 1 'I N 1. n1 I pi.„.'.i'ai_ 1� v E.— ;` . Eclk� l �, �(( ti p` e,�1 .j t . `y x •12E•4.i Al,�5+:�.r�l� ��+•,�.c71 ,i71�II�IS,;�I'�: � ��lp �Ei�9��Le',_f�°.+.S + �k�f�i�'��lw�'�' :`� 1 �:d k=a[�L��ry?'c�_Ghl f�+l il��ui��I'�#��:,'rol�f ff�`4�1�i.1"yt #�,�Y'�Ll i:�•,' ,II l_ i., � :, ��LiCi'f �rf� e 7� b��., �-11.,,.er1 , -Ij �. ii �:11.5 �„ t A3�'u `I`'.7 7_! Y'L] ali,._;11�J4 *4bVr�[,r' 3 �� 7 � , �!(5kp��yn ��{� -. � E�� L� � ��{- {�(�•{,7� , f�[�� w � :_��:}. w„ � ��_f1 �:"r-±,;�� _ .. � �- -- .-� .`•J €?•-4- [ -.+t'p,� it i10tf xl I�j,-��°`�r=.z 'f . } *I-1Ja �}1:ri ,,.,.l r Y� r_W,. .. .1:L....!It.t.r..,�`, GL !3„� . 1. -. ,.} - ,k--..--5• '•C .�f'_l� •,..,„1,. .,..:I L:' Gi! 9�iv_IL11'4`I''a .. .1 1'41ni 0.t10-5..'"Z'��r � i....i,.. 84..E ici U a 1 i ,"`r1 r �. ,1i-�*1 r �L;_,t7� '� 5 pfll { ! ;] w f{ � �II t 1 l f4 1 :rl �{Iif��.� I'„kr;l fi' ,kti�iilfr J��ur.,?7 }� i '{]BI}l=1 ',1! 1 {Lf { i � r aT �€ �i'J_ iiY`Atp J ' 1' , .{ _ s r,e+�,?ioi it .•R i t plriti F ttg1 +�i,``sm,A. F'j ��r L'.1:� '1: �°p'1L11i' ,•i r IrLll _ Mh 1+ ft r . '•I i1 5,-'•it,Vt111"1 "•a° ' �1Pis_ .I'Q:. -,; 11`, L ', .�i : Ir:r ' t ,��3., !1.4 - �:`'t • _ Yfl °▪�,A �11i t1,+��txi t'1 � ;,�� Ei.w„Lk� : '_` a.; � ,l`a,,s'=. {..-:s.._ _ 1f? ECPA-01-10 Request: Chauge the Comprehensive Plan neap designation City of Spokane Valley from CCT to MUA; subsequent Zoning change Community Development Department from CCT to MUA. } I 1 Exhibit 6: Vicinity Map 0 LiiitikinT r u''' '� [lt[l■[l■ - - ------ I, a on e r15Clninl{� 16�o 'a� n P n I FE T-1 3T ! w^ I I — I'a` II II co , I _ Br adway ∎ J.L-�--I Broadway Er--Broadway--)1 L° ,� Broadway„ i...__ .■ BrURtivri”. _ J I �, �� - J— ElemrriltLr}'- _ u_ pringfield� C7 i —S riIi field• 3 0 , ..SI'T5ugo,id „ 1 , 11 Alki — 1 _� Ii - Alki 3 I all,--CI'I. 'CI - 'a: - •- -� live I I3 S ± 4 I I_ y<�y i Em.!. .i ,E1 A T Val le.- =a. !alleyway IV.all,.yw ly I U -- •C I I I�1 1[ M_ � Nixon _�Alifit -Main.- _ El El Il _ Ii• ^T Main hfaI t NII II. . - 1r ' $- f.a.,. .ar:. .1aIrs a I.1I #'�aV, Lill_ ' l I I J ! 1 I♦ •: llalfoiarrl;utl: _ �ive side P . LA-= Riverside o P i II ■} ,Sliall'oal��i rl:l_ , J i■■ In Sprague _ Sprague i, Sprague PI ia I I C4ou#rt4 Ii:ASCCI F.duc la�rq - - � L ig f ECPA—01-10 — �d 0 ny —� �� Ill f H mr-z-- ■r — � _ - ■ II I 3rd _, I 3 r.asn , kits j - .. ,Ill . , . • a 'Lh -- roll , ..,.t srs 7 f,,„ ,., dtI -� � I ��y li„..:, - _sill lilt L II �� IA 5th 6th = of A 1 E- Gtlr” 61th • •�� _ • _ 5t1i 1 111 111 � _ ' 1 ca l v ki 111111 �� 7th11�111 _ 7ih I_c_, 1 EM . ' L.. ".I , 1 8,, .0,0 .. 88, . . ...11 — s . _ ,/ 1 i z I1�— — _=3 a �� a . I � 9th Atli 4th 9th_ _ lLc_ J it ■■ Mil- Jodi_—_I— 10th � MO —1-othJ 11_ 4 nis.,L'slly - {'{ILLtiY p i f _ 3 4th 11 --I _ =III AY:— -_ 1 ' FITT Fl I Z ECPA-01-10 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map designation City of Spokane Valley from CCT to MUA; subsequent Zoning change Community Development Department from CCT to MUA. Exhibit 7; Transportation Map I i I L L � I _An 5,- Gthsen>lanc Lutheran no 1 .- 'T- . - _ ,,„ 5" i 1 proauway �' 1 ,1= . J_I- �� - • II• �-11 ,Bread„-w , icrnentary III. ' I - in ° Springfield - I= e� ■ •■11- 7 -- Spriogtizld V. m� Springfield A--ui°• 1 - O M� I } Alki Alki A'F•,�II, 1•MI - - -1 St-John Vianney_ - I p - - --I , i 1 ■ 1 -G _Olin"c ■■II� - a N G r - r n 0 1 r i 'alleyway Is I 1— !Nixon C I c• Nixon v FFOT-1(1= II El 71' .. T I1; l _ W• iliiif ' L �3 MM •itcrside a, Ri>erside � gaff,- ,.F i. �IIM r- 7 6 — - a. �, 1 �i FIR: 1]ISTRIC7 9 t ` J I _'� . �� 1 lraene Contract Based Education t ECPA-01-10 — `-- - - - + Iri,iu , 3rd 1,- I iuL.' i. Ill Illpillell , am . .:> II = 1,11 1 /Sib _ i.,,• `o `.I Y Irmo se, ■I 111111.E a Ii , ii•_]1 6t 1� c 1 611, Iii.! •63h 631, _ 1[•• i� �� r _z , 6111_211 • • •OI . — MINN A 1 Legend J-11 .11I■l 11111■iMi la, Current Classification - —. - Am j I l 1 I�� r I - - Stale or Federal ' -- Principal Arterial 4 '-�Minor Arterial ii- EL- Collector _ 9ih _ - - - Proposed Principal Arterial o F — 1 I) Proposed Minor Arterial o _ _ 10th [. I '• 101h ■III 1 II 11 1 Proposed Collector k Nliv enteIri I k I I lh �� 111 x. i■1„I.lth NISI Ll Ih_ J`i • 11th ininnTAMEMMI rmr1� 1i LCPA-01-10 1 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map designation City of Spokane Valley from CCT to MUA; subsequent Zoning change Community Development Department I from CCT to WA. 1 • H, JAMES MAGNUSON ATTORNEY AT LAW 1250 NORTHWOOD CENTER COURT POST OFFICE BOX 2266 COEUR D'AI_ENE, IDAHO 83816-2268 TELEPHONE (209) 666-1696 FAX(208)668-1700 December 7, 2010 The Honorable Mayor Tom Towey • City of Spokane Valley, Washington 11707 East Sprague Avenue,Suite 106 Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Dear Mayor Towey: • I am writing on behalf of University City, Inc.,an owner of real property in the Spokane Valley. • I atn writing with respect to the City Council's consideration for zoning in the University City Center area. The new zoning adopted should be pre-City Center and pre-Sprague Subarea Plan zoning, The property needs a flexible, commercial zoning to enable redevelopment to increase the tax base and create more jobs, Broad commercial zoning is appropriate and compatible with existing commercial uses, traffic mid arterials in the area, As such,I would urge you to adopt a flexible, broad, commercial zoning to apply to this area going forward, Thank you for your assistance. Very truly yours, II, irS MAGMA N A rney at Law HJM:slb cc; Brenda Grasso!(posit Ion 1) Gary Scilimu els(position 4) Dean Grafos(position 2) Bob McCaslin ositioi 5) Rose Dempsey(position 3) Bill Gotinnaun +sltiol 6) Mike Jackson(City Manager) Kathy McClung(Conununity Development Director) • • City of Spokane Valley 12/09/10 Planning Commission The City Council has been irresponsible and made hasty decisions that have unintended consequences. Special interests have some members making decisions without public input or research. It is quite obvious that some members of this Council do not(10 their homework or even read their packet before a Council Meeting, Making snap decisions to please one citizen or business person really is not acceptable when time results of that decision affect the whole city. Why would ANYONE want to work hard to expand their business if they believe the Spokane Valley City Council is just going to TAKE IT AWAY! The very reason a large majority of the business community supported incorporation of Spokane Valley was the poor planning and unrestricted development by Spokane County. WE DO NOT NEED TO RETURN TO THAT TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT! OUR CITY NEEDS A PLAN FOR THE FUTURE! Some members of the Council say they have a mandate to kill.the Sprague /Appleway Revitalization Plan. I don't believe that, Some Special Interests would like unrestricted development, but I remember that hundreds of citizens participated along with business and property owners in over 70 workshops, public meetings, hearings and Council Meetings to help plan a future for the City of Spokane Valley. The Sprague/Appleway Revitalization plan was the result. Granted, not everyone is pleased with the result, But remember the GOAL. To revitalize Sprague Ave. and Create an Identity for Our City. A City Center and a Vibrant Business Community that every citizen can be proud of. I am sure everyone would agree with these goals, the question is how do we achieve them. The responsibility of the Planning Commission is to represent all the citizens and have a plan for the future of the City. Over the last 7 years the City has spent approximately 1,2 million dollars in planning to develop SARP. It would be irresponsible for the Planning Commission to waste 7 years of work and over a million dollars in tax payer money by proposing to abandon the City Center Zone. A plan is important. Without one,businesses are unsure of the future and reluctant to invest hi our city. SARP is not perfect and needs changes, but it is a roadmap to the future,please do not let it be destroyed. Involve the citizens and business community to revise it if necessary,but keep our vision of the future alive, Richard C,l3ehm 9405 E.Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley,WA. 99206 • Karen Kendall • From I Sue Passmore on behalf of mayor/counclimembers Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 7;49 AM To: City Council; Mike Jackson; Kathy McClung; Scott Kuhta Cc; Karen Kendall - Subject: ' FW: City hall site vs. used car lot From;Joan nolan fmailto:joan1422 @msn.comj Sent; Wednesday, December 08, 2010 8:20 PM To: mayor/ counclimembers Subject: EW: City hall site vs, used car lot We are responding to the ad In the newspaper regarding Philip Rudy's request to place the city hail on 8 acres now owned by the Pring Corporation. We are adamantly opposed to changing the one way Sprague Avenue back to a two way street to accommodate this endeavor, We have lived here 42 years and the one way corridor is the best thing that has happened to help the flow of Increased traffic, An area better suited for the city hall is In a "park like" setting near - Mlrabeau Park, There are many used car lots in the proximity of Pring's property, another one would be well suited to the area, city hall would not. NO TWO WAY- LEAVE IT AS IS - PLEASE Jim and Joan Nolan 1422 South Bowdlsh Rd. Spokane Valley, WA 99206 i • Dean . . ...... , ._. ,._ ...... . . - - : :..._. :. - - r . . ... . ... . . na Griffith • From: Kathy McClung Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 7:41 AM - To: Deanna Griffith . Subject: FW: City hall site vs. used car lot From: Sue Passmore on behalf of mayor/councilmembers Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 7:40:'16 AM To: City Council; Mike Jackson; Kathy McClung; Scott Kuhta Cc: Karen Kendall Subject: FW: City hall site vs. used car lot Auto forwarded by a Rule From:Joan nolan fmailto:joan1422Cc�msn.coml Sent: Wednesday, December 08,2010 8:20 PM To: mayor/ councilmembers Subject: FW: City hall site vs. used car lot We are responding to the ad in the newspaper regarding Philip Rudy's request to place the city hail on 8 acres now owned by the Pring Corporation. We are adamantly opposed to changing the one way Sprague Avenue back to a two way street to accommodate this endeavor. We have lived here 42 years and the one way corridor is the best thing that has happened to help the flow of increased traffic. An area better suited for the city hall is in a "park like" setting near Mirabeau Park. There are many used car lots in the proximity of Pring's property, another one would be well suited to the area, city hall would not. NO TWO WAY- LEAVE 1T AS TS " PLEASE Jim and Joan Nolan 1422 South Bowdlsh Rd. Spokane Valley, WA 99206 • i • • • Karen Kendall • From: Scott Kuhta • i • • Sent: . Wednesday, December 08, 2010 2:40 PM To: Karen Kendall • Subject: FW: Sprague Avenue and City Hall Site • Attachments: Clearwater Survey Final Report,doc FYI Scott Kuhta, AICP, Planning Manager City of Spokane Valley • (509) 720-5334 skuhta @spokanevalley.org www.spokanevalley.org -----Original Message- - From: Sue Passmore Sent; Monday, December 06, 2010 11:52 AM To: City Council; Mike Jackson; Kathy McClung; Scott Kuhta Subject: Fbi: Sprague Avenue and City Hall Site Original Message Front: Bill Gothmann Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 11:35 AM .To: danvollmer @icehouse,net Cc: Sue Passmore Subject: RE: Sprague Avenue and. City Hall Site Good Morning: I Thank you for taking the time to contact us. I have been out of town and am just now getting around to email correspondence. A couple of points. The land under consideration is already adjacent to a park, Balfour Park. The survey was done by Clearwater Resources in Boise Idaho. I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of their survey, It was a scientifically accurate survey. I have attached it for your perusal. 52% preferred U-City as City Center. Cooling in second was Marabeau with a distant 18%. I would suggest that it is time to do another survey to see what citizens think. One of the methods of -financing a city hall is through a leaseback arrangement, as you indicated. There are other ways, also. The word, "city center" has a multitude of meanings. To me, it means a high density group of businesses that provide synergy in their service to the community. A public building could or could not be a part of it. As for the one-way vs two-way, I am convinced that one way streets help commuters but hurt small businesses. The evidence I have seen is overwhelming. There are, of course, many businesses that can thrive if they have access to both directions of the one-way street. Automobilie sales is a notable example. Winco is another example. This does not address what we should do as a city, however. • 1 • As to the extension of Appleway, one approach is to wait until the traffic along Sprague east ' o-rUniversity is. sufficient to warrant another street. " a want to see some evidence before we spend city matching funds on such a street. (By the way, those matching funds come from Real Estate Excise Taxes, and not property taxes.) These are not easy issues. There are pros and cons to everything we do with public money. We need added discussion as a community to arrive at an acceptable solution. I appreciate the input, however. Sincerely, Bill Gothmann Councilmember • From: Sue Passmore On Behalf .Of mayor/ councilmembers Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 4:15 PM To: City Council; Mike Jackson; Kathy McClung Subject: FW: Sprague Avenue and City Hall Site Original Message From: danvollter @icehouse.net Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 4:16 PM - To: mayor/ councilmembers; plrudy @sbcglobal.net Subject: Sprague Avenue and City Hall Site We are writing concerning Philip Rudy's paid political ad in the Spokesman Review on 11/25/2010. The size of the parcel that he is referring to is only eight acres.This is hardly enough for an adequate park, let alone city hall, and leave room for future expansions such as library, courthouse, city center,etc., which is what a "modern " City Center should include. Mr. Rudy also seems to like to refer to a survey that was taken in 2004, where a slight majority of 52% has been represented as "the will of the people". First off, given the reputation of those people who made the survey in the first place, I highly question. the results. No one in my neighborhood was surveyed and I doubt that anyone who didn't live in the immediate area was surveyed. This survey is now 6 six old and many changes have happened in our .city since then, including, by the will of the people, an entire change of City Council, which was one of the few changes for the better that has happened since incorporation. As for the Pring Corporation being willing to build a City Hall, I'm sure that they could build a nice building to lease, but it wouldn't be the building that we would want to build for ourselves. One of the long term goals of the city should be to own and operate its.own facilities. Regarding the Two Way All The Way philosophy, the project is only half finished. It's intended purpose was to traverse the entire city. Even a dentist wouldn't want the outcome of his procedure judged when he has only completed half of the job. The way forward would be to leave it as it is and complete the project as designed when the County used our tax money to have a design made and plans set in place. If it wasn't for incorporation, this job would have been finished a long time ago and people would be adjusted to it and businesses would be thriving as they do on all couplets in a city, as evidenced by the Division/Ruby couplet in 2 Spokane.- Have we all forgotten that two people gave their lives in the confusion of getting - used to having the two way couplet in place? • Now'.many more will die 'in the confusion of returning it back'to two way? Finish'. the project, then judge it. If you must have a City Center, it should be a modern facility close to upscale shopping, fine restaurants, hotel and motel accommodations, theaters, free parking, open landscape and close proximity to parks and recreational facilities. The old Opportunity area offers none of these amenities. Mirabeau Park area and the proximity to the Valley Mall is the obvious choice, but only when we can afford it Whatever the Council decides to do, keep in mind that city planning is a concept that by its very design is expected to change. To force future expansion and development will never be in the best interest of the citizens. If the people in Opportunity want their own city, let them incorporate into the City of Opportunity and they can then do anything they want with the old area. . Please listen to all the people, not just the few who are set on revitalizing that old part of the valley, look to the new. Dan and Marilyn Vollmer 3 Deanna Griffith. .. - - - From: • ' Kathy McClung ' • Sent: Monday, November 29,2010 4:18 PM - To: Deanna Griffith Subject: FW: Sprague Avenue and City Hall Slte From: Sue Passmore on behalf of mayor/ councilmembers Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 4:15:56 PM To: City Council; Mike Jackson; Kathy McClung Subject: FW: Sprague Avenue and City Hall Site Auto forwarded by a Rule Original Message From: Dan Vollmer [maiito:danvoiimer@icehouse,netl Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 4:16 PM 'To: mayor/ councilmembers; plrudy@sbcglobal,nei; -Subject: Sprague Avenue and City Hall Site • We are writing concerning Philip Rudy's paid political ad In the Spokesman Review on 11/25/2010. The size of the parcel that,he is referring to is only eight acres,This Is hardly enough for an adequate park, let alone city hall, and leave room for future expansions such as library, courthouse, city center,etc., which Is what a "modern " City Center should include. Mr. Rudy also seems to like to refer to a survey that was taken In 2004, where a slight majority of 52% has been represented as "the will of the people". First off, given the reputation of those people who made the survey in the first place, I highly question the results. No one In my neighborhood was surveyed and I do_ubt that anyone who didn't live in the Immediate area was surveyed. This survey Is now 6 six old and many changes have happened In our city since then, including, by the will of the people, an entire change of City Council, which was one of the few changes for the better that has happened since incorporation, As for the Pring Corporation being willing to build a City Hall, I'm sure that they could build a nice building to lease, but it wouldn't be the building that we would want to build for ourselves. One of the long term goals of the City should be to own and operate its own facilities, Regarding the Two Way All The Way philosophy, the project is only half finished, It's intended purpose was to traverse the entire city. Even a dentist wouldn't want the outcu1iie of his procedure judged when he has . - only'completed half of the job. The way forward would be to leave it as it is and complete the. project as designed when the County used our tax . money to have a design made and plans set In place. If It wasn't for incorporation, this job would have been finished a long time ago and people would be adjusted to it and businesses would be thriving as they do on all couplets In a city, as evidenced by the Division/Ruby couplet in Spokane, Have we all forgotten that two people gave their lives in the confusion of getting used to having the two way couplet in place? How many more will die in the confusion of returning it back to two way? Finish the project, then judge it. If you must have a City Center, It should be a modern facility close to upscale shopping, fine restaurants, hotel and motel accommodations, theaters, free parking, open landscape and close proximity to parks and recreational facilities. The old Opportunity area offers none of these amenities. Mirabeau Park area and the proximity to the Valley Mall is the obvious choice, but only when we can afford it, Whatever the Council decides to do, keep In mind that city planning is a concept that by its very design is expected to change. To force future expansion and development will never be In the best Interest of the citizens. 'If the people in Opportunity want their own city, let them Incorporate into the City of Opportunity and they can then do anything they want with the old area. Please listen to all the people, not just the few who are set on revitalizing that old part of the valley, look to the new Dan and Marilyn Vollmer • 2 • Deanna Griffith From: Kathy McClung Sent: 'Monday, November 29,2010 10:64 AM To: Deanna Griffith Subject: FW: City Hall on empty 8 acres From: Mike Jackson Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 10:53:44 AM To; Kathy McClung Subject: FW: City Hall on empty 8 acres Auto forwarded by a Rule • From: Chris Thompson On Behalf Of City Hall Sent; Monday, November 29, 2010 8:47 AM To: City Council A-Cc:•Mike Jackson; Sue Passmore; Carolbelle Branch • Subject: FW: City Hall on empty 8 acres Chris Thompson City of Spokane Valley 11707 C.Sprague Ave„ Ste. 108 Spokane Valley, 99208 Direct: (509) 720-5110 • Fax:(509) 921-1008 cthompson{a,spokanevalley.orq Web:www.spokanevalley.orq Unsubscribe: This email Is provided as an informational service to those Interested in staying informed on City of Spokane Valley programs, projects and issues. if you no longer prefer to receive these emails, please email cthompsonc sookanevalley.orq and type"Unsubscribe""in the subject line, Or call Chris at 720-5110. From: Meg Krelner fmallto:megkrein(@yahoo.coml Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2010 2:20 PM To: City Hall Subject: City Hall on empty 8 acres To : The Mayor and the Spokane City Council : • Please consider building city hall on the 8 acre Pring Corporation property . A park like setting there would enhance the little Balfour park next door, which is used a great deal by the surrounding neighborhood . We go there almost daily to walk our little dog and almost every time we do there are people are using that park. In fact we spoke with the park maintenance 1 woman and she told uk„, out of all the parks she maintains, Balfour was the most used. I have lived in the Valley for over 20 years and have 'always thought the adjacent land should be used to expand' the park so that the Valley would have a nice "central" park in the middle of our city. A car lot is NOT the choice of the people--we need more parks (or park like settings) ; we do not need more car lots as Sprague is already filled with them--a couple I think are even empty at the moment so there is plenty of space for a car lot elsewhere . I would love it if the Balfour park could be expanded, but if that is not possible then the next best alternative would be to build a city hall with a park like setting . Please consider your choice carefully and think of the long term future of our city . Thank you . Meg Kreiner 12005 E 5th Ave. Spokane Valley, WA 99206 921-6859 2 Deanna Griffith From: Kathy McClung Sent: ' Monday, November 29, 2010 8:55 AM To: Deanna Griffith Subject: FW: City Hall on empty 8 acres From; Sue Passmore Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8:54:23 AM To: City Council; Mike Jackson; Kathy McClung Subject: FW: City Hall on empty 8 acres Auto forwarded by a Rule From: Chris Thompson On Behalf Of City Hall Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8147 AM To: City Council - Cc: Mike Jackson; Sue Passmore; Carolbelle Branch Subject: FW: City Hall on empty 8 acres Chris Thompson City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Ave., Ste. 106 Spokane Valley, 99206 Direct: (509) 720-5110 Fax: (609)921-1008 cthompson(a.spokanevallev.orc Web: www.sookanevalley.ora Unsubscribe: This email is provided as an informational service to those Interested In staying informed on City of Spokane Valley programs, projects and issues, If you no longer prefer to receive these emails, please email cthompson(a)si okanevaiiev,orq and type"Unsubscribe"in the subject Iine. Or call Chris at 720-5110, From: Meg Krelner jrnallto:megkrein©yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2010 2:20 PM To: City Hall Subject: City Hall on empty 8 acres To : The Mayor and the Spokane City Council : Please consider building city hall on the 8 acre Prang Corporation property . A park like setting there would enhance the little Balfour park next door, which is used a great deal by the surrounding neighborhood . We go there almost daily to walk our little dog and almost every time we do there are people are using that park. In fact we spoke with the park maintenance woman and she told us out of all the parks she maintains, Balfour was the most used. I have lived in the Valley for over 20 years and have alLdys thought the adjacent land should be used to expand the park so that the Valley would have a nice "-central" park in the middle .of 'our city . ' A car lot is .NOT the choice of the people--we need more parks (or park like settings) ; we do not need more car lots as Sprague is already filled with them--a couple T think are even empty at the moment so there is plenty of space for a car lot elsewhere . I would love it if the Balfour park could be 'expanded, but if that is not possible then the next best alternative would be to build a city hall with a park like setting . Please consider your choice carefully, and think of the long term future of our city . Thank you . Meg Kreiner 12005 E 5th Ave . Spokane Valley, WA 99206 921-6859 2 ( . Deanna Griffith From: Kathy McClung Sent: Monday, November 20, 2010 8:07 AM To: Deanna Griffith Subject: FW: Use of the Pring Corporation Property From: Sue Passmore on behalf of mayor/councilmembers Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8:06:63 AM To: City Council; Mike Jackson; Kathy McClung Subject: FW: Use of the Pring Corporation Property Auto forwarded by a Rule • From; chetandbol nieVcomcast,net fniailto:chetandbonnieC comcast,net1 Sent=Thursday, November 25, 2010 8:17 AM To: mayor/ councilmembers Subject; Use of the Pring Corporation Property It is time for the leaders of the City of Spokane Valley to decide whether they wish the City of Spokane Valley to develop into the fine city it can be or let its best asset continue to deteriorate. It is time to opt for establishing a City Center in the logical place for such a development. Opt now for strong public use of the Pring Corporation Property rather than to let it become another Eyesore on Sprague.. I strongly urge you to refuse the proposed zone change and retain the option to make that location the center of a progressive and beautiful city. Chester Nelson 18719 Fait-view et Spokane Valley, WA 99027 509-926-2083 1 Deanna Griffith • From: Kathy McClung Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8:07 AM To: Deanna Griffith Subject: FW: Support the Pring Corporation Property From; Sue Passmore on behalf of mayor/councllmembers Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8:06:39 AM To: City Council; Mike Jackson; Kathy McClung Subject: FW: Support the Pring Corporation Property Auto forwarded by a Rule From: Bruce Robinson{malito:rbrucerobinson©gmall,coml Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2010. 10:10 AM To: mayor/ councilmembers Subject: Support the Pring Corporation Property To Whom It May Concern, We have an opportunity to make a statement as a city to build a user friendly,efficient and class facility that as citizens of Spokane Valley we can be proud of. The City Hall is the center point of any city's proclamation that we are In fact a smart, forward thinking city that attracts a positive business and community climate with a first class City Hall In an area that would not add yet another car lot but a park like setting that promotes a centralized theme of class and beauty. t support the purchase and use of the Pring property for a City Hall we can all hang our hat on and feel proud of this city as a true city. Bruce Robinson cell; 509-879-7899 E-mall: rbrucerobinson @gmall,com 1 Deanna Griffith • From: Kathy McClung Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8:07 AM To: Deanna Griffith Subject: FW: city hall vs car lot From: Sue Passmore on behalf of mayor/councilmembers Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8:06:25 AM To: City Council; Mike Jackson; Kathy McClung Subject: FW: city hall vs car lot Auto forwarded by a Rule ' • From: Jeff Brooks rmallto:hollywood6870hotmall.com] Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2010 11:16 AM To: mayor/ councilmembers Subject: city hall vs car lot Dear Mayor and city council members, When will the city of Spokane Valley develope Its own Identity? Currently it appears to be the city of car lots and strip mails. Why would the idea of adding another huge used car lot even be considered when the property directly North of i_1- City would serve perfectly as a city center with a city hall building as the anchor.This community is floundering with no direction or central gathering place.The city of Liberty Lake has a beautiful core park area that people in the community call their own and they identify as their home. We have nothing like that here. Just uncontrolled building and poorly kept structures with gravel car lots, We can do better. Please DO NOT allow an "emergency zone change" as neither of the parties are in distress and no "emergency" exists. Purchase the land for the city and design a beautiful city hall with a park that could be "our" city identity, Sincerely, Jeff Brooks PT 4813 S. Low Way Ct Spokane Valliey, 99206 509-370-0645 Deanna Griffith i From:. Kathy McClung • Sent:' Monday, November 29, 2010 8:07 AM • To: Deanna Griffith Subject: FW: City Hall Slte vs. Used Car Lot From: Sue Passmore on behalf of mayor/councllmembers Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8:06:11 AM To: City Council; Mike Jackson; Kathy McClung Subject: FW: City Hall Site vs. Used Car Lot Auto forwarded by a Rule From: Sabrina Gonder f niallto:gonderfamllyWomcast.net1 Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2010 11:48 AM To: mayor/counclimembers • Subject: City Hall Site vs. Used Car Lot My husband and I would both prefer the City Hall of the Spokane Valley to be located at the proposed site in the park like setting over a car lot of any kind. The City of the Spokane Valley desperately needs a city center and currently seems lost between the City of Spokane and the City of Liberty Lake. With all the available commercial space and land, why doesn't the car lot look for another location? We have Ilved, worked and supported the Spokane Valley our entire lives and recognize the value a properly located city center can provide. Sincerely, Sabrina Gonder Thomas Gonder . Deanna Griffith From: • Kathy McClung Sent: Monday, November 20, 2010 8:06 AM To: Deanna Griffith Subject: FW: (no subject) • From: Sue Passmore on behalf of mayor/councllmembers Sent: Monday, November 29, 2010 8:05;54 AM To: City Council; Mike Jackson; Kathy McClung Subject: FW: (no subject) Auto forwarded by a Rule From: TIMO1535aol,com [mailto:TIMO1535 @aol.com] Sent Thursday, November 25, 2010 1:37 PM To: mayor/councilmembers Subject: (no subject) HI City Council members, my name is Tim Hatton . I have lived in the Spokane area for most of my life .1 have been a Valley resident for the past 18 years. Is The City of the Spokane Valley here to stay ?If yes then we need to step In the right direction and Not Build anymore Car Lots/Dealerships.We do not need anymore of them. Don't you think we have enough of them ? Build a New City Hail and a nice green park area for all of us citizens, not another car lot. There are plenty of other property's for a car lot, Lets revitalize the City of Spokane Valley, Make It a better city to Live in .Plant some trees along the back of the old u-city ,along Appleyway. Drive by the new Valley Mall , down Indiana street, Mtrabeua Park Area ,It looks really nice with all the trees and green areas,That also includes Sprague Avenue ,where the green spaces have been made. Lets Go Green Not another Black Parking Lot .Thank You Tim Hatton 1 Spokane Valley Planning Commission DRAFT Minutes Council Chambers — City Hall, 11707 E. Sprague Ave. December 9, 2010 I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Carroll called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance III. ROLL CALL Commissioners Carroll, Eggleston, Hall, Mann, Sands, Sharpe and Woodard were present. . Staff attending the meeting: Kathy McClung, Community Development Director; Scott Kuhta, Planner Manager; Cary Driskell, Acting City Attorney; Lori Barlow, Associate Planner; Karen Kendall, Assistant Planner; Gary Schimmels, Deputy Mayor; Dean Grafos, Counciltnember; Brenda Grasse', Councilmember; Deanna Griffith, Administrative Assistant IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Sands made a motion which was seconded and unanimously approved to accept the December 9, 2010 agenda as presented. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES There were no minutes to approve. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. VII. COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Woodard reported he had attended the City Council meetings. Commissioner Carroll stated that he had met with a citizen in regard to an upcoming proposed code amendment on adult retail use. VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Director McClung stated that during the next council meeting the Mayor would be announcing the new Planning Commission members. The director also stated that this would be Commissioner Eggleston and Sharpe's last meeting and thanked them for their service. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS A. New Business: Study Session — Code Amendment CTA-D9-10, Adult Retail Use Establishment Associate Planner Lori Barlow made a presentation to the Commission regarding the proposed code amendment to modify the definition of Adult Retail Use Establishment. Ms. Barlow explained the difference between an Adult Entertainment establishment and an Adult Retail Use Establishment. An Adult Entertainment Establishment example would be Deja Vn, they are required to follow different regulations and allows for viewing movies, arcades and live entertainment. These types of 12-09-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 1 of 12 establishments are governed by the zoning code Chapter 19.80 and must be licensed according to Chapter 5.10, Adult Entertainment Establishments. An Adult Retail Use Establishment example would be Castle Superstore, where themed merchandise is for sale or rental. Adult Retail Use Establishments are governed by the zoning code, Title 19.80. The current definition is being proposed to be amended as follows - Adult retail use establishment: A retail use establishment which, for money or any other form of consideration, devotes a significant or substantial portion of stock in trade, to the sale, exchange, rental, loan, trade, or transferring, er teievwing of adult-oriented merchandise. The.relail use i t,3hlislinetit 3nay permit patrons to view the adult-oriented merchandise for wssiblc Purchase or rental. but such olr- aremisesAe ing_ a Il, l hL in e7cc ange Ectmo11ey 01 .any otll t_rpransfc n idprittiQ Ms Barlow stated that the issue at hand is that the final phrase in the original definition the viewing of adult-oriented merchandise' is becoming difficult to say it does not allow the viewing of merchandise for sale or rental in an adult retail use establishment, and that you cannot charge money to do so. Both uses are allowed in the same zoning districts, but are regulated differently. The proposed language will remove the incentive to view the movies in the retail use establishments since they cannot charge money to do so. Commissioner Mann asked if an establishment showed a movie for free to get people in the door would that be would be ok? Acting City Attorney, Cary Driskell, stated that to look at the question in a different way: that if Blockbusters or Hastings were to show a movie up on the wall or if an Adult Retail Use Establishment were to do the same we could not tell them "no" because the City cannot differentiate based on the message. The appellate courts have stated that would be unconstitutional, it violates the first amendment regarding freedom of speech. The City has drafted the language this way in the definition in order to protect the first amendment and still restrict viewing in the retail use establishments. We cannot tell them they cannot view something, or that they can't look at the cover, that is considering viewing, and considered part of the decision to purchase or not purchase. Within the constraints of the first amendment and the case law, we can say they can show it, but cannot charge for it. The reason we can enact this regulation is that we have defined the conduct, `viewing of adult themed content for a charge' is adult entertainment. It has licensing requirements, it has different zoning requirements and from that aspect we have drawn the regulation as close as we feel we safely can within in the law. Commissioner Mann asked if the City was attempting to change behavior, in the retail use establishments? Mr. Driskell responded the City Council defined that activity, viewing for a charge, as being adult entertainment. It has been brought to the City's attention that that the "or viewing" can be interpreted in such a way that it allows that behavior to be conducted in a different zone. So this change is to simply identify which establishments this type of behavior will be allowed hi. The goal is to clarify the definition, if the change in behavior would be a consequence of the change of the definition, then that would be something we could not control, Commissioner Sands asked about video media to be separate from other types of media. Would it be possible to define,the media in another way? Mr. Driskell stated he thought that the amendment had been written in a way that is constitutional now and he would rather not rewrite it. However he stated he thought they could go back and look at it a little more closely, but he would have concerns about doing that. Commissioner Carroll asked if the proposed definition had not been tested in the court already, would the City be at risk if we changed it now? Mr. Driskell stated the prior definition had been tested for other challenges but did not believe it had been tested under these grounds so he has no great confidence that it would be upheld for that reason. Currently the City feels it can tighten up the regulation and if it needed to be enforced this regulation could be upheld. This is why staff is currently recommending this change. Commissioner Carroll said that `viewing' had been removed and then added back in to the definition, would it be better to say, not allowed for viewing on site? Mr. Driskell stated he could also look at that option, but would rather not. 12-09-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 12 Commissioner Sharpe asked if this had been an issue or was staff just trying to clean up some items? Mr. Driskell stated it had been in issue. There have been complaints received by the City. Mr. Driskell stated he did not feel that the complaints received by the City were relevant to the Commission's consideration of this amendment. Mr, Driskell stated his opinion was that staff reviewed the issue, made the determination that the definition needed to be refined and are presenting that to the Commissioners for a recommendation. Commissioner Carroll stated he was concerned that we were still allowing viewing when we were hying to stop that. Mr. Driskell stated he did not feel that the City was trying to stop viewing, because there could be a constitutional issue with that. What the City is trying to do is stop the viewing for a charge, which is defined as adult entertainment elsewhere in the municipal code. Staff is attempting to harmonize the two code provisions. Commissioner Sands stated the same type of viewing could endanger staff or the community in those establishments if it is not regulated under the adult entertainment regulations. Mr. Driskell stated he would take a look at this issue and report back to the Commission. Mr. Driskell asked for clarification that the adult retail definition could be further amended to prohibit any viewing of adult video on adult retail zoned places? Commissioner Sands stated that the two places were not regulated the same. In adult entertainment establishments there are rules that regulate where viewing is allowed in certain places, certain circumstances, and protect the staff and community. In an adult retail there are not. Mr. Driskell stated he would look at this. B. New Business: Public Hearing -- Comprehensive Plan Amendment, ECPA-01-10 Removing the City Center designation from the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan. Chair Carroll opened the public hearing at 6:27 p.m. Prior to the presentation, Ms. Kendall stated that written comments had been received from the following individuals: Dan and Marilyn Vollmer, Meg Kreiner, Chester Nelson, Bruce Robinson, Jeff Brooks, Sabrina and Thomas Gender, Tim Hatton, Jim and Joan Nolan, and Richard Behm. Ms. Kendall then summarized the comments regarding the Subarea Plan, the City Center District zone and car lots in the City Center zone. Assistant Planner Karen Kendall made a presentation to the Planning Commission regarding ECPA-01-10. Ms. Kendall began her presentation with the reasons the City Council has stated in declaring an economic emergency for this Comprehensive Plan amendment. An emergency can be declared by a jurisdiction to process an amendment outside of the regular once a year time frame in which the City normally processes Comprehensive Plan amendments, but it does not allow any of the other normal time frames, like noticing, hearings or to be waived. This is the first time the City has declared an emergency to process a Comprehensive Plan amendment. 1. In the last 12 months, since the adoption of the Subarea Plan, the City's revenue forecast has continued to deteriorate. Specifically, sales taxes are projected to decrease by $400,000 from 2010 to 2011, and property taxes by $100,000 from 2010 to 2011. Funds available from the real estate excise tax have decreased from a high of approximately $2.2 million in 2007 and 2008 to approximately $900,000 for 2010 and 2011. 2. Funds for significant private development are not as available and significant failures of large commercial investments within the City have occurred. 3. The economic development anticipated by the Council when the Ordinance adopting the Subarea Plan was passed in June of 2009 has not occurred. 12-09-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 12 4, The restrictions on development within the City Center zone, as well as the design requirements, contemplate significant public investment involving both the purchase of property and construction of a City Hall as well as adjacent infrastructure improvements. The projected 2011 budget does not contemplate the purchase of any property within the City Center zone and funds available for the construction of City Hall are projected to be reduced by $2.2 million to fund other capital projects. 5. Because there is little likelihood that any significant investment will occur by the City, the City Center zone, as currently configured and restricted, creates significant immediate economic hardships for the property owners within that zone. Based upon these facts an emergency exists and an immediate change to the Comprehensive PIan pursuant to the RCW 36.70A.130 (2)(b) set forth above may be appropriate, The Comprehensive Plan amendment proposal is to change the area currently designated as City Center district zone in the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan from City Center to Mixed Use Ave District Zone. Ms. Kendall also reviewed the development standards between the two different zones. Ms. Kendall stated, based on the information provided by the declaration of the emergency by the City Council, the staff recommends approval of this amendment. Commissioner Eggleston asked why staff was recommending approval of this proposal. Ms. Kendall responded that this is a directive from the City Council to proceed with this amendment. Also, based on the current economic condition, and lack of community support to move forward at this time with a City Center, by changing this area to Mixed Use Avenue would provide more flexibility in the development standards. Commissioner Eggleston followed up with another inquiry, wondering if there had been the same amount of time and effort and out pour from the public in recent times to cause this "lack of public support" compared to the hundreds of hours and days, weeks and months of creating the Subarea Plan? Mr. Eggleston stated that from what he could derive it was infinitesimal in comparison. He said the creation of the Subarea Plan is far better put together and thought out than the current public pressure to dismantle it. Mr. Eggleston asked to have someone help him to understand this difference, Mr, Carroll asked if any additional surveys had been done. Ms. Kendall stated that she was not aware of any other surveys. Planning Manager Scott Kuhta stated he would like to address Mr. Eggleston's question, regarding the amount of work that has gone into the creation of the Subarea Plan. Mr. Kuhta stated that since the adoption of the Subarea Plan, a majority of the City Council was newly elected, and they have gone down the path to review the Subarea Plan in great detail. Staff has spent a great deal of time going through each zone, district by district. There was testimony at the City Center zone about the impacts of the uses in that area, of how the current economy is affecting the area. In the long term staff would recommend that the City needs a City Center in this community. However, staff must balance that with the short term concerns that were heard consistently through the process along with the direction of the current City Council. Staff believes at this point and time that the best thing for this community is to have some more flexible zoning in this corridor. Mr. Kuhta stated that hopefully over time staff will be able to revisit the idea of a City Center. Mr. Kuhta said that specifically based on the question of how much time has gone into this amendment, not nearly the time and effort that went into the original analysis for the 12-09-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 12 original recommendation. Mr. Eggleston asked in summary the hours that went into creating the Subarea Plan is far greater that the thought and hours that were put into making this emergency recommendation? Mr. Kuhta responded that would be a fair statement from staff's perspective. Mr. Carroll asked for the expected time of development of the City Center, 10 years or more. Mr. Kuhta responded that would be a good long term projection. Mr. Eggleston asked if the Mixed Use goes into effect and then City Center concept is thrown out the window, and buildings are constructed, what is the average lifetime of a building that is constructed in the City Center area? How long do commercial buildings last? Mr. Kuhta stated it depends on the economics and demand. Mr. Eggleston stated that what Mr. Kuhta said was that the life time of a building standing is decades, 15-50 years. Mr. Kuhta said he believed it depended purely on the demand for that land for a different use. Mr. Woodard asked that if this is amendment is approved, is there anything that would preclude the City from designating a City Center in the future?, somewhere other than at Sprague and University? Ms. Kendall responded that there was nothing that she was aware of A City Center will remain within the City's Comprehensive Plan, to allow the possibility in the future. Mr. Woodard asked to clarify that it did not need to be at Sprague and University, could it be moved to another part of the City? Ms Kendall stated that could be done. Commissioner Sands stated there was a great deal of public input when developing the City Center, is there any talk of putting this idea to a vote? Director McClung stated that would need to be a City Council decision. Commissioner Hall asked staff if they felt they had a truly statistical valid survey on this issue? He also asked if that would be the next most appropriate step. Mr. Hall stated that he would like to know for accuracy what the community wants. Mr. Eggleston stated that in an earlier question the answer was that there has been no survey since the 2004 Clearwater survey. Chair Carroll read the rules for public testimony. Richard Rehm, 9405 E Sprague Ave.: Mr. Behm stated he owns commercial property at the address given, which is in the Mixed Use zone. Mr. Behm stated he wishes his property was in the City Center zone, he believes it would add value to his real estate if he were there. Mr. Behm stated he did not believe this was an emergency, by any stretch of the imagination, not for the reasons given. At the City Center meeting, and he attended each of the Subarea Plan zoning meetings all year long, there were very few criticisms of the zoning problems within the City Center zone. There was no demand at that time for change to Mixed Use. In fact the City Center zone had less comments about the requirements than the other zones. Mr. Behm stated he felt that was very interesting. Mr. Behm stated the Clearwater report was done in 2004 and it is very specific and very well done, Mr. Behm stated that off the top of his head between pages 20 and 30 there are 6 or 7 pages that report the desires of the citizens for an identity for the City of Spokane Valley and a City Center and over whelmingly they chose the University City area. It wasn't specific to University City but University and Sprague. It very well documents the desires of the citizens of the City of Spokane Valley and what they wanted for the future of our City. If indeed the City Council does not want to reply on that, then he stated he thought 12-09-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 12 they should ask Clearwater to update that report to find out what the desires of our citizens are right now. Not to throw it away and say that's not any good. Mr. Behm stated it was very well done and many of the citizens count on that report in their own planning. Mr. Behm stated that only one property owner asked for a zone change in the City Center, on the west side of the City Center zone to build an auto lot. Mr. Behm also stated that during the discussion at the City Council meeting, one council member stated `why don't we just eliminate the whole City Center zone'. Mr. Behm stated that this suggestion was voted on, by the Council, and sent to the Planning Commission with no discussion for public input. Mr. Behm stated he did not feel that was the way the City should operate. Mr. Behm stated he was really, really upset about this. Mr. Behm stated he worked many years and very hard, and that he was involved in practically everything, in creating this City, and that this is not the way to run things. Mr. Behm stated that if `we' want to see what the citizens want, then the Clearwater report should be updated if`we' do not want to rely on it. Karla Kaley, 10516 E Main Ave.: Ms. Kaley stated she and her husband, Richard, own a property management company in Spokane Valley and have owned property in the Spokane Valley for more than eight years. Ms. Kaley stated she and her husband moved to this area deliberately and on purpose with the promise and potential that they saw in this area. She stated they have lived in four western states. Ms. Kaley said she has seen firsthand what can happen when Cities have short sighted, narrow minded planning in our local communities. She said she has watched this city struggle with the shoes that were created, approximately seven years ago. The city serves the needs and colors the futures of 86,000 people and growing. The city is approximately 42% of Spokane. We think we are small, we think we are insignificant, and yet we are 42%the size of Spokane, already, after 7 years. Spokane is the second largest city in Washington, it is 31.6 largest city in the entire Pacific Northwest from a municipality stand point. In 2013, when the Federal Government combines the likely combination of Spokane and the Coeur d'Alene areas for planning, statistics and budget purposes we will create a scenario that could result in the 4tn largest metropolitan area in the United States. What does this mean? This means we will meet the criteria for attracting Fortune 500 companies to this area. And we need to do this right and we have the opportunity to do it now. We talk about the economy, we talk about the things and how they are, this emergency that we have and waiting to do a City Center. The time is right now. There is simply no reason why the City of Spokane Valley cannot be cooperative even competitive with the City of Spokane and Liberty Lake and our neighboring communities and attract these businesses. But you need a plan. And the plan includes the Subarea Plan and that provides a City Center and without a City Center you are not a City. Without a City Center and not being a City you cannot attract businesses and it is that simple. By supporting the emergency zone change before you, you are essentially killing the Subarea Plan and eliminating our chance for a City Center. You have asked the question twice and I've been in both meetings. The answer to your question, does this prevent us from having a City Center in the future is yes. And it is not because it is a zoning problem, or a state regulation or a planning commission issue or even a public issue. It is a practical issue. If you don't provide the space and the planning and the mechanism for doing it, you will have back in-fill, infiltration and the hodge podge that we have right now, with the composite planning that we grew out of the County in the first place to become a City. If you want to continue with the look that we have right now,just do what you are proposing to do to do today or been asked to do by the City Council and support the declining, unappealing properties we have lining our City corridor. The 12-09-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 12 Subarea Plan was three years in the planning, a million bucks. It is one year in the implementation phase. I don't know the last time anybody read this, but I read this a couple of weeks ago. There is some really good stuff in here. You got your million bucks worth. Everything you need to build a cake is right here. You got the ingredients, you got the planning, you got the chemistry, you got the science, you got the technology, maybe you don't like the flavor, maybe you don't like the color of the frosting, ok let's fix that. But you got your money's worth, This is your road map, this is your plan for the City of Spokane Valley's future. Its purpose is sound. Its purpose is to address retail uses and issues that bring in money for our economy. It addresses the appearance and the concerns that investors have for image and ascetics along the corridor and it addresses new development and what it is going to look like. So here is what I would like to propose for you. You have more options than what you have been given by staff, I would like to support part of those. Don't be fooled by the idea that this is an emergency. Ok, don't be fooled. Don't be afraid of the economy. Here's why. Ms. Kaely stated 9 different cases of businesses expanding or growing in and around the area, Trader Joe's, Red Lion Vandervert, The City of Cheney, Spokane Tribe of Indians, Rockwood South Hill expansion, Greenstone projects. They are not here because our City does not have its act together. Not because we have the Subarea Plan, not because of architectural standards that are too onerous, not because we don't like our setbacks or because of signage. We just don't have our act together as a City and we are not doing anything for economic development. I would like to help change that. Here is what I would like to propose. Keep the City Center plan in place but do your modifications. There are lots of parts I don't like either, and I would like to help if I could. But the flaws in this plan are not fatal. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater, and it is not worth throwing a million dollars down the drain. I propose you make this modification using something I have not heard yet or seen yet. A community stakeholder process. I have participated in them before in other states. You get a community group together, you invite them, You have strategic, surgical goals. The purpose of surgical is deliberate finite and focused, You give them two to four months to get their act together and come back viable recommendations and suggestions for changes and you have those stakeholders composed of the public and interested experts. Like experts in architecture might be one group, signs and setbacks could be another group., parking and open spaces another group, economic development another group and the most important that I don't hear anything about. In all of these City Council meetings nobody's doing much that I see. So in closing given the development stage that our city is in, seven years but we are still an infant really, you have a more important job than the City Council does. The most important job we have right now as we are growing and developing our City is to deal with the local land use issues and as the Planning Commission it is your job to assist in determining the highest and best use of that land, to assure that adjacent land uses are compatible, That is part of what the Subarea Plan does, in conjunction with the overall Plan. You can't do this without a reasonable plan and you can't do it without a City Center and you can't wait 10 years for a City Center. I respectfully and courteously request that you do not approve the proposal you have before you today but instead explore more options. Especially more options that take a much more active role in economic development. Phillip Rudy, 5647 N Fruithill, 720 N Argonne Rd: In my opinion stability is a huge factor. You talk about economic downturn. Now is the time to make investments. You can buy land cheap, maybe. But not too many things have been said about changing hands 12-09-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 12 on East Sprague. But not too many things have been said about that but I think that is because people are waiting to see what is really going to happen. They are hoping for stability in their government and in the decision that is going to be made. In my opinion in the last few years the City Council has spent a lot of time to put City Hall or City Center in one spot. In my opinion and I say this positively and complimentary, they should have had the big boys, and I am talking Magnusson, Pring and Douglass duke it out as to whether they wanted to have City Hall. I think you would have had a better project rather than have City Council say we want City Hall at this one spot. What they did was eliminate their ability to negotiate a decent price. You need stability in government and government decisions. If you do throw everything out I think that the most important thing that has come out of the Subarea Plan, and it is this one thing and I have been talking about it, I think the most important thing of the Subarea Plan for economic reasons, for development reasons, for safety of neighborhood reasons, and for environmental reasons is that the roads be two-way all the way on Sprague Ave and on Appleway. Dwight Hume, 9101 Mt View Lane: Listening to the questions asked by the Planning Commission I am reminded that you are looking for the public that was in support of the Subarea Plan. Indeed there were a lot of people in support of the Subarea Plan, but there were a lot of people, who we all know in land use, if they are neutral or not in favor of it, you don't see them here. And they spoke and they spoke when they voted the council in that is here. They all campaigned against the Subarea Plan. They got voted in, they got voted in by that public that you don't see and don't count noses. This Council said they wanted to get rid of the Subarea Plan. They have ordered the staff to review and consider that and for whatever reasons to have an emergency ordinance declared and you know the story that is going on here with the City Center elimination. I don't think it is a matter of revisiting the Subarea Plan and whether there are enough statistics to put on the scale to equal the weight of what was done. That is a moot point. This legislative body said we want to get rid of it and this is a recommending body not another council. You are here to assist, to facilitate through hearings, conduct public meetings, this is a public meeting, there is not standing room only here to try and protect City Center. So read what is currently going on, not what you remember. The new council is saying something entirely different than what the previous Council did. Yea, I am against the Subarea Plan, it is impractical to put it in just a portion of the City. All of this economic growth that has been in the paper in the last two months, none of it is inside the Subarea Plan. That is not why it is happening. That is not a reason to preserve the Subarea Plan. Because everything I have heard about it, it is going to be difficult to attract people to something that is more expensive to build in especially in the recession we have. Robert Olson, representing H&H Molds at 119 S Adams: I have had several clients in the last week talk to me about Spokane Valley and I did not have an answer for them. I told them I was going to meetings. I think they would like to invest. I think the passion of this lady is phenomenal, but the Subarea Plan isn't the answer. It's direction from staff, or from City Council or Planning Commission of what you are going to do with Spokane Valley. There are developers, there are outside businesses that would love to do business in Spokane Valley but they don't know what it is going to look like for their business in the future and how to grow. I know I have talked to past City Council members, have mentioned, well this doesn't affect your property. But you look at the Subarea Plan or you look at a plan and it does affect. Don't tell me one thing and do another. The last year, I have been looking at all the studies, all the history, the past notes of the seven years of the 12-09-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 12 lady was saying, was revisiting, there are a lot of mixed messages, mixed signals, they are opted out of it, or making some deals on the side or saying some things. And that has been the biggest frustration in Spokane Valley. And I thought you should hear it first hand from developers saying to me, `Bob, I would like to put a big box store in the Valley, but I am not going to, because what side of the street are they going to impose certain regulations, and what is it going to look like for taxes' and I have had to deal with issues with tax. I just want to say just representing a lot of businesses out here in Spokane Valley or prospective businesses that your decisions matter and you really need to listen to the property owners and think about your decisions and how it affects. You are a beautiful city and I think you have a long way to go. And you have beautiful land, you got a river, you got more land river property than anybody else, and it is beautiful out here and it is flat and people like it, and you know the history of Spokane Valley, I just want to say that the decisions you are about to make are very crucial for the livelihood of the future, As she pointed out they want to invest but they want to know what the return on investment is going to be. Steven Neill, 10820 E. 18'x`: the one thing I have noticed about the people speaking in favor of the Subarea Plan is that they have a vested interest in it. They stand to gain financially. I don't, I am just a normal Joe, who lives up on l8`11, who can't get to the freeway, unless I go down Sprague or unless I go down Argonne. Thought this is not talking about returning it to a two-way, too much, to do that, would delay my trip a tremendous amount. I have lived in the Spokane area for over 30 years. I know Sprague, I remember the way it was when it was two way. I know the traffic jams, I remember it all. People can't deceive me or confuse me on that. I remember it. This to me is an important step in saying enough of the Subarea Plan, enough of this whole thing. It was mentioned that people spent a lot of time and money on the Subarea Plan. Well, having lived here this long, I don't recall a large turnout of people asking for the Subarea Plan, or asking for a opportunity for a City Center or anything else. I haven't seen it. In my mind the decision, the poll if you will for where the people stand was decided this November, where three new City Council members were elected on totally against the Subarea Plan policies. That's your poll, that's your direction from the people. I think that it is wrong to be directed by a few, certain people, who stand to gain financially from this. If there is anything to be done, I think an actual poll would be good. Or just put it out to the people. Vote for it, get it over with, end the garbage and get it over with. That way you would know where the people are at. Susan Scott, 205 S Evergreen Rd. (business location): I would first like to speak to the Clearwater survey. A whopping 69% agreed that the Sprague/Appleway couplet was useful improvement to the overall roadway system in Spokane Valley, yet the Subarea Plan calls for return to two-way traffic on that portion between University and Argonne at considerable public expense. In my opinion that significant detail such as the massive rezoning and the public and private cost to implement such an undertaking been disclosed upfront and understood and disseminated to the public a considerable amount of time and money could have been saved. I believe there were flaws throughout the entire process that lead to the adoption of the Subarea Plan. The Planning Commission has an opportunity this evening to begin to address and correct some of those flaws. I sat in the cheap seats and observed every hour of the Planning Commission deliberations on the Subarea Plan. There was an overwhelming amount of information to review in a very limited amount of time. There was a sense of urgency that over rode any in-depth analysis of the actual impact of the plan. I found that the need for the plan was over stated by completely 12-09-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 of 12 ignoring the existing centers and segments style of zoning introduced in our 2007 Comprehensive Plan zoning and instead the 2003 zoning inherited from the County was used as the base line. Critical questions were often asked and put off for later and never answered. Others were answered with casual antidotal information clearly lacking any real research or hard evidence. I found it interesting that in the final analysis of the plan there was never the option to do nothing, Proof of public support was based on cherry-picking questions from a 2004 survey and siting over 60 public participation meetings that were so lacking in substantive data and detail they were little more than dream sessions. Public opposition was ignored. 85% of citizen comment and testimony for the public hearings was in opposition but the City Council went on and adopted the plan by emergency ordinance with the disclaimer that we will work the bugs out later. Tonight is later. As the facts of the plan have come to light, with the prospects of a City Hall and City Center at that location unsupportable, tax payers, landowners and businessmen are beginning to see the inherent dangers to property rights and problems with the new form based code. We need a plan that tells the citizens what they can do, not what they must do. There is a very real emergency to begin addressing the real economic concerns of the corridor, starting with the City Center district. This is an opportunity, not only to mitigate some of the damage caused by the errors and omissions that lead to the adoption of the Subarea Plan but to bring jobs and much needed investment to our City. Thank you. H Jim Magnusson, (Mr. Magnusson asked to have this letter read into the record, letter originally sent to Council) I am writing on behalf of the U-City Incorporated, owner of real property in Spokane Valley. I am writing with respect to the Council's consideration for zoning in the University City area. The new zoning adopted should be pre-City Center and pre-Sprague Subarea Plan zoning. The property needs to be a flexible commercial zoning to enable redevelopment to increase tax base and create more jobs. Broad commercial zoning is appropriate and compatible with existing commercial uses, traffic and arterials in the area. As such I would urge you to adopt flexible broad commercial and apply this to the area going forward, Chair Carroll closed the public hearing at 7:13. The Commission then took a break, and returned at 7:25 p.m. Commissioner Eggleston made a motion to recommend denial of ECPA-01-10 to the City Council. Motion was second by Commissioner Sands, Deliberations between the Commissioners included the following thoughts. Supporting the motion • Fail to plan, is planning to fail. • Need to have a stable plan for the future. • Plenty of time spent with public meetings and planning to adopt the plan. No time spent to dismantle. • The City needs a City Center. • City needs a heart, with no heart the City dies, economic challenges have nothing to do with decision. • Our City is young and needs guidance, leadership and planning, • The Subarea Plan is good for economic development. • People without vision want to go backwards. 12-09-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 of 12 • Commissioners do not feel this is an emergency. • Commissioners would like to have an updated, scientific survey of the community before eliminating the only plan the City has. • Does the Plan need changes, and can it be changed? It can but we need to have something to move forward with. • In favor of a City Center but not sure current location in the Subarea Plan is the correct one. • People don't want to locate businesses here because we keep changing our minds and they don't know what we are going to do next, it has nothing to do with the Subarea Plan. • Not allowing more than a year for a plan to implement and develop is short-sighted • Plan can be changed to allow for success instead of eliminating the City Center • Declaring an emergency is reckless • Felt the consultant listened to the community and was detailed in incorporating city vision • Only city's indecisiveness is causing economic problems. • Do not want to make a knee jerk reaction, economy is getting better. • Lack of vision is the reason the plan and City Center zone is not working. • Eliminating the City Center zone indicates we are no longer a City. • Plan is the basis for decisions, absence of a plan allows for no basis for guidance. • City Center needs to be closer to the river • City needs an identity • Would rather modify the proposal, instead of deny • Proposal driven by one property owner who can't do what he wants to do and had the money to make this change. • Change is inevitable. Spokane Valley does not want change. • Not enough input from the citizens Against the motion: • Commissioners felt the Plan is too big, not a vision of the community, • Felt center of the community is someplace else, not at University and Sprague. • Need a plan for less than 10 years not more than 20 years. Don't have 20 years to wait. • Only one permit issued along Sprague in the last year. • Plan is too big • Form based zoning is a fad, does not work for this area • Plan makes too many businesses non-conforming • Size of the City Center zone is too large currently Vote on the motion to recommend denial of emergency Comprehensive Plan amendment ECPA-01-10 to the City Council. In favor, 5, Against, 2 — Commissioners Sharpe and Woodard dissenting. Acting City Attorney asked the Chairman if he would like staff to prepare findings and conclusions to send forward to the City Council. Chair Carroll then asked staff to prepare the findings for signatures, based on this motion. 12-09-10 Planning Coirunission Minutes Page 11 of 12 C. Election of Officer for the year 2011: Commissioner Eggleston nominated John Carroll to serve as Planning Commission Chairman for the 2011 year. Seconded by Commissioner Joe Mann. Vote is 6 in favor, 1 against, with Commissioner Woodard being the dissenting vote. Motion passes, John Carroll Chairman of the Planning Commission for 2011 Commissioner Eggleston nominated Marcia Sands to serve as Planning Commission Vice- Chaimman for the 2011 year. Seconded by Commissioner Joe Mann. Vote is unanimous. Motion passes Marcia Sands Vice-Chairperson of the Planning Commission for 2011 X. GOOD OF THE ORDER Commissioner Carroll stated that he would like to thank Commissioners Sharpe and Eggleston for their years of service to the community and for serving on the Planning Commission. XL ADJOURNMENT The being no other business the meeting was adjourned at 8:36 p.m. SUBMITTED: APPROVED: Deanna Griffith, Administrative Assistant John G. Carroll, Chairperson 12-09-10 Planning Commission Minutes Page 12 of 12 Comments from the August 19, 2010 City Center Community Meeting: Director McClung welcomed the attendees (there was a head count of 22) and introduced staff. Senior Planner Scott Kuhta gave a presentation giving the background, intent and design of the Sprague and Appleway Corridor Subarea Plan. This is the discussion that came after the presentation: Mike King: There are a lot of details in plan in developing. You want to really set up a meeting with us if you're looking to do anything with your properties. You need to contact myself, so give me a call and we can sit down and talk about the regulations and how they affect your property. We represented this to council Tuesday night of this week and we will be reporting back to council what we here today and over the next couple weeks and on the 14th of September. So any of the comments we receive, any concerns that we have, we will be reporting back to council. We're taking verbatim notes of this meeting and everything that's being said today will be forwarded verbatim to council. We're going to record everything up here on the sheets so make sure we capture everything. If you're not sure you have any comments today, you can write them down and submit them anytime till Sep. 7th'. We have to get the packet ready for council by the 7th. So you have until the 7th if you have anything specific to write down and you're not sure what you want to tell us today. We'll open the floor for questions at this point. Question -- Scott, I want to ask that you remove the temporary restrictions to the city center on the binding site plan? Mike King: Request to remove the temporary restriction which has to do with the building until the binding site plan is put on. Any other questions or concerns? Dwight Hume: I have some concerns that I've expressed in previous meetings of this workshop type that we're dealing with symptoms and not the cause. You realize that the council was in the beginning of the year trying to repeal the SARP plan only to be advised legally that was something that had to follow a process of input. Unfortunately, the input that is being sought is an attempt to tweak the plan by putting in other uses that may or may not be acceptable to both; but none the less be brought in to it to make it more compatible with all concerned, Yet the real issue is the plan itself and to get rid of it but be that as it may, there are some issues here about the plan that I feel like we're treating a symptom and not the cause. The symptoms are allegedly the uses now allowed or not allowed and what we should do to add some back in and that doesn't really solve the problem of the plan itself. I think the plan is premature and it's not something that the economy can deal with and it isn't something that market forces will implement and well, the city center is the center piece of the plan. It has, as the gentleman just said, it has problems that are serious in nature. One in which is the moreitorium or the defactomoritorium the need to wait until the core street is fully permitted with building permits and everybody else waits indefinitely to put uses on their property. That has to change, that is not an incentive. That is a serious flaw in the plan. Second aspect of this is that well in 2007 there was a pre-sarp zoning matrix that says certain uses are allowed. Now it says 34 of those uses are not allowed but we're going to give you parks and medical supply sales and bed and breakfast, none of those are necessarily strong tenants to your properties. Based on the changes that have been made would be far better not to have had the SARP plan and have those other 34 uses again. The other aspect August 19,2010 City Center Community Meeting Page 1 of 6 of this that is hardly mentioned and not today that the pre-designated streets affect numerous buildings that are already in place and probably cause us some traffic problems in terms of the introduction of intersections every 600 ft along Sprague and Appleway that are not in place right now. Appleway was originally sought as a bypass and the more intersections you create the more problems you create for traffic flow. So, I think I would suggest, I've even talked to people that received plans, maps, GPS base maps that show land use and show the streets on top of them the pre-designated streets. They show, therefore the reality what those pre-designated streets system does to existing land use. You've heard about some of that in other workshops but there are different maps out there and they show different things and they all came out of the city. I'm going to suggest we have a workshop just on the entire SARP on pre-designated streets and maybe the public information that goes out is on a GPS base that shows the land use and those streets and just have a dialogue discussion with the land owners weather or not they want those streets. So, 3 things, 1st we lost 34 uses. 2nd we've got this pre-disignated street system on various exhibits that's sent out by the city or given out by the city that controdict each other. Some of them show pre-designated streets within the CC area on the north side of Sprague but your adopted plan doesn't have any, so there's misinformation out there and then 3rd issued addressed initially and that is the memortorium thats created by your building permit requirements along the strreet frontage of the core street. Thank you Just a little bit on the pre-Iocated streets, the plan does call for new streets throughout the corridor, certainly this city center? Scott: The plan does call for new streets throughout the corridor. Certainly, this city center needs new streets if the city is going to develope new city's blocks and the core street would be one of/hose pre-located streets. It does allow those pre-located streets located other than where there shown on the plan if you can still show you can still meet the objectives of more connectivity and circulation with cars. One of the things we have cr challenge with in the corridor is circulation for automobiles. I think that's one of the things we heard early on with the couplet and put more cross streets in and have more connections that would make things clot easier for people to move around. We have wide long stretches where you can't get from Sprague to Appleway throughout the whole corridor so that is one of the reasons and it also makes more the principal behind the pre-located streets is to make more developable blocks, manageable block sizes rather than the large suburban type blocks. That's one of the reasons why those pre-located streets are in. We have heard concerns about those pre-located streets that they are identified where they go through buildings. When we first laid out the pre-located streets we tried to avoid buildings where we could. The only way the buildings would be affected is if that street would be required to be built is if there was a redevelopment of that properly. So, that is concerning to some people so one of the things were looking at right now is changing that regulations so that was brought up earlier in This process and were going to be working on a text amendment the way that works if you have a development that is 5 acres or greater the regulations say you ore required to build a new street somewhere on that property meet the objectivity of objective to the connectivities so the council will be reviewing that as part of these tweaks initially and then we'll see there will be a full review of the whole plan in starting in November during the next year comprehensive plan amendment process. August 19,2010 City Center Community Meeting Page 2 of 6 Jack Pring: First, I want to thank the council for taking a positive stand returning the zoning to make it the way it was in 2004. We've got some issues here. The city center non-conforming permitting core streets is going through buildings and so forth. I don't understand all this. We got to make this thing pretty simple. We got to make it easy to do business. We got to make it easy for customers to do business with us. We've got a little strip mall over on Sullivan Rd and the setback the tenant that's in the mall that's doing very well. But he's also has some space with us on that strip mall and I'm happy to say were out selling that mall out completely. I'm happy for my customers and happy for my tenant. In closing how many buy/sell agreements have taken place on the zoning area we're talking about today? And why not? Thank you. Anyone else???? Kirk Owsley: Just a couple of things, I agree with most of what Dwight said earlier. This is becoming more and more restrictive. Completely 34 less uses, taking away free trade, taking away the choices of land as far as business owners. Scott, one more thing, how do we determine the degree on nonconforming use? Scott: I'm not sure of your question? Kirk: Replace with a lessor agree, lessor of nonconforming would be ok, versus... Scott: There are some criteria on the impact of the transportation system is one, noise, what we have to do is look at the Hakes code, it's a code that codes industrial and commercial uses, similar to another classification, that is something we look at. It is an administration determination which the CD director makes. We gather the evidence and the nature of the business and look at the impacts and make a determination. Kirk: One thing this fails to address we look at buildings and new setbacks and it doesn't address the impact of undeveloped ground. I think really undeveloped ground really feels a pinch in this because of the restrictions in uses that they had when they purchased it. I think there was a memo out to council from Lori in 2008 when she talked to some appraisers and bankers. She stated there indeed would be an economic impact to undeveloped ground if this goes into effect. We have less choices. The last thing I would like to say and it is a questions Scott. If this does go through a city center, is city hall required to be there? Scott: -No, there is no requirement for a city hall be there. Jim Magnuseu: I'm a part owner of University City. Regulations are way over my head and I think I need to speak on this. Perhaps the concept of when this started was a dream. The economics and the world were different. You could borrow money if you could build. People bought and sold things. What's happened and the design was by Friedman and those people out of San Francisco and it was fairy dreamy. Good goals but the world has changed. You can't borrow money. You can't sell property. You can't buy property. I think you really ought to step back from this SARP idea and make a fundamental, philisophical decision. Does the city want to go to some type of zoning where they're going to encourage growth or do they want to set something up for utopia 10, 20, 30 years down the line. I think the plan right now is sort of utopia goal oriented but it's not functional in the economy that we're here with today. 1 think you really have to look at where the city wants to go and just like Mr. Pring said, how many buy/sell agreements have happened in the past 4,5,6 years. It's impossible to sell your property. It's impossible to do anything with your property because of the uncertainty. That's going to stay August 19,2010 City Center Community Meeting Page 3 of 6 here. The economy is not going to bounce back and it's not going back to 2007 or 2006. We don't know how long its going to be here but for growth and development the vitality in the area there has to be a plan to enncourage multipal uses and uses people can finance and be successful in this area. All I have to say. Karla Kelly: Good morning, KSP Management. My husband and I both own property in Spokane Valley. We also have our property management company here at 10516 E Main Ave. I'm a new comer. I do know one thing, we've been here over 7 years and focusing on growing our business. We relocated here from another state, born and raised in Alaska, lived in CA. for 18 years. There met and married my husband, He's from Oklahoma. We're here back in the pacific northwest which is where we want to die. So the bottom Iine is we've been in a lot of places. I've lived in cities. I've lived in the country. I've commuted from the country to the city. I have a few questions, Again, I do apologize because this planning process has been going on for many years before we were ever involved here and I know a lot of hard work and good work as gone on. I have a few larger picture questions which I thought would be important to keep in mind, One of the fundamental questions I have is: does the city of Spokane Valley actually have an identity? Do you know who you want to be because if you don't know who you want to be then you're not going to know how to pattern or flavor your city center. Your city center is going to be a direct reflection of your city identity. That's going to be a huge marketing tool. It's going to be a business draw or not. It's going to be a reason for people to come or not. It's going to be useful or not useful, so that's one thing. I happen to think a city center is essential for any community that is serious about its identity and serious about its economical growth and viability, Without a city center you don't have an identity. I don't know what the identity is and I apologize if everyone else knows what it is and I don't, that's my responsibility to get caught up. I'm not sure we do know what the city of Spokane Valley is. Are we recreational destination. Are we senior services retirement community. Are we gateway to a recreational area, Idaho/Washington inland northwest. Are we commercial. Are we light industry. What are we? Are we a satellite indentity sitting next to the city of Spokane? I mean, I don't know. How many people like to do business in downtown Spokane? Ok. How many prefer to do business where you don't have parking challenges and have to do-that sort of thing? So you're city people or you're country people. I think a lot of people in Spokane Valley are country people. That's kind of why we're here but you need city services. So were in favor of the city concept but we want to make sure the city center reflects what it is. What Spokane Valley wants to be and also how we're going to do business here. I disagree a little bit with some of my colleagues. You are concerned about the economy and planning takes a really long time. When the economy is down it is a great time to plan. I've done planning professionally in a former life. This is actually an ok time to plan as long as everybody is really smart about what your goals are and what you want to do because here is what's happening when you don't plan you get a hot economy. You get a hot economy and everybody wants to spend money and you push projects through that probably weren't well thought out because everybody wants to capatalize on the hot economy so because the economy is cool right now doesn't mean we shouldn't be working really hard on something for the city of Spokane Valley, for our city center or the corridor area. There are a lot of things we need to work on and I'm not going to go into all those details. There are smarter people who can handle from parking, to streets, to traffic patterns and all those sorts of things. But here is what I do know, I've lived in a community where literally the city center shut down at night because nobody wanted to stay there after their job was done. They went home. They had kids, grocery shopping, pick up dog from the vet, or whatever. If you don't put a lot of thought into August 19,2010 City Center Comtumunity Meeting Page 4 of 6 your city center commercial business entities are going to be you have the potential to have something that shuts down at 5:00 and everybody vacates. So you have to look long and hard about how you're going to use your city center. Then, also; I don't know about anyone else but snow removal is a really big thing. We want to be really really careful. I think we forgot who we are. We forgot we don't have building structures and traffic patterns and street layouts and sidewalks that you can see in CA, AZ or FL. We have to deal with 10 feet of snow. So this is something. I want to ask a question for the City Planners which I know have an incredibly challenging job. We have an opportunity to look at some of the other models. As you said, we are patterning our plan which looks wonderful after some other development. My question to the city is to the planners? Are they working? Since we have an opportunity to look at models, can we go back and see ones that have been built by other cities and see if there actually working and what their problems are? Does the city shut down at night and just have lots of places for panhandlers to stay overnight? That's one thing we want to consider. We want to be a little careful we're not playing God. Does everybody really know what everybody really wants? We have to make some decisions. You can't have a plan without some decisions but it you don't have an identity, you don't really know what we want for our city center. I think we need one. We need one or city of Spokane Valley is not going to be taken seriously. You're not going to be your economically vial entity that I think everybody wants to be. That's good for business for everybody. Looking at other successes and basically making sure that what we do put together makes good sense. There are restrictions in zoning in places. There lots of really practical reasons for that. I don't think anybody wants uncontrolled growth. I'm not a big fan of controlling anything. It's one of the reasons why we live and work where we do and we have the freedoms we have in this country. I don't like change. I don't like change for change in general and I don't like change as I get older. I like things I know about. I like things familiar but sometimes change is good but it has to be with an identity and a purpose. So, I'm interested in participating more certainly as a business owner in this community, but also we own a number of single family residentials and my family lives here. I want to know what this is going to look like in 10 years. I want to know where they're going to park. I want to know whose going to be visiting our city center. How can you have a city center if you don't have city services? I think city hall should be in the city center. I mean things like that, If you just create a lot of boutiques retail places, I'm going to tell you right now, boutique retail places struggle in any economy. I lived in cities where it has, so I'm not going to take to much more time. I just wanted to make the point that I really really really hope that we have an identity because without an identity, without who we want to be, it's going to be very hard to design the buildings. I know we have big columns of wood or we do have a lot of concrete and brick, what are we? I don't just want to be a cookie cutter from some city in CA, because I don't think that will work up here. Thank you. Jim Bonrresely: I have an issue with a non-conforming use cannot be replaced with the properties that are abandoned or discontinued for 24 months. My reasoning is that as a property owner of commercial rental property, given the market place the way it is, I'm seeing anywhere from 10 to 20 percent of vacancies on my property. If I have a single use property, in fact it could be vacant for a year unless if I find a tenant that's a conforming use sign, a one year or two year lease, then I'm no longer to utilize the property in the non-conformed use that was prior to the vacancies. I guess my point is I like the 24 month limitation expand to a longer time period whether its 3 years actually 5 years but whether the council will approve that I'm not sure, I know that given the market place right now, I know we have Spokane Valley has multiple August 19,2010 City Center Comm-Junky Meeting Page 5 of 6 buildings along Sprague Avenue that are vacant and in fact those buildings are losing ability if in fact, a non-confoming use before to have that use in future. That's my point. Thank you. Scott: Sept. 7 is the deadline for the comments. Again, this process will be ongoing. Look for more notices and information coming out once we get through these individual zone meetings. Next year we will start a full review of the sub area plan. There will be a lot more opportunities to speak to us and council. Thank you for coming. August 19, 2010 City Center Conuuinunity Meeting Page 6 of 6 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 25, 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: n consent n old business Fl new business n public hearing n information n admin. report n pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Second reading of draft ordinance 11-002 amending the development code and zoning. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A.130 (1)(d), (2)(a) and (b); Section 17.80.140 Type IV applications - Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide rezones and Section 19.30.010 Comprehensive Plan text and map amendments of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Matter was referred to Planning Commission on October 26, 2010. See October 26, 2010 Council packet for additional information. BACKGROUND: On October 26, 2010, the Spokane Valley City Council passed a motion to forward an emergency comprehensive plan and zoning code amendment to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation. The proposal is to change the City Center (CCT) comprehensive plan and zoning designation to Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) and remove all language referencing City Center in the Sprague Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan (Subarea Plan)from Book 1: Community Intent, adopted as part of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan; and Book 2: Development Regulations and Book 3: City Actions, adopted by reference in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). The City Council discussed the following basis for the emergency amendment as follows; 1. In the last 12 months, since the adoption of the Subarea Plan, the City's revenue forecast has continued to deteriorate. Specifically, sales taxes are projected to decrease by $400,000 from 2010 to 2011, and property taxes by $100,000 from 2010 to 2011. Funds available from the real estate excise tax have decreased from a high of approximately $2.2 million in 2007 and 2008 to approximately $900,000 for 2010 and 2011. 2. Funds for significant private development are not available and significant failures of large commercial investments within the City have occurred. 3. The economic development anticipated by the Council when the Ordinance adopting the Subarea Plan was passed in June of 2009 has not occurred. 4. The restrictions on development within the City Center zone, as well as the design requirements, contemplate significant public investment involving both the purchase of property and construction of a City Hall as well as adjacent infrastructure improvements. The projected 2011 budget does not contemplate the purchase of any property within the City Center zone and funds available for the construction of City Hall are projected to be reduced by $2.2 million to fund other capital projects. 5. Because there is little likelihood that any significant investment will occur by the City, the City Center zone, as currently configured and restricted, creates significant immediate economic hardships for the property owners within that zone. Based upon these facts an RCA—Second Reading of Draft Ordinance(zoning) January 25,2011 emergency exists and an immediate change to the Comprehensive Plan pursuant to the RCW 36.70A.130 (2)(b) set forth above may be appropriate. Staff presented the proposed amendment to the Planning Commission at a study session on November 18, 2010. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on December 9, 2010. Following the public hearing the Commission voted 5 to 2 to recommend denial of the proposed amendment. The City Council received the Planning Commission's recommendation at their January 4, 2011 study session. Following staff's presentation and discussion, Council directed staff to proceed forward with the emergency amendment as proposed and prepare an ordinance for consideration. On January 18, 2011, the Council conducted a first reading of the ordinance. Following public comments and council deliberations, the Council voted 4 to 2 to advance the ordinance to a second reading. APPROVAL CRITERIA: Section 17.80.140(H) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code provides approval criteria for comprehensive plan amendments to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. The criterion stipulates that the proposed amendment must be consistent with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and bear a substantial relation to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment. OPTIONS: 1. Approve ordinance; 2. Disapprove ordinance; 3. Modify the ordinance. If modification is substantial, the council must either conduct a public hearing on the modified proposal; or 4. Refer the proposal back to the planning commission for further consideration. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council's discretion. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Kathy McClung— Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS: (1) Draft Ordinance Amending the Development Code and Zoning Map (clean) (2) Exhibit A Book II and Book III Amendments (3) Exhibit B Zoning Map (4) Draft Ordinance Amending the Development Code and Zoning Map (redline version) RCA—Second Reading of Draft Ordinance(zoning) January 25,2011 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 11-002 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE SPOKANE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE, SPECIFICALLY THE SPOKANE VALLEY SPRAGUE APPLEWAY CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN; DELETING REFERENCES TO THE DESIGNATION "CITY CENTER"; AND AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION "CITY CENTER" TO "MIXED USE AVENUE"; AND AMENDING ORDINANCE 09-021. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, (The "City") is a noncharter Code City organized under the laws of Title 35A RCW; and WHEREAS, the City has the authority to amend its development regulations pursuant to RCW 35A.63.100; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, ( The "City Council"), pursuant to that authority, adopted Ordinance 09-021 on September 15, 2009, adopting the development regulations implementing the Spokane Valley Sprague Appleway Subarea Plan, (The"Subarea Plan"); and WHEREAS, on October 26, 2010, the City Council passed a motion to forward an emergency Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code amendment to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed tthis request, as well as the recommendation of the Community development Department to approve this request, at a study session on November 18, 2010 and conducted a public hearing on December 9, 2010; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Findings and Recommendations and the same were presented to the City Council on January 4, 2011; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered this Ordinance amending the Zoning Code and Map and the Findings and Recommendations of the Planning Commission on January 18, 2011, for the first reading and on January 25, 2011, for the second and final reading, with public comment received at both City Council meetings; and WHEREAS, one of the land use designations contained within the Subarea Plan was the "City Center" designation; and WHEREAS, at the time the City Center designation was approved, the City of Spokane Valley intended to make significant investments in the City Center area through the purchase of property on which it would construct and operate a new City Hall as well as construct improvements to streets and streetscapes adjacent to the new City Hall; and Ordinance 11-002,Amending Zoning Map Page 1 of 6 DRAFT WHEREAS, the plan for the development of the City Center property also included the construction of a Library within its boundaries; and WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, adopted pursuant to chapter 36.70A RCW, (The "Comprehensive Plan") envisioned that certain uses within the City Center area would be restricted and limited to encourage the development of a City Center that would provide the community with, "its symbolic, social and geographic heart," the "center of its civic and social life" and provide services such as shops, cafes, restaurants, community services and the offering of"comfortable public streets and public places;" and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan further envisioned that the new City Hall was intended to "preside over the City's main outdoor gathering space and its vista will be the iconic image that stands for Spokane Valley," and spur development including a new regional center including retail, office and residential development; and WHEREAS, the City Center designation in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations did not allow a number of specific uses including vehicle sales, convenience stores, gas stations and thrift stores; and WHEREAS, the Mixed Use Avenue designation in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations does allow such uses; and WHEREAS, the City Center designation in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations, once the development of the "core" City Center Main Street commenced, restricted retail development in areas adjacent to Main Street until specific development thresholds were met; and WHEREAS, the City Center designation in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations imposed certain design restrictions and construction requirements that were unique to the City Center area; and WHEREAS, in the last sixteen months since the adoption of the Subarea Plan, the City's revenue forecast has continued to deteriorate. Specifically, sales taxes are projected to decrease by $400,000 from 2010 to 2011; property taxes are projected to decrease by $100,000 from 2010 to 2011 and funds available from the real estate excise tax have decreased from a high of approximately $2.2 million in 2007 and 2008 to approximately $900,000 in 2010 and 2011; and WHEREAS, funds for significant private development are not as available as they would have been at the time the initial ordinance was passed, and major commercial investments within the City have had financial difficulties; and WHEREAS, the City is not able and does not intend to make any significant investment in the Center area as was contemplated at the time the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations comprising the Subarea Plan was adopted. Specifically the City Council has, by motion, ended negotiations for the purchase of property on which to locate a new City Hall and adopted a 2011 budget that does not include sums for the purchase of such property, and further Ordinance 11-002,Amending Zoning Map Page 2 of 6 DRAFT reduced funds available for the construction of a new City Hall by $2.2 million to fund other necessary capital projects; and WHEREAS,the voters of the City rejected a bond proposal to construct a Library within the City Center property; and WHEREAS, the property owners within the City Center designation are burdened by the restriction on allowable uses outlined above, the further restrictions that would be in place if and when a development plan for the core was adopted, and the design restrictions and requirements unique to the City Center designation, without the City investment and infrastructure improvements; and WHEREAS, the City has been made aware of potential development that could occur within the City Center area that currently is precluded by the current designation; and WHEREAS, a number of uses, buildings and signs have been made non-conforming by the adoption of the City Center designation and development regulations implementing the same; and WHEREAS, testimony before the City Council and Planning Commission has demonstrated both the economic hardships and desire to remove the current limitations as is set forth in the Findings of Fact below; and WHEREAS, the issues and factors concerning the creation of the City Center designation has been the subject of three years of study and analysis, and public meetings and testimony, specifically as set forth in Ordinance 09-022 and in additional public hearings and meetings identified in the findings of fact below; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 2006 prior to the adoption of the Subarea Plan, recognized the goal of identifying and creating a City Center for the City, and the City Council wishes to continue to pursue this goal with staff, taking into consideration the existing economic situation and the City's current financial circumstances, in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommendations fail to take into account the specific factors set forth in the findings of fact below; and WHEREAS adoption of this amendment to the Zoning Code and Map must comply with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA") as set forth in RCW 43.21C; and WHEREAS, the City is required to notify the Washington State Department of Commerce of its intent to adopt this amendment to the Zoning Code and Map at least 60 days prior to final adoption pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106. Ordinance 11-002,Amending Zoning Map Page 3 of 6 DRAFT NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The facts set forth in the recitals above are incorporated by this reference as Findings of Fact. 2. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Code and Map has been provided to the Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106 on November 3, 2010. 3. The City of Spokane Valley has complied with the requirements of RCW 43.21C and issued a Determination of Non Significance ("DNS") for the proposed amendment on November 12, 2010 in a manner consistent with the City of Spokane Valley Environmental Ordinance. 4. At the time the City Center designation was approved, the City intended to make significant investments in the City Center area through the purchase of property on which it would construct and operate a new City Hall as well as construct improvements to streets and streetscapes adjacent to the new City Hall. 5. The plan for development of the City Center property also included plans for the construction of a Library within the City Center boundaries but the voters rejected a bond proposal to construct that Library. 6. In the last sixteen months, since the adoption of the Subarea Plan, the city's revenue forecast has continued to deteriorate. Specifically, sales taxes are projected to decrease by $400,000 from 2010 to 2011; property taxes are projected to decrease by $100,000 from 2010 to 2011, and funds available from the real estate excise tax have decreased from a high of approximately $2.2 million in 2007 and 2008 to approximately $900,000 in 2010 and 2011. 7. Funds for significant private development are not as available as they would have been at the time the initial ordinance was passed, and major commercial investments within the City have had financial difficulties. The City Council has, by motion, ended negotiations for the purchase of property on which to locate a new City Hall and adopted a 2011 budget that does not include sums for the purchase of such property, and further reduced funds available for the construction of a City Hall by $2.2 million to fund other necessary capital projects. 8. The City has been made aware of potential development that could occur within the City Center area that currently is precluded by the current designation. 9. Public testimony has favored and opposed the change. Specific comments at the City Council meeting of October 26, 2010 supporting the amendment include comments that businesses were struggling, vacancies rates were high, and that the property owners within the City Center designation support removal of the current restrictions; further testimony at the Planning Commission meeting on December 9, 2010 supporting the amendment indicated that the City Council has, since taking office in January of 2010 reviewed the Subarea Plan in detail, reviewed each zone classification, and heard testimony concerning the impacts of the current regulations on development and how the current economy is Ordinance 11-002,Amending Zoning Map Page 4 of 6 DRAFT affecting properties within this designation, as well as the desire of property owners for additional flexibility for development within this designation as well as testimony by a property owner within the City Center designation requesting more flexibility to enable redevelopment to increase the tax base and create more jobs. Further, public comment at the City Council meetings of January 18, 2011 and January 25, 2011, supporting this change included comments that current restrictions stymied business growth and development, created a significant percentage of non-conforming uses and buildings, resulted in little or no building applications since the designation was established; further that City investment and major tenant interest has not materialized, that the City is suffering the effects of a serious economic downturn, and that investment opportunities may exist if the restrictions on use and development were removed. 10. The City of Spokane Valley has provided notice and engaged in a public process to ensure citizen participation pursuant to RCW 36.70A.035, RCW 36.70A.130 and RCW 36.70A.140, providing the public an opportunity to be heard on October 26, 2010, December 9, 2010, January 18, 2011 and January 25, 2011. The notice provided and meetings identified constitute early and continuous public participation in the consideration of this proposed amendment to the comprehensive plan and map. 11. The City Council does not accept the Findings of the Planning Commission for the reasons set forth in these Findings of Fact as well as the following:: a. The public has had an appropriate opportunity to be heard. Public notice was provided and public comment on this issue was taken on October 26, December 9, 2010, January 18, 2011, and January 25, 2011. There further is no evidence in the record that the current designation, without the anticipated City investment, provided any guidance or stability for future economic investment, on the contrary, economic development has not occurred due to the restrictions currently in place. b. The change is not inconsistent with the remaining portions of the Comprehensive Plan including Chapter 2.2.1-City Center, and Goals and Policies LUG-6 and LUP- 6.1.11. The City Council is not abandoning the concept of a future City Center and is actively exploring alternatives to this site. All remaining provisions of the Subarea Plan contained in the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations are still in place. c. The City Council finds that the economic threat to existing property owners within the City Center designation is immediate and a result of the restrictive development standards imposed. 12. This amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as amended by Ordinance 11-001. BASED UPON THE RECITALS AND FINDINGS OF FACT SET FORTH ABOVE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Ordinance 11-002,Amending Zoning Map Page 5 of 6 DRAFT Section 1: Amendment of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code. The Spokane Valley Sprague Appleway Corridor Subarea Plan is hereby amended as is set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. Section 2: Amendment of the Spokane Valley Official Zoning Map. The Official Zoning Map is hereby amended as is set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. Section 3: 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 lack of constitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 4: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley as provided by law. Passed by the City Council this day of January, 2011. ATTEST: Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved As To Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 11-002,Amending Zoning Map Page 6 of 6 Exhibit A Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment BOOK II 2.0.1. APPLICABILITY 1) City Center District Zone. These regulations shall apply to: a) New construction. 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. 2.0.3. HOW TO USE THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS F I G . 2 . 0 . 3 . How T O U S E T H E D E V E L O P M E N T REGULATIONS BOOK Il;DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS • 2.1, 2.2, 2.3. 2.4. 2.5. 2.G. DISTRICT ZONES SITE DEVELOPMENT STREET ANO PARKING ARCHITECTURAL SIGNAGE REGULATIONS REGULATIONS OPEN SPACE REGULATIONS REGULATIONS REGULATION REGULATIONS 2.3,1, 2.5.1. 2,6.1, 2.1. 2.2,1,Bu1LDiNG 2.2.8.SID. 2.4.1. STREET BUILDING MASSING GENERAL SIGN 1STRICT ZONES MAP ORIENTATION STREET SETBACK STANDARDS PARKING TYPES &COMPOSITION REGULATIONS/. 1 2.22. 2.2.9,SIDE 1 4. 4, 1 locate the property in BUILDING USE YARD SETBACK ren iew.the definitions question on the District i eview the definitions and rarfvns .caw..general sipmge !Oren f Zones Ma and identify the review sweet standards and specifications for definitions,standards, P a fY each building massing dr a lieahle District Zone(s) 2.2.8. 2.2.1 O.REAR each Parking Type and guidelines PP composition element 1 BUILDING HEIGHT YARD SETBACK ■ emo. 2.2.4.RELATIO� 2.2.11. ?.:L2. 2.5.2.HE1GH l ' TO SINGLE 2.4.2. ALLEY SETBACK 111'EN S/'1/:E MASSING& SIGN TYPE FAMILY HOMES S1.\.\11.\R llti PARKING STANDARDS COMPOSITION UMW.EI 2A,2. 2.2.5.PUBLIC 2,2A2,FRONTAGI, 1 2.5.3.LENGTH z • NEIGHBORHOOD FRONTAGE COVERAGE ew open spare YeL a MASSING& reel CENTERS.r,� revs w parking standard. review definitions, standards , COMPOSITION standards,and guidelines 2.1.9. 2.2.6.PRIVATE 2.2.13.BUILD-Ti- 4, • 1 — for each Sign Type MIXED USE FRONTAGE CORNER AVENUE 2.3.3.SIR 1141 AND 2.4,3, review height and length OPEN SP.\I:I'. PARKING massing dr composition 2,1.4. 2.2.7.FRONT 2.2.14.MAXIMUM GUIDITENES GUIDELINES regulation. COMMUNITY STREET SETBACK UUU.OING LENGTH 1 -- - 1 BOULEVARD review street and open review parking guidelines 2.5.4. 2.1.5.GATEWAY space guideline including COMMERCIAL. r,vuvu the definition and cations or lighting and ARCHITECTURAL fi specifi f g Ban ping ELEMENTS AVENUE each site development regulation 2.1.6.GATEWAY 1 COMMERCIAL r¢uiew vandards CENTERS and guidelines for . architectural elements 1 review the Disrtet-Spiel jar regrdatiansf the property's Dlslntt Zone(s) 1 f the definitionsand specifications that follow In sections 1..e-a6 Exhibit A Page 1 of 16 2.0.3. HOW TO USE THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Figure 2.1 District Zone Map — remove CCT and add MUA designation 2.0.3. HOW TO USE THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 1) The Development Regulations are divided into six sections: 2.3. Street and Open Space Regulations set forth minimum requirements for the provision, design, and configuration of new streets and publicly accessible spaces as well as regulations governing landscaping of front, side,and rear yards and other on-site improvements to ensure that new development creates attractive and livable City Center and Corridor environments with amenities for pedestrians. 2.1.1 CITY CENTER DISTRICT ZONE LOCATION: CITY CENTER City Center. DeseFiptionCitCenteF The City Center District is the heart of the community. It is an urban district that consists of a wide range of building types and uses. The district is where pedestrian activity is most lively and where the most pedestrian amenities are located. It has a core of entertainment, shopping and dining supported by a neighborhood of urban homes and workplaces. Within the City Center District, entertainment and shopping oriented City Center Core Street Development is surrounded and supported by City Center Neighborhood Development. City Center Core Street Development is the most urban development in the City with consistent, urban streetscape treatments and attached commercial block buildings set along the sidewalk. Sprague Avenue and other new Core Streets put"Main FORM l�� Street" development on display, highlighting its fine grained o ` concentration of ground floor, activity generating retail. The buildings are primarily mixed use with housing, office, or lodging USE retail. Adding to this City Center Core network is the largest concentration of Civic and Cultural uses in the City. (Applicability of City Center Core Street Regulations is Dlsrosm• established by 2.1.1 (2) City Center Core: Pre Located Core Street PFD ` Regulations). This diagram represents an example of the typical development envisioned for this district. It:oes not represent a specific design required on any particular site or property. -1 . . . . i . . .— , City Center Neighborhood Development has slightly less urban FORM °' setbacks and frontage coverage that surrounds and supports the Core Streets. These parts of the City Center are primarily USE „.0,? Exhibit A DISPOSITION • ` 4g �F O� highlights the Sprague Avenue Edge, while attached housing and compatible office lines the Appleway Boulevard Edge. A tight network of Other Streets, with wide sidewalks and steady street planting make this a concentrated,walkable neighborhood. This diagram represents an example of the typical development envisioned for this district. It does not represent a specific design required on any particular site or property +om 1) City Ccntcr Corc: Prc Located 111 Strcct Regulations —� -' In order to"incubate" a District Core within the City Center District Zone, I ;; a new,Pre located Core Street is established. This Pre located Core Street r is the basis for temporary regulatory restrictions on the entire City Center •?.. District as described in the following sections. These restrictions insure that a critical mass of clustered ground level retail shops is established _�'i along a pedestrian oriented street frontage in the core of the district before Pre Located Center Core Street a more diffuse pattern of retail is allowed to develop. Once the Minimum Pre-Lora•.Street B- City Center Core is fully constructed, these Pre Located Core Street regulatory restrictions will no longer be in effect. a) Pre located Core Street i) The creation of the City Center Core shall begin along the Pre Located Core Street(Street A) shown in the City Center: Pre Located Core Street Map to the right side of this page (this pre located street is consistent with the Figure 2.3.1 (2)Pre Located Streets map.) ii) The location of the Pre Located Core Street may be changed in a manner consistent with the intent of Book I, with the approval of the Community Development Director/Designee. In any case, the Core Street must be at least 600 feet long. b) Minimum City Center Core The minimum City Center Core shall be established when the entire length of the Pre located Core Street is built out with continuous City Center Retail Shopfronts and 100 percent frontage coverage on both sides of the street (unless a part of the frontage along the Pre located Core Street is public open space associated with a civic building. c) Core Street Development Temporary Restrictions i) Core Street Development restrictions shall be effective only Example of City Center Core Development Satisfyin AFTER a final Binding Site Plan I um City Center Core Policies (B SP) establishing the City Center Core Street is approved. 1 •'k7..17R Sprague eA ■_Y a es I L IL ,:... ,+.�; ._' x•+ lei - :. • • ii) After the final BSP creating the �` City Center Core Street is - approved, City Center Retail is el - `, - only permitted: J I_-1 (1) In shopfronts along the Pre ''`�w ••• •* I located Core Street 1 , l (2) In shopfronts that - continuously extend from Example of a City Center Core Layout Ghopfronts along the Pre located Core Street: (a) Along the south side of Sprague Ave. (b) Along other new Core Streets south of Sprague Ave. Exhibit A Page 3 of 16 (c) Along the west side of University Rd. (d) Along the north side of Appleway Blvd. iii) The pre located core street shall be considered fully built out after permits are issued for buildings lining and facing both sides of the Pre located Core Street, City Center Retail shall be permitted on all properties within the City Center District Zone as determined by the City Center District Zone Regulations, Section 2.22,Building Use. d) Core Street Configuration&Design i) All new Core Streets shall be designed as specified in Section 2.3/Street and Open Space Regulations. i) As shown in the City Center:Pre Located Core Street Map to the right side of this page,a new street(street B) shall be built connecting the Pre located Core Street(Street A)and the planned civic facilities described in Section 3.1.1 (this pre located street is consistent with the Figure 2.3.1(2)Pre Located Streets map). ii) The location of the Pre Located Core Street may be changed in a manner consistent with the intent of Book I,with the approval of the Community Development Director/Designee. t� l IL U II !L J _..J Sprague Ave. _ Prdocated Lore Street Sprague Ave. Prgaated Core SUee[ t__ _ d \ L, 1� L60000"-- • mple of Core Streets Example o 4 =e Development Layout Streets Layout - The following special regulations apply to new Core Street development along Sprague Ave.,pre located Street B (described above and shown in the City Center: Pre Located Core Street map to the right side of this page), and Other streets: i) Core Street Development with a Retail Anchor Store: (1) Surface parking lots serving the anchor store may be exposed to the following streets in combination with the minimum frontage coverage exceptions indicated: (a) Sprague Ave: 50%minimum frontage coverage (b) Street B: 80%minimum frontage coverage (c) Other Streets: 0%minimum frontage coverage ii) Core Street Development without a Retail Anchor Store: (1) Surface parking lots serving this Core Street Development may be exposed to the following streets in combination with the minimum frontage coverage exceptions indicated: (a) Sprague Ave:70%minimum frontage coverage (b) Street B: 80%minimum frontage coverage Exhibit A Page 4 of 16 1 (c) Other Streets: 20%minimum frontage coverage 2.1.1 City Center District Zone Development Regulations Matrix- Remove ,,.d: .. it...,.. an..i...Lay •�.v�ia o..v e...i.......i'.oe.r:... .. h....r......•■._.. .r r`_.-x....a.r.ry....4 WW.=...... ........•w^+.•........+g...... ....r...a..:1 in ......., •.,a....---......i la- ma...a.- W.i......... ........r•4WpJ•ri Wi+.R..4 WJ...F+S ...aka Y.s u • w . -i r- . .rrt-s.-i iTTA w..........•...•.n ■..m......... 2.1.1.Ci Center Di , t Zone riro•..�..rr � a.Wr ..1.... .�.a.. L..la. oa.rar.. .. r D. c...x. ®fl l...'_in i MI r ... -- rte•. .'may --__ '...I-I.d.Y +f. r.• 1,i. 4•fh•• 9Nrl.Y .--r.. '.1..r7 I .4- � I'l].-.r..- ; u•4bwr. --ac i.as i■as n a...raftN.. .�•Y�� -.r I K.. I . wr•.'uriw. - ... . . ....� t• �.tr a • ...a. �.a i�t .�t r i.�rorr 1 ..rs.... I. ..ter 1+4.+ ISVAgil ,.. a.• rte lYri .7 r_' lru • }.••■•• ■•■• #pia l .il M1.i■11 arLW gba]..r•l■r _ .... r 'i I '■.M1 ,∎∎• • r I - - r .: 1 •:.r 1 - - ...a�sY- f.-d •r •. •r •- L w ...z .... _ 2.2.1. BUILDING ORIENTATION 2 M Stregijde Streejil Some regulations throughout Book II refer to "Front Streets" and "Side Streets." For the purposed of this Specific Plan,these terms are defined as follows: i) Front Streets shall include Sprague Avenue, Appleway Boulevard, City Center Core Street and City Center Street`B". ii) On corner properties along Sprague Avenue or Appleway Boulevard, Sprague Avenue or Appleway Boulevard shall be Front Streets, and all cross streets shall be Side Streets. The only exception to this is in the instance of the corner of the City Center Core Street at Sprague Avenue, in which case both Sprague Avenue and the Core Street shall be classified as Front Streets. Exhibit A Page 5 of 16 2.2.2. BUILDING USE 1) Retail a) City Center Retail i) Permitted Uses: (1) City Center retail anchors, including supermarkets, pharmacies, convenience stores, junior department stores and general merchandise "anchor retail" and "superstore" uses particularly those not specializing in the sale of large scale goods. (2) Retail sales&services,including the following: (a) Specialty food retail, including the following and similar specialty foods: chocolate/candy; wine tasting and similar specialty foods. supplies/culinary; general house wares; decorator/arts and design centers (including tile, floor and wall coverings); specialty hardware; antique stores selling high quality used goods (this accessories;books/magazines/stationary; music/instruments. furniture; clothing/shoe stores; stereo/video or computers; cameras/photography; sporting watches/clocks/plants;beauty/cosmetics;flowers;quality consignment stores (3) Eating and Drinking Establishments including the following uses: (a) Restaurants serving alcoholic beverages or providing entertainment provided this activity is clearly ancillary to food service. (b) Beverage vendors serving coffee, smoothies,juices,and other nonalcoholic beverages. (c) Chairs and tables for outdoor dining and carts for merchant display and sales (i.e. hot dog carts)may be permitted in the public right of way(i.e.in sidewalk areas)provided that: (i) The use maintains a minimum five foot wide unobstructed portion of sidewalk corridor which is clear and unimpeded for pedestrian traffic. (ii) The use keeps the full width of the building entrance clear and unimpeded for building access. (1) Entertainment&recreation uses,including the following: (a) Movie theaters and private performing arts theaters. cases the serving of alcohol must be clearly ancillary to the recreational use. alcoholic beverages,provided this activity is clearly ancillary to food service. (5) Art galleries and display spaces with a retail component. (6) Health and exercise clubs. (7) Banks and financial institutions (8) Business services businesses that generate a significant amount of foot traffic, such as computer and office supply,photocopy shops, photo finishers, and print shops excluding sales and storage of heavy equipment. Exhibit A Page 6 of 16 (9) Personal services especially those types of services that are particularly neighborhood oriented spas,beauty or barber shops, shoe repair. ii) Conditional Uses: Upon granting of a Conditional Use Permit: (1) Bars and nightclubs and casinos, including establishments providing entertainment, and establishments serving alcoholic beverages not clearly ancillary to food service. (2) Farmers Markets and other seasonal sales. (3) Other similar and compatible uses deemed by the Community Development Director/Designee to meet the purpose and intent of the Plan. iii) .pecial Conditions: not be applied to use conversion in an existing building. (2) Drive up/drive through windows are allowed for permitted uses listed above with direct access to Sprague Avenue. iv) Prohibited Uses: (1) Bail bonds offices (2) Gas Stations 2.2.5. Public Frontage Improvements 11 Sprague Avenue i) North Properties: The future curb and back of sidewalk will correspond approximately to the existing curb and back of sidewalk. (1) Prior to Streetscape Improvements: Public Frontage shall be constructed by developers as existing back of sidewalk. constructed. ii) South Properties. The future curb will be relocated and the future back of sidewalk will be located approximately 10 feet south of the existing right of way. (1) Prior to Streetscape Improvements: an in lieu fee for future improvements shall be required, Private Frontage/Front Setback Area treatments shall be built to the future back of sidewalk, and temporary sidewalk improvements shall be built between the existing back of sidewalk and the future back of sidewalk. (a) For large developments, the entire public frontage may be required to be built as development occurs (to be determined by the Community Development Director/Designee). constructed. Exhibit A Page 7 of 16 Remove figure 2.2.5 2)a)ii) City Center North Properties Remove figure 2.2.5 2)a)ii) City Center South Properties 2.3.1. STREET STANDARDS 6) Street Types New streets within the Plan Area are also recommended to incorporate bike routes that enhance the Comprehensive Plan's Bike/Pedestrian System. Appropriate pavement markings and signage shall be installed where appropriate. •- .. . .. . . .• - .. • . • • •- ... .. . - • •- • -• - District Zone. a) Core Street i) Purpose: Organize the primary public realm to create an environment suitable for shopping and unobstructed to provide ample room for pedestrians to walk, and to encourage activities including y. ii) Components (1) On street parking oriented parallel or at a 15 degree angle to the curb. (2) Each block shall have a single species of large, open habit deciduous trees with a maximum spacing of 10 feet on center. Trees should be located in tree grates that are flush mounted at the back of curb,or may be located in islands within the parking lanes. (a) Trees should be maintained in a way that provides unobstructed views to showroom windows and building signage. center.Light source should be located 11 13 feet above finished grade. (1) Fire hydrants shall be located on both sides of the street and installed at street corners wherever pessible Exhibit A Page 8 of 16 2.4.2. PARKING STANDARDS 2.4.2 PARKING PROVISIONS Permitted Maximum Permitted Minimum Parking Shared Parking Location of Use Categories Parking Provided Requirement w/Surface Parking Requirement Required Parking 1-Retail(except for corner store) on site,or on 3 space/1,000 sf or in street spaces a)in City Center lieu fee II space/1,000 sf Rimed within 500 ft on-site,or on- 3 space/1,000 sf or in- street spaces b)in Neighborhood Center lieu fee 4 space/1,000 sf Required within 200 ft on-site,or on- street spaces c)in other District Zones 3 space/1,000 sf 5 space/1,000 sf Not Required within 500 ft 2-Corner Store Retail on-site,or on- Required only in street spaces 3 space/1,000 sf 4 space/1,000 sf City Center within 200 ft 3-Eating and Drinking Establishment on site,or on street spaces a)in City Center /1 space/1,000 sf 10 space/1,000 sf Requited within 500 ft on-site,or on- street spaces b)in Neighborhood Center 6 space/1,000 sf 10 space/1,000 sf Required within 200 ft c in other District Zones 12 s ace/1,000 sf N/A Not Re uired on-site 4)Entertainment&Recreation on site,or on street spaces a)in City Center 6 space/1,000 sf 10 space/1,000 sf Requited within 500 ft b)in Gateway Commercial Center 12 space/1,000 sf N/A Required on-site 5)Vehicle Sales&Services 3 space/1,000 sf (for showroom) 5 space/1,000 sf Not Required on-site 6)Civic,Quasi-Civic&Cultural -11= on-site,or on- a) in City Center & street spaces Neighborhood Center A 3 space/1,000 sf 4 space/1,000 sf Required within 500 ft Exhibit A Page 9 of 16 2.4.2 PARKING PROVISIONS Permitted Maximum Permitted Minimum Parking Shared Parking Location of Use Categories Parking Provided Requirement w/Surface Parking Requirement Required Parking AIM on-site,or on- street spaces b)in other District Zones 4 s ace/1,000 sf N/A Not Re uired within 500 ft 7)Office on-site,or on- a)in City Center&Neighborhood street spaces Center 2.5 space/1,000 sf 3.5 space/1,000 sf Required within 200 ft on-site,or on- street spaces b)in other District Zones 2.5 space/1,000 sf 4 space/1,000 sf Not Required within 500 ft 8)Lodging on-site,or on- a)in City Center&Neighborhood street spaces Center 1 space/guest room 1 space/guest room Required within 200 ft b)in other District Zones 1 space/guest room 1.5 space/guest room Not Required on-site 9)Live-Work on-site,or on- 1 space/unit+0 1.5 space/unit+l street spaces space/employee space/employee Not Required within 200 ft 10)Residential I- 1 space/studio 1 space/unit 1 space/lbr unit 1.5 space/lbr unit 1 space/2br+unit 2.5 space/2br+unit 2 guest space/10 DU 4 guest space/10 DU Not Required on-site * On-street parking within the indicated distance may be counted toward minimum parking requirement with the approval of the Community Development Director/Designee 2.5.4. ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS M=1 ii) Guidelines (1) Form: (ii) In the City Center and in Neighborhood Centers, a vertical proportion of window panes or window openings (3:2 to 2:1 height: width ratio) should typically be used. Openings may be composed of a series of vertically proportioned panes or frames. Exhibit A Page 10 of 16 ii) Guidelines (1) By District Zones (a) City Center: colors used in new construction and renovations should build on the palette of colors of existing historic Spokane 1-alley buildings. In general, these include medium toned brick colors (typically red brick, with occasional use of white or tan brick; also, with light siding, according to architectural style as well. 2.6.1. GENERAL SIGNAGE REGULATIONS 2) Standards 1) Animated signs are permitted as follows: a. In the Gateway Commercial Center and Gateway Commercial Avenue Zones. b. Anywhere along Sprague Avenue - -• -• - ■• _.•- . •_• . - prohibited in the City Center District Zone). 16) Billboards shall be regulated by Section 22.110.130 SVMC.,EXCEPT that relocated billboards are prohibited within the City Center District Zone. Further,in all other zones within the Subarea Plan billboards may be constructed only on Sprague Avenue. Figure 2.1 District Zone Map — remove CCT and add MUA designation 2.6.2 Sign Type Regulations 5) Monument Signs iv) Monument Signs shall not exceed a maximum height of seven(7)feet above grade.v) The maximum area of a Monument Sign for permitted District Zones shall be as follows: (1) City Center Non Core Streets: 32 square feet. Exhibit A Page 11 of 16 FIG.2.6. SIGNAGE REGULATIONS CHART 2.6 SIGNAGE REGULATIONS 2.1.1 City Center 2.1.2 Neighborhood Center 2.1.3 Mixed-Use Avenue 2.1.4 Community Boulevard 2.1.5 Gateway Commercial Avenue 2.1.6 Gateway Commercial Centers 2.1 District Zones Co - Streets Non-Core ', reets 1 -Grand Projecting Sign pe itted -- permitted --- --- --- permitted 2-Marquee Signs per •tted per itted permitted permitted --- --- permitted 3-Wall Sign perms -d p: mitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted 4-Roof Sign permitter '-rmitted permitted permitted --- permitted permitted 5-Monument Sign --- permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted 6-Freestanding Sign --- --- --- permitted --- permitted permitted 7-Blade Sign permitted permitted permitted permitted restricted permitted permitted 8-Projecting Sign permitted permitted permitted permitted restricted permitted permitted 9-Awning Face Sign permitted permitted permitted permitted restricted permitted permitted 10-Awning Valance Sign permitted permitted permitted permitted restricted permitted permitted 11 -Awning Side Sign permitted permitted permitted permitted restricted permitted permitted 12-Above Awning Sign permitted permitted permitted permitted restricted permitted permitted 13-Under Awning Sign permitted permitted permitted permitted restricted permitted permitted 14-Canopy Fascia Sign permitt-, ermitted permitted permitted restricted permitted permitted 15-Above Canopy Sign permit -d p. mitted permitted permitted restricted permitted permitted 16-Under Canopy Sign per ted pe itted permitted permitted restricted permitted permitted 17-Recessed Entry Sign per itted per ted permitted permitted restricted permitted permitted 18-Window Sign p miffed permit,-d permitted permitted restricted permitted permitted 19-Time and Temperature Sign Aermitted permitte permitted permitted --- permitted permitted 20-Building Identification Canopy Fascia Sign permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted 21 -Building Identification Wall Sign permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted 22-Building Identification Window Sign permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted permitted 23-Temporary Signs See SVMC Chapter 22.110 for temporary sign regulations for all district zones Legend: ---:Not Permitted Permitted:These signs are allowed,by right,as indicated. Restricted:Signs are restricted to corner stores only. Book III Preamble The revitalization of the Sprague Avenue and Appleway Boulevard Corridors .,- new City Ccntcr will be a program of actions and investments. Given the substantial length of the corridor and the multiplicity of needs represented, this program will need to be implemented in phases over an extended period of time in accordance with the availability of City resources. The prioritization of City Actions will be guided by the goals and strategies outlined in Book I of this Subarea Plan. Complementing the regulatory controls contained in Book II, the strategic investment of limited public resources planned in this chapter are intended to accelerate the revitalization process and add to the appeal and success of the corridor as the central spine of the Spokane Valley community. City Actions will be guided by the community intent described in Book I. As opportunities arise that were not known at the time of this Plan's adoption, the City may consider alternative investment strategies and projects to more effectively realize the community vision for the Sprague and Appleway Corridors. 3.1. THE CITY CENTER The Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan identifies the vicinity around the intersection of Sprague and University as the future City Center for Spokane Valley. The Center will be the community's living room, with shops, restaurants, civic buildings, residences and public plazas all contributing to a new urban environment and central community gathering place. The City recognizes that the envisioned center will be built in cooperation with property owners and with support from community. Public/private partnership opportunities will be explored; however, the City does not intend to play the part of "developer". The property owners and the City will look for investment opportunities that will have a high probability of instigating the type if development that is envisioned by this Subarea Plan and supported by the community. During development of this Subarea Plan, the City's consultant developed a conceptual master plan for the first phase of the City Center. The City will consider the following list of strategies and tools in its effort to attract developers who will transform the concept into reality: 1. Identify opportunities for public information and involvement in the design and implementation of the City Center, especially the public spaces. 2. Encourage private developers to involve the community in the design of the City Center. 3. Adopt, monitor and adjust zoning controls that will allow a City Ccntcr to be built, in a form that is consistent with the City's vision. /I. Identify and pursue funding mechanisms for necessary infrastructure improvements that will support the development of City Center. 5. Prepare a SEPA/Planned Action ordinance for the area identified as the City Ccntcr. 6. Purchase a site for future City Hall. 7. Support the efforts of the Spokane County Library District to locate and construct a library as a civic anchor in the City Ccntcr. S. Support other civic entities to locate in the City Ccntcr. Exhibit A Page 13 of 16 3.1.1. CITY CENTER CIVIC FACILITIES The envisioned City Ccntcr will be a place where families and friends can gather, shop, dins and live. It is also a place that intends to include important public spaccs, such as plazas, gardens, fountains, green spaces and outdoor seating. These areas will be designed with the intent of establishing the City Center as the place the community gathers and interacts. Therefore thcsc public spaccs will be designed and located so they arc pleasant and fun to spend time in. Since thcsc spaccs will become the communities "living room"where people gather and share,the City will extensively engage the residents in the design process. The City also intends to purchase land and construct a City Hall. The City Hall will help establish the civic identity for the center and it will be efficient and comfortable for people to do business. It will be constructed using sustainable "green"practices. The City will encourage other civic uses to locate in the City Center. These could include a new library, firs district officcs and the officcs of other government purposes. 3.1 .1. STAGING THE STREET NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS 1) Stage 1: Establish the Transportation Framework Sprague Avenue is poised to become Spokane Valley's Main Street. and indeed is one of the primary streets of the proposed City Center. However, its present state limits it from supporting a strong activity center. Its roadway design prioritizes speed and through movement. In order to enable the City Center tThe City will reclaim Sprague Avenue to better function as an urban retail street; as this reclamation happens, Appleway Boulevard must be extended and configured to two-way traffic to complement Sprague Avenue and enhance the overall capacity of the street network. 2) Stage 2: Strengthen the City Ccntcr and Extend the Network In order to further enable the City Center tThe City will continue to reclaim Sprague Avenue to better function as an urban retail street; as this reclamation happens, Appleway Boulevard must be extended and configured to two-way traffic to complement Sprague Avenue and enhance the overall capacity of the street network 3.3. STREETSCAPE SEGMENTS MAP 17 Sprague Avenue City Centc� Cit. Center Boulevard: Along Sprague Avenue within the City Center, Sprague Avenue will consist of four through lanes,a landscaped center median with left turn pockets, a parallel parking lane along the north side of the street and a protected access lane with angled parking along the south side of the street. This street design will maintain the existing back of sidewalk along the north side of the street and require a new back of sidewalk along an expanded right of way along the south side of the street. Streetscape elements include: North Side • A ten(10)foot sidewalk along the back of curb and an eight(8)foot parking lane oriented parallel to the curb. with a maximum spacing of 80 feet on center. Light source should be located 25 35 feet above finished lighting. • A single species of large, moderate density, deciduous trees located in planting wells within the parking lane and/or in flush tree grates along the back of curb with a maximum spacing of 10 feet on center. South-Side Exhibit A Page 14 of 16 • A 15 foot sidewalk along the back of curb and a six(6)foot planted median located between the street and access lane. • Boulevard scale decorative street lighting with banners located within the access lanes planted median with a maximum spacing of 120 feet on center. Light source should be located 25 35 feet above finished grade. • Pedestrian scale decorative street lighting located within the sidewalk with a maximum spacing of 80 feet on center. Light source should be located 12 11 feet above finished grade. • A single species of large, moderate density, deciduous trees located within the access lanes planted median and in flush tree grates along the back of curb with a maximum spacing of 10 feet on center. City Center T andmark: Following the successful instigation of a new City Center, the City will consider locating and building a City Center landmark to highlight the City Center. It will memorialize the City Center's location and help direct people into the City Center from Sprague Avenue. - : -. .. --s. --- �' -- z__3 - — -- .'Fr r I3 1 I.' Y� .e• .- r - - :v7�.— Eq-� ..e. ': .m...= ' -_. . _ __ a -- - _ .MIA alamirs North Side South Side Exhibit A Page 15 of 16 . ..... .....„ ... .. 7 . . X. ,_ ..,. , „.. . , . r, • . . \ ., , ii , .e p 4. Inprr ; :'41:414 21 (i ( eater H i 1 �' i :M AO Mug abk 1 MI —._ _ Core 1.et 1#Ili// Inters ction ff ...-Th ... A_ „ 41I7 - .., T / rriti - —ibif,rj ' i `... lE .e $ __A a _ ..9.. ).--i_ North Side South Side North Side South Side 764 City Gateway The City will consider locating and building a City Gateway near the intersection of the future I-90 off-ramp and Sprague Avenue that announces entrance into the City of Spokane Valley. and helps direct visitors to the City Center. The potential location of a city gateway is shown in Fig.3.3 Streetscape Segments Map. GLOSSARY provide active"Main Street"like shopping and entertainment environments. Exhibit A Page 16 of 16 Exhibit B Zoning i.e.e ..y■1 e e Broadway R=4-w°'Broadway IIU Broadway NM BroadwayBroadway U Broadway Broadway Gethsemane Broadway , T. o Luthan I' oftNC Y� � C7 R-3 — 1 I ■ iSpringfield cC Broadway Springfield Springfield Is Elementary 8$ g M I,, -- Alki Alki± AM Alkli 1 PC1 Alki • (�_ ° R-3 MM I k Y 'd C7 " _ o E Olive L-Olive _ - L_ St John : 4 R 13 L-_ — „ 1--. -4:= 3 Vianney — I 1 j .4 -Valle_y-wa Vab\'!`le_y_way I Va1le_y_way _V_alley_way Nc t_LValle_y_way _Valle_y_way V_alle_y_w.ay V_alley_w ly Vtalley_way IT I IV ill!! ��i�� ■i■■■ � ■�■I■ b Nixon •41111 ML Nixon a R-3 •b • I .1� w I '�. E 1111111111 a..F aim' e i • - !n - .111 +I=- _= .e *Main, Man_ ,T��e - � � Main Main�m -Main 3 •■;_li ------- - -__ `______ li` iii j••• �ikij� Al �nn Balfour Park CCT ��■ ■■�: i1m■ lZiveratde •..Di■ \,Balfour Parlo � `rs d■ >, i&l'a.l C ■J..i' $i �i ii:u. ,■ • Contract Sprague Spragprague Sprague Sprague Sprague a Sprague Sprague Sprague �Snrague v►- ,717Irn 1 1 g Based Education N m?A o \ ECPA-01-10 '� �� : o 1 I0 ccT ■\;\�. +�� Z � Applewa a�\ .,, `\��\�� b�I CB4 Apple _ �ea� �, � �IT §§ 1\ � �� i/I�i waw Pop m \ �\\\ ��\ 1'- ��f ,� �� YAppi'eway o , �i \ �l \ �, -- 3r � �� 1 e :- - - I . 11611111_uuiiri :a,i,,,,Ill _ I 1 Wu III 4th= A =I 4th __ °_ -_ 4th 4th I■ � —_°- � `— _�� DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 11-002 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE SPOKANE VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CODE, SPECIFICALLY THE SPOKANE VALLEY SPRAGUE APPLEWAY CORRIDOR SUBAREA PLAN; DELETING REFERENCES TO THE DESIGNATION "CITY CENTER"; AND AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION "CITY CENTER" TO "MIXED USE AVENUE"; AND AMENDING ORDINANCE 09-021. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, (The "City") is a noncharter Code City organized under the laws of Title 35A RCW; and WHEREAS, the City has the authority to amend its development regulations pursuant to RCW 35A.63.100; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, ( The "City Council"), I pursuant to that authority, adopted Ordinance 09-021 on September 152-5-, 2009, adopting the development regulations implementing the Spokane Valley Sprague Appleway Subarea Plan, (The"Subarea Plan"); and WHEREAS, on October 26, 2010, the City Council passed a motion to forward an emergency Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code amendment to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewedtthis request, as well as the recommendation of the Community development Department to approve this request, at a study session on November 18, 2010 and conducted a public hearing on December 9, 2010; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Findings and Recommendations and the same were presented to the City Council on January 4, 2011; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered this Ordinance amending the Zoning Code and Map and the Findings and Recommendations of the Planning Commission on January 18, 2011, for the first reading and on January 25, 2011, for the second and final reading, with public comment received at both City Council meetings; and WHEREAS, one of the land use designations contained within the Subarea Plan was the "City Center" designation; and WHEREAS, at the time the City Center designation was approved, the City of Spokane Valley intended to make significant investments in the City Center area through the purchase of property on which it would construct and operate a new City Hall as well as construct improvements to streets and streetscapes adjacent to the new City Hall; and Ordinance 11-002,Amending Zoning Map Page 1 of 6 DRAFT WHEREAS, the plan for the development of the City Center property also included the construction of a Library within its boundaries; and WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, adopted pursuant to chapter 36.70A RCW, (The "Comprehensive Plan") envisioned that certain uses within the City Center area would be restricted and limited to encourage the development of a City Center that would provide the community with, "its symbolic, social and geographic heart," the "center of its civic and social life" and provide services such as shops, cafes, restaurants, community services and the offering of"comfortable public streets and public places;" and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan further envisioned that the new City Hall was intended to "preside over the City's main outdoor gathering space and its vista will be the iconic image that stands for Spokane Valley," and spur development including a new regional center including retail, office and residential development; and WHEREAS, the City Center designation in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations did not allow a number of specific uses including vehicle sales, convenience stores, gas stations and thrift stores; and WHEREAS, the Mixed Use Avenue designation in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations does allow such uses; and WHEREAS, the City Center designation in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations, once the development of the "core" City Center Main Street commenced, restricted retail development in areas adjacent to Main Street until specific development thresholds were met; and WHEREAS, the City Center designation in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequent development regulations imposed certain design restrictions and construction requirements that were unique to the City Center area; and WHEREAS, in the last sixteen months since the adoption of the Subarea Plan, the City's revenue forecast has continued to deteriorate. Specifically, sales taxes are projected to decrease by $400,000 from 2010 to 2011; property taxes are projected to decrease by $100,000 from 2010 to 2011 and funds available from the real estate excise tax have decreased from a high of approximately $2.2 million in 2007 and 2008 to approximately $900,000 in 2010 and 2011; and WHEREAS, funds for significant private development are not as available as they would have been at the time the initial ordinance was passed, and major commercial investments within the City have had financial difficulties; and WHEREAS, the City is not able and does not intend to make any significant investment in the Center area as was contemplated at the time the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations comprising the Subarea Plan was adopted. Specifically the City Council has, by motion, ended negotiations for the purchase of property on which to locate a new City Hall and adopted a 2011 budget that does not include sums for the purchase of such property, and further Ordinance 11-002,Amending Zoning Map Page 2 of 6 DRAFT reduced funds available for the construction of a new City Hall by $2.2 million to fund other necessary capital projects; and and WHEREAS,the voters of the City rejected a bond proposal to construct a Library within the City Center property; and WHEREAS, the property owners within the City Center designation are burdened by the restriction on allowable uses outlined above, the further restrictions that would be in place if and when a development plan for the core was adopted, and the design restrictions and requirements unique to the city hallCity Center designation, without the City investment and infrastructure improvements; and WHEREAS, the City has been made aware of potential development that could occur within the City Center area that currently is precluded by the current designation; and WHEREAS, a number of uses, buildings and signs have been made non-conforming by the adoption of the City Center designation and development regulations implementing the same; and WHEREAS, testimony before the City Council and Planning Commission has demonstrated both the economic hardships and desire to remove the current limitations as is set forth in the findings Findings of€Fact below; and WHEREAS, the issues and factors concerning the creation of the City Center designation has been the subject of three years of study and analysis, and public meetings and testimony, specifically as set forth in Ordinance 09-022 and in additional public hearings and meetings identified in the findings of fact below; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 2006 prior to the adoption of the Subarea Plan, recognized the goal of identifying and creating a City Center for the City of Spokane Valley, and the City Council wishes to continue to pursue this goal with staff, taking into consideration the existing economic situation and the City's current financial circumstances, in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommendations fail to take into account the specific factors set forth in the findings of fact below; and WHEREAS adoption of this amendment to the Zoning Code and Map must comply with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA") as set forth in RCW 43.21C; and WHEREAS, the City is required to notify the Washington State Department of Commerce of its intent to adopt this amendment to the Zoning Code and Map at least 60 days prior to final adoption pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106. Ordinance 11-002,Amending Zoning Map Page 3 of 6 DRAFT NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. The facts set forth in the recitals above are incorporated by this reference as Findingsw of Fact. -L2.The proposed amendment to the Zoning Code and Map has been provided to the Department of Commerce pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106 on November 3, 2010. 2 3.The City of Spokane Valley has complied with the requirements of RCW 43.21C and issued a Determination of Non Significance ("DNS") for the proposed amendment on November 12, 2010 in a manner consistent with the City of Spokane Valley Environmental Ordinance. 4. At the time the City Center designation was approved, the City intended to make significant investments in the City Center area through the purchase of property on which it would construct and operate a new City Hall as well as construct improvements to streets and streetscapes adjacent to the new City Hall. 5. The plan for development of the City Center property also included plans for the construction of a Library within the City Center boundaries but the voters rejected a bond proposal to construct that Library. .6.In the last sixteen months, since the adoption of the Subarea Plan, the city's revenue forecast has continued to deteriorate. Specifically, sales taxes are projected to decrease by $400,000 from 2010 to 2011; property taxes are projected to decrease by $100,000 from 2010 to 2011, and funds available from the real estate excise tax have decreased from a high of approximately $2.2 million in 2007 and 2008 to approximately $900,000 in 2010 and 2011. 47.Funds for significant private development are not as available as they would have been at the time the initial ordinance was passed, and major commercial investments within the City have had financial difficulties. The City Council has, by motion, ended negotiations for the purchase of property on which to locate a new City Hall and adopted a 2011 budget that does not include sums for the purchase of such property, and further reduced funds available for the construction of a City Hall by $2.2 million to fund other necessary capital projects. City has been made aware of potential development that could occur within the City Center area that currently is precluded by the current designation. 99 Public testimony has favored and opposed the change. Specific comments at the City Council meeting of October 26, 2010 supporting the amendment include comments that businesses were struggling, vacancies rates were high, and that the property owners e€ property wherewithin the City Center designation was planned to be located supports removal of the current restrictions; further testimony at the Planning Commission meeting on December 9, 2010 supporting the amendment indicated that the City Ceouncil has, since taking office in January of 2010 reviewed the Subarea Plan in detail, reviewing reviewed each zone classification, and has—heard testimony concerning the impacts of the current Ordinance 11-002,Amending Zoning Map Page 4 of 6 DRAFT regulations on development and how the current economy is affecting the properties within this designation, as well as the desire of property owners for additional flexibility for development within this designation as well as testimony by a property owner within the City Center designation requesting more flexibility to enable redevelopment to increase the tax base and create more jobs. Further, public comment at the City Council meetings of January 18, 2011 and January 25, 2011, supporting this change included comments that current restrictions stymied business growth and development, created a significant percentage of non-conforming uses and buildings, resulted in little or no building applications since the designation was established; further that City investment and major tenant interest has not materialized, that the City is suffering the effects of a serious economic downturn, and that investment opportunities may exist if the restrictions on use and development were removed. 10. The City of Spokane Valley has provided notice and engaged in a public process to ensure citizen participation pursuant to RCW 36.70A.035, RCW 36.70A.130 and RCW 36.70A.140, providing the public an opportunity to be heard on October 26, 2010, December 9, 2010, January 18, 2011 and January 25, 2011. The notice provided and meetings identified constitute early and continuous public participation in the consideration of this proposed amendment to the comprehensive plan and map. 11. The City Council does not accept the Findings of the Planning Commission for the following reasons set forth in these Findings of Fact as well as the following:: a. The public has had an appropriate opportunity to be heard. Public notice was provided and public comment on this issue was taken on October 26, December 9, 2010, January 18, 2011, and January 25, 2011. There further is no evidence in the record that the current designation, without the anticipated City investment, provided any guidance or stability for future economic investment, on the contrary, economic development has not occurred due to the restrictions currently in place. b. The change is not inconsistent with the remaining portions of the Comprehensive Plan including Chapter 2.2.1-City Center, and Goals and Policies LUG-6 and LUP- 6.1.11. The City Council is not abandoning the concept of a future City Center and is actively exploring alternatives to this site. All remaining provisions of the Subarea Plan contained in the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations are still in place. c. The City Council finds that the economic threat to existing property owners within the City Center designation is immediate and a result of the restrictive development standards imposed. 12. This amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as amended by Ordinance 11-001. BASED UPON THE RECITALS AND FINDINGS OF FACT SET FORTH ABOVE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Ordinance 11-002,Amending Zoning Map Page 5 of 6 DRAFT Section 1: Amendment of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code. The Spokane Valley Sprague Appleway Corridor Subarea Plan is hereby amended as is set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. Section 2: Amendment of the Spokane Valley Official Zoning Map. The Official Zoning Map is hereby amended as is set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. Section 3: 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 lack of constitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 4: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley as provided by law. Passed by the City Council this day of January, 2011. ATTEST: Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved As To Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 11-002,Amending Zoning Map Page 6 of 6 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 25, 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Solid Waste Update GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Attached is proposed interlocal agreement for Solid Waste Services and a Utility Tax Fact Sheet developed by the City of Spokane, and other documents as noted below. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten, Deputy Mayor Schimmels ATTACHMENTS 1. Interests of Spokane County 2. Proposed Interlocal Agreement 3. Utility Tax Fact Sheet (developed by the City of Spokane) 4. Briefing Book Table of Contents/Outline 5. City of Spokane Valley Specific Concerns regarding Interlocal 6. Notice of Solid Waste Summit Final Meeting February 2 and 3, 2011 Interests of Spokane County Regarding Revisions to the Regional Solid Waste System Governance 1. The Regional Solid Waste System ("System")will become an independent entity; Spokane County's preference is for a non-profit corporation. It is anticipated that a new interlocal agreement will be prepared between the participants in the new System. 2. The System will be governed by a Board of Directors that uniformly represents the interests of all participants in the System. 3. Decisions regarding System policies and management will be made by the Board of Directors using a weighted voting structure that equitably represents the interests of all participants in the System 4. The system will be financially independent from other municipal entities in Spokane County. 5. The System Director and system management staff will report to the Board of Directors for the System. 6. Existing employees of the system, who are members of a bargaining unit, will be transitioned into the new system and will not lose wages, benefits, and working conditions currently provided by their bargaining agreements. 7. Revenues of the system will be adequate to fund operations, maintenance, equipment replacement, repairs, operating reserves, capital improvements, and debt service for the system. 8. Revenues will be derived from the System to adequately fund on-going monitoring, operations, and maintenance for existing closed regional landfills. The owners of existing landfills will retain liability for their own landfills. 9. The new interlocal agreement will address the ownership of the Waste to Energy Facility, transfer stations in the Spokane Valley and at Colbert, as well as other equipment and assets. 10. A Spokane County Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC), as authorized under RCW 70.95.165, will participate and assist in development of programs and policies in an advisory role to the Board of Directors for the new System. DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM [DRAFT OF NOVEMBER 1, 20101 INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT AGREEMENT FOR SOLID WASTE SERVICES BY THE SPOKANE REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ALLIANCE by and among City Airway Heights, City of Cheney, City of Deer Park, City of Fairfield, City of Latah, City of Liberty Lake, City of Medical Lake, City of Millwood, City of Rockford, City of Spangle, City of Spokane, City of Spokane Valley, City of Waverly, and Spokane County , , 2010 Page 1 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM TABLE OF CONTENTS [To be inserted/revised later] Page 2 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11111201012:36 PM INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT AGREEMENT FOR SOLID WASTE SERVICES BY THE SPOKANE REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ALLIANCE THIS INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT AGREEMENT FOR SOLID WASTE SERVICES BY THE SPOKANE REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ALLIANCE ("Agreement") is entered into by and among the City Airway Heights, Washington, a code city duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington ("Airway Heights"), the City of Cheney, Washington, an optional municipal code city duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington ("Cheney"),the City of Deer Park, Washington, a code city duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington ("Deer Park"), the City of Fairfield, Washington, a town duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington ("Fairfield"), the City of Latah, Washington, a town duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the. State of Washington ("Latah"), the City of Liberty Lake, Washington ("Liberty Lake"), the City of Medical Lake, Washington, a code city duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington ("Medical Lake"), the City of Millwood, Washington, a code city duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington ("Millwood"), the City of Rockford, Washington ("Rockford"), the City of Spangle, Washington, a town duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington("Spangle"), the City of Spokane, Washington, a first class charter city duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington ("Spokane"), the City of Spokane Valley, Washington ("Spokane Valley"), the City of Waverly, a town duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington ("Waverly") and Spokane County, Washington, a class A county duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Washington ("County") pursuant to Chapter 39.34 RCW. The parties are individually referred to as "Member" and collectively as the "Members." The Members agree as follows: ARTICLE I RECITALS Section 1.1 Since 1989, Spokane and the County have operated under an Interlocal cooperation agreement for the operation of a regional Solid Waste management system, including the development and operation of the Waste to Energy Facility owned and operated by the City of Spokane. Section 1.2 The City of Liberty Lake incorporated in 2001, and the City of Spokane Valley incorporated in 2003. Section 1.3 The contracts for participation in the regional Solid Waste management system by both Liberty Lake and Spokane Valley will expire in 2011. Section 1.4 The bonds issued to finance the construction of the Waste to Energy Facility will soon be retired, and the initial 25-year term of the Interlocal agreement will expire in 2014. Page 3 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 111112010 12:36 PM Section 1.5 The City of Spokane and other incorporated cities in the County, together with the County, desire to enter into a successor interlocal cooperation agreement allowing for the formation of a new governance structure to manage Solid Waste throughout the County. Section 1.6 The Members have agreed that a new governance structure will enable the Members to engage in coordinated Solid Waste management, and other activities including the operation and maintenance of SWMA Facilities, in response to the current and future Spokane County SWM Plan. Section 1.7 The Members will exercise control of the new governance structure, called the "Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management Alliance" ("SWMA"), through appointment of board members by and from their legislative bodies, who will represent their respective local governments. Section 1.8 All prior existing interlocal agreements shall be superseded by this Agreement. Section 1.9 Spokane will continue to own the Spokane WTE Facility, the Valley Recycling Center /Transfer Station, and the North County Recycling Center I Transfer Station (as well as their associated recycling centers), and will continue to provide waste to energy disposal services to the SWMA Members. Each SWMA Member will continue to retain ownership of their Member Landfills along with any and all associated liability, responsibility, and operation. Section 1.10 Through this Agreement, the Members intend that the County shall remain responsible under RCW 70.95.080(2) for updating the Spokane County SWM Plan for the County, and that future revisions and updates of this Plan will be prepared, with the participation of the SWMA Members and an expanded Solid Waste Advisory Committee in accordance with the provisions of RCW 70.95.080. Section 1.11 The SWMA Members will exercise and enforce their respective County and municipal Flow Control Powers to effect the SWMA Solid Waste Services components of this Agreement and the Spokane County SWM Plan. ARTICLE II PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT Section 2.1 The Members agree that the purpose of this Agreement is to establish SWMA as the new inter-governmental structure pursuant to RCW Chapter 39.34 to engage in coordinated SWMA Solid Waste Services in response to the current and future Spokane County SWM Plans. SWMA's primary purposes in this collaborative endeavor shall be to equitably and fairly distribute power among all Members by: A) Providing freely available, timely access to information; B) Requiring and implementing transparent, forum-based decision-making; and C) Maintaining public accountability for actions and decision-making. Page 4 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM 2.1.2 SWMA's other primary purposes include and the Members have agreed that SWMA shall: A) Carry out the public purposes expressed in the Spokane County SWM Plan and this Agreement, as both may be amended or supplemented from time to time; B) Commit Members to support SWMA through their respective Flow Control Powers, that is, by directing all Solid Waste in their Local Collection Systems or otherwise under their regulatory control to SWMA Facilities; C) Function as a new governance structure that provides regional SWMA Solid Waste Services; D) Equitably distribute Spokane's Solid Waste disposal utility tax revenues back to the Members in the form of a revenue-sharing payment; E) Maintain an integrated, regional approach to providing SWMA Solid Waste Services; F) Upgrade the WTE Facility and other infrastructure and implement improved technologies for Recycling, environmental protection and sustainability as may become commercially and scientifically proven and economically feasible; and G) Maintain use of the WTE Facility, not only for SWMA Solid Waste Services, but as a Recycling hub and Energy Recovery source for economic development in Spokane County. Section 2.2 Each Member foregoes the opportunity to individually plan for, fund, construct, or otherwise engage in Solid Waste Handling except for their own Local Collection Systems. Section 2.3 CONTRACT DOCUMENTS The following exhibits are incorporated by reference into this Agreement as though fully set forth herein: Exhibit A— Interlocal agreements that will be superseded by this Agreement Section 2.4 DEFINITIONS For purposes of this Agreement, the following terms shall have the meanings set out below. 2.4.1 "Debt Service" means the principal of, interest on, sinking fund requirements, reserve account requirements and any coverage requirement required by a resolution authorizing the issuance of SWMA debt. Page 5 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/112010 12:36 PM 2.4.2 "Disposal Site"means "Disposal Site" as defined by RCW 70.95.030(6) as "the location where any final treatment, utilization, processing, or deposit of solid waste occurs," as the same may be amended or updated through time. 2.4.3 "Energy Recovery" means "Energy Recovery" as defined by RCW 70.95.030(7), as "a process operating under federal and state environmental laws and regulations for converting solid waste into usable energy and for reducing the volume of Solid Waste," as the same may be amended or updated through time." 2.4.4 "Flow Control Powers" means, in either the case of an incorporated City or in the case of Spokane County, those regulatory powers that enable a City or Spokane County to irrevocably covenant, obligate and bind itself to direct all Solid Waste collected in within, generated within, or otherwise within or subject to its regulatory jurisdiction or Local Collection System to SWMA Facilities for SWMA Solid Waste Services 2,4.5 "Incineration" means "Incineration" as defined by RCW 70.95.030(9) as "a process of reducing the volume of solid waste operating under federal and state environmental laws and regulations by use of an enclosed device using controlled flame combustion," as the same may be amended or updated through time." 2.4,6 "Landfill" means "Landfill"as defined by RCW 70.95.030(12), as " a disposal facility or part of a facility at which Solid Waste is placed in or on land and which is not a land treatment facility,"as the same may be amended or updated through time. 2.4.7 "Local Collection System" means any municipal Solid Waste collection system(s) that is/are operated by or under contract pursuant to applicable state law with one of the SWMA Members or by a municipality that is not a SWMA Member. 2.4.8 "Member Landfills" means all Landfills within Spokane County that are not Spokane Landfills. 2.4.9 "Member Population" means that population of each Member that is determined from information maintained by the State of Washington Office of Financial Management (or successor agency) as of December 31 of the calendar year before the year in which any particular vote of the Board of Directors is taken. 2.4,10 "North County Recycling Center/Transfer Station" means the recycling center and transfer station located at North 22123 Elk-Chattaroy Road, Intersection Elk-Chattaroy Road and Highway 2, Spokane County owned by the City of Spokane. 2.4.11 "Recyclable Materials" means "Recyclable materials" as defined by RCW 70.95.130(17) as "those solid wastes that are separated for recycling or reuse, such as papers, metals, and glass, that are identified as recyclable material pursuant to a local comprehensive solid waste plan [ in this case, the Spokane County SWM Plan]", as the same may be amended or updated through time. Page 6 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM 2.4.12 "Recycling" means "Recycling" as defined by RCW 70.95.130(18) as "transforming or remanufacturing waste materials into usable or marketable materials or use other than landfill disposal or incineration," as the same may be amended or updated through time. 2.4.13 "Sewage Sludge" means "Sewage sludge" as defined by RCW 70.95.130(20) as "semisolid substance consisting of settled sewage solids combined with varying amounts of water and dissolved materials, generated from a wastewater treatment system, that does not meet the requirements of chapter 70,95J RCW," as the same may be amended or updated through time. 2.4.14 "Solid Waste" means "Solid waste" as defined by RCW 70.95.030(22), as "all putrescible and nonputrescible solid and semisolid wastes including, but not limited to, garbage, rubbish, ashes, industrial wastes, swill, sewage sludge, demolition and construction wastes, abandoned vehicles or parts thereof, and recyclable materials," as the same may be amended or updated through time. 2.4.15 "Solid Waste Handling" means "Solid waste handling" as defined by RCW 70.95.030 (23) as "the management, storage, collection, transportation, treatment, utilization, processing, and final disposal of solid wastes, including the recovery and recycling of materials from solid wastes, the recovery of energy resources from solid wastes or the conversion of the energy in solid wastes to more useful forms or combinations thereof," as the same may be amended or updated through time. 2.4.16 "Source Separation" means "Source separation" as defined by RCW 70.95.030(24) as " the separation of different kinds of solid waste at the place where the waste originates," as the same may be amended or updated through time. 2.4.17 "Spokane County SWM Plan" means the Spokane County 2009 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, dated September 15, 2009, and as may be amended from time to time. 2.4.18 "Spokane Landfills" means the currently operating disposal cell at Spokane's Northside Landfill, the closed and remediated Northside Landfill subject to EPA closure, and the Southside Landfill. 2.4.19 "Spokane Series 1989 Bonds" means the two Spokane-issued, RCW 35.92 revenue bond series, Series 1989 A (in the principal amount of$74,730,000) and Series 1989 B (in the amount of$30, 520,000. 2.4.20 "SWMA" means the Spokane Regional Solid Waste Alliance and governance structure created by this Agreement. 2.4.21 "SWMA Board" or "Board of Directors" or "Board" means the board of directors created pursuant to this Agreement to manage and oversee SWMA. Page 7 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM 2.4.22 "SWMA Debt" means any notes, bonds or other obligation of the SWMA issued to finance or refinance improvements, betterments, or extensions to existing or future SWMA Facilities or any other costs related to the SWMA System. 2.4.23 "SWMA Facilities" means the North County Recycling Center/Transfer Station, the Valley Recycling Center /Transfer Station, the WTE Facility, the Spokane Landfills, and any other such future facilities as SWMA may construct or so designate. 2.4.24 "SWMA Facilities Maintenance and Operation Expenses" means all costs and expenses relating to and properly chargeable to the operation and maintenance of the SWMA Facilities, whether directly or by contract, including taxes chargeable to the operations of the SWMA Facilities plus administrative overhead expenses, and any other similar costs chargeable to the SWMA Facilities. 2,4.25 "SWMA Solid Waste Services" means all Solid Waste Handling services provided by SWMA, but specifically excludes Solid Waste collection services provided by Members through Local Collection Systems. 2.4.26 "SWMA System" means all SWMA Facilities that are owned, operated, or controlled by SWMA or that are used or useful in the performance of SWMA's functions excluding Local Collection Systems. 2.4.27 "SWAC" means the local solid waste advisory committee mandated under RCW 70.95.165(3), that will be involved in providing continuing advice to SWMA in addition to its advice on the development of the Spokane County SWM Plan, described in the mandating statute as follows: (1) assist in the development of programs and policies concerning Solid Waste Handling and disposal; (2) to review and comment upon proposed rules, policies, or ordinances prior to their adoption 2.4.28 "Tipping Fees" means the fees established by SWMA for use of SWMA Facilities or other solid waste transfer, disposal or recycling facilities under contract with the SWMA. 2.4.29 "Valley Recycling Center/Transfer Station" means the recycling center and transfer station owned by Spokane and located at 3941 North Sullivan Road, Spokane Valley, Washington. 2.4.30 "Waste Reduction" means "Waste reduction" as defined by RCW 70.95.030(27) as " reducing the amount or toxicity of waste generated or reusing materials," as the same may be amended or updated through time. 2.4.31 "WTE Facility" means the Waste to Energy Facility, a Solid Waste Handling facility including, without limit, a Solid Waste disposal site, transfer station, and Recycling center, that is owned and operated by Spokane and is located at 2900 South Geiger Boulevard, Spokane, Washington, and any other facilities that may be constructed by SWMA in the future. 2.4.32 "Yard Debris" means "Yard debris" as defined by RCW 70.95.030(28) as "plant material Page 8 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM commonly created in the course of maintaining yards and gardens, and through horticulture, gardening, landscaping, or similar activities. Yard debris includes but is not limited to grass clippings, leaves, branches, brush, weeds, flowers, roots, windfall fruit, vegetable garden debris, holiday trees, and tree prunings four inches or less in diameter," as the same may be amended or updated through time. ARTICLE III SPOKANE REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ALLIANCE GOVERNANCE Section 3.1 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ALLIANCE The Members do hereby agree to create and regionally cooperate through the "Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management Alliance" ("SWMA"), which shall be operated, governed, and possessed of powers and authority as provided herein for the term of this Agreement and as authorized by the Interlocal Cooperation Act, RCW Chapter 39.34 et seq. Section 3.2 PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY 3.2.1 Open Deliberations and Actions. The Members intend for SWMA to conduct its deliberations and take action openly. Therefore, the SWMA Board shall operate and conduct its business subject to the Open Public Meetings Act (Ch. 42.30 RCW, as may be amended), the Public Records Act (Ch. 42.56 RCW, as may be amended), local government accountancy statutes (RCW 43.09.200 et seq., as may be amended), and other applicable laws, regulations, and self-imposed policies. 3,2.2 SWMA OMBUDSMAN A) SWMA Ombudsman. In furtherance of Section 3.2.1, the Members hereby agree to establish an ombudsman position, the "SWMA Ombudsman," to receive, review, investigate, mediate, internal and external complaints and questions regarding SWMA operational performance and/or all matters related to this Agreement. i) The SWMA Ombudsman shall be an independent, unrelated third party individual that shall be appointed as an independent contractor of the SWMA by the Board of Directors by Majority Vote. ii) The Ombudsman shall serve an initial contractual term of 5 years, renewable at the sole option of the SWMA Board of Directors to a maximum of 15 years. B) SWMA Ombudsman Duties and Responsibilities. i) The SWMA Ombudsman is charged with receiving and handling concerns and questions from the Members, SWMA staff and/or employees, SWMA Directors, the general public, and concerned citizens. ii) The SWMA Ombudsman shall oversee and actively monitor the Page 9 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM investigation of complaints of improper action or activity regarding SWMA and/or matters related to this Agreement. iii) The SWMA Ombudsman shall ensure that SWMA policies and procedures are uniformly applied within and outside of the SWMA organization. iv) The SWMA Ombudsman shall monitor Solid Waste Handling activities as they relate to this Agreement, SWMA, the Members, and the Spokane County SWM Plan. v) The SWMA Ombudsman shall review SWMA policies and procedures to coordinate and propose alignment to resolve legitimate complaints or issues. vi) The SWMA Ombudsman shall make recommendation for further action to the Board of Directors. Section 3.3 No EFFECT ON MEMBER POLICE POWERS Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to limit the exercise of a Member's police or regulatory powers as may be required or allowed by law. The Members confirm that the SWMA Board has no local Solid Waste collection authority within each Member's jurisdiction or within its Local Collection System. However, the SWMA Board will have a central role in developing and revising future Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plans and enforcing Member Flow Control Powers to effect the objectives of that Plan and the purpose of this Agreement. In addition, the SWMA Board may comment on proposed changes by Members to their Local Collection System plans where such changes could affect the amount, timing or characteristics of Solid Waste to be handled in the SWMA System. Section 3.4 No EFFECT ON LANDFILL LIABILITY Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to alter Members' ownership of, operational responsibilities for, and/or liabilities associated with or related to the Member Landfills, whether now existing and identified or as of yet unknown, including, without limit, any liability for remedial action, clean-up, or closure pursuant to state, federal, or local law, including, without limit, the Washington Model Toxics Control Act (RCW 70.105D) or the Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq.). Section 3.5 SWMA BOARD 3.5.1 Composition. The Board of Directors for SWMA shall consist of one Director and one Alternate Director from each Member. One Director and one Alternate Director shall be appointed by and from the legislative bodies of each Member. Both the Director and the Alternate Director shall be elected officials of the Member. The Director and Alternate Director of each Member appointed to the SWMA Board shall serve at the will and discretion of the legislative body of that Member. Any Member may remove its Director or Alternate Director from the SWMA Board at any time. In the event that a Member's Director or Alternate Director Page 10 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM is so removed, is no longer qualified to serve on, or otherwise departs from the SWMA Board, that Member's legislative body shall promptly appoint a new Director or Alternate Director to the SWMA Board. 3.5.2 Local government representation. It is the Members' intent that a representative on the SWMA Board will represent his or her Member local government in voting and acting as a member of the SWMA Board of Directors. The Members hereby agree that legislative oversight by their respective local governments shall not be required for any Board decisions in the management and operation of the SWMA System, except as expressly provided herein or except as required by applicable Federal, state, or local law. Board members shall represent the interests of their respective local governments in carrying out their responsibilities to act in the best interests of SWMA. Section 3.6 QUORUM AND VOTING 3.6.1 Quorum. For purposes of this Agreement, a "Quorum" shall be defined as a majority of the Board of Directors members. 3.6.2 Procedures and voting. A Member's Alternate Director shall vote in place of that Member's Director when the Director is absent or unavailable or when the Director position is vacant. The SWMA Board shall establish procedures for conducting its meetings consistent with Roberts Rules of Order or other rules deemed appropriate, which procedure shall at a minimum include, without limit, the following provisions: A) All decisions made, actions taken, and business conducted by the SWMA Board shall be pursuant to vote at a duly called meeting of the Board of Directors where a Quorum of the Board of Directors is present; and B) Each SWMA Board member shall be duly authorized, and hereby is duly authorized, to represent his/her particular Member and to act as its agent with respect to all business of decisions by, and exercises of the powers and authority vested in the Board by this Agreement; and C) Each SWMA Board member shall also be responsible for seeing that its Member local government and community is fully informed of decisions made and actions taken by the SWMA Board. 3.6.3 Voting Categories. Each action of the SWMA Board shall be by Majority Vote or by Super Majority Vote,pursuant to this Section 3.6. 3.6.4 SWMA Decision-Making by Majority Vote. A) A "Majority Vote" shall consist of the votes of Directors (or Alternate Directors) representing greater than fifty percent (50%) of the total Member Populations. The SWMA Board shall hereby be empowered as follows by a Majority Vote: i) Establishing a Mission Statement; Page 11 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM ii) Electing a President, Vice President, Secretary, and Treasurer of the Board ("Executive Officers"); iii) Establishing and approving any policies, guidelines, or rules to carry out SWMA's powers and responsibilities as may be required to implement this Agreement; iv) Appointing the SWMA Ombudsman; v) Setting SWMA meeting dates and agenda topics; vi) Approving SWMA Meeting Minutes; and vii) Forming and convening committees and advisory bodies as the SWMA Board deems appropriate for Member review and comment, public input, efficient staff and SWMA Board work, and other purposes. 3,6.5 SWMA Decision-Making by Super Majority Vote. A) A "Super Majority Vote" shall consist of the votes of Directors (or Alternate Directors) representing at least sixty percent (60%) of the total Member Populations. B) The Board shall hereby be empowered as follows by a Super Majority Vote: i) Approving or amending the Spokane County SWM Plan, subject to RCW 70.95.080; ii) Setting rates for SWMA Solid Waste Services on an annual basis, including imposing, altering, regulating, and controlling Tipping Fees; iii) Reviewing and approving SWMA's Annual Budget; iv) Approving capital expenditures greater than $1,000,000.00; v) Approving any contracts for services exceeding$1,000,000.00 per year; vi) Payment of Member Cash Distribution(as per Section 4.5); vii) Establishing operating hours and levels of SWMA Solid Waste Services on an annual basis; viii) Approving any addition of new members to SWMA; ix) Accepting Solid Waste from other jurisdictions; x) Imposing any limits on Members' Solid Waste flows or deliveries to SWMA Facilities; xi) Amending this Agreement; Page 12 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM xii) Planning, developing, replacing, operating and maintaining existing or future SWMA Facilities; xiii) Making SWMA employee hiring and firing recommendations to Spokane; xiv) Fixing salaries, wages and other compensation of SWMA Executive Officers and certain nonrepresented employees; xv) Employing or retaining engineering, legal, financial or other specialized personnel and consultants as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of SWMA; xvi) Indemnifying the Members and their officers and employees in accordance with law; xvii) Exercising all other powers within the authority of and that may be exercised individually by all of the Members with respect to SWMA Solid Waste Services or other SWMA purposes or functions as set forth herein; and xviii) Taking any other actions as the SWMA Board deems necessary to implement the Spokane County SWM Plan, to protect and advance the interests of the SWMA, the SWMA System, its Members, and its ratepayers that are consistent with this Agreement, Chapter 39.34 RCW, and other applicable law. Section 3.7 SAFE HARBOR PROTECTION. 3.7.1 Safe Harbor Protection. If any SWMA Super Majority Vote, in the City of Spokane's sole discretion, causes or threatens to cause an adverse material financial impact to the SWMA Facilities or to Spokane ("Adverse Vote"), Spokane may invalidate such Adverse Vote and elect to have SWMA pursue an alternative course of action with respect to the item subject to invalidation that it may deem reasonable and prudent ("Spokane Safe Harbor Election"). A) Spokane shall exercise its Spokane Safe Harbor Election not later than 5:00 p.m. ten (10) business days after the date the Board took the Adverse Vote. B) A Spokane Safe Harbor Election shall be deemed exercised hereunder if a Spokane Director(or Alternate Director, as the case may be)files with the President of the Board Spokane's written invocation of this Section 3.7 Safe Harbor Protection, stating (a) specific date and nature of the Adverse Vote; and (b) the grounds and basis upon which the Spokane Safe Harbor Election is exercised and (c) the intended alternative course of SWMA action ("Safe Harbor Notice"). C) Upon Spokane's filing of the Safe Harbor Notice, the Adverse Vote shall be suspended, and Spokane Safe Harbor Election shall be deemed to be the action of the SWMA Board. 3.7.2 Safe Harbor Election - Remedy. No later than 5:00 p.m. fifteen (15) business days from the date the Safe Harbor Notice is filed with the President of the Board pursuant to Section 3.7.1 Page 13 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM B) herein, any Member who voted in opposition to Spokane's position on the item subject to invalidation may elect to withdraw from SWMA by filing with the President such Member's Notice of Withdrawal, stating (a) the specific Safe Harbor Notice at issue and the date it was filed with the President; (b)the grounds and basis upon which such Member elects to withdrawal ("Notice of Withdrawal"). Each Member shall file its own separate Notice of Withdrawal, 3.7.3 Withdrawing Member. Effective on the date of delivery of the Notice of Withdrawal to the President, all voting rights of the withdrawing Member shall terminate; and the Member shall become a Withdrawing Member subject to the provisions of Section 3.8 herein, 3.7.4 The terms of Section 3.7 herein notwithstanding, SWMA shall remain in operation and the remaining Members shall continue to perform their respective obligations pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. Section 3.8 WITHDRAWING MEMBER-RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS. 3.8,1 Accounting. SWMA shall provide to the Withdrawing Member a full accounting of SWMA Facilities Maintenance and Operation Expenses, SWMA Debt, Debt Service, and any and all other debts, obligations, claims, and/or liabilities of any kind attributable to SWMA (collectively referred to as the "SWMA Liabilities") as of the date of Spokane's Safe Harbor Election upon which the Member's withdrawal is based. A) The Board of Directors and the Withdrawing Member shall enter into an Agreement for Withdrawal which shall identify the following: i) the Withdrawing Member's allocated share of SWMA Liabilities as of the date of Spokane's Safe Harbor Election upon which the Member's withdrawal is based; ii) the terms of Withdrawing Member's satisfaction and discharge of its share of SWMA Liabilities; and iii) a Withdrawing Member Asset Distribution Plan, if, and only if, the Withdrawing Member contributed any assets to SWMA. B) Deadlock. i) Dispute Resolution. If the Board of Directors and Withdrawing Member reach a deadlock in negotiating terms for the Agreement for Withdrawal, the matter shall be submitted for dispute resolution under the provisions of Section 8.6 hereof. ii) Judicial Resolution. If the Board of Directors and Withdrawing Member reach a deadlock in negotiating terms for the Agreement for Withdrawal, and: either the Board of Directors or the Withdrawing Member alleges in good faith that (a) irreparable injury to SWMA is being suffered or is threatened by reason thereof; or (b) the acts of the Board of Directors or Withdrawing Member are illegal, oppressive or fraudulent; or (c) the SWMA assets are being misapplied or wasted; or (d) SWMA is unable to carry out its purposes, then either SWMA or the Withdrawing Member may file a legal action Page 14 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM in Spokane Superior Court for judicial resolution of the deadlock, 3.8.2 Withdrawing Member— SWMA Liability"Put or Pay" Off-Set Alternative. A) A Withdrawing Member may offset its allocated share of SWMA Liabilities by entering into one or more third party feedstock supply agreements in lieu of all or part of its own SWMA Solid Waste Flow Control obligations required by this Agreement. B) The Withdrawing Member may offset its allocated share of SWMA Liabilities by paying SWMA the difference in costs incurred in obtaining replacement Solid Waste feedstock from another source. Section 3.9 LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVIEW AND COMMENT The Board shall, in a timely manner, solicit the review and comment by its Member local governments and the SWAC of proposed changes in Spokane County Comprehensive SWM Plan, annual budgets and annual capital programs, The SWMA Board shall consult with a Member local government on any specific SWMA Facility capital project proposed within the Member jurisdiction prior to approving the final design for such project. Section 3.10 BOOKS AND RECORDS Any member of the SWMA Board of Directors may examine the books and records of any Member or of SWMA that relate to the SWMA Facilities,to the administration thereof, or to this Agreement, After provision of reasonable notice, such books and records may be examined at the Member's sole expense at any reasonable time during SWMA business hours or of that of the Member subject to examination, as the case may be. ARTICLE IV SWMA FINANCE AND FLOW CONTROL POWERS Section 4.1 SWMA RATES &CHARGES SWMA shall establish rates and collect Tipping Fees for SWMA Solid Waste Services that will be at least sufficient to pay the expenses of maintenance and operation of the SWMA, including, without limit, SWMA Debt, Debt Service, and SWMA Facilities Maintenance and Operation Expenses. Section 4.2 MEMBER COVENANTS TO EXERCISE FLOW CONTROL POWERS AND MAKE PAYMENTS 4.2.1 Covenants to Exercise Flow Control Powers. In consideration for SWMA owning and operating the SWMA Facilities and as a condition for use thereof and service there from, each Member irrevocably covenants, obligates and binds itself to direct all Solid Waste collected in within, generated within, or otherwise within or subject to its regulatory jurisdiction or Local Collection System to SWMA Facilities for SWMA Solid Waste Services pursuant to this Agreement and the Spokane County SWM Plan. Page 15 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM 4.2.2 Confirmation. Because this Agreement and the Spokane County SWM Plan contemplate that all Members will be using SWMA Facilities for all SWMA Solid Waste Services, and because most, if not all, Members will be collecting, transporting, or otherwise regulating Solid Waste subject to their Local Collection Systems or within their regulatory control through the political jurisdictions of one or more other Members, the Members declare and confirm as follows: A) that this Agreement is not intended as an instrument to permit one Member to control the Solid Waste Collection services or the Local Collection System of another Member; and, B) that each Member will cooperate to provide the other Members with access for Solid Waste transport or transfer to SWMA Facilities. Section 4.3 MEMBER COVENANTS TO MAINTAIN CHARGES Each Member irrevocably covenants and agrees to establish rates and collect fees for Solid Waste collection services in the case of a Member's operation of or contract for its Local Collection System/collection system within its jurisdiction, or otherwise collect fees and taxes that will be at least sufficient to pay any Tipping Fees (Section 4.1) and to pay the other maintenance and operation expenses of their respective Local Collection Systems. Section 4.4 SPOKANE BONDS 4.4.1 Future SWMA Bonds. On and after the effective date of this Agreement, the City of Spokane shall be the sole Member entitled to issue any debt secured by existing or future Tipping Fees, SWMA Facilities, or any other SWMA revenues or assets. 4.4.2 Outstanding Spokane Bonds. It is recognized that the City of Spokane has outstanding revenue bonds payable in whole or in part from the net revenue of the SWMA Facilities. Nothing in this Agreement is intended or shall be construed to violate any covenant of these outstanding bonds, and such covenants, to the extent there is a conflict between them and this Agreement, shall control with respect to such outstanding bonds. Section 4.5 TAXATION 4.5.1 Utility Tax, In recognition of the SWMA as an interlocal governance structure, the Members hereby agree that Spokane shall be the sole Member entitled to impose a municipal utility tax on the gross revenues receipts generated by and through SWMA. All other Members agree that they shall not impose any tax on the gross revenues receipts of the SWMA, Each Member, however, may levy a gross receipts tax on its own Local Collection System and other non-SWMA Solid Waste collection operations in its jurisdiction. 4.5.2 Member Cash Distribution. In further recognition of SWMA as a public entity, in consideration for the Members entering in to SWMA with the other Members, and in consideration of the Members' Flow Control Powers and Flow Control commitments set forth Page 16 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM herein, in the event that Spokane imposes a municipal utility tax on the disposal gross revenue receipts generated by and through SWMA, Spokane agrees to pay each Member a cash distribution in an amount and frequency to be determined by the SWMA Board of Directors ("Member Cash Distribution") through a duly authorized and executed Super Majority Vote. Section 4.6 SWMA BUDGETING 4.6.1 Separate Funds. The SWMA Board shall control and direct the disposition of all SWMA funds and monies. The City of Spokane shall establish a separate Fund to hold SWMA funds (the "SWMA Fund"), establish special accounts within the SWMA Fund, and keep separate and adequate books and records of the same, all as required by law and regulations of the State Auditor and as the SWMA Board may direct. The City of Spokane shall also be responsible for investment of SWMA funds consistent with the investment policy adopted by the SWMA Board. 4.6.2 Annual SWMA Budget, A) By each June 1, the SWMA Board shall notify each Member of its proposed budget and capital improvement program for the SWMA Facilities showing its estimate of the debt service and reserve requirements for debt obligations incurred to finance the SWMA System. Each Member shall furnish SWMA with its recommendations and comments by July 31. Thereafter SWMA shall adopt its final annual budget and capital improvement program for the forthcoming calendar year on or before August 31. B) By March 1 of each year, SWMA shall determine and notify the Members of the actual debt service and reserve requirements of the SWMA Debt, the actual SWMA Facilities Maintenance and Operation Expenses, the actual requirements for SWMA contract obligations and any other payment requirements for the immediately preceding calendar year, or part thereof, covered by this Agreement. C) The annual schedule of budget events is summarized as follows: March 1St Notice of previous year's reconciliation March 151h Preliminary Solid Waste generation estimate for next calendar year provided by SWMA April 15th Members respond to preliminary Solid Waste generation for next calendar year May 1st SWMA provides final Solid Waste generation estimate for next calendar year June 1st SWMA provides proposed budget, Tipping Fee levels and capital improvement program for next calendar year July 31St Members and public comment on proposed SWMA budget, Tipping Fee levels, and capital improvement program for next calendar year August 31St SWMA adopts budget and capital improvement program for next calendar and advises Members of Tipping Fees to take effect January 1st Page 17 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM D) To respond to special circumstances, the SWMA Board shall have the authority to amend the annual budget schedule in a given year. 4.6.3 SWMA Facilities Budget Adjustments. The SWMA shall operate within its annual budget. Should debt service and reserve requirements for the SWMA Debt, or SWMA Facilities Maintenance and Operation Expenses, or contract requirements increase above budget estimates, or should the money in the operations account or capital account of the SWMA be insufficient to meet and pay those requirements and expenses in that calendar year, the SWMA may amend its budget and increase the Tipping Fees to the Members after first submitting the proposed budget amendment to the Members for comment and subsequent vote. ARTICLE V SWMA SOLID WASTE SERVICES Section 5.1 SWMA SERVICE OBLIGATION IN SERVICE AREA SWMA shall accept all Member Solid Waste that is approved for delivery to the SWMA Facilities within the SWMA System, subject to the conditions and limitations established by the SWMA. The SWMA is established to provide SWMA Solid Waste Services for Solid Waste generated throughout Spokane County, but it may also accept Solid Waste from other jurisdictions, provided such acceptance is in accord with the Spokane County SWM Plan and duly authorized by Board Super Majority Vote, Section 5.2 MEMBER OBLIGATION TO DELIVER FLOWS Each Member shall enact and enforce such ordinances and any other regulatory requirements as necessary to assure and enforce its respective Solid Waste Flow Control Powers and for delivery of all Solid Waste collected by its Local Collection System, or within its jurisdiction, to the SWMA System. Each Member shall direct Solid Waste to the SWMA Facilities and pursuant to procedures and other terms and conditions as may be established by the SWMA Board and in accordance with the Spokane County SWM Plan. Except as otherwise provided by law, a Member shall not direct Solid Waste to an agency or location other than SWMA or SWMA Facilities, respectively, Section 5.3 SWMA SYSTEM CAPACITY 5.3,1 Acceptance of Member Waste Flows, The SWMA System shall be available to receive Solid Waste delivered to SWMA Facilities by the Members for SWMA Solid Waste Services. SWMA shall use its best efforts to provide for increased capacity pursuant to the Spokane County SWM Plan, in a manner designed to allow the SWMA System to accept, treat, and manage all Solid Waste proposed to be delivered to the SWMA Facilities by the Members. Solid Waste from the Members' Local Collection Systems or certificated collectors shall be accepted on a "first-come, first-served" basis. The SWMA Board shall have the authority to limit flows from the Members only to ensure preservation of public health and compliance with applicable Page 18 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM laws, regulations, permits and provisions of the Spokane County SWM Plan and pursuant to a duly authorized Board Super Majority Vote, 53.2 Annual Solid Waste Predictions. The SWMA Board shall annually provide to the Members by March 15th a preliminary estimate of Solid Waste that is expected to be generated within each Member local government based on data relating to Member Population and employment, and economic development. Each Member, within thirty(30) days of receipt of the estimate, shall a) estimate and provide to SWMA the expected building activity within its jurisdiction for the following calendar year based on plats and/or building permits approved or pending immediate approval and b) provide to SWMA any other information that it would like SWMA to consider in establishing a final estimate of the SWMA Solid Waste Services capacity available during the following calendar year. After receiving such comments and information from the Members, the SWMA Board shall publish a final estimate no later than each May 1st identifying the total estimated capacity available for the following year in the SWMA System and the percentage of such capacity expected to be utilized during such year. Section 5.4 COMMITMENT TO SUPPORT WASTE REDUCTION As early as practical, but in no event later than within one (1) year of its existence, the SWMA Board shall endeavor to develop economic and other incentives that assist individual Members to implement rates and other incentives to accomplish Waste Reduction in their respective jurisdictions and throughout the County in accordance with the Spokane County SWM Plan, Section 5.5 INTEGRAL INVOLVEMENT OF SWAC 5.5.1 The SWAC will be integrally involved in developing plans for SWMA Facilities, amendments to the Spokane County SWM Plan, and economic and other incentives for Waste Reduction throughout the County as provided by and in accordance with RCW 70.95.165, 5.5.2 In order to encourage the broadest participation by the SWAC, the SWMA shall work with the Spokane County Board of Commissioners to take steps to expand the membership beyond the minimal number and representative membership prescribed under RCW 70.95.165 in accordance with policy duly voted by the Board of Directors by suggesting a broad membership for appointment by the Spokane County Board of Commissioners. 5.5.3 RCW 70.95.165 states that the primary responsibilities of the SWAC are to provide both technical and policy advice to the SWMA in the development of the Spokane County SWM Plan, development of facilities for Solid Waste services, and economic and other incentives for Waste Reduction throughout Spokane County. Page 19 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM ARTICLE VI SWMA COOPERATION IN MANAGEMENT & DEVELOPMENT OF EXISTING AND FUTURE SWMA SOLID WASTE FACILITIES Section 6.1 RESPONSIBILITY FOR SWMA FACILITIES AND LOCAL COLLECTION SYSTEMS 6.1.1 SWMA Facilities. The SWMA shall in its sole discretion determine the name, location, and time of construction of any new SWMA Facilities developed in the future. The SWMA shall maintain through responsible insurers, including insurance pools, public liability insurance for SWMA Facilities operations and responsibilities in accordance with industry standards. 6.1.2 Local Collection Systems, The Members shall maintain and operate their respective Local Collection Systems in accordance with high engineering standards and in conformity with the standards established by the state and federal agencies having jurisdiction over them. The Members shall secure and maintain with responsible insurers including insurance pools all such insurance as is customarily maintained with respect to Solid Waste systems and facilities of like character against loss of or damage and other liability to the extent that such insurance can be secured and maintained at reasonable cost, Section 6.2 RELATIONSHIP TO LOCAL PLANNING 6.2.1 Land use. The development of SWMA Facilities shall be consistent with the Spokane County SWM Plan, with applicable laws, regulations and permits, and with the Members' zoning and land use requirements. Members shall recognize SWMA Facilities as essential public facilities subject to the requirements for facilitating essential public facilities, Member zoning and land use requirements for the development of new SWMA Facilities or modification of existing SWMA Facilities shall be followed. 6.2.2 Member Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plans and the Spokane County SWM Plan. The Spokane County SWM Plan shall be consistent with and responsive to Solid Waste management plans adopted both individually and collectively by the Members at the time this Agreement is adopted and in the future whenever the Spokane County SWM Plan is amended. Future Solid Waste management plans proposed individually or collectively by the Members that affect or relate to SWMA Solid Waste Services shall be offered to the SWMA Board for review and comment regarding their relationship to current SWMA plans prior to their adoption. Before adopting any new or modified solid waste management plan to be integrated with the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan for the County, each Member shall forward any such plan proposal to the SWMA Board and to the SWAC with sufficient time to allow SWMA and the SWAC meaningful review and comment prior to the any such plan's submission for state review required by Chapter 70.95 RCW. Section 6.3 MEMBER COMMITMENTS TO ASSIST SWMA To the extent legally feasible, each Member agrees to give good faith consideration to SWMA requests for necessary zoning, land use, eminent domain proceedings and other permits and approvals to implement the Spokane County SWM Plan. In the event that a Member Page 20 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM completes an eminent domain proceeding for the benefit of the SWMA to secure property or property rights for SWMA Facilities, SWMA shall compensate the Member for its expenses and for just compensation paid for such property and property rights in accordance with applicable law. ARTICLE VII STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT Section 7.1 COORDINATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW&SEPA REQUIREMENTS The Members and the SWMA are obligated to identify and consider environmental impacts, alternatives and mitigation measures in the development of plans, programs and facilities relating to Solid Waste management. The State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW, and the regulations and ordinances promulgated under it ("SEPA"), establish procedures for preparing environmental documents and obtaining input from citizens and agencies, and requires identification of a lead agency to prepare the environmental documents and administer the environmental review process. SEPA also requires agencies to integrate environmental review at the earliest time in the decision making process to ensure that planning and decisions reflect environmental values. The Members agree that it is generally in the public interest for SWMA to directly manage environmental review of SWMA proposals and actions to assure the early consideration of environmental factors. For purposes of this Article VI, "action" has the meaning given it in WAC 197-11-704, and"proposal" has the meaning provided in WAC 197-11-784. Section 7.2 SEPA COMPLIANCE 7.2.1 SWMA as an Agency under SEPA. SWMA shall fulfill the responsibilities of an agency pursuant to SEPA in connection with all proposals and actions which it undertakes. By carrying out the responsibilities of an agency under SEPA, SWMA shall satisfy any SEPA obligations that apply directly to SWMA as well as any that may apply to indirectly due to SWMA acting on a Members' behalf. 7.2.2 Procedural Responsibilities as Lead Agency. With respect to SWMA proposals and actions, the SWMA shall carry out the Members' lead agency procedural responsibilities under SEPA, including the procedural functions of a "lead agency" under SEPA, WAC 197-11-758. This includes, without limitation, authority to adopt agency SEPA rules, to establish an administrative appeals process, to enter into lead agency agreements pursuant to WAC 197-11- 944, and to appoint a "responsible official." However, the Members retain their legal authority to assert lead agency status for projects located within their respective jurisdictions as permitted under SEPA, including, for example, by WAC 197-11-340(2)(e) and 197-11-948. Section 7.3 RETENTION OF SUBSTANTIVE AUTHORITY The SWMA's authority under this Article VII is to implement the procedural requirements of SEPA for SWMA proposals and actions. The Members retain their respective Page 21 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM substantive authorities to condition or deny such proposals and actions in their respective jurisdictions as part of their zoning, land use, SEPA, or other permitting processes. In addition, pursuant to its responsibility under Chapter 70.95 RCW, the County will retain its lead responsibility for the Spokane County SWM Plan. ARTICLE VIII LEGAL RELATIONS Section 8.1 EFFECTIVE DATE&TERM OF AGREEMENT 8.1.1 Effective date. This Agreement shall become effective on the first date when all of the following events have occurred: i) the Agreement has been duly executed by all of the Members; and ii) the Agreement has been filed with the Spokane County Auditor pursuant to RCW 39.34.040. 8.1.2 Duration. Commencing on the effective date specified above, this Agreement shall be for a term of thirty-five (35) years or such longer period as any SWMA Debt is outstanding or the payment thereof is not fully provided for, secured and funded. Section 8.2 WITHDRAWAL BY A MEMBER Subject to the provisions of Section 3,7 and 3.8 hereof, any Member, upon at least two year's written notice to the Board, may individually withdraw from the obligations of this Agreement with the consent of all of the other Members, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, after all of that Member's proportionate share of SWMA Debt is retired or payment thereof is fully provided for, secured and funded, and the remaining Members shall continue to be bound by this Agreement as it may be amended. Section 8.3 ADDITION OF NEW MEMBERS 8.3.1 Upon the incorporation of any new city within the County, that city, upon at least one hundred eighty (180) day's written request to the Board, shall be added as a Member to this Agreement and as a member of the Board of the SWMA upon a duly authorized Board Super Majority Vote. 8.3.2 Any Member city or the County that has previously withdrawn from the SWMA pursuant to this Section 8.3shall only be added as a new Member with the unanimous consenting vote of all of the other Members. Page 22 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010.12:36 PM Section 8.4 AMENDMENT This Agreement may be amended only with the approval of the legislative bodies of the Members. Section 8.5 NOTICE Subject to the provisions of Section 3 herein, notices required to be given to Members shall be deemed given when served on their respective City Clerks and the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners. When members of the SWMA Board must be notified, notice to one Director thereof from each Member shall be sufficient compliance, but reasonable efforts shall be made to give notice to every alternate Director as well. Section 8.6 RESOLUTION OF LEGAL DISPUTES 8.6.1 To affect a quick and efficient resolution of legal disputes that may arise under this Agreement, the Members establish the following procedure. All claims or disputes concerning the interpretation or application of this Agreement or breach thereof("Dispute") shall be decided exclusively by the following dispute resolution procedure unless all Members agree in writing otherwise. This dispute resolution procedure applies only to disputes of a legal nature that arise under this Agreement, and shall not be construed to apply to legislative or policy matters that are within the discretion or authority of the SWMA Board or individual Members. 8.6.2 Each Member shall use its best efforts to resolve issues prior to giving Notice of Dispute and invoking the procedures set forth in this Section. In the event that any Member is not satisfied with the results of the resolution, that Member, acting through its representative on the SWMA Board, shall give prompt written notice of any Dispute to the other Members' representatives on the SWMA Board, with a copy to the SWMA administrator or executive director, This notice, herein referred to as a "Notice of Dispute," shall clearly state the subject matter of the unresolved issues and the relief requested. 8.6.3 Level I. Within ten (10) working days of receipt of a Notice of Dispute, each Member's representative on the SWMA Board shall designate a representative and the designated representatives shall meet and confer and attempt to resolve the Dispute for a period not to exceed five (5) working days. If the Dispute is not resolved at the close of the Level I meeting, the designated representatives shall prepare before adjournment of the meeting a written memorandum summarizing the matters that remain at issue. 8.6.4 Level II. If the Dispute is not resolved within 48 hours of the close of the Level I meeting, each designated representative shall meet with that Member's representative on the SWMA Board to discuss the Dispute and the memorandum. Within ten (10) working days of the close of the Level I meeting, the designated representatives of the Members shall meet and confer and attempt to resolve the Dispute for an additional period not to exceed five (5) working days. Attendance by SWMA Board members at the Level II meeting is optional. If the Members are not able to resolve the Dispute in the Level II meeting, the designated Page 23 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM representatives shall discuss the use of mediation, arbitration, or other alternative dispute resolution process before concluding the Level II meeting. 8.6.5 The terms of the resolution of all Disputes concluded in Level I or II meetings shall be memorialized in writing and signed by each Member's representative on the SWMA Board. 8.6.6 If the Dispute is not resolved within 48 hours of the close of the Level II meeting, then a) the Members may mediate the issue; b) the Members may submit the dispute to the Superior Court of Spokane County for arbitration proceedings provided by Chapter 7.04 RCW; or c) any Member may commence a civil action to resolve the Dispute, unless the Parties agree otherwise in writing. Mediation and arbitration shall require the prior written consent of SWMA and Member(s) involved with the Dispute. 8.6.7 Any Dispute shall be limited to the interpretation and application of this Agreement and may not impair the contract and debt obligations of SWMA or the powers of SWMA to fix the budget for and determine the methods used in the management of the SWMA Facilities. Section 8.7 MEMBER OBLIGATION PENDING RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES The initiation or existence of a dispute between the Members or between one or more Members and the SWMA arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall not relieve or authorize the deferral of the Members' duty to exercise flow control of solid waste or make payments to the SWMA as provided herein. Section 8.8 SURVIVAL OF OBLIGATIONS The Members' obligations under Section 8.2 of this Agreement shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. Section 8.9 INTERPRETATION OF AGREEMENT 8.9.1 Governing law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington. The exclusive jurisdiction and venue for any lawsuit between the Members arising out of this Agreement shall be in Spokane County Superior Court. 8.9.2 Assignment. This Agreement shall be binding on each Member and the successors to them and may not be assigned in any respect without the consent of all Members. 8.9.3 Third party beneficiaries. The Members expressly do not intend to create any right, obligation or liability, or promise any performance, to any third party. The Members have not created any right for any third party to enforce this Agreement. 8.9.4 Severability. It is the belief of the Members that all provisions of this Agreement are lawful. If any covenant or provision of this Agreement shall be finally adjudicated by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, such adjudication shall not affect the validity, obligation or performance of any other covenant or provision, or part thereof, which in itself is valid if such remainder conforms to the terms and requirements of applicable law and the Page 24 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM intent of this Agreement. In such event,the Members shall enter into immediate negotiations for the purpose of arriving at a mutually satisfactory replacement of such covenant or provision. 8.9.5 Entire Agreement. This Agreement embodies the Members' entire agreement on the issues covered by it, except as supplemented by subsequent written agreements that the Parties make. All prior negotiations and draft written agreements are superseded by this Agreement including, without limitation, the following: A) The Amended and Restated Interlocal Cooperation Agreement Between the City of Spokane and Spokane County, Washington, Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System, dated April 10, 1989; B) An Interlocal Agreement Between the City of Spokane, Spokane County and the City of Airway Heights, Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System, dated October 4, 1989; C) An Interlocal Agreement Between the City of Spokane, Spokane County, and the City of Cheney, Spokane Regional Solid Waste System, dated September 1, 1989; D) An Interlocal Agreement Between the City of Spokane, Spokane County, and the City of Deer Park, Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System, dated April 16, 1991; E) An Interlocal Agreement Between the City of Spokane, Spokane County, and the City of Fairfield, Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System, dated September 25, 1990; F) An Interlocal Agreement Between the City of Spokane, Spokane County, and the City of Latah, Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System, dated June 4, 1991; G) Interlocal Agreement (CH. 39.34 RCW) Between the City of Spokane, Spokane County, and the City of Liberty Lake RE: Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System, dated September 24, 2003; H) An Interlocal Agreement Between the City of Spokane, Spokane County, and the City of Medical Lake, Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System, dated September 1, 1989; I) An Interlocal Agreement Between the City of Spokane, Spokane County, and the City of Millwood, Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System, dated April 24, 1991; J) An Interlocal Agreement Between the City of Spokane, Spokane County, and the Town of Rockford; Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System; K) An Interlocal Agreement Between the City of Spokane, Spokane County, and the City of Spangle, Spokane Regional Solid Waste Management System, dated October 9, 1990; L) Interlocal Agreement (CH. 39.34 RCW) Between the City of Spokane, Spokane Page 25 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM County and the City of Spokane Valley, dated June 19, 2003; M) An Interlocal Agreement Between the City of Spokane, Spokane County and the City of Waverly, Spokane Regional Solid Waste System, dated November 30, 1990. 8.9.6 Counterparts, This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be considered for all purposes as an original. Section 8.10 WAIVER No waiver by any party of any term or condition of this Agreement shall be deemed or construed as a waiver of any other term or condition, nor shall a waiver of any breach be deemed to constitute a waiver of any subsequent breach whether of the same or a different provision of this Agreement. Section 8.11 REMEDIES In addition to the remedies provided by law, this Agreement shall be specifically enforceable by any party. ARTICLE IX COOPERATION THROUGH CONSOLIDATION PERIOD Section 9.1 COORDINATION: SWMA BOARD&THE COUNTY AND CITY OF SPOKANE The Members recognize that, during at least the initial twelve months after the effective date of this Agreement, extraordinary cooperative efforts will be required to coordinate the legal and service obligations of the SWMA System and to complete all of the legal and administrative steps necessary. The Members shall use their best efforts and work together in good faith. 9.1.1 Flow control and Tipping Fees, The Members shall have approved and imposed flow control requirements and Tipping Fees, and the proceeds are under the control of and available for use by the SWMA. ARTICLE X APPROVAL AND EFFECTIVE DATE Section 10.1 EXECUTION AND APPROVAL 10.1.1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each Party has caused this Agreement to be signed by its duly authorized officer or representative as of the date set forth below its signature. 10.1.2 Each Member warrants that it is authorized to and has executed this Agreement for and on behalf of the Member. Page 26 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM Section 10.2 IMPLEMENTATION This Agreement shall take effect and be in force consistent with Agreement Section 8.1.1, but shall otherwise be binding on all Members executing the Agreement on the last of the dates the Agreement has been signed by County, Spokane and Spokane Valley. CITY OF SPOKANE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY By By Its: Its: Date: Date: Attest: By Attest: By CITY OF AIRWAY HEIGHTS (ETC.) SPOKANE COUNTY By By Its: Its: Date: Date: Attest: Attest: Page 27 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM Exhibit A INTERLOCAL AGREEMENTS THAT WILL BE SUPERSEDED BY THIS AGREEMENT Page 28 of 29 DRAFT 1.0 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY 11/1/2010 12:36 PM Exhibit B SWMA FACILITIES Page 29 of 29 West Plains Annexation Utility Tax Issue City of Spokane Fact Sheet Background: The City of Airway Heights, the City of Spokane, and Spokane County have been cooperatively working on a proposal to annex portions of the West Plains into Spokane and Airway Heights since late 2008/early 2009. Considerable financial analysis of the annexation proposal has been ongoing and has continued to inform consideration of the proposal throughout this time, In an effort to consider all possible financial impacts, the City of Spokane's Finance Division recently began to look at whether the City of Spokane could impose a utility tax on the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System operations if the Waste to Energy facility were located within the Spokane City limits. The Finance Division spent a month researching the issue from a financial and legal perspective, and the City has concluded that, so long as ownership of the utility is maintained by the City, a utility tax could be implemented, and that all partners in the Regional Solid Waste System could share in the revenue. The basic factual information is included here, At this point, the City of Spokane is not advocating a position for or against such a tax, but merely providing information so everyone is working from the same information. What is the possible utility tax on the Regional Solid Waste System? Cities are allowed by state law to charge taxes on the gross receipts of private and public utilities doing business in the City. In this case, the City could tax the gross receipts of the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System once the Waste to Energy facility were located within the City limits after annexation is complete. The Regional Solid Waste System operates the Waste to Energy facility and North Side and Valley garbage transfer stations. How would such a tax impact citizens? Citizens may not see any impact on their utility bills. Such a tax could be implemented after the System's bonds are paid off in 2011 or earlier. Once payments on these bonds cease, the tipping fees still could be reduced even with the addition of this tax. What would the tax rate be? The Regional Solid Waste System could be taxed similarly to the City's water, wastewater, and solid waste utilities. Those utilities are taxed at a rate of 20 percent of gross revenues, as established by City ordinance. By comparison, telephone, cable, and power utility tax rates are capped by state law at 6 percent, How much money could be generated? At the 20 percent tax rate, the amount that would be generated totals $6,7 million. The City of Spokane already captures $2,2 million from City Solid Waste customers for disposal costs, and this wouldn't be double counted, The net increase to all the communities served by the Regional Solid Waste System would be about$4,42 million. How would the money be allocated among jurisdictions? The allocations would be based on the existing interlocal agreement that created the Regional Solid Waste System and the agreements with each of the regional cities. Here is an estimated breakdown of where the net amount of money would go based on 2008 revenues: • City of Spokane $1.1 million* • Spokane County $1,7 million • Airway Heights $69,000 • Cheney $134,000 • Deer Park $44,000 • Fairfield $8,000 • Latah $3,000 • Liberty Lake $92,000 • Medical Lake $63,000 • Millwood $22,000 • Rockford $7,000 • Spangle $4,000 • Spokane Valley $1,17 million • Waverly $2,000 • TOTAL $4.42 million This is a net amount, The City already collects$2.2 million on the amount of money its Solid Waste utility customers inside the City already pay toward disposal as part of their monthly bills. How could the money be spent? The tax collected would be a General Fund resource for each jurisdiction. Elected leadership within each jurisdiction would decide how to spend the money through their normal budgeting processes based on their own priorities. The Mayor of Spokane proposes using the City of Spokane's share to mitigate the costs of annexation and potentially to reduce the City's utility tax rate. Can you tax the revenues generated outside of the City limits? Our legal analysis concludes that because the main operations of the Solid Waste System would be within the City limits after annexation, the revenues of the entire system could be taxed. Are there any other applications of a utility tax? The City of Spokane also could implement a utility tax on the power sales from the Waste to Energy facility. That rate is capped at 6 percent by state law. Such a tax would generate $700,000 for the City of Spokane. What would be required for implementation? The Spokane City Council can implement the tax by ordinance with a majority vote. SPOKANE June 2009 DRAFT: Briefing Book Table of Contents/Outline January 12,2011 Introduction and purpose of this briefing book History of the formation of the System Expiration of contracts and interlocal agreements Key provisions of the 1989 City of Spokane/Spokane County Interlocal Agreement Creating the System Ownership Financing Pre-Existing Landfill Closure and Cleanup funding Landfill Closure Component Tipping Fees Flow Control Revenues and Budgets Utilit y Tax • Tipping Fees Management Major Decisions Role of Liaison Board Term and Termination Key provisions of the Regional Cities Interlocal Agreements Solid Waste Directed to System Representation on Liaison Board Tipping Fees Landfill Closure Component Utility Tax Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Planning Terms and Termination Facilities of the System Waste to Energy Facility Transfer Stations Recycling and Household Hazardous Waste Northside Landfill Composting Contract Ash and Bypass Disposal Contract Flow of Waste Other Services provided by the System Education Coordination of Recycling Programs Recycling Containers Business Waste Audits Countywide Litter Control and Enforcement Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Planning Funding of the System—Bonds and Debt Service Upcoming Investments and Funding Flow Control Tipping Fees and Reserves City of Spokane's Fiduciary Responsibility Environmental Compliance Solid Waste Management Planning Waste to Energy vs. Long Haul Governance Discussions Options for each Jurisdiction City of Spokane Valley and City of Liberty Lake City of Spokane Spokane County Other Regional Cities f City of Spokane Valley January 12, 2011 Page 1 SPECIFIC CONCERN'S WITH SPOKANE'S PROPOSED INTERLOCAL Section 1.9 This section confirms Spokane's ownership of the WTE Facility. Obviously, if a regional or metro entity was set up this may not work. If Spokane wishes to impose a utility tax on the solid waste brought to the WTE Facility, they will likely have to maintain, at the very least, control and ownership. We also need to ensure that by entering into an interlocal agreement we do not assume any ownership or liability for the landfills located in other jurisdictions. Section 1.11 and Section 2.4.4 We should pass an ordinance implementing any flow control measures agreed to by contract. Section 2.1.2(D) The utility tax may or may not be upheld. Distribution of the tax will be left to the SWMA Board. We need to calculate the numbers to determine if two of the larger members could vote against Spokane Valley's interest. Section 2.1.2(F) Wheelabrator has certain responsibilities to maintain and upgrade the facility pursuant to the existing contract. In any future contract these obligations may or may not continue. The question that needs to be answered is who is responsible for the maintenance and upgrades for the WTE Facility and/or other facilities. SWMA? Spokane? What funds will be used for that upgrade? Who decides when something is commercially and scientifically proven and/or economically feasible? Section 2.4.28 Definition of tipping fees _ "Fees established by SWMA ...." Other than giving the SWMA this authority,there is little or no guidance as to how these fees should be set or what criteria should be used. Section 3.2.2 SWMA Ombudsman This position has no authority over the WTE Facility or any of the member municipal organizations. I'm not sure what his/her role would be. Section 3,5 SWMA Board, 3.6 Quorums and Voting This board vote is weighted by population. Spokane and Spokane County may be able to trump Spokane Valley and depending on the numbers, Spokane may be able to trump Spokane Valley and the County combined. Section 3.6.5 Decision-Making by Super Majority Vote There doesn't appear to be a place for the approval of contracts and capital expenditures of less than $1,000,000; possibly they are intended to be included within 3.6.4 A(iii). Section 3.7 Safe Harbor Protection This section is written so broadly that it would allow Spokane to veto any decision of the board. It should be written very narrowly. Section 4.2.1 Covenants to Exercise Flow Control Powers This section should include language that would prevent Spokane or any other party from taking an action that might interfere with the exercise of flow control regulations. The public purpose component of the flow control analysis is important. Section 4.4 Spokane bonds It is unclear if all debt would have to be approved by the SWMA Board. City of Spokane Valley January 12,2011 Page 2 Section 4.5.1 Utility Tax There is no language controlling what percentage Spokane could charge and it is unclear if this is a decision of the SWMA Board. Section 4.6.1 Separate Funds. It is unclear if control of"all SWMA funds and monies"includes the utility tax proceeds. Section 4.6.2 Annual SWMA Budget This section envisions significant responsibility on the part of the SWMA. It is unclear how it would be staffed, what its responsibilities will be as compared to Spokane as owner of the WTE Facility, or the private party who contracts to operate the WTE Facility. What is Spokane in charge of? What would the SWMA be in charge of? What responsibilities or obligations do the member Cities and the County have? Section 5.1 SWMA Service Obligation in Service Area It is unclear what"approved for delivery"means. Can the SWMA say no? Section 5.2 Member Obligation to Deliver Flows Should include language that the SWMA and Spokane will take no action that impairs the ability of member cities or the County to enforce flow control provisions and a consequence if they should do so. Section 5.3.1 Acceptance of Member Waste Flows. The words"only to ensure preservation of public health and compliance with applicable laws, regulations, permits and provisions of the Spokane County SWM Plan and pursuant to a duly authorized `Board Super Majority Vote," is broad and does not spell out a remedy if the board should so vote. Section 6.1.1 SWMA Facilities The SWMA is responsible for liability insurance for all facilities including the WTE Facility, even though Spokane continues to own it? Section 6.1.2 Local Collection Systems. The word"high"has no legal meaning. Section 6.3 Member Commitments to Assist SWMA This section should require a jurisdiction to enter into a specific interlocal agreement when eminent domain proceeding are instituted. Section 7.1 Coordination of Environmental Review and SEPA Requirements It is not clear what responsibility the members have for compliance with all environmental laws or when SWMA will be the responsible party. The last sentence of this section has no legal significance. Section 7.2 SEPA Compliance 1 wouldn't use the words,"for example." Section 8.1.2 Duration 35 years? What debt? Section 8.2 Withdrawal by member It is unclear how a member is suddenly responsible for system debt, or whether it is s for the WTE facility owned by Spokane, or the system,or what say the member has in establishing the debt. (See 4.6). SPOKANE r®‘ ‘‘® \\' ',,-„ ,,\-'\;\, i ti , ---01=41 l'ibitullitie „MM., ilivilltifokir,. ?� Ji� ? ? ) ) Soit SPOKARE Cou\uY January 12, 2011 Dear Honorable Elected Officials, You are cordially invited to participate in a Regional Solid Waste Governance Summit. Wednesday, February 2,2011 & Thursday,February 3, 2011 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Center Place 2426 N. Discovery Place, Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Please join us and your fellow policy makers that serve within Spokane County for the purpose of strengthening relationships and: • Providing a clear picture of the future regarding Solid Waste issues • Developing regional priorities regarding Solid Waste • Assembling a long-term agreement to replace our current Solid Waste Interlocal Agreement The first day will be structured for presentations, information sharing, and responses to questions, Briefing materials with background information will be sent to each jurisdiction The second day will be a facilitated discussion intended to help us reach agreement on future governance of the regional system. Please come prepared with decision-making authority from your jurisdiction. We ask each jurisdiction to submit your "must haves" regarding Regional Solid Waste governance by Friday, January 21, 2011 to Gerry Gemmill, Public Works & Utilities, City of Spokane at ggemill a,spokanecity,org. To RSVP with names of your attendees and authorized decision-makers,please contact Karen Corkins at(509) 477-2741 or kcorkins rr,spokanecounty.org, Thank you for your time and we look forward to seeing you there! de; , _...._ ri--1 " is... \,./...e.--,—,..,_e_-, Al French, Chairman Mayor Mary Verner Spokane County Commissioners Office City of Spokane CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 25, 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ® admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Procedure to fill a vacant council position. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.13.020, RCW 42.12.070, City of Spokane Valley Governance Manual 2.04 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council used a similar process in 2009. BACKGROUND: Councilmember Rose Dempsey resigned her position by written notice effective Friday, January 21, 2011. Pursuant to RCW 35A.13.020 City Council has within ninety (90) days of the vacancy to appoint a qualified person to the vacant position. If this timeframe is not met, the City's authority in this matter would cease and the County would appoint a qualified person to fill the vacancy. The date to meet the ninety day deadline is April 20, 2011. The proposed draft Timeline for the process is as follows: February 4, February 11, February 18, February 25, 2011: Publication of the notice of vacancy March 4, 2011, 4:00 p.m. Applications must be received by the City Clerk March 8, 2011; 5:00 p.m. Executive Session to review applications March 8, 2011; 6:00 p.m. Determine list of those applicants to interview (in open session) March 22, 2011; 6:00 p.m. Interviews of selected applicants (in open session) March 29, 2011; 5:00 p.m. Executive Session to discuss applicant interviews March 29, 2011; 6:00 p.m. Appointment of applicant (in open session) OPTIONS: Proceed with the process as outlined Amend the outlined process Start with a new process (RCW's dictate some elements of the process) RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Consensus to place the Procedure to Select a Councilmember on the February 1st agenda for motion consideration. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: Mike Jackson, Cary Driskell ATTACHMENTS Draft Spokane Valley City Council Procedure for Filling a Council Vacancy Applicable Statutes; Governance Manual, 2.04; RCW 35A.13.020; RCW 42.12.070 Application Form Advertisement SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL PROCEDURE FOR FILLING A COUNCIL VACANCY A. Timeline/Procedure: 1. The City will publish the vacancy and invite citizens of the City who are interested and qualified to sit as a Council member to apply on an application form provided by the City. Publication of the vacancy will be on February 4, February 11, February 18, and February 25, 2011. Qualifications to sit as a Council member are set forth in RCW 35A.13.020,which refers to RCW 35A.12.030. 2.All applications shall be received by the City Clerk no later than 4:00 p.m. on March 4,2011. 3. On March 8, 2011, the City Council will meet and adjourn to executive session to review and discuss all of the applications. After the review and discussion,the City Council will return to open session to discuss and select applicants to interview. Selection will be by nomination and second. A vote will be taken and candidates receiving three or more votes will be interviewed. 4. The interviews will be conducted March 22, 2011. 5. On March 29, 2011,the City Council will have an executive session(closed session). 6. On March 29, 2011 Council will then discuss applicant interviews and vote in open session to fill the vacancy. 7. Each interview will be a maximum of 30 minutes. B. Interview Questions/Process: 1. City Council members interested in submitting interview questions for applicants to answer will provide their top five questions (which they have rank ordered in terms of importance) to the City Manager by February 16, 2011. 2. Staff will compile the list of City Council members' questions. Where questions are regarding the same topic, staff will combine them while attempting to capture the specificity of the individual question. 3. The draft Selection Procedure will be considered by motion on February 1, 2011. 4. Draft interview questions will be provided to City Council to discuss and finalize at the March 1, 2011 Council Meeting. 5. Following the March 8, 2011 Council meeting,the City Clerk will send the entire list of questions to each candidate to be interviewed. 6. Council will approve the final questions. 7. Each Councilmember may ask each candidate up to three of the questions. 8. Candidates will be interviewed in alphabetical order of last name. Page 1 of 2 C. Voting Process: 1. A City Council member may nominate an applicant to fill the vacancy. A second is required. If no second is received, that applicant shall not be considered further unless no applicant receives a second, in which case all applicants who were nominated may be considered again. Once the nominations are given,the Mayor will close the nominations and Council will proceed to vote. 2. Any vote to approve an applicant shall be by voice or raised hand in the affirmative or negative. 3. The vacancy can only be filled if a majority of the City Council present affirmatively votes for the applicant, i.e. if five City Council members are present, this would require at least three out of five City Council members voting for an applicant. 4. If no applicant receives a majority of votes from the City Council, then the three applicants receiving the most affirmative votes would be considered in a second round. In a second round of consideration,the same process would be followed as before to determine if one applicant receives a majority of affirmative votes. If one of the three applicants still fails to receive a majority of affirmative, then the two applicants of the three who received the most affirmative votes would then be considered in a third round. In a third round of consideration,the same process would be followed as before to determine if one applicant receives a majority of affirmative votes. In the possible case of a vote resulting in one applicant gaining the most votes (but not a majority of votes of all councilmembers) and a three-way tie of three other candidates, Council will proceed with a second vote. 5. In the event the City Council fails after three rounds to arrive at a majority vote for an applicant, then the City Manager shall flip a coin to determine who shall fill the vacancy, with the applicant whose last name is closest to the letter A being assigned "heads" and the other person assigned "tails." D. Seating of New City Council Member: 1. Once an applicant has either received a majority of votes or wins the coin flip,the City Clerk shall administer the oath of office, and the new councilmember will be officially seated as a City Council member. Page 2 of 2 35A.13.020 Election of councilmembers — Eligibility — Terms — Vacancies — Forfeiture of office — Council chair. In council-manager code cities, eligibility for election to the council, the manner of electing councilmembers, the numbering of council positions, the terms of councilmembers, the occurrence and the filling of vacancies, the grounds for forfeiture of office, and appointment of a mayor pro tempore or deputy mayor or councilmember pro tempore shall be governed by the corresponding provisions of RCW 35A.12.030, 35A.12.040, 35A.12.050, 35A.12.060, and 35A.12.065 relating to the council of a code city organized under the mayor-council plan, except that in council- manager cities where all council positions are at-large positions, the city council may, pursuant to RCW 35A.13.033, provide that the person elected to council position one shall be the council chair and shall carry out the duties prescribed by RCW 35A.13.030. [2009 c 549§3017; 1994 c 223§36; 1975 1st ex.s.c 155§1;1967 ex.s.c 119§35A.13.020.] 35A.12.030 Eligibility to hold elective office. No person shall be eligible to hold elective office under the mayor-council plan unless the person is a registered voter of the city at the time of filing his or her declaration of candidacy and has been a resident of the city for a period of at least one year next preceding his or her election. Residence and voting within the limits of any territory which has been included in, annexed to, or consolidated with such city is construed to have been residence within the city. A mayor or councilmember shall hold within the city government no other public office or employment except as permitted under the provisions of chapter 42.23 RCW. [2009 c 549§3006; 1979 ex.s.c 18§20;1967 ex.s.c 119§35A.12.030.] Notes: Severability -- 1979 ex.s. c 18: See note following RCW 35A.01.070. 35A.12.040 Elections — Terms of elective officers — Numbering of council positions. Officers shall be elected at biennial municipal elections to be conducted as provided in chapter 35A.29 RCW. The mayor and the councilmembers shall be elected for four-year terms of office and until their successors are elected and qualified and assume office in accordance with*RCW 29.04.170. At any first election upon reorganization, councilmembers shall be elected as provided in RCW 35A.02.050. Thereafter the requisite number of councilmembers shall be elected biennially as the terms of their predecessors expire and shall serve for terms of four years. The positions to be filled on the city council shall be designated by consecutive numbers and shall be dealt with as separate offices for all election purposes. Election to positions on the council shall be by majority vote from the city at large, unless provision is made by charter or ordinance for election by wards. The mayor and councilmembers shall qualify by taking an oath or affirmation of office and as may be provided by law, charter, or ordinance. [1994 c 223§31; 1979 ex.s.c 18§21; 1970 ex.s.c 52§3;1967 ex.s.c 119§35A.12.040.] Notes: *Reviser's note: RCW 29.04.170 was recodified as RCW 29A.20.040 pursuant to 2003 c 111 § 2401, effective July 1, 2004. Severability -- 1979 ex.s. c 18: See note following RCW 35A.01.070. 35A.12.050 Vacancies. The office of a mayor or councilmember shall become vacant if the person who is elected or appointed to that position fails to qualify as provided by law, fails to enter upon the duties of that office at the time fixed by law without a justifiable reason, or as provided in RCW 35A.12.060 or 42.12.010. A vacancy in the office of mayor or in the council shall be filled as provided in chapter 42.12 RCW. An incumbent councilmember is eligible to be appointed to fill a vacancy in the office of mayor. [2008 c 50§4;1994 c 223§32; 1967 ex.s.c 119§35A.12.050.] 35A.12.060 Vacancy for nonattendance. In addition a council position shall become vacant if the councilmember fails to attend three consecutive regular meetings of the council without being excused by the council. [1994 c 223§33; 1967 ex.s.c 119§35A.12.060.] 35A.12.065 Pro tempore appointments. Biennially at the first meeting of a new council, or periodically, the members thereof, by majority vote, may designate one of their number as mayor pro tempore or deputy mayor for such period as the council may specify, to serve in the absence or temporary disability of the mayor: or, in lieu thereof, the council may, as the need may arise, appoint any qualified person to serve as mayor pro tempore in the absence or temporary disability of the mayor. In the event of the extended excused absence or disability of a councilmember, the remaining members by majority vote may appoint a councilmember pro tempore to serve during the absence or disability. [2009 c 549§3007; 1967 ex.s.c 119§35A.12.065.] End of Article I-Council Meetings ARTICLE 2 -DUTIES AND PRIVILEGES OF MEMBERS 2.01 Respect and Decorum. It is the duty of the Mayor and Couneilmembers to maintain dignity and respect for their offices, City staff and the public. While the Council is in session, the Councilmembers shall preserve order and decorum and a member shall neither, by conversation or otherwise, delay or interrupt the proceedings of the Council, nor disrupt or disparage any member while speaking. Councilmembers and the public shall comply with the directives of the Chair. Any person making disruptive, disparaging or impertinent remarks or unreasonably disturbing the business of the Council, either while addressing the Council or attending its proceedings, shall be asked to leave, or be removed from the meeting. Continued disruptions may result in a recess or adjournment as set forth in section 3.04 below. 2.O1A Forms of Address. The Mayor shall be addressed as "Mayor (surname)" or "Your Honor." The Deputy Mayor shall be addressed as"Deputy Mayor(surname)." Members of the Council shall be addressed as "Councilmember (surname)" unless waived by the Presiding Officer. 2.02 Seating Arrangement. Couneilmembers shall occupy the respective seats in the Council Chamber assigned to them by the Mayor. 2.03 Dissents and Protests. Any Councilmember shall have the right to express dissent from or protest, orally or in writing, against any motion, ordinance or resolution of the Council and have the reason therefore entered or retained in the minutes. 2.04 Filling Council Vacancies, If a vacancy occurs on the City Council, the Council will follow the procedures outlined in RCW 35A.13,020. In order to fill the vacancy with the most qualified person available until an election is held, the Council will publish a notice of the vacancy and the procedure, and distribute the application form for applying. The Council will have an application drafted which contains relevant information to answer set questions posed by the Council. The application form will be used in conjunction with interviews of candidates to aid in the selection of the Councilmember. End ofArticle 2-Duties and Privileges of Members ARTICLE 3- COUNCIL MEETING PROCEDURES 3.01 Rules of Order. Rules of order not specified by statute, ordinance or resolution shall be governed by the chart of the most common"Rules of Order"questions. Attached as Exhibit A-3. Tile City Clerk shall keep a copy of the most current "Robert's Rules of Order" in Council Chambers during Council meetings. (a) Out of Order Requests. Occasionally a member of the public may wish to speak on an agenda item but cannot remain until the item is reached on the agenda. During Open Comments From the Public, such person may request permission to speak by explaining the circumstances. The Governance Manual 9 Spokane • Va11ey CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley,WA 99206 (509) 921-1000 APPLICATION FOR INTERIM CITY COUNCIL MEMBER POSITION# 3 Thank you for your interest in serving the Spokane Valley community as a member of the Spokane Valley City Council. To be considered, applications must be completed, signed, and received at the City Clerk's office, 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, no later than 4:00 p.m. Friday, March 4, 2011, (late arriving mail will not be accepted). Applications may be hand-delivered or mailed. Name: (Last) (Middle) (First) Complete Home Mailing Address: If you have lived at your current address less than one year,please list your previous addresses and state how long you lived at those residences: Complete Previous Address Length of Time at this Address Home Phone: ( ) Fax: ( ) Business Phone: ( ) Cell: ( ) E-mail: Occupation: (if retired,please indicate former occupation) Business Address: Educational Background: 1. Registered voter in the City of Spokane Valley? Yes [ ] No [ ] 2. Have you continuously resided within the city limits of the City of Spokane Valley for a year or more? (State law requires a councilmember to be a resident of Spokane Valley for at least a year prior to appointment, and to be a registered voter at the time of application.) Yes [ ] No [ ] 3. Have you ever been convicted for anything other than a minor traffic violation? Yes [ ] No [ ] 4. If you answered"YES"to #3 above,please explain: 5. Do you or your spouse or any immediate family member (spouse, children, siblings, parents) have a financial interest in, or are you an employee or officer of any business or agency which does business with the City of Spokane Valley? Yes [ ] No [ ] If yes,please explain: 6. Is any member of your immediate family currently employed, either full time or part time,by the City of Spokane Valley, or currently perform any volunteer work for the City of Spokane Valley? Yes [ ] No [ ] If yes,please explain: 7.Would your appointment create a conflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest?Yes [ ] No [ ] If yes,please explain: 8. Please list your employment for the past ten years: NAME OF EMPLOYER POSITION HELD DATES OF EMPLOYMENT 9. Please list the professional affiliations, clubs, social, or fraternal organizations to which you belong or hold office: 10. Please list your special skills and/or interests: 11. Please list your volunteer experience, and include any volunteer or paid positions held on any governmental board, committee or commission: FROM: TO: FROM: TO: FROM: TO: FROM: TO: 12.Why are you interested in serving in this interim position as a Spokane Valley City Councilmember? 13.What are the three highest priorities you believe the City needs to address? How would you propose to address these issues? 14. Have you ever attended a meeting of the Spokane Valley City Council? Yes [ ] No [ ] If yes,give an estimate of how many meetings you have attended in the past year: 15. Appointment to the City Council will require your attendance at numerous regularly scheduled and special meetings, which generally occur on Tuesday evenings. Councilmembers are also expected to represent the City of Spokane Valley by serving on various regional commissions, committees and boards. Are you able to commit your time and energy to participate fully as a member of the Spokane Valley City Council. Yes [ ] No [ ] 16. References: Please list name, address and phone number: 1. 2. J. Once submitted, applications and related materials become a public record subject to public disclosure, and will appear in the Council agenda packet for the March 8, 2011 City Council meeting. Interviews are tentatively scheduled for the evening of March 22, 2011. Selected applicants will be notified of the exact date and time of the interview once all applications have been received. Final action appointing a candidate to elective office will take place in the open public meeting, which is anticipated to occur March 29, 2011. No City elected officer shall hold any other office or employment within the Spokane Valley City government. Signature: Today's Date: SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL MEMBER POSITION VACANCY The Spokane Valley City Council is accepting applications from individuals interested in serving as an interim Councilmember to fill the vacancy of City Council Position 3. The person appointed to this interim position will serve from the date of appointment until the person elected in the November 2011 general election takes office on November 29, 2011, which is the date the election results are expected to be certified. State law requires that a councilmember be a resident of Spokane Valley for at least a year prior to appointment, and be a registered voter at the time of application. Council positions are at-large positions. The City of Spokane Valley is a non-charter code city, operates under a council-manager form of government, and is governed under the optional municipal code of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) Title 35A. Under this form of government, legislative authority is concentrated in the elected City Council, which hires a professional administrator, a City Manager, to implement policies. The Council is comprised of seven members, all of whom have an equal vote, with the Mayor chosen every two years from among fellow Councilmembers. As the legislative body,the City Council establishes local laws and policies, and has general oversight and control over the City's finances, primarily through the budget process. Regular Council meetings are held the second and fourth Tuesdays at 6:00 p.m., and Council study sessions are generally held the first,third, and occasionally the fifth Tuesdays at 6:00 p.m. Submittal process: Applications must be received by the City Clerk no later than 4:00 p.m. Friday, March 4, 2011. Late arriving mail will not be accepted. Applications may be hand-delivered or mailed to: Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk, Spokane Valley City Hall, 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley, Washington, 99206. Questions may be directed to Chris Bainbridge, Spokane Valley City Clerk, 509-720-5102, or e-mailed to cbainbridge@spokanevalley.org. Please do not e-mail or fax your application. Applications can be found on the city's website at www.spokanevalley.org; or by calling the City Clerk's office. Interviews are tentatively scheduled for the evening of March 22, 2011. Selected applicants will be notified of the exact date and time of the interview once all applications have been received. The formal appointment is tentatively set for the March 29 Council Meeting. PUBLISHED: Feb 4, 11, 18 and 25, 2011 Christine Bainbridge, MMC Spokane Valley City Clerk (509) 720-5102 DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of January 19, 2011; 3:00 p.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 February 1,2011,Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Jan 24] 1. Sidewalks - (20 minutes) 2. 2011 STEP Paveback Program— Steve Worley (20 minutes) 3. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 45 minutes] Feb 8,2010, Special Mtg: Retreat, 8:30 a.m.—3:30 p.m. CenterPlace,Rm 213 [due date Mon Jan 31] Tentative topics include: Economic Development Snow Removal Business Work Plans Law Enforcement Goals Budget Goals February 8,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Jan 31] Proclamations:Kiwanis Children's Cancer Cure Month; CVSD FBLA-PBL 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Motion Consideration: Approval of MOU for 2011 STEP Paveback Program— Steve Worley (10 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] February 15,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. (CONFIRMED:no meeting) February 16-17: City Legislative Action Conference(CLAC) Olympia, Washington February 22,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Feb 14] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Admin Report: Chickens in Residential Areas (CTA 01-11)—Christina Janssen (15 minutes) 3. Admin report: Code Text Amendment,Adult Retail Uses—Lori Barlow (15 minutes) 4. Info Only: Dept Reports [*estimated meeting: 35 minutes] February 25, 2011:Spokane Regional Council of Governments 9:30 a.m. —12:00 p.m. Spokane County Fair&Expo Center, Conference Facility in Expo Complex, 404 NHavana March 1,2011,Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Feb 21] March 8,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,Jan 28] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance (CTA 01-11)Animal Raising &Keeping—Christina Janssen (20 min) 3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending Adult Enter.(Retail, CTA 03-10)—Lori Barlow (10 minutes) NLC Congressional Conf, Wash.,D.C. March 12-16 March 15, 2011,NO MEETING(Council attends NLC Conference) Draft Advance Agenda 1/20/2011 3:09:48 PM Page 1 of 2 March 22,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,March 14] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance (CTA 01-11)Animal Raising &Keeping—Christina Janssen(15 min) 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Amending Adult Enter.(Retail, CTA 03-10)—Lori Barlow(10 minutes) 4. Info Only: Dept Reports [*estimated meeting: minutes] March 28, 2011, 9 a.m. —noon;Special Joint Meeting with City of Spokane Exact meeting time TBD. Exact meeting place at City of Spokane TBD. March 29,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon, March 21] April 5, 2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,March 28] April 12,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,April 4] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) April 19,2011,Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,April 11] April 26,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,April 18] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Comp Plan Amendments (Subarea Plan,etc.) 3. Info Only: Dept Reports [*estimated meeting: minutes] OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: Airway Heights Plan Review Renewal Solid Waste Amended Interlocal Alternative Analysis (contracts) Speed Limits Bidding Contracts (SVMC 3. —bidding exceptions) Sprague Appleway Corridor Environ.Assessment Budget 2012 (August/Sept 2011) Sprague Avenue: One-way vs.two-way Capital Projects Funding Street Maintenance Facility CDBG(Fall 2011) Transp Improvement Plan (6-yr, May/June 2011) Centennial Trail Agreement WIRA,Water Protection Commitment,public Clean Air Agency education East Gateway Monument Structure # E-Cigarettes # =Awaiting action by others Governance Manual (resolution) Update * = doesn't include time for public or council Greenacres Park Bid comments Lodging Tax Funding for 2012 (Oct 2011) Milwaukee Right-of-way Outside Agencies 2012 (August 2011) Parking/Paving Options (for driveways, etc.) Permit Tracking System Railroad Quiet Zones Reimbursement Assessment Amendment Retreat, Summer 2011 Signage (I-90) Site Selector Update Draft Advance Agenda 1/20/2011 3:09:48 PM Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 25, 2011 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ® information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2011 Sewer Paveback Program — Draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Spokane County GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adopted 2011-2016 Six Year TIP which includes the 2011 STEP paveback program. BACKGROUND: The 2011 Budget includes funds for full-width street paving associated with Spokane County's 2011 Sewer Construction Program. As has been done in previous years City staff is working with Spokane County staff on estimates for the city's portion of paving the roads in the 2011 sewer project areas. Spokane County's 2011 Septic Tank Elimination Program includes two projects within the City of Spokane Valley: M icaview This basin generally includes the area south of Sprague Avenue to the City limits south of the Eighth Avenue between Barker Road to the west and Hodges Road to the east. Green Haven This basin generally includes the area north of Appleway Avenue and south of Broadway Avenue between Flora Road to the west and Michigan Road to the east. Attached are copies of the boundaries for each of these projects. Estimated paveback costs to provide full-width paving and drainage improvements for the two sewer basins are summarized below: City of Spokane Valley Share 2011 Estimated Road and Drainage Improvement Costs Estimated Road Estimated Drainage 2011 Projects Improvement Costs Improvement Costs Green Haven $ 550,000 $ 70,000 Micaview $ 250,000 $ 30,000 Total Est. Cost: $ 800,000 $ 100,000 Below are a few comments on the above estimates: 1. A Community Development Block Grant application was submitted to Spokane County for the Green Haven sewer project for $ 247,000 for road paveback. 2. These are preliminary estimates. Staff will be reviewing them in more detail with Spokane County to ensure all appropriate credits and savings have been accounted for. Also attached is a draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding the City of Spokane Valley's reimbursement to Spokane County for our share of the paving and drainage costs. OPTIONS: Info only RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Info only BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The 2011 Budget includes sufficient funds for the 2011 STEP paveback program. STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Steve M. Worley, Senior Capital Projects Engineer ATTACHMENTS Sewer basin maps; Draft MOU DRAFT Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Spokane Valley and Spokane County Pavement Replacement Cost Sharing and Drainage Improvement Costs For the 2011 Sewer Construction Program WHEREAS the City of Spokane Valley (the CITY) and Spokane County (the COUNTY) desire to work collaboratively to construct portions of the COUNTY's 2011 Sewer Construction Program together with CITY paving and drainage improvement projects; and WHEREAS the CITY desires that the roads impacted by the construction of sewers in the 2011 Sewer Construction Program be reconstructed to the full preconstruction width for an improved roadway surface; and WHEREAS the CITY also desires that pavement replacement work be extended in some areas beyond the limits of sewer construction; and WHEREAS the CITY also desires that certain drainage improvements be constructed in areas that will be impacted by the COUNTY's 2011 Sewer Construction Program; and WHEREAS the costs of such full width repaving, additional length of road reconstruction, and miscellaneous drainage improvements are not funded by the COUNTY's Sewer Construction Program, and said costs will need to be paid by the CITY; and WHEREAS the 2011 Sewer Construction Program includes the Micaview and Green Haven Sewer Projects within the limits of the CITY, as identified in the COUNTY's adopted Six-Year Sewer Capital Improvement Program 2011-2016. NOW THEREFORE, the CITY and the COUNTY do hereby agree as follows: 1. Prior to the bid of each project, the COUNTY shall provide the CITY with a set of project plans indicating the extent of pavement removal and replacement to be paid for by the COUNTY as a part of the sewer project. The CITY shall review the plans, and shall advise the COUNTY regarding the extent to which the CITY desires to add pavement removal and replacement, as well as the specific drainage improvements that the CITY would like to make in conjunction with the project. 2. The COUNTY shall prepare bid documents that include the additional work outlined in Paragraph 1 above requested by the CITY. 3. After the bids for a project are opened, the COUNTY shall prepare the bid tabulation and provide a copy to the CITY, typically within 24 hours, together with an estimate of the CITY's share of the project cost based upon the unit prices submitted by the low DRAFT Memorandum of Understanding 2011 Sewer Construction Program Page 2 of 3 bidder. The calculation of the CITY's share will include a representative credit for the COUNTY's avoided cost of crack sealing and surface sealing that would be associated with partial road width removal and replacement. If the CITY then decides to proceed with the desired improvements, the CITY shall provide a written notice to the COUNTY within two days of the receipt of the bid tabulation. 4. The CITY's estimated shares of the construction costs are presented in Table 1 below. The estimates in Table 1 are based on a minimum pavement section for local access roads consisting of two inches of hot mix asphalt overlying four inches of crushed rock, in keeping with historical practices for the STEP. 5. The CITY and the COUNTY recognize that the estimated costs shown in Table 1 are for planning purposes, and that the actual amounts will be based upon final quantities and actual contract prices. The CITY's maximum cost for the two projects shall not exceed $ 900,000 without written authorization by the CITY. The COUNTY shall not proceed with any work that would increase the CITY's cost to an amount greater than the total amount authorized. 6. If the CITY subsequently elects to make additions to the scope of any project, the CITY shall request such additional work in writing. A corresponding adjustment shall then be made to the CITY's share of the cost based upon the resulting increase in pay quantities and the associated contract bid prices. For work items requested by the CITY that are not covered by the contract bid prices, the COUNTY shall prepare a change order for the CITY's review and acceptance prior to work items being constructed. 7. As paving operations are undertaken for each project, the COUNTY will send progress invoices (no more than one per month) to the CITY for the CITY's portion of the cost of roadway and drainage improvements. When all paving and drainage work is completed on a project, the COUNTY will send a final invoice to the CITY for the remainder of the CITY's portion of the project costs. For each project that is not completed by the close of the 2011 construction season, the COUNTY will send a progress invoice to the CITY prior to December 31, 2011. TABLE 1 City of Spokane Valley Share 2011 Estimated Road and Drainage Improvement Costs Estimated Road Estimated Drainage Improvement Costs Improvement Costs Total Costs $800,000 $100,000 Memorandum of Understanding DRAFT 2011 Sewer Construction Program Page 3 of 3 SPOKANE COUNTY: By: Date: N. Bruce Rawls, County Utilities Director CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY: By: Date: Mike Jackson, City Manager Boone jil „rBroadwal. • +,1.111 ■'"111fo urspringfie a111I� uuulIIuI111l� NI IiIIIIriui... uu 1 FL 0 375 750 1,500 Feet GREEN HAVEN SEWER BASIN co I, 0 �I • wirt ■r ME Si MI tr3 0 250 500 1,000 et M I CAV I EW SEWER BASIN N 12-31-2010 OE v4 • c> NI 4dtge cludairirdeit aefdlyrit • FIRE DEPT. S P O K A N E V A L L E Y F I R E D E P A R T M E N T CHIEF ' S LETTER The Votes Were Counted and Spokane Valley Fire Protection District No. 1 was Formed. It's interesting and informative to find out about your family history, and the same THANK YOU is true about the Spokane Valley Fire Department. On November 14, 1939, the TO THE Board of the Spokane County Commissioners adopted a resolution to hold an elec- F O L L O W I N G tion on Tuesday, March 12, 1940, to determine whether or not the Spokane Valley • Fire Chief Fire Protection District No. 1 should be formed and for the election of its first Fire Mike Thompson Commissioners. The campaign material that came out on March 8th had some 'Chief's Letter' strong wording. "To leave Spokane Valley homes, places of business, schools and • Battalion Chief churches to the unchecked ravages of the fire demon is a criminal waste that no Randy Olson modern community of equal size would put up with. To risk the lives of our 'EMS Division' children, in our homes and school buildings, for lack of adequate fire protection is • Battalion Chief nothing short of murder." On March 12th more than two-thirds of the votes cast Wayne Howerton were in favor of the formation, and E.G. Kenney, F.R. Salter, and D.R. Meigs 'Training Division' received the highest number of votes for Fire Commissioner. The Spokane Valley Fire Protection District No. 1 was officially approved by another resolution of the • Engineer Board of the Spokane County Commissioners on March 22, 1940. Kurt Kilayko 'Honor Guard' J.R. Bittle was the first fire chief to be appointed on December 1, 1940, by the Fire • Captain Commissioners. Chief Bittle left the department in September 1942, and Bassil Bruce Hamner George was appointed as the next chief. America was at war which caused a 'CERT' couple of interim chiefs to fill in for Chief George while he was on military duty, and • Captain in general there was a significant turnover in firefighters during this period of time. Bruce Hamner Since Chief George's service to the community, there have been 11 more fire 'GreenacresStation' chiefs. • Asst.Fire Marshal Rick Freier In 1940, the population within the District's boundaries was approximately 'Renters Insurance' 10,000, and today the population served is approximately 125,000. For many • Asst.Fire Marshal years, the service area within the District was an unincorporated part of Spokane Bill Clifford County. Today, the Spokane Valley Fire Department provides emergency services 'Prevention Division' and programs to the cities of Liberty Lake, Spokane Valley, Millwood, all of whom • Deputy Fire Marshal annexed into the District at various times over the past 10 years, and surrounding Clifton Mehaffey unincorporated areas of Spokane County. 'Investigations' The fire service in general has a rich history with much tradition. The Spokane • Firefighter Tim Page Valley Fire Department is no exception when it comes to this same history and Attic Gym" tradition. Although there are a few gaps we need to fill in, Retired Fire Chief Doug Rider is working to compile the information in hope of writing a book. One thing we know for certain is that time doesn't stand still, but it's important to understand where you started. PAGE 2 4TH QUARTER REPORT EMS DIVISION 7th Advanced Life Support Apparatus - The Spokane Valley Fire Department has replaced their old basic life support (BLS) apparatus, Valley Rescue 8 or VR8, with a new apparatus ��-��;•• which was upgraded to an Advanced Life Support (ALS or paramedic) _Y'Y_� apparatus on January 3, 2011. The apparatus responded from Station z �riR 8, which is located at 2110 N. Wilbur, beginning December 23, 2010. 4 — The addition of VR8 as an ALS apparatus will ease the ALS call volumes A- ar VR8's surrounding ALS units as it will be dispatched by itself on emergency medical service (EMS) calls, except in cases of cardiac or respiratory arrest. TRAINING DIVISION In November, all firefighters attended a scenario based live fire training session. The session had two scenarios. One focused on attacking and extinguishing basement fires, while the second focused on rescuing civilians who were trapped on the 2nd floor of a house with fire burning on the first floor. Company evaluations were r conducted in November. The focus of this evaluation was assessing skills and knowledge used by the firefighters to escape a burning building on their own. Firefighters 4416 ,, were confronted with a scenario where there was no visibility, no radio, no help. They were separated from their crew, told they were lost, and they needed to find their own way out of a burning building. Information gathered from this assessment will be used to enhance future firefighter safety training. Look for crews this February to be out on Liberty Lake training for ice and water rescues. HONOR GUARD In October, the honor guard was able to send teams to both the Washington State Fallen Firefighters' Memorial in Olympia and the National Fallen Firefighters Memorial in Emmitsburg, MD. Participating in these solemn ceremonies helps remind our honor guard of the reason it was formed, to pay tribute to our fire service brothers and sisters who sacrificed all in the line of duty. In November, some of our guard members hosted and attended a "Taking Care of Our Own" seminar put on locally by the National Fallen Firefighters' Foundation. This class helped area fire departments and law enforcement agencies prepare for the worst, a line-of-duty death or serious injury. Participants heard from supervisors and family members who have experienced such tragedy and learned what to expect and how to plan for handling the inevitable chaos sur- rounding a line-of-duty death. That month, the team provided a color guard and music for a SVFD retirement and promo- tion ceremony. They also presented the colors - _ , and played music for the annual Red Cross J u " *� "Heroes on the Runway"fundraising luncheon. � ` � Finally, the honor guard participated in the dedication of the new Rescue apparatus at tation 8. P A G E 4 4 T H Q U A R T E R R E P O R T PREVENTION DIVISION Fire Hydrants and Roads The Spokane Valley Fire Department would like to remind the public about '" the importance of keeping fire hydrants visible in front of their homes and businesses. Everyone can assist in making sure the hydrants are visible by : removing snow that gets piled up around the hydrants. Firefighters need ' F - quick access to a water supply from hydrants to fight fires. After all, it may ;. be your property that needs water for fire suppression. Please help firefight- " ers do their job effectively when every second counts. c■ There are also many challenges associated with driving large fire trucks through restricted streets during heavy snow conditions. Help maintain clear routes for emergency vehicles to gain access on all streets. Please do not obstruct your roadway when parking or piling snow on the streets. Avoiding Frozen Pipes With temperatures now below freezing, pipes and faucets near or in exterior walls may be at risk of freezing and bursting, resulting in a water problem when warmer temperatures return. Spokane Valley Fire advises individuals to take the following preventative measures and know how to shut off the water to their home in case of emergency. • In your home, you may have pipes located in the exterior wall because they serve a fixture that is placed against that wall. While they may be somewhat insulated, they can still become cold enough to freeze. In the case of a sink, it may be helpful to open the cabinet doors under the sink to allow warm interior air to warm the wall. You can also leave a trickle of water running from the faucet. Pc' - + • Exposed pipes in the attic, basement, or crawl space can also be at risk of freezing. Leaving a trickle of water running from a faucet farthest away from the water meter can be helpful. You can also wrap insulating material or electrical wire heating wrap around the pipes. This can be purchased at any home improvement store. • Never use a propane torch or an open flame to thaw a pipe due to the risk of igniting wood beams, flooring, and other combustible materials around pipes. Hair dryers should also be avoided due to the risk of electrocution. As water freezes, it expands. With enough expansion, pipes can develop cracks which are not apparent at first, but begin to leak as the ice melts. In the case of a broken pipe, shut off the water valve and contact a professional plumber or fire and water restoration company. These companies are located in the Yellow Pages, and they have the skills and equipment to remedy any water damage and get your home quickly back in order. 4-IAA Did you remember to "Change Your Clocks Change Your Batteries" in your smoke detectors? ' ; Spokane Valley Fire Department reminds citizens to replace the La batteries in your smoke alarms and to test them every month to make sure they are working properly. If your smoke detector has a ` ' � lithium type battery please follow the manufactures' recommenda- ,c r tions. These batteries have a ten-year battery life and should be •� replaced as instructed. PAGE 3 CERT This is the time of the year that most of us think about being prepared. It definitely is hard to think of this topic when it is sunny and warm outside. We need to be prepared year round. It is never too late to take steps to form the simplest concept of disaster 411 h. "' preparedness. This simplest concept is a basic plan. Start your planning with the . 3:: ..`` . - . . •. weather in mind. Keep slippers and a robe or coat by your bed in case you have to COMMUNITY EMERGENCY leave your house suddenly during the night. Have your medications available so that RESPONSE TEAM you can quickly grab them. Do you have a plan if you lose power for an extended period of time? These steps are the start to your plan and can be expanded as needed. If you are interested in learning more about disaster preparedness,the Spokane Valley Fire Department will be holding their Commu- nity Emergency Response Team (CERT) class starting in March. This class is held every Monday night for 8 weeks. If you are interested,contact our administration office at 928-1700. GREENACRES STATION On November 16th, the Spokane Valley Fire Department opened their newest fire station. e...„ The Greenacres Fire Station is home to the crews of Pumper Ladder 10 and the 2nd Bat- _f talion chief officer. This station was built not only for today but with the future planned �- growth of this area. Pumper Ladder 10 serves the immediate area of Greenacres, from • --NINE approximately Sullivan on the West boundary to the boundary of the City of Liberty Lake .--.Iii P1 -- on the East, North to the Spokane River, and South to the Department's boundary at ap- proximately 16th. Pumper Ladder 10 and 2nd Battalion Chief also assist the other Spo- .. , ' '`vlOabs kane Valley Fire Department stations which lie primarily from Evergreen East to the State ..,' '� Line. The Spokane Valley Fire Department will be holding an open house at the Green- _- j.46.' _.,'',S.;." .. acres Fire Station this spring. RENTERS INSURANCE A survey by Apartments.com found almost 70 percent of tenants did not carry renters insurance despite data showing that renters are 50 percent more likely than homeowners to need insurance. Most thought that their personal property wasn't worth insuring, it would be too expensive, or they didn't know renters insurance existed. A typical renter will have $10,000 to $20,000 in personal property. Take a moment and look around, and you might be sur- prised how fast it adds up. Just think how much it would cost to replace your furniture; clothing;TV, computer equipment and accessories; dishes, cookware and silverware;jewelry; collections; and small appliances. Renters insurance also covers liability. Let's say a candle starts a fire in your apartment. You could be held responsible. It is always a good idea to have some liability insurance. As with every insurance decision you need to take time and learn about the products available. You should get a few quotes before you make a commitment. Remember to ask about cash value vs. replacement cost, additional living expenses, and liability coverage. Expensive items may need a separate policy. V.4' 7 t w i� Other things to consider • Make a room-by-room list of your belongings. • Consider taking photos of items and photos of each room as a whole. • Use your camera to record serial numbers and receipts. . • Make sure that you keep this information in a separate safe location. f • To help keep your premiums low, ask how to get additional premium discounts. • 1 IN Sometimes combining your auto and renters policy or having a higher deductible can maximize your coverage. YEAR TO DATE RESPONSE TOTALS J SPOKANE i\i ILLWOOD LIBERTY *Unincorporated 2010 SVFD 2009 SVFD % VALLEY LAKE Areas Jan.—Dec. Jan.—Dec. Change INCIDENT TYPE YTD YTD YTD YTD YIP YTD YTD 11-S/F Structure Fire Single Response 433 14 11 54 512 523 -2.10 11-W Working Fire 29 1 0 3 33 42 -21.43 13-S Vehicle Fire 78 1 2 10 91 88 3.41 14-L/H Brush Fire-Low 67 1 0 24 92 111 -17.12 15-S Trash Fire 20 0 0 1 21 29 -27.59 18-S/F Alarm System-Single Response 444 5 21 44 514 587 -12.44 31-A/B BLS EMS Alarm 3640 63 137 301 4141 4121 0.49 31-C/D/E ALS EMS Alarm 3773 72 181 352 4378 4419 -0.93 31-F 2nd alarm EMS/Mass Casualty 4 0 0 0 4 0 35-F Extrication 10 0 2 7 19 20 -5.00 36-F Water Rescue 2 0 0 2 4 3 33.33 37-F Tech Rescue 1 0 0 0 1 0 40-I Hazmat Investigation 77 3 8 4 92 78 17.95 40-F Hazmat Full Response 15 0 0 4 19 17 11.76 46-A/B Auto Accident-Unknown Injuries 578 22 28 95 723 622 16.24 46-C/D Auto Accident-Life Threats 68 2 2 11 83 84 -1.19 50-S Service Call 152 3 3 22 180 209 -13.88 YEAR TO DATE TOTALS 9391 187 395 934 10907 10953 -0.42 \ I *UNINCORPORATED AREAS INCLUDES RESPONSES OUTSIDE THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, MILLWOOD AND LI-3ERTY LAKE RETIREMENT ,y a' , 4/4/!1/ 1"..ir'-i' fit' J'A, 44,0, qt, -1(11-°I''.\ Obiii DM°M11I Jfl WELLNESS Attic Gym P R O M O T I O N The Attic Gym, which is located on the 5th floor of the Field House at the rSpokane Regional Training Facility, is now open to the employees of ,.. , Ryan Van Wey Spokane Valley Fire. This has been a long process from both City and Captain Valley Fire Departments. This facility is a top of the line fitness center with a wide variety of equipment. It will be staffed with a trainer at all times, and SVFD trainers will be able to conduct classes specifically for our department. P R O M O T I O N We are very fortunate to be Alt employed and involved with _ departments that have - - - - - made this facility available. '41 lik Jeff WIlIlllIlgo This gym is meant to be fun -.._, MffiEIl and enjoyable. It will provide - ffiCP(�I �, r,_. us with another location for working out further promot- ing our Wellness Program. y - 'k PAGE 6 PREVENTION DIVISION • Fire Safety House . Firstseri Every October is "Fire Prevention %=#. Month". Over 800 third grade stu- dents from 14 schools located in Lib- erty Lake, Millwood, and Spokane Val- ley are able to get hands-on training Free Smoke Alarm Program with the Fire Safety Trailer and learn Classes Taught the importance of fire safety in the home. The children watch a movie Spokane Valley Fire has a "Free Smoke Over 600 citizens were instructed in the about fire safety and then participate Alarm" program that is available to low use of fire extinguishers, work place fire income families. "We want to make sure in activities in the trailer to identify fire safety, apartment manager's fire safety, every home in our response area is hazards in the kitchen, living room with and fire inspections. safe." It is the responsibility of the land a fire place, and the bedroom. Then lord to install smoke alarms in their they practice a fire drill with theatrical property and they can purchase them at (fake) smoke. Every year we visit all 28 441 ,. �� Ih�• i , . yrt. ,.� ; �� o local hardware stores. grade schools and speak to over 1500 students and teachers. $ Junior Fire Marshal �y telet !,,. I ,� ^' The Spokane Valley Fire Department visited over 1600 second grade children at area Elementary schools with a safety message. The Junior Fire Marshal program targets the second grade classes from 28 schools to inform the children with having and practicing fire exit drills in the home, making sure they have working smoke detectors and two ways out of every room.The second grade classes are given information and an assignment to complete with their parents. When the homework is completed the children receive a Junior Fire Marshal badge, helmet, and get to see a fire engine and ask questions of firefighters. INVESTIGATIONS 25 - Fourth Quarter Investigations with an estimated $459,360 in property damage. 4 - Intentional/Criminal fires causing an estimated $15,000 in property damage, two (2) of which were cleared by either ar- rest or exceptional means. 17 -Accidental fires,six(6)of which were caused by heating appliances(stoves,space heaters,etc),five(5) caused by electri- cal means, and two(2)caused by smoking materials,such as the improper discarding of cigarettes or wood stove ashes. 4 - Fires of undetermined origin or cause. One male juvenile was arrested on November 2nd for the Unlawful Discharge of Fireworks in the East Valley High School. The youth lit a firework, dropped it into the toilet, and when the firework exploded, it broke the toilet causing an estimated $200 in damage. An accidental fire occurred at Spokane Valley Fire Department's Station #6 on December 13th. An electrical component in the Bosch Dishwasher overheated causing a fire and $5000 in fire and smoke damage. The Spokane Valley Fire Department recommends that residents consult the Consumer Product Safety Commission website at www.cpsc.gov to check for recalls on all of their appliances. •� s„iifirU i 9 i x�a_y,r�ar . • •Y. ~ :WA-,�2 - '�, ' JaA�S�}- b i ^ t' �. �•41� - .-...-_--.1-7.7-•--: -Cl�^15 r. - r Fr _ SPA%itl E'VALLEY 1 .. - PERE n BUM f STirr PON...s J ■ � IV II: tiV 'I .. _ r _ _ ii �. . + 1 a err 1 Val 4 =INF s • ' -No.,_ iii, .. t,. It A 1 f ,, • ., _ , . .,... 4 ne Valley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 0 Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 0 Fax: 509.921.1008 0 cityhall®spokanevalley.org Memorandum To: Mike Jackson, City Manager From: Ken Thompson, Finance Director Date: January 7, 2011 Re December Finance Activity Report December activities in Finance included: Financial reports. Reports showing a comparison of actual revenues and expenditures at December 31, 2010, to the 2010 Budget, are attached. Gambling tax receipts are expected to have a large uncollectible portion, as casinos struggle to make ends meet. Two of our three casinos have closed, with one reopening weeks later. Investment earnings are likely to be less than projected in our 2010 budget as interest rates are down dramatically from prior years. Sales tax receipts are down 2% from 2009 collections. Since we estimate our revenues conservatively (we usually exceed our revenue estimates) and our expenditures are usually less than our estimates, moderate changes in revenues and expenditures have very little affect on our operations. This approach provides a smooth, "steady as you go" financial foundation for our operations. Fine and forfeiture revenues are expected to exceed our budget by $250,000. State shared revenue(mostly liquor tax) is projected to be $450,000 more than budget. The investment report is also attached for your review. Audit of 2009 financial records. The State Auditor's Office completed their review of our 2009 financial records. The auditor's office offered suggestions for improving our processes and providing additional checks and balances over City assets. These suggestions are usually routine and will be carefully considered. We try to avoid audit "findings" which tend to be more serious issues and take considerable time and effort to correct. There were no"findings"for our year ended 12-31-09. 2011 Budget. This process is complete. We are reviewing a few amendments that will be needed in the 2011 budget as the final version omitted a portion of the Storm Water Fund. Outside agency funding. Nineteen agencies requested funding from the city for programs in 2011. The City Council allocated $159,000 at the September 28 Council meeting. We have notified those who did not receive funding. Mini-contracts are being prepared for those that received an allocation for 2011, Lodging tax grants. Applications(5) for tourism promotion grants have been received. The lodging tax advisory committee received the applications in early October and made a recommendation to the City Council in December. Council approved the recommendation. Agreements are being prepared for the five agencies. Use of Public, Educational and Governmental fees collected with cable franchise fees. These dollars are available for capital costs of providing local programming. Staff is reviewing the requirements of the Franchise Agreement and searching for a fair way to allocate public and educational dollars. The Governmental portion will be used to acquire hardware to broadcast council meetings. City of Spokane Valley General Fund Budget Variance Report For the Period Ended December 31, 2010, at January 6,2011 Will Be Updated in February 2011 Amended Budget December YTD Unrealized Percent 2010 Revenues Revenues Revenue Realized General Fund Revenues: Begining Fund Balance $ 19,375,000 24,626,549 $ (5,251,549) 127.10% 5 Property Tax 10,969,500 847,785 10,692,669 276,831 97.48% 4 Sales Tax 16,600,000 1,301,846 14,756,722 1,843,278 88.90% Gambling Tax 425,000 31,914 532,284 (107,284) 125.24% 20 Franchise Fees/Business Licenses 1,100,000 11,423 1,008,238 91,762 91.66% 11 State Shared Revenues 1,450,000 320,776 1,908,628 (458,628) 131.63% Planning&Building Fees 1,649,786 52,602 1,307,109 342,677 79.23% Fines and Forfeitures 1,594,700 170,300 1,864,296 (269,596) 116.91% Recreation&Centerpiece Fees 740,000 70,565 658,687 81,313 89.01% 10 Investment Interest 416,864 19,160 157,553 259,311 37.79% 18 Operating Transfers 220,000 53,061 87,361 132,639 39.71% 16 Total General Fund Revenues: $ 54,540,850 2,879,433 57,600,095 $ (3,059,245) 105.61% Amended Budget December YTD Unrealized Percent 2010 Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures Realized General Fund Expenditures: Council 322,120 27,207 307,941 14,179 95.60% City Manager 1,063,842 85,199 1,259,285 (195,443) 118.37% 19 Public Safety 22,062,268 1,946,258 20,716,177 1,346,091 93.90% Operations&Administrative Svcs 1,892,382 127,025 1,500,268 392,114 79.28% Public Works 893,793 74,514 688,014 205,779 76.98% Planning&Community Day. 3,552,450 230,601 2,866,404 686,046 80.69% Library Services - - 1,012 (1,012) Parks&Recreation 2,926,033 156,121 2,242,744 683,289 76.65% General Government 21,827,963 102,473 1,439,234 20,388,729 6.59% 17 Total General Fund Expenditures: $ 54,540,851 $ 2,749,398 $ 31,021,078 $ 23,519,773 56.88% 01107/2011 2;34 PM City of Spokane Valley Other Funds Budget Variance Report For the Period Ended December 31,2010, at January 6,2011 Will Be Updated in February 2011 Amended Budget December YTD Unrealized Percent 2010 Revenues Revenues Revenue Realized Other Funds Revenues: Street Fund $ 7,399,050 $ 419,302 $ 4,601,178 2,797,872 62.19% 7 Trails and Paths 8,000 8 62 7,938 0.78% 3 Hotel/Motel Fund 400,000 34,397 422,644 (22,644) 105.66% Civic Facilities Replacement 1,240,000 240 2,708 1,237,292 0.22% 15 Debt Service-LTGO 03 675,000 141,751 605,023 69,978 89.63% Capital Projects Fund 1,948,000 36,237 472,477 1,475,523 24.25% 3 Special Capital Projects Fund 612,000 36,249 458,374 153,626 74.90% 3 Street Capital Projects 10,572,000 804,697 2,172,295 8,399,705 20.55% 3 Mirabeau Point Project - 9 (106) 106 Community Developmt Block Grnts 300,000 - - 300,000 0.00% 13 Capital Grants Fund 2,465,000 391,340 1,589,214 875,786 64.47% 3 Barker Bridge Reconstruction 1,767,000 - 578,573 1,188,427 32.74% Stormwater Mgmt Fund 4,398,015 176,137 1,761,386 2,636,629 40.05% 7 Equip. Rental&Replacement 919,000 180 2,326 916,674 0.25% 7 Risk Management 318,000 60,003 318,043 (43) 100.01% Reserves: Centerplace Operating 350,000 69 902 349,098 0.26% 6 Service Level Stabilization 5,400,000 1,076 14,541 5,385,459 0.27% 6 Winter Weather 505,000 99 923 504,077 0.18% 12 Parks Capital 820,000 204 2,185 817,815 0.27% 3 Civic Buildings 5,827,000 1,156 15,638 5,811,362 0.27% 6 Total Other Funds Revenues: $ 45,923,065 $ 2,103,154 $ 13.018.385 32.904.680 28.35% I Amended Budget December YTD Unrealized Percent 2010 Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures Realized Other Funds Expenditures: Street Fund $ 7,399,050 510,828 3,648,149 $ 3,750,901 49.31% 17 Trails and Paths 8,000 - - 8,000 0.00% 3 Hotel/Motel Fund 400,000 50,000 339,940 60,060 84.98% Civic Facilities Replacement 1,240,000 - - 1,240,000 0.00% 15 Debt Service LTGO 03 675,000 - 554,604 120,396 82.16% Capital Projects Fund 1,948,000 70,876 91,751 1,856,249 4.71% 3 Special Capital Projects Fund 612,000 70,876 91,751 520,249 14.99% 3 Street Capital Projects 10,572,000 49,475 2,325,130 8,246,870 21.99% 3 Community Developmt Block Grnts 300,000 - - 300,000 0.00% 13 Capital Grants Fund 2,465,000 225,721 1,928,091 536,909 78.22% 3 Barker Bridge Reconstruction 1,767,000 42,017 1,248,352 518,648 70.65% Stormwater Mgmt Fund 4,398,015 176,358 1,666,286 2,731,729 37.89% 17 Equip. Rental&Replacemnt 919,000 - - 919,000 0.00% 8 Risk Management 318,000 - 305,834 12,166 96.17% Reserves: Centerplace Operating 350,000 - - 350,000 0,00% 9 Service Level Stabilization 5,400,000 - - 5,400,000 0.00% 12 Winter Weather 505,000 - - 505,000 0,00% 12 Parks Capital 820,000 1,770 275,347 544,653 33,58% 3 Civic Facilities Capital 5,827,000 - 17,866 5,809,134 0.31% 3 Total Other Funds Expenditures: $ 45,923,065 $ 1.197.919 12,493,102 $ 33,429,963 27.20% 01/07/2011 2:34 PM City of Spokane Valley Investment Report For the Month of December 2010 Total LGIP* BB CD 1 BB CD 2 Investments Beginning $ 43,589,071.55 $ 2,035,657.54 $ 3,007,561.64 $ 48,632,290.73 Deposits 2,337,076.05 - - $ 2,337,076.05 Withdrawls (1,500,000.00) - - $ (1,500,000.00) Interest 9,817.10 - 7,498.31 $ 17,315.41 Ending $ 44,435,964.70 $ 2,035,657.54 $ 3,015,059.95 $ 49,486,682.19 Investment Interest Balances by Fund 001 General Fund $ 26,382,609.72 101 Street Fund 2,669,730.49 103 Trails & Paths 37,855.52 105 Hotel/Motel 338,879.85 120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve 348,950.24 121 Service Level Stabilization Reserve 5,421,235.87 122 Winter Weather Reserve 500,923.12 123 Civic Facilities Replacement 1,210,481.09 301 Capital Projects 1,140,732.98 302 Special Capital Projects 1,201,135.76 304 Mirabeau Point Project 44,183.81 309 Parks Capital Project 1,027,341.56 310 Civic Buildings Capital Projects 5,825,860.17 402 Stormwater Management 2,415,875.25 501 Equipment Rental & Replacement 905,115.00 502 Risk Management 15,771.76 $ 49,486,682.19 *Local Government Investment Pool City of Spokane Valley Sales Tax Receipts Month by Month Comparison Year to date Month Percentage Received 2009 2010 Change February $ 1,690,170.61 $ 1,693,974.29 0.23% March 1,245,885.86 1,097,126.08 -4.94% April 1,210,210.64 1,1 60,934.77 -4.68% May 1,297,589.85 1,349,758.63 -2.61% June 1,254,330.03 1,252,377,28 -2.15% July 1,312,964.99 1,271,607.01 -2,31% August 1,494,486.56 1,442,679.59 -2.50% September 1,381,203.54 1,380,147.05 -2.19% October 1,393,353.36 1,354,001.39 -2.26% November 1,417,465.22 1,452,269.26 -1.77% December 1,314,434.56 1,301,846.34 -1.70% January 2010 1,221,873.05 2011 $ 16,233,968.27 $ 14,756,721.69 FOOTNOTES 1 Most costs are typically late in the year. 2 Debt paid twice each year(June and December.) 3 Capital projects often take a number of years to plan, engineer, acquire right of way and construct. 4 Most property tax received in May and November. 5 Based on audited 2009 annual report. 6 Interest earnings. 7 Beg. Bal. included in budget which understates percent realized for current year 8 For replacement of vehicles & computers. 9 Required operating reserve, no expenditures planned for 2010. 10 Revenue for 2011 events will be moved to 2011. 11 Quarterly Payment to City. 12 Emergency use only. 13 Fund being phased out. 14 Budget adjustment needed 15 In reserve for replacement of buildings. 16 Transfer for loan repayment processed in late 2009. 17 Budget includes projected fund balances at 12-31-10, which understates percent realized. 18 Interest rates are down significantly. 19 Severance pay. 20 Shows revenue earned, some will not be collected. 01/07/2011 2:34 PM Spoka•■'■ ne . Valley® Operations & Administrative Services 2010 — 4th Quarter Report Administrative: • Completed options analysis for Spokane County service contracts • Negotiating new detention services agreement • Evaluating regional animal control • Planning modification of prosecutorial services to allow greater control over criminal justice services and costs • Utilized new Customer Service Request system (E-gov)to monitor, track, map, and respond to citizen's requests according to Snow Plan Human Resources: Recruiting/Employment ecruitment JI , Applicants Interviews Administrative Assistant-Legal 109 () TOTAL: * Numbers do not reflect duplicate applications Recruiting/Employment, continued Positio Status Administrative Assistant—Legal Interviewing Temp. Engineering Tech II Mr Filled 10/25/2010 Assistant Engineer Filled 10/28/2010 EIMMI Special Projects: Deploying the new City website. Public Information: Key Reporting Areas Media relations o Media contacts: 51 (does not include those that were subsequently referred to another City resource) o Media releases & traffic: 17 Media Releases, 32 SnowInfo, 15 Traffic Alerts for a total of 64 o Total media stories: 214city stories plus 208 police activity stories (does not include ads nor all television/radio/web)for a total of 422 o Earned media stories: 119 (does not include all television/radio/web) o Hot Topic Community ENewsletter Subscribers: 407 o Hot Topic Community Newsletter Distribution: 20,000 quarterly Other Citizen contacts: 106 Website Updates: 30, not including PIO-initiated or those by departments with their own authority Areas of Significant focus: o Responding to problems, making adjustments to and helping train staff on newly launched web site o Wrapping up summer construction projects information o Preparing for and launching winter SnowInfo program Web Site Web Site Summary Oct Nov Dec Quarter 2010 Year to Date 1 Unique User Sessions Top Five Pages Viewed Employment Aquatics Parks & Rec Mir. Point Park Police Top Five "Referrer"Web Sites Spokane County—employment Municipal Research(MRSC) County Ideas Spokanevalley.org APWA.net/work-zone/job details *Google Analytics® feature is needed on new Web Site in order to be able to continue to obtain performance measures. This feature will be installed in January, 2011. Central Reception: Business Registration • 367 New registrations • 1,135 Annual renewals (Due annually in December) Call Volume 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 7 CD Council H R Legal Misc Ops/Ad P& R PW Total min ■Oct 303 58 10 14 230 83 8 120 826 ■Nov 250 35 15 1 191 65 6 163 726 •Dec 222 42 9 4 241 74 6 256 854 Visitor Volume Dec,204 Oct,204 141111141%fri Nov,191 Citizen Action Requests - October—31 November—22 December— 422 422 TOTALS 22 31 358 Snow 0 0 28 Signs III18 7 0 Sweeping 0 1 I2 Signals 0 I2 ■❑ec 0 •Nov Sight obstruction 12 •Oct 4 I2 Storm Drains 0 0 16 Potholes 0 14 26 Dead Animals r 13 0 100 200 300 400 500 • ........\.,, Pe •t Spokane PARKS AND RECREATION alleys FOURTH QUARTER REPORT 2010 ' } ADMINISTRATION AND PARKS: • Discovery Playground was closed in October, not only for the season, but to make necessary repairs and complete the landscaping. • Park reservations ended mid-October; however, a great deal of staff time has been spent working with customers and groups for reservations in 2011. • Numerous contracts were either completed or initiated during this quarter: o Community Colleges of Spokane are leasing a classroom at CenterPlace. o Central Valley School District is leasing two classrooms at CenterPlace for administrative trainings. o We contracted with Alan Zeutschel, Inc. to hydroseed a large portion of the area surrounding Discovery Playground. We plan to complete the remaining small portion in 2011. This will complete the campus landscaping. o A major outcropping gave way by the Mirabeau Springs pathway resulting in damage to the path and retaining wall creating a safety hazard. Rock Placing Co. cleared the path of boulders and debris. The area is marked and secured at this time. We contracted with Hite Crane & Rigging to remove more boulders up the slope to prevent any further slides. This work has been postponed because of winter weather and will be completed in 2011. o A contract with Signs for Success for a project at the Police Precinct to install large letters for their building signage has been initiated. o We contracted with Northwest Fence Co. to permanently install fencing around the perimeter of the patio at CenterPlace, o Negotiations have taken place with Senske Lawn and Tree Care regarding a one-year renewal of the Parks Maintenance Contract. Also, a contract with Senske for snow removal at the Police Precinct for the winter months has been completed. o Negotiations with Red Rock Catering regarding their contract are underway. • We are replacing our outdated facility reservation and class registration software program through Peak Software Systems, Inc. to better serve the public. The program is more user friendly, cost efficient, and Peak provides better technical support. Staff has completed the training, and we are anticipating its implementation in early 2011. 4, 5v ; ,` • ':,.,' • Staff continues to work on the Greenacres Park process. The i W , s• construction documents are being developed. We hope to 3; t: bid this project in late February or early March. • , ' t �= •i+ ;, �. • Staff continued to work on the Barker Bridge river access r ` ;' `-10 40iii t. ,` ' ,, __ _ - issue. - - =�� to 0r' � '�ki 1 CENTERPLACE: • Staff has been working with the Finance Department to test the new a � ,; facility reservation and class registration software to make sure it feeds the financial information into our EDEN program correctly. • The Wedding brochures and advertisements were updated in preparation for the January Spokane Bridal Festival held at the gin 'r'!'41!Sli-".‘ Convention Center. t • Google analytics (which is a free service) was added to our CenterPlace website so we can track the following: how many customers are visiting our website per day; how they found our website; how much time they spent on our website; and which pages were most viewed. This information will allow us to track whether 0EcE trade shows or networking meetings are successfully driving :.. } customers to our website for information. This information collected will help us evaluate and target our marketing. • In October, we held our Five-Year Anniversary Open House. We had a great response with over 250 attending the event. It was a great opportunity for the public to come see our building and sample our caterer's food. We also invited our partners, such as, Community Colleges of Spokane, Central Valley School District, and Meals on Wheels to have booths and distribute information regarding what they do in our facility. • Staff has been negotiating with a local wedding-oriented business to partner with our facility. They would provide information to their customers about CenterPlace and list us the sole Premier Venue on their website, which is nationwide. They would also have CenterPlace information displayed in their store. • CenterPlace revenues are down approximately $49,000 from 2009. This is largely due to the reduction in the lease with Community Colleges of Spokane. • On the other hand, expenses were held 15% below the budgeted amount for 2010, which is 6% less than expenses in 2009. • Staff took 178 CenterPlace reservations this quarter. There were 823 reservations booked for 2010, which is up from 815 in 2009. Even though the number of wedding receptions being held at CenterPlace decreased since 2009, there has been an increase in banquets, worship services, and community events, such as walk/runs, concerts, fairs and festivals.} � I 'Isle-. ' x w ` • M1 ;* 5`r { i, 11' RECREATION AND AQUATICS: • The Second Annual Valley Mission Haunted Pool was a success bringing in 489 people, which is 147 more than last year. Staff recruited and organized over 96 local high school and college volunteers to make the event possible. • This was our third year of coordinating with the Spokane Valley Rotary Club and co- hosting the Breakfast With Santa event at CenterPlace. Participants enjoy a pancake breakfast, visit with Santa, play games, and engage in arts and crafts activities. The event was a huge success with over 500 people in attendance, which is more than double the amount who attended last year. % Program Cost e Fall 20.10 - Aftendan _ : Rey .__. . C ?ots.e _._ ...:.F _ ve.ry _. Little Tykes Indoor Playground 12 $360.00 $247.00 145_75% Haunted Pool 489 $1,237.00 $1,618.20 76.44% Bab sitters Training 5 $225.00 $210.00 107.14% Lego Crazy Action Contraption Ballroom Classics 25 $910.00 $755.30 120.48% Romance Dancing 8 $245.00 $203.35 120.48% Swing Dancing 18 $435.00 $361.05 120.48% Ballroom Essentials 12 $145.00 $120.35 120.48% Night Club Essentials 6 $65.00 $53.95 120.48% Card Making Workshops Lego Dino Safari Orienteering Classes 14 $196.00 $0.00 100.00% Dodgeball League CPR/First Aid Certification Liberty Lake Ad in Brochure $60.00 Western Dance Hall Ad in Brochure _ $40.00 ` IRi_4f .tl $3}918.00 $3,569.20 109.77% F 1 ,,t i 4..;.?...v..• ..__ii...i.!. ,;,....4-7:,i4"1 .f :.1.,. .IP I;1 Oh ' - to.o.. , .7././F-,_,-;;Ax'' .'. ' i'' .* P ..1C- lc' t sig, .±:i. _, :• .._ : 0,*.,41 • i• .,: , .., ••,...,..,.,,,, . _ .. :,..., .,.. ,. . , ., , ,,,.., li �� 1 t Pt. ''....4, 0 . Foil l' _.:x.', .it + " d `' ik+l i 2:' V 1 FI' 40.:!.'. .',%c7c . ., .1.1kt J.,M t '1 ' I+ . I i 'I I. 1' 5+ Sr- i F I i _ I .. - -! I 11 fr Y ..oil+ j. ' f h } i ! V 11i ` . I 4 LS 3 SENIOR CENTER: i - ---- - • Texas Hold `em has finally stampeded its way { r ` ' + into the Senior Center and become the fastest '` wr I. growing activity since whirling tumbleweeds • ' ?I.' ' 5 I during the Dust Bowl. - • Workshops for Medicare options were held by Senior Health Insurance Benefits Advisors - (SHIBA) through Aging & Long Term Care of I ---__ _-- ' , Eastern WA and also through HUMANA. • WSU nursing students presented special programs along with their weekly visits. The presentations included diabetes education and heart attack and stroke recognition. WSU pharmacy students reviewed medications. • Senior Smile Day information was provided by the EWU Dental Hygiene Clinic. The clinic provides affordable dental screenings, fillings, and cleanings for seniors. • Maxim and Safeway administered a total of 124 flu shots. • New evening classes have danced their way into the hearts of seniors. Beginning tap and dogging are now part of the extended hours programming on Tuesday nights. • Frazzled? Stressed? Shoveled too much snow? Chair massages are now being offered on a regular basis at the Senior Center. • The Senior Association held their election for new board members. Dale Ferrell is now on the board, and Rich Hill and Pam Orne were re-elected. Ernie Buckler was appointed to replace Mary Elizabeth Nelson who resigned from the board. All serve a three-year term. • The Association updated their Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws and presented them at their annual meeting to the general membership for approval. Both motions passed. • Ladies never tire of lunching and shopping. The annual Holiday Style Show with the Cancer Care Discovery Shop was held with around 125 in attendance. While lunch is being served and enjoyed, clothing is being modeled. Then the clothes are displayed for purchase and proceeds go to benefit the organization. • Table tennis bounced its way back to the Senior Center with a little backspin. Play times were carved out in between other activities on the dance floor, and the average attendance is six. • Woven through the holidays is the popular Holiday Basket silent auction fundraiser. The 28 baskets gathered a total income of $1,150, which goes into the Association's general fund. The general fund provides all the equipment for table tennis, pickleball, badminton, BINGO, and various card games. • Hospice of Spokane now holds bereavement group meetings on a weekly basis. • We continue to work with and invite neighboring retirement communities to the Senior Center to participate in the - 1 activities that are offered here. Residents have joined in on ' the fun participating in ceramics, dance, Tai Chi, Wii, and our , -, special events. �; 1 • It's terrific witnessing active seniors participating in various ' activities and enjoying themselves. Total monthly l' attendance is around 2,000. Of that, the pool room alone I 7 ." gets up to over 500 in a month. In addition, the players of ' table tennis, pickleball, and badminton at the Hepton Center l c have been up over 200 in a month. _ _-_ - 4 MEMO TO: Mike Jackson, City Manager FROM: Rick VanLeuven, Chief of Police DATE: January 14, 2011 RE: Monthly Report December 2010 December 2010: December 2009: CAD incidents: 3,955 CAD incidents: 4,671 Reports taken: 1,427 Reports taken: 1,425 Traffic stops: 844* Traffic stops: 1,681 Traffic reports: 223 Traffic reports: 271 *Due to the snow and inclement weather, officers spent a significant amount of time responding to collisions and weather-related accidents instead of making traffic stops. CAD incidents indicate calls for service as well as self-initiated officer contacts. Hot spot maps are attached showing December residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, traffic collision hot spots and vehicle prowling hot spots, along with November 2010 and December 2010 stolen vehicle hot spots. Also attached are nine bar graphs for 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010: commercial burglary, garage burglary, residential burglary, forgery, malicious mischief, stolen vehicles, theft, vehicle prowling, and property crimes comparisons for 2007 through 2009. ADMINISTRATIVE: Chief VanLeuven attended the Joint Public Safety Leadership Forum in early December. Quarterly Leadership Training was held in early December, which Chief VanLeuven attended. A Winter Storm Tabletop Exercise was held and attended by Chief VanLeuven in early December, discussing winter weather contingency plans for Spokane County. Lt. Lyons attended the Strategic Planning Meeting which was held at the Fire Training Center in early December. Chief VanLeuven attended the FBI NAA Holiday Luncheon & Training in Renton in early December. The presenter was Chuck Joyner who is a recognized expert in the field of Use of Force. He presented information on Use of Force policy, training, and documentation.. Chief VanLeuven attended SCOPE North's annual Christmas Party as well as University S.C.O.P.E.'s Christmas Dinner, both of which were held in mid-December. Page 1 The Annual Holidays & Heroes was held the week before Christmas. Law Enforcement agencies from all across the area come together to bring holiday joy to families in need. Deputies and Corrections Deputies partner with a child to take them Christmas shopping with graciously donated funds. Afterwards, they head to the Greyhound Park at Stateline where they have lunch, see Santa, wrap their gifts, and pick up their box of food containing all the fixings for a delicious Christmas dinner. "Ir JR -. -Off . i .64._Mr. - _..„ ‘Ittil :::_.1.7.22._ _._ - *y ~ 1 I rte_ r n} i; -•!.,114- E 1 it - "� . ,\- ,r 0...,_ �. i� r..1.1 .• -31-I ; ,� 3-- t7, Ili I _ Ir Pr 'f r r� K 6 • T- - - .. 4 r IJP, - 1 fi .% 4 i r T + 4 It— Chief VanLeuven attended the 2010 Law Enforcement Recognition Award Ceremony in mid- December, where Deputies Travis Smith, Jack Rosenthal, and Joe Bonin were recognized by the Washington State Traffic Safety Commission for their excellent service to our community. A plaque was presented to the officers, which will be on display at the Spokane Valley Police Precinct. Page 2 COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING: Simone Ramel was recently chosen to be the new Neighborhood Watch Coordinator and S.C.O.P.E. Program Assistant, effective January 2011. She will be working part-time at the Valley Mall office and part-time at S.C.O.P.E. Main. Simone's background is in Writing, Editing and Marketing. Most recently she worked as the Communications Specialist with Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency. She has been a S.C.O.P.E. volunteer with Newman Lake S.C.O.P.E. since 2008 and has assisted S.C.O.P.E. Main with Basic Training and other writing/editing tasks since 2009. S.C.O.P.E. participated in the following events during the month of December: • Greater Spokane Substance Abuse Council Coalition meeting; • Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) meeting; • Child Sexual Predator Task Force meeting; • Edgecliff S.C.O.P.E. Children's Christmas party at VFW post; and, • SIRT (S.C.O.P.E. Incident Response Team) SV Tree Lighting Ceremony. December 2010 Volunteers Hours per station: CV S.C.O.P.E 684.5 hrs. Edgecliff S.C.O.P.E. 440.0 hrs. Trentwood S.C.O.P.E. 218.0 hrs. University S.C.O.P.E. 568.5 hrs. Total SV December 1,911.0 hrs. S.C.O.P.E. Incident Response Team (SIRT) volunteers contributed 88 on-scene hours (including travel time) in December, responding to crime scenes, structure fires, motor vehicle accidents and providing traffic control. Of those hours, 26 hours were for incidents in the City of Spokane Valley. Total December volunteer hours contributed by SIRT, including training, stand-by, response and special events is 527; year-to-date total is 6,670 hours. With a total of 152 callouts in 2010, SIRT exceeded 2009 and all other prior years by over 20%. This is in spite of very little activity during the first quarter of 2010, due to a lack of heavy winter weather. SIRT membership has increased and there are two new members in training. Sadly, SIRT lost one of their long-term members, Walt Clouse, who passed away unexpectedly just before Christmas. There were 4 juvenile runaways in the Spokane Valley for the month of December 2010. There were 58 runaway children from the City of Spokane Valley for entire year of 2010; all but 2 returned home, which are recent runaways. There were 874 for Spokane County and all but 8 returned home. Spokane Valley has the highest population density in Spokane County, but the number lowest runaways. Statistics were not maintained on ethnicity or whether the child ran from a group home setting, but will be for the coming years. Abandoned vehicles tagged by S.C.O.P.E. volunteers for impoundment in the Spokane Valley in November totaled 16 and in December 27, with 9 and 5 respectively, vehicles eventually cited and towed. Ten were processed in November and 5 hulks processed in December. During the month of December, a total of 69 vehicles were processed. Page 3 S.C.O.P.E. DISABLED PARKING ACTIVITY REPORT JANUARY-DECEMBER 2010 City of Spokane Valley # of # of # of Disabled # of # of Non - Vol. Hrs Infractions Warnings Disabled Issued Issued Infractions Issued January 9 360 63 93 2 February 8 342 39 122 2 March 8 411 36 82 2 April 6 286 35 47 2 May 6 136 17 65 0 June 2 179 12 2 0 July 6 194 22 7 0 August 6 95 12 5 0 September 6 81 20 1 0 October 7 79 7 0 0 November 5 71 3 1 0 December 9 95 14 0 0 Total 78 2326 280 425 8 S.C.O.P.E. DISABLED PARKING ACTIVITY REPORT (cont.) Spokane County # of # of # of Disabled # of # of Non - Vol. Hrs Infractions Warnings Disabled Issued Issued Infractions Issued January 6 47 1 23 0 February 5 78.5 0 15 0 March 4 47 2 5 0 April 7 107.5 12 19 0 May 9 67 17 9 0 June 7 265 14 3 0 July 6 9 1 2 0 August 6 12 1 8 0 September 3 9 0 0 0 October 4 7 1 3 0 November 7 48 3 0 0 December 6 20 5 0 0 Total 70 717 57 87 0 Page 4 OPERATIONS: Knife Assault Leads To Arrest - Officers arrested a 49-year-old Spokane man after he threatened sheriff's SWAT team members with a military-style knife during the execution of a search warrant. The suspect was booked into the Spokane County Jail on a felony count of Second-Degree Assault. Additional criminal charges may be filed after detectives located items of stolen property and non- prescribed legend drugs inside his home. Spokane Valley property crimes detectives developed information that the suspect had stolen firearms at his residence on West 25th. They obtained a search warrant which was executed with the assistance of the Sheriff's SWAT team. As officers announced their presence a third time, the suspect jerked the front door open and had a knife raised over his head with the blade pointed downward, standing in a fighting stance. When officers ordered him to drop the knife, he slammed the door closed and SWAT members had to breach it with a ram. When they entered the home, the suspect had disarmed. He was quickly detained, as was a woman living in the home with him. No firearms were recovered, but detectives did find speakers taken from a stolen car and a bicycle that had its serial number removed. They also found controlled drugs not prescribed to the male suspect. The stolen property and knife were seized as evidence in the case which remains an active investigation. Valley Bank Robbed - A lone gunman walked into the Sterling Savings Bank on East Sprague on a late Thursday afternoon, brandished a pistol at tellers and then left with an undisclosed amount of cash. Employees told officers that the suspect entered the bank through the west doors and already had a chrome pistol drawn. He demanded cash, which was placed into a green and blue bag. The suspect left the east doors of the bank. No shots were fired and no one was injured. A sheriffs K-9 team attempted to track the suspect but was unsuccessful. The amount of cash stolen was not disclosed. The suspect was described as a white male 25 to 30 years old who was about 5'06" tall and weighed 130 pounds. He wore sunglasses, a dark coat, a stocking cap and dark jeans. The suspect discarded the stocking cap and it was recovered by officers. Anyone with information regarding the robbery or suspect involved is encouraged to call Crime Check at 456-2233. Drugs, Firearms Seized From Valley Home - Detectives pursuing leads in a counterfeiting investigation ended up seizing drugs, firearms and cash from a Spokane Valley home in early December. Sheriffs Investigative Task Force Detective Dean Meyer and Secret Service Agent Ryan Smith contacted the two primary suspects at the home and smelled marijuana coming from inside. They requested and received consent to search the residence. Inside, the two discovered and seized two pounds of harvested marijuana, more than two pounds of psilocybin mushrooms, a small quantity of ecstasy, a 12 gauge shotgun, a stolen 9mm pistol and $5,000 cash. Names of the suspects and location of the home were withheld as the investigation continues. Montana Fugitive Arrested - A fugitive from Montana was arrested in Spokane Valley on a mid- December night after he failed to elude police during a brief vehicle pursuit and foot chase. Shortly after 8:30 p.m., sheriff's dispatch received information that the 35-year-old suspect was wanted on a felony warrant in Montana and that he had just left Hayden, Idaho, headed for the Linger Longer Apartments on North Hutchinson. Officers went to the address and found the suspect's Ford Escort, but no suspect. They set up surveillance and at 10:30 p.m., Sgt. Don Manning saw the suspect drive away. Officers attempted to stop the Ford, but the suspect took off at high speeds, running stop signs Page 5 and attempting to flee. At Vista and Baldwin, the suspect drove around a patrol car and hit a snow berm on the west side of Vista. The car was launched into the air and then quit running when it landed. The suspect jumped from the car, climbed a six foot fence and then climbed a concrete barrier that separates Interstate 90 from the residential area to the north. He jumped the barrier and was captured seconds later by officers on I-90. The suspect was driven to the Spokane County Jail and booked on a felony count of Attempting to Elude a Police Vehicle. A Fugitive from Justice charge is pending. Marijuana Dealer at East Valley High School — In early December, a 17-year-old male student at East Valley High School was arrested for possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver after he was discovered at school with marijuana packaged individually to sell. The student admitted he had brought the drug to school to sell and admitted to selling the drug to other students. During the investigation the student's cell phone was seized. Subsequent to a search warrant, the phone was taken to the forensics unit where the text messages and photographs were downloaded and viewed. The information gained from the student's phone revealed photographs of what appeared to be several ounces of marijuana, as well as a possible marijuana grow. The text messages led to the identity of the adult supplier of the marijuana to the student, as well as another possible dealer, who is a 19 year- old student at the school. The investigation is continuing. Traffic Stop Nets Cocaine, Ecstasy - A traffic stop for vehicle equipment violations on an early December morning resulted in the arrests of two men for outstanding misdemeanor warrants. During the arrests, both were found in possession of controlled substances. Officer Justin Elliott was patrolling East Sprague about 1:30 a.m. when he spotted a Chevrolet Malibu that was missing its rear bumper and had an inoperative license plate light. He stopped the car and identified the female driver. She identified her front passenger as 21-year-old male of Spokane. He had an outstanding warrant charging him with malicious mischief and Elliott arrested him. During a search of his clothing, the officer pulled two small baggies containing cocaine from his pockets. He then turned his attention to a backseat passenger, 22-year-old male Spokane resident. This male too had an outstanding warrant, for driving while license suspended. Elliott arrested him. Within his reach on the backseat floorboard was a zippered pouch that contained a glass marijuana pipe, a small baggie containing cocaine, and a plastic bindle containing five ecstasy tablets. Interviews with the driver and two other passengers tied the drug pouch to the 22-year-old suspect. Elliott drove both suspects to the Spokane County Jail where he booked the first suspect on one count of Possession of Controlled Substance for the cocaine, and the second suspect on two counts for the cocaine and ecstasy. The driver and other two passengers were released. Stolen Sports Cards Recovered - A Spokane Valley Police detective's investigation resulted in the recovery of thousands of stolen sports cards in mid-December and landed a 27-year-old Spokane man in jail for First-Degree Possession of Stolen Property. On October 26th Collector's Corner on North Evergreen Road was burgled and high-end collectable sports cards worth nearly $10,000 were stolen. On October 28th, Gameday Sports Cards on North Division was hit and lost about$400 in cards. On November 3rd, Spokane Valley Sportscards on East First was burgled and lost cards valued at nearly $5,000. All three businesses provided lists of stolen cards to police. On November 11th, a male suspect and a woman entered Sports Cards Northwest on East Sprague and wanted to trade sports cards for other merchandise. The store owner recognized the cards as items stolen from the three burglary victims and called police. Officer Jim Ebel had investigated the Collector's Corner burglary and had sketched a shoe print left on a glass counter by the suspect. He recognized the print as a Page 6 "Vans" brand shoe. Ironically, it was Ebel who got the call to check out the male suspect at Sports Cards Northwest. He noted both the male suspect and the woman were very nervous and that the male suspect was wearing Vans shoes, although with a different print. He seized the cards they were offering up as potential stolen property. The case went to Detective Dale Toliver who determined that the male suspect had been dealing cards on Internet sales sites. He also learned from the owner of Collector's Corner that the male suspect had been in her store a few days before her burglary, but had purchased nothing. Toliver obtained a search warrant for two residences associated with the male suspect. The warrant was executed and several thousand stolen sports cards were recovered, as were a pair of Vans shoes with soles that matched Officer Ebel's sketch. The suspect was arrested and booked into the Spokane county jail on the felony possession of stolen property charge. Investigation is continuing. Gunman Robs Valley Businesses - A man armed with a black semi-automatic pistol robbed three Spokane Valley convenience stores in late November/early December, and in each instance escaped with an undisclosed amount of cash. Sheriff's Major Crimes detectives who were investigating the robberies identified a 23-year-old male and a 23-year-old female as suspects in the case. The SWAT team along with Major Crimes detectives executed a search warrant at the Crosslands Motel on East Sprague, and located both suspects inside. Robbery evidence and a small amount of marijuana were seized. The male suspect was booked on a Department of Corrections hold while detectives furthered their investigation. The female suspect was booked into jail on a First-Degree Robbery (accomplice) charge. Two days later, a third suspect connected to the string of convenience store robberies was arrested when police picked him up for trespassing. Spokane Police drove him to the Public Safety Building where interviews with Sheriff's Detective Mike Ricketts tied the suspect to six robberies including the three Spokane Valley convenience stores previously mentioned. A pellet gun was used during the heists, the detective said. The 18-year-old suspect was arrested and booked into jail on a single count of First-Degree Robbery. Additional robbery charges are pending. Burglars Create Ruckus - Officers were called to the home of Ernest Creach in mid-December, after his wife, who was working at The Plant Farm, saw her back door open. The victim at first thought there were contractors at the home, but as she got closer realized the home had been broken into. She saw two suspects run out the back door and a third climb out a bathroom window. The three suspects, all white males in their 20's, ran to the south. It was unknown if the suspects had a vehicle nearby, but a systematic ground search failed to turn up the burglars. Air One, the sheriff's helicopter, was launched and searched the area, but without success. Initial search of the home indicates the suspect stole a checkbook, credit cards, a red Wii and a cell phone. The resident also indicated the burglars had stolen a semi-automatic pistol. Sgt. Nowels provided patrol with photos and information on possible residential burglary suspects. The information included a suspect vehicle description and photo. During one of the night shifts, Deputy Benner spotted a vehicle matching the description of the suspect vehicle. He was able to get a license plate but unable to make a stop on the vehicle. This new information was provided to patrol deputies at roll call on the following morning. Deputies Erdman and Hubbell took it upon themselves to research further in an attempt identify the suspects. They connected the registered owner to an address in the Spokane Valley. They determined that a 28-year-old male also connected to this address had, at some time in the past, used an address in Oregon which had also been used by the registered owner. They theorized that this male, although Page 7 having a different last name, was likely the registered owner's son. Upon comparing a photo of the male with the surveillance photos they determined that this male was very likely one of the burglary suspects. Deputies Erdman and Hubbell informed Sgt. Nowels of their findings. Armed with this new information, Sgt. Nowels and his unit located the male suspect and arrested him. As a result of the suspect's arrest, two additional burglary suspects were identified and several burglaries were solved. Truly an example of intelligence led policing at its best. Within a few days of the Creach burglary, Spokane Valley property crimes detectives had arrested all three suspects and booked them into the Spokane County Jail. One suspect was booked on Theft of a Firearm, two counts of Residential Burglary, and one count of Armed Burglary. The second suspect was booked into the Spokane County Jail on a felony count of First-Degree Burglary. Detectives arrested the third and final suspect in the burglary of the Creach home within a week of the crime being committed. The 23-year-old Greenacres resident was arrested and booked into the Spokane County Jail on a First-Degree Burglary charge after he surrendered to police. A family laptop and bag used to carry away stolen goods were recovered during searches of two residences and two vehicles. Sgt. John Nowels said more than 100 items of stolen property were recovered that link the first suspect arrested to at least five other Spokane Valley burglaries. Nowels said that in addition to the third burglar's arrest, other suspects face criminal charges for impeding the burglary investigation. Commercial Burglars Arrested - Spokane Valley Police arrested a trio of commercial burglars in mid-December after catching them in the act of stealing items from a construction shed. A neighbor called police shortly after midnight and reported a suspicious pickup truck parked on East Sixth. Officers responded and walked into the Alpine Construction property to find three suspects, one of which was carrying a stolen tarp. The suspect's accomplices were detained and officers found where the three had hidden a stolen nail gun and tent as they heard police approaching. All three suspects were arrested and booked into the Spokane County Jail on felony counts of Second-Degree Burglary. Investigation into the trio's recent activities is on-going. Air One Finds Missing Man - Air One, the sheriffs helicopter, successfully located a missing Alzheimer's patient on a Saturday morning in late December using its forward looking infrared radar (FLIR) system. Crewed by volunteer pilot Lt. Col. Olaf Holm of Fairchild Air Force Base and sheriff's deputies Dan Knight and Scott Bonney, the helicopter located Clyde Pentzer within a mile of his North Barker Road home. Pentzer was suffering from the cold and minor cuts and bruises he sustained during his early-morning trek. He was transported to a Spokane Valley medical center, but did not appear to have suffered any life-threatening injuries. Pentzer walked away from his home sometime after 2 a.m. Saturday. The FLIR system identifies sources of heat, including body heat, and is particularly effective when the ground is colder. The video from Air One can be viewed on the Sheriffs web page. Van Drivers' Actions Suspicious - Coeur d'Alene Police issued a caution bulletin regarding a suspicious male in a blue van who reportedly had attempted to entice children into the vehicle. A review of reports in Spokane County resulted in two similar incidents here, each involving a white male driver. The van descriptions differ, however. On June 25th, a 10-year-old boy was walking to his home in the 2800 block of South Man 0' War Lane when a man with gray hair pulled his older white full-sized van alongside and asked him if he had any dog treats. The boy's mother felt the suspect was attempting to lure her son into the vehicle, but the boy did not respond. On October 4th Page 8 a 14-year-old female was walking in the area of Sprague and Pines when a man pulled up alongside her in a white Dodge Caravan and asked her to get in. She refused and the suspect persisted. The girl finally ran into a nearby business to get away. That suspect was described as a tanned, blond-haired, 18-to-25-year-old. His van had Washington license plates. While these incidents may or may not be related to those described in the Coeur d'Alene Police bulletin, they illustrate the need for parents to discuss the potential for their children to be targets of child luring or enticement. Children should be made aware of the risks of conversing with or accepting rides from strangers, and should be educated about methods of escape and places of safety should such an incident occur. Children who walk in pairs or groups are less likely to be targeted, and should stick to well-lighted and populated streets and sidewalks. Deputy to be Commended for Job Well Done - Deputy Hert was contacted at the front desk in late December, by a mother seeking assistance in locating her missing endangered 19 year old daughter. Apparently the missing woman had borrowed her mother's truck the previous day to visit a friend in Rathdrum Idaho. At approximately midnight, the mother received a call from the Rathdrum police telling her that her vehicle had been found unoccupied and she needed to come and pick it up. She was told that when the vehicle was found the lights were on and the keys were in the ignition. Deputy Hert began trying to contact the Rathdrum Police while getting further information from mother. He also arranged to have a unit check the suspects address; however, they did not find anyone at the residence. Deputy Hert was able to reach the suspect and the victim on the suspect's cell phone. When the suspect allowed him to speak to the daughter, she seemed weak as if sick or having been crying. Her answers to questions were delayed and he heard a male voice before she answered. He believed that the suspect had the phone on speaker mode and was telling her what to say. Deputy Hert attempted to learn from the victim where she was but each time he asked there was a pause before she answered. Her answers were limited to one word responses. Deputy Hert offered to send someone to check on her but she simply told him she was okay and they were leaving. Deputy Hert eventually got the suspect on the phone and began trying to build a rapport with him. Deputy Hert made several attempts to get the suspect to stop somewhere so we could have someone do a welfare check on the victim. He refused because he believed he had a warrant and would be arrested. Deputy Hert eventually discovered the location of the victim and suspect, and directed other officers to the location where the suspect was arrested. During interviews, the victim advised deputies that the suspect had forced her to go with him at gun point. Deputy Hert is commended for his diligent work and his willingness to pursue the suspect to gain the victim's safe return. Crime Stoppers wrapped up 2010 with a whopping 795 tips that solved 33 cases and earned tipsters more than $3,400 in cash rewards. Rewards totaling more than $3,900 were approved, but some were never collected by the tipsters. The outlay of cash resulted from the arrests of 29 targeted fugitives, the solution of four criminal cases, and payment of five school rewards. In total, 234 suspects were arrested after being featured on the Crime Stoppers website, Spokane-area television programs and Washington's Most Wanted, a program featuring unsolved crimes and targeted fugitives from all over Washington State. Crime Stoppers is a national program that enhances community safety by paying cash rewards for information that solves crimes. Unlike many such programs, it does not require that suspects be convicted in order to collect the rewards, thus assuring tipsters that they can remain anonymous. Spokane County previously had the Secret Witness program which was inaugurated in 1980. It was consolidated into the international Crime Stoppers program in 2008 when its civilian board of directors decided to expand their law enforcement partnership beyond Spokane County borders. Since then, a Crime Stoppers program has been started Page 9 in Kootenai County, Idaho, and law enforcement agencies surrounding Spokane County have been offered participation in the program as a means to enhance their investigative abilities. Since its inception, the combined Secret Witness — Crime Stoppers program has paid out $156,845 for information that resulted in the solution of a crime or arrest of a targeted fugitive. In many instances, local crimes would have gone unsolved had not a tipster provided a key tip that led police to its resolution. Another arena in which cash rewards are paid is the "Keep Guns Outta Schools" program which pays tipsters $75 for information that leads to the seizure of a dangerous weapon on school property. Persons interested in obtaining more information about the local Crime Stoppers program can visit the website www.crimestoppersinlandnorthwest.org. For information about the international Crime Stoppers program, go to http://www.csiworld.org. Page 10 2010 DECEMBER CRIME REPORT To date: Yearly totals: Dec-10 Dec-09 2010 2009 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 BURGLARY 65 77 936 725 725 753 584 714 744 997 FORGERY 22 20 341 297 297 354 365 334 464 465 MALICIOUS MISCHIEF 71 79 1183 1245 1245 893 1,265 1,122 904 1,224 NON-CRIMINAL 73 67 917 892 892 944 839 811 749 916 PROPERTY OTHER 65 69 837 933 933 828 890 982 1,154 1,665 RECOVERED VEHICLES 16 18 365 187 187 319 343 403 333 390 STOLEN VEHICLES 30 37 496 298 298 496 478 711 603 577 THEFT 231 159 2365 2162 2162 1,846 1,881 1,888 2,256 2,853 UIOBC 0 0 3 4 4 4 8 11 8 10 VEHICLE OTHER 1 0 3 5 5 7 3 3 5 40 VEHICLE PROWLING 121 105 1395 920 920 1069 682 937 958 1,382 TOTAL PROPERTY CRIMES 695 631 8,852 7,668 7,668 7,513 7,338 7,916 8,178 10,519 ASSAULT 61 68 895 927 927 869 853 846 894 880 DOA/SUICIDE 10 23 188 210 210 269 221 167 159 164 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 122 125 1297 1226 1226 1063 874 736 762 755 HOMICIDE 0 0 1 3 3 3 1 5 1 5 KIDNAP 1 2 16 21 21 16 23 22 35 24 MENTAL 15 25 289 310 310 360 350 425 425 386 MP 10 6 128 115 115 95 83 88 97 106 PERSONS OTHER 122 134 1692 1621 1621 1,354 1,337 1,159 1,256 1,624 ROBBERY 11 8 68 75 75 71 60 58 56 58 TELEPHONE HARASSMENT 15 13 153 159 159 95 73 83 92 190 TOTAL MAJOR CRIMES 367 404 4727 4,667 4,667 4,195 3,875 3,589 3,777 4,192 ADULT RAPE 2 1 44 35 35 44 43 29 39 37 CHILD ABUSE 9 13 115 159 159 148 104 78 101 126 CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE 23 3 206 157 157 86 92 105 88 205 SEX REGISTRATION 0 0 1 2 2 3 4 3 6 4 INDECENT LIBERTIES 2 0 8 10 10 11 18 15 9 21 CHILD MOLESTATION 6 7 47 35 35 66 46 69 67 77 CHILD RAPE 2 1 28 35 35 39 31 62 35 30 RUNAWAY 31 33 490 440 440 369 295 309 311 437 SEX OTHER 18 10 215 211 211 179 194 203 181 162 STALKING 1 2 18 15 15 21 17 17 27 35 SUSPICIOUS PERSON 18 12 215 175 175 142 152 177 244 341 TOTAL SEX CRIMES 112 82 1387 1271 1271 1,108 996 1,067 1,108 1,475 DRUG 30 36 541 670 670 838 807 665 891 999 ISU OTHER 0 1 2 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 TOTAL ISU 30 37 542 671 671 838 808 665 891 1,000 TOTAL TRAFFIC REPORTS 223 271 3081 3,183 3,183 3,811 3,800 3,345 2,403 2,776 TOTAL REPORTS RECEIVED 1,427 1,425 18,589 17,460 17,460 17,465 16,817 16,582 16,357 19,962 BrideiiinL/EM—[ �a\to ■�w� ern•vim a m E 33104N111111RIFirill. mire.40-cr� I1111`r 01°i1111 l GFi�f� �oLL omen ' sly©0 MA � 3��dF1�1 — i!1l11 � �� iaz.rama numszU� s wEr—a st sr.mmarmd gt waicummoit 1w��s�i1i '• NM/W = ommwm �!lIl�sSil11 rMzER «gym NoMmaamm = ; �ni .--sue •--- :w.miaf � s�tr tAIM :.�iur 1l- F7•911IM= ■lt�i••=1=�1N ∎•∎===.111 MIZIMMENII mirmommvin � roadwa ��JIf �Q _ `I,Cie Broadwa Iffinu LLt„¢ {[�.mallk,1,.• ID Al ,,EN .• • : . ague = aui-^C mom i`i7 im � � S.ra.ue +�14ir� th l UST ^@ ��F-- 4th 4th 1 �'1c fllEa.nn��0��.'�1�� Vehicle Collisions 0 1 o 2- 3 0 4- 5 Low I I Medium MP Medium High Miles 2010 December Vehicle Collision Hotspots 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 Spokane Valley Commercial Burglary JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■2007 ■2008 '2009 ■2010 ' 'lam, 'S l Kl-jt'�,�„ 4U■n m o Brid.e ■�■ �_ 101i'1■11m tyam Matto monifilionoWW emu'ilr'.. .■ 11110P' .. ' 1iEI, ,oX 1 y.y��.rounds !elm nowm OVA===o— IPA! -+r-Vli 4 ii €%�i..=.fI lii t miasma I k\' Iwo-s"'iL '. ..1-i—m L'CJL'=MN11 ..71�srilri [4i91=.711M=191 I!111 •••1=K2/31= •L& .--sue .∎=srl1� MEMEIN iw.i.fYy� ■6111411111. ■ ,..s R' �:MllB�a �� wow =111 •��g11i11 � �' IE i�irmr m- �ra��7,!lWellL•3L•I]I!AEi�y �E. •■C "i�■� �IRilI�RJ=... �!1 woor..■■CIA ��i'�`�Q�ivau.;n�rr�ta.�sc_�.�7w�vu��lT�■�1��3�i11 `�I:�n:1�,�y■ inn r Commercial Burglaries 0 1 02 I-1 Low 2010 December Commercial Burglary Hotspots 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 Spokane Valley Forgery 1 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■2007 ■2008 - 2009 ❑2010 35 30 25 20 15 10 Spokane Valley Garage Burglary 1 1 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 2007 ■2008 2009 ❑2010 200 - 180 160 140 120 100 - 80 60 40 20 Spokane Valley Malicious Mischief 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■2007 ■2008 2009 ❑2010 2500 - 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Spokane Valley Property Crimes Comparisons (2010 is through December) Commercial Residential Forgery Malicious Stolen Vehicle Theft Vehicle Prowling Burglary Burglary Mischief •2007 •2008 ■2009 ■2010 Spokane Valley Residential Burglary JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 2007 ■2008 2009 ❑2010 app Trails Ilesle c` Mission Boone 9J111LIMn Em•ire a�to Ii Oi°'�`Irllrr 0 KEN Kn� sr3�Y Trent II 2�I. 01111 �c YVora�� w", Court) w Euclid Marie Euclid Knox 190 2 ndia E c Mission `Mission Broadwa rounds :MOW" d V U LW!ICyr�� roadwa 4 2.�=III 1:21 sro ti am timmL"'LIfIS+ lifinatr 'maw 1 pea S.rague Mk `IN O MOMS S I�rsau••�� .7 - �M ti 0 0 s�i®liw wigiffrwminw 0 no.a, Rice c 4th 18th 31st 32nd Belle Terre arie Corkey Residential Burglaries 0 1 02 I— Low Medium Ir High 0 o.5 1 Miles 2010 December Residential Burglary Hotspots Map Produced: 11 January 2011 I,;� —FaVounds Mi-` I: IL Main j1 S•ra •� a=1. 0 7A i et �i u i +r'-Vl1L"'S 1111 inumaxim ari:rrtd .imwyumr•r.I•' IwMALIMELii '• •■■• F unummrin imummuisi p _191 1711=<1511 ___- .___:Ell MENFIN : Mt Illibil N Brid liiiMI■.rMt ■��w�LL'' 1177 ern y� ° 3! illM11111111Ri iiEm•ire ��s o�c�tet��M.+��o❑Tr e,nt Ln 'TOO . -•�1 y E er -R M E�miO 11 Q �K�nox•-7 ta�eina•71r- rink 0 �� ❑y o M.d sfiel/d' m r )ndi� Marie=�R �0 A 0 Eli P P --‘,- intirmildIA Mission m -,■ M� �h' ,..� .. • Ivor MEWL �.: CLC F_1 Q Stolen Vehicles O 1 0 2 n Low MP Medium High 2010 November & December Stolen Vehicle Hotspots 1MJanuary2011 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Spokane Valley Stolen Vehicles JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC r 2007 T 2008 2009 ■2010 250 - 200 Spokane Valley Theft 150 - 100 - 50 - 0 1 o JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 2007 M2008 .2009 ■2010 PPY ails Kio.�.11I�r, UU■n m o iia+YC�ur.', Brid.e��yy ■■ ■�_ aannefin Eye Matto Sita111111to.�rfn i�Em•ire.90. I��■ ��"i11111111 11 Mission ---- -- i 41 an -i u I IVIVE4 flit i CS1� S-Za� Irs wEr-a sr..r._�rt Msearm_.r� 6t :Para' a ; ;■ Iwo=1:11;' '. ■IL�I'L�lli mm 2. ommoom ..NFL= p_u__Il L& .--sue .--- littM iw.i..af !V� 3�tr l�lF' eT,W'.71.1.tl L.�No 8th m a 2 J ac co 32nd 1 0 random point U co a 0 44th 44th V sta E 0 0.5 Cork Er tt�Y 44th o N m N cg U Miles 2010 December Vehicle Prowling Hotspots Vehicle Prowling 0 1 O 2- 4 Low Medium • High Map Produced: 11 January 2011 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 Spokane Valley Vehicle Prowling 1 1 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 2007 • 2008 i 2009 ■2010 Spokane Valley PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT December 2010 AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICES ADOPTED AND IN OPERATION • Street Maintenance—2010 Signal, Sign & Striping County Interlocal • Street Sweeping —AAA sweeping • Street and Stormwater Maintenance and Repair contract—Poe Asphalt Paving Inc. • Vactoring Contract—AAA Sweeping • Engineering Services Support—Agreements with private engineering firms • Street Maintenance (Pines & Trent) —WSDOT Interlocal • Solid Waste - Regional Solid Waste Interlocal • Winter operations —Snow Removal — Poe Asphalt • Landscaping Contract—Spokane ProCare • Emergency After Hours Call-out—Senske • Litter and Weed Control —Spokane County Geiger Work Crew WASTEWATER • Status of the process can be monitored at: http://www.spokaneriver.net/ http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/tmdl/spokaneriver/dissolved oxygen/status.html http://www.spokanecounty.orq/utilities/WaterReclamation/content.aspx?c=2224 and http://www.spokaneriverpartners.com/ REGIONAL SOLID WASTE SYSTEM Solid Waste Liaison Board will continue to discuss Regional Governance. STREET MASTER PLAN JUB Engineers completed the traffic counts/accident data collection and evaluation. They have also completed the street pavement ratings on one half of the city's arterials and one third of the residential streets. Results are still being compiled and evaluated. CAPITAL PROJECTS (See attached Capital Projects Spreadsheet) STREET & STORMWATER MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY The following is a summary of Public Works/Contractor maintenance activities in the City of Spokane Valley for December 2010: 1 Winter Street and Stormwater Maintenance Items: • AAA Sweeping, LLC substantially completed fall sweeping tasks. • AAA continued cleaning underground stormwater structures under the Vactoring Services Agreement. Emergency Winter Snow Operations: • We will continue with the emergency contract with Poe Asphalt for 2010/2011. Purchase of a permanent Street Maintenance Facility: • On April 6, 2010, Council recommended that we conduct a property search. We sent out a notice to all realtors in Spokane Valley. We are currently reviewing properties with realtors and will bring that information to Council in the November. STORMWATER • SW Improvement Projects —2010 Small Works Contract 4 projects were completed under the Small Works Roster, the projects are now substantially complete. We are holding retainage awaiting minor adjustment work and as-built drawings from the contractor. 1. Robinhood Street, 1300— 1400 Block 2. Herald Street, 8th to 9th Ave. 3. Oberlin Street, South of 11th Avenue 4. 10th Avenue, Little John Ct. to Mariam St: 2010 Maintenance Projects — IN PROGRESS 1. 11th and Herald — improve catchbasins and rehabilitate existing failing UIC. Scheduled for design this Fall/Winter and construction in 2011, to be assigned to a 2011 Small Works Contract. 2. 13618 E. 4th (west of Evergreen) — replace existing pipe sump with deep catch basin and a Drywell, replace existing soil with pervious gravel from mailboxes to new pavement and new catch basin. Under design, to be assigned to a 2011 Small Works Contract. 3. 32nd and Bowdish intersection, north leg — mitigate ongoing stormwater ponding. Evaluating various alternatives, to be designed 2011, assigned to a future Small Works Contract. • 2010 County Sewer Projects Both the West Farms and South Greenacres Phase 3 projects are substantially complete. Only minor/punchlist items remain for 2011. Approximate carry-over of 2010 projects: Cronk (20%), Corbin (30%) and South Greenacres Phase 4 (75%). • 2011 STEP sewer projects Working on stormwater funded improvements for the Green Haven and Mica View areas. Staff is developing design and details to improve existing problems and complaints in those areas. • Green Haven South Area — 75% plan received, working to confirm paving widths and thicknesses. Two storm water areas to be improved and included in construction documents, plans in the works. Ad date 2/9/11, Bid date 2/23/11. 2 • Green Haven North Area —Ad date 3/9/11, bid date 3/23/11. • M icaview West Area —75% review set received, ad date 2/23/11, bid date 3/9/11. • Pines/Mansfield - swales (near Montgomery and behind fire station) Staff will get quotes on removing material and replacing with an engineered soil and sod in spring of 2011. • Phase II Implementation Project (DOE Grant G0600363) Ecology funded a grant to help the City implement requirements under the Department of Ecology's Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit. Work for this grant is substantially completed; City staff is working on a final report for final reimbursement. • Ecology NPDES Permit Implementation Grants The City received a $50k grant to implement NPDES Permit requirements for stormwater; funding will need to be expended by June 2011. The City received an additional $308k grant that will need to be expended by June 2012. • Stormwater Decant Facility- to be programmed with draft 2012-2018 Stormwater Improvement Plan. • Underground Injection Control (UIC) Assessment Staff continues work on compliance requirements for the City's 7,300 drywells (UICs) and performing required assessments by February 2013. A preliminary draft assessment and map has been completed and staff is continuing to review and revise based on internal comments received. Map will help show priority areas for retrofit and be used to help determine projects for the Stormwater Improvement Plan. • 2011 Stormwater Fee Assessor Rolls Update Staff completed work to update stormwater fees to existing or new commercial properties for the 2011 Stormwater Fee Assessor Roll Update. • Regulated Stormwater Outfalls and Basins Draft Report Staff started work on a draft report of the City's Stormwater utility infrastructure and basins that discharge to surface waters of the State. This will document the City's compliance with several requirements of the Ecology Municipal Stormwater Permit. GRANT APPLICATIONS • Safe Routes to School (federal) and Washington 2010 Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Grant (state) Currently our projects fell just below the anticipated funding cutoff. If Congress decides to increase funding for this program, there is a good chance we'll get at least one of our projects funded. • Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) Final selection of projects to received funding has yet to be approved by the SRTC Board. We anticipate this will occur at their February 2011 meeting. Currently it looks like the following projects may get funded: Sidewalk Infill Project — Phase 1, Sprague/Sullivan ITS Project, Mansfield Ave Extension Project. 3 WETS Ili Dec-10 )005 Pines/Manfield, Wilbur Rd to Pines )063 Broadway Avenue Safety Project, Pines RD )069 Park Rd Recon. #2 Brdwy& Ind. SRTC06-12 )088 Broadway Ave. Moore to Flora )112 Indiana Ave Extension )113 Indiana/Sullivan PCC Intersection )123 Mission Ave- Flora to Barker )139 Park Road RR Crossing Safety Improvement )141 Sullivan & Euclid PCC )142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan )143 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation )145 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trail TIB UAP STP(U) TIB UCP STA STP(U) WUTC STP(U) STP(U) Knutson Knutson Knutson Knutson Aldworth Aldworth Aldworth Aldworth Knutson Fed Program Fed Program 05/23/08 02/04/11 100 35 65 06/04/10 100 85 20 0 08/20/10 100 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 90 11/14/10 0 07/01/11 0 12/31/11 0 0 04/30/11 0 0 0 0 06/30/11 08/31/11 6,627,000 932,850 352,002 3,027,071 2,082,000 1,252,000 517,919 44,000 175,260 276,301 720,000 Sewer Projects )106 West Pondersoa (STEP) 302 Arlt 05/06/09 100 99 06/01/10 $ 1,215,335 )128 West Farms (STEP) 001 Arlt 02/17/10 100 95 11/01/10 $ 427,000 )129 South Greenacres (STEP) 001 Arlt 03/03/10 100 60 07/01/11 $ 640,500 )130 Corbin (STEP) 001 Arlt 05/05/10 100 70 06/01/11 $ 705,000 )131 Cronk (STEP) 001 Arlt 04/14/10 100 80 06/01/10 $ 315,000 Street Preservation Projects )115 Sprague Ave Resurfacing- E'grn to S'van 102 Arlt 95 0 $ 95,000 Estimated Total Project Proposed %Complete Construction Project # Road Projects Funding Manager Bid Date PE I CN Completion Cost )005 Pines/Manfield, Wilbur Rd to Pines )063 Broadway Avenue Safety Project, Pines RD )069 Park Rd Recon. #2 Brdwy& Ind. SRTC06-12 )088 Broadway Ave. Moore to Flora )112 Indiana Ave Extension )113 Indiana/Sullivan PCC Intersection )123 Mission Ave- Flora to Barker )139 Park Road RR Crossing Safety Improvement )141 Sullivan & Euclid PCC )142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan )143 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation )145 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trail TIB UAP STP(U) TIB UCP STA STP(U) WUTC STP(U) STP(U) Knutson Knutson Knutson Knutson Aldworth Aldworth Aldworth Aldworth Knutson Fed Program Fed Program 05/23/08 02/04/11 100 35 65 06/04/10 100 85 20 0 08/20/10 100 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 90 11/14/10 0 07/01/11 0 12/31/11 0 0 04/30/11 0 0 0 0 06/30/11 08/31/11 6,627,000 932,850 352,002 3,027,071 2,082,000 1,252,000 517,919 44,000 175,260 276,301 720,000 Sewer Projects )106 West Pondersoa (STEP) 302 Arlt 05/06/09 100 99 06/01/10 $ 1,215,335 )128 West Farms (STEP) 001 Arlt 02/17/10 100 95 11/01/10 $ 427,000 )129 South Greenacres (STEP) 001 Arlt 03/03/10 100 60 07/01/11 $ 640,500 )130 Corbin (STEP) 001 Arlt 05/05/10 100 70 06/01/11 $ 705,000 )131 Cronk (STEP) 001 Arlt 04/14/10 100 80 06/01/10 $ 315,000 Street Preservation Projects )115 Sprague Ave Resurfacing- E'grn to S'van 102 Arlt 95 0 $ 95,000 Traffic Projects )060 Argonne Road Corridor Upgrade (SRTC 06-3 )061 Pines (SR27) ITS Improvements (SRTC 06-2 )133 Sprague Ave ITS )135 Flashing Yellow Arrow Installation )136 Traffic Signal LED Replacement )137 Traffic Signal Coordination Parks Projects )076 Valley Mission Park )086 Discovery Playground )144 Terrace View Shelter Other Projects )134 Bike & Ped Master Plan - Facility Imp )138 Pre Award Consultant Costs )140 Bike & Ped MP Doc Prep Closeout Phase )003 Barker Road Bridge Replacement )054 44th Ave Pathway-Woodruff Rd to Sands Rd )062 Appleway/Sprague/Dishman Mica ITS )065 Sullivan/Sprague PCC Intersection )066 Broadway Rehab Phase 2 )067 Broadway Francher PCC Intersection )071 SIGNAL CONTROLLER UPGRADES SRTC 06-22 )099 WSDOT Urban Ramp Project )100 16th and Bettman Stormwater )102 Evergreen -Sprague PCC )103 Pines-Sprague PCC )104 McDonald -Sprague PCC )107 Valleyview (STEP) )108 Rotchford Acres (STEP) )109 Clement (STEP) )110 Sprague Avenue Rehabilitation )114 Broadway/Sullivan PCC Intersection )127 2009 ADA Improvements CMAQ Knutson CMAQ Knutson USDOE (d) Knutson USDOE (d) Kipp USDOE (d) Kipp USDOE (d) Note 301 Kersten CTED Worley USDOE (d) Note USDOE (d) USDOE (d) Basinger 04/15/11 04/15/11 03/25/11 50 0 $ 1,290,636 0 0 $ 2,083,121 30 0 $ 400,000 100 99 12/31/10 $ 34,210 0 0 12/31/11 $ 65,000 0 0 $ 75,000 100 99 06/01/09 $ 05/01/09 100 99 05/12/10 $ 0 0 $ 0 0 07/31/11 $ 100,000 0 0 $ 0 0 $ 51,850 BR Progran Knutson 04/18/08 100 100 08/31/10 STP(E) Aldworth 06/11/10 100 100 10/15/10 CMAQ Knutson 09/18/08 100 100 10/30/09 STP(P) Aldworth 05/28/10 100 100 10/31/10 STP(U) Aldworth 06/19/09 100 100 02/10/10 STP(U) Aldworth 02/13/09 100 100 12/02/09 CMAQ Knutson 04/29/08 100 100 11/30/09 302 Worley 100 100 09/30/09 402 Arlt 04/01/09 100 100 06/01/10 STA Aldworth 04/24/10 100 100 02/09/10 STA Aldworth 03/20/09 100 100 12/07/09 STA Aldworth 04/24/10 100 100 02/09/10 302 Arlt 04/01/09 100 100 06/01/10 302 Arlt 04/22/09 100 100 10/01/09 302 Arlt 05/13/09 100 100 11/01/09 ARRA(i) Arlt 04/17/09 100 100 06/01/10 STA Aldworth 02/12/10 100 100 12/31/10 CDBG Aldworth 04/07/10 100 100 06/30/10 $ 11,817,000 $ 405,480 $ 672,000 $ 995,520 $ 627,500 $ 759,218 $ 258,400 $ 300,000 $ 116,563 $ 685,000 $ 978,000 $ 762,000 $ 679,923 $ 388,306 $ 565,116 $ 2,838,000 $ 788,450 $ 110,713