The URL can be used to link to this page

2011, 03-22 Regular Meeting AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL/REGULAR MEETING FORMAL MEETING FORMAT Tuesday,March 22,2011 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: Pastor Gary Hebden,The Intersection Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: ROLL CALL: APPROVAL OF AGENDA: INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: COMMITTEE,BOARD,LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: MAYOR'S REPORT: Proclamations:Honoring Councilmember McCaslin; March for Meals 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. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft Amended 2011 Transportation Improvement Plan— Steve Worley 2. 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 03/04/2011 22289-22313 $72,126.42 03/04/2011 22314-22339; 228110020; 304110010 $1,737,451.44 03/09/3011 3463-3466, 3474, 22340-22344 $203,140.11 03/11/2011 22345-22394; 309110167 $382,802.13 GRAND TOTAL $2,395,520.10 b. Approval of Payroll for Period Ending March 15, 2011: $254,851.82 c. Approval of City Council Study Session Format Meeting Minutes of March 1,2011 d. Approval of City Council Executive Session Meeting Minutes of March 8, 2011 e. Approval of City Council Formal Format Meeting Minutes of March 8,2011 NEW BUSINESS: 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 11-004 Animal Raising and Keeping— Christina Janssen [public comments] 4. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 11-005 Amending Adult Entertainment — Lori Barlow [public comments] Council Agenda 03-22-2011 Regular Meeting Page 1 of 2 5. Motion Consideration: Bid Award Indiana Ave. Extension— Steve Worley [public comments] 6. Motion Consideration: Appleway Court Drainage License—Cary Driskell [public comments] 7. Motion Consideration: Motions for March 29 Interviews of Applicants for Council Position#3 Vacancy—Mayor Towey [No public comments will be taken] 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: 8. Comprehensive Plan 2011 Amendments—Mike Basinger SEPARATE DOCUMENT— SEE COUNCIL ITEM 8 IN CURRENT COUNCIL AGENDA FOLDER 9. Public Access Programming Funding Process—Morgan Koudelka 10. Advance Agenda INFORMATION ONLY (will not be reported or discussed): 11. Greenacres Park Bid 12. Railroad Quiet Zones 13. Community Development Block Grant Letters of Support 14. Department Reports 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 03-22-2011 Regular Meeting Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 22, 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: Draft Amended 2011 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35.77.010 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Adopted 2011-2016 Six Year TIP on June 29, 2010, Resolution #10-013; Approved STP Enhancement Project Applications on September 7, 2010; Approved Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) Applications on July 27th, 2010; Approved Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) Applications on May 25th, 2010; Approved Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Applications on October 12th, 2010; Approval of STEP Paveback Projects for 2011 on February 8th, 2011. Info RCA on March 1, 2011. BACKGROUND: Council adopted the 2011-2016 TIP based upon information staff had at that time relative to available funds and how these funds could be utilized for transportation projects. Since the adoption of the 2011-2016 TIP, staff submitted applications for a federal Surface Transportation Program Enhancement (STP(E)) grant, a Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) Urban Sidewalk Program (USP) grant, a Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) grant, a federal Bridge Program (BR) grant and a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) for the following projects that were selected for funding: • Spokane Valley— Millwood Trail (PE Only) (STP(E)) • 24th Sidewalk — (TIB-USP) • Sullivan West Bridge— (BR, FMSIB) • Green Haven STEP Paveback— (CDBG) • Broadway Ave. Overlay— (CDBG) • Sidewalk Infill Proiect— (CMAQ) • Mansfield Extension — (CMAQ) • Sprague/Sullivan ITS — (CMAQ) Additional proposed changes identified in the Amended 2011 TIP include the following: • Broadway Avenue Safety Project was rescheduled from 2010 to 2011 due to delays from the temporary suspension of the design. • The Corbin, Cronk, South Greenacres and West Farms Sewer Paveback projects were not completed in 2010 and will carry over into 2011. • The Barker Road Bridge, Pines-Mansfield, Broadway Ave Reconstruction (Moore to Flora), Park Rd./BNSF Barrier Curb, and Sprague ITS projects are carryovers from 2010. • The Pavement Management Program-Arterials & Local Access projects have been deleted from the 2011 TIP. The Pavement Management Program for arterials and local access streets is currently unfunded. • The Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation (PE Only) was deleted due to unsuccessful funding application for FY2011 Federal Earmark. • The 2011 STEP Paveback projects (Green Haven and Mica View) have been added based on Council approval on February 8, 2011. • The Flashing Yellow Arrow Installation and Traffic Signal LED Replacement Projects are carryovers from 2010. • The Greenacres Trail (PE Only) was added after reallocation of Energy Efficiency & Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) funds that were previously awarded in 2009. Based on this information, it is recommended that the 2011 TIP be amended to reflect the deletion of the projects that did not receive funding, include those projects that were not completed in 2010 and have been carried over to the 2011 construction year, and those projects added to the 2011 construction year. Attached is a summary of the proposed changes. Adoption of the Amended 2011 TIP is currently scheduled for March 29th, 2011. OPTIONS: Discussion Only RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Conduct public hearing BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Steve Worley, Senior Capital Projects Engineer Neil Kersten, Public Works Director; ATTACHMENTS: Draft Amended 2011 TIP City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works Adopted 2011 Transportation Improvement Program Primary City Total 2011 Proj.# Project From To Source Amount Project Costs 1 0069 Park Road Project 2(PE Only) oadway Indiana STP(U) $ 5,000 $ 35,000 2 0112 Indiana Ave. Extension e/o Sullivan Flora TIB-UCP $ 53,000 $ 375,000 3 0060 Argonne Road Corridor Improvements 1-90 Trent CMAQ $ 101,000 $ 713,000 4 0113 Indiana/Sullivan Intersection PCC Indiana @Sullivan STA $ 249,000 $ 1,216,000 5 0061 Pines Corridor ITS Sprague Trent CMAQ $ 216,000 $ 1,609,000 6 0143 Barker Road/BNSF Grade Separation(PE Only) Barker @Trent Other Fed $ - $ 1,900,000 7 0142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan Intersections PCC Broadway @Argonne/Mullan STP(U) $ 37,000 $ 271,000 8 0123 Mission Ave Improvement Project Flora Barker STP(U) $ 66,000 $ 488,000 9 Pavement Management Program-Arterials Various locations City $ 2,000,000 $ 4,000,000 10 Pavement Management Program-Local Access Various locations City $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 11 STEP Paveback Various locations City $ 602,000 $ 602,000 12 0141 Sullivan/Euclid PCC Intersection(PE/RW Only) Sullivan Euclid STP(U) $ 22,000 $ 163,000 13 Sullivan West Bridge Sullivan @Spokane River BR $ - $ 668,000 $ 5,351,000 $ 14,040,000 Funded Projects Added Projects City of Spokane Valley Department of Public Works DRAFT Amended 2011 Transportation Improvement Program Resolution 11-XXX,XXXXXXX,2011 Primary City Total 2011 Proj.# Project From To Source Amount Project Costs 1 0003 Barker Road Bridge @ Spokane River City $ 140,000 $ 140,000 2 0005 Pines/Mansfield Montgomery Pines(SR-27) City $ 500,000 $ 500,000 3 0088 Broadway Ave Reconstruction 180 ft. E of Moore Flora TIB-UAP $ 30,000 $ 150,000 4 0069 Park Road Project 2(PE Only) Broadway Indiana STP(U) $ 18,800 $ 139,000 5 0063 Broadway Ave Safety Project Pines(SR 27) Park TIB-UAP $ 171,000 $ 855,200 6 0112 Indiana Ave. Extension e/o Sullivan Flora TIB-UCP $ 215,400 $ 1,492,000 7 0060 Argonne Road Corridor Improvements 1-90 Trent CMAQ $ 93,000 $ 686,000 8 0113 Indiana/Sullivan Intersection PCC Indiana @Sullivan STA $ 242,000 $ 1,294,000 9 0061 Pines Corridor ITS Sprague Trent CMAQ $ 32,400 $ 240,000 10 0142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan Intersections PCC Broadway @Argonne/Mullan STP(U) $ 37,300 $ 276,300 11 0123 Mission Ave Improvement Project Flora Barker STP(U) $ 28,000 $ 207,000 STEP Paveback Various locations 12 -Corbin(Received$330,733 CDBG Grant) CDBG $ - $ 82,000 13 -Cronk City $ 16,100 $ 16,100 14 -South Greenacres 3 City $ 7,000 $ 7,000 15 -South Greenacres 4 City $ 205,000 $ 205,000 16 -West Farms City $ 97,000 $ 97,000 17 -Green Haven($247,000 CDBG Grant Anticipated) City/CDBG $ 303,000 $ 550,000 18 -Mica View City $ 250,000 $ 250,000 19 0141 Sullivan/Euclid PCC Intersection(PE/RW Only) Sullivan Euclid STP(U) $ 24,000 $ 175,000 20 Sullivan West Bridge Sullivan @Spokane River BR $ 115,000 $ 574,000 21 0133 Sprague ITS University McDonald EECBG $ - $ 330,920 22 0139 Park Rd/BNSF Barrier Curb Trent(SR 290) Indiana WUTC $ 4,000 $ 39,000 23 0145 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trail(PE Only) SCC Valley Mall STP(E) $ - $ 186,000 24 0146 24th Avenue Sidewalk Project Adams Sullivan TIB-USP $ 19,650 $ 33,700 25 0148 Greenacres Trail(PE Only) Sullivan Hodges EECBG $ - $ 100,000 26 0135 Flashing Yellow Arrows Various locations EECBG $ - $ 33,550 27 0136 Traffic Signal LED Replacement Various locations EECBG $ - $ 74,000 28 0153 Broadway Ave.Overlay(Approx$88.7K CDBG grant) Park Vista City/CDBG $ 257,300 $ 346,000 29 Sidewalk Infill Project Various locations CMAQ $ 24,000 $ 153,000 30 Mansfield Extension Project Pines(SR 27) Houk St. CMAQ $ 39,000 $ 288,000 31 Sprague/Sullivan ITS McDonald/Sprague Sullivan/l-90 CMAQ $ 4,000 $ 30,000 $ 2,872,950 $ 9,549,770 Projects and timeframes identified in the TIP are to be considered estimates only that may change due to a variety of circumstances,and are not intended by the City to be relied upon by property owners or developers in making development decisions. Funded Projects Added Projects 2010 Carry Over Projects P:\Public Works\Capital Projects\CIP-TIP Funding\2011-2016 TIP\Amended 2011 TIP\Draft Amended 2011 TIP.xls 3/17/2011 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 03-22- 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 03/04/2011 22289-22313 $72,126.42 03/04/2011 22314-22339; 228110020; 304110010 $1,737,451.44 03/09/3011 3463-3466, 3474, 22340-22344 $203,140.11 03/11/2011 22345-22394; 309110167 $382,802.13 GRAND TOTAL $2,395,520.10 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve claims for vouchers as listed above. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS Voucher Lists vchlist 03/04/2011 2:13:32PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor invoice 22789 22290 22291 22292 22293 3/4/2011 000150 ALLIED FIRE&SECURITY 3/4/2011 001715 AMERICAN RED CROSS 3/4/2011 001606 BANNER BANK 3/4/2011 002206 BARLOW, LORI 3/4/2011 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 22294 3/4/2011 000143 CITY OF SPOKANE 22295 3/4/2011 001169 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 22296 3/4/2011 000109 COFFEE SYSTEMS INC 22297 3/4/2011 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION#19 22298 3/4/2011 000421 HOHMAN,JOHN 22299 3/4/2011 000070 INLAND POWER& LIGHT CO IVC1011603 Feb 2011 6527 Expenses 9201095 9203334 S9202942 S9204307 February 2011 Feb 2011 3820:073879 3820:074218 February 2011 Expenses 94202 Fund/Dept 001.076.305 001.076.301 001.058.050 001.058.050 001.076.305 001.076.305 001.076.305 001.076.305 101.042.000 001.013.015 001.076.305 001.011.000 001.076.305 001.058.055 101.042.000 Description/Account Amount KEYS FOR CENTERPLACE CPR/AED FIRST AID JAN 2011:6527 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : Total : Total : Total : LINEN SUPPLY AND SERVICE:CEN LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY:CP LINEN SUPPLY AND SERVICE LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY:CP Total : TRANSFER STATION: PW Total : PETTY CASH:9201,9203,9204 Total : COFFEE SUPPLIES:CENTERPLAC1 SERVICE COMPONENT FEE Total: UTILITIES: PARKS EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT UTILITIES: FEB 2011 PW Total : Total : 23.99 23.99 132.00 132.00 1,361.64 1,361.64 20.00 20.00 272.37 159.59 4.61 59.40 495.97 5.00 5.00 27.13 27.13 193.98 32.61 226.59 66.60 66.60 6.00 6.00 510.70 Total : 51 0.70 Page: 1 vchlist 03/04/2011 2:13:32PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 22300 3/4/2011 001635 !SS FAC1LITY/EVENT SERVICES 22301 3/4/2011 001684 MARKETING SOLUTIONS NW 22302 3/4/2011 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER CO 22303 3/4/2011 000997 OTIS ELEVATOR COMPANY 22304 3/4/2011 001860 PLATT 22305 3/4/2011 000119 PLESE PRINTING 22306 3/4/2011 002475 POST FALLS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Feb 2011 24902 001.076.305 FEBRUARY 2011 24903 001.076.305 EVENT SVCS:CP CP 1/18/11 P&P REC Postage 2.11 February 2011 SR04008311 9085574 9089600 9094476 9109132 1330048155 22307 3/4/2011 000675 RAMAX PRINTING&AWARDS 20795 22308 3/4/2011 000709 SENSKE LAWN&TREE CARE INC. 3926813 4115678 22309 3/4/2011 000783 VALLEY GLASS 11-63063 22310 3/4/2011 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 2886370-2681-7 2886371-2681-5 Total: 001.076.305 ADVERTISING:CENTERPLACE 001.076.301 POSTAGE/MAILING FOR REC DEPT Total: 001.076.302 UTILITIES: PARKS Total: 001.076.305 ELEVATOR SERVICE CONTRACT Total: 001.016.000 SUPPLIES FOR PRECINCT 001.016.000 SUPPLIES:PRECINCT 001.076.305 SUPPLIES:CENTERPLACE 001.016.000 SUPPLIES FOR PRECINCT 001.013.015 PRINTING-TITLE PLATE&NAME F Total: Total : 001.076.305 2011 COMMERCE AND COMM FAIR Total : 001.076.305 PRINTING FOR CENTERPLACE Total : 001.076.300 CONTRACT MAINT: FEBRUARY 201 101.042.000 2011 EMERGENCY TRAFFIC CONTI Total : 001.076.305 LABAL AND MATERIALS: CP REPAI Total : 001.076.305 WASTE MGMT: CENTERPLACE 001.016.000 WASTE MGMT: PRECINCT 7,136.00 59.10 7,195.10 2,234.60 553.00 2,787.60 1,465.11 1,465.11 1,482.96 1,482.96 79.89 211.97 376.06 119.84 787.76 34.13 34.13 175.00 175.00 18.48 18.48 48,215.07 542.70 48,757.77 809.82 809.82 736.01 285.27 Page: 2 vchlist 03/04/2011 2:13:32PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 3 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 22310 3/4/2011 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 22311 3/4/2011 002111 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 22312 3/4/2011 000558 WCMA 22313 3/4/2011 001409 WORLD CLASS COMMUNICATIONS 25 Vouchers for bank code: apbank 25 Vouchers in this report I,the undersigned,do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished,the services rendered,or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just,due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley,and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Mayor Date Council Member Date (Continued) 2886372-2681-3 March 2011 2011 110201291 101.042.000 WASTE MGMT: PW 402.402.000 2011 LEASE ON MAINTENANCE FA Total : 001.013.000 2011 SPRING CONFERENCE 001.076.305 ANSWERING SERVICE FOR CENTE Total : Bank total : Total vouchers: Total : Total : 173.79 1,195.07 4,195.00 4,195.00 325.00 325.00 22.00 22.00 72,126.42 72,126.42 Page: 3 vchlist 0310412011 2:29:54PM Voucher List Page: Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice FundlDept DescriptionlAccount Amount 22314 3/4/2011 002543 AIR ELECTRIC EQUIPMENT&TOOLS 165575 101.042.000 PARTS FOR PLOWS 4,831.77 Total: 4,831.77 22315 3/4/2011 000659 ASCE INLAND EMPIRE March 2011 001.032.000 2011 ASCE TRAINGING 285.00 Total : 285.00 22316 3/4/2011 002615 BULLOCK,SUSAN EXPENSES 001.013.015 REIMBURSEMENT:S. BULLOCK 12.00 Total: 12.00 22317 3/4/2011 002362 CASCADE INTERNATIONAL 252048 T '10'1.042.000 SNOW PLOW TRUCK 7600 SFA 201 107,326.17 Total: 107,326.17 22318 3/4/2011 000425 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS 216824 101.042.000 INSTALL EQUIPTMENT IN TRUCK 348.71 Total: 348.71 22319 3/4/2011 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION RE-313-ATB10215052 101.042.000 STATE ROUTE ROADWAY MAINT 7,768.16 RE-313 ATB10215057 101.042.000 SIGNAL&ILLUMINATION MAIN 5,182.93 RE-313-ATB10215065 101.042.000 INTELLIGENT TRAFFIC SYSTEMS E 419.44 Total : 13,370.53 22320 3/4/2011 000278 DRISKELL,CARY EXPENSES 001.013.015 MILEAGE: C. DRISKELL 45,35 Total : 45.35 22321 3/4/2011 002157 ELJAY OIL COMPANY 4179437 101.042.000 FEBRUARY 2011 OIL PRODUCTS F 2,958.20 Total : 2,958.20 22322 3/4/2011 002507 FASTENERS, INC S2972402.005 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 17.85 S2972402.006 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 83.04 Total: 100.89 22323 3/4/2011 000106 FEDEX 7-399-53470 001.032.000 SHIPPING CHARGES: PW 36.36 Total : 36.36 22324 3/4/2011 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 35841 001.013.000 LEGAL PUBLICATION 121.60 35847 001.013.000 LEGAL PUBLICATION 123.20 35849 001.058.056 LEGAL PUBLICATION 92.65 Page: 1 vchlist 03/04/2011 2:29:54PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account 22324 3/4/2011 001447 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC (Continued) 22325 3/4/2011 002595 INLAND BUSINESS PRODUCTS 98080 22326 3/4/2011 000864 JUB ENGINEERS, INC. 22327 3/4/2011 002593 LILAC CITY GARGE DOOR 22328 3/4/2011 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 22329 3/4/2011 000119 PLESE PRINTING 22330 3/4/2011 002510 POHL SPRING WORKS INC 0068616 22311 55072510001 550725103001 5508252855001 • 550849999001 552008659001 552463379001 552463697001 1330048118 1330048119 150401 22331 3/4/2011 002578 REBUILDING&HARDFACING INC 43591 22332 3/4/2011 002516 SACKETT CONTRACTING&EXCAVATING 90542 22333 3/4/2011 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 51500540 22334 3/4/2011 000617 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 45101.9068 45105.9010 Total: 001.018.016 EMPLOYEE PHOTO ID 101.042.000 TIP DATA MAINTENANCE AND UPC Total : 101.042.000 WORK DONE ON MIDDLE DOOR:M Total: Total: 001.032.000 001.032.000 001.032.000 001.032.000 001.076.305 001.032.000 001.032.000 001.090.000 001.090.000 101.042.000 101.042.000 101.042.000 001.016.000 001.076.300 001.076.300 OFFICE SUPPLIES:PW OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW OFFICE SUPPLIES:PW OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW OFFICE SUPPLIES: CP OFFICE SUPPLIES:PW OFFICE SUPPLIES:PW Total: ENVELOPES:COLORED LOGO EVELOPES: BLACK CITY LOGO Total: SUPPLIES FOR WINTER MAINT FA( Total : ICE BLADE GAURDS Total : ON-CALL ROAD GRADERS FOR SN Total JANUARY 2011 HOUSING INVOICE Total: UID BOND PAYMENT UID BOND Amount 337.45 28.11 28.11 2,260.61 2,260.61 423.93 423.93 27.96 58.60 32.94 68.24 88.34 19.24 12.80 308.12 932.70 307.74 1,240.44 540.04 540.04 859.82 859.82 1,207.00 1,207.00 69,994.00 69,994.00 6,025.77 2,116.88 Page: 2 vchlist 0310412011 2:29:54PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 3 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account 22334 3/4/2011 000617 000617 SPOKANE CO TREASURER (Continued) 22335 22336 22337 3/4/2011 002540 SPOKANE HOUSE OF HOSE INC. FEBRUARY 2011 3/4/2011 000093 SPOKESMAN-REVIEW 245030 3/4/2011 002188 VALLEY BEST-WAY BLDG SUPPLY FEBRUARY 2011 22338 3/4/2011 000087 VERIZON WIRELESS 09/544303 0951543523 22339 3/4/2011 002158 WILBUR-ELLIS COMPANY 228//0020 2/28/2011 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 3041/0010 3/4/2011 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 28 Vouchers for bank code: apbank 28 Vouchers in this report 5187162 9290200115 FEBRUARY 2011 101.042.000 001.018.016 101.042.000 001.016.000 001.016.000 101.042.000 001.016.000 001.016.000 SHOP MAINT SUPPLIES ADVERTSING: HR Total : Total: Total : SMALL TOOLS AND SUPPLIES; PW Total : AIR CARDS FOR POLICE DEPARTN AIR CARD FOR SHERIFF Total: MELTDOWN AP—SNOW REMOVAL Total: LAW ENFORCEMENT Total : SPOKANE COUNTY SERVICES Total : Bank total: Total vouchers: Amount 8,142.65 278.04 278.04 47.92 47.92 51.86 51.86 860.38 43.01 903.39 4,136.87 4,136.87 1,282,372.81 1,282,372.81 235,003.40 235,003.40 1,737,451.44 1,737,451.44 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 03/09/2011 3:59:55PM Spokane Valley Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept DescriptionlAccount Amount 3463 3/4/2011 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS,401A PLAN Ben37175 001.231.14. 401k Payment 20,521.67 Total: 20,521.67 3464 3/4/2011 000682 EFTPS Ben37177 001.231,11. FEDERAL TAXES:Payment 26,128.01 Total: 26,128.01 3465 3/4/2011 000145 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS,457 PL Ben37179 001.231.18. 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION:Payn 5,039.50 Total: 5,039.50 3466 3/4/2011 000162 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS,401A EXEC P Ben37181 001.231.14. 401 EXEC PLAN:Payment 1,026.67 Total: 1,026.67 3474 3/4/2011 000682 EFTPS Ben37185 001.231.12. FEDERAL TAXES:Payment 814.00 Total: 814.00 22340 3/4/2011 000165 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS Ben37165 303.231.15. PERS:Payment 41,675.80 Total: 41,675.80 22341 3/4/2011 002574 WASHINGTON TRUST BANK Ben37173 001.231.20. BERG 20110-02-039524 1,244.26 Total: 1,244.26 22342 3/4/2011 000120 AWC Ben37171 308.231.16. HEALTH PLANS:Payment 97,281.76 Ben37183 001.231.16. HEALTH PLANS(COUNCIL):Payment 5,932.31 Total: 103,214.07 22343 3/4/2011 002227 IDAHO TAX COMMISSION Ben37167 001.231.50. IDAHO STATE TAX BASE:Payment 1,404.84 Total: 1,404.84 22344 3/4/2011 000699 WA COUNCIL CO/CITY EMPLOYEES Ben37169 001.231.21. UNION DUES:Payment 2,071.29 Total: 2,071.29 10 Vouchers for bank code: apbank Bank total: 203,140.11 10 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers: 203,140.11 Page: 1 vchlist 03/11/2011 12:04:57PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 22345 3/11/2011 000958 AAA SWEEPING, LLC 22346 3/11/2011 000648 ABADAN 22347 3/11/2011 001873 ACME CONCRETE PAVING INC 22348 3/11/2011 001012 ASSOC BUSINESS SYSTEMS 22349 3/11/2011 000694 AVISTA UTILITIES 22350 3/11/2011 002617 BARRETT,STEPHEN 22351 3/11/2011 000796 BUDINGER&ASSOC INC 22352 3/11/2011 000101 CDW-G 22353 3/11/2011 000863 CENTURY WEST ENG CORP 22354 3/11/2011 000729 CH2MHILL INC 45716 154784 154984 JANUARY 2011 466510 466578 24508 FEBRUARY 2011 H11024-1 WMF6840 WMR0711 WNM9390 232236 3775997 3775997 3781263 Fund/Dept 402.402.000 303.303.112 303.303.112 101.223.40. 001.013.015 001.058.050 001.090.000 101.042.000 402.402.000 001.090.000 001.090.000 001.090.000 101.042.000 308.308.003 308.308.003 303.303.069 Description/Account Amount 2011 STREET SWEEPING SREVICE Total : PLANS&SPECS:INDIANA AVE E)C PLANS&SPECS: INDIANA AVE EX Total : RETAINAGE RELEASE COPIER COSTS: LEGAL COPIER COSTS:CD HOME ENERGY AUDITS REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL Total : Total: Total: Total: DICKEY GEOTECH INVESTIGATIOP Total: SERVER RACK AND UPS FOR BRO SERVER RACK AND UPS FOR BRO AVERMEDIAAVERVISION SPB3701 Total: 2011 TIP SERVICES Total : 0003-BARKER ROAD BRIDGE 0003 BARKER RD BRIDGE TS&L ST PARK RD RECON 0069 ENG SVCS Total: 7,432.06 7,432.06 1,361.68 215.44 1,577.12 32,727.77 32,727.77 81.70 1,177.71 1,259.41 414.00 414.00 1,750.00 1,750.00 5,493.73 5,493.73 53.60 2,510.38 1,075.94 3,639.92 6,825.51 6,825.51 112,714.40 12,337.00 40,188.31 165,239.71 Page: 1 vchlist 03/11/2011 12:04:57PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 22355 3/11/2011 002572 CINTAS CORPORATOIN 22356 3/11/2011 001888 COMCAST 22357 3/11/2011 001926 DAVENPORT,SARAH 22358 3/11/2011 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 22359 3/11/2011 002385 DKS ASSOCIATES 22360 3/11/2011 001232 FASTENAL CO PURCHASING 22361 3/11/2011 002507 FASTENERS, INC 22362 3/11/2011 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 22363 3/11/2011 001253 GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL 22364 3/11/2011 002271 GRASSEL, BRENDA 22365 3/11/2011 001723 HEDEEN&CADITZ, PLLC 22366 3/11/2011 002520 HUSKY INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS FEBRUARY 2011 MARCH 2011 EXPENSES RE 46 JG6362 L001 47238 IDLEW73477 s2996123.001 Fund/Dept Description/Account 101.042.000 SUPPLIES:PW 001.090.000 HIGH SPEED INTERNET:CITY HAL! Total: Total: 001.018.014 MILEAGE 303.303,113 SIGNAL DESIGN PARTICIPATION Total: Amount Total: 303.303.060 ARGONNE CORRIDOR SIGNAL&D Total : 101.042.000 SUPPLIES; PW 101.042.000 SUPPLIES: PW 35848 303.303.112 LEGAL PUBLICATION 35875 001.013.000 LEGAL PUBLICATION 35876 001.058.056 LEGAL PUBLICATION Feb 11 1042 EXPENSES 6707 FEBRUARY 2011 001.011.000 001.011.000 001.013.015 101.042.000 LOBBYIST SERVICES TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Total : Total : Total: Total: Total: Total: SHOP MAINT SUPPLIES:TRUCK PE Total: 387.73 387.73 1 17.40 117.40 91.80 91.80 941.18 941.18 65,563.94 65,563.94 21.59 21.59 66.98 66.98 102.40 41.65 84.15 228.20 3,081.61 3,081.61 351.55 351.55 660.00 660.00 2,258.79 2,258.79 Page: 2 vchlist 03/11/2011 12:04:57PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 3 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 22367 3/11/2011 002466 KENWORTH SALES 22368 3/11/2011 000993 LES SCHWAB TIRE CENTER 22369 3/11/2011 002552 MDM CONSTRUCTION, INC. 22370 3/11/2011 000258 MICROFLEX INC. 22371 3/11/2011 000696 MITEL NETWORKS, INC 22372 3/11/2011 002203 NAPA AUTO PARTS 22373 3/11/2011 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 22374 3/11/2011 000058 OMA 22375 3/11/2011 000881 OXARC 22376 3/11/2011 000019 PURRFECT LOGOS, INC. 22377 3/11/2011 000256 RAINBOW ELECTRIC INC 22378 3/11/2011 002616 ROADWISE, INC FEBRUARY 2011 821834 1812 00019868 92768397 FEBRUARY 2011 552323371001 552475541001 552475666001 552477256001 552893393001 FEBRUARY 2011 R042531 26827 126453 53752 Fund/Dept 101.042.000 101.042,000 101.042.000 001.090.000 001.090.000 101.042.000 001.090.000 001.090.000 001.090.000 001.090.000 001.018.013 001.018.016 101.042.000 001.058.056 001.090.000 101.042.000 Description/Account Amount SUPPLIES FOR WINTER MAINT FAI Total: TIRE REPAIR FOR PLOW:A7302D Total: ON-CALL ROAD GRADERS FOR SN Total: TAXTOOLS SOFTWARE RENTAL: F Total: MITEL 3300 RENEWAL Total: SHOP MAINT TOOLS AND EQUIPMI Total: Display Cable BROADCASTING EQUIPMENT BROADCASTING BROADCASTING OFFICE SUPPLIES Total: PHYSICAL EXAMS: NEW EMPLOYE Total : Total : Total : Total: SUPPLIES:PW COUNCIL CHAMBER SIGN OUTLETS ADDED FREEZGARD ZERO 35.04 35.04 40.44 40.44 8,812.50 8,812.50 343.83 343.83 1,079.52 1,079.52 172.68 172.68 20.39 43.03 31.15 32.26 33.93 160.76 65.00 65.00 82.50 82.50 179.36 179.36 309.80 309.80 1,497.03 Page: 3 vchlist 0311112011 12:04:57PM Voucher list Spokane Valley Page: 4 Bank code: Voucher 22378 22379 22380 22381 22382 22383 22384 22385 22386 22387 22388 22389 apbank Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account 3/11/2011 002616 3/11/2011 002554 3/11/2011 002570 002616 ROADWISE, INC S.A.GONZALES CONSTRUCTIONS 29008 SAN DIEGO POLICE EQUIPMENT CO 596145 596146 596188 596420 3/11/2011 000064 SCHIMMELS, GARY 3/11/2011 000235 SECURE SHRED 3/11/2011 000779 SOUTHARD, BRAD 3/11/2011 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 3/11/2011 000862 SPOKANE ROCK PRODUCTS, INC. 3/11/2011 000065 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 3/11/2011 002205 STATE PROTECTION SERVICES (Continued) EXPENSES 64212 FEBRUARY 2011 51500580 9954 8017675208 REFUND 3/11/2011 002555 T. LARIVIERE EQUIPMENT&, EXCAVATG 1808 3/11/2011 002254 TOWEY,TOM EXPENSES 101.042.000 001.016.000 001.016.000 001.016.000 001.016.000 001.011.000 001.090.000 101.042.000 101.042.000 101.042.000 001.058.050 001.016.000 101.042.000 001.011.000 Total : ON-CALL ROAD GRADERS FOR SN Total: AMMUNITION FOR POLICE DEPT AMMUNITION FOR POLICE DEPAR" AMMUNITION FOR POLICE DEPT AMMUNITION FOR POLICE DEPT Total : TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT SHREDDING CHARGES Total : Total: 2011 DEAD ANIMAL REMOVAL Total : FEBRUARY 2011:WORK CREW Total : ON-CALL ROAD GRADERS FOR SN Total: OFFICE SUPPLIES:JANUARY 2011 Total: CRYWOLF REFUND Total : ON-CALL ROAD GRADERS FOR SN Total: MILEAGE Total: Amount 1,497.03 4,785.00 4,785.00 10,146.71 1,693.89 17,335.48 8,067.85 37,243.93 87.98 87.98 162.60 162.60 1,665.00 1,665.00 4,993.61 4,993.61 9,460.00 9,460.00 1,145.03 1,145.03 35.00 35.00 6,670.00 6,670.00 92.31 92.31 Page: 4 vchlist 03/11/2011 12:04:57PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 5 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 22390 3/11/2011 001464 TW TELECOM 22391 3/11/2011 002597 TWISTED PAIR ENTERPRIZES L.L.0 22392 3/11/2011 000337 UPS 22393 3/11/2011 002619 WASHINGOTN FISH&WILDLIFE 22394 3/11/2011 000089 XO COMMUNICATIONS 269215 212011 000Y3F950091 REFUND 0241831388 309110167 3/9/2011 002244 AOT PUBLIC SAFETY CORPORATION SPKVLY-15 51 Vouchers for bank code: apbank 51 Vouchers in this report Fund/Dept 001.090.000 001.090.000 001.032.000 001.016.000 001.090.000 001.016.000 Description/Account Amount LATE FEE CHARGE 19.67 Total: 19.67 BROADCASTING COUNCIL MTGS E 240.00 Total: 240.00 SHIPPING CHARGES:PW 74.80 Total : 74.80 CRYWOLF REFUND 225.00 Total: 225.00 INTERNET/DATA LINES:JANUARY: 275.38 Total: 275.38 CRY WOLF CHARGES:FEBRAURY 2,718.36 Total : 2,718.36 Bank total : 382,802.13 Total vouchers: 382,802.13 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 03-22-11 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 March 15, 2011 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Budget/Financial impacts: Gross: $ 224,007.02 Benefits: $ 30,844.80 Total payroll $ 254,851.82 STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri ATTACHMENTS DRAFT MINUTE S SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STUDY SESSION FORMAT Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley,Washington March 1,2011 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Tom Towey, Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager Gary Schimmels, Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell,Acting City Attorney Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir. Dean Grafos, Councilmember Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Brenda Grassel, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks &Rec Director Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Absent: Morgan Koudelka, Sr. Administrative Analyst Bob McCaslin, Councilmember Rick Van Leuven,Police Chief Lori Barlow,Associate Planner Scott Kuhta, Planning Manager Carolbelle Branch,Public Information Officer Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Towey called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. At the request of the Mayor, City Clerk Bainbridge called roll. All Councilmembers were present except Councilmember McCaslin. It was moved by Councilmember Grafos, seconded and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmember McCaslin from tonight's council meeting. 1. Draft Amended 2011 Transportation Improvement Plan(TIP)— Steve Worley Senior Engineer Worley explained that tonight is an opportunity to discuss with Council the proposed amended TIP as we do annually; and he explained the difference from the original Adopted 2011 TIP to the draft Amended 2011 TIP; and said that some of the reasons for those changes include that some projects were completed and those that were not were carried over; some projects like the pavement management plan for local access and arterials was not funded so that will be removed; some of the grants applied for were not granted; and there were projects for which we will receive additional funds to complete the project, such as the traffic signal LED projects. Mr. Worley mentioned that next week he will give council a presentation/update on the Indiana Avenue Extension project as well as the Sullivan Road Bridge Replacement Project. 2. Maintenance Shop—Neil Kersten Public Works Director Kersten discussed some of the options of acquiring a city maintenance shop,which included staying on the site the city currently occupies, and he mentioned several sites and some of the pros and cons of those locations. Regarding the property at 17002 E. Euclid, Mr. Kersten said that this was not previously on the market; but that he feels the facility and land would fit our needs very well with their small amount of office space and nice size shop of 4500 square feet; and said three acres should be enough to handle us well into the future; and mentioned the area is also on a railroad spur which means materials such as de-icers could be brought in via train instead of the more expensive truck option. Mr. Kersten said in today's market, it would be more economically feasible for us to buy a site rather than build one; and he recommended council's consideration of this site, and said the area is currently zoned industrial; that the property never went on the market but that he saw a "for lease" sign on the premises Council Study Session Minutes March 1,2011 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT and had an opportunity to speak with the seller; and said we can have a committed offer for $750,000 if council agrees. He also mentioned that there is the possibility in the future of housing a vactoring truck on the site, and said if that were the case, it would likely only involve one truck. Mr. Kersten said it is council's choice if they would like to go into an executive session, but we have a firm offer at $750,000, and said it is a fair price, and if council concurs, staff will bring that back for council approval consideration, and then move through the inspections and property closing; or go into executive session to discuss the issue further. Councilmember Grassel said although she will be out of town next week, she prefers holding an executive session. Councilmembers agreed and Mr. Jackson said he will schedule that for next week, and Mr. Kersten said he will put the information into the packet for next week. Councilmember Grafos said he is concerned with buying this for snow plowing and having it expand into other products, like vactoring, and thereby pretty soon we would create a huge municipal department, which he does not want to happen. Mr. Jackson said it would be council's decision in the future whether to add any other functions; and that in light of full disclosure, Mr. Kersten has looked at some figures and would at least present later, an option of doing our own vactoring, which decision would be entirely up to council on whether or not to pursue. 3. Animal Control Update—Morgan Koudelka Senior Administrative Analyst Koudelka said this was a topic of discussion at the Council of Governance meeting last week, that there was also an article in the newspaper regarding regional animal control, and that tonight is an opportunity to discuss this and help him to know what information can best help council as we move forward, and said that he does not seek anything definitive tonight, but rather would like to find out what information council needs so they can provide appropriate feedback to staff on this issue. Mr. Koudelka went through his PowerPoint presentation which included background on the topic, facility needs, various options including cost and non-ballot options; and that in conclusion, the partners do not have the funds available to self-finance a new facility and a nine-year levy lid-lift was recommended as a funding mechanism, which based on a home value of$200,000, would equate to approximately $8.00 per year; and said if that is the preferred method, other considerations for council include whether to pursue a long term agreement, or a new regional facility,to continue the same type of relationship with the county as the contracting agent providing the service, or form a separate regional entity which would have representatives on the board from all participating jurisdictions. Council discussion included comment from Councilmember Gothmann that if the target is $7 million, and our city put up the difference, would that alleviate the need for a ballot issue to lift the levy. Mr. Koudelka responded that that question was not specifically put to us, but an additional question raised would be, would the remaining partners be willing to assume that additional risk by covering additional funding, not just the $7 million for the retro- fit but also the $2.7 million for the property; he said Spokane is looking at various options including the option of leasing the facility; although Mr. Koudelka mentioned that the meeting included comment from Mr. Shogan about leasing, which received a response from Commissioner Mielke that it would still be a cost in the future as they are trying not to raise the ongoing annual cost of providing the services; and Mr. Koudelka said the option was not brought up about Spokane Valley undertaking that entire risk. Councilmember Gothmann said if the greatest benefit to our citizens would be Spokane Valley providing the funding, that perhaps that option should be considered. Mr. Koudelka said if Council wants to consider funding this through our city funds, we would want to identify potential other uses for available funds; and Mayor Towey added that we are paying over $300,000 annually now for the service, and that our cost as a city would be the same regardless of which option was chosen. Mr. Koudelka agreed and said our cost would not increase,but the figures actually show us with a cost reduction. In response to Mayor Towey's question about the matter going on the ballot, and if approved, who would own the facility, Mr. Koudelka said all those issues would need to be determined and it would depend on the nature of the arrangement. Councilmember Grafos said he feels there is not enough information at this point as the costs appear to be based on increased license fees and donations, and he questioned how realistic such projection would be. There was further discussion concerning a levy lid lift and of our need Council Study Session Minutes March 1,2011 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT to gather more information from the City of Spokane; and Councilmember Grassel said she would want to see an updated interlocal agreement, and Mr. Koudelka explained that the only change to our existing agreement is that Spokane mentioned their desire to potentially apply license revenues to each individual jurisdiction so they could benefit from those revenues instead of throwing everything in a "pot" for distribution; and said that if Council wants to do something different from what we have now,that would be addressed when staff brings this issue back for further discussion; and said it appears the main question is, as stated by Councilmember Gothmann, will Spokane participate, and that any potential levy hinges on their participation and that the issue continues to be discussed by the Spokane City Council. 4. Shoreline Master Program(SMP) Update—Lori Barlow, Kathy McClung, Mike Connelly Community Development Director McClung explained that this process will culminate with a final review by Council; she encouraged Council to advise staff of any Council concerns along the way; said that Associate Planner Barlow will present an update on the process by recapping what has been accomplished to date, and that Attorney Mike Connelly is here to offer any information or advice about limits. Associate Planner Barlow recapped the history of the process of the plan thus far, mentioning the public participation process, public meetings, open houses, public hearings, reviews by the Citizen Advisory Committee and Advisory Group, and reports generated and accepted by Council. Ms. Barlow then explained some of the next and on-going steps, such as review of goals and policies, gathering input from the Shoreline Advisory Group; development of environmental designations; staff and members of URS Consultants working with the Department of Ecology (DOE) to refine those designations; more public reviews, open houses, planning commission public hearings, and ultimately back to council for review. She said one of the tasks remaining is the development of the draft regulations, adding that there are rules that affect the use of properties; development of the cumulative impact analysis and restoration plan, and that once all those steps are completed and the public review process over, all the pieces will also be brought to council for a formal local adoption process; after which it will be turned over to DOE. In terms of workload, she explained that about 60% of the workload is complete and said the Inventory and Analysis was a huge task; and in terms of completing all tasks,that we are about halfway there; and said she hopes to have the local adoption process begin in spring, and mentioned the timeline to adopt is December 2013. Mayor Towey voiced his concern with the communications between the County and the DOE and if we can be involved in the process instead of waiting for the initial draft. Ms. Barlow said that before the updated was started, staff met with County and City of Spokane staff with the understanding that they had just been through the process and in an effort to capitalize on what they learned; she said there are numerous nuances in the development of the SMP, and based on their experiences, we developed our work program and that we built into that some points where we get review from the DOE, but she added we cannot dictate how long their(DOE) review takes and that historically,they have taken a long time to respond back to jurisdictions. She further explained that we have built-in opportunities for their review and meetings where everyone can discuss the issues; and said that representatives of DOE are on the technical group and are required to provide input. Councilmember Grassel said she would like council to have opportunities to review the chapters as staff goes through them as she is concerned that Council as the policymaker won't have opportunity to review until the end of the process; that she feels council should have opportunity to interject council's points of view and concerns through the process, including before it goes to the public hearing instead of after. Mr. Connelly explained that there are two directions of input essential to make this process work; one is the involvement of the DOE and the State so we don't present something they will reject; and the other input is from council, and said it is and should be built into the process as we move through each step; and said that is already occurring as the first involvement was Council's approval of the Public Participation Plan, which came to council and was passed by resolution; he said then the second step was the retention of the specialist to do the inventory and Council's acceptance of the inventory, which was brought to council and council gave input and ultimate approval; and third he said will be when the policies being drafted complete the staff process, that that Council Study Session Minutes March 1,2011 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT will come to council; then the designations come to council for input; and a number of other steps and other regulations prior to actual submittal; and he said he thinks staff can keep council in the loop before the document is finalized. Director McClung said if council prefers, staff can bring the goals and policies to council prior to taking them for review to the Planning Commission, and Councilmember Grassel said that is her preference as she does not want staff to write the entire policy without hearing anything from the policymakers until the end. Mr. Connelly agreed that he does not see a problem with each step presented to council in study session to receive council's reaction, adding that he "wouldn't want to start taking votes now"but council would be part of the process so staff would know about concerns. Further, Mr. Connelly said it is important that council understands that this is different, it is not a comp plan or zoning ordinance where policy power is given to council to create your own city; but rather that this is a state regulation to implement a constitutionally granted authority over all state waterways over shorelines of state-wide significance; that the regulations of the use and development of shorelines under the SMA (Shoreline Management Act) is derived under the state; that this is a state regulation where they built in local involvement in drafting the regulations; he said the state says it must be jointly planned and coordinated with all affected jurisdictions; i.e. the County, our city, Liberty, Lake, and the various state agencies including the DOE; he said the courts have held that GMA is triumphed by the shoreline regulations in a number of circumstances; and the local authority is trumped by improvement of the shoreline master program; so this is different from what Council usually deals with; and said the complexity of this coordination that the state has mandated, involves many laws that govern the waters and shorelines of our river, and said that all affects how this river will be developed; and said that there are a myriad of laws that have to work together and our management plan must be consistent with all those, including the Clean Water Act, SEPA, rules of the Department of Natural Resources, the Endangered Species Act, and more and said it is important and appropriate for council to be appraised where everybody is in each section; and said that the Public Participation Plan is supposed to be all inclusive. Mr. Connelly said that staff continues to make sure all different parties will have a chance to speak; and added that it is not a fair analysis to say our river should be like someone else's river; as our baseline will be different; that we cannot increase the adverse impact; that we can make it better but not worse; and that within each area, council will have options. Mr. Connelly said he and staff will try to educate council about those, and that when they are developing the policies, they are developed within given guidelines; adding that we can discuss what flexibility council has for each section, and what the range of options would be for each section, and Councilmembers Grassel and Grafos agreed that they prefer to review it section by section rather than all at the end. Mr. Connelly said they will try to identify the room council has to move so council knows where they have discretion. Mr. Jackson suggested Ms. McClung and Mr. Connelly put together a work program or summary to discuss what was talked about tonight; and to bring that back and make adjustments if needed so we all understand process and council involvement. Mayor Towey called for a recess at 7:40 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:50 p.m. 5. Comprehensive Plan Review Process—Kathy McClung Community Development Director McClung explained that tonight's presentation is merely a type of snapshot of what will come to council later regarding the Comprehensive Plan update; that the Planning Commission held an initial public hearing and workshop which has been continued to their next meeting; she mentioned that we have received two citizen-initiated requests for changes to the comprehensive plan map and subsequent zoning change: (1) for a piece of property bounded by Progress where the owner wants a change from Mixed Use Avenue to Neighborhood Commercial. Ms. McClung said that if the SARP is eliminated,that rezone won't be necessary and the applicant has indicated the zoning that would be put in place would take care of their concerns; and(2)property on Walnut north of Sprague and owned by the Catholic Church, for a change to allow medium density residential to accommodate plans to build some low income senior housing; and Ms. McClung said it appears this will be somewhat controversial for the neighborhood. Director McClung said there are no changes to the land use map; and text changes Council Study Session Minutes March 1,2011 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT are minimal and include changed necessary to that our information remains current. Director McClung explained the amendment docket and the city-initiated amendments for those sections listed on that document, as noted in the council packet material; and said these changes will likely be brought to Council in March, depending upon how long the Planning Commission conducts their review. 6. Advance Agenda—Mayor Towey Mayor Towey mentioned the upcoming March 28 joint meeting with the City of Spokane, and asked Councilmembers for suggested agenda topics, and to forward those to him or City Manager Jackson. 7. Transfer Portion of Havana Street and Community Survey were for information only and were not reported or discussed. 8. Council Check-in—Mayor Towey Councilmember Gothmann said he met with John Peterson from Spokane County's Community Development Department and mentioned the idea of having their Planning Commission and ours meet in a joint session; said he realized such meeting would be at the discretion of the Community Development Department, but thought it might be helpful to have the two commissions talk and share ideas. Councilmember Grafos said he went to the Planning Commission meeting, and also attended a Boy Scout appreciation breakfast at the Spokane Convention Center, and attended the Council of Governance meeting. Councilmember Grassel said she also attended the Governance Meeting and suggested perhaps some of those topics could be included on the upcoming joint meeting. 9. City Manager Comments—Mike Jackson City Manager Jackson said that during the last retreat, council discussed the idea of perhaps using the state of the city address in conjunction with town hall meetings or conversations with the community;that he has visited with the Mayor and in the past, we have had department directors attend these meetings as well; he said there are four different meetings scheduled, and he asked if this was what council had in mind, and/or would council like to talk about what we need to prepare for these meetings. Councilmember Gothmann said he would like to have some staff represented for possible community questions. Mayor Towey explained that his presentation would be about thirty minutes in length, followed by a question and answer session; that he plans for this to be an informal meeting, and would appreciate having as many staff as can attend. Deputy Mayor Schimmels suggested having some highlighted items and use that as a sounding board to get the conversation started, such as street maintenance or some other project. Councilmember Grafos suggested having 3 x 5 cards available for members of the public to use to submit questions. There being no further business, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded, and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:04 p.m. ATTEST: Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Study Session Minutes March 1,2011 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTE S City of Spokane Valley City Council Executive Session Tuesday,March 8,2011 Attendance: Councilmembers: Staff: Tom Towey, Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager Gary Schimmels, Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell,Acting City Attorney Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Dean Grafos, Councilmember Absent: Brenda Grassel, Councilmember Bob McCaslin, Councilmember EXECUTIVE SESSION: Mayor Towey called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. I t was then moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive session for approximately thirty minutes to discuss land acquisition [RCW 42.30.110(1)(b)J, and that action is anticipated thereafter during the regular 6:00 p.m. council meeting. Council adjourned into executive session at 5:33 p.m. At approximately 5:44 p.m., Mayor Towey declared council out of executive session and it was then moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 5:44 p.m. Thomas E. Towey, Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Minutes:03-08-2011 Page 1 of 1 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTE S City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meetings Formal Meeting Format Tuesday, March 8, 2011 Mayor Towey called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Citv Staff' Tom Towey, Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager Gary Schimmels, Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell,Acting City Attorney Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Ken Thompson, Finance Director Dean Grafos, Councilmember Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir. Mike Stone, Parks &Recreation Director Lori Barlow,Associate Planner Absent: Christina Janssen,Assistant Planner Brenda Grassel, Councilmember Scott Kuhta, Planning Manager Bob McCaslin, Councilmember Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Steve Worley, Senior Engineer John Hohman, Development Engineer Rick Van Leuven, Police Chief Carolbelle Branch,Public Information Officer Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION: Pastor Bill Dropko of Greenacres Christian Fellowship Church gave the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Towey led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all councilmembers were present except Councilmembers Grassel and McCaslin. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmembers Grassel and McCaslin from tonight's meeting. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the amended agenda. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: n/a COMMITTEE,BOARD,LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Councilmember Gothmann: reported that among many meetings, he attended the Health Board Meeting, Boy Scout Leadership Breakfast; Council of Governance meeting, a community health forum at Gonzaga; Fire District building groundbreaking; TIB (Transportation Improvement Board) phone meeting; this City's Governance Committee meeting regarding our governance manual; and a SNAP meeting. Councilmember Grafos: reported that as mentioned previously, he attended the Boy Scout Appreciation Breakfast, and the Council of Governance meeting. Deputy Mayor Schimmels: said he attended the Spokane Transit Operations Committee meeting; stood in for Mayor Towey at the Northeast Mayor's Meeting in Cheney; and went to the Solid Waste Liaison Board Meeting. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Towey said he also attended the Boy Scout Breakfast and participated in our City's Governance Committee Meeting and said the Governance Manual will be presented to council throughout several upcoming study sessions as council takes the opportunity to go through each section; Council Regular Meeting 03-08-2011 Page 1 of 13 Approved by Council: DRAFT that in preparation for the upcoming Washington, D.C. conference, he met with the Director of Relations for representatives from Congresswoman Rogers and for Senator Murray. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited general public comments and asked that comments please be limited to three minutes; and for longer comments, he suggested citizens submit their written statements to the clerk who will distribute them to members of council. Mary Pollard, 17216 E Baldwin Ave: regarding the upcoming Indiana Avenue Extension project, she gave copies of her concerns to council, which included her request that council stop the project since she said that SEPA failed to note impacts; that there was no public participation, and there was a failure to notify Washington State Parks; and said developers normally build roads and deed them to the city and said we should not be building roads; she expressed concern for pedestrian safety and of the need to retain public access to the Centennial Trail on Mission. Mel Jones, 1404 N Hodges, Greenacres: said he got involved with the chicken regulation ordinance which prompted him to get on an e-mail list; and said he wanted to commend staff on their competence and eagerness to please. Bruce Wakeman, 7616 E Baldwin Avenue: said when Mayor Towey goes to Washington, D.C., that perhaps he can bring up with our senators the issue of obscenity not being prosecuted. Diane Johnson, 17112 E. Baldwin: concerning the Flora Mission project, said she understands it is set up and it will happen,that there are some neighbors concerned with the round-about and said a light would be more safe as there is a lot of pedestrian activity in that area; she voiced a concern with a lack of access and the trail head at Mission; and said she would appreciate some of these things being addressed, and asked if the process could be slowed down so things can be done to help the neighborhoods. RoseMarie Larson, Greenacres: said she is concerned with the chicken issue and was told that there would be no opportunity for public comment tonight; and Mayor Towey assured her she could speak to that issue during that agenda item, and the City Clerk explained that Ms. Larson misunderstood their previous conversation when the Clerk told her that there would indeed be opportunity at tonight's meeting for public comment on this issue. 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 02/14/2011 22153-22209 $258,689.79 02/17/2011 3449-3452 $56,880.08 02/18/2011 22210-22218 $43,670.56 02/18/2011 22219-22242 $146,292.13 02/25/2011 22243-22272; 225110005 $32,638.40 02/25/2011 22273-22288 $90,594.48 02/28/2011 5214-5220 (Feb. Park Refunds) $889.00 GRAND TOTAL $629,654.44 b. Approval of Payroll for Period Ending February 28,2011: $332,402.34 c. Approval City Council Formal Meeting Format Minutes of February 22, 2011 Councilmember Grafos asked the purpose of voucher#22168 regarding dance lessons, and City Manager Jackson explained that we contract with various people to supply programs for Parks and Recreation , and Council Regular Meeting 03-08-2011 Page 2 of 13 Approved by Council: DRAFT that the dance instructors receive payment for those lessons. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the consent agenda. NEW BUSINESS: 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 11-004 (CTA 01-11) Animal Raising & Keeping — Christina Janssen After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to advance Ordinance 11-004 to a second reading. Assistant Planner Janssen went through her PowerPoint presentation explaining the proposal compared with the current regulations, after which Mayor Towey invited public comment. Bridget Jackson, 708 S Progress Road: expressed concern rendering the chickens unable to fly, she suggested simply stating that chickens must be kept on one's own property, and said she felt the chicken's wings did not need to be clipped as owners should be "smart enough to figure out how to keep chickens on their own property;"and added that if there were an acre or more, a property owner should be allowed to have a rooster as they are not as irritating as dogs barking at 2:00 a.m. Hal Jones, 1404 N Hodges, Greenacres: questioned if rendering chickens incapable of flight might include simply having a covered run. Attorney Driskell responded that by keeping chickens in an enclosure and not allowing them to run in other yards, would be rendering them flightless. Mary Pollard, 17216 E. Baldwin: said the animals don't bother her but she would prefer having a boombox ordinance as there are other things more irritating than roosters; and that owners should not have to clip the chicken's wings. Grant Rice, 16620 East Valleyway: said he appreciates what's been done so far and if roosters are kept indoors until 8:00 a.m.,they won't crow at the crack of dawn;that if you raise meat chickens,you need roosters. RoseMarie Larson, Greenacres: said if you feed the roosters well before they go to bed, they'll sleep longer; and mentioned there is a way to alter the rooster's vocal cords to lessen the noise; and said there must be other ways of keeping the chickens from flying then clipping their wings. She handed a copy of her written remarks to the City Clerk. Kent Young, 704 S Progress: said he works nights and his neighbor has roosters,but they have never bothered him; and feels it would be senseless to clip their wings. There were no further comments, and Councilmember Gothmann said the original reason this issue came up was when the city was formed, we were getting many complaints about the neighbor's chickens in other people's yards. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 11-005 Amending Adult Entertainment(Retail, CTA 03-10) — Lori Barlow After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to advance to a second reading, Ordinance 11-005 amending the definition of Adult Retail Use Establishment as set forth in Option 1, the staff-recommended amendment. Associate Planner Barlow went through her PowerPoint presentation explaining the proposal, the difference between the staff recommended definition and the Planning Commission's recommended definition and said the current definition can be interpreted to allow viewing of adult oriented films within an adult retail use establishment, and the intent of the code amendment is to limit the viewing of adult themed films to occur within adult entertainment establishments which are appropriately regulated; that the amendment is necessary to be clear that the City does not intend for an adult retail use establishment to allow their patrons to view adult-oriented graphic films, videotapes, or other digital display of specified sexual activities or sexual conduct within their retail use, and that staff does not support the Planning Commission recommendation because it regulates based on the expectation of adverse impacts rather than evidence of such impacts, and if the City finds that the alternative proposed by staff does not achieve the desired result of limiting viewing of adult video in the nature of an arcade to adult entertainment facilities, the issue can come back with a second amendment. Mayor Towey invited public comment. Council Regular Meeting 03-08-2011 Page 3 of 13 Approved by Council: DRAFT Richard Sloan, Chattaroy, Washington: said he found it offensive that this topic is being discussed as adult bookstores or pornography should not be in business. Mary Pollard, 17216 E. Baldwin: said she understands the legal difficulties with this and wants legal staff to continue to ensure the protections of residents of that area; realizes we have to allow them some place to go, but suggested tightening up the local laws. Bruce Wakeman, 7616 E. Baldwin: spoke of the predator and the prey in connection with this type of business; and said he believes Spokane Valley has the authority to exclude businesses that engage in obscenities. Paul Unger, 3328 W 2nd Avenue: said he dealt with this issue in Spokane and he checked out the place, that they have rooms for one purpose, and said it should be illegal to pursue lewd sexual activity, and feels the Planning Commission's alternative is the wise choice. Lee Lefler, 1120 S Warren Road: said he is pleased to be before a council not afraid to address a big cancer of the United States; and said this is a small change to an ordinance recommended by the city staff to go against what the people want as evidenced by what the Planning Commission recommended and that city employees are afraid to take a strong stand on this matter, and he asked council to please consider doing the right thing. Richard Sloan spoke again about getting a complete breakdown from the Sheriffs Office on what this business costs the taxpayers. Marilyn Lawson, 4917 E 17th Court: said although the city decided to allow adult businesses to remain at the time of incorporation, to remember all the reasons why they are subject to zoning and that she believes Council must do everything to keep the city safe for all citizens, and said she supports the Planning Commission option.Wayne Lawson, 4917 E 17t''Court: said staffs version doesn't create a safer environment and without charging,they can hide how much business they generate and said there is no accountability with staff's version; and he asked why is the city afraid to close them down, and asked Council not to let them get away with having business as usual, which he said, is what will happen with the City Attorney's proposal. There were no further comments. Councilmember Gothmann said that when the City first incorporated, we learned through the courts and rules that this is a permitted activity and that cities must provide some area for this to occur;that we chose a particular area; but if we required all these businesses to move to that one particular area, we would be creating a red light district;that six or seven years ago we asked police to give us information concerning crime around those establishments, and the police said there was actually very little crime, so it was decided to leave those establishments where they were; he said this is a United States Constitution issue as the federal courts have ruled they are permitted to exist; he said the problem is one of enforcement and we need laws that can be legally enforceable;that we found a flaw in the present ordinance and are trying to correct that, and if enforcement doesn't work, it can be re-addressed. Councilmember Grafos said he agreed that we cannot prohibit this type of behavior because of First Amendment rights, and that the City Attorney has expertise in this area and has consulted with some of the leading experts that it is not in the best interests in protecting rights of citizens to get bogged down in expensive lawsuits; that it is more effective to take this definition and then move on if it doesn't work; adding that the Sheriffs Office will monitor activity. Deputy Mayor Schimmels said he also supports this motion as did Mayor Towey, who added that while he appreciates the Planning Commission's stronger language, he hesitates using that wording since it does not appear in any other ordinance within the State of Washington, and that he does not want our city to become a test market for such verbiage. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 4. Motion Consideration: Purchase Street Maintenance Facility—Neil Kersten It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to authorize the City Manager to execute any necessary documents for the purchase of the property at 17002 E. Euclid based on the conditions outlined in the offer letter dated February 9, 2011 for the purchase price of$750,000. Public Works Director Kersten explained about the process he undertook in looking for property for the city's street maintenance facility, and of the opportunity to purchase this property; that the facility is in good condition and meets the city's needs in terms of building and site; and they have a purchase offer that has been accepted with the conditions as stated,that the offer of$750,000 was less than the appraisal of$760,000; and said they will also conduct a visual and phase one environmental inspection prior to moving in before closing to Council Regular Meeting 03-08-2011 Page 4 of 13 Approved by Council: DRAFT make sure there are no major defects on the property and no title limitations. Mayor Towey invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 4a. Motion Consideration: Letter of Support for Greater Spokane Substance Abuse Council's (GSSAC) Application for the Comprehensive Anti-gang Program— Councilmember Gothmann [added agenda item] It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of support to the Greater Spokane Substance Abuse Council for the Spokane County Strategic Comprehensive Anti-Gang Program. Councilmember Gothmann said he was asked to attend a greater Spokane Substance Abuse Council meeting some time ago where this and the next grant were discussed, and he asked Ms. Linda Thompson, GSSAC Executive Director to further explain these grants. Ms. Thompson thanked Council for the opportunity to bring this up tonight and mentioned the quick turn- around time for the grants,with a deadline of this Friday; said that this anti-gang program has a maximum grant of$250,000 for three years; and said that there is no cost to the City of Spokane Valley for this or the next agenda item grant. Mayor Towey invited public comment, and Mary Pollard, 17216 E Baldwin said she highly recommends Council support this grant. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 4b. Motion Consideration: Letter of Support for Greater Spokane Substance Abuse Council's Application for the Prevention Outreach Coalition—Councilmember Gothmann jadded agenda item] It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels and seconded to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of support to the Greater Spokane Substance Abuse Council for their Prevention Outreach Coalition Grant Application. Ms. Thompson explained that they have been looking for years to find ways to help the Edgeclift community and this should be of great assistance; that the Edgeclift community was the only community to have a weed and seed grant, and the plan with this grant is to support prevention; and again mentioned that there is no financial obligation to the City of Spokane Valley; and that the Greater Spokane Substance Abuse Council has the matching funds required. City Manager Jackson said the coalition involvement agreement is included in tonight's council packet, but that he wanted to make clear that Council is approving the letter and that staff and council should visit before actually signing the grant. Ms. Thompson said they are actually two different things; that the letter would be helpful but they can find someone else to sign that coalition agreement. Mayor Towey invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. Mayor Towey called for a recess at 7:40 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 7:52 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Towey invited general public comments; no comments were offered. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 5. Livestock in Mixed Use Areas—Christina Janssen Assistant Planner Janssen explained the proposal per her PowerPoint presentation; that the Community Development Director received a citizen request for an Administrative Interpretation seeking clarification on zoning regulations for keeping livestock in areas of the city zone Mixed Use. Ms. Janssen said that the Planning Commission held a study session on the issue January 27, held a public hearing February 10, and continued deliberations to February 24. She explained the current regulations regarding animal raising and keeping (SVMC 19.40.150) and the proposal concerning lot requirements,that the lot or track must exceed 40,000 square feet in residential zones, and in mixed use zones livestock and poultry (excluding swine)would be permitted on lots or tracts with legally established residential uses that exceed 40,000 square feet; and she mentioned there are nineteen lots in the entire city which meet those requirements. There were no objections from council to proceed to a first reading of an ordinance. Council Regular Meeting 03-08-2011 Page 5 of 13 Approved by Council: DRAFT 6. Appleway Court Drainage License— Cary Driskell Acting City Attorney Driskell explained that representatives of Appleway Court 202 is requesting permission to landscape and maintain the swale area between their building and the sidewalk along Appleway;that the landscaping would consist of irrigated grass that would extend along the entire side of the parcel; that two inches of top soil and hydroseed would be brought in and there would also be some underground sprinkler piping to provide irrigation. He said the swale area is approximately 50 feet by 327 feet and he showed the area in question on the overhead map, and explained that if Council is in agreement with the proposal, staff suggests granting a license to allow the use and maintenance of this area. The question of liability was brought up and Mr. Driskell said Appleway Court would be responsible for their actions similar to the provisions we include in most city contracts. There were no objections from council to proceed with an upcoming motion consideration. 7. Indiana Avenue Extension— Steve Worley Senior Capital Projects Engineer Worley said there is a bid opening this Friday for the Indiana Avenue Extension project and the results of that bid will be presented to council for a bid award two weeks from tonight. Mr. Worley explained that in order to access the commercial area of the Spokane Valley Mall from Greenacres, it would require travelling south across the freeway on Flora or Barker,then travel over to the Sullivan/Broadway intersection, then cross back over the freeway to get to Indiana Avenue. He explained that the congestion at the Sullivan/Broadway intersection is becoming high and the level of service is starting to drop,which prompted staff to examine ways to relieve that intersection's congestion; and in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Arterial Street Plan,there was shown that someday there would be a connection to allow all the traffic in this area to easily access through Mission and access the Mall without having to cross over to the south side of I-90 and then back over to the north side again; and said it made sense that this connection would make an efficient east/west arterial and would complete an east/west arterial on the north side of I-90, and thereby complete the existing gap. Mr. Worley mentioned that staff has presented to council numerous times since 2008, including public hearings on Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP), and approval of grant applications and adopting the six-year TIP, as well as related items in the development of the Comprehensive Plan and all the public process associated with that Plan, and the adoption of the Arterial Street Plan which showed this road being connected, and all those actions before Council relative to the annual budgets with this project listed in those budgets. Mr. Worley showed figures associated with the original project funding and the current project funding, which originally showed the developer's right-of-way contribution as $530,000 as compared with the current project funding showing the developer's cash contribution of$161,000 in addition to a right-of-way/easement contribution of over $1.2 million, with the total estimate originally projected $7,000 higher than the current project funding. Mr.Worley mentioned that staff applied for and received funds from the Urban Corridor Program (UCP), which is a TIB Grant, in the amount of $1,566,850; and said that UCP program requires developer participation, and that this particular program is intended to improve economic development by the building of roads and improving infrastructure so that new development can occur. Mr. Worley said that normally on projects such as this, we would have to buy the right-of-way and with a 20% match, that would have meant we would have had to come up with a quarter-million dollars just to purchase the right-of-way. Mr. Worley also clarified that there is more than one developer involved, and that it would be more correct to call them "land owners" instead of developers, although some of the land owners might be developers to sell some of the properties to developers, and said that the $200,000 developer contribution has been paid, and said that difference between the $200,000 and the shown amount of$161,000 was donated right-of-way. Mr.Worley explained that when the property owner agreed to partner with us and donate the right-of-way for this project,the agreement was that if this was submitted and approved,the alignment was not "set in stone" as the developer would have the ability to adjust the alignment of the road as necessary based on his future development; and said staff felt that was a fair trade. Mr. Worley showed a drawing of the original master plan of how the developer wanted to develop the plan; and Mr. Worley explained that the Council Regular Meeting 03-08-2011 Page 6 of 13 Approved by Council: DRAFT drawing/plan proposal is not a preliminary plat and is not a plat of any kind; that this has no land use action associated with it yet as it is strictly a picture of what this particular property owner has identified as potentially developing his property based on the mixed-use zone; and said that the property owner wanted to figure out how to develop his property so the road wasn't splitting the property in half. In addition, Mr. Worley said that the right-of-way is not shown near the Mission Avenue roadway, but he said the right-of-way still exists and will remain at the completion of the project. Mr.Worley said that the trailhead was commented on tonight that the trailhead at the end of Mission Avenue where it is now is going to be re- located; but he said that the project is not doing any of these things, that this is strictly a conceptual plan; and one of the things not shown on the layout is a roadway that meets any kind of engineering design standard; and he stressed that this is strictly a conceptual plan for a mixed use development, and is a"little bit better than the back of a napkin drawing." Further, Mr. Worley said that this concept has an interior road which is there to help the development; that the City is not building the interior road; and he showed where the turnouts would be located to accommodate people needing to come in and turn around to head in the opposite direction. Mayor Towey said that at the end of Mission where the pavement ends,beyond that is dirt all the way to the trailhead, and he asked if that is a city road or a city right-of-way down to the trailhead. Mr. Worley said that is a city right-of-way, not through private property, but is a public right-of-way; that the gravel road is in public right-of-way. Councilmember Grafos said the other leg of the conceptual drawing, the south part, that would not be built with city funds but would be strictly paid for by the developer if he elected to do that, or are we agreeing that we will do that for him as part of his $2 million. Mr. Worley said no,that this project is to make a connection from Indiana Avenue to the intersection;the original concept was three lanes, one-lane each direction; and in this concept there is still one each direction, but are split in the one area into two, one-way roads;that there is no center turn lane but under the final road layout proposal, a center turn lane is not needed; he said staff told the property owner that this is their concept, but the interior road is not part of the City's project and we cannot include that in the project being built by the city as that would be beyond the scope of our grant application; so our agreement is we would build the outside lanes and when the middle area develops,the developer would build the interior lanes. Councilmember Grafos said then the Mission Avenue, the extension of Mission would be two-way road; and Mr. Worley showed on the layout where the area on Mission would be two lanes, then switch to a one-lane westbound and come back to two lanes; so a traveler coming eastbound would come off the five-lane road, down to a single lane where it splits to one lane eastbound; then come together through the round-about; and Councilmember Grafos said when that road (Mission Parkway) needs to be widened, it would be done at the taxpayer's expense. Mr. Worley explained that there is another project pending that we have design money for now, which is to improve Mission Avenue from Flora east to Barker;that there is no other city project proposed in this area; and once we are finished with the Indiana Avenue Extension Project, we don't have any other plans to widen the road; and will remain that way until the development comes in and once those plans come in, any additional lanes to that road would be built by the developer. Mayor Towey asked if the round-about is inside the grant and Mr. Worley said that the round-about is part of the grant and not separate and he clarified that this is the round-about at Mission and Flora. Mr. Worley said that this is the second iteration of the master plan with a road designed to engineering standards;then from this we ended up with the engineered final drawing and said this is what will be built as part of the city's project. To summarize, Mr. Worley said we have the one-road streets; an access road to Mission Avenue to the trailhead as we want to and must provide that; and said one of the issues staff came across was, if the area is one-way westbound,how do people coming out of this trailhead go east on Mission; and said a turnaround area was created to accommodate that; but another turnaround at the top wouldn't be needed because the round-about would be available. Mr. Worley said staff and the property owner have had a fantastic working relationship regarding what the City is able to pay for as part of a public road, and what they would pay for as part of new development; and the turnaround as part of the developer's new development, would of course be paid for by the developer. Mr. Worley added that sidewalks will be included for the entire length on both sides as they are required as part of the TIB grant. Council Regular Meeting 03-08-2011 Page 7 of 13 Approved by Council: DRAFT As per the slides, Mr. Worley went over the design elements. Mr. Worley also mentioned that the round- about is safer, more environmentally friendly, and more economical in the long-run; he mentioned that the widening of both parkways is a future project that is not a city project and will not be paid for by the city but will be done as part of the development of that commercial area; and said standard design for round-abouts includes street lights and Mr.Worley said those will be included as well. Mr. Worley said a study of the Mission and Flora intersection was conducted, including what would the future traffic look like at that intersection; that it is currently a two-way stop controlled intersection. Mr. Worley said staff looked at two-way stops for the future, or switching the two-way stops to Flora instead of Mission, looked at a signalized intersection, and looked at a roundabout; and overall the round-about allows the intersection to operate at its highest level of service in 2030 with future development in the area. If there were no round-about or signalized intersection and we only used stop-controlled, then the level of service in 2030 would be F which is a failed intersection; and Mr. Worley said when looking at signalized intersections, staff also looks at round-abouts as alternatives. Fuel consumption was examined as well as emissions, and Mr. Worley said the difference between those CO2 emissions and fuel consumption at a signalized intersection, stop-controlled intersection and a roundabout, is the round-about produces less than one-half of the CO2 emissions than any of the other options; and it also uses less fuel because of the start and stops associated with the other types of intersections controls. Pedestrian safety was examined for the round-about and the entire project, and he said that is one of the reasons for the six- foot wide sidewalks with seven-foot wide separated landscaped strips to keep the pedestrians away from the roadway; and in the round-about there are eight and a half-foot wide sidewalks adjacent to the curbs on all corners of the round-about; that there would be ADA (American with Disabilities Act) -compliant pedestrian ramps, and crosswalks with refuge islands in the middle to allow pedestrians to cross only one lane at a time and be safe doing it; and he said also provided is a connection to a pathway that already exists at the northeast corner, which eventually will hopefully connect to the Centennial Trail at the trailhead at the north end of Flora. Concerning the slope of Mission Avenue coming down into the existing intersection, Mr. Worley said the slope is fairly steep but meets the standards for a minor arterial, and to try to mitigate the steepness, the elevation of the roundabout was raised about three or four feet to provide a more shallower landing where people would slow down as they come off the hill; he said there will be signs for the round-about at the top of the hill to warn about the upcoming round-about and slope and to start slowing down. If after all that there are still problems, Mr. Worley said the project for the improvement of Mission Avenue from Flora east to Barker, there will still be an opportunity at that time to look at the slope of the road and if changes are felt to be necessary, the slope could be changed with that project. Councilmember Grafos asked how we would deal with a single-family resident that is about 15-20 feet from the edge of the round-about,which will have a three and a half foot grade in front of their house,explaining that there is a house just to the north of that. Mr. Worley said they transitioned from the elevation of the round-about down to the road on the north side of the intersection, and those grades have all worked out; he said there are some improvements they are making but all the connections to the existing driveways are fully maintained so that single family house will not be impacted. Concerning naming the roads, he said that while Indiana Avenue ends at the railroad tracks,there is also an Indiana Avenue north of Mission; and he said you can't have two Indiana Avenues in the same block location; and in working with the Spokane Valley Fire District and with our building department and we came up with the idea of the noted green area will be Indiana Parkway, and the pink area on the map will be Mission Parkway; and by changing the name to parkways instead of avenues indicates there are two different roads and thereby alleviates the potential problem of having duplicate addresses; traveling eastbound off Indiana a driver will be on Indiana Parkway; and a travelling off Mission westbound,the driver will be on Mission Parkway. Mr. Worley mentioned there was some comment about public notification. Mr. Worley said a flyer was sent out to let the residents know that there is an upcoming construction project; he said there was not a Council Regular Meeting 03-08-2011 Page 8 of 13 Approved by Council: DRAFT public meeting on this project but we don't hold public meetings on every project and the criteria used to determine whether a public meeting is needed, is (1) are we doing a road improvement in front of people's houses that we will ask them to sell us part of their front yard as when we have a lot of property we have to buy, we want people to know ahead of time what it is we are proposing; and (2) when we do construction in front of their homes, we want them to know the project and the status. Since in this case we are not buying right-of-way in front of people's houses and the construction of it is in an area that is away from many residents in this area, staff felt it was not necessary to hold a public meeting. Mr. Worley said the flyer was sent out because the intersection will have to be closed at some point which will impact travel through the area, and the flyer was to let people know about detour routes. Mr. Worley said there have been comments concerning the SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act) checklist for this project and that it didn't address all the issues associated with the development of this area. Mr. Worley clarified that when we do a SEPA checklist,we do it for the city's project only; and said there is perhaps a misconception that a SEPA checklist should have been done for that first master plan, but he said that is not how the SEPA process works; that the SEPA process is for that particular road project, what are the city's environmental impacts and he said those are the questions city staff answered. Further, Mr.Worley explained, that when the properties in this area get developed, they will go through their own separate SEPA process; and said regarding the road project, we answered those issues on the checklist and a Determination of Nonsignificance was issued. Mr. Worley said that there are several project partners, such as Centennial Properties, Hanson Industries, and Spokane County, and that staff has had an excellent working relationship with the partners. Finally, Mr. Worley mentioned the several utilities they coordinated with on this project, such as Avista Gas, Avista Electric, Spokane County Utilities, and several others. The road construction is expected to begin mid-April and end approximately July 4; and Mr. Worley said this Friday is the bid opening. Mr. Worley said that this project does not benefit only one developer, but benefits the community and many developers, and is an opportunity to open the north Greenacres area to any development that the Comprehensive Plan allows;that access is maintained to the Centennial Trail; that there might be access issues during construction, but said they indicated to the contractor that they must have access to the Centennial Trail at all times even during construction. Councilmember Grafos said that when Mr.Worley mentioned he would have some options when they are going to continue east to Flora Road and improve Mission, another project, that if the round-about seemed to be a problem with the neighborhood, at what point does that round-about stop being the most efficient use, and said he is concerned with safety and mentioned the grade school about two blocks away; and said when that area grows into a commercial area with all the pedestrian, bike and car traffic, that safety is his concern; and said so far as the design of the project is concerned, he thinks it is great so long as the taxpayer doesn't end up paying for it. Mr. Worley said regarding traffic volumes with the school and the property development, that all that was taken into consideration when they looked at the round- about in terms of what kind of device to use to control that intersection; that SRTC (Spokane Regional Transportation Council) Regional Traffic Model looks at all the development in this area, including the school and the mixed-use commercial development, and the future traffic models is what indicates what the future traffic volumes will be; and those volumes are what staff uses in the intersection analysis; and said the round-about is the most efficient, and safest alternative to accommodate all of the future development in this area and said it has all been evaluated, analyzed, and modeled. Deputy Mayor Schimmels said there are now two round-abouts in our city limits and asked if there is a way for our police department to monitor the accidents around those two areas. Chief VanLeuven said they can monitor any collisions that occur at the existing round-abouts. 8. Sullivan Road Bridge Replacement Project— Steve Worley Mr. Worley gave his PowerPoint presentation to update council on the status of the Sullivan Road west bridge; that there has been some recent information that has come to staffs attention; he said this particular bridge project has been on every TIP (Transportation Improvement Plan) since we incorporated, at least since 2004; and the reason is because as the inspection reports come in, we have Council Regular Meeting 03-08-2011 Page 9 of 13 Approved by Council: DRAFT identified that this bridge needed to be eventually replaced. Mr. Worley explained that there are actually two bridges at this location, and the southbound lane bridge was built in the early 1950s and the northbound lane bridge was built in the mid-70's. Mr. Worley gave an overview of the bridge and its average daily traffic use, which includes 23%truck traffic which he said is very high; that traffic often backs up well over the bridge during the evening peak traffic hours, and because the distance between the south end of the bridge and the intersection is so short,the right-turn lane is affected because of the bridge backup. Mr. Worley said the last inspection report in April 2010 showed some deterioration which is causing the sufficiency rating to drop; and said this has been in steady decline over the years with a sufficiency rating of 24.14,which is based on a 100 point scale; and said we have a contract with Spokane County Bridge Division who are our bridge engineers, and we also have a consultant who does some of our bridge loadings for us who works with the County; and said all the bridges in the state are evaluated the same way according to a program developed by WSDOT (Washington State Department of Transportation). Mr. Worley said that WSDOT offers federal funds for bridge replacements but in the last round,they were only funding bridge that had a sufficiency rating of 35 or lower, so this bridge qualified for funding. He said the bridge is classified as "structurally deficient," which means it is not ideal for carrying the existing loads; and the bridge pier footings in the river are considered to be "scour critical" since an old footing design was used when this bridge was built years ago; and said that means that the river bed around the footing is scouring away and could threaten the bridge. Mr. Worley said staff is reviewing the need to post weight restrictions and said that the bridge is not an immediate risk for failure and it is safe to drive over; and said if weight restrictions were to be put on this bridge, it would be done so in an effort to prolong the life of the bridge as long as possible until it could be replaced. Mr. Worley explained that a notice was sent out to all the trucking companies giving them notice that this bridge needs to be replaced and of the need to be careful with the loads going over the bridge and to caution the companies not to over-weight the trucks as that would cause the bridge to deteriorate faster. Mr. Worley said this area of Sullivan has been the center of growth for the last twenty years and that growth is expected to continue; and when the County's Bigelow Gulch project is completed, the current estimate is that 8400 vehicles will be dumped daily onto the north end of Sullivan and cross this bridge; and said that 8400 vehicle count assumes that the north Spokane Freeway is completed all the way to I- 90; and said if that is not completed all the way to I-90 by the time Bigelow Gulch is completed, that number will be much higher than 8400; and said the Indiana Avenue Extension project just discussed will also increase traffic on this bridge; and said the Indiana Sullivan Intersection currently has a level of service of C, but has a projected level of service in 2014 of C-D. Mr. Worley said this bridge is considered regionally significant; that SRTC went through a process of identifying the regionally significant projects in our area and we submitted the Sullivan Road Corridor project, which includes the replacement of the Sullivan Road West Bridge, re-surfacing the Union Pacific Railroad Bridge, concreting the entire corridor because of the heavy traffic, and lengthening and widening the bridges over Trent and the Burlington Northern Railroad Track. He said they combined all that into a single project called the Sullivan Road Corridor Project; and this project was ranked #1 of all the other projects submitted in the region, as regionally significant. Mr. Worley said the funding estimate for a new bridge is $19.75 million, that they have $8 million from the federal bridge program, and $2 million from the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment board, and that staff is pursuing additional funds so we can move ahead with the project. Mr. Worley said the estimate is based on a form required by WSDOT, but that staff feels the cost estimate is high; and said the Barker Road bridge was replaced for about $11 million and this bridge is slightly shorter and a little more narrow. To move ahead, Mr. Worley said they would propose sending a letter to WSDOT requesting that they release the design funds for this project; that normally they don't do that until the project is fully funded; but said staff would like to request them to release those funds now so the design and the environmental phase can start; and said it takes about two years to get through the environmental and the design phases of such a project; and said during those two years, staff would like to pursue the rest of the funding for the project; and by starting the design, it would Council Regular Meeting 03-08-2011 Page 10 of 13 Approved by Council: DRAFT allow staff to refine the cost estimate for this project to give a more clear picture of how much remaining funds are needed. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to extend the meeting to 9:30 p.m. Mr. Worley explained that if we were to request the release of those funds, it would require a local 20% match, so we would need 20% of the $2.6 million for the design; and said if Councilmembers were to support this additional funding to our state and federal legislators, we may have a good chance to get the additional funds needed to replace this bridge sooner rather than later; and asked if Council supports the release of the design funds so this project can commence. Councilmember Gothmann said he supports getting the funds as soon as we can; and Councilmember Grafos said he too would support that and said he feels that is an area of growth and the bridge is important. Mr. Worley said if council approves, he would write a letter to our WSDOT contact through Highways and Local Programs and they would take it to Olympia and ask for that on our behalf; and if we get agreement, then we would move through the normal process of working on federally funded projects. Deputy Mayor Schimmels voiced his support of this request. There was brief discussion about options to restricting weight, such as slowing the speed or reducing the bridge to one lane or other ideas to minimize the impact to the businesses in the area. Mayor Towey said he recommends moving forward with this to gain the support of WSDOT along with the federal support; and Councilmember Gothmann said that perhaps this is something Mayor Towey and Deputy Mayor Schimmels could address while in Washington, D.C. Mr. Worley mentioned he distributed information at the last Chamber Transportation Committee Meeting and the representatives from the Spokane Valley Chamber were there who indicated they would be willing to provide a letter of support to WSDOT to go with our letter to request the release of the design funds. Mayor Towey said Senator Murray's chief of staff is an expert on transportation and he and Deputy Mayor Schimmels will be meeting with him during the Washington, D.C.trip. 9. Hanson Property Development Agreement—John Hohman Senior Development Engineer Hohman said this project combines the efforts of our Public Works Department with efforts in Community Development and with private developers; that this is a relatively new project as staff has only been working on this for the last three weeks, but staff wanted to share this with Council early on to make sure council is comfortable with the direction staff is taking. Mr. Hohman said this is more focusing on the permitting side of struggling developments trying to have properties ready for development, and this project deals with properties owned by Hanson Industries typically along the Indiana corridor. Prior to getting to the specifics of the project and the development agreement, Mr. Hohman reviewed State regulations and requirements concerning traffic concurrency, traffic thresholds, and levels of service; and spoke of those associated regulations contained in this City's Comprehensive Plan, our own Municipal Code, as well as in the Street Standards. Mr. Hohman explained the purpose of this development agreement with Hanson Industries and gave some of the background of the project; explaining that Hanson Industries typically likes to put in all the infrastructure, do as much permitting up- front as possible, and usually do a lot of preliminary traffic, environmental, and stormwater work; and said they have the desire and the means to put these projects together. In 1998, Mr. Hohman explained, Hanson Industries did a very detailed study/traffic analysis of the different areas they own and how best to move forward with development certainty. Mr. Hohman said that developers like certainty and those buying the projects and developing the buildings also like certainty that there won't be any rule changes down the road. Based on that 1998 traffic study, Mr. Hohman said that Spokane County entered into agreements with Hanson based on work Hanson did on the infrastructure; Hanson and the County agreed that Hanson would be allowed a certain amount of trips in a type of"trip bank" so they could pull from those at a later date; there was a fifteen-year period that began in 2000 and will be expiring March 2015; and said due to the economy, there hasn't been a lot of Council Regular Meeting 03-08-2011 Page 11 of 13 Approved by Council: DRAFT activity over the last three years; and now there is a concern from Hanson that their trips might expire, which would lead into their properties not being as marketable. Mr. Hohman explained that what we are examining, is the possibility of a new developer agreement, or a voluntary mitigation agreement, to look at some option for extending those trips and to look at all the different aspects for providing traffic circulation in the area. Mr. Hohman said that staff believes that extending the trips through this new agreement will promote economic development by making those properties that already exist, economically viable and attractive to development; and clarified that we are talking about having "shovel- ready"properties that can have the very minimum amount of permitting done to get them into the ground; and Mr. Hohman gave some background on Hanson Industries including some of that company's past property development; and said Hanson previously contributed about $8 million to various projects over the years, which Mr. Hohman said, is a significant contribution to the City's and to DOT's infrastructure; in addition to the $200,000 contribution to the Indiana Avenue Extension project previously mentioned by Mr.Worley. Mr. Hohman said that Hanson and city staff want to take a pro-active approach to attract businesses into the city; and the developer wants to offer properties that address traffic and stormwater projects up front so they can strongly market these areas in an attempt to get strong companies to bring businesses here; and he said Hanson feels they have to do this because they are not just competing with Spokane and Liberty Lake, but that competition is expanded to the Tri-Cities, Boise, Post Falls, Coeur d'Alene and other municipalities all vying for these companies. The idea of a new developer agreement was broached as well as new construction to the Indiana and Sullivan intersection, which would be minor but ones that would allow a lot of additional capacity to come through; and in that, staff identified splitting the intersection in two parts, focusing first on the south half and adding a turn lane from eastbound Indiana to southbound Sullivan; then creating another through-lane going eastbound, and making some modifications on the eastern half of the intersection; he said they were able to model that into the SRTC model and it shows that it greatly increases the capacity of the intersection; and said one of the projects scheduled for the summer is to rehabilitate that intersection by putting in a concrete surface instead of the deteriorating asphalt; and the idea came up, can the city and Hanson financially participate to make this happen in the timeframe available, and to be able to generate the capacity that would then allow us to extend their trips for at least ten years beyond the existing 2015 expiration date; and said staff also felt it would be prudent to pick up some right-of-way on the north side since with the bridge project mentioned by Mr. Worley, it included adding another turn lane in front of Crispy Cream that would be southbound Sullivan to westbound Indiana; and he said Hanson very willing to cooperate with us. Mr. Hohman said that the developer is looking for this extension that would allow him to market these properties and have them ready to go, and said this is important to try to resolve as quickly as we can since Hanson is trying to recruit some large economic businesses; and once we have some of this development certainty we are hoping will come out of this agreement, that would help bolster their position in their business recruitment. Next steps, Mr. Hohman said, would be to finalize negotiation with Hanson regarding the trips and contributions; and he explained that an important element that is taking quite some time, is to try to get concurrence from WSDOT, owner of the intersection, and he said a lot of the trips that go through the intersection also go into the interchange, so we have to make sure WSDOT feels comfortable with the work and modeling done. Councilmember Grafos said he feels this is a great idea and supports this 100%;that this is an insight into a successful developer; and said he likes the idea of the concept of"certainty" with these projects. Mr. Hohman added that from a permitting standpoint, this shows us the types of partnerships we will need to have with future land owners and developers; and said he feels the city must be more pro-active in working with those owners and developers to determine needs and how the City can facilitate meeting the state and local requirements so the properties are marketable. Council Regular Meeting 03-08-2011 Page 12 of 13 Approved by Council: DRAFT 10. Advance Agenda Councilmember Gothmann said he would like concurrence from council, and said that he mentioned this to Community Development Director McClung as well,that he was contacted by a citizen who suggested the city provide electrical inspections and said he would be interested in talking about this service as we could probably provide the service at about the same cost but with better service. Mr. Jackson said he can look into that, but he would make it a lower priority as staff is currently working on various and many different issues. Mayor Towey reminded everyone there is no council meeting next week; and said that Spokane County has offered to give us a piece of land bordering Appleway and Sprague and would like a letter from us accepting the land; and there were no objections from council in staff sending such a letter. City Manager Jackson said with the looming possibility of the federal government cutting the CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funds, that staff has drafted letters to senators urging that those cuts not be made,and council had no objections to staff sending those letters. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Schimmels, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:32 p.m. ATTEST: Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Regular Meeting 03-08-2011 Page 13 of 13 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 22nd, 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: Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 11-004, amendment to Title 19 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code as follows: Chapter 19.40.150 (Animal raising and keeping) amending current regulations for the keeping of chickens in residential areas including minimum lot size requirements, number of chickens allowed, and setbacks for structures. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70B.170-210 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: First Reading of the ordinance was held March 8, 2011 BACKGROUND: The Uniform Development Code was adopted in September of 2007 and was effective October 28th, 2007. In the fall of 2010, following a number of citizen comments, the Spokane Valley City Council requested that staff work with the Planning Commission on the issue of raising chickens in residential areas. The Planning Commission held a study session on this issue January 27th 2011 and held a public hearing February 10th, 2011. OPTIONS: Approve ordinance with or without modifications or direct staff further. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve ordinance 11-004 amending Spokane Valley Municipal Code 19.40.150 BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Christina Janssen —Assistant Planner ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Ordinance DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 11-004 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON AMENDING ORDINANCE 07-015 AND SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS (SVMC) 19.40.150 AMENDING REGULATIONS FOR THE KEEPING OF CHICKENS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley (City) adopted the Uniform Development Code (UDC) pursuant to Ordinance 07-015, on the 25th day of September, 2007; and WHEREAS,the UDC became effective on 28th day of October,2007; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the Environmental Checklists, the City issued a Determination of Non- significance (DNS) for the proposals, published the DNS in the Valley News Herald, posted the DNS at City Hall and mailed the DNS to all affected public agencies; and WHEREAS, on the 14th day of January, 2011,the City provided a copy of the proposed amendment to Washington State Department of Commerce (DOC) initiating a 60 day comment period pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106; and WHEREAS,the amendment as is set forth below bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety and welfare,and to the protection of the environment; and WHEREAS, on the 27th day of January, 2011, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on the 10th day of February, 2011 the Planning Commission received evidence, information,public testimony, and a staff report and recommendation at a public hearing ; and WHEREAS, on the 10th day of February, 2011 the Planning Commission deliberated; the Planning Commission provided a recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received no objection to the proposed amendments from the public; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission is an advisory body to the City Council as is set forth in SVMC 18.10.050 and RCW 35.63.060; and WHEREAS, on the 22nd day of January , 2011,the City Council reviewed the proposed amendments, the recommendations by the Planning Commission and the record before the Planning Commission including the minutes of that meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council determined that such an amendment would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, The amendment as is set forth below is consistent with the Land Use Residential Goals and Policies Goal LUG-1, as well as NG-2 in the Neighborhood Goals and Policies; and Ordinance 11-004 Animal Raising&Keeping Page 1 of 3 DRAFT WHEREAS, the provisions set forth below are also consistent with provisions contained within land use codes of jurisdictions located in the greater Spokane region. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIFICALLY ORDAINS AS SET FORTH BELOW: Section One: SVMC Chapter 19 shall be amended as follows: 19.40150 Animal raising and keeping. Where permitted,the keeping of poultry and livestock(excluding swine and chickens)is subject to the following conditions: A. The lot or tract must exceed 40,000 square feet in area; B. The keeping of swine is not permitted C. Beekeeping for noncommercial purposes is limited to 25 hives; D. Any building or structure housing poultry or livestock including,but not limited to, any stable, paddock,yard, runway,pen, or enclosure, or any manure pile shall be located not less than 75 feet from any habitation; E. No building or structure housing poultry or livestock including,but not limited to, any stable, paddock,yard, runway,pen, or enclosure, or any manure pile shall be located within the front yard nor be closer than 10 feet from any side property line; F. The keeping of animals and livestock is limited as follows: 1. Not more than three horses,mules, donkeys,bovine, llama or alpacas shall be permitted per gross acre; or 2. Not more than six sheep or goats shall be permitted per gross acres; or 3. Any equivalent combination of subsection (F)(1) and(F)(2) of this section. G. Small Animals/Fowl. A maximum of one animal or fowl (excluding chickens),including chickens,duck,turkey,goose or similar domesticated fowl, or rabbit,mink,nutria, chinchilla or similar animal,may be raised or kept per 3,000 square feet of gross lot area. In addition, a shed, coop,hutch,or similar containment structure must be constructed prior to the acquisition of any small animal/fowl; and condition. H. In residential areas,the keeping of chickens is subject to the following conditions: 1. A maximum of one chicken may be raised or kept per 2,000 gross square feet of lot area, with a maximum of 25 birds allowed. 2. The keeping of roosters is prohibited. 3. Coops,hutches or similar containment structures must be kept a minimum of 20 feet from the front property line, 5 feet from side and rear property lines, and 15 feet from flanking streets. Ordinance 11-004 Animal Raising&Keeping Page 2 of 3 DRAFT 4. Coops,hutches or similar containment structures must be kept a minimum of 25 feet from occupied structures on neighboring properties. 4-5.All chickens must be rendered incapable of flight. ICI.Structures, pens, yards, enclosures, pastures and grazing areas shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition. Section Two: All other provisions of SVMC Title 19 and Appendix A (Definitions) not specifically referenced hereto shall remain in full force and effect. Section Three: Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, clause or phrase of this Ordinance. Section Four: Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after the publication of the Ordinance, or a summary thereof, occurs in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. Passed by the City Council this day of March,2011. Mayor, Thomas E. Towey ATTEST: City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 11-004 Animal Raising&Keeping Page 3 of 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 22, 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: Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 11-005, Amendment to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Appendix A: "Adult Retail Use Establishment" Definition GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC 17.80.150 and 19.30.040; RCW 36.70A.106 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: November 16, 2010 - Council consensus to forward the text amendment to the Planning Commission for consideration; February 22, 2011 — advanced to first reading of an Ordinance; March 8— advanced to 2nd reading. BACKGROUND: The amendment to the definition is proposed to clarify that the on-premise viewing of adult-oriented films in exchange for compensation is not a permitted use of an adult retail use establishment. The current definition could be interpreted to mean that showing an adult movie is permitted because the definition currently allows for the "viewing of adult oriented merchandise." The City Council in 2010 adopted revisions to the Adult Entertainment provisions in SVMC 5.10 identifying this type of conduct as "adult entertainment," rather than "adult retail." On January 13, 2011, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and considered the language of the text amendment proposed by staff. The Commission decided that stronger language should be considered which further restricted adult-oriented movie viewing to promotional clips in a visible location and directed staff to provide an alternative definition. On February 10, 2011 the Commission voted 4-3 to recommend to the Council that the Planning Commission alternative definition be adopted. On March 8, 2011 staff presented for a first reading, a draft ordinance containing both proposed definitions to the Council for consideration. Council voted unanimously to advance the ordinance with staff's recommendation, to a second reading OPTIONS: Approve the ordinance with or without modifications. RECOMMENDED ACTION: I move that we approve Ordinance 11-005 amending the definition of Adult Retail Use Establishment as drafted.. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Lori Barlow, AICP, Associate Planner; Cary Driskell, Acting City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: (1) Draft Ordinance (2) Written Public Comment (3) PowerPoint Presentation RCA Ordinance 2nd Reading for CTA-09-10 1 of 1 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 11-005 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON AMENDING SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE (SVMC) APPENDIX A DEFINITION FOR "ADULT RETAIL USE ESTABLISHMENT, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Chapter 5.10 governs adult entertainment establishments; and WHEREAS, SVMC 5.10.010 defines "adult entertainment establishment" as live adult entertainment establishments and adult arcade establishments; and WHEREAS, "adult arcade establishment" is defined as a commercial premises, or portion of any premises, to which a member of the public is invited or admitted and where adult arcade stations or adult arcade devices are used to exhibit or display a graphic picture, view, film, videotape, or digital display of specified sexual activities or sexual conduct to a member of the public on a regular basis or as a substantial part of the premises activity; and WHEREAS, "adult arcade station" is defined as any enclosure where a patron, member, or customer would ordinarily be positioned while using an adult arcade device. "Adult arcade station" refers to the area in which an adult arcade device is located and from which the graphic picture, view, film, videotape or digital display of specified sexual activities or sexual conduct is to be viewed; and WHEREAS, "adult arcade device, " sometimes also known as "panoram," "review," "picture arcade," "adult arcade," or "peep show," means any device which for payment of a fee, membership fee or other charge, is used to exhibit or display a graphic picture, view, film, videotape, or digital display of specified sexual activities or sexual conduct; and WHEREAS, SVMC Appendix A defines "adult retail use establishment" as an 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,transfer, or viewing of adult-oriented merchandise; and WHEREAS, an adult retail establishment allows viewing of adult-oriented merchandise, which could include the viewing of a graphic film, videotape, or digital display of specified sexual activities or sexual conduct the establishment sells in return for money or any other form of consideration; and WHEREAS, the current Code may be interpreted to allow an adult retail use establishment to show adult- oriented graphic film, videotape, or digital display of specified sexual activities or sexual conduct that the establishment sells and still be within the definition of adult retail use; and WHEREAS, it was not the City's intent when it adopted the definition of"adult retail use establishment" to allow the on-premises viewing of adult-oriented graphic film, videotape, or other digital display of specified sexual activities or sexual conduct that the establishment sells, when that viewing is in return for money or any other form of consideration, because the adverse impacts of such viewing are properly regulated as an adult entertainment establishment; and WHEREAS, the City recently amended SVMC Chapter 5.10, which specifies that the viewing of adult- oriented graphic film, videotape, or digital display of specified sexual activities or sexual conduct that the Ordinance 11-005 Page 1 of 3 DRAFT establishment sells, when that viewing is in return for money or any other form of consideration, is an adult entertainment establishment use and not an adult retail use; and WHEREAS, the city does not intend to prevent any person or entity from exercising rights protected by the Washington and United States Constitutions; and WHEREAS, the following amendment is necessary to clarify the permissible uses of an adult retail use establishment,to prevent the adverse impacts associated with adult entertainment establishments that allow on- premises viewing for any consideration, and to enact a reasonable time, place or manner regulation that protects the health and safety of the City and its citizens. Such impacts are set forth in the legislative record to Spokane Valley Ordinance 10-006,which is incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, after reviewing the Environmental Checklists, the City issued a Determination of Non- significance (DNS) for the proposal, published the DNS in the Valley News Herald, posted the DNS at City Hall, and mailed the DNS to all affected public agencies; and WHEREAS, the City provided a copy of the proposed amendment to Community Trade and Economic Development(CTED) initiating a 60 day comment period pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106; and WHEREAS, on December 9, 2010,the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received evidence, information, public testimony and a staff report and recommendation at a public hearing on January 13, 2010; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission deliberated on February 10, 2011;the Planning Commission provided a recommendation; and WHEREAS, on February 22, 2011, City Council reviewed the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on March 8, 2011, City Council considered a first ordinance reading to adopt the proposed amendment. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIFICALLY ORDAINS AS SET FORTH BELOW: Section One: Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the definition of "adult retail use establishment" found in Spokane Valley Municipal Code Appendix A in order to be clear that the City does not intend for an adult retail use establishment to allow their patrons to view adult-oriented graphic films, videotapes, or other digital display of specified sexual activities or sexual conduct within their retail use. Section Two: Amendment. Spokane Valley Municipal Code Appendix A definition of "Adult retail use establishment' is hereby amended as set forth below: 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, or viewing of adult-oriented merchandise. The retail use establishment may permit patrons to view the adult-oriented merchandise for possible purchase or rental, but such on-premises viewing shall not be in exchange for money or any other form of consideration. Section Three: Severability. If any section, sentence,clause or phrases of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance. Ordinance 11-005 Page 2 of 3 DRAFT Section Four: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after the publication of the Ordinance, or a summary thereof, occurs in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. Passed by the City Council this day of , 2011. Mayor, Thomas E. Towey ATTEST: City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 11-005 Page 3 of 3 City Council Meeting 2 "a Ordinance Reading March 22, 2011 Text Amendment to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code S``inkan�e "` CITYHALL@SPOICANEV Department of Community Development Planning Division Description of the Code Text Amendment ❑ Amend the definition to clarify that Movie Viewing for a fee is not allowed within an Adult Retail Use Establishment. sta='f Pro-poseol Amendment to Definition ❑ Adult retail use establishment: 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, transferring, of adult-oriented merchandise. The retail use establishment may permit patrons to view the adult-oriented merchandise for possible purchase or rental, but such on-premises viewing shall not be in exchange for money or any other form of consideration. S"pnkan CITY HALL[a�SPOIANE'v Department of Community Development ' lley Planning Division Why_is the Amendment Necessary? Current definition can be interpreted to allow viewing of adult oriented films within a adult retail use establishment. Code Intent To limit the viewing of adult themed films to occur within adult entertainment esta blishments which are appropriately regulated S pnkan� CITYHALL[a�SPOIANEV Department of Community Development Nall Planning Division Cour. - equested Action PREVIOUS ACTIONS: Planning Commission Jan. 1 3-Public Hearing Feb. 8 — Forward to Council 4-3 Vote Adopt Planning Commission Amended Definition City Council Feb. 22 — Study Session Mar. 8 — 1st Reading of Ordinance Council Consensus - Selected Staff Recommended definition amendment ❑ 2"d Reading of Ordinance v Staff Recommendation Approve as proposed CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 22, 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: Motion Consideration: Bid Award — Indiana Ave Extension Project (#0112) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: August 12, 2008, approved motion to submit TIB Grant Application for the Indiana Avenue Extension Project; December 29, 2008, Info Memo on TIB grant award; January 27, 2009, Public Hearing/Approval of Amended 2009 TIP; February 24, 2009, Info RCA re: TIB Grant; March 3, 2009, Admin Report re: TIB Grant; March 10, 2009, Motion to sign TIB grant agreement; April 14, 2009, Approved Amendment #2 —2009 TIP; June 16, 2009, approval of 2010-2015 Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan (Resolution #09- 009) which included the Indiana Extension Project; March 2, 2010, Info RCA, Amended 2010 TIP; March 9, 2010, Admin Report on Amended 2010 TIP; March 23, 2010, Public Hearing on Amended 2010 TIP; April 13, 2010, approved Resolution #10-007 adopting Amended 2010 TIP, March 8, 2011- Staff presentation on Indiana Ave extension. BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane Valley received a grant from the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) Under the grant agreement TIB will fund 80 % of the project cost, up to a maximum of $1,566,850. The project will connect Indiana Ave east of Sullivan Road to the Mission/Flora intersection with a divided parkway including sidewalks, curbs, gutters, bike lanes, and drainage improvements. This project will help alleviate congestion along Broadway Ave and Sullivan Rd by completing a missing link and providing an east-west route immediately north of 1-90. The design and contract documents were prepared by City staff. The project was advertised for bid on February 18, 2011 and bids were opened Friday, March 11, 2011. Eight bidders responded. Spokane Rock Products is the low bidder with a bid of$1,049,282.20. OPTIONS: 1) Award contract to Spokane Rock Products, or 2) Provide additional direction to staff. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to award the bid for the Indiana Avenue Extension Project #0112 to Spokane Rock Products, Inc., in the amount of $1,049,282.20 and to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the construction contract. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The 2011 budget has sufficient funds to provide the local match for this project. STAFF CONTACT: Steve Worley, Senior Capital Projects Engineer Neil Kersten, Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: Bid Tabulation — Indiana Avenue Extension Project#0112 BID TABULATION Indiana Avenue Extension Project Project CIP No.0112 BID OPENING DATE-March 11,2011 10:00 A.M. SpOIid 0 alley Engineer's Estimate 1 SPOKANE ROCK PRODUCTS INLAND ASPHALT POE ASPHALT PAVING,INC. 1 KNIFE RIVER CORPORATION 1 SCHINVELS CONSTRUCTION 1 CONTINENTIAL CONTRACTORS 1 NOM CONSTRUCTION,INC. ISTAN PALNERCONSTUCTION,INC. ITEM NUMBER ECHEDULEA Ro. MOBILIZATION OTAL ITEM Unit IDUANTITvI Unit Pnce I Total Cost UntPnce I TotICo. Unit Pnce TotICo. UntPnce I TotaCon Unit Price I Total Co. Unit Pnce I Total Co. Unit Pnce TotICo. Unit Pnce Total Co. Unit Pnce I Total Co. 1 CONSTRUCTION SURVEYING PROJECT TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL TRENCH EXCAVATION SAFETY SYSTEM EROSION CONTROL SPCC PLAN CLEARING AND GRUBBING REMOVE BOULDER OR DEBRIS REMOVE/ABANDON CATCH BASIN ABANDON DRYWELL REMOVE STORM DRAIN PIPE REMOVE PCC SIDEWALK/DRIVEWAY APPROACH REMOVE PCC CURB AND GUTTER REMOVE ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT ROADWAY EXCAV INCL HAUL EMBANKMENT COMPACTION METHOD CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE,2 IN DEPTH CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE,4 IN DEPTH CRUSHED SURFACING BASE COURSE,4 IN DEPTH SOIL RESIDUAL HERBICIDE HMA CL 1/2"PG 7028,42 FT DEPTH ASPHALT CONCRETE CURB,NPE C JOINT ADHESIVE ANT1-STRIPPING ADDITIVE JOB MIX COMPLIANCE PRICE ADJUSTMENT COMPACTION PRICE ADJUSTMENT CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT,8-1N THICK,INCL DOWELS FURNISHING CONCRETE FOR CEMENT CONCRETE PAVEMENT PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE COMPLIANCE ADJUSTMENT REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF UNSUITABLE MATERIAL CURB INLET NPE 1 CONCRETE INLET NPE 2 GRATE INLET NPE 2 ADJUST EXISTING MANHOLE,CATCHBASIN OR DRYWELL PRECAST CONCRETE DPW/END/PE A PRECAST CONCRETE DPW/END/PE B DUCTILE IRON STORM SEWER PIPE,10 IN D1AM DUCTILE IRON STORM SEWER PIPE,12 D1AM DUCTILE IRON STORM SEWER PIPE,24 IN D1AM STORM DRAIN ENCASEMENT DUCTILE IRON PIPE FOR WATER MAIN,12 D1AM IMPORTED PIPE BEDDING CONNECTION TO EXISTING MANHOLE ADJUST WATER VALVE BOX ADJUST WATER METER BOX 1 IN D1AM WATER SERVICE PIPE CEMENT CONCRETE CURB AND 18"GUTTER CEMENT CONCRETE TRAFFIC CURB AND 12"GUTTER DRIVEWAY APPROACH PEDESTRIAN CURB TYPE"S"CURB FIRE CURB CEMENT CONCRETE SIDEWALK ROUNDABOUT TRUCK APRON CEMENT CONCRETE CURB ROUNDABOUT CENTQN ISZaND CEMENT CONCRETE CURB DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE IN PCC DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE IN JIMA SEEDING,FERTILIZING AND MULCHING TOPSOIL,TYPE A BARK MULCH SOD INSTALLATION SEEDED LAWN INSTALLATION POROUS PAVING SWALE IRRIGATION SYSTEM IRRIGATION SYSTEM REVISIONS PLANT SELECTION-UTAH SERVICEBERRY PLANT SELECTION-WOODS ROSE PLANT SELECTION-MOCK ORANGE SEGMENTAL CONCRETE RETAINING WALL REMOVE AND REINSTALL VINYL FENCING TEMPORARY FENCE BOLLARD TYPE 2 CONDUIT PIPE 31N,D1AM MONUMENT CASE AND COVER QUARRY SPALLS MAILBOX SUPPORT,NPE 1 PERMANENT SIGNING BULLNOSE MARKER DELINEATOR AND COREHOLE TEMPORARY PAVEMENT MARKING PAINT LINE PLASTIC UNE WIDE PLASTIC UNE PLASTIC CROSSWALK LINE PLASTIC STOP UNE PLASTIC TRAFFIC ARROW PLASTIC BICYCLE SYMBOL PAINTED YIELD LINE SYMBOL LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS EA EA SY SY CY CY SY SY SY SY SY CALC CALC CALC SY CY CALC CY EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA EA SY SY SY SF SF SY SY SY SY SY SF EA EA EA EA EA SF EA EA SY EA LS EA EA SF EA EA EA $170,000 00 $15000 00 $500000 $1,000 00 $500000 $500 00 $500000 $5,00000 CALC CALC CALC CALC $500 00 $500 00 012 00 $8 00 $3 00 $052 $200 $12 BB $12 00 $300 8600 $500 80 15 $27 00 $300 $200 $3000 $12008 $2000 $500 00 $1,50000 $1,75000 $200000 $200000 010000 $300000 $200000 $4000 $5000 000 00 $5000 010000 $1200 $1,50000 $3000 0700 00 0700 00 $1500 $1200 01000 $3000 $1500 $1500 $1500 $2500 $25 00 $25 00 $25 00 $38 00 $5000 8025 $1 50 $300 $500 $500 $39 00 $5,00000 $1,00000 $5000 $5000 $5000 $22 00 $5000 $500 $25000 $500 $1,00000 $5000 $25000 $500000 0400 00 $180 00 8050 01 10 0 10 0 10 0 10 $1200 $56 50 015000 $25 00 $170,000 00 $15000 00 $400000 $1,000 00 $400000 $500 00 $400000 $400000 $500 00 $500 00 $370 00 $2240 00 04780 00 873500 01006000 0154,80000 013020000 $51,00000 $27,000 00 $87,850 00 $0520 00 0450600 00 $7,500 00 0710 00 $400000 $100 0100 01020000 $1440000 $100 0200000 $1,00000 $1500000 $7,000 00 $8,000 00 $400000 $1,20000 $9,000 00 $6,000 00 $38,800 00 $38,000 00 $5160 00 $5,75000 $28,000 00 $3,660 00 $4,50000 $9,150 00 $100000 0600 00 $8700 00 $9,480 00 $47,500 00 $14400 00 $45000 060000 $210000 $84,375 00 $7,12500 $3,12500 010500 00 $5168 00 $400000 $400000 $4,59750 $1,770 00 0,00000 0200000 $1228500 $1400000 04,00000 $500 00 $500 00 $50000 040 80 00 0200000 $25000 $25000 $1,36000 $1,00000 05250 00 $500 00 $400000 $240000 $3,250 00 $1,50000 $3,520 00 0440000 0445500 8286 00 042000 828950 $1,05000 $17500 ssm LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS $17500 $45000 $10 00 $4 00 $3 00 $050 $350 $700 $200 $200 $2 25 8320 80 12 $1825 $1 35 8220 CALC CALC CALC $28 00 $58 00 CALC $14 00 865 00 0800 00 $750 00 $1,70000 0500 00 $35000 $1,20000 $1,50000 $27 00 $3000 $5000 $24 00 $38 00 $225 $35000 825 00 $22000 $50000 8500 00 50 87 90 $2550 $14 00 $14 00 $1250 $2000 $1500 $1800 830 15 $1860 $38 00 8041 82 33 82 35 83 87 80 41 09 11 $3,750 00 $350 00 817 00 817 00 813 00 821 55 867 00 819 92 0880 00 $12 00 $250 00 824 00 8211 00 Ls $270 00 080 es 00 so 80 26 81 25 82 65 86 35 810 25 8113 00 853 75 826 75 $47,000 00 $11,800 00 $11,820 00 $1,500 00 $6,500 00 $650 00 86,526 00 $6,500 00 8175 00 $450 00 $370 00 $1,120 00 83,780 00 8735 00 $22,855 00 $90,300 00 $22,700 00 $64,000 00 $10,125 00 $56,224 00 82,016 00 $306,600 00 83,375 00 8781 00 $4,000 00 01 oo 01 oo $15,120 00 $11,760 00 01 oo $1,400 00 $130 00 08,000 00 $3,000 00 00,800 00 $1,800 00 $4,200 00 $3,600 00 $4,500 00 $26,190 00 $22,800 00 $4,300 00 82,760 00 $10,640 00 8686 25 08,515 oo $1,320 00 $1,000 00 $2,700 00 87,505 00 $37,525 00 $12,240 00 $420 00 $560 00 $1,750 00 $67,500 00 $4,275 00 82,250 00 $23,517 00 82,529 60 $3,940 00 $8,200 00 $7 141 45 $1,386 50 86,966 00 8246 00 $2,869 65 $11,250 00 $1,400 00 $170 00 $170 00 $130 00 $4,094 50 82,680 00 8996 00 0880 00 83,264 00 $250 00 82,520 00 8422 00 $11,710 00 $1,620 00 82 021 50 8832 00 $5,000 00 $10,732 50 $1 651 00 8358 75 8339 00 8376 25 8187 25 LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS $155 00 8515 00 812 40 01 80 80 52 80 95 82 05 86 10 82 20 85 20 83 24 80 15 818 10 81 75 83 55 CALC CALC CALC $30 00 0118 00 CALC 814 40 873 00 $700 00 $770 00 81,470 00 $1,625 00 $230 00 82,580 00 $3,100 re $30 00 835 00 872 00 041 00 851 00 89 45 $750 00 828 eo $230 re $185 re 84 30 87 20 87 20 $30 00 $10 30 01 00 87 20 822 eo 817 40 818 75 831 00 818 50 828 50 80 46 82 35 82 40 83 50 80 75 88 20 $5,900 00 8395 00 824 50 824 50 824 50 $47 00 869 00 $20 so 0soo 00 $10 30 0305 oo 825 50 8215 00 Ls 8275 00 883 00 80 25 80 27 81 25 82 70 86 50 $10 50 011 00 855 00 827 50 $71,000 00 $12,500 00 $12,500 00 8285 00 87 200 00 $500 re 89 300 00 81 640 00 8155 00 $515 re $458 eo $594 oo 8655 20 81 396 50 $13,386 50 $78,690 00 $17,479 00 $37,400 00 $23,400 00 $56,926 80 82 520 00 $304,080 00 84 375 00 81 260 25 01 re 01 re $16,200 00 $14,160 00 01 re 81 440 00 8146 00 05 080 00 05 88o 00 83 250 00 82 760 00 87 740 00 89 300 00 $29,100 00 $26,600 00 86 192 00 84 715 00 $14,280 00 82 882 25 82 250 00 $1,380 00 $370 00 $2,322 00 05 see oo $34,200 00 $14,400 00 $309 oo $760 re $76,950 00 84 959 00 82 343 75 $24,180 00 82 516 00 82 280 00 89 200 00 87 202 75 81 416 00 $6,300 re $450 00 82,583 00 $17,700 00 81 580 00 8245 00 8245 00 8245 00 88,930 00 82 760 00 81 030 00 0soo 00 $2 801 60 0305 oo $2,677 50 $430 00 $12,000 00 81 650 00 82 075 00 $750 re 88.00 $10,935 00 01 sso 00 8367 50 8348 00 8385 00 8192 50 $1 100 81290 LS LS LS LS LS LS Ls Ls $306 oo $306 oo 87 14 08 Is 81 02 82 63 818 39 81 25 83 57 CALC CALC CALC 824 48 8117 30 CALC 825 50 851 00 8102 00 8765 00 $1,785 00 $1,989 00 8255 00 $2,346 00 $2,652 00 828 56 833 66 881 60 83 06 80244 00 040 eo 8178 50 $294 oo 87 14 87 13 87 13 827 54 810 20 812 24 87 14 820 15 815 30 815 30 $30 so 818 36 040 eo 80 46 82 35 82 39 83 52 80 74 88 12 $5,842 56 8392 70 824 48 824 48 824 48 822 01 874 46 822 13 8897 60 810 20 $306 oo 816 32 8215 22 Ls 8275 40 882 48 80 85 80 27 81 24 82 67 06 44 $10 44 8115 18 854 81 827 27 $90,856 09 $14,800 00 $32,640 00 $2,040 00 $11,220 00 $294 oo $19,380 00 $6,120 00 $306 oo $306 oo 82.18 02250 eo $3,213 00 $1 499 40 $19,851 20 880495 00 $24,480 00 $26,775 00 $46,209 10 $2,688 00 $308,952 00 $3,125 00 $1,267 35 $4,000 00 01 oo 01 oo $13,219 20 $14,076 00 01 oo $2,550 00 8102 00 $1,020 00 $3,060 00 $7,140 00 $3,978 00 $3,060 00 $7,038 00 $7,956 00 $27,703 20 $25,581 60 $7,017 60 01,926 60 8933 30 $6,732 00 $12444 00 $1 071 00 $408 00 83,855 60 $5,632 70 $33,867 50 $13,219 20 $306 oo $489 60 8999 60 068,006 25 01,360 50 $1,912 50 $23,868 00 $2,496 96 83264 00 $9,200 00 $7,202 75 $1,410 10 $6,336 00 $444 00 $2,557 80 $17027 68 $1,570 80 8244 eo 8244 eo 8244 eo $4 181 so $2 978 40 $1,106 50 8897 60 $2 774 40 $306 oo $1,713 60 $430 44 011044 20 $1 652 40 $2,062 00 $2,550 00 88.00 01,960 00 $10,813 50 $1 674 40 8365 40 8345 54 8383 67 01so es LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS $300 00 $300 00 87 00 08 00 82 50 80 30 81 50 86 00 82 00 82 50 83 75 84 00 80 15 821 50 82 50 83 50 CALC CALC CALC 829 00 8125 00 CALC 825 00 854 00 $1,000 00 $1,000 00 $1,750 00 $1,950 00 $250 00 $2,300 00 $2,600 00 828 00 833 00 080 00 $42 00 $47 00 83 00 $2,200 00 $40 00 $175 00 $200 00 87 00 89 00 88 50 833 50 816 00 818 00 812 75 825 00 018 00 018 00 837 00 01 00 $40 00 80 40 83 00 82 50 80 40 86 50 $4,000 00 $350 00 818 00 818 00 813 00 821 00 $12 00 88 50 $400 00 010 00 $700 00 01 00 8295 00 Ls $230 00 080 00 80 30 80 20 81 25 82 75 86 50 010 00 895 00 010o 00 $40 00 $50,000 00 $11,800 00 85,500 00 $2,000 00 88,300 00 $500 00 $19,000 00 00,000 00 $300 00 $300 00 8259 00 82,240 00 83,150 00 $041 oo 89,795 00 $77,400 00 $22,700 00 $42,500 00 $16,875 00 $70,280 00 82,520 00 $361,200 00 86,250 00 $1,242 50 $4,000 00 01 oo 01 oo $15,660 00 $15,000 00 01 00 $2,500 00 0108 00 $10,000 00 $4,000 00 $7,000 00 $3,900 00 $3,000 00 00,00o 00 $7,800 00 $27,160 00 $25,080 00 86,880 00 $4,830 00 $13,160 00 8915 00 00,000 00 $12,200 00 $1,050 00 $400 00 83,780 00 $7,110 00 $40,375 00 $16,080 00 $480 00 $720 00 880375 00 85,130 00 82,250 00 028,860 00 82,584 00 $3,200 00 08,00o 00 89,195 00 $1,475 00 $7,200 00 $240 00 82,947 50 $12,000 00 $1,400 00 018o 00 018o 00 $130 00 83,990 00 $480 00 8425 00 $400 00 82,720 00 $700 00 $1,680 00 $590 00 $11,500 00 $1,380 00 $2,000 00 0soo 00 8.0 00 05,00o 00 $11,137 50 $1,690 00 $350 00 8285 00 $700 00 $280 00 Ls Ls Ls Ls Ls Ls Ls Ls $402 00 $402 00 811 22 86 41 80 48 82 35 815 62 83 50 82 40 85 70 83 60 80 12 819 00 82 00 CALC CALC CALC 826 40 8126 50 CALC 821 63 855 00 $1 421 61 $1,035 00 $1,828 98 $1 593 45 $441 06 $1,928 70 $2,466 12 833 54 841 45 080 74 837 94 863 44 82 79 $488 25 856 65 8207 75 8376 50 813 27 87 69 87 69 829 70 $11 00 813 20 87 70 821 73 816 50 816 50 833 00 819 80 838 50 80 47 82 71 82 72 83 76 80 79 88 20 $4,583 33 0sso 00 822 00 822 00 822 00 $20 so 873 70 821 91 $440 00 89 24 8348 00 837 88 8263 25 Ls 8297 00 888 97 80 57 80 29 82 88 811 28 8124 30 859 24 829 54 $57,000 00 $17,600 00 86,902 50 $480 re 08,80o 00 $480 00 $20,000 00 899 00 0402 oo 0402 oo 8415 14 $1,794 80 85,292 00 $705 so $15,015 50 $201,498 00 $39,725 00 $40,800 00 $25,650 00 $63,252 00 $2,016 00 $319,200 00 05,00o 00 81,420 00 $4,000 re $14,256 00 $15,180 00 82,163 00 0110 00 $14,216 10 $4,140 00 87,315 92 83,186 90 85,292 72 85,786 10 87,398 36 $32,533 80 $31,502 00 80.3 64 84,259 60 $17,763 20 8850 95 81,464 75 $17,278 25 81,246 50 8753 00 87,165 eo 86,075 10 $36,527 50 $14,256 00 $330 00 8528 00 $1,078 00 $73,338 75 $4,702 50 82,062 50 $25,740 00 82,692 eo $3,080 re $9,400 re 88,306 15 $1,604 80 86,768 00 8474 00 82,583 00 $13,749 99 83,960 00 $220 00 $220 00 $220 00 83 971 00 82,948 00 81,095 50 8440 00 82,513 28 8.8 00 83,977 40 8526 50 $12,881 00 81,782 00 82,224 25 $1,710 re 8928 00 85,360 00 $11,664 00 $1,804 40 8394 eo 8372 90 8414 se 8206 78 Ls Ls Ls Ls Ls Ls Ls Ls 8375 00 8937 50 010 00 87 64 86 58 80 38 82 50 87 45 84 10 81 45 86 00 82 79 80 16 820 40 81 25 83 55 CALC CALC CALC 826 67 8127 78 CALC $40 00 855 56 $1,940 re 81,250 00 82,730 00 81,766 25 080o 00 82,443 75 $3,200 re $42 00 048 re 0so 00 0101 00 864 00 85 38 $1,500 re 832 00 8185 00 8255 00 810 45 87 77 87 77 834 70 813 33 87 78 828 14 $20 11 $20 11 838 03 $20 re $42 00 80 67 82 73 84 94 81 23 89 10 $6,200 re 8633 33 832 00 832 00 832 00 824 00 835 00 $20 re $700 re 84 63 8875 00 88 75 8310 00 LS $350 re $150 re 80 58 80 21 81 33 83 06 86 94 810 56 0110 00 $112 re 045 re $88,125 00 $31,250 00 87 500 00 8625 00 $13,750 00 $500 re $19,642 00 88,250 00 8375 00 8937 50 $370 re 82,139 20 88,290 eo 8558 60 $16,325 00 $96,105 00 $46,535 00 $24,650 00 $27,000 00 $49,020 30 82,688 00 $342,720 00 83,125 00 81,260 25 $4,000 re $14,401 80 $15,333 60 $4,000 re 8111 12 $10,400 00 $5,000 re $10,920 00 83,532 50 00,500 00 87 331 25 $9 soo 00 $40,740 00 $36,480 00 87,740 00 $11,615 00 $17,920 00 81,640 90 $4,500 re 89 760 00 01 110 00 $510 re 85 643 00 86,138 30 $36,907 50 $16,656 00 8333 30 8533 20 81,089 20 $94,972 50 85 731 35 82 513 75 $29,663 40 82 720 00 83 360 00 $13,400 00 88,367 45 $590 re 88,892 00 8738 00 82,866 50 $18,600 00 82,533 32 $320 re $320 re $320 re 84,560 00 $1,400 re 01,000 00 $700 re 81 259 36 8875 00 8918 75 $620 re $13,000 00 82,100 00 83,750 00 81,740 00 8672 00 85,320 00 $12,393 00 81,894 40 8369 60 $330 re 87.00 $315 re LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS $300 00 $420 00 815 00 81 25 80 25 81 85 010 00 86 25 82 85 80 18 819 90 81 30 83 75 CALC CALC CALC 826 00 8125 00 CALC $30 re 856 00 81 400 00 $1,500 00 $2,600 00 $2,300 00 $300 re $2,500 00 $3,000 00 844 00 845 00 857 00 824 00 854 00 82 50 $1,000 00 856 00 8175 00 $400 00 815 00 87 70 87 70 838 00 $11 re $13 re 87 40 825 00 01s 00 816 00 833 00 $20 00 $20 00 80 45 82 60 82 60 80 45 010 00 84 500 00 $750 00 010 00 010 00 814 65 826 00 828 00 821 00 0soo 00 815 00 $700 00 856 00 8235 00 LS $300 re 891 00 80 20 80 30 81 40 82 95 87 00 811 30 8125 00 050 00 $30 re $45,000 00 $20,000 00 $16000 00 $3,500 00 510000 00 $1,400 00 $2,500 00 515000 00 $300 00 $420 00 8555 00 $1,120 00 $1,575 00 8367 50 $12,080 50 $245,100 00 $11,350 00 $27,200 00 $28,125 00 $50,074 50 $3,024 00 $334,320 00 $3,250 00 $1 331 25 $4,000 00 $14,040 00 $15,000 00 $3,000 00 8112 00 $14000 00 $6,000 00 01,600 00 $3,600 00 $7,500 00 $9,000 00 $42,680 00 801,200 00 $4,902 00 $2,760 00 $15,120 00 8762 50 $3,000 00 517080 00 $1,050 00 080o 00 $8,100 00 $6,083 00 $36,575 00 $18,240 00 $330 00 $520 00 $1,036 00 880375 00 01,560 00 $2,000 00 $25,740 00 $2,720 00 $1,600 00 $9,000 00 $7,969 00 $1,564 oo $7,200 00 $270 00 $3,150 00 $13000 00 $3,000 00 01so 00 01so 00 8146 50 $4,940 00 $1,120 00 $1,050 00 0soo 00 01,080 00 $700 00 85,880 00 $470 00 $13,201 00 $1,800 00 $2,275 00 mu 00 0sso 00 55,600 00 $11,947 50 $1,820 00 8395 50 8375 00 $420 00 $210 00 Ls Ls Ls Ls Ls Ls Ls Ls $330 00 $350 00 89 00 80 20 810 50 82 50 82 50 86 00 83 70 80 25 $20 00 82 00 83 50 CALC CALC CALC 828 00 $120 00 CALC 817 00 080o 00 $1,600 00 $1,700 00 $1,100 00 $250 00 $1,300 00 $1,600 00 839 00 856 00 875 00 $43 00 045 00 86 00 $300 00 825 00 $140 00 $140 00 $11 00 010 00 010 00 835 00 813 00 815 00 $11 00 828 00 01 00 01 00 833 00 01 00 $42 00 80 50 83 00 83 00 83 50 815 00 05,000 00 $1,000 00 822 00 822 00 822 00 825 00 $70 00 86 00 8425 00 814 00 $500 00 834 00 $300 00 Ls 8325 00 $140 00 80 50 80 20 81 30 82 00 87 00 010 00 895 00 0105 00 $42 00 $125 000 00 $16,000 00 $30,000 00 $1,200 re $7,000 re 01,000 00 $7,500 re $5,000 re $330 re $350 re 8296 00 82,520 00 85,940 00 8294 00 $26,120 00 $135,450 00 $28,375 00 $42,500 00 $27,000 00 $65,009 00 $4,200 re $336,000 00 $5,000 re 81,242 50 $4,000 re $15,120 00 $14,400 00 $1,700 re 01,soo 00 $10,000 00 $6,400 re 05,800 00 $2,200 re $3,000 re $3,900 re $4,800 re $37,830 00 012,560 00 86,450 00 84,945 00 $12,600 00 81,830 00 0soo 00 87,625 00 $840 re $280 re 85 940 00 $7,900 re $47,500 00 $16,800 00 $390 re me 00 01,500 00 $94,500 00 85,415 00 82,375 00 $25,740 00 83,360 00 $10,000 00 89,195 00 81,770 00 $6,300 re me 00 84,725 00 $18,000 00 $4,000 re $220 re $220 re $220 re 84,750 00 $2,800 re $300 re $425 00 83,808 00 $500 re 83 570 00 mu 00 $12,500 00 81,950 00 $3,500 re $1,500 re $640 oo $5,200 re 08,100 00 81,820 00 $350 re 8285 00 8735 00 8294 00 $10,500 mullplIcat on Era 088 -$0 10 racking Total Error Contractor BM Amount$1,300068 81 010400 mullplIcaton ErTor B22 $616 Arldos Total Error Contractor BM Amount$1,384,946 50 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 3-22-11 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration - Appleway Court 202 License to maintain portion of landscaping swale GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Study session March 8, 2011. BACKGROUND: Appleway Court 202 contacted the City requesting permission to landscape and maintain the swale area between their building and the sidewalk along Appleway. The landscaping would consist of irrigated grass (lawn) that would extend along the north side of the parcel starting at the corner of Farr Road and go eastward to their property line. (See Attachment 2 — Map of Affected Area) Two inches of top soil and hydroseed would be brought in and there would be some underground sprinkler piping to provide irrigation. The swale area to be affected measures approximately 50 feet by 327 feet. In the event the Council is in agreement with Appleway Court 202's proposal, Staff has identified granting a License to be appropriate to grant Appleway Court permission to landscape and maintain this turf area. A License to use property is essentially written permission to use it. The License would run for a period of 20 years and is revocable by the City. The Stormwater Department finds granting a License to be compatible with their needs. OPTIONS: (1) Request changes or further information; (2) Grant License; (3) Do nothing. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move that we approve the License Agreement to Appleway Court 202, and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute any necessary documents related thereto. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, Acting City Attorney and Scott Kuhta, Planning Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. License Agreement 2. Map of Affected Area RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City Clerk City of Spokane Valley 11707 East Sprague, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDING ONLY Document Title: License Grantor(s): City of Spokane Valley, a Municipal Corporation Grantee: Appleway Court 202 2903 E. 25th Avenue Spokane, WA 99203 Legal Description: (CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY) OPPORTUNITY W1/2 BLK 242 EXC S291FT& EXC RR R/W& EXC RD R/W Additional Legal Description: 13 Five-Plus Unit Assessor's Tax Parcel Number: 45202.0818 Reference Number: N/A LICENSE AGREEMENT For mutually valuable consideration accruing to both parties, the City of Spokane Valley ("Grantor") hereby grants to Appleway Court 202 ("Grantee"), and his successors, a License to use the City property ("Premises") described in SECTION 1, below. License Agreement City of Spokane Valley,Washington Page 1 SECTION 1 —DESCRIPTION The Premises subject to this License lies immediately north of the northern property line of parcel 45202.0818 and south of Appleway Boulevard, measuring approximately 50 feet by 327 feet, including the southern 50 feet of the right-of-way adjacent to the northern boundary line of parcel 45202.0818. SECTION 2 -PURPOSE The City hereby grants to Grantee a License to use the Premises for the purpose of maintaining and placement of landscaping, vegetation, and irrigation related to Grantee's residential structure. SECTION 3 - TERM This License shall commence an initial term on December 1, 2010, shall run for a period of 20 years, and is subject to the rights of any other person or entity with an interest in the subject property, including utility providers. Thereafter, the term of this License shall automatically renew for one additional period of 20 years with the same conditions as the initial term and any subsequent modifications by the Grantor pursuant to SECTION 6 below. SECTION 4 - SCOPE (A) The Grantee shall only utilize and access the property for landscaping and related uses. Grantee shall be solely responsible for all maintenance and repair of improvements Grantee places on the property. In the event Grantee does not use the property for this stated purpose for more than one year, the License shall become null and void and cease to be an encumbrance upon the real property. (B) The Grantee shall use the Premises in a manner that does not violate (i) any applicable laws and regulations of all state, federal, municipal and local governments, departments, commissions and boards, whether now existing or hereafter arising, and any applicable orders, rules and regulations of any fire department or any similar body or (ii) the terms of this License and any applicable rules and regulations promulgated by the Grantor. SECTION 5 —LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION Grantee shall indemnify and hold Grantor, its officers, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, orders, decrees or judgments for injuries, death or damage to any person or property arising or resulting from a negligent act or omission License Agreement City of Spokane Valley,Washington Page 2 on the part of Grantee or its agents, employees or volunteers in the use of this License. In the event that any suit based upon such a claim, action, loss, or damage is brought against its officers, agents or employees, Grantee shall defend the same at its sole cost and expense; and if final judgment be rendered is rendered against Grantor, that party or its officers, agents or employees, then Grantee shall satisfy the same. SECTION 6 —MODIFICATION No modification of the License can be made without prior written approval of the Grantor. Upon such an event, Grantee will be given reasonable notice of the modification and a reasonable time to comply with the new terms and/or provide Grantor with written notice of termination pursuant to SECTION 7, below. SECTION 7 —TERMINATION Either Grantor or Grantee may terminate this License upon not less than thirty (30) days prior written notice to the other party, which notice may be given at any time. Such notice shall be addressed to the other party as they appear in this License, or their successor(s)in interest. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor hereto has caused their duly authorized representatives to execute this instrument as of the date hereinafter written. DATED this day of , 2010. License Agreement City of Spokane Valley,Washington Page 3 GRANTOR: City of Spokane Valley, By: Name: Title: GRANTEE: ACCEPTANCE OF LICENSE Appleway Court 202 2903 E. 25th Avenue Spokane, WA 99203 509-536-6845 Signature By: Title and entity signing on behalf of STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. County of Spokane ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is the individual who appeared before me, and said individual acknowledged that he signed this instrument, and acknowledged it as his free and voluntary act, for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. DATED this day of , 2010. Notary Public for the State of Washington Residing at My commission expires License Agreement City of Spokane Valley,Washington Page 4 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 03-22-11 City Manager Sign-off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Applicant Interviews for Vacant Council position 143 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 35A.13.020, RCW 42.12.070 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: As a result of Councilmember Dempsey's resignation, staff drafted a position vacancy announcement which was published for several weeks; and Council approved a Council Vacancy Policy that states in part: 3. Interview Selection Process: a. At 5:00 p.m. March 22, 2011, the City Council will meet and adjourn to executive session (closed session)to review and discuss all of the applications. b. At 6:00 p.m. March 22, 2011, the City Council will meet in 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. Date of Interviews: The interviews will be conducted March 29, 2011, during the open council session. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: For each nomination: `I nominate to be included as a candidate to interview March 29, 2011 for vacant Council Position#3." A motion to close the nominations is appropriate. STAFF/COUNCIL CONTACT: Mayor Towey ATTACHMENTS: 1) Amended Procedure for Filling Council Vacancy 2) RCW 42.12.070 3) Submitted Applications for Council Vacancy: 1. Baldwin, John 6. Neill, Steven 2. Collins, Joseph 7. Watson, George 3. Cordero, Clyde 8. Wick, Ben 4. Lippincott, Ronald 9. Willardson, Jennie 5. Loberg, DeeDee 10. Woodard, Arne AMENDED SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL PROCEDURE FOR FILLING A COUNCIL VACANCY A. Timeline/Procedure: 1. Placing the Ad: 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 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. Application Deadline: All applications shall be received by the City Clerk no later than 4:00 p.m. on March 4,2011, 3. Interview Selection Process: a. At 5:00 p.m. March 22, 2011, the City Council will meet and adjourn to executive session (closed session)to review and discuss all of the applications. b. At 6:00 p.m. March 22, 2011, the City Council will meet in 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. Date of Interviews: The interviews will be conducted March 29, 2011, during the open council session. 5. Discussion of Applicants: At 5:00 p.m. April 5, 2011, the City Council will meet and adjourn to executive session(closed session)to discuss qualifications of the applicants. 6. Appointment: At 6:00 p.m. April 5, 2011, during its regular open session, Council will discuss applicant interviews and vote 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, 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. If such motion passes, applications will be accepted effective immediately. 4. Draft interview questions will be provided to City Council to discuss and finalize at the March 1, 2011 Council Meeting. 5. hollowing the March 22, 2011 Council meeting, the City Clerk will send the entire list of questions to each candidate to be interviewed. Page I of 2 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, C. Voting Process to Appoint Interim Councilmember: I. 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. If a candidate receives a majority of votes, that candidate is the Interim Councilmember. 4. If no applicant receives a majority of votes from the City Council, then the three applicants receiving the rnost affirmative votes would be considered in a second round. In the possible case of a vote resulting in one applicant gaining the most votes (but not a majority of votes of all councihnembers), and a three-way tie of three other candidates, Council will proceed with a second vote. 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. 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 councilrnember will be officially seated as a City Council member. Page 2 of 2 RCW 42.12.070: Filling nonpartisan vacancies. Page 1 of 1 RCW 42.12.070 Filling nonpartisan vacancies. A vacancy on an elected nonpartisan governing body of a special purpose district where property ownership is not a qualification to vote, a town,or a city other than a first-class city or a charter code city, shall be filled as follows unless the provisions of law relating to the special district,town,or city provide otherwise: (1)Where one position is vacant,the remaining members of the governing body shall appoint a qualified person to fill the vacant position. (2)Where two or more positions are vacant and two or more members of the governing body remain in office,the remaining members of the governing body shall appoint a qualified person to fill one of the vacant positions,the remaining members of the governing body and the newly appointed person shall appoint another qualified person to fill another vacant position,and so on until each of the vacant positions is filled with each of the new appointees participating in each appointment that is made after his or her appointment. (3) If less than two members of a governing body remain in office,the county legislative authority of the county in which all or the largest geographic portion of the city,town,or special district is located shall appoint a qualified person or persons to the governing body until the governing body has two members. (4) If a governing body fails to appoint a qualified person to fill a vacancy within ninety days of the occurrence of the vacancy, the authority of the governing body to fill the vacancy shall cease and the county legislative authority of the county in which all or the largest geographic portion of the city, town,or special district is located shall appoint a qualified person to fill the vacancy. (5) If the county legislative authority of the county fails to appoint a qualified person within one hundred eighty days of the occurrence of the vacancy,the county legislative authority or the remaining members of the governing body of the city,town, or special district may petition the governor to appoint a qualified person to fill the vacancy.The governor may appoint a qualified person to fill the vacancy after being petitioned if at the time the governor fills the vacancy the county legislative authority has not appointed a qualified person to fill the vacancy. (6)As provided in `RCW 29.15.190 and 29.21.410, each person who is appointed shall serve until a qualified person is elected at the next election at which a member of the governing body normally would be elected that occurs twenty-eight or more days after the occurrence of the vacancy. If needed, special filing periods shall be authorized as provided in `RCW 29.15.170 and 29.15.180 for qualified persons to file for the vacant office.A primary shall be held to nominate candidates if sufficient time exists to hold a primary and more than two candidates file for the vacant office. Otherwise,a primary shall not be held and the person receiving the greatest number of votes shall be elected.The person elected shall take office immediately and serve the remainder of the unexpired term. If an election for the position that became vacant would otherwise have been held at this general election date,only one election to fill the position shall be held and the person elected to fill the succeeding term for that position shall take office immediately when qualified as defined in*RCW 29.01.135 and shall service both the remainder of the unexpired term and the succeeding term. [1994 c 223§1.) Notes: Reviser's note: RCW 29.15.190, 29.21.410, 29.15.170, 29.15.180, and 29.01.135 were recodified as RCW 29A.24.190, 29A.52.240, 29A.24.170, 29A.24.180, and 29A.04.133, respectively, pursuant to 2003 c 111 §2401, effective July 1, 2004. RCW 29A.24.170, 29A.24.180, and 29A.24.190 were subsequently repealed by 2004 c 271 § 193. Later enactment of RCW 29A.24.170, 29A.24.180, and 29A.24.190, see RCW 29A.24.171, 29A.24.181, and 29A.24.191, respectively. http://apps.leg.wa.govlrcw/defauit.aspx?cite=42.12.070 03/14/2011 Siokane Valley 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: /Q 1- O IA,i i 3TM (Last) (Middle) (First) Complete Hoene Mailing Address: II cj O $ ) 02 1 K.))) f) 1/1:::-, S 1°O 1°-(/ ''E. ,' ��-. .i '1 1 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 f S ai\r( O E Via 1-.1-.+: (11 1 Q A 89,206 Home Phone: (56 9) Cf ( O L/ 1 1 Fax: ( ) Business Phone: ( ) Cell: (6t? .7 0 / 7 S`3 ;1, E-mail: ,.30 PO 14.0` GI',$ H U O Lc,144 Occupation: (if retired,please indicate former occupation) Business Address: Educational Background: H I (9 00(. I L1 r i' c' c^ L[.,t-=- 1.Registered voter in the City of Spokane Valley? Yes [ Xi] No [ 1 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 ['v] No [ ] 3. Have you ever been convicted for anything other than a minor traffic violation? Yes [ 1 No [V] 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 [ 1 No [ X] 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 [y] If yes, please explain: it 7. Would your appointment create a conflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest?Yes [ 1 No [ If yes,please explain: 8. Please list your employment for the past ten years: NAME OF EMPLOYER POSITION HELD DATES OF EMPLOYMENT tt 5 E 5r 1 r—ra_ �,1 i r� 9. Please list the professional affiliations, clubs, social, or fraternal organizations to which you belong or hold office: UN/tG1 -12s r r�VriV c-= cyr to7vre.. 10.Please list your special skills and/or interests: i3 - W.S ) 5` C r r i C.I C:6 11. Please list your volunteer experience, and include any volunteer or paid positions held on any governmental board,committee or commission: c 4P L FROM:2 Ci 1 TO: c -CSC) 7 lu i V E r i f L( c.cr CE FROM: ad 1 0 TO: O 1 G-.. L K FROM: TO: FROM: TO: 12. Why are you interested in serving in this interim position as a Spokane Valley City Councilmember? Z: t, Gc iA j s L tu 5 Tr2 c t)U s t,' 0 pea- T`E= r . c) C i rc.i Oki a i ca V S P o`Czx""r 67-1 L ) if - �l c .i ()c O r vE6 lk) rt i 1 r i k(rte.y i r s i u o r i` r' _ .01 iU C f IV k kJ (- 1-14 X c . .i' ir L rtuou ...) vo if 13. What are the three highest priorities you believe the City needs to address? How would you propose to address these issues? R 0 to 0- /1 P L Lk)A l ti, r/+ wt A u 41=1/4 erozi aO t ry G 7r� r '174 C r2 wA- /4- E C--0 a G- , u T" 0.4 O Li 'r To n 4 a (AL( 'M t.\ (..mr\t\_) G 0 L Rc, ra 1 E 1/r t:. t: k-"j i e r3V 1)_.C2v/J d�t~ C0 l2C - S. :3 1")..3 tl i L, f t 0-- c != L i� �1 i� S T i�I,V k, PLO 5 5�J G, E 1+ L{ p67 Iv ( f !! ...C,u 14. Have you ever attended a meeting of the Spokane Valley City Council? Yes [ `] No [ j If yes,give an estimate of how many meetings you have attended in the past year: 0 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, comtnittees and boards. Are you able to commit your time and energy to participate fully as a member of the Spokane Valley City Council. Yes [X] No [ ] 16. References: Please list name, address and phone number: 1. fy TrJ4C/-&'1) 2. 3. 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 offi e or employment within the Spokane Valley City government. 4 Signatttte: � Today's Date: 1J John Baldwin 11905 E 22❑d Ave Spokane Valley, WA 99206 509-926-0419 509-701-7832 Qualifications Security Officer, 2007 -2010 Responsible for providing security for Honeywell Plant, Spokane Valley, WA, for subcontractor, GS 4 Wackenhut& Securitas. Duties were outside fence perimeter checks, inside building checks. Aided Honeywell employees at security desks with problems that arose,Issued badges for temporary manpower and full time employees,visitors, and contractors. Checked on the welfare of employees hourly that were working alone in various parts of the plant. Inside Building checks consisted of making sure all unoccupied offices were locked and secured. Assisted HSE when requested, such as various duties involving changing tanks in wastewater treatment plant when no employees were on duty. Assisted Honeywell Evacuation team in plant Evacuation drills. Emptied all shed bins in plant weekly for delivery to United Data Security. Checked all sumps, machinery, etc when there were no employees on site. Checked all fire extinguishers in the plant monthly. Notified plant maintenance when various incidents or problems occurred inside and outside plant. Established a weekend on call list of Honeywell employees for weekend security officers. Cert Program Coordinator, 2001 -2007, Spokane County Sheriff's Office Responsible for providing disaster training for volunteers & Scope personnel in the Cert Program for Spokane County. Set up drills for volunteers to train for different disaster scenarios with all Spokane City, Valley, and County Fire Departments. Provided volunteers for various training of Spokane County Sheriff s Department. Set up &provided monthly newsletter via email and print. Assisted in Neighborhood Watch Program. Provided speakers for seminars for all Scope &Cert volunteers and the public on various law enforcement and fire topics. Provided volunteers for different training exercises need by Fire departments & Spokane County Sheriff's department. Member of University Scope. Member of Sirt,Abandoned Car unit, COP. Commissioned to write tickets,abandoned vehicles,disabled parking, etc. Entered data for Sheriff's property crimes unit. Worked as volunteer with Sheriffs drug,traffic, sex offender units. Started monthly University Scope newsletter which along with Neighborhood Watch newsletter was delivered to schools and businesses. Set up business checks and trained volunteers the proper way to check businesses. Worked with all Scope stations on various projects. Worked closely with Spokane City of the Valley Code Enforcement in regards with abandoned and distressed properties. Professional Experience: Securitas Spokane, WA 05/2010 - 08/2010 Security Guard GS4 Wackenhut Spokane, WA 09/2007 - 05/2010 Security Guard Spokane County Sheriffs Dept Spokane, WA 09/2001 - 08/2007 Cert Program Director Rosauers Spokane, WA 05/1980 - 08/2001 Stock Clerk/Night Manager US Government East Coast 01/1965 - 09/1978 Agent US Air Force Worldwide 12/1956 - 12/1964 Education: Livingston Manor Central Livingston Manor,NY Diploma References: * Rick Scott * SCOPE Director * Spokane County Sheriff * 509-477-3376 * Mark Stewart * Detective, Spokane County Sheriff * Property Crimes * 509-477-6618 * Greg Snyder * Deputy, Spokane County Sheriff * Community Service * 509-477-2592 * Joe Gumminger * LT, Fire District 10 * 509-995-4544 * Nick Scharff * Chief, Fire District 10 * 509-995-9400 * Chris Berg * Code Enforcement * City of Spokane Valley * 509-921-1000 * Rick Hardin * Eastern Washington Supervisor * Wackenhut/Honeywell * 509-244-2024 * Deputy Travis Pendall * Spokane County Deputy * Neighborhood Watch * 509-477-6044 * Harry Wilson. * Store Manager,Rosauers * 509-535-3683 * Dave Martin * SGT * Spokane County Sheriff, Property Crimes * 509-477-3341 * Mike Croom * HSE * Honeywell * 509-714-6101 * Steve Stolp * Site Supervisor * SecuritaslHoneywell * 509-993-2179 * Bob &Eileen Grooins * Friend * 11624 E Sunview Circle, Spokane Valley * 509.922-1932 * Kathy Pollock * Friend * 11912 E 22nd Ave, Spokane Valley * 509-928-1735 * Gary&Judy Wentling * Friend * 10305 E Holmand Rd, Spokane Valley * 509-926-7301 1 i Stiokane - Valley ° 207 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY . I' 1 1 1707 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: CO1 (Last) (Middle) (First) Complete Home Mailing Address: [ca 3 pv-Cv S/o ✓/9L. w/� - C `Z 2_0 C 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 n 1/4-, Home Phone: (5.0 ) g°I i 9 ca Fax: ( ) Business Phone: ( ) Cell: (57`1) 51— ( 7-- f - E-mail: L t, i'% g i Slit • A--N. Occupation: (if retired, please indicate former occupation) 6/2e/1 /5;e-IP Business Address: (c 3 e ��o v4� q ?20 � Educational Background: 1.Registered voter in the City of Spokane Valley? Yes [)(3,] 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 councihnember 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 O(] 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 [ 1 No [x] 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.1(] Byes,please explain:_ .- 7, Would your appointment create a conflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest?Yes [ 1 No [ 1 If yes,please explain: 8, Please list your employment for the past ten years: NAME OF r MVI LOVER POSITION I hLI} DATES OF EM LOY TENT • • ,,- 1,1— Ouvtu2.1._ / tii., 664---- 1 . Pl is6+ list ficv Urolcssio nal iifilliatiorrs, iiii.i6s, .l:-c.i.aai, v1 iiiaten..6,1 i xgu.i=-ia..k-,us t3 -iii,-..i. you ic g ii,f I1c1:1 • C% El. ,,.3 list y 'ut.g ,..-c)k SLS!cis ii.nOkS'iSi.i hc,s s; . 40 . 11. Ple?.ga 11gt y of r vollvItemr exrterionco; 9nd inGl de any volunteer or paid Positions held on any _governmental ,::arch,c;;;L ili“v - it ccrLi iii3sicri:u _.0U.6./.-j--- -T- rkode,y 04-4-1---- PROM! TO TO; U _ OM iii: c_____,1 p .._ `I 1 5'' cfit2 _N J Y OM, f '�.y_2aOTO: ,A...,14-....1— L . ;s fl G-_-,)'(J it :r'"'Stvat in,ba. :tinr lL1:)8. .!! ,Z,:",-ri ,...). ,? �. 7F :.:.:;!i_ :::__t5y CfV C-;:' Kd1 fi C-.- :.,c;.J Ct J JZIA__111_,,)L-_ -14.--- cji-4,- --, r4-'7-2) .■6tA4,,,A-- 41 * - -0-4-A-c4, 't''tl-t'si -41-W:144- rItAA:4141/(44 ±_,/ cgiZt, 4,._ Cam.`.,--- - Gt `.,/ i ' t mom. .w...._— _._.-- , 4 4a CJ---,-- /74.4-1_., CJ�.__- 13. What are the three highest priorities you believe the City needs to address? How would you propose to address these issues? r . `` Gtr ' ALA.,.- —+ a -� 4Jfr ..4. * .ar -A.,.a. r/ ':. L�.r .:L,►.A.A.d - .44, , /i�� _ 1 wu_ '' . , i, GYA7t4 CC-4A 11 04- / / f ' 69e// _... r 7- -.61(91"12 ''''67 CA(.4: 1111/76--. C 5 6"-e. il I • - E/L'—" -7 CO" Ao / i / j j— 14. Have you ever attended a meeting of the Spokane Valley City Council? Yes 1 No [ ] If yes,give an estimate of how many meetings you have attended in the past year: Q _ , • 1 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 Iist name,address and phone number: 1. 0. K &- 4-/- .- 6615" Si ej L s-(( /.4. r5-5- - s- 3,-,c 2. 12,4-, - �f Q A 07 Vv • Q - to I? / y 3. 11 , _.,.� . y o 7 s, S0,-,��-e,< , ,A, 95/- 3 971 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: V3 /2-(3 I l 1 ,9 Iry RECEIVED Spokane Valley: MAR — 4 2011 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY E. Sprague Avenue, Suite I06 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 nail will not be accepted).Applications may be hand-delivered or mailed. ,,[ Name: 1� °Y' evo 1`� Y-1`h�� L, V L Q (Last) I (Middle)� ,� (First) Complete Home Mailing Address: S IL , ) 9 s'pa 1(4,-, - \L, )I ev vol cm 2/ If you have lived at your current address Icss than one year,please List your previous addr sses and state how long you lived at those residences: Complete Previous Address Length of Time at this Address Home Phone: (50c) 5 3c 91 3 +� Fax: ( ) Business Phone: ( eo 3 2 A `55 �'}1 Cell: ( ) E-mail: eJ L{d e.C 0 rel E.v"oA Cl y-,M i I k Co toil — Occupation: (if retired,please indicate former occupation) Business Address: P1)-5)-5 , W1%41;01401')01401' ST S ro IC elk Q. Educational Background: Q. 4A _, (Ay V91"(14'y f'/ s c 0/1)1140 i y 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 councihneinber to be a resident of Spoljne Valley for at least a year prior to appointment, and to be a registered voter at the time of application.) Yes [ V ] No [ ] 3. Have you ever been convicted for anything other than a minor traffic violation? Yes [k ] No [V'] 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 arc 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 [VS If yes,please explain: 7. Would your appointment create a conflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest? Yes [ J No [ If ycs,please explain: 8. Please list your employment for the past ten years: NAME OF EMPLOYER POSITION HELD DATES OF EMPLOYMENT �,, O? tows 3v5�►r► .cJ cuhsvl 401- i2iot reja,,F ° rl� Se}o Ntvi /ti-o 6flQ ! ` AJOV C LvunY! J , cK1 D — 6/1 9. Please list the professional affiliations, clubs, social, or fraternal organizations to which you belong or hold office: N o w_ V hr.,2 i 4 10. Please list your special skills and/or interests: T. s'+,,,,) cowl ;CC, l op/ U vuf '+U$41 �)�►�� kt? !S G V)J 1 h 611) � 00( p rk ej ' /) 11. Please Iist your volunteer experience, and include any volunteer or paid positions held on any governmental board,committee or commission: l E PY'251 y• 1rt t,� C1?L I�,, FROM: D Cei TO: rveSC-2"F VI° a„A 141ce_ 14Q.3,91,,62v Ole(I ti-SiOC t c(4cyobello) FROM: D3 TO: (2. 4'I �.Q/} 11at/1)e i'y {�t�G�v(A Pis 2 C �LY(yW+�i @) FROM: O -/ TO: OS I P Vh�v i L�y� Fo,ut FROM: 0 0 TO: 0 12. Why are you interested in serving in this interim position as a Spokane Valley Citty� Councihnember? (API/11- 41, SQV'V2 - '1 people.. ?rj<e.,me ,1/ �► Ci. ‘,/ 1114 ve.41- jo &e , Sevviuj 60A1t1 t G;n'-Gin 3 t-, ti )41') Le.1!l , y t, ) ivev 0-1610), Yh\ / lrle t l ilu ks Seen-, [Av►c )6c it as •4-0 Lv114 t' )4/ cA t n fol.,. 1L 10 en(2,„ e_ e i 4--mend peck k-1/4) (ke-Vc lop C.)e v” Vision --ot( ®vv -A4vyrz., GrsA 1 "ILQnCS omh jj e oriicc-Q, Q 4.e_C lve y 1-6 12 -vo ,5ln , ne_11‘'6o(�+9 SoL i )e yh iA t a[,vs 4qq 1� e tth Y�� t /1 �tt Ih(Ju J,) poke_ _ono( O1 er Xi s i mnrove re.141-10hJ Q IA y ∎Ue >� & I yh.'tre. V01CQ 13. What are the three highest priorities you believe the City needs to address? 1-Iow would you propose to address these issues? i (9 Mc Aov 04- otA ci - . IL t Ii ,,c , flo'i- see_ �k vi 1o_i,.c, I v\ c o v io o v,, e •i .0 1/10W . 4'4 1'5 1, 1 e eathv1 -t'G,n'i) v Pri,eclui iv Ad-1V iri ' �`� - c - f/IS-I-i 1l Civic prik, Tin � r�a h U Ya p h G f ne.5 4 t_ t 1 (i , A to +/I pe7P1 e ohI,1 611 S (bntrnkfili 1 e, \AIQ. I ( No ._ ciCfiv 5"e ,k oukiut-e e4 144 ) fnve,S" / 1i ana V464n bui1 �� spite lr Wit/ cvee,& ov'e,_, okk Gw h t,{ iu ip ovv, 1064 PL4l i121t Y W'y ftheov cvi+ h1 rhtd.1- t- ovk he a,v r e,141-ims be et-, C, -i om f }} C . p 1�.if. pr1,1.04,411 L tI( 1'-1' oef cev�S t)�1 0 - P}v c.€ v'..� red 14. Have you ever attended a meeting of the Spokane Val cy City ounci . "es o 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. A,dopb.v g11 Colo 1 (D ) 0 c. koven cpokepte_ l/ r '240 'COD 17 2. ) oiJ 4v) cv )021 ! �c,p�.�+ � l� �� Se,;10,a X16, �� — 'krS2 3. Sont1GI DLvThoVQ. 4305 E 1/'ty1frtS oku t4//ey .s? 6 .W1I la 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.to Signature: Today's Date: 3 l./ 1 RECEIVED ern car MAR .- 4 2011 Valley. CITY OF S-POKANE VALLEY 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 he accepted).Applications may be hand-delivered or mailed. Name: Z-7)/_))'/7 /2)'/7 L6:77; c, 4-Ic� (Last) 1 (Middle) ,, 1 f/ irst) Complete Home Mailing Address: 1-/d./'/ 5. .5 Li'7 cf del i. . Ur. ` PQke.w l't.1/e 11M (i9,-20,4, If you have lived at your current address less than one year,please list your'previous address'and state how long you lived at those residences: Complete Previous Address Length of Tune at this Address Horne Phone: (507) 9 R.--6, 79.3 iY. ,7,ts5d. Fax: ( ) Business Phone: ( ) Cell: ( ) E-mail: } Occupation: (if retired,please indicate former occupation) 5- G,1 f Business Address: 1/)/'/ 5. 5virde r!ac vld Dr-. k ��c ,<,t e. fie v (' �� vtl ` � )O Educational Background: , ?/J c/�lr.L(r,0( EWe)/('c AI rm. 1. Registered voter in the City of Spokane Valley? /14 e2 CIl/ Sett of!'/a/ Ycs [ ] No[ ] 2. Have you continuously resided within the city limits attic City of Spokane Valley for a year or more? (State law requires a councilmcmber 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[x] No[ ] 3.Have you ever been convicted for anything other than a minor traffic violation? Yes[ ] Noik] 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 hall 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: , i 7.Would your appointment create a conflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest?Yes [ 1 Nopd if yes,please explain: 8. Please list your employment for the past ten years: NAME OF EMPLOYER POSITION HELD / DATES OF EMPLOYMENT S'e!/ ' l a x,1 f c- 55/0/1 / Ae7-or /f%-`S Y "-- /--e5c-,n G N,.; 5,06,e 7 s' / h,/�J £5/ream SA1e5 ,2e)07 - 2 00 S' A ei.Al eS f`/om t'. Lo,i n Z-04Ji OP-r;'c e - ,2Ve3— rii ,/f f eii e /140.-71"s�/�`)t., Mor /}�'0 liti/� r doe o6 5�� 1(3" /� TV /Vy P/9 7rdpi(/.,! �,Gr7 1 CAL 4 Fi U!. '� lL / $l) /0/ _ /e e'c u,, /9,-04',,71 O//o 2 -- a/02- 9. Please list the professional affiliations, clubs, social, or fraternal organizations to which you belong or hold office: /-/1,,?,,-c-fy l�'le,�i3c'.2 j/�G1/ 10. Please list your special skills and/or interests: /(/c.1 P,-4;--/ fr:At4/1 s n e Eye r1 L o,F-�P 11. Please list your volunteer experience, and include any volunteer or paid positions held on any governmental board,committee or conunission: 1 ►Axel A/W iP(-Jrisi,A /,ti$ FROM: TO: 0/O � )C-vv ill /I�V(5/.v if4, ter FROM: TO: 2()O /``i6i r-k— X 9 f / o,1.,Ci9 /, '1 FROM: TO: -0(1_) � /� l Ve.ieitc,n5 e 1 r�,•,-e,�. �� itle..rs FROM: TO: 2C 0 � (.foil ," 12. Why are you interested in serving in this interim position as a Spokane Valley City Couneihneniber? (A/z4.e..e 13.What are the three highest priorities you believe the City needs to address? How would you propose to address these issues? (A / fc /f:e'P) 14. Have you ever attended a meeting of the Spokane Valley City Council? Yes,V]' No [ ] If yes,give an estimate of how many meetings you have attended in the past year: r/ 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. /.. vi 1 Gilgit e //O/6. r" 3- ve 5lookArle /Ic>,/1'Vi `79io 0) 5-99- 2/ 2,8 2. /41,i5/,, /7;vt,'kAA s /s-6 Ifs/-<;r/a/c/ (iW 99 7- 6-0 ) P99 /kg', 3. 1 tv c5C�,�i+aan ///r7 L 4///r /�vC' . .` 0%}•7 2. I1� /�P V� LUft %v)0‘67q) /c 766' 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 govertunent. Signature: r-t1.[ L ��nGv Today's Date: (7.-/_-1d�;'c,// 12. I believe strongly that I can listen effectively to the concerns of the citizens and business owners in a fair and non-partial manner. All sides of the issues must be exarnined and investigated without bias. I want to become a participant in our government system. I ran for city council in 2005 and plan to run for city council again. Should I become elected in the future;the interim position would help educate me with council procedure and with current issues facing the city. I am very interested on participating with educational,health, and trade boards. 13. 1) Option to return Sprague to a 2-way. We want our business to succeed yet people want to get to work with minimal congestion. I believe the business owners along Sprague should be interviewed about their opinion with the cooperation of the Valley Chamber of Commerce. Traffic studies and safety data should be looked at and citizen input should be gathered. This issue needs to be solved so the Valley City can move on to other business. If this is not a ballot issue then now would be a great time to include this issue on the 2011 community survey. I spoke with a business owner about this issue and he believes business is down regionally due to the economic downturn. 2) Sign Ordinance. The Valley City and local business needs to find ways to increase the vitality of the local economy. Small businesses have limited funds for advertisement and signage is key to their success. I discussed this issue with a local business owner and they are struggling and believe that more signage would increase business. I worked for a large corporation that also had issues with the regulations. A temporary lift on said ordinance could be looked at in order to help business in this environment. 3) Education& Outreach. The Valley City needs to be aware of the current needs of its citizens and a survey is an excellent way to do that. I am pleased to see that a Community Survey is going to be distributed soon. I would though,make the survey available online so that more than 1200 people get to participate. This would also reduce some of the cost in doing the survey. With lower costs the survey could be given yearly vs. every two years and give the council more timely information about the citizen's priorities. It would also help to insure a completion rate of at least 400 people to gain statistically valid data. HONORS & ACTIVITIES Run for political office, Spokane Valley City Council, Pos. #6,2005 Honorary member,Veteran's of Foreign Wars Post 1435,2003 Chase Youth Award,Nominee,"Community Contribution",2004 COMMUNITY WORK ORGANIZATION SPECIAL EVENT WORK YEAR First Night Spokane NW Tourism Awards Volunteer 2010 The Gardens Nursing Home Visitor Volunteer 2006 Mark Rypien Foundation Gift Auction Gift Solicitor 2005 Veterans of Foreign Wars Easter Baskets Gift Solicitor 2004 Veterans of Foreign Wars Toys for Kids Gift Solicitor 2003 Boys&Girls Clubs NICK Lets Play Game Staff 2003 Make-a-Wish Foundation Radiothon Fundraising Booth 2001 Toys for Tots Christmas Gifts Gift Solicitor 1999 SCIDS Foundation Baby Riley Benefit Co-Coordinator 1999 Child Abuse Prev. Center Kid'sweek Events Booth 1998 Eastern Washington University Radiothon Fundraising 1998 Children's Home Society Kid'sweek Events Booth 1997 Behan Crisis Nursery Bon Marche' Days Guest Relations 1996 Children's Home Society Kid'sweek Events Booth 1996 Chase Youth Commission Family a Fair PBS KZ Kangaroo 1995 Chase Youth Commission Kids on Stage Co-Host 1994 FOX TV& 98 KISS FM Kid's Club Show Stagehand 1993 4-H Clubs of Washington Elvis& Willie Entertainment 1993 Children's Home Society Wild& Crazy Kids Stagehand 1993 Spokane Blood Bank BIood Drive @ SCC Sponsorships 1992 Spokane Blood Bank Blood Drive @ SCC Promotions 1991 Behan Crisis Nursery Spokane Haunted House Character 1987 Kennedy Foundation Special Olympics School Ambassador 1985 Kennedy Foundation Special Olympics School Ambassador 1984 Spokane Food Bank Paper Drive Boy Scouts 1982 Spokane Food Bank Food Drive Cub Scouts 1981 S-I{1S�f Sp011ane Valley. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY sf ,=', '': k.'-_` %; 4 i:,,;_e.f lei 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: _ • • i • . .0 . . _ (Last) Middle) ` I 1 e_(First) Complete Home Mailing Address: 1 9S0 (D E. (-44-1- S p 0 kO,V1 V cJ ) -■j1 ' 14 q `�y O 1 ir 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 Al/4 ft) /fi Home Phone: ,( 09) q a 7 - 6 R? 3 Fax: ( ). Business Rhone: ( °.)--' Cell: ( ...._.. E-mail: • s -f f C• a! ` 411 • e CO Occupation:(if retired,please indicate former occupation) }-1(�I`YIC 11'7 a, kel 1. WI rY1U-. Yl ► k1 a ; v 1,5 Business Address: 1"../ 1 Educational Background:_14 f 311 Se_6OO1 /....ara_.8_Uck._1-e- _...- L i it'.._.0-cf a.1�,�. 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 [X] No [ ] 3.Have you ever been convicted for anything other than a minor traffic violation? Yes[ 1 No[il ] 4.If you answered"YES"to#3 above,please explain: /4 _ _ , 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 1 .] : No [ ] If yes,please explain / " /y — 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[ ] Nov] If yes,please explain: /V _ - 7. Would your appointment create a onflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest?Yes [ ] No [[A, if yes,please explain: /V /,q 8.Please list your employment fo the past ten years: NAME OF EMPLOYER POSITION HELD DATES OF EMPLOYMENT . - - - rt roetil / erhafsrr a00 - (20 /0 _ k i rte (;t r c l e cat)1---c r? F o a l. ,.r e rase e r.r i cr e 1(18 !0 9. Please list the professional affiliations, clubs, social, or fraternal organizations to which you belong or hold office: Lo 11° T J c - ( 1 L r S . V S C_ P ( inac.4-; ,re e Y �e � 1 �'av �1ct� pan Ni ' k+ au: - 10.Please list your special skills and/or interests: ee c6-1-1-ached 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: 5 e a a C/7 FROM: TO: FROM: TO: 12. Why are you interested in serving in this interim position as a Spokane Valley City Councilmember? 7- C 13. What are the three highest priorities you believe the City needs to address? How would you propose to address these issues? e aficte 14.Have you ever attended a meeting of the Spokane Valley City Council? Yes [X] No [ ] If yes,give an estimate of how many meetings you have attended in the past year: 5 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 W] No [ ] 16. References: Please list name,address and phone number: 1. 2. SC ache d 3. 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: llr ` 1'`�_♦ A Today's Date: pe - -7 - 1 10.Please list your special skills and/or interests: I have spent the last 10+years advocating for Education,Families and Community.1 have worked with a wide range of people and philosophies'.1 have attended numerous training opportunities to advance my Leadership Skills and Advocacy efforts.1 have worked with various Jurisdictions,Educational Establishments and the Community to help establish a City,support Education and promote the Arts.I am approachable,loyal,consistent and thorough.I am able to steer to and find consensus.1 can manage and be held accountable to large budgets on a wide range of programs. 11.Please list your volunteer experience,and include any volunteer or paid positions held on any governmental board,committee or commission: COMMUNITY SERVICE: Spokane Valley Library Arts and Culture Transition Team Chair 2003/2004 A Founder of the Spokane Valley Arts Council/2005 Valleyfest Committee Chair/2005-ongoing WSPTA COMITTEES: Regional Legislative Chair/ I998-2008 Resolution Committee member/2009-2011 Various Awards Camtnittee CllairMan/2004-2011 WSPTA Region 15 Service Delivery Team/ 1999 -2009 LOCAL PTA LEADERSHIP ROLES; Greenacres Elementary PTA President,Vice President/2000 -2006 Greenacres Middle School Vice President/2004 Central Valley PTA Council President/2005-2007 CENTRAL VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT COMMITTEES; Bond/Levy Committee/2000 &2003 Teacher/Principal Evaluations Committee/2010 &ongoing 12.Why are you interested in serving in this interim position as a Spokane Valley City Councilmember? I ani interested in bringing an additional voice and perspective to the council and our citizens.I come from a non-business owning, engaged citizen perspective.1 am extremely optimistic when it comes to our city's fiiture and can provide a dedicated,thorough and effective service. 13.What are the three highest priorities you believe the City needs to address?How would you propose to address these issues? 1. Accessing the Community/Provide opportunities for public engagement to solve the issues and determine next steps in providing for our critical services and urban development and enhancement. 2. Economic Development/Work to address the barriers,i.e. bring common sense to the B&O tax calculations,provide limited tax breaks for business development,apply consistent zoning, address public access and increase marketing of what this city offers to prospective businesses that provide living wage jobs for our community. 3. Waste Management/I think we are on the right track and should be looking at regional solutions to this regional problem. 16.References: Please list name,address and phone number: 1. Peggy Doering / 11522 E. Sunview Circle Spokane Valley,WA. 99206/509-928-8463 (Valleyfest Chair) 2. Ann Long / 1004 N.Knudson Liberty Lake, WA.99019/509-928-5380 (CV School Board member) 3. Gail Bongiovanni/ 14120 E. Springfield Spokane Valley, WA. 99216/509-922-4493 (Spokane Valley Arts Council Board member) 4. Clint Leu / 11012 E.29's Spokane Valley, WA. 99206/509-721-0125 (Levy Home Entertainment) Spokane Valley 6 41 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 1 1707 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 marl will not be accepted).Applications may be hand-delivered or mailed. Name: ,1)//e://) l Jc r/e$ .S'even (Last) (Middle) (First) Complete Home Mailing Address: /oozy 1 / 4ve o L<' -e l/� 1(e 4 IV/4 l2 If you have lived at your ciurent address less than one year,please list yonr�previous addressed state how long you lived at those residences: Complete Previous Address Length of Time at this Address ' Home Phone: (509) q Z s - 033 j Fax: (.0 ) 9 L 033`I Business Phone: (50'1) 36) Z 3 Cell: WO 6 s/- 9 O E-mail: SCa?e, 80 M5.1 , c0,-)1 Occupation: (if retired,please indicate former occupation) ],,,ler;e}/s / -ie- j 2 Business Address: 3200 F Ave_. S 14 ,-IP F S i1 c ,ir 16/4 r'IG?/07-- Educational Background: B! is n e7,74,i.'Zczl,` c / +-tie%7 I rrotir WA,11 n./0(.4 A IA :'e-r-c�7 1.Registered voter in the City of Spokane Valley? Yes [✓ ] No [ ] / 2.Have you continuously resided within the city linits of the City of Spokane Valley for a year or more? (State law requires a counciLnember 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/ 4.If you answered"YES"to#3 above,please explain: il)// 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 [/1/ if yes,please explain: pv Al 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: �/4- 7.Would your appointment create a conflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest?Yes [ ] No [ If yes,please explain: ,4v S. Please list your employment for the past ten years: NAME OF EMPLOYER POSITION HELD DATES OF EMPLOYMENT QP(r're /Ylrj }c /1`54r;134 Sloe, f P ttscn 4 ,?}s-?e/2 Sf�► 1"4'r'� 'r� 1>a,f,B�Ssscc �PCr�,�rr 61IAV J0 " 1/ 1! C/ CY3 ,�G�r`BR ��,•rr-�e/ Ca�t'1-�a1 //,5-ier- )) t-A 1nrte-;r (Ueccc VO6 ' 02/TO n /, 11 T wD^tee 4-4esc 0011,`51 en ,`cc i/'X 'q/leA fie- 015-)e1 S+ryeCJn ,/ Tec[. / c ' , 07/03 --0t/05 - ^,l , 5.$r4 (Agee.'De) /i/1.7 r;CT 1141, ©6/e- -- O/D ! 9• Please list the professional affi iations, clubs, social, or fraternal'/organnizatioi s to which you belong or hold office: 5 Q✓,till( Orr 4;e -SDcr'c 1 S/�fl�'crit e V`t /1 YQlOvth Leer'"? 4 lic9 - W41ft" Hrc' 10.Please list your special skills and/or interests: tier 's a—v-e Av fl:20,49trr 5 ep w h 1 ✓IK�r�roes /e //Cr5 45-•f/ie ve 10t /mss e( rerc of OP■Kevlif ,e , Y41 c1'7 , 11. Please list your volunteer experience, and include any volunteer or paid positions held on any governmental board,committee or commission: Comir), lie( CA c4;rMtri-4'0leevte 49,0-1 Gee fw frorrri FROM: O J/07 TO: (91/f0 Oar 5elbq r S,ouAc Can 41“4�re// s FROM:of TO: (9y763 SCC _Il e Pas g 4.7 LCU e4Cj ( rC vt 7(lnb O M: /O 7 TO: © / 7 lea d') /nem A i-- —Po- i-n; i Set,re, Corm,: HP( rV ileC FROM:.p TO: CYO 12.Why are you interested in serving in this interim position as a Spokane Valley City Councilmember? p/fat$( Set_ or (-kic hoe--ts 13.What are the three highest priorities you believe tl City needs to address? How would you propose to address these issues? r h--4/-5e Pt' e ,L4 lPJ 5-.4e e.1 3 1 14.Have you ever attended a meeting of the Spokane Valley City Council? Yes [ 7 No [ j If yes, give an estiinate of how many meetings you have attended in the past year: fQ o e , r e__ 15. Appointment to the City Council will require your attendance at numerous regularly scheduled and special meetings, which generally occur on Tuesday evenings. Councihnembers 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 [ 1 No [ 1 16. References: Please list name,address and phone number: �}/} SO-62q-;z 1K 1. Ae r j�y /Aricz -1-19g ,A/, d779,14 e. (� 1'1_5, f uc7ne VII( y, W4 7%ZI7. 2. 4 ' R '1, , , r 5`1 iZ (/r✓,v I ;e✓ 4,1 ��t• ( . I,./ / ' 2 ©a '' 10 6--SV99' �� lle �7/ 2 9 0/6 s X99 F)�z�o 1�s 3. ��i 5 D A C IL�,/�rYrn�j 2 !`( S. t"Ipt n S� � 1 n 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. Signahire: C Today's Date: 2/2-.5/i / _, A<( - 12)Why are you interested in serving this interim position as a Spokane Valley City Councilman? With the end of SARP becoming a reality,we can and need to move on and I am convinced that now is the time for this council to not only move to create a business friendly city but that by doing our due diligence,we can attract some of the businesses fleeing California.We have so much going for us that by actively promoting our qualities,we can become a destination city for some of those same businesses. I am greatly encouraged with the direction this current City Council is taking, and I believe my past manufacturing, business ownership and recruiting experience would make a great addition to this council. It is my intention to listen to the citizens of Spokane Valley and effectively represent them for the duration of this term. 13)What are the three highest priorities you believe the City needs to address? How do you propose to address these issues? 1. Create a business friendly City.We need to attract manufacturers to this area and we can,we have so many things we can offer companies that we should be a destination city but because we live in the shadow of the West Side we are at a disadvantage in comparison to other states. We need to overcome this by crafting laws to reduce the costs of doing business such as reviewing the overzealous fire sprinkler codes we currently have and applying zoning laws to allow more flexibility. 1 propose having meetings with representatives of manufacturing companies like Kaiser, Honeywell, Purcell and Monaco as well as smaller companies to see what changes would be beneficial to them while balancing those proposed changes with environmental and social considerations. 2. Rebuilding unity and establishing an affordable and realistic vision for the City of Spokane Valley. After the disaster called SARP,we need to focus on where this city is headed in a mature and responsible way.We need to understand the realities of the current economic situation and create a climate to attract new businesses,while respecting private property rights and retaining the atmosphere that makes the Valley such a wonderful place to live. I would propose that we do so by creating a set of questions placed on the City web page that Spokane Valley residents could answer. For Instance: Do they want a city center/hall,if so, where would they like it to be?Are they willing to pay additional taxes to Implement such a plan and if so, how much? The questionnaire could also have questions about the continuation of the Appleway Couplet and Sprague one-way vs.two-way.This might not be the most scientific method but it would show whether or not there was enough interest in these topics to conduct further information gathering.This would be a very open, inexpensive,and transparent way to find out voter interest. 3. Maintaining and improving our roads.We do not want our roads to fall apart like Spokane's has so we must be diligent in maintaining therm However maintaining roads cost money thus we need to find ways to pay for them including looking at all non-essential budgetary items for ways to eliminate waste, possibly renegotiating union and non union salaries to bring them more into line with the private sector;and lastly,asking voters about raising the revenue required to support raising road construction costs. {'SESi1f Spokane Valley :r ra CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY `'p' . 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: Watson Phillip George (Last) (Middle) (First) Complete Home Mailing Address: 14925 East 24th Ave City Of Spokane Valley,WA. 99037 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: (509)891-9426 Fax: (509) 891-9426 Business Phone: (509)863-3231 Cell: (509)863-3231 E-mail: gp,watson@comeast.net Occupation: (if retired,please indicate former occupation) Partner of Watson&Herres Architectural Firm Business Address: 14925 East 24th Avenue City of Spokane Valley,WA. 99037 Educational Background: A.A. Degree in Architecture 1. Registered voter in the City of Spokane Valley? Yes [ X ] 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 [X]No 3. Have you ever been convicted for anything other than a minor traffic violation? Yes [ ]No [X] 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 [X] No [ ] If yes,please explain: I am partner of Watson&Herres Architectural Firm doing business in the City of Spokane Valley 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 [X] If yes, please explain: 7. Would your appointment create a conflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest? Yes [ ]No [Xj If yes, please explain: 8. Please list your employment for the past ten years: NAME OF EMPLOYER POSITION HELD DATES OF EMPLOYMENT Watson &Hems Partner December 10,2011 to Present Lindquist Architects Project Director July 12, 1994 to December 10,2011 9. Please list the professional affiliations,clubs, social,or fraternal organizations to which you belong or hold office: 1. Vice President Panorama Poodle Dog Club 10. Please list your special skills and/or interests: A. Special Skills; 1.Architecture 2. Working with people 3.Problem solving B. Interest; 1.NASCAR Racing 2. Vacationing 3. Gardening/Landscaping 11.Please list your volunteer experience,and include any volunteer or paid positions held on any governmental board,committee or commission: President&VP Panorama Poodle Dog Club FROM: 2005 TO: Present Kiwanis Club, Sonoma,CA. FROM: 1987 TO: 1993 President of Rohnert Park,CA.Kiwanis Club FROM: 1987 TO: 1988 Vice President of Rohnert Park Kiwanis Club FROM: 1986 TO: 1987 Board of Directors Boys and Girls Club of America FROM: 1983 TO: 1984 12. Why are you interested in serving in this interim position as a Spokane Valley City Councilmember? Living in the Valley since before the time of incorporation to the City of Spokane Valley I have seen many changes which some have been good and some not so good.Being involved on that committee forming the City of Spokane Valley has given me many insights of issues the city faces to become a stronger city.I believe niy knowledge of the City of the Spokane Valley and dedication and determination to solve problem would be a very valuable asset to the Councilmember's position in helping guide the city to a stronger and brighter future. 13. What are the three highest priorities you believe the City needs to address? How would you propose to address these issues? 1. Sprague/Appleway Revitalization PIan: There is no black and white way to solve this issues.I think that there are ways to meet hi the middle so that both sides believe that they have resolved an issue that works for everyone. 2. New Businesses to the City. Many other cities offer new business tax breaks or incentives to either move or expand their business. The City needs to decide what it has to offer to businesses considering locating to the City of Spokane Valley. The city also needs to work closely with the Economic Development Association to locate businesses wanting to relocate to our City. 3. Creating a City Core/City Center. Living here for the past 10 years the Valley's City Center seems to be the University Area. The new city center should be located in the middle of the community not in the outlying area, The city is in the process of working through SARP, locating the City Center at University area could be in the benefit in helping resolve SARP. There are ways to build the new Facility in phases which can help with the sack of funds. Not knowing the program or the needed space requirements for the facility,I think the city may look at phasing the project. In conclusion,not knowing all the specific information addressing the above three issues,there is no way to come up with a proposed solution to address the issues without being totally involved and informed of the issues. 14.Have you ever attended a meeting of the Spokane Valley City Council?Yes [X] No 1 ] If yes,give an estimate of how many meetings you have attended in the past year: Approximately 3 meeting. 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 [X] No [ ] 16. References: Please list name, address and phone number: 1. Eric Ellingsen, Ellingsen/Flynn Dentrist 1215 North McDonald 924-2866 2.Larry Rider SVFD 10319 East Sprague Ave, Spokane Valley 892-4102 3. Pat Davison Peirone Produce Hallett Road, Spokane 838-3515 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: G Today's Date: :///' Spokane Valley � t CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ;;x'` ;°: 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: Wick T Ben (Last) (Middle) (First) Complete Home Mailing Address: 12018 E Frederick, Spokane Valley, WA 99206 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: ( 509) 928-2641 Fax: ( ) Business Phone: ( ) Cell: ( ) E-mail: ben_wick@hotmail.com Occupation: (if retired,please indicate former occupation) Information Technology Business Address: 11135 W Westbow, Spokane, WA 99224 Educational Background: BS in Computer Science from Eastern Washington University 1.Registered voter in the City of Spokane Valley? Yes [ x ] 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 [ x ] No [ ] 3. Have you ever been convicted for anything other than a minor traffic violation? Yes [ ] No [ x ] 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 [ x ] 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 [x] If yes,please explain: 7. Would your appointment create a conflict of interest or an appearance of a conflict of interest?Yes [ ] No [x] If yes,please explain: 8. Please list your employment for the past ten years: NAME OF EMPLOYER POSITION HELD DATES OF EMPLOYMENT Goodrich Corporation _ IT System Administrator Nov. 2004 to present 9. Please list the professional affiliations, clubs, social, or fraternal organizations to which you belong or hold office: New member of the Spokane Valley Kiwanis Club, member of the Northwest Llama Ranchers, Certified Tourism Ambassador (CTA) , and the Rockford Historical Society 10. Please List your special skills and/or interests:Utilizing Continuous Improvement / the Lean philosophy, implementing technology, helping others, being involved in my community, and lifelong learning 11. Please list your volunteer experience, and include any volunteer or paid positions held on any governmental board,committee or commission: Spokane County Fair & Expo Center Advisory Board FROM: 2004 TO: Present Spokane County Interstate Fair Superintendant FROM: 2009 TO: Present East Valley School District Superintendant Search FROM: 2008 TO: 2008 FROM: TO: 12. Why are you interested in serving in this interim position as a Spokane Valley City Councihnember? -- See Attached -- 13. What are the three highest priorities you believe the City needs to address? How would you propose to address these issues? -- See Attached -- 14.Have you ever attended a meeting of the Spokane Valley City Council? Yes [x] No [ ] If yes, give an estimate of how many meetings you have attended in the past year 6 to 10 15. Appointment to the City Council will require your attendance at numerous regularly scheduled and special meetings, which generally occur on Tuesday evenings. Councilmembeis 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 [x] No [ ] 16. References: Please list name,address and phone number: 1. Lee Cameron, Spokane Valley 509-922-6213 2. Jessica McLaughlin, Spokane Valley 509-477-2772 3. Wayne Brokaw, Cheney WA 509-624-6636 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. f 1 - 7 Signature: �-« >� Today's Date: / )/11 Why are you interested in serving in this interim position as a Spokane Valley City Councilmember? 9 years ago I signed a piece of paper pledging that creating the City of Spokane Valley would be a wise decision and worked hard to prove to others that it was true. Shortly after, 1 put my name in to be one of the first City Council members but received many comments that people admired my interest and enthusiasm but I needed to finish college first. in 2004, I graduated Eastern Washington University with a Bachelors of Science in Computer Science and went to work for Goodrich Aerospace in their IT Department. I have watched the City of Spokane Valley take shape with much excitement. Now that I have my degree,an accomplished career,and have started a family I am ready to pursue my passion for serving my community. While I haven't been as visible in the recent past 1 believe that; my previous involvement in gathering information from other Washington Cities during the incorporation drive, participating in the Boundary Review Boards Financial Feasibility Study for the potential City of Spokane Valley, listening/ participating on the transition committees,completing the Certified Tourism Ambassador(CTA)training from the Spokane Regional Convention and Visitors Bureau,and serving on the Spokane County Fair& Expo Center Advisory Board for the last 6 years(chair for the last 5)give me the knowledge/skills to hit the ground running and be a contributing City Council member. What are the three highest priorities you believe the City needs to address? How would you propose to address these issues? 1) Vision—The citizens of the City of Spokane Valley want direction and leadership.The indecision of the Sprague Appleway Revitalization Plan has put the focus on undoing the past instead of building our city's future. A clear, long-term vision needs to be formed and put into action. I would like to form goals and projects that aid in developing our city toward this vision. I see the City Council's role as more than policy making its leadership.As leaders of the city we need to communicate with citizens and start discussing ideas for improving our city and our way of life. As a city we have set the groundwork for the future by establishing a good financial foundation. The Council's current proposal of conducting a citizen survey is a great plan as we look toward the future. 2) Teamwork—When we work together everyone gains more. There are two facets of interaction that I would like to focus on. a. Internal—The City of Spokane Valley is one team.The Council and staff will only succeed with each other.Watching the interactions/discussions between staff and Council, I see a lack of trust. Maintaining good relationships, empowering people, and ensuring a positive environment will greatly enhance the productivity of the city. b. Regionally-- I applaud your efforts in being good stewards of the tax payer's money. There are more factors in being a great city than the bottom dollar.As a citizen in the City of Spokane Valley, I want to live in a city that not only has good money management, but is enjoyable and well respected.We are the second largest city in the region; by size alone we cannot be ignored.We have the potential of being regional leaders. Unlike the other municipalities we have a unique opportunity.We have no past, no burned bridges.We can partner with the County,the City of Spokane, or even the smaller cities to create better outcomes for all citizens. Because we are young, we bring an unbiased, clean slate which is non-threatening and facilitates better discussions/ decisions.We should take opportunities to be heard and take a more prominent role in the region. 3) Finding revenue to sustain the Street Fund—This isn't going to be easy. Like everyone else, I don't want any more taxes.So,there are only two options:find the money elsewhere within the budget or increase the tax base to generate more revenues(i.e.facilitate more businesses locating to the Spokane Valley thereby increasing sales tax revenues, promote tourism).While efforts have been made to stream line the permitting processes and regulatory oversight I think more needs to be done. I would encourage the use of continuous improvement or lean activities to analyze processes and streamline requirements. Spokane .:. . ,y Valley � � 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 nail will not be accepted).Applications may be hand-delivered or mailed. Willardson Nam Lynette Jennie (Last) (Middle) (First) Complete Horne Mailing Address: 12722 East 23 Ave. , Spokane Valley WA 99216-0327 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 Prcvious Address Length of Time at this Address Home Phone: (509 ) 926-6854 Fax:(.509) 926-689-i- Business Phone: ( ) Cell: (509) 981-0950 E-mail: jlnniewillardson @yahoo.com Occupation:(if retired,please indicate former occupation) customer service representative Business Address: West Corporation, 9317E Sinto, Spokane Valley WA 99206-403 Educational Background: BA and NA in History Eastern Washington Univeristy 1. Registered voter in the City of Spokane Valley? Yes [X ] 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 councilmetnber 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[X ] No [ ] 3.Have you ever been convicted for anything other than a minor traffic violation? Yes[ ] No [ X ] 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 [X ] 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 [x] If yes,please explain: 8. Please list your employunent for the past ten years: NAME OF EMPLOYER POSITION HELD DATES OF EMPLOYMENT West Corporation Customer Service April 26, 2010 and current self employed Investor current Willardson Consulting Administrative Assistant 1984 to Jan. 17, 2007 9. Please list the professional affiliations, clubs, social, or fraternal organizations to which you belong or hold office: Daughters of the American Revolution Spokane Garry Chapter former Regent and current WA State DAR Conservation Chairman, Treasurer 4th Legislative District Deals 10.Please list your special skills and/or interests: Libraries, the Arts, Parks and Neighborhoods Founding member Spokane Valley Arts Council, Master Gardener 1998 11. Please list your volunteer experience, and include any volunteer or paid positions held on any govermnental board,committee or commission: Cable Adviporg_Board FROM: 2008 TO: Jan. 2010 Library Ad Hoc Committee FROM: TO: 2004 Library Facilities Committee FROM: 2003 TO: 2004 Library, Arts and Culture Transition Team FROM: 2002 TO: 2003 12.Why are you interested in serving in this interim position as a Spokane Valley City Councilmember? I have lived at 12722 East 23rd Ave in the Spokane Valley for the last 37 years. I am a Spokane Valley Girl. Since the city incorporated in 2002, I have seryed on several committees and boards to do my part to make this the best city it can be. In 2005, I ran for city council to better serve my community and other years I Have WOTked on campaigns to help good people get elected to the city council. If I am Blessed to be chosen to serve out this team, I will make our city my number one priority. If not our city will still be my number one priority and I will gladly serve the community in any capacity. 13.What are the three highest priorities you believe the City needs to address? How would you propose to address these issues? 1). In these tough economic times the highest priority the city needs to have is a business friendly atmosphere that preserves and grows existing businesses while attracting new businesses, thus creating more jobs. 2) Keeping the budget balanced without raising tax rates and/or fees, while continuing to provide necessary services and maintaining-a rainy day fund. This can be accomplished by eliminating unnecessary studies and by having business friendly policies that increase business revenues, which in turn increase tax revenues without raising rates. 3) Defending property rights by encouraging business districts and neighborhoods to determine their own character, rather than allowing outside non-stake holders to dictate zoning. 14. Have you ever attended a meeting of the Spokane Valley City Council? Yes [X] No[ ] If yes,give an estimate of how many meetings you have attended in the past year: 6 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 [X] No[ ] 16. References: Please list name,address and phone number: 1. Mary and James Pollard, 17216E Baldwin, Spokane Valley WA 99016 (509) 926--8899 2. Janice Cooperstein, 9716 E 45th, Spokane Valley WA 99206 (.509) 993-6298 3. Deanna Hormann, 1319 S Shamrock, Spokane Valley WA 99037 (509) 924-4796 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: -• � Toda 's Date: 0/246 /1 *Wane . Valley' 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: Woo d tFr d 1{'a1.0.44 S Afe-ltte (Last) (Middle (First) Complete Home Mailing Address: • -r `P cd c 0 - If you have lived at your current address less than one year, pie se list yo ur previous addresses and state how long you Iived at those residences: Complete Previous Address Length of Time at this Address Home Phone: (5-dtj 92,6 - 3434i Fax:(e,,—by) 9 - VS Business Phone: (.. eteh 9 3`7} //1-e Cell: (yam 739'- 1/' i. E-mail: Occupation: (if retired,please indicate former occupation) g,e_ed E51de_ grokeviOw iler Business Address: 0.....51/ S 5'f d l S L( 4)4, 9?0 - n Educational Background: 6j,t}Zc� c�_ r / %'L�f r5 .5f Oil ) 1%1, Re�al1-Ste�Dv 5r� frer45 in to 7 1. Registered voter in the City of Spokane Valley? 1 U 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: c ,4 vrA Con5fmelito . fccd 6045"-el-4n ;ef Wig- (gab Bridle. PrthAc- tfv--aefor-5, 6. is any tnember 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? YesSI No[ ] If yes,please explain: Them Wt ri 5 V Pr - tem -i on, d1O 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 k-C.P2oepea fi'e5 fr55oc. rte 4orinq /995 "1b Ateficelt Zoo. l.Jeo do -r1 Praoer 'c5 iL1le5' 7 PresiAes /C' o/0wi er mareL1}zx to Pre5e(c " 9. Please list the professional affiliations, clubs, social, or fraternal organizations to which you belong or hold office:,.%1d��wie,4-`�a'ro,ers 0,1 , Pres'.5�vkanens5oc.,.51. -/far5"- Ord,A--13iri Cokerivmeclf fi�rcr0.1f$ ('_on inf.-A e_ Ed u ea.•I-r d .fn' /max d e ,`re1Ga-hi � (�o nr`.�t i we e__y fm a rn k�er j�v, :-{-9��e ��e,. zx-a �s5o e_� � ri- `' u.6"itie„� ,er� S'/+2F�odcime.. 0.nnua.l1r�� o re.er rLoa- uu, 10. Please list your special skills and/or interests: A t( ha. es • ein fr,,t-I-iJac r 'ea a1c. E r-etcGe..? �i I0219 (Exe.ep+ 1/PI-onit s)gesi r{&'i+ wlha /940/-07i S-o r- Va./ley) "1)-0)19 )vec fi of c s k'lI s, Er'lfre pouf- tt f o ,�-d ]1 Life Lois ..C: Lau, -5' cm i-,...1 trAu6,,�r4 1-0,4 ,...-C-- rerse,,, 1fAfd- iL; -SS Coairtc i- 5TA-3-4,1 ,i >�e tu-,-ki-e'f-4)%�j i nisi-Cry 6IJ-I 1/ F�C.0.ai)ig1/VU,1',-4 6 -g lueeiI A 11. Please list your volunteer experience, and include any volunteer or paid positions held on any governmental board,committee or commission: 5 v.va-ite PPa ;nq ee Rtmi5 o.).-t. (fir rI.A 6 60 FROM: 11( 110 TO: Pre5en-! f e_re.c / r--1- (Lh;I t-e .'S goy, Old)600..__(Vo(v- er 6(///0 P►'e 5 e,-,4-- Bo al-d ohs-T 5fee5 5t.ytir3.rq rs 5t.J o 1 rou+acr-hr -('r FROM: /9192- TO: kz. - 24/0 rite_Vr.,t Etxrire -c(e.,.. Li+.4...6 jtte ti/o/wr-leer z}f, / ? urrese,=f`_ p, t3` .i! l'a►i 6-rrx4p FRO y 4-/990 TO: fre_ c°.na vitmlf. ee_' 5-,A)10.1/64,1u-w-r- �' a1`ffee5f )rows ru,,'c io7.s(vol) t�r " ee,° `fz- � i,,,er)r� arlt�a fen Fra r t FROM: 2 a& P.O: 9a's 2.'!.4 rvesf Fcf�d A-4(.4 y�o.�(niley ( for$ CF.,cl,J)rti(re-5 9e.icid,-)/q99 t6 rePc.'I 12. Why are you interested in serving in this interim position as a Spokane Valley City Councilmember? Vim?, Age,a- AMM bee" o•F cs'lr/ettl isstie5 11?) he deeht,6if 1+/s year /11.41-fliee pail lo We-a- V&e loin f 'ed' ©�r t di�ee:pan o•C our 1 1'iy, �e nee€ g"h'tiiii i r 1 . r ►'.x'A ally e .r '06 Iv e DV-she Chou iI k 5ohie erne. -has- a 5(N-t 7 Itektdp -ff AjetL5 ct,e4 i' for%l1 f 'fin inerl 414, kebeci dee,'siay'S. 1 Le< eue_Tam /u4.-44; eci 0s l a °'ercon4s1.am tz ' ,_.1' uy rut, , ,�r, c'►c - ` �, I. . , '� • a rei..d i c el-reek 1 _ 1 ` /` tlPr+lT� ante O u&/ mgdi 5 dons-k6.-417 e'odle /Air- 145 /4-1- media is , 1/ 11 What are the three highest priorities you believe the City needs to address? How would you propose to address these issues?' ` , , %w — ,ecrr-, .I t ie.dr' '5 in at rte crib ` 1344'tke 13444 4$ to 11c haid.,.ee, tc,flL • er^reoc. ' 06161r:5 ;p i la Crory 0u;0 47 Io d c In fo`tk'Se f'z vlw eal ea er ed S i ocn S Cal euei « Y he 4-taineell wl;eL woalcl area e Q { ore Y-ahc5t' ISIA-$ _55 Atmosphere- Wkie_k wok-id ps�carac ce-r-.c(fro fef pro e &u5ivteS5 51—;ii ee 2 r -121,L5 ille55 4 t es.ide4• 4 e/,•!fie.,05 10.-6,, Wocc/ &/lou) 145 fa /ool.,al-i-wi--t s5,bfe et . e 0_. :44 n L. 4'n o is-, ti i '`ss .. a ` i . _ i A r'• of ., ' , ..ri le))/2)prav;Cie 1 }cr45frue c e.C(20a.-61.5elver We-der 4 4:5.-1"orrrrWafev)'3)trc'vlde ret56->utDle &KA A e .- ' i •2 -61.- /� Gir'eafe a. ievr` e ereov+o--r.o.f'Itl 4-eon.lr'vi•rnf7 tests/ r ro,erF-►€51©irbui'/d 1 Ct ' e'J• ' e '. . 1 , • . t , AgL_ 'to • ■erax-, ` ee 4 w 514-efve el f ii,e ee Varkkf ele er►->az,e_ • re9 , 10111, o- hiilify Ho/1t fi. 15 y5fei • • ''� ;14,ra' , A.• :. 1 ` " 1 : A )v t fr :I.+, ff , - ,ff 4 4, , ,1, �� .. reel-' O . _ r u • '., . ) . I' is • i A e 4 _ GJO-w7 our 1• - r s i ' pa-dP•h (n- ef75 u-Sii cc'S), ur ci1y LtQS 11011.1 b ePil.. le.44014)11 4 -0 6e -5f +e14(/ r• dare o,or . I heS e Oc it . , 5`7144-f 1.&.... . au ' a ' .' i' FU ,t� L 1 j ' L f ( 1- i 1 etot. 5t + aJ re5 077Sr tile- aits&er� R It fd acc_owt,-`h' ,le_, Le:/ y' ,, ho..5r`f1e5 a5 Gihkg`' b� L ev-Oi_wt� : 'e e1 f 111 h } . -de e le-,�f to;9-h C�o�sf. .ileriall &ivnC*4 ve4rt Meta—Gt}co']�.x a vrt_��.n.t et. 5evuo 6Pc.tti4icde,7Ae det,t, Dc, C.e` `i y 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:01;55 fi'aY la ill 2414 I-/6 11.1.0>t1'&5 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. '206 14W er-5 (. -.ih5c^e_ i-orc) i 2i//1); A 1,) /510o, 14,)a.`)72o;; 3-24--922- 2, era zdCitJ( (e(`/4nal75-;s 6) / f/ E, lo'l,v i '`' 14 e192oz y35-47-q1 3.?L,,,,. /<i ie Ck-C'_Net F e,y`) /216 rU. Arrane . ,15 VI 104 `9212,922 257-5' 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: (2 ft, /�pJ' Q7n-77 .� Today's Date: 012.1/// CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Review Meeting Date: March 22, 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 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments-Overview PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: The Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC 17.80.140) establishes an annual comprehensive plan amendment cycle that runs from November 2"d to November 15t of the following year. The Planning Commission considers applications received prior to November 1st in late spring of the following year,with a decision by City Council in late spring/early summer. All parts of the Comprehensive Plan can be amended during the annual cycle. The Community Development Department received two privately initiated site specific map amendments. Sites that are approved for a Comprehensive Plan amendment will automatically receive a zoning designation that is consistent with the new land use designation. The 2011 Comprehensive Plan text amendments include amendments to five Comprehensive Plan Elements: Chapter 2 - Land Use, Chapter 3 —Transportation, Chapter 4 — Capital Facilities and Public Services, Chapter 7 — Economic Development, and Chapter 8— Natural Environment. The amendments may also entail minor changes to other elements referencing the proposed amendments. Staff presented the proposed amendments to the Planning Commission at a study session on February 10, 2011. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the amendments on February 24, 2011. The Planning Commission continued the public hearing to March 10, 2011 to receive additional testimony and for deliberation. Staff is scheduled to provide Council with the Planning Commission's recommendations and findings at the April 12, 2011 Council meeting. PUBLIC NOTICE: Notice for the proposed amendments was placed in the Spokane Valley News Herald on February 4, 2011 and each site was posted with a "Notice of Public Hearing" sign, with a description of the proposal. Individual notice of the proposals was mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of each amendment. SEPA REVIEW: Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA— RCW 43.21C) environmental checklists were required for each proposed comprehensive plan amendments. Under SEPA, amendments to the comprehensive plan are considered "non-project actions" defined as actions involving decisions on policies, plans, or programs that contain standards controlling use or modification 1of2 of the environment. Additional environmental review may be required for the physical development of the subject properties. Staff reviewed the environmental checklists and a threshold determination was made for each proposed comprehensive plan amendment. Determinations of Non-significance (DNS) were issued for the proposed amendments on February 4, 2011 consistent with the City of Spokane Valley Environmental Ordinance. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROPOSALS: Comprehensive plan amendment proposals are organized into individual reports consisting of application materials, staff reports, comprehensive plan maps, zoning maps, aerial maps,vicinity maps, transportation maps, and comments submitted to date to assist the City Council in their review. OPTIONS: Consensus to proceed with first reading scheduled for April 12, 2011 STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger,AICP, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: 2011 Comprehensive Plan amendment docket Exhibit 2: 2011 Comprehensive Plan Amendments with Individual Staff Reports. 2 of 2 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION S „'okane ValIey STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA-01-11 STAFF REPORT DATE: February 16, 2011 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: February 24, 2011, 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: Site-specific comprehensive plan map amendment to change the designation on parcels 45321.0109, 45231.0210, 45231.0211, 45231.0212, 45231.0213, 45231.0214, 45231.0216, 45231.0218, 45231.0224 and 45231.0226 from Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) to Neighborhood Center (NCT) comprehensive plan and zoning designation. PROPOSAL LOCATION: Parcels 45321.0109,45231.0210,45231.0211, 45231.0212,45231.0213,45231.0214, 45231.0216,45231.0218,45231.0224 and 45231.0226;located on the southeast corner of Progress Road and Sprague Avenue; further located in the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 23,Township 25 North,Range 44 East,Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington. OWNER/APPLICANT: John Hultman, Hultman Family Trust, LLC & SET LLC; 3876 East Aphrodite Ct; Boise, ID 83716 OWNER OF PARCEL 45231.0114:Matt Jankowski; 315 West Riverside, Suite 302; Spokane,WA 99201 OWNER OF PARCEL 45231.4215:Judy Soucy; 15121 East 1st Avenue; Spokane Valley,WA 990037 APPLICANTS REPRESENTATIVE: Dwight Hume; 9101 North Mt. View Lane; Spokane,WA 99218 APPROVAL CRITERIA: Chapter 2 (Urban Land Use) of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Title 17 (General Provision), Title 19 (Zoning Regulations), and Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of 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 CPA-01-11 subject to incorporating parcels 45231.0114 and 45321.0215 as part of the amendment. STAFF PLANNER:Karen Kendall, Assistant Planner, Community Development Department REVIEWED BY: Scott Kuhta, AICP,Planning Manager, Community Development Department ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Comprehensive Plan Map Exhibit 2 Zoning Map Exhibit 3: 2009 Aerial Map Exhibit 4: Vicinity Map Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-41-11 Page 1 of 7 Exhibit 5: Transportation Map Exhibit 6: Application Submittal Exhibit 7: SEPA Determination 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: October 13, 2010 Application Submitted: November 1, 2010 Determination of Completeness: November 1, 2010 Issuance of Determination of Non-Significance (DNS): February 4, 2011 End of Appeal Period for DNS: February 18, 2011 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: February 4, 2011 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: February 9, 2011 PROPERTY INFORMATION: Size and Characteristics: The site is approximately 4.57 acres in size. The SEPA checklist states the site is flat. Comprehensive Plan: Mixed Use Avenue Zoning: Mixed Use Avenue Existing Land Use: There is a multiple occupancy building with office, shoe repair, restaurant and lock smith, post office, tire repair and six (6) single family dwelling on the subject parcels. SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,ZONING,AND LAND USES: North Comprehensive Plan—Neighborhood Center(NCT) and Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) Zoning—Neighborhood Center and Mixed Use Avenue Existing Land Uses—Church, restaurant, fitness center, bank and vacant building South Comprehensive Plan—Mixed Use Avenue(MUA) and Community Boulevard (CB) Zoning—Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) and Community Boulevard(CB) Existing Land Uses—Single family residences East Comprehensive Plan—Neighborhood Center(NCT) Zoning—Neighborhood Center(NCT) Existing Land Uses—Multiple retail complex with restaurants and bank West Comprehensive Plan—Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) and Community Boulevard(CB) Zoning—Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) and Community Boulevard(CB) Existing Land Uses—Car lot, retail uses and single-family residences 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 Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-01-11 Page 2 of 7 was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. Conclusion(s): The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act and Title 21 of the SVMC have been fulfilled by the 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). No appeals were received. 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 City may approve Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide zone map amendments if it finds that(analysis is italicized): a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; Staff Comment: The City's adopted policies of the Comprehensive Plan state in part "the economic development strategy is to promote a more diverse economy [that] would achieve a better balance between jobs, housing and support the City's desired quality of life" (Section 2.3.1). The site-specific amendment offers additional opportunities to achieve the balance by expanding the land use available for further diverse development. 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; Staff Comment: The proposed location is served by all necessary urban services and provides for appropriate in-fill development within 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. The current amendment does not include two (2)parcels (45231.0114 and 45321.0215) located to the east and south of the proposal. Stafffinds the two (2)parcels should be included in the site-specific amendment to prevent islands of Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) surrounded by Neighborhood Center (NCT). The applicant, Dwight Hume, has contacted each property owner by mail requesting consent to include their parcel into the amendment. As of the date of this report, staff has spoken with the property owner of parcel 45231.0114 Matt Jankowski (KFC restaurant), however no direction was given to staff 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; Staff Comment: The site-specific amendment is not responding to a change in conditions. Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-01-11 Page 3 of 7 d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or Staff Comment: The site-specific amendment does not correct a mapping error. e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Comment: The site-specific amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: a. The effect upon the physical environment; Staff Comment: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the City of Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code, the lead agency has determined that this amendment does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the 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 may 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; Staff Comment: The SEPA checklist states that there is no surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of site. c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; Staff Comment: The site-specific amendment is contiguous to a Neighborhood Commercial Comprehensive Plan designation. The uses currently in operation on the subject parcels are convenient and within close proximity to serve the surrounding neighborhood. At the time of future development, standards in Title 22 (Design and Development Standards), specifically 22.70 (Fencing, Screening, and Landscaping) will reduce impacts on adjacent low density residential designated properties. d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads,public transportation,parks,recreation, and schools; Staff Comment: 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 development, the proposed amendment may have an impact on transportation. All subject parcels are developed, however at the time of the future development staff will evaluate the impacts of the use(s) and proposed structure(s) on the physical environment in regards to transportation. e. The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; Staff Comment: The amendment is consistent with the existing character of the neighborhood. The parcels proposed to change are in a neighborhood that has existing commercial/industrial uses on three (3) sides and single family residences to the south. Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-01-11 Page 4 of 7 f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; Staff Comment: The site-specific amendment is approximately 4.57 acres in size and has a variety of commercial uses and six (6) single-family residences. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the plan. g. The current and projected population density in the area; and Staff Comment: The site-specific amendment will not increase the population density. The proposed comprehensive plan amendment does not demand population analysis. h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Comment: The site-specific amendment as proposed to be modified by staff will be consistent with the comprehensive plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the plan. The applicant, Dwight Hume, has contacted each property owner by mail requesting consent to include their parcel into the amendment. As of the date of this report, staff has spoken with the property owner of parcel 45231.0114 Matt Jankowski (KFC restaurant), however no decision has been made. B. COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE 19 (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE Findings: Section 19.60.040 (Neighborhood Commercial District) Spokane Valley Municipal Code The Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment is from Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) to Neighborhood Center (NCT) comprehensive plan and zoning designation. The Neighborhood Commercial designation is intended to provide a limited number of commercial goods and services to surrounding residential neighborhoods. Conclusion(s): The proposed site-specific amendment is contiguous to Neighborhood Commercial properties and will provide a wider variety of commercial uses. At the time of development, standards in Title 22 (Design and Development Standards), specifically 22.70 (Fencing, Screening, and Landscaping)will reduce impacts on adjacent low density residential designated properties by providing visual separation and physical buffers between land uses. Any future development would be consistent with the intention of the Neighborhood Commercial designation. C. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive plan states that the Neighborhood Commercial designation provides areas for small- scale neighborhoods serving retail and office uses located in clustered development. 1. LUG-4 of the Comprehensive Plan recommends providing neighborhood and community scale retail centers for the City's neighborhoods. Staff Comment: The Neighborhood Commercial designation is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. There is public transportation route along Sprague Avenue adjacent to the proposed amendment. Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-01-11 Page 5 of 7 2. LUP-4.4 of the Comprehensive Plan encourages the integration of retail developments into surrounding residential areas. Staff Comment: The Neighborhood Commercial designation will allow the introduction of a variety of commercial uses that would service the surrounding residential neighborhood. D. PUBLIC FACILITIES Findings: The property is currently served with public water and sewer. Progress Road designated as a local access street and Sprague Avenue designated as a principal urban arterial provide access as indicated in the Arterial Street Plan(Exhibit 5). E. 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 CPA-01-11 in accordance with adopted public noticing procedures. F. FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS Findings: Staff has received no agency comments to date. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted. IV. OVERALL CONCLUSION The proposed Comprehensive Plan designation to Neighborhood Commercial and change in zoning classification to NCT is consistent with the Comprehensive Plans policies and goals. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Division after review and consideration of the submitted application and applicable approval criteria recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approve CPA-01-11 subject to incorporating parcels 45231.0114 and 45321.0215 as part of the amendment. Planning Commission Findings and Factors (Section 17.180.140H of the SVMC): Findings a. The public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment is furthered by ensuring economic diversity and a better balance between jobs, housing and support of the City's desired quality of life. b. The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are consistent with Chapter 36.70A RCW (Growth Management Act). c. The proposed amendment is not responding to a change in conditions. d. The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-01-11 Page 6 of 7 e. The proposed amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Factors: a. 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 proposed amendment is a non-project amendment and will not affect open space, streams, rivers, and lakes. c. The proposed amendment is contiguous to neighborhood center, mixed use avenue and low density residential properties. Any potential impact to adjacent properties will be addressed during the development of the property and can be mitigated with design and development standards. d. Future development of the site may impact traffic in the area. At the time of development, an additional SEPA review will be required to evaluate the impacts of increased traffic. e. The proposal is consistent with the character of the neighborhood and will provide a wider array of commercial uses serving the neighborhood. f The proposed amendment will not increase population densities and does not demand population analysis. g. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the plan. Recommended Motion: The Planning Commission finds CPA-01-11 to be consistent with Section 17.80.140 (H) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). The Planning Commission adopts the findings in the staff report and recommends approval of CPA-01-11, a change to Neighborhood Commercial with a subsequent zone change to Neighborhood Commercial(NC). Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-01-11 Page 7 of 7 Comprehensive Plan Map � L 1 -- - . - � - 1CPA-01-11 Sprague • / •• ..--._,■`.'%,•,,,,H,- .7„...„..,,,,.< 'N's444%•.....„,,N„ r 2 Arr Ir 1st --,,‘,;._ f f 2nd I _ 2nd a O ;r. - CPA-01-11 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map City of Spokane Valley designation from MUA to NCT;subsequent zoning Community Development Department change from MUA to NCT. Zoning Map k....... . • v T CPA-41.11 ' ire, voie r / . : ..,. /Ar' Fry<//1 ... izosi z A Alf:". .Z 4 , 1st 4,.. .. ,, . ,, • I >>>.-- . _.......,,...................,.......,....,.........„..;"' -.-..N .6 ., .NN.s.,..i%.._ .41.4 - ';.-> ›).. '............0'%. '0;07......e...........e-,•••.,...... - • - - 2nd r 2nd \ `u r l ( E E ,, --—--I--.-... ..- •--- --- -- — . -_,,, CPA-01-11 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map City of Spokane Valley designation from MUA to NCT; subsequent zoning Community Development Department change from MUA to NCT. 2009 Aerial Map v* -- - ® !9 ;;,K Ili Pl-, r . ar.11•111► r.-0,,f' #p 'i_ col' 1. _ , . r`.• f r 'I D ' - .. ss 6 r r" -f 1.• Jk r f 1 i7C !!F ,A -' S r, t_ , {' _ ' .aim - - .F I ,_� err 5,, 'p_F i�. .. N .i - r.r ' !. g� r - I r ,.• I imiLi { 4 1 r I Fill Sprague. Sp.ra; ue� �,�_ ` _ r} - ru ik3I , F r- 4. * "1 f it — ' ---"' '''''Pr"- /Fir i A .,_,E :, . 0 . L ' 0///77 7"' , _ . _ . f � r Y ,. _ . .. . - -.. Lli. .... &,0 _ _.-02f,1-..,... 04 feiXdoe `A i ye 1 j ir } 1 'r . CP -01-11 : , t_ ? f[ r it... f ' ws,_ - i '- - , - . �Yr 7514 t 1% �: s— BO ' !r- _.� #. - - '.� 's'-•r' - r` drill. �.�- ! •may ,nr .•nldr zr :sr - - 1 ~! I • , --,1! �- •: bF� ' _ '.. iiiiiims 1 ma ! � i ! _ �v p R itill it ' mile i"'' . :-. ..i. ,,'..- •.!:'.. .Eiri , iligirPoilrmi. i . f-__ IIIII:JIIII - il .. ..r. , -',., -4-.1- ,; .. - ;h -- --Lith 7 - ,— -'■�� I CPA-01-11 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map City of Spokane Valley designation from MUA to NCT; subsequent zoning Community Development Department change from MUA to NCT. Vicinity Map e r [ 1 1 i'ragrrss {il Elementary Sprin field en Pioneer and Rainbow I „Alki JI Alhi -[ d L ,. Vol leywa�� ^ II t L Valleye�a�_—__, 1 atieyway1 I . Mil III. ' i ._____ ...--..-----' F ij Main t l `I r7i r — 1 1 fiver ide - d E CPA-Q1-11 1 0.:_ i Sprue Sprue Sprague ^• Oliocir_ — 490 rAor A, — end _, �� • 1 r - L -2ntl rl . I I - • • 1B1 I • ' li �St Man's L h. m �'rd 11- as a U I [ .. 4th_ . . . J .th,II Is,1,. , 4th- 3 IIII —4 � iy tal—) 5th = e E 1. 6th m' 6th k , 111111 •R ■■■ in „7th „ Adams . �G�nt 1 III Elementary = Atrl.. 8th , I gth __ _ g 8th M....--_ MOM _I— ■1MMI MIMIME IMII CPA-01-11 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map City of Spokane Valley designation from MUA to NCT;subsequent zoning Community Development Department change from MUA to NCT. Transportation Map lir = : Progress Elementary 1 . !11 ,■springflcld , Pioneer and Rainbow Alki = r . I - "'L.111111 Ir. - . ■ IN_ in ■ ■ NMI liii.! il I d ill V,allev_wa ,1 mi iullr.:ii �EMIL lill _kx.iiple 11F1 IT I 'mot ■ ��• m 11 I 1 Riverside R lb" 1111 lip spry Pe iI F jr,pp ' Bij .1 _ ..E� , �M� �«� SPA-Ul-I� ■11111 `n 1 2nd I. Iii• ■■ MI St Mary's 6 - Mg :r°. 3rd 7 ii: I■ i p° -■ i'""=MI iii I. t Legend ii U ■.1 I it Current Classification I ." E z State or Federal ME■ ,■ : ■ I Principal Arterial 6ti, s!h In 'i Minor Arterial MB ? UI Collector =■ ! illi - - • Proposed Principal Arterial Mill\Lay's cr 1 Y Y - Proposed Minor Arterial dams Elementary - 1ru • Proposed Collector ■PA� ■ rii- 'MEN ill AM CPA-41-11 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map City of Spokane Valley designation from MUA to NCT; subsequent zoning Community Development Department L change from MUA to NCT. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY (For Staff Use Only) Spokane Community Development DATE aUCMIITEO: 10//0 RECEIVED u ; Valley D11 7ep03 East Sprague Ave., Suite B-3 Fzr-t No./NnmE: Spokane Valley, WA 99206 /n n,D3C,I ct Tel: (509) 921-1000 - r Fax: (509) 921-1008 PLANNING FEE: 1�-�n Ulanningeisvakanevallev.010 ;EPA FEE: -35c7 _ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PART 1 --APPLICATION INFORMATION (Check One) 171 Map Amendment n Text Amendment PROPERTY OWNER: Hultman Family Trust LLC &SET LLC C/O John Hultman MAILING ADDRESS: 3876 E Aphrodite Ct CITY: Boise STATE: ID ZIP: 83716 Email: johnanderma©gmail.com PHONE: (r-IM) (WK) (car.) APPLICANT: Dwight J Hume MAILING ADDRESS: 9101 N Mt. View Lane CITY: Spokane STATE:WA Zip: 99218 Email: dhume @Spokane-landtJse.cam PHONE:OM) (WK} 435-3108 (CELT.) Same RELATIONSHIP TO OWNER: Agent for Owners PROPERTY LOCATION(ADDRESS AND/OR DISTANCE AND DIRECTION FROM NEAREST CROSS STREET): SEC of Progress and Sprague Avenue. See attached map and legals ASSESSOR PARCEL NO.: See attached PROPERTY SIZE: 4.57 acres CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION:- Mixed Use Avenue PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Neighborhood Center CURRENT ZONING CLASSIFICATION: Mixed Use Avenue PROPOSED ZONING CLASSIFICATION: Neighborhood Centers BRIEFLY EXPLAIN REASON FOR MAP OR TEXT AMENDMENT(ATTACH FULL EXPLANATION): A more logical boundary for Neighborhood Center is Progress Rd rather than a property ownership line See Attached SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER: �l "� DATE: SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT: JI i : _- DATE: //f.--a- — Comprehensive Plan Amendment P.cket Page 3 of 13 P:lCommunily Development102 Adminislralion\03 Forms-Official VersianslLong Range Pianning\Comp Plan Amend Application Form tot 1.dec T) ITU)614,1 Land Use Planning Services 9101 N. MT, VIEW LANE Spc'kan , NA 9921€ 509-435-3108 (V) 509-467-0229 (F) 11-01-10 Mike Basinger Community Development Department E. 11707 Sprague Avenue Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Ref•. Annual Comp Plan Map Amendment to SARP Dear Mike: Pursuant to our Pre-Application meeting discussions I have prepared a map amendment to 4.57 acres located at the SE corner of Progress and Sprague Avenue for my clients commonly known as the Hultman Family Trust LLC and SET LLC.Their request is to amend the above described property from Mixed Use Avenue to Neighborhood Center for their entire ownership,(see attached map). Please note that this will exclude two other ownerships that are adjacent to this ownership and unless modified as well,will leave them as Mixed Use Avenue.These are the Kentucky Fried Chicken located at Sprague and our east boundary and a residence located on the north side of I g Avenue at 15121 E 15°Avenue and identified as Parcel Number 45231.0215. 1 will leave the issue of their inclusion to the discretion of staff and the Planning Commission. To conclude,my clients are pleased with the direction and mandate of the City Council to repeal SARP.Notwithstanding,if there were any other outcome that spared SARP of this repeal; they desired to have this amendment considered and approved and ubmit the same accordingly. Re pee fitli SLJ rnicd, r Dwig J ume Land Use Planning Services Copy: Hultman Family Trust LLC and SET LLC, owners i - r •e'E 71 • :r ' • l_ • . ,. la • I i 11 i --- .7 - .2 I ! , ... , !, i !. . . .._. i .. .. !...21.0..,:.140,../..),,..) . . . 1 . _,,_ . . i .. , _. ; . . ..,.._. , •... 1; • . ,._ . _. , . , .0 • L ........ , _:._ . i g"goo eag [1, • 1_,_,„ I 4 ; - r ,• 3.• . .:4 9 ; . • (1c PART IV APPLICANT SIGNATURE I, DG0/6ff7- !lr- , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVE RESPO SEE-ARE MA 7c E TRUT. FULLY ,ND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. , - .4 i .- //4- 7/O / (Si•,-ture) (Date) NOTARY (For Part IV above) STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this I •_ day ofd, -.L,' ,o�rX .. , 20 k. ,. NOTARY SEAL - - .` i NOTARY'SIGNATURE Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at: ((:•1::".--'. ■ c: r .. .♦�*�%�%∎�111111 My appointment expires: / ) - \ 1 ‘,Ap,IN 4*i `r v,�,+�i•�aRngrh ��/ r.y ^�p . t -' J• Comprehensive Plan Amendment Packet Page 6 of 13 P;lCommunity Oevelopment102 Administration103 Forms-official Versions\Long Range PIIanning1Comp Plan Amend Application Form 2011.doc AUTHORIZATION TO REPRESENT I, we hereby affirm that I am the managing partner of SET LLC,owner of property bounded by Sprague Avenue and First Avenue north and south,and Progress on the west and Liberty Tire on the east per attached exhibit. We hereby authorize Dwight J Hume to represent our interest in this matter before the City of Spokane Valley reviewing bodies. date 3 7 (' .f� � Owner of Record ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ARAPAHOE ) On this , ; day of October,2010, before me,the undersigned,a Notary Public in and for the State of Colorado,duly commissioned and sworn,personally appeared -71 ,to me known to be the individual that executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged the said instrument to be free and his/her free and voluntary act and deed,for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. Witness my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written. eiv .tl.�" ,•aae••,• ct ,8 ._. -. fidup .� -�,a;•., •/0 �i` Notary Public in and for the State of Colorado ® �O� � residing at AUTHORIZATION TO REPRESENT 1,we hereby affirm that I am the managing partner of Hultman Family LLC,owner of property bounded by Sprague Avenue and First Avenue north and south,and Progress on the west and Liberty Tire on the east per attached exhibit. We hereby authorize Dwight.I Hume to represent our interest in this matter before the City of Spokane Valley reviewing bodies. r d 24 1 G ate r Own, •of -cord ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss. COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) On this =Al day of October,2010, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn,personally appeared 1„ ,. , ,,,;, „ , to me known to be the individual that executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged the said instrument to be free and his/her free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. Witness my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written. ��►�rrrirr►r�� :t,.� +I+� .0 L,:11-C i' /t` �`,��' M• BUp�`'rf,. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington , �o�ARF residing at (11f1cI. r • ray Comm.Expirrr; Fabruaiy 28,2611 Pon LAG Hultman Family CPA4Viap Supplement Al) Reason for the comprehensive plan amendment Zoning Boundary Pattern The subject property is flanked on the north by the Neighborhood Center designation and zone and then again on the east by the same. Heretofore, the 2007 zone was Community Comrtmercial for the subject property as well as those to the west, north and east. There is no particular reason to depart from this previous similar zoning pattern, especially when the Neighborhood Center zone is designated to the north and ends at Progress. Clearly the same street could have been used for the west boundary south of Sprague, Street Patte ; The subject properties are located at the SEC ofProgress and Sprague Avenue which is a controlled intersection serving a much broader residential neighborhood south of Sprague Avenue, This is similar to the land use pattern and road of Progress extending north of Sprague Avenue where the Neighborhood Center designation ends. The purpose of the Neighborhood Center is to be a nodal point of traffic that serves several neighborhoods beyond.As stated above, Progress performs that,function north of Sprague but for some reason was overlooked south of Sprague. Summary and conclusion; The subject site should be treated the same as the north side of Sprague with Progress serving as the west boundary of the Neighborhood Center designation, since Progress serves the same neighborhood collector function both north and south of Sprague, Applicable Criteria A.The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health,safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; The proposed amendment would allow the application of the Neighborhood Center designation consistent with what has already been designated along the north side of Sprague Avenue from Sullivan to Progress.As such it is therefore in compliance with applicable goals and policies supporting what has currently been designated Since it is therefore consistent with these applicable goals and policies, it bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare and the environment. 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 proposed addition to the Neighborhood Center District follows the purpose and intent of the NC designation location criteria and is consistent with what has already been approved.As such it too complies with the applicable provisions of RCW 36.70A since these state regulations dictate what the comprehensive land use plan must include. C.The proposed amendment responds to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owners control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies; Not Applicable D. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; The proposed amendment would make the westerly extension of the Neighborhood Center border consistent with the existing border north of Sprague Avenue which now extends to progress Road It also acknowledges the function of Progress as a neighborhood serving arterial and Sprague and Progress as a nodal point appropriate for the Neighborhood Center designation. E.The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Not Applicable SVMC 17.80.140 cites the following specific factors that must be addressed in order for Comprehensive Plan amendments to be approved. Please address the following factors: A. The effect upon the physical environment; The Neighborhood Center category of SARP has it's own performance standards that regulate or control the visual impacts on the physical environment. These development standards will apply if SARP is retained as an element of the comprehensive plan. B. The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes; For the most part this factor is not applicable because it is an urban development designation without any of these elements existing or planned for the immediate area, On the other hand, the high level of development standards ensures the quality of the built environment to be aesthetically pleasing. C, The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; As stated above, the development standards regulating the actual improvements within this category ensure compatibility with the surroundings. D.The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities,roads,public transportation,parks,recreation and schools; This is a retail category of similar intensity to the Mixed Use category. There are urban services in place and no additional expansion is foreseen to accommodate Neighborhood Center services to that of`the existing mixed use categor y E. The benefit to the neighborhood,city and region; The benefit to the neighborhood is convenience of accessibility for services provided, thus meeting the intent of this category. It also provides an opportunity for similar services to that across the street and thereby expands upon needed convenience services for those wishing to shop in this location. F.The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density, and the demand for such land; This factor is not applicable as this is an adjustment to an error in the plan that created an inconsistent land use designation boundary. There is no evidence that the current boundary for Neighborhood Center reflects the quantitative analysis referred to. G. The current and projected population density in the area; See item F above, and H.The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. This minor amendment to add 4.57 acres to the Neighborhood Center category is insignificant to the rest of the plan. Moreover, many uses allowed in the Mixed Use category are also allowed in the Neighborhood Center category, so there is little long term change from the one category to the other that affects the city wide plan. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS Parcel Number Parcel Size Owner 45231.0109 4000 sf SET LLC 45231,0210 31582 sf SET LLC 45231,0211 10800 sf Hultman Family LLC 45231.0212 7298 sf SET LLC 45231,0213 9031 sf Hultman Family LLC 45231.0214 26889 sf' SET LLC 45231:0216 9350 sf SET LLC 45231,0218 10710 sf flultrnan Family LLC 45231.0224 20218 sf' SET LLC 45231.0226 69135 sf SET LLC 199013 sf (4,57 ac.) 7�- 1.0432 I Qif 1.0211 cr:,_ 135 02.50 140 14�•.50�_ 1.0210 135 203.50 N- N- CO. CO 1.0214 1.0212 v 47 Cr 1.0320 ji s 203.50 1.0321 OJT 203.5 47.5 -- 60— 0 1.0226 ti co _._31.70_28.30 63.i0- 477.5 20 n 74 1.021 ST AVE- 37 69 74 Tzt iN 1.0224 90.26 1.0114 146 170.89 72.40 CNI C9 1.0322 1.0323 c 1.03241 iN 1.0326 U, ti • 1.0327 1.0328 U, vr 1,0115 6 xe49 Pr7..rc) A s 1 } ;. 4, i€ S .. , 4 ]: .- _• _. - 'y Z- i• l' ,Ley I - �T•• �S 1,,,a, 4 014 I '' -' ".... . ' . : h. i a .r. , ...L.4 4_. . -- r_ ..... -. ._.,......_.:Itr, . • = ti y1' S i. '{j4' e i 2 1 ' r i $ Lys' .' •. 1:.7..t.7 1 it-:.--,, :1 ,-._.-' I r c3rr Co AZLViIUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ne _ PLANN NG DIVISION Determination of itiof Non-Significance (DNS) PROPOSAL: CPA-01-11 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Site-specific comprehensive plan map amendment to change the designation on parcels 45321.0109, 45231.0210, 45231.0211, 45231.0212, 45231.0213, 45231.0214, 45231.0216, 45231.0218, 45231.0224 and 45231.0226 from Mixed Use Avenue (MUA) to Neighborhood Center (NCT) comprehensive plan and zoning designation. APPLICANT:Dwight Hume; 9101 North Mt. View Lane; Spokane, WA 99218 OWNER: John Hultman, Hultman Family Trust, LLC & SET LLC; 3876 East Aphrodite Ct;Boise, ID 83716 LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:Parcels 45321.0109, 45231.0210,45231.0211,45231.0212, 45231.0213, 45231.0214, 45231.0216,45231.0218, 45231.0224 and 45231.0226; located on the southeast corner of Progress Road and Sprague Avenue; further located in the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of Section 23, Township 25 North,Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington. 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 using 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: February 4,2011 SIGNATURE: / 1' APPEAL: An appeal of this determination shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within fourteen (14) calendar days aft er the date issued. The appeal must be 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. City of Spokane Valley February 4,2011 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 1 of 2 CPA-01-11 THIS DNS WAS MAILED TO: Applicant Owner City of Liberty Lake, Community Development City of Spokane,Planning Services Spokane County, Boundary Review Board Spokane County,Building and Planning Spokane County Division of Utilities—Info Svc Spokane County, Clean Air Agency Spokane County, Fire District No. 1 Spokane County, Fire District No. 8 Spokane County,Regional Health District Spokane Transit Authority (STA) Spokane Regional Transportation Council Washington State Department of Ecology,(Spokane) Washington State Department of Ecology (Olympia) City of Spokane Valley February 4,2011 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 2 of 2 CPA-01-11 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION SIIVCJ1lane Valley STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CPA-02-11 STAFF REPORT DATE: February 16,2011 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: February 24, 2011, 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: Site-specific comprehensive plan map amendment to change the designation on parcel 45174.2102 from Low Density Residential with an R-3 zoning designation to Medium Density Residential with an MF-1 zoning designation. PROPOSAL LOCATION: Parcel 45174.2102;addressed as 503 North Walnut Road; further located in the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 17,Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County, Washington. APPLICANT:Aim Martin,Heylman Martin Architects; 100 North Stevens Street; Spokane, WA 99201 OWNER: St. John Vianney Catholic Parish; 503 North Walnut Road; Spokane Valley, 99206 APPROVAL CRITERIA: Chapter 2 (Urban Land Use) of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Title 17 (General Provision), Title 19 (Zoning Regulations), and Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of 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 CPA-02-11. STAFF PLANNER:Karen Kendall,Assistant Planner, Community Development Department REVIEWED BY: Scott Kuhta,AICP, Planning Manager, Community Development Department ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Comprehensive Plan Map Exhibit 2 Zoning Map Exhibit 3: 2008 Aerial Map Exhibit 4: Vicinity Map Exhibit 5: Transportation Map Exhibit 6: Application Submittal Exhibit 7: SEPA Determination Exhibit 8: Public Comments Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-02-11 Page 1 of 7 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: November 15, 2010 Application Submitted: November 24,2010 Determination of Completeness: November 24, 2010 Issuance of Determination of Non-Significance (DNS): February 4,2011 End of Appeal Period for DNS: February 18, 2011 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: February 4,2011 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: February 9, 2011 PROPERTY INFORMATION: Size and Characteristics: The site is approximately 1.91 acres in size. The SEPA checklist states the site is flat. Comprehensive Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: Single Family Residential District(R-3) Existing Land Use: The parcel is an existing parking lot serving the St. John Vianney Catholic Church and School. SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,ZONING,AND LAND USES: North Comprehensive Plan—Low Density Residential (LDR) Zoning— Single Family Residential District(R-3) Existing Land Uses— St. John Vianney Catholic Church and single family residences South Comprehensive Plan — High Density Residential (HDR) Medium Density Residential (MDR) and Low Density Residential (LDR) Zoning — High Density Multi-family Residential District (MF-2), Medium Density Multi- family Residential District(MF-1) and Single Family Residential Urban District(R-3) Existing Land Uses— Single family residences East Comprehensive Plan—Low Density Residential (LDR) Zoning—Single Family Residential District(R-3) Existing Land Uses—Single-family residences West Comprehensive Plan—Low Density Residential (LDR) Zoning—Single Family Residential District(R-3) Existing Land Uses—St. John Vianney Catholic School and single family residences 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 CPA-02-11 Page 2 of 7 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). No appeals were received. 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 City may approve Comprehensive Plan amendments and area-wide zone map amendments if it finds that (analysis is italicized): a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment; Staff Comment: The City's adopted policies of the Comprehensive Plan state in part "the economic development strategy is to promote a more diverse economy [that] would achieve a better balance between jobs, housing and support the City's desired quality of life" (Section 2.3.1). The site-specific amendment offers additional opportunities to achieve the balance by expanding the land use available for further diverse development. The application states the intent is to provide senior citizen housing. 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; Staff Comment: 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. State-Wide Planning Goals: Goal 1: Urban Growth. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner. Goal 4: Housing. Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of this state,promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock Approval of the requested site-specific amendment would meet both state-wide planning goals cited above. The proposed location is served by all necessary urban services and provides 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 site- specific amendment is consistent with the Growth Management Act. Adjacent land use designations are consistent with the amendment. Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-02-11 Page 3 of 7 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; Staff Comment: The site-specific amendment is not responding to a change in conditions. d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; or Staff Comment: The site-specific amendment does not correct a mapping error. e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Comment: The site-specific amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The City must also consider the following factors prior to approving Comprehensive Plan amendments: a. The effect upon the physical environment; Staff Comment: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the City of Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code, the lead agency has determined that this proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. The site-specific 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; Staff Comment: The SEPA checklist states that there is no surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of site. c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; Staff Comment: The site-specific amendment is contiguous to a Medium Density Residential Comprehensive Plan designation on the south. At the time of development, standards in Title 22 (Design and Development Standards), specifically 22.70 (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; Staff Comment: 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 development, the site-specific amendment may have an impact on transportation. At the time of the submittal of any building permit applications, an additional SEPA review may be required to evaluate the impacts of the use(s) and proposed structure(s) on the physical environment in regards to transportation. e. The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-02-11 Page 4 of 7 Staff Comment: The subject site is owned by St. John Vianney, which has a K-8 school, church and play field adjacent to site-specific amendment. Senior housing is proposed to complement the existing uses on site. f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; Staff Comment: The site-specific amendment is approximately 1.91 acres in size. The intent of this comprehensive plan amendment is to merge a portion of parcel 45174.2103 with the subject parcel by a boundary line adjustment for a total of 2.7 acres. Senior housing is proposed with approximately forty (40) dwelling units. The amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the plan. g. The current and projected population density in the area; and Staff Comment: The site-specific amendment is intended to provide approximately forty (40) housing units to low-income seniors through residential bonus densities. The site-specific amendment does not demand population analysis. h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Comment: The site-specific amendment is consistent with the comprehensive plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the plan. B. COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE 19 (ZONING REGULATIONS) OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE Findings: Section 19.60.040 (Neighborhood Commercial District) Spokane Valley Municipal Code The Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment is from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential and corresponding zoning map amendment from Single-family Residential District (R-3) to Multifamily Medium Density Residential District(MF-1). The Medium Density Residential designation is intended to provide a range of housing types to accommodate anticipated residential growth with densities not to exceed twelve (12) units per acre. Multifamily residential zones should be used as transitional zoning between higher intensity land uses, such as commercial and office, to lower density single-family neighborhoods. High density residential areas should be located near services and high capacity transit facilities or transit routes. Conclusion(s): The 1.91 acres allows the opportunity for flexible development in housing types with a minimum size 3,600 square feet per dwelling unit. At the time of development, standards in Title 22 (Design and Development Standards), specifically 22.70 (Fencing, Screening, and Landscaping) will reduce impacts on adjacent low density residential designated properties by providing visual separation and physical buffers between land uses. C. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive plan states that Medium Density Residential designation represents an opportunity to provide a range of housing types to accommodate anticipated residential growth. staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-02-11 Page 5 of 7 1. LUG-1 of the Comprehensive Plan recommends preserving and protecting the character of Spokane Valley's residential neighborhoods. Staff Comment: The Medium Density Residential designation allows flexibility and a wide range of housing options. At the time of development, standards in Title 22 (Design and Development Standards), specifically 22.70 (Fencing, Screening, and Landscaping) will reduce impacts on adjacent low density residential designated properties by providing visual separation and physical buffers between land uses. 2. LUP-1.3 of the Comprehensive Plan encourages review and revisions as necessary for existing land use regulations to provide for innovation and flexibility in the design of new residential developments, accessory dwelling units and in-fill development. Staff Comment: The Medium Density Residential designation will allow flexibility in development with the option of different housing types from single-family residential, clustered housing, duplexes, townhouses and/or apartments. 3. HG-3 of the Comprehensive Plan encourages meeting the housing needs of special populations including the elderly,mentally ill, victims of domestic abuse,persons with debilitative conditions or injuries, and the homeless. Staff Comment: The Medium Density Residential designation will allow flexibility in development. The intent of this comprehensive plan amendment is to merge a portion of parcel 45174.2103 with the subject parcel by a boundary line adjustment for a total of 2.7 acres. Senior housing is proposed with approximately forty (40) dwelling units. D. PUBLIC FACILITIES Findings: The property is currently served with public water and sewer. Walnut Road provides access and designated as a Local Access Street(Exhibit 5). E. FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS Findings: Staff has received two (2) public comments concerning the proposal to date. Public comments are focused on increased traffic concerns and the potential of Valleyway Avenue being extended to Walnut Road. The comments are attached in Exhibit 8. Conclusion(s): The proposal is considered a non-project action and future development is not a part of the decision making process. At the time of future development, traffic will be reviewed and determined by the City's Traffic Engineer. Adequate public noticing was conducted for CPA-02-11 in accordance with adopted public noticing procedures. F. FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS Findings: Staff has received no agency comments to date. Conclusion(s): Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-02-11 Page 6 of 7 No concerns are noted. IV. OVERALL CONCLUSION The proposed Comprehensive Plan designation to Neighborhood Commercial and change in zoning classification to NC is consistent with the Comprehensive Plans policies and goals. 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 CPA-02-11. Planning Commission Findings and Factors (Section 17.180.140H of the SVMC): Findings a. The public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment is furthered by ensuring economic diversity and a better balance between jobs, housing and support of the City's desired quality of life. b. The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are consistent with Chapter 36.70A RCW(Growth Management Act). c. The proposed amendment is not responding to a change in conditions. d. The proposed amendment does not correct a mapping error. e. The proposed amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Factors: a. 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 proposed amendment is a non-project amendment and will not affect open space, streams, rivers, and lakes. c. The proposed amendment is contiguous to medium density residential zoned properties. Any potential impact to adjacent properties will be addressed during the development of the property and can be mitigated with design and development standards. d. Future development of the site may impact traffic in the area. At the time of development, an additional SEPA review will be required to evaluate the impacts of increased traffic. e. The proposal is consistent with the character of the neighborhood and will provide a wider array of commercial uses serving the neighborhood. f. The proposed amendment will not increase population densities and does not demand population analysis. g. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the plan. Recommended Motion: The Planning Commission finds CPA-02-11 to be consistent with Section 17.80.140 (H) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). The Planning Commission adopts the findings in the staff report and recommends approval of CPA-02-11, a change to Medium Density Residential with a subsequent zone change to Medium Density Multifamily Residential District(MF-1). Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-02-11 Page 7 of 7 Comprehensive Plan Map Spiin811dd CPA-02-11 St John Vianney c►, 2 Valleyway Valleyway f � I 3 I . I I _ V] — CPA-02-11 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map City of Spokane Valley designation from LDR to MDR; subsequent zoning Community Development Department ! change from R-3 to MF-1. Zoning Map - Spr•ingfield • CPA-02-11 ' St John Vianney Valleysvay 7 —Valle vny G _ i 1 { C W 'd 7 V7 CPA-02-11 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map City of Spokane Valley designation from LDR to MDR;subsequent zoning Community Development Department change from R-3 to MI-1. 2009 Aerial Map . i. - P.7-;ill:6 nr , ,, ,,.;, . . .-ir ,• , • .., . ..„,...... , ... .. • A fik-icim '.. 11 '1--L,r 1. ,Ka,C- F aa a- SteI 1 a&'y,ay. D,r,4 dux'y. .' -(1 , it ..-iir rt. . n_t .„...„ ii !! r i !:i, „ •fir .. � - *-- '.' �� l ti i(-krmali mil „rye [#.1 1.— W.-.;1 511111i.:1111-16111111–'4114' --,-,g/ EN r Mr* ----aufr.41, en , , .... , 1,-, 4 '`.21 - iiii 111.11E Iiiillwr:. ,... ..1 ,_. . ,, , , .. _,. .Q i 1 Fri F i IF I 1 tiiiiii, 1 T: . y T UIaiwW_ ,.. Alkr �� a 1— f . ..,.,1 '';' 41 NS NM _ - ' , 'i µmnhn r1;111115‘, John 11111111211 'a -� �, >Veanney Dir3 IC. - . . , . ..___.,.. , - , ,,.. .__,_ ,.. . , _. ._ 4.41- ,I.,1 %-w. ..-, ...., __ . ,4,,%,..i, ... ,,,„ ", ital tia, >,,r - y .� '__ c•"8 'r'e Y. ,4 tirte*• .. '�-'. rig' rIl{ gig •ft 2...-2—.11,..ll• r.,�c, ,•-V all'f ,.• L-, w ra J...:, 1,,,i ill . t.-.4 -7 m .zi-iii - I—•. — CPA-02-11 r•.1 46A1111111 , .-. 6:i •4 I ' t prorp-IA Simi. .1 ".. I.rs , �a i Mil , ' - ri, 1 _,_ 1 i. i-•. I, 4 4 IS l' ■ ri 4:1 '.-. . ,... '• 1 41 -1 "it„,.,-11 i 17: 7- , , 1 , .7.. . 4 --• 07—' ••=-.'"NFRitl +t r t,i 11 Ill 1 �r `r Y. t , +L 1 5 ilk k. , ...... iffj. . _, •.„ , isi . ,- , - .11.[A- -k •, . ... J f .. .0 41•L _ , t. 1, • . . • CPA-02-11 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map City of Spokane Valley designation from LDR to MDR; subsequent zoning Community Development Department change from R-3 to MF-1. Vicinity Map '- — `r� Sh rp ■ Shar-p w �� I e - -,■.,,,11 �- _ J:o.ne Boon ■■I ■i 1,i! ' ir7r Lam■ Bafo ,, MI - .1 a �a . bm 1. 1.1■■ 1 Arthur , I _ W _ X111111-11 maid. $Ness I 18 = �„ ,,,1 p Elementary 3 Dc n 11111 II - ___J OP. ti 11 Broadway Brnadwa �� ' a roadway_ IIIIIIII ■ � �■ 11111111 _II 11•IuII■ w �� S•i_gi ldld� p n �.i 1 l� , _ MI i On 11111111 Sri ■ 1 CPA-02-11 Ii= D I� -- III ki 111 - �_ _ Stanne V John "■ 1111„1, 1 •n -Vi ay ney, St John y =mom Gym -= g � - ohs - i11 1 1 _ V Iley% ay Va le. ay -111= - .- NNE, 1 ■ - I Cr . - In ixo - Main _ c -Main l •, Mai l I t t t-- 38 ifl�li l"i';f 1 � I P, 1 ) ? I l 1 ' �L Sprague Sprague . ± J1 __i . MEI i 1 s t -..'..-•-•,,„ i - _pplewa� umi �p\t.S-- a -- =K 1 L - _ - _ - CPA-02-11 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map City of Spokane Valley designation from LDR to MDR; subsequent zoning Community Development Department change from R-3 to MF-1. Transportation Map Aimi !' '.k Sha ■ Ilmwm _ sharp■■- �r� � MI Ii .i:.uuuiuiii!■' ■l ,■ E El FA„ e r ii:Ea II 1 immilm 1 WM rilli(11111111 ll 11.1111. MI"1171IM in ,, Eno alum mini■ ■— �■ ■�■ ■ ■ loom= ■■� : . Desmc .,■ ■ In. I= 1111 :,old�, 1IctaId„ ;Immo— . .. 01111111111 II 1 • Arthur B Ness Elementary ■ �_ I■■ 'D , ■ N II ■ r �� 111 p i � Wi.. 1�■l ��111 11111 iuiiuiiu.iiura :I1I los 1 - r ■ r ■ ■■ ■■! �■ 11111111 .... . 1■Springliel�111 ,Ij&p1 • .UN _ - _ : i!I •r ■, 1 11111III f■ r i Illil �■ Ali 1 ■■■1■■■■ Mg On�_11141ki El ■■ ■■ ■ -■ 1.- : 11111111 ■ME■ St John Vianney "■ — ■■� • ■■ — ■.I St John Vianney,Gym — r� 1� I� hhi■_ 1 a.■■ v_allr_,�:r,: �■ 1.F■ 1 ,iii 1...I11l •1� - ••Illll 41__•1111111111LU11•...I Nixon �■ - � I �� ■■ is CPA-02-11 .... ■1 El11. �■_ - ,` ■i . ■ , 1�I■ �,.1� �� ■■ 11 !I c ■■ Balfour Pa Bal • .'rk TIM Mil 71111 �■�,■■ IRE DISTRICT- liru•i, Legend SPingue Current Classification ■ .110 ... - -- - State or Federal I Principal Arterial Minor Arterial II — — Collector Proposed Principal Arterial , _rii= = • Proposed Minor Arterial Apple"3y Proposed Collector 1111,11... Lil CPA-02-11 Request: Change the Comprehensive Plan map City of Spokane Valley designation from LDR to MDR;subsequent zoning Community Development Department change from R-3 to MF-1. , - __ ..` ., - — Spokane Valley. COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION 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; d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; and e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF USE ONLY Date Submitted: /V9-°�f/0 Received by: TS Fee: I6Oc' ° PLUS#: (OOa3S'n File#: cPA-02' I I PART II — APPLICATION INFORMATION g Map Amendment; or ❑ Text Amendrftent APPLICANT NAME: ilfdlyfian AWA, i ih0 Con n Altd, I�1tA. MAILING ADDRESS: I 00 NOY ► • CITY:7944wAtes STATE:UViL ZIP PHONE 2707 FAx( ) Cs (° `4D ftYaln1a 1 8�j® CELL: EMAIL:��n� ;t� aYOt1•com 2,705 PROPERTY OWNER: r ® chrt V iAr1 ti i,G Gtitt STREET ADDRESS: 5CY3 N . VII GPI nt I CITY 1 V W'` STATE:WA ZIP: 2.06, PHON - FAX: CELL: EMAIL: Mn reit ,S`Vcflt3s^C,h.or, PARCEL NO: SITE ADDRESS: 60S t. W4Intita 17 , I COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW FeltekiA to?) PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: dtum ,1 kA CfrAdria4 ZONING DESIGNATION: PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION: IMF- I BRIEFLY EXPLAIN REASON FOR MAP OR TEXT AMENDMENT(attached full explanation on separate sheet of paper): Tb4ene, / I, r REVISED 2/2610 Page 3 of 4 i Spokane Valley. COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PART III — AUTHORIZATION (Signature of legal owner or applicant) I , (print name) swear or affirm that the above responses are made truthfu ly and t the best of my knowledge. /r 17 ki,ov, zoo .i�nature}' (Date) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this // -- day of N°v4 ✓ ,20 II NOTARY SEAL 41611114.11.-- NOTARY SIGNATURE Robert J Joy Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary Public State of Washington My Appointment Expires 04/18/2012 Residing at: Spo , My appointment expires: //81,?-0/ 7-- LEGAL OWNER AUTHORIZATION: If the ap licant is not the legal owner(s), the owner must provide the following acknowledgement; I, Ititgak h' , 1. , owner of the above described property do hereby authorize— f47/14 TT (1111/247L/b i to represent me and my interests in all matters regarding this application. REVISED 2/2610 Page 4 of 4 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Spokane AMENDMENT APPLICATION Valley® SVMC 17.80.140 Community Development— Planning Division 11703 E Sprague Ave Suite B-3 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.720.5026 • Fax: 509.688.0037 • planning®spokanevalley.org Year 6QLI ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROCESS The City of Spokane Valley is accepting applications for map and text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan for the 2010 annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment cycle. The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) allows Comprehensive Plan amendments only one time per year. Any interested person, organization, agency or business may submit suggestions, proposals, or requests to the City for changes to the Comprehensive Plan, including maps and text. PROCEDURES 1. Application Period. Applications are due by November 1st of each year to be considered during the next calendar year amendment cycle. Submittals received after the deadline will be considered during the next annual amendment cycle. 2. Staff Review and Report. Spokane Valley Planning Staff will review all applications and will prepare a report and recommendation to the Spokane Valley Planning Commission. The report will analyze how each proposal addresses amendment criteria established by Spokane Valley City Council in Ordinance 06-020. All application documents and staff reports will be available for public review. 3. Planning Commission Public Hearing. The Spokane Valley Planning Commission will conduct a formal public hearing on all proposed amendments. The Commission will consider amendments individually and will examine the cumulative impacts of all amendments collectively. The Commission will prepare one recommendation to the Spokane Valley City Council, including findings on each individual proposed amendment. 4. City Council Review and Decision. Within 60 days of receipt of the Planning Commission's recommendation, City Council may choose to adopt the individual amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission, disapprove the amendments, or modify and adopt the proposal. If the Council chooses to substantially modify a proposal, they must either conduct a public hearing or refer the proposal back to the Planning Commission for further consideration. 5. Notice. Each year, the City will provide notice of the annual amendment cycle at least 60 days prior to the application deadline via display ads in local newspapers, email to interested parties and on the City's website. Notice of public hearings and public meetings will be provided to the public as set forth in the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. At a minimum, notice will be provided to surrounding properties within 400' for site-specific Land Use Map amendments at least 14 days prior to any public hearing. Notice will also be posted on-site at least 14 days prior to any public hearing. Legal notice will also be published in the newspaper. 6. Appeal Procedures. City Council decisions on Comprehensive Plan amendments may be appealed to the Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board within 60 days of publication of notice of adoption, in accordance with RCW 36.70A.290(2). 7. Staff Contact. Questions may be directed to Mike Basinger, Senior Planner (mbasinger spokanevalleV.orq) or Greg McCormick, Planning Manager (gmccormick a(�spokanevalley.orq), 509-921-1000. REVISED 2/2610 Page 1 of 4 Spokane Valley. COMPREHENISVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PART I - REQUIRED MATERIAL ""THE PLANNING DIVISION WILL NOT ACCEPT YOUR APPLICATION IF THE REQUIRED MATERIALS ARE NOT PROVIDED** A. Submit the following for MAP AMENDMENTS: • Pre-Application Meeting Request (include copy of staff worksheet from meeting) N0% (® ,_y Completed Application Form !►�1 Application and SEPA Fee ►�1 SEPA Checklist: One (1)copy of completed State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) Environmental Checklist, including option Non-Project Action supplemental form. (Note: Any previous environmental documents that are relevant to this project should be included and may be adopted by reference.) ❑ Notice of Application packet for 400-foot notification. (Please note: DO NOT submit the notice of application packet until you have been contacted by the City. Addresses must be current within 30 days of the Planning Commission public hearing.) M 1 One(1)copy of a narrative describing the following: 1. State the reason for the Comprehensive plan Map Amendment. 2. Describe how the proposed changed meets the approval criteria below; a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; 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; 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; d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; and e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Describe how the proposal addresses the following specific factors; a. The effect upon the physical environment; b. The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes; c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks, recreation and schools; e. The benefit to the neighborhood, city and region; f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density, and the demand for such land; g. The current and projected population density in the area; and h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. B. Submit the following for TEXT AMENDMENTS: ❑ Pre-Application Meeting Request (include copy of staff worksheet from meeting) ❑ Completed Application Form ❑ One (1) copy of the text proposed to be changed,showing deletions by strikethrough and additions by underline. ❑ One (1) copy of a narrative describing the following: 1. Why the change is needed and the potential land use impacts if approved; 1. Describe how the proposed changed meets the approval criteria below; a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; 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; REVISED 212610 Page 2 of 4 Briefly Explain Reason for Map Amendment Parcel 45174.2102 is currently zoned R-3,with a Comprehensive Plan designation of Low Density Residential. This parcel serves as a parking lot for St. John Vianney Catholic Church. Parcel 45174.2103, also owned by St. John Vianney Catholic Church,is the parcel immediately adjacent and to the south of the above-listed Parcel 45174.2102. This parcel is zoned MF-1,with a Comprehensive Plan designation of Medium Density Residential. St. John Vianney Catholic Church has a goal to create approximately forty(40)housing units for senior citizens on the two parcels listed above. Consistent with Chapter 5— Housing of the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Goal HG-3 states "Encourage meeting the housing needs of special populations including the elderly..." Policy HP-3.5 states "Encourage the location of new facilities for the special populations identified above within one-quarter mile of transit corridors." Sprague Avenue, exactly one-quarter mile south of the proposed site, is a major public transit corridor. The subject parcel (seeking to be changed from an R-3 Low Density Residential designation to a MF-1 Medium Density Residential designation) is necessary as an MF-1 in order to achieve the Parish goal of providing a safe, affordable inventory of housing for senior citizens. By means of a Boundary Line Adjustment between the two parcels, a single parcel of approximately 2.7 acres in an MF-1 zone, Medium Density Residential, can achieve 32 housing units. Through providing housing to low-income seniors,bonus residential densities can be achieved. In addition,through providing site amenities that benefit the public, in accordance with SVMC 19.35.040,plus the bonus density of low- income housing, a final unit total of fifty-one (51) units could be achieved on the site. The future project contemplates forty (40)units. Narrative to describe the following: 1. Reason for the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment: St. John Vianney Catholic Parish wishes to develop land that is adjacent to the church and elementary school on their campus into a project to provide housing for senior citizens. The church owns the parcel on which they are requesting a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, as well as the adjacent parcels to the north, south and west. To the east is a public street: Walnut Road. In order to assemble the land parcels so they are adequate for the future housing project, a Boundary Line Adjustment is necessary between Parcels#45174.2102 and#45174.2103. Currently Parcel#45174.2102 is designated R-3, LDR. In order to achieve the multi-unit senior citizen housing project,the Comprehensive Plan designation need to be changed to MF-1, MDR. 2.Describe how the proposed change meets the approval criteria below: a. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare and protection of the environment. If the subject site is zoned to a higher density, in accordance with the Washington State Growth Management Act(GMA) (RCW 36.70A.020 (2)) multi-family development will be enabled to occur in close proximity to already established centers and corridors with services and public transit. 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. City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 5-Housing 5.1 Planning Context. 5.1.1 Washington State Growth Management Act states the following: The Washington State Growth Management Act provides the following guidance applicable to housing and neighborhoods: • Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provide in an efficient manner. ▪ Reduce inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development. ▪ Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of this state, and promote a variety of residential densities. The subject site,Parcel#45174.2102, if enabled to become MF-1, MDR,will fulfill the above-stated goals. Higher density housing for low-income senior (' f citizens will be developed in close proximity public facilities and services along Sprague Avenue. 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. Not applicable d. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error Not applicable e. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Not applicable 3. Describe how the proposal addresses the following specific factors: a. The effect upon the physical environment. Higher density housing in close proximity to already-established centers and corridors (in this case Sprague Avenue)preserves undeveloped land and reduces inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development. b. The effect on open space, streams, rivers and lakes. Not applicable c. The compatability with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods. In accordance with the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan: Chapter 5— Housing, 5.1 Planning Context, "GMA further requires that a housing element ensuring the vitality and character of established residential neighborhoods that includes: Identification of sufficient land area for the number of needed housing units, including government assisted housing, housing for low income and special needs housing." If the subject site becomes MF-1,MDR,via the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process,the above-stated goal will have been achieved. The new zoning will allow for in-fill in a nearly urban setting of medium-density housing for low- income senior citizens. d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation,parks, recreation and schools. At the time of application for a Building Permit, a concurrency study will be undertaken. Undetermined as of yet,however,public services along Sprague Avenue, less than a quarter mile to the south of the subject site, are plentiful. e. The benefit to the neighborhood, city and region. Senior citizens provide an enduring, stabilizing fabric to a neighborhood. This neighborhood has the benefit of a K-8 school along with a church as cornerstones to the subject site. Through the Comp Plan Amendment and zoning change that will enable construction of housing for the elderly, enhancement to the neighborhood, city and region will be realized. f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density, and the demand for such land. Following a BLA for the two parcels slated to become the site for the future senior citizen housing development, a single parcel of approximately 2.7 acres will exist. Per SVMC 19.40.070, a zoning designation of MF-1 allows twelve (12)units per acre. When a Residential Bonus Density is utilized,per SVMC 19.35.040,with specific steps and public amenities incorporated into the future project, approx. fifty-one (51) housing units are allowed. The project being contemplated by St. John Vianney Catholic Parish is planning forty(40) senior housing units. f Discuss the current and projected population density in the area. From information taken from the demographics report found at www.selectspokane.com (Spokane Regional Site Selector and Property Locator), the current(2010)population indicates a total of 9,599 persons living within a one-mile radius of the subject parcel. The projected population within a one-mile radius of the subject site in the year 2015 is for a projected total of 9,556 persons. g. Discuss the effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan It is anticipated that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment being sought(to change the zoning and land use designation of Parcel#45174.2102 from R-3 LDR to MF-1 MDR)will not have an effect on other parts of the Plan. A Gsrl 4 fS1.`1S.0�01 . Architecture Planning Interior Design eylman Martin and associates NORTH 100 STEVENS PARKA/0 PLAZA SPOKANE.WASHINGTON 99201 1509)838-2707 FAX(509)8384785 ST. JOHN VIANNEY COMP. PLAN AMENDMENT 505 N.IIALHW,SPOKANE VALLEY,NA 99214 SITE PLAN 11-15-10 01 vorli� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) PROPOSAL: CPA-02-11 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Site-specific comprehensive plan map amendment to change the designation on parcel 45174.2102 from Low Density Residential with an R-3 zoning designation to Medium Density Residential with an MF-1 zoning designation. APPLICANT:Ann Martin,Heylman Martin Architects; 100 North Stevens Street; Spokane, WA 99201 OWNER: St. John Vianney Catholic Parish; 503 North Walnut Road; Spokane Valley, 99206 LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:Parcel 45174.2102; addressed as 503 North Walnut Road; further located in the northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 17, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane County,Washington. 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 using 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: February 4,2011 SIGNATURE: /we- APPEAL: An appeal of this determination shall be submitted to the Community Deve opment Department within fourteen (14) calendar days after the date issued. The appeal must be 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. City of Spokane Valley February 4,2011 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 1 of 2 CPA-02-11 THIS DNS WAS MAILED TO: Applicant Owner City of Liberty Lake, Community Development City of Spokane,Planning Services Spokane County, Boundary Review Board Spokane County, Building and Planning Spokane County Division of Utilities—Info Svc Spokane County, Clean Air Agency Spokane County, Fire District No. 1 Spokane County, Fire District No. 8 Spokane County,Regional Health District Spokane Transit Authority(STA) Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) Washington State Department of Ecology(Spokane) Washington State Department of Ecology (Olympia) City of Spokane Valley February 4,2011 Determination of Non-Significance(DNS) Page 2 of 2 CPA-02-11 Karen Kendall From: Deanna Griffith Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 3:15 PM To: Karen Kendall Subject: FW: Proposed Project St. John Vianney Church: Comment for your Comp Plan amendment Deal/WO! From: Chris Thompson On Behalf Of City Hall Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 1:55 PM To: Deanna Griffith Subject: Preposed Project St.John Vianney Church: Deanna, Can you please forward to the appropriate person? Thanks, Chris Christine Thompson City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Ave., Ste. 106 Spokane Valley, 99206 Direct: (509)720-5110 Fax: (509) 921-1008 cthompson(cr�spokanevalleV.orq Web:www.spokanevalley.orq (Contents of this email and reply are subject to public disclosure) From bailey51103 @comcast.net jmailto:bailey51103 @comcast.netl Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 1:43 PM To: City Hall Subject: Cell# Preposed Project St.John Vianney Church: To Whom it May Concern: By way of this e-mail, I would like to express my concerns regarding the new project @ St. John Vianney Church located @ 503 N. Walnut Road. I am a home owner on the corner of Valleyway and Herald and would be directed impacted IF Valleyway is made a through street. Valleyway is presently a Bus Route for small elementary school children. The increase in traffic would be a safety issue and of great concern for many parents in the local neighborhood, As a home owner, I am also extremely concerned about the increase in traffic and possible loss of value to my primary residence and greatest asset. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at the e-mail address listed above. Thank You 1 Maria Naccarato Cell# 509-638-5743 2 Karen Kendall From: Deanna Griffith Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 3:14 PM To: Karen Kendall Subject: FW: Forward to Planning Commission Comments for you. yea wwa From: Chris Thompson On Behalf Of City Hall Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 12:19 PM To: Deanna Griffith Subject: FW: Forward to Planning Commisson Christine Thompson City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Ave., Ste. 106 Spokane Valley, 99206 Direct: (509)720-5110 Fax: (509)921-1008 chompson a(�,spokanevalley.org Web: www.spokanevalley.ord (Contents of this email and reply are subject to public disclosure) From: Stevens, Shelly (RBC Wealth Mgmt)Imailto:shelly.stevens@rbc.com.1 Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 11:41 AM To: City Hall Subject: Forward to Planning Commisson RE: 40 unit low rise senior housing on Walnut Road and Valleyway. Please do not allow Valleyway to turn into a through street based on this project. Valleyway currently dead ends on Farr and on Walnut, please see that is stays that way. Thanks so much for your consideration I live at 312 North Walnut Road Spokane Valley WA 99206 Sherry L.Stevens Investment Associate Spokane Branch Office 509-363-5509 RBC Wealth Management does not accept buy, sell, or cancel orders by e—mail, or any instructions by e—mail that would require your 1 signature. Information contained in this communication is not considered an official record of your account and does not supersede normal trade confirmations or statements. Any information provided has been prepared from sources believed to be reliable but is not guaranteed, does not represent all available data necessary for making investment decisions and is for informational purposes only. This message is intended only for residents of the states in which the sender is registered as applicable to the content . This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not waive any related rights and obligations . Any distribution, use, or copying of this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient is unauthorized. If you receive this e-mail in error, please advise me (by return e-mail or otherwise) immediately. Information received by or sent from this system is subject to review by supervisory personnel, is retained and may be produced to regulatory authorities or others with a legal right to the information. Unless specified by the sender, e-mail messages are not encrypted. As such, client sensitive information sent to or received from your RBC Wealth Management Financial Consultant electronically may not be secure . With respect to the companies that are the subject of an equity research report not authored by our firm that is included in this electronic mail message, RBC Wealth Management is required to disclose to you certain conflicts of interest . Any such disclosures may be obtained by either accessing our web site at https : //www. rbccm. com/GLDisclosure/PublicWeb/DisclosureLookup. aspx?EntitylD =2 or by mailing a request for such information to RBC Wealth Management Research Publishing, 60 South Sixth Street, Mailstop P18, Minneapolis, MN 55402 . RBC Wealth Management, a division of RBC Capital Markets Corporation. Member NYSE/FINRA/SIPC. 2 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNLNG DIVISION Sp(Ilex okane STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE Valley PLANNING COMMISSION CPA-03-11 STAFF REPORT DATE: February 17,2011 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: February 24, 2011, beginning at 6:00 p.m., Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 101, Spokane Valley, Washington 99206. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: City initiated, comprehensive plan amendment to remove the entire Sprague and Appleway Revitalization Plan(SARP) and associated zoning designations and return those areas to the City of Spokane Valley zoning in effect on October 15,2009. Associated Comprehensive Plan and Development Code text Amendments necessary to remove all reference to the Subarea Plan are also considered. PROPOSAL LOCATION: The amendment area includes all properties located within the Subarea Plan. Generally,the plan area consists of approximately 1000 acres of properties lining along and located in between the Sprague Ave. and the Appleway Boulevard rights-of-way, and extending west from Interstate 90 to just east of Sullivan Road. The area generally lies between E. Main Ave.IE Riverside Ave. to the north and E. 4th Ave. to the south. See Exhibit 4 for the exact location. APPLICANT: City of Spokane Valley Community Development Department, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley, WA 99206. 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) . SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Division has not provided a recommendation to approve or deny the proposal. The Commission should review the information and discuss the impacts of eliminating the Subarea Plan as described in CPA-03-11. STAFF PLANNER:LORI BARLOW,AICP,Associate Planner, Community Development Department REVIEWED BY: SCOTT KUHTA,AICP, Planning Manager, Community Development Department EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: SARP Area Exhibit 2 Existing Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations Map Exhibit 3: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations Map Exhibit 4: Existing Zoning Map Exhibit 5: Proposed Zoning Map Exhibit 6: Associated SVMC Code Text Amendments Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-03-1 I Page 1 of 10 I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Subarea Plan was developed in response to the community's desire to reverse the visual and economic decline of the Sprague and Appleway Corridor, restore the area as a viable commercial area within the community, and plan for the development of the City Center for the City of Spokane Valley. The plan provides the implementing regulations to achieve the desired change along the corridor, and also identifies corresponding public and private investments necessary for the plan goals to be accomplished. A major component of the city actions included plans to reconfigure portions of Sprague Avenue to a two-lane,two- way street with wide sidewalks, and extend Appleway Boulevard, also as a two-way street. The reconfiguration of streets was intended to reverse the negative impacts to business resulting from the one way street configuration, as well as make the area pedestrian friendly. The Plan was based on the broad policies established in the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan for a new City Center and mixed-use/commercial development along the corridor. Planning for the Subarea plan began in 2006 with community focus group meetings and followed by public meetings. After several years of effort the plan was formally adopted by Ordinance 09-013. Subsequent to plan adoption, Council directed staff to review the plan on a zone by zone basis with affected property owners, business operators and interested citizens. As a result of the zone district review, changes were considered to the plan as code text amendments, with other changes to be docketed as a comprehensive plan amendment during the annual amendment process. Subsequent to the complete review of the Subarea Plan, the Council determined that the Plan no longer conformed with the policy direction of the Council and directed staff to begin the process to remove the Plan in its entirety. Prior to the beginning of the annual amendment process the City Center portion of the plan was eliminated by an Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Ordinance 11-001. 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): February 4,2011 End of Appeal Period for DNS: February 18, 2011 Date of Published Notice of Public Hearing: February 4,2011 Date of Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: N/A Date of Public Hearing: February 24, 2011 PROPERTY INFORMATION(GENERAL): Size and Characteristics: The plan area consists of approximately 1000 acres of privately and publicly owned properties. The area is relatively flat. No environmentally sensitive areas are known to exist within the plan area. Existini Comprehensive Gateway Commercial Centers, Gateway Commercial Avenue, Plan Land Use Community Boulevard, Neighborhood Centers, and Mixed Use Designations: Avenue; (Note: City Center area was redesignated as Mixed Use Avenue by an Emergency Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Ordinance 11-001) Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-03-11 Page 2 of 10 Proposed Comprehensive Regional Commercial, Community Commercial, Office, Medium Plan Land Use Designations Density Residential, Corridor Mixed Use, High Density Residential, (Oct. 15, 2009 Parks/Open Space Designations): Existing Zoning: Gateway Commercial Center, Gateway Commercial Avenue, Community Boulevard, Neighborhood Center, and Mixed Use Avenue; (Note: City Center area was rezoned Mixed Use Center by Ordinance 11-0002) Proposed Zoning (Oct 15, Community Facilities, Regional Commercial, Multi-Family-1, 2009 Zoning): Corridor Mixed Use, I-2, Heavy Industrial, Community Commercial, and Multi-Family 2. Existing Land Use: The corridor is predominantly occupied by commercial and retail oriented uses. At major intersections along the corridor, such as Pines and Argonne-Mullan, the uses are generally office type uses in the north and south direction from Sprague. The uses south of Appleway R.O.W. are a mix of residential and limited commercial. Major intersections along the corridor are developed with neighborhood retail, and the area west of Argonne-Mullan contains mostly auto dealers and auto related commercial and service type uses. SURROUNDING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,ZONING,AND LAND USES: North Comprehensive Plan—Predominantly Low, Medium and High Density Residential; Heavy Industrial, Community Commercial and Office Zoning — R-3, R-4, MF-1 and MF-2; Garden Office and Office, Community Commercial, and I-2, Heavy Industrial Existing Land Uses — Predominantly Residential with commercial and Office uses along the major intersections of Sprague South Comprehensive Plan—Predominantly Medium and High Density Residential; Community Commercial and Corridor Mixed Use Zoning—MF-1 and MF-2; Office, CMU and Community Commercial Existing Land Uses—Predominantly Residential East Comprehensive Plan —Low, Medium and High Density Residential; and Community Commercial Zoning—R-4, MF-1 and MF-2; Community Commercial Existing Land Uses—Commercial, Office and Residential West Comprehensive Plan—Heavy Industrial, Regional Commercial and Office Zoning—I-2, Office and MF-2 Existing Land 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 Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-03-11 Page 3 of 10 was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. Conclusion(s): The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act and Title 21 of the SVMC have been fulfilled by the submittal of the required SEPA Checklist, and the issuance of the City's threshold determination consisting of a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS). 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 amendment due to the deterioration of the economy and opposition to the implementation of the plan. The public has conveyed to the Council, with written comment and verbal testimony their belief that the Subarea plan creates an additional layer of regulation that in their opinion results in unwarranted project design and development costs not desired by the community. The costs create a financial burden to property and business owners, which in combination with the current economic conditions, has stifled, rather than stimulated, development within the subarea. The proposed amendment reduces the amount of regulations, creates a more flexible environment for developers, and eliminates the restrictive corridor identity established in the Subarea plan. However, if the plan is eliminated the conditions along the corridor may remain unchanged, with the expectation that vacancies and property disinvestment could continue. If the cycle continues properties will become increasingly more disadvantaged. This proposal has no potential impact on the safety of the community. It can be concluded that the vocal consensus of the community does not support the subarea plan goals and policies, and therefore eliminating the plan will support the health and welfare of the community by returning the area to its previous Comprehensive Plan Land Use designations and zoning. However, it also can be concluded that eliminating the plan does not address the declining conditions that are recognized along the corridor, and the continuation of the decline is contrary to the health and welfare of the community. 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; Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-03-11 Page 4 of 10 RCW 36.70A, The Growth Management Act, (GMA) requires cities and counties to adopt comprehensive plans and development regulations that are consistent with thirteen statewide planning goals. RCW 36.70A.080 authorizes jurisdictions to adopt optional elements and subarea plans. A subarea plan is not a required element, but one that is allowed so long as it is consistent with the goals and policies of the adopted comprehensive plan. The GMA planning goals require citizen participation and coordination to be a part of the plan development and allows for amendments to occur on an annual basis. The proposed amendment would eliminate the subarea plan, and amend the comprehensive plan in part, while retaining the goals and policies that directed the development of the subarea plan within the comprehensive plan. The proposed amendment to eliminate the plan is based on public dissatisfaction with the plan. Public comment has indicated that the development of the plan was based on a fraction of input from the community and does not represent the community's interests. The public comment received does not dispute the general direction of the goals and policies found within the Comprehensive Plan, but contends the Subarea plan developed is not what the community envisioned. Alternatively, other members of the community contend that the plan should not be abandoned recognizing that change is anticipated over a long period of time and that it is premature to determine that the plan will not provide the expected results. Regardless of the opposing opinions, the conclusion can be drawn that the elimination of the subarea plan will not cause the comprehensive plan to be inconsistent with the GMA, and it will not cause the development regulations to be inconsistent with the goals and policies of the plan. Retaining the goals and policies within the plan regarding the development of a city center and revitalization of the Sprague Corridor will allow the community to develop a plan and corresponding regulations in line with current community preference. 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. Over 1,100 properties are located within the Sprague and Appleway Corridor Plan area. The amendment does not respond to any change in conditions to individual properties but is in response to the consensus of vocal citizens and property owners who contend that the plan does not reflect the needs and/or desires of the community, that the design standards within the form based code are not practical to apply to existing development, and that additional regulations have become a deterrent to developers considering the corridor. However, two specific conditions have changed since the adoption of the plan. First, the council has eliminated the city center portion of the plan as an emergency comprehensive plan amendment. Second, the City has not resolved the issues that would enable the City to acquire the Appleway right-of-way making it possible to extend Appleway in the future, as well as impeding the ability of those affected property owners to meet the requirements for frontage improvements concurrent with development. Two conclusions may be drawn from the latter statement: The first is that those properties may be unfairly burdened until the right of way is improved; and the second conclusion is that the principals of the plan are working by insuring that Appleway does not continue to develop as the "Back door of Sprague. " Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-03-11 Page 5 of 10 It can be concluded that a shift in the economic climate, community support, and obstacles to obtaining the Appleway right-of-way have 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 does not address a deficiency in the Comprehensive 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 and has no identifiable impact on the environment. Development regulations in conjunction with environmental review ensure that all project related adverse impacts are mitigated at the time of development. b. The effect on open space, streams, rivers, and lakes; There is no surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of subarea. Balfour Park is the only designated open space within the proposed amendment area. There are no impacts anticipated. c. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; The proposed amendment is to return the land use designations and zoning to those in place prior to the implementation date of the Subarea Plan on Oct. 15, 2009. The designations and zoning were established consistent with the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan adopted on April 25, 2006. Development regulations address impacts anticipated due to incompatible uses and SEPA provides the tool to address impacts not anticipated by regulations. Since the amendment proposes to restore land use designations and associated zoning to that which was previously in place, the status quo will be maintained, and no impacts are anticipated. d. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities,roads,public transportation,parks,recreation, and schools; The City of Spokane Valley addresses the 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. 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. However the community has noted that the Sprague Avenue and Appleway Boulevard configured as a one-way street have negatively impacted business, and that too few north- south connections exist to conveniently provide access to business on either street. The limited connections and fast travel speeds of the thru-traffic create unfriendly and dangerous conditions for pedestrians. Book II: Development Regulations, and Book III: City Actions address these conditions, but to this date no measures have been implemented or projects Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-03-11 Page 6of10 initiated that would bring about change. As a result of eliminating the plan, the conditions noted may remain unchanged. Traffic Studies completed for the EIS by Glatting Jackson and Associates prior to the plan adoption have shown that reconfiguring Sprague Avenue and Appleway Boulevard would have marginal impact on the level of service. Eliminating the plan does not create, nor address known impacts, but allows for conditions to continue. e. The benefit to the neighborhood, City, and region; The proposal would restore many uses within the subarea neighborhoods to that of a conforming status and restore commercial entitlements to properties that were rezoned. However, studies prepared by Eco-northwest indicated that the city has a surplus inventory of vacant and available commercial and office properties. Shopping trends indicated a consumer preference for anchor based shopping centers located at major crossroads which led to the underutilization of the commercial zoned properties. The Subarea plan zoning established a pattern of centers, boulevard and avenue segments in keeping with contemporary consumer and investor preference. The shift of entitlements within the plan attempted to reposition the corridor properties to capture value in the contemporary market place. Eliminating the plan will restore commercial entitlements contributing to the surplus of commercial properties. A benefit to the city may be realized by deciding the fate of the Subarea Plan in a final fashion as the continued controversy creates an uncertain climate for developers. f. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; The Subarea plan contains approximately 1,000 acres of underutilized land. The proposal would return all acreage to the October 15, 2009 land use designations and zoning. The EIS prepared for the Subarea Plan noted that in general, there is not a significant difference between the "terms of envisioned growth"for the corridor and the land uses established within the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. Under either scenario, SARP, or pre-SARP Sprague Avenue will take many years to transform from strip retail to a mixed-use avenue. However the combination of form based zoning and the reconfiguration of Sprague and Appleway was intended to provide a foundation for redevelopment. A few differences are noted from the report: First, the mixed use vision for the Sprague corridor is similar under both alternatives (pre SARP and SARP) in that it allows a mix of uses. The subarea plan regulations require compatible building types, with regulations that control the building form,placement and architectural design of buildings. The current zoning regulations (in this case zoning prior to October 15, 2009) are use-based considering primarily use and bulk standards, such as minimum setbacks, height limits and maximum coverage requirements. Second, the subarea plan concentrated like uses into centers and segments. The elimination of the plan will allow commercial development essentially up and down the corridor increasing the amount of land available for generalized commercial uses. The elimination of the Community Boulevard District will return the zoning such that generally commercial uses are Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-03-11 Page 7of10 allowed on the north side of Appleway Boulevard and residential uses allowed on the south side. Last, regulating the design of buildings was intended to encourage a mixed use environment. Residential development along Sprague is less likely to occur when the zoning code is use- based, and not form-based. g. The current and projected population density in the area; and According to the EIS prepared for the Subarea Plan, impacts to population, housing and employment were not anticipated to be more significant than the impacts evaluated during the adoption of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan.(SVCP) Both the Subarea plan and the SVCP encourage residential growth along the corridor, however the subarea promotes higher density apartments and townhouses. The subarea plan analysis predicted an increase in employment,particularly in the City Center area. Since the City Center designation has been removed, and more commercial entitlements would be restored up and down the corridor, the strip commercial land use pattern is expected to continue. If the pattern of vacancies continues, a decrease in employment will be expected. h. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal would eliminate the mapped area and zoning associated with the Subarea plan. The pre-SARP land use designations were consistent with the goals and policies within the SVCP at the time of adoption, and remain consistent. The mixed use vision for Sprague Avenue is similar under the Subarea plan, and the previous land use designations. However, mixed use development may be less likely to occur under the use based zoning. 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 includes the proposal to eliminate zoning associated with the Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan and replace the zoning for affected properties with the zoning that was in effect on October 15, 2009. All references to the Subarea Plan and its authority are proposed to be removed from the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. The following sections of the SVMC are proposed to be amended: Title 19 Zoning Regulations, section 19.110.020 and 19.140.010; Title 5 Business Licenses and Regulations, Chapter 5.10 Adult Entertainment Establishments; and Appendix D, Spokane Valley Sprague and Appleway Corridors Subarea Plan. Conclusion(s): Rezoning the properties within the subarea to be consistent with the proposed land use designation would not result in any inconsistencies with Title 19 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. Any non-conforming uses that existed prior to the adoption of the Subarea Plan, would likely be nonconforming at the time the proposed zoning became effective. C. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Section I of Ordinance # 09-013,which amends the Comprehensive Plan Map and adopts the Land Use Designations set forth in the Sprague and Appleway Subarea Plan, identifies in great detail 41 supporting Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-03-11 Page 8of10 Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies. The Subarea plan is supported by the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. However, based on public input and council direction the subarea plan is not representative of the community's vision, nor the Council's policy direction. Section 3 of Ordinance #07-015 which adopts Title 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 as portion of city of Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code identifies in detail that the Development Regulations are consistent with numerous Goals and Policies from Chapter 1 Introduction, Chapter 2, Land Use, Chapter 3 — Transportation, Chapter 5 —Housing, Chapter 6,- Private and Public Utilities, Chapter 7-Economic Development, Chapter 8 - Natural Environment, Chapter 9—Parks, Recreation and the Arts and Chapter 10 Neighborhoods of the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore it can be concluded that the proposed zoning regulations are consistent with the comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies. Goal EDG -7 of the Comprehensive Plan states, " Maintain a regulatory environment that offers flexibility, consistency,predictability and clear direction." The continuation of the sub area plan creates an unpredictable environment for developers as staff struggles to implement the regulations contained within the plan consistent with the policy direction of the council. D. FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS Findings: Staff has received no written public comment concerning the proposal as a result of the comprehensive plan amendment noticing requirements to date. However, at the direction of Council, staff conducted a review of the plan by hosting 5 public meetings between May 2010 and September 2010. Both written and verbal comments were received during the process. As a result of the comments, council addressed issues through the code text amendment process, and then added the remaining issues to the annual comprehensive plan docket for further consideration. Conclusion(s): Adequate public noticing was conducted for CPA-03-11 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 Considerable analysis was completed during the adoption of the Subarea Plan. The Plan was determined to adequately establish the planning and design framework to restore the vitality, functionality, and beauty of the Sprague and Appleway Corridor consistent with the free-market and community's vision. While the plan was built on public participation and governmental support, it appears that the vision within the plan may no longer be supported by the community and current council. The Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. However, the plan is intended to be a living document and as such should respond to the visions and preference of the community and its leaders. RCW 36.70A.130 of the Growth Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-03-11 Page 9 of 10 Management Act identifies the review process and schedule for annual updates acknowledging that revisions are necessary to address changing conditions within communities. This process has been followed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION No recommendation is provided. The Planning Commission should consider the information within the staff report and discuss the merits of eliminating the plan as it relates to the public health and welfare of the community. The Commission should forward their recommendation, along with findings of fact to the Council for their consideration. Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission for CPA-03-11 Page 10of10 HIP _ -':I ' ° ism �\\ � \�-nn.Plot?• .11--III: '._ :111' IIIIII 11 i <.1111. 111.. '11111 �I.i. _slits errii1r ■IIIII :::rr..7F:•e+ 11111-I 1111"_ _ 1® Ell nu: 111: Inn 1 •./ lilln Illy:i' %-nlllp; iiui iud: r..ran_..Ir:.:ri?'=>r'.�.�:=__ err j% n:yllll I7r" ,. 1 .. '�- _/i �� ':11i 1�®� anise•;ir, '::':.:VIIGG:-F1= -��:1: WI: ,i� :y�iluunnnn_u GG1'tG�: 'e: T``c� -:. .. ES1 ��• N.�I1.:Gllm�l�al lllllllr ///...iII. .C1-�: E n.11n11' ,i�11%i•-1111 , I- u /*mill:■;44,... !!'==G;LII'• ii ndlrr.m.r un1511.:1111:nun um !'L I •lIG1" 'liis " ll =1j]1 must !L. n p.`.' 11111: ANN El riE.llllll'22M =T ill:y -11 :111111111 PVTIT II4:G: K:i�e.•lure.ellli.elll!a.+llr�:l,•l.lix.li: pi:1%M 11111nn nnu.11u,1.A ': ..,n CI��IIIIII.. .. II'Gil11111111!I1�I,i'ILL111111111111111[1•::11 :CCCCC77777 ECM] ^_S[CCC7777. m ii!is i%i ti. 774 • iii ; - } �= ' nuctiO 7333 C CLL 14=1,,11:=Lb`tillli;jjjL; GLI) 111 \1r�I+:./J-1..-! n1n 11111111111: >:1°:111Ir11111\ , 'LIE till alma e,1 IIIIIf 111�• :' Aii .11111 :II11 1n.z� ':: ■II.r 111.. 11e: - In ICI111IK:: : IPA; i 1i01 \\n 11 1::LIIIIIa.. : 1l11111I1e III" .1. - 11n'...71111111��■ /;ice Amli:: 11 i :1111,.11.1 ;: li 11 - t e n - J nl , -'1 11 "-- - i .1- I'iinl AIIII m 1 lip !iin Al JA ME: E: III••Inl -r 'iii:1. 1.�lllr.nl. 1111111 1'1111 111 IIll.gll - Neighborhood Centers Gateway Commercial Ave Office Mixed Use Avenue Community Boulevard M City Center Mixed Use Center Low Density Residential ';;;;; Neighborhood Commercial Corridor Mixed Use Medium Density Residential Community Commercial -Water Bodies Gateway Commercial Centers ® High Density Residential -Regional Commercial dem) Light Industrial - Heavy Industrial Park/Open Space Bull wuuunnn ruunm 11111111n1.1' unu 111:111.. nn. 1111: Inn.1 Illllllll r�Maid; 111111 I�4�a� : MTEDIE 4:4‘101 Exhibit 2-Existing Comprehensive Plan N 05 Land Use Designations 0.25 05 MIes '--1a n_f�r1 .; s:r1r� -��-..-" =.1s._ ■ i fI-% '11.nm.1"'III- ::iii+ i I --. - Q•:n, Ir-. =�•_G-e�=-�- 1i=�1�1�11'Iltillt��il i111��11111i �i�:r `-----� 1;..1 u, 111.i.nn1111111111111:i :=JI11111,_illre l ll\\�:/IU-mow.: _!�y 1�•Yl._ "II��p . •I IU 111:1I�1� ',' a ■�n1i�InIr111n m.11i(Imn+1�`l i•., 1�-.r == mr. .In':■111 ".. r�Y•�a111!II• '1 1e;��.IIII.=��L11 :_I n . urrnu ll.nn n ltr i:al'ir -�-1 is 1•■ :I x::11111"la •:_ — I- ill ra -w1 I- ��Il ;'i`',, .I�iGlunrnl■.nnlll..l1i.w�i:�-1 1111111-' "1. Jii�==1 . +R 11l:alli '-=I. . �: l°" �..- �••- -•■11 11 - ,!/111- 1�i��tilnnluC '= .-11iig'II1iiii' iii -il iia51:1 iin = r'`-it,•=• , - n.�. -.� - - -- I- IWn=- - =• .11111 ; .111 Ilir■ -I1+ % % .� :!.�La.nr.rll1!•. 17,.. ri� :11 i =��5,:j?1 ...i .ul r`-=�. .. L /�•: - a n unu nm -IIL VIII,_ � •'�-��51-.��- �IJL-.1111+.1.. Il,lli�ii iilii%% �' 7i.II �IIIIIIII■I.I 1111 II.III I�IIII HMI -1 l.■1iiii%Frin it:.111111n1111b.. u111nal...m. 1■.I■1..111..1 m nut:■ ■nnu.1.■=Dour 11 :■ �Il:nl'lill_I__y"111111111�. i'_%ii 1€1`?0�:��i111I: .IIM Ii-- 111 n111_1 11swIII sumPuliiii "r111=1. 11 .1 7,11::."1:111111 k111 iii =Jun nl 1 1111■ �.•P+Ifll�-• 31 1 I1.. nm,_A11 z�� rlii nom mu-- :,,: rieta_II1111 ■- 1,111.$111 l�1IIL - � �- .,•lam?-' .11F: i 1111 VIII.II11111.I1 _-r:'$_-le�•��F='+ � In111n- 1-- . r:l Elllm1= = ~"-ll = 'mow nS.nlelrl-�=. 11'.1M EMI=11 1 iii ii II1 iii -__ mill 11 1 gill t'1111-=11Gi irF ,. Ii41111Ln_i�. ----FCCCC 77777"------CCCCC777FC77=_C�-° rn CCCCC73]711 7 .11 4 771J 1 .... I ve�1�""- 1 111th per �.Ii..IIt�IIIl' 1 W.�FY.Illl:li'Nil ■ 7�173j7J CCR,. C 6 7777 CCLCC1n177 -r_111:1 n - nl"'_r11r1 In m klllllll:tl11�111-?Er fJ. nu11;:.Inu.....a.- ::71111:1u!GGi!4.soil Mixed Use Corridor Mixed Use High Density Residential - Regional Commercial Light Industrial Low Density Residential TT��'� Neighborhood Commercial Heavy Industrial Medium Density Residential Community Commerdal I 1 Park/Open Space Office Water Bodies Q SARP 11 1r iii ? 1I:� 1II1'g11r Exhibit 3-Proposed Comprehensive Plan N Land Use Designations A 0.5 0.25 0 0.51A188 E J l5 a } 1La �-r IL�CL M na Ca II Ie M 0 rery M 1'I S 8 ,L.P Frederick Grace Vr 9uakeye- w mr�> .n RNlroad Frederick — Em °11 �" Fr d ck floc itt #`"�( G i F'ry j1jt� �� 'Pick 8 k ILSJ.I 0.. dig \Ital. �JJ��jy�l�_ul�[.,r�!�� IIp�F .911116T7.16‘ •` Ermina Nrtox — ■. 4 90 W 192 �� 1:'52" -F�p 13 1d in I W28OFF" _ll�r Note 180 O C«-- N IraB I `�� 1�•■■ A'yusta aAU9us1a ,�v A g pt9 V't1'97 weM II it JJJIII��--yyy �I m M x 5 3 C 1 S,nto- r5lnte Sharp r 'Sh rP `a L_. oes11es_° c 'chr,de o 3 Scan IQ O }LMallon .o i - La al.ro S H e away` E Spr ngt_eld a C'6p yl'Itl� ac,,,, Alki gpr,,ole u Y d ji ,1 '^7L i 3 1 I I '.. G11ve salt swat/ E Ntxon N{xon.u!''.s ---:i'�e..j.°' .1 11882,1 Pe j!� j L FaiMAAvv JShcd Ro a 9eo 1e Semitic. Flora PR g LL.�il IT7 1 i; 1 012 11 V , t O 00❑ I- amoa T1..16Ih 5th 1.ilila I in II LL i1' 7th 't1ET-1lll:3 BM w 9111 "9 1,11,19 1 ;I __ When Mai rLf017 Mmn Mato �J•s"aS7C 11 Rrv¢rsitle At Bo �`{R1 �p 3 • I 1 L]'e�{�r i1 Wavd�. i`» %. 7th 6th o 211 A Archery Nana o 9th 18111 10th ��10th� _e 11th 12th 3 �" _ S e as}; Moto-1 sharp B 3ne „Beene Gesmet Gesmet Cackle Calaldo mCataloo Malls .I N it Oka ■I_J,-I ® 11 14th c m 16th 101h 19th d1B,hr�J 11111 3 Malt, 1719 0 171h 14th u°19th� 19th 19th e ]et 19th . - 7.19x, 19th a 11th h C Sunview 3 u'28[h P l Glenxl ewtsl 23rd Co1Hns 24th °t1 3 2511, 25Rn v ' 25R __2611 3 d. tr '&261.1, �1--- 'l-2tn 97th 211+ gealh 27th vo IFr1281h `29 ct 26111 Ml:1 29th Mtl 1.11 ..30th m9 2 Lenora 38th a u e e E....31.t WE. 3 e 31s1h u 39tH 1st 2 e - 14111!tit 15111 11th lath 1911. 20Th z21s ' 22nd �22r4 m]Sth� L1�'36th3 26th ,3 Cameron zznn 20th]1st 22nd 22nd p,im11.7,73.-„,7 `Fe (0 <:Aa ,23rd 24th F Q-09a 21st 01701111 G ®SARP Boundary City of Spokane Valley Exhibit 1-SARP Area 0.5 025 N 04 Mila9 A BIM roo- Elar any A IMO a GGg F u iy ,nd 11 -a.'Ci� 11 11W 0�„o 1Yi.y` O.l[ylr;1114 1 111 ill�I 1111.F L F 11 GIII�i73i�iui-lul �3 , l ,. 111 BEMEEI LEE lip ikatB ell"a�QF�i RIG„I Lw ilu i i 11:111 Q q--- �� 40L3■20 �Sooco �» :LGo 4gp 1r'-41111 1101101111:1®.jl UJ_rnJ rr'i,M17 49 ril MR= n.1.lllll 1T 5 �IL11 lIIIE ia !TEA:: !� n � y: C NCT -GCCj CB CCT MUA GCA VA R-1 R-2 .E= R-4 MF-2 O 1 ' MUC _RC -I-2 SARP R-3 MF-1 GO CMU NC M,I-1 111111 P/OS 0.5 Exhibit4-Existing Zoning 005 O S Miles MU. Ill1111•111•MIIl® u u...m.. n 111 iu11nn MIME '1181°s 111::7 R1 R-3 MF-1 GO \ CMU NC RC - 1-2r R-2 = R 4 MF-2 O MUC C I-1 CF C SARP Exhibit 5-Proposed Zoning 05 025 N 0.5 Mlles A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION Spkan� STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE Valley PLANNING COMMISSION 2011 CUMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS STAFF REPORT DATE:February 15, 2011 HEARING DATE AND LOCATION: February 24, 2011, 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: The 2011 Comprehensive Plan amendments include: CITY INITIATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS File Number Map or Text Summary of Amendment CPA-04-11 Text Chapter 2-Land Use: Table 2,1,Spokane Valley UGA Land Capacity Analysis,will reflect new population numbers within the City of Spokane Valley. Map 2,1,Land Use,will display land use designation changes approved through the 2011 amendment process. CPA-05-11 Map 3.2 Chapter 3-Transportation: Map 3.2,Bike and Pedestrian System, will display newly developed bike and pedestrian infrastructure. CPA-06-11 Text Chapter 4-Capital Facilities and Public Services: Amendments will Map 4.1 incorporate changes in the 6-year Transportation Improvement Plan Map 4.2 (TIP) into the Capital Facilities Plan to ensure consistency. Map 4.5 Amendments will update special purpose district's and other city service provider's facility and service data. Capital projects such as city hall,parks,and public works storage facility will be included for the use of REET funding. Maps 4.1,4.2,and 4.5 will display updates to reflect the latest capital facilities and public services. Amendments will also update the growth assumptions to reflect population allocation numbers approved by the Spokane County Board of Commissioners. CPA-07-11 Map 7.1 Chapter 7-Economic Development: Map 7,1 will display new building permits and land use actions in the 2010 development cycle. _ CPA-08-11 Map 8.3 Chapter 8-Natural Environment: Map 8.3 will display the field Map 8.4 inventory work done in conjunction with DNR to update stream typing in Spokane Valley. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code, the lead agency has determined that the proposed text amendments to the comprehensive plan do not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. After a thorough review of the completed environmental checklist, the lead agency has determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). PROPOSAL LOCATION:The proposal affects the entire City of Spokane Valley,Washington. APPLICANT: City of Spokane Valley,WA APPROVAL CRITERIA: Title 17 (General Provisions) and Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC). Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission Page 1 of 5 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Division recommends that the Planning Commission approve the proposed text amendments to the adopted Comprehensive Plan. STAFF PLANNER: Mike Basinger,AICP,Senior Planner,Community Development Department ATTACHMENTS: CPA-04-11: Chapter 2-Land Use CPA-05-11: Chapter 3-Transportation CPA-06-11: Chapter 4-Capital Facilities CPA-07-11: Chapter 7-Economic Development CPA-08-11: Chapter 8-Natural Environment 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. Application Submitted: November 1, 2010 Determination of Completeness: November 1, 2010 Issuance of Determination of Non-Significance (DNS): '; February 4, 2011 End of Appeal Period for DNS: February 18, 2011 Published Notice of Public Hearing: February 4, 2011 Mailed Notice of Public Hearing: February 4, 2011 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. 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). No appeals were received. III. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS A. COMPLIANCE WITH TITLE 17(GENERAL PROVISIONS) OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE Findings: Section 17.80.140(H) of the SVMC provides approval criteria that must be considered when the City amends the Comprehensive Plan. The criteria are listed below along with staff comments. 1. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment; Staff Response: The Washington State Growth Management Act limits the City to amending the Comprehensive Plan to once a year. The City provides a process each year for individuals, groups, Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission Page 2 of 5 City departments, and elected officials to propose updates to address changing conditions so the plan will reflect ongoing work or new information. The proposed text amendments add or modify policy direction in specific policy areas and update information in the plan. The 2011 proposed text amendments will ensure that internal plans such as the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), special purpose district's and other service provider's plans are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The public health, safety,welfare, and protection of the environment are furthered by ensuring the Comprehensive Plan is reflective of regional policy and current with other plans. 2. 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; Staff Response: The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are not in conflict with Chapter 36.70A RCW (Growth Management Act) and do not result in internal inconsistencies within the plan itself. 3. 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; Staff Response: The proposed text amendments are not site or property specific. This approval criterion does not apply. 4. The proposed amendment corrects an obvious mapping error; Staff Response: The proposed text amendments will not result in changes to specific properties. 5. The proposed amendment addresses an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan; Staff Response: The majority of the proposed text amendments either update or correct information contained in the plan. At this point, staff has not identified any deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Section 17.80.140(H) of the SVMC provides the following factors that must be considered when the City amends the Comprehensive Plan. The factors are listed below along with staff comments. 1. The effect of the physical environment; Staff Response: Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the City of Spokane Valley Municipal Code, the lead agency has determined that the proposed text amendments do not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. 2. The effect on open space,streams,rivers,and lakes; Staff Response: The proposed text amendments are policy oriented and non-project amendments. 3. The compatibility with and impact on adjacent land uses and surrounding neighborhoods; Staff Response: The proposed text amendments are policy oriented and non-project amendments. 4. The adequacy of and impact on community facilities including utilities, roads, public transportation, parks,recreation,and schools; Staff Response: The City of Spokane Valley addresses adequacy of community facilities on a citywide basis through capital facilities planning. The Comprehensive Plan recommends a concurrency Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission Page 3 of 5 management system for transportation, sewer, and water facilities. The Parks and Recreation Plan provide an implementation strategy including a capital facilities plan, which identifies costs and revenue sources for new parks. 5. The benefit to the neighborhood,City,and region; Staff Response: The proposed text amendments add or modify policy direction in specific policy areas and update information in the plan to ensure consistency with other internal plans within the City. The public benefit is furthered by ensuring the Comprehensive Plan is reflective of regional policy and current with other internal plans. 6. The quantity and location of land planned for the proposed land use type and density and the demand for such land; Staff Response: The proposed text amendments are policy oriented and do not address land quantity or land use designations. 7. The current and projected population density in the area; and Staff Response: The proposed text amendments are policy oriented and non-project amendments. The proposed amendments do not demand population analysis; however,population projections and capacity numbers were updated through this amendment process. 8. The effect upon other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Analysis: The proposed amendments are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the plan. Conclusion(s): The proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendments are consistent with the approval criteria and factors contained in the SVMC. B. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO PUBLIC COMMENTS Findings: Staff has received no public comments to date. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted. C. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SPECIFIC TO AGENCY COMMENTS Findings: The Department of Commerce (DOC) sent confirmation that materials were received on February 4, 2011 and processed with the Material ID No. 16608. The City is required under RCW.70A.106 to send comprehensive plan amendments to DOC for review 60-days prior to adoption. Conclusion(s): No concerns are noted. IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Planning Division after review and consideration of the proposed amendments and applicable approval criteria and factors recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of CPA-04-11 through CPA-08-11. Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission Page 4 of 5 V. PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS The Planning Commission is required to adopt findings of fact(Sections 17.80.140) when recommending changes to the Comprehensive Plan. At the conclusion of the hearing for the Comprehensive Plan amendments, the Planning Commission,by separate motion,should adopt findings of fact. Findings: Staff has prepared the following findings for the Planning Commission in the event there is concurrence with the recommended approval. Section 17.80.140 (H) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) provides approval criteria that must be considered when the City amends the Comprehensive Plan. Planning Commission Findings and Factors(Section 17.180.140H of the SVMC): Findings a. The public health, safety, welfare, and protection of the environment is furthered by ensuring the Comprehensive Plan is reflective of regional policy and current with other internal plans. b. The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are consistent with Chapter 36.70A RCW (Growth Management Act). c. The proposed text amendments are not site or property specific and do not respond to a substantial change in conditions beyond the property owner's control applicable to the area within which the subject property lies. This approval criterion does not apply. d. The proposed text amendments are not site or property specific and do not correct mapping errors. This approval criterion does not apply. e. The proposed amendment does not address an identified deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. The majority of the proposed text amendments either update or correct information contained in the plan. At this point,staff has not identified any deficiency in the Comprehensive Plan. Factors: a. Pursuant to Title 21 (Environmental Controls) of the City of Spokane Valley Municipal Code, the lead agency has determined that the proposed text amendments do not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. b. The proposed text amendments are policy oriented non-project amendments and will not affect open space,streams, rivers, and lakes. c. The proposed text amendments are policy oriented non-project amendments and will not impact adjacent land uses or surrounding neighborhoods d. The adequacy of community facilities is determined on a citywide basis through capital facilities planning. e. The proposed text amendments are policy oriented and do not address land quantity or land use designations. f The proposed text amendments are policy oriented and non-project amendments. The proposed amendments do not demand population analysis. g. The proposed amendments are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will have minimal impact on other aspects of the plan. Recommended Motion: The Planning Commission finds the 2011 Comprehensive Plan text amendments to be consistent with Section 17.80.140(H) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC). The Planning Commission adopts the findings in the staff report and recommends approval of CPA-04-11 through CPA-08-11, amendments to the comprehensive plan text. Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission Page 5 of 5 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan quality of water runoff. Furthermore, development of a wellhead protection program with the various water providers should provide guidelines to avoid possible contamination. Policies contained in the Natural Environment chapter provide direction for development near wellheads and in aquifer recharge areas. For a complete discussion of water resources and water purveyors in the City of Spokane Valley, refer to the Capital Facilities chapter. 2.3.3 Parks and Open Space One of the most important and valued elements of a high quality living and working environment is a parks and open space system. Providing parks and open spaces contributes to a reduction in environmental impacts such as noise and air pollution; increases the value of adjacent properties; provides areas for passive and active recreation; and helps preserve the natural beauty of the City. 2.3.4 Natural Environment Spokane Valley's natural beauty is apparent. Streams, wetlands, surrounding mountains and the Spokane River provide a scenic backdrop as well as a source for active and passive recreation for the citizens of Spokane Valley. The Land Use chapter seeks to protect Spokane Valley's unique natural resources through policies that support the preservation of these areas for future generations. The Natural Environment chapter also includes a discussion of critical areas as defined by GMA. For a complete discussion, please refer to the Natural Environment chapter. 2.3.5 Housing Housing is a basic human need and a major factor in the quality of life for individuals and families. An adequate supply of affordable, attractive, and functional housing is fundamental to achieving a sense of community. The central issue related to land use is supplying enough land to accommodate projected growth for a range of incomes and households. Presently, housing is provided primarily in single-family subdivisions. This plan sets forth strategies to increase housing options and choices. The Land Use chapter advocates changes to current development codes to increase flexibility in platting land and encourage housing as part of mixed-use developments in commercial areas. The latter provides an opportunity to locate housing closer to employment and shopping, and to create affordable housing. A complete discussion of housing can be found in the Housing chapter. 2.4 Potential Annexation Areas 2.4.1 Projected Growth In October 2003, the City of Spokane Valley received a 2000 population certification from the U.S. Census Bureau that indicated 80,927 people called Spokane Valley home on April 1, 2000. As of April 1, 2003 the population had grown to 82,005 (based on the Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM) population estimates). Upon incorporation on March 31, 2003, the City of Spokane Valley became the state's ninth largest city and second largest in Spokane County. • . _4, - ee• _ •50. This new - -- .. :-- - - - -. The most recent OFM estimate for Spokane Valley is RB,92090.210 as of April 1, 299 2010. This fi ; population increase represents an annual growth rate of approximately 1-51_0 percent since 2009. The average annual growth rate is approximately 1.01%1.37% over the_-47 year period from 2003 to 24072010. Future population growth is forecasted at the state and county level by OFM. This future population growth was distributed between jurisdictions and unincorporated Spokane County through a methodology prepared by the Spokane County Steering Committee of Elected Officials (SCEO). The City of Spokane Valley was ..} - --- • t_ -'':- - with originally because the City hack not-b6en i„Gnr-poc ted when—t is Adopted April 25, 2006(Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 2—Land Use Page 9of36 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan This - - - - t - _ ---- - - - • - --- -` - e •e Spokane Valley lUGA. ThiE--- • ' - -. - -- - - - ! - --'- - - - - - • - - - rate. Using the 1.5%an average annual growth rate of 1.37%, -'- - -- =- ` --- _: • - _ - -- -._. _• -! - - --, the estimated 20-25 2031 population of Spokane Valley is 114,765120 145 or an increase of 30,81529,935 persons. The 2-5% annual growth rate results in a 202 -on of 141,011, an increase of 57,06-1. - - - ---- - - - - --- - ' - .. •- -- e - - - - capasity methodology. Thic request was proposed ac an `interim" requost based on the detail below. -RCW 36.70A requires that at least every ten years the incorporated and unincorporated portions of the designated urban growth areas and the densities permitted therein, be reviewed and revised so as to ensure that the urban growth areas are sufficient to accommodate the urban growth that is projected OFM to occur in the county for the succeeding 20 year period. -- -e - - -- • --- - - -- • - •- - - _ -- --- - - - - - i'�. •• • e -. !R• • •- - - - - - - - .... -} - - '- - - - - - .. lc 20060n June 9, 2009, the BoCC approved via Resolution 06-G44809-0531 a population allocation of 33,12518,746 for Spokane Valley for planning purposes. 2.4.2 Land Capacity Analysis The GMA does not require a Population and Land Capacity Element to be included in the comprehensive plan. However, GMA does require that Land Use, Housing and Capital Facilities Elements include population densities, building intensities and estimates of future population growth. The GMA also requires a Land Capacity Analysis, or the theoretical holding capacity of the designated Urban Growth Areas, which by definition includes cities. By assigning the expected population growth to the results of the Land Capacity Analysis, the area required to accommodate the population growth is shaped. Countywide population forecasts are identified by the CWPPs, as one criterion for consideration in developing a regional methodology or countywide population allocation. The countywide growth target is based on the OFM growth management population forecast for Spokane County, The Land Quantity Analysis Methodology for Spokane County was developed through the efforts of the Land Quantity Technical Committee between March 1995 and October 1995. The Growth Management Steering Committee of Elected Officials adopted that methodology on November 3, 1995. The adopted methodology is patterned after the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development's (CTED) land quantity inventory guidebook entitled Issues in Designating Urban Growth Areas Part 1- Providing Adequate Urban Area Land Supply. Use of that document was specified by the adopted Countywide Planning Policies (Policy Topic 1 (Urban Growth Areas Policy#3). However, the step-by-step CTED process was modified somewhat by the Land Quantity Technical Committee to reflect unique circumstances in Spokane County. The following steps of the regional methodology were followed by Spokane Valley in conducting the land capacity analysis: Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 2—Land Use Page 10 of 36 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 1, Identify lands that are potential candidates to accommodate future growth - vacant, partially-used and under-utilized land (in other words, subtract all parcels committed to other uses). 2. Subtract all parcels that the community defines as not developable because of physical limitation. 3. Subtract lands that will be needed for other public purposes. 4. Subtract all parcels that the community determines are not suitable for development for social and economic reasons. 5. Subtract that percentage of land that the community assumes will not be available for development within the community plan's 20-year time frame. 6. Build in a safety factor. 7. Determine total capacity. Spokane Valley prepared a land capacity analysis of the city and surrounding UGAs based on the above regional methodology. The results of the land capacity analysis are contained in the table below: Table 2.1 Spokane Valley UGA Land Capacity Analysis(updated 12105/030ctober 2010) Vacant and Net Developable Potential New Population Area Partially Used Acres Dwelling Units Capacity Land Spokane Valley 17,2E016 44 4,1e03,314 3 1-370 7,9337 412 (Incorporated Area) 93 Nc thc�.ct 42- 23 g? #er#ifwaod 723 042 1,367 241£ East 8A 42,7 1,o£g south as: 447 2-25 2.381 it Sa 14 664 27-2 4Q 9 2,722 Penclefes-a 76 44 Cd clif`IDishr an 4 99 12.2 827 9 $-Q--A!= -- 6464 2,481 12,E-75 24:443 Spokane Valley recommended to the Steering Committee that both the City of Spokane Valley and the City of Liberty Lake receive an interim population allocation that could be accommodated within the existing city limits of each city. The rationale for this recommendation was based on the situation regarding sanitary sewer throughout the entire Spokane region, It is estimated that the Spokane County treatment plant will run out of capacity in 2009, and the Liberty Lake Water&Sewer District treatment capability is currently at or near capacity. Permits to expand the Spokane County and Liberty Lake plants from the Washington State Department of Ecology and the Environmental Protection Agency are currently in doubt. Given the potential constraint for both jurisdictions to provide this vital urban service, the Steering Committee forwarded a recommendation to the Spokane County Board of County Commissioners to allocate only the population that could be accommodated within existing city limits until such time as the sanitary sewer issues are resolved. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 2—Land Use Page 11 of 36 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 2.4.3 Potential Annexation Areas The purpose of this section is to identify the unincorporated areas within the existing Spokane County UGA that are adjacent to the City of Spokane Valley, which would comprise potential annexation areas for the City. Map 2.2 indicates potential annexation areas (PAAs) for the City of Spokane Valley. Spokane County adopted its first comprehensive plan developed under GMA in 2001. A complete examination of urban services was required at the time the County established the UGA, moreover, Spokane County was obligated to comply with the State Environmental Policy Act. The County's plan included the designation of a regional UGA, which included the still unincorporated area of Spokane Valley. The County utilized the SEPAIGMA integration process to fulfill the environmental review requirements of the plan including the designated UGA. When Liberty Lake incorporated in 2001 and Spokane Valley incorporated in 2003 much of the "Valley UGA" was included as part of the newly created cities, but not all. In 2003 and again in 2006, Liberty Lake completed annexations totaling 975.69 acres of the County designated UGA. These annexations resulted in a nearly 34 percent increase (from 4,5 square miles to just over 6 square miles) in land area for Liberty Lake. • _ RA - •- contiguous to Spokane Valley - t ?^,, northeast) Several of the:le UGAs are en - g p y feu'.-!�, sct4heas•, ��, and would be logical areas for future annexation to the City of Spokane Valley. Spokane County and the metro cities of Spokane Valley, Spokane, Liberty Lake and Airway Heights have begun the process of updating the regional UGA consistent with the county wide planning policies (CWPPs). Through this process, the City of Spokane Valley will identify areas needed to accommodate allocated population growth by re-evaluating land quantity analysis and urban service delivery. 2.4.4 Development of Goals, Policies,and Actions for Annexation The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires counties to designate Urban Growth Area (UGAs) within which urban growth shall be encouraged RCW 36.70A.110 (1). UGAs are to include sufficient land to accommodate the twenty-year population growth projected for the county. The GMA imposes planning requirements to influence the ability of a city to annex UGAs. A city is required by GMA to adopt policies for land use, housing, capital facilities, utilities, and transportation within the city's UGA. In order to meet this requirement the City of Spokane Valley has developed policies and goals to provide policy guidance for annexation of territory within UGAs. Annexation will have financial impacts on the city; it may be positive or negative. The City may need to develop an annexation study to assess the financial impacts especially for larger annexations. The Capital Facilities chapter identifies current service providers within the Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs) as a starting point for the - detailed analysis that may be needed _ prior to annexation. Land Use Designations *'�'J The land use designations in the SVCP , r„ -►err t �-`? } recognize the relationships between :Ali broad patterns of land uses. The = r,•+,_, ' ~r :� ., ,; .r • designations set forth locational criteria _ __ r#-. ,,. ' ' ;..;. for each specific class of uses consistent .�'7' ;,, with the long-term objectives of the SVCP. These designations provide the purpose and intent for specific zoning districts. The location of the comprehensive plan land use designations are shown on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map(Map 2.1). Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 2- Land Use Page 12 of 36 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 4.4.2 Growth Assumption On June 9, 2009, the Spokane County Board of Commissioners (BoCC) approved a population allocation of 18,746 people for the City of Spokane Valley. The allocation is the amount of people the City can accommodate within its current municipal boundary. In addition, the BoCC approved a population allocation of 8,138 people for the unincorporated Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) adjacent to the City of Spokane Valley. The City of Spokane Valley has identified the adjacent UGAs as Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs). The City has identified existing service providers to help determine the effects on existing levels of service in the event of annexation. Capital facilities planning activities within these UGAs continue to be the County's responsibility. The following population data is used for capital facilities planning purposes: 2909 2446 2039 P[ip-ttlat4SFS 5 ,41 + 03,°51- 40677-K Table 4.4 Population Projection Year 2011 2017 2031 Population 91,836 96,307 107.609 4.4.3 Level of Service Cities are often defined by the quality of facilities and services that are provided to its residents. Good road, sewer and water infrastructure are typical criteria used by businesses considering relocation. Park and recreation facilities are increasingly used to judge the quality of a City. Businesses want to locate where they can attract the best employees, and quality of life issues are often the deciding factor for a person to move to a new area. Level of service standards are quantifiable measures, such as acres of parks per 1000 people, or the amount of time it takes to travel a road segment during peak morning and afternoon "rush hours," the higher the level of service the higher the cost. This element establishes levels of service which will be used to evaluate the adequacy and future cost of urban facilities and services. 4.4.3 Concurrency The Growth Management Act introduces the concept of concurrency, which requires new development to be served with adequate urban services at the time of development, or within a specified time thereafter. The GMA allows six years for necessary transportation improvements to be constructed as long as a financial commitment is made at the time of development. The GMA strongly encourages concurrency for water and sewer, and it is good public policy to require the same. 4.4.4 Financing Facilities and Services The City is limited in its ability to finance all desired capital facility projects. Options must be available for addressing funding shortfalls or decisions must be made to lower levels of service for public facilities. In deciding how to address a particular shortfall, the City will need to balance current needs versus future growth requirements; existing deficiencies versus future expansions. Capita! facilities plans must be balanced. When funding shortfalls occur, the following options should be considered: a. Increase revenues, b. decrease level of service standards, Adopted April 25, 2006(Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 12 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Capital Projects and Financing Plan Spokane Valley anticipates either constructing a new City Hall building, or purchasing and remodeling an existing building within the six year time frame of this CFP. The following table shows that Spokane Valley will use approximately $1,000,000 of Real Estate Excise Tax revenue for Civic Buildings. Table 4.0 Community Facilities Finanelfig-Pilan 2 Project 200- 2943 ?499 2010 X14 2012 Total 6 Civ:c Lcili ee 6,4 650 0 390 2,163 Total 0 0 0 060 750 11 47380 v,1 3 II Revenue Souse Real Estate Encisc Tax 260 229 400 400 1,000 Ge- era cued 343 300 340 1,200 2,153 II Total 0 r• C 4€33 654 MO 1,303 01-1-63 s Table 4,5 Community Facilities Financing Plan i Prelect 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Civic Facilities 100 100 400 400 400 4[00 1800 Public Works 500 Maintenance Facility Total 600 100 400 400 400 400 2300 1 Revenue Source Real Estate Excise Tax 100 100 100 200 100 200 800 i' General Fund 0 0 300 200 300 200 1000 Street Fund 250 250 Stormwater Fund 250 250 Total 500 100 400 400 400 400 2300 4.4.8 Domestic Water The City of Spokane Valley does not own or operate a public water supply system. Rather,water is provided to Spokane Valley residences and businesses by special purpose districts, associations, and public and private corporations. Water service is coordinated by Spokane County through the Coordinated Water System Plan (CWSP), which identifies service boundaries, establishes minimum design standards and promotes the consolidation of regional water resource management. The CWSP is updated as needed at the direction of the Board of County Commissioners or the Washington State Department of Health (DOH). Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 16 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan East Spokane Water Dist 1 1700 94 1.277,000 Hutchinson Irrigation Dist#16 790 0 1.200,000 Honeywell Electronic Mfg LLC Q 1 0 Irvin Water District#6 IN/ 154 1,900,000 Kaiser Alum-Trentwood Works 0 2 21,200 Model Irrigation Dist#18 2518 ' 6 550.000 Modern Electric Water Co 7424 824 1,500.000 Orchard Avenue Irrigation Dist 6 1255 4 0 Pinecroft Mobile Home Park 143 0 400 Puerta Valle rta I 0 1 0 Spitfire Pub And Eatery 0 2 87 Spokane Business&Industrial Park 0 252 478.000 Spokane Co-Mirabeau Park 0 2 200 Spokane Co Water Dist#3 9788 426 6.880.000 Trentwood Irrigation District 3 1727 162 1,120,000 Vera Water&Power 9259 390 8,650,000 Woodland Park Trailer Court 30 0 0 •Approximately 620 connections within City Qf_Spokane Valley Source Washington Slate Department of Health Table 4.8 Group B Systems Group B System Connections Holiday Trailer Court 12 Janzen&Janzen 1 Levernier Const.Water System 1 Mercer Trucking Co Inc 1 Middco Tool&Equipment 1 Systems Transport Inc 1 Tci Water System 6 Tds 2 Union Pacific Railroad-Trentwood Westco S Apparel Service 3 Western Structures Inc 2 WSDT-Pines Road Maintenance 1 Source: Washington State Department of Health Level of Service The Countywide Planning Policies were amended in 2004 to defer level of service standards for water supply and fire flow to the requirements of the Department of Health and local fire codes respectively. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 20 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Forecast of Future Needs Spokane Valley adopts by reference water system plans for all water purveyors providing service within the City of Spokane Valley. Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities Spokane Valley adopts by reference water system plans for all water purveyors providing service within the City of Spokane Valley. Capital Projects and Financing Plan Spokane Valley adopts by reference capital project and financing plans for all water purveyors providing service within the City of Spokane Valley. Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Service Fire protection and emergency medical services (EMS) are provided by Spokane Valley Fire Department (District Nc. 1 SVFD) and Spokane - County Fire District No. 8. Spokcne Vcllcy feSVFD serves over 90% of the Valley, while • District 8 serves a few small areas in the southern ..`� , � part of the City (see Fire Districts Map at the end of = this chapter). Both districts serve the City with a full ; �, ;Y.y "_ f' range of fire suppression and EMS services. - Spokane Valley voters chose to annex tc Spok7Ava f Valley Firointo SVFD and District No. 8 in }' — ,"g" � September, 2004. Insurance Rating CIty fFire departments and fire protection district: are assigned a numerical fire protection rating by the Washington Surveying and Ratings Bureau. Insurance companies fund the Bureau to perform on-site inspections of fire districts to determine the rating. The Bureau analyzes five main areas: average response time, water supply, communication network, schedule of fire inspections and fire station evaluations (which focus on age of vehicles), personnel training and staffing of facilities. Insurance companies use the fire protection rating to help determine insurance rates on all fire insurance policies. The rating is on a scale of one to ten, with one representing the best score. Quality of fire service can have a significant impact on fire insurance rates, particularly for commercial businesses. As of April, ?me-. Spoke o Valk Fire DcportmentSVFD has a Fire Insurance Rating of -three (3) and District No. 8 has a Rating of five (5), both indicating Jac od excellent fire protection services. Adopted April 25, 2006(Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 21 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Inventory of Existing Facilities and Apparatus The Fire Districts Map shows the location of fire stations and service area boundaries for Spokane Valley FireSVFD, District No. 8 and surrounding fire protection districts. All fire agencies have mutual aid agreements to assist each other in major emergencies. _: -•- - - e!-SVFD 2011 apparatus inventory includes taae-10 Class AType I e esEnnines, two-3 Type II Engines, 3 Class A pumper/ladders, two medic vehicles, three brush trucks and other miscellaneous vehicles for staff, training, rescue, maintenance, prevention and command. S-pokonc. Vw11 y FireSVFD has ten stations, including €i bt seven within the City of Spokane Valley. Locations of the stations are as follows: [ 'Fade 1.9 Spokane Valley Firo District Station Locatlors: Station 1' 10319 East Sprague Station 2' 8907 East Tfent Station 3 2218 North Harvard Station-4 22406 East Wellesley Station 5" 15510 East Mac etta Station 6" 6306 East SPfag" Station 7' 1121 South Evcrgrson Station 8' N4414-2140-1A4414-64 Station-9 East 11514 16N' Sts cri-40--2 East 17217 Sprague • inside Spokar. Valley'''' "Medic only station Table 4.9 Spokane Valley Fire Department Station Locations Station 1" 10319 East Sprague Station 2 9111 E Frederick Station 3 2218 North Harvard Station 4 22406 East Wellesley Station 5' 15510 East Marietta Station 6' 6306 East Sprague Station 7" 1121 South Evergreen Station 8" North 2110 Wilbur Station 9" East 12121 32n1 Greenacres Station' East 17217 Sprague I " inside Spokane Valley City Limits Fire District No. 8 has one fire station inside the City limits, station 84 in the Ponderosa neighborhood, located at 4410 South Bates. The District has two stations located outside the City limits providing additional coverage, No. 81 at 6117 South Palouse Highway and No. 85 at 3324 South Linke Road. Stations 81 and 84 each have two Class A engines and two wildland brush engines. Station 85 has one Class A engine and one wildland brush engine. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 22 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Level of Service Spokane Valley Firs'sThe Level of Service goals for response time are cs follow :described in SFVD's Standard of Cover. SVFD's Standard of Cover is consistent with the regionally adopted minimum level of service for fire protection and emergency services. :11 .. - :e°. - - •- 5:00 minutes E0%of the time for B.. ' • ----- " - • ' - - ---- - - - - - _ - - -} .e-- •e • - - - -- - •- . patients, .-t - ..___- - -- - - - - F _ -- . t- - e .1-T. _ . -- _• =- - - ` - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - .-r certain advanced nroced _ e--- _ _ _ _. e. ' 4'_ .. _ eel �. ! a■ } • 2001 5 minutes 28 scCendc • 2000 5 minutes 35 seconds -- - ' - - ' t- - titre e.. The following table shows the number of calls per year. Yea+ 2804 2001 2002 -993 Response 4 7,105 7°2 8-1-05 Table 4.10 Spokane Valley Fire Department City Responses Year 2006 I 2007 I 2008 2009 2010 City Responses 8270 9144 10080 9480 9394 The Countywide Planning Policies for Spokane County establishes minimum levels of service for fire and emergency medical services as follows: Urban areas are required to be serviced by a Fire District with at least a Class Six Insurance rating. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 23 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan • Urban areas must be within five road miles of an operating fire station that provides service with a"Class A" pumper, unless structures are equipped with fire sprinklers. ▪ Urban areas shall be served by a state certified basic life support (BLS) agency within five miles and an operating advanced life support unit within six miles or ten minutes response time. Both Firo Diztrist-4-SVFD and 8 meet the minimum countywide level of service standards. Forecast of Future Needs •Spokane - - '- - •-- - - • - - -- • - -` - •- oy that need - - - - • - - - - . - ;-••• e -24 Ave. and Pines Rd. The northeast area of the City is underdeveloped at present but as the City grows over the next ten to fifteen years, the DistrictSVFD recognizes that a new station will need to be constructed to provide an adequate level of service. The stotionStation 11 will be constructed in the v;c,inity o€at Barker and Euclid. Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities • e, _ - _ e e . - _ e- .2* - • _- = to the vicinity of 3244 and :-:•- -- - -►= • • - _ - • -- _ -- - _ _ -- . __ - . Station No. 11 will be located in the vicinity of Barker and Euclid and will ajso-behave two 3 bays with dorms for sight perconaclfire apparatus. Construction for Station 11 is tentatively planned for 2011 or 20152016 or when growth in the area will support the investment and ongoing costs. Capital Projects and Financing Plan . - .-- ••-r'SVFD is a junior taxing authority thatdistrict and supplements its regular taxes with special levies. As the restrictions on the taxes generated from the regular tax go down, special levies are proposed to maintain needed funding. Special levies must be approved by Fire District voters served by SVFD. The Department does not use its bonding capacity to fund capital projects. The Department's philosophy is to reserve funds generated through its regular revenues for future capital needs. The following table represents the Valley FireSVFD planned capital expenditures. tr o'A;ne"°' 8-y r Cacit.l Projects-end Firtancina -Plan Projcct 2004 200' 2808 ' 2000 204-0 20-4} 2g4-2- Tsui Fire Station?Fe.0 6-44340 $1,800 {new-construction} Fare Station No. 14 (fe&an6-trl:cticn) I Via, 51808 54 00 ''24.40 Table 4.11 SVFD Capita!Projects Plan Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 24 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Protect 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total Administration BuiIdinq 83,400 S3.400 (New construction) Fire Station No.6 51,600 S1.600 (Reconstruction] Fire Station No. 11 $1,800 S1,800 (New construction) ! Total 88.800 (Amounts are times 51.000) 4.4.9 Library Service Library services are provided by the Spokane County Library District, which serves the unincorporated county and eleven of its thirteen cities and towns. The District has a long history of excellent service and upon incorporation, the City of Spokane Valley executed a one year contracted with the District for continued service for its residents. After the initial year, Spokane Valley and the Library District agreed to a-five year contract for library services beginning in 2005. Eighty ccveci- percent of voters approved annexing back into the District in Ina May 2005 special election, eighty-seven percent of voters approved annexing back into the District, with the annexation effective January 1, 2006. After incorporation, t .e-Li• ry District and the City of Spokane Valley collaborated on develap -u began and a signifieaat arnount of information was gathered, including: • Spokane Valley demographics • An analysis of curr nt Spokane Valley area libraries • Community research Public Participation - - - .' '- - - •- -• - - - - - _ - _. - - -- ' - - - _.e - - - - - _ • - _ - . --s e 1 _!; • survey gathered information on local library-use, e'.. - - - _' - -- •• F' -- -- - . i,_, •a. _ - - - -- -a' - - - - -..t-• . • _ - -' -- e- ...• - e- - - .e• • - - --d service, i+brartes. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 25 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Research Conclusions Analysis of infe4naticn gathered leads to the conclusion that additional-library space is needed to E..CPIC Spoka - - - - - . - -- e" -- - - --•- -- .. - - - - - -• •- with library cervices and a high level-of satisfaction with-current faciliti- -- ___ _ _ - __ •- . orccc needing improvement materials availability-, which requires a larger library, and public demonstrating a strong need for community educatioe-about future library facilities needs. Spokane Vailey'e Community Preference Survey included- a question to gauge Spokane Valley citizen's Satisfaction with current Library services. - -- The majority of survey respondents viewed library services in a positive light, with 83% of respondents reporting that library services were _ _. good, very good or excellent. i Vii , ; Inventory of Existing Facilities - Spokane Valley has one library located inside its boundary, the District's Valley Branch, located at 12004 East Main. This resource library is the District's largest facility, measuring 22,400-950 square feet, including branch administrative space. The District has two other libraries within the greater Valley area located at 4322 North Argonne and 22324 East Wellesley in Otis Orchards. As of May 2-0442010, approximately :35,54433 000 Spokane Valley residents were Library District cardholders. Valley Library was the primary branch of VALLEY registration, with Argonne second and Otis Orchards third. Spokane County Library District has a reciprocal library cardborrowing agreement with the �� City of Spokane with over 1,500 Spokane Valley : ■ va�i%.B T■ residents owning having a Spokane public Public x ss �e library Library card. Library Facility Master Plan E,6lhAv In March 2008 voters defeated a proposal to establish a proposed Greater Spokane Valley Library Capital Facility area to issue General Obligation Bonds for construction of a new main library and a new neighborhood branch in the eastern area of the City. The District subsequently undertook a capital facilities planning process for its entire service area, resulting in the July 2010 Board of Trustees approval of a 20-year Library Facilities Master Plan (LFMP). Using 2031 population estimates based on Spokane County GMA population allocations, the LFMP addresses current and future facility needs in each of its five geographic service areas: the Greater Spokane Valley. North County, Southeast County. Southwest County, and Moran/Glenrose Prairie. LFMP development included community research (customer and community telephone surveys, focus groups. and community leader interviews); population growth estimating by geographic area; evaluations of existing facilities and sites; and a public input process. The plan proposes replacement of three existing libraries with new facilities, the addition of three new branches, and remodeling/expansion of five others at a total cost of$50.8 million (2010 dollars). Level of Service The Spokane County Library District has not established a level of service. The Library Facilities Master Plan establishes a Level of Service (LOS) of 0.5 square feet per capita for the overall District,with a target 0.5 square feet per capita within each of the five geographic regions served. Adopted April 25, 2006(Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 26 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Forecast of Future Needs • '' - - - • - - . _ - ---- - 'e• ._ ... _ - -ions, which-is consistent with the City of Spekanc Valley's populatie• -' e.c-F-• • - - • within the existing City limits. The District fcccgnizee that o new library needs to be built inside Spokane Valley to provide -- -- - - - - C - .. ^ - - ' _-- - -' .+h nd a fu4W�re neighborhood broach. The LFMP uses a 2031 Spokane Valley population estimate of 108,000 for its future projections. consistent with the City of Spokane Valley's GMA population allocation for growth within the existing City limits. The District recognizes that new library facilities need to be built inside Spokane Valley to provide adequate library services to its residents. Future facilities will be divided between a main branch and two future neighborhood branches. Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities .. . _•_ •-. =' _-- ---- ,et _ uarc foot to adequately serve- e populat ,■e e .. _ - - - - - - - - • - • - _,. - __F - - ---- - - -- - - •- -- - - - - - i i,_-- t - •- - - -_ • ' _- - -- - - • - • - C - -- -- - 0,11a _ • 't-. - --- - . ' - • - to three miles of the main branch. A new main branch to replace the existing Spokane Valley Library should contain about 50.000 square feet of space and should be located on an arterial street within about one-half mile of the Sprague corridor between Dartmouth and Evergreen Roads. To better serve the Veradale and Greenacres areas, a new neighborhood branch of approximately 112,000 square feet should be built on District-owned property on Conklin Road, immediately south of Sprague Avenue. A second new branch to serve the South Valley should be built between Dishman-Mica and Evergreen Roads on or immediately south of 32nd Avenue. Capital Projects and Financing Plan The future main branch is estimated to cost $11.115.56 million in 2001 2010 dollars; the neighborhood branch would cost about $345.1 million each. - - --e - -- 1--- - .. :gaticn - - •- •• , - _ - •_- _ _ _ , Besides construction costs and fees, the estimates include library materials, furnishings, and equipment. Voter-approved general obligation bonds are the normal financing method for library projects of this size. The District's Library Facilities Master Plan proposes a three phase capital improvement schedule that includes all Spokane Valley projects in the first two phases. The earliest feasible date for a District-wide bond election to carry out the proposed projects is early 2013, which for purposes of the schedule is Year 1. Phase 1: Years 1 to 4 • Complete property purchases(Year 1) • Design, construct, and open replacement Spokane Valley branch (Years 1-41 Phase 2: Years 3 to 8 • Design, construct. and open new Conklin Road branch (Years 3-5) • Sell existing Spokane Valley branch (Year 5) • Design. construct. and open new South Valley branch (Years 6-8) Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 27 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The District proposes the following capital improvement ss#edule 1 to6y ro • Develop funding plan. • Purchase land for libraries. 6to10years • Secure funding and purchase site(s)if not already done. • Construct new main branch. • Sell existing Valley branch. 1D to 20 yoars • Secure funding and construct neighborhood-branch. Table 1.12 Spotmnc County Library Dict-1c:six-year Capital Projects anti-Pi-naming Plan Prejeet 2 2007 2005 2-008 -204-0 2011 2042 Total New Spokane Valley $300 5-1- 0 X00 I $5,3010 9 0 9 34-8000 Library Totes $4-00 S4-59 $1,700 I $87300 58,750 0 0 $4-4;4P,0 Rovonue Sources C-O and 5-1-00 34-59 5-1,709 35,500 S5,750 0 0 49009 Total $4.00 54-50 $4,7 00 x400 0 0 0 49009 Note: Th:- , -r .. ....- - .--t- -- -- • ••.. . _�c reimbursable frorn voter approved bond funds. Table 4.12 Spokane County Library District six year Capital Projects and Financing Plan (Assumes a 2013 bond issue approval) Project 2011 2012 2813 2014 2015 2015 2017 Total New Spokane Valley 0 0 51.250' 5800 57.380 87.380 0 516.810 Library New Conklin Road 0 0 0 0 $200 52450 52,450 55:100 Library New South Valley 0 0 5250° 0 0 0 0 3250 Library" Total 0 0 51,500 5800 57.580 39:830 52.450 522,160 II Revenue Sources District Funds 0 0 $1,500 0 0 0 0 51,500 GD Bonds 0 0 0 5800 57.580 59 83.0 52.450-320,650 II Total 0 0 51.500 $800 87,580 $9,830 52,450 522.160 'These expenses are reimbursable from voter-approved bond funds. — ll *2 The South Valley Library's design.construction.and opening is in 2018-2020.outside the Six Year Plan Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 28 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan The Library District will ^^ ice coordinate to–vier-lc–with the City of Spokane Valley to further Plan will be amended tc incorporate future changes. in identifying and procuring building sites, planning the bond issue election, in carrying out design and construction of the new libraries. As the LFMP is updated, this Capital Facilities Plan will be amended to incorporate future changes. Operational Costs The Library District assumes that with efficient building design and continuing staff productivity improvements, a larger Valley Library and an eventual new branch can be operated at normal District funding levels of 50 cents per$1,000 of assessed valuation. 4.4.10 Parks and Recreation Spokane Valley has a wide range of , f . f. •,- „ recreational opportunities available to residents ! � and visitors. Cty parks, school play fields, golf �_ �!' �.�:F' '„?r'” k courses, trails, County parks and conservations 1- `=L " A �c 57 ` '� • . k ' �, areas are all within close vicinity to Spokane i i ,,• Valley residents. �� { ' The City provides a system of local parks that r.y, 7_, #,'o • __ ,, ' I is managed by the Spokane Valley Parks and w .1- 4i:-R:: .. _ Recreation Department. The Parks -4"—. 7.1 R Department is in the process of developing a dioGio. - - -------- --7-- - Y= new Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces - - _ Master Plan. When finished, this plan will offer a detailed picture of the park, recreation and open space system, including changes and - improvements that will be made in the future. - - -a,- -- This section of the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) provides summaries of the parks inventory, level of service(LOS), future park needs, proposed projects, and a financing plan for the next six years. Park Types Parks are classified by their size, service area and function. Spokane Valley uses the nationally recognized Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Guidelines, to establish standard for parks planning. Major classifications include mini-park, neighborhood, school-park, community, large urban, various trail designations and special use facilities, The Parks Element, Chapter 9, provides a thorough description of park types used for planning purposes. Inventory of Existing Facilities The Parks Map, found at the end of this Chapter, shows the location of all parks within Spokane Valley. Table 4.13 provides an inventory of park and recreation facilities owned by Spokane Valley. These parks are used to calculate Spokane Valley's level of service for parks. The Parks Master Plan provides the most detailed inventory of parks, including equipment, structures and other miscellaneous park facilities. Table 4.13 Spokane Valley Park Facilities Spokane Valley Parks Acreage Status Neighborhood Parks Balfour Park 2.86 Developed Browns Park 8.03 Developed Castle Park 2.71 Minimally Developed Edgecliff Park 4.74 Developed Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 29 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Level of Service The Countywide Planning Policies for Spokane County requires all jurisdictions to adopt a level of service (LOS) standard for parks. Spokane Valley has the flexibility and freedom to adopt a ;'`.. LOS standard for parks that reflects the ,- t expressed need and desire of our community. ! ; The National Recreation and Parks Association '-" ¢ ' suggest that cities adopt LOS standards for Il, [ different park types, such as mini (pocket), I i neighborhood, community and major parks. '=;.� Li',, t ._ „Spokane Valley does not have a well-developed ""' ' park system and will use total City-owned park # acres for its LOS measurement. Spokarao Vallzy currently owns 16i3 acres of _ �n every -1000 re- identE In 2006, Spokane Valley adopts adopted a LOS of 1.92 acres/1000 people as its minimum LOS standard for Table 1.11 Spo;:ane Va0ey-Partc Level of Service Arks, as vhown is T b]e i!.11. Spokane Valley recognizes that schools, churches, natural areas and 200 Population City Owned Level of Service commercial enterprises all provide Park Acre recreation opportunities for Spokane Valley residents. These will all be 85,040 4Ez 1.02 core_1000 1 taken into consideration when -- — Spokane Valley determines the best location to purchase new park land. Forecast of Future Needs Spokane Valley has the capacity to accommodate an additional 2446416 493 people over the next 20 years within the current City limits. In order to maintain the current adopted LOS of 1.92 acres/1000 people, Spokane Valley would have to add about 49-35 acres of park land over the next 20 years, with 12 13 acres in the first six years, as shown in Table 4.15. The Parks Master Plan provides a more detailed analysis of park and recreation needs by dividing the City into smaller service areas. Table 4.15 Future Park Demand Year Population Total Park Acres Acres Required at 1.92 Net Deficiency Acres Available acres/1000 200e2011 85,01091 836 -16-3172 153177 0-6 241-22017 92,7 . 96.307 1-63172 177185 -1-4-13 I20252031 105,676107 604 1-63172 2-03207 --49-35 *Assumes 20-year growth of 2. -8' 16,493 people Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities In order to maintain the adopted 1.92 acres/1000 level of service standard, Spokane Valley must would need to add 12 13 acres of park land by the year 291-1-2017. In order to addrocs this Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 31 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan --_ - - - ' - -- - • - - - - -•t acres as shown-in Table 1.16. The Master Plan 7, 4-;v,Parks Capacity Analyz,lo pn lativ Total Park Acros Required Y -af Aerco at 4.92 N eserva Acres il Mal-Wale acres/1000 2996 0 4-63 462 0 2012 92,213 l 193' 4_,-7_-L 5 "20 aoro:of parkland will bo purchosef :t i `r t 6 p! Capital Projects and Financing Plan The following table details Spokane Valley's six year Parks and Recreation capital improvement financing plan. The table details projects that address level of service deficiencies (capacity projects)and other capital improvements (non-capacity) projects. Table-447-Perlis Capita!Facilitieo Plan eiotc Ar.:A..,ante-in$1,000 lest 2-006 2007 2003 220-9 2949 2011 20422 Total v.,.k and A er c_ (20 Acros Capacity) 4-086 Pa4c4prierevemeRts 300 060 690 €99 590 4-09 200 637-1-09 1 Swimming Pool Upgradcc 47600 i 4.400 Total 4480 2450 500 6600 580 4-09 290 55772,0 Revenue Saurcc GaL erai Fund 17390 300 i 0 BEET tt1 — 450 400 490 6190 490 200 61,959 200 4-00 499 1-40 5489 Grants I X S.. 00 �4 �e9 Total 4 X 00 59 590 590 480 298 85,720 Table 4.17 Parks Capital Facilities Plan Note:Amounts In$1,000 Protect 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total Park Improvements 1,959 100 100 100 100 100 100 52,559 Swimming Pool Upgrades Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 32 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4,17 Parks Capital Facilities Plan Note:Amounts in$1,000 Total 1.959 100 100 100 100 100 1Q2 $2,559 Revenue Source General Fund 1,959 50 50 50 50 50 50 $2,259 REET#1 50 50 50 50 50 50 $300 Grants 500 S500 Spokane County Total 1.959 100 100 600 100 100 100 $3.059 4.4.11 Public Safety The Spokane Valley Police Department is a contract law enforcement agency, partnering with the Spokane County Sheriffs Department to provide a safe environment for the citizens, businesses, and visitors of the City of Spokane Valley. This unique contracting relationship allows for the sharing of many of our resources, allowing both agencies to operate at peak efficiency without duplicating services. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 33 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Spokane Valley also contracts with Spokane County for judicial, jail and animal control services. The total contract for public safety for 2406-2411 totaled over $15 $15.3 million, including approximately 100 commissioned police officers. Spokane Valley supports community oriented policing and recognizes it as an important complement to traditional law enforcement. In Spokane County, community policing is known as S.C.O.P.E., or Sheriff Community Oriented Policing Effort. The community policing model balances reactive responses to calls for service with proactive problem-solving centered on the causes of crime and disorder. Community policing requires police and citizens to join together as partners in the course of both identifying and effectively addressing these issues. About 364 Spokane Valley citizens are S.C.O.RE volunteers. Community Survey The Community Preference Survey included questions to gauge the public's perception of police services. Results show that 85% of Spokane Valley residents believe police services are good, very good, or excellent, indicating a generally high level of confidence in the police force. Only 27% of respondents expressed a willingness to pay additional taxes to have improved police services. Inventory of Existing Facilities The Spokane Valley Police Precinct is located at 12710 E. Sprague and houses patrol and detective divisions, the traffic unit and administrative staff. The Precinct also includes o property Etorage facility a1;d a Spokane County District Court. Spokane Valley is served by five four S,C.O.P.E. stations, shown in the following table. Teb1 .1R— o44e c Valley S.C.O.P.E s:a:ions NeitAlaar-hsod taaation !14�eInhbedwed uw klan w West Valley 3402 North Argo n.% Tr ntw. .6 24001.Wilburt 70 University 10621 East 154' Central V..11ey 115 N.Evergreen Rd. Edgec'+f: 622 S.Thicrman Rd. East 400?N. HaNard t'3 1 Table 4.18 Spokane Valley S.C.O.P.E stations Neighborhood Location Neighborhood Location University 10621 East 15"' Treniwood 2400 N.Wilbur#79 Edaecliff 522 S.Thierrnan Rd. Central Valley 115 N. Evergreen Rd. Level of Service Public safety is a priority for the City of Spokane Valley. It is difficult to determine at this time, an adequate and measurable level of police protection. Spokane Valley will monitor the performance of the Spokane County Sheriffs Department and will adjust the contract for services as necessary to ensure an adequate level of police protection. Forecast of Future Needs Future needs for police protection will be determined as a part of the annual budget process. Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities Spokane Valley is not planning to construct any new law enforcement facilities at this time. Capital Projects and Financing Plan Spokane Valley is not planning to construct any new law enforcement facilities at this time. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 34 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan In 1988, the intergovernmental agency known as the Spokane Regional Solid Waste System (System) was formed by interlocal agreement between the City of Spokane, Spokane County and all other cities and towns within the County. The System is responsible for implementing solid waste management plans, planning and developing specific waste management programs and updating solid waste plans for the entire County. The System is managed by the City of Spokane, which uses its structure to carry out the various solid waste management programs for our region. In Spokane Valley, solid waste services are provided by private haulers licensed by the Washington Utility and Transportation Commission (W.U.T.C.) through franchise agreements. Waste Management of Spokane provides residential and commercial garbage services and weekly curbside recycling collection: Sunshine Disposal provides only commercial services. At this time, Spokane Valley residents are allowed to self-haul their garbage to an appropriate dumping site. Inventory of Existing Facilities The Regional Solid Waste System includes a Waste to Energy facility located at 2900 South Geiger, and two recycling/transfer stations. One of the stations is located within Spokane Valley at 3941 N. Sullivan Road south of Trent and across from the Spokane Industrial Park; the other is located in north Spokane County at the intersection of Elk-Chattaroy Road and Highway 2. Landfills are necessary to provide disposal for solid waste that cannot be recycled or incinerated, or that exceeds the capacity of the WTE Facility. The Spokane County Regional Health District licenses six privately owned landfills in Spokane County. Level of Service The minimum Regional Level of Service Standards requires solid waste services to meet all State and Federal regulations. Forecast of Future Needs Spokane Valley is participating on the update of the Spokane County Waste Management Plan (SCWMP). The SCWMP update process will determine future needs for solid waste disposal. Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities The updated Spokane County Solid Waste Management Plan will provide information on future regional solid waste facilities. Finance Plan The updated Spokane County Solid Waste Management plan will include a financing plan for future regional solid waste facilities. 4.4.15 stormwater Facilities Storrnwater runoff in Spokane Valley flows to a combination of public and private facilities. In developed areas, runoff infiltrates into the ground or flows do.vn strop: ;utt.�s—a4d is dicpcsed thrcuuth to drywells in public road rights-of-way, drywells on private property and grassy swales with overflow drywells in easements on private property. There are advantages and disadvantages to relying on on-site facilities for all stormwater management. One advantage is that on-site facilities are typically constructed with private funds and can be integrated into the development as a green space amenity. However, on-site facilities are sometimes not well maintained. Their capacity may be diminished over time or they may fail entirely during large runoff events. On-site facilities may take up large portions of a development site, thereby reducing the effective density that can be accommodated in that area. In 2004, the Spokane Valley City Council created a stormwater utility to develop and maintain storm drainage systems on City owned puhhte-land. To create revenues for the stormwater utility operations, the Council adopted an annual fee per Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU). Residential ERUs are based on the number of single-family dwellings, while Commercial ERUs are based on the square footage of impervious surface associated with a business or commercial development. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4 -Capital Facilities Page 47 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Inventory of Existing Facilities Spokane Valley's inventory of stormwater facilities, most of which are integral to the safe function of our street system, consists of about 5;E-..-D07.200 drywells, 92. --1900 bio-infiltration swales_ 61 detention ponds, and one retention pond. Other facilities include curb inlets, bridge drains, and culverts, all of which require monitoring and maintenance. The retention pond, located at Dishman- Mica Road. and 32r''Ave., was constructed as a part of a road project and provides a disposal point for water flowing from Chester Creek. The inventory does not reflect stormwater structures located on private properties that do not serve the public street drainage system. Level of Service The Spokane County Board of Commissioners adopted new regional level of service standards for stormwater in 2004 as a part of the Countywide Planning Policies update_- "Flooding of property outside designated drainage-ways, defacto drainage-ways, easements, flood zones or other approved drainage facilities, during the design precipitation or runoff event prescribed in the standards of the governing local agency or jurisdiction, shall be prevented within the reasonable probability afforded by such standards. impact to buildings and accessory structures shall be avoided to the maximum extent practicable by evaluating the effects of al00year rain event, and implementing measures to ensure that the runoff attendant to such event is directed awrry from such buildings and accessory structures. Any stormwater discharge to surface or ground waters must meet federal, state and local requirements for water quality treatment. stormwater runoff and infiltration. " The standards reflect current best practices that are established in adopted stormwater design guidelines. Spokane Valley follows said guidelines in reviewing and approving new development and is therefore in compliance with the regional LOS standards for stormwater runoff. Forecast of Future Needs Spokane Valley will continue to use private, on-site treatment facilities for new development and will install drywells, swales and other facilities as needed for new street improvement projects. Locations and Capacities of Future Facilities Location and capacities of future facilities is dependent on the location and size of new development, future public street projects, and projects that will address current problem areas within the City. Future updates to this Capital Facilities Plan will incorporate capital programming for stormwater facilities. Capital Projects and Financing Plan The City currently charges a $20$21 annual stormwater utility fee per Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU) to generate revenues for stormwater facility engineering, maintenance and administration. The stormwater fee is expected to generate 51.8 million annually. Transportation Facilities Inventory of Existing Facilities This section of the Capital Facilities Plan includes transportation facilities within Spokane Valley, including streets, bridges, pathways and sidewalks. Street maintenance is not included as a part of the Capital Facilities Plan. Spokane Valley is responsible for about 455 miles of public roads, including 51 miles of Urban Principal Arterials, 61 miles of Urban Minor Arterials, 44 miles of Urban Collectors, and 298.85 miles of Local Access Streets. Table 4.36 provides a list of all arterial intersections within Spokane Valley. Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4 -Capital Facilities Page 48 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Funding for the operation and expansion of the City's transportation system falls into several categories, which include federal, state and city funds. Some sources consist of reliable annual funds while others are periodic, such as grants. The use, availability and applicability of these various sources are not always at the discretion of the City. Spokane Valley will develop a track record with funding agencies as time goes on, which will help make to make more reliable funding assumptions. A summary of expected federal, state and local funding sources for the City's six year Capital Improvement Program is shown in Table 4.39. The following is a summary of transportation funding options. Federal Assistance These funds are authorized under the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act for the 21S1 Century (SAFETEA-21) and are administered by the Federal Highway Administration through Washington State Department of Transportation and the Metropolitan Planning Organization (Spokane Regional Transportation Council). Federal funding programs include Bridge Replacement (BR), Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) and the Surface Transportation Program (STP). State Assistance The Washington State Transportation Improvement Board administers State transportation programs, including the Urban Corridor Program (UCP), the Urban Arterial Program (UAP), and the Sidewalk Program (SP). City Funds Spokane Valley contributes revenues from the General Fund and the Real Estate Excise Tax funds for transportation projects. The City also receives State Motor Fuel Tax and Restricted State Fuel Tax. - _ 't Capital Facilitios ;nd Financing Parr 24 idoliars in thoucar.ds) item P c ec. nza. ptiar Primary 5+ty Total - Sourcc A+ ,'rt A> 4- Baracef•Read Bridge, BR —- 5 407 2 _ _-. . • UAP 2,465 3 Part-Read L'2(PE Only) gFeadway to Indiana, STP(U) _ !3 246 4 Sreaciway Avenua Safety Projact Pines(SR 27)to Park UAP _ - 167 8334 - _ . • , •• _ - - ' - a Io4GP 264 1,871 6 A r...+.. ie Road _ I90 t TrcnL_ GMAQ - —7-7 576 7 Sroadway1Suflivan Intcr°cction- CG STA 253 1,230 g _ STA 275 '1,312 9 _Sullivan Road(PE on!y) Euclid to Wcllccloy STP(U) _ 40 205 City 933 1,67-5 44 Pavornent Man:gcc cnt Program Arteria!s Other Fc.d 2,000 4,000 City 2 000 2,000 4-3 ST-EP Paveback 3,543 3,5.43 . - 2010 Totals: 9,798 20,493 Adopted April 25, 2006(Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 61 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.38 Six-Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2011 (dollars in thousands) Item Proiect Description Primary City Total # Source Amount Amount ._. ■ : ._. _ to Indiana. STPAUL 5 35 2 Indiana Ave Extension-3600'e!o Sullivan Rd to Mission&Flora UCP 53 375 3 Argonne Road-190 to Trent. CMAQ 101 713 4 Indiana/Sullivan Intersection PCC STA - 249 1.216 5 Pines Corridor ITS Sprague to Trent CMAQ 216 1,609 6 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation(PE Only) Other Fed 0 1.900_ 7 Broadway @ Ar.onne/Mullan Intersections PCC(PEIRW Only) STP(U) 37 271 8 Mission Ave.-Flora to Barker(PE/RW Only) STP(U) - 66 488 9 Pavement Management Program-Arterials Other Fed 2,000 4.000 10 Pavement Management Program-Local Access City 2,000 2:000 11 _ STEP Paycheck City 602 602 12 Sullivan/Euclid PCC Intersection(PE/RW 2r.thyl STP(U) 22 163 13 Sullivan West Bridge BR d 668 2011 Totals: 5,351 14.040 Takao 4.3-B 41-x Ye r T;ancportwicn Capital F3-. .3.� -- - .., .. nu -2011 (dollars in thoucans) stern w on 1:4.1; :; City Total 4 - Sourso Amount Amount 6 Argonne Road 100 to Trait, _ GMAQ - 1a1 713 S Sullivan Road(PE only) Euclid to Wellesley CTP(I ) 40 243 Other Coa - 2,000 4,000 4-2 a.,v.,ment Management Program Loc21 Acecsa City 27000 2,040 4-3 S--T-E42-4?-avetack Gi-Ey — 767 757 CMAQ -- 280 2,081 4-5 c,•Mya RaaelWast B e li _ - -447 735 - 4-6 M s i'•an°.verFo Barber CTS 128 049 2011 Totalc: —C -8 - 11,633 - Table 4.38 Six-Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2012 (dollars in thousands) Item Proiect Description Primary CitV Total # Source Amount Amount 6 Barker Rd IBNSF Grade Separation(PE Only) Other Fed 0 2.700 8 Mission Ave.-Flora to Barker(PEIRW Only) STPIIU) 58 8 9 Pavement Management Program--Arterials Other Fed , 2.000 4.000 10 Pavement Management Program-Local Access City 2.000 2.000 13 Sullivan West Bridge BR 0 1.435 1 Broadway Ave. Extension-Flora to Barker IPE Only] City 265 265 15 Evergreen/32nd-16th to 32nd,Evergreen to SR-27(PE Only) City - 312 312 16 Park Road-#2(RW/CN Only]-Broadway to Indiana STP(U) 135 1.000 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 62 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan 17 Saltese/Sullivan Signal Developers 62 _ 250 18 Sullivan Rd.Corridor Traffic Study(I-90 to Wellesley] STP(U) 27 200 19 University Rd/1-90 Overpass Study STP(U) 34 250 20 Broadway_@ Ar.onnelMullan Intersections FCC(CN Only) STP(U) 280 2,075 21 Sullivan/Euclid PCC Intersection(CN Ong STS 169 1,253 2012 Totals: 5.342 96,170 Adopted April 25, 2006(Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 63 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.33 Six Year Transportation Capita! Facilities and Financing Plan 2012 4do1la-rs in thousands) #erra Project Description Pnmaq City Total 4 - Sou-rce Amount Amount Pavement Mange ent Program Arterials Other-Fed --24000 000 4-2 Pavement Management Program Local Aeons City 2,000 000 4-5 Sullivan Rood Wost Bridgo 8R 147 735 1-6 AAlscion Ave. Flora to Barker S•TP(U) 671- 4,967 4-7 Park Rood t2(CN Only) Broadway to Indiana STP(U) _ 262 1,942 Bowdish Road 32nd to 8th CTS 116 852 2012 Totale: - 54196 14,646 Table 4.38 Six-Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2013 (dollars in thousands? Item Project Description Primary City Total # _ Source Amount Amount 9 Pavement Management Program-Arterials Other Fed 2 000 4,000 10 Pavement Management Program-Local Access City 2.000 2,000 13 Sullivan.Road West Bridge BR 0 768 14 Broadway Ave. Extension-Flora to Barker(PE Only) City 265 265 15 Evergreen/32nd-16th to 32nd.Evergreen to SR-27(PE Only) City 312 312 16 Park Road-#2(RWICN Only)-Broadway to Indiana STP(U) 540 _ 4.000 22 Mission Ave.-Flora to Barker ON Onlvl STP(U) 536 3969 2013 Totals: 5,553 15,314 III_ _'. - - _ - - - ;' 1_ .. - - _ -- •I 2013 td^llarc-in thousands) Project Description P*}F?aary City l -# - Source Amount Amt } _ _ __ •_• ' -- ' Oth Ced 2,000 4,000 12 Gity x•,00~ - 2,000 4-5 Sullivan Raad Wost Bridge B-RR —1-x300 • 6,500 4-7 Park Road #2(CN Only) Broadway to Indiana STP(U) • 502 3,767 4-8 Bawd:oh Road 32nd to 8th STP(U) 655 4-0 _ Park Road Bridging the Valley!BNSF Crade Se} rale Other Fed 21 —60 20 Saltose/Sullivan Signal Developers - -62 50 - 2044-Totals: 5,991 17,922 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 64 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Table 4.38 Six-Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2014 (dollars in thousands( Item Proiect Description Primary City Total # Source Amount Amount ' 9 Pavement Management Program-Arterials Other Fed 2,000 ' _ 4,000 10 Pavement Management Program-Local Access , Cam[ 2.000_ 2,000 13 Sullivan Road West Bridge BR 0 8.440 23 Barker Road-South City Limits to Appleway(PE Only) ay 236 236 24 Bowdish Road-32nd to 8'"(PE Only) STP(U) 52 384 25 Broadway Ave.Extension-Flora to Barker(PE Only) UCP _ 100 500. 26 Flora Road-Sprague to Mission-[PE Only) .city 216 216 27 Sidewalk Infill Program_ STP(E) 45 330 2014 Totals: 4,649 16.1106 2011 (dollars in thousands) Item Project Description Primary City Total -# - &e ae Amount Amount 44 Pavement Management Program Artorialc Gt;tea 2000 11,000 42 _• _ ss City 2,000 - 2.000 4-5 Sullivan Road Wect r io _� X3 R 09 6,500 45 Bowdish Road 32nd to 8th STP(U) 1,061 7,782 4-9 Park Road Bridging the Vallcy/BNSF Grade Separation Other-Ped X90 2,150 2-1- Spragua!Barker Traffic-Signal Developers 155 75 - - 2044 Totals: 6,'156 • 22,507 Table 4.38 Six-Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2015 (dollars in thousands,, Item Proiect Description Primary City Total # Source Amount Amount 9 Pavement Management Program-Arterials Other Fed 2.000 4,000 10 Pavement Management Program-Local Access City 2.000 2.000 13 Sullivan Road West Bridge BR 0 8.440_ 23 Barker Road-South City.Limits to Applewav(PE Only) City 236 236 24 Bowdish Road-32nd to 8" PE Onl STP(U) 52 384 25 Broadwa Ave.Extension-Flora to Barker RWICN Onl UCP 100 500 26 Flora Road-Sprague to Mission(PE Only) ay 216 216 27 Sidewalk Infill Program STP(E) 36 270 28 Evergreen ITS improvements CMAQ 17 _ 126 Evergreen/32nd-16th to 32nd,Evergreen to SR-27 29 f_RWICN Only1 STP(U) 54 400 2015 Totals: 4711 i _ 16,572 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 65 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan - - "-- - __ -- - -_ - ';. , '";:, a,•id FinancingPlarl 2015 1`e-m Pca;cct Dcfcrip'.ion Primary Gity To-te terse rse Aunt Arna�►nt _ •• _ Other Fed _ 2,000 — 4-,890 4? - Q,445, 2,000 2,000 4-9 art:Road Bridging the Valley!SNSF Crade Separation Other-Fed 286 6,801 24 pague/Barker Traffic Signal Developers 71 370 22 Apploway Extcnoicr. University to-Evergreen STP el 205 UAP 52 250 24 Manoficld Extencion Pines{SR2.7)to 300-ft Eastof Houk Rd LAP 73 25 Sullivan Read(RW/CN only) Euclid to Wollccloy STP(U) 54 - 100 26 Sullivan Road North Extension(Bigelow Gulch) City 56 55 27 Trent(SR220) Del Ray to Barker Turn Lane Devekrpecs 133 _ - -632 3 --9 13: 2-9 Sullivan Rd ITS,Broadway to 241h GMAQ 150 1,108 . SO gitipoide-I-T-S-I-rap-r-ovemen-ts 6MAQ — 700 S U) 164 1,215 , 2015-Totals: ---64-14 --_-173T-1-6.8 i Table 4.38 Six-Year Transportation Capital Facilities and Financing Plan 2016 (dollars in thousands) Item Protect Description Primary City Total # Source Amount Amount 9 Pavement Management Program-Arterials Other Fed 2,000 4 000 10 Pavement Management Program-Local Access City 2,000 2 000 25 Broadway Ave.Extension-Flora to Barker_(RWICN Only} UCP 812 4.062 27 Sidewalk Infill Program STP{E] 162 1.200 28 Evergreen ITS Improvements CMAQ 79 582 Evergreen/32nd-16th to 32nd,Evergreen to SR-27 29_ (RWICN Only) STP(U) 647 4.791 30 A lewa Extension-Universit to Ever reen STP 127 406 31 Greenacres Trail Plannin• Stud Sullivan Rd.to Libe Lake STP E 28 210 WI Mansfield Extension-Pines 5827_to 300-ft East of Houk Rd 136 136 33 Millwood Urban Trail-Fancher Rd.to Ever.reen Rd. STP(E1 - ®� 34 Park Rd/BNSF Grade Separation Other Fed. 35 Sullivan Rd ITS, Broadway to 24th CMAQ 183 7,356 2016 Totals: 6,264 , 19.932 Adopted April 25, 2006(Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4 -Capital Facilities Page 66 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan r -- - .. - - • • ...-.•• _ nl-Suwaany-204-0-throtig4-2015(In 51,000)•ceartm to Plea-nee-Pir6}est£ Totals • Fedc.al Sta;c 9;her l4 Total Federal State Cthcr Gity Total Pas laz1 Sale 44her S24103 5,826 52,905 52466 $10950 &2 14913 SB 58 $7444 59.543 51,053 5352-3 $2905 W44 520;493 2014 $2,671 SA SO 5124 53092 52422 5Q $9 5932 $8444 66489 S9 $0 $ 493 511,6-33 2012 59 S9 $0 &'d 59 55440 59 59 $`_,196 S1-47596 59,310 SO SO 55,196 514606 2013 59 59 59 S9 59 541.3€8 5255 5225 55,991 5-1-7;922 S1-1T32 531-8 5225 55,991 517,023 2014 S9 59 SO 59 5Q 54-4,85 €44 5161 66,556 522 507 54197E 5944 5154 557455 522,507 2915 54 SQ SO SQ SQ_ 58,477 52,332 5025 58444 54-8,402 58,577 5389 $1702-5 $5,211 515,103 Total:: $4721 53,-526 52,505 52,537 511,012 549,-550 5.4 51,414 590- $91,021 551291 5-8T444 54;249 524449 S-44252 Table 4.39 Six•Year Transportation Improvement Program Summary 2011 through 2016(in$1,000) Secured Projects Planned Projects Totals Fear Federal State Other City+ Total Federal State tither C_v Total Federal State Other Total 2311 $2,$32 $282 $1,007 $749 54,870 54,339 9134 995 54,602 59,170 57,171 $416 51,102 $5,351 514,040 12012 $372 $O SO X59 $430 59,846 $287 $323 55,284 $15.740 510,218 $287 5323 $5,342 916,170 2013 SO $0 $0 5 SR 59,507 $154 S0 55,653 $15,314 59,507 $154 SO $5,653 515.314 12014 50 S0 S0 $0 5 $9,369 $2,088 IQ $4,649 $16,106 $9,359 $2.086 $2 $4,649 $16.106 12015 SO $0 $O $1 SO $9,773 52,088 $0 $4,711 516,572 $9,773 $2,088 $ $4,711 516,572 2016 SO SO SO SO SO 510,057 53.574 537 56,264 $19,932 $10057 $3,574 537 $$6,264 519,932 liotals 53.204 5282 51,007 $807 55.300 552,891 58.325 5455 531,163 592.834 956,095 58.607 51,462 $31.970 598,134 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 67 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Tal to" Si�Y T"^ aporatlon improvement Program 2010 Through 2015(In $1,000) Projects without Lo-- '-`-- ' - - - - -- -- Project Name Project Dcocri-pt+en Total Cc:t 32nd Avenue Evergreen to Reconstruct and widen to three lanes with Best 2,237.00 8th Avenue Phase 1 Carnahan Reconstruct 8th Ave.to a three lane section to-Havana with curb, gutter,sidewalks and b44 . 348-3,00 8th Avenue Phase 2 Park to Reconstruct 8th Ave.to a three lane section Dickey with curb, gutter,sidewalks and bike lanes. 5,120.90 8th Avenue Phase 3 Dickey to '--=•- -- = • - - - -- -•- --- ._ Carnahan with curb, gutter, sidewalks and bike lanes. 4,6-67,00 Apple•,vay Extension Evergreen Extend Appleway Blvd.with a multi lane _to Tshirley facility including curbs and sidewalks. 12,212.00 Reconstruct to 3 lane roadway w/center turn lane,sidewalks, rb&gutter and Barker Road 8th to Appleway _ stormwater S,'7n0 Barker Road Spokane River to Trent Reconstruct to a 2 lanc curbed arterial 6,530.00 Broadway @ ArgonnellYlullan lntocccctions PCC Reconstruct intersections in PCC 1t 556 00 Broadway Ave Flora to Barker Reconstruct to 3 lanes, Flora to Barker 6,824.00. Carnahan Truck Lane 8th to City Limits, Add SB truck Lane to road 51073.00 Euclid Ave/Flora Rd Flora Euclid to Euclid,Euclid Flora to Reconstruct to provide a 2 lane, shouldered lderred Barker arterial 0 Flora Road Sprague to Mission Rocor..struct 8 widen to 3 land roadway 5,175,00 !Kiernan&Sullivan PCC Reconstruct Intersection in PCC 1,350.00 ❑<,rk Road _ l 3_Sprague-to • -- Eroadway lane arterial street with curbs and sidowalko 4;244.00 Pines Corridor ITS: Sprague to 1-6-th Traffic Signal Control System for Corridor 445,00 SR27/Pines/16th Intersection Roundabout) '� O0 !`University/Sprague lntcrscctioa Replace asphalt pavement witl+portland cement concre4e pavement. 1,6112.00 TOTAL - 75,877.00 Table 4.40 Six Year Transportation Improvement Program 2010 Through 2015(in$1,000) Ir Projects without Local Match within Existing Resources Protect Name Protect Descri•tion Total Cost 32nd Avenue-Evergreen to Reconstruct and widen to three lanes with Best curbs and sidewalks. 2,237.00 8th Avenue Phase 1-Carnahan Reconstruct 8th Ave.to a three-lane section to Havana with curb 'utter sidewalks and bike lanes. 3,483.00 8th Avenue Phase 2-Park to Reconstruct 8th Ave. to a three-lane section Dickey with curb, gutter,sidewalks and bike lanes. 5,120.00 8th Avenue Phase 3-Dickey to Reconstruct 8th Ave.to a three-lane section Carnahan with curb •utter sidewalks and bike lanes. 4 667.00 Adopted April 25, 2006 (Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 68 of 71 City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan Appleway Extension-Evergreen Extend Appleway Blvd.with a multi-lane to Tshirley facility including curbs and sidewalks. 13,219.00 Reconstruct to 3-lane roadway w/center turn lane, sidewalks,curb&gutter and Barker Road-.8th to Anolevy stormwater 5 4_75.U0 Barker Road-Spokane River to Trent Reconstruct to a 2-lane curbed a_rterial 6 530.00 Broadway(ArgonneIMulfan Intersections FCC Reconstruct intersections in PCC 1,556.00 Broadwa Ave- Flora to Barker Reconstruct to 3-lanes Flora to Barker 6.824.00 Carnahan Truck Lane-8th to City Limits, Add SB truck Lane to road 5.973.00 Euclid Ave/Flora Rd-Fiore Euclid to Euclid. Euclid Flora to Reconstruct to provide a 2-lane, shouldered Barker arterial 5,408.00 Flora Road- Sprague to Mission Reconstruct&widen to 3-lane roadway 5,1/5.00 f Kiernan&Sullivan PCC Reconstruct Intersection in PCC 1.350.00 Park Road-#3-Sprague to Reconstruct and widen to a standard three- Broadway lane arterial street with curbs and sidewalks 4.244.00_ Pines Corridor ITS:Sprague to 16th Traffic Signal Control System for Corridor 785.00 Improvements to intersection(Dual lane SR27/Pines/16th Intersection Roundabout) 3,189.00 University/Sprague Intersection Replace asphalt pavement with portland PCC cement concrete •avement. 1 642.00 TOTAL _ 76,877.00 Potential Annexation Areas/Urban Services The Growth Management Act requires that counties designate urban growth areas (UGAs). The City of Spokane Valley identified lands adjacent to the City within existing UGAs that would likely be developed for urban uses and potentially be annexed to the City. In order to assess the need for capital facilities, the City has identified existing service providers within the Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs). This assessment should help identify the effects a potential annexation area will have on existing levels of service. Table 4.41 Existing Urban Service Providers within Potential Annexation Areas(PAAs) PAAs Northwood Northeast East Southeast South Ponderosa Edgecliff _ Domestic Water Pasadena Park Consolidated Consolidated Vera Vera S.C.W.D.No.3 East Spokane Hutton Settlement Consolidated S.C.W.D.No.3 Fire&Emergency Services F• .D.No.1&9 F.D.No.1 F.D.No.1 F.Q.No.1&8 F.D.No.1&8 F.D.No.8 F.D.No.1&8 Law Enforcement S• pokane County Spokane County Spokane County— Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Libraries S.C.Library Dist. -S.C.Library Dist. S.C.Library Dist S.C.Library Dist. S.C.Library Dist. S.C.Library Dist. S.C.Library Dist. Parks&Open Space Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Public Schools W• .V.S.D.&S.D.81 E.V.S.D C.V.S.D. C.V.S.D. C.V.S.D. C.V.S.D. W.V.S.D.&S.O.81 Public Transit Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available Sanitary Sewer ' S• pokane County ' Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Not Sewered Spokane County Solid WastelRecycle Waste Mgmt. Waste Mgmt. -Waste Mgmt Waste Mgmt. Waste Mgmt. Waste Mgmt. Waste Mgmt. Storm water Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Street Cleaning Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Transportation Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Spokane County Adopted April 25, 2006(Updated 04-27-2010) Chapter 4-Capital Facilities Page 69 of 71 Clements Creaveo few Plan[e's I err to City of Spokane shicfds Park Olionchi:hn Recks) II WM A15IA€#I11MI` rte: �•�� w�i�mrssrtt a[� ++ 1�� k�irf7GW riali . VISPINZICOMIUMEJ p�� A[31!1� IM MIME a.Chellev� Kamm ��1�■1�'iori @ wzai� � w� n2==4=11.� ��1 iI �r. i. `i� �rtIt 7��y Ter a l P•ao RB M, P y 1 PTI . iii :ITCMIes stal f.. 'ZINy�a wlW � ij'= ira `wait I© E lik r y ' � � Castle 7 I _ �aY]I rr33 V fPC� W#41U Map 3.2 Bike and Pedestrian System Legend Bicycle and Pedestrian System — - Shared Use Path Proposed Shared Use Path - Bike Lane •••• Proposed Bike Lane ,.� Bike Lane/Proposed Shared Use Path - Signed Shared Roadway .��. Signed Shared Roadway/Proposed Bike Shared Roadway - Pedestrian Path - Proposed Pedestrian Path ▪ Traiiheads Interstate 90 Schools Railroad Other Municipalities 11 11 n City of Spokane Valley ® Urban Growth Area ▪ Parks Water Bodies Effective Date:X/XX/XXXX Ordinance No.:XX-XXX• j� Map Location 0 0.5 1 2 Miles i I I I 1 1 I I I Nation The information shown on this nap is compiled front various sources and is subject to constant revision.The City makes no claims or guarantees stout the accuracy or currency of this amp and expressly disclaims liabittryfor errors and omissions in its contents. To confirm accuracy contact she City of Spokane Valley,Community Development Deparotent.Division of Planning,(509)921-1000, Produce arthe Chy of Spokane VYIey,Community n..elopmmi neperemene - rndR6"'Sp iuswImmumwr ggr.■ O er. 2643 1a 35 M-'-maobr 02 Pasadena Park 9 Irrigation District 417 .2644 33 - Trent-venal/ Err gaunt District 43 Pioneer Water r 2645 Company 31 4 • 8r-' El � J1 � 1 Orchard Avenue Irrigation District-h ' poi ice\ 111 - _Irvin Wstor MN1S:g: _District q6 F MI fil�i i d11 -...;.In OW" .1m/IINEIIIMM:IPPPII. i-r�i nun Hutton mu 'Trentwood a E a rz Settle meat DIrrgraio a e s iil11•3 ...in _F.-_ .,_.."7'17;14--I- R 1 fYia Ari EIMUITIlso IMLI.11:=301.,—.'�ar� TR_-3111nFalaE ran Spokane , 2 Industrial 'i"e Perk s T 32 Iii n.pokane- `�, County Water Dlstrib Consolidated irrigation District 419 Map 4.1 Water Districts & Well Heads Looso idaled "t°O1 Irrigation Dts fief#19 • floor Pit IifN'a m∎!! =al16i /storm" tin 'Maar -111ELTIM ty N ,�. a tt I 'Mode eEleolric Water Comp ny SIh Ew f��IL� 1 is�rn �• ' " xa tm '�a4�.lV", lro iinnl•LII maiearz in East Spokane-� - -Watet', - District pl R _d 9 39111 Ciry_n reels Spokane Wate m r Service % 47 Iaa�pla- Wat 4� eRrd tiar ,''ejrtlit� 4 111 Vera Crngation Distrb t Kl5 a li 36N, 31 3 32 0 q 06 03 Spokane County Water I District -103 (2 a,= 02 c Linkc 06 Spokane is County'Water 1 District 2145 1 05 Legend Municipal Water Purveyors City of Spokane Water Service City of Spokane Valley • Group A Well Heads • Group B Well Heads I Urban Growth Area Water Bodies Effective Date:XX/XX/XXXX Ordinance No.:XX-XXX F J d Map Location 0 0.5 1 2 Miles I I I I t I I I Notice:The information shown on this map is compiled from various sources and is subject to constant revision.The Ciry makes no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this nap and expressly disclaims Liability for errors and omissions in its contents. To confirm accuracy contact the City ofSpokane Valley.Community Development Department,Division of Planning,(509)921-1000. Product or the City of Spokane Villey,Com mu oiry ne.elopment Deportment Map 4.2 Fire Districts ..,a glorwwe — r nwi >tartmava ��TR �� _T F�...,, � 'nth■r,�rtne�l6� i I t ',.j, � 1 +�FaI�f:Tll2sr�17°, YnSenll Shop and alt Ilt II•C■�14�LJ ;�� .I� y , • " p 111411461011MIIM 141 Emaminiki �y •® 5:��[ry�I■��n��j � ieenacres �� t , rtr. �E�E�.■ 111! L I A_.■HLI M �� ° S Lion a i� . Demo + as.e.a.p.aaeuraw�.RRs�,�'!R_ �� 11� {f ¢Gn�1� u F\■t•1.F1� 3}�'r��`�� t Statiole I �11�?-�rn�� -��+5- F7 � � slailUn 6 �■.�o.atatl� MIEWEINESIIMIMriiMEARKIDUrd ■! 5m[Ipll■v � Q-a, MA� - ■ pFIEg3�i1 �. . -9 manor Legend l City of Spokane Fire Service Area Fire District I Fire District S Fire District 9 0 Fire Stations City of Spokane Valley Boundary Address Grid Other Municipalities I Urban Growth Area Water Bodies Effective Date:XX/XX/XXXX Ordinance No.:XX-XXX Spolutae� 0 0.5 1 I t I I I I I I I Notice:The information shown on this reap is compiled front various sauces oral is subject to constant revision.The City modes no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this mop and expressly disclaims ilublltty for errors and omtssiona In irs contents. To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley.Community Development Doparuaem.Division of Planning,(509)921-1000. Product alike City or Spokane Voter,Com.aelty DkrIIOpaent Deptrtoteat Map Location O , 2 Mites • -6300• 1 I U I I __4900 i_>I_..-� C�Ty of ; Spokane) _-4000' I -.e I- -32007 _24001___ I ,'SpolCan. F y c 1 � 1 Map 4.5 Six-Year Sewer Projects alesry A-e 1 _Stipa__— I- — f•Eir1ld�A Vc 2. Ott«r^ue�ra naeVcyc.AVen„ Immgon y.Ave I c 2911) t,m�'p4c -4 _1.6004_ __0 _1600 -.210.0 t � 1 Legend n City of Spokane Valley Boundary Urban Growth Area Municipal Areas Water Bodies 1 a4 Mm:ndq-nr< 1 50.9006 snmcry Ind�n'�alAvel �� 'T1SR•90ubrrsRl9L eys`�dnwb City of Spokane Valley Sewers Six Year Capital Improvement Plan M'ssion n sh,p Al z *a my.P.:-. �� SK aa,y,i,a� brae.-.,v-tee En,aJwayhvc 1.yA wmi ywny-nw<• vaney,..r•A,cr�� 2011 svaPU�Ae. Four.Aye _9bl l "Pnyv�Aa ppl •)El e l I Sheller "'i 1 La 6 Year CIP(2005-2010) Sewered -.Interceptors Collectors ----Address Grid usoo SME Eighth Apc C EiehthE.(. C __29.00 „3,700 _4400. 10 70.0 1____lt---- Lei 1 I I 1 F I 1 Is • 1 d - -i. 1 1' lJ .1= (2, •- • • _ ♦1 '—r a I I- --_u.100 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I I- -1 • J -___1117011 4800._ _ 4409 .57,00._ Effective Date:XX/XX/XX Ordinance No.:XX-XXX ifr Map Location P 0 0.5 1 2 Miles 1 1 I 1 I 1 I Notice:The information shown on this amp is compiled from various sources and is subject to constant revision.The Cily makes no claims or guarantees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly disclaims liability for errors and omissions la its contents. To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spokane Valley,Community Development Department.Division of naming,(509)921-1000. Product of the CI Iy of Spokane Valley.Community.evpopmevl trepaeIn.uI Map 7.1 2010 Development Activity ■� Fflp[f, r� NO l�ii riZTYY,. - aginn iM "i ?Mama�o, V at!` �,ii i lyff nw ,alnel ?7� 1� - — r7nir-�re��iW�,—w = Z �nan,+ rmma Lake? p �su�w i forams r>• �Rfl '. 1Rry�lI,1�frx�r� 3G7 s�ww.1_I :n�, P.� tar, ,t!►� ro ' t l lea=Kt c.�ueurars �[ �. �� ri.ww , ,1 L��r w:_�wwi� rte• iY m. �ssn� ��a� u�wr� � �•!Ek � - . . Edo • n wr i s.;� ls�tn�l ..w. a �t1 --s Legend Permits Commercial 11/ Residential ciPlats Recorded f1 Plats w/Preliminary Approval _ Plat&BSPAppl feet ions Urban Growth Boundary City of 5 palane Valley 177 Other Munici palities Zoning Changes NOT MF-2 MUA GO -GCC 0 GCA CM U CC MUC CB NC « R-1 C R-2 -RC R-3 I-1 R-4 -1-2 MF-1 P/OS Effective e Date:XX/XX/XXXX Ordinance No.:XX-XXX Sited e 4, walfey. Map Location d P _ 0.5 2 Miles I Novice: The inf,neon shown on this map is compiled from various sources and is subject to cocetmtl revlsian The Ciry makes no claims or guarantees abate the crertrany or currency of this map and expressly disclaims liability for errors and omiasioln in its contents. To confirm acerrary contact the Ciy afSpokane Colley.Cmnmuniry Development Department,Division ofPltmmrg.(509)923-50111) Pre dart of the dry of Spokane Valley,Community Vevelopment Department clemam ,pranci, ••• C —.Sp° aRn- 6rh la 6e ' e i 5 46.1 .4e .1141. • 1 55171.1:"EI . .■ - _ • .wy ••••';.• " ' _•• ,?_••- . • 'IP •e . ..•)2.0 7 Map 8.3 Fish & Wildlife Habitat Legend Eli City of Spokane Valley Boundary Cliffs/Bluff White Tailed Deer Moose Elk Habitat Urban Natural Open Space Ell Riparian Zone Waterfowl - Urban Growth Area Water Bodies DNR Stream Type (S)Designated Shoreline -(F)Fish Habitat —(N)Non-fish Habitat - (U)Unknown Effective Date:XX/XX/XXXX Ordinance No.:XX-XXX Map Location 0 03 1 2 Mlles 11111 m I Notice:The itformation shown on this map is compiled front various soirees and is subject to constant revision.The Ciry,makes no claims or gterantees about the accuracy or currency of this mop and expressly disclaims liability/or errors tend omissions in its content, To confirm accuracy contact the City of Spcltenre Volley.Communiry, Dewlopment Deporimeru,Division of Planning.(509)9214009 Prodset orthe City of Spokane V NI ley,Co min u Demi von entDepar.eni !MP wr r, '2644 al eN�l7 I I � I n'1ey City of Spokane 3 0 -Pr -_ w .r� z V: C cbt NJi -.----— 222 t -03 �• I a ice'. of - -"1 �'; , � v-t � •i 2445 "e I I y �+• Is r f a Map 8.4 FEMA Flood Hazards Legend Areas of 100-year flooding FAreas of 500-year flooding City of Spokane Valley Other Municipalities 1 Urban Growth Area Water Bodies Effective Date:XX/XXIXXXX Ordinance No.:XX-XXX Spokane jMalley 0 0.5 Map Location t� 2 Miles I Nance:The eq rmarion shorn on the map is campiledfram carious sources and Is subject to constant revision.The City makes no claims or grmmntees about the accuracy or currency of this map and expressly dsciaitas liability for errors and omissions in its comets. To oofirm accuracycamael the Ciry of Spokane Valley.Comm* Damlopmem Department Division of Planning.(509)921-1000. Product prlbe City of Speka 00 Va1ky,C000rpoay ne.elepmml oepvlmemr CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 22, 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: Public Access Programming Funding Process GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Franchise Agreement Ordinance 09-034 PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Approval of Comcast franchise December 1, 2009 BACKGROUND: The Council adopted Ordinance 09-034, which approved the franchise between Spokane Valley and Comcast so that Comcast may place its cable facilities in the City's right-of-way so it can operate its business. One of the requirements of the franchise (a contract granted by ordinance) is for Comcast to provide funding to the City for capital purchases associated with the creation and broadcasting of public, educational, and governmental (PEG) programming. O PEG funding is the equivalent of$.35 per subscriber per month O 21,732 out of 35,000 Spokane Valley households subscribe to Comcast O Estimated $90,011 per year in PEG funding with $150,000 upfront. $.25/subscriber/month is withheld to pay off$150,000 upfront payment O Staff recommends reserving $80,000 of the $150,000 payment for City use and splitting remainder equally between educational and public access programming. Both current providers of public and educational programming in Spokane County are receiving equal funding from the City of Spokane, both request funding equal to the other, and both have similar capital needs. Spokane Valley staff negotiated PEG fee with Comcast based upon need for all three components. O Proposals solicited for disbursement of remaining funds. OPTIONS: 1.) Provide consensus to split non-governmental PEG funds equally between educational and public access programming. 2.) Determine available funding based upon proposals received. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Staff recommends splitting non-governmental PEG funds equally between public and educational programming. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The proposed distributions would be a pass-through of restricted PEG revenues that can only be used for this purpose. No other general fund resources would be utilized. STAFF CONTACT: Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint, RFP Notice, RFP, Draft Agreement Spokane Valley u PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL, AND GOVERNMENTAL ( PEG ) CHANNELS PUBLIC ACCESS FUNDING Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst March 22, 2011 Current PEG Channels or Comcast Channel 5 — City of Spokane governmental broadcasting EJ Channel 14 — Community-Minded Television (CMTV) public broadcasting Channels 15 - 19 — Cable Advisory Board for Learning and Education (C.A. B.L.E.)educational broadcasting Reserved multi-jurisdictional channel available but not currently being used. PEG Channels Not mandated but a right given to the franchising authority EJ Trade-off for cable operator's use of the public right-of-way E Intended to provide voice to the citizens and encourage local community enrichment Public Broadcasting City of Spokane Currently contracts with Community-Minded TV (CMTV), a non-profit organization. Parent company is Community-Minded Enterprises (Previously operated by Comcast) CMTV provides training to teach citizens how to record and edit programs Channel 14 runs continuously, reaches 100,000 households in Spokane County, and broadcasts programming that benefit the community; includes City of Spokane Valley by default. Examples of programming include health and fitness, faith-based, environmental, veterans forums, living with disabilities, overcoming addiction, arts and culture, at-risk youth CMTV received $200,000 in capital funds, and $50,000 in operational funds from the City of Spokane in 2007. CMTV requested $74,000 in annual capital contributions from the City of Spokane Valley Educational Programming ❑ C.A.B.L.E has served as the custodian of the five educational channels since 1980 1- Members include EWU, Gonzaga, WSU, SCC, SFCC, UW, ESD 101 , Spokane Public Schools Continuous learning and informational programming ❑ Members pay production costs E SFCC and KSPS pay majority of operating and capital costs ❑ Received $ 153,000 from Cox cable in 1990 and $200,000 from City of Spokane in 2006 and 2007. Requested $63,000 in annual contributions from City of Spokane Valley Governmental Broadcasting Local governments that have their own or share a governmental PEG channel Spokane Spokane County Coeur d'Alene Post Falls All Washington cities over 75,000 population have a government channel except Spokane Valley Typical programming is council meetings, public information and education, bulletin board, other relevant government and agency meetings ❑ City of Spokane Valley currently rebroadcasts recorded City Council meetings on public access Channel 14. PEG Funding History City Staff negotiated PEG Fee with Comcast based upon the following needs. PEG Capital Needs for COSV Total Capital Needs for PEG Spokane Valley Share Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Annual Avq. 0 22.45% of subscribers CMTV $ 567,155 $ 186,900 $ 186,400 $ 123,900 $ 96,900 $1,161,255 $ 232,251 $ 52,137.98 CABLE $ 158,000 $ 157,500 $ 142,000 $ 144,000 $ 146,000 $ 747,500 $ 149,500 $ 33,561.22 COSV $ 40,000 $ 2,500 $ 2,500 $ 2,500 $ 2,500 $ 50,000 $ 10,000 $ 10,000.00 $ 95,699.20 At the time, CMTV was a start-up, requiring larger start-up costs in year 1 , while CABLE had been in existence for many years. Both organization are now established and their annual capital needs are very similar. Both current providers request funding equal to the other. Both providers are currently receiving equal funding from City of Spokane. PEG Funding ■ill ❑ PEG Capital Reimbursement Equivalent of $.35 per subscriber per month 21 ,732 out of 35,000 Spokane Valley households subscribe to Comcast $90,011 per year with $ 150,000 up front. $.25/subscriber/month withheld to payoff $ 150,000 payment Staff recommends reserving $80,000 of the $ 150,000 for City expenditures and splitting the remainder between educational and public access programming. Staff also recommends splitting the quarterly payment for 2010 and 2011 equally among public and educational programming. PEG Funding — Received and Projected o Received $ 150,000 in 2010 $9,076 in 2010 (4 full months, 1 partial month, $. l 0/subscriber) L Projected $25,717* Annual contributions $. 10/subscriber/month Return to full $.35 in December of 201 2 $26,994 in 2012, $90,011 /year in 2013- 15 * Comcast lost 3% of its cable TV subscribers in 2010 Process for Awarding of Funds Determine needs of City government first ❑ Request proposals for public and education programming providers Provide proposals with staff recommendations to Council Council approves funding available for each provider c Require providers to sign contract through 2015 ❑ Notify providers by October 31 of each subsequent year of the funding available for the upcoming year Next Steps Council Feedback on Process Publish notice requesting proposals for Public Access Channel Manager EJ Council determines funding available for providers in current year. Contracts signed Funds dispersed as reimbursements for qualifying capital expenses. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Public Access Television Capital Funding The City of Spokane Valley is accepting proposals from organizations who desire to be the channel manager for the City of Spokane Valley public access channel broadcast on Comcast cable television. The City anticipates that $35,000 will be available for funding in 2011. Funds awarded will be limited to amounts needed for capital expenditures, pursuant to Federal law. Organization(s) awarded funds will be required to sign an agreement with the City of Spokane Valley. A full copy the Request for Proposals, as well as a copy of the required agreement, is available on the City's website at www.spokanevalley.org. Copies may also be obtained at City Hall, 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley, WA 99206. Proposals must be received at City Hall no later than 4:00pm on April 22, 2011. Please deliver/mail one original and seven (7) copies of the proposal and any supporting documents to: City of Spokane Valley Attn: Daniel Domrese 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Proposals received after the deadline will not be considered. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Public Access Television Capital Funding The City of Spokane Valley is accepting proposals from organizations that desire to be the channel manager for the City of Spokane Valley public access channel broadcast on Comcast cable television. The City anticipates that$35,000 will be available for funding in 2011. Projected funding for future years will be determined by October 31 of the preceding year. Funds awarded will be limited to amounts needed for capital expenditures,pursuant to Federal law, and will be determined based upon the actual PEG funds remitted by Comcast to the City of Spokane Valley Organization(s) awarded funds will be required to sign an agreement with the City of Spokane Valley lasting through the end of 2015 and committing the applicant to provide equipment and training to Spokane Valley residents producing video programming suitable for broadcast,and to broadcast locally produced programming over the dedicated public access channel provided by Comcast. A full copy of the required agreement is available on the City's website at www.spokanevalley.org. Copies may also be obtained at City Hall, 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106, Spokane Valley,WA 99206. Proposals must include (1) Certification of Insurance at levels that meet or exceed those specified in Section 11 of the required agreement; (2)A preliminary Annual Report as specified in Section 9 of the required agreement. The Annual Report shall be based upon the most recent available data or the most recently completed Annual Report submitted to other jurisdictions. The Annual Report shall include a capital budget request for the year 2011 as well as a projected request for all subsequent years of the required agreement. (3)A business model or description of the type of programming cultivated and the benefit provided to the citizens of Spokane Valley and a description and history of the organization. Proposals must be received at City Hall no later than 4:00pm on April 22,2011. Please deliver/mail one original and seven (7) copies of the proposal and any supporting documents to: City of Spokane Valley Attn: Daniel Domrese 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Proposals received after the deadline will not be considered. Proposals will be reviewed by staff with recommendations made to the City Council. It is anticipated that City Council will make its final funding decision by May 10. The successful applicant will be notified by mail within five days of the Council decision. For more information, contact Daniel Domrese at ddomrese@spokanevalley.org or call 720-5042. AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES (Entity) THIS AGREEMENT is between the City of Spokane Valley, a code City of the State of Washington,hereinafter"City,"and(entity),hereinafter"(entity),"jointly referred to as "parties." WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley has obtained certain channel resources and capital financing as a result of a Franchise renewal with the local Cable Operator, Comcast of Pennsylvania/Washington/West Virginia, LP, ("Comcast"); and WHEREAS, the Franchise documents include the Franchise Ordinance itself as well as one side letter. For convenience, Section 13 of the Franchise Ordinance affecting such aforementioned channel resources is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, (entity) has agreed to provide community programming identified in Section 13 of the City's franchise with Comcast as reflected in its Proposal, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, the City provided public notice it would accept applications from entities interested in contracting with the City to provide public television for City residents. (entity) responded by applying to the City for execution of an agreement for such services, and the (entity) proposal appears to be in the public interest; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. DESIGNATION OF (entity) AS CHANNEL MANAGER. The City designates (entity) as Channel Manager of the channel reserved in Exhibit A. This designation terminates if the Comcast Franchise Agreement terminates or expires. The designation is in the nature of a quit-claim authorization, to the extent of the City's power and authority to make such designation, without any promises or warranties. This section and Section 2, immediately below, comprise the entire obligations of the City under this Agreement, notwithstanding any other provision. The failure to provide at least * hours each day on average over each calendar week of broadcasting shall be considered a material breach of this Agreement. 2. GRANT FROM PEG FEE SOURCE. a. Subject to applicable Franchise requirements for PEG Fee source expenditures that may apply, the City agrees to pay (entity) from the "PEG Fee" resource identified in Exhibit A, a grant of $35,000 for capital equipment and other capital expenditures in accord with the equipment list attached as Exhibit C hereto. The parties agree Exhibit C is a planning document and may be revised, subject to the City's approval and Comcast's review to the extent appropriate, as provided hereafter. For each subsequent year of the agreement the City will notify (entity) by October 31 of the preceding year the amount of PEG funds projected to be distributed, if any. The actual amount of funding available will be determined by the actual PEG contributions provided to the City by Comcast. Any additional funds would be subject to the same requirements as the original PEG Fee grant contained herein. Channel Manager Contract Page 1 of 6 b. With respect to the PEG Fee grant, (entity) is solely responsible for satisfying any expenditures and/or documentation requirements of Comcast set forth in Exhibit A (to the extent applicable), and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City from any loss or liability for (entity)'s failure to satisfy any applicable requirements set forth therein. Under no circumstances shall the City be independently liable to (entity) for payment of any additional funds in the event of a reduction of money payable by Comcast to the City.Nothing herein limits (entity)'s option to apply for additional PEG funding or creates any obligation on the part of the City to accept such applications. c. Within 90 days, upon request, (entity) shall provide Comcast with appropriate documentation showing expenditures for PEG capital use of the previous year's PEG funding and showing the budgeted use of the current year's PEG funding. In the event (entity) cannot demonstrate that PEG funding was used or budgeted for PEG capital needs consistent with Franchise requirements, it is responsible to reimburse the City any reduction in PEG funding obligations by Comcast under Exhibit A under this or any future PEG Fee grant source. 3. PAYMENT. (entity) acknowledges and is accustomed to the practice of being held accountable for achieving deliverables associated with grant funds. Because these funds are restricted to capital expenditures, (entity) understands the City's concern about protecting the grant resource in case of (entity)non-performance. The funds shall only be available for reimbursement following expenditures by (entity). Reimbursements will only be made from PEG funds received from Comcast. The City receives quarterly PEG payments from Comcast. The City will provide (entity) with the current available balance upon request. Reimbursement requests shall include invoices and proof of payment. Reimbursement shall be made within 30 days of request. 4. ASSIGNMENT. (entity) shall not assign this Agreement without prior written consent. Any Assignee shall accept all terms and conditions of this Agreement in writing as a condition of the assignment. 5. (entity) ACCEPTANCE. (entity) accepts the City's designation as Channel Manager and all responsibilities express and implied in connection therewith. (entity) agrees to manage and operate the channel for programming of community interest consistent with this Agreement and its Proposal, reserving editorial content control to (entity). To the extent as may be required by law, (entity) agrees to develop viewpoint neutral community access rules for its users. It is not the purpose or intent of this or any other provision of this Agreement to create a public forum or open microphone for the channel. (entity) is an independent contractor for all purposes of this Agreement and not an agent or employee of the City in any respect. 6. SOLE RESPONSIBILITY. Except as provided elsewhere in this Agreement, (entity) is solely and separately responsible for all channel operations, equipment financing, budget, management and programming. Nothing in this Agreement limits (entity)'s ability to seek protection from programmers or others as between itself and third parties. 7. COMCAST/FRANCHISE REQUIREMENTS. a. (entity) is responsible to meet any reasonable signal quality or technical requirements of Comcast. In case of dispute,the City reserves the right to determine the issue, consistent with the Franchise and this Agreement. b. (entity) understands that the City and Franchisee (Comcast) may mutually agree upon an implementation and enforcement of policy directive and terms of use requirements. Channel Manager Contract Page 2 of 6 c. (entity) guarantees that all users of any channel resources or channel facilities, obtained pursuant to this Agreement will assume responsibility for the content of programming prepared at such channel facilities and/or cablecasts on the subject channel. Clearance for use of copyrighted material shall be the sole responsibility of(entity) and/or the access user. (entity) promises to implement any use requirements required by the City and Comcast related to the protection of copyrighted material. (entity) will likewise require that all (entity) programmers/channel users indemnify and hold Comcast and the City harmless from all loss or liability, including the costs of legal defense from programming or use of facilities,channel(s) or access time by the user. d. Failure to comply with the provisions of this section shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement. e. (entity) shall accommodate Comcast's reasonable needs for use of parental control devises. The City reserves the right to determine any disputes. 8. ANNUAL REPORT. (entity) shall present in writing an annual report to the City Council on its yearly activities no later than October 1 each year. A courtesy copy of the written report shall also be sent to Comcast, the City Clerk's Office, the Cable Advisory Board, and to the Spokane Valley Library Branch. The report shall include the following information: a. A financial report of all channel operations and expenditures. b. A summary of all programming, including hours presented, weekly programming schedules (may be summarized). c. A detailed list of each expenditure the prior year, including the cost and purpose to which the equipment is being used. d. A capital budget request for the subsequent year(annually revised Exhibit C). e. Proof of compliance with all Comcast/Franchise requirements above mentioned, including: i. Confirmation that (entity) meets Comcast's reasonable signal quality or technical requirements and a statement that there are no pending disputes regarding the same. ii. A current copy of(entity)'s policies and use requirements if changed from previous year. 9. TERM/NOTICES. The Agreement takes effect_,and expires December 31, 2015; PROVIDED: It automatically expires if the current Comcast Franchise expires or is otherwise terminated or substantially modified for any reason unless extended in writing by the City. It may be terminated without any requirement of showing cause by either party, upon ninety (90) days written notice; PROVIDED the City may terminate the Agreement upon a lesser notice period if it reasonably determines that it is exposed to any loss or liability because of continuation of the Agreement, Additionally, failure to comply with the minimum daily broadcast requirements set forth in Section 1 shall be considered a material breach subject to termination on 10 days notice. Channel Manager Contract Page 3 of 6 Notices shall be given as follows: To City: City Manager To (entity): General Manager 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley,WA 99206 10. INDEMNIFICATION. (entity) is jointly and severally responsible to protect the City from any loss or liability, and shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits including attorney fees, arising out of or in connection with the performance of this Agreement, subject only to the limitations provided below: (entity)'s duty to indemnify shall not apply to liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damage to property caused by or resulting from the sole negligence of (entity), or its agents or employees. Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW 4.24.115, then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of(entity), its agents or employees, and the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers, (entity)'s duty to indemnify hereunder shall be only to the extent of (entity)'s negligence. It is further specifically and expressly understood that the indemnification provided herein constitutes (entity)'s waiver of immunity under Industrial Insurance, Title 51 RCW, solely for the purposes of this indemnification. (entity)'s obligation to defend, indemnify and hold the City harmless shall include,but not be limited to,the City's attorney and expert fees, court costs, and all other claim-related expenses. This waiver has been mutually negotiated by the parties. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of the Agreement. 11. INSURANCE. During the term of the Agreement, (entity) shall maintain in force at its own expense,the following insurance: a. Workers' Compensation Insurance in compliance with RCW 51.12.020, which requires subject employers to provide workers' compensation coverage for all their subject workers and Employer's Liability or Stop Gap Insurance in the amount of$1,000,000; b. General Liability Insurance on an occurrence basis with a combined single limit, of not less than $1,000,000 each occurrence for bodily injury and property damage. It shall include contractual liability coverage for the indemnity provided under this Agreement. It shall provide that the City, its officers, employees and agents are additional insureds with respect to (entity)'s obligations under the Agreement; and c. Automobile Liability Insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than $1,000,000 each accident for bodily injury and property damage, including coverage for owned, hired or non-owned vehicles. There shall be no cancellation, material change, reduction of limits or intent not to renew the insurance coverage(s)without thirty(30) days written notice from (entity)or its insurer(s)to the City. As evidence of the insurance coverages required by this Agreement, (entity) shall furnish acceptable insurance certificates to the City Risk Manager at the time (entity) returns the signed Agreement. The certificate shall specify all of the parties who are additional insureds, and include applicable policy endorsements, the thirty (30) day cancellation clause, and the deduction or retention level. Insuring Channel Manager Contract Page 4 of 6 companies or entities and proof of compliance are subject to City Risk Manager acceptance. If requested, complete copies of insurance policies shall be provided to the City Risk Manager. (entity) shall be financially responsible for all pertinent deductibles, self-insured retentions, and/or self-insurance. With the consent of(entity), Risk Manager is authorized to make reasonable adjustments in the requirements of this section, consistent with the need. Any approved Risk Manager changes must be in writing. 12. BUSINESS REGISTRATION REQUIREMENT. Prior to commencement of work under this Agreement, (entity) shall register with the City as a business. 13. RECORDS. The City or State Auditor or any of their representatives shall have full access to and the right to examine during normal business hours all of (entity)'s records with respect to all matters covered in this Agreement. Such representatives shall be permitted to audit, examine and make excerpts or transcripts from such records and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, payrolls and record of matters covered by this Agreement for a period of three years from the date final payment is made hereunder. Any records relating to this Agreement may be subject to Washington's Public Record Act, Chapter 42.56 RCW. 14. NON-DISCRIMINATION. No individual shall be excluded from participation in, denied the benefit of, subjected to discrimination under, or denied employment in the administration of or in connection with this Agreement in violation of State or Federal laws relating to discrimination. 15. ANTI-KICKBACK. No officer or employee of the City of Spokane, having the power or duty to perform an official act or action related to this Agreement shall have or acquire any interest in the Agreement, or have solicited, accepted or granted a present or future gift, favor, service or other thing of value from or to any person involved in this Agreement. 16. NO SEPARATE ENTITY; AMENDMENTS. No separate legal entity, partnership or joint venture is created by this Agreement. This Agreement is binding on the parties and their heirs, successors,and assigns. This Agreement may be amended at any time by mutual written agreement. 17. OWNERSHIP OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. The City and (entity) hereby acknowledge that this Agreement shall not constitute a "work made for hire agreement" as that term is defined under the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.0 § 101 et seq. Additionally,the City expressly acknowledges and agrees that (entity) shall own all right, title, and interest in and to all intellectual property created or obtained by (entity) during the time it operates as Channel Manager. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall restrict (entity) from licensing, sublicensing, assigning, or otherwise disposing of (entity)'s Intellectual Property Rights. "Intellectual Property Rights" means all intellectual property rights throughout the universe, whether existing under statute or at common law or equity, now or hereafter in force or recognized, including but not limited to: (i) copyrights, trade secrets, trademarks, patents, inventions, designs, logos and trade dress, "moral rights," mask works, publicity rights, privacy rights and any other intellectual property and proprietary rights; and (ii) any application or right to apply for any of the rights referred to in clause (i),and any and all renewals,extensions and restorations thereof. 18. NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES. Except to the extent that this Agreement recognizes and confirms certain rights of Comcast under the Comcast Franchise Agreement, this Agreement is solely between the City and(entity), and there are no third party beneficiaries to this Agreement. 19. ENTIRE AGREEMENT/SEVERABILITY. This is the entire agreement. In the event any provision of this Agreement should become invalid, the rest of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unless agreed in writing by the parties. Channel Manager Contract Page 5 of 6 Dated: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ATTEST: City Manager City Clerk Approved as to form: Office of the City Attorney Dated: Signed: For(entity) Title: Federal Tax I.D.No. Channel Manager Contract Page 6 of 6 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO.09-034 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, GRANTING A NON-OCCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO COMCAST OF PENNSYLVANIA/WASHINGTON/WEST VIRGINIA, LP, TO CONSTRUCT, MAINTAIN AND OPERATE CERTAIN FACILITIES WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND PUBLIC PROPERTIES OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY. WHEREAS, RCW 35A.47.040 authorizes the City to grant, permit, and regulate non-exclusive franchises for the use of public streets, bridges or other public ways, structures or places above or below the surface of the ground for railroads and other routes and facilities for public conveyances, for poles, conduits, tunnels, towers and structures, pipes and wires and appurtenances thereof for transmission and distribution of electrical energy, signals and other methods of communication, for gas, steam and liquid fuels,for water, sewer and other private and publicly owned and operated facilities for public service;and WHEREAS, the grant of such non-exclusive franchises requires the approving vote of at least a majority of the entire City Council and publication at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the City; and WHEREAS,the Council finds that the grant of the Franchise contained in this Ordinance, subject to its terms and conditions, is in the best interests of the public; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 626 of the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, Grantee has requested renewal of its Cable Communications Franchise Agreement, and after negotiations with Grantee, the City has determined that it is in the best interest of the City and its residents to renew the Franchise Agreement with Grantee; and WHEREAS, the City has, following required and reasonable notice, conducted a full public hearing,.affording all persons concerned with the analysis and consideration of the technical'ability, financial condition,legal qualifications and general character of the Grantee;and WHEREAS, the City, after such consideration, analysis and deliberation, has approved and found sufficient the technical ability, financial condition, legal qualification and character of the Grantee;and WHEREAS, the City has also considered and analyzed the plans of the Grantee for the continued operation of a Cable System and found the same to be adequate and feasible in view of the needs and requirements of the City; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that it is in the best interests of and consistent with the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City to renew the Franchise Agreement to the Grantee to operate a Cable System within the confines of the City and on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth;and WHEREAS,the Grantee has agreed to be bound by the conditions hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington,does ordain as follows: Section 1. Definitions. For the purpose of this Ordinance, the following words and terms shall have the meaning set forth below: Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 1 of 27 C09- �L� "Basic Cable Service" shall mean any Service Tier which includes the lawful retransmission of local television broadcast signals and any public, educational, and governmental access programming required by this Franchise Agreement to be carried on the basic tier. "Cable Act"means the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, as amended by the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, and the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and any amendments thereto. "Cable Advisory Board" shall mean a City or regional Cable Advisory Board as established by ordinance or interlocal agreement. "Cable Service" or "Service" shall mean (A) the one-way transmission to Subscribers of(i) Video Programming or (ii) Other Programming Service, and (B) Subscriber interaction, if any, which is required for the selection or use of such Video Programming or Other Programming Service. "Cable System" or "System" shall mean a Facility, consisting of a set of closed transmission paths and associated signal generation, reception, and control equipment that is designed to provide Cable Service which includes Video Programming and which is provided to multiple Subscribers within a community, but such term shall not include: (1) a facility that serves only to retransmit the television signals of one (1) or more television broadcast stations; (2) a facility that serves only Subscribers without using any Public Right of Way; (3) a facility of a common carrier which is subject, in-whole or in part, to the provisions of 47 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., except that such facility shall be considered a Cable System (other than for purposes of 47 U.S.C. § 541(c)) to the extent such facility is used in the transmission of Video Programming directly to Subscribers, unless the extent of such use is solely to provide interactive on-demand services; (4) an open video system that complies with 47 U.S.C. § 573; or (5) any facilities of any electric utility used solely for operating its electric utility system. For the purpose of this Franchise, Cable System shall mean the Grantee's cable Facilities servicing the City. "Channel" shall mean a portion of the electromagnetic frequency spectrum which is used in a cable system and which is capable of a television Channel, as television Channel is defined by the FCC. "City"means the City of Spokane Valley, a Washington municipal corporation. "City Manager"means the City Manager or designee. "Complaint" shall mean a Subscriber contact with the Grantee to express a grievance or dissatisfaction concerning Cable Service. Complaints do not include matters not within the scope of this Franchise Agreement. A Complaint may be verbal or in writing but need not include initial contacts where an issue is promptly resolved to the Subscriber's satisfaction. Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 2 of 27 "Construction" or "Construct" shall mean digging, excavating, laying, extending, upgrading, removing,and replacing of Facility. "FCC" shall mean the Federal Communications Commission or any legally appointed or designated agent or successor. "Facility" or"Facilities"means all of the plant, equipment, fixtures, appurtenances, and other related property necessary to furnish and deliver cable television services, including but not limited to wires, cables, conductors, ducts, conduits, vaults,manholes, pedestals, amplifiers, appliances, and attachments, necessary or incidental to the distribution and use of cable television services. "Franchise" shall mean the nonexclusive right and authority to Construct, Maintain, and operate a Cable System through use of Public Rights of Way in the City pursuant to a contractual agreement approved by the City Council and executed by the City and the Grantee. "Franchise Area"shall mean the entire geographic area within the City as it is now constituted or may in the future be constituted. "Grantee" shall mean Comcast of Pennsylvania/Washington/West Virginia, LP, including any lawful successor,transferee,or assignee of the original Grantee. "Gross Revenues" means all revenue derived directly or indirectly by the Grantee, or by Grantee's Affiliates, from the operation of Grantee's Cable System to provide Cable Services in the Franchise Area. Gross Revenues include, by way of illustration and not limitation, monthly fees charged Subscribers for Cable Services including Basic Service and all other Tiers of Cable Service;Pay-Per- View Service; Cable Service installation, disconnection, change-in-service and reconnection fees, Leased Access Channel fees, late fees, payments received by the Grantee from programmers for carriage of Cable Services on the Cable System and recognized as revenue under generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"), revenues from rentals of Cable System equipment such as converters; advertising revenues(including local,regional,and a pro rata share of national advertising carried on the Cable System in the Franchise Area) net of commissions due to advertising agencies that arrange for the advertising buy and as recognized as revenue under GAAP; additional outlet fees, Franchise Fees, and revenues from home shopping Channels. Gross Revenues shall not include (i) Bad Debt, provided, however, that all or part of any such Bad Debt that is written off but subsequently collected shall be included in Gross Revenues in the period collected; (ii) any Capital Contribution referenced in subsections 13.8; (iii) any payments by the City to Grantee for I-Net maintenance or expansion; or(iv) any taxes on services furnished by the Grantee which are imposed directly on any Subscriber or user by the State, City or other governmental unit and which are collected by the Grantee on behalf of said governmental unit. The Franchise Fees are not such a tax and are therefore included in Gross Revenues. "Lockout Device" shall mean an optional mechanical or electrical accessory to a Subscriber's terminal which inhibits the viewing of a certain program, certain Channel, or certain Channels provided by way of the Cable System. "Maintenance or Maintain" shall mean repair, restoration, replacement, renovation and testing of the Cable System or components thereof so as to ensure that it operates in a safe and reliable manner and as required by this Franchise. "Non-commercial" shall mean, in the context of PEG Channels, that products and services are not sold via the PEG Channel. The term will not be interpreted to prohibit an PEG Channel operator or Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 3 of 27 { � I programmer from independently (i.e. not in the context of any televised programming) soliciting and receiving financial support to produce and transmit Video Programming on an PEG Channel, or from acknowledging a contribution, in the manner of the corporation for public broadcasting. A PEG Channel operator or programmer may cablecast informational programming regarding City events, projects and attractions of interest to residents so long as the format for such programming is consistent with the purposes for which PEG resources may be used. "Normal Business Hours" shall mean those hours during which most similar businesses in City are open to serve customers. In all cases, "Normal Business Hours"must include some evening hours, at least one(1)night per week and/or some weekend hours. "Normal Operating Conditions" shall mean those Service conditions which are within the control of Grantee. Those conditions which are not within the control of a Grantee include, but are not limited to, natural disasters, civil disturbances, power outages, telephone network outages, and severe weather conditions. Those conditions which are ordinarily within the control of Grantee include, but are not.limited to, special promotions, pay-per-view events, rate increases, regular peak or seasonal demand periods,and Maintenance or upgrade of the Cable System. "PEG" shall mean any Channel set aside for public use, educational use, governmental use without a Channel usage charge. "Person"shall mean an individual or legal entity,such as a corporation or partnership. "Premium Service"shall mean pay television offered on a per Channel or per program basis. "Public Property"shall mean any real estate or any facility owned by the City. "Public Works Director"shall mean the Spokane Valley Public Works Director or his/her designee. "Right-of-Way" shall mean all property, and the space above and below, in which the City has any form of ownership, title, or interest, including easements and adjacent utility strips, which is held for public roadway or dedicated for compatible utility purposes, regardless of whether or not any roadway or utility exists thereon or whether it is used,improved or maintained for public use. "Service Interruption" shall mean the loss of picture or sound on one(1)or more Cable Channels. "Service Tier" shall mean a specific set of Cable Services which are made available as, and only as, a group for purchase by Subscribers at a separate rate for the group. "Standard Installation" shall mean those that are located up to one hundred twenty-five (125) feet from the existing distribution System. Grantee shall comply with applicable FCC regulations regarding commercial installations as may now or hereafter arise. "Subscriber"shall mean any Person who lawfully receives Cable Service via the System. "Video Programming" shall mean programming provided by, or generally considered comparable to programming provided by, a television broadcast station. Section 2. Grant of Franchise. The City hereby grants unto the Grantee, a nonexclusive Franchise authorizing the Grantee to Construct, Maintain and operate a Cable System in the Right-of-Way such Facilities and other related property or equipment as may be necessary or appurtenant for the Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 4 of 27 deployment of Cable Services over the Cable System in the City pursuant to this Franchise and according to the Cable Act. The term of this Franchise and all its rights,privileges,obligations and restrictions shall be ten(10)years from the effective date. However,upon the fifth year anniversary date of the Franchise term, the Grantee has the option to provide written notice to the City opting out of the remaining five (5) years given a change in federal or State law which negatively impacts the City's ability to regulate this Franchise. To exercise the option,the Grantee shall give the City such written notice at least six(6)months prior to the fifth year anniversary date of the Franchise term. Section 3. Non-Exclusivity. The grant of authority for use of the City's Rights-of-Way is not exclusive and does not establish priority for use over other franchise holders, permit holders and the City's own use of Public Property. Nothing in this Franchise agreement shall affect the right of the City to grant to any other Person a similar franchise or right to occupy and use the Rights-of-Way or any part thereof. Section 4. Fee. 1. From and after the effective date of this Franchise Agreement and throughout the full term of this Franchise Agreement, the Grantee shall pay to the City five percent (5%) of its annual Gross Revenues in the City, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 542. Payment shall be due no later than 30 days from the end of each calendar quarter after which interest shall accrue at the rate of 1%per month. In the event all or a portion of the franchise fee has not been paid within 60 days of the end of each calendar quarter, a penalty in the amount of 10% of the delinquent amount shall be added to the outstanding amount. All franchise fees and interest and penalties shall constitute a debt of the City and may be collected by any means allowed under the law. 2. No acceptance by the City of any payment from Grantee shall be construed as an accord that the amount paid is in fact the correct amount, nor shall such acceptance of payment be construed as a release of any claim the City may have for further or additional sums payable under the provisions of this Franchise Agreement. All amounts paid shall be subject to auditing and recomputation by the City. 3. Grantee acknowledges and agrees that the franchise fees payable by Grantee to City pursuant to this Franchise Agreement as well as capital support provided by Grantee for PEG equipment and facilities are authorized under the Federal Cable Act and shall not be deemed to be in the nature of a federal, state or local tax. 4. Franchise Fees Subject to Audit. Upon reasonable prior written notice, during Normal Business Hours, at the Grantee's principal business office in the City, the City shall have the right to inspect the Grantee's financial records used to calculate the City's franchise fees. The City shall provide to the Grantee a final report setting forth the City's findings in detail, including any and all substantiating documentation. In the event of an alleged underpayment,the Grantee shall have thirty(30)days from the receipt of the report to provide the City with a written response agreeing to or refuting the results of the audit, including any substantiating documentation. Grantee shall review and the City shall be entitled to review Grantee's historical financial records used to calculate the City's franchise fees consistent with the currently applicable state statute of limitations. 5. Failure to comply with this section, except alleged underpayments under subsection 4, shall constitute a material breach of the Franchise Agreement pursuant to Section 40. Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 5 of 27 Section 5. Competitive Equity. 1. The City reserves the right to grant one (1) or more additional franchises. The City shall amend this franchise, as requested by the Grantee, if it grants additional Cable Service franchises or similar multiple channels of Video Programming authorizations that contain material terms or conditions which are substantially more favorable or less burdensome to the competitive entity than the material terms and conditions herein. A word for word identical franchise or authorization for a competitive entity is not required so long as the regulatory and financial burdens on each entity are generally equivalent taking into account any difference in the number of subscribers served, the number of PEG channels and aggregate support provided, the level of fees and taxes imposed, the term of the franchise, and all other circumstances affecting the relative burdens. 2. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, at any time prior to the commencement of the Grantee's thirty-six (36) month renewal window provided by Section 626 of the Cable Act, that a non- wireless facilities based entity, legally authorized by state or federal law,makes available for purchase by Subscribers or customers, Cable Services or multiple channels of Video Programming within the Franchise Area without a franchise or other similar lawful authorization granted by the City, then the Grantee shall have a right to request Franchise amendments that relieve the Grantee of regulatory burdens that create a competitive disadvantage to the franchisee. In requesting amendments,the Grantee shall file a petition seeking to amend the franchise. Such petition shall: (1) indicate the presence of such wireline competitor; and(2) identify all material terms or conditions which are substantially more favorable or less burdensome to the competitive entity.The City shall act on the petition within 120 days. 3. In the event an application for a new cable television franchise is filed with the City proposing to serve the franchise area,in whole or in part,the City shall notify the Grantee. Section 6. Previous Rights Abandoned. This Franchise Agreement is in lieu of any and all other contractual rights, privileges, powers, immunities, and authorities owned, possessed, controlled, or exercisable by Grantee or any successor pertaining to the Construction, operation, modification or Maintenance of a Cable System in the City. The acceptance of this Franchise Agreement shall operate as between Grantee and the City as an abandonment of any and all such contractual rights, privileges, powers, immunities, and authorities within the City. All Construction, operation, modification, and Maintenance by the Grantee of any Cable System in the City to provide Cable Service shall be under this Franchise agreement and not under any other contractual right, privilege,power,immunity,or authority. Section 7. Time Is Of The Essence To This Agreement. Whenever this Franchise Agreement shall set forth any time for an act to be performed by or on behalf of the Grantee, such time shall be deemed of the essence. Any failure of the Grantee to perform within the time allotted shall always be sufficient grounds for the City to invoke any appropriate remedy, including,without limitation, termination of this Franchise Agreement. Section 8. Taxes. As is consistent with applicable law, nothing contained in this Franchise Agreement shall be construed to except the Grantee from any applicable tax, liability or assessment authorized by law. Section 9. Cable System Specifications. 1. Prior to the effective date of this Franchise Agreement, the Grantee completed a voluntary upgrade of its Cable System. Concurrently, the Grantee modified its Cable System to a hybrid fiber coaxial, fiber-to-the-node System architecture, with fiber-optic cable deployed from the headend to the node and coaxial cable deployed from the node to Subscribers' homes. Active and passive devices are capable of passing a minimum of 750 MHz and capable of delivering high-quality analog or digital video signals meeting, or exceeding FCC technical quality standards. Cable System nodes are designed for Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 6 of 27 future segmentation as necessary to maximize shared bandwidth. During the term of this Franchise Agreement, the Grantee agrees to Maintain the Cable System in a manner consistent with these specifications or better. 2. The Grantee shall comply with all applicable technical standards of the FCC as published in subpart K of 47 C.F.R. § 76. To the extent those standards are altered, modified, or amended during the term of this Franchise Agreement, the Grantee shall comply with such altered, modified or amended standards within a reasonable period after such standards become effective. The City shall have, upon written request,the right to review tests and records required to be performed pursuant to the FCC's rules. 3. In accordance with applicable law, the City shall have the right to regulate and inspect the Construction, operation and Maintenance of the Cable System in the public Rights-of-Way. Upon reasonable prior written notice and in the presence of the Grantee's employee, the City may review the Cable System's technical performance as necessary to monitor the Grantee's compliance with the provisions of this Franchise Agreement. All equipment testing under a technical performance review shall be conducted by the Grantee. Section 10. Cable Service. 1. Subject to the density considerations listed below,except in areas reserved for public travel or utility access not yet opened and accepted by the City as public Right-of-Way that the Grantee is specifically and lawfully prohibited from deploying its Cable System by the owner/developer,the Grantee shall provide Cable Service throughout the entire City. Areas subsequently annexed shall be provided with Cable Service within twelve(12)months of the time of annexation. 2. Access to Cable Service shall not be denied to any group of potential cable subscribers because of the income of the potential cable subscribers or the area in which such group resides. All residents requesting Cable Service and living within a Standard Installation of one hundred twenty-five (125) feet shall have the cable installed at no more than the prevailing published installation rate. In the event a request is made for Cable Service and the residence is more than a Standard Installation of one hundred twenty-five (125) feet, such installation shall be completed on a time and material cost basis for that portion of the service line extending beyond one hundred twenty-five(125)feet. 3. Upon request through the designated City representative, the Grantee shall provide, without charge and throughout the term of this Franchise Agreement, one (1) outlet, one (1) Converter, if necessary, and Basic Cable Service and expanded Basic Cable Service (i.e. together the equivalent of sixty (60) Channels of programming) or the future analog or digital equivalent of such Service Tiers offered by Grantee to the City's administrative buildings as designated by the City, fire station(s), police station(s),libraries and state accredited K-12 public and private school(s). a. If the drop line to such building exceeds a Standard Installation drop one hundred twenty-five (125) feet, the Grantee will accommodate the drop up to three hundred (300) feet if the City or other agency provides the necessary attachment point for aerial service or conduit pathway for underground service. If the necessary pathway is not provided the City or other agency agrees to pay the incremental cost of such drop in excess of one hundred twenty-five (125) feet or the necessary distribution line extension of the Cable System, including the cost of such excess labor and materials. The recipient of the Service will secure any necessary right of entry. b. The Cable Service will not be used for commercial purposes, and the outlets will not be located in areas open to the public excepting one (1) outlet to be located in a public lobby of any government building that will be used by the public for viewing public, governmental, or educational access Channels. The City will take reasonable precautions to prevent any use of the Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 7 of 27 Grantee's Cable System in any manner that results in inappropriate use, loss or damage to the Cable System. Grantee hereby reserves all rights it may have under the law to seek payment from City for liability or claims arising out of the provision and use of the Cable Service required by this section. c.If additional outlets of Cable Service are provided to such buildings,the building occupant will pay the usual Installation fees, if any. 4. Grantee shall extend the System to any portion of the City after the date of the Franchise Agreement, when dwellings can be served by extension of the System past dwellings equivalent to a density of seven (7)dwellings per one-quarter(1/4)mile of cable contiguous to the System. Grantee may petition the City for a waiver of this requirement, such waiver to be granted for good cause shown. Such extension shall be at Grantee's cost. In areas not meeting the requirements of seven(7)or more dwellings per one-quarter(1/4)mile, for mandatory extension of Service, Grantee shall provide, upon the request of any potential subscribers desiring Service, an estimate of the costs required to extend Service to such Subscribers. Grantee shall then extend Service upon request and upon payment of an amount equal to the reasonable value of actual time and materials to be incurred by Grantee for such extension. Any customer drop not exceeding a Standard Installation drop of one hundred twenty-five (125) feet will be free of charge to the customer other than normal installation fees. For drops in excess of one hundred twenty- five(125)feet,Grantee may assess an amount equal to time and materials. Section 11. Programming. 1. All final programming decisions remain the discretion of Grantee in accordance with this Franchise Agreement,provided that Grantee notifies City and Subscribers in writing thirty(30)days prior to any Channel additions, deletions, or realignments, and further subject to Grantee's signal carriage obligations hereunder and pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 531-536, and further subject to City's rights pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 545. 2. Grantee will provide at least the following initial broad categories of programming to the extent such categories are reasonably available: a. Educational programming; b. News,weather and information; c. Sports; d. General entertainment including movies; e. Children,family oriented; f. Arts,culture and performing arts; g. Foreign language programming;and h. Science/documentary. 3. The Grantee shall offer to all Subscribers a diversity of Video Programming services and it will not eliminate any broad categories of programming without first obtaining the written approval of the City, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld. 4. Grantee shall notify in writing the City of its intent to eliminate any broad category of programming noted in 11.2. The City, or its designee, shall make a determination on such request not later than sixty (60) days after receipt of the request by Grantee. In the event that the City makes an adverse determination, such determination shall be in writing, along with a concise statement of the reasons therefore. In the event the City fails to make a determination within sixty(60) days after receipt of a request from Grantee, Grantee shall have the right to make the deletion contained in its written request. Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 8 of 27 Section 12. Rates. 1. Throughout the term of this Franchise Agreement and upon request by the City, the Grantee shall provide an updated rate card to the City that details applicable rates and charges for Cable Services provided under this Franchise Agreement. This does not require the Grantee to file rates and charges under temporary reductions or waivers of rates and charges in conjunction with promotional campaigns. 2. Grantee shall provide a minimum of thirty (30) days' written notice to the City and each Subscriber before changing any rates and charges. 3. City may regulate rates for the provision of Cable Service rovided over the System in P Y accordance with applicable federal law, in particular 47 C.F.R. Part 76 subpart N. In the event the City chooses to regulate rates it shall, in accordance with 47 C.F.R. § 76.910, obtain certification from the FCC, if applicable. The City shall follow all applicable FCC rate regulations and shall ensure that appropriate personnel are in place to administer such regulations. City reserves the right to regulate rates for any future Cable Services to the maximum extent allowed by law. Section 13. PEG and Local Programming. 1. Commencing on the effective date of this Franchise Agreement, Grantee shall make available one(1)full-time Non-commercial multi jurisdictional PEG Channel(the"Government Channel")for future activation and joint use by the City,the City of Spokane and/or Spokane County for governmental access programming. The City shall provide Grantee with a minimum of forty-five(45)days prior written notice of an initial meeting to develop an implementation plan for activation of the Government Channel. 2. Grantee has historically delivered all PEG Channels available on its Cable System to its customers in the City whether or not such Channels were directly controlled by the City. Commencing on the effective date of this Franchise,and throughout the term of this Franchise, Grantee shall deliver those PEG Channels with whom the City has contracted for service,up to a maximum of six(6) Channels. Grantee shall continue to deliver those PEG Channels so long as the City's contracts are valid and the PEG Channels have content to distribute. The City shall provide copies of all PEG Channel contracts,and contract renewals,to Grantee within thirty(30)days of execution. 3. The City acknowledges that Grantee provides additional benefits to PEG programming needs beyond the requirement listed above. This is accomplished through the inclusion of other regional PEG programming within the regional Channel line-up that services the Franchise Area. The Grantee will endeavor to provide the Subscribers in the Franchise Area with the other regional PEG Channels so long as the PEG programmers offer them for use on the Cable System. 4. All PEG Channels provided to Subscribers under this Franchise shall be included by Grantee subject to applicable law. For all PEG Channels not under Grantee's control, Grantee shall insure that there is no material degradation in the signal that is received by Grantee for distribution by Grantee over the Cable System. 5. The City shall be responsible for all programming requirements for the Government Channel, including but not limited to scheduling,playback,training, staffing, copyright clearances, and equipment, maintenance and repair, unless responsibility for administering the Government Channel has been designated to a third party,which shall then become responsible for all programming requirements under this section. 6. The Grantee shall provide the PEG Channels as part of the Cable Service provided to any Subscriber,at no additional charge. If Channels are selected through a menu system,the PEG Channels Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 9 of 27 shall be displayed as prominently as commercial programming choices offered by Grantee. Comcast will use reasonable efforts to minimize the movement of City-designated PEG Channel assignments and maintain common Channel assignments for compatible PEG programming. 7. At such time as the Grantee converts its Basic Cable Service Tier from an analog to a digital format,the City's PEG Channels will be carried on the digital platform and Grantee shall install,at its sole cost, such headend equipment to accommodate such Channels. Such PEG Channels shall be accessed by Subscribers through use of standard digital equipment compatible with Grantee's Cable System. 8. Within ninety (90) days of Grantee's acceptance of the Franchise, Grantee will remit to the City as a capital contribution in support of PEG capital requirements: (1) one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) and (2) an amount equal to thirty five cents ($0.35) per Subscriber per month to be paid to the City on a quarterly basis for the life of the Franchise. Grantee will recoup the initial one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) in an amount equal to twenty five cents($0.25)per Subscriber per month until the amount is recovered in full. To be clear,during the recovery period,the Grantee will remit to the City an amount equal to ten cents($0.10)per Subscriber per month until the recovery of the initial PEG capital contribution is completed. After completion of the initial PEG capital contribution recovery, the Grantee will remit the entire thirty five cents ($0.35) per Subscriber per month to the City until the fifth year of the Franchise. Upon the fifth year anniversary date of the Franchise term, if the Grantee accepts the full continuation of the ten (10)year term, the Grantee will remit to the City, within ninety (90) days of the anniversary date, another upfront PEG capital contribution payment of one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000), which will be recovered, recouped, and remitted to the City in the same manner as the initial PEG capital contribution payment. The City shall allocate all amounts under this subsection to PEG capital uses exclusively. Grantee shall not be responsible for paying the PEG capital contribution with respect to gratis or bad debt accounts. Consistent with 47 C.F.R. § 76.922, Grantee may, in its sole discretion, add the cost of the PEG capital contribution to the price of Cable Services and to collect the PEG capital contribution from Subscribers. In addition, consistent with 47 C.F.R. § 76.985, all amounts paid as the PEG capital contribution may be separately stated on Subscribers' bills as a City of Spokane Valley PEG capital contribution. Upon Grantee's written request and due as agreed upon by both parties,the City shall provide the Grantee with documentation showing expenditures for PEG capital use of the previous fiscal years' PEG capital contribution and showing the budgeted use of the current year's PEG funding. In the event the City cannot demonstrate that PEG capital funding was used or budgeted for PEG capital needs, Grantee's PEG funding obligations going forward shall be reduced by an equivalent amount. 9. Within ninety (90) days of request, the Grantee shall provide an estimate of costs associated with the construction and activation of one return path capable of transmitting Video Programming to enable the distribution of the City's specific government access programming to Subscribers on the multi- jurisdictional PEG Channel. The return line shall run from a location to be determined by the City to the Grantee's Facilities. Within two hundred seventy (270) days of the City's directive, the Grantee shall Construct and activate a return line in accordance with the cost estimate previously provided. The City agrees to pay the costs of the return line within sixty(60)days of Construction/activation and receipt of an invoice from the Grantee. Section 14. Institutional Network Connections. Upon request of the City, the Grantee shall investigate and provide the City a plan with a cost estimate based on either a managed network or the most cost efficient connection utilizing current technology to accommodate the City's reasonable broadband capacity needs for a non-commercial connection between the City's facilities. For the purposes of this section, non-commercial means private network communications from and among the Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 10 of 27 City and other public agencies and excludes leasing or reselling the broadband capacity to a third party for any purpose. After receiving a request from the City, Grantee shall provide the City a plan, including an estimate of the Construction costs, within ninety (90) days. The cost estimate shall include the fully allocated Construction cost from the nearest Grantee identified fiber access location to the requested site(s), including, but not limited to, site construction, fiber, labor, materials and Grantee provided equipment. The City shall pay all of Grantee's design engineering costs associated with development of the requested plan and cost estimate(s), if the City does not accepted the plan for Construction. To approve the Grantee to perform the work,the City shall provide the Grantee with written authorization to complete the connectivity Construction and a purchase order in the amount of the cost estimate. Any connectivity Construction shall be performed and completed within six (6) months after the City authorizes the work be performed, unless the parties agree in writing to a different completion date prior to commencement of the work in order to accommodate special considerations of the City. Section 15. Parental Control. 1. Grantee shall provide Subscriber controlled Lockout Devices (audio and visual) at a reasonable charge to Subscribers upon their request. 2. As to any program which is transmitted on a Channel offered on a per Channel or per program basis, Grantee shall block entirely the audio and video portion of such program from reception by any Subscriber who so requests. Scrambling of the signal shall not be sufficient to comply with this provision. Section 16. Recovery of Costs. Grantee shall reimburse the City for all costs of one publication of this Franchise in a local newspaper, and required legal notices prior to any public hearing regarding this Franchise,contemporaneous with its acceptance of this Franchise. Section 17. Least Interference. The City shall have prior and superior right to the use of its Rights-of-Way for installation and maintenance of its facilities and other governmental purposes. Work by Grantee in the Right-of-Way shall be done in a manner that causes the least interference with the rights and reasonable convenience of property owners and residents. The owners of all facilities, public or private, installed in or on such public properties prior to the installation of the Facilities of the Grantee, shall have preference as to the positioning and location of such utilities with respect to the Grantee. Such preference shall continue in the event of the necessity of relocating or changing the grade of any such Right-of-Way. Disputes between the Grantee and other parties over the use, pursuant to this Franchise agreement,of the Rights-of-Way shall be submitted to the City for recommended resolution. This Franchise shall, in no way,prevent or prohibit the City from using any of its Rights-of-Way, or affect its jurisdiction over them or any part of them. The City hereby retains its full police power to make all changes, relocations, repairs, maintenance, establishments, improvements, dedications or vacation of same, including the dedication, establishment, maintenance, and improvement of all new Rights-of-Way. Section 18. Construction Standards. All work authorized and required hereunder shall comply with all generally applicable City codes and regulations.Grantee shall also comply with all applicable federal and state regulations, laws and practices. Grantee is responsible for the supervision, condition, and quality of the work done,whether it is by itself or by contractors, assigns or agencies. Section 19. Restoration After Construction. If in connection with the Construction, operation, Maintenance, upgrade, repair or replacement of the Cable System, the Grantee disturbs, alters, or damages any public or private property,the Grantee agrees that it shall at its own cost and expense pay for any damage and replace and restore any such property to a condition reasonably comparable to the condition existing Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 11 of 27 immediately prior to the disturbance. Whenever Grantee disturbs or damages any Right-of-Way or other Public Property, Grantee shall complete the restoration work within a reasonable time as authorized by the City's Public Works Director. Section 20. Obstruction Permits Required. Grantee shall apply for and obtain appropriate obstruction permits from the City pursuant to the Spokane Valley Municipal Code. Grantee shall pay all generally applicable permit fees for the requisite City permits and reimburse the City for all generally applicable fees incurred by the City in the examination, inspection,and approval of Grantee's work. Section 21. Emergency Response. The Grantee shall maintain with the City an emergency response number providing an emergency 24-hour response for the City to use in case of an emergency. After being notified of an emergency, Grantee shall cooperate with the City and make every effort to immediately respond with action to aid the protection the health and safety of the public. Section 22. Hazardous Substances. Grantee shall comply with all applicable state and federal laws concerning hazardous substances relating to Grantee's Facilities in the Right—of-Way. Section 23. Environmental. Grantee shall comply with all applicable state and federal laws concerning environmental protection relating to Grantee's Facilities in the Right—of-Way. Section 24. Movement and Relocation of Facilities. The following shall apply when it is necessary to relocate Grantee's Facilities: 1. Relocation of Facilities at the request of a third party. a. If any removal, replacement, modification or disconnection of the Cable System is required to accommodate the construction, operation or repair of the facilities or equipment of another City cable franchise holder(s),Grantee shall, after at least thirty(30)days advance written notice,take action to effect the necessary changes requested by the responsible entity, as long as the other cable franchise holder(s)pay for the Grantee's time and material costs associated with the project and Grantee is issued a permit for such work by the City. b. The Grantee shall, upon reasonable prior written request of any Subscriber, relocate its aerial distribution cable Facilities underground, as long as the Subscriber pays for the Grantee's time and material costs associated with the project and Grantee is issued a permit for such work by the City. c. In the event an underground conversion of cable Facilities is required as part of the street improvement condition(s) of a new land use development, not associated with a City designated capital improvement project, this Franchise shall in no way limit the Grantee's right to bill and collect in advance all time and material costs associated with the underground conversion of the Cable System from the Person responsible for the land use development project. d. At the request of any Person holding a valid permit and upon reasonable advance notice and payment by the permit holder of Grantee's expenses of such temporary change, Grantee shall temporarily raise, lower or remove its Facilities as necessary to accommodate a permittee of the City. Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 12 of 27 2. Relocation at Request of the City. a. Upon at least sixty(60)days prior written notice to Grantee,the City shall have the right to require Grantee to relocate any part of the Cable System within the Rights-of-Way when the safety,health or welfare of the public requires such change,and the expense thereof shall be paid by Grantee. The City may, at its option,provide more than sixty(60)days notice. After receipt of such notice, Grantee shall complete relocation of its Facilities at least five(5)days prior to commencement of the project or an agreed upon date by both parties. Should Grantee fail to remove or relocate any such Facilities by the date established by the City,the City may effect such removal or relocation,and the expense thereof shall be paid by Grantee, including all costs and expenses incurred by the City due to Grantee's delay. If the City requires Grantee to relocate its Facilities located within the Rights-of-Way,the City shall make a reasonable effort to provide Grantee with an alternate location within the Right-of-Way. If public funds are available to any Person using such Rights-of-Way for the purpose of defraying the cost of any of the foregoing, the Grantee may make application for such funds. b. In the case of relocation projects where the City hires and designates an independent contractor to accommodate and coordinate conversion of overhead utilities within a City capital improvement project,then the Grantee shall participate in the joint trenching portion of the project, and Grantee shall pay to the Grantee's portion of the traffic control and trench costs, including excavation and other associated costs,trench bedding,and backfill commensurate with Grantee's proportionate share of trench usage. However, if bids from the City or it's designated contractor for placement of Grantee's conduits and vaults/pedestals in the supplied joint trench, in the reasonable estimation of the Grantee are not acceptable,the Grantee shall have the option to utilize contractor(s)of its choice to complete the required work, so long as use by Grantee of its contractor(s)does not delay the City project. The City or it's designated contractor shall coordinate with the Grantee's contractor(s)to provide reasonable notice and time to complete the placement of the Grantee's Facilities in the supplied joint trench. c. Nothing in this Franchise shall prevent the City from constructing any public work or capital improvement. Further,the City shall have the right to require Grantee to relocate,remove, replace,modify or disconnect Grantee's Facilities and equipment located in the Rights-of-Way or on any other property of the City in the event of an emergency or when necessary to protect or further the health, safety or welfare of the general public, and such work shall be performed at Grantee's expense. Following notice by the City,Grantee shall relocate,remove,replace,modify or disconnect any of its Facilities or equipment within any Right-of-Way, or on any other property of the City. d. If the Grantee fails to complete the above work within the time prescribed by the City,given the nature and extent of the work,or if it is not done to the City's reasonable satisfaction,the City may cause such work to be done and bill the reasonable cost of the work to the Grantee, including all reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the City due to Grantee's delay. In such event,the City shall not be liable for any damage to any portion of Grantee's Cable System. Grantee shall pay the City within ninety(90)days of receipt of an itemized list of those costs. The City shall give consideration to any circumstances outside the Grantee's control preventing Grantee's completion of work. Section 25. Tree Trimming. The Grantee shall have the authority to conduct pruning and trimming for access to Cable System Facilities in the Rights-of-Way subject to compliance with the City Code. All such trimming shall be done at the Grantee's sole cost and expense. The Grantee shall be responsible for any damage caused by such trimming. Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 13 of 27 i I Section 26. Vacation. The City may vacate any City road, Right-of-Way or other City property which is subject to rights granted by this Franchise, but the Grantee shall be provided notice of such vacation proceedings and the opportunity to secure future use rights as allowed under the City's Municipal Code. Section 27. Abandonment of Grantee's Facilities. No Facility Constructed or owned by Grantee may be abandoned without the express written consent of the City. Section 28. Maps,Books,and Records. 1. Grantee shall provide to the City upon request: a. A route map that depicts the general location of the Cable System Facilities placed in the Rights- of-Way. The route map shall identify Cable System Facilities as aerial or underground and is not required to depict cable types,number of cables,electronic equipment,and service lines to individual Subscribers. The Grantee shall also provide, if requested, an electronic format of the aerial/underground Facilities in relation to the Right-of-Way centerline reference to allow the City to add this information to the City's GIS program;and b. A copy of all FCC filings which relate to the operation of the Cable System in the Franchise Area. 2. To the extent such requests are limited to specific Facilities at a given location within the Franchise area in connection with the construction of any City project, Grantee shall cooperate with the City , upon the City's reasonable request, to field locate its Facilities in order to facilitate design and planning of City improvement projects. 3. The City has the right to inspect books and records of Grantee,which are reasonably necessary to monitor the Grantee's compliance with the provision of Cable Services under this Franchise Agreement. Within receipt of written notice from the City to inspect the Grantee's books and records under this section, the Grantee shall within five (5) business days or a mutually agreeable date and time, accommodate the City's request at the Grantee's business office in the City, during Normal Business Hours, and without unreasonably interfering with the Grantee's business operations. All such documents pertaining to fmancial matters shall be preserved and maintained in accordance with Grantee's standard record retention policy except for fmancial records which are governed by Section 4.4. 4. The City has the right to request a copy of the books and records that are not identified as proprietary or confidential. For purposes of this section, the terms "proprietary or confidential" include, but are not limited to, information relating to the Cable System design, customer lists, marketing plans, financial information unrelated to the calculation of franchise fees or rates pursuant to FCC rules,or other information that is reasonably determined by the Grantee to be competitively sensitive. a. The City shall have a right to inspect but the Grantee shall not be required to release information that it reasonably deems to be proprietary or confidential in nature provided that this shall not prevent the release of such proprietary or confidential documents for purposes of any enforcement proceeding where appropriate legal steps are available to address Grantee's concerns regarding confidentiality. The City agrees not to oppose any of the Grantee's requests for confidentiality. In the event the Grantee asserts that certain information is proprietary or confidential in nature, the Grantee shall identify generally the information which it deems proprietary and confidential and the reasons for its confidentiality in writing to the City. Each page of such information provided will be clearly marked as "proprietary and confidential." The City agrees to treat any information disclosed by the Grantee as confidential and only to disclose Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 14 of 27 ( I it to those employees, representatives, and agents of the City that have a need to know in order to enforce this Franchise Agreement and who agree to maintain the confidentiality of all such information. The Grantee shall not be required to provide customer information in violation of Section 631 of the Cable Act or any other applicable federal or state privacy law. b. Grantee acknowledges that information submitted to the City may be subject to inspection and copying under the Washington Public Disclosure Act codified in RCW 42.56. The.City agrees to timely provide the Grantee with a copy of any public disclosure request to inspect or copy documentation/information which the Grantee has provided to the City and marked as "proprietary and confidential" prior to allowing any inspection and/or copying as well as provide the Grantee with a time frame, consistent with RCW 42.56.520, to provide the City with its written basis for non-disclosure of the requested documentation/information. In the event the City disagrees with the Grantee's basis for non-disclosure, the City agrees to withhold release of the requested documentation/information in dispute for a reasonable amount of time to allow Grantee an opportunity to file a legal action under RCW 42.56.540. Section 29. Reports. 1. File for Public Inspection. Throughout the term of this Franchise Agreement, the Grantee shall maintain at its business office, in a file available for public inspection during Normal Business Hours,those documents required pursuant to the FCC's rules and regulations. 2. Complaint File and Reports. Grantee will keep an accurate and comprehensive file of all Complaints regarding the System and Grantee's actions in response to those Complaints in a manner consistent with the privacy rights of Subscribers. Upon thirty (30) days written request, Grantee will provide a report to the City that contains total number and summary of all Complaints received by category, length of time taken to resolve and action taken to provide resolution. 3. Annual Report. No later than March 31st of each year, if requested by the City, Grantee shall file a written report with the City,which shall include: a. a summary of the previous calendar year's activities in development of this System, including but not limited to Services begun or dropped, number of Subscribers (including gains and losses), homes passed, and miles of cable distribution plant in service (including different classes if applicable); b. a Gross Revenue statement for the preceding fiscal year and all deductions and computations for the period, and such statement shall be reviewed by a certified public accountant, who may also be the chief financial officer or controller of Grantee; c. a current statement of cost of any Construction by component category; d. a summary of Complaints, identifying the number and nature of Complaints and their disposition; e. if a Grantee is a corporation, a list of officers and members of the board and the officers and board members of any parent corporation; f. a list of all partners or stockholders holding one percent or more ownership interest in a Grantee and any parent corporation;provided,however,that when any parent corporation has in excess of one thousand shareholders and its shares are publicly traded on a national stock exchange,then a list of the twenty largest stockholders of the voting stock of such corporation shall be disclosed; Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 15 of 27 g. a copy of all of a Grantee's written rules and regulations applicable to Subscribers and users of the Cable System; h. any additional information related to operation of the Cable System as reasonably requested by the City. 4. Customer Service Reports. Grantee shall maintain a quarterly compliance report specific to the System in the Franchise Area and shall provide such report to the City at the request of the City. Such report shall demonstrate Grantee's compliance with the customer service standards set forth herein. 5. Grantee shall,upon request of the City,make available to the Public Works Director a description of Construction plans for the following twelve months. 6. Grantee shall,upon request of the City,make available a copy of the final report on each proof of performance test of each technical parameter defined in Part 76 of the Rules and Regulations of the FCC. Section 30. Customer Service Standards 1. The Grantee shall comply in all respects with the customer service standards contained herein. 2. Grantee shall comply at all times with.all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding discrimination,as adopted or amended. 3. In providing Service, Grantee shall maintain a convenient local customer service location in either the City of Spokane or the City for receiving Subscriber payments, handling billing questions, equipment replacement and dispensing customer service information. Also, the Grantee will endeavor to accommodate a bill payment location in the City as long as there is an acceptable 3`d party vendor available to support the service in accordance with the Grantee's business practices. 4. When similar Complaints have been made by a number of Subscribers, or where other evidence exists which, in the reasonable judgment of the City, casts doubt on the reliability or quality of the Cable Service, the City, notwithstanding any other provisions of this Franchise Agreement, shall have the right and authority to require that Grantee test, analyze and report on the performance of the System relative to applicable technical standards of the FCC. Upon 30-day prior written notice from the City,the Grantee shall fully cooperate with the City in performing such testing and shall prepare a written report of the results,if requested. 5. Grantee shall satisfy the consumer protection and service standards as outlined below during the term of this Franchise Agreement. a. Cable System office hours and telephone availability: i. Grantee will maintain a local, toll-free or collect call telephone access line which will be available to its Subscribers twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. 1. Trained Grantee representatives will be available to respond to customer telephone inquiries during Normal Business Hours. 2. After Normal Business Hours, the access line may be answered by a service or an automated response system, including an answering machine. Inquiries Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 16 of 27 received after Normal Business Hours must be responded to by a trained Grantee representative on the next business day. ii. Under Normal Operating Conditions, telephone answer time by a customer representative, including wait time, shall not exceed thirty seconds when the connection is made. If the call needs to be transferred, transfer time shall not exceed thirty seconds. These standards shall be met no less then ninety percent of the time under Normal Operating Conditions, measured on a quarterly basis. iii. Grantee shall possess equipment to measure compliance with the telephone answering standards above. iv. Under Normal Operating Conditions,the customer will receive a busy signal less than three percent of the time. v. Customer service center and bill payment locations will be open at least during Normal Business Hours. b. Installations, Outages and Service Calls. Under Normal Operating Conditions, each of the following standards will be met no less than ninety-five percent of the time measured on a quarterly basis: i. Standard Installations will be performed within seven business days after an order has been placed. 1. The "appointment window" alternatives for installations, service calls and other installation activities will be either a specific time or, at maximum, a four- hour time block during Normal Business Hours. (Grantee may schedule service calls and other installation activities outside of Normal Business Hours for the express convenience of the customer.) 2. Grantee may not cancel an appointment with a customer after the close of business on the business day prior to the scheduled appointment. 3. If Grantee's representative is running late for an appointment with a customer and will not be able to keep the appointment as scheduled, the Grantee shall use its best efforts to contact the customer prior to the time of the scheduled appointment. The appointment will be rescheduled, as necessary, at a time which is convenient for the customer. 4. Under Normal Operating Conditions, if Grantee cannot perform installations within the times specified in applicable customer standards, the Grantee shall offer the Subscriber a credit equal to the charge for a Standard Installation or other compensation of equal or greater value. For non-Standard Installation, Grantee shall attempt to contact a Subscriber requesting an estimate of charges within seven business days of receiving the request by the Subscriber. This subsection does not apply to the introduction of new products and services when Grantee is utilizing a phased introduction. ii. Excluding conditions beyond the control of Grantee, Grantee will begin working on "Service Interruptions" promptly and in no event later than twenty-four hours after the Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 17 of 27 • interruption becomes known. Grantee must begin actions to correct other Service problems the next business day after notification of the Service problem. Grantee shall resolve all Service Interruptions to the extent reasonably possible within forty-eight hours under Normal Operating Conditions. 1. In those cases where Service is not restored within twenty-four hours due to unusual circumstances, the reasons for the delay shall be fully documented in an outage log. 2. Under Normal Operating Conditions, if after twenty-four hours Service is not restored to a Subscriber, Grantee shall, upon a Subscriber's request, provide a refund or credit or other compensation of equal or greater value. 3. As Subscribers are connected or reconnected to the System, Grantee shall, by appropriate means such as a card or brochure, furnish general Subscriber information (including, but not limited to, terms of Service and procedures for making inquiries or Complaints, including the name, address and local telephone number of the employee or employees or agent to whom such inquiries or Complaints are to be addressed) and furnish information concerning the City office responsible for the administration of the Franchise Agreement, including the address and telephone number of said office. c. Communications between Grantee and Subscribers. i. Notifications to Subscribers. 1. Grantee shall provide written information on each of the following areas at the time of installation of Service, at least annually to all Subscribers,and at any time upon request to Subscriber or the City: a. Products and Services offered. b. Prices and options for programming services and conditions of subscription to programming and other services. c. Installation and Service Maintenance policies. d. Instructions on how to use the Cable Service. e. Channel positions of the programming carried on the System;and f. Billing and Complaint procedures, including the address and telephone number of the City. ii. Rate/Programming Changes. 1. Subscribers will be notified of any changes in rates, programming services or Channel positions as soon as possible h writing. Notice must be given to Subscribers a minimum of thirty days in advance of such changes if the changes are within the control of the Grantee. In addition, the Grantee shall notify Subscribers thirty days in advance of any significant changes in the other Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 18 of 27 1 1 information required by this section. Grantee shall not be required to provide prior notice of any rate changes as a result of a regulatory fee, franchise fee or other fees,tax, assessment or charge of any kind imposed by any federal agency, state or City on the transaction between the Grantee and the Subscriber. 2. The City recognizes that the Grantee voluntarily provides a qualified discount program for senior and disabled customers. The Grantee commits that it will continue the program over the term of the Franchise. The Grantee will notify the City and customers regarding changes to the existing qualified discount program consistent with the above notification requirements. 3. All programming decisions remain the discretion of Grantee in accordance with this Franchise Agreement, provided that Grantee notifies City and Subscribers in writing thirty days prior to any Channel additions, deletions or realignments directed to each Subscriber individually through mailed notice or as an insert or addendum to the Subscriber's monthly bill, email or other means reasonably calculated to give the Subscriber and the City advanced notice, and further subject to Grantee's signal carriage obligations hereunder and pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 531-536, and further subject to City's rights pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 545. Location and relocation of the PEG Channels shall be governed by this Franchise Agreement, and further to the programming category requirements contained within this Franchise Agreement. iii. Billing. 1. Bills will be clear, concise and understandable. Bills must be fully itemized, with itemizations including, but not limited to, basic and Premium Service charges and equipment charges. Bills will also clearly delineate all activity during the billing period,including optional charges,rebates and credits. 2. Billing Complaints shall be responded to promptly, but in no event later than within seven days of receipt. iv. Refunds. Refund checks will be issued promptly,but no later than either: 1. the Subscriber's next billing cycle following resolution of the request or thirty days,whichever is earlier; or 2. the return of the equipment supplied by Grantee if Service is terminated. v. Credits. Credits for Service will be issued no later than the Subscriber's next billing cycle following the determination that a credit is warranted. vi. Subscriber Charges. A list of Grantee's current Subscriber rates and charges for Cable Service shall be maintained on file with City and shall be available for public inspection. 6. The Grantee shall comply with all applicable federal and state privacy laws, including Section 631 of the Cable Act and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 19 of 27 Section 31. Cable Advisory Board. City reserves the right to maintain a Cable Advisory Board over the term of this Franchise Agreement for advisory purposes only. The Grantee agrees to cooperate with reasonable requests for information,through the designated City representative,to support the Cable Advisory Board. Section 32. City Ordinances and Regulations. Grantee, through this Franchise, is granted the right to operate its Cable System using the Rights-of-Way within the Franchise Area. Such use must be in compliance with generally applicable Municipal Code and Regulations. In the event of a conflict between the Municipal Code and Regulations and this Franchise,this Franchise shall control subject to the limitation of the City's exercise of the police powers set forth below. Subject to federal and state preemption, the material terms and conditions contained in this Franchise may not be unilaterally altered by the City through subsequent amendments to any ordinance, regulation, resolution or other enactment of the City, except within the lawful exercise of the City's police power. Grantee has the right to challenge any City ordinance or regulation that conflicts with its rights under this Franchise. Grantee acknowledges that its rights hereunder are subject to the police powers of the City to adopt and enforce ordinances necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the public, and Grantee agrees to comply with all applicable laws and ordinances enacted by the City pursuant to such power so long as the same do not unduly discriminate against Grantee. Section 33. Franchise Agreement and Modification. This Franchise Agreement is a contract between the City and the Grantee, negotiated in good faith and binding upon both parties. The City and Grantee hereby reserve the right to alter, amend or modify the terms and conditions of this Franchise upon written agreement of both parties. Section 34. Indemnification. The Grantee shall, at its sole cost and expense, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officials, boards, commissions, agents and employees against any and all third party claims, suits, causes of action,proceedings, and judgments for injury, loss, or damage arising out of the Construction, reconstruction, use, operation, ownership and Maintenance of the Cable System under this Franchise Agreement, except that no such requirement shall apply where such claims, suits,causes of actions, proceedings, and judgments for damage are occasioned by the active negligence, gross negligence or intentional acts of the City or its officials, boards, commissions, agents and employees while acting on behalf of the City. These damages shall include, but not be limited to, claims made against the City by the Franchisee's employees from which the Franchisee would otherwise be immune under Title 51 RCW, penalties arising out of copyright infringements and damages arising out of any failure by the Grantee to secure consents from the owners, authorized distributors or licensees of programs to be delivered by the Grantee's Cable System whether or not any act or omission complained of is authorized, allowed, or prohibited by this Franchise Agreement. Indemnified expenses shall include, but not be limited to, all out-of-pocket expenses, such as costs and attorneys' fees, and shall also include the reasonable value of any services rendered by the City Attorney, Assistant City Attorneys or any outside consultants employed by the City. Grantee shall not be required to provide indemnification to City for programming cablecast over the Access Channel administered by City. The City shall give the Grantee timely written notice of any claim or of the commencement of any action, suit or other proceeding covered by the indemnity in this section,but failure to give notice is not a defense to the indemnification obligations except to the extent of actual prejudice. In the event any such claim arises, the City or any other indemnified party shall tender the defense thereof to the Grantee and the Grantee shall have the obligation and duty to defend, through services of competent counsel satisfactory to the City, settle or compromise any claims arising thereunder. If the City determines that it is necessary for it to employ separate counsel, the costs for such separate counsel shall be the responsibility of the City. Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 20 of 27 Section 35. Insurance. 1. Upon the granting of this Franchise Agreement and following simultaneously with the filing of the acceptance of this Franchise Agreement and at all times during the term of this Franchise Agreement, the Grantee shall obtain,pay all premiums for, and deliver to the City,written evidence of payment of premiums for and a certificate of insurance,naming the City as an additional insured,with a company licensed to do business in the State of Washington with a rating by A.M.Best and Co. of not less than "A"or equivalent,for the following: a.A comprehensive commercial or general liability insurance policy or policies, issued by an insurance carrier licensed to do business in the State of Washington. Said policy or policies shall pay on behalf of and defend the City, its officials,boards, commissions,agents or employees from any and all claims by any Person whatsoever(including the costs, defense costs,attorneys' fees and interest arising therefrom)on account of personal injury,bodily injury or death of a Person or Persons or damages to property occasioned by the operations of the Grantee under this Franchise Agreement,or alleged to have been so caused or occurred,with a minimum combined single limit of One Million and No/100 Dollars($1,000,000)per occurrence and$2,000,000 general aggregate for personal injury,bodily injury and property damage. b.A comprehensive automobile liability insurance policy or policies, issued by an insurance carrier licensed to do business in the State of Washington. Said policy or policies shall pay on behalf of and defend the City, its officials,boards,commissions,agents or employees from any and all claims by any Person whatsoever(including the costs,defense costs,attorneys' fees and interest arising therefrom)for bodily injury and property damage occasioned by any vehicle operation of the Grantee,or alleged to have been so caused or occurred,with a minimum liability of One Million and No/100 Dollars($1,000,000)per Person and Five Million and No/100 Dollars ($5,000,000)in any one(1)accident or occurrence. 2. Not less than thirty(30) days prior to its expiration, Grantee shall deliver to City, a substitute, renewal or replacement policy or bond conforming to the provisions of this Franchise Agreement. Section 36. Performance Bond. 1. Within sixty(60)days of the effective date of this Franchise, Grantee will provide a performance bond to the City, in the total sum of$250,000.00 which will remain in effect for the term of this Franchise. The performance bond is to ensure the faithful performance of Grantee's obligations under the Franchise including the payment by the Grantee of any penalties,claims, liens,fees,or taxes due the City which arise by reason of the operation,Maintenance,or Construction of the Cable System within the Franchise Area. 2. If the Franchise is terminated, or upon expiration or renewal, or transfer of the Franchise,the City will return the original bond or sign the necessary documentation to release the bond promptly if Grantee does not owe funds to the City or is not in default of a material provision of the Franchise. Section 37. Remedies to Enforce Compliance. 1. This section does not apply to revocation of the Franchise Agreement. Whenever the City seeks to enforce the Franchise Agreement, it shall first provide written notice to the Grantee of the nature of the problem and requested action, together with any applicable time frame for response. Any time limits here or elsewhere in the Franchise Agreement may be modified by written stipulation of the City and Grantee, except time limits relating to revocation of this Franchise Agreement or where otherwise required by law must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 21 of 27 2. Except in case of urgency or public need relating to management of the public Right-of-Way as reasonably determined by the City, the Grantee has thirty (30) days from receipt of such notice to respond in writing to the City official sending the notice: a. contesting it;or b. accepting it and agreeing to cure as requested within time limits specified; or c. requesting additional time or other modifications. In such event, Grantee shall promptly take all reasonable steps to cure the default,keeping the City informed as to the steps to be taken and a projected completion date. 3. If the City is not satisfied with the Grantee's response, both parties shall meet informally to discuss the matter. If these discussions do not lead to resolution of the problem, the City shall notify the Grantee in writing. Grantee may thereafter request a hearing thereafter as provided in this Franchise. 4. No provision of this Franchise affects the right of either party to seek judicial relief from a violation of any provision of this Franchise, or any regulation or directive under this Franchise. The existence of other remedies under this Franchise does not limit the right of either party to recover monetary damages, or to seek judicial enforcement of obligations by specific performance, injunctive relief or mandate,or any other remedy at law or in equity. Section 38. Liquidated Damages. 1. Because Grantee's failure to comply with the provisions of this Franchise Agreement will result in damage to the City and because it will be impractical to determine the actual amount of such damages, the City and Grantee hereby agree upon and specify certain amounts set forth hereafter in this section which represent both parties' best estimate of the damages. Penalties associated with franchise fee non-payments are not subject to this section. 2.The City shall specify any damages subject to this section and shall include such information in the notice sent to Grantee required under Section 37. Such a notice may provide for damages sustained prior to the notice where so provided,and subsequent thereto pending compliance by Grantee. 3. To the extent that the City elects to assess liquidated damages as provided in this section and such liquidated damages have been paid, the parties agree that this shall be the City s sole and exclusive damage remedy in lieu of actual damages; provided,that this shall not limit the right of the City to seek equitable or other relief as reserved in Section 39. 4. Unless otherwise provided, liquidated damages do not accrue after the timely filing of a request for hearing by Grantee until the time of a decision from the hearing. Nothing in this section prevents the parties from settling any dispute relating to liquidated damages by mutual stipulation. 5. Grantee may cure the breach or violation within the time specified to petition for review to the City's satisfaction,whereupon no liquidated damages are assessed. 6. After fulfilling the procedure required under Section 37, Grantee has thirty (30) days to pay such amounts, or Grantee may seek review of any assessment of liquidated damages under Section 39. Liquidated damages shall be immediately payable from the performance bond, if review is not sought or if not paid within the thirty(30)day period by the Grantee. Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 22 of 27 7.Schedule of Liquidated Damages. Liquidated damages are set as follows. All amounts accrue per day but not beyond the number of days to exceed the amount of$10,000 per twelve(12)month period unless specifically provided. Nothing requires the City to assess liquidated damages, acting in its sole discretion,but such event does not operate as waiver or estoppel upon the City. 8. Pursuant to the requirements outlined herein,liquidated damages shall not exceed the following amounts: a. five-hundred dollars ($500.00) per day for failure to provide cable service as promised in Section 9 of this Franchise Agreement; one-hundred dollars ($100.00) per day for material departure from the FCC technical performance standards;fifty dollars($50.00)per day for failure to provide the PEG Channel or any PEG Fee related thereto which is required hereunder; one- hundred dollars ($100.00)per day for each material violation of the Customer Service Standards; twenty five dollars ($25.00) per day for failure to provide reports or notices as required by this Franchise; and one hundred dollars ($100.00) per day for any material breaches or defaults not enumerated herein. b. Where Grantee has three (3) or more of the same violation or breach events (an "event" may involve multiple customers, but is discrete in time or circumstances) within any twelve (12) month period,all applicable damages amounts are doubled. Section 39. Hearings. Grantee may request a hearing as follows: 1. Grantee files a written request within fourteen (14) days of receipt of a decision it wants reviewed with the City Manager. The request does not stay the effect of the decision or obligation to comply or exercise of any remedy available to the City except as otherwise provided. The City Manager may conduct the hearing or appoint an alternate hearings officer, who shall not be the Person issuing the order or such Person's subordinate. For matters exceeding $25,000 reasonably estimated value in controversy as determined by the City Manager, the Grantee may file a request that the City Hearings Examiner conduct the hearing. A reasonable filing fee may be set by the Hearings Examiner or generally applicable ordinances. 2. The hearing may be informal and shall be conducted within twenty(20)days,with at least ten (10) days prior notice to both sides. The official conducting the hearing is responsible to keep a record of any materials submitted and shall record the hearing by video or audio tape, for matters exceeding $25,000 reasonable estimated value amount in controversy. A written decision shall be issued within ten (10) days. Either party may appeal the decision to a court of competent jurisdiction within thirty (30) days. 3. Except where otherwise provided, at the conclusion of the City hearings process, if Grantee remains in default,it shall correct said default in fifteen(15)days or as otherwise ordered by the City. In the event the Grantee does not cure within such time to the City's reasonable satisfaction,the City may: a. seek specific performance of any provision that reasonably lends itself to such remedy as an alternative to damages,or seek other equitable relief;and/or b. assess liquidated damages resulting from Grantee's default if not already done or await the conclusion of the judicial process. 4. Where Grantee seeks judicial review and ultimately prevails, any money judgment against the City shall be paid or may thereafter be offset by Grantee, in Grantee's discretion, against further franchise O rdinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 23 of 27 fee payments due to the City. In such event, Grantee shall notify the City at least sixty(60)days prior to apply the offset. 5.Nothing herein limits the City's right to seek to revoke this Franchise Agreement in accordance with Section 40. Section 40. Revocation. 1. The City may revoke this Franchise Agreement and rescind all rights and privileges associated with this Franchise Agreement in the following circumstances: a. Grantee abandons the Cable System,fails to cure a non-payment of a quarterly franchise fee within 30 days of the required payment date,or terminates the Cable System's operations; or b. Grantee has a pattern of failing to perform the material obligations listed under Section 38.8 of this Franchise Agreement; or c. Grantee attempts to evade any material provision of this Franchise Agreement or practices any fraud or deceit upon the City or Subscribers. 2. Prior to revocation of the Franchise Agreement,the City shall give written notice to the Grantee of its intent to revoke the Franchise Agreement, setting forth the exact nature of the noncompliance. The Grantee shall have thirty(30)days from such notice to object in writing and to state its reasons for such objection and provide any explanation. In the event the City has not received a timely and satisfactory response from the Grantee, it may then seek a revocation of the Franchise Agreement by the City Council in accordance with this section. 3. The Grantee may file a revocation hearings request within 14 days of the City's written notice of intent to revoke the franchise with the City Hearings Examiner. A reasonable filing fee may be required pursuant to generally applicable ordinances. Any revocation hearing under this subsection shall be consistent with Spokane Valley Municipal Code 17.90, except as specifically set forth below. This shall provide the Grantee a fair opportunity for full participation, including the right to be represented by legal counsel, and to introduce evidence. Within 20 days of the hearing,the Hearing Examiner shall issue a recommendation to the City Council. At the next available City Council meeting with notice provided to the Grantee, the City Council shall review the City Hearing Examiner's record and recommendation, allowing the Grantee an opportunity to state its position on the matter reserving the right to set reasonable time limits. Within sixty (60) days after the review, the City Council shall determine whether to revoke the Franchise Agreement; or if the breach at issue is capable of being cured by the Grantee, direct the Grantee to take appropriate remedial action within the time and in the manner and on the terms and conditions that the City Council determines are reasonable under the circumstances. The City Council shall issue a written decision and shall transmit a copy of the decision to the Grantee. Any appeal of the decision by the City Council shall be to Spokane County Superior Court within thirty (30) days of adoption of the decision. Upon timely appeal,the effect of the revocation is stayed pending fmal judicial resolution, but this shall not affect accrual of penalties or the right of the City to take any other enforcement action, including curing the default at Grantee's expense and liability, also subject to judicial review. The parties shall be entitled to such relief as the court may deem appropriate. 4. The Council may in its sole discretion take any lawful action that it deems appropriate to enforce the City's rights under the Franchise Agreement in lieu of revocation. Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 24 of 27 Section 41. Conditions of Sale. If a renewal of this Franchise Agreement is denied or the Franchise Agreement is lawfully terminated, and the City lawfully acquires ownership of the Cable System or by its actions lawfully effects a transfer of ownership of the Cable System to another Person, any such acquisition or transfer shall be at a price determined pursuant to the provisions of the Cable Act. Section 42. Transfer of Rights. This Franchise may not be assigned or transferred without the written approval of the City pursuant to the provisions of the Cable Act. However,Grantee can assign or transfer this Franchise without approval of but upon notice to the City to any parent, affiliate or subsidiary of Grantee or to any entity that acquires all or substantially all the assets or equity of Grantee, by merger, sale, consolidation or otherwise and for transfers in trust obtained to finance Construction or operations of a Cable System by pledging the System as collateral.. Section 43. Acceptance.- Not later than sixty days after passage and publication of this Ordinance, the Grantee must accept the Franchise herein by filing with the City Clerk an unconditional written acceptance thereof. Failure of Grantee to so accept this Franchise within said period of time shall be deemed a rejection thereof by Grantee, and the rights and privileges herein granted shall, after the expiration of the sixty days period, absolutely cease, unless the time period is extended by ordinance duly passed for that purpose. Section 44. Force Majeure. The Grantee shall not be held in default under, or in noncompliance with,the provisions of this Franchise agreement due to acts of God or impossibility of performance as recognized in the common law of the State of Washington,to the extent and for such period as such conditions persist. For purposes of enforcement,conditions outside of Normal Operating Conditions are a basis to excuse Grantee's performance,but only to the extent and for such period as such conditions persist.Conditions outside Normal Operating Conditions may also excuse other Franchise obligations where they effectively render performance infeasible or impossible,to the extent and for such period as such conditions persist,but this does not apply as to conditions within the Grantee's reasonable control. Section 45. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section,sentence,clause or phrase of this Ordinance. In the event that any of the provision of the Franchise are held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction,the Franchise may be modified upon agreement by both parties. Section 46. Renewal. Any renewal of this Franchise Agreement shall be governed by and comply with the provisions of the Cable Act(47 U.S.C. § 546), as amended. Section 47. Notice. Any notice or information required or permitted to be given by or to the parties under this Franchise may be sent to the following addresses unless otherwise specified, in writing: The City: City of Spokane Valley Attn: City Clerk 11707 E. Sprague, Suite 106 Spokane Valley,WA 99206 Grantee: Comcast of Pennsylvania/Washington/West Virginia LP Attn:Ken Watts, General Manager 1717 East Buckeye Avenue Spokane,Washington 99207 Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 25 of 27 With a copy to: Comcast of Washington IV,Inc. 15815 25th Avenue Lynnwood,WA 98087 Attention: Franchising Department Section 48. Choice of Law. Any litigation between the City and Grantee arising under or regarding this Franchise shall occur, if in the state courts, in the Spokane County Superior Court, and if in the federal courts, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington. Section 49. Non-Waiver. The failure of either party at any time to require performance by the other of any provision of this Franchise will in no way affect the right of the other party to enforce the Franchise. The waiver by either party of any breach of any provision is not a waiver of any succeeding breach of such provision,or as a waiver of the provision itself or any other provision. Section 50. Entire Agreement. This Franchise constitutes the entire understanding and agreement between the parties as to the subject matter herein and no other agreements or understandings, written or otherwise, shall be binding upon the parties upon execution and acceptance hereof. This Franchise shall also supersede and cancel any previous right or claim of Grantee to occupy the Right-of- Way as herein described. Section 51. Counterparts. This Franchise Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which when so executed shall be deemed to be an original copy, and all of which together shall constitute one agreement binding on all parties hereto, notwithstanding that all parties shall not have signed the same counterpart. Section 52. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of the ordinance or a summary thereof occurs in the official newspaper of the City of Spokane Valley as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council this 1st day of December, 2009 Thomas E.Towey,Mayor A 11 aZ Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: 0- I Office the City orney Date of Publication: g D/C) Effective Date: J 1, - c& Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 26 of 27 ■ ( Accepted by Comcast of Penns 1 shington/West Virginia LP, By: i.%�E ._ Timothy T.Nester By: The Grantee, Comcast of Pennsylvania/Washington/West Virginia. A limited partnership company, for itself, and for its successors and assigns, does accept all of the terms and conditions of the foregoing Franchise. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I i o i 1),5r-:t-e has signed this c9 m day of_ \+-..0._ , 2010. Subscribed and sworn before me this day of ,2010. A��,,\ ix S � ��MSC R.N�c� Nota Public in and for the State of • : : ,Cc' I o r- ��i.\ .�j P' �' �� • residing •in .A .. -' _-j 1 I.Q Z l� My commission expires /0. 1 �O I o j •• 0105 ,,‘il, FOF �+0` Ordinance 09-034 Comcast Cable Franchise Page 27 of 27 Comcast--Washington Market ( omcast. Spokane Office 1717 E.Buckeye Ave. Spokane,WA 99207 February 23,2010 Mr. Mike Jackson Acting City Manager City of Spokane Valley 11707 E Sprague Ave, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Dear Mr. Jackson: The purpose of this letter agreement is to set forth a commitment between Comcast of Pennsylvania/Washington/West Virginia, LP (hereinafter, "Comcast") and the City of Spokane Valley (hereinafter, "the City")that is in addition to the Franchise Agreement, to be adopted by Ordinance (hereinafter, "the Franchise"). This item has been negotiated in good faith and agreed to as part of the informal franchise renewal process pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 546(h), and specifically relates to a unique community need that exist in the City. Comcast agrees to provide the City two (2) $10,000 unrestricted grants, totaling $20,000 over the life of the franchise term. The first grant will be remitted to the City within ninety (90) days of Comcast's acceptance of the Franchise. The second grant will be remitted to the City within ninety (90) days of the fifth year anniversary date of the Franchise term, if Comcast accepts the full continuation of the ten (10) year term. Comcast reserves the right to pass-through the grants to Subscribers, in addition to the PEG Fee specified in the Franchise,this amount would be at Comcast's sole discretion. The terms and conditions of this letter agreement are binding upon the City and Comcast and their successors and assigns. Comcast stipulates that a payment failure of these terms by Comcast may be considered by the City as a violation of the Franchise. Acknowledged and agreed to this'7 day of A4,7 , 2010. Comcast of Pennsyly. ashington/West Virginia, LP WIM 111 Its: Timothy T.Nester Date: SVP-Finance and Accounting Dole.) City of Spokane Valley By: / / Its: A z=1-.-34,-. C, /1-4,7 Date: S - 2-7 — D DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of March 17, 2011; 9:00 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative To: Council & Staff From: City Clerk, by direction of City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings March 28, 2011, 9 a.m. —noon;Special Joint Meeting with City of Spokane Meeting to be held at Spokane City Hall Council Chambers,W. 808 Spokane Falls Blvd Tentative Topics include (1)Animal Control; (2)Regional Solid Waste System; and(3)Jail. March 29,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,March 21] ACTION ITEMS: 1. Proposed Resolution Adopting Amended 2011 TIP— Steve Worley (15 minutes) 2. Motion Consideration: Sprague Avenue ITS Bid Award— Steve Worley (10 minutes) NON-ACTION ITEMS: 3. Council Position#3 Candidate Interviews—Mayor&Council (— 120 minutes) 4. Admin Report: Greenacres Bid—Mike Stone (10 minutes) 5. Shoreline Master Program, Chapter 1 —Lori Barlow (30 minutes) 6. Hanson Developer Agreement—John Hohman (15 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 200 minutes] April 5,2011, SPECIAL MEETING: Executive Session 5:00 p.m. [RCW 42.30.110(1)(h)] To evaluate the qualifications of candidates for appointment to elective office April 5,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,March 28] ACTION ITEMS: 1. Greenacres Park Bid Award—Mike Stone (10 minutes) 2. Motion Consideration: Hanson Developer Agreement—John Hohman (10 minutes) 3. Mayor and Councilmembers: Appt of Candidate to Council Position#3 110 public comment) (20 min) a. Nomination&2nd of candidate: vote. b. Clerk Administers Oath c. New Councilmember Takes Position at the Dias NON-ACTION ITEMS: 4. Discussion of Options for Mayor Selection— Cary Driskell (25 minutes) 5. Pavement Management Program Update— Steve Worley (20 minutes) [estimated meeting: 85 minutes] #1 Mayor's State of the City Address/Community Forum Monday,April 11, 2011; 7:00 pm to 8:00 pm. Valley Fourth Memorial Church, 2303 S. Bowdish Road April 12,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,April 4] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance dealing with livestock in mixed use—Christina Janssen (15 minutes) 3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance for 2011 Comp Plan Amendments—Mike Basinger (20 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 40 minutes] #2 Mayor's State of the City Address/Community Forum Thursday,April 14, 2011; 7:00 pm to 8:00 pm, Greenacres Christian Church, 18010 E. Mission Avenue April 19,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,April 11] 1. Advance Agenda—Mayor Towey (5 minutes) 2. Disaster Cost-Recovery(FEMA)—Gerry Bozarth, Spokane Emergency Management (20 minutes) 3. Airway Heights Plan Review Renewal—MaryKate McGee (15 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] Draft Advance Agenda 3/17/2011 4:26:43 PM Page 1 of 3 #3 Mayor's State of the City Address/Community Forum Thursday,April 21, 2011; 7:00 pm to 8:00 pm, Seth Woodard Elementary School, 7401 E. Mission Ave. April 26,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,April 18] Proclamation:Public Service Recognition Week 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance Livestock in Mixed Use—Christina Janssen (10 minutes) 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance for 2011 Comp Plan Amendments—Mike Basinger (10 minutes) 4. Motion Consideration: Airway Heights Plan Review Renewal—MaryKate McGee (10 minutes) 5. Info Only: Dept Reports [*estimated meeting: minutes] #4 (and final)Mayor's State of the City Address/Community Forum Thursday,April 28, 2011; 12:30 to 1:30 pm, CenterPlace Regional Event Center 2426 N. Discovery Place May 3,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,April 25] 1. Draft 2012-2017 Six Year TIP— Steve Worley (20 minutes) May 10,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,May 2] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) May 17,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,May 9] 1. Admin Report: Draft 2012-2017 Six Year TIP— Steve Worley (15 minutes) May 24,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,May 16] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft 2012-2017 Six Year TIP— Steve Worley (15 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 3. Info Only: Dept Reports [*estimated meeting: minutes] May 31,2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,May 23] June 7, 2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,May 30] June 14,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,June 6] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Proposed Resolution Adopting 2012-2017 Six Year TIP— Steve Worley (15 minutes) June 21, 2011, Possible no Meeting, (AWC Conference, Spokane, Wa.) June 28,2011,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,June 20] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Info Only: Dept Reports [*estimated meeting: minutes] July 5, 2011, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due date Mon,June 27] Draft Advance Agenda 3/17/2011 4:26:43 PM Page 2 of 3 OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: Alternative Analysis (contracts) Bidding Contracts (SVMC 3. —bidding exceptions) Budget 2012 (August/Sept 2011) Capital Projects Funding CDBG(Fall 2011) Centennial Trail Agreement Clean Air Agency East Gateway Monument Structure # Flashing Beacons Governance Manual (resolution) Update Joint Meetings: Planning Commission; BOCC Liberty Lake City Sign Lodging Tax Funding for 2012 (Oct 2011) Milwaukee Right-of-way Monument(Veterans') Sign Outside Agencies 2012 (August 2011) Parking/Paving Options(for driveways, etc.) PEG Funds: Allocation of P&E Funding Permit Tracking System Reimbursement Assessment Amendment Retreat, Summer 2011 Sidewalks Signage (I-90) Site Selector Update Solid Waste Amended Interlocal Speed Limits Sprague Appleway Corridor Environ.Assessment Sprague Avenue: One-way vs.two-way WIRA,Water Protection Commitment, Public Education # =Awaiting action by others * =doesn't include time for public or council comments Draft Advance Agenda 3/17/2011 4:26:43 PM Page 3 of 3 Spokane Valley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall@spokanevalley.org Memorandum To: City Council Members; Mike Jackson, City Manager From: Michael D. Stone, CPRP, Director of Parks and Recreation Date: March 17, 2011 Re: Greenacres Park Phase 1 Bid Update With the Greenacres Park Master Plan complete and funding in place, staff has been working with Landscape Architect Mike Terrell to complete the construction plans and specifications for Phase 1. The construction documents have been completed and the project is currently out to bid. Bids will be opened on March 17, 2011 at 10:00 am in the City Council chambers. After the bids are received, staff will review all bids and begin to develop a construction contract. Staff is scheduled to present an Administrative Report regarding this bid to the City Council on March 29, 2011. We plan to bring forward a bid award recommendation motion on April 5, 2011. A pre-bid meeting was held on March 3, 2011 that was well attended. To date, there appears to be very good interest in this project which hopefully results in numerous bids being received. This project consists of constructing an 8.3-acre planned neighborhood park in the North Greenacres neighborhood. Phase 1 development of the park includes: a restroom, picnic pavilion, children's play area, water splash pad, tot lot, parking lot, site grading, irrigation, turf (seeding & sodding), landscaping, site utilities, sidewalks and pathways. If you have any questions or need additional information please let me know. Thank you. 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: Mar 22, 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: Neighborhood request for Quiet Zone at Park Rd and Vista Road UPRR Xings GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Discussion at 10/26/2010 and 12/7/2010 Council Meetings BACKGROUND: A group of neighbors in the northwest part of Spokane Valley submitted a petition in 2010 asking for the installation of a Quiet Zone at the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) crossings of Park Road and Vista Road. A Quiet Zone is a crossing that has been enhanced with additional safety measures and has been approved by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) as a location where trains are not required to blow their whistle. At the 12/07/2010 Council Meeting staff was asked to move forward by preparing a scope of work with an engineering firm to further evaluate the quiet zone. We selected a consultant from our roster and have attached their scope of work and fee. The scope of work includes stakeholder and neighborhood meetings, coordination with UPRR and FRA, evaluation of different improvement options, 90% design and cost estimates for the work, and filing of the preliminary paperwork with the FRA to establish the quiet zone. This scope would take the City to the point where a decision would need to be made on how to fund the required crossing improvements. The estimated fee for this work is $82,551. If the City desires to move forward with construction, then additional engineering, construction inspection, and coordination with UPRR and FRA would be required. This stage is not covered in the attached scope of work. OPTIONS: Please let us know if you have questions or would like additional information. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Neil Kersten, Public Works Director; Inga Note, Senior Traffic Engineer ATTACHMENTS: 1. Scope of Work and Estimate. City of Spokane Valley, WA Spokane V Zone Study cope and Fee Estimate M F I Ilk- :4 ..1,f';ip}• yy* i.. af- 41*------ . -mkt. !• , ' ....;,..* "-I•tid7 lib.. :'.4•. ., '9-, --------t. —kir_ %9•99-9,...,...........,kui Fffi k.se M* ' ' o ' ' . 6 w • • • # - + — • _.......0-- — ::....7.7:11..f. - i %. !'' - Y . - Prepared by: ,}- .. _ - ' ;,h `_ 3 WI - ' • Y .. x }4 1.1 - 0 . •4 DAVID EVANS • ANDASSOCIATES INC. . . it., March 7, 2011 . , .. . , , • ' .. -f I- 1 -r • DAVID EVANS � ""1QA$SOCIATES�kc• INTRODUCTION David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA) staff blends the skills, resources, and expertise necessary to evaluate the feasibility of establishing a quiet zone for the City of Spokane Valley. DEA offers highly qualified individuals with established experience in quiet zones and railroad crossing operational studies and design, as well as specific experience with complex railroad coordination. DEA also offers the most responsive project personnel available to provide the best client service. Led by Quiet Zone Project Manager, Susan Grabler, DEA will approach this project with enthusiasm, focus, and commitment. DEA will provide the City of Spokane Valley with comprehensive railroad operations and design experience, familiarity with railroad policies and practices, and a practical background in the implementation and funding of railroad projects. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING DEA understands that the City of Spokane Valley wishes to reduce train whistle noise in Union Pacific Main Line corridor at the Park and Vista crossings. A quiet zone study will identify the improvements, policies and strategies needed to accomplish quiet zone implementation while meeting federal and railroad requirements and given realistic potential funding sources. The timeline for the establishment of a quiet zone is highly variable, depending on the FRA, UPRR< and road authority requirements unique to each crossing. The schedule for the initial work up to the preliminary design is expected to be completed within six months of the start date for this project. Project Objectives DEA's approach to the quiet zone study will focus on early definition of project goals and identification of critical project elements that will need to be addressed in order to achieve these goals. Project objectives may include: • Building a strong and effective agency/public coordination program with all of the key stakeholders, such as the City of Spokane Valley and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR), the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC), and affected property owners. Project Manager Susan Grabler has a strong relationship with the UPRR. • Evaluating the critical elements associated with the project and developing solutions that will successfully address those issues and achieve the project goals. • Identifying potential project constraints, such as special railroad requirements, right-of-way constraints, utility impacts, and public concern early and developing a plan of action to efficiently comply with all regulations with minimal impact on the primary project objectives and schedule. • Developing an overall project design that achieves the project goals and provides the City of Spokane Valley with an enhanced transportation district. Recommended Project Phasing Phasel—Quiet Zone Study and Preliminary Design Phase one includes the work covered by this contract. The DEA team will analyze all of the FRA supplemental safety devices for each Phase of the quiet zone study to determine the best and safest alternate for each crossing. DEA will assist the UPRR and all regulatory agencies necessary to obtain approvals for the quiet zone. Project Manager Susan Grabler spent 24 years as the Public Project Manager for the UPRR. In that position Susan has worked with and negotiated numerous public projects through the regulatory agencies in several states and numerous public agencies. 1 City of Spokane Valley Spokane Valley Quiet Zone Study II DAVID EVANS AN ASSQCIATES'"'c Susan is familiar with the processes at each agency and has a track record for successfully completing several challenging projects throughout her career. Susan will be able to provide the City of Spokane Valley with a "Letter of Intent", which needs to be filed with the FRA once the quiet zone corridor has been selected. DEA will assist the City with the implementation of the quiet zone by making sure the preliminary analysis of each crossing is complete and concise before the actual diagnostic meetings are held. Once the diagnostic meetings are completed, DEA will compile the information and run the FRA calculations for each crossing, and prepare the "Letter of Intent" to be filed with the FRA. Susan Grabler has the experience and knowledge to keep the project moving along, and will also work with the stakeholders to make sure there are no unknown issues; as any unknown issues can derail the quiet zone process and delay the implementation. DEA will provide preliminary design plans to 90% completion for the improvements needed to complete the quiet zone. With such modifications as raised medians with channelizing devices, new crossing systems and gates, and potential road closures, DEA will complete a set of plans for review by the City and UPRR for submittal to the FRA. In conjunction with the analysis and preliminary design, DEA will coordinate the approval process through the railroad company and the FRA. The FRA reviews and analyzes all quiet zone projects and proposed changes annually with statistical information as well as input from stakeholders during the quiet zone process. Phase 2- Implementation Subsequent to the completion of the items contained within this scope of work,the City may select a consulting firm to develop final design drawings, and provide construction assistance as necessary for the City and railroad approved improvements to implement the quiet zone. DEA is a multi-disciplined engineering and planning firm and we can plan, design, estimate and support a quiet zone project during design and construction after the City has received approvals from the FRA, WUTC, UPRR and other stakeholders on the required improvements. Critical Issues There are several critical issues/challenges associated with this project that must be successfully addressed in order to achieve the project objectives and goals, as addressed in the following tasks. Our approach to the City of Spokane Valley Quiet Zone Study is to work collaboratively with the City and other stakeholders to develop a document that achieves the technical, fiscal, and implementation objectives. Our key staff has successfully completed many projects similar in scope. Through this experience, we have developed a technical and management approach that blends our understanding of jurisdictional and agency procedures with specific project requirements. Because we see the "big picture" of both the immediate tasks at hand and the overall objectives, we can provide an approach to meet project schedules within fiscal constraints while delivering the highest quality work. PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK Task 1—Data Collection and Assessment The project will begin with the collection and inventory of data relating to the crossings from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the UPRR. This information will be used in subsequent tasks to evaluate the crossings for improvements to bring them in compliance with Quiet Zone requirements. Also during this task, an assessment of the adjacent crossings in the City of Millwood (Margeurite and Argonne) will be conducted and coordination will take place to determine if the crossings will be included in the quiet zone. In the event that the Margeurite and Argonne crossings are to be included, negotiations would be necessary with the City of Millwood to provide funding for the analysis of those crossings. 2 City of Spokane Valley Spokane Valley Quiet Zone Study II DAVID EVANS AN ASSQCIATES'"'c Task 2—Field Review Engineering and design personnel will visit the sites to familiarize themselves with geometric, safety, operational and environmental conditions related to the crossings prior to beginning the design of proposed improvements. There is currently a planned shared use pathway (Millwood Trail) that will interact with this section of the railroad. The field review would include consultation with Craig Aldworth to determine the location and impact of the proposed trail. Task 3—Summary of Legal Issues DEA will develop a summary of the legal issues that accompany the establishment of a quiet zone. This summary will be submitted to the City for review and included as an appendix in the final report. The legal summary will include such topics as indemnification and the City's liability in relation to the crossings in the quiet zone provided as a list and not intended as legal advice. Task 4—Survey Also to be completed prior to the design tasks, a topographic survey will be conducted to establish a base from which to begin design of proposed improvements. The survey will gather data related to road edges, centerlines, train rails, signals, traffic control, and one-call utility locates for the two crossings in the City of Spokane Valley: Park Road and Vista Road. It is assumed that coordination with the railroad will be done by the DEA Project Manager. Through coordination with the City of Millwood, additional survey efforts may be necessary and would be funded through the City of Millwood. Task 5—Documentation Based on the field review and data collection, the sites will be documented within the FRA database for compliance with the Quiet Zone requirements. A brief technical memorandum will be prepared summarizing the sites and their requirements. Task 6—Analysis of Safety Measures Once components of the crossings have been entered into the FRA system, potential safety measures will be identified and evaluated for inclusion in the Quiet Zone. Potential measures include Supplementary Safety Measures (SSM) and Alternative Safety Measures (ASM) as included in the Use of Locomotive Horns at Highway- Rail Grade Crossings; Final Rule. The five SSMs include temporary closure, four-quadrant gates, gates with medians or channelization, and one-way street with gates, and permanent closure. ASMs are a safety system or procedure other than an SSM that is reviewed and decided to be an effective substitute for the locomotive horn. Examples include modified SSMs, non-engineering ASMs (enhanced enforcement), or engineering ASMs. It is understood that it is the City's intention to keep adjacent street open to travel if possible. As such, combinations of SSMs and ASMs will be considered to accomplish this. Task 7—Quiet Zone Feasibility Evaluation Based on the evaluation of the safety measures and site-specific information, the feasibility of a Quiet Zone at the crossings will be evaluated. This includes data entry to the FRA database for a safety rating based on the proposed safety measures. With the current configuration of the UPRR crossings it will be difficult to meet all Federal regulations to establish a quiet zone without some modifications to the crossings. One of the Federal requirements to establish a quiet zone is that all driveways within 60-feet of a railroad-highway crossing must be closed. Several options will need to be evaluated as potential solutions to mitigate the issue and meet the quiet zone requirement at each of the actual roadway crossings. Curb and gutter or a concrete barrier may be constructed on the approaches to the tracks. 3 City of Spokane Valley Spokane Valley Quiet Zone Study II DAVID EVANS AN ASSQCIATES'"'c Due to the proximity of the adjacent crossings in Millwood, the train horns would still be heard through the quiet zone at a reduced volume. Although they are far enough away not to be included, the feasibility of their inclusion will be evaluated and subsequent coordination with Millwood officials will be pursued, if necessary. The FRA rules and regulations require that all crossings in a proposed quiet zone corridor be funded 100% by the local entity requesting the quiet zone. Typically, Federal funding has not been used to fund quiet zone improvements. Further research will be necessary to investigate all funding options. DEA has successfully worked with other communities on creative strategies which may be negotiated with the railroads. For example, the City and DEA may identify existing at-grade crossings which could be closed and approach the railroad with this proposal. The railroad has a program whereby they will pay the road authority for the closure of redundant public at-grade crossings, thereby offsetting a portion of the cost of improvements to the remaining crossings. Task 8—Diagnostic Review and Agency Coordination DEA's Project Manager will coordinate contact with the FRA and UPRR throughout the project to identify conflicts or concerns and effectively address them. A full diagnostic review is required with all of the major stakeholders at each of the at-grade highway-railroad crossings in any proposed quiet zone corridor. If it is determined at the diagnostic review that a railroad signal installation or roadway improvements are required, then the railroad signal system design and estimate as well as actual installation can typically take 12-18 months from the date of the on-site diagnostic. In addition, any roadway improvements, including installation of curb and gutter, driveway closures, utility relocations and other civil improvements, must be designed, estimated and installed before a quiet zone can be implemented. Coordination and effective communications with the UPRR throughout the process is critical. Project Manager, Susan Grabler will facilitate this process and keep it moving to meet the City's timeline. Task 9—Conceptual Railroad Signal Cost Estimate As part of the upgrades to the crossings, a new signal and gates will be necessary at Park Road to meet Quiet Zone requirements for gates, lights, constant warning time devices and power out indicators. In addition, depending on the age and functionality of the components of the Vista Road crossing, it is possible that a new signal or additional gates would need to be installed there, as well. UPRR will provide a cost estimate for the signal components necessary to meet these criteria. Task 10—Conceptual Roadway and Crossing Improvements Potential improvements to the site to meet Quiet Zone requirements include some aspects of roadway improvements, such as a raised median and channelizing devices. In order to establish a quiet zone, the roadway must be improved in such a way that vehicles cannot enter the crossing when a train is present and the signal is active. The recommended improvements at the crossings will be displayed in a conceptual design for presentation to the Client for approval. Task 11—Draft and Final Reports A draft report will be submitted to the City in electronic form summarizing the Quiet Zone study process and results. It is expected that the City will have two weeks to review the draft report and return comments to DEA. In turn, DEA will prepare a final report for submittal. The Final Report will consist of two hard copies as well as an electronic copy. 4 City of Spokane Valley Spokane Valley Quiet Zone Study II DAVID EVANS AN ASSQCIATES'"'c Task 12—Presentations and Public Involvement During the early stages of the project, DEA will conduct a stakeholders meeting; most likely in coordination with the field review task. In conjunction with the completion of Task 9, DEA will present the conceptual design and cost estimate to the City Council for comment and approval prior to completing the preliminary design. In addition, DEA will lead one public meeting to inform residents of the process and address comments and concerns of the residents. It is possible that the improvements may include street closures at intersections immediately adjacent to the crossing. DEA will provide alternative options to the closures and facilitate discussion regarding the options at the public meeting. It is expected that the meeting will occur in conjunction with Task 6—Quiet Zone Feasibility Evaluation, so that public comment may be considered prior to the commencement of the design phase A key to the success of this project will be to engage the many affected stakeholder agencies in an open, coordinated project development process that begins with mutual project definition and continues through completion of the project. Coordination, communication, and documentation are essential. This approach requires that each entity that has jurisdictional approval authority, such as the FRA, WUTC, SRTC, and emergency service providers, participate in a committed and consistent manner throughout the entire project development process. This is an essential element in creating an efficient process. Our first priority in agency coordination will be to seek a thorough understanding of all of the project issues. Our approach seeks effective and efficient agency coordination through an early and continuous communications process. We will keep all agencies and stakeholders "in the loop" throughout the project in order to minimize procedural oversights and to avoid overlooking significant project elements or requirements. Regular coordination meetings with the City and other agencies and stakeholders will be held throughout the duration of the project. The coordination process must be effective and focus dually on keeping the City staff and the UPRR informed and building consensus on the study. Based on our prior experience with similar projects, we envision close interaction with City staff, including formal preliminary and final reviews of the quiet zone study. It is anticipated that three meetings will be scheduled to be integrated strategically within the study process. Task 13—Preliminary Design and Cost Estimate As presented in the approved conceptual design, the 90% preliminary design of crossing improvements will include the plan sheets necessary to construct the improvements and a project cost estimate. The preliminary design will be contingent upon a defined set of improvements and it may be necessary to delay the completion of this task until after the approval process is complete. It is assumed that the improvements included in the design will include all or part of the following: raised median with channelizing devices, active warning systems with crossing gates, four quadrant gate systems, concrete curb and gutter, asphalt pavement, roadway closure and obliteration, and advanced warning signage. This submittal will include a detailed engineering estimate based on the recommended improvements to be installed. Task 14—Coordination of Approval Process Following the submittal of the letter of intent to the FRA, DEA will continue administrative support of the quiet zone process as it progresses through agency approval. Susan will be available during this period to address concerns by either the City or the UPRR until the final decision has been made by the FRA. Based on DEA's prior experience on similar quiet zone projects, we know that we need to identify the City's public safety concerns as well as the Railroad's safety concerns, making sure that the safest quiet zone possible is established. Additionally, we will make sure that all Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) processes are considered and in place for the City to file its quiet zone "Letter of Intent" with the FRA. Identifying and establishing positive solutions to the railroad's infrastructure are a critical element to this process as are the 5 City of Spokane Valley Spokane Valley Quiet Zone Study II DAVID EVANS AN ASSQCIATES'"'c unique processes that the railroads use to implement public projects. DEA will coordinate the process with the railroad agencies throughout this process for the City. In addition, it is likely that the City of Millwood will want to include their crossings in the quiet zone. This task will also encompass the coordination with that jurisdiction as needed to complete the quiet zone process. Task 15—Miscellaneous Tasks Other task such as accounting and administration, preparation of presentation materials, and travel to the site will be completed commensurate with project progression. If required, Susan Grabler would make up to two trips for meetings with City staff. It is anticipated that these trips will be coordinated with the public involvement efforts. KEY PERSONNEL Susan Grabler, Project Manager Susan Grabler is the Mountain West Regional Rail Manager in the DEA Denver office and will serve as the Project Manager and the administrative point of contact for this project. She will be responsible for team coordination, project schedule, and overall management of the tasks within this project. Susan has experience with all aspects of the project, including railroad engineering, quiet zone documentation, railroad coordination, and railroad project funding. This hands-on experience will provide project efficiency as Susan can usefully contribute to the team tasks as well as manage the overall project. She also has strong interpersonal skills that will prove to be invaluable for the success of this project. Other key personnel and their anticipated roles are described below. Our team organization chart is located at the end of this section. Ms. Grabler has more than 38 years of railroad engineering experience both working for a Class 1 Railroad and in the private sector. Her experience includes ten years of railroad track design, as well as general railroad engineering experience. She has managed hundreds of public projects over a 24 year period working as a Manager of Industry and Public Projects for UPRR in nine states and has facilitated the administration of at-grade and grade separation public projects from inception to completion. She has participated in all phases of the railroad process and assisted city, county, and state authorities to move their projects through the railroad administration and construction process. Susan has served on several technical advisory committees where the railroad was an integral part of the transportation studies. She is an active member of Committee 36 (Communications and Signal Committee) of the American Railroad Engineering and Maintenance of Way Association. Susan has managed several quiet zone studies including San Diego, California, Sheridan, Wyoming, and Douglas County, Colorado. While working for the UPRR, Susan participated in several on-site diagnostic reviews of proposed Quiet zones for the Town of Winter Park, the City of Brighton and the City of Arvada. Jerremy Clark, PE, Traffic Engineering Mr. Clark has led the efforts to date for the proposed quiet zone projects as part of his three years of ongoing traffic work with the City of Spokane Valley. With a background of nine years in the engineering field, he has extensive experience in a range of projects from sidewalks to highways. Through the past five years of his experience in traffic engineering, Jerremy has served both planning and design roles in numerous projects including traffic signals and roadways. Through his work with the City of Spokane valley, Jerremy has led such tasks sight distance studies, operational analyses and coordination optimization along City corridors, and traffic design relative to Capital Projects. Jerremy will be the primary local contact for the project, assisting DEA's project manager and providing support and coordination through preliminary design. Jerremy will also staff any needed City Council interaction. 6 City of Spokane Valley Spokane Valley Quiet Zone Study DAVID EVANS An ASSQCIATES'"fC Kevin Picanco, PE, Traffic Engineering Mr. Picanco is a senior transportation engineer with more than 17 years of engineering and transportation planning experience. His professional experience spans many aspects of transportation including roadway and freeway transportation planning, traffic engineering, and roadway and freeway design. His recent professional focus has been on roadway and channelization design, transportation planning studies, traffic operational analysis, traffic impact studies, traffic signal design, and site access and circulation evaluation. Kevin has managed numerous roadway design projects including projects with railroad crossing improvements. Carole Richardson, PE, Quality Assurance Ms. Richardson has 23 years of experience in transportation planning, engineering and management, emphasizing multi-modal studies and projects. Richardson is a talented group facilitator and skilled presenter, capable of explaining complex issues in terms that decision-makers and the public can easily understand. She is also a seasoned veteran in the realm of transportation funding, and her prior experience with the Bridging the Valley project provides her with a good handle on crossing issues related to the Union Pacific Corridor. As DEA's quality assurance manager, Carole's role is to ensure that the City gets the best from the DEA team, and that DEA's quality and value exceed the City's expectations. 7 City of Spokane Valley Spokane Valley Quiet Zone Study a DAVID EVANS ASSOC ATES ' • • REFERENCES Union Pacific Railroad(UPRR) `I have had the pleasure of working with David Evans and John Trumbull Associates'railroad, bridge, and roadway engineers on Retired Industry and several occasions.In each instance,DEA coordinated with Public Projects Manager UPRR to prepare designs that were sensitive to our 2020 South West 4th Avenue, 3rd Floor standards,procedures, requirements and operations. This Portland, OR 97201-4958 included close communication with railroad personnel throughout each project. (503) 736-4135 DEA's creativity in finding solutions that keep the project's BNSF Railroad best interests at heart, while meeting our needs and those of Andy Amparin, Manager Public Projects their clients in each case, has gone above and beyond the 4515 Kansas Avenue call of duty." Kansas City, KS 66106 -John Trumbull (913) 551-4964 Town of Sheridan, Wyoming Nic Bateson PO Box 848 Sheridan, WY 82801 (307) 674-6483 extension 248 Douglas County, Colorado Fred Cook 100 Third Street Castle Rock, CO 80104 (303) 660-7490 8 City of Spokane Valley Spokane Valley Quiet Zone Study CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY-RAILROAD QUIET ZONE STUDY REPORT Consultant Labor Hours TASK DESCRIPTION Project Por'"lpal Principal Engineer Senior DCSigner Survey 2-Person Survey Project Manager Engineer I Manager Survey Crew Technician Assistant Engineer II T tal T k H Labor Total Dreorr Costs Total Cost Grabler Richardson Picanco Clark Pierce Zimmerman Denton $ 17400 $ 145.00 $ 145.00®i $ 105.00 $ 190_00 ®i $ 8°0° EgMEI i -- ©-------- ® $ 348 00 - -C ® $ 398.00 ©-------- ® $ 348.00 ® $ 348.00 2. Field Review = i --��----IT $ 6,184.00 FIM S 6,184.00 --®-----I® S 1,474_00 IIM S 1 474.00 $ 4,53500 IIM S 4,535 00 --- -®®®-I® --®-----® $ 1,822.00 IIM S 1,822.00 EiMiZEMEM ®-®®-----I® $ 1,70600 C $ 1,706.00 ®®-®-----I® $ 2,40200 121M S 2,402.00 0--®-----I® $ 2,41600 IIM S 2,416.00 0--------INZI1=1® $ 1,392.00 0--®®----ISEEMZI®IZ=1 ®��®-----I® 5 7,684.00 C $ 7,684.00 ©-©----- $ 2,054.00 EIM S 2,054.00 ®®-®----- EMEI© C Pre•are and facilitate•ublic moesin. ® $ 5,648.00 IZIM S 5,648.00 1 ®®----I® 5 11,26400 LIM S 11,264.00 -- -----U $ 25,18000 liM S 25,180.00 Re•ro.ra.hits Re•ort Production Presentation Materials --------- • liiM S 500.00 $ 500.00 ®EI1515[01 C ©--0----®® $ 1,01300 C $ 1013.00 36 12 182 92 4 16 16 6 590 S 80,279.00 S 2,271.90 5 82,550.90 City of Spokane Valley CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: March 22, 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: Letters regarding funding for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Attached are the City's letters of support and list of CDBG funding allocated to Spokane Valley, which were sent to our Legislators Senator Maria Cantwell, Senator Patty Murray, and Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers. These letters were also included in a packet for the Mayor and Deputy Mayor to discuss with our Legislators while attending the National Cities Congressional Conference in Washington D.C. OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Mike Jackson ATTACHMENTS: Copies of letters to Senator Cantwell, Senator Murray, and Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers; List of CDBG funding. SC1TY F _ �� po K Valley® 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000• Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall@spokanevalley.org March 8, 2011 The Honorable Maria Cantwell U.S. Senate 511 Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 RE: CDBG Budget Cuts Dear Senator Cantwell: The City of Spokane Valley encourages your support in the continuation of all Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)funding. Eliminating or cutting this important program will impact local and state projects that provide valuable contributions to our economic recovery. The residents of Spokane Valley,population 90,000, have directly benefitted from CDBG funding for the Spokane Valley Community Center, Spokane Valley Partners (the local food and clothing bank), Spokane Valley Meals on Wheels (meal delivery to home bound seniors) and many other programs. A copy of past block grant funding for Spokane Valley is attached to this letter. One of the most important projects to Spokane Valley has been local citizen assistance for sewer connection and paving costs associated with new sewer development. Since Spokane Valley depends on the Spokane-Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer as our sole source of water,elimination of septic tanks is an essential project for the aquifer protection. Once this project is completed in 2014,the equivalent of 60,000 residential units will have connected to sewer. We ask you to oppose any legislation that would eliminate or cut CDBG funding to our community in FY11 or FY12. Thank you in advance for your consideration of this important issue. Sincer2 Thomas E. Towey, Mayor SC1TY OF '� pokane Valley® 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ® Spokane Valtey WA 99206 509.921.1000 0 Fax: 509.921.1008 4 cityhall@spokanevatley.org March 8, 2011 The Honorable Patty Murray U.S. Senate 448 Russell Senate Office Building Washington,D.C. 20510 RE: CDBG Budget Cuts Dear Senator Murray: The City of Spokane Valley encourages your support in the continuation of all Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) funding. Eliminating or cutting this important program will impact local and state projects that provide valuable contributions to our economic recovery. The residents of Spokane Valley,population 90,000, have directly benefitted from CDBG funding for the Spokane Valley Community Center, Spokane Valley Partners (the local food and clothing bank), Spokane Valley Meals on Wheels (meal delivery to home bound seniors) and many other programs. A copy of past block grant funding for Spokane Valley is attached to this letter. One of the most important projects to Spokane Valley has been local citizen assistance for sewer connection and paving costs associated with new sewer development. Since Spokane Valley depends on the Spokane-Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer as our sole source of water,elimination of septic tanks is an essential project for the aquifer protection. Once this project is completed in 2014,the equivalent of 60,000 residential units will have connected to sewer. We ask you to oppose any legislation that would eliminate or cut CDBG funding to our community in FY11 or FY12. Thank you in advance for your consideration of this important issue. Sincerel , Thomas E. Towey, Mayor Sjiokiiie Valley® 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 ' cityhaUU®spokanevalley,org March 8,2011 The Honorable Cathy McMorris Rodgers U.S. House of Representatives 2421 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 RE: CDBG Budget Cuts Dear Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers: The City of Spokane Valley encourages your support in the continuation of all Community Development Block Grant(CDBG) funding. Eliminating or cutting this important program will impact local and state projects that provide valuable contributions to our economic recovery. The residents of Spokane Valley,population 90,000, have directly benefitted from CDBG funding for the Spokane Valley Community Center, Spokane Valley Partners (the local food and clothing bank), Spokane Valley Meals on Wheels (meal delivery to home bound seniors) and many other programs. A copy of past block grant funding for Spokane Valley is attached to this letter. One of the most important projects to Spokane Valley has been local citizen assistance for sewer connection and paving costs associated with new sewer development. Since Spokane Valley depends on the Spokane-Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer as our sole source of water,elimination of septic tanks is an essential project for the aquifer protection. Once this project is completed in 2014, the equivalent of 60,000 residential units will have connected to sewer. We ask you to oppose any legislation that would eliminate or cut CDBG funding to our community in FY11 or FY12. Thank you in advance for your consideration of this important issue. Sincerely Thomas E. Towey, Mayor SPOKANE COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT(CDBG)FUNDING IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY I Spokane County CDBG Entitlement Grant 2003 $1,868,000(city proportionate share approx,$616,440) I Project Description Year Amount Spokane Valley Community Center 2003 $21,574 Spokane Valley Meals on Wheels 2003 16,000 Big Brothers and Big Sisters-Trentwood School Program 2003 7,000 East Spokane Water District 2003 100,300 Orchard Avenue Irrigation Dist#6 2003 98,860 SC Public Works-RID Projects 2003 38,948 CAPA Special Assessments Assistance 2003 150,000 CAPA Sewer Connection Assistance 2003 150.000 Total $582,682 I Spokane County CDBG Entitlement 2004 $1,831,000(city proportionate share approx.$604,230) Project Description Year Amount Spokane Valley Community Center 2004 $18,000 Meals on Wheels 2004 20,000 Sewer Connection Assistance 2004 175,000 SC Public Works-RID Projects 2004 6,385 Weatherwood/Owens Street Improvement 2004 267,803 Carnahan Street Improvement 2004 108,162 CAPA Assessment Assistance 2004 175,000 Housing and Economic Dev.Planning 2004 20,500 Irvin Water District#6 2004 158,900 Carnhope Irrigation Dist#7 2004 116,150 Total $1,065,900 I Spokane County CDBG Entitlement 2005 $1,737,347(city proportionate share approx.$575,000) I Project Description Year Amount Meals on Wheels 2005 $20,000 Spokane Valley Community Center 2005 18,000 Montgomery Ave.1-90 to University 2005 439,850 Economic Development Planning 2005 17,469 Sewer Connection Assistance 2005 437,000 Total $932,319 I Spokane County CDBG Entitlement 2006 $1,548,837(city proportionate share approx.$511,116) 1 Project Description Year Amount Spokane Valley Community Center 2006 $13.000 Spokane Valley Meals on Wheels 2006 15,000 East Spokane Water District 2006 118,980 Carnhope Irrigation District 2006 24,700 SC Public Works-RID Projects 2006 36,898 CAPA Special Assessments Assistance 2006 116,050 CAPA Sewer Connection Assistance 2006 212,000 Spokane Valley-Vera Terrace Sewer Basin Paveback 2006 207,815 Total $744,443 I Spokane County CDBG Entitlement 2007 $1,549,880(city proportionate share approx.$511,460) I Project Description Year Amount Spokane Valley Community Center 2007 $25,000 Spokane Valley Meals on Wheels 2007 4,604 East Spokane Water District 2007 146,400 CAPA Special Assessments Assistance 2007 105,400 CAPA Sewer Connection Assistance 2007 100,624 Spokane Valley-Trentwood Sewer Basin-Street Paveback 2007 77.706 Total $459,734 Spokane County CDBG Entitlement 2008 $1,498,326(city proportionate share$509,021) I Project Description Year Amount Spokane Valley Partners 2008 $15,000 Spokane Valley Meals on Wheels--Meal Delivery 2008 20,000 Spokane Valley Meals on Wheels-Senior Nutrition Site 2008 7,700 Carnhope Water District 2008 96,500 CAPA Special Assessments Assistance 2008 150,000 CAPA Sewer Connection Assistance 2008 75,000 Spokane Valley-Rockwell Sewer Basin-Street Paveback 2008 195,410 Total $559,610 I Spokane County CDBG Entitlement 2009 $1,545,480(city approx. proportionate share$540,918) Project Description Year Amount Spokane Valley Partners 2009 $15,000 Spokane Valley Meals on Wheels-Meal Delivery 2009 15,000 Spokane Valley ADA Sidewalks-Sprague Ave. 2009 88,570 CAPA Special Assessments(CFR)Assistance 2009 125,000 CAPA Sewer Connection Assistance 2009 175,000 Spokane Valley-Clement Sewer Basin-Street Paveback 2009 220.554 Total $624,124 { Spokane County CDBG Entitlement 2010 $1,678,692(city approx.proportionate share 5599,833) i Project Description Year Amount Spokane Valley Partners 2010 $20,000 Spokane Valley Meals on Wheels-Meal Delivery 2010 30,000 East Spokane Water District 2010 132,800 CAPA Special Assessments(CFR Grant)Assistance 2010 60,000 CAPA Sewer Connection Assistance 2010 60,000 Spokane Valley-Corbin Sewer Basin-Street Paveback 2010 330,733 Total $633,533 Total Allocated to City of Spokane Valley 2003 through 2010 $5,602,345 Annual Average-8 years $700,293 SPOKANE COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM FUNDING* IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Project Description Year County HOME Amount Total Project Costs Woodruff Heights Apartments 1998 $648,000 $2,550,856 Village Multi-Family Apartments 1999 252,145 1,400,000 Hidden Pines Apartments 2000 349,203 2,664,031 East Valley Senior Housing Apartments 2001 357,425 2,678,025 IERR S.O.L.A.Homes(Severely Disabled) 2003 446,700 493,420 IERR Valley Home(Severely Disabled) 2005 180,000 275,534 Holman Gardens Senior Apartments 2005 225,000 5,004,997 Sprague Crossing Senior Housing 2005 164,486 759,767 Catherine Johnson Court Multi-Family Apartments 2006 700,000 869,500 Appleway Court 2008 500,000 6,152,666 Rockwell Apartments 2009 1,649,692 1.649,692 Total $5,472,651 $24,498,488 *Does not include Tenant-Based Rental Assistance or Down-Payment Homebuyer Assistance Spokane Community Development ��alle Monthly Report y January 2011 PERMIT CENTER Revenue Permits Permit revenue for January 2011 was $38,914. This is approx. 46% behind Jan of 2010. Permit Revenue $300,000 $250,000 - — $200,000 $150,000 - $100,000 $50,0001 Y so Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug _2011 Revenue 2010 Revenue Land Use Land Use revenue for January 2011 was 9,002. This figure is behind January of last year. Land Use Revenue $16,000 $14,000 $12,000 u $10,000 I $8,000 0 $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 joilmaimaimiotaimilimaini $0 Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec G2011 Revenue G2010 Revenue Page 1 of 8 Spokane Community Development Valle Monthly Report y January 2011 Valuation The valuation' for January 2011 was $1,461,121 $35,000,000 Permit Valuation $30,000,000 - $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 � �� ♦ ��a-� $0 �_ IimrTmTmTtTMTllETll•TllET11•T 1111111■1■91E—, Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Gf fice off inan ciaiManagementPermitlnformation (l'ermitslssuedJ January 2011 Dwelling Residential New Separate Demolition Units Structures Dwelling Units Permits Demolished Single Family Residence 8 Duplex 1 Triplex 4-Plex Apartments January 2011 New Tenant Commercial Buildings Improvements Additions 6 1 1 Per the currently adopted Master Fee Schedule, valuations reported above for commercial and residential construction permits are"assigned based on the value of the construction work as stated by the applicant or the value calculated by the Building Official using the latest valuation data published in the Building Safety Journal by the International Code Council, whichever is greatest." Page 2 of 8 Spokane Community Development Valle Monthly Report y January 2011 Permit.4ctivity Certificate of Occupancy A Certificate of Occupancy was issued to the Novelis Corporation at 16004 Euclid Ave. Permits Issued Community Development issued a total of 159 permits in January 2011. This is the same as last year. Construction Permits Issued 600 500 400 300 200 / 1111111 100 111111111 0 •2011 Permits IN Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Uct Nov Dec i 2010 Permits 158 200 259 256 241 284 263 328 508 366 246 231 Land Use Applications Two SEPA determinations were issued in January. One for the annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments and one for a new 18,000 sq. ft. office building. Commercial Pre-application Meetings There were 8 pre-application meetings including one for the new Greenacres Park, a commercial shop, and a motorcycles sales shop. Hearing Examiner The Hearing Examiner did not have any land use hearings in January. Business Licenses Staff approved 120 business licenses in January. Home Occupation Permits Staff approved 40 home occupation permits in January. Entertainers Licenses Page 3 of 8 Spokane Community Development Valle Monthly Report y January 2011 Staff processed 12 adult entertainment licenses for January. Express Permits There were 4 Express permits processed in January. CuStomerServIce The Permit Center staff assisted 359 customers at the counter and handled 231 customers' inquires by phone in the Permit Center during January. The Permit Center staff provided an average target date of 10 working days for Commercial projects, 3 working days for Residential platted and 10 working days for Residential un-platted. This target date represents the time to first comments issued to the applicant. Zn peCtZ0n7S Right of Way Inspector The Right-of-Way inspector performed 388 inspections in January. Right-of-Way Inspections 1200 1000 • • • • 800 • • • • • 600 I � 400 0 200 0 Jan Feb ar Apr ay June Ju y Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec O 2011 388 2010 221 491 773 852 1007 941 957 704 859 1003 755 482 Page 4 of 8 ",, Community Development 1]Ul�aZle .0...Valley Monthly Report January 2011 Building Inspectors: The City's Building Inspectors performed 296 Residential inspections and 115 commercial inspections in the month of January. ■2011 Residential 02010 Residential 2011 Commercial X2010 Commercial 1000 61 �'Building O4_,Li, O (:), Inspectionsloo Performed 10 1 — I ii _ W J d AN. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 Residential 296 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 Residential 393 387 397 557 498 522 531 403 581 525 437 379 2011 Commercial 115 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 Commercial 229 187 274 180 163 185 201 312 196 170 137 120 Development Engineering Inspector During the month of January the Development Engineering Inspector performed 11 site inspections. Development Engineering Inspections 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 II Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec .2011 • 2010 lielk Page 5 of 8 >%7Community Development alle Monthly Report y January 2011 UPDATES Planning Planning Commission The Planning Commission met twice during the month of January. The first meeting in January the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding a proposed amendment to the adult retail use establishment definition. The second regular meeting was a study session on the proposed changes to the animal keeping regulations. 2011 Comprehensive Plan Amendments/Updates — Staff continues to work on the 2011 annual Comprehensive Plan update. Amendments are proposed to Chapter 2 - Land Use, Chapter 3 - Transportation, Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities, Chapter 7 — Economic Development and Chapter 8, Natural Environment. The proposed amendments also include two citizen-initiated requests for site-specific map amendments. In addition, staff tentatively scheduled a review session and public hearing to be held in February with the Planning Commission. Growth Management Steering Committee of Elected Officials (SCEO)— The Steering Committee met in December to hear about progress on the UGA update process. The Planning Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC) has completed a land capacity analysis study and has started the SEPA/GMA integration process as the mechanism for environmental review. Shoreline Master Program Staff continued to work on the Shoreline Master Program, drafting initial goals and policies. The Shoreline Advisory Group began meeting in January, reviewing draft goals and policies and providing feedback to staff. Sprague Appleway Plan The City Center was removed from the SARP by City Council at their January meetings. Dq,artment yt Energy Grant A status report, including a request to reallocate funds between approved projects, was before the City Council on December 28th. With the Council's concurrence, the modification requests were filed with the Department of Energy. Public Works continues transportation projects that will result in energy conservation and carbon footprint reduction. See the paragraph below for updates on the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan. Washington State Energy Strategy Update Process The Washington State Energy Strategy update process continued this month with weekly webinars. The Building Official continues to participate in the conservation sector process and has been working with Commerce staff to improve access to the work group meetings. Participation in this process was on-going through December 2010. ADA Study Staff is analyzing data entered from the department surveys and is researching report formats. The City attorney's office has reviewed legal requirements associated with the self evaluation and transition plan. Sidewalk inventories are on hold for the construction season. Page 6 of 8 PMane Community Development ��alle Monthly Report y January 2011 Bike/Pedestrian Plan (BPMP)— Staff has been working with Valley school districts to compile Safe Route to School (SRTS) walking audits and will be inputting the information into the City's GIS system. Staff continues to work with representatives from Washington State University and Spokane County ISD in a joint effort to update and maintain a pedestrian network model. In addition, staff continues to draft preliminary text for the BPMP. Wellhead Protection Staff attended the January wellhead protection meeting. Regional Partnering The Regional Partnering Group met with respective staff to review the master application. Staff identified some procedural barriers that may not be resolvable. Building Officials will seek direction from Directors and Commissioners to determine what priority this project has. In the meantime, the Building official group is working on identifying and prioritizing new partnering opportunities. Code Ccm_pliance Citizen Action Requests Code Compliance officers received 20 Citizen Action Requests in January. All complaints received must be investigated, if even to determine that no violation exists. 100% 80% 60% -- - 40% 20% 0% Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec [3 Clear View Triangle 0 3 Complaint- No Violation 1 •Environmental 0 ©Junk Auto 6 ]Property 4 ]Signs 0 ■Solid Waste 9 2011 Code Total Violations Reported - by Category Page 7 of 8 1]U""` kaZle Community Development Valle ` Monthly Report January 2011 UPCOMING DATES OF INTEREST MAIIIMEM . INTEREST 2-17-11 President's Day, City Hall Closed 2-21-11 No City Council meeting 2-24-11 Planning Commission regular meeting — Public Hearing, Comprehensive Plan amendments 3-1-11 City Council meeting —Shoreline Master Program process update 3-10-11 Planning Commission regular meeting, Comprehensive Plan continued hearing 3-15-11 No City Council meeting 3-24-11 Planning Commission regular meeting — Planning Commission training Page 8 of 8 Spokane Community Development _Valle Monthly Report y February 2011 PERMIT CENTER Revenue Permits Permit revenue for February 2011 was $70,226. This is the same as last year. Permit Revenue $300,000 - $250,000 — - $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 — LILL jji $0 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec _2011 Revenue 2010 Revenue Land Use Land Use revenue for February 2011 was 9,404. This figure is behind February of last year. Land Use Revenue $16,000 $14,000 asni $12,000 ° O $10,000 o C $8,000 $6,000 ! o $4,000 1 $2,000 $0 „ „ „ -4!1.1101-- mF,1111110110 Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 02011 Revenue •2010 Revenue Page 1 of 8 "n Community Development 1]Ul�aZle Valle Monthly Report y February 2011 Valuation The valuation' for February 2011 was $5,949.147 $35,000,000 Permit Valuation • $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 • $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,000 t►11•••••44,04044000001Nmm■r $0 • • w - 1 - - - M MI eb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov mi..••2011 Valuation mr.3.•2010 Valuation Gf fice of financial-Management Permit_Information (l'ermitslssuedJ February 2011 Dwelling Residential New Separate Demolition Units Structures Dwelling Units Permits Demolished Single Family Residence 9 Duplex Triplex 4-Plex Apartments February 2011 New Tenant Commercial Buildings Improvements Additions 4 12 1 Per the currently adopted Master Fee Schedule, valuations reported above for commercial and residential construction permits are"assigned based on the value of the construction work as stated by the applicant or the value calculated by the Building Official using the latest valuation data published in the Building Safety Journal by the International Code Council, whichever is greatest." Page 2 of 8 pone Community Development ��alle Monthly Report y February 2011 Permit.4ctivity Certificate of Occupancy: Four CO's were issued in February including Appleway Court, New Seal Used Cars and a new building for AVISTA. Permits Issued Community Development issued a total of 121 permits in February 2011. A permit was issued for a new Fire District Admin Building at 2120 N. Wilber and a child care center at 905 N. McDonald. Construction Permits Issued 600 / 500 400 300 200 / I I I 100 11111111111 0 Ian Fah Mar Apr May lima luly Aug Sept C1rt Nnv ner •2011 Permits 159 121 i 2010 Permits 158 200 259 256 241 284 263 328 508 366 246 231 Land Use Applications Four SEPA determinations were issued in February. Two were for Comprehensive Plan Amendments. One was for the animal keeping code amendment and one was for a 13 lot subdivision. Commercial Pre-application Meetings Seven pre-application meetings were held in February including a 13,000 sq. ft. addition in the Industrial Park, two new office buildings, a new apartment complex on 4th Ave, and a new retail building on Sprague Avenue. Hearing Examiner The Hearing Examiner held a hearing for an appeal of a code compliance action from Rick Philips, owner of Farm Fresh Fruit. Business Licenses Staff approved 116 business licenses in February. Page 3 of 8 Spokane Community Development ��alle Monthly Report y February 2011 Home Occupation Permits Staff approved 33 home occupation permits in February. Entertainers Licenses Staff processed 14 adult entertainment licenses for February. Express Permits There were 8 Express permits processed in February. Economic Development Development Engineering put together an inventory and report about replacing the business directory signs on Appleway. Next step: Meet with the City Manager and public works to establish policies. John Holman has been meeting with Hansen Properties regarding their future development and extending their traffic agreements. CuStomerServIce The Permit Center staff assisted 295 customers at the counter and handled 251 customers' inquires by phone in the Permit Center during February. The Permit Center staff provided an average target date of 10 working days for Commercial projects, 3 working days for Residential platted and 10 working days for Residential un-platted. This target date represents the time to first comments issued to the applicant. Inspections Right of Way Inspector The Right-of-Way inspector performed 376 inspections in February. Right-of-Way Inspections 1200 1000 • • • 800 • • 600 • 400 Q 0 200 0 Jan Feb ar Apr May June Ju y Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec O 2011 388 376 0 2010 221 491 773 852 1007 941 957 704 859 1003 755 482 Page 4 of 8 Community Development pokane ��alle Monthly Report y February 2011 Building Inspectors: The City's Building Inspectors performed 275 Residential inspections and 109 commercial inspections in the month of February. 2011 Residential 02010 Residential 2011 Commercial X2010 Commercial 1000 01 t .1 • Building Inspectionsl oo - Performed 10 1 c. L Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 Residential 296 275 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 Residential 393 387 397 557 498 522 531 403 581 525 437 379 2011 Commercial 115 109 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010 Commercial 229 187 274 180 163 185 201 312 196 170 137 120 Development Engineering Inspector During the month of February the Development Engineering Inspector performed 17 site inspections. Development Engineering Inspections 40 30 20 10 11 WI I Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec _ 2011 ■ 2010 UPDATES Page 5 of 8 >%7Community Development alle Monthly Report y February 2011 Planning Planning Commission The Planning Commission met twice during the month of February. Items on their agenda included study sessions and public hearings on the annual amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. The Commission also considered zoning code text amendments relative to the keeping of chickens and refining the definition of adult retail establishment. 2011 Comprehensive Plan Amendments/Updates — Staff continues to work on the 2011 annual Comprehensive Plan update. Amendments are proposed to Chapter 2 - Land Use, Chapter 3 - Transportation, Chapter 4 - Capital Facilities, Chapter 7 — Economic Development and Chapter 8, Natural Environment. The proposed amendments also include two citizen-initiated requests for site-specific map amendments. In addition, staff tentatively scheduled a review session and public hearing to be held in February with the Planning Commission. Growth Management Steering Committee of Elected Officials (SCEO)— The Steering Committee met in December to hear about progress on the UGA update process. The Planning Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC) has completed a land capacity analysis study and has started the SEPA/GMA integration process as the mechanism for environmental review. Shoreline Master Program Staff continued to work on the Shoreline Master Program, drafting initial goals and policies. The Shoreline Advisory Group met twice in February, reviewing draft goals and policies and providing feedback to staff. Code Amendments, The Chicken Ordinance and an Amendment to the Adult Use Ordinance were presented to City Council in February. Dq,artment yt Energy Grant Public Works continues transportation projects that will result in energy conservation and carbon footprint reduction. See the paragraph below for updates on the Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan. Washington State Energy Strategy Update Process The Washington State Energy Strategy update process provided an update to the legislature and the Governor December 1, 2010. The update was not intended to be a comprehensive revision. The full revision is expected to be delivered to the legislature and the Governor in December 2011. The meetings for the full revision began in January and are scheduled throughout 2011. The Building Official met with Commerce staff in January to discuss access to meetings and public outreach to engage more of the public and the construction industry in future meetings. ADA Study Staff has begun the process of evaluating the survey data for compliance with ADA regulations. A core group will do an initial review and then the full work group will develop a consensus for the draft report. Sidewalk inventories will begin again in March. Bike/Pedestrian Plan (BPMP)— Staff has been working with Valley school districts to compile Safe Route to School (SRTS) walking audits and will be inputting the information into the City's GIS system. Staff continues to work with representatives from Washington State University and Spokane County ISD in a joint effort to update and maintain a pedestrian network model. In addition, staff continues to draft preliminary text for the BPMP. Wellhead Protection Staff attended the February wellhead protection meeting. Page 6 of 8 Spokane Community Development Valle Monthly Report y February 2011 Regional Partnering The Regional Partnering Group met with respective staff to review the master application. Staff identified some procedural barriers that may not be resolvable. Building Officials will seek direction from Directors and Commissioners to determine what priority this project has. In the meantime, the Building official group is working on identifying and prioritizing new partnering opportunities. Permit Tracking System Community Development Staff has been working on a multi-department team to research a new permit tracking system. The team has looked at a short list of systems and will prepare a report for City Council soon. Department Training Mary May and Karen Kendall attended a communication class in February. Tom Melbourn attended a seminar on the use of structured insulated panels. Code Ccm_pliance Citizen Action Requests Code Compliance officers received 20 Citizen Action Requests in February. All complaints received must be investigated, if even to determine that no violation exists. 100% ■ I II■ 80% I 60% II 40% - 1 20% ----- lib 0% Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec •Clear View Triangle 0 2 •Complaint- No Violation 1 1 ■Environmental 0 0 •Junk Auto 6 3 •Property 4 4 Signs 0 1 •Solid Waste 9 9 2011 Code Total Violations Reported - by Category Page 7 of 8 Community Development 1]Ul�aZl� Valle Monthly Report y February 2011 UPCOMING DATES OF INTEREST INTEREST 3-1-11 f City Council meeting —Shoreline Master Program process update 3-10-11 Planning Commission regular meeting, Comprehensive Plan continued hearing 3-15-11 No City Council meeting 3-17-11 Shoreline Advisory Group meeting 4-6 CenterPlace 03-22-11 City Council-Admin Rpt Comp Plan Amendment 3-24-11 Planning Commission Regular Meeting (CANCELLED) 4-7-11 Shoreline Advisory Group meeting, CenterPlace 4-11-11 State of the City Address, 7:00 p.m. 04-12-11 City Council—Comp Plan Amendment 1st reading 4/14/11 Planning Commission Regular Meeting — PC Training 04-14-11 State of the City Address, 7:00 p.m. 04-21-11 Shoreline Advisory Group Meeting, CenterPlace 04-21-11 State of the City Address, 7:00 p.m. 04-26-11 City Council—Comp Plan Amendment 2rid Reading 04-28-11 State of the City Address, CenterPlace 12:30 Page 8 of 8 anok .ne Valley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevattey.org Memorandum To: Mike Jackson, City Manager From: Ken Thompson, Finance Director Date: March 14, 2011 Re Finance Activity Report—February 2011 The City's fiscal year ends on December 31. Most of our revenues and expenditures in January of each year are accrued into the prior year, based on accounting standards where "fiscal year revenue should be matched against fiscal year expenditures." Thus, the attached report is a combined January/February 2011 report. Activities in January and February in Finance included: Financial reports: Reports showing a comparison of actual revenues and expenditures at February 28, 2011 to the 2011 Budget, are attached. Gambling tax receipts are expected to have a large uncolIectible portion, as casinos struggle to make ends meet. Investment earnings are likely to be less than projected in our 2011 budget as interest rates are down dramatically from prior years. Sales tax receipts are expected to be close to our projected budget as our projections have been reduced based on 2010 experience. With most financial transactions in January being accrued into the prior year, it is difficult to determine our financial status at February 28, 2011, It will take several more months to determine how close our budgeted numbers are to actual revenues and expenditures. The investment report is also attached for your review. Note the investment balance at $49 million at February 28, 2011. The $49 million is the largest amount invested at the end of any month since incorporation. 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. 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 February 28,2011 Budget February YTD Unrealized Percent 2011 Revenues Revenues Revenue Realized General Fund Revenues: Begining Fund Balance $ 24,600,000 $ 24,600,000 0.00% Property Tax 10,875,000 34,882 34,882 10,840,118 0.32% 4 Sales Tax 16,200,000 1,659,065 1,659,129 14,540,871 10.24% Gambling Tax 425,000 8,451 (308) 425,308 -0.07% Franchise Fees/Business Licenses 1,111,000 8,467 15,008 1,095,992 1.35% State Shared Revenues 1,665,625 4,762 4,762 1,660,863 0.29% Planning&Building Fees 1,600,000 85,329 190,888 1,409,112 11.93% Fines and Forfeitures 1,800,000 215,678 339,573 1,460,427 18.87% Recreation&Centerpiece Fees 555,500 45,814 96,177 459,323 17.31% Miscellaneous 200,000 9,849 14,889 185,111 7.44% Operating Transfers 2,040,000 - - 2,040,000 0.00% Total General Fund Revenues: $ 61,072,125 2,072,298 2,355,000 $ 58,717,125 3.86% Budget February YTD Unrealized Percent 2011 Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures Realized General Fund Expenditures: Ending Fund Balance 24,147,039 - - 24,147,039 0.00% Council 324,296 17,426 90,298 234,000 27.84% City Manager 1,055,906 82,068 138,747 917,159 13.14% Public Safety 22,179,680 1,540,214 2,685,369 19,494,511 12.11% Operations&Administrative Svcs 1,810,928 129,671 259,537 1,551,391 14.33% Public Works 892,617 51,194 97,399 795,218 10.91% Planning&Community Dev. 3,229,295 206,794 429,131 2,600,164 13.29% Parks&Recreation 2,813,412 130,148 202,191 2,611,221 7.19% General Government 4,618,750 181,270 225,472 4,393,278 4.88% Total General Fund Expenditures: $ 61,072,125 $ 2,338,785 $ 4,128,143 $ 56,943,982 6.76% 03115/2011 5:11 PM City of Spokane Valley Other Funds Budget Variance Report For the Period Ended February 28, 2011 Budget February YTD Unrealized Percent . 2011 Revenues Revenues Revenue Realized Other Funds Revenues: Street Fund $ 7,042,050 $ 399,700 $ 399,776 6,642,274 5.68% 7 Trails and Paths 48,000 6 7 47,993 0.01% 3 Flotel/Motel Fund 500,000 22,254 22,264 477,736 4.45% Civic Facilities Replacement 1,629,000 181 214 1,628,786 0.01% 14 Debt Service-LTGO 03 685,000 - - 685,000 0.00% Capital Projects Fund 1,013,598 32,435 32,465 981,133 3.20% 3 Special Capital Projects Fund 1,021,069 32,013 32,045 989,024 3.14% 3 Street Capital Projects 8,437,307 5,392 95,291 8,342,016 1.13% 3 Mirabeau Point Project - 4 5 (5) Community Developmt Block Grnts .. - - - 0.00% 12 Capital Grants Fund 55,000 - - 55,000 0.00% 3 Barker Bridge Reconstruction - - - - Parks Capital 1,959,036 156 183 1,958,853 0.01% 3 Street Capital Improvements 2011+ 500,000 - - 500,000 0.00% 3 Stormwater Mgmt Fund 3,632,000 5,886 5,951 3,626,049 0.16% 7 Equip.Rental&Replacement 909,000 133 157 908,843 0.02% 7 Risk Management 319,000 2 3 318,997 0.00% Reserves: Centerpiece Operating 353,000 51 60 352,940 0.02% 6 Service Level Stabilization 5,464,000 786 933 5,463,067 0.02% 6 Winter Weather 505,000 76 90 504,910 0.02% 6 Civic Buildings 4,040,000 845 1,002 4,038,998 0.02% 6 Total Other Funds Revenues: $ 38,112,Oiz0 $ 499,918 $ 590,447 S 37,521,613 1.55% Budget February YTD Unrealized Percent 2011 Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures Realized Other Funds Expenditures: Street Fund $ 7,042,050 232,672 351,879 $ 6,690,171 5.00% 16 Trails and Paths 48,000 - - 48,000 0.00% 3 Hotel/Motel Fund 500,000 10,272 - 500,000 0.00% Civic Facilities Replacement 1,629,000 - - 1,629,000 0.00% 14 Debt Service LTGO 03 685,000 - (50,969) 735,969 -7.44% 15 Capital Projects Fund 1,013,598 - - 1,013,598 0.00% 3 Special Capital Projects Fund 1,021,069 - - 1,021,069 0.00% 3 Street Capital Projects 8,437,307 36,201 79,427 8,357,880 0.94% 3 Community Developmt Block Grnts - - - - 12 Capital Grants Fund 55,000 54,558 5,620 49,380 10.22% 3 Barker Bridge Reconstruction - 1,554 3,082 (3,082) 13 Parks Capital 1,959,036 30,608 76,878 1,882,158 3.92% 3 Street Capital Improvements 2011+ 500,000 - - 500,000 0.00% Stormwater Mgmt Fund 3,632,000 61,853 101,515 3,530,485 2.80% 16 Equip.Rental&Replacemnt 909,000 - - 909,000 0.00% 8 Risk Management 319,000 - 282,419 36,581 88.53% Reserves: Centerpiece Operating 353,000 - - 353,000 0.00% 9 Service Level Stabilization 5,464,000 - - 5,464,000 0.00% 11 Winter Weather 505,000 - - 505,000 0.00% 11 Civic Facilities Capital 4,040,000 - - 4,040,000 0.00% 3 Total Other Funds Expenditures: $ 38,112,060 $ 427,718 849,851 $ 37,262,209 2.23% 03/15/2011 1:11 PM • • City of Spokane Valley Investment Report For the Month of February 2011 Total LGIP* BB CD 2 Investments Beginning $ 46,102,166.01 $ 3,015,059.95 $ 49,117,225.96 Deposits 1,844,702.71 - $ 1,844,702.71 Withdrawls (1,500,000.00) - $ (1,500,000.00) Interest 7,526.72 - $ 7,526.72 Ending $ 46,454,395.44 $ 3,015,059.95 $ 49,469,455.39 Balances by Fund 001 General Fund $ 27,121,250.86 101 Street Fund 2,928,644.35 103 Trails & Paths 37,793.97 105 Hotel/Motel 276,960.16 120 CenterPlace Operating Reserve 332,462.90 121 Service Level Stabilization Reserve 5,165,940.29 122 Winter Weather Reserve 501,088.42 123 Civic Facilities Replacement 1,191,155.89 301 Capital Projects 1,043,994.94 302 Special Capital Projects 1,054,698.49 304 Mirabeau Point Project 26,387.33 309 Parks Capital Project 1,023,312.97 310 Civic Buildings Capital Projects 5,551,432.28 402 Stormwater Management 2,327,816.48 501 Equipment Rental & Replacement 871,454.88 502 Risk Management 15,061.20 $ 49,469,455.41 Rounding $ 0.02 *Local Government Investment Pool City of Spokane Valley Sales Tax Receipts Month by Month Comparison Year to date Month Percentage Received 2010 2011 Change February $ 1,693,974.29 $ 1,659,064.57 -2.06% March 1,097,126.08 April 1,1 60,934.77 May 1,349,758.63 June 1,252,377.28 July 1,271,607.01 August 1,442,679.59 September 1,380,147.05 October 1,354,001.39 November 1,452,269.26 December 1,301,846.34 January 2011 1,299,191.80 2012 $ 16,055,913.49 $ 1,659,064.57 FOOTNOTES I 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 Estimated 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 2011. 10 Quarterly Payment to City. 11 Emergency use only. 12 Fund being phased out. 13 Budget adjustment needed 14 In reserve for replacement of buildings. 15 Accounting adjustment pending 16 Budget includes projected fund balances at 12-31-10, which understates percent realized. 17 Interest rates are down significantly. 18 Shows revenue earned, some will not be collected. 03/15/2011 1:11 PM MEMO TO: Mike Jackson, City Manager FROM: Rick VanLeuven, Chief of Police DATE: February 14, 2011 RE: Monthly Report February 2011 February 2011: February 2010: CAD incidents: 4,054 CAD incidents: 4,506 Reports taken: 1,310 Reports taken: 1,410 Traffic stops: 1,290 Traffic stops: 1,648 Traffic reports: 278 Traffic reports: 261 CAD incidents indicate calls for service as well as self-initiated officer contacts. Hot spot maps are attached showing February residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, traffic collision hot spots and vehicle prowling hot spots, along with December 2010 and February 2011 stolen vehicle hot spots. Also attached are nine bar graphs for 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011: commercial burglary, garage burglary, residential burglary, forgery, malicious mischief, stolen vehicles, theft, vehicle prowling, and property crimes comparisons for 2007 through 2010. ADMINISTRATIVE: Chief VanLeuven was on-call for the first week of February. Chief VanLeuven attended the Joint Public Safety Leadership Forum in early February. This is a group comprised of five law enforcement leaders and five fire service leaders who meet monthly to strengthen relationships and make joint decisions that affect public service. Paradigm Liaison Services hosted the annual pipeline safety emergency response program at the beginning of February. Various officers from Spokane Valley Police attended. The program included "Know the Operators," "In-Person Operator Information," "Noteworthy Nationwide Incidents," and "Interactive Incident Scenario" in addition to other presentations. The Region 9 All Hazard Emergency Preparedness Strategic Plan meeting was held at the end of February, which Chief VanLeuven attended. At this meeting, the group explored implementation strategies and ownership of the final strategic plan. Chief VanLeuven attended a live Town Hall meeting in late February, at the Lincoln Center, where members of the public had an opportunity to address a panel of community leaders to include Sheriff Knezovich and Chief Kirkpatrick. Page 1 Deputy Darell Stidham, one of Spokane Valley's K-9 handlers, was appointed by Governor Gregoire to the Criminal Justice Training Commission, for a six-month period. COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING: S.C.O.P.E. participated in the following events during the month of February: ➢ EWU 3rd Annual "Work It" Career Conference; ➢ Greater Spokane Substance Abuse Council Coalition meeting; ➢ GSSAC Drug Free Community Meeting; ➢ Latent Print Training for Volunteers; ➢ Safe Routes Walk Audits at Trentwood and Skyview Elementary Schools; ➢ Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) meeting; and, ➢ Child Sexual Predator Task Force meeting. February 2011 Volunteers Hours per station: The hours have been calculated for SCOPE services provided to the Spokane Valley, which total 52,082.5. At the standard volunteer rate of $21.18/hour, that totals $1,103,107.35! This is an outstanding effort by Spokane Valley SCOPE volunteers. We cannot thank them enough for all they do for Spokane Valley Police and the citizens of the City of Spokane Valley. Location #Volunteers Admin Hours L.E. Hours Total Hours Central Valley 18 634.5 180 814.5 Edgecliff 24 834. 69 903 Trentwood 6 122.5 65 187.5 University 19 406.5 163.5 570 TOTALS 67 1,997.5 477.5 2,475 S.C.O.P.E. Incident Response Team (SIRT) volunteers contributed 73 on-scene hours (including travel time) in February, responding to crime scenes, structure fires, motor vehicle accidents and providing traffic control. Of those hours, 36 hours were for incidents in the City of Spokane Valley. Total February volunteer hours contributed by SIRT, including training, stand-by, response and special events is 492; year-to-date total is 1,058 hours. There were five (5) juvenile runaways reported in the Spokane Valley for the month of February 2011, who have all returned home. Abandoned vehicles tagged by S.C.O.P.E. volunteers for impoundment in the Spokane Valley in January totaled 15 and in February 9, with 7 and 2 respectively, vehicles eventually cited and towed. Thirteen were processed in January and 11 hulks processed in February. During the month of February, a total of 30 vehicles were processed. Page 2 S.C.O.P.E. DISABLED PARKING ACTIVITY REPORT JANUARY-DECEMBER 2011 City of Spokane Valley # of # of # of Disabled # of # of Non - Vol. Hrs Infractions Warnings Disabled Issued Issued Infractions Issued January 7 51 5 1 5 February 10 87 6 1 0 Total 17 138 11 2 5 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 8 42 1 0 0 February 7 38.25 0 0 0 Total 15 80.25 1 0 0 OPERATIONS: Long-Time Crime Stoppers Fugitive Nabbed - A criminal first listed as a wanted Crime Stoppers fugitive in November 2010 was arrested over the weekend in early February, after trying to fool a Spokane Valley Police officer by using a phony name. The female suspect was a passenger in a 1996 Cadillac stopped by Officer Juan Rodriguez just before midnight. He placed her under arrest for her outstanding DOC Escape warrant. During a search, Rodriguez found a Toyota key and two Chrysler keys in her coat pocket. Inside her purse he found another 13 keys belonging to various makes of cars and trucks. Some of the keys had obviously been altered to work in ignitions for which they were not intended. Rodriguez cited the driver for having no driver's license on his person and for providing no proof of insurance. He released him at the scene. The officer drove the female suspect to the Spokane County Jail where he booked her on her warrant and on two fresh criminal charges of Making False Statements and Possession of Motor Vehicle Theft Tools. Warrant Arrest Lead to Drugs - A 25-year-old Spokane Valley woman was the front seat passenger in a 1993 Cadillac stopped by Officer Justin Elliot about 1:30 a.m. The officer spotted the car at Broadway and Havana and stopped it for equipment and license violations. The male driver produced an old Washington license and said he had purchased the car from a friend and hadn't yet licensed it in his name. He identified his passenger as his wife, and she confirmed his story about the car. When Elliott checked both names through police records, he learned that the female had an Page 3 outstanding DOC Escape warrant. He arrested her and drove her to the Spokane County Jail for booking. During the intake search, a corrections deputy found a small baggie of methamphetamine, a small baggie of marijuana and a small baggie of psilocybin mushrooms in her brassier. Elliott added felony counts of Possession of Controlled Substance to her booking paperwork. Brother Stabs Brother in Property Dispute - A 46-year-old Spokane Valley man was in serious condition at a Spokane hospital's Intensive Care Unit after being stabbed in the chest by his 49-year- old brother. The victim's girlfriend called 911 about 11:15 p.m. and reported that her boyfriend was being stabbed by his brother in their apartment in the 8900 block of East Broadway. Officers Marc Melville and Jason Karnitz were first to arrive and saw the bloody victim lying on the floor with the suspect kneeling over him with his left hand raised and holding something. The suspect did not drop the item or move away at the officers' first commands. He eventually stood up and they saw a knife clipped to his pants pocket. The two officers had to physically fight the suspect into handcuffs when he refused to comply with their handcuffing instructions and hid his hands beneath him. After they removed him from the apartment, Officer Chuck Sciortino arrived and began applying pressure to a single stab wound in the center of the victim's chest. The victim repeatedly stated that his brother "stabbed me." Paramedics arrived and transported the victim to a downtown trauma center for treatment. The victim's girlfriend said the suspect had just been released from jail earlier in the day and came over to visit. The two began arguing over heirlooms and division of some property and ended up physically fighting. The four-inch folding knife officers removed from the suspect's pocket was bloody, and they seized it as evidence. The suspect was driven to a downtown hospital to be checked for injuries prior to being booked into the Spokane County Jail on an Attempted Second- Degree Murder charge. Equipment Business Burgled - A thief smashed a window in the front wall of Country Homes Power Equipment overnight and made off with a pair of high-end Stihl chainsaws. The store is located at 5323 East Sprague. The company received an alarm at 1:09 a.m., but a manager opted to not call police. When employees arrived later, they discovered the 7' by 7' window shattered and the two saws taken from a display shelf. Value of the stolen saws was set at more than $1,800. Business owners are urged to call police when they receive alarms at their business so an attempt can be made by law enforcement to either catch the thieves in the act, or to track the suspects as they leave the premises. Calling police hours after the break-in diminishes the possibility of officers following up on potential evidence in an effort to find the suspect and recover the victim's stolen items. Robber Strikes Dollar Tree - A man armed with a black semi-automatic pistol robbed the Dollar Tree in the Argonne Village and escaped with a small amount of cash. Employees said the man entered the store about 7:20 p.m. and ordered a cashier to a register. The employee called a manager to the front of the store when she was unable to open the till herself. The suspect flashed a black pistol and took cash from a pair of tills. He left the store running southbound toward a nearby Subway store. No suspect vehicle was seen. Employees described the robber as a white male who was 5'10" to six feet tall, 170 pounds with a reddish-blond goatee. They said he was wearing a black beanie cap, a black and white camouflage-print hoodie and a tan Carhartt-style jacket over blue jeans. No one was injured during the robbery. Anyone with information about the robbery is encouraged to call Crime Check at 456-2233. Officer Injured in Panhandler Arrest - A Spokane Valley Police officer suffered a broken hand as he was arresting an aggressive panhandler near Sprague and Robie. Despite his efforts to thwart Page 4 Officer Jerad Kiehn's intent, the 29-year-old suspect was taken into custody and booked into the Spokane County Jail on two counts of Harassment and a single count of Resisting Arrest. Kiehn and other officers were dispatched to the area of Sprague and Robie after Crime Check received several reports of an aggressive panhandler who was slapping vehicles and threatening their occupants. One complainant reported that the suspect reached inside his pickup truck and punched his dog. Kiehn arrived in the area and identified the suspect based on witness reports. While attempting to place the suspect into handcuffs, the male suspect began resisting and ended up face down on the ground with his hands buried beneath his torso. During the struggle to remove the suspect's hands and arms, Kiehn broke a bone in his left hand, leaving only his thumb as a working digit. Still, he and backup officer were able to take the suspect into custody. Kiehn was released from duty after the arrest to seek medical treatment, from which he is still recovering. Educate Your Elders - Another elderly Spokane Valley resident has fallen victim to a form of the Canadian Lottery Scam, and this 73-year-old victim lost more than $8,200 before realizing he had been had. The victim told Crime Check he had received a phone call from International Winner's Circle and was advised he had won a quarter-million-dollar sweepstakes, but he had to send them money to cover various fees in order to receive his winnings. After receiving the $8,250, a company representative called again and said they needed another $1,500. At this point, the man realized he had been defrauded. He reported the matter to Crime Check, but his money is gone. This scam generally targets the elderly, although unwary younger victims have contacted police as well. The scam usually involves the victim receiving a phone call or e-mail advising that they have won some tremendous amount of cash in a lottery. There is always a fee required to cover moving the cash across a border, or for shipment of such a large amount of money. Victims report that they didn't recall actually entering a sweepstakes. Families can reduce the risk of an elderly parent or grandparent falling victim to this type of scam by discussing it with them beforehand. Having a designated family member monitor expenditures can be helpful as well. Scams of this nature rarely are successfully investigated by law enforcement due to jurisdictional limitations. Education is the best method to prevent them from occurring. Transient Nabbed in Church Burglary - A 50-year-old transient was arrested for Second-Degree Burglary after officers caught him entering the Valley View Baptist Church through a broken window. The male suspect gave a St. Paul, Minnesota address when booked into jail. He suffered a minor cut on one hand during the break-in. The incident began about 5:20 p.m. when an alert neighbor spotted the male suspect trying to open doors and windows in the closed church. As she continued to watch, the intoxicated suspect punched out the glass in a window and began climbing inside. The neighbor called 9-1-1 and Officer Mike McNees found the suspect straddling the wall, half inside and half outside of the broken window, and bleeding from his hand injury. He and backup officers made quick work of the arrest. The pastor responded and told officers he had not given the male suspect permission to damage or enter the building. Identity Thief Arrested — In mid-February, a woman reported her vehicle broken into in the 11800 block of East Maxwell. Her driver's license, debit card and checkbook were among the items stolen. On a Saturday night, a male and female ran up a $117 bar tab at the Corner Club Bar located at Trent and Park. They attempted to pay the tab shortly before 2 a.m. Sunday with a debit card that was declined. They told the employee they would go to their nearby motel room and return with cash. They did not. The bar employee called Spokane Valley Police Officer Justin Elliott to the business to retrieve the debit card that the female suspect had left behind. He determined it was stolen and then Page 5 contacted management at the nearby Red Top Motel. He learned the woman named on the stolen card had rented a room there using the same name and card. Officers went to the motel and contacted an intoxicated 24-year-old female, who at first stated she was the woman named on the card. The officers noted marijuana on a nightstand and she invited Elliott to get her medical marijuana card from her purse. He found no medical marijuana card, but did find identification naming the woman as well as financial information and mail from five other residents who live in the same general area where the vehicle prowling incident had occurred. He found personal checks made out to the female suspect and businesses in five other person's names, and handwritten notes suggesting that checks be cashed by a certain date or destroyed. Elliott arrested the female suspect and booked her into the Spokane County Jail on a felony count of Second-Degree Identity Theft and misdemeanor counts of Third-Degree Theft (for the bar tab) and Possession of Marijuana. The female suspect's male companion was identified but not located. Investigation into the matter is ongoing. Discarded Mail Fuels Theft Arrests - A 21-year-old Spokane Valley woman was arrested for a pair of gasoline thefts in which she left her identification card with an employee during the first and threw her mail in the station trashcan during the second. Using the discarded mail, it didn't take officers long to track the female suspect to her 1800 N. Hutchinson Road apartment. When they contacted her in the parking lot there, they arrested her on a pre-existing felony warrant charging her with Second-Degree Theft. They also arrested her for Third-Degree Driving while License Suspended, and eventually for two counts of Third-Degree Theft for the stolen gasoline. The incident began when an employee at the Cenex Station at 15504 E. Fourth reported a white Ford Explorer had driven off without paying for $60 in fuel. While filling the SUV, the female driver had tossed mail in the trashcan. When Officer Todd Miller arrived, the employee detailed the current theft and reported also working the night of January 29th when the same female had left her ID card while stealing $75 in fuel. Using the name and address on the mail, Cpl. Darin Staley went to the Hutchinson address and located the female suspect. During her arrest on the warrant, he found a used drug pipe and a small quantity of methamphetamine in her purse. The suspect was booked into the Spokane County Jail on the warrant, two theft counts, the traffic misdemeanor and a fresh felony count of Possession of Methamphetamine. Valley Men Arrested for Apartment Burglary - Two suspects were arrested for Residential Burglary after a witness spotted them stealing items from a neighbor's apartment. Both male suspects were booked into the Spokane County Jail on felony counts of burglary. Officer Chan Erdman was called to the apartment complex at 10101 E. Main after the witness saw one male suspect running into his apartment carrying a flat-screen television. The apartment manager determined that someone had kicked in the door to an apartment rented by a couple currently on vacation. When confronted, the male suspect invited Erdman into his apartment to search, asserting that the officer would find no television. The stolen television was found hidden beneath a blanket on a bed. Officers spoke with the vacationing victims and learned that X-Box games and collectable knives had also been stolen from their apartment. The knives and games were also found in the male suspect's apartment. Interviews with witnesses and the one male suspect led to a second male suspect being identified as his accomplice in the burglary. Both men were arrested and driven to jail for booking. Attempted Ramming Leads to Arrest - A 56-year-old Spokane Valley man was arrested on a felony assault charge after he attempted to ram a sheriff's patrol car several times with the large motor home he was driving. Sheriff's Sergeant Doug Marske had pulled to the side of Willow Road Page 6 to read a computer message about 10 p.m. when he saw headlights approaching from behind at a high rate of speed. Fearing he would be rear-ended, he quickly accelerated forward and off the roadway as far as he could go. The vehicle did not hit the patrol car, but pulled forward and stopped, blocking Marske's patrol car. The sergeant exited his car and began to approach the motor home, but the driver began backing the rig toward Marske while staring directly at him. After a tense several seconds to the two watching each other, the motor home took off southbound on Willow. Marske activated his emergency lights and caught up to the suspect who was now stopped. The motor home again put the vehicle in reverse and began accelerating rapidly backward at the patrol car. The sergeant again was able to move his car to avoid the collision and alerted other officers in the area that he needed emergency assistance. The suspect took off again, driving erratically. It turned southbound on Farr Road, turned into a private drive, and then into the yard. Marske followed the rig and again used his spotlight to illuminate the driver. The suspect yet again backed toward the patrol car causing the sergeant to retreat. The suspect pulled forward next to a home, exited the motor home and walked into the home, refusing commands to stop. Other officers arrived and surrounded the home. At one point the driver came to the back of the home armed with a baseball bat, and commanded his dog several times to "get `em" while gesturing toward officers. After several minutes, the suspect invited officers into the home and Marske entered and arrested him for Second- Degree Assault. It became apparently that the male suspect was impaired — he had trouble standing, had slurred speech and smelled strongly of alcoholic beverage. The suspect was processed for DUI and booked into the Spokane County Jail for felony assault. Warrant Issued For Sex Offender - Sheriffs detectives sought the public's help to locate a Level I sex offender who they believe has been sexually abusing and photographing a four-year-old girl. Detective Kevin Bechtold obtained a warrant charging the 51-year-old male suspect with First- Degree Child Molestation, First-Degree Child Rape, Sexual Exploitation of a Minor and First-Degree Possession of Depictions of a Minor Engaged in Sexually-Explicit Conduct. Investigation of the matter began February 9th when Child Protection Services received a phone call from a man who said he had purchased a computer from the male suspect and was told that male suspect had forgotten the password. Further investigation turned up a digital camera that identified the suspect and a minor- aged victim through 223 still images as well as 49 video clips. The child's mother told detectives that from November 2010 to February 2011, she frequently left the girl at the male's apartment to play with his four-year-old daughter. Bechtold then obtained an arrest warrant charging the male suspect with the four offenses involving the one four-year-old. He said that the investigation is far from complete and that other victims may still be identified. The male suspect is registered in Spokane County as a Level I offender, a class of sex offenders considered least likely to re-offend based on their known criminal history. He was convicted in Chelan County in 1999 of two counts of Possession of Depictions of Minors Engaged in Sexually-Explicit Conduct. The victims in those offenses were minor neighbors who the suspect photographed using a Polaroid camera. Detective Seeks Potential Victims - A 36-year-old Spokane man arrested for driving while impaired and drug possession has falsely portrayed himself to at least one woman as a policeman, and may have used a prescription drug to render another woman unconscious. Sheriff's Detective Kirk Keyser would like to hear from anyone who has had recent contact with Terence Maurice Washington, a 36- year-old black male who is 5'09" tall and weighs 150 pounds. On February 7th, Washington was the driver who rear-ended another motorist at Sixteenth and Progress about 10:30 p.m. The victim driver said he thought Washington was intoxicated. Spokane Valley Police Officer Juan Rodriguez interviewed Washington. As he attempted to determine to what degree he was impaired, Washington Page 7 demanded to be taken to jail because he was "drunk." Rodriguez arrested the suspect for Driving while Under the Influence of Alcohol and for driving on a suspended Florida driver's license. He drove him to jail. In the interim, Corporal Shannon McCrillis had contacted the registered owner of the Mitsubishi at her home and learned that Washington had been living with her. She complained that she had been sleeping all day, and felt very drowsy as if she had been drugged. She said she was missing a bottle of Ambien containing 13 tablets, and provided a cup of water to McCrillis that she said Washington had forced her to drink several times during the night. McCrillis seized the cup and liquid after noticing residue in the cup and that the water was cloudy. He alerted Rodriguez at the jail, and also alerted Deputy Dale Wells who was still at the accident scene with a female passenger who had been with Washington at the time of the crash. The passenger told Wells that she met Washington on the website Plenty of Fish.com and that he identified himself as a Coeur d'Alene, Idaho police officer who was in the process of being hired by the U.S. Marshal's Office. She said she had shared a pitcher of beer with Washington, but that she didn't feel anything other than tired from her long day. While removing the Mitsubishi, a tow truck driver found an empty prescription bottle for Ambien about 15 feet from the vehicle and turned it over to Wells who seized it as evidence. At the jail, corrections staff found 10 yellow Ambien tablets in Washington's jacket pocket and Rodriguez added a charge of Possession of Controlled Substance to Washington's list of booking charges. He placed the pills on police property as evidence. The case was assigned to Keyser for follow-up investigation. He contacted the suspected drugging victim and learned she had met Washington at an Oz Fitness club and that she had allowed him to spend one night — and he never left, despite her repeated requests that he get out. She provided evidence that Washington had physically assaulted her with his elbows and fists, and the detective added a Fourth-Degree Assault charge to the suspect's list of charges. He also learned from the victim that it had been Washington's idea that she get an Ambien prescription to help her sleep, and he then submitted the seized cup and water to the Washington State Toxicology Lab. Keyser learned that both the cup and water contained traces of Ambien. He forwarded an affidavit to the prosecutor's office requesting Washington be charged with Delivery of a Controlled Substance for the apparent drugging of the woman. Keyser said that he is concerned that Washington may have met and drugged other female victims after placing himself in a position of trust by claiming to be a policeman. Anyone who has information regarding the suspect's recent activities, or who may have dated the suspect, is encouraged to contact Keyser by calling him at 477-3786. Burglary Reward Offered - Someone has been breaking into vacant Spokane Valley homes for sale and stealing kitchen appliances. Crime Stoppers has offered a cash reward for information that solves the series of 23 burglaries. Sheriff's office crime analysts say the suspect's method of operation is to steal the realtor's lockbox from the front door of vacant homes. The boxes are designed to be difficult to break open, so the thief does that elsewhere. He returns with a truck and possibly confederates and steals ovens, stoves or refrigerators. The burglaries have been limited to Spokane Valley so far. Anyone with information regarding this string of burglaries is encouraged to contact Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-TIPS or www.inlandnorthwestcrimestoppers.org. Tipsters do not have to give their names to collect the cash rewards Valley Man Arrested for Robbery - A 23-year-old Spokane Valley man was arrested for First- Degree Armed Robbery in late February, after he failed to elude police officers who flooded the area after his 1 p.m. heist. The male suspect entered the McDonald Food Mart at 13105 E. Sprague and implied he was armed with a gun while demanding cash. The female employee handed it over and then immediately called 9-1-1. Officers quickly set up containment around the business and Deputy Page 8 Glenn Hinckley spotted the suspect running northbound at Valleyway and Blake. Sgt Mark Nygren moved in and took the suspect into custody at gunpoint, 17 minutes after the robbery occurred. The suspect was unarmed. Citizens' Academy— Citizens of Spokane County including Spokane Valley are invited to attend the 2011 Citizen's Academy. © Get an insider's view of many of the departments within the Sheriffs Office; © Hear first-hand from patrolmen and investigators about the service they provide; © See the specialty units that enhance our ability to enforce the laws that keep our neighborhoods safe; © Get your questions answered about policing in Spokane County. WHEN: Every Monday night beginning April 4 and ending May 18 (8 days total) Class time is 6:00pm to 9:00pm WHERE: Sheriff's Training Center, 10319 E Appleway, Spokane Valley WA TO SIGN UP: Call Deputy Pendell @ 477-6044 or email him at TPendell @spokanesheriff.org. Class is limited to 30 participants so sign up soon. Thank You - Donna O'Donnell, the owner of Poppy's Tavern, was the victim of a robbery on a Sunday mid-morning. Deputy Ebel responded to the scene and took her report. Her purse, money pouch for the business and other items were recovered intact not far from where the robbery occurred. Ms. O'Donnell came by the precinct the following day to express her thanks to the responding deputies who went"above and beyond" to help her. She was very appreciative and in this time of constant complaints and bad news about police, she wanted to commend those officers for a good job. Kudos - A Lewis County detective wrote to Sergeant Reagan and Sheriff Knezovich that he wanted to drop a quick line about the excellent service he received from the Sheriff's Office, in particular the Investigative Task Force. Sergeant Gores and his team of detectives helped out tremendously with the apprehension of Lewis County's triple homicide suspect back in August. Sergeant Gores then tasked Detective Knechtel to assist in writing several search warrants for vehicles that were possibly involved in the incident. Detective Knechtel then helped in the processing of the vehicles. The Lewis County detective stated, "I am very impressed with your detectives and their willingness to help outside agencies." ***** Page 9 2011 FEBRUARY CRIME REPORT To date: Yearly totals: Feb-11 Feb-10 2011 2010 2,010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 BURGLARY 68 65 154 145 936 725 753 584 714 744 FORGERY 32 17 58 50 341 297 354 365 334 464 MALICIOUS MISCHIEF 74 78 169 163 1183 1245 893 1,265 1,122 904 NON-CRIMINAL 3 62 87 139 917 892 944 839 811 749 PROPERTY OTHER 72 93 125 167 837 933 828 890 982 1,154 RECOVERED VEHICLES 18 36 26 57 365 187 319 343 403 333 STOLEN VEHICLES 25 53 56 90 496 298 496 478 711 603 THEFT 176 160 329 342 2365 2162 1,846 1,881 1,888 2,256 UIOBC 0 0 0 0 3 4 4 8 11 8 VEHICLE OTHER 0 0 0 0 3 5 7 3 3 5 VEHICLE PROWLING 85 89 196 218 1395 920 1069 682 937 958 TOTAL PROPERTY CRIMES 553 653 1,200 1,371 8,852 7,668 7,513 7,338 7,916 8,178 ASSAULT 40 59 116 154 895 927 869 853 846 894 DOA/SUICIDE 19 16 30 37 188 210 269 221 167 159 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 125 88 224 184 1297 1226 1063 874 736 762 HOMICIDE 2 0 2 0 1 3 3 1 5 1 KIDNAP 2 2 3 2 16 21 16 23 22 35 MENTAL 17 27 31 58 289 310 360 350 425 425 MP 11 8 17 18 128 115 95 83 88 97 PERSONS OTHER 105 149 230 333 1692 1621 1,354 1,337 1,159 1,256 ROBBERY 4 2 10 8 68 75 71 60 58 56 TELEPHONE HARASSMENT 11 9 22 20 153 159 95 73 83 92 TOTAL MAJOR CRIMES 336 360 685 814 4727 4,667 4,195 3,875 3,589 3,777 ADULT RAPE 2 3 6 6 44 35 44 43 29 39 CHILD ABUSE 5 8 13 19 115 159 148 104 78 101 CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE 20 5 39 16 206 157 86 92 105 88 SEX REGISTRATION F 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 3 6 INDECENT LIBERTIES 2 0 2 2 8 10 11 18 15 9 CHILD MOLESTATION 5 5 11 6 47 35 66 46 69 67 CHILD RAPE 1 1 1 1 28 35 39 31 62 35 RUNAWAY 27 31 69 53 490 440 369 295 309 311 SEX OTHER 5 19 18 37 215 211 179 194 203 181 STALKING 3 0 3 0 18 15 21 17 17 27 SUSPICIOUS PERSON 22 16 42 30 215 175 142 152 177 244 TOTAL SEX CRIMES 92 88 204 170 1387 1271 1,108 996 1,067 1,108 DRUG 50 48 118 98 541 670 838 807 665 891 ITF OTHER 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 TOTAL ITF 51 48 119 98 542 671 838 808 665 891 TOTAL TRAFFIC REPORTS 278 261 529 557 3081 3,183 3,811 3,800 3,345 2,403 TOTAL REPORTS RECEIVED 1,310 1,410 2,737 3,010 18,589 17,460 17,465 16,817 16,582 16,357 1111116. aim•• Brid. 1 r� i to Li.t�I�wx�i1111�` ��arYl �a\ iim - IIIIIFIs omm nails � PP' •E,0 Knok -c �_' IIE: tI!. Z •_ . � sn- a �� 'Ali.�lil 11�. 190 ,` 3 ndia�- in YI ih N W... - —_ — �a � JL� Nora l��G YII= . :? •• 1�Y nE�►`�YI i �amF�I t, YI�fiiTTi� YI �■©60.1■IIIIf. 1 �--�' ;'a, ��I�■lii`�113 ''''•' � � @ Rr, barAdlisi j�. MINM 1713 MOM, 0 • m:IrmL BrOadwa :7:m0 A •�YIYI m YI =��1■ I,,� Alki I y YI FAINIEFIMEAM NOM g YI �ilr`IY p J.rayue :Miles 2011 February Traffic Collision Hotspots ILMEMENIIIN L U JL1- �C�■-' IITCI - IC nd ErArMam RIME How 7 Clements Jos f Thierman Cent m rF Suthe lin anson v•re 2 a E w Y an O a 8 Fruit °Hill } Welle to Freder.e c`F Li. urr c` % Mission ° t 5. .7D- r21 Tre Ki �13 Brid. �. r_ . [auwPillll�_r1 a_ r 1 a\to Em ire 111■ « 11111617 Er. p • ntp +� �1��111 - tom =miftj pi _� W Jor =Mission n T m ox a Sh Ilesle Lacro =— In t iel aroma- Pal!. I Urial ■NNwC13 RENZI Euclid app Trails Granite Trot J Court! w m nd Euclid I 90 Knox TA O O Nal f:S:FI:E•rw •; �� AP' ° Mission 190 `°' e o 111.1EMIIIIILJ W41111 ■■t1■ iimaimma lenb 71'M O -Mission 0 do •0 ormiitmin �� QQQIII nfFT. 1i■m1� i� Thi�• •�3Y; •��E � 4A ague ■�i■1 �1■�� FC�� rounds O ��7 _ �' l7a�E71i1� I ��F7�1911M_ !1111====W■lI�B2�W L'.'J �'`W -__ I MU d rAy _iro�aa_diu -!=IN=FI=4L � 2 A 1 pea S.rag R • roadwa : moms . Alki 14th IVA 29th 21st 25th 27th 31st n ! ,p 37th ,Ea_ Pont , � ✓lJ1 ' ° o 1 w ~ i 9.4a Jenne Alk 002 V ■Ills 1 � O . ■•_ea==�. .1w�F31>r 1ea__ulxll 5S co Ri ue Rice 4th and mow- _i♦! 3-1F1111�_•a� =ti+mob.. �nlr .Eu •• WV_wl_ - •M__I41u w 12t N • irr- �<�� u••••�•rl 1 �+ I.� sa �I � .sum, � a 111 e 18th m eck a ,F: •'®__,■ ■civ'S•ll .��\�■lk■�` cy[ FF�ii��llll � ti__ iVA r�tV! "tea Id a igl-`C' h !lr,:ib, 2' r�___I n "._le 11�� \amim� ]. •�ir♦r �■+KfLTI m Main aOli i G/e,. th 0 0 arie Corke 44th 0 l Corks .E Ext y c O 1 U° a 44th 5) co FROCkcj. ohe off S 0 d 2Li ell 1st d 6th 090 Belle A 5th pin Belle Terre er Verd 45t a ,\ce PoCe Ball \sta v Mom pxF N o m 5. MIEN= 4th L 1uilu��,,•w71 ualu�t� 39 0 44th N cg 0 32nd h c 2 st n 1t Commercial Burglaries 0 1 02 I-1 Low Medium W High 0.5 1 Miles I 2011 February Commercial Burglary Hotspots Map Produced: 8 March 2011 Brid.:P ii i to i�[■■:u��wxx■��1�ern!ate 3!eJL'J��■��`� 1111 p�■i-��Em•ire , Broadwa oh,� n „rounds :: �-- Pe • } A.ki zEu j ilkos umrsm I mom s —� ■C7i i c mum t -mIN■miIi4L LitrusiTEYm IWl'F'�ctg� 1 h ICSlIF�Fi'/ 4th 19 >. sr■GLip� �� 1 niar�r_rr_7i ,0 Nimicummi IlLrraih\' ibn -iU-. MINNOMELISi ■I AJd i 21st ■ii• i EENIMrC4i rLi 25th •LP■itL•LL Col c 27th IM2IMMIT!> 25th i_iamws -ii_L7 ■iiilL 0 ■1■= _mow..- 6111 W' 37th mo�'I�1` �i ap/EE1Mi i• i= .viii Min IMIFI=PM1 Vehicle Prowling 0 1 0 2 0 3- 5 r' Low ME Medium in High Miles 2011 February Vehicle Prowling Hotspots /LLL- Li.LUIrPaN11141 I IB#' I. all:J n ��I%II aian.BB■L 1■.IS�7E819 _ rG��17 '•_= G�_}.17-=_ 3rd• ! rl d'illihne�.� Residential Burglaries 0 1 0 2 n Low Miles 2011 February Residential Burglary Hotspots ETARtipi ry 7.III�.�e�ll!7M—a:Me.�w..� _—=I__ LA MUM -+r.�VliL-..Yal I nirat*6 Irsumsr-4, sr-aria• F.1 kstsrM��rya nAUyicummo u�aal . u __3_ EINIMMENE .171—MJR1 IM+M_+!∎" 291 sMJLL7 L& : -- .---7.71 .---ru am EA1Mmi. ILI III-IMP EINEM .F.7•1911MM II —�-��--1711 min w, Stolen Vehicles 0 1 0 2- 3 I-1 Low Medium High Miles 2011 January & February Stolen Vehicle Hotspots 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 Spokane Valley Commercial Burglary i 1 1 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC •2008 2009 ❑2010 ■2010 70 60 50 40 Spokane Valley Stolen Vehicles JAN h 1 I FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■2008 2009 ❑2010 •2011 50 - 45 Spokane Valley Forgery 40 - 35 - 30 - 25 - 20 - 15 - 10 - 5 - 0 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■2008 2009 ❑2010 •2011 35 30 25 20 15 10 Spokane Valley Garage Burglary I 1 1 1 1 I JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC •2008 2009 ❑2010 ■2011 180 - 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 - 20 - Spokane Valley Malicious Mischief 1 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 112008 2009 ❑2010 •2011 ■ 1 2500 - 2000 1500 1000 500 Spokane Valley Property Crimes Comparisons (2011 is through February) Commercial Burglary Residential Burglary Forgery Malicious Mischief Stolen Vehicle Theft ■2008 al 2009 12010 ■2011 Spokane Valley Residential Burglary JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC ■2008 2009 ❑2010 ■2011 250 - 200 150 Spokane Valley Theft 100 - 50 - 0 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 112008 2009 ❑2010 •2011 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 Spokane Valley Vehicle Prowling 1 I I 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC • 2008 2009 ❑2010 ■2011 * 2011 FEBRUARY CRIMES BY CITIES 03/08/2011 AH CH DP FC FF LAH LL ML MW RF SCO SPA SPK SV WAV Total BURGLARY 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 77 0 0 68 0 154 FORGERY 1 0 3 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 21 0 3 32 0 62 MAL MISCHIEF 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 54 0 3 74 0 136 NON-CRIMINAL 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 7 PROP OTHER 25 1 5 0 0 0 8 3 3 0 61 0 10 72 0 188 RCRVD VEH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 10 0 2 18 0 31 STL VEH 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 3 0 15 0 4 25 0 51 THEFT 16 0 9 1 0 1 4 8 0 1 121 0 10 176 0 347 UIBOC 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 VEH OTHER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VEH PROWL 2 0 3 0 0 2 1 1 1 1 46 0 0 85 0 142 TOTAL PROPERTY CRIMES 51 1 29 1 0 3 15 14 10 3 405 0 34 553 0 1,119 ASSAULT 7 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 5 40 0 86 DOA/SUICIDE 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 2 19 0 46 DV 6 0 6 1 2 0 4 4 1 0 105 1 3 125 0 258 HOMICIDE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 4 KIDNAP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 MENTAL 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 17 0 2 17 0 42 MP 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 11 0 13 PERS OTHER 8 0 6 0 0 0 4 3 4 0 73 0 6 105 0 209 ROBBERY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 0 6 I'EL-HARASS 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 11 0 25 TOTAL MAJOR CRIMES 24 0 17 1 2 0 8 12 5 0 266 1 19 336 0 691 ADULT RAPE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 5 CHILD ABUSE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 5 0 11 CUST INTFER 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 20 0 33 SEX REGIS F 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 IND LIBERTY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 3 MOLES/CHILD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 0 0 5 0 12 RAPE/CHILD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 4 RUNAWAY 6 0 2 0 0 1 1 1 2 0 36 1 0 27 0 77 SEX OTHER 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 5 0 9 STALKING 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 0 5 SUSP PERSON 3 0 2 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 25 0 2 22 0 58 TOTAL SEX CRIMES 10 1 6 0 0 1 5 4 3 0 92 1 4 92 0 219 DRUG 9 1 6 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 36 0 14 50 0 121 ITF OTHER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 TOTAL ITF 9 1 6 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 36 0 14 51 0 122 TOTAL TRAFFIC 4 0 9 0 0 0 10 6 15 1 185 0 53 278 0 561 TOTAL REPORTS RECEIVED 98 3 67 2 2 4 38 39 34 5 984 2 124 1,310 0 2,712 Classification changes to match NIBRS by 2012 03/08/2011 2011 FEBRUARY INCIDENTS BY CITIES 03/08/2011 AH CH DP FC FF LAH LL ML MW RF SCO SPA SPK SV WAV TOTALS CAD INCIDENTS 17 136 228 13 7 2 31 165 96 21 3,283 3 577 4,054 0 8,633 SELF INITIATED INCIDENTS 14 33 158 1 3 1 23 115 54 18 1,520 1 529 1,983 0 4,453 DRUG SELF INT (PATROL) 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 7 8 0 20 TRAFFIC STOPS 4 7 57 0 0 1 15 28 36 13 895 1 342 1,290 0 2,689 TRAFFIC STOPS (ARST/CIT/IN) 1 1 16 0 0 1 7 15 15 11 432 0 184 705 0 1,388 TS (WARRANTS) 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 6 11 0 22 CALLS FOR SERVICE 3 103 70 12 4 1 8 50 42 3 1,763 2 48 2,071 0 4,180 ALARMS 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 87 0 0 80 0 175 ACCIDENTS 2 5 1 0 0 0 1 4 3 0 275 0 14 190 0 495 ACCIDENTS (ARREST/CIT) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 15 0 22 DRUG CALLS 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 18 0 33 DV 6 0 12 1 2 0 3 5 1 0 136 1 4 160 0 331 DUI 0 3 3 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 76 0 4 66 0 156 DUI (ARREST) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 4 0 8 PURSUITS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY 0 4 18 0 0 0 2 9 8 0 237 0 21 301 0 600 VEHICLE RECOVERED 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 10 0 1 22 0 35 911 ABANDON LINE 0 39 5 8 0 0 0 8 4 1 130 0 5 180 0 380 SHOPLIFTING 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 41 0 44 ALL ARRESTS (ARREST/CIT/IN) 1 4 29 1 0 1 7 23 16 11 535 1 202 897 0 1,728 CRIME CHECK REPORTS 1 0 15 1 0 4 1 10 7 2 323 0 6 410 0 780 03/08/2011 Spokane �Valleyn PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT February 2011 AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICES ADOPTED AND IN OPERATION • Street Maintenance—2011 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.org/utilities/WaterReclamation/content.aspx?c=2224 and http://www.spokaneriverpartners.com/ REGIONAL SOLID WASTE SYSTEM Solid Waste Liaison Board and the Solid Waste Governance Task Force 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 being compiled and evaluated. A report to council on the updated pavement management program is scheduled for April 5, 2011 CAPITAL PROJECTS (See attached Capital Projects Spreadsheet) 1 STREET & STORMWATER MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY The following is a summary of Public Works/Contractor maintenance activities in the City of Spokane Valley for February 2011: Winter Street and Stormwater Maintenance Items: • AAA continued cleaning underground stormwater structures under the Vactoring Services Agreement. • AAA is sweeping arterials as weather allows. Purchase of a permanent Street Maintenance Facility: • Council approved the purchase of the property at 17002 E. Euclid. We are in the process of doing inspections and Phase 1 Environmental Assessment. Closing is scheduled for early April. STORMWATER 1. 8th and Park— replace failing drain field, provide improved treatment including swales if possible. Awaiting survey/design, to be assigned to a 2011 Small Works Contract. 2. 11th and Herald — improve catchbasins and rehabilitate existing failing UIC. Awaiting survey/design, to be assigned to a 2011 Small Works Contract. 3. 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. Design on hold, to be assigned to a 2011 Small Works Contract. 4. 32nd and Bowdish intersection, north leg — mitigate ongoing stormwater ponding. Evaluating various alternatives, awaiting survey/design in 2011, assigned to a future Small Works Contract. 5. Park and Valleyway— replace failing drain field, provide improved treatment including swales if possible. Awaiting survey, anticipated for future Small Works Contract. 6. Evergreen and 17th — replace existing failing drain field, provide additional treatment through catchbasins. Design/Construction scheduled for 2011. 7. Woodward & 35th - replace existing failing drain field, provide additional treatment through catchbasins. Design/Construction scheduled for 2011. 8. 14th Avenue, Custer to Chronicle— mitigate roadside erosion, capture runoff, and eliminate outfall to waters of the state. Design in 2011, possible construction in 2012. 9. Archery & Farr— improve capture of runoff through installation of improved inlet structures, mitigate for pine needle debris, and protect/improve existing drain fields. Design in 2011, Schedule improvements for 2011 or later. • Ecology Facility Grant—Sullivan Road Bridge Drain Retrofit Project The City received a $186,665 grant to divert stormwater runoff discharging to the Spokane River from the Sullivan Road northbound and southbound bridges. Grant negotiations to finalize the agreement will begin this spring. Preliminary design has commenced, to negotiate property requirements with State Parks, see CIP Project#150. 2 • 2010 County Sewer Projects — Carry over West Farms and South Greenacres Phase 3 projects are substantially complete. Only minor/punchlist items remain for 2011. Cronk - Re-starting soon. Corbin — Re-Started...Bow, Barker and Sprague to be impacted. Paving scheduled May 24 through 26. South Greenacres Phase 4 — Re-starting...Boone, Greenacres, Long and Desmet first scheduled for main installation and side services. • 2011 STEP sewer projects Green Haven (SW Area) — Bids completed. MDM to begin after South Greenacres, estimating May. Micaview West Area — Bids complete. L&L Cargile is apparent low bidder, should be awarded shortly. Green Haven (NE Area) — Bid date 3/23/11. • 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. • Stormwater Decant Facility - Staff is reviewing for inclusion with possible maintenance facility acquisition. Design on hold pending property acquisition and review of the Stormwater Structure Cleaning (Vactoring) program. • 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. • 2012 Stormwater Fee Assessor Rolls Update Staff is starting the process of updating stormwater fees to existing or new commercial properties for the 2012 Stormwater Fee Assessor Roll. • Regulated Stormwater Outfalls and Basins Draft Report Completed mapping surface water outfalls and discharge points of interest and worked 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. • 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. It appears that the City will be able to be reimbursed up to the $50k for spring sweeping efforts. The City received an additional $308k grant that will need to be expended by June 2012. 3 BRIDGE MAINTENANCE • Specifications and quantities for Bridge Repair and Maintenance Contract bids...rough draft still in the works. • Sullivan Road over Trent (4501) repair and Sullivan SB over UPRR tracks (4507) expansion joint repairs drafted...under review. TRAFFIC • School Zone Beacon Upgrade Awarded a grant by WTSC to upgrade all 20 of the existing school zone beacon controllers. Half have been ordered and are scheduled to be delivered in April and installed by the end of May. The other half will be ordered and installed this summer. GRANT APPLICATIONS • Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) Final selection of projects to receive funding was approved by the SRTC Board on March 10. The following projects were funded: Sidewalk Infill Project — Phase 1, Sprague/Sullivan ITS Project, Mansfield Ave Extension Project, and University Road Overpass Study. New Call for Projects- • New Freedom Funds Applied for funding to construct sidewalks and accessible pathways to transit stops. 4 SO lime Val ley February-11 0003 Barker Road Bridge Replacement 0005 Pines/Manfield, Wilbur Rd to Pines 0063 Broadway Avenue Safety Project, Pines RD 0069 Park Rd Recon. #2 Brdwy& Ind. SRTC06-12 0088 Broadway Ave. Moore to Flora 0112 Indiana Ave Extension 0113 Indiana/Sullivan PCC Intersection 0123 Mission Ave - Flora to Barker 0139 Park Road RR Crossing Safety Improvement 0141 Sullivan & Euclid PCC 0142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan 0143 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation 0145 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trail 0146 24th Ave Sidewalk Adams to Sullivan BR Progran Knutson TIB Knutson UAP Knutson 04/18/08 05/23/08 04/15/11 STP(U) Knutson n/a TIB Aldworth 06/04/10 UCP Aldworth 02/18/11 STA Aldworth 5/20/11 STP(U) Aldworth n/a WUTC Knutson 08/20/10 STP(U) Amsden n/a STP(U) Knutson n/a Fed Program n/a STP(e) Aldworth n/a 302 Knutson 3/15/2012 100 100 50 65 100 100 20 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 99 95 0 0 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08/31/10 06/30/11 08/31/11 $ 11,817,000 $ 6,627,000 $ 932,850 $ 352,002 11/14/10 $ 3,027,071 07/01/11 $ 2,082,000 12/31/11 $ 1,252,000 $ 517,919 04/30/11 $ 44,000 $ 175,260 $ 276,301 $ 720,000 $ 745,000 07/31/12 $ 292,000 Sewer Projects 0106 West Pondersoa (STEP) 302 Arlt 05/06/09 100 99 06/01/10 $ 1,215,335 0129 South Greenacres (STEP) 001 Arlt 03/03/10 100 60 07/01/11 $ 640,500 0130 Corbin (STEP) 001 Arlt 05/05/10 100 70 06/01/11 $ 705,000 0131 Cronk(STEP) 001 Arlt 04/14/10 100 80 06/01/10 $ 315,000 0151 Green Haven STEP 001 Iris 3/23/2011 0 0 10/15/2011 $ 620,000 0152 Micaview STEP 001 Iris 3/3/2011 0 0 10/15/2011 $ 280,000 Estimated Total Project Proposed %Complete Construction Project # Road Projects Funding Manager Bid Date PE I CN Completion Cost 0003 Barker Road Bridge Replacement 0005 Pines/Manfield, Wilbur Rd to Pines 0063 Broadway Avenue Safety Project, Pines RD 0069 Park Rd Recon. #2 Brdwy& Ind. SRTC06-12 0088 Broadway Ave. Moore to Flora 0112 Indiana Ave Extension 0113 Indiana/Sullivan PCC Intersection 0123 Mission Ave - Flora to Barker 0139 Park Road RR Crossing Safety Improvement 0141 Sullivan & Euclid PCC 0142 Broadway @ Argonne/Mullan 0143 Barker Rd/BNSF Grade Separation 0145 Spokane Valley-Millwood Trail 0146 24th Ave Sidewalk Adams to Sullivan BR Progran Knutson TIB Knutson UAP Knutson 04/18/08 05/23/08 04/15/11 STP(U) Knutson n/a TIB Aldworth 06/04/10 UCP Aldworth 02/18/11 STA Aldworth 5/20/11 STP(U) Aldworth n/a WUTC Knutson 08/20/10 STP(U) Amsden n/a STP(U) Knutson n/a Fed Program n/a STP(e) Aldworth n/a 302 Knutson 3/15/2012 100 100 50 65 100 100 20 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 99 95 0 0 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08/31/10 06/30/11 08/31/11 $ 11,817,000 $ 6,627,000 $ 932,850 $ 352,002 11/14/10 $ 3,027,071 07/01/11 $ 2,082,000 12/31/11 $ 1,252,000 $ 517,919 04/30/11 $ 44,000 $ 175,260 $ 276,301 $ 720,000 $ 745,000 07/31/12 $ 292,000 Sewer Projects 0106 West Pondersoa (STEP) 302 Arlt 05/06/09 100 99 06/01/10 $ 1,215,335 0129 South Greenacres (STEP) 001 Arlt 03/03/10 100 60 07/01/11 $ 640,500 0130 Corbin (STEP) 001 Arlt 05/05/10 100 70 06/01/11 $ 705,000 0131 Cronk(STEP) 001 Arlt 04/14/10 100 80 06/01/10 $ 315,000 0151 Green Haven STEP 001 Iris 3/23/2011 0 0 10/15/2011 $ 620,000 0152 Micaview STEP 001 Iris 3/3/2011 0 0 10/15/2011 $ 280,000 Street Preservation Projects 0153 Broadway Ave Resurfacing/SW Upgrade Knutson 0 0 $ Traffic Projects 0060 Argonne Road Corridor Upgrade (SRTC 06-3 CMAQ Knutson 04/15/11 50 0 $ 1,290,636 0061 Pines (SR27) ITS Improvements (SRTC 06-2 CMAQ Knutson 04/15/11 0 0 $ 2,083,121 0133 Sprague Ave ITS USDOE(d) Knutson 03/04/11 100 0 07/31/11 $ 400,000 0135 Flashing Yellow Arrow Installation USDOE(d) Kipp 100 99 12/31/10 $ 34,210 0136 Traffic Signal LED Replacement USDOE(d) Kipp 100 33 12/31/11 $ 90,000 0147 Bike Lane Restriping USDOE(d) Kipp 0 0 $ 50,000 Stormwater Projects 0150 Sullivan Rd Bridge Drain Retrofit C Aldworth 0 0 12/31/12 $ Parks Projects 0086 Discovery Playground CTED Worley 05/01/09 100 99 05/12/10 $ 0144 Terrace View Shelter 0 0 $ Other Projects 0140 Bike& Ped MP Doc Prep USDOE(d) Basinger 0 0 $ 51,850 0148 Greenacres Trail - Design USDOE(d) Aldworth n/a 0 0 $ 100,000 0149 In-House Design -Sidewalk Infill USDOE(d) Amsden 0 0 $ 65,000 Closeout Phase 0039 Argonne Rd Overlay- Indiana to Montgom. Fed Progra Arlt 100 100 $ 405,948 0054 44th Ave Pathway-Woodruff Rd to Sands Rd STP(E) Aldworth 06/11/10 100 100 10/15/10 $ 431,228 0062 Appleway/Sprague/Dishman Mica ITS CMAQ Knutson 09/18/08 100 100 10/30/09 $ 672,000 0065 Sullivan/Sprague PCC Intersection STP(P) Aldworth 05/28/10 100 100 10/31/10 $ 995,520 0066 Broadway Rehab Phase 2 STP(U) Aldworth 06/19/09 100 100 02/10/10 $ 627,500 0067 Broadway Francher PCC Intersection STP(U) Aldworth 02/13/09 100 100 12/02/09 $ 759,218 0071 SIGNAL CONTROLLER UPGRADES SRTC 06-22 CMAQ Knutson 04/29/08 100 100 11/30/09 $ 258,400 0099 WSDOT Urban Ramp Project Special Cap Worley 100 100 09/30/09 $ 300,000 0100 16th and Bettman Stormwater 402 Arlt 04/01/09 100 100 06/01/10 $ 116,563 0102 Evergreen -Sprague PCC STA Aldworth 04/24/10 100 100 02/09/10 $ 685,000 0103 Pines-Sprague PCC 0104 McDonald -Sprague PCC 0107 Valleyview (STEP) 0108 Rotchford Acres (STEP) 0109 Clement(STEP) 0110 Sprague Avenue Rehabilitation 0114 Broadway/Sullivan PCC Intersection 0127 2009 ADA Improvements 0128 West Farms (STEP) STA Aldworth STA Aldworth 302 Arlt 302 Arlt 302 Arlt ARRA(i) Arlt STA Aldworth CDBG Aldworth 001 Arlt 03/20/09 100 100 12/07/09 04/24/10 100 100 02/09/10 04/01/09 100 100 06/01/10 04/22/09 100 100 10/01/09 05/13/09 100 100 11/01/09 04/17/09 100 100 06/01/10 02/12/10 100 100 12/31/10 04/07/10 100 100 06/30/10 02/17/10 100 100 11/01/10 $ 978,000 $ 762,000 $ 679,923 $ 388,306 $ 565,116 $ 2,838,000 $ 788,450 $ 110,713 $ 427,000