Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2004, 11-30 Regular Meeting
VOUCHER LIST DATE VOUCHER Number(s) TOTAL VOUCHER AMOUNT 11 -05-04 5809 -5845 1,029.159.30 11 -12-04 5846 -5874 436.301.21 GRAND TOTAL 1,465,460.51 Tuesday, November 30, 2004 CHI HALL AT REDWOOD PLAZA 11707 Fast Sprague Avenue, First Floor CALL TO ORDER AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING #56 Council Requests All Electronic Devices be Turned Off During Council Meeting; 6:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION: Pastor Manuel Denninr. Fountain Ministries ROIL CALL APPROVAL OF AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT: PITBLIC COMMENTS For members of the Public to speak to the Council regarding matters NOT on the Agenda. Please state your name and address for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. 1. CONSENT AGENDA Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. A Councilmcmber may remove an item from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately'. a. Approval of Regular Council Meeting Minutes of November 9, 2004 b. Approval of Study Session Minutes of November 16, 2004 c. Approval of Payroll of November 15, 2004 of S107.236.00 d. Approval of thc Following Vouchers: NEW BUSINESS 2. Motion Consideration: Propose! Contract for Library Services — Nina Regor 'public comment' ∎b :s: it Agenda 1 t -30-04 Regular Meeting Page 1 of 2 7 Yl(<1 6,e- PUBLIC COMMENTS (Maximum of three minutes please; state your name and address fair thc record) ADMLNISTRATIY'E REPORTS: [no public comment' 3. Spokane Valley Arts Council - Norma Ventris 4. Winter Snow Handling Report - John Ilohman/Ncil kersten 5. New Employee Position Descriptions - Nina Rcgor 6. Proposed 2004 Comprehensive flan Amendments - Marina Sukup/Scott Kuhta 7. Propcscd Area -wide Rezone Request N. Greenncres area (REZ 17 -04) - Scott Kuhta INFORMATION ONLY: [no public comment] 8. Departmental Monthly Reports 9. Response to Public Comments ADJOURNMENT FLTL'RE SCHEDULE Regular Council Meetings are generally held 2nd and 4`" Tuesdays, beginning al 6:0(1 p.m. Council Study Sessions are generally held l ". ?r" and 5th Tuesdays, beginning at 6:00 p.m. Other Tentative Uvcuminr Meetings /Events: December 28, 2001- No Council Meeting or Council Study Session January 19. 2005 - Conversation with the Community, 6 p.m.. Sports USA February 12, 2005 - Half- -Day Council/Staff Retreat June 11.2005 - Mid -Year Council /Staff Retreat, 9 a.m. - noon NOTICE individuals planning to attend the meeting who moire special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing or other impairments, please amtart the City Clerk at (509) 921 - 1000 as seem as po ible w that arrangements may be mode Council Agenda 11 -10-64 Regular Ming Pier 2 u t 2 DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday, November 9, 2004 Mayor DeVleming called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the 55 meeting. Attendance: Councilmembers: Michael DeVleming, Mayor Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Couneilmember Gary Schimmels, Couneilmember Richard Munson, Councilmember Staff: David Mercier, City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Attorney Stanley Schwartz, City Attorney Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Mike Jackson, Parks & Recreation Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Ken Thompson, Finance Director Tom Scholtens, Building Official Courtney Moore, Accountant/budget analyst Morgan Koudelka, Administrative Analyst Bing (Greg) Bingaman, IT Specialist Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor DeVleming led the Pledge of Allegiance. INVOCATION: Pastor 13i11 Dropko, Greenacres Christian Fellowship Church, gave the invocation. ROLL CALL City Clerk Bainbridge called roll; all Councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Munson to approve the agenda. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS Mayor DeVleming acknowledged and welcomed the Boy Scouts from Troops 405 and 412, who were attending in partial fulfillment of certain merit badges. COMMITTEE. BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS Councibnember Denenny: reported that the STA (Spokane Transit Authority) finance committee met last Wednesday and discussed some of the adjustments that will be made this summer to a number of bus routes, including having more routes in the Valley; which Mr. Denenny stated he feels is in response to input from Council in voicing the needs of the Valley citizens. Councilmember Schimmels: stated that he attended the local community meeting for the State Transportation Commission, that the Mayor and other elected officials were also in attendance; that he attended an award luncheon put on in conjunction with individuals who run our burn plant, and WISHA, Industrial Safety Agency, and that they received a work site award and were one of ten in the State of Washington out of 207,000 businesses, to receive such an award. Council Meeting 11-09-04 Page 1 of 7 Approved by Council: VOUCHER LiST DATE VOUCHER Number(s) TOTAL VOUCH AMOUNT 10 -22 -04 5713 -5771 1,791,402.75 10 -28 -04 5773 -5774 5,506.54 11 -01 -04 5775 -5797 1,155,549.74 GRAND TOTAL 2,952,459,03 DRAFT Councilmember Flanigan: reported that the hotel motel tax committee will meet this Friday morning at 9:00 a.m. in the City Council's conference room. Councilmember Munson: mentioned that he attended the Operations and Administrative Committee meeting for STA, and discussed and passed on for approval to the STA Board a continuing effort to improve the size of the buses being bought by STA; and discussed the reduction route for people with disabilities, and said that STA will move forward as per the court- agreed settlement. Deputy Mayor Wilhite: stated that she attended the meeting on the Comprehensive Plan held at Pratt Elementary; and also attended the meeting regarding the Parks Plan. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor DeVleming reminded everyone of this year's Celebration of Lights scheduled for December 2, 2004. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Clark Hagar, 11717 East Lenora Drive, Spokane Valle•, expressed concern with the citizens not having the right of initiative and referendum, and asked Council to immediately take that under advisement; and to immediately give the citizens the right to vote; he stated it is a travesty of justice not to incorporate that under our ordinances; and asked that council expedite that issue. Troy Dillev, 2400 N Wilbur Road, Apt #130: stated his opposition to the homeless people approaching him at his car on Appleway, Sprague and Pines, and the area near Wal -Mart; that he was forced to roll up his window to avoid being panhandled; he stated the current situation is ridiculous, and he wants us to adopt what Spokane County has adopted. Dick Rehm, 3626 S Ridgeview Drive: spoke in support of what Clark Hager said earlier; said that in the efforts for incorporation, there were five different groups working together; that the driving force behind that was the right of initiative and referendum and he assumed it was a foregone conclusion; that apparently that was left out and he wants Council to rectify the issue at the next meeting. Mayor DeVleming invited further public comment; no further comments were offered. 1. CONSENT AGENDA Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. A Councilmember may remove an item from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. a. Approval of Regular Council Meeting Minutes of October 26, 2004 b. Approval of Study Session Minutes of November 2, 2004 c. Approval of Payroll of October 30, 2004 of $ 143,652.24 d. Approval of the Following Vouchers: .11 was proved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Munson to waive the reading and approve the Consent Agenda. Vote by Acclamation: hi Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Council Meeting 11 -09 -04 Approved by Council: Page 2 of 7 DRAFT NEW BUSINESS 2. Second Reading; Proposed Ordinance 04 -044 Adopting 2005 Budget — Ken Thompson After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember Munson and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite, to approve Ordinance 04 -044. Finance Director Thompson explained that this is the second reading toward adopting the budget; he mentioned some minor changes that Council was already aware of but added that a vehicle that was inadvertently added was eliminated. Councilmember Taylor noted that library expenditures have been budgeted at $2.27 million, and asked for the previous figure. Director Thompson said the budget was $2.1 million in the current year's budget, although we ended up paying just slightly less than that; that we have not agreed to expend $2.27 million as that needs to be negotiated and the figure in the budget merely serves as a placeholder. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Clark Hagar. 11717 East Lenora Drive, Spokane Veer_ stated that he realizes we contract most services with Spokane County, but that part of the problem with these contracts is it seems there is no control over the wage negotiations; that when the issue was originally brought up, it was with the provision that the Council would have input with the wage negotiations; and if that is not the case, the County would therefore have no motivation to help the City and we would be left with a "take it or leave it" proposition; and if that is the case we would have no control over the costs, which would have an impact on this budget. Mr. Hagar asked Council if they were involved in contract negotiations with the Police, or with the road contractors. Mayor DeVleming said staff will address the questions and try to get answers back as soon as possible. Mayor DeVleming invited further public comment; no further comments were offered. Brief council discussion ensued concerning this budget, planning for future budgets, and facing long -term financial difficulties. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 04 -046 Planned Unit Developments (PUD) — Marina Sukup After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite to approve Ordinance 04 -046. Community Development Director Sukup explained the issue as per her PowerPoint presentation and gave background as per the attached Request for Council Action form. Director Sukup also suggested adding the phrase "or the public utility" to page 9 at the end of the sentence. of 4.08.19.15d, which was ultimately agreed to change to "or the serving utility." In reference to the financial responsibility issue, City Attorney Schwartz explained that he changed the role of the City regarding financial responsibility; that the previous ordinance allowed the City to take control; in a PUD it is the Homeowners Association that is set up for the purposes of managing the common area, which typically includes streets, stormwater and other public infrastructure; and that he changed the role regarding the obligation to maintain that public infrastructure. Mr. Schwartz said that the previous ordinance allowed the City to stand in the shoes of the Homeowners Association and take control, which meant that the City could build, assess and if needed foreclose the improvement; that it occurred to him that by doing so, we would be in conflict with public works bidding laws and create a long, unnecessary process. To alleviate that, the revision provides that the City tells the Homeowners Association that it has a duty to perform, that a court order can be obtained if needed, and the performance would be related to maintenance of the infrastructure; so the City would not be in control of infrastructure maintenance, but would require that the Homeowners Association carry that burden. Attorney Schwartz mentioned this would apply to future new developments and this ordinance would not affect existing situations. After brief council discussion, and Director Sukup explaining the need to correct pagination on page nine, Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were offered. Mayor DeVleming proved, seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite, to amend his motion to approve ordinance 04 -046 as amended. Vote Council Meeting 11 -09 -04 Page 3 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT to amend the motion: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried to amend the motion. Vote by Acclamation on the amended motion: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed. None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 4. First Reading: Proposed Ordinance 04 -047 Amending Spokane Valley Building Code — Tom Scholtens After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councibnember Munson to suspend the rules and approve Ordinance 04 -047. Building Official Scholtens explained the background of the issue as per his November 9 Request for Council Action form. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 5. Motion Consideration: Selecting a Library Services Provider, and Authorizing City Manager to Negotiate Agreement — Nina Regor It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Munson to select the Spokane County Library District as the service provider and instruct the City Manager to negotiate the agreement based on usage and not on assessed valuation. Deputy City Manager Regor explained the issue per her PowerPoint presentation; adding that the SCLD proposal used taxable valuation in calculating cost, giving an estimated cost for 2005 of $2.27 million; but that the 2004 library cost was based upon a usage model and came to $2.02 million. Ms. Regor also stated that staff seeks Council input concerning policies to address with the District, including cost, length of contract, terms of ownership or other provisions. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. David Sani, Board Member. Library District Board of Trustees, 4322 N Argonne: stated that he was speaking on behalf of the Board and of the approximate 230,000 current service area residents; that they feel that the City and the Board have a common goal to advocate for the proposal that best meets the community's needs; and he recommends that SCLD continue to provide services; but that he is surprised and dismayed with the suggestion that the major proposal elements including fee structures and asset ownership, will continue to be topics of discussion; he stated that the proposal submitted was to have been evaluated and considered as a package, and he urges Council to move in that direction, to accept the proposal in its entirety and to move forward. Council discussion then ensued regarding Council's attempts to examine all aspects of the issue in order to get the best value for the money spent; careful consideration of spending, ownership, length of contract, not arbitrarily placing a dollar amount on services; and the philosophy of which formula to use regarding costs. Councilmember Flanigan stated that the private company (UST) came in for Tess dollars, and if we start the negotiation process again, we will be back to where we were before the RFP was submitted; and that he will not support large reductions in the library's proposal and feels the proposal is the best and most fair for the citizens of the community. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor DeVleming, Deputy Mayor Wilhite, and Councilmembers Schimmels, Taylor, Munson, and Denenny. Opposed: Councilmember Flanigan. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 6. Discussion: Mayoral Appointments to Boards and Committees — Mayor DeVleming Mayor DeVleming stated that this issue is not an action item but merely discussion; that the policy is to make re- appointments annually, he mentioned the attached short list of particular committees coming up for re- appointment, and asked Councilmembers for their philosophy on rotating positions or other options. After discussing the various boards and committees, and the desire of some Councilmembers to remain in their current committee in order to become more familiar with the issues each board is facing, Mayor DeVleming suggested Councilmembers make note if anyone would like to participate on a particular committee, or move from a committee, and to please leave the Mayor a note so stating their preference. Mayor DeVleming said this issue will be brought back at the next Council meeting. Council Mccting 11-09-04 Page 4 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT Mayor DeVleming called for a short recess at 7:00 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 7:10 p.m. 7. Presentation: Six -Year Financial Forecast — Dave Mercier City Manager Mercier stated that this is still a work in progress, and with each passing month we gain better financial detail and incorporate that detail into our projections; and added that a large scale update is planned in advance of the February retreat. City Manager Mercier then went over his updated PowerPoint presentation. Mr. Mercier also stated that this budget makes no provisions for changes in staff or new costs; that the forecast is not perfect as he knows no way to bring absolute precision to the numbers, although the trends are real and present real economic challenges. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Tony Lazanis, 10626 East Empire; Spokane Valley: said he previously suggested having a $1,000 impact fee on new construction on new houses; and also suggested a small business fee of $60.00, stating that would generate more revenue; that perhaps there should be negotiation for Tess funding in the police contract; and ended by stating there are many other things to do other than impose a utility tax. Bill Gothmann, 10010 E 48 Ave: said that previously he had asked that staff show what we are buying and not buying with the budget and he complimented the City Manager and staff on providing citizens with that information; he stated that he enjoys the level of service we have; he is not convinced public services should be decreased; and given a choice between cutting services and raising taxes, he'd rather raise taxes and not cut services; and that he understands that it will cost him personally. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: S. First Reading Proposed Utility Tax Ordinance (Tabled October 26, 2004) — Ken Thompson Councilmember Munson moved, seconded by Councilmember Denenny, to remove from the table the reading of the proposed ordinance 04 -045, and resume discussion. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanirnous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried to place hack on the fable for discussion, the original motion to advance ordinance 04 -045 to a second reading. In response to Councilmember Denenny's request for an update on applying the tax on electrical entities, City Attorney Schwartz explained that the ability to impose a city tax depends on the entity paying the tax, and that municipal tax corporations cannot tax each other; and also that certain municipal corporations may not be subject to a utility tax. Mr. Schwartz stated that in his general conversations with the attorney for Avista, he discussed the issue of taxing other governmental entities and all agreed that it cannot be done. Councilmember Munson mentioned that in talking to several members of the community, he is convinced we need to do some cutting; that he examined the budget and feels the growth estimate of our sales tax is too conservative, and suggests staff look at 2.8% rather than 1 %. Discussion came up concerning the three reserves, and Councilmember Munson suggested reducing each of the contingency funds until such time as there is a record of achievement and accumulation which would give a better way to forecast budget issues. He suggested reducing each of the three reserves from $500,000 to $300,000, giving a one -time savings of $600,000, realizing this would only prolong the deficit numbers until 2007 or 2010. He also suggested staff work with these numbers and also with a five position cut in the police force. Councilmember Munson suggested and encouraged members of the community to participate in the website calculations for their suggestions on balancing future budgets, and to continue to give Council input. Further discussion included predicting future building activity, the amount of fine and forfeitures to expect in the coming years; possible increase in interest' rates having an adverse affect on construction, building, and sales tax; trying to be equitable to everyone's situation; and other tax possibilities. It was Council consensus not to include SCOPE or the school reserve officers in the possible cuts; and for staff Council Meeting 11 -09-04 Page 5 of 7 Approves! by Council: DRAFT to come back with spreadsheets showing scenarios with 4, 5, and 6% utility tax rate without electricity; with reduced contingencies, and with the reduction of five police officer positions. Councilmember Denenny as maker of the original motion, and Councilmember Munson as seconder of the original motion, (the original motion to advance ordinance 04 -045 to a second reading) withdrew the motion. It was moved by Mayor DeVleming to advance ordinance 04 -045 to a second reading for December 7, 2004. There being no second, the notion was not considered. It was then moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded by Councihnember Munson to allow public comment on the utility tax ordinance. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Clark Hager: stated that during the last meeting of the Spokane Valley Business Association, he recommended considering placement: of any new tax on a ballot for the people to decide; he added that whenever a city is going to put a utility tax on citizens, that they incorporate a referendum provision in the ordinance; and that we decided not to take that advice; he suggested we insert a referendum provision in that ordinance; that putting the issue on the ballot would be a positive step and a means to inform the public of the issues; and that the ordinance could also contain a sunset clause explaining that the tax would be temporary; and that he feels the people will react positively to get over a short term crisis. CCouncilmember Flanigan left the room; and returned within a few minutes.] Mayor DeVleming invited further public comment on this issue. No further comments were offered. It was Council consensus to place this issue on the next two Council agendas. PUBLIC COMMENTS Dick Behm, 3626 S Ridgeview: commended Council and Mr. Mercier for a good presentation, and for making the issue and position understandable, and he extended his thanks. It was proved by Mayor DeVleming, seconded by Councilmember Munson, and tntanimously agreed upon to extend the meeting to 9 :10 p.m. AJ)MiNISTRATTVE REPORTS: [no public comment] 9. Update on Park Maintenance Service Proposals - Mike Jackson Parks and Recreation Director Jackson explained the issue as per his November 9 Request for Council Action, and his accompanying PowerPoint. Director Jackson said staff feels the County's proposal was not responsive, leaving the two firms of Skilis'Kin and Senske Lawn and Tree Care as responsive proposals. Director Jackson sought Council direction in order to return next week with a formal request for a motion. After Director Jackson summarized the different proposals, and explained some of the rating criteria, he stated that both companies are local, that Spokane County's proposal included an added stipulation that if the City selects Spokane County for park maintenance, the City must also agree to contract with the County for aquatic services; and that as it has been determined that the County's proposal is nonresponsive, we must look at alternatives for the aquatic program, adding that there is always the option of doing it in- house. Further discussion continued regarding overall necessary funds needed for the parks and for the aquatic program, the possibility of the YMCA or Jeff Ellis & Associates handling the aquatic program or training employees, rejecting all bids and moving away from managed competition, and of staff examining other options. It was moved by Councilmember Taylor, seconded and unanimously agreed upon to extend the meeting for an additional ten minutes. Council Meeting 11-09-04 Page 6 of 7 • Approved by Council: DRAFT It was Council consensus to eliminate the proposal from Spokane County; to continue with managed competition, not reject all bids, and that staff come back with additional information including a recommendation from the selection committee, information concerning the aquatic situation, and information on performing these tasks in- house. There being no further business, it was moved by Mayor DcVleming, seconded by Councilmember Schimmels, and unanimously agreed upon to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:17 p.m. A 1 Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Diana Wilhite, Mayor Council Meeting 11 -09-04 Page 7 of 7 Approved by Council: Draft Attendance: Councilmembers: Michael DeVleming, Mayor Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Rich Munson, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember MINUTES CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY STUDY SESSION Tuesday, November 16, 2004, 6:00 p.m. Staff: Dave Mercier, Deputy City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Ken Thompson, Finance Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Tom Scholtens, Building Official Mike Jackson, Parks and Recreation Director Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Courtney Moore, Accountant Budget Analyst Bing (Greg) Bingaman, IT Specialist Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor DeVleming called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., welcomed all in attendance, reminded everyone that this is a study session although some items would be open for public comment, and requested that all electronic devices be turned off for the duration of the meeting. Mayor DeVleming also welcomed Scouts from Troop 121. ]..Council Officer Selections — CB It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Munson that the term of Mayor and Deputy Mayor run from November 26, 2004, through midnight December 31, 2005. Mayor DeVleming explained the reason for this motion and strict timeline is because of the date of the City's incorporation and the beginning of the first Mayor's and Deputy Mayor's terms, which were two -year terms beginning November 26, 2002, and with these new dates, the Mayor and Deputy Mayor's terms will be synchronized with the terms of office; and from now on, the terms will be for two years. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment on the length of terms; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. City Clerk Bainbridge explained the process of officer selection. City Clerk Bainbridge opened the floor for nominations for Mayor. After commendations to Mayor DeVleming for an outstanding term as first Mayor, Councilmember Flanigan nominated Deputy Mayor Diana Wilhite. City Clerk Bainbridge called for other nominations; none being offered, the nominations were closed. Ballots were distributed to each councilmember; voted upon, then collected. City Clerk Bainbridge announced that the vote was unanimous for Diana Wilhite for Mayor. Mayor -elect Wilhite gave a brief speech acknowledging Mayor's DeVleming great job as Mayor, and accepting her selection as Mayor. Mayor -elect Wilhite asked for nominations for Deputy Mayor. After commendations to Deputy Mayor Wilhite, Councilmember Flanigan nominated Councilmember Rich Munson; and Councilmember Schimmels nominated himself. After conducting the selection process, City Clerk Bainbridge announced that the majority vote was for Councilmember Munson. In later tallying the votes, Councilmember Munson received votes from Mayor -elect Wilhite, and Councilmembers Taylor, Flanigan, Denenny, and himself. Councilmember Schimmels received votes Study Session ,Minutes of 11 -16-41 Page 1 of 6 Approved by Council: Draft from himself and Mayor DeVleming. Deputy Mayor -elect Munson also gave a brief speech conveying his thanks for the votes of confidence. Mayor DeVleming called for short break at 6:15; and reconvened the meeting at 6:22 p.m. 2. First Reading: Proposed Ordinance 04 -048 Motorized Scooters After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite to suspend the rules and approve Ordinance 04 -048. Deputy City Attorney Driskell went over the background of the ordinance, of previous council action taken, and stated that this ordinance attempts to incorporate the numerous comments by Council relating to safety and nuisance issues. It was noted that a section was inadvertently omitted concerning when a bicycle helmet would be required and that section will be re- incorporated into the ordinance. After explaining the difference between a Class 2 and a Class 3 infraction, it was moved by Councilmember Taylor, seconded by Councilmember Flanigan, and unanimously approved to set the violation as a class 3 infraction. It was moved by Mayor DeVleming, seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite, and unanimously approved to amend the motion to include the amended language concerning the requirement of a bicycle helmet, and specking the violation as a class 3 infraction. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Larry Miller, E .19215 Riverwalk Lone, Greenacres: suggested Council strongly consider this, as he believes it will have good benefits to riders and people on the street, and he encouraged passage as soon as possible. Mayor DeVleming invited other public comment; no further comments were offered. Council discussed the handling of subsequent violations, different fines for those over and under age, and seizure of the scooters. Deputy Attorney Driskell explained that the scooter could be seized if it was determined to have been used in a crime, and that the ordinance can be amended in the future as needed concerning changing fines or addressing numerous violations. Vote on the motion as amended: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 3. Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointments to Boards and Committees it was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Denenny to extend by one year the terms of the current Councilmemhers serving on boards and commissions currently up for reconsideration, except . for the Convention and Visitor's Bureau, where Mayor DeVleming proposed Steve Taylor as representative and Dick Denenny as alternate. It was reiterated that this is only for those committees currently up for reconsideration (expiring December 31, 2004). Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 4. Motion Consideration: Selecting a Park Maintenance Service Provide and Authorizing City Manager or Designee to Negotiate Agreement — Mike Jackson It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Munson to authorise the City Manager to negotiate the Parks Maintenance Contract with Senske Company. Parks and Recreation Director Jackson explained the background and gave his PowerPoint presentation. Director Jackson stated that while both competing firms are capable of performing the work, due to the potential 10% cost savings, staff recommends Senske Lawn and Tree Care Company. Discussion ensued regarding performing the aquatics services, and Director Jackson said he has a high level of confidence that arrangements can be worked out with the YMCA and /or Jeff Ellis and Associates. Director Jackson explained that any contact would be for one year with four renewal options. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Ray Lancaster, representing Skils'Ki n, 4004 E Boone: said he was disappointed is not being chosen; that one of his company's goals is crafting relationships that will end up with meaningful jobs for people with Study Session Minutes of 11 -16 -04 Approved by Council: Page 2 of 6 Draft disabilities; and that he will be discussing with Senske who will be doing the janitorial contract; and he thanked council and staff for the opportunity to participate. Tony Lazanis, city resident of Spokane Valley: asked questions about the person getting the contract concerning insurance benefits for their employees. [It was determined that the company receiving the contract would be subject to the prevailing wage stipulation.] John Snediker, 18316 E Broadway: said it was nice to see two local firms; that he hopes we will begin contract negotiations quickly and fairly. Dave Warehime, Senske Lawn and Tree Care, 7115 East Cataldo: thanked Director Jackson for the recommendation, and stated he believes he will be able t:o provide his service at a fair rate. Mayor DeVleming invited further public comment; no further comments were received. 5. Motion Consideration: SRTC, 2004 CaII for Projects, Grant Applications - Steve Worley It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmentber Munson to approve the list of projects. Public Works Director Kersten explained the background of the issue as per the SRTC 2004 call for projects slide and the accompanying Request for Council Action form. Engineer Worley explained that this is more of a housekeeping issue and added that the Argonne Road Project was identified in the 2004 budget, but due to funding delays, that was forwarded to this call for projects. Public Works Director Kersten stated that once the projects are ranked, Council will have an opportunity to approve that ranking, and City Manager Mercier stated that staff is working to compose all parts that must be in place to have confidence and security that financing for Pines/Ivlansfield is intact and to move forward in a timely manner. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. .lay Bookout, East Mission: stated his concerned about air quality issue and said that he hopes this project does not involve a traffic signal as a cure, as that has been the County's cure for congestion; and that Pines/Mansfield intersection is an improperly designed intersection, that a design change would cure the problem, but a traffic signal would increase congestion and decrease air quality. Mayor DeVleming invited further public comment; no further comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In .Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 6. Motion Consideration: Approving Spokane County lnterlocal Agreement Authorizing Funds for Consulting Services for Wastewater Alliance Research — Neil Kersten It was moved by Councilmember Denenny and seconded to authorize approve of the Wastewater Alliance lnterlocal to include $14,500. Public Works Director Kersten explained the background of the issue and that there are sufficient funds to cover the contract within the Public Works budget. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Tony Lazanis: questioned if we were paying for that work from our general funds; and stated that he feels the engineering study is a conflict of interest as it is apparently not an independent study. City Manager Mercier responded that we would pay our share of this work from the general funds; and that the purpose of this agreement is not to conduct a research study but to provide facilitation among a number of interested parties to determine if there is common ground; that it is not an academic experience, but is very hands on interactive. Mr. Lazanis stated he hopes Council and staff pay attention to how the money is used. Vote by Acclamation on the above motion: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Study Session Minutes of 11 -16-04 1'agc 3 of 6 Approved by Council: Draft 7. Motion Consideration: Approval of Agreement with CH2M Hill Regarding Barker Road Project It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Denenny, to approve the agreement with CH2M Hill Regarding the Barker Road Project. Public Works Director Kersten stated that previous approval of the Six -Year Transportation improvement Plan included the Barker Road Project. Engineer Worley gave additional background on the issue as noted in the November 16, 2004 Request for Council Action form. Discussion turned to the area in question, if additional right -of -way will be needed, and that the scope of work will determine the best way to deal with traffic and construction, and that the project involves constructing a new bridge. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Jay Bookout, East Mission: stated that he had just gone through the same type of project; that he watched with promises of 35 mph roads and bike lanes; that the road is still at 30 mph and traffic is limited to about 8,000 and before anything was done it was about 14,000 cars a day. He said that Barker Road needs to be cement to take care of the truck traffic, and that two lanes is plenty; that three lanes are not needed and that it will make the road wider and slower and result in more air pollution; that this is the wrong approach to building highways; and he feels we should look to another source for better ideas for building roads. Larry Miller, E 195 Walker Lane: asked about how far that project goes, and if it goes from the freeway to Trent. Engineer Worley responded that the project goes from 13oone Ave to the river right to the bridge, that the new bridge construction is a separate project; and that this is just for improvement of Barker Road. Mr. Miller stated he has safety concerns for the people living in the area of Barker Road. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed.- None. Abstentions.- None. M. olron carried. Mayor DeVleming called for a short recess at 7:58 p.m.; he reconvened the meeting at 8:10 p.m. 8. SCRAPS Presentation Animal Control Director Nancy Hill gave a presentation on the current pet license campaign, and added that she would like to give a more detailed year -end report at the end of the year. Discussion of our ordinance requiring a license came up concerning whether the ordinance requires pet stores to issue licenses at the time a dog or cat is sold. City Manager Mercier said staff will research that. in response to Councilmember Munson's question of the timeline or probability of the system paying for itself, Ms. Hill said that they will probably never have the license raised to the point where it will pay for itself; but she stated that she continues to make adjustments on how they advertise; and that with the licensing program, more pets are identified and returned home, which lowers the number of pets undergoing euthanasia. 9. Budget Calculator. .Demonstration City Manager Mercier stated that one of the Council goals is to use technology to improve customer services; and that this is a prime example of that goal in action; that concerning budget issues, our website continues to have forms and information on line; that all PowerPoint presentations used in the budget and in the six -year forecast are also on our website. Mr. Mercier stated that Accountant/Budget Analyst Courtney Moore has developed spreadsheets which will be placed on the website tomorrow with appropriate links describing the purposes and activities associated with the budget calculations; and that citizens will be able to pick and choose and e-mail back to us or print out and mail in, their suggestions for future budgets. Mr. Mercier added that the data will not be statically valid, but will hopefully give us feedback. M.r. Moore discussed the budget calculator and basic instructions; and said that the budget calculator can be viewed as a reverse shopping cart; the starting point is the identified shortfalls and we are asking members of the public to balance the budget by deciding where to make the cuts or what to take out, by simply completing the white boxes shown on the calculator, and as each box is completed, the totals are adjusted accordingly. Mr. Mercier, with the assistance of those in attendance, went through a mock budget calculation to demonstrate how the calculator works. Study Session Minutes of 11 -16 -04 Page 4 of 6 Approved by Council: Draft As the budget calculator demonstration continued, discussion included remarks about the reality of looking five or six years in the future, and of actually seeing the affects of the mix and match of cuts and/or changes in proposed revenue. It was moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded by Councilmember Munson, to extend the meeting by thirty minutes. Vote by Acclamation.' In Favor: Deputy Mayor Wilhite, Councilmembers Schimmels, Taylor, Mtmson, Denenny and Flanigan. Opposed: Mayor DeVleming. Abstention: None. Motion carried. 10. Update on Utility Tax Data Deputy City Manager Regor explained that staff has been working on several utility tax options to address projected budget deficits beginning in 2006. Ms. Regor explained several scenarios via her PowerPoint presentation, and focused on problem statement numbers 1, 2, and 3. Finance Director Thompson also explained several scenarios including the information on page eight which addresses the 6% utility tax including electricity; the green pages which explain the generic utility tax including tax on electricity, the blue pages showing the utility tax without electricity, and the yellow pages which are a modified assumption showing the 2.8% increase in sales tax, utility tax excluding electricity, Give reductions from the police department, and reducing the reserves; ending by explaining that the pink pages roll in the capital needs over the same period of time. City Manager added a slide #25, which dealt with trying to account for unmet capital needs as well. City Manager Mercier added that the sooner we can apply the remedy, the sooner we will see the appropriate response, and that a probable date on receipts witnessed from any utility tax will likely be April or later. Councilmember Taylor said he would like to see more research into the possibility of applying a utility tax on electricity across all utilities serving the area, and also to look at a ten -man reduction in police services. He also mentioned he would like to get copies of the spreadsheet. It was mentioned that this item is scheduled for the December 7 council agenda as well as the December 21 agenda; and Councilmember Taylor said he would like to discuss potential cuts in services at those times. Councilmember Taylor also asked for a breakdown of' services within the police department including the FTE counts. Mr. Mercier said that staff will gather that information. 11. Advance Agenda Additions Councilmember Denenny said he would like to direct staff to provide background on what the statutes allow and what are the options concerning initiatives and referendums. It was determined to place that issue on the upcoming December 21 agenda. It was also suggested that for those members not able to attend the November 30 council meeting, they might want to attend the upcoming Planning Commission meeting dealing with the proposed area -wide rezone and comp plan amendments. Staff will research the dates of that meeting and e-mail Council. 12. Council Check in. Mayor DeVleming announced that he has had a wonderful two years as Mayor, and thanked everyone. for their support and willingness to work together. 13. City Manager Comments City Manager Mercier mentioned that this afternoon he received correspondence from the County Commissioners concerning a vote to accept the GMA steering committee recommendation for interim population allocations to Spokane Valley and also to Liberty Lake, with slightly more than 20,000 for Spokane Valley and 2,500 for Liberty Lake. Mr. Mercier also mentioned that this Friday he will meet with Kirk Nelson, State President of Quest, and that he would be glad to relay any Council issues to Quest. Mr. Mercier also acknowledged receipt of a letter from Spokane County advising that they are about to launch a S7.5 million improvement plan for their radio system and that they believe we are responsible for 44% of the associated cost; and that the Board would appreciate confirming by next Study Session Minutes of 11.16 -04 Approved by Council: Page 5 of 6 Draft Tuesday if will participate in the amount of $429,000. Mr. Mercier said he will circulate copies of that information to Council and await direction for an appropriate response. There being no further business, it was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed upon to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Study Session Minutes of I I.1641 Approved by Council: Diana Wilhite, Mayor Page 6 of 6 Meeting Date: 11 -30 -04 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: x consent ❑ information AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Payroll for Period Ending November 15, 2004 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Payroll for period ending 11 -15 -04 Salary: $ 97,529.62 Benefits: $ 9,706.38 $ 107,236.00 STAFF CONTACT: Daniel Cenis /Courtney Moore ATTACHMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation .�i vchlist 11/05/2004 11:25:35AM Bank code : apbank Voucher List Page: 1 Spokane Valley Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount 5809 11/5/2004 000335 ALTON'S TIRE 6 -760 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE 24.35 Total : 24.35 5810 11/5/2004 000235 B &B SHREDDING 13559 SHREDDING SERVICE 30.00 Total : 30.00 5811 11/5/2004 000101 CDWG PH10059 40331 SMALL TOOLS & MINOR EQUIPMEI 28.40 Total : 28.40 5812 11/5/2004 000143 CITY OF SPOKANE 00104058 10/27/04 VALLEY TRANSFER STATION DROI 12.03 Total : 12.03 5813 11/5/2004 000109 COFFEE SYSTEMS INC 25294 COFFEE SUPPLIES 7.95 Total : 7.95 5814 11/5/2004 000508 CONOCOPHILLIPS FLEET 870166725410 VEHICLE FUEL 944.19 Total : 944.19 5815 11/5/2004 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION DIST, #19 05859.0 10/25/04 WATER CHARGES 136.27 11534.2 10/25/04 WATER CHARGES 18.77 Total : 155.04 5816 11/5/2004 000059 DEVLEMING, MICHAEL 11/3104 MD Reimb. REIMB. TRAVEL/MILEAGE 85.15 Total : 85.15 5817 11/5/2004 000246 EAST SPOKANE WATER DIST #1 02051000 10/19/04 WATER CHARGES 132.00 Total : 132.00 5818 11/5/2004 000106 FEDEX 7 -812 -18402 FED EX CHARGES 24.64 Total : 24.64 5819 11/5/2004 000410 GRIFFIN PUBLISHING INC. 04942 SENIOR CENTER NEWSLETTERS 349.05 Total : 349.05 5820 11/5/2004 000104 HIGH NOONER 20825 PLANNING MEETING LUNCH 44.63 Total : 44.63 Page: 1 vchlist 11/0512004 11:25:35AM Bank code : Voucher 5821 5822 5823 5824 5825 5826 5827 5828 5829 5830 5831 apbank Date Vendor 11/5/2004 000070 INLAND POWER AND LIGHT CO 11/5/2004 000288 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL 11/5/2004 000388 IRVIN WATER DIST. #6 11/5/2004 000117 JOURNAL NEWS PUBLISHING 11/5/2004 000012 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS 11/5/2004 000258 MICROFLEX INC. 11/5/2004 000239 NORTHWEST BUSINESS STAMP 11/5/2004 000652 OFFICE DEPOT 11/5/2004 000029 PITNEY BOWES CREDIT CORP. 11/5/2004 000322 QWEST 5832 11/5/2004 000415 ROSAUERS U -CITY Invoice 10/28/04 IP&L 0842076-IN 112500.0 Oct., 2004 25279 25280 25281 11/5/2004 000132 MODERN ELECTRIC WATER COMPANY 10/28/04 Modem Elec Vouurier List Spokane Valley INV001922510 00015253 51022 261686547 -001 261686679 -001 5618533 -0T04 509 - 921 -6787 511B 509 - 924 -4707F 493E PO 1/ 40338 40342 40333 40333 Description /Account PUBLICATIONS WATER CHARGES ADVERTISING ADVERTISING ADVERTISING ADVERTISING STREET POWER LIGHTING CHARG Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : TAXTOOLS SOFTWARE RENTAL Total : STREET LIGHTING POWERIWATEF Total : NAME PLATES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES COPIER RENTAL PAYMENT PHONE CHARGES TELEPHONE CHARGES Total : Total : Total : Total : Page: 2 Amount 378.54 378.54 35.45 35.45 165.00 165.00 37.50 96.00 46.50 180.00 140.00 140.00 559.23 559.23 7,331.04 7,331.04 21.57 21.57 307.66 44.59 352.25 448.77 448.77 38.13 22.21 60.34 481329 MEETING SUPPLIES 30.34 Page: 2 vchlist 11/0512004 11:25:35AM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor 5832 11/5/2004 000415 ROSAUERS U -CITY 5833 11/5/2004 000297 SCHOLTENS, TOM 5834 11/5/2004 000324 SC W O #3 5835 11/5/2004 000661 SPECIALTY HOME PRODUCTS 5836 11/5/2004 000090 SPOKANE COUNTY INFORMATION, SYS 41454 41464 11/1/04 Library 5838 11/1/04 Refund 5839 10/28/04 Juror Fees 031608/081608 5837 11/5/2004 000499 SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DIST. 11/5/2004 000664 SPOKANE COUNTY REGIONAL, ANIMAL 11/5/2004 000658 SPOKANE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT 5840 11/5/2004 000323 SPOKANE COUNTY UTILITIES 5841 11/5/2004 000374 SPOKANE REGIONAL, CHAMBER OF CC 41998 5842 11/5/2004 000663 THE SEATTLE TIMES 5843 11/5/2004 000295 VALLEYFEST 6 Invoice Voucher List Spokane Valley (Continued) 482968 10/27/04 TS Reimb. 10/30/04 TS Reimb. 170- 0040 -03 10/12/04 11/5/04 Refund 094228805 10/31/04 PO # 40329 Description /Account MEETING SUPPLIES REIMB. FOR TRAVEL/MILEAGE REIMB. FOR TRAVEUMILEAGE Total : WATER CHARGES PERMIT REFUND CITRIX LICENSES PRISM CLASSES REFUND DAMAGE DEPOSIT JUROR CHARGES SEWER CHARGES REGISTRATION ADVERTISING PORTA POTTIES Total : Total : Total : Total : LIBRARY CONTRACT PAYMENT Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Page: 3 Amount 28.38 58.72 163.46 17.79 181.25 38.39 38.39 297.75 297.75 1,040.00 405.00 1,445.00 1,010,148.00 1,010,148.00 50.00 50.00 971.75 971.75 504.02 504.02 20.00 20.00 1,328.64 1,328.64 140.00 Page: 3 vchlist 1110512004 11:25:35AM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 5843 11/5/2004 000295 000295 VALLEYFEST 5844 11/5/2004 000167 VERA WATER & POWER 11/1/04 VERA 5845 11/5/2004 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 1344020 - 2681 -6 1344021- 2681 -4 1344022 - 2681 -2 37 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 37 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 to said claim. Finance Director Date Vouc er List Spokane Valley (Continued) PO t1 Description /Account Total : STREET POWER LIGHTING/WATEF Total : WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICE WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICES WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICES Total : Bank total : Total vouchers : Page: 4 Amount 140.00 2,220.23 2,220.23 33.57 191.94 20.42 245.93 1,029,159.30 1,029,159.30 Page: 4 vchlist 11/12/2004 2:49:46PM Bank code : Voucher 5846 5847 5848 5849 5850 5851 5852 5853 5854 5855 5856 5857 apbank Date Vendor 11/12/2004 000037 AMERICAN LINEN 11/12/2004 000497 BANK OF NEW YORK 11/12/2004 000113 BASLINGTON, MARY 11/12/2004 000109 COFFEE SYSTEMS INC 11/12/2004 000035 CORPORATE EXPRESS 11/12/2004 000171 GEIGER CORRECTIONS CENTER 11/12/2004 000117 JOURNAL NEWS PUBLISHING 11/12/2004 000258 MICROFLEX INC. 11/12/2004 000193 NORTHWEST CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS 11/12/2004 000243 NORTHWEST SIGN SUPPLY 11/12/2004 000652 OFFICE DEPOT Invoice 25306 25307 25308 25309 f /\ Voucher List Spokane Valley 11/5/2004 000328 SPOKANE VALLEY SENIOR, CITIZENS A 10/15/04 Reimb. SC 510863 11/04/04 -1791 11/9/04 MEB Reimb. 25416 56265027 OCT. 2004 GEIGER 00015259 Dec. 2004 Rent 709630 262218393 -001 PO # 40341 40347 40333 Description /Account REIMBURSEMENT FOR INTERNET/ Total : FLOOR MAT SERVICE BOND DEBT SERVICE PAYMENT Total : REIMS. FOR OFFICE SUPPLIES Total : Total : Total : COFFEE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES GEIGER CONTRACT PAYMENT Total : ADVERTISING ADVERTISING ADVERTISING ADVERTISING TAX AUDIT PROGRAM DECEMBER 2004 RENT MAP PLO'I"UER PAPER OFFICE SUPPLIES Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Page: 1 Amount 37.99 37.99 45.78 45.78 355,367.50 355,367.50 75.42 75.42 166.52 166.52 49.59 49.59 8,917.00 8,917.00 46.50 54.75 54.00 64.50 219.75 383.60 383.60 22,738.68 22,738.68 134.01 134.01 94.27 Page: 1 vchlist 11/12/2004 2:49:46PM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor 5857 11/12/2004 000652 OFFICE DEPOT 5858 11/12/2004 000024 RESOURCE COMPUTING INC. 5859 11/12/2004 000341 RICOH CORPORATION 5860 11/12/2004 000415 ROSAUERS U -CITY 5861 11/12/2004 000297 SCHOLTENS, TOM 5865 11/12/2004 000323 SPOKANE COUNTY UTILITIES 5866 11/12/2004 000406 SPOKANE REGIONAL CVB Invoice 36534 04126068194 04126068661 04126090078 482753 5867 11/12/2004 000011 SPOKANE VALLEY CHAMBER, OF COMh 103215 Vo'vurivar List Spokane Valley (Continued) 262238661 -001 262552681 -001 2625552320 -001 262579923 -001 11/9/04 TS Reimb. 5862 11/12/2004 000230 SPOKANE CNTY AUDITORS OFC, RECO Receipt #438846 5863 11/12/2004 000090 SPOKANE COUNTY INFORMATION, SYS 41536 5864 11/12/2004 000658 SPOKANE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT 11/5/04 Juror Fees 11/1/04 County Util. 11/1/04 Contract PO # 40336 40339 40339 40333 Description /Account OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES IT SUPPORT MEETING SUPPLIES TITLE NOTICE RECORDING COUNTY IT SUPPORT JUROR FEES SEWER CHARGES TOURISM MARKETING MEMBERSHIP Total : Total : COPIER RENTAL PAYMENT COPIER RENTAL PAYMENT COPIER RENTAL PAYMENT Total : Total : SMALL TOOLS & MINOR EQUIPMEP Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Total : Page: 2 Amount 259.22 95.50 119.26 30.87 599.12 2,872.60 2,872.60 246.07 411.92 238.48 896.47 10.75 10.75 150.68 150.68 20.00 20.00 10,995.33 10,995.33 402.00 402.00 429.48 429.48 12, 500.00 12,500.00 250.00 Page: 2 Voucher 5867 5868 5869 5870 5871 5872 5873 vchlist 11/12/2004 2:49:46PM Bank code : apbank Date Vendor 11/12/2004 000011 000011 SPOKANE VALLEY CHAMBER, OF C (Continued) 11/12/2004 000391 SPOKANE VALLEY FIRE DIST. #1 11/5/04 Fire Dist. 11/12/2004 000665 STATE OF WA, PAF- POUSUBS FUND, 4: 11/05/04 State 11/12/2004 000093 THE SPOKESMAN- REVIEW 11/12/2004 000025 UNISOURCE CORPORATION 11/12/2004 000167 VERA WATER & POWER 5874 11/12/2004 000089 XO COMMUNICATIONS 29 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 29 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 to said claim. Finance Director Date Invoice 11/12/2004 000021 WITHERSPOON, KELLEY, DAVENPORT 72523 72524 Voucher List Spokane Valley 42365 10/31/04 657 21273510 11/3 - 11/8/04 Vera 0104492013 PO # 40345 Description /Account FIRE DEPARTMENT FEES ADVERTISING COPIER PAPER TELEPHONE /DSL CHARGES Total : Total : STATE PURCHASING AGREEMENT Total : Total : Total : STREET POWER LIGHTING CHARC Total : LEGAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LEGAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Total : Total : Bank total : Total vouchers : I Page: 3 Amount 250.00 7,882.97 7,882.97 200.00 200.00 703.56 703.56 409.16 409.16 384.40 384.40 6,034.00 2,130.00 8,164.00 1,294.85 1,294.85 436, 301.21 436, 301.21 Page: 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: November 30, 2004 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: Library Services Agreement with SCLD GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council has discussed library services at the May 25, September 7, November 2 and November 9, 2004 meetings. BACKGROUND: The purpose of this agenda item is to seek Council direction on terms of negotiation for the provision of library services, and to provide an update on activities concerning a 2005 agreement with SCLD. Spokane Valley currently has a contract with the Spokane County Library District (SCLD) for library services. The agreement expires at the end of 2004. On November 9, Council moved to select SCLD as the preferred library services provider, and authorized the City Manager to negotiate an agreement based upon library usage. At its November 16 meeting, the SCLD Board voted to authorize the District Director to submit a contract to the City for library services consistent with its proposal, including the payment methodology based upon taxable valuation of property. They also instructed the Director to prepare a contingency plan arranging for the closure of the Valley Branch effective January 1, 2005, and to prepare employee lay -off notices, conditional upon the potential closure, as well as notifications to Spokane Valley cardholders of the closure if the City and District do not have a signed agreement in place by December 1, 2004. A draft of the agreement is attached, along with the presentation Director Mike Wirt provided to the Board during the November 16 meeting. The District's estimated timeline for the contingency plan is to provide the notices of potential lay -off pending finalization of the plan to all SCLD employees on December 1, and to finalize the plan by December 15. At that point, the District will notify specifically impacted employees. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the SCLD Board is December 21. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Provide direction to staff. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None for 2004. The SCLD proposal uses taxable valuation as its method of calculating cost. The District estimates this cost to be $2.27 million for 2005. The 2004 library cost, which was based upon a usage model, came to $2.02 million. The 2004 agreement states that in the event the City does not contract with SCLD after 2004, the City will reimburse the District for the costs of the consultant (i.e., the survey firm) and other expenses incurred in development of the Library Capital Facilities plan, to a maximum amount of $10,000. STAFF CONTACT: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager ATTACHMENTS 1. November 17, 2004 letter to SCLD 2. November 16, 2004 Presentation by SCLD Director Mike Wirt to the SCLD Board 3. Draft Interlocal Agreement Spo°kan .0•0°Ualley November 17, 2004 Michael J. Wirt, Director SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT Administrative Offices 4322 N. Argonne Rd. Spokane, WA 99212 -1g68 Dear Mike, Sincerely, Nina Regor Deputy City Manager Attachment 1 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1003 • cityhall@sppkanevalley.org At the November 9 Council meeting, the Spokane Valley City Council selected SCLD as the preferred library service provider for Spokane Valley, and authorized the City Manager to negotiate an agreement with the District, based upon a usage model. The City Council was complimentary of the service the Library District has provided. The Council clearly recognized that the usage model was different than that proposed by the District. They expressed an interest in coming to terms in a way that satisfies the needs of Spokane Valley residents as well as District members. I look forward to continuing our work together on this important issue. Please let me know when we can meet to negotiate terms. Spokane Valley Library Services Board of Trustees Briefing 11/16/04 2004 Contract Negotiation History Attachment 2 • Effective incorporation date: March 31, 2003 — 2003 property tax collection by SCLD. — Service through 12/31/03. — No property tax collection or service in 2004 without contract; too late in year for. annexation. • January 2003: Contract proposal to interim staff. • January — May 2003: Discussions, legal review, apparent agreement on terms; consideration delayed by city. • June — August 2003: New city manager; new city staff hired. • August 2003: Library contract assigned to deputy city manager. • September 2003: Earlier contract rejected; primary issue method of determining cost. • September — December 2003: City analysis in attempt to determine "actual cost" to service Spokane Valley residents. — Concerns about property tax basis & delinquent taxes. — Geocode cardholder addresses & apply to SCLD branch.cost estimates: "usage" • December 2003: No contract agreement; SCLD decision to continue services in January as service to community and to avoid potentially unnecessary staff layoffs. m Late January 2004: Agreement on contract — $2,020,296; based on number SV library cardholders as proportion of branch registrations. — One year only: intended as one -time compromise to give city time for long -term decision analysis, not precedent. Spokane Valley Library Services Board of Trustees Briefing "The City and District agree that this amount was determined by the District in accordance with the methodology set forth in Exhibit "A" and that this payment amount applies only to 2004 and understand that the method by which payments applying to any future agreements are determined may be different" — Also section on future decision "City's Commitment to Make Future Library Services Decision. The City agrees to make a decision regarding the provision of future Library Services to the residents of the City and to notify the District of that decision. 1. If this decision is to continue contracting with the District for Library Service, both parties agree to make a good faith effort to negotiate and execute a new interlocal agreement no later than August 31, 2004. 2. If this decision is to propose that voters decide on annexation to the District and the decision is made later than the date necessary for the annexation to be effective in 2005, both parties agree to make a good faith effort to negotiate and execute a one -year interlocal agreement for 2005 no later than August 31, 2004." • February 2004: Contract approval. Spokane County Library District Page 2 of 11 O . LIBRARY USAGE MODELING SHORTCOMINGS Spokane Valley Library Services Board of Trustees Briefing • Library cards — Coded by branch of registration, not political jurisdiction. — Not required for all types of use. — Even where required, software can't track by individual cardholder. — Don't represent all users: families often share cards, especially with children. • Types of use — Requiring library card • Materials holds; materials checkout; interlibrary loan. • In- library Internet booking; in- library software station booking. • Remote access to online databases. — Not requiring library card • In- library materials use: reference, newspapers, magazines, etc. • In- library, phone, or Web -based reference & readers advising assistance. • Library programs (storytimes, adult programs, computer classes, etc. • Meeting room booking and use. • Outreach services: use of adult facility deposit materials, childcare storytime programs; use of childcare deposit materials. • Use of Web site services: reference information, booklists, Web links. Spokane County Library District Page 3 of 11 Spokane Valley Library Services Board of Trustees Briefing • Other external services reaching customers - Community events: e.g. Valleyfest. - School visits. - Business events. • Summary - Library cardholders represent - only a portion of users. - Software can't measure library card use by individual cardholder. - No practical way to measure use by customers for services for which library cards aren't required. Spokane County Library District Page 4 of 11 Spokane Valley Library Services Board of Trustees Briefing Request for Proposals Process • May 2004: Staff recommendation for "managed competition pilot project" for library services and parks maintenance; council direction to proceed. • Original schedule: RFP available by end of July; proposals due end of August. • August 9( ?), 2004: RFP received by e -mail; 09/06 (Labor Day) deadline. • August 11, 2004: RFP with deadline date correction (to 09/07) received. • Mid - August 2004: Verbal notification that deadline date to be extended. • August 30, 2004: RFP Addendum B received by e -mail. — Deadline changed to 09/28. Requirement for bidders bond or payment holdback deleted. Up to five year term allowed to accommodate amortization of capital expenditures. — Changes resulted from requests by LSSI and/or Library Associates. — Also minor corrections to current service information. • 2 proposals submitted: SCLD and LSSI — SCLD's a public document. — LSSI's released October 12 in significantly redacted form. • Final statement in RFP: The City reserves the right to waive informalities, and to reject any and all proposals. All proposal documents submitted in response to this Request for Proposal will become the property of the City of Spokane Valley which may use such documents and the information contained in the documents and may copy the documents for proposal assessment purposes and as evidence of the proposal lodged. Spokane County Library District Page 5 of 11 Spokane Valley Library Services Board of Trustees Briefing Proposal Evaluation & City Council Action • Considerable citizen concern expressed to City Council and in newspaper guest columns. • Ad hoc committee — September 14: City council decision to appoint ad hoc proposal evaluation committee; September 28 application deadline • 5 citizens • 2 council members October 5: Appointments made; includes Council members Wilhite and Flanagan. — Three committee meetings. — October 27: Unanimous committee decision to recommend SCLD, 5 -year contract; study annexation within first 2 years. • Staff — Concurrent evaluation process. — Deputy city manager, administrative analyst, parks & recreation director. • Recommendations to council: November 2 study session — Ad hoc committee: as stated above. — Staff • SCLD. • Concerns about SCLD responsiveness to community; method of determining cost; asset ownership. — Council direction to bring action item to November 9 regular meeting (although some confusion about what actually happened). Spokane County Library District Page 6 of 11 Spokane Valley Library Services Board of Trustees Briefing • Council action; November 9 regular meeting — Motion to select SCLD, direct city manager to negotiate contract based on usage, not assessed valuation. • Statements on "most bang for the buck" and council responsibilities in contract negotiation. • Councilman Flanagan statements on process, fair proposal, disagree with motion. • 6 to 1 approval. — No specific direction on contract term or assets. — In prior action on budget adoption, increase in library services line item to amount estimated in SCLD proposal. • No further contact from city staff. Spokane County Library District Page 7 of 11 Spokane Valley Library Services Board of Trustees Briefing SCLD Legal and Policy Framework • District legal service area: unincorporated county and 8 annexed cities and towns. • Funding through property tax funding within legal service area: no other option. • Uniform property tax levy required within taxing districts. • City contracts with library districts (Airway Heights, Spokane Valley) - Permitted by state law (RCW 27.12.180) - District required to "...perform all the functions of a library within the governmental unit wanting service." - Nothing in statute on contract fee basis; not subject to uniform levy requirement • Board of Trustees represents and is responsible to residents of legal services area. • Board of Trustees powers and duties (RCW 27.12.210) include "(1) Adopt such bylaws, rules, and regulations for their own guidance and for the government of the library as they deem expedient; (5) Have exclusive control of the finances of the library; (10) Do all other acts necessary for the orderly and efficient management and control of the library." • Board fiduciary responsibility to - Represent interests of District residents /taxpayers. - Obtain funding necessary to provide library services. - Make the best use of available funds. • Board ethical responsibility to - Assure fairness and equity in funding. - Assure fairness and equity in service availability. Spokane County Library District Page 8 of 11 Spokane Valley Library Services Board of Trustees Briefing Issues • City council motion: "Usage' vs. assessed valuation (which equates to service availability). — SCLD proposed assessed valuation basis; motion disregards SCLD proposal. — Usage can't be accurately measured. — With regarding assessed valuation method. • Everyone pays on the same basis. • Everyone has equal access to the same system resources: branches and services. • SCLD allocates resources in response to use. • Other areas of city staff concern — Asset accumulation • Library service contracts are for services. • SCLD proposal addressed this area. — Contract term • Original RFP specified two year initial term with three 1 -year extensions. • Addendum B revised to up to 5 years "...to allow for more options in the provision of capital items." "The chosen contractor will enter into a service contract with the City for the provision of library services for a period of up to five (5) years as negotiated between the parties. A termination clause and renewal options may also be negotiated as part of the contract." • The shorter the term, the more difficult for long -range planning and staff recruitment and retention, especially librarians. • The shorter the termination window, the more difficult to downsize in an orderly manner. Spokane County Library District Page 9 of 11 Spokane Valley Library Services Board of Trustees Briefing • Short term contingency plan — Is there option for temporary continuation of services into 2005 without approved contract? Does service end after 12/31/04 without signed contract? If so— • Would require short tem contingency plan as interim measure if no signed contract by 12/31/04 but still possibility that agreement could be reached. • With customer notification beginning 12/01/04. • With conditional layoff /furlough notices to all staff on 12/01/04; potential 01/01/05 effective date. • With temporary freeze on hiring, salaries, all expenditures that can be avoided or delayed. • Currently working on specifics. • Permanent downsizing — Would be implemented only with decision by City not to contract with SCLD in future. — Would require one -third reduction in expenditures • Besides Valley Library staff, one third of related support services. • Loss of economies of scale would require spread of reductions to other branches. • Many service contracts would require renegotiation. • Complete organizational restructuring necessary. — Significant leave payout and unemployment insurance costs for laid -off staff would significantly reduce reserves. Probably loss of reciprocal use with Spokane Public Library. — Currently working on specifics. Spokane County Library District Page 10 of 11 Spokane Valley Library Services Board of Trustees Briefing Direction Requested from Board of Trustees • Contract negotiation: SCLD proposal or something else? — Fee calculation methodology: SCLD proposed assessed valuation with alternate for annexation. — Assets: SCLD proposed service contract; items purchased to provide service are owned by District. — Contract term: SCLD proposed 5 -year term. • Continuation of services into 2005 without approved contract — Discontinue services after 12/31/04 and plan accordingly for short and long terms? — Or, negotiate terms for short-term service extension? Spokane County Library District Page 11 of 11 DRAFT 11/18/04 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT AND THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY RELATING TO THE PROVISION OF LIBRARY SERVICES WHEREAS, the City incorporated effective March 31, 2003; and At tachment 3 This lnterlocal Agreement (the. "Agreement ") is entered into this _ day of 2004, by and between the Spokane County Library District a political subdivision of the State of Washington (the "District ") and the City of Spokane Valley, a Non Charter Code City of the State of Washington (the "City ") jointly referred to as "Parties ". WHER.EAS, the District provided Library services ( "Library Services ") to the residents of the City prior to its incorporation through December 31, 2003; and WHEREAS, the' District provided Library Services to the residents of the City during 2.004 under a one year contract; and the .District has previously entered into contracts for Library Services with other cities and towns in Spokane County; and WHEREAS, the City issued a Request for Proposals for Library Services (the "RFP) and the District responded to the RFP with a Proposal (the "Proposal," incorporated by reference herein) prior to the 5:00 p.m., September 28, 2004 deadline; and WHEREAS the City evaluated all Proposals received and on the basis of its Proposal selected the District as the City's Library Services provider at the November 9, 2004 regular city council meeting; and WHEREAS, the City has the authority and desire to contract with the District for Library Services and to allocate funds in its general fund budget for the provision of Library Services to the residents of the City for a multi -year period beginning January 1, 2005; and WHEREAS the District has the authority and agrees, pursuant to RCW 27.12.180, to enter into a contract with the. City to continue to provide Library Services to residents of the City January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2009 under the terms set forth in the its Proposal and this Agreement; NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. District Commitment to Provide Library Services to the City. From January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2009, the District shall: a. provide public Library Services to residents of the City at the same service level and upon the same teens and conditions as are now being provided 1 to all other residents within the. District, consistent with the terms of the Proposal. b. work in cooperation with the City to achieve the goals of: I. Providing library and information services which meet the needs of the community; 2. Facilitating equitable access to information and library services through well managed resources which enable the community to access information in a variety of ways; 3. Developing a balanced collection of library materials that caters to the community's cultural, reference, lifelong learning and recreation needs; 4. Enriching the quality of life for Spokane Valley citizens by being a center for cultural and community activities and resources. c. Work in cooperation with the City to carry out the July 23, 2004 Spokane Valley Library Capital Facilities Plan elements that are integrated into the Comprehensive Plan's Capital Facilities Plan. DRAFT 11/18/04 2. Term of Library Services Agreement. This Agreement for Library Services between the Parties shall be in full force and effect for a five (5) year tenor commencing January 1, 2005. 3. City's Obligation to Pay District for Provision of Library Services. a. The City agrees to pay to the District a sum equal to that which the District would have collected had it levied its property tax on the property within the City at the same levy rate as the District levies on other property in the District during 2005, and for each succeeding year, to continue provision of library services to the residents of the City until the City annexes to the District. In no event shall the City's obligation to the District exceed $0.50 $1 of the City's assessed valuation of the property. b. The City shall pay the sum described in 2.a., above, to the District in two equal payments: the first payment shall be made by the City to the District by no later than May 31 of each year; the second payment shall be made by the City to the District by no later than November 30 of each year. 4. City Annexation to the District a. If the City requests annexation to the District under RCW 27.12.360, the District agrees to concur with the annexation request, enabling registered voters within the City to approve or disapprove the annexation proposal at an election to be held prior to June 1, 2005 in order to have the annexation be effective for the 2006 budget year if approved by City voters. b. If an an.nexation measure is approved, this Agreement becomes null and void on the effective date of the annexation DRAFT 11/18/04 5. Administrative Authority. The City Manager or designee shall administer and be the City's primary contact with the District. The Director of the District or designee shall be the District's primary contact with the City. 6. Relationship o f t he P arties. The Parties intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this agreement. This agreement is not a joint venture between the District and the City. No District or City employee shall be deemed a representative, employee or agent of the other Party for any purpose. 7. Notice. Notice shall be given in writing as follows: TO THE CITY: Name: Chris Bainbridge Title: City Clerk Phone Number: (509) 921 -1000 Address: 11707 East Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Accepted and agreed the year and date first above written. 3 TO THE DISTRICT: Name: Michael Wirt Title: Secretary, Board of Trustees Phone Number: (509) 924 -4122 Address: 4322 North Argonne Rd. Spokane, WA 99212 -1868 8. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. Each Party shall indemnify and hold the other, 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 any act or omission on the part of said Party or its agents, employees or volunteers in the performance of this Agreement. 9. Waiver. No officer, employee, agent or other individual acting on behalf of other Party has the power, right or authority to waive any of the conditions or provisions of this Agreement. No waiver in one instance shall be held to be waiver of any other subsequent breach or nonperformance.. Al] remedies afforded in this Agreement or by law, shall be taken a nd construed as cumulative, and in addition to every other remedy provided herein or by law. Failure of either Party to enforce at any time any of the provisions of this Agreement or to require at any time performance by the other Party of any provision hereof shall in no way be construed to be a waiver of such provisions nor shall it affect the validity of this Agreement or any part thereof. 10. Entire Agreement. This written agreement constitutes the entire and complete agreement between the City and the District for the provision of Library Services to the residents of the. City of Spokane Valley and supercedes any prior oral or written agreements. This Agreement may not be changed, modified or altered except in writing signed by the City and the District. DRAFT 1 1 /18 /04 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY LIBRARY DISTRICT David Mercier, City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY Stanley M. Schwartz Witherspoon, Kelley, Davenport & Toole. LLP Frank Payne, Chair Board of Trustees APPROVED AS TO FORM: COUNSEL TO THE DISTRICT Tames C. Sloane Paine, Hamblen, Coffin, Brooke & Miller, LLP 4 Spokane Valley Arts Council SVAC Mission Statement "To promote, support and enhance the diversity, quality and accessibility of arts and culture in Spokane Valley" klalus vtiymcarza Spokane Valley Arts Council History — Arts and Culture Transition Team was formed June 2002.' Known as "ACTT" — Applied for and deceived a grant from Foundation Northwest with Spokane Arts Commission — Initiated a phone survey of Valley residents to get their input on arts and culture conducted by SCC students 0011711. ICCM 4P9as112ryAa Cow Spokane Valley Arts Council Bill Bulick founded Creative Planning. Inc. in 1999 after nearly 20 years in non -profit and Arts management From 1989 -99 he was Executive Director of the Regional Arts and Culture Council of Portland, Oregon Qnba PO I'M SM>. Ydgna Cad 1 Spokane Valley Arts Council History • Worked cooperatively with the Spokane Arts Commission to sponsor - Bridging Tho Community' • Provided to Valleyfesta;traveling mural: -A 60 -foot long canvas. - Volunt helped festival-goers paint it_ ate, Pit nw e,as vet e7 ue C Wij Spokane Valley Arts Council SVAC Status and Community Support Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce agreed to provide support to SVAC for the first six months: Onaly Scrkz= Vdky Aw Canal 0eata:314 ))e Spokane Valley Arts Council SVAC Mission Statement "To promote, support and enhance the diversity, quality and accessibility of arts and culture in Spokane Valley Scam. VYtk7 Am C ®eil 2 Spokane Valley Arts Council Vision Statement "We envision artists, civic leaders and local businesses working cooperatively to conceive, develop and implement arts - related programs and cultural activities" ccuw nn na oiler Vane) AD Cara Mini Retreat June 14, 2004 - Set a Timeline of our activities - Set Priorities for 6 months - Set Priorities for the year (IamOa T1. SDI Spokane Valley Arts Council Spats: Ydkr Cast Ong. n rn( Spokane Valley Arts Council SVAC Milestone: June- August 2004 Spokane Valley Arts Council becomes a legal entity with EIN #, Bylaws, Articles of Incorporation, and 501 c3 preliminary approval letter Nov.1,2004 ,gle Cl 3 Omtor rft. 2334 Spokane Valley Arts Council SVAC Milestone: July 2004 Committee Structure: Arts Education Marketing Performing Arts Literary Arts Development Financial Visual arts Community Events Stdme Vt64 Ara [1'7 mina MW'r s tsn.0m gait Spokane Valley Arts Council Art Explorer Art Classes For Children (June- August 04) Held at the Valley Main Library: this program - offered children a wide range of hands -on Art Activities. ttacty X2004 Sprta4 Yang Am C 7 Spokane Valley Arts Council Community Events Valleyfest 2004 -First Juried Art Show - -Arts and Crafts Booths - Traveling Mural Project ()Pats :TA 3004 SA.: Vdh4 Ara C x401 4 l \ haae nn nu Spokane Valley Arts Council M Visual Arts IVICW Mr. Library Art Exhibits We have had 3 different shows by a variety of artists from the Spokane Valley. The Next show goes up in January! c04m :u. r». Spokane Valley Arts Council Top Priorities: Achieved to date • Art Explorer Classes @ Valley Library • Brochure • Valleyfest 2004 • Art Exhibits @ Valley Library • Membership Campaign =dQ % L 4 C.4ux1 Spokane Valley Arts Council SVAC Will Work To Facilitate: Family friendly programs /festivals Literary events, like Open Mic. Night, Opportunities for visiting artists Art lasses for children and adults, Music Recitals, Theatre Productions, Creation of exhibition spaces, Dance Acquiring Art for public spaces 00410 TL moo Sf*a. Vdk7 Am C 5 Spokane Valley Arts Council SVAC Planned Community Events Mirabeau Point Center Place Quality of Llfo Arts Programming Art Displays Jury art for Mirabeau % for.Art In public buildings awe2 XV. sp.vlk Amnia Spokane Valley Arts Council SVAC Planned Community Events Christmas Tree Lightling SVAC would like to collaborato with our :civic- leaders on this ovont. Spokane Valley Artist's Studio Tour SVAC will provide support in organizing an artist's studio tour fall 2005. Oaf's aU SOI *Ur Ville, Am Coil Spokane Valley Arts Council SVAC Planned Community Events Riverfest We hope to organize an Arts Festival which will be called Riverfest. Riverfest will eventually become a premier Art Festival. On»r:15.MIA SGdm S'.U'An Ceoxa 6 owed 2>h Zes Spokane Valley Arts Council Vision Statement "We envision artists, civic leaders and local businesses working cooperatively to conceive, develop and implement arts - related programs and cultural activities" SpAarvcn usC J 7 season. Details include levels of service, priorities, and required equipment and materials. Meeting Date: November 16, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: [ j consent ( ) old business [ ] new business ( ] public hearing [ ] information [ ] admin. report [ ] pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : REPORT ON SNOW REMOVAL PLAN FOR WINTER 2004/05 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: City Agreement No. CO3 -33 - Interlocal Agreement with Spokane County Regarding Road Maintenance and City Agreement No. CO3 -24 with Washington State Department of Transportation Regarding Road Maintenance PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Agreement CO3 -33 approved April 22, 2003; Agreement CO3 -24 approved March 28, 2003 BACKGROUND: PowerPoint presentation discusses snow removal operations for the upcoming 2004/05 winter RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: 2004 Snow Removal Budget: $875,204 2005 Proposed Snow Removal Budget: $802,564 STAFF CONTACT: John Hohman, P.E. ATTACHMENTS: Snow Removal Plan for Winter 2004/05 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Snow Removal Plan for Winter 2004/05 Neil Kersten, Public Works Director John Hohman, Senior Engineer November 30, 2004 Snow Removal Plan for Winter 2004/05 �.i Levels of Service ■ Crews provided by Spokane County and WSDOT through maintenance agreements m Crews available in shifts for 24 hour coverage WSDOT responsible for SR 290 -Trent and SR 27 -Pines ■ Trent and Pines are priority after I - 90 County responsible for all other arterials and streets Limited operations for snow events ranging from 1 to 3 inches — focuses on problem areas Full plowing activities for snow events exceeding a depth of 4 inches Typical Operations • Foremen monitor weather reports from consultant and internet C • Deicing activities begin prior to snow event • Deicer continuously melts snow and ice — can remain effective for several days El Sanding occurs during snow event — usually limited to intersections, hills, and corners Plowing performed as conditions warrant — coordination occurs with Police Department zi Full plow of City takes 4 1 /2 days with 24 hour operations Snow Removal Plan for Winter 2004/05 3 Priorities 7 " T' ,I3 II 4 Vl .• 2003-2004 Priority Snow Removal - PRIORITY I Snow Removal Plan for Winter 2004/05 4 Priorities r NM ost Lrf r sv ^ — � 4 2003 -2004 Priority Snow Removal - PRIORITY S PRIORITY 2 Snow Removal Plan for Winter 2004/05 5 Priorities c_f' s ns+ rte_ &41 7 - f iG t ,, vrsovr °„ 2003 -2004 Priority Snow Removal - PRIORITY PRIORITY 2 - PRIORITY 3 Snow Removal Plan for Winter 2004/05 6 Priorities Snow Removal Plan for Winter 2004/05 I b. • ill Ad , g'-', • - 5 01141 t irr - • , lot . -- 2-," - - CI ,es Lii r , - • . NI+111 _--,Lros _ ei ,... ... i i t m: p rigt ZCH,...,,,..-a=_._. 7.1,11 ti grin n i p 1 . , . _. • 11 1 UR. tallit fl rallir — . Illin2Alik - .:11.1. ' • ' • -."2u.... \ It="411111 EMI 1 I bk .. IOW mm•••• 13 : tiTII:Vai==1111 ; "' e • • M.ILTil;a1 I ' • ''.% 'V. L , : m4..,to !, :'4 4 , 47- t .41 i. -.1-. 4 , =,.. ,..,..., .. • ,. ti , p. 11 ....., .1... 11.. 11 "r, '3 , 117 [ ,== . Olin, '‘• a , am .47 ..* 4 \ .... • W. f ‘14T \- C-- .•• t NIMITTAi 44 . .._.! -,:e., 1 : •-• Dv 2001-2004 Priority Snow Removal — PRionmv 1 PRIORITY 2 - PRIORITY 3 - PRIORJ 7 Personnel and Equipment — Spokane County RI 20 Personnel 3 Sander /plow trucks typical 2 Deicer trucks 0 8 Graders Ei Additional personnel and equipment can be brought in from other county areas as needed Operations based out of yard near Flora and Euclid Personnel and Equipment — WSDOT RI 5 Personnel 2 Sander /plow trucks: one each for Pines and Trent — 2 others available as needed 2 Deicer trucks 1 Grader if needed Operations based out of yard near Pines and Indiana City Budget for 2004 and 2005 Spokane County Plowing, Sanding, Deicing 2004 $765,204 m 2005 $692,564 WSDOT Plowing, Sanding, Deicing for SR 290 Trent and SR 27 Pines [I 2004 $110,000 EA 2005 $110,000 Snow Removal Plan for Winter 2004/05 10 City Budget for 2004 and 2005 Totals Plowing, Sanding, Deicing Operations (Spokane County and WSDOT combined) 2004 $875,204 2005 $802,564 Snow Removal Plan for Winter 2004105 11 Meeting Date: November 30, 2004 Item: Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ information CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ pending legislation ❑ admin. report AGENDA ITEM TITLE: New Employee Position Descriptions GOVERNING LEGISLATION: NIA PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: 2005 Budget adoption 11/9/04 BACKGROUND: The 2005 budget includes 5.25 new positions. Position descriptions exist for three of those full -time positions — the Administrative Assistant, the Maintenance Worker (both for CenterPlace) and the Engineering Technician (Stormwater). However, the City does not have a position description for an Engineer. The City will use this description to hire an Engineer for Capital Projects, and one for the Stormwater program. In addition, the City has budgeted but never filled a CenterPlace Coordinator position, Hiring is timed in conjunction with CenterPlace completion, and is expected to be filled in spring 2005. A description is needed for this position as well. The purpose of this agenda item is to provide draft position descriptions and proposed classification levels for the Engineer and the CenterPlace Coordinator. OPTIONS: N/A RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Provide input and direction to staff BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Funds are included in the 2005 budget to fill the positions. STAFF CONTACT: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager ATTACHMENTS 1. Background Memo 2. Draft Position Descriptions — A) Engineer; B) CenterPlace Coordinator City Manager Sign -off: S161 . Valley Memorandum To: David Mercier, City Manager and Members of Council From: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Date: November 16, 2004 Re: Classification Levels for the New 2005 Positions The 2005 budget includes two position categories which are new to the Spokane Valley organization — the Engineer and the CenterPlace Coordinator. Draft position descriptions have been developed, and will be presented to Council for consideration. The purpose of this memo is to provide. background information, and to propose classification levels for these two new position types. Engineer 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 1 Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall ®spokanevalley.org Two new Engineer positions have been authorized for 2005. One Engineer will be a project manager for the City's capital improvement program. The second Engineer will be assigned to the Stormwater program, which will be taking a more proactive approach in protecting the aquifer and in complying with state and federal mandates. The City currently does not have an Engineer position category, so a position description does not exist, and a classification level has not been assigned. The Engineer position is non - supervisory, but may play a lead - worker role. He or she may be overseeing the work of other employees on a project - specific basis. This position will act as a project manager, and as a result will be exercising a high degree of independent judgment in the accomplishment of his/her responsibilities. This is not an entry -level position. The individual filling the Engineer position must be a Professional Engineer (PE), and have previous civil engineering experience. Staff recommends placing the Engineer position at Grade 16. There are several reasons for this recommendation, including appropriate placement within the Public Works Department, and in comparison to other City Departments. The City Clerk, Accounting Manager and Senior Planner are also placed in Grade 16. They are a mixture of lead - worker and supervisory positions. However, they are similar in the level of independent judgment they exercise, and in the level of complexity of the program areas for which Attachment 1 Classification Level for the New 2005 Positions, continued November 16, 2004 Page 2 of 3 they are responsible. The table below shows the Engineer's placement in the City's overall engineering Structure. Engineering Structure POSITION Engineerin Technician Assistant Engineer En ineer ro osed Part-Time Senior Engineer non - superviso Full -Time Senior Engineer — Capital Projects; Development su.ervisory) GRAUE 14 15 16 17 18 Comparables for the Engineer Position The Association of Washington Cities (AWC) compiles an employment survey. It is very helpful in providing general comparisons. However, the AWC survey is not an in- depth analysis of all city positions. From city to city, the job description (and even the title) will vary, as will that position's placement in the overall organization. These are important factors in determining appropriate compensation. The Engineer — Journey Level is the closest comparable in the AWC survey. It operates under the supervision of a senior or project engineer, as would be the case in Spokane Valley. It typically requires a four -year degree, and at least two years of experience. Following is a summary of Engineer — Journey Level positions for thirteen cities of population greater than 50,000. Spokane Valley (Grade 16) Spokane Valley (Grade 17) Engineer Average of 13 WA cities of population > 50,000 Range Range Low High $4,503 $5,609 $4,145 85,314 $4,606 85,905 The AWC average falls between two of Spokane Valley's grades. Staff recommends posting the Engineer positions at Grade 16. Grade 16 is somewhat less than the statewide average; however, it is slightly higher than the salary ranges reported by the City of Spokane and Spokane County for similar positions. It is reasonable to assume that Grade 16 is in line with the regional market. Classification Level for the New 2005 Positions, continued November 16, 2004 Page 3 of 3 CenterPlace Coordinator The CenterPlace Coordinator was funded in the 2004 budget, but will not be filled until spring 2005. This position will be responsible for overseeing the operations, maintenance and programs of the CenterPlace Regional Center. This position will supervise an Administrative Assistant and Maintenance Worker, both of whom have also been budgeted for 2005. Like the CenterPlace Coordinator, those two positions will likely be filled mid -2005. The CenterPlace Coordinator will develop and implement services and programs for the new facility, create and carry out a marketing plan, and have significant interaction with public and private groups, agencies and businesses. The successful candidate will have experience in recreation administration, hotel /convention center management, business administration or closely related fields. Staff recommends placing the CenterPlace Coordinator position at Grade 16. Other positions in this Grade include the City Clerk, the Accounting Manager and the Senior Planner. They are similar in the level of independent judgment they exercise, and in the level of complexity of the program areas for which they are responsible. Comparables for the CenterPlace Coordinator Position The AWC survey does not include a position comparable to the CenterPlace Coordinator. Staff is currently surveying other communities with similar facilities, and will report the results at the November 30 meeting. Class Title: Engineer Department: Public Works Division: NA Date: January 1, 2005 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY POSITION DESCRIPTION Job Code Number: 310 Grade Number: 16 FL SA Status: Exempt Location: City Hall GENERAL PURPOSE Performs a variety of technical, supervisory and complex engineering work in the accomplishment of transportation, stormwater, utility, environmental and other Public Works projects and programs, ensuring technical competence and compliance with all current codes and criteria. SUPERVISION RECEIVED: Works under the general guidance and direction of a Senior Engineer. SUPERVISION EXERCISED ATTACHMENT 2 -A N/A ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSi_BI.LITIES Provide professional engineering design, management, and review of engineering plans, specifications, and estimates related to private developments and municipal capital projects prepared by consultants and /or city staff. May exercise project supervision over assistant engineers and /or technical staff as assigned. Develops, evaluates potential impacts and assists in rendering decisions for the following: • Design standards and Deviation R.equests from property owners, developers, private. and governmental engineers, and utility companies. • Conditions of Approval for private development projects. • Road and easement establishments and vacations. • Developer Agreements Coordinates the formation and operation of Local Improvement Districts as required. Determines and accurately applies appropriate codes, regulations, and requirements for assigned projects. Coordinates the preparation of or develops, engineering plans and specifications, coordinates required advertising for bids, reviews construction bids and makes necessary recommendations based on lowest and best bids, competency of vendors and consultants, and the selection criteria. Provides project management for the design and/or construction of municipal public works projects. Oversees assigned projects to ensure consultant/contractor compliance with time and budget parameters for the project. Performs review of state and federal stormwater and environment permitting regulations. Assists in determining compliance with applicable stormwater and environmental requirements. Coordinates the development of, reviews, and/or updates the storm drainage, sanitary sewer, water, and street system maps, data base, and comprehensive plans. Assists in maintaining the engineering library and infrastructure records. Assures as -built records of capital projects and documents necessary changes for the operation and maintenance programs. Responds to public or other inquiries relative to engineering policies and procedures on specific projects and other information. Evaluates issues and options regarding municipal public works and makes recommendations. Maintains regular contact with consulting engineers, construction project engineers, City, County, State and Federal agencies, professional and technical groups and the general public regarding division activities and services. Provides intersection signal and channelization design. Assists in developing and maintaining a pavement management system. PERIPHERAL DUTIES Reviews, makes recommendations and/or approves Public Works- related permits, such as utility, street use and franchise utility. Assists in the evaluation of transportation and traffic impacts of development proposals, permits, rezones, plats, etc. Prepares traffic, utility and other studies and reports. Assists in the training of other city personnel in public works design and construction techniques. DESIRED MTs IIMUM QUALIFICATIONS Education and Experience: (A) Graduation from a four -year college or university with a degree in civil engineering or a closely related field; and (13) Minimum of three (3) years previous professional civil engineering experience including at least two years of municipal engineering; previous supervisory experience desired; or (C) Any equivalent combination of education and experience. Necessary Knowledge, Skills and Abilities: (A) Thorough knowledge of civil engineering principles, practices and methods as applicable to a municipal setting; thorough knowledge of applicable City policies, laws, and regulations affecting Division activities; (B) Considerable skill in arriving at cost estimates on complex projects; skill in operating the listed tools and equipment. (C) Ability to communicate effectively, orally and in writing, with employees, consultants, other governmental agency representatives, City officials and the general public; ability to conduct necessary engineering research and compile comprehensive reports. Position Description: Engineer 2 Ci (D) A key value of the City is customer service. This position requires considerable knowledge, ability and skill in the principles and practices of excellent customer service as practiced in both the private and public sectors. It requires the ability to effectively meet and deal with the public; the ability to handle stressful situations; the ability to greet and respond to customers, in a friendly, pleasant and professional manner using appropriate inflection, grammar and syntax; the ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships with employees, supervisors, and the general public; the ability to maintain a professional, courteous, and pleasant demeanor in difficult and stressful situations; and the ability to diplomatically deal with difficult people. A willingness to expend extra effort to help the public find answers or information relative to their inquiry or complaint is expected. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS Must possess a valid State driver's license or have the ability to obtain one prior to employment; Registration as a Professional Engineer (PE) in the State of Washington or reciprocal certification; TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT USED Personal computer, including word processing, spreadsheet, and data base and computer- aided- design software; standard drafting tools; surveying equipment including level, theodolite and electronic distance measuring devices; motor vehicle; phone; mobile radio. PHYSICAL DEMANDS The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. Work is performed mostly in office settings. Some outdoor work is required in the inspection of various land use developments, construction sites, or public works facilities. Work necessitates moving about on construction work sites, and may take place under adverse weather conditions. Hand -eye coordination is necessary to operate drafting instruments, computers and various pieces of office equipment. While performing the duties of this job, the employee is occasionally required to stand; walk; use hands to finger, handle, feel or operate objects, tools, or controls; and reach with hands and arms. The employee is occasionally required to sit; climb or balance; stoop, kneel, crouch, or crawl; talk or hear; and smell. The employee must occasionally lift and /or move up to 25 pounds. Specific vision abilities required by this job include close vision, distance vision, color vision, peripheral vision, depth perception, and the ability to adjust focus. WORK ENVIRONMENT The work envirotunent characteristics described here are representative of those an employee encounters while performing the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. Position Description: Engineer 3 While performing the duties of this job, the employee occasionally works in outside weather conditions. The employee occasionally works near moving mechanical parts and in high, precarious places and is occasionally exposed to wet and /or humid conditions, fumes or airborne particles, toxic or caustic chemicals, risk of electrical shock, and vibration. The noise level in the work environment is usually quiet to moderate. SELECTION GUIDELINES Formal application, rating of education and experience; oral interview and reference check; job related tests may be required. The duties listed above are intended only as illustrations of the various types of work that may be performed. The omission of specific statements of duties does not exclude them from the position if the work is similar, related or a logical assignment to the position. The job description does not constitute an employment agreement between the employer and employee and is subject to change by the employer as the needs of the employer and requirements of the job change. Approval: Approval: Human Resources Manager Effective Date: January 1, 2005 City Manager Revision History: New Position Description: Engineer 4 Class Title: Department: Division: Date: CenterPlace Coordinator Parks & Recreation NA January 1, 2005 CITY Of SPOKANE VALLEY POSITION DESCRIPTION ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: Job Code Number: Grade Number: FLSA Status: Location: ATTACHMENT 2 -B 430 16 Exempt CenterPlace GENERAL PURPOSE: Manages operations, maintenance and programs of the CenterPlace Community Center. SUPERVISION RECEIVED Works under the guidance and direction of the Parks and Recreation Director SUPERVISION EXERCISED Exercises supervision over Administrative Assistant., Maintenance Worker(s), and other personnel as assigned. Manages and participates in the development and implementation of goals, objectives, policies and priorities for assigned programs; recommends and administers policies.and procedures. Selects, trains, evaluates and disciplines personnel, and resolves employee grievances. Determines work procedures, prepares work schedules and expedites workflow. Issues written and oral instructions. Assigns duties and examines work for exactness, neatness and conformance to policies and procedures. Counsels employees to improve • performance. Studies and standardizes procedures to improve efficiency of subordinates. Oversees and participates in the development and administration of the Parks and Recreation Department's annual budget in areas of responsibility; participates in the forecast of funds needed for staffing, training, equipment, materials, supplies and projects. Develops, promotes, coordinates, organizes, and participates in services and programs at CenterPlace. Seeks new and innovative ways to utilize available space. Interacts with public and private groups, agencies and businesses to maximize CenterPlace use by developing marketing strategies that support and enhance existing, local and regional business, service clubs, and other service providers. Manages and supervises CenterPlace regional community and senior center facility: • Develops and implements maintenance and operations procedures and conducts minor facility repairs; • Schedules and monitors the use of facilities in conjunction with city staff and other building tenants; • Administers service contracts, such as janitorial; and • Maintains records of facility use. Assures that assigned areas of responsibility are performed within budget; performs cost control activities; monitors revenues and expenditures in assigned area to assure sound fiscal control; prepares annual budget requests; assures effective and efficient use of budgeted funds, personnel, materials, facilities and time. Provides recommendations for program and facility fees. Makes private and public presentations, both written and oral, to supervisors, boards, commissions, civic groups, potential clients and the general public. Communicates official plans, programs, policies and procedures to staff and the general public. PERIPHERAL DUTIES Researches, prepares and administers grants benefiting CenterPlace. Serves as a member of various staff committees as assigned. Keeps abreast of trends and developments in the field of community center marketing and management. Assists other Department staff as needed. DESIRED MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS Education and Experience: A. Graduation from an accredited four -year college or university with a degree in recreation administration, hotel /convention center management, business administration or closely related fields. 13. Minimum three (3) years previous experience and /or training that includes management, customer service, and recreation administration, two of which are m community center, banquet facilitates, or other public facilities management. C. Any equivalent combination of education and experience. Necessary Knowledge, Skills and Abilities: A. Ability to identify and achieve long and short term management goals. Position Description: CcnterPlace Coordinator 2 B. Ability to communicate effectively, orally and in writing, with employees, consultants, representatives of the business conununity and the general public. C. Knowledge of community center and food service facilities and programs. D. Knowledge and skills in the area of marketing, including: 1) Marketing principles and fund raising methods, including the development and implementation of a Marketing Plan; 2) Ability to identify and capture market segment. E. Knowledge and skills in the area of fiscal management, including: 1) Methods and procedures of budgeting; 2) Tracking expenditures and revenues and meeting financial objectives; 3) Maintaining accurate financial records and participating in a Department - wide budget process; 4) Office and billing procedures and practices. F. A key value of the City is customer service. This position requires considerable knowledge, ability and skill in the principles and practices of excellent customer service as practiced in both the private and public sectors. It requires the ability to effectively meet and deal with the public; the ability to handle stressful situations; the ability to greet and respond to customers in a friendly, pleasant and professional manner using appropriate inflection, grammar and syntax; the ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships with employees, supervisors and the general public; the ability to maintain a professional, courteous, and pleasant demeanor in difficult and stressful situations; and the ability to diplomatically deal with difficult people. A willingness to expend extra effort to help the public find answers or information relative to their inquiry or complaint is expected. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS Valid state driver's license or the ability to obtain one within 90 days. TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT USED Personal computer, including word processing, spreadsheet, presentation and database software; adding machine and/or calculator; telephone, copy- and fax machine. PHYSICAL DEMANDS The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. Position Description: CenterPlace Coordinator 3 While performing the duties of this job, the employee is frequently required to walk, sit and talk or hear. The employee is occasionally required to use hands to finger, handle, feel or operate object, tools, or controls; and reach with hands and arms. The employee is occasionally required to climb or balance; stoop, kneel, crouch, or crawl. The employee must occasionally lift and/or move up to 50 pounds. Specific vision abilities required by this job include close vision, color vision, and the ability to adjust focus. WORK ENVIRONMENT The work environment characteristics described here are representative of those an employee encounters while performing the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions. While performing the duties of this job, the employee occasionally works in outside weather conditions. The employee is occasionally exposed to wet and /or humid conditions, or airborne particles. The noise level in the work environment is usually quiet in the office, and moderate in the field. SELECTION GUIDELINES Formal application, rating of education and experience; oral interview and reference check; job - related tests may be required. The duties listed above are intended only as illustrations of the various types of work that may be performed. The omission of specific statements of duties does not exclude them from the position if the work is similar, related or a logical assignment to the position. The job description does not constitute an employment agreement between the employer and employee, and is subject to change by the employer as the needs of the employer and requirements of the job change. Approval: Human Resources Manager Effective Date: January 1, 2005 Approval: Revision History: New City Manager Position Description: CenterPlace Coordinator 4 DATE: November 30, 2004 TYPE: ❑ Consent ❑ Legislation City of Spokane Valley Request for Council Review ❑ Old Business ® New Business ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Information ❑ Administrative Report AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Study Session GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Interim Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane Valley Interim Comprehensive Plan provides for an annual Comprehensive Plan amendment process. The Community Development Department received eight amendment proposals by the July 1, 2004 submittal deadline. The amendments for 2004 are summarized below: File No. CPA -01 -04 Location: South side of Dishman -Mica Road, west of its intersection with Bowdish Road. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map amendment from Low Density Residential to Community Commercial; corresponding Zoning Map amendment from UR -3.5 and B -3 to B -2, Community Commercial, on approximately 4.23 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to Community Commercial and zone B -2. File No. CPA -02-04 Location: North side of Broadway Avenue, east of Ella Road. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map amendment from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; corresponding Zoning Map amendment from UR -3.5 to UR -22 on approximately 1.4 acres of land. PC Recommendation: No Change File No. CPA -03 -04 Location: South side of Springfield Avenue, west of Sullivan Road, one block north of Valleyway. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map amendment from Medium Density to High Density Residential; corresponding Zoning Map amendment from UR -7 and B -2 to UR -22 on approximately 1.45 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to High Density Residential and zone UR -22 File No. CPA -04-04 Location: South side of Broadway Avenue, about 4000 feet east of Sullivan Road. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map amendment from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; corresponding Zoning Map amendment from UR -3.5 to UR -22 on approximately 4.85 acres of land. PC Recommendation: No Change File No. CPA -05-04 Location: North side of Valleyway Avenue, about 150 feet east of Sullivan Road, Request: Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from Low Density Residential to Regional Commercial; corresponding Zoning Map amendment from UR -22 to B -1 on approximately 1.75 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to Regional Commercial and zone B -2 File No. CPA -06-04 Location: East side of Adams Road, about 400 feet south of Mission Avenue. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map amendment from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; corresponding Zoning Map amendment from UR -3.5 to UR -22 on approximately 8 acres of land. PC Recommendation: No Change File No. CPA -07 -04 Location: The proposal will remove Mansfield Avenue, between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway, from the Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan. Request: Amend the Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan by removing Mansfield Avenue between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway. PC Recommendation: No Recommendation to date. Planning Commission continued testimony to allow time for Applicant to prepare a traffic study. File No. CPA -08 -04 Location: North of Rutter Road, west of Dora Avenue, on the southeastern boundary of Felts Field Airport, the only Airport property located within the City of Spokane Valley. Request Comprehensive Plan Map amendment from Low Density Residential to Light Industrial; corresponding Zoning Map amendment from UR -3.5 to 1 -2 on approximately 10 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2. The Spokane Valley Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on September 23, 2004, to consider the proposed amendments. After hearing public testimony, the Commission made recommendations on seven of the amendments. The Commission continued the public hearing for CPA - 07-04 to October 14, 2004, to allow time for the applicant and City staff to review information submitted for the hearing. On October 14, 2004, the hearing was continued to November 18, 2004 to allow the Applicant time to complete a traffic study for the area. The Applicant submitted the study to the City on November 10, 2004, resulting in another request to continue the hearing by the Public Works Department to allow sufficient time to review the complex traffic study. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report, application materials, vicinity, zoning and comprehensive plan maps, public comment correspondence and Planning Commission minutes. STAFF CONTACT: Scott Kuhta, AICP, Planner Spokane Valley Planning Commission Approved Minutes Council Chambers — City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave. September 23, 2004 I. CALL TO ORDER Planning Commission Chair Gothmann called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Commission, audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. ITt. ROLL CALL Fred Beaulac— Present Bob Blum — Present David Crosby — Excused Absence Gail Kogle — Present Bill Gothmann — Present Ian Robertson — Present John G. Carroll — Present IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Gothmann suggested that the Public Hearings for REZ -17 -04 (Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone) and CPA -06 -04 be moved to the top of the scheduled list of hearings. Commissioner Robertson moved that the September 23, 2004 agenda be approved as amended Commissioner Kogle seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Gothmann asked that the record reflect an excused absence for Mr. Crosby on August 26, 2004. It was moved by Commissioner Beaulac and seconded by Commissioner Robertson that the minutes of the August 26, 2004 Planning Commission meetings be approved as amended Motion passed unanimously. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. VII. COMMISSION REPORTS Conunnissioner Robertson thanked the Planning staff for the new Comprehensive Plan Community Meeting format. It worked very well at Zion Evangelical C Lutheran Church on September 9, 2004. Ms. Sukup announced the dates of the final three Community Meetings: October 7, 2004 at Bowdish Middle School; October 28, 2004 at Pratt Elementary School, and November 4, 2004 in the City Hall Council Chambers. Commissioner Kogle reported that the Clear View Triangle Ordinance and Street Vacation Request liSTV -04 -04 were both advanced to a second reading on October 28, 2004, by the City Council. Commissioner Gothmann reminded the Commissioners that there will be two vacancies on the Planning Commission as of December 31, 2004. City Council has decided to open the positions up to interested community members, and Commissioners Crosby and Blum have been asked to submit applications to formally reapply. He also complimented the Planning staff on the Couplet Economic Analysis presentation and Charrette held on Monday, September 20, 2004. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Ms. Sukup notified the Planning Commission that some of their regularly scheduled meetings in October and November have been changed to accommodate the fuial three Comprehensive Plan Community Meetings. The October 28, 2004 regular meeting has been cancelled to accommodate a Community Meeting at Pratt Elementary School on that date. Since both regular meetings in November fall on City holidays, meetings will be changed to the first and third Thursdays of the month with a Community Meeting on November 7, 2004, and a regular meeting on Thursday, November 18, 2004. A current Community Development Calendar was passed out to all Commissioners. Qt. COMMISSION BUSINESS A. NEW BUSINESS: Pu blic Hearing: Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone Application #REZ-17 -04 Chairman Gothmann opened the public hearing for REZ -17 -04 at 6:50 p.m. Mr. Greg McCormick, Planning Division Manager, provided the Commission and audience with a brief overview of the area -wide rezone application. REZ -17 -04 is a request from over 51% of Greenacres area citizens to rezone a site generally bounded by Mission Avenue on the south, Darker Road on the east, and the Spokane River on the north and west from UR -3.5 and UR -7* to UR -3.5 only. Planning Division staff recommended the requested rezone be approved with one exception: existing property owners in the area maintain the ability to rezone back to UR -7* through the City's formal application and Hearing Examination process. Commissioner Carroll asked Mr. McCormick if there were any property owners within the boundaries of this area -wide rezone who were already 2 vested to be zoned outside the proposed UR -3.5 zone. Mr. McCormick affirmed that the City has some preliminary plat applications from this area that are consistent with the U -7* usage. Commissioner Carroll responded that it would be worthwhile for the Planning Commission to be provided a map containing details about the properties which are already vested to be zoned outside the UR -3.5 zone. In preparation for public testimony, Commissioner Gotlunann read the audience the associated Rules of Procedure. He explained that individual testimony would be limited to three minutes. Those providing testimony for groups would be allowed to speak for five minutes. Public Testimony for REZ -17 -04 was opened at 6:58 p.m. Mary Pollard, Applicant, 17216 E. Baldwin Ave., Spokane Valley Ms. Pollard was speaking on behalf of the 71% of Greenacres area citizens who signed the petition in favor of an area -wide rezone to 1.1R -3.5. She thanked the Planning Commission and Planning Division staff for their assistance with this area -wide rezone application. Ms. Pollard strongly suggested that after this area has been successfully rezoned, all property owners within the stated borders be required to present their rezone requests as annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments to limit sudden and random land use activity. The application for REZ -1 7 -04 contained a written narrative of citizens' concerns, which were briefly outlined during Ms. Pollard's presentation to the Commission. She emphasized her community's belief that building high density structures within this area would be detrimental in many ways. She assured the Commission that she and other members of her group will be paying careful attention to any new developments, and will be forwarding their zoning concerns throughout the GMA process. Vicky Dalton, 1816 N. Greenacres, Spokane Valley Ms. Dalton spoke in favor of the area -wide rezone request. She has lived in Greenacres for thirteen years, and it is a very close knit community. Greenacres citizens understand that development will occur. They would, however, like to participate in the design and structure of what their neighborhood will look like in the future. This rezone application was submitted to buy them time so they can continue to share the closeness of the community with everyone moving in or visiting. Ms. Dalton thanked the Planning Commission and Planning Division staff for their help with the area -wide rezone application. Commissioner Robertson read the names of audience members who were in favor of the proposed area -wide rezone but did not wish to speak. They `, were: Bob and Pat Lowerce, E. 16908 Indiana, Spokane Valley John Bowditch, 17725 E. Montgomery, Spokane Valley Rich & Alice Beattie, 17324 E. Montgomery, Spokane Valley Nahlah Abdal -Wahed and Mohamed El-Bakkush, 18410 E. Riverway, Spokane Valley Mir. Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner, submitted letters and emails from citizens in favor of RITZ -17 -04 to the Planning Commission. These letters will become part of the permanent record and were from: John Bowditch, 17725 E. Montgomery Ave., Spokane Valley Grace & Al Frederick (no address provided) Bob and Pat Loweree, E. 16908 Indiana Ave., Spokane Valley A petition in favor of the rezone application was submitted by Gary & Laurie Hopkins, 1306 N. Long Road, in Greenacres and signed by eighteen other citizens living in or around the subject area. It will be placed in the permanent record. Citizens opposing the proposed Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone were called to testify: ,Tarn Courchaine. 17201 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley Ms. Courchaine was opposed to REZ- 17 -04. She owns and operates Arbor Grove Mobile Home Park, which is a 96 -unit adult Mobile Horne Park. She purchased some UR -7* zoned property on the comer of Indiana and Greenacres in December 2003 to extend her Mobile Home Park and potentially build duplex units. She recently discovered that this property is now within the proposed boundaries of the area -wide rezone to UR -3.5, which would prohibit her from development. Ms. Courchaine has already hired an engineer to begin development of her property. She was told by a City Planner that if she requested an exclusion of her property from the area -wide rezone, the Planning Commission could grant her request. Mr. McCormick affirmed that the Planning Commission does have the power to exclude Ms. Courcbaine's property from the rezone request at this time so it could maintain its UR -7* zoning. Rick Berg, 18313 E. Rivcrwav, Spokane Valley Mr. Berg requested his property and another parcel of land at 18319 F. Riverway be exempted by the Planning Commission from REZ -17 -04 so the UR -7* zoning can be maintained. Dan Frickle, 18400 E. Indiana, Spokane Valley Mr. Frickle lives next door to Ms. Courchaine, and requested that the Planning Commission exempt his property from R.EZ -17 -04 so it can maintain its present UR -7* zoning. Mr. Kuhta submitted two letters to be placed into the permanent record in opposition to REZ- 17 -04. One was a letter from Attorney Margaret L. Arpin, Arpin Law Office, and requesting exemption of the following properties: Lots N Land, L.L.C. Properties: Parcel numbers 55073.0715, 55073.1235 and 55074.0303 have received preliminary plat approval and are vested to be reviewed under the zoning in effect today. The second was a letter from: Joe & Jayne House, 17406 E. Montgomery Ave., Spokane Valley Vicky Dalton, 1816 N. Greenacres. Spokane Valley Ms. Dalton stepped up to the microphone a second time to ask the Planning Commission not to remove the requested parcels from the area - wide rezone application. They are directly north of her home and there are serious electrical infrastructure issues in that area. The applicants wish to have their area looked at in its entirety, she asked the Planning Commission not to allow spot zoning at this time. Jayn Courchaine, 17201 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley I4er main concern in attending this public hearing was to protect her rights as a landowner. She has no intention of growing quickly, but wishes to take her time to do it right. Jerry Norman, 18321 E. Riverwav, Spokane Valley Mr. Norman explained that Greenacres citizens are not afraid of development, but they wish to halt congested development. He doesn't want to see empty lots fill up with seven houses per acre. He is against spot zoning as well. The hearing was closed to further public testimony at 7:30 p.m. The Commission raised the question of the different processes for exemption from the requested rezone to UR -3.5. Property owners have two options: to gain exemption from the UR -3.5 zoning designation by direct request to the Planning Commission at the time of public hearing, or to submit a rezone request to the City at a cost of $1,800 for processing and Hearing Examiner fees. Commissioner Robertson moved that the Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone Request #REZ -17 -04 be approved as presented by the staff Motion seconded by Commissioner Beaulac. Motion tabled Ms. Sukup explained to the Planning Commission that it could draw the boundaries for the area -wide rezone proposal, excluding requested parcels, but she did not recommend that. It was moved by Commissioner Blum that an amendment be made to Commissioner Robertson's original motion to exclude the four parcels requested by Jayn Courchaine, Rick Berg and Dan Fricke, plus the three parcels requested in Attorney Margaret Arpin's letter on behalf of Lots N Land, L.L.C. Properties. The amendment was seconded by Commissioner CarrolL Commissioners Carroll, Blum and Robertson voted in favor of the amendment. Commissioners Kogle, Beaulac and Gothmann voted against the amendment Motion for amendment to the original motion failed to carry. The Planning Commissioners continued its discussion of REZ- 17 -04. Commissioner Kogle moved to table the original motion to approve the Greenacres Area -Wide .Rezone as presented, and to table the Public Hearing on REZ -17 -04 to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission October 14, 2004. Commissioner Carroll seconded the motion. Commissioners Kogle, Beaulac, Blum and Carroll voted in favor of the motion. Conunissioners Gothmann and Robertson voted against the motion. Motion passed 4 -2. Planning Division staff will gather information on present land actions and requested parcel exemptions in order to prepare a map for the Commissioners to study and discuss at the October 14, 2004 public hearing. At 7:50 p.m., Public Hearing on REZ-17-04 was tabled for continuation on October 14, 2004. The Commission took a break from 7:50 to 8:00 p.m. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -06 -04 Commissioner Gothmann opened the hearing for CPA -06 -04 at 8:00 p.m. M.r. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application by the Crosby Family Land, LLC for approximately 8 acres of land located on the east 6 side of Adams Road, approximately 400 feet south of Mission Avenue; Parcel No. 45141.9003. Applicant's proposal: change the property from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential and to change the zoning from UR -3.5 to UR -22. The application states the intent to develop the property into an adult living /assisted living facility. Staff recommendation: no change to the current Comprehensive Plan designation. The area is surrounded by large, undeveloped parcels of land with limited infrastructure available to support higher densities. The area should be reviewed during the City's Comprehensive Plan process with community input into the design of the Land Use .Plan. Public Testimony for CPA -06 -04 was opened at 8:03 p.m. Commissioner Robertson explained that there were no speaker cards submitted in favor of the proposal. The following citizens spoke in opposition to CPA- 06 -04: Ron Van Tassel, 1003 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Mr. Van Tassel's rear property line abuts the subject property. Staff recommendation coincides with his opinion. He submitted a petition signed by over 200 residents of the area in opposition to the change in Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning. Existing infrastructure cannot support a high - density development. Area residents don't want this development. Ruth Maddox, 919 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Ms. Maddox explained that the vacant lot is presently being used as a park. She is happy to know that the staff doesn't recommend the proposed changes. Gary Ramsey, 1207 N. Adams Road, Spokane Valley Mr. Ramsey reported that the sewer is new this year and is not capable of high- density flow. Doug; Slaton, 15311 E. 15 Avenue, Spokane Valley Mr. Slaton concurs with the staff recommendation and the views of the previous speakers. Lillian Mittman, 1010 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Ms. Mittman concurs with all the previous speakers in opposition to this proposal. She has lived in this neighborhood since 1957, and finds it stable and established. There are already many care enters in the area. Sewer capabilities are of major concern to area residents. Bill Downie, 14215 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley Mr. Downie agrees with the previous speakers. He doesn't believe adding high- density development to this low- density neighborhood would be prudent. Traffic, especially on the comer of Cataldo and Evergreen, has become a problem. He believes that this vacant lot would be a perfect location for a park. Commissioner Gothmann suggested that Mr. Downie speak to Mike Jackson, Parks & Recreation Director, about the Parks Department Long Range Plan. Gretchen .Hoy, 1218 N. Marcus, Spokane Vallee Ms. Hoy owns four properties adjacent to the Crosby Family Land property. Access to the Crosby property is a concern to her. She presented the Commission with a copy of a letter to be placed into the permanent record. Amanda Clemmons, 1006 N. Warren, Spokane Valley Ms. Clemmons' concern is for the safety of her children. She moved to a low - density area so there would be less traffic danger. Jill Woolf, 524 N. Adams Road, Spokane Valley Ms. Woolf teaches school at Progress Elementary. All of the school children in this area walk to school. There are no sidewalks or curbs, and no street lights except on Broadway. This high- density development adds to the safety issues already existing in the neighborhood. Other citizens present, who were opposed to Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. CPA -06 -04 but did not wish to speak, were: Vic Headlee, 1017 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley *Linnea and Karin Hall, 1021 N. Cahrin Road, Spokane Valley Mary E. Summerson, 1107 N. Warren Road, Spokane Valley Martha L. Summerson Witter, 1105 N. Warren Road, Spokane Valley Sam and Andria Delgado, 14513 E. Mallon, Spokane Valley Franklin and Nancy Smith, 917 N. Warren Road, Spokane Valley Karl H. Garlock, 921 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Dave and Dani Fergen, 14316 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley Robert and Maryann Adams, 14507 E. Mallon, Spokane Valley Chris and Jamie Owens, 14511. E. Mallon, Spokane Valley Thomas Endicott, 11 N. Warren, Spokane Valley Rich and Peggy Cannon, 1103 Burns Road, Spokane Valley Debbie Downie, 14215 E. Cataldo Avenue, Spokane Valley Leonard and Lena Lyson, 1111 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Eric and Colleen Meyer, 14207 E. Cataldo Avenue, Spokane Valley Tanner Woolf, 524 N. Adams Road, Spokane Valley Jeff and Kristie James, 14315 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley *Joan E. Colwell - Hartung, 918 N. Calvin Road, Spokane Valley Paul Swavely, 924 N. Calvin Road, Spokane Valley *Letters from these citizens were received by the Planning Commission and placed into permanent record. Mr. Kuhta presented the Commission with a letter opposing CPA -06 -04 to include in the permanent record from: Gary L. Collins, 1204 N. Calvin, Spokane Valley Public Testimony for the hearing on CPA -06 -04 was closed at 8:24 p.m. Commissioner Carroll moved that the Planning Commission accept the staff's recommendation on CPA -06 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further action. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Blum. Motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Robertson commended the neighborhood for banding together on this issue. The Comrnission took a second break from 8:25 to 8:33 p.m.. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -01 -04 Commissioner Gothmann opened the hearing for CPA -01 -04 at 8:33 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Warren and Sylvia Riddle for approximately 4.23 acres of land located on the south side of Dishman -Mina Road, west of Bowdish Road; Parcel Nos. 45333.9024 and 45333.9155. Applicants' proposal: change the land use designation from Low - Density Residential to Community Commercial; change zoning from B -3 and UR -3.5 to B -2. Staff recommendation: change property to Community Commercial and zone entire property B -2. The property is not suited for residential use due to railroad adjacent to southern parcel boundary and a busy arterial intersection. Public Testimony for CPA -01 -04 was opened at 8:36 p.m. Sylvia Riddle, Applicant, 13616 E. Mt. Spokane Drive, Spokane County (home), 11210 E. Dishpan -Mica Road, Spokane Valley (work) Mrs. Riddle grew up in the Chester Township. She and her husband bought this property in chunks with the express purpose of breathing new life into a stretch of property that was once Chester Township's - community center (post office, grade school, etc.). They now need to sell the property, and wish to have it rezoned consistently with the surrounding parcels so it can more easily be sold to another entrepreneur. She asked the Planning Commission to approve the request. Public Testimony for CPA-01-04 was closed at 8:43 p.m. It was moved by Commissioner Robertson and seconded by Commissioner Carroll that the Planning Commission accept the staff's recommendation on CPA -01 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council forfurther action. Motion passed unanimously. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment ?CPA -01 -04 was closed at 8:45 p.m. Ms. Sukup explained to the Commission and audience that Comprehensive Plan Amendments will be presented to the City Council for a first reading at its November 23, 2004 meeting. Public Bearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -02 -04 Public Hearing on CPA -02 -04 was opened at 8:46 p.m. Mx. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Robert G. Curry for approximately 1A acres of land located on the north side of Broadway Avenue, east of Ella Road; Parcel No. 45812.9035. Applicant's proposal: change land use designation from Low- Density Residential to High - Density Residential; change zoning from UR -3.5 to UR -22. Staff recommendation: change the Comprehensive Plan designation to High - Density Residential for the subject property and the property surrounding the subject that is currently zoned UR -22. Staff also recommends changing the zone of the subject parcel to UR -22. Public Testimony for CPA -02 -04 was opened at 8:48 p.m. Robert Currv, Applicant, P.O. Box 1031, Chewelah, WA 99109 Mr. Curry's aim with this application is to make the subject and surrounding property more compatible for development. Public Testimony for CPA -02 -04 was closed at 8:49 p.m. It was moved by Commissioner .Beaulac that the Planning Commission accept the staffs recommendation for CPA -02 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further action. Motion passed unanimously. 10 Public Hearing on CPA -02 -04 was closed at 8:50 p.m. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -03 -04 Chairman Gothmann opened the public hearing for CPA -03 -04 at 8:50 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Dwight Hume, representing the Pring Corporation, for 1.45 acres of land located on the south side of Springfield Avenue, west of Sullivan Road, one block north of Valleyway; Parcel No. 45144.0245. Applicants' proposal: change the land use designation from Medium - Density Residential to High - Density Residential; change zone from UR -7 and B -2 to UR -22. The Applicant indicates that the site would be an ideal location for a medical office facility, and that the current Comprehensive Plan designation would not allow for medical offices. Staff recommendation: staff recommends changing the Comprehensive Plan designation to High - Density Residential and implementing with the UR -22 zone. Public Testimony for CPA -03 -04 was opened at 8:53 p.m. Dwight Hume, Applicant, 9101 N. Mt. View Lane, Spokane Mr. Hume reviewed the staff report and agreed with the recommendation. Greg Waggoner, 15317 E. Springfield Avenue, Spokane Valley Mr. Waggoner approves the zoning change with the understanding that a medical office, not an apartment building, will be built on the land. Road improvements are needed in this area, and this development may encourage pavement and curbs. John Rohrhack, 15311 E. Springfield, Spokane Valley Mr. Rohrback's major concern with the zone change is that apartments may be built on the land, and he is totally opposed to any use of the property other than for a medical office building. Planning staff explained to Mr. Waggoner and Mr. Rohrback that the Planning Commission bas no control over land use after a zone has been determined. Public Testimony for CPA -03 -04 was dosed at 8:56 p.m. Commissioner Kogle moved, and Commissioner Blum seconded, a motionfor Planning Commission to accept the staffs r ecommendation for CPA -03 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further 11 action. Commissioners Blum, Beaulac, Gothmann, Robertson and .Kogle voted in favor of the motion. Commissioner Carroll voted against the notion. Motion passed 5-1. Staff explained that LTR -22 is the only existing zone that would allow for a medical office to be built on the property, so it was the only viable rezone option. Public Hearing for CPA -03 -04 was closed at 9:00 p.m. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -04-04 Public Hearing for CPA -04 -04 was opened at 9:00 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Paul Gillespie, Jr. for 4.85 acres of land located on the south side of Broadway Avenue, about 4,000 feet east of Sullivan Road; Parcel No. 45134.0206. Applicant's proposal: change property from Low- Density Residential to High - Density Residential; change zone to UR -22. Staff recommendation: staff recommends no change to the current Comprehensive Plan designation. The area is surrounded by large, undeveloped parcels of land with limited infrastructure available to support higher densities. The area should be reviewed during the City's Comprehensive Plan process with community input into the design of the Land Use Plan. Public Testimony for CPA -04-04 was opened at 9:03 p.m. Paul Gillespie, 740 E. Plateau Road, Spokane Mr. Gillespie explained that there is some development occurring in the area, noting the Wal -Mart shopping area, and he doesn't think east Broadway will remain a two -lane road forever. He foresees a need in the area for small, well- built, multi - family areas. Public Testimony for CPA -04 -04 was closed at 9:07 p.m. Staff explained that the City of Spokane Valley has not scheduled any road improvements for east Broadway in its six -year road plan. There are no sewers in the area. Mr. Gillespie's proposal does not appear to be the best choice for his property at this time. Although Mr. Gillespie has made some good points in his application, the absence of design standards negatively affects the tinning for approval. Commissioner Beaulac moved that the Planning Commission accept the staff's recommendation for CPA -04 -04 as written, and forward it to the 12 City Council for further action. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Carroll. Motion passed unanimously. Public clearing for CPA -04 -04 was closed at 9:10 p.m. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -05 -04 Public hearing for CPA -05 -04 was opened at 9:11 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Vernon Eden for 1.75 acres of land located on the north side of Valleyway Avenue, about 150 feet off Sullivan Road; Parcel Nos. 45133.0524 and 45133.0540. Applicants' proposal: change property from Low - Density Residential to Regional Commercial; change zone from UR -22 to B -1. Staff recommendation: Planning staff recommended changing the property to Regional Commercial and applying the 13-2 zone. Staff further recommended no further commercial zoning east of the subject property along Valleyway. There was no Public Testimony for CPA- 05 -04. Commissioner Robertson moved that the Planning Commission accept the staffs recommendation for CPA -05 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further action. Commissioner Blunt seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Public hearing for CPA -05 -04 was closed at 9:19 p.m. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -07 -04 — Mansfield Road Alignment Public Hearing for CPA -07 -04 was opened at 9:20 p.m. Mr. Kuhta introduced Sandra Raskell, P.E., who works in the City's Public Works Department. IIe provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Todd R. Whipple, P.E., on behalf of Chris Ashenbrener and 13i11 Lawson, for the undeveloped portion of Mansfield Avenue between Houk and Mirabeau Parkway, measuring approximately 2,000 feet. Applicants' proposal: amend the Interim Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan by removing Mansfield Avenue between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway. Staff recommendation: Community Development and Public Works staff recommends denial of the proposed Arterial Road Plan change. 13 Extension of Mansfield Avenue would provide traffic relief from Indiana Avenue and connectivity of the City street system. Public Testimony for CPA -07 -04 was opened at 9:23 p.m. Chris Ashenbrener, 202 1. Trent, #400, Spokane Mr. Ashenbrener presented the Commissioners with copies of a document entitled "Argument for Removal of Mansf eld Extension to Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan" . This document will become a part of the permanent record. Commissioner Gothmann moved that the meeting be extended to 9:45 p.m. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Rogle. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Ashenbrener spoke to each of the points detailed in his four -page proposal to remove the Mansfield Extension from the Spokane Valley Road Plan. In summary, he believes that the existing north and south streets provide adequate access in that particular area of development. I1 was moved by Commissioner Gothmann, and seconded by Commissioner Robertson that the meeting be extended to 10:00 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Todd Whipple, 13218 E. Sprague Ave., Spokane Valley Mr. Whipple presented the Commissioners with copies of his five -page letter intended to help clarify points from his testimony. This document will become a part of the permanent record. He spoke to each of the points detailed in his letter, giving the Commission and remaining audience a historical overview of the issue. In summary, Mr. Whipple believes that the line that was drawn from Houk to Mirabeau Parkway was a mistake. Commissioner Gothmann moved to extend the meeting to 10:15 p.m. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Kogle. Motion passed unanimously. It was moved by Commissioner Carroll that the Planning Commission continue the hearing and public testimony for CPA-07-04, and table the Commissioner's discussion until October .14, 2004. Commissioner Blum seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Whipple asked that Mr. Wayne Frost be allowed to speak at this hearing. The Commission agreed to hear Mr. Frost. Wayne Frost, Centennial Properties, 3320 N. Argonne Rd., Spokane Valley Mr. Frost works with the Inland Empire Paper Company and stated that it is true that his organization has extended Mansfield to the west of their property line. They also plan to extend Mirabeau Parkway. H.e asked the Commission to take into consideration the "Bridging the Valley" project which could potentially provide better arterial access for the City within the next ten years. Staff will take a look at the information that was handed out at the public hearing by Mr. Ashenbrener and Mr. Whipple before the October 14 meeting. Public Works staff will present the City's proposal at that time Commissioner Gothmann moved to extend the meeting to 10:30 p.m. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Kogle. Motion passed unanimously. At 10:12 p.m., Public Hearing for CPA -07 -04 was tabled for continuation on October 14, 2004. Public Rearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -08 -04 Public Hearing for CPA -08 -04 was opened at 10:12 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by the City of Spokane Valley, for ten (10) acres of land located north of Rutter Road and west of Dora Avenue, on the southeastern boundary of Felts Field. It is the only portion of Airport property located within the City of Spokane Valley. Applicant's proposal: change the land use designation from Low - Density Residential to Light Industrial; change zoning from UR -3.5 to 1 -2. Staff recommendation: change property to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2, consistent with current uses. Public Testimony for CPA -08 -04 was opened at 10:13 p.m. Rodney Rick, 19201. Dora Road, Spokane Valley Mr. Rick's family has had problems with the fumes from landing airplanes. The fumes get stuck in his basement. He doesn't know what to do about this, and is worried that if the Planning Conunission approves this proposal, things will get worse for his family. Commissioner Gothmann suggested that Mr. Rick contact the F.A.A. I-Ie offered the City's support with Mr. Rick's efforts. Commissioner Kogle also recommended that shrubs or other protective landscaping be 15 considered by both Mr. Rick and the Airport. Mr. Kuhta agreed to speak with someone from the Airport about considering fume mitigation through the use of protective landscaping. John Gordon, 7105 E. Euclid, Spokane Valley Mr. Gordon believes that increased Airport traffic will break up the roads in that area well before their time. He is also concerned about-the property values in the area, having already lost his view of the sunset. Mr. Gordon is concerned about adequate Airport use regulation, and an increase of hazardous waste in the area. Public Testimony for CPA -08 -04 was closed at 10:25 p.rn. Mr. Kuhta explained that this is a routine and expected land transaction, which is not really negotiable. It was moved by Commissioner Blum that the Planning Commission accept the staffs recommendation for CPA-08-04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further action. Commissioner Robertson seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Public hearing for CPA -08 -04 was closed at 10:27 p.m. Commissioner Kogle recommended that the Planning Commissioners and staff members use respect and caution when speaking in public. It was obvious to her that people were tired and wanted to rush the hearing process, and she felt the final two citizens waiting all night to testify bore the brunt of that impatience unnecessarily. OLD BUSINESS: B. Tabled Public Hearing on Street Vacation Request No. STV -03 -04 There was a change of scope for Street Vacation Request #ST'V- 03 -04, so it has been re- noticed and will be opened again for public testimony on October 14, 2004. Ms. Sukup handed out a revised Request. for Planning Commission Action on this proposal. X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER Commissioner Carroll asked staff if the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code contain information regarding air quality issues. He asked staff if the City should consider this in the Comprehensive Plan process. Ms. Sukup explained that this is typically the job of the Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority. 16 XL A1)JOURNK NT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 1 0:32 p.m. SUBMITTED: APPROVED: Debi Alley, Administrative Assistant William H. Gothmann, Chairman Spokane Valley Planning Commission DRAFT Minutes Council Chambers— City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave. October 14, 2004 I. CALL TO ORDER Planning Commission Chair Gothmann called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Commission, audience, and staffrecited the Pledge of Allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Fred Beaulae — Present Bob Blum — Present David Crosby — Present Gail Kogle — Excused Absence IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Kuhta requested a change under "Old.Business" to move the continued hearing for CPA -07 -04 ahead of the hearing-for REZ- 17 -04. Commissioner Crosby moved that the October 14, 2004 agenda be approved as amended Commissioner Beaulac seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Kuhta requested that Page 5 of the September 23, 2004 meeting minutes be corrected to reflect that Rich & Alice Beattie, Nahlah Abdal -Wahed and Mohamed E1- Bakkush were in favor of the Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone proposal (REZ- 17 -04). It was moved by Commissioner Robertson and seconded by Commissioner Gothmann that the minutes of the September 23, 2004 Planning Commission meeting be approved as amended Motion passed unanimously. VI. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. Bill Gothniann — Present Ian Robertson Present John G.. Carroll — Present VH. COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Blum reported that he had attended the City Council meeting on October 12. Ike and Commissioner Crosby were reappointed to the Planning Commission for an additional three year term, commencing January 1, 2005. Commissioner Crosby reported that he also attended the October 12 City Council meeting to present an Ad Hoc Sign Comnuttee progress report. The Council had IAfFT • very few questions in response to his report. The Ad Hoc Sign Committee met on Wednesday, October 13, 2004, to review a discussion draft of the Revised Sign Code. Discussion focused on height and area standards, sign maintenance, and treatment of obsolete/abandoned signs. Commissioner Gothmann explained to the Commission that due to family emergencies, he had not been able to gather the local Planning Commission Chairs together for a meeting this past summer as promised. Additionally, he was traveling throughout New England recently, trying to keep abreast of Comprehensive Plan processes in several towns and cities. I-Ie noticed that each individual plan reflected the community's values, and he is looking forward to the continued development of the City of Spokane Valley's plan. VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Ms. Sukup reminded Commissioners of the Joint Meeting with other local Planning Commissions on Wednesday, October 27, 2004, from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. The City of Spokane is hosting the event at t 'City Library, 906 W. Main, Room 1 -A. Topic of discussion will be changes in the Countywide Planning Policies (CWPPs). ,. Planning Commission meetings m November have been changed from the second and fourth Thursdays of the month to the lirstand third Thursdays because of the holidays. A Community Workshop at Spokane Church of the Nazarene will be held on Thursday, November 4,.2004.. Findings from the previous Community Meetings will be summarized and public discussion will begin on the Parks & Recreation Master Plan. The Planning Commission will hold a regular meeting in the Council Chambers on Thursday, November 18, 2004. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS A. OLD BUSINESS: Continued Public Hearing: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. CPA -07 -04 Mr. Kuhta explained to the Commission that he received an email from Applicants Todd Whipple and Chris Ashenbrener requesting a continuance of this hearing until November 1 8, 2004. They received new information from the City's Public Works Department and would like more time to prepare a transportation model for the subarea. Commissioner Crosby moved that the Planning Commission continue the Public Hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA- 07 -04, to include public testimony, at its next regular meeting on 2 November 18, 2004. Commissioner Gothmann seconded Mr. Crosby's motion. Motion passed unanimously. L)) IF Continued Public Hearing for Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone Application No. REZ -17 -04 The Public Hearing for Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone Application #REZ- 17 -04 was continued al 6:45 p.m. Commissioner Gothmann reminded the Commission and audience that there was still a motion on the floor to adopt the staff recommendation as presented on September 23, 2004. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission approve the requested area -wide rezone. l Mr. Kuhta provided the Commission with an update report. At the September 23, 2004 hearing, public testimony was closed. The Planning Commission agreed to conti_nuethe Commission discussion section of the hearing on October 14, 2004. In the meantime, staff was asked to construct a map of the proposed rezone area. indicating the lots with vested land actions pending and the lots that citizens requested be excluded from the area -wide rezone on September 23. The revised map was sent to the Cc mmission'and posted on the web. Mr. Kuhta explained that the map.shows four lots with preliminary plat approvals, two other vested lots with land use action applications pending, and four lots which requested exclusion from the:rezone at the last meeting, for a total of ten lots.. ti 'addition, a letter sent by Joe and Jayne House in opposition to the area -wide rezone application was entered into public record on September 23, 2004. The letter requested that the City make the west boundary of the rezone area FloraRoad. The area west of Flora Road was not indicated as a requested exclusion on the revised map. None of the other property owners in that area signed the Houses' letter nor filed a petition to be excluded. Mr. Gothrnann asked Mr. Kuhta to address the appropriateness of excluding individual parcels from the rezone. Mr. Kuhta deferred the question to Director Sukup. Ms. Sukup informed the Commission that spot zoning is illegal. The Commission could change the outer boundary of the rezone area, as long as they don't make the area larger. Commissioner Crosby favored pulling the area west of Flora out of the area -wide rezone proposal for development purposes. Mr. Crosby asked for staff opinion. Staff recommended that the Commission consider the area -wide rezone request as a whole. If the Commission wants to consider excluding land from the rezone, they must have justification, and it is up 3 to the Commission to decide the issue based on information provided in public testimony. Staff recommended rezoning the entire area UR -3.5. The Commission proceeded with a lengthy discussion on the matter. Mr. Kuhta explained to them that if the area -wide rezone is approved, and the properties in the area which are presently vested are not developed within the land use action application deadline, the undeveloped parcels will revert to UR -3.5 zoning. if the presently vested properties are exempted from the area -wide rezone request and are not developed, they will remain UR -7 *. Commissioner Crosby moved to amend the original area -wide rezone boundaries by excluding the area west of Flora Road and north of Mission Avenue from the proposed boundaries. Commissioner Gothmann seconded Commissioner Crosby's amendment. Those in favor: Commissioner Crosby. Those opposed: Commissioners Beaulac, Blum, Carroll, Gothmann and Robertson. Motion failed 5-1. • It was moved by Commissioner: :Carroll and seconded by Commissioner Blum to amend the original area- widerezone boundaries by excluding the area south of Indiana and east of Greenacres. Those in favor: Commissioners Carroll and Blum. Those opposed: Commissioners Beaulac, Crosby, Gothmann and Robertson. Motion failed 4 -2. A motion was made by Comni ssioner Carroll to combine the last two amendments by excluding both the area west of Flora Road and north of Mission Avenue and the area south of Indiana and east of Greenacres. Commissioner Crosby seconded the motion. Those in favor: Commissioners Carroll and Crosby. Those opposed: Commissioners Bea.ulac, Blum,.Gothmann and Robertson. Motion failed 4 - 2. Commissioner Blum moved that the Planning Commission amend the original area -wide rezone boundaries by excluding the six vested properties shown on the map. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Crosby. Those in favor: Commissioners plum and Crosby. Those opposed: Commissioners Beaulac, Carroll, Gothmann and Robertson. Motion failed 4 -2. Chairman Gothmann called for the main motion: approval of the Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone Request #REZ- I7 -04 as presented Those in favor: Commissioners Beaulac, Gothmann and Robertson. Those opposed: Commissioners Blum, Carroll and Crosby. Motion tied 3 -3. Df-TAFT The Planning Commission was unable to develop a recommendation on the requested rezone.. The matter will be forwarded to the City Council without a Commission recommendation. Public Hearing for REZ-17-04 was closed at 7:45 p.m. The Planning Commissioners took a ten-minute break. B. NEW BUSINESS: Public Hearing for Amended Street Vacation Request No. STV-03-04 Commissioner Gothmann opened the hearing for Amended Street Vacation Request #STV -03 -04 at 7:55 p.m. Chris Linc Properties, L.L.C. is requesting the vacation of a remainder of the Appleway right-of-way acquisition and a portion of David Road located between Sprague Avenue and Appleway, west of Thierman Road.. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 26, 2004, but tabled the decision pending additional information concerning WSDOT's interest in David Road. Since that time, the applicant amended the original request, proposing to exclude that portion of David Road under the jurisdiction of WSDOT, but including the property acquired by Spokane County for the Appleway Extension. Applicant.proposes to use the property to construct 208 swales. Staff made.the:following two recommendations to the Planning Commission: • Approve vacation of that portion of David Street within the City's jurisdiction, subject to the requirements of the ordinance for survey and utility easements with conditions required by the utility; and • Provide notice to the Council of a proposal to declare the remainder of the Appleway right -of -way acquisition as surplus property. Commissioner Carroll suggested that the City vacate the triangle of land now and then sell its 50% immediately to simplify the process. Ms. Sukup explained that there are legal reasons this cannot be done. The red crosshatched area on the map, north and east of the triangle of land, belongs to the Washington State Department of Transportation. It first needs to be turned over to the County, and then turned over to the City before vacation can occur. Public Testimony for STV -03 -04 was opened at 8:02 p.m. Marshall Clark, Applicant, 2320 N. Atlantic, Spokane, WA 99205 Mx. Clark asked that the City vacate the triangle of land, and David Road, as quickly as possible. That was his original proposal. The land in question is only about 1,000 s.f. Public Testimony for STV -03 -04 was closed at 8:05 p.m. Commissioner Robertson moved that the Planning Commission accept the staff recommendation to approve the street vacation request, advising City Council of a proposal by the correct department to declare the small triangle of land as surplus. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Beaulac. Those in favor: Commissioners Beaulac, Carroll, Gothmann and Robertson. Those opposed: Commissioner Crosby. Abstaining: Commissioner Blum. Motion passed 4 -1. Public Hearing for STV -03 -04 was closed at 8:12 p.m. Public Hearing for Ordinance Amending Regulations Relating to Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) A Public Hearing was opened at'8:1:2 p.m. to amend City Ordinance No. 03 -053, Sections 4.08 : 19 and 4.15.01 of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code relating to, Planned Unit Development and Residential Dimensional Standards ;repealing Chapter 14.704.00 of the Interim Development Regulations; and establishing an effective date. Ms. Sukup provided the Commission with an overview of present City standards and new County Amendments regarding these issues. These proposed revisions are intended to add to the safety and quality of new Planned Unit Developments (PUDs). Public Testimony was opened and closed at 9:02 p.m. Following discussion, the Commission requested that the following changes be made to the proposed draft ordinance: Section 4.08.19.02 Applications and Process, Number 2.a: Commissioner Crosby suggested that the extension of time referred to in the last sentence be defined. Ms. Sukup recommended it be twelve months. Section 4.15.1 Residential Zone Dimensional Standards Chart: Commissioner Beaulac asked that the column labeled "Residential PUDs" for Building Height (in stories) be changed to read "Zone ". 6 Commissioner Crosby moved to accept the draft ordinance related to Planned Unit Developments as amended Commissioner Blum seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. The Public Hearing was closed at 9:17 p.m. X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER Commissioner Carroll recommended that the Commission review its policies and procedures. He doesn't think the Commission should let anything leave its purview without some sort of recommendation. It was suggested as a discussion item on the November 18, 2004 meeting agenda. 11 was moved by Commissioner Crosby and seconded by Commissioner Carroll that the Planning Commission discuss Public Hearing policies, particularly with regard to forwarding recommendations to the City Council, at the November 18, 2004 regular meeting. Motion passed unanimously. XL ADJOURNMENT . There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. SUBMITTED: • APPROVED: Debi Alley, Administrative Assistant William H. Gothmann, Chairman 7 DRAFT Stiliaie I Valley STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: 2004 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS Community Development Department PLANNING DIVISION Spokane Valley Planning Commission To: Hearing Date: September 23, 2004 Staff: Greg McCormick, AICP — Planning Division Manager Scott Kuhta, AICP — Senior Planner Marina Sukup, AICP — Community Development Director I. BACKGROUND The Spokane Valley Interim Comprehensive Plan includes an annual amendment cycle that runs from July 2" to July 1 of the following year. Applications received prior to July 1st are considered by the Planning Commission in August and September, with a recommendation forwarded to the City Council in late September or early October. A decision by the City Council is to be made no later than December of each year. All parts of the Comprehensive Plan can be amended during the annual cycle. The Community Development Department received 7 requests for site - specific Comprehensive Plan amendments and one request for an Arterial Road Plan amendment for 2004. Sites that are approved for a Comprehensive Plan amendment will automatically receive a zoning designation that is consistent with the new land use designation. Attachments to this report include application materials, SEPA documentation, land use, zoning and aerial maps to assist the Commission's review. 1I. NOTICE Notice for the proposed amendments was placed in the Spokane Valley News Herald on September 3, 2004 and each site was posted with a "Notice of Land Use Application" sign, which included a map and description of the proposal and a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) determination. Finally, individual notice of the proposals was mailed to all property owners within 400 feet of each amendment. III. SEPA REVIEW Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA — RCW 43.21C) environmental checklists were required for each proposed comprehensive plan amendment. Under SEPA, amendments to the comprehensive plan are considered "non- project actions" which Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments are defined as actions involving decisions on policies, plans, or programs that contain standards controlling use or modification of the environment. Additional environmental review may be required for the actual development of the subject properties. Staff reviewed the environmental checklists and a threshold determination was made for each comprehensive plan amendment request. Determinations of Nonsignificance (DNS) were issued for the requested comprehensive plan amendments on August 25, 2004. The DNS's were published in the city's official newspaper on September 3, 2004 consistent with the City of Spokane Valley Environmental Ordinance. IV. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT PROPOSALS CPA -01 -04 Applicant: Warren and Sylvia Riddle Request: Change the land use designation from Low - Density Residential to Community Commercial; change zoning from B -3 and UR 3.5 to B -2. Location: South side of Dishman -Mica Road, west of Bowdish Road; Parcel No. 45333.9024 and 9155. Site Area: 4.23 acres Current Use: The site is largely vacant, but does include a single - family residence and a commercial office. Adjacent Uses: Railroad to the south, commercial to the north and east, vacant residential to the west. Public Facilities: The property is currently served with public water and sewer and is accessed from a Dishman -Mica Road, a Principal Arterial on the Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan. Comprehensive Plan /Zoning Analysis: The Bowdish /Dishman Mica Road intersection has developed as a commercial center over the years. This is reflected on the Interim Spokane Valley Land Use Map by the Community Commercial land use designation for property at the intersection. The proposal would extend the Community Commercial designation northwest along Dishman -Mica Road. The Applicant requests that the property be designated Community Commercial, consistent with property to the north and east. A portion of the subject property was zoned B -3 in 1993; the remainder of the property is zoned UR 3.5. The small parcel directly east of the subject property, at the southwest September 15, 2003 Page 2 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments corner of Bowdish /Dishman Mica Road, was zoned B -1 in 1997. Property directly across Dishman -Mica Road to the north is zoned B -3. The Applicant requests that the entire property be zoned B -2, including the portion currently zoned B -3. The B -2 designation is the appropriate implementing zone for the Community Commercial Comprehensive Plan designation. Public Comment: Staff has received no letters concerning the proposal to date. Staff Recommendation: Change property to Community Commercial and zone entire property B -2. The property is not suited for residential use due to railroad adjacent to southern parcel boundary and the busy arterial intersection. CPA -02 -04 Applicant: Robert G. Curry Request: Change land use designation from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; change zoning from UR -3.5 to UR -22. Location: North side of Broadway Avenue, east of Ella Road; Parcel No. 45812.9035. Site Area: 1.4 acres Current Use: The property has one, single - family dwelling located on it. Adjacent Uses: A construction company office is located on the parcel directly west on Broadway Avenue; single story apartments are located west and north of the property; a single- family dwelling is located to east; Centennial Middle School is located across Ella Road to the west. Public Facilities: The subject property is located within Spokane County Water District # 3. The area was sewered by Spokane County in 1996; access is via Broadway Avenue, which is designated as a Principal Arterial. Comprehensive Plan /Zoning Analysis: The current land use designation for the subject and surrounding property is Low Density Residential. This designation is not consistent with the existing office and multi - family apartment uses surrounding the subject parcel. The subject property is zoned UR 3.5; property surrounding the site is zoned UR -22, which is consistent with current office and multi - family uses. The single - family dwelling located east of the subject is zoned UR -3.5. Public Comment: Staff has received no letters concerning the proposal to date. September 15, 2003 Page 3 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Staff Recommendation: Change the Comprehensive Plan designation to High Density Residential for the subject property and the property surrounding the subject that is currently zoned UR -22. Staff also recommends changing the zone of the subject parcel to UR-22. CPA -03 -04 Applicant: Pring Corporation (represented by Dwight Hume) Request: Change the land use designation from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential; change zone from UR -7 and B -2 to UR -22. The Applicant indicates that the site would be an ideal location for a medical office facility and that the current Comprehensive Plan designation would not allow for medical offices. Location: South side of Springfield Avenue, west of Sullivan Road, one block north of Valleyway; parcels No. 45144.0245. Site Area: 1.45 acres Current Use: Vacant Adjacent Uses: Property to the east, fronting Sullivan Road, is commercial retail; single - family residences are located to the north across Springfield Road; a Vera Water and Power pump house is located to the west; Progress Elementary is located approximately 200 feet further west.. Pubiic vacuities: vliater is available from Vera Water arid Power; pubiic sewer is available. Springfield Road is an unpaved local access street. Future development on the subject parcel would require Springfield to be paved. Comprehensive Plan /Zoning Analysis: The Interim Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property Medium Density Residential, which is intended as a buffer between the commercial uses along Sullivan and single - family residential neighborhoods to the east. Property to the east, fronting Sullivan, is designated Regional Commercial and is zoned B- 2; property directly north, south and west is designated Medium Density residential on the Interim Comprehensive Plan map. Property to the south is zoned UR -22 while property to the west and north is zoned UR -7. The site has good to Sullivan Road and Commercial services. The requested Comprehensive Plan designation would allow for office and multi- family development under the implementing UR -22 zone. These uses would be compatible with current uses surrounding the property. Public Comment: Staff has received no letters concerning the proposal to date. September 15, 2003 Page 4 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends changing the Comprehensive Plan designation to High Density Residential and implementing with the UR -22 zone. CPA -04 -04 Applicant: Paul H. Gillespie, Jr. Request: Change property from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; change zone to UR -22. Location: South side of Broadway Avenue, about 4000 feet east of Sullivan Road; Parcel No. 45134.0206. Site Area: 4.85 acres Current Use: The property has one, single - family residence located on it. Adjacent Uses: The property is surrounding by largely vacant, single - family residential land on the south side of Broadway; property on the north side of Broadway includes single - family and duplex units. Public Facilities: Public water is provided by Consolidated Irrigation District No. 19. Sewer is not currently available at the property. Future development of the site would either require public sewer or interim septic systems until public sewer is available. Access is via Broadway Avenue. Comprehensive Plan /Zoning Analysis: The Interim Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the subject parcel and surrounding property Low Density Residential. Policies in the Land Use Chapter encourage High Density Residential areas to be designated near commercial areas with good access to Major Arterials. The site is located within close proximity to the Sullivan Road commercial district. However, Broadway Avenue is a narrow, two -lane road designated as a Minor Arterial. The Comprehensive Plan also requires the development of regulations that establish design standards for multifamily developments. The intent of this policy is to better integrate multifamily developments adjacent to single- family neighborhoods. The design standards would specify building heights and design features to give a residential scale and identity to multifamily developments. Spokane Valley has not adopted design standards that would address compatibility between multi - family developments and single - family neighborhoods. Further, Spokane Valley is currently in the process of developing a new Comprehensive Plan. Caution should be used in making Land Use decisions that may be contrary to the direction of the community planning process. September 15, 2003 Page 5 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments The property is currently zoned UR 3.5 which is consistent with surrounding uses and current Comprehensive Plan designation. Public Comment: Staff has received no letters concerning the proposal to date. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends no change to the current Comprehensive Plan designation. The area is surrounded by large, undeveloped parcels of land with limited infrastructure available to support higher densities. The area should be reviewed during the City's Comprehensive Plan process with community input into the design of the Land Use Plan. CPA -05 -04 Applicant: Vernon Eden and David Wheldon Request: Change property from Low Density Residential to Regional Commercial; change zone from UR -22 to B -1. Location: North side of Valleyway Avenue, about 150 feet of Sullivan Road; Parcel No's 45133.0524 and 0540. Site Area: 1.75 acres Current Use: Each parcel is occupied with a single- family dwelling. Adjacent Uses: Residential to the east, vacant to the north, a Vera utility station to the west, commercial strip mall across Valleyway to the south. Public Facilities: The property has public sewer available; water is provided by Vera Water and Power; sewer is provided by Spokane County. Access to the site is from Valleyway Avenue, a two lane road designated as an Urban Collector. Previous Land Use/Zoning Actions: The subject property received a zone change to UR -22 in 2000. Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Analysis: The subject site is located adjacent to property designated Regional Commercial to the west, along Sullivan Road, and south, across Valleyway. The Interim Comprehensive Plan states that Regional Commercial areas are intended to draw customers from the City and outlying areas and accessible from roadways of major arterial classification or higher. At the time of application, the Interim Spokane Valley Zoning Code required B -3 and B -2 properties to have direct access to either a Minor or Major arterial. Valleyway is designated as a Collector on the Arterial Road Plan map. Planning Staff advised the applicant to request B -1 zoning, which could be approved with access to a Collector. September 15, 2003 Page 6 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments However, the Zoning Code was amended recently and the requirement for B -3 and B -2 zones to have access to a Minor or Major arterial was deleted. Therefore, the Planning Commission may consider zoning the parcel B -2. The requested Regional Commercial designation and proposed B -2 zoning is consistent with property directly across Valleyway to the south and along Sullivan to the west. Public Comment: Staff has received no letters concerning the proposal to date. Staff Recommendation: Planning Staff recommends changing the property to Regional Commercial and applying the B -2 zone. Staff further recommends no further commercial zoning east of the subject property along Valleyway. CPA - 06-04 Applicant: Crosby Family Land, LLC Request: Change property from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; change zoning from UR 3.5 to UR -22. The application states the intent to develop the property into an adult living /assisted living facility. Location: East side of Adams Road, approximately 400 feet south of Mission Avenue; Parcel No. 45141.9003. Site Area: 8 acres Current Use: The property is vacant. Adjacent Uses: The site is surrounded by single - family residential development. Public Facilities: Vera Water and Power provides water service; public sewer available. The site is accessed by Adams Road which is a Local Access street on the Interim Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan. Comprehensive Plan /Zoning Analysis: The area surrounding the subject parcel is exclusively single - family residential. The nearest high density development is north, across Mission Road. The Interim Comprehensive Plan encourages multi- family residential development to be located near commercial areas and on sites with good access to major arterials. The nearest commercial services are along Sullivan Road, approximately one -half mile to the east. Adams Road is a narrow, two -lane collector without sidewalks or shoulders for pedestrians. The Comprehensive Plan also requires the development of regulations that establish design standards for multifamily developments. The intent of this policy is to better integrate multifamily developments adjacent to single- family neighborhoods. The design September 15, 2003 Page 7 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments standards would specify building heights and design features to give a residential scale and identity to multifamily developments. Spokane Valley has not adopted design standards that would address compatibility between multi - family developments and single - family neighborhoods. Further, Spokane Valley is currently in the process of developing a new Comprehensive Plan. Caution should be used in making Land Use decisions that may be contrary to the direction of the community planning process. Public Comment: Staff received a letter dated September 14, 2004, signed by area residents opposing the proposed Comprehensive Plan change. Staff also received an email from Peggy and Richard Cannon opposing the change (letter and email attached). Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends no change to the current Comprehensive plan designation. The application states the intent to construct an adult living /assisted living facility. However, it is not possible to condition approval of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to limit development to the stated intent. The UR -22 zone would potentially allow 172 dwelling units to be developed on the 8-acre site, which would negatively impact the single - family neighborhood. The site could accommodate approximately 32 single - family residences under the UR 3.5 zone. The area should be reviewed during the City's Comprehensive Plan process with community input into the design of the Land Use Plan for this neighborhood. CPA -07 -04 Appppiicant: Todd R. Whipple, P.E. Request: Amend the Interim Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan by removing Mansfield Avenue between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway. The application indicates that other options will be available that won't require Mansfield Avenue to be constructed per the Arterial Road Plan. The Applicant proposes to replace Mansfield with Houk Street extended south to Indiana, which would require a new railroad crossing (see application documents for full details). The Applicant further suggests that the Bridging the Valley project would remove this segment -of railroad some time between 2009 and 2012. According to a letter by Christopher R. Ashenbrener, Corporate Counsel for A & A Construction (see application materials) Mansfield Avenue was "casually proposed" to be extended easterly as a traffic fix for problems along the Pines Road corridor during development project discussions. The intent was to provide for east/west traffic flow without impacting the Pines /Indiana intersection. Extending Mansfield west to Pines would require the purchase and demolition of a 6 -plex apartment building. Mr. Ashenbrener further states in his letter that the extension of Mansfield would be extremely burdensome because it would bisect a residential community planned for the area between Mirabeau Parkway and Houk Street. September 15, 2003 Page 8 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Site Area: The undeveloped portion of Mansfield Avenue measures approximately 2000 feet. Current Land Use: The western end of the Mansfield alignment consists of multi - family residential development; the eastern end consists of office, commercial and recreational uses. Property in the middle is currently vacant, with a multi - family residential development in process of approval. Comprehensive Plan Analysis: The Arterial Road Plan Map is a part of the Transportation Element of the Interim Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. The map identifies current and future roads that are required to support the future land uses envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan. Mansfield Avenue was added to the Arterial Road Plan in the late 1990's as an important east/west link from Pines Road to Mirabeau Parkway. The future road will provide for better traffic circulation in this area and is an important link to the Pines /Mansfield /Montgomery Road realignment project (Pines Road Corridor Project). The Pines /Mansfield Mitigation Project is scheduled for construction in 2005. Part of that project would improve Mansfield Road west of Pines, moving east bound traffic crossing Pines to the north. This will alleviate congestion at the current Montgomery/Pines intersection. Constructing Mansfield east of Pines Road will then allow connection through Mirabeau Parkway. It should be noted that Mansfield Avenue is currently being extend both east and west of Mirabeau Parkway for new developments, consistent with the Arterial Road Plan. The Bridging the Valley project will remove the rail line paralleling Indiana Avenue; however, the right -of -way will not be vacated. The entire project is expected to be completed by 2015, if funding is secured. The most applicable goals of the Comprehensive Plan are: Goal T.7 Provide efficient and cost effective movement of people, goods and freight to maintain industrial, commercial and manufacturing capability. The future Mansfield Road is an important link in the City's transportation system that will provide better circulation between the light industrial areas west of Pines and residential areas north of Pines to the Valley Mall office parks east of Pines. Goal T.Ba Establish and maintain level of services standards for roads. Level of service is currently failing at the Pines /Montgomery/Mansfield /Indiana intersections. The proposed Pines Road Corridor project will maintain adequate levels of service in this area. Construction of Mansfield Road east of Pines will remove more cars from the Pines /Indiana intersection, which will help to maintain level of service standards. September 15, 2003 Page 9 of 10 Staff Report 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments Public Comment: Staff has received no letters concerning the proposal to date. Staff Recommendation: Community Development and Public Works Staff recommends denial of the proposed Arterial Road Plan change (see letter from Sandra Raskell, P.E., Spokane Valley Development Review Engineer). Extension of Mansfield Avenue would provide traffic relief from Indian Avenue and connectivity of the City street system. CPA -08 -04 Applicant: City of Spokane Valley Request: Change the land use designation from Low - Density Residential to Light Industrial; change zoning from UR -3.5 to 1 -2. Location: North of Rutter Road, west of Dora Avenue, on the southeastern boundary of Felts Field, the only portion of Airport property located within the City of Spokane Valley. Site Area: 10 acres Current Use: The site is developed with airplane hangars and storage facilities. Adjacent Uses: Single family residential to the east. Public Facilities: The site has public sewer and water available and is accessed from Rutter Road. Comprehensive Plan /Zoning Analysis: The current Low Density Residential designation is not consistent with the use of the airport property. The City of Spokane Valley signed an interlocal agreement with the City of Spokane and Spokane County that which states that development of airport property must be consistent with the Felts Field Airport Master Plan. The agreement further states that the Master Plan supercedes the City's zoning of the property. Staff Recommendation: Change property to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2, consistent with current uses. V. ATTACHMENTS Attached to this Staff Report are application materials, zone maps, comprehensive plan maps, aerial maps and letters submitted to date. September 15, 2003 Page 10 of 10 / CURRENT POLICY n lJ PROPOSED POLICY , �/ V . NAME: �i rnP, PHONE: ADDRESS: Na /7.P , EMAIL: . CITY/STATE/ZIP 4,e. det /aL- FAx: NAME: �i rnP, PHONE: ADDRESS: /V 4 tP EMAIL: CITY /STATE/ZIP: 4,e. det /aL- FAx: NAME: - PHONE: ADDRESS: /V 4 tP EMAIL: CITY/STATE/ZIP: 4,e. det /aL- FAX: SfRane valley 40, APPLICANT PART I NAME: L{ YI 2n /�cr�r�>'•P PHONE: 9r�6 6a/ 7 ADDRESS: //, /U ,6V /1)7tat /2. -/k.& 2d EMAIL: wi. iel €/-4i 0 uQ/,er J 1, CrTY /STATE/ZIP: ?k,„„„, / !(f/f j'9 FAx: 9 S ggg p PROPERTY OWNER 1 IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment PROPERTY OWNER 2 IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET 1 FILE No. CM ECE1VED APR 2 3 2004 SPOKANE VALLEY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVE AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL (ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): OFFICE USE ONLY: 111412003 a City Initiated Concurrency Review • equired: ❑ Yes Date Received: 2 L Received By: itizen Initiated Page 1 of 5 CURRENT DESIGNATION PROPOSED DESIGNATION LAND USE MAP Loa) ) -n 5if a fi z i 4,e. det /aL- n ti • 7 dern/n Pt-cio ( ZONING MAP 1 - 0`2 SfRane valley 40, APPLICANT PART I NAME: L{ YI 2n /�cr�r�>'•P PHONE: 9r�6 6a/ 7 ADDRESS: //, /U ,6V /1)7tat /2. -/k.& 2d EMAIL: wi. iel €/-4i 0 uQ/,er J 1, CrTY /STATE/ZIP: ?k,„„„, / !(f/f j'9 FAx: 9 S ggg p PROPERTY OWNER 1 IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment PROPERTY OWNER 2 IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET 1 FILE No. CM ECE1VED APR 2 3 2004 SPOKANE VALLEY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVE AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL (ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): OFFICE USE ONLY: 111412003 a City Initiated Concurrency Review • equired: ❑ Yes Date Received: 2 L Received By: itizen Initiated Page 1 of 5 ADDRESS: //./Z) F /c;'//!la. /1 ka n e (City) ca NOTARY SEAL 11/4/2003 LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE (Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) I I v (°- Pt )d' e , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVE RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE AREA PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED LAND USE ACTION, OR, IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF. (Signature) PART II - �cca (State) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this (QdY'dday of ApPeaNL.DO NOTARY SIGNATURE Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at 0,0 CA-M. \ i i Q QQ�{ LEA My appointment expires: 1 D' 2. ) 0 PHONE: 9& G a/ 7 ZIP: 9' 9 r �i Q-F (Dat Page 2 of 5 6 PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SQ. FT.) "10 5 p 0 ,'Ya„ .e_.• ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SQ.FT.) EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: N'� $.r i elP 11/ P / c3'F-Cr c-e SCHOOL DISTRICT: C e4d l-a L iteL FIRE DISTRICT: v a , ;. 1 * 1 WATER DISTRICT: ?F I. .p e M p o-3 NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: ) �! (I._11.- 7L , PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: (611S,n t.a / 1-- {nrrc. ILI WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC /PRIVATE ROAD: .d Q -F ,P 63 r .0k c.J ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL? (YIN) Ye--s NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: Q.LSla g4 - 1 02C C ? /141 c(7 : k /t7 . (5 S . 9 O ; °i /555 PR.tvIous ZONING /LAND USE DECISION 1114/2003 f r a4e. KA64J PART M LIST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGES CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? PaC e!t/ Rea / 4 f... 5 AaUe, del/doped .b /AeSSe - - • La Ace - Oki at. e -k! 5/! �ILr 5 10(7.1_ �YO v c�2 More_ / b a /.► s'.5 s "le 1- 11 5 PLa ■ p er- [,L — ! • 7"i(Q Let kce C,5 5aIwQcci ccfie lJe.1/.vP�..ti raiL!^a4 wdc aA4 it L!!l sic r� -Fo f'G� SI��C,�(a_( /1 /Aa /L A2c-c L �T�L 4 i / / 5 j`C_ A F yne Zznd !s dirrrou.s/ Qr/re4�y za g �3 Page 3 of 5 PROPOSAL PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Z/)/5/ t �2 y . iu sale, , X r i s' p ailc5 7-er Aas U '�� a W/ idal c i e6�s am per) Values ,'f its iS Sete, zt X17 C,heccSe� p Nero 6as.ness65) , ADJACENT LAND USES } DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: 11/4/2003 we/ C'L Q -- Sea sQl a L /64 1,0 t — 60a nv NO - ce 1.� 6racey � r.�a -r.� Po-c eti-1 y � w i res oe k_'t 1 Q�n`j -ei &►ic � t rs0 al. ar 5 c4rc a( }, — frt. ce K � � — 3 et dZ r .QArk or, o as staid 3 A cv'o-ct,Q Page 4 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE HOW PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN- CITE SPECIFIC GOALS /POLICIES: Nook J pe pay Can tyke ic�QC f-e4L/ L) �QP' ;l to k.barbods • zmi ma 3 biL3,; 6PinmtcvLL ±X ezn o a, &n .8 /mssrue FAA ve/ansc u - e 61 afr-dLclk f 1) i t " The e_oynt.unt7 reeks F ofar 11/4/2003 ,s ex hr La,e l 5 b u s / A S� b a si ji��s atusfer s < � ra>\ o ip,,,de crhQ 1 1 4 (? r6-2,-5 s /4. 4 .t, -6- rye Page 5 of 5 // PUBLIC FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT: TYd js dam + / h1Q n - 474-4k -- /vitt?. Aerial Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-01-04 August, 2004 kane .00.0Valley Comp Plan Category I a Low Density Residential r Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Mired Use ME Community Cantor mg Urban Activity Center jJ Community Commercial 11111 Regional Commercial Light Industrial 171 Heavy Industrial titineral Land Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-01-04 August, 20134 Sfiokane i Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -01 -04 *Wan ne .Valley August, 2004 - NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: /- EMAIL: . CITY / STATE/ZIP: Fax: NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: - — [ EMAIL: CITY /STATE /ZIP: FAX: SWite• s of Ualley APPLICANT NAME: R O J 3 E I T G c u y ADDRESS: a, c 130 < /0 3 AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY NAME: ADDRESS: I CITY /STATE/ZIP LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: CURRENT POLICY PROPOSED POLICY OFFICE USE ONLY: Concurrency Revi Date Received: .Q/c 11/412003 PR OPERTY OWNER 1 IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment RL ;EIVED PART 1 CITY /STATE /ZIP: c4E -.L.0 Ll'� -� 1� , 9;1.0_5_ FAX: ERTY OWNER 2 IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL (ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): D City Initiated equired: D Yes Received By: PHONE: EMAIL: FAX: vex Tin Initiated 1b-N Page 1 of 5 FILE No.eP4 JUN 2 1 2004 PQK C4E -WiL4 G - PHONE: �7 prtiTO> EMAIL:. �n nr- vr.L(P N T CURRENT DESIGNATION PROPOSED DESIGNATION LAND USE MAP L 4 $ esrda.poci4L I 1 De,i5 2=22_ ges,'G✓!p. --i ZONING MAP G -3. S SWite• s of Ualley APPLICANT NAME: R O J 3 E I T G c u y ADDRESS: a, c 130 < /0 3 AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY NAME: ADDRESS: I CITY /STATE/ZIP LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: CURRENT POLICY PROPOSED POLICY OFFICE USE ONLY: Concurrency Revi Date Received: .Q/c 11/412003 PR OPERTY OWNER 1 IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment RL ;EIVED PART 1 CITY /STATE /ZIP: c4E -.L.0 Ll'� -� 1� , 9;1.0_5_ FAX: ERTY OWNER 2 IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL (ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): D City Initiated equired: D Yes Received By: PHONE: EMAIL: FAX: vex Tin Initiated 1b-N Page 1 of 5 FILE No.eP4 JUN 2 1 2004 PQK C4E -WiL4 G - PHONE: �7 prtiTO> EMAIL:. �n nr- vr.L(P N T PART II LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE ignatur- I . er or representative as authorized by legal owner) , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE A= • VE RESPONSES A M DE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE AREA PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED LAND USE ACTION, OR, IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF. ADDRESS: Po BOX' 7 O.7 1 11/4/2003 4- (State) PHONE: ?2g 0600. ZIP: NOTARY SEAL NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ca0i4A day of J-Lti 1-Q> , 20 OC.4_ 11 • NOTARY SIGNATURE Notary Public in and for the State of Washington �qq Residing at: � � 0, Val) '� -, (,J My appointment expires: Page 2 of 5 PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SQ. Ft) ) q. zD ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SO.FT.) NoA.)e' EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: R_sr SCHOOL DISTRICT: _ bliES T V* IA ,W FIRE DISTRICT: WATER DISTRICT: �3 NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: NONE UBLI OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC /PRIVATE ROAD: a II i ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL ? ?N) I1 j - �� NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: CHANGED CONDITIONS apt a a c1 PART Xn 1-4 i '80, 035 PREVIOUS ZONING /LAND USE DpclsION . LIST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: WHAT ARE THE CHANGES CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? o FF1cl: ON MolttP ¢ Ides 1 s of {?op55e'Y 1-841/ E ,eEEA/ TIhEQE Foy. 10 S 11/4/2003 Page 3 of 5 PROPOSAL PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: 7 4-5 1 41 /E - 4t!` r E oily Gru Al y ADJACENT LAND USES DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: 11/4/2003 14� TO 1 1 /b T/ " JS aF Eas7 of" /cC- 6WLP /Wc,5 To 1 Slut -LL 0-r}ont -L' Re/ Dew ct; Tts 6,9 T• Page 4 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE HOW PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - CITE EE SPECIFIC GOALS /POLICIES: To &low Aph- thie s - 7 - s LANp +Luv , LE,UO /,Fro R p 1.2 t»i itjTS ,UoW ou pR° P � )t tY to IDES t Au,) 1,4R7)4 •gD:loywc- TV'S PArfe t L / ALso orr /ce &, le nra- ro w(-ST Al IJa PA L- PUBLIC FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT: 11/4/2003 SEWER gAS SEEP SruB 6EL At Two t-o e-/+1 ro-' S GuATE,Z fS �i I/ t r /�(3L� 131)5 /5 A vEL1 ABLE ON 3Na'. scHcoC ,ADD PL y yA1zo Age ctIESr Less THIN A &OC k• FKc M pRo PE1>;T/ Page 5 of 5 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -02 -04 Comprehensive Plan Map ppm Comp Plan Category Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential gm High Density Residential 1 •1 Mbized Use Community Center 1111111 Urban Activity Center Lim Neighborhood Commercial Heavy Industrial ED Mineral Land 11111 Regional Commercial Community Commercial Light Industrial 11111111"11 111 r Site Density Residential • Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-02-04 August, 2004 Sikikane 4I0 Val ley Zoning Map Zoning Category 1= UR-3.5 UR-7 ED UR-7* 1= UR-12 M UR-22 1 B-1 MI B-2 Frit B-3 L RR-10 I 1.1 -2 M 1-2 ME 1-3 PAZ 1• - I 11 N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-02-04 August, 2004 SiTokane ,.•••• Val ley CPA 6 -23 -04 Spokane Valley P1 inning Department 11707 E. Sprague Avenue Suite 106 Spokane, Valley, WA 99206 C��1, �a. Land Use Consulting Services 9101 N. Mt. View Lane Spokane, WA 99218 509 -467 -0112 (0) 509-435-3108 (C) 509- 467 -0229 (F) Attn:• Scott Kuhta Long Range Planner Ref: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change Dear Scott: tJ um Land Use consulting Services Enclosure: Comp Plan Application, SEPA Checklist and Fees Copy: Pring Corporation CIO John Peterson 1• Enclosed are the completed forms you provided fdr a comprehensive plan amendment and zone change. I am filing this application on behalf of my client Pring Corporation, who owns property just west of Sullivan Rd. on Springfield Avenue one block north of. Valley Way. The site is currently designated Medium Density Residential but only zoned UR -7. It adjoins their retail development within a Regional Commercial category along Sullivan and would be an ideal location for a medical office facility. As you know, this requires a UR -22 zone, therefore we are filing this request to amend the map from MDR to HDR to provide UR - 22 zoning for medical office use. I think you will find that the location and surrounding land uses lend the site to medical use better than apartments. Unfortunately, we still live with the mixed beg of zoning inherited from the County regulations. Ultimately, if this approved, we would prefer straight "office" zoning if and when such is available. Please keep me informed of your progress toward a public hearing with the Planning Commission. T S�ea �Ualley APPLICANT 1 Name: Pring Corporation CIO John Peterson ; PHONE: 924 -6423 Address: 8412 E. Sprague Avenue EMAIL: City /State /Zip: Spokane, WA 99212 s FAx: PROPERTY OWNER 1 IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT) NAME: Same ADDRESS: CITY /STATE /ZIP: PROPERTY OWNER 2 (IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET) 1 NAME: NA ADDRESS: CITY /STATE /ZIP: AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY Name: Dwight J. Hume Address: 9101 N. Mt. View Lane City /State /Zip Spokane, WA 99218 LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: t CURRENT DESIGNATION T PROPOSED DESIGNATION LAND USE MAP . MDR HDR I ZONING MAP 1 UR -7 1 UR -22 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL (ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): CURRENT POLICY PROPOSED POLICY City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment PART I ' PHONE: EMAIL: FAx: PHONE: EMAIL: FAx: Not Applicable Not Applicable • FILE No.CPj -00 Phone: 435 -3108 Ema dhume @spokane- landuse.com Fax: 467 -0229 6/23/2004 Page 1 of 5 l % OFFICE USE ONLY: 0 City Initiated t !Eitizen Initiated Concurrency Review Required: 0 Yes o Date Received: 2 i '6 Received By: (A4 (Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) I, Kirk M. Owsley , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVE RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. Pring Corporation, a Washington corporation is I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT +1- THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE AREA PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED LAND USE ACTION, OR, IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF. ADDRESS: 8412 E. Sprague Ave. Spokane, WA By: 1r,1 June 24., 2004 (Date) Kirk M. Owsley (Sign reasurer STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 24th day of June , 20 04 NOTAR S EAL `1111 f 11 11,, • NOTARy. •; +tA: !- PU8t 6/23/2004 PART II LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE NOTARY OTARY SIGN TURE Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at: one My appointment expires: July 2 , 2005 PHONE: (509) 921 -8880 ZIP: 99121 Page 2 of 5 ' P\UJAl. -1V 1 ARC .IVVIY> =v Jr r vv IN I nv�,6.6.. v-.....6..... v.. v..... .., . v. vv1 vv ' EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: • vacant SCHOOL DISTRICT: - CVSD#356 : FIRE DISTRICT: WATER DISTRICT: i , FD #1 Vera Water and Power NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: Unknown PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: r Spnngfleld Avenue 1 WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC/PRIVATE ROAD: L l approximately 215 ft. ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL? (YIN) ' NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: NO Sullivan Rd. PART III SITE DATA PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SQ. FT.) d- f 5 / LL ° O h- 1 S PREVIOUS ZONING /LAND USE DECISION • LIST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: The City has not acted upon this property through previous actions. CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGES CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? 2.23 acres (97,139 sf) The conversion to commercial along the adjacent easterly boundary at Sullivan Rd. The conversion to UR -22 office uses and zoning adjacent to the south along Valley Way. The installation of full services to the subject property. The requirement for GMA Planning. The combination of high density residential and medical office uses within the UR -22 zone and the lack of specific office land use designations and zones. 6/2.3/2004 Page 3 of 5 PROPOSAL PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: PROPOSED LAND USE CHANGE FROM MDR TO HDR TO PROVIDE THE ABILITY TO HAVE MEDICAL OFFICE USAGE, WHEREAS THE UR -12 ZONE OF THE MDR CATEGORY DOES NOT ALLOW MEDICAL OFFICE USES. ADJACENT LAND USES DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: NORTH: 5 SINGLE- FAMILY DWELLINGS EXIST ALONG SPRINGFIELD; WEST: VERA WATER AND POWER HAS A PUMP HOUSE FACILITY AND A CITY PARK IS ADJACENT THAT. EAST: RETAIL AND OFFICE USES SOUTH: VACANT AND OFFICE USES; DUPLEX UNITS TO THE SW. 5123/2004 Page 4 of 5 ) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE HOW PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - CITE SPECIFIC GOALS/POLICIES: THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS VOID OF ANY "OFFICE" USE POLICIES. SINCE THE USE IS ALLOWED WITHIN THE HDR CATEGORY, IT IS BEST TO ADDRESS THE USE BY THAT CATEGORY. PERHAPS THE MOST APLLICABLE GOAL FROM THE EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT IS UL2.16 WHICH STATES THAT WE SHOULD ENCOURGAGE THE LOCATION OF MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CATEGORIES NEAR COMMERCIAL AREAS AND PUBLIC OPEN SPACES AND ON SITES WITH GOOD ACCESS TO MAJOR ARTERIALS. COMMENT: THIS GOAL DESCIBES THE SUBJECT SITE COMPLETELY. IT IS NEAR PUBLIC OPEN SPACE AND ADJACENT COMMERCIAL AREAS AND CAN HAVE GOOD ACCESS TO SULLIVAN RD. A MAJOR ARTERIAL, VIA SPRINGFIELD AVENUE ONCE IMPROVED WITH PAVING, CURBING AND SIDEWALKS TO MATCH EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS AT SULLIVAN. SINCE THE U R -22 ZONE SERVES BOTH HOUSING AND MEDICAL OFFICE IT IS PRESUMED THAT THIS GOAL AND POLICY APPLIES. PUBLIC FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT: ALL SERVICES ARE AVAIALABLE TO THE SITE, HOWEVER SPRINGFIELD IS GRAVEL AND NEEDS TO BE PAVED, CURBED AND SIDEWALKED PER ADJACENT IMPROVEMENTS ADJACENT OUT TO SULLIVAN. 6/23/2004 Page 5 of 5 PARCEL 1 - 45144.0221 LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE SOUTH HALF OF TRACT 49 OF VERA, IN VOLUME "0" OF PLATS, PAGE 30; EXCEPT THE WEST 200 FEET THEREOF; AND EXCEPT THE EAST 231 FEET THEREOF; AND ALSO EXCEPT SPRINGFIELD ROAD DEEDED TO SPOKANE COUNTY RECORDED ON NOVEMBER 19, 1970 UNDER RECORDING NO. 520823C; AND ALSO EXCEPT THE SOUTH 130 FEET OF THE EAST HALF THEREOF; TOGETHER WITH THE WEST 78 FEET OF THE SOUTH 130 FEET OF THE EAST HALF OF SAID TRACT 49; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, COUNTY OF SPOKANE, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Aerial Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -03 -04 August. 2004 ka �al kjy Comprehensive Plan Map • • • 1 Comp Plan Category Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Mixed Use Community Center III Urban Activity Center Neighborhood Commercial =S: -ii' Community Commercial S Regional Commercial Light Industrial 11� "-==. Heavy Industrial Loata llin 1 Mineral Land a Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -03 -04 August, 2004 S16kane .0.0/Valley • •■;7, ■r, Zoning Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-03-04 Spokane August, 2004 4 00 0 Val ley C1DA-04-04 APPLICANT NAME: f 7J J N - /ez ADDRESS: E 7S,`D P/ eeac) / G4°� CITY /STATE/ZIP: 5 a/ra e L,/4- 5 1 9 �� PROPERTY OWNER 1 (IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT) NAME: E s of ADDRESS: CITY /STATE/ZIP: PROPERTY OWNER 2 (IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET PRONE: EMAIL: FAx: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY/STATE/ZIP: AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY NAME: ADDRESS: CITY/STATE/ZIP LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: CURRENT DESIGNATION LAND USE MAP Loy✓ De4.5 -; Res Ii/e•76/ / ZONING MAP u /� CURRENT POLICY PROPOSED POLICY City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment PART Z Pao/ H. Gil /mss �� v/A OFFICE USE ONLY: 0 City Initiated „_initti.. Concurrency Review Required: 0 Yes Date Received: (a'99 rOL. Received By: 1114/2003 1 FILE NO.Cr ?l' PHONE: 52:7 9 833 EMAIL: FIG-j//sir 0 COM FAX: PHONE: EMAIL: FAx: PHONE: EMAIL: FAX: PROPOSED DESIGNATION L Deas� y Hes / e4r&i( ' u/ ZZ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL (ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY itizen Initiated Page 1 of 5 11/4/2003 LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE (Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) I, . ?, v / � . ')/ 4 7/e � � , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVE RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. • I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I AM THE OWNER N .OF OWNER, PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED LAND USE , ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF. PART It ADDRESS: L� - 7 yo P/ 4'v aod (City) (State) ( Sign ature) PHONE: 3Y r/ ' 3 ZIP: ` Ode y (Date) STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE . ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me t \S J. ti t, U 1401-App. y N� : PUBLIC y I r I' +1 $/ . WASN" NOTARY e $ • day of NOTARY SIG TURE c.o.) , 20° Notary Public in and for the State Washington Residing at: (s -ti 4_ - 5(51h m -5r E ti >03 My appointment expires: i , f r /•fl 1 Page 2 of 5 SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON N r.. , COUNTY OF SPOKANE ESTATE, OF PAUL H. GILLESPIE, Dated: OCTOBER 29, 1999 Dated: OCTOBER 29, 1999 {Seal} LETTERS TESTAMENTARY DECEASED I. BASIS 1.1 The last will of the decedent(s), late of Spokane County, Washington was exhibited, proven and recorded in this court on: OCTOBER 29, 1999. 2.2 • In that will: PAUL H. GILLESPIE, JR. is named personal representative. 1.3 The personal representative has qualified. II. AUTHORIZATION THIS CERTIFIES: PAUL H. GILLESPIE, JR. is authorized by this court to execute the will of the above decedent according to law. THOMAS R. FALLQUIST SPOKANE COUNTY CLERK By Vivian Nachtwey, {Seal} Deputy Clerk III. CERTIFICATE OF COPY State of Washington ) County of Spokane ) As clerk of the superior court of this county, I certify that the above is a true and correct copy of the Letters Testamentary in the above -named case which was enteFed of record on: 1012911999. that these letters are now in full forc and effect. I further certify r THOMAS R. FALLQUIST By RCW 11.28.010.090 CASE NO. 99- 4- 01305 -2 LETTERS TESTAMENTARY N,E COUNTY CL Deput FILE) UT 2 9 1999 THOMAS R FALLOUIST SPOKANE.: COUNTY CLER.': Probate l PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SQ. FT.) y a iry Gres ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SQ.FT.) /147/ EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: S / 11 . /e fd/7? l fr /7ome 4 /1d /"Cd 0 SCHOOL DISTRICT: e, £. IV.a / /ey -�-� . .. / FIRE DISTRICT: WATER DISTRICT: I aid L/e Pouf e r NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: IV on PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: 0/- 4„7 /hiesive, WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC /PRIVATE ROAD: 3 q ec t • ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL? (YIN) Y NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: 13 cocildwdy Al vested. e SITE DATA yo,rtd N6 15 1344. D PREVIOUS ZONING /LAND USE DECISION PART III LIST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: A) ose. CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGES CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? 2. e v e 4X/rfe/L Z /� OCCV Y r i t y /.../ 74 lf-)V v / /dr: L , d F i y � i- of7l - r c p /iX I1 OUS /tr vse es wept r'crwt'lr 6vi /t J /77 e el r �s� .Si r v v�wo�� � ro..� � t / 7.-,29e c, f /A( e.g. �r Z /7' dc.,; /t arn • se Roc7o, /tea - 2.7-,5&` 7%4 r �er�7 . /67144//t /44°raV l/ e c�� E9 rn rc.�'s /7vfZ� 0 l /ley /u)�y /�/ , - C S /q / v c s - 0 cJ 7/ /4SL‘ 11/4/2003 Page 3 of 5 G/� PROPOSAL PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: / / e //---4? $ a c r e_r /' 4/ c/e//S / 4 "`e S / .. e/1 / � . / / Qe z o � �/ �[ ('7/ A , e /zsie7 r e,riep eilG /J/ re " c-d /Z -S• i i7 re ZoJf l.r9 L � / 2 z • /V e7 5/4 /0 r / e C / `S 7/ "4. Pcl . ADJACENT LAND USES DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: Curren 7 sip r� e fa/11;/y l re s / /7' c r e (• .e •r L /y P c'r G / /Z cii rPC 7 a c ro SS /-ar"4A147r o ° •. r '� - t %' e't�' / aig . / , 16e 9 �CA a FeeG.. -ez>s O'T� f*e �r°pCd�y /2h6, 5 O Ot/SP a �ir� Sdsr1G e eon -575 f st y/ �a�i /f. �7 11/4/2003 Page 4of5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE How PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE COMP - CITE SPECIFIC GOALS/POLICIES: { J� 2, „ PJi _ ed / irj a e -r i%: / cd e /oei or /77 ed /vim .7/10/ / oIP 4 S/t r esla�e 1 CAL g /7edr 60/ erciaPies '.r (o.z Sues Gv z4 , ' ?ccBSS Zo r r}•Jdr a? 6er/�/s he i ora� ! [7�r�� Is I oc d m. of o .as were 7.74 0,761/43 E �r ® D. 1 e. r D lrt W0 /m't m a Z /J'Z / //; 5' h2 L 2 �le�C �. Z [yc i 1 P 1 .t 3771 0 k 7"e 14e //e7 /Lla/ /. V ?� / % of h4cr /fi-pa nom. e.s /•o e ,e Ur .6.P/7 (r>a,r) / /- so f/tde 7 -ey a t ;.r ice — fo Ced i /dV S/yra`l rcaCZcoref / oarce /s 7'11,UU,5 1 oue - �Xisz PesNe&td /aiedS 7rl1 #/a„pdJewe .Oh /'t, .0.-6sdre you 4d /0,-0,aiWG Aor • Z i o 4'; k arah.r/e,- A oo.r/.r ea; 7 - i 7 - �d�/ .e.rs( 57:77e h o vs / o r7 (� r!>ad wa ' & J 6 p f S' 4., /�r vd eaajr/vjercis`ce,- ,/oror /h Lela rope M70 /7 ., he � aP7 dl0 r. G o 9 Drva�c�r�i _re a f 7 S'u /1, 0.1 h [or r �.{ i 6e • Bad' & a�� 7:3; eC1. - 7 PUBLIC FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT: /7,07.e/ .F r 7ks r•na /Or ,grz � 44/�6er it avai / 26 /c. 0A •&e. frz;a.e 4ivr� Vera L) - j-'es- rowr J tiv ��'iic / .e fur s6ao� aie /ae &„ree O_.? .K /e .4 .,,s- rrd�S %� 4 o /-.e d/s0 m i � � cu es on S)((iv�/ �j We/fxa Ip T� /ar 470.9a/, ( Q.� L,., e s& .00 °� .5 c 2 /le°l a A •L �cr ! f 0. 5-0.1.1a_ rf �S'h�jo /�� �'�`'� u / /iva.t f�oa� "I1 `l /I /. /711/es �4v� .� D .6 / re �e Pre r9 -cis/ dree� ♦'s J �, J. arGC - t - lz c /(L�d 1 a. f✓l is l- 2 ,xi es G / Ce K z /77/;0 // i s / v mi /c. swa • �,� a �( a 6 7 ZOO `� . • Se-"" er f s Sc kea6..lect on // 1 /:c°/ / Y we ' asesZT/ be til I'jo rtfl / Z-0 S 2 O/a eh et9It S /Ms /r1 � s o 7 e &5f D 11/4/2003 Page 5of5 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -04 -04 T3211.1 P 2 sum. sm. Comp Plan Categony ISE 1 I SVE High Ctenstly Residential 111 Low Density Residential III DIUI4RR!I [ ■ I , I Mixed Use Community Center Urban Activity Center Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial NI Regional Commercial 1 1 Light Industrial Heavy Industrial n Mineral Land 1 I Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -04 -04 August, 2004 Siokane al ley � 1 UR -3.5 J UR - r = =� UR - 7 . UR -12 UR -22 j B ® B-2 B -3 ETO RR -10 M I-3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -04 -04 0 CPA -05 -04 l.,UIVlrrccnmr ivG r L., 1 A� ...,‘,.• . .y„r. ..._ • .._. - - -- - - - CU ENT POLICY ROPOSED OLICY ll (V • City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment PARTI APPLICANT NAME: V' tR I) a IU ED ADDRESS: \ o u o g' S' /»? D 15 /,J CITY /STATE/ZIP: .J l c/ k PROPERTY OWNER 1 IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT NAME: ADDRESS: 1 CITY /STATE/ZIP: PHO EMAIL: FAx: PROPERTY OWNER 2 (IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET) PHONE: G 1 2 14-1 S'3 9 1 NAME: D,4 1 ADDRESS: I, 2 3 C v I le CITY /STATE/ZIP: 5 q b3 7 A AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY NAME: ADDRESS: 1 CITY/STATE/ZIP LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: LAND USE MAP ZONING MAP OFFICE USE ONLY: 11/4/2003 CURRENT DESIGNATION Id Concurrency Review Required: ❑ Yes Date Received: - 2I - CA Received By: EMAIL: FAx: PHONE: EMAIL: FAx: PROPOSED DESIGNATION RATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): FILE No. cm - 05 -0, ❑ City Initiated itizen Initiated Page 1 of 5 NOTARY SEAL 1 114/200 (City) (Signature) LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE (Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) (pr name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM AT _i_itl 1.)6 1 k __._6—)F. t-____I______--. THE ABOvC R ESPONSES ARE MADE TRU AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT 1 AM THE OWNER OF COROTOF OWNER, THE PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE 1D ENTPERMISSI{ON FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ATTACHED ON HRSIHER BEHALF ACTION •12- g S g, _ _ HONE:. � ADDRESS: t"-- 1 S a S VA fe .J a� _ ZIP: i q 03 6 (State) NOTARY STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) r ‘ . — 20 � SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this q day of �^ (Date) Na ,r GNA Notary Public in and for the State of W Residing at: My appointment expires: Page 2of5 ADDRESS: Z Vq ale y (City) (Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) 1 D IJ 01:p p L pn iJ (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOvc RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE AREA PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED LAND USE ACTION, OR, IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF. NOTARY * .Wl e • • 0 MFRrE • • : u NOTARY �': ■ • PUBLIC • • • r v • • o f wAS f •sss LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this n2$ day of _.Gl�✓� , 200 L/ 9Th PART II NOTARY Pg, (State) N TARY SIGNATURE ZIP: 9' 90.1 7 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at: -r My appointment expires: O G _ 0 HONE:. 9 5 - /g3 (3' Q . (Date) 11/4/2003 Page 2 of 5 1,�,1)a. WOO , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVC RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT 1 AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE AREA PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED LAND USE ACTION, OR, IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF. ADDRESS: 11/4/2003 PART If 'PI( 1? *lli'-e it LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE (Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) (Signature) P7' A_ cZ 240 STATE OF WASHINGTON •) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) NOTARY G s C1 1 . NOTARW SIGNATURE Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Residing at: ` (� E � PHONE:. j 0Si< ZIP: quo 3C Ala. Date) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day of d.A.trw , 20 U My appointment expires: 1. 0 a-0 0 Page 2 of 5 PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SO. FT.) 1 i 7S J ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SQ. FT.) 7.§, v & o ,542, EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: 1 2 J- 2J SCHOOL DISTRICT: - f FIRE DISTRICT: f%RE f1/,$_ WATER DISTRICT: LIE R / NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: CA _ f11411 J � ,i d_ y 41'"r LQ d: PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: ,L._••_.LlJ-d.,- •a.._Li , WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC /PRIVATE ROAD: ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL? (YIN) f'r,5 NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: 844 ll/ /JAVV l dt 2- 15 (3 3, 0 5 a�{ PREVIOUS ZONING /LAND USE DECISION LIST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: • ' ' 5 C it N gec- - .roni LA 3.5 Xo Li• P. .2 �+1 f7H 13° 044'e5LT1bk/s - 200,E CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGES CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? �N �► Qv aw NQd- 1 11 - CS (- P S i 11??, 4 u y C k N yg5 ii et_ J4z. d C t ed i - t :5 O 2 c - ( -&-V 'To wYrocipid- -q -t 1/1412003 1. PART III Page 3 of 5 PROPOSAL PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: 11f•e�r is l.75 C 1ro j V Hey `.Jdy A-± 1 c 5Z S E \ ) A ' 1 1 'c.y ` tk aT 0 o N) a✓ G oLa 4C)uSe$, '-e- Navy v.) 10 d -+ k� L& -� 4. h.) Y �Y.S A ud w�Sti `ro t I t e_ ? Yo P e F-* > -t o a. k ; 5 It e1 eve t O Lt5e e L k4N5e 1S L o IJ S■5'7"cc_N1" J 1Tk /4 d u o I1.1I y p)-0 P cr`f 7 /9 Aid C 0 -tO r e kc d s NJ L S e+ V J e. fi t - P o S U. I- t- o u. ed � y )3-2_ c r - i a _ & o IJ 3 3 t "d.e s ADJACENT LAND USES DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL .p N - t` S; d . s L,k) ; rJ Q � �Y • 13- bps'N sses p1 -es -r o S h a P i 0 7 h e.1-- t S r t' P n1 A. L L_ A ko r t N 11/4/2003 Page 4 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE How PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - CITE SPECIFIC GOALS /POLICIES: A c6,1 C o . , trAerchal` .443 , Ny 1 tii"S t'A ce r b bQ5T +.LS<. O „C t w � ANd C onk JLT Lii�, �Y o perm/ A IN ciT5 504t- o PoL.;ct rat.. L )O.3 L. fn_ 14- t tv. PUBLIC FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT: .5'e va e Y \/A - - fier S t.x.5 .5L k/ • \j€ t - a. W a.Te >•- ► s W &Te t ^ a cJ e L. e c. l r i C a. L ,5 11/4/2003 IS • •r s 1� aIIcY wc.yl F'fr.e but.5laeS5p$ d � xT ,xouT P p L y k 5 A I he � - 1),e 1J i4 p Pro o . .i, Se:TVLC.e. St.4_LL_;ve-IJ lZ bu_d. 2. 5 -0 -l r��T. Ls Ld �a - a_tr'teh;4L cLYect to - creew4y, Page 5 of 5 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -05 -04 Comprehensive Plan Map Comp Plan Category Low Density Residential n Medium Density Residential ® Kiph Density Residential U Mixed Use Community Center Ns Urban Activity Center Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial Regional Commercial 9 tight Industrial Heavy Industrial Mineral Land 1 1 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -05 -04 August, 2004 Spokane Watley Zoning Category UR -3.5 UR -7 ED UR -7' UR -12 IM UR -22 B-1 B-2 B-3 ® RR -10 1 11.1 EM 12 1-3 NZ Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -05 -04 August, 2004 Spokane Walley CPA -06 -04 Scott Kuhta From: Peggy L Cannon [cannonrp @juno.coml Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 11:17 AM To: Scott Kuhta Subject: Re: Application No. CPA-06 -04 Dear Scott: Just a note to say how much we all appreciated your help during this re- zoning issue. It was gratifying to know that we were heard by the commissioners. Your professionalism made the process as pleasant as possible. Additionally, we would like to thank the entire staff and the commissioners for treating everyone with such respect. Thank you. Rich and Peggy Cannon 1 September 23, 2004 Mr. Kuhta, Joan Colwell- Hartung N918 Calvin Rd. Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Attn: Scott Kuhta Spokane Valley Community Development Department 11707 East Sprague Ave. Spokane Valley, WA. 99206 RECEIVED SEP - 2 2 2004 SPOKANE VAU.EY DEPARTMENT OF OOMMUNIT YDEVELOPIIIIINT 1 am writing 'concerning the proposedpne change on the cast side of Adams Rd., 400 ,Feet south -:o {'Mission Ave:.Tlie proposal is•to.go from low density housing to high- density : housing. This - proposal would put 176 units onto the 8 acres. Our neighborhood is a walking neighborhood. People are outside a great deal'walking with dogs or children. . There are basketball games going on all the time in the• street area. Children ride around on their bikes, scooters and:skateboards. Our neighborhood watches Out for each other. We'are .a pretty low -key area_'We also have no sidewalks. The increase . in traffic would, greatly lower the quality of life for area residents. Cataldo would be used as an arterial over to Evergreen. - the apartments\Vould;also he such contrastto the surrounding .homes that it would . iotal1y``break'thc continuity of the area. - - - •Pleasetor e.out against the zone change. - Thank you Joan ColweIi-Hartimg: Scott Kuhta From: Peggy L Cannon [cannonrp@juno.comj Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 4:24 PM To: Scott Kuhta Subject: Application No. CPA -06 -04 September 16, 2004 Mr. Scott Kuhta Spokane Valley Community Development Department 11707 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 RE: Application No. CPA -06 -04 Dear Mr. Kuhta: Page 1 of 1 After learning of the application by Crosby Family Land, LLC, to change the designation of 8 acres of land east of Adams Road, 400 feet south of Mission Avenue, Parcel No. 45141.9003, from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential, we feel compelled to notify you that as homeowners and taxpayers we enthusiastically oppose this proposal. We object to this proposal for many of the same reasons you might object should someone propose a zoning change which would allow a multilevel, multifamily apartment complex to be built literally in your backyard. We object to the increased traffic, noise, and pollution it would ultimately bring. We object to the consequential loss of property value such a development would mean for all neighboring residential properties. We object to the taxing of community resources which would result from a bulging population. We bought our current home in good faith, knowing it was located in an area zoned as Low Density Residential. We realized that at some point the land in question would indeed be developed. We expected, however, it to be developed as designated — low density residential. We have watched with dismay as our neighbors on Evergreen Road have had their front yards encroached upon and their living environments changed forever. We realize that yours is an awesome responsibility — providing the greater good for the greatest number of citizens. It is our hope, Mr. Kuhta, that you and your fellow planning commissioners will agree that the greater good is maintaining good, solid, environmentally and esthetically friendly neighborhoods in which the citizens of the City of Spokane Valley can live, raise their families, and contribute to the community. It is our hope that you will realize that allowing a business organization to change a zone solely for its own profit is not in the best interest of the City's homeowners and taxpayers. We sincerely hope that you will reflect carefully on this decision. Your decision will have an enormous impact on the lives of many of your city neighbors. Please help us maintain the neighborhoods which we call home. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Richard and Peggy Cannon 1103 North Burns Road Spokane Valley, Washington 9/17/2004 Sept. 14,2004 We have received notice of the desire of the Crosby Family Land, LLC to have the Comprehensive Land Use designation changed to High Density Residential on the parcel of land they own. This has caused considerable consternation among the residents near this parcel. This is a stable neighborhood with many residents of long tenure who are very comfortable with the neighborhood as it presently exists. It has been well accepted that one day the parcel would be put to use for more single family homes. We feel that any development on the land should not disturb the environment we are accustomed to. While these are emotional concerns, they are important to near -by residents. There are other concerns of a more technical nature. The parcel between the eight acre parcel and Broadway has already been sold and developed which allows no direct access to Broadway. The intersection of Adams and Broadway is already difficult, so more traffic would flow to Mission. While Mission has been recently improved, the improvement has caused many of the residences on the north side of the street to lose access and parking to the widening. Backing out of those driveways is already a problem, a problem that would be exacerbated by additional traffic on that street. Since Mission is essentially a two lane street, the possibility of collision with resulting property damage or personal injury would increase with increased traffic. A UR -22 zoning could allow 1 76 units to be built. Traffic control uses a possibility of five car trips per day per unit for a possibility of 880 car trips per day added to Adams, a two lane street.. Additional policing would be required to monitor traffic. This brings up the question of sewer capacity. Though the recently added sewer has not yet be approved for use, it could already be insufficient to handle the increased Toad. If high density structures were to be built, there would be no buffer between that property and the properties that now exist on the west side of Burns Rd. There has been a long standing practice in zoning to provide a zoning buffer between high and low density. To allow this change would upset that practice. The Central Valley School District is already considering the possibility of instituting busing as early as next year. An influx of 1800 new residences is forecast for the next five years. Progress Elementary has a capacity 416 students and currently has fewer than that, but that school is targeted to receive busing. Pines Middle School is currently being re- modeled for expected influx. New high density housing in an area of low density housing would increase the burden. We, the tax payers, paid the bill for a long process of study and meetings to develop a comprehensive land use plan. if errors were made in that plan, and if it is argued that sufficient land was not designated for high density use one might look at the area south of Sprague and east of Argonne where a change of designation could be made with far less impact. /D2/ / / ,3 2A) 5 Ltk 1 . V ��r7 �i'SfLG� f- GeJfg7 �,� /L / September 14, 2004 I have read the attached letter and agree with it's contents. Sept. 14,2004 We have received notice of the desire of the Crosby Family Land, LLC to have the Comprehensive Land Use designation changed to High Density Residential on the parcel of land they own. This has caused considerable consternation among the residents near this parcel. This is a stable neighborhood with many residents of long tenure who are very comfortable with the neighborhood as it presently exists. It has been well accepted that one day the parcel would be put to use for more single family homes. We feel that any development on the land should not disturb the environment we are accustomed to. While these are emotional concerns, they are important to near -by residents. There are other concerns of a more technical nature. The parcel between the eight acre parcel and Broadway has already been sold and developed which allows no direct access to Broadway. The intersection of Adams and Broadway is already difficult, so more traffic would flow to Mission. While Mission has been recently improved, the improvement has caused many of the residences on the north side of the street to lose access and parking to the widening. Backing out of those driveways is already a problem, a problem that would be exacerbated by additional traffic on that street. Since Mission is essentially a two lane street, the possibility of collision with resulting property damage or personal injury would increase with increased traffic. A UR -22 zoning could allow 176 units to be built. Traffic control uses a possibility of five car trips per day per unit for a possibility of 880 car trips per day added to Adams, a two lane street.. Additional policing would be required to monitor traffic. This brings up the question of sewer capacity. Though the recently added sewer has not yet be approved for use, it could already be insufficient to handle the increased load. If high density structures were to be built, there would be no buffer between that property and the properties that now exist on the west side of Burns Rd There has been a long standing practice in zoning to provide a zoning buffer between high and low density. To allow this change would upset that practice. The Central Valley School District is already considering the possibility of instituting busing as early as next year. An influx of 1 800 new residences is forecast for the next five years. Progress Elementary has a capacity 416 students and currently has fewer than that, but that school is targeted to receive busing. Pines Middle School is currently being re- modeled for expected influx. New high density housing in an area of low density housing would increase the burden. We, the tax payers, paid the bill for a long process of study and meetings to develop a comprehensive land use plan. If errors were made in that plan, and if it is argued that sufficient land was not dcsiLnatrd for high density use, one might look at the area south of Sprague and east of Argonne where a change of designation could be made with far I s impact. N ° f. tlt» s '�d .c9a, 9x 7- 10 4 51 / teZ/AY 4 WA ‘1:9 - 40 - 7 1 19' ROI ( t $,�r�s R� sec, W%q 9� �'� n /10 3 77 • ii-1164(-di /0? Cl02 04 301 CPokA,vc'VaLL t-7, (e3 ea f'P' i"?/, Julle,y) Oaf C7-27/ ~w s S rV-PA1 CAI 69 1 war ,,,/vim. -_ v oral September 14, 2004 I have read the attt ached letter and agree with it's contents. ? /4 / ea,0 to Sept. 14,2004 We have received notice of the desire of the Crosby Family Land, LLC to have the Comprehensive Land Use designation changed to High Density Residential on the parcel of land they own. This has caused considerable consternation among the residents near this parcel. This is a stable neighborhood with many residents of long tenure who are very comfortable with the neighborhood as it presently exists. It has been well accepted that one day the parcel would be put to use for more single family homes. We feel that any development on the land should not disturb the environment we are accustomed to. While these are emotional concerns, they are important to near-by residents. There are other concerns of a more technical nature. The parcel between the eight acre parcel and Broadway has already been sold and developed which allows no direct access to Broadway. The intersection of Adams and Broadway is already difficult, so more traffic would flow to Mission. While Mission has been recently improved, the improvement has caused many of the residences on the north side of the street to lose access and parking to the widening. Backing out of those driveways is already a problem, a problem that would be exacerbated by additional traffic on that street. Since Mission is essentially a two lane street, the possibility of collision with resulting property damage or personal injury would increase with increased traffic. A UR -22 zoning could allow 176 units to be built. Traffic control uses a possibility of five car trips per day per unit for a possibility of 880 car trips per day added to Adams, a two lane street.. Additional policing would be required to monitor traffic. This brings up the question of sewer capacity. Though the recently added sewer has not yet be approved for use, it could already be insufficient to handle the increased load. If high density structures were to be built, there would be no buffer between that property and the properties that now exist on the west side of Burns Rd. There has been a long standing practice in zoning to provide a zoning buffer between high and low density. To allow this change would upset that practice. The Central Valley School is already considering the possibility of instituting busing as early as next year. An influx of 1800 new residences is forecast for the next five years. Progress Elementary has a capacity 416 students and currently has fewer than that, but that school is targeted to receive busing. Pines Middle School is currently being re- modeled for expected influx. New high density housing in an area of low density housing would increase the burden. We, the tax payers, paid the bill for a long process of study and meetings to develop a comprehensive land use plan. if errors were made in that plan, and if it is argued that sufficient land was not designated for high density use, one might look at the area south of Sprague and east of Argonne where a change of designation could be made with far less impact- September 14, 2004 I have read the attached letter and agree with it's contents. /1:4A) >7)24 , 4a. ` -11 = - /i o'� /E: Baef Xd -1///4P • Ni 22 o 3 n! 3, / 1 0 2. N Bury lrVlvirma.r Qgio.v.- 1 CURRENT POLICY v-u• . v. -•- . ...-...-_ • .._. - -- -- .- - .. - PROPOSED POLICY Cdr Qw i u Ji r3C - -2_7- U "'-° .Qil (. /.\*;. Spa ValleT rTh APPLICANT I NAME: C J'Lf y L.J U. ,C PHONE: ( 04 1 — (.1 co I ADDRESS: I ZS I S (. EMAIL: 1 17 - C ITY /STATE / ZIP , 0- 02- FAX: ► we:, PROPERTY OWNER 1 OF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT) NAME: ADDRESS: CITY /STATE/ZIP: PROPERTY OWNER 2 (IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET) PHONE: EMAIL: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY /STATE/ZIP: AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY NAME: ADDRESS: CITY /STATE /ZIP LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: LAND USE MAP ZONING MAP 11!4/2003 City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment CURRENT DESIGNATION Low Dews _'� PART 1 OFFICE USE ONLY: . 0 City Initiated Concurrency Review Required: 0 Yes Date Received: 7 — EL( o q Received By: 1 PHONE: 1 EMAIL: 1 FAX: FAx: PHONE: EMAIL: FAx: PROPOSED DESIGNATION CH SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): d-Cifien Initiated Page 1 of 5 FILE No.0 A-0G -cr' 11/4/2003 PART II LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE (Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) CO-e). I ITV J0 0 wa I, �. not h r r & . 6 r , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVE RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE AREA PROPOSED FOR THE ABOVE IDENTIFIED LAND USE ACTION, OR, IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS /HER BEHALF. ADDRESS: I aS (5, S CE (Z L • PHONECSdg) 19 (0 MS, CA- ZIP: (1902,3 (City) (State) (D /3e/ STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) NOTARY SEAL Notary Public Notary, Slots of Washington MICHAEL J 8RYANS Residi my Appointment Expires Apr 19. 2008 NOTARY SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this Bb . day of r.) , , 20M 711.t-P NOTARY SIGNATURE bublic in and for the State of Washington at: S 9 O ? Ss�r�krt >J, intment expires: A- p i 11 f 2 1' Page 2 of 5 JI I V?%t PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SO. FT.) 0 Ac-or---- IA.4 D L_ ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SQ.FT_) N O/A, EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: \,fCla...J i L-01 II 1 C c.I \IA -LC_Er ' °;' >' 1 SCHOOL DISTRICT: FIRE DISTRICT: WATER DISTRICT: , / \( E-r--fp- Vj _rot ".0-... NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: — N-1. ._- ELI s t� . PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC /PRIVATE ROAD: ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL? (YIN) NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: J 1Q �_ u +s.s.s Lox) .) PART III ) 0_ ‘c 4)0. 0 3 5- 0 3 PREVIOUS ZONING /LAND USE DECISION LIS PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: N 1 bNe_. CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGES CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? cr z_ P'so P aze. a-'1 t-3 s - ,-E-._ c_an/.._ 78- . , ...)t - -...1(..t dam- L a CO 1E" ("b42_ a'.c.,vL L_(_C_. \l.) Go.,,3-1 ,,..1 u -ra 1 N.) c..0 2 % p6..r f E.S Amt.., _ f� \Ib L ..s 7 i � l n� y ?7 v-S'ui , f- ' k ' -- ) - E_•! l -L'as cm. l°---' 1) 1 . C_ .cp.)e, .)`1 1 f) r1q JJC WZ 7 I`I'z -�S Wass - �y�/la-5Y2. ∎/•E N-1 Gt.€..5, �f'r' S f L. L� r- q-s -c. }, c� - q �ti-1 C L ..S• , • 0 � 'c' ' �wo'�n. to t -r.3�� 6C- ts��� 1 'Lr .- --) s - -D 13'C.) L._01- 1 i rt-i� , e ��� ' -L �l (�,Cr "Ver -- rll - L t crv1A- i 7 L-O 6 L_P_ A 1 S D P2.ov Z G7 11/4/2003 Page 3 of 5 PROPOSAL PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: ADJACENT LAND USES DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: 11/4/2003 Page 4 of 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE HOW PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - CITE SPECIFIC GOALS /POLICIES: Acn' c- PUBLIC. FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT: 11/4/2003 Page 5 of 5 PROPOSAL Provide General Description of Proposal: We propose to develop our approximately eight -acre parcel into a quality adult care/ assisted living facility. This facility would be much along the lines of the Broadway Court just to the west of this property and Sullivan Park to the south on south Adams road. We feel that this would be an ideal use for this property as it has nearby access to the Valley Medical Complex as well as numerous shopping options. ADJACENT LAND USES Describe Existing Land Uses within the Vicinity of Proposal: The existing land use is single family residential along with duplexes across the street from the property location. There is also a Montessori school just to the south of the property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY Describe How Proposal is Consistent with Comprehensive Plan -Cite Specific Goals/Policies: We feel that our company's proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. It would provide a nice fit for the neighborhood by incorporating a quality adult living/assisted living facility with access to both major arterials north and south providing a reduction of the traffic impact. It would also be a improvement for the neighborhood from it current use as a vacant lot that is being used as an illegal dumping ground for trash, abandoned vehicles and unsafe trespassing motor vehicle traffic. We have had to erect large signage in order to help curtail these activities. Under the Comprehensive Plan, it states that it is desirable for the following: • Locate high density near commercial areas- We believe that this project would be complimentary with this goal as it is very close to the busy Sullivan Road and Sprague business corridors. It is also in very close proximity to the Valley Mall Complex with good access from both Sullivan and Evergreen interchanges. • Locate high- density sites with good access to major arterials- Our project would be very near the arterials of Broadway and Mission Avenues. It would also benefit by the close proximity to the Sullivan and Evergreen interchanges. • Create a variety of residential densities within the Urban Growth Area with an emphasis on compact mixed use development in designated centers or corridors -We feel that our project adheres to this goal by locating in an area that this type of development is already present but not clustered together. It would provide a nice mix while not being overwhelming. • Provide a healthful, safe, and sustainable urban environment that offers a variety of opportunities for affordable housing and employment. — This project would provide affordable and convenient housing for the growing senior population while also adding nearby jobs to the couununity. • Require effective landscape buffers and/or transitional uses between incompatible industrial, commercial, and residential uses to mitigate noise, glare, and other impacts associated with uses - This project would provide an attractive landscaped buffer zone while eliminating the dust, noxious weeds, and nuisance of the current state of the property. PUBLIC FACILITIES Describe Availability of Public Facilities and Services, Including Roads Water, Sewer, Parks, and Public Transit. The property is serviced for power and water from Vera Water and Power Utility. The sewer is currently being constructed up Adams road and is scheduled for completion this summer The nearby parks include Valley Mission Park, Sullivan Park, and close proximity to the Centennial trail. Public transit is available with bus routes on both Broadway to the immediate south and Mission Avenue to the immediate north. Scott Kuhta From: Peggy L Cannon [cannonrp @juno.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 4:24 PM To: Scott Kuhta Subject: Application No. CPA -06 -04 September 16, 2004 Mr. Scott Kuhta Spokane Valley Community Development Department 11707 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 RE: Application No. CPA -06 -04 Dear Mr. Kuhta: After learning of the application by Crosby Family Land, LLC, to change the designation of 8 acres of land east of Adams Road, 400 feet south of Mission Avenue, Parcel No. 4514L9003, from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential, we feel compelled to notify you that as homeowners and taxpayers we enthusiastically oppose this proposal. We object to this proposal for many of the same reasons you might object should someone propose a zoning change which would allow a multilevel, multifamily apartment complex to be built literally in your backyard. We object to the increased traffic, noise, and pollution it would ultimately bring. We object to the consequential loss of property value such a development would mean for all neighboring residential properties. We object to the taxing of community resources which would result from a bulging population. We bought our current home in good faith, knowing it was located in an area zoned as Low Density Residential. We realized that at some point the land in question would indeed be developed. We expected, however, it to be developed as designated — low density residential. We have watched with dismay as our neighbors on Evergreen Road have had their front yards encroached upon and their living environments changed forever. We realize that yours is an awesome responsibility — providing the greater good for the greatest number of citizens. It is our hope, Mr. Kuhta, that you and your fellow planning commissioners will agree that the greater good is maintaining good, solid, environmentally and esthetically friendly neighborhoods in which the citizens of the City of Spokane Valley can live, raise their families, and contribute to the community. It is our hope that you will realize that allowing a business organization to change a zone solely for its own profit is not in the best interest of the City's homeowners and taxpayers. We sincerely hope that you will reflect carefully on this decision. Your decision will have an enormous impact on the lives of many of your city neighbors. Please help us maintain the neighborhoods which we call home. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Richard and Peggy Cannon 1103 North Burns Road Spokane Valley, Washington 9/17/2004 Sept. 14,2004 We have received notice of the desire of the Crosby Family Land, LLC to have the Comprehensive Land Use designation changed to High Density Residential on the parcel of land they own. This has caused considerable consternation among the residents near this parceL This is a stable neighborhood with many residents of long tenure who are very comfortable with the neighborhood as it presently exists. It has been well accepted that one day the parcel would be put to use for more single family homes. We feel that any development on the land should not disturb the environment we are accustomed to. While these are emotional concerns, they are important to near -by residents. There are other concerns of a more technical nature. The parcel between the eight acre parcel and Broadway has already been sold and developed which allows no direct access to Broadway. The intersection of Adams and Broadway is already difficult, so more traffic would flow to Mission. While Mission has been recently improved, the improvement has caused many of the residences on the north side of the street to lose access and parking to the widening. Backing out of those driveways is already a problem, a problem that would be exacerbated by additional traffic on that street. Since Mission is essentially a two lane street, the possibility of collision with resulting property damage or personal injury would increase with increased traffic. A UR -22 zoning could allow 176 units to be built. Traffic control uses a possibility of five car trips per day per unit for a possibility of 880 car trips per day added to Adams, a two lane street.. Additional policing would be required to monitor traffic. This brings up the question of sewer capacity. Though the recently added sewer has not yet be approved for use, it could already be insufficient to handle the increased load. If high density structures were to be built, there would be no buffer between that property and the properties that now exist on the west side of Burns Rd. There has been a long standing practice in zoning to provide a zoning buffer between high and low density. To allow this change would upset that practice. The Central Valley School District is already considering the possibility of instituting busing as early as next year. An influx of 1800 new residences is forecast for the next five years. Progress Elementary has a capacity 416 students and currently has fewer than that, but that school is targeted to receive busing. Pines Middle School is currently being re- modeled for expected influx. New high density housing in an area of low density housing would increase the burden. We, the tax payers, paid the bill for a long process of study and meetings to develop a comprehensive land use plan. If errors were made in that plan, and if it is argued that sufficient land was not designated for high density use, one might look at the area south of Sprague and east of Argonne where a change of designation could be made with far less impact 0,011. *44 k.ti W. t' - a ,e WO 2 A k3 ikt¢ . S n a,,,,f , (Ak., r 1 Y us Sept. 14,2004 We have received notice of the desire of the Crosby Family Land, LLC to have the Comprehensive Land Use designation changed to High Density Residential on the parcel of land they own. This has caused considerable consternation among the residents near this parcel. This is a stable neighborhood with many residents of long tenure who are very comfortable with the neighborhood as it presently exists. It has been well accepted that one day the parcel would be put to use for more single family homes. We feel that any development on the land should not disturb the environment we are accustomed to. While these are emotional concerns, they are important to near-by residents. There are other concerns of a more technical nature. The pa eel between the eight acre parcel and Broadway has already been sold and developed which allows no direct access to Broadway. The intersection of Adams and Broadway is already difficult, so more traffic would flow to Mission. While Mission has been recently improved, the improvement has caused many of the residences on the north side of the street to lose access and parking to the widening. Backing out of those driveways is already a problem, a problem that would be exacerbated by additional traffic on that street. Since Mission is essentially a two lane street, the possibility of collision with resulting property damage or personal injury would increase with increased traffic. A UR -22 zoning could allow 176 units to be built. Traffic control uses a possibility of five car trips per day per unit for a possibility of 880 car trips per day added to Adams, a two lane street.. Additional policing would be required to monitor traffic. This brings up the question of sewer capacity. Though the recently added sewer has not yet be approved for use, it could already be insufficient to handle the increased load. If high density structures were to be built, there would be no buffer between that property and the properties that now exist on the west side of Burns Rd. There has been a long standing practice in zoning to provide a zoning buffer between high and low density. To allow this change would upset that practice. The Central Valley School District is already considering the possibility of instituting busing as early as next year. An influx of 1 800 new residences is forecast for the next five years. Progress Elementary has a capacity 416 students and currently has fewer than that, but that school is targeted to receive busing. Pines Middle School is currently being re- modeled for expected influx. New high density housing in an area of low density housing would increase the burden. We, the tax payers, paid the bill for a long process of study and meetings to develop a comprehensive land use plan. If errors were made in that plan, and if it is argued that sufficient land was not designated for high density use, one might look at the area south of Sprague and east of Argonne where a change of designation could be made with far less impact. . N /o 1 L)-i7S ' J � c /4K `7z7- 49 1017 /U . 21./A/ td 40 1 I4)11- 404 - to - t 9 r t/ .t PIS is $ .3 7? v16 \54P-?-1-efeeitid? 0 30i �l? / r�l, r (1)5 r3u Yes l?" � 6( to c� Y ( , Se- -lam U.? I fi.J A- September 14, 2004 I have read the attached letter and agree with it's contents. ��(4...7-mot.? 7/a/D F BI �� Sept. 1 4,2004 We have received notice of the desire of the Crosby Family Land, LLC to have the Comprehensive Land Use designation changed to High Density Residential on the parcel of land they own. This has caused considerable consternation among the residents near this parcel. This is a stable neighborhood with many residents of long tenure who are very comfortable with the neighborhood as it presently exists. It has been well accepted that one day the parcel would be put to use for more single family homes. We feel that any development on the land should not disturb the environment we are accustomed to. While these are emotional concerns, they are important to near -by residents. There are other concerns of a more technical nature. The parcel between the eight acre parcel and Broadway has already been sold and developed which allows no direct access to Broadway. The intersection of Adams and Broadway is already difficult, so more traffic would flow to Mission. While Mission has been recently improved, the improvement has caused many of the residences on the north side of the street to lose access and parking to the widening. Backing out of those driveways is already a problem, a problem that would be exacerbated by additional traffic on that street Since Mission is essentially a two lane street, the possibility of collision with resulting property damage or personal injury would increase with increased traffic. A UR -22 zoning could allow 176 units to be built. Traffic control uses a passibility of five car trips per day per unit for a possibility of 880 car trips per day added to Adams, a two lane street.. Additional policing would be required to monitor tragic. This brings up the question of sewer capacity. Though the recently added sewer has not yet be approved for use, it could already be insufficient to handle the increased load. If high density structures were to be built, there would be no buffer between that property and the properties that now exist on the west side of Burns Rd. There has been a long standing practice in zoning to provide a zoning buffer between high and low density. To allow this change would upset that practice. The Central Valley School'District is already considering the possibility of instituting busing as early as next year. An influx of 1800 new residences is forecast for the next five years. Progress Elementary has a capacity 416 students and currently has fewer than that, but that school is targeted to receive busing. Pines Middle School is currently being re- modeled for expected influx. New high density housing in an area of low density housing would increase the burden. We, the tax payers, paid the bill for a long process of study and meetings to develop a comprehensive land use plan. If errors were made in that plan, and if it is argued that sufficient land was not designated for high density use, one might look at the area south of Sprague and east of Argonne where a change of designation could be made with far less impact. cv ' ?za4, ' (Y o hi V September 14, 2004 I have read the attached letter and agree with it's contents. / 9a,2 , Bue.'.5 .ed / /El �'f C13 t✓ t;,vttrli / l02.. 1I.3urv 9 .F-7e ‘f ;=7/- qs 79 72-‘9-6 5-57 Di Aerial Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -06 -04 August. 2004 azail „-- .1 • 1 • f 1 4 , t .11 • I • + - 1 .4". t 'Plo AI L - ' - ! • fit! _ �ii ` ' j ; • ' • _fit;' - a " ... " ..• • . .1i' i. ile ` - 0:-` ` L + e C is • .. ..._ . _ ____:. 1_ fiar ' . le ' I 161. e g j :I i+ ! s. �. . I - . ,. 7 ill f 47- 1 • J . • • • w 1 4 • , r • - _ • Lit. t o, :' •1 kane Zoning Category li_j UR -3.5 UR -7 - UR -7' I ! UR -12 M UR -22 B-1 B -2 B -3 /M RR -10 I -1 L�J I -2 M 1 -3 MZ Zoning Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -06 -04 August, 2004 S 11L 1� poI ane jVal ley Comprehensive Plan Map • tr MIMMICIM Comp Plan Category Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Egg High Density Residential FT Mixed Use Community Center MI Urban Activity Center Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial ® Regional Commercial I ' Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Mineral Land INNIS NMI 11111111M _Amu N Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -06 -04 August, 2004 Sinioka a Mal leer CPA-07-04 Sfi Rune Valley CURRENT POLICY City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment PART I APPLICANT NAME: TODD R. WHIPPLE, P.E. ADDRESS: 13218 E. SPRAGUE AVENUE CITY /STATE/ZIP: SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99216 PROPERTY OWNER 1 (IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT) NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: EMAIL: CITY /STATE/ZIP: FAX: PROPERTY OWNER 2 (IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET) NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: EMAIL: CITY /STATE/ZIP: FAX: AGENT /CONSULTANT /ATTORNEY ( NAME: CHRIS ASHENBRENNER PHONE: 624 -1170 ADDRESS: 202 E. TRENT EMAIL: CHRIS@AACDI.COM CITY /STATE/ZIP: SPOKANE, WA 99202 FAX: 624 -1255 LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: CURRENT DESIGNATION PROPOSED DESIGNATION LAND USE MAP N/A N/A ZONING MAP N/A N/A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL (ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET W NECESSARY): THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN CURRENTLY SHOWS A FUTURE MANSFIELD AVENUE BEING EXTENDED BETWEEN ITS CURRENT TERMIMUS WITH HOUK STREET AND MIRABEAU PARKWAY To CHANGE THE ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN BY REMOVING MANSFIELD PROPOSED AVENUE BETWEEN HOUK STREET AND MIRABEAU PARKWAY AND POLICY REPLACING THIS ROADWAY WITH HOUK STREET EXTENDED SOUTH TO INDIANA AVENUE AND CREATING A NEW INTERSECTION WITH INDIANA AVE OFFICE USE ONLY: 0 City Initiated Concurrency Review Required: 0 Yes Date Received: f )- ( - 0 C- 4 Received By: ,i) { FILE No.Q PA - Di -1 PHONE: 893 -2617 EMAIL: TRWATWCE @MSN.COM FAX: 926 -0227 citizen Initiated v�- 6/30/2004 Page 1 of 7 ADDRESS: 13218 E. Sprague Avenue 6/30/2004 PART Tr LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE (Signature of legal owner or representative as authorized by legal owner) I, Todd R. Whipple SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVE RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. 1 FURTHER SWEAR OR-AFFIRM THAT I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE AREA S•okane Valle (Cit � (State) J'- A Signature) W PHONE: 893 -2617 ZIP: 99216 June 30, 2004 (Date) STATE OF WASHINGTON) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this / day of ■`/ , 20 0 NOTARY SEAL NOTARY TARY S L y N y ATU , R � E Notary Pu • is in and for the State of a chin g of ��Si�/6r� Residing at: My appointment expires: TA 0 Page 2 of 7 PART III. SITE DATA PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SQ. FT.) N/A ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SO.FT.) N/A EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: N/A SCHOOL DISTRICT. N/A FIRE DISTRICT: N/A WATER DISTRICT: N/A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: N/A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: N/A WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC /PRIVATE ROAD: N/A ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL? (YIN) N/A NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: MANSFIELD AVENUE / HOUK STREET PREVIOUS ZONING /LAND USE DECISION LIST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: MANSFIELD AVENUE BETWEEN PINES ROAD AND MIRABEAU PARKWAY WAS INCLUDED ON THE SPOKANE COUNTY ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN AND INCORPORATED BY THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, DATE AND JUSTIFICTION FOR PLACEMENT ON THE PLAN ARE UNKNOWN. CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGES CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? IN ADDITION TO THOSE ITEMS NOTED BELOW PLEASE SEE ATTACHED LETTER REPORT ON CHANGED CONDITIONS AND GENERAL PROPOSAL NARRATIVE. WE BELIEVE THE FOLLOWING CHANGED CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROPOSAL • MANSFIELD AVENUE REMAINS AN UNFUNDED ROADWAY ON THE ARTERIAL ROAD SYSTEM BETWEEN HOUK AND MIRABEAU PARKWAY • THE PINES ROAD CORRIDOR PROJECT HAS REMAINED UNFUNDED AND SLOWLY MOVING FORWARD IF MOVING FORWARD AT ALL • THE BRIDGING THE VALLEY RAILROAD REALIGNMENT PROJECT IS MOVING FORWARD WITH THE VACATION OF THE UPRR LINE PLANNED FOR 2009 TO 2012 • HOUK STREET EXTENDED REPRESENTS A $600,000 TO $800,000 COST SAVINGS TO THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY • MANSFIELD AVENUE WAS DESIGNATED BASED UPON INSUFFICIENT DOCUMENTATION AND PROCESS AS A FUTURE ARTERIAL ROADWAY • DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THIS CORRIDOR IS BEHIND ORIGINAL PROJECTIONS FOR GROWTH AND INFRASTRUCTURE NEED • INDIANA AVENUE WITHN THIS VICINITY REMAINS AN UNDERUTILIZED FACILITY 6130/2004 Page 3 of 7 PROPOSAL PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: THIS APPLICATION IS SUPPLEMENTED BY A SEPARATE DOCUMENT, HOWEVER A BRIEF DESCRIPTION IS NOTED HERE. IN 1993 THE AREA NORTH OF INDIANA AVENUE, EAST OF HOUK, WEST OF MIRABEAU POINT AND SOUTH OF THE THEN WALK IN THE WILD ZOO, WAS THE SUBJECT OF SEVERAL LAND USE ACTIONS. DURING THE LAND USE PLANNING PORTION FOR THESE PROJECTS, SPOKANE COUNTY AND THE WSDOT IN IN ATTEMPT TO IMPROVE TRAFFIC CONGESTIONS ALONG THE PINES ROAD CORRIDOR BETWEEN MISSION AND TRENT CONDUCTED THE PINES ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY. THE PRIMARY GOAL OF THIS STUDY WAS TO MINIMIZE THE NUMBER OF INTERSECTIONS ALONG PINES ROAD WITHIN THESE LIMITS. To THAT END THE REALINGMENT OF MONTGOMERY FROM THE MONTGOMERY / INDIANA / PINES INTERSECTION TO THE MANSFIELD AND PINES INTERSECTION WAS PROPOSED. THE INTENT OF THIS MOVE WAS TO PUSH TRAFFIC THAT WAS ONLY HEADING EAST AND WEST ON INDIANA / MONTGOMERY FROM USING THE REALIGNED PINES ROAD / INDIANA / WB RAMP INTERSECTION. TO THAT END A NEW ARTERIAL ROADWAY EXTENSION FROMT THE INTERSECTION OF MANSFIELD AND HOUK AND TIEING INTO MIRABEAU PARKWAY, HENCE MANSFIELD EXTENDED WAS ENVISIONED AND ADDED TO THE COUNTY'S ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN. THE PREMISE OF THE MANSFIELD PROPOSAL AT THE TIME THAT IT WAS PROPOSED WAS THAT THERE WAS ONLY ONE WAY TO MOVE TRAFFIC EAST AND WEST AND STILL GET THEM BACK TO INDIANA AVENUE WITHOUT HAVING THIS TRAFFIC USE THE RECONFIGURED PINES AND INDIANA INTERSECTION. THE PRIMARY REASON WAS NOT AN OVERWHELMING DESIRE BY EITHER THE AGENCY (COUNTY OR WSDOT) TO HAVE THE ROAD BISECT PROPERTIES TO INTERESECT WITH MIRABEAU PARKWAY. RATHER IT WAS MORE PRAGMATIC, THERE WAS ONLY ONE CROSSING OF THE UPRR BETWEEN PINES AND SULLIVAN AND THAT WAS AT MIRABEAU PARKWAY HAVING BEEN MOVED FROM THE ORIGINAL SHANNON AVENUE CROSSING (MCDONALD RD. EXTENDED). WITH THE BRIDGING OF THE VALLEY PROJECT MOVING FORWARD AND THE VACATION OF THE UPRR RAILROAD AN OPTION THAT DIDN'T EXIST IN 1998 WHEN THE PINES ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY WAS PROPOSED, WE BELIEVE THAT OTHER SOLUTIONS ARE AVAILABLE SUCH AS THE HOUK EXTENSION TO INDIANA. ADJACENT LAND USES DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: LAND USES WITH THE AREA OF THIS PROPOSAL ARE RECREATIONAL, MULITI- FAMILY, VACANT LAND, OFFICE, BUSINESS PARK AND COMMERCIAL. • 6/30/2004 Page 4 of 7 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE How PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - CITE SPECIFIC GOALS /POLICIES: WE BELIEVE THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THROUGH THE FOLLOWING POLICIES AND GOALS: T.2.2 — TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED TO SERVE NEW DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE IN PLACE AT THE TIME NEW DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS OCCUR. IF THIS IS NOT FEASIBLE, THEN A FINANCIAL COMMITMENT, CONSISTENT WITH THE CAPITAL FACIUITIES PLAN, SHALL BE MADE TO COMPLETE THE IMPROVEMENT WITHIN SIX YEARS. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAL/POLICY AS FOLLOWS: • BECAUSE THE OWNERS OF MUCH OF THE AFFECTED PROPERTY WHICH THE PROPOSED MANSFIELD AVENUE WOULD CROSS ARE CURRENTLY WORKING WITH THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY AND WSDOT IN THE PINES (SR -27) /MANSFIELD CORRIDOR CONGESTION RELIEF PROJECT BY CONTRIBUTING A SHARE CURRENTLY CALCULATED AT $119,866.00. THIS AMOUNT WOULD BE APPLIED TO EITHER HOUK OR MANSFIELD IN THE EVENT THAT THERE IS A PROJECT TO TIE THESE FUNDS TO IN ORDER TO MEET CONCURRENCY. HOWEVER, TO DATE THERE HAS BEEN NO TRANSPORTATION PROJECT AND THE DEVELOPERS ARE DESIREOUS TO MOVE FORWARD. THEY BELIEVE THAT THEIR CONTRIBUTION WILL BE BETTER SPENT EXTENDING HOUK RATHER THAN PAYING $600,000 TO $800,000 CONDEMENING AN EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDING, HAVING THEIR PROJECT BISECTED AND RUNNING A STRAIGHT THROUGH 35 MPH ARTERIAL ROADWAY WHICH MANSFIELD WOULD REPRESENT. T.2.4. — TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH LAND USE PLANS, CAPITAL FUNDING AND OTHER PLANNING ELEMENTS. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAL/POUCY AS FOLLOWS: • IT IS CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT LAND USE PLANS • IT IS CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT CAPITAL FUNDING ISSUES - MANSFIELD IS NOT ON THE 6 -YEAR PLAN AND REQUIRES A $600,000 TO $800,000 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE TO PURCHASE AND DEMOLISH AN EXISTING 6 -UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING • IT IS CONSISTENT WITH OTHER PLANNING ELEMENTS - IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT PHASE 1 REGULATIONS, WITH THE BRIDGING THE VALLEY PROJECT AND WSDOT 1 -90 — FOUR LAKES TO STATELINE EIS. T.2.7. — THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHALL SUPPORT THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE SPOKANE COUNTY (CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS GRCYWTH OCCURS. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAL/POLICY AS FOLLOWS: • THE PROPOSAL FOR HOUK STREET EXTENDED AND THE REMOVAL OF MANSFIELD WILL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS GOAL AS ADJACENT LAND ACCESS WILL BE MAINTAINED, ARTERIAL ROADWAYS WILL NOT BISECT DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY AND HAVE UNNECESSARY ACCESS POINTS, THROUGH TRANSPORTATION AND OVERALL AREA MOBILITY WILL BE MAINTAINED AND ARTERIAL TRAFFIC WILL STAY ON THE ARTERIALS (PINES AND INDIANA) AS PLANNED. T.3A.1 - THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHALL PROVIDE A RANGE OF TRANSPORTATION MODES. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAL/POLICY AS FOLLOWS: • INDIANA AVENUE IS A MAJOR BUS ROUTE FOR SPOKANE TRANSIT AUTHORITY, BY ALLOWING HOUK TO DIRECLTY ACCESS INDIANA, YOU WILL ALLOW OVER 1000 APARTMENT UNITS DIRECT ACCESS TO MASS TRANSIT, INCLUDING ANY RESIDENTS OF THE AREA WITH DISABILITIES. THE MANSFIELD ROUTE TO PINES OR MIRABEAU PARKWAY DOES NOT AFFORDED THE SAME LUXURY AS A NEW CONNECTION TO INDIANA WOULD PROVIDE. 6/30/2004 Page 5 of 7 GOAL - T.4A - ENSURE THAT URBAN ROADWAY SYSTEMS ARE DESIGNED TO PRESERVE AND BE CONSISTENT WITH COMMUNTIY CHARACTER WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL 1S CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAL/POLICY AS FOLLOWS: • MANSFIELD EXTENDED IS NOT PLANNED TO PRESERVE NOR TO BE CONSISTENT WITH COMMUNITY CHARACTER AS IT BISECTS A COMMUNITY BETWEEN PINES AND MIRABEAU PARKWAY WITH AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY. • HOUK, WHILE INTRUSIVE USES THE SAME ALIGNEMENT AS EXISTING WITH A SHORT EXTENSION OVER THE UPRR RIGHT OF WAY TO INDIANA. • MANSFIELD EXTENDED WILL DESTROY AN EXISTING 6 -UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING AT A COST OF $600,000 TO $800,000 WHICH CANNOT SUPPORT NOR BE CONSISTENT WITH COMMUNITY CHARACTER. T.4A.2 — OPTIMIZE THE CAPACITY OF EXISTING ROADS TO MINIMIZE THE NEED FOR NEW OR EXPANDED ROADS THROUGH THE USE OF IMPROVED SIGNAGE, SIGNALIZATION, ROAD MAINTENANCE AND OTHER MEANS. WE BELIEVE THAT THE CURRENT MANSFIELD PROPOSAL IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAL/POLICY AS FOLLOWS: • WE BELIEVE THAT THE EXTENSION OF HOUK TO INDIANA MEETS THIS GOAL BETTER THAN THE EXTENSION OF MANSFIELD BECAUSE HOUK EXISTS, THE EXPECTED VOLUME OF TRAFFIC WILL NOT EXCEED THE CAPACITY OF HOUK AND IS A LESS COSTLY OPTION TO RESULT IN THE SAME BENEFIT. THAT BENEFIT IS THE REDIRECTION OF TRAFFIC EAST AND WEST ACROSS PINES AND AWAY FROM THE PINES AND INDIANA INTERSECTION. T.4A.5 — TRANSPORTATION FACILITY DESIGN STANDARES SHALL SUPPORT THE CREATION AND PRESERVATION OF COMMUNITIES AND NEIGHBORHOODS WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY PROVIDING FOR THE SAFE AND EFFICIENT MOVEMENT OF PEOPLE AND GOODS. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAL/POLICY AS FOLLOWS: • WE BELIEVE THAT THE PROPOSAL FOR HOUK STREET EXTENDED IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH THIS POLCIY AS IT RELATES TO THE EXISTING APARTMENT COMMUNITY THAN THE PROPOSED EXTENSION OF MANSFIELD AVENUE. • WE BELIEVE THAT THE INTRODUCTION OF PASS - THROUGH TRAFFIC FROM THE MIRABEAU POINT DEVELOPMENT ALONG MANSFIELD EXTENDED IN ADDITION TO EAST / WEST TRAFFIC HEADING BETWEEN EVERGREEN AND ARGONNE WOULD BE ONEROUS TO THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED APARTMENT COMMUNITIES AND COULD LEAD TO A SITUATION WHERE VACANCIES INCREASE DUE TO AN INORDINATE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC AND NOISE AND DECREASE IN SAFTEY AND AESTHETICS FOR THESE APARTPAENT UNITS. • WE BELIVE THAT HOUK, WHILE MAKING THE SAME CONNECTION, WILL REDIRECT TRIPS IN A CURVALINEAR WAY TO MINIMIZE SPEEDS, REDUCE TRAFFIC NOISE AND THE OVERALL IMPACT TO THE EXISTING APARTMENT COMMUNITY WITHOUT THE STRAIGHTAWAY SPEEDS THAT WILL BE INHERANT ON A STRAIGTH THROUGH MANSFIELD. T.4A.6 — DEVELOP AN ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN THAT EMPHASIZES PLANNED CORRIDORS FOR HIGH - CAPACITY ROADWAYS TO KEEP HIGH -SPEED TRAFFIC OUT OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAL/POLICY AS FOLLOWS: • WE BELIEVE THAT WHILE MANSFIELD FULFILLS THIS GOAL FOR HIGH CAPACITY ROADWAYS IT FAILS THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS POLICY IS INCONFLICT WITH T.4A.5 NOTED ABOVE AND THAT POLICY T.4A.5 IS MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE EXISTING AND PLANNED APARTMENT COMMUNITY WITHIN THIS AREA WHICH SHOULD DISCOURAGE STRIAGHT THROUGH AND HIGH-CAPACITY ROADWAYS. 6/30/2004 Page 6 of 7 T.4A.7 — DESIGN OF NEW TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES OR FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS SHOULD INCORPORATE ADEOAUATE CONSIDERATION OF THE CULTURAL, HISTORICAL AND AESTHETIC ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH A PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAL/POLICY AS FOLLOWS: • WE BELIEVE THAT MANSFIELD DOES NOT MEET THIS POLICY WHICH IS ALSO IN CONFUCT WITH T.4A.5 IN THAT MANSFIELD EXTENDED DOES NOT DEAL WITH ANY OF THESE ISSUES, MOST NOTABLY THE AESTHETIC ISSUE. WHILE HOUK EXTENDED IS AN EXISTING ROAD AND EXTENDING AN EXISTING ROAD IS MORE AESTHETIC THAN TEARING DOWN A BUILDING AND BUILDING A STRAIGHT LINE THROUGHFARE BETWEEN PINES AND MIRABEAU PARKWAY. T.4A.1 1 - ENCOURAGE STREET DESIGNS, WHICH REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ACCESS POINTS ON PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS AND HIGHWAYS BY COMBINING DRIEWAYS FOR ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND USE OF FRONTAGE ROADS. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAL/POLICY AS FOLLOWS: • WE BEUEVE THAT MANSFIELD EXTENDED IS INCONSISTENT WITH THIS GOAL AS DRIVEWAYS TO. EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDINGS WILL NEED TO BE MAINTAINED AS THERE IS NO VIABLE OPTION FOR COMBINING THESE DRIVEWAYS AS WELL THERE ARE NO VIALBE ALTERNATIVES AVAILABLE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF FRONTAGE ROADS. T.4A.13 — ENCOURAGE LOCAL ACCESS STREES WHICH ARE CURVALINEAR, NARROW OR USE OTHER STREET DESIGNS CONSISTENT WITH SAFETY REOUIREMENTS TO DISCOURAGE THROUGH TRAFFIC IN NEIGHBORHOODS VIII-ERE SUCH DESIGN FITS INTO THE SURROUNDIGN STREET SYSTEMS AND AIDS IN IMPLEMENTING SPECIFIC LAND USE GOALS. WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE NOTED GOAL/POUCY AS FOLLOWS: • WE BEUEVE THAT MANSFIELD AVENUE AS CURRENTLY SHOWN ON THE CITY'S ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN IS INCONSISTENT WITH THIS POLICY AS WIANSFIELD WILL BISECT AN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD AND THERE IS VERY LITTLE ROOM FOR A CURVAUNEAR ALIGNEMENT. • WE BEUEVE THAT WHILE HOUK IS A CURVALINEAR STREET AND WHILE IT WILL EXPERIENCE HIGHER TRAFFIC VOLUMES THAN IT CURRENTLY DOES, IT WILL NOT EXPERIENCE AS HIGH OF SHORT CIRCUITING 1 PASS THROUGH TRAFFIC AS IF IT WERE A CURVALINEAR ROADWAY. • THIS IS ESPECIALLY TRUE WHEN CONSIDERING THAT MIRABEAU POINT WAS NOT ANALYZED NOR PLANNED WITH A DIRECT ACCESS TO PINES AND IT IS UNKNOWN WHAT THE TRANSPORTATION AND SAFETY IMPACTS TO THE SURROUNDING APARTMENT COMMUNITY WILL BE IN THE EVENT THAT MANSFIELD IS CONSTRUCTED AND SHORT CUT AND PASS THROUGH TRAFFIC FROM A DEVELOPING MIRABEAU POINT ARE DIRECTED BACK TO PINES AND THE NEW MANSFIELD INTERSECTION SIGNAL. PUBLIC FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND PUBLIC TRANSIT. THE AREA IN QUESTION WILL BE SERVED BY ALL KNOWN PUBLIC FACILITIES INCLUDING WATER, SEWER, ROADS, PARKS ( MIRABEAU) AND PUBLIC TRANSIT (PINES AND INDIANA). 6/30/2004 Page 7 of 7 June 30, 2004 W.O. No. 2004 -30 City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Re: Application for Modification of the City of Spokane Valley, Transportation Comprehensive Plan / Arterial Road Plan Specifically: Removal of Mansfield between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway from the Arterial Road Plan with Alternate Route of Houk Road Extended to Indiana Dear Sirs, ,JWC E OP - 07-o+ This application has been prepared on behalf of the Sponsor A&A Construction which is currently in the process of rezoning the existing RR -10 parcels (Parcel Numbers 45103.0205, 45103.0206, 45103.0208, 45103.0244, 45103.0210) just east of the existing apartments on Houk Street from RR -10 to UR -22 to fulfill the Comprehensive Plan Designation of Community Center. It is anticipated that once the rezone is complete an apartment site plan for the development of the A&A Construction parcel will be forwarded for approval. It is anticipated that this proposal will be in keeping with the original applications to Spokane County for 350 to 400 multi - family dwelling units. For this Comprehensive Plan Change Application, the following documents need to be noted as they form the basis of the analysis and recommendations for this proposal. Reference Documents 1. Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared for the Lawson /Gunning Properties Rezone, June 1993 - Inland Pacific Engineering . 2. Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared for the Lawson /Gunning Project, Shannon Avenue, June 1999 - Inland Pacific Engineering . 3. Mirabeau Point Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Reclassification, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix B - Traffic Impact Analysis, September 1997 - Inland Pacific Engineering 4. Mirabeau Point Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Reclassification, Final Impact Statement, Appendix C - Technical Appendicles to the Revised Traffic Impact Analysis, May 14, 1998 - Inland Pacific Engineering 5. Pines Corridor Improvement Project, Westbound On -Ramp Realignment for WSDOT & Spokane County, July 1998 - Inland Pacific Engineering . WHIPPLE CONSULTING ENGINEERS • CIVIL AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 2 Background Narrative The following is a narrative to help the reviewer understand the nature of the request and the reasoning for Mansfield being placed on Spokane County's and the City of Spokane Valley's Arterial Road Plan / Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). In 1993 Bill Lawson and Ted Gunning, the owners of two separate parcels of property were desirous of starting the development process and contemplated a rezone of approximately 35.30 Acres of property from RR -10 to UR -22, see a copy of the Vicinity Map in the Appendix. Originally, both Lawson and Gunning saw value in pursing a joint rezone as both the Gunning property (now owned by Hamilton) and the Lawson properties were complimentary as they lay east of the development along Houk and west of the Inland Empire Paper property (now Mirabeau), north of Shannon Avenue and the UPRR and south of the Walk in the Wild Zoo and the DNR 40 acre parcel. Additionally, both Sponsors wanted to pursue the development of multi - family developments. Access to these parcels at this time came from Shannon Avenue which had two access opportunities one each to the east and west. To the west these properties had access to Shannon Avenue which via Houk Street would direct them to Mansfield Avenue and its unsignalized intersection with Pines Road, a copy of the site plan from that project is attached for reference in the appendix. The second access, or easterly access point was a crossing of the UPRR at McDonald Road, extended, but it was known as the Shannon Road railroad crossing by County Personnel as well as the overall community. This approach was an unsignalized crossing of the UPRR and therefore provided direct access to Indiana Avenue. At the time of the original study, the McDonald crossing was intended to be the primary access point for the combined properties. It was contemplated at that time that this railroad crossing could be expanded and signalized to meet UPRR, WSDOT, FHWA and USDOT guidelines. At the time of the original study it was understood that Shannon Road would be improved to allow, by congestion, a pressure relief to Mansfield and Pines intersection, and encourage access via Indiana and the Shannon crossing of the UPRR. It should be noted that at the time of the original study, Indiana Avenue ended 2000 -feet east of Pines Road, the current configuration between Pines Road and Sullivan Road did not exist until a later date. . In 1997 Lawson and Gunning made formal application to Spokane County fora rezone, ZE- 36 -97, which at this time has not been completed. From June of 1993 until June of 1999 (6 years) no additional traffic studies were prepared or submitted on behalf of the Lawson and Gunning Properties Rezone. During that time, however, development within this part of Spokane Valley continued as well the privately owned zoo Walk in the Wild failed. The zoo was on property owned by the Inland Paper Company. The Spokane Valley Regional Mall developer Price City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 3 announced that they were moving forward with the proposed 1,000,000 sf +/- mall with the addition of several large anchors. As a part of the new mall they then constructed Indiana Avenue from a point 2,000 feet east of pines to Sullivan Road. The WSDOT continued to proceed with an interchange at Evergreen Road to serve the development of the new mall as well as growth within the Greater Spokane Valley. In addition to Evergreen the WSDOT made access revisions to the Pines Road interchange as well as the Pines and Mission Avenue intersection to accommodate additional traffic volumes. The railroad crossing at Shannon was officially closed by action of the Washington State Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC) and moved approximately 1,1,00 feet east to a new arterial roadway to be known as Mirabeau Parkway which was to provide access to a new Master Planned Development, known as Mirabeau Point. The proposal for Mirabeau Point included a principal arterial running between the intersection of Euclid and Pines and Indiana Avenue. It should be noted here that the loss of the Shannon Road (McDonald Road extended) crossing of the UPRR had significant traffic access impacts to the proposed Lawson and Gunning Properties Rezone which had intended to use the Shannon Road crossing of the UPRR as their primary access point due to capacity limitations with the Pines Road and Mansfield intersection. This then forced Lawson / Gunning to deal with the Pines and Mansfield intersection as the only ingress /egress point to the larger transportation system. The Mirabeau Point development was supported by an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process that started in 1997 and finished in 1998. During that time Inland Pacific Engineering (IPEC) again participated in that process by providing documentation for traffic and access to this proposed development. In September of 1997 IPEC prepared the initial Traffic Impact Analysis for the Mirabeau Point Draft EIS. In May of 1998 IPEC revised the September 1997 traffic study as part of preparing the Final EIS. Copies of the Site Plan and appropriate access and traffic count diagrams are included within the appendix. It is important to note that the Mirabeau Point project included the Lawson and Gunning Properties Rezone as a background project for analysis. The Mirabeau Point project anticipated as a part of their development that it would generate1166 PM Peak hour trips. . It is important to note that in both 1997 and 1998 for the Mirabeau Point project, these studies did NOT include Mansfield Avenue as a straight through access point across the Lawson and Gunning Properties, rather they included the originally proposed option for the construction and improvement of Shannon Avenue which ran from Houk, along the UPRR and then back up to meet the proposed alignment for Mansfield within the Mirabeau Point development, exhibits from the Mirabeau Point EIS are clear on this point and are attached in the Appendix for reference. This is extremely significant because the Mirabeau Point project was the last substantial piece of property north of the UPRR to develop or be analyzed and Figure 6 through 11 show no Site Generated PM Peak Hour volumes using the Mansfield, Houk, Shannon, Mansfield route. There was consensus at that time that it was more important to keep trips on either Mirabeau City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 4 Parkway or Indiana Avenue which were intended to be THE Principal Arterial roadways. This therefore, meant that the entire Mirabeau Point project was contemplated with traffic getting to this site either via the Pines and Euclid /Mirabeau intersection or the Mirabeau and Indiana intersection with no access to /from the Mansfield and Pines intersection. The result of this analysis yielded acceptable LOS which included Lawson /Gunning as a background project In July of 1998, IPEC was contacted by Spokane County as a apart of the Lawson and Gunning Properties Rezone to further analyze the arterial roadways in the area and more specifically provide a detailed capacity analysis for the Pines Road Corridor Improvement Project. The intent of this analysis project was to analyze capacity improvement options between Mission Avenue and Mansfield Avenue, more specifically from the Westbound 1 -90 Ramps to Mansfield Avenue. The IPEC study was to provide a circulation and mobility analysis to provide for the efficient movement of traffic through the Pines, Indiana and Westbound 1 -90 Ramps closely spaced intersections. It should be noted that after nearly six years of analysis this was the first document to propose connecting Mansfield between Houk and Mirabeau Parkway. This proposal came about because of a meeting between the project Sponsors (Lawson and Gunning) and Spokane County, as a pretense to solving the larger transportation issues within the Pines Road and Indiana Avenue and Pines Road and Mansfield Avenue intersections. It should also be noted that the loss of the Shannon Avenue railroad crossing also had a significant impact as this railroad crossing provided direct access to Indiana for the combined Lawson and Gunning properties and alleviated the capacity problem at Pines and Mansfield which was identified in 1993. It is significant to recognize that the IPEC Pines Road Corridor Study, proposed significant changes to the 1 -90 Westbound ramps and their intersections with Pines Road and Indiana Avenue, the Montgomery/Indiana Avenue and Pines Road intersection as well as the alignment of Montgomery as far back as Wilbur Street and the UPRR crossing of Pines Road. See the Overall Concept Plan of Pines Road (SR- 27) Improvements provided in the appendix. By looking at this exhibit you can see that in order to begin to fix the Indiana and Pines intersection, Montgomery Drive was relocated to tie directly into Mansfield Avenue at Wilbur and move the eastbound portion of the Montgomery and Pines intersection up to Mansfield. The idea would be that based upon conversations between Lawson and Gunning, the County would acquire a 6 -unit apartment parcel (L5, Blk 1, Meadows End Subdivision) from a third party and extend Mansfield through so that Lawson, Gunning and Inland Paper (Mirabeau Point) could ultimately connect Mansfield from Pines Road to Mirabeau Parkway. Given the State of the Knowns vs. Unknowns this seemed like a logical presumption for Lawson and Gunning for the following reasons. A. The lost direct access to Indiana when the Shannon crossing was closed for Mirabeau Parkway. City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 5 B. The Mansfield / Pines intersection was a very difficult mitigation issue for the Lawson /Gunning properties and the cost/benefit analysis for this mitigation was askew. C. The UPRR gave all appearances that the line between Shannon and Indiana was viable for the long term so future access to Indiana from Shannon or Houk was not a near term option. D. The proposal to use Houk via Shannon via Mansfield to get to Mirabeau Point was not a reasonable solution for the Gunning parcel which bore the brunt of the geometric design issues. Now, the 1997 and 1998 traffic studies done by IPEC for the Mirabeau Point Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements had no traffic accessing Pines Road via Shannon and Mansfield. Rather it was anticipated that traffic from Mirabeau Point heading north would use Mirabeau Parkway to access Pines Road at the old Euclid Intersection and those wanting to travel south and west of Pines Road would access Pines from Mirabeau and Indiana vicinity, including those trips continuing west from the Indiana and Pines intersection on Montgomery. The Pines Road Corridor study was trying to move traffic east and west of Pines Road and away from the Pines and Indiana intersection. To that end the Indiana and Westbound ramps along with the realignment of Montgomery allowed the removal of an intersection along Pines Road, as it turns out to the detriment of the Lawson and Gunning properties. Therefore, it is important to remember, that the goal of the Pines Road Corridor Study was to A) reduce the number of intersections between Mansfield Road and the Westbound Ramps on Pines Road and B) reduce the number of vehicles using the these same intersections, hence the connection of Mansfield to Mirabeau Parkway. This connection then moved trips /vehicles from west of Pines to a point east of Pines bud did not add traffic to the Pines and Indiana intersection. This was one of the main premises of the corridor study. This proposal proposes to maintain the intent of the previous studies conducted to date within this area (reduce traffic congestion at Indiana and Pines), consider new available information, while at the same time reducing the onerous impacts imposed upon Lawson /Gunning and now Hamilton of having an arterial roadway (Mansfield Avenue) bisecting their respective parcels and directly impacting their opportunity for them to develop their parcels to their highest and best use. We believe that Mansfield extended as proposed is not consistent with the following Phase 1 Policies due to the undue impacts to the Lawson / Gunning properties and surrounding community. Please see responses to the following Goals and Policies in the application • T.2.2; T.2.4; T.2.7; T.3a.1; T.4a; T.4a.2; T.4a.5; T.4a.6; T.4a.7; T.4a.11; T.4a.13 City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 6 Lawson and Gunning Properties 1999 Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Having laidthe background for all pertinent studies from 1993 to 1999 it is here that we discuss the last traffic study prepared for the Lawson and Gunning Properties Rezone and Project. Up to this point, all of the studies for these Sponsors as well as all of the other studies were generic rezones, analyzing the intent for development, in 1999 that changed for this property as specific proposals were now being proposed. As it relates to site plans several site plans were proposed as is normal for the process that was then on going in 1999. At that time, the planner was John Konen at David Evans and David Evans prepared several drafts for both Lawson and Gunning. AU drafts either centered around the straight through Mansfield or the more circuitous route using Houk, Shannon and Mansfield which was consistent with the Mirabeau Point Draft and Final EIS's. However, with the Pines Road corridor study being adopted by the agencies and with the Shannon Avenue railroad crossing relocated to it's current location and with the capacity issues at Mansfield, there really weren't many options for access from the Lawson and Gunning properties other than the updated Pines and Mansfield intersection via the Corridor improvement project. A copy of the site plan from the 1999 study is included as reference, also included are several other options that were internal options that were evaluated but were not included within the 1999 TIA but may have been discussed with Spokane County staff. In this 1999 study, many things were different as it related to the analysis performed and scoped with Spokane County. First, the direction from the County in keeping with the 1998 Pines Road Corridor Study was that Mansfield would be used for primary ingress and egress. Shannon Avenue would be vacated due to several factors, most notably the fact that the Shannon Avenue (McDonald extended) railroad crossing was no longer available and the fact that the Agencies involved needed a revised /updated Mansfield and Pines intersection to be implemented to facilitate changes on how traffic that use to use Montgomery west of Pines would access Pines not only north and south, but also head east of Pines without using the reconfigured Indiana and Pines intersection. Additional differences lie in the rezone requests themselves, Lawson held with the rezone to UR -22 while Gunning changed to an 1 -2 rezone so that he could have more of a mixed used development to develop options such as care facilities, RV Park, Mini - storage and an office park w/ some commercial development. Because of the long timelines associated with the development of not only the Lawson and Gunning properties. (5 to 10 years) as well as Mirabeau Point (10 to 20 years) the study analyzed the overall area with Mansfield extended between Pines and Mirabeau and without the connection made but with the Lawson and Gunning project completed. The result of this analysis was that either way the intersection of Pines and Mansfield with the Pines Road Corridor Project items implemented would continue to work at adequate levels of service. Enclosed in the Appendix is Table 6 from the 1999 study titled "Table 6 — 2006 Traffic With Proposed Project, With and Without Mansfield City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 7 Connection (to Mirabeau). As shown on this table, it was anticipated that all of the existing levels of service with many of the other changes in effect resulted in all signalized intersections operating with an LOS of D or better. It should be noted again that the successful implementation of the Mansfield extension from Houk to Mirabeau Drive involved the taking (by Spokane County /City of Spokane Valley) of a residential rental property which is an existing and occupied 6 unit complex as this property was and is owned by a party not involved with the Lawson and Gunning land use actions. As noted, the implementation of the Pines Road Corridor project would entail the taking of this 6 -unit apartment building would cost between $600,000 and $800,000. For this reason, the likelihood of this connection being made may not be cost effective for the benefit that will be received to the overall transportation system. From the completion of the 1999 analysis to today, the changes in the overall area from a development and transportation system perspective, that need to be considered for this proposal are as follows: • Spokane Valley Mall is complete or nearing completion with only a few restaurant pads left to build out. • Hansen Center East is still undergoing development with a Residence Inn, Hansen Industries Building, Sullivan Homes and a "Ramey" office buildings are under construction. • ITT is building a new building on the Hansen property west of Evergreen along Indiana. • The Hansen property on the north side of Indiana from Sullivan east to the UPRR has been developed to it's maximum commercial potential with an Oxford Suites, Best Buy, Arby's Fast Food restaurant, Krispy Kreme donuts and another strip development. • Mirabeau Parkway is complete. • Mirabeau Point is moving forward with the YMCA complete, WDOE building under construction as well as the Valley Center building and other construction progressing with plans for more office buildings to come along Mansfield both east and west of Mirabeau Parkway. • The Pines Road Corridor Improvement project has not moved forward yet. • Interstate 90 is being widened to 6 -lanes (3 in each direction). • The Wal -Mart shopping center is nearing completion with only one or two pads left to complete. • The northbound to westbound ramp from Sullivan to 1 -90 is now in operation and an intersection on Sullivan has been partially removed as is the intent for the NB Pines to WB on Ramp at Indiana. • The WSDOT, The State of Idaho, Spokane County, the City of Spokane Valley, Union Pacific Railroad, Burlington Northern Railroad, FHWA and USDOT have proposed a project titled, Bridging the Valley, which is to begin implementation within a year or so. This project is expected to be complete and ready for UPRR line vacation as early as 2009 but no later than 2012 a 5 to 7 year time frame. City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 8 • Mirabeau Point has had Mansfield Avenue west of Mirabeau Parkway designed and construction is to begin with completion in 2004. However, Mirabeau Point is not constructing all the way to the Hamilton Property, at this writing they will be stopping 100 -feet short with paving operations, as approved by the City of Spokane Valley. • Discussions with Mirabeau representatives have revealed that while they understand the potential for a Mansfield extension, they intend to be neither a proponent nor an opponent for a Mansfield extension to Pines Road from Mirabeau Parkway. • Phase 1 Development regulations with Spokane County were adopted as a part of Growth Management. • The City of Spokane Valley was formed adding a new Municipal Corporation to the mix of jurisdictions within the Valley. Proposal Discussion As noted at the beginning of this document we are proposing the following: APPLICATION FOR MODIFICATION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, TRANSPORTATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN / ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN SPECIFICALLY: REMOVAL OF MANSFIELD AVENUE BETWEEN HOUK STREET AND MIRABEAU PARKWAY FROM THE ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN WITH RECOMMENDED ALTERNATE ROUTE OF HOUK ROAD EXTENDED SOUTH OVER THE FUTURE UPRR VACATION TO INDIANA As described in the Background section of this document, this area has been analyzed off and on over the last 11 years by both the private and public sector with the author of this document participating in many of these analyses if not all. After all of this discovery, investigation and analysis several things within this area have yet to reach there anticipated outcomes, most notably the projected traffic volumes are well below projections. Since 1993, the Pines Road and Mansfield Intersection has been counted and projected into future years. Table 1 below shows the counts by movement from 1993 and 2004; Figure 3 in the appendix provides a summary of all the turning movement counts for 1993, 1996, 1998 and 2004. ' wh 4s.:�t1993''^ =a c ? 'e14 ` >'33t` 14MV ^w0 • P$ CREAS E , By. x r '� . ' 4 -r :i4g; " •,�K7. rya t k ,,, v . . OVER-1111 ��;�±t•.0.R.;;: 1 - yf s A , R4 , r 'DI RECTIO N c- ' .' r �...5:e '_, `'•3's� lilis _ S K V OL U ME ,' 4•r .,., ''I'S et.�iaE ¢' = w ..„....,„44, r ,_.• t e r A PPOACH' DIRECTION; y'= - yoig,4e' ... .rte u:d s a :a sv .e +:.. z , VOLUMEI '°"' T'3u..'g,4, " j= ,_., ` 4A r' f A PPROACH 4„ , +57 w...:,. WB Left 20 87 WB Left 23 101 14 1.26% Thru 5 Thru 11 Right 62 Right 67 EB Left 52 70 EB Left 65 113 43 3.46% Thru 1 Thru 13 Right 17 Right 35 NB - Left 137 835 NB Left 107 942 107 1.03% Thru 640 Thru 730 Ri•ht 58 Right 105 SB Left 26 505 SB Left 43 679 174 2.33% Thru 459 Thru 610 Right 20 Right 26 Intersection Totals 26 1497 2481 1835 338 1.67% _ 4 , .71.4,;wia At . D Z?� a �.�� y ?$3 00,4 PROJECTED •'vea -Lf'�,•s�c r "�:� r . V Y uMe: � x i�= T�;7�i� 3'Y Y .yT.,c APPROACH '�.;'r � t .._`��: c . ; 2004:AcTU t t COUIJTS ` ?� 5 ..*,= L.z..im. :0 - ve DIRECTIO yL i4'."?,'•'= kf��a�. �'J' MAY Jl: n'�Y kp . VOLU . r , ,;,. rtz;. ,eG 1P RO CH DI'FFERENCE ,.,(i By. ' ~,APPROACH 4 - -, r_i rt3 � PC - , 44Jr T : ,, r DfF c FERENCE. WB Left 27 113 WB Left 23 101 (12) - 10.62% Thru 0 Thru 11 Right 86 Right 67 EB Left 73 113 EB Left 65 113 0 0% Thru 1 Thru 13 Right 39 Right 35 NB Left 193 1424 NB Left 107 942 (482) - 33.84% Thru 1044 Thru 730 Right 187 I Right 105 SB Left 64 831 SB I Left 43 679 (152) - 18.29% Thru 740 1 Thru 610 Right 27 Right 26 Intersection Totals 2481 1835 (646) - 26.04% City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 9 Table 1 — 1993 to 2004 Actual Count Volume Comparison at Mansfield and Pines As demonstrated within Table 1, the average intersection growth rate for the Mansfield and Pines intersection is 1.67- percent. From 1993 through 1999, the growth rate for all intersections within this area was analyzed with a growth rate of 3.0 percent. Therefore, for all studies performed over time, the future year volumes are overstated. This is evident when you look at the projected 2004 traffic Volumes at the Pines and Mansfield intersection with the 1999 Lawson and Gunning project from the Mirabeau Point Project EIS documents. These are shown graphically on Figure 2 in the appendix and listed with the actual counts from 2004 shown on the same Figure in Table 2 below. Table 2 — 2004 Projected vs. Actual Turning Movement Counts at Pines and nsfield City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 10 As can be seen from Table 2, the anticipated growth on Pines has been overstated by over 25- percent. Some of this overstatement, granted has been because the NB rights and SB lefts from Pines to Mansfield have not materialized due to the fact that the Lawson and Gunning projects have not been constructed and occupied. However, the issues remain the same depending upon which side you may or may not be on, the Mansfield connection to Mirabeau was and is intended to allow traffic from west of Pines to access Indian Avenue east of Pines without having to use the revised Pines and Indiana Avenue intersection. The intent is still the same and the result will be much better once the Pines Road Corridor project is implemented, even without Mansfield extended. The resulting LOS will be better than projected by year because of the progress, or lack thereof, of development north and east of the Pines and Indiana intersection, however, extending Mansfield per the Pines Road Corridor Study (PRCS) is not the only alternative available in 2004 as it was in 1998 when it was proposed. To this point, we have only been dealing with the original purpose for Mansfield being provided as an option to meet the issues associated with the Pines Road Corridor Study which was prepared for Spokane County and the WSDOT. At the time the analysis was prepared and presented there appeared to be no other alternative available that would accomplish the same goals that Mansfield extended would do. However, as noted in the bullet points of changed conditions a very significant item has changed and that is the Bridging the Valley project. In 1998, it could never have been envisioned by myself as one of the principal authors of the Pines Road Corridor Study that sometime in the future the UPRR line between Indiana Avenue and Shannon Avenue would be vacated with both the UPRR and BNRR sharing mainline adjacent to Trent Avenue. If, at that time, this was someone's ultimate solution to the railroad crossing issues in the Valley, it was not divulged during all of the meetings held between numerous agencies that met and commented on the Pines Road Corridor project. What this Bridging the Valley project does is alleviate the two largest issues associated with the Pines Road study which were; 1.) How to move traffic from the west side of Pines to the east side of Pines, get them to Indiana and move them to the east either to Evergreen Road, the Mall, Mirabeau Point or Sullivan Road without impacting the new Pines /Indiana/WB Ramps intersection; and 2.) Deal with the high cost and low benefit or condemning a 6 -unit apartment building for $600,000 to $800,000 for the through extension from Houk to the Lawson property. What the Bridging the Valley project does is provide a low cost (Estimate of $100,000 without a signal and $300,000 with a signal) solution by extending Houk to Indiana over the future vacated UPRR right'of way. The result would be the same and meet the needs and goals of the original Pines Road Corridor Study, traffic would move from west to east at Mansfield, traffic would access Indiana via Houk Street instead of Mirabeau Parkway and not use the Indiana and Pines Road intersection. Therefore, by extending Houk Street to Indiana Avenue, the City /County/WSDOT would save $350,000 to $725,000 and use these funds for other projects in the Valley. City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 11 Proposed Alternative Discussion Based upon the above discussion, the intent of this change is to modify the City of Spokane Valley Transportation Improvement Plan / Arterial Road Plan to allow for the deletion of Mansfield Avenue between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway. This link would be replaced with a less costly and intrusive alternative to realign Houk Street and extend Houk Street south and tie into Indiana Avenue. By removing Mansfield extended from the Arterial Road Plan and replacing it with Houk Street extended you will have the same opportunity to keep traffic from east of the Pines away from the Pines and Indiana intersection. It our opinion that this would in every aspect keep in place the intent of the Pines Road Corridor Study. By utilizing Houk Street it would keep the Corridor study intact and at the same time delete the impact to development by not bisecting the Lawson and Gunning (Hamilton) properties with Mansfield. Therefore, we believe that the overall area mobility will not be impacted by this proposed change, to that end we have provided a limited transportation analysis based upon various components from the background studies to further our proposal and to provide a reasonable assertion that the premise is appropriate and should be adopted. For this analysis the following assumptions shall apply. • The intent of the 1999 Lawson Gunning Traffic Impact Analysis (1999 study) will be followed. • Within the 1999 study, the WITH Mansfield analysis will be used for trips, dealing with the Pines Road Corridor Study and the Pines and Mansfield intersection for volume definition. • The assumptions for directional distribution will be modified as follows: 1. The Lawson properties will access Pines and Indiana from the . construction and improvement of Shannon Avenue and Houk Street. 2, The Lawson and Hamilton Properties although adjoining do not and should not require cross access if adequate access can be provide separately and per City and Fire codes. Therefore, the notion that access between these two parcels is advantageous it is necessarily not, especially if one develops into a 300 to 400 unit apartment complex and the other into a business park or development with office capabilities, etc. 3. For this analysis, it will be assumed that Mansfield Avenue may or may not be extended to the west past the Inland Empire Paper property known as Mirabeau Point, currently its westernmost terminus. It has not been fully decided by Hamilton if he will extend as a public or private road. 4. Directional distributions will hold from the 1999 study, only easterly travel from Lawson will use Indiana from Houk, All traffic from Hamilton will use Mansfield east to Mirabeau Parkway and then either south to Indiana or north to Pines. City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 12 • Traffic Volumes from the 1999 study will not be normalized for 2004 from the count at Mansfield even though the projections are 25- percent over existing for conservatism. • There will be no modification of trip generation rates or distribution percentages other than previously noted from the 1999 study. • For consistency, the results of the analysis will be cross checked with the Mirabeau Point EIS documents as these documents held that no trips would access Pines except from Euclid (Mirabeau Parkway) and Indiana Avenue as this analysis was prepared prior to the adoptions of Mansfield as a through street from Mirabeau and Houk. • Applicable sections of the appropriate document will be provided in the appendix for reference. The affected intersections for discussion and analysis purposes for this proposed comprehensive plan change are as follows. A. Mansfield and Pines B. Pines and Indiana C. Indiana and Houk D. Indiana and Mirabeau Parkway E. Mansfield and Mirabeau Parkway It should be noted, that all of these intersections have been previously analyzed by other proposals that have or are already moving forward. As noted at the beginning of this document, the following reference documents make up the basis and justification for this change. 1. Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared for the Lawson /Gunning Properties Rezone, June 1993 — Inland Pacific Engineering 2. Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared for the Lawson /Gunning Project, Shannon Avenue, June 1999 — Inland Pacific Engineering 3. Mirabeau Point Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Reclassification, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix B — Traffic Impact Analysis, September 1997 — Inland Pacific Engineering 4. Mirabeau Point Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Reclassification, Final Impact Statement, Appendix C — Technical Appendicles to the Revised Traffic Impact Analysis, May 14, 1998 — Inland Pacific Engineering 5. Pines Corridor Improvement Project, Westbound On -Ramp Realignment for WSDOT & Spokane County, July 1998 — Inland Pacific Engineering Most notably from this list, this proposal takes note of Item No. 2, the Traffic Impact Analysis provided for ZE -36 -97 which was the rezone application applied for by Lawson and Gunning that was not dropped, but was not completed. This traffic study evaluated the impacts for this area both with and without Mansfield extended. The reason for this Implementation o an wltn the riouK to rnuiana intersection. , ;;,. a; '` ` ='F �1.�_ , Z .,h:'•t, ,.-v ��`?' � r �lyd, T_ EksECTION r ' � - • „ Ala "qa.. ; ,�� .k � ti t •..r 9 -�? $^CN.•7� , r r � � : P 1 00 . 6 PMTPEAK'H URjFRAFFIC a^.��- ` }p�yf -. °-� �. .r � S tiNaYP 't` � `- U " : [LC 11 • C U 1f � �t S ''� -FOR 's' - e�f.:.•. s�'i. .4:� „ i ��Y `2` 4 -` T»•.'e f �'r` r r t Y` a 16-E , " F k t Iii . _ �/ „ y , ar ,E� E �I� Jr � ' I .N cii' E �. A, -,I ss -,� N ' J y . * '�'` NA r�i, r.,: ?�:_i , ,�r.�_�}{': n4;11,,,,, ��,f� _,,,. �" „"- . . — .,..,. '1c - hr-' °1f� �* • - . ° � �• •�- . �! ' �.. r<�� 't: �'� ��w: � t`'' Houk and Shannon U WB Left = 25.9 seconds D Houk and Indiana U ' SB Left = 17.2 seconds C Pines and Mansfield • S Intersection = 28.3 sec D Pines / WB On / Indiana S Intersection = 21.3 sec C Indiana and Mirabeau S Intersection = 16.7 sec C Mirabeau and Mansfield S (future) Minor Left = 15.0 sec B City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 13 was the private parcel laying between Houk and the Lawson properties and that even though Lawson and Gunning could have moved forward and developed their properties, per the Pines Road Corridor Study (Item No. 5) the local agencies needed to act on the existing 6 -plex lot as well the Mirabeau Point project would need to move forward to build their portion of Mansfield for the Lawson /Gunning properties to have access to both Pines Road and Mirabeau Parkway. Based on the fact that the County could not preclude the Lawson and Gunning properties from developing and moving forward the rezone was analyzed without Mansfield extended to Mirabeau Parkway. Lastly, the other study of note is Item No. 4, the Mirabeau Point EIS, wherein, this analysis, used the Mansfield, Shannon, Houk, Mansfield to Pines route and no traffic access pines from this route, thereby, assuming that no connection in fact was available and it was incumbent upon Mirabeau to move traffic east, west, north and south via Mirabeau Parkway from either the Pines and Euclid /Mirabeau Pkwy or the Mirabeau Pkwy and Indiana intersection. Based on this the only new elements to be analyzed would be the Proposed Houk Street and Indiana Avenue intersection and the Houk Street and Shannon Avenue for unsignalized level or service. It should be noted prior to review of this Table that all traffic from the Lawson and Gunning (Hamilton) was assumed to use the Shannon Avenue approach and that no traffic was routed to Mansfield east of the Gunning (Hamilton) property to maximize the potential for impact to the new Shannon and Indiana intersections with Houk. The following Table 3, supplements Table 6 of the 1999 study for existing 2004 traffic volumes and presents the Existing LOS of the affected intersections. Table 3, 2006 Level of Service w/ Project w/ Pines Road Corridor Study • "S" = Signalized / "U" = Unsignalized Intersections As shown in Table 3 without Mansfield extended and with Houk extended to Indiana the Houk and Indiana intersection levels of service are adequate as are all the other intersections within this area. It should be noted, that with the exception of the trip generation rates as revised for the proposed increase in apartments on the Lawson parcel all traffic turning movements were either taken from the 1999 Lawson /Gunning City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 14 study or the 1998 Revised Mirabeau Point TIA that include a built in 25-percent increase over existing volumes and should represent levels of service at a 1.67 - percent growth rate for 10 to 12 years beyond 2006. It is apparent from a level of service and land access perspective that both the Lawson /Gunning and other traffic from realigned Montgomery can reach the west side of Pines Road, by not going through the Pines and Indiana intersection and not have a detrimental impact to Indiana Avenue with the addition of the new Houk intersection. Summary It is the intent of this presentation to provide the City of Spokane Valley Staff, Planning Commission and City Council with the appropriate information to make an informed decision to modify the City of Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan (and any other affected documents) by removing Mansfield extended from Houk Street to Mirabeau Parkway and replacing this link with an extension of Houk Street to Indiana Avenue. In order to make this decision the following information was presented and is either included as text or as reference materials in the Appendix of this document. 1. The Pines Road Corridor, prepared in 1998 proposed the first extension of Mansfield Avenue between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway. This extension Was originally collaboration between the WSDOT, Spokane County and the Lawson /Gunning properties. However, the premise of this mutual agreement has changed with the potential changes incurred from the Bridging the Valley project. 2. Lawson and Hamilton (Gunning) are desirous of developing their property, but they do not wish to have their single proprietor developments bisected by an Arterial roadway that may or may not have a beginning or an end, when the Houk Street extension to Indiana will for all intents and purposes meet all of the requirements of the ALL.known previous traffic studies as well as the Pines Road Corridor Study. • 3. Indiana Avenue between Pines, Evergreen and Sullivan has always been the preferred Arterial route of choice. Re- directing traffic to Mirabeau unduly stresses Mirabeau Parkway and Mirabeau's portion of Mansfield as well as places a significant development burden on Lawson and Hamilton to design residential communities around an Arterial roadway. 4. Since 1993, Indiana Avenue has always been the preferred route of choice for access from the Lawson and Gunning properties. When the Lawson and Gunning projects started in 1993 the assumption was that they would use and modify the Shannon Avenue (McDonald Extended) existing railroad crossing and use that as their primary point of ingress and egress. This crossing allowed Lawson and Gunning to stay out of the issues associated with the Pines and Mansfield intersection and to move forward with their project. City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 15 5. The extension of Houk Street to Indiana Avenue continues to meet the intent of the Pines Road Corridor Study by providing for the movement of traffic from east to west around the future Pines /IndianalWB Ramps intersection. The Corridor study was not fixated on Mirabeau Parkway as the only means to redirect traffic back to Indiana via the Mirabeau and Indiana intersection. However, at the time it was the ONLY CROSSING OF THE UPRR except at Pines Road! It is important to remember that in 1998 the constraints for north south travel between Shannon and Indiana are substantially different once the UPRR line is vacated. 6. As noted in No. 5 above the concept of Bridging the Valley changes all of criteria and assumptions for the Mansfield Avenue extension to Mirabeau Parkway in that it allows for a crossing of the UPRR that did not exist in several places. It may very well be that in Hamilton's instance he may want his property to connect to Shannon, Mansfield (within Mirabeau) and also to Indiana. The point being that with the Bridging of the Valley project moving forward, to some degree all bet's are off and additional access options are now available to the Lawson and Gunning properties, much the same as they are to Mirabeau Point, which most likely would like to have an Evergreen extension north at the Evergreen and Indiana intersection. It makes logical sense and is already signalized on three legs. 7. Lastly removing the Mansfield extension makes economic sense. As has been discussed within this document, between the Gunning parcels and Houk Street there is an existing 6 -unit apartment building that would need to be condemned by the local jurisdiction (City of Spokane Valley) before Mansfield could ever be extended. The cost of this purchase originally was discussed with the County in 1998 and at that time it was estimated to cost between $600,000 and $800,000, which did not include any construction of Mansfield, which a small portion would need to be constructed over this lot once the building was demolished. It is important for the reviewer to note, that even if Lawson moves forward with his project, Hamilton, now the owner of the gunning parcel may not move forward for several years to come. Therefore, it could come to pass that the City could spend $800,000 and still not have a through access to Mirabeau Parkway. 8. It is more reasonable to assume, that the cost benefit ratio would say that an extension of Houk Street to Indiana Avenue at a cost of $100,000 to $300,000 a saving of between $500,000 and $700,000 that maintains the intent of the Pines Road Corridor Study would be the appropriate answer for the problem within this area as it will provide for area wide mobility, pass traffic from west to east out of the Pines and Indiana intersection and allow for pedestrian access from a highly populated multi - family developed area directly to Indiana and the sidewalks and busses found there. Therefore, we ask the City of Spokane Valley to modify your Arterial Road Plan and Transportation Improvement Plan if need be, to remove the extension of Mansfield from City of Spokane Valley Proposed Amendment to the Arterial Road Plan June 30, 2004 Page 16 Houk Street to Mirabeau Parkway. We would ask that you replace this with Houk Street extended to form a new intersection with Indiana Avenue south of Shannon and the UPRR tracks. We believe that given the history of this project, the time spent to date, 1993 to 2004 and the likely hood of Mansfield being extended with the next 5 to 10 years anyway provides a more reasonable and cost effective solution to the issues at hand. Additionally, I will be available at the Planning Commission and City Council meetings to provide a presentation and discussion on this topic for your consideration and deliberation. Should you have any questions related to this document do not hesitate to call at 893 -2617. Sincerely, Whipple • onsulirg- nginee Todd R. Whipple, P.E. Enclosures — Appendix Cc: Bill Lawson Chris Ashenbrenner Jay Bonnett File a I PROJ #: 2004 -3a DATE: 0E /D5/04 DRAWN: RLM APPROVED: TRW PROJECT SITE VE INDIANA AVE. U E EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EXISTING MAP W / MANSFIELD EXTENDED AS SHOWN v I r 1 nl IYV a.n A fl PROPOSED ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN REVISION MANSFIELD - HOUK TO MIRABEAU A & A CONSTRUCTION SHANNON APARTMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON PROJECT SITE Fes; r r .ire 141 INDIANA AVE. WI-I ?Fly CC NSUTATING ENGINEERS CIVIL AND TRANSPORTION ENGINEERNG 13216 SPW.GLF_ AVENUE SPJKA1 VALLEY, WASHINGTON 99216 4 PROPOSED REVISION NEW MAP W/O MANSFIELD EXTENDED SHOWING HOUK EXTENDED TO INDIANA AND NEW SHANNON AWC i "A" ACTUAL P.M. PEAK COUNT MAY OF 2004 N ca 23 35 Sim X13 57 4=65 O M 0 — N I N N on u'1 41 f 5 21j t318 0i=>. a 1 68(2% 9=56 NO • "C" EXISTING 1996 W/ & W/o EVERGREEN INTERCHANGE FIG. 4 & 15 OF MIRABEAU FINAL E.I.S. "B" 1998 PROJECTED 2004 TRAFFIC VOLUME WITH LAWSON PROJECT FROM FIG. 16 & 17, MIRAEAU POINT E.I.S. NO N v to 27J t39 Di=> := 1 561: ‘ 73. o MANSFIELD AVENUE INDIANA AVENUE PRO..I #: 2004 -30 DATE: 06/0 5/04 DRAWN: RLM APPROVED: TRW FIGURE NO. PROPOSED ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN REVISION MANSFIELD - HOUK TO MIRABEAU A & A CONSTRUCTION SHANNON APARTMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON 1 -90 NOT TO SCAL ( 1'AiIPPLE CONSULATING ENGINEERS CM. Al) TAANSPORTION ENGINEERtNG 192 in SPFlAGUE AVENUE SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON 00214 PFt 50S-MIS-2617 FAX; S(19828.0227 "C" EXISTING P.M. PEAK HOUR EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES PROJ it : 2004-30 DATE: 05/05/04 DRAWN: RLM APPROVED: TRW CI 0!I10C AAA a "A" ACTUAL P.M. PEAK COUNT MAY OF 2004 CD pM tD Y Y V 23 �35 112=1> Z »13 67 7 65 n 0 1n or, 0 r- O 11 N Al CV 20j L ' 2 17 5 =✓" Ce= 1 62 o /352 Cs: al V: N 0 h n 22 cP 1 219 72e% e262 a4� trl a) CD tD 0 ui I�1 z PROPOSED ARTERIAL ROAD PLAN REVISION MANSFIELD - HOUK TO MIRAHEAU A Sc A CONSTRUCTION SHANNON APARTMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON M AIJG CI c-1 Pl rV10TI n1 I: r' r.I 1 ,.ITC. 1 007 1 OOG 1000 "B" 1993 EXISTING P.M. PEAK TRAFFIC VOLUMES MANSFIELD AVENUE INDIANA AVENUE 1 -90 "0" 1998 P.M. PEAK HOUR NOT TO SCALE AWC E Wt(PPLE Cc »'SL%AflNG ENGINEERS MU. AND TRA1ISPORTION ENGINEERING t32 1 E SPRAGUE AVENUE SS O(.NE VALLEY. WASHINGTON 9421E AVENUE SHANNON AVENUE NINIM BRIDGING 1999 LAWSON /GUNNING FIGURE 12, 2006 WITH PROJECT, VATH MANSFIELD, WITH PINES ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY TO ARGONNE I/C 1999 LAWSON /GUNNING FIGURE 12, 2006 PATH PROJECT, Y11TH MANSFIELD, WITH PINES ROAD CORRIDOR STUDY MANSFIELD PINES ROAD I/O AREA 1999 STUDY A FROM FIGURE 6 AND FIGURE 7 ON MANSFIELD BACKGROUND 100 VPL 3 VPH NEW INTERSECTION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGE '• ASSUMES ALL GUNNING (HAMILTON) TRIPS USE SHANNON AS ACCESS, WORST CASE FOR HOUK AND INDIANA INTERSECTION MANSFIELD NEW INTERSECTION • MOVEMENT VOLUMES ARE DIFFERENT, THIS IS D FOR APPROACHES THAT YoVULD BE REDIRECTED TO MIRAMEAU PARKWAY 1998 A4IRA8EAU POINT E.LS., REVISED E.I.S FIGURE 12, 2006 Y.ITH PROJECT WITHOUT MANSFIELD U.P.RR. TO BE VACATED DUE TO THE VALLEY PROJECT '0 (1999 LAWSON /GUNNING STUDY, FIGURE 12) 1998 REVISED T.I.A., MIRA9EAU POINT PROJECT, FIGURE 19 ?t0T TO SCALE 2 W Z ttC aW Gz - a ZC— -r Oy� a= 2 0.979 11 CL1ZYuU F-I <GZ < Wqy amp a vZ an 07“ = U 0 a z 0 z z 0 Y 2 2 F 0 J r 0 z z f 0 R 3 O W a 1 0 z Q a a 4 LANO USE P.M PEAK HOUR RATE ENTERING EXITING Z VOL. R VOL. LAWSON — APTS. 400 0.62 57Z 165 33% 32 TABLE 4 1999 STIJOY REMAINDER — — — 97 — i60 TOTALS' 262• 242• CURRENT LAWSON PROPOSAL = 393 SAY 400 M.F. IJNITS • WORST CASE ALL TRIPS ACCESSING SHANNON PREVIOUS LAWSON PROPOSAL = 222 M.F. UNITS WITH MANSFIELD AS EMERGENCY ACCESS ONLY. NOTE: COMPARE TO FIGURE 8, 1999 LAWSON GUNNING STUDY FOR ORIGINAL SITE TRIPS W/0 HOUK AND tiWITI MANSFIELD 0 ? raw 13 s q N 0 u • as 01-QC ¢Y0* a00a 0 x N W J J 0 O F J W CC CC 7 0 1 0 6 NOT 'I∎}"" 1 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information alyst g enc y /Co. Todd Whipple, P.E. Whipple Consultin Engineers Intersection Houk and Indiana Jurisdiction City of Spokane Valley Date Performed 6/24/2004 Analysis Year 2006 nalysis Time Period PM Peak Hour - Project Description 2004-30 A&A Construction - Mansfield Comprehensive Plan Chan East/West Street: Indiana Avenue North /South Street: Houk Street Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R olume (veh/h) 176 277 0 0 261 193 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate veh /h) 185 291 0 0 274 203 Proportion of heavy ehicles, Pm, 0 — 0 — — Median type Two Way Left Tum Lane RT Channelized? 0 1 anes 1. 2 0 0 2 1 Configuration L T T - R Upstream Signal 1 1 Minor Street Northbound Southbound ovement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R olume (veh /h) 0 0 0 181 0 296 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Hourly Flow Rate (veh /h) 0 0 0 190 0 ' 311 Proportion of heavy ehicles, P� 0 0 0 0 0 0 ercent grade ( %) 0 0 Flared approach N . N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 •1 Lanes 0 0 0 1 0 • 1 Configuration _ L R Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service' . pproach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ne Configuration L L R olume, v (vph) 185 190 311 Capacity, c (vph) 1301 483 885 /c ratio 0.14 0.39 0.35 Queue length (95 %) 0.50 1.85 1.59 Control Delay (s /veh) 8.2 17.2 11.3 LOS A _ C B pproach delay (s /veh) — — - - 13.5 pproach LOS -- _ -- 8 Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 ot 1 Copyrigh1 Univenity ofFlurida, All Rights Reserved Version d.Id Analyst Todd R. Whipple, P.E. Agency/Co. Whipple Consulting Engineers pate Performed 6/25/2004 Analysis Time Period PM Peak Hour Intersection Houk and Shannon Jurisdiction City of Spokane Valley Analysis Year 2006 Two -Way Stop Control General Information ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street 1 Eastbound Movement 1 L olume (veh/h) 1 0 Peak -hour factor, PHF i 0.95 . Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) Proportion of heavy ehicles, PHv Median type RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal 0 0 0 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Project Description 2004 -30 ALA Construction - Mansfield Comp Plan Change East West Street: Shannon Avenue Intersection Orientation: East -West 2 T 0 0.95 0 0 0 Site Information North /South Street: Houk Street Study Period (hrs): 0.25 3 R 0 0.95 0 0 0 Westbound Undivided 4 L 197 0.95 207 2 1 L 5 T 0 0.95 0 0 0 6 R 33 0.95 34 0 1 R Page 1 of 1 Minor Street Movement olume (veh/h) Peak -hour factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) t roportion of heavy vehicles, PHV Percent grade (%) Flared approach Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Northbound 7 L 0 0.95 0 0 0 8 T 148 0.95 155 2 N 0 1 T 9 R 205 0.95 215 0 0 0 1 Southbound 10 L 42 0.95 44 0 1 L 11 T 76 0.95 80 2 0 N 0 1 T 12 R 0 0.95 0 0 0 0 Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service . Approach Movement Lane Configuration Volume, v (vph) Capacity, c (vph) v/c ratio Queue length (95 %) Control Delay (s /veh) LOS Approach delay (s /veh) Approach LOS EB 1 WB 4 L 207 1613 0.13 0.44 7.6 A Northbound 7 8 T 155 434 0.36 1.59 17.8 C 9 R 215 1081 0.20 0.74 9.2 A 12.8 8 Southbound 10 L 44 216 0,20 0.74 25.9 0 11 T 80 453 0.18 0.63 14.6 8 12 18.6 C NCS Copyright c 2003 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1d Pines Corridor Improvement Project Westbound On -Ramp Realignment for WSDOT & Spokane County Timothy A. Schwab, P.E. Spokane County, Washington July 1998 IPE W.O. Num. 95551 Prepared as a part of Lawson/Gunning Rezone Traffic Study ZE -36 -97 Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 707 W. 7th Avenue, Suite 200 Spokane, WA 99204 (509)458 -6840 Todd R. Whipple, P.E. Preliminary Design Analysis Introduction/Purpose Existing Conditions Planned Improvements Description of Proposed Improvements Design Standards Used Cost Estimates Attachments TABLE OF CONTENTS Level of Service Calculations With 2006 Traffic Improvements Level of Service Calculations With 2006 Traffic Improvements Typical Roadway Sections Overall Concept Plan Plan of Improvements Volumes Without Proposed Volumes With Proposed Pines Road/Indiana Proposed Transportation Improvements 1-90 Westbound Ramps to Mansfield Intersection Preliminary Design Analysis Introduction/Purpose The land north of I -90 surrounding Pines Road has a combination of retail, commercial, multi- family and single family land uses as well as public uses including a park and ride lot and a maintenance /storage area for WSDOT. There is some proposed developments for vacant land in this area, including the Mirabeau Point project, additional mall/retail space and both multi- family and single family land uses. With the proposed projects comes increased use of the existing transportation facilities and a need for capacity improvements for the transportation system. The purpose of this design analysis is to present a concept for improving the transportation circulation and mobility in the area from the westbound ramp intersection north of I -90 to Mansfield Road on Pines Road and from the proposed Mirabeau Parkway east of Pines to approximately Wilbur Road west of Pines. This information is intended to show that the proposed improvements will provide adequate levels of service for the anticipated traffic volumes in this area of Spokane County as well as provide a proposal of the general layout of the improvements. This design analysis is being provided as supplementary information to the Lawson/Gunning Comprehensive Plan and Rezone request ZE- 36 -97. This document incorporates by reference the Lawson/Gunning TIA, the Mirabeau Point EIS and the SR 90 - Four Lakes to State Line EIS documents. Existing Conditions The portion of Pines Road (SR27) from I -90 to Mansfield Avenue is located in Spokane County east of the City of Spokane in the Spokane Valley area. Within the last decade, a significant amount of development has occurred along the Pines Corridor increasing traffic congestion. The new Spokane Valley Mall along with other proposed land developments and annual increases in background growth of traffic will bring the levels of service to intersections in this area to unacceptable levels. While the proposed new Evergreen Interchange will take some traffic from the Pines Road Interchange and provide some relief for the traffic on Pines Road, with the proposed land developments in the area, additional transportation improvements are needed. The existing intersections of Pines Road/Indiana Avenue/Montgomery Avenue and Pines Road/Westbound ramps are closely spaced without adequate room for storage. These two intersections are both signalized, but operate from one controller. During peak periods, there is not enough storage for the vehicles making the northbound left turn onto Montgomery. The southbound traffic at the Pines /Indiana intersection also suffers excessive delay during the peak Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 1 Pines Road Corridor Improvements f �1 periods while the westbound traffic on Indiana is only given a few seconds of green to turn onto or cross Pines Road. Pines Road in the project area has two through lanes in both the northbound and southbound directions. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. There are left turn lanes for the left turning movements on Pines Road at all signalized intersections. A two way left turn lane exists between Indiana and Mansfield on Pines Road. Indiana Avenue east of Pines Road has two through lanes in both the eastbound and southbound directions. Two way left turn lanes and dedicated left tum lanes exist on Indiana to service the existing and proposed commercial/retail land uses. Montgomery Avenue west of Pines Road has one lane each direction with no turn lanes. Mansfield Avenue (east/west) currently has one lane each direction. The Mansfield Avenue and Pines Road intersection is located approximately 600 feet north of Indiana Avenue. The general topography of the project area is flat to rolling. A railroad crossing exists immediately north and adjacent to the Pines/Indiana intersection. Planned Improvements WSDOT has two planned projects on Pines Road schedule for constriction within the next two years. The first project will widen Pines Road at the westbound ramp terminal intersection to accommodate a second left turn lane for the traffic going westbound on I -90. The second project is an overlay project on Pines Road between I -90 and Trent Avenue (SR 290). The traffic impact analysis for the Mirabeau Project has identified several transportation improvements needed to adequately handle the traffic from the proposed developments in this area. These improvements include: 1) Relocate the westbound off -ramp from Pines Road to the existing slip ramp at Indiana with a signal at this ramp intersection, and 2) At Pines Road/Indiana intersection, construct an eastbound right turn lane and revise the eastbound and westbound phasing to split phasing. Additionally, several land use actions are moving forward within this area with several transportation improvement mitigations proposed. At the present time, a project proposed by Divcon, Inc. at the southeast comer of Pines Road & Euclid Avenue is being conditioned to add a southbound to eastbound left turn lane on Pines Road at Euclid Avenue as well as provide for full signalization of this intersection. Description of Proposed Improvements The primary design issue which causes problems in this area is the existing closely spaced intersections on Pines Road, namely the westbound ramps and the Indiana/Montgomery intersections. Based on supplementary analysis provided by Inland Pacific Engineering, we are proposing improvements that will combine these two intersections eliminating many of the storage/queuing problems and improve circulation through this area. The main components of Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 2 Pines Road Corridor Improvements the proposed improvements are as follows; please see overall plan in the attachments. 1. Move the westbound on -ramp to be the west leg of the Pines/lndiana intersection. This west leg would be a one -way road (westbound) with two lanes which would serve as the on -ramp. Montgomery would be realigned to "tee" into the on -ramp road. At this "tee" intersection, only right turns in and right turns out would be allowed. Revisions to the on -ramp would be constructed to transition from existing Montgomery Road to the existing on -ramp roadway. 2. At the Pines/Indiana intersection, construct a second northbound to westbound left turn lane. Pines would be widened to the west to accommodate this additional lane. The west railroad crossing gate would require relocation to the west. 3. Montgomery Avenue access would be revised east of the "tee" with the on -ramp. Those wanting to leave sites on Montgomery, but not wishing to use I -90 will no longer be able to access Pines Road from Montgomery but instead have to go to Mansfield Avenue to access Pines Road. It is the intent that Mansfield Avenue replace Montgomery as the primary east/west collector /arterials as future construction east of Pines Road will tie Mansfield into Mirabeau point Drive for access to the Mall and point east. 4. At the Pines/Mansfield intersection, a signal will be installed. Striping for eastbound right turn and westbound left turn lanes would be installed. 5. At the Mansfield/Montgomery/Wilbur intersections, a four legged intersection would be constructed by straightening out Montgomery Dr. to tie into Mansfield Avenue. Wilbur Road would provide the north/south legs of the intersection. Stop control would be installed on the north and south legs to provide unimpeded through movement for the east/west traffic on Montgomery/Mansfield. Mansfield Avenue would be improved to collector arterial design standards in phases from Wilbur Road to Pines Road. Design deviations may be required for portions of this roadway to remain within available right -of -way until additional CRP and acquisition funds become available. However, this portion of Mansfield is generally consistent with portions of existing Montgomery within this area. 7. Mansfield Avenue would be extended east from approximately the Houk/Mansfield intersection on a new alignment to connect to the east/west road in the Mirabeau Point project adjacent to the proposed YMCA site. Collector arterial design standards would be used for the new roadway. This connection will make the collector /arterial east/west mobility link complete by providing access to the mall and other proposed developments. 8. Shannon Avenue east of Houk Road along the railroad would be vacated. Access to the remaining property will be from the extended Mansfield Avenue. (This property is part Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 3 Pines Road Corridor Improvements INTERSECTION Level of Service With 2006 Traffic Volumes Without Improvements With Proposed Improvements Delay LOS Delay 1 LOS Pines Rd./WB Ramps 30.8 sec. D N/A - Intersection Removed Pines Rd./Indiana Ave. 28.4 sec. D 18.7 sec. C Pines Rd./Mansfield Ave. (Unsig.) (Signalized) * * F - 19.0 sec. - C Indiana Ave./WB Off-Ramp ( Unsig.) (Signalized) 22.7 sec. D - 7.8 sec. - B of the "Lawson/Gunning Rezone" proposal.) See the appendix for typical roadway sections and preliminary plan sheets for a concept plan of these improvements. Shown in the following table is a summary of the levels of service for the anticipated traffic volumes with the proposed developments and improvements outlined in the Mirabeau Point EIS (Without Improvements column) and with the proposed improvements as outlined above. (With Proposed Improvements column). The levels of service shown are based on the assumption that Evergreen Interchange is constructed since this is a requirement for most of the development in the area. Table 1 - Level of Service With and Without Proposed Improvements (* * ) Denotes that the calculated value was greater than 1,000 seconds The above table shows that the level of service for the intersections in this area will improve to LOS C or better with the proposed improvements and at full buildout of all proposed developments. The intersection at Mansfield Ave./Montgomery/Wilbur Road will operate at LOS C with 15.2 seconds of delay as shown in the attachments. The proposed on -ramp realignment is expected to require FHWA approval since the proposed improvements revise the access point onto I -90. This will likely require an Access Point Decision Report (Six Point Report). The FHWA approval process for the ramp realignment will require a minimum time of three months. Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 4 Pines Road Corridor Improvements Other Improvements to be Considered in the Future With the relocation of the westbound on -ramp from the current location north to opposite Indiana Avenue, there becomes room available to consider a westbound I -90 to southbound Pines Road loop ramp. A loop ramp at this location would improve the flow of traffic in this area, particularly at the Indiana Ave./Pines Road intersection. A loop ramp with radius lengths of 150 feet will fit within the area which will be available. However, there will not be enough room for deceleration and taper lengths due to the bridge abutment. To provide adequate room for deceleration and taper lengths, the bridge abutment will need to be moved north and girders replaced. Under current traffic conditions without Evergreen Interchange, this would not be practical. However, when Evergreen Interchange is constructed, one bridge at a time could be reconstructed with traffic diverted to the other bridge. Lanes would be constricted to one to two lanes each direction with more of the traffic using Evergreen Interchange. Design Standards Used Spokane County Roadway design standards were used in the preliminary design and layout of the roadway widening on Mansfield Avenue. WSDOT design standards were used for the horizontal layout of the revised westbound on- ramp/Montgomery/Indiana access. The minimum horizontal curves used for the widening on Mansfield Road are 450 foot radius curves to keep the roadway within the right -of -way. A design deviation will be needed for this since the minimum radius on collector arterials is 500 feet. This design deviation should be approved since there are existing horizontal curves on Montgomery with approximately 350 foot radius curves. The construction of walls may be required for Mansfield Avenue between Pines Road and Wilbur Road due to topography and to reduce adjacent property impact. Vertical grades through the project will be maintained at a minimum grade of 0.5 %. Maximum grades used will most likely be less than 1.5% as this area is relatively flat. A constant superelevation of 2% was assumed throughout the project. For the relocated west -bound on -ramp, horizontal curve radii of 500 feet and 800 feet were used to transition to the existing ramp. Cost Estimates The following cost estimates are preliminary, but should be sufficiently accurate to provide information for pursing funding for this project. The significant items of construction for widening and realigning the roadway will be the grading, any walls which may be needed, and surfacing materials, namely the crushed rock, concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk and the asphalt pavement. The required thickness of these materials can vary depending on the pavement design. When a pavement design has been completed, the cost of these items can be determined more accurately. For this preliminary estimate, we assumed a thickness of 6 inches of crushed rock and 4 inches of asphalt pavement. This should provide an adequate pavement section from the anticipated truck traffic with the commercial and industrial land uses in reasonable good native Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 5 Pines Road Corridor Improvements Transportation Improvement Component Preliminary Construction Cost Roadway Improvements at Montgomery, Westbound on -ramp $300,000 Signal Revision at the Pines/Indiana intersection $100,000 Roadway widening of Mansfield west of Pines Road $450,000 Mansfield Avenue extension east of Pines Road Developer Constructed New Signal at Pines/Mansfield Intersection $150,000 • valley gravel soil conditions. The following table gives the preliminary cost estimate for each component of the overall irnprovement. Table 2 - Preliminary Cost Estimates of Components Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 6 Pines Road Corridor Improvements YTS.• DIY NANDI U) MANSFIELD At.ENLIE — MONTGOMERY DRIVE TO PINES tiFfR ,MANSFIELD AVENUE — HOUK 10 MIRADEAU POINT W.DENWD ON PINES ROAD Mg 2 —NORTH BOUND LEFT TURN LANE RELOcANON OF WEST BOUND UN —RAMP RMb w or.. 0 as Via. OO V GAL L cO(cEP1i PLt OF PONES I OQ® (SGT 27) OMP OVE nM� C l`TS Vae..e er S SPOKANE 0 NTY µ W ASHINGTON Nan 0. Ws 1G.0 Nweamtur 9.100(0114 A V0 0E tALIAN4 rNUr, oftft ANTACID ANsAuE '"Q INLAND ENQVCEERINQ TV N.I It• ..n. ,m f1q •�rz+o .200 CRTPRIC M 11 1 . V3 t LAWSON j GUNNING PINES ROAD (SR 27) IMPROVEMENTS 9n1� , u la. la !aC16.i TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for LAWSON /GUNNING PROJECT Shannon Avenue Spokane County, Washington June, 1999 Prepared by: Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 707 W. 7th Avenue, Suite 200 Spokane, WA 99204 (509)458 -6840 This report has been prepared by the staff of Inland Pacific Engineering Company under the direction of the undersigned professional engineer whose seal and signature appears hereon. EXPIRES: / y V 1 Timothy A. Schwab, P.E. RUCKfTP CAYALOO z w W C3 TC Lu w GI 10:10 Q 0 c e 4 a r.lu( 11 p tam 6: 1haASA GI y 0 W ;T WELLES EY •' .09 MAXWELL TO SHARP O { CATALOO C.TA100 AY ALTO AY( ALTO I OLIVE KFIOX AYE BUCKETS; 6PRIr ALKI rcaa zse r, AIRV W WELLESELY CAnLAN NOR A AT f►a,UUIOlo z FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAP CRWELL 3 - O'C ` L PORKER 1 rem= INLAND inC PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 Wert 7th • Suite 200 (509) 458 -6840 FAX: (509) 458 -6844 Spokane, WA 99204 LAWSON / GUNNING TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 95551 i .ii!i 1: t 111.011.11, .. ii.l i :• h /w w•n wit w.w•s. .. a•wlwln..a __ r F Cjjll ?lltii!il dill 11 u;1"'1 t . s ° •.y w•n•wa .. 17It a Sw 7•ti 111: I :It it ••j•1 1 .' • 1 • .1 ••n•• a ww•n•.a •■•■oa "1 M/1i 171:1 1••11111111tit 11 1 INLAND IC PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 West 7th • Suite 200 (509) 458 -6840 Spokane. WA 99204 FAX: (503) 458 -6844 LAWSON / GUNNING TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 95551 PROJECT LOCATIO N RR-I0 /Virobl Par fet UR•t2 UR -35 •Bo UR -22 UR -22 e twu. ... . CATA LOU UR - {2 EUCLID , NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 3 INLAND miC PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 West 7th • Sufte 200 (5509) 450 -0840 Spokane, WA 99204 FAX: (509) 458 -6844 LAWSON /GUNNING TRAFFIC fMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 95551 ZONING MAP 1 information on background projects from the Mirabeau Point traffic impact analysis. This study lists all background projects for this study as well as trip generation from the Mirabeau Point traffic impact analysis which become background trips for this study. A copy of the list of background projects is included in the appendix. The following table lists each of these background projects from the Mirabeau Point study and lists the completion status at the time of the traffic counts in April 1998. Table 3 - Status of Background Projects in April 1998 I Project Size Status Hotel (Lawson Site) Office Building (Lawson Site) Strip Mall Office Building (Wolff Site) Restaurant Ridgeview Estates Apartments (Whimsical Pig) Retirement (on Evergreen) Inland Constr. Business Park Cherry Street Apartments Walmart Spokane Valley Mall: Mall Spokane Valley Mall: Hotel Spokane Industrial Park Expansion Spokane Valley Mall: Add. Mall Spokane Valley Mall: Commercial Spokane Valley Mall: Business Park Spokane Valley Mall: Industrial Park 200 Rooms Completed prior to 4/98 20 k.S.F. Include as Background 9 k.S.F. 24 k.S.F. 5.5 k.S.F. 317 units 72 units Various 233 units Various 715 k.S.F. 300 amts Various 315 k.S.F. 318 k.S.F. 390 k.S.F. 75% occupied in 4/98 Include as Background Completed prior to 4/98 Completed prior to 4/98 Include as Background 75% Occupied in 4/98 Include as Background Partially Occupied, Little or no impact to Pines & Evergreen Completed prior to 4/98 Trips traded for additional commercial buildings Little or no impact to Pines & Evergreen Include as Background Include as Background Include as Background 800 k.S.F. Include as Background Inland Pacific End neering, Inc. 38 Lawson/Gunning Project TL4 �^,� ?>'n JY - : '�•A l!t : w^ ' l ` �1°1Ff �'= t`• :$ : J� '� ^T •. c d' , fS T4'134:.. -k • x+ 7 1. J P c� o£' `L•�C iiJ� : -r 1 • c �J �r .77' - rk. •• 1,� �. . ,r!^ ... cr. ' : /,'... , "_ . «- �° •g •y `- Gi�a`ct''vv t - '. {i`` � '4` W �M.taS'. � 'N ' r F.!' a r > �� +r t•'• � ` L' �� L �z: ‘ 1.-. j T i �.CA i ' d �v' 'r d i. ik ii , ��Ci'�i�.� y � ` 1��� '�t�; ^�C" .., , `� % - r-v 1 ' 4 ? i N y a+ ' .a .cZr. t ., �` .;_„ : -�.. 7 A S 5 ° :r ' � `�`dd... �� r tinge ttion S' � ac 3 � D� t. ' "�}i.- .... - - ,.r1 ��� ` .:.ZF Zk °+- RP' '� '' �, ^• S(4' ... � . . `J St12- PS 1� d , - n t 70 1 . ';:�*`� " dt&r.s'`r- 7 bt jttrx°s...i� -. _ - F y " et . ' -• Y ' � 3 j 4 " '-tl,� `�'r 4 ;v .�. t._ Pines Rd./Mission Ave. 26.3 sec. D 25.4 sec. D Pines Rd./EB Ramps 29.3 sec. D 25.5 sec. D Pines Rd_/WB On- Ramp/Indiana 26.3 sec. D 21.3 sec. C Pines Rd./Mansfield Ave. 33.3 sec. D 28.3 sec. D Indiana Ave./WB Off -ramp 14.2 sec. B 13.7 sec. B Evergreen RdJEB Ramps 12.9 sec. B 13.0 sec. B Evergreen Rd./WB Ramps 8.0 sec. B 8.2 sec. B Evergreen Rd/Indiana Ave. 15.9 sec. C 19.8 sec. C Mirabeau Point/Indiana 16.0 sec. C 16.7 sec. C Mirabeau Point/Mansfield 14.5 sec. B 15.0 sec. B On the intersections analyzed with the anticipated traffic volumes, the improvements to the transportation system including Evergreen Interchange and improvements listed in the Pines Corridor Improvement Study, and without the proposed project, the levels of service will be at adequate levels, LOS C or better. Build Out Levels of Service With Proposed Project Using the number of generated trips shown on Table 4 and estimated trip distribution shown on Figures 8 & 9 and adding it to the background traffic, the total number of trips projected to use the transportation system at build out is obtained. Figures 12 & 13 show the future traffic volumes under these conditions. Using these future traffic volumes, build out year (2006) level of service calculations were performed and the results are displayed in Table 6. Table 6 - 2006 Traffic With Proposed Project, With and Without Mansfield Connection On the intersections analyzed with the anticipated traffic volumes and the improvements to the transportation system including Evergreen Interchange and improvements listed in the Pines Corridor Improvement Study, with the proposed project, the levels of service will be at adequate levels, LOS D or better. Inland Pack Engineering, Inc. 29 Lawson /Gunning Project TIA 370 IT N N N r � • EAST BOUND RAMPS 422 =C> X508 462 640 MANSFIELD AVE. INDIANA AVE. i ' INLAND IC PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 West 7th • Suite 200 (509) 456 -6840 Spokane, WA 99204 FAX (509) 458 -6944 MISSION AVE. LAI4SON /GUNNING TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 95551 WEST BOUND RAMPS EAST BOUND RAMPS NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 12 2005 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH PROJECT . WITHOUT MANSFIELD CONNECTION EAST BOUND RAMPS p INLAND igC PACIFIC E N GIN EERING 707 West 7th -Suite 200 (5O) 458 -6840 Spokane. WA 99204 FAX; (509) 458 -6844 LAWSON /GUNNING TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 95551 FIGURE 13 NOT TO SCALE 2006 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH PROJECT WITH MANSFIELD CONNECTION 1 (Th REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS for 1VZIRA.BEAU POINT PROJECT Spokane County, Washington May 14, 1998 Prepared by: Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 707 W. 7th Avenue, Suite 200 Spokane, WA 99204 (509)458 -6840 This report has been prepared by the staff of Inland Pacific Engineering Company under the direction of the undersigned professional engineer whose seal and signature appears hereon. Timothy A. Schwab, P.E. ROCHE ic OCSI2ET DE:LET CATALDO Tnnl EknrslnT E LI NDRA AVE CAIALDO 11411041 NA 0 CATAL00 AVE VENTAA FRUIT Kill LACAOSS BELIE MK I NDIAHA AVE L11GC*Ta ; " au :L AV E b °ao a .. tl` &moor . Nxq Pints SMIULnfLO ME RICO . VE an r oclnTEu = t SPAacfRO ans SARliCITEL Eaif Va GAY p0 WELLESELY e SANSON LN SANSEI OD FRANCIS AYE • FORKER 4, D i 1 PQ. ' to„ eS -• 1 ,.i Y� 1 mis INLANb iL 1 MIRABEAU POINT PACIFIC ENGINEERING VICI MAP. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 707 Weft 7th • Suite 200 (509) 458 -6840 PROJECT NO. 96149 Spokane, WA 90204 FAX (509) 458 -6944 NSA MR•JC p.¢wr •wfJ.a A.G p...aa . .on) v *Ma r n•■ w Con 1 tem INLAND miC PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 West 7th • Suite 200 (509) 458 -6840 Spokane. WA 99204 FAX: (509) 458 -6844 MIRA9EAU POINT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 96149 } NOT TO SCALE FIGURE 2 SITE PLAN EUCLID MI SSIO INDIANA MIRABEAU POINT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 96149 NOT TO SCALE EUCLID 1 -3 ZONING MAP 1 , , INLAND miC PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 West 71 - �a a 200 � S ?ekcne, WI !. (509) 458 -6040 FAX: (509) 45 -684, Table 4 - Trip Generation Rates for Background Projects - PM Peak Hour (I) - Lawson site (1) - Wolff site (3) - Ridgeview Estates Apartments (4) - Cherry Street Apartments (S) - Included in the Spokane Valley Mall project Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 24 Mirabeau Point Project 17A 1 707 West 7th •Suite 200 (509) 458 -6840 1 l PROJECT NO. 96149 `Spokane, WA 99204 FAX (509) 453 -6844) / 1 Kr a' 5 hY r t `{ � � t 7 F S an } JL" 4 „ Zu J # +l �} '1 l + }A S , .( F' x x { Y ') £ E } k v¢ IS , Jr 9hF !! J } t• { i.. J¢ ! t b O^ - �{ w� •k.< � 2fi.. f A� v '1 9 y.P v t , .y '�i'r+7, J 1 Z . J � g4.. �o Sa - (° ,J'> , "S' �' Z n x } h.rc � e x J .i 2 t : . �} ° t: ° a r'Y3 fyt.$ J lYl �` .,�ia� }:fQ � . >* �f6yp JC' -� rr 4YV � r 3 ye t T r _, ' � '�'` T `�' J y 4 4Fr• j +�F ?F^ '� F k � F _ Y` T tg i .,c „ m OCa Y T.'� } hr NC{�..1.+r".�:r.Fa. /..... .} ......._. y »:« 9 �}# 4$7.:::,51.:i � ,O &,.5: Y tS � + d F Rx Z?r'� v . �$ } t2$. F.i h Y ...t' Y � Q� � F ; hJ (, fh F �.v>1'.�.:.vX .:....>+¢.i v {o A r J ( }>,� } n1 Fr » k j`j .c..„' � • } ''r �S,�y } t� Y t.{ ..A $, .o.SJ 3`E iF }fxa ' ♦, , } }. 3 f _ . S 1r'2..4 - .4.,{i 1r II.•i . , �ti2. 2 X . X 3 . NF " ,, . " �a . t lee ? i Per. ,, {$ 3. -. �.... ,C� r �} ',' ' Y I ,�..i, u Ie.. . M J '{ , ea}Y ° ` > ' 4 {: ,xFi h. M •1.. Y P rce'n ....u..Yyo[t1mE�r,. r .. C G v G �.i » i k � $ ''' $ 4C Hotel(') .. 200 Rooms 0.62 124 60% . 74 40% 50 Office Building(') 20 k.S.F. 2.92 58 17% 10 83% 48 Strip Mall 9 k.S.F. 15.14 136 50% 68 50% 68 Office Building 24 k.S.F. 2.68 64 17% 11 83% 53 Restaurant 5.5 k.S.F. 12.92 71 56% 40 44% 31 Apartments °) 317 0.63 200 68% 136 32% 64 Retirement 72 units 0.28 20 56% 11 44% 9 Business Park Various N/A 141 N/A 28 N/A 113 Apartmentsm 233 units 0.49 114 64% 73 36% 41 Walrnart Various N/A 2,287 N/A 1,127 N/A 1,160 Valley Mall: Mall Hote1m 715 k.S.F. G.L.A. 300 units 3.26 0.76 2,331 228 50% 54% 1,165 123 50% 46% 1,166 105 Industrial Park Expan. Various N/A 1,710 N/A 747 N/A 963 Table 4 - Trip Generation Rates for Background Projects - PM Peak Hour (I) - Lawson site (1) - Wolff site (3) - Ridgeview Estates Apartments (4) - Cherry Street Apartments (S) - Included in the Spokane Valley Mall project Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 24 Mirabeau Point Project 17A 1 707 West 7th •Suite 200 (509) 458 -6840 1 l PROJECT NO. 96149 `Spokane, WA 99204 FAX (509) 453 -6844) / 1 x rT£#R. rc t ' a `� S og 3 o :is : �o fi ),'.§-'? 0 Y� i .t� . t� ^h} ' aS l M �'v A X. $iT• .,P \ .I { -0 -0t 4�' �!n v. ay >`Re T t3 v .i . 9 X ,< <` ,u ,y :.;€ ft 7 i , a sk $ 'i `Ca'K ¢ K • 7 S .7. S' c!"X ,,. 3 t ,� '` <,,�,i - :\. �Y . b y � : 52, K 3 , S v f} � r a,,ko 52.u' cr 'S `,,fi�'R ,.„.. rc. „.. y a % .f � � J dJ C$ T -0 it� x r QTY ^, ! r �.'w da. a c c' t y� 3 ri. F o' y S' Cf Z J ..bYtT t r anY'fi . Y SF� M . $ £ w , Jr: >4 7 'La '�.}A. h'•ti `� t, > -•. t - ''t ' « » :}�r`t ,p:VV. r 'rY y } ti , � , ° a ' '' rc�' "45: . $8. S Xfit 3° '! F i X ro 't "�` < I �t f , Y,,}' y p 3 <» �S. $' fin J } Y , Ran o .! f��> Z�LiJR.' .� Nt, r rt'j ::'::: " 1y J c1? ki-`C'•°`al"' '�Ys S -0 i*`T i( S. J ? "!'c. .L"L,JY o F4 i to l'� ,. ;;4'',..7`;: .t fi'. -1 1�" `t -0t�aC 4 $ �Y >Z \F 1( 2 «K�J{ T} yr {�. 'L ' M ' L3Y�4.' %t .y J y ,• .. 3 r it i tt T -k R 2 ,J 1 q , `� > > 4f ,.ate ,,, , :- " 75:ti ''k $fir c if K -S' C y i T N'.J �4 � {�'�y/����} I ry %�+ - ` t p ..P .S 2. �'�t5.59G d 2 Y3`. aiX"a t Y 4c <7.•, A „,,Uv .�y S 1 } � c F U ; 3 ,ZP kv'` riT S?E' �� [[ .,, 'fi Ja F 3 .c,� �.,�a. o- Y -•"t'i ' $ T `T-0 d : Apartments 144 units 0.49 64% 45 , 36% 25 Retirement Community 208 units 0.28 56% 32 44% 26 Nursing Home 27.8 k.S.F. 0.35 42% 4 58% 6 Mini- Warehouse 72.3 k.S.F. 0.26 52% 10 48% 9 RV Park 116 units 0.46 65% 35 35% 19 'S'. ti ;;a y r, may{ f t'' tat A i4+4 S C a o i k » < 2 Y H a {.� ' J � ¢hits% ' anEl''tL' ;se, 4S } i. qq Y S.Y M }' ;_. fLv l � h�;� ry t Q yt . p � '. it; , ''., - 2l o-� F �" R. 'Y)J Jy '� Y”' ,. • 1c�t�T.iS t .,8 T fis ,�t i '� ,.2� s. 5., rS.. .7:;w�r.�F'S'lY.yeir..lh`4S i 4<S hY64 -0 00 !q }{4 ` y.'IE i yy ry�i� Z"+•h jSG, T . r o !✓ 'E "i��� A `4' } �% 4 ' G ` fi,� -. k. t^'a'Y' :� 3 ^ } ' v1. L� p'' fv!', cLS' a ..i �Y ,..,..*:.;:oe l Y F S , iYKSkc Vt x'�l x .K A \.t S i .i ! ' r7 12 v�1NY y� + � . y < . L 1 h -01'�}r( . i -0 x YLi1iC 4 {.. M1 g�v G Y$ SaT"i?„6Xy JN f +Z V3' v"iK r v. x o s k ,x 1� A i $ Fy 4 n '$.u.. :: Ff; S ... nn .,,,. .' FJ. Y: 3¢ d4 L' Y Y J i y Y Uy F 'J S ,p r� �yty� Y.) } Y�' t 4`>N"+.5 L w l S %!h 1 ... j. I.- M y } . CK -- <�E i c{ f irt i r lW. , i � $ Y «4 X M 1J vba ::::::: {. ?kk+ T .. :, ,„ . . . , .. %4T (7) Y } 0 FN r ? } "'C! Aii'x ,F4� li. l:l�'t. : b 2e K S ¢L�(li� , ro. x F ct s} . e t . ":o-. �....J 1 Y.!'k a 1 x S 0� r a � .4.. w..! <�..v.n� r � .�t f a{ P r .: c�. 6 `M 1 1Cltl AT�$• , ., .......C• 1 $ $ fn d x `i .6 i,"'� ,, { { i .,,..: . }F.c.< 14. . ait:.....aa . , w �. Regional Center 1,030 k.S.F. 2.95 50% 1,519 50% 1,519 Other Commercial 318 k.S.F. 3.5 50% 557 50% 557 Hotel 300 rooms 0.76 54% 123 46% 105 Business Park 390 k.S.F. 1.48 22% 127 78% 450 Industrial Park 800 k.S.F. 0.91 21% 153 79% 575 Table 5 - Trip Generation for Background Projects (Lawson/Gunning) - PM Peak Hour Table 6 - Trip Generation for Background Projects (Full Build out of Spokane Valley Mall) - P11f Peak Hour Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 25 Mirabeau Point Project TIA •;3.1.-•$$.,,,. i" A Y {(r K.S. ..<'' • % L, 5 A. J5 fia r`S2 Y� Y 'rs. �t" J o a� a J > , JZ 0 y {-1,-.4-t, �b O {%'�� YY. q r` ' .� ...o'h2 '�e` i' �'` &:.ii�' n`f�� .d`.`nr d ;'altt '%\ �„ Q� � : � \�} o A- %® toa 4 � m4 � ._ rr }� rivi.S -.'<2 P+4 Y L . { FYN- } o' a V i} J h� 4 ai a'H- V! �v y� 4?t1 � f ' !C' a • ' a A .. ab"� %{+': '1 1k V N Q w. { &,-• Y , � {> F"Zar ./':', Q aw E<L,�' ?Ka f tf s c �a �J.3Exf {0, 5 ti { '. J!. Y `t e .aY2wKC .'.; , t hY .} y ; - { '2 L ' � a 9� Y ` ti Sb y ,Y } Fc fit' fia�1 ,, J {�G 'tx n�.a x Y6' Y h 1 Y .+` S { .2y; Y % 4 �C f Y bi 'fit, S .d- x •, fi �2( fr 4 <tr ;a t �' ua b .G. �kf Ra ..9< Ya'crJ �i <� � ,{� of j W.,_. } J fl / } . }. / ,,. b q' ` v ,{ Y a t { 5 .2' hal►F{�l - 1 J %. Q�.Y.Fr •., � � •f } a a ^ .�' 4 ''' ��4y�t lilfiyk Ice Arena 2 sheets I 37.5 67% 50 33% 25 YMCA 42 k.S.F. 1.75 34% 25 66% 49 Performing Arts See Below N/A 25% 5 75% 15 Educational See Below N/A 25% 3 75% 9 Planetarium See Below N/A 20% 1 80% 5 Senior Center . See Below N/A 0% 0 100% 1 Retail Center 50 k.S.F. 4.93 57% 141 43% 106 Fitness Center 20 k.S.F. 4.3 60% 52 40% 34 Totals 277 244 Project Trip Generation Using the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 5th Edition, and other data gathered from similar facilities, the anticipated number oftrips to be generated on adjacent streets by the proposed project was determined. The Trip Generation Manual (TGM) provides empirical data, based upon actual field observations for trip generation characteristic of similar projects throughout the United States. The TGM provides trip generation data for the Mirabeau Point Project development as shown in the following tables. Table 7 - Site Trip Generation Rates and Volumes for Phase 1 The following land uses for phase 1 were either not found in the ITE Trip Generation Manual or other specific information was used. The following is a list of these non - standard land uses and the assumptions used for trip generation: Ice Arena - A trip generation study was performed at an existing ice arena with similar uses as the proposed ice arena. The detailed information is included in the appendix. The following land uses do not have an operator or owner for the proposed use. However, Ron Tan, an architect involved in concept planning for these facilities has written a letter regarding the peak usage of these proposed facilities. Please refer to the appendix for a copy of this letter and how the facilities will most likely be used. Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 31 Mirabeau Point Project TIA EDERIGK 'mom STRIP MAL N0 M I'•IO BUST E PAR OgsNET CATAIDO .VALLEY •MALL CATAEDO CATALI0 4AXWEU wIT0 LACRei3! FA&V1 N. INDIANA . CNO c VALLEY WAY NE110 vi Jo �r4NS�l a t Eart V0er e. c ei mug • Jr. H.S. E x. riLlo a .. V7ELLESLEY' a .+• li d e�o�� i0 OF1VE WALMART FRUIT IQ.L R0 1:0999, EI m r c.ncrato ___ iEE a: u WELLESELY 1 7 INLAND PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 West 7th • Suite 200 (509) 458 -6840 Spokane, WA 99204 . FAX: (509) 45& -6544/ c .‘ • SAMSON W SAMSON NO FRANCIS AVE � FORKER FIGURE 7A LOCATION OF BA CKGROUND PROJECTS Q C a E..! Varier Its. MIRABEAU POINT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROJECT NO. 96149 a Performing Arts - The concerts and other events that will occur at this facility will be scheduled after the PM peak hour. Therefore PM peak hour trips will be generated from staff and performers rehearsing. We assumed a total of 20 PM peak hour trips, 5 entering and 15 exiting. Educational Complex - The seminars and lectures will occur during off-peak hours. Only the administrative /staff people will generate PM peak hour trips. For the PM peak hour, we assumed 12 trips, 3 entering and 9 exiting. Planetarium - The shows at this facility will occur during off peak hours and on the weekends. Operation will be similar to the Denver Planetarium They have 7 full time employees and 4 part time employees. Volunteers leave the site before 4:00 PM. Hours vary greatly from employees, spreading out the trips. We assumed 6 PM peak hour trips, 1 entering and 5 exiting. . Senior Center - The Valley Senior Center 'which may move into this facility closes generally by 3:30 PM on weekdays. We assumed 1 exiting PM peak hour trip for the one employee. See letter in the appendix regarding the use of the existing Valley Senior Center. Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 32 Mirabeau Point Project TZ4 Y ..nv Yak'::Sv: ' W}:•: {t AZ 'C' • , .t{. ' : ".,N::. . 4f , �°o- S {:{h' , { 'R �> x+ .b'�,f4) % 9` '" $, .�,.�,� r�ndrlTse a s ,,�S,� - - i 4< wc`� 2 y - *in: } ''' .. rt � < ta t d 2 C 0 bf'k�° 3:c Y ' ',rsa Y , ::., ' .t. r•. M{ { S C > �G' 3,•q ,t 7t<>,iY S t of [oc a,c it , »•w 9 .} { rte{ Su , . } v4 ' : s ao C : > 4 ..a a � a 1 .• r'k Cf ,� } 0" ` � S F f , - DERV.. } >. X a.` k:2 } > ,( +, 'S \.`� < h .5 F g M � '$ *} W C v __ J ,t : I i0 >? Y ` "E . r � . :5. �Cra c Q�r �• .;n{_F 7' v r.> 'O hir Y M ° > > f ; d ' .r �. m < r s Ka2 v � m 25r "d�'F3 ^� « ) ...f': . '{¢r'RSQ' L }� � 4.4x149 o s i s r2'z , . � C '{ J k ..X 4? S M M' ',� �° ,5 X7,1 .:. , a" tY Y ` � 4 - wt,F s { w X•sr F .M!.< i . {< �# {roc s d 2 d .,.d, o • 4 ! � g t '�{S 5 � SY .o s r {.CY ;ar�S'yY a 9 / �y , i: :-___ t ' M a ` � 1t����pppp f O xFi:4Ya w «,�3 ,•, J { a:Q/ld.;€' �"ffi a a , 1 'so S \"ii - ljj6�Saj) a l '.�<•v bliinie6 Hotel m 150 rooms 0.76 54% 49 46% 42 Business Park 250 k.S.F. 1.48 22% 81 78% 289 Office Park 100 k.S.F. 1.51 15% 23 85% 128 Specialty Retail 50 k.S.F. 4.93 57% 141 43% 106 Library 15 k.S.F. 4.74 48% 34 52% 37 Conven. Store 2 k.S.F. 53.73 50% 54 . 50% 54 Bank, Drive -In 3 k.S.F. 43.63 48% 63 52% 68 Fast Food Rest. 3 k.S.F. 36.53 52% 57 48% 53 Totals 502 777 Cumulative Totals 779 1,021 3y� '' {R Er -!' ft - .. >.. ?, iAyti �R,yi�`�MMy., 9•, l . 'b A 5 ` - r ' ti '�' A 'C w r k. rrf r ` Zr .{t. r .cs h r ^f11.iYJY g `E , ,,4, .�. ., b` •. j.oa €{ »�.. Ya.4' rr h `Sk {'.< i£ '+{ k� , v .:* . r < >.r � tc..� >aa� ( �`a,N. ����yy// ? AI+ A.,?'. -, h 1 r.J.Q:,:- XO �.4.: }'....14.5 � � ° \ » �� &k��\ .. � \ :4 t" n vic i ƒ` � a f"�' w � � , £�Ni .> ,,,4 y { � � Y .WW.:: !l <rW i�x'4Ax Y .f ,S $" O' , .t T {.A of .''' ! i ?' -Y7 r" r, Y^' � Uara..y, `:t+fc 12".� '� � `5',,,o '17:: n a e ° r,•,. ..r � i.�7 r t i rT � ,a(J( � y � N :C'O M.n1CSF_ . `t '� ro 2''k qS >„. a � s"r � i . {< �# {roc s d 2 d .,.d, o • 4 ! � g t '�{S 5 � SY .o s r {.CY G a > `rr } 1 } .S+ . <4 "" Yr•, wS h te h��' 'E Pk' ; " k: ".' .>. r. a r k of }r , t<.� i � ff � , k•_ h , K o1 a < Y t � »-r n M/] 1' , �L p Stif � iw..'., l ltia+,'PaJ4 v Y`X at } JE ....1? p ;. A S �q� °1v > a.0 �'�a a 'nc• >.f' s} W: k }xy & Olu f: Office Park 50 k.S.F. 1.51 15% 11 85% 64 RV Park 80 units 0.46 52% 19 48% 18 Residential, Apartments 230 units 0.49 64% 72 36% 41 Totals 102 123 Cumulative Totals 881 1 1,144 Table 8 - Site Trip Generation Rates and Volumes for Phase ase 2 (1) Assume 80% occupancy. Table 9 - Site Trip Generation Rates and Volurnes for Phase 3 Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 33 Mirabeau Point Project TTA v S ' A ', s_,( P,"•,. 'f ro < K > }r }k, 9 tr i F f o f � • iisc� 3te^ d iS A C � cct, �.,�.R' $' >.i SK i v? 7�wY %J+�y} t,��54J'/W}� � i` Y } hy KO� A 3 $ � j }•,¢� A >S A A ra V{RS }+t ~a °j �4r :o'OXh: ;�r... b:, .v,.v,i k�...��.?'an >, '7F..,. L �. fi. A .S sc}'x co L( �`- 4"...'4":;:).:•••:—::,::;,....,::::: •.3 R,4 ,,,,:::.,,:..;ii:: � o ( 7 a< A hi iGSSi'o-�l�ll ' AC �� + � Z S))�Ay} -� s A � ■ ^y'.S .v - ! +`a a� iti Jp vs i y Sw ii i e. ,a is f _ .-4„,, , ' f 4L� N� P �S`, E i i r } •* f C Y f '' ..6: ' b 4b'vi i)f a�] `+, X A. J .� Y `) M �Z V. f ^ \ ? l � '., X { A `7 2C +f^ ( f%, x i ojcc S T . )� + J ; , ...- .Jiy �'¢ . K� +i . DEL � >; nJ �.. ......., .:. ._r,. .p 1 }��c� -.I.--:,:w: ..}.., : .,•.,,,,,.r. } Div �.5� Z � Y .. .v,. .. '� � K 5 Y A. Y Pines Rd./Mission Ave. (With Phase 2 Revisions) 43.1 sec. - E - - 31.0 sec. - D Pines Rd./EB Ramps (With Ph. 2 Improvements) 98.0 sec. F - 30.8 sec. - D Pines Rd./WB Ramps (With off -ramp revisions) 18.8 sec. - C - 30.8 sec. 6.2 sec. D B Pines Rd./Indiana Ave. (With off -ramp revisions) 36.3 sec. - D - 28.4 sec. 24.4 sec. D C Pines Rd./Mansfield Ave. (Unsig.) ( *) F ( *) F Pines Rd./Euclid Ave. (Unsig.) (Signalized) 33.1 sec. - E - - 16.3 sec. - C Pines Rd./Trent Ave. (With Ph. 2 Improvements) 159.5 sec. - F - - 38.9 sec. - D Indiana Ave. /Off -Ramp (Unsig.) (With off -ramp revisions) 12.3 sec. - C - 22.7 sec. 11.5 sec. D B Indiana Ave./Mirabeau Pt. 8.8 sec. B 17.6 sec. C Evergreen Rd.IEB Ramps 12.9 sec. B 15.2 sec. B Evergreen Rd./WB Ramps 7.5 sec. B 16.6 sec. B Evergreen Rd./Indiana Ave. (With Ph. 2 Improvements) 16.5 sec. - C - 61.7 sec. 13.6 sec. F B Phase 3 (2006) Build Out Levels of Service With and Without Proposed Project Using the number of generated trips shown on Tables 6, 7 & 8 and the estimated trip distributions shown on Figures 9, 10 & 1. 1 and adding it to the background traffic, the total number of trips projected to use the transportation system at phase 3, year 2006 is obtained. See Figures 18 & 19 for the total traffic volumes with and without phase 3 traffic. Evergreen Interchange is assumed to be constructed by this phase. A summary of the LOS calculations is shown in Table 13 which follows. Table 13 - 2006 Traffic (Phase 3) With and Without Proposed Project Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 54 Mirabeau Point Project TIA : p ":e {>4'Fdh'' s - -c 2. w. a R' tape • C' v , � 2 �`$o� ? { {.€l ',•,. 4,} •f '>'. > .t: ' 3. 0. . �d $ 2 'k �t »rpt` � fi $�' f -0s ' a:<•:c ,,:=rT: �:: .9xt ;k.,k -4.4 �c q� :4.°k rSy :1.4 .:: •4 Y.CS .6':ows ekv:�sib. :ja;: b �f 1 ?{y �O V � 1 ✓ �� , (� y t ,...: St ' � 9 • ...: '�'•.�1.`��. '�C3 l 0.} ve nt >i•+vii.� J... J dpi.;::: .' :h \2i�:'Vh 40 .Y � ap 4) �.+FS ` Y f KiN '> '¢ > p "�" @ • ;e > r.. ' > , o�.V: +Lt a 2 t'. +o- w�v �s �: t i = � � d. .. , :1 � � b{�Q,y .?h ? } Y' y Y SJ Y ?3 j5\ ..Y C � 3 sr_ !4" ' ,�> �W�°Q i .o- # rlF ^'" > ,i 'Jr % ?P?. h z <>. ; o-yy} . R•5. � .s."� .��F�yl..s..p.' .ttw. 4� •.W��. n C:5,K 5 T #�: - u::Vc i K a 3 K > Wxthou�`�j.Fara , . ? p' + ro k... :'1., t: f •rr• % ect +L , G T � .CCti1�Fr u y +, w ''Y - .a . aS: I:• :, � ' 7 o r rr # i r > > �� W � harect >. t r`w .s� "0.: �;X 3`A : r °' °' e` "Zk " ' .We,. :':' D.�.�.v.. rC.JP(. X�: F: .. Y : y X,, �� `'•• — 7 GL nF.... >....i. Nv < :4�o3 s'..;: S.,x v ``� : �D { '' `.Ct xA>o.x^S . �L• -�3=� �^ ;,*.tj'. . '6±u'+n Sullivan Rd./Mission Ave. 26.1 sec. D 26.6 sec. D Sullivan Rd./EB Ramps 72.8 sec. F 72.9 sec. F Sullivan Rd./WB Ramps 111.4 sec. F 111.4 sec. F Sullivan Rd./Indiana Ave. 167.8 sec. F 168.1 sec. F ( *) Denotes that the calculated value was greater than 999.9 seconds. Without Phase 3 traffic in the year 2006, levels of service on Pines Road will be at unacceptable levels for the Mission Avenue, Eastbound Ramps and Trent Avenue intersections. The other signalized intersections on Pines Road will operate at acceptable levels. The Pines/Mansfield intersection will continue to operate at LOS F. On Sullivan Road, the Eastbound Ramps, the Westbound Ramps and Indiana Avenue Intersections will be at LOS F. The Sullivan Road/Mission Avenue intersection and the intersections on Evergreen Road will operate at acceptable levels of service without Phase 3 traffic. With Phase 3 traffic in the year 2006, levels of service on Pines Road will be at unacceptable levels for the Mission Avenue, Eastbound Ramps, Euclid Avenue and Trent Avenue intersections unless Phase 2 improvements are in place. If phase 2 improvements are in place, all the intersections on Pines Road will operate at acceptable levels. On Sullivan Road, levels of service will be the same as the without project condition. Levels of service on Evergreen Road will remain at acceptable levels with Phase 2 improvements in place for the Evergreen Road/Indiana Avenue intersection. The intersection at Indiana Avenue/Mirabeau Parkway will operate at acceptable levels with a signal Inland Pacific Engineering, Inc. 55 Mirabeau Point Project TIA SHANNON AVENUE � s '\ AVE �'E w a - - -- ALTERNATIVE TO RELOCATE RAMP (a000) VOLUMES FOR RELOCATED ALTERATIVE RAMP I pa•i INLAND IC PACIFIC ENGINEERING 707 West 7th •Suite 200 (509) 458 -6840 Spokane. WA 99204 FAX: (509) 456 -6844 7- MIRABEAU POINT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS te INDIA NOT TO SCALE 'AVENUE FIGURE 19 2006 (PHASE 3) WITH PROJECT WITH EVERGREEN I/C P.M. PEAK HOUR PROJECT NO. 96149 ) \ TRAFFIC VOLUMES SI�k �iey 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhallespokanevalley.org May 6, 2004 Subject Pines (SR 27)/Mansfield Corridor Congestion Relief Project Dear Developer Partner, At the request of many of the Developer Partners, a meeting was held on Monday, April 26, 2004 to review the Mitigation Agreement language that was sent to each of you on April 12, 2004. Several issues were brought up during the discussion including the following: • No time limit on how long the P.M. Peak Hour trips are reserved • Latecomer's agreement for other developments adding 5 or more trips to Pines/Indiana intersection • Credit for unused trips after some time limit (20 years ?) City staff agreed to review these issues and respond back with any proposed changes to the Mitigation Agreements. We reviewed these issues and propose to replace Section 7, Committed P.M. Peak Hour Trips, with the following: 7. Committed P.M. Peak Hour Trips. The City agrees to reserve up to a total of P.M Peak Hour trips for the Property until the Development is complete provided such reservation complies with all federal, state and local laws at the time application for a building permit is made. "Complete" is defined as having received all governmental permits and approvals necessary to construct and permanently occupy the Development. If the total number of P.M. Peak Hour trips for the Development exceeds the total number of reserved trips noted above, a new traffic study shall be provided to determine if additional traffic mitigation is required With this proposed change there would be no latecomer's agreement and no credit for any unused trips. Each Development covered by this Mitigation Agreement will be considered a "pipeline" project in terms of traffic- related concurrency requirements. Any proposed developments in and around the project area that does not have a Mitigation Agreement for the Pines/Mansfield project and that is required to provide the City a traffic analysis will be required to include all trips from approved pipeline projects. Developer Partners Pines (SR 27)/Mansfield Corridor Congestion Relief Project In order to finalize each agreement please let me know if 1) the name and address of each developer and their respective companies are correct and 2) The parcel(s) shown in Exhibit A is correct for your development. I also need to have a complete legal description of the parcel(s) identified in Exhibit A from your licensed surveyor. Please provide this information to me via email if possible at sworleyaspokanevalleY.org. Please let me know by May 14, 2004 if you have any comments regarding the proposed change to paragraph 7. I can be reached at 688 -0191. Sincerely, Steve M.'•orley, P.E. Senior Capital Projects Engjnee 5/6/2004 Page 2 A & A CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, INC. 202 East Trent Avenue, Suite 400, Spokane, Washington 99202 FAX TRANSMITTAL SM: l 1 H To: Date: 017. Page 1 of it From • Fax # Ja Y - 6,00.5 Re: Contractor's Licenses Alaska AA20704 Arizona 124930 California 760705 Oregon 66668 Utah 0000431130 Washington AACOND1134LE A & A CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, INC. 202 East Trent Avenue, Suite 400, Spokane, Washington 99202 To: Sdda-zz. From: Re: FAX TRANSMIT7'AL (509) 624-1170 fax (509) 624 -1255 7 -- (509) 624-1170 fax (509) 624 -1255 Date: ..4 ,e) Page 1 of 5" Fax # 47t 7— as S�3 Contractor's Licenses Alnska AA20704 Arizona 124930 California 760705 Oregon 66668 Utah 0000431 130 Washinstan AACOND11341E A Sc A CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, INC. 202 East Trent Avenu, Suite 400, Spoi ne, Washington 99202 (509) 624 -1170 fax (509) 624 -1255 August 23, 2002 Scott Engelhard Spokane County En 1026 W. Broadway Avenue Spokane, WA 99260 -0170 Greg Figg WSDOT 2714 N. Mayfair Spokane, WA 99207 RE: Updated SR27 Corridor Project Participation Lawson / Hamilton / Ashenbrener Parcel Dear Scott & Greg: This letter is in response to your request for participation in the SR27 Corridor Congestion Relief Participation Project. Bill Lawson, Tom Hamilton, and I have reviewed your suggested breakdown from the various private parties which was faxed to us on August 23, 2002. A copy of your suggested contribution schedule is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. The breakdown suggests the contribution from our project in the amount of 5119,866.00. We agree to commit to payment of that amount toward matching funds for the grant on the following conditions: 1. This amount will satisfy all traffic mitigation and impact fees with regard to the following parcels. 45103.0205 45103.0206 45103.0208 45103.0210 45103.0244 The amount that we pay as satisfaction toward our participation in the grant must satisfy all traffic mitigation and impact irrespective of any final use to which we are. entitled. We acknowledge that the duration of this commitment by the County cannot be open - ended and we agree to reassess traffic mitigation in the event that we have not committed to some type of binding site plan or master.plan for all fve parcels within twenty years from the date the grant is finally awarded. 2. The satisfaction of traffic mitigation and impact fees shall preclude the necessity of any further traffic studies or analysis with regard to these parcels for twenty years. Contractor's Licenses Alaska 8420709 Arizona 124930 Califbr tie 760705 Oregon 66663 LW: 0000431130 Washi'zgtor, AACO/,V113412' WSDOT 3. Satisfaction of the traffic mitigation and impact shall include any perceived impact upon Trent Road, Pines Road (Highway 27) and the Evergreen Freeway Interchange at 190 and shall satisfy any and all prior agreements discussed or verbally agreed upon. 4. The payment of the amount referenced in the first paragraph above shall not be due until the grant is awarded and improvements are actually commenced. 5. Payment of the $119,866.00 is based on 395 peak hour trips, and such mitigation shall apply to any usage to which the above five parcels shall be put and shall satisfy traffic mitigation for zone changes, binding site plans, subdivision, building permits and any other SEPA triggering within 20 years from the date the grant for this improvement is awarded. We are excited about the possibility of this grant and look forward to assisting you in any manner possible. I would appreciate each of you signing below to approve these stipulations. Please then either fax or mail a copy back to me at your earliest convenience and thank you for this assistance. BY: BY: Greg Figg Scott Engelhard Very Truly Yours, r5-- hristopher R. " Ashenbrener CRA:sf Enclosure cc: Bill Lawson Tom Hamilton SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEERS 08/23/2002 14:05 FAX 3246190 PLANNING— TRAFIC Transportation Partnership Program Participation Breakdown SR27/Mansfteld Ave. Project 307E Match Cost at Improremanrs irtanshem Ara. County i 1250.651 Pins VC WB Ramps $ 1.438201 Manetldd end Puns Scud . i 261,583 Euc8d and Pines Signal i 225,683 Pines RAN at Eudid S 25.000 tots! Project Cosa 3 3,199,318 cestArfp to PnNDte development a 30% match $ 959,795 Public Match i 4 60,E Private Match 3 499,795 Tata! Pubf+c Share $ 2.899,523 84.4% Tata! Private Sham S 409.795 15.6% 3 3,189,318 100.0% $ 512,266 Potential Punting Partners Cash Contributors 1 at New % of New Total leas developer Uses Trips Trips Conthbuton credits 1 STPU Ands 3 350.000 $ 360,000 2 Spokane Cady $ 55,000 $ 55,000 3 MOOT — i 55,000 $ 53.00 • 4 lrtItd Empire Paper Mlrabcau Point 500 30.38% 3 151.729 3 151.729 •. 5 Allot 15 /lea 181031 183 11.1176 $ 55.533 $ 55.533 6 831Lesson LaweonIGunning nnuMbuse 345 23.93% $ 119,968 $ 119.888 w 7 Bob Ban ccel6 35 Acres 400 24.29% i 121.383 $ e6..8s 8 Tom FtamObn Hamilton Apps. 852 Apts 94 5.71% $ 20.525 $ 28.325 o Rhdc t4mimr Vlow Ranch Est. 46 SFOU 48 2.79% $ 13,950 $ 13,959 10 Four Square Church 6 0.36% 3 1.821 i 1,521 11 Gunning Change of Conditions odd 10 Apia. 6 0.38% $ 1,821 $ 1.321 t2 Cu r1 Pierson Warehouse 34kb1 17 1.03% 5 5,159 $ 5.152 1647 100% 3303.48 • inch nos a =loam of 143 trips from saw a112 acres to Jahn Miter. •• 70 trip reduction for 51.8 kaf already constnrctod and 143 trip 6tcrea:o from puts: haze of 12 acres from Intard Empire Paper and 368,635 credit for aitl design "• Induces a 323,000 swat horn ri9htot-way agreement wl WSDOT $ 959.795 i 928.637 I O2 A & A CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, INC. 202 East Trent Avenue, Suite 400, Spok$ne , Washifon 99202 (509) 624 -1170 fax (509) 624 -125 August 26, 2002 Scott Engelhard Spokane County Engineers 1026 W. Broadway Avenue Spokane, WA 99260 -0170 RE: Participation in Spokane County's Corridor Congestion Relief Program Application for the SR27 Mansfield Project Dear Mr. Engelhard: Very Truly Yours, Christopher R. Ashenbrener CRA:sf cc: Greg Figg Bill Lawson Tom Hamilton 1 Bill Lawson, Tom Hamilton and I own property east of Pines Road near Mansfield in the Spokane Valley. We have attempted to develop this over the past several years and have conducted several traffic studies. We also own a number of apartments in the area and are aware of the traffic problems there. We have worked hard to find an appropriate remedy to the traffic problems and have come to realize that none are easy. We are very much in support of the County's application for the Corridor Congestion Relief Grant. We will contribute the sum of $ 119,866.00 to be used as a local match on behalf of the five parcels that we own and that are listed in my earlier correspondence to you dated August 23, 2002. We understand that we will need to enter into a Developer's Agreement with Spokane County once the grant has been approved. We would expect the conditions set forth in our August 23rd letter to be part of that Developer's Agreement. We are very excited to see progress finally being made toward resolution of this difficult traffic problem. Please contact me on behalf of our partnership if I can be of any further assistance. Corrtr:retar's l./c ases iUr L-e AA20704 Arizona 124.930 Crrlilurnm 76070.5 Orrgvrr 66668 Utah 0000431130 4Vash/ ton AACONDII34LE A & A CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, INC. 202 Fast Thent Avenue, Suite 400, Spokane Washington 99202 (509) 624- fax (509) 624-1255 June 30, 2004 City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: Letter in Support Amendment of Comprehensive Plan/Arterial Road Plan Removal of Mansfield between Houk St. & Mirabeau Parkway Ladies and Gentlemen: This letter of support is presented by and on behalf of sponsor, A & A Construction & Development, Inc., for purposes of removing the extension of Mansfield from Houk Street to Mirabeau Parkway and thereby amending the Comprehensive Plan/Arterial Road Plan, accordingly. The purpose of this letter is to provide some background and understanding as to how the proposed extension of Mansfield from Mirabeau Parkway, westerly to Houk Street ( "Mansfield Extension ") came to be included in the Arterial Road Plan, and more importantly, why the Mansfield extension is inappropriate. By way of summarized bullet points, it is my intention to expose how the Mansfield Extension is really nothing more than an oversight or mistake, and not part of a well analyzed, long term traffic flow strategy. Salient points that are relevant to the history and evolution of this "mistake" are as follows: 1. Bill Lawson and Ted Gunning each owned approximately 16 acres adjacent to each other north of Shannon Road and near the Mirabeau area of the Spokane Valley. Gunning's acreage on the east was subsequently transferred to Tom Hamilton and I subsequently purchased a portion of Lawson's acreage on the west. 2. Joint efforts began by Lawson and Gunning in 1993 to develop both parcels. The overriding issue and concern was always traffic and the first of several Traffic Impact Analysis was done as early as June of 1993. 3. Access to the development was always to have been in two places, one being on Shannon east to Pines Road, and the other being across the railroad crossing from Shannon south to Indiana. 4. When we started discussions with the Railroad concerning improving the Shannon crossing (at McDonald Road) to meet necessary traffic standards, we were informed that some consideration was being given to closing this crossing and moving it to the east. 5. I subsequently attended a public hearing concerning the possibility of closing the Shannon crossing and opening a similar but controlled crossing to the east. At that time I acted as attorney for Lawson and Gunning and expressed concern at the potential loss of access to Lawson and ■....M=ocnrCI - .�xm...,:�- :eanrsnn- .+:w..,�... . nmes�•..-........ �w.....-..._...;,., .w:v:ass:r:•�r_�..rwex.war.aa�. .r_• Con tredor's Licenses Alsska AA20704 Arizona 124930 Cr:lifa nis 760705 arson 66668 Utah 0000431130 11/2shrilgton AACOA'DI134LE Gunnings projects if this closing took effect. I was assured by Denny Ashlock, the main proponent for the Mirabeau Point development, as well as others, that the closing of the Shannon crossing would not affect our access at all. It would merely move it along Shannon Road to the east to a separate crossing. I was also assured that the Shannon crossing closing was for tl' greater public good in that it would benefit the Mirabeau Point project which would serve as ,a community recreational development. 6. The Shannon crossing at McDonald was closed. Shannon was never extended easterly to the new crossing. Our access point was lost. 7. From 1993 through the present time, many meetings and negotiations were conducted with the Washington State Department of Transportation and the Spokane County Traffic engineers in an effort to determine the overall traffic impact from both Lawson and Gunnings projects and how the mitigation could be handled in a way to enable these developers to proceed with a defined "traffic fix ". Pursuant to State Statutes, neither the County nor the State could accept traffic mitigation that did not completely remedy the impact produced by the proposed project. Any traffic mitigation had to be toward an existing defined project. Any eventual remedy that was not completed within five (5) years, resulted in those funds needing to be refunded to the Developer. We needed a specific mitigation project. 8. Our traffic was always proposed as going westerly towards Pines Road. Accordingly, we tried to develop a "traffic fix" that would relate to our impact and that would not necessitate the contribution or involvement of other projects so that we could move forward immediately. 9. At the time, we were utilizing John Konen of David Evans Engineers as our Planner. John casually mentioned a proposal while in discussions with either the County or the State one da,. which involved extending Mansfield easterly from Pines straight through to our project as .a "specific fix" for our project. The problem was that this extension necessitated the acquisition and demolition of a six -plex apartment structure. Without knowing the cost or possibility of acquisition of the six -plex, a site plan was drawn for our project which included extending Mansfield through the six -plex. 10. Subsequently, it became clear that the cost of the six -plex would prohibit our extending Mansfield as shown. Discussions with the County and the State also quickly brought a definitive response from them that they could not generate the funds necessary to accomplish the same. 11. The plan was . quickly abandoned although, somehow, a copy of the proposal had become entwined in the County files and showed up in their Arterial Road Plan. When questioned about this, County personnel indicated they really had no idea how that happened and fully acknowledged that there were no funds available or anticipated to accomplish the Mansfield Extension. 12. At some point, a group of developers with property in the area were contacted by the County with regard to a potential grant for mitigation to the area that would satisfy all of our traffic needs and we were all asked to contribute matching funds. The Pines/Mansfield Corridor Congestion Relief Project was the resulting "specific fix" that we could all contribute to. At no time was the Mansfield Extension ever a part of those discussions concerning the grant or the eventual mitigation that would be accomplished by the grant and accompanying matching funds. \J 13. The Mansfield Extension was forgotten and not again discussed until our recent meetings with the City of the Valley revealed that the Mansfield Extension had become a part of your Arterial Road Plan. The Mansfield Extension is a mistake and should be removed from the City of the Valley's Arterial Road Plan. It arose out of a narrowly defined need to structure mitigation for traffic impact from the Lawson Gunning proposed projects that would comport in cost with the traffic impact it generated and would not necessitate other developers or other projects. It was ill conceived and impractical. Additionally, we feel the arterial would be duplicative since Indiana is so close and parallels to the south. The cost of acquiring the six -plex is both prohibitive and a poor use of Municipal funds since Indiana can serve the same function. Since it is the intention of the Gunning parcel, now owned by Hamilton, and Inland Empire's parcels to utilize Mirabeau Parkway and Indiana, there is no need for the Mansfield Extension. The parcel owned by Lawson and me will access westerly to Pines and our contribution of matching funds to the Pines/Mansfield Corridor Congestion Relief Project and the overall relief which that project is intending to provide, is precisely in anticipation of our traffic moving westerly only. Finally, since it is our intent to develop a single residential community that will cover our entire parcel, dividing the parcel by an arterial thoroughfare will be extremely burdensome to the project. We intend to have a recreation area and swimming pool which would, necessarily, need to be on one side of the arterial or the other. This would result in many residents, including children, needing to cross the arterial to visit the recreation area. The Manager's office would also have to be located on one side of the arterial or the other, creating the same problem. It would also damage the "sense of community" that we would attempt to accomplish for a residential community of this type. My partner, Bill Lawson, and I urge you to amend the Comprehensive Plan/Road Arterial Plan to remove the Mansfield Extension. It would create a tremendous burden on us by dividing our residential project into two separate halves as well as a burden on the Municipality with regard to the cost of the duplex needed to complete the extension. Very truly yours, A & A Construction & Dev., Inc. Christopher R. Ashenbrener Corporate Counsel CRA: sf JUN -30 - 200 4 WED 10:51 AM haA CONSTRUCTION & DEV FAX NO. 509ti X255 P. 02 June 30, 2004 City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: Request for Inclusion in Amendment of Comprehensive Plan/Arterial Road Plan Removal of Mansfield Extension between Houk St. & Mirabesu Pazlcway Deer Council Members, Commission Members & Staff: This letter is to request that the Applieation for Amendment of the Comprehensive Plan /Arterial Road Plan to remove the extension of Mansfield between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway which is being filed by Lawson and Ashenbrenea' include my parcel of land to the east of the I.awson/Ashenbr ner parcel As suer I support the application for modification of the City of Spokane Valley Transportation C.omprehDsive P1anlArterial Road Plan filed on behalf of Lawson end Asb.enlem ncr and dated June 28, 2004. I purchased approximately 16 acres from Ted Gunning in the year 1999. This land is located immediately adjacent to and east of the land owned by Lawson and Ashenbrcner When Y as th 1 became e and involved in the many meetings and negotiations with the Department of Transportation _ of the County Transportation Department I was never made aware that there was ever i nasal crag a main thoroughfare through the mdle id of my property that would beeomc part of the Arte Road Plan. I was always of the belief that I could put a road through there if I wanted to but not that I would be obligated to. I have been informed that Inland Paper is developing their property to the 'east of me and intends on constructing a road to my eastern boundary that I will be entitled to use for access. I have also been en abling a the to I ndia untBridge t o In this regard, would eventually vacation seem co pletely unnecessary to have enabling ass to Indiana Mansfield serve as a parallel arterial that is so close to Indiana. It would be to rat including the Valley as it would appear that someone would have to acquit` property demolition of a building which seems to be in the way. It would also be very burdensome t0 my parcel to require the construction of this thoroughfare right through the middle of my property. For these reasons, I support the Application which has been filed by Lawson and Ashenbres er and request that the removal of the Mansfield Arterial apply to my pawl as well. teoe so rl or 1 4o > V 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org I13L.5 '&SB' 7u : +s Memorandum To: Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner Thru: Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Date: 9 -2 -04 John V. Hohman, P.E. – Senior Engineer /Maintenance Superintendent. From: Sandra Raskell, P.E. – Assistant Engineer - '—_ Re: Mansfield Avenue Comp. Plan Amendment (CPA -07 -04) The Public Works Department reviewed the application to amend the alignment of Mansfield Avenue. We recommend denial of this application. The proposed alignment of Mansfield Avenue provides traffic relief from Indiana Avenue, connectivity of our City street system, as well the extension of Mansfield Avenue from adjacent development. The proposed Mansfield Avenue alignment is an extension to the proposed Pines/Mansfield Traffic Mitigation Project currently scheduled for construction 2005. Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -07-04 r Comp Plan Category Law Density Residential ` I Medium Density Residential NE high Density Residential Mixed Use Community Center Urban Activity Center n Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial Regional Commercial 1 j Light Industrial Heavy Industrial Mineral Land IL t Future Mansfield Road Alignment Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -07 -04 August 2004 SR lane ❑lrir ane _Val ley VINAAIN \t■ NV.Ni ‘tN Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -07 -04 CPA -08 -04 galley APPUCANT NAME: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY MARINA SUKUP, COMMUNITY DEV. DIRECTOR ADDRESS: 11707 EAST SPRAGUE CrrY/STATE/Lp: SPOKANE VALLEY, WA 99206 PROPERTY OWNER 1 (IF DIFFERENT FROM APPLICANT) L riAllE CITY OF SPOKANE/SPOKANE COUNTY/AIRPORT BOARD PHONE: I ADDRESS: PO Box 19186 I EMAIL: LCITY/STATE/ZIP: SPOKANE, WA 99219-9186 [ FAX: PROPERTY OWNER 2 (IF MORE THAN TWO PROPERTY OWNERS, ATTACH SEPARATE SHEET) [ NAME: I PHONE: ADDRESS: cITY/STATE/ZIP: EMAIL: - 1 FAX: AGENT/CONSULTANT/ATTORNEY NAME: ADDRESS: [CITY/STATE/ZIP LAND USE MAP CHANGE PROPOSAL: CURRENT DESIGNATION [LAND USE MAP Low DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING MAP UR-3.5 L CURRENT POLICY 7/1/04 PROPOSED POLICY N/A N/A City of Spokane Valley Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment PART' r-\ 0 L., FILE NO.CPA-o 9 oi PHONE: 509-688-0030 EMAIL: MSUKUP@SPDXANEVALLEY.ORG iff2C — T - PHONE: 1 EMAIL: j FAX: Page 1 of 5 PROPOSED DEsJGNATION LIGHT INDUSTRIAL 1-2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CHANGE PROPOSAL (ArrAcH SEPARATE SHEET IF NECESSARY): OFFICE USE ONLY: i71 City Initiated 0 Citizen Initiated Concurrency Review Required: 0 Yes 0 No Date Received: /c d Received By: ^ PROJECT /PROPOSAL SITE AREA (ACRES OR SQ. FT) [ 10 ACRES MOL !^ ADJACENT ARE OWNED OR CONTROLLED (ACRES OR SQ.FT.) FELTS FIELD AIRPORT EXISTING USE OF PROPERTY: PLANE HANGARS SCHOOL DISTRICT. WEST VALLEY FIRE DISTRICT: VALLEY FIRE WATER DISTRICT. CITY OF SPOKANE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: N/A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROAD ACCESSING PROPERTY: DORA, EUCLID,RUTTER WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING PUBLIC/PRIVATE ROAD: 50' MOL ACCESS TO EXISTING OR PLANNED ARTERIAL? (Y /N) Y NAME OF ARTERIAL ROADS: RUTTER AVE. - PRINCIPAL MINOR SITE DATA PREVIOUS ZONING /LAND USE DECISION LIST PREVIOUS PLANNING ACTIONS INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: ADOPTION OF AIRPORT MASTER PLAN FOR FELTS FIELD. PART II CHANGED CONDITIONS WHAT ARE THE CHANGED CONDITIONS WHICH WARRANTS THIS PROPOSED CHANGE? THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TOTALUNG APPROXIMATELY 10 ACRES IS OWNED BY SPOKANE COUNTY AND THE CITY OF SPOKANE AND OPERATED BY THE SPOKANE AIRPORT BOARD. THIS IS THE ONLY PIECE OF AIRPORT PROPERTY LCOATED WITHIN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY. THE REST OF FELTS FIELD IS WITHIN THE CITY OF SPOKANE. THE PROPERTY IS DEVELOPED WITH AIRPLANE HANGARS THAT SUPPORT AIPORT OPERATIONS. THE CURRENT Low DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION AND UR -3.5 ZONING IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR USES ASSOICATED WITH AIRPORTS. THE CITY OF SPOKANE'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATES FELTS FIELD AS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, WHICH IS THE SAME DESIGNATION PROPOSED BY THIS AMENDMENT. 7/1/04 Page 3 of 5 PROPOSAL _ r PROVIDE GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM Low DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND CHANGE ZONING FROM UR3.5 TO 1 -2, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CATEGORY IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY OR THE AIRPORT MASTER PLAN. ADJACENT LAND USES DESCRIBE EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF PROPOSAL: PROPERTY TO THE EAST AND SOUTH IS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL; TO THE NORTH AND WEST IS AIRPORT PROPERTY. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY DESCRIBE How PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — CITE SPECIFIC GOALS /POLICIES: THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE FOLLOWING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES: POLICY T.3G.5 DISCOURAGE NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT NEAR AIRPORTS WHERE SIGNIFICANT NOICSE IMPACTS AND SAFETY HAZARDS EXIST OR ARE LIKELY IN THE FUTURE. THE PROPOSAL WILL REMOVE RESIDENTIAL ZONING ON AIRPORT PROPERTY. GOAL UL.14A PROVIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF WELL - PLANNED INDUSTRIAL AREAS THAT CREATE HIGHER - INCOME JOBS, PROVIDE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND IMPROVE THE OVERALL TAX BASE OF SPOKANE COUNTY. POLICY UL.14.1 IDENTIFY AND DESIGNATE INDUSTRIAL LAND AREAS FOR HEAVY INDUSTRY AND LIGHT INDUSTRY. AIRPORT OPERATIONS, WHICH INCLUDE THE STORAGE AND MAINTENANCE OF AIRPLANES, ARE INDUSTRIAL IN NATURE. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE MAP SHOULD REFLECT THE INDUSTRIAL NATURE OF AIRPORTS WITH AN APPROPRIATE LAND USE DESIGNATION. PUBLIC FACILITIES DESCRIBE AVAILABIUTY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES, INCLUDING, ROADS, WATER, SEWER, PARKS, AND -1 PUBLIC TRANSIT: THE PROPERTY IS SERVED ADEQUATE FACILITIES INCLUDING PUBLIC SEWER AND WATER AND ARTERIAL ROADS. A CITY PARK IS A SHORT DISTANCE TO THE NORTHEAST. 711104 Page5of5 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -08 -04 • Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential itig High Density Residential Mixed Use Y i Community Center E ' Urban Activity Center Neighborhood Commercial d.'wS Community Commercial - Regional Commercial Light Industrial ETLI Heavy Industrial F Mineral Land Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -08 -04 j UR -7 -•- UR -7* UR -12 M UR -22 B-1 M B-2 :7 A RR -10 E_ 1 -1 ET 1-2 Eia 1 -3 MZ Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -08 -04 Sj6' ne Valley MEMO Date: November 19, 2004 To: City Council 11707 E. Sprague Ave. • Suite 106 • Spokane Valley, WA 99206 (509) 921 -1000 • Fax (509) 921 -1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org Cc: Dave Mercier, City Manager Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Greg McCormick, Planning Manager Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk From: Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner ,S2 RE: Planning Commission Reconsideration - Greenacres Areawide Rezone On November 18, 2004, the Planning Commission reconsidered the Greenacres areawide rezone. A motion was passed to put the motion to adopt the rezone back on the table. After lengthy discussion, the Commission voted 4 -3 to recommend approval of the rezone from UR -7* to UR -3.5. The October 14, 2004, vote on a motion to approve the rezone resulted in a 3 -3 tie, one Commissioner being absent. Please contact me if you have any questions about the Planning Commission's recommendation. DATE: November 30, 2004 TYPE: ❑ Consent ❑ Legislation City of Spokane Valley Request for Council Review ❑ Old Business /1 New Business ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Information ❑ Administrative Report AGENDA ITEM TITLE: REZ- 17 -04, Area -wide Rezone request, North Greenacres area. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Interim Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan and development regulations. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane Valley Interim Zoning Code, Section 14.402.100, provides a process for property owners to initiate an area -wide rezoning action via petition. The code requires that at least 51% of the property owners within the boundary of the proposed zone change sign the petition for rezone in order to initiate the rezoning process. On July 1, 2004 the City received a petition from the North Greenacres neighborhood requesting a rezone from the existing Urban Residential 7* (UR -7 *) to Urban Residential 3.5 (UR -3.5). City staff verified the signatures on the petition, utilizing the most current taxpayer records of the Spokane County Auditor's Office. The area under consideration for this rezoning action is bounded on the south by Mission Avenue, Barker Road on the east and the Spokane River to the north and west. The area is approximately 457 acres and is comprised of 264 separate parcels of land. On September 23, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the rezone request. The Commission closed public testimony and continued the hearing to October 14, 2004, for deliberations. The Commission requested Planning Staff to produce a map showing "vested" development projects and individual requests by property owners to retain UR -7* zoning. After discussion, the Commission voted on four separate motions to exclude areas from the proposed rezone. The Commission could not agree to amend the boundary of the rezone request and each motion failed. The Commission then voted on the original proposal to rezone the entire area to UR -3.5, resulting in a3-3 tie, one Commissioner being absent from the meeting. Therefore, the rezone is forwarded to City Council without a recommendation from the Planning Commission. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report to Planning Commission including vicinity, zoning, and comprehensive plan maps, map showing vested projects within proposed rezone area, public testimony correspondence and Planning Commission minutes. STAFF CONTACT: Greg McCormick, AICP - Planning Division Manager Scott Kuhta, AICP - Senior Planner ; i Sp�ka� tl jUalley STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: AREA WIDE REZONE -01 -04 Community Development Department PLANNING DIVISION Hearing Date: September 23, 2004 Staff: Greg McCormick, AICP — Planning Division Manager Scott Kuhta, AICP — Senior Planner I. Background Section 14.402.100 of the Interim Spokane Valley Zoning Code provides a process for property owners to initiate an area -wide rezoning action by petition. The code requires that at least 51 percent of property owners within the boundary of the proposed zone change sign the petition to initiate the rezone process. On July 1, 2004, a representative from the Greenacres neighborhood submitted a petition with signatures of more than 51 percent of property owners requesting a zone change from Urban Residential -7* (UR -7 *) to Urban Residential -3.5 (UR -3.5). The Community Development Department placed a notice of public hearing in the Spokane Valley News Herald on September 3, 2004, notifying the public that a public hearing on the proposed area wide rezone would be conducted by the Planning Commission on September 23, 2004. As required by Section 14.402.100 of the city's interim code, public notice boards were posted in conformance with requirements of the appropriate code sections. Moreover, city staff sent written notice to all property owners within the proposed rezone area and property owners within 400 feet of the boundaries of the rezone area, based on the most current tax payer records of the Spokane County Assessor's office. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) an environmental checklist was required for the proposed rezoning action. Under SEPA rezones are considered "non - project actions ", which are defined as actions involving decisions on policies, plans, or programs that contain standards controlling use of modification of the environment. Staff reviewed the environmental checklist submitted for the proposed rezone and a threshold determination was made on the requested rezone. The City issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) on August 24, 2004. The DNS was published in the City's official newspaper consistent with City of Spokane Valley requirements. RL•Z -17-04 — Grccnacres Areawide Rezone Page 1 of 4 II. Previous Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Actions The subject site is generally bounded by Mission Avenue on the south, Barker Road on the east, and the Spokane River on the north and west. The subject site is approximately 457 acres and approximately 264 separate parcels of land. As previously stated, the existing zoning in the area is UR -7 *. The UR -7* zoning district allows 6 single family dwelling units per acre. The UR -7* district also allows duplexes and multifamily structures as long as the overall density does not exceed 6 units per acre. This area was involved in an area wide rezoning action in 1994 by Spokane County. The County received a comprehensive plan amendment request (CPA- 79 -94) and rezone request (RZ- 17 -94) from the North Greenacres neighborhood requesting the following: • Amend the comprehensive plan map west of Flora Road, north of Mission from "Industrial" to "Urban "; • Amend the zoning map from I -2, Industrial west of Flora Road and from UR -3.5 east of Flora Road to SR -1. Based on this request the Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) directed county planning staff to conduct a study of the subject area. The Spokane County Planning Department developed a "Lead Agency Report" (June 16, 1994) referred to as the "North Greenacres" Study. The report stated that the County was mandated to establish an "interim" urban growth area (IUGA) by October of 1996. This action would determine if the subject area was "Urban" or "Rural" under the County's comprehensive plan required by the Growth Management Act (GMA). As indicated above, the IUGA was established prior to the County starting work on the GMA comprehensive plan. The North Greenacres study states: "The Planning Department's major concern, regarding the "North Greenacres" Neighborhood, is the unknown results of the 20 year Urban Growth Area (UGA) boundary and which future Land Use Category would be assigned to the "North Greenacres" portion of the Valley." The report further states (page 20) that County's intention was to consider the comprehensive plan amendment and rezone as an "interim" measure until the IUGA and ultimately the GMA Comprehensive Plan was adopted by the County. Spokane County adopted an IUGA that designated the subject area as "Urban ". Additionally the County adopted its GMA Plan in January 2001 that designated the subject property as "Low Density Residential" on the comprehensive plan map. REZ -17-04 — Grcenacres Arcawidc Rezone Page 2 of 4 III. Analysis of Proposed Rezone The City of Spokane Valley adopted the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan (including map) and development regulations as interim measures upon incorporation. As the attached Comprehensive Plan Map indicates the subject area is designated Low Density Residential (LDR). Several goals and policies are included the City's interim comprehensive plan related to residential areas of the City, particularly the Residential Land Use Section of the Urban Land Use Chapter. Specific goals and policies that support the requested rezone include: Goal UL.7 — Guide efficient development patterns by locating residential development in areas where facilities and services can be provided in a cost - effective and timely fashion. Policy UL.7.3 — New urban development must be located within the Urban Growth Area (UGA) boundary. Goal UL.8 — Create urban areas with a variety of housing types and prices, including manufactured home parks, multifamily development, townhouses and single - family development. Goal UL.9a — Create a variety of residential densities within the Urban Growth Area with an emphasis on compact mixed -use development in designated centers and corridors. The City of Spokane Valley adopted interim development regulations under Ordinance 53 -03, which adopted the Spokane County Zoning Code as amended, as the interim zoning code for the City. The interim zoning code includes the County's Phase I Development Regulations. Section II of the Phase I Development Regulations include a table designed to stipulate comprehensive plan categories and zoning designations that are consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan map designations. As previously stated the subject area is designated LDR on the City's interim comprehensive plan map. The table referenced in the previous paragraph indicates that implementing zoning designations for the LDR map designation are UR -3.5 and UR -7 *. The proposed rezone to UR -3.5 is consistent with the subject table. Staff would like to state that the rezoning of this area to UR -3. S will not preclude individual property owners in the subject area from requesting rezones of individual properties to UR -7 *. Site specific rezone requests are processed through the City's hearing examiner on a case -by -case basis. REZ-17-04 — Grccnaacs Areas idc Rezone Page 3 of 4 N. Findings and Recommendation Planning Division staff makes the following findings related to the proposed rezone: 1. The rezone petition is sufficient in that signatures of over 51% of the property owners in the affected area have signed the petition; 2. An environmental review of the proposed rezone was completed and a threshold determination issued by the City consistent with state requirements; 3. The proposed rezone is consistent with appropriate goals and policies of the City's Interim Comprehensive Plan; and 4. The proposed rezone is consistent with the City's Interim Zoning Code's comprehensive plan category/implementing zoning table included in Section II of the Phase I Development Regulations adopted by the City of Spokane Valley in Ordinance 53 -03. Planning Division staff recommends the requested area -wide rezone be approved. Attachments RE7_ -17 -04 — Greeruacres Arcawidc Rczonc Pagc 4 of 4 '�5 y""'Y:AFC^.._ .:�•_..._' - �._'�i_ �'.:_.�.._._. ~' _ EPi4RTMENT. OF:COMMUNITI(;- DEVELOPMENT• -; PLA NNING` .C-•T 6 � . AREAWIDE REZONE APPLICATION • APPLICANT OR REPRESENTATIVE: Mary Pollard MAILING ADDRESS: 17216 East Baldwin CITY: Spokane Valley STATE: WA ZIP: 99224 PHONE (home): 926 -8899 PHONE (office): 926 -8899 CELL: 990 -3103_ EMAIL ADDRESS: maryp @icehouse.net NUMBER OF PARCELS WITHIN SUBJECT AREA: 264 GENERAL BOUNDARY OF PROPOSAL: North and West boundary is Spokane River; South boundary is Mission Avenue; east boundary is Barker Road. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN SUBJECT AREA: Farming, storage of large machinery, greenhouses, commercial raising of flowers, equipment repair shop, single family residential homes, classic car paint shop, small orchards, gardening, barns and shops for storage of personal and small business use (such as an upholstery shop.) SIZE OF SUBJECT AREA (acres or square feet): EXISTING ZONE CLASSIFICATION(S): Urban Residential 7* (UR - *) PROPOSED ZONING: Urban Residential 3.5 (UR - 3.5) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CATEGORY: Low Density Residential LIST PREVIOUS LAND USE ACTIONS, IF ANY, INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: In 1994 there was an area -wide study conducted by Spokane County following the GMA process that resulted in an area -wide zoning of SR1. In January, 2002, when the county adopted their Comprehensive Plan, they zoned our area UR.7 *. Our existing land use and insufficient level of services and improvements (such as roads), created a hardship for this neighborhood to safely function at this density. The zoning designation also changes the ability to continue animal keeping, except under the grandfather provision. There is a majority interest in retaining this right. This is the impetus for application for an area wide rezone of UR3.5. We are seeking to protect our area from high development. This is the only zoning available under the existing zoning ordinances. We would prefer larger lot sizes of 1 acre minimums but are seeking to L ' protect ourselves with this zoning of UR3.5 while the City of Spokane Valley writes our own Comprehensive Plan and adopts a broader variety of zoning designations to accommodate a richer variety of lifestyles, more closely resembling the community that makes Spokane Valley an attractive place to live. WHAT ARE THE CHANGED CONDITIONS OF THE AREA WHICH YOU FEEL MAKE THIS PROPOSAL WARRANTED? This area has not changed, but areas nearby have dramatically increased in population as developments have encroached around us. This has caused increased traffic on all roads. Mission recently had a sewer line brought by a developer but the rest of the area is still not part of the 6 year sewer plan. This has created an inequitable situation. Those with money are purchasing public services at the expense of capacity that the general public on the plan should have been receiving. Also, others desiring sewer, cannot develop their properties and may be delayed even longer as capacity of our waste water treatment facility reaches capacity "officially in 2009." One citizen should not receive special treatment over another for public services. Present road conditions on the secondary roads such as Baldwin, Indiana, Montgomery, Riverway, Long and Greenacres Road, are narrow and not well maintained. In winter, we are not plowed on snow days. It usually stops at Mission, and days later we may have our streets plowed. This will create more hazardous road conditions with the hundreds of new cars that are expected to travel daily down these roads. Neighbors have already commented they have had near misses with head on collisions when they have moved over on the road to accommodate a bicyclist. Any reduction in homes will lessen the traffic and hopefully avert more serious problems but I believe the roads are not up to the standards needed for any significant increase in traffic. Concurrency is demanded by GMA, UR 3.5 is the only zoning available to try to mitigate the road problem that is being created. During summer months, siow moving vehicles such as tractors and harvesting equipment utilize Flora and some of the other roads. WHAT FACTORS SUPPORT THE ZONE RECLASSIFICATION? CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: To quote the Short Course on Planning, "the perception or reality that existing roads cannot handle present traffic and that they would be overtaxed by significant new levels of use - would be a barrier to increasing densities in existing urban or suburban areas. The Comprehensive Plan demands that capital facilities funding is provided for in the present. The courts have ruled that you cannot hold an area's land indefinitely. There must be a clear need for those lands for housing and without that it is a taking of property that must be compensated. It is too early to know where the people want to put our growth and what we want to preserve. The County Comprehensive Plan 7ANTNr. OFri ACCTFTPATTAN ADOI TrATTAN Dana 7 of requires a 4 house average per acre of new housing. The zoning would conform to this goal /while North Greenacres waits out this Interim period. The land use element of the plan and the finance piece of the capital facilities element must be coordinated and consistent. COMPLIANCE WITH PURPOSE AND INTENT OF ZONING: Zoning is to prevent urban sprawl and must have capital facilities in place. Good planning would not initiate large developments in an area without sewer services for the entire area. We need to have good management of what already exists before we attempt to increase the population and traffic of an area. Schools are full and there is a need for more schools. While there may not be enough room for new students, by law schools cannot turn any student away and so we must not just follow the letter of the law but the intent and purpose of insuring there Is money and capacity in the present school system. Otherwise, students that move into an area are bused outside of their neighborhood and cannot begin making friends and their educational experience is interrupted by school moves beyond their physical move to an area. Poor development standards may cause the larger community to bear the expense of retrofitting the development to meet urban standards. WHAT MEASURES DO YOU PROPOSED TO MITIGATE YOUR PROPOSAL'S IMPACT ON SURROUNDING LAND USE? Animal keeping should not be a variance since 71% of the area support this use. We would Tike to see something created to permit this use, to be submitted with the community comprehensive plan amendments if needed. Likely, this is a bureaucratic decision that can be made at this time. The present zoning is injurious to the historical and present land uses and deprives us of rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in this vicinity such as Otis Orchards and South Greenacres area. This is a takings that can be rectified. In addition, the following measures should be enacted to mitigate the interim zoning that was enacted to assist the proposed zoning. In order to preserve the scenic view, 1 Vz story houses should also have a 10 foot setback so ' \ there is not a visible wall created since that is the setback required of 2 story homes. Since it 's more than one story, it should be treated as a 2 story not a single story structure. WHAT IMPACT WILL THE PROPOSED ZONE RECLASSIFICATION HAVE ON THE SURROUNDING AREA? It will be consistent with zoning adjacent to the South Boundary on Mission 7ANTNf7 DCf 1 ACCTCTrATTAN ADDI TPATTAN Dean 1 of Setbacks should be a minimum of 10 to 12 feet if there is animal keeping on adjacent to the proposed building project. This is to protect both neighboring property owners from harm to one another. Fencing should be required of any PUD or housing development along the entire perimeter of the development to protect the neighboring properties. The benefits to the local area to continue agricultural use is of public interest. Residential development adjacent to these lands should be advised that these uses shall not be considered a nuisance if conducted and maintained according to beset farming and animal management practices. Informing new or potential purchasers of the daily activities and potential "inconveniences" (i.e. dust, odors, machinery operation, sounds, etc.) would be helpful in maintaining a harmonious neighborhood, while such notices do not have any real force of law. If one is determined to live in an area that has these land uses they should be prepared to accept inconveniences or discomfort as a normal and necessary aspect of living in an area with a rural character. Definitions: Agricultural Operations means, but is not limited to, the cultivation and tillage of the soil, production, irrigation, frost protection, cultivation, growing, harvesting and processing of any agricultural commodity, including viticulture, horticulture, timber or apiculture, the raising of livestock and poultry, any agricultural practice or process, private or commercial, performed as incident to or in conjunction with such operations, including recycling of agricultural waste, preparation for market, delivery to storage or to carriers for transportation to market. A Grievance Committee could be established to assist in the resolution of any disputes that might arise regarding agricultural operations and the right to farm or use your property. Electric fence should be encouraged and provided for in our zoning ordinances to prevent damage to neighboring property and fences - since it discourages leaning on the fence and does not pose any harm beyond a shock to any child or adult touching the fence. (Any planner wishing to touch an electric fence as a trial is welcome to try.) Penalties for unlawful interference, theft, trespassing, or vandalism to owners in agricultural pursuits should be created since a large majority of the area are grandfathered with these uses and should be protected. DATE SUBMITTED: RECEIVED BY: FILE NUMBER: PART II ' (For Staff Use Only) 7nNTNG act" ACCTCTrATT,m ADDI TfATTAN Dann A S Aerial Map Greenacres Areawide Rezone August, 2004 ,, cikan� \ j` I {e) Comp Plan Category Lam Denstty Residential Medium Density Residential High Denstty Residential `` \ MBxad Use NMI - ► 11�1��� :F. _ ... l ...TIM .111�r� . .����111 is 0-'1 1111 ignii;75141-11111111111:11 11n1 liilli"a . thfistr, nci.�ty cent '" Iirlrt�! O ■ rj� -- r.- ----- Neighborh Conmc I� 1 :� `r�IluIII g�' E w i �. — ��. 1 \ �� '� o ' bin nli Comnturd Commerdal � . r . +,� ^ � ■ � ` �i - Reg9wtal Com mercial , �� � � I� �� tom' or= � ;. ~ �� i • Light industrial �■ �i ra1I '� f ll� . . �� i �'.'� Ha Industrial 1111111:1 � � � , 1 , e , i � ' � . titt+tL►� r a�i lidlili III i• 1 7 1 :: • =a 2 = - ZI n Amaral Land l' r - Comprehensive Plan Map z, .;:ggp� to Legend I I UR-3.S rni UR•2 I I uR -12 PT uR -22 ® 13-2 RR 1-2 . I'a 1 . =j r.+z aipsimutwo a ■■ .� 411410111 t ' ,e4gkW MI CO Land Action Applications and Plats Approved and Recorded ince Phase 1 Crossover in Proposed Greenacres UR 7* to UR- 3 Areawide Rezone i' {rriiull•.t 07,Z5•45 & 12.25 -44 in ilir 0'i14' .0i Svir4anr 1'4111ry -- Proposed Rezone LL-- it:5i1 read Arue HaIId1dary Svrib L iz Map l rare rl ientcrilal Prml t } Iw'r:: s maE want to retain IJI 7' reninc lirr►.�r. M crN I AL L iIt.r1 A Ppid? ar.:!n5 Mee Phase 1 I Iri{r Arifer wl Flan Altar P 1 implementation r n nlmarp Irlal 414+IrrnYredl t • Iota Meatiest% 111471111011 3l- lsrt+ � jwfel YA1'kl (40,51.1'011 U!ldi:3lr 1)/ Subitivibien suU.at•aa 45 P. oir 'la rrr Iilraro Vial i p unr*rl N#' LJ1 Sultdhitien ►d *l�- I.i�U� S91 n11t it* A( x1111111 Peri rprhrr a t , rn IYcS. gal+L 01.01 sup -t7.4I# 1'4I4ikl 1.1 Awn" Loom ERR glin APPLICANT OR REPRESENTATIVE: Mary Pollard MAILING ADDRESS: 17216 East Baldwin CITY: Spokane Valley STATE: WA ZIP: 99224 PHONE (home): 926 -8899 PHONE (office): 926- 8899 990-3103 EMAIL ADDRESS: maryp @icehouse.net NUMBER OF PARCELS WITHIN SUBJECT AREA: 264 GENERAL BOUNDARY OF PROPOSAL: North and West boundary is Spokane River; South boundary is Mission Avenue; east boundary is Barker Road. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING LAND USES WITHIN SUBJECT AREA: Farming, storage of large machinery, greenhouses, commercial raising of flowers, equipment repair shop, single family residential homes, classic car paint shop, small orchards, gardening, barns and shops for storage of personal and small business use (such as an upholstery shop.) SIZE OF SUBJECT AREA (acres or square feet): EXISTING ZONE CLASSIFICATION(S): Urban Residential 7* (UR -7 *) PROPOSED ZONING: Urban Residential 3.5 (UR -3.5) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CATEGORY: Low Density Residential LIST PREVIOUS LAND USE ACTIONS, IF ANY, INVOLVING THIS PROPERTY: In 1994 there was an area -wide study conducted by Spokane County following the GMA process that resulted in an area -wide zoning of SR1. In January, 2002, when the county adopted their Comprehensive Plan, they zoned our area UR.7 *. Our existing land use and insufficient level of services and improvements (such as roads), created a hardship for this neighborhood to safely function at this density. The zoning designation also changes the ability to continue animal keeping, except under the grandfather provision. There is a majority interest in retaining this right. This is the impetus for application for an area wide rezone of UR3.5. We are seeking to protect our area from high development. This is the only zoning available under the existing zoning ordinances. We would prefer larger lot sizes of 1 acre minimums but are seeking to protect ourselves with this zoning of UR3.5 while the City of Spokane Valley writes our own Comprehensive Plan and adopts a broader variety of zoning designations to accommodate a richer variety of lifestyles, more closely resembling the community that makes Spokane Valley an attractive place to live. WHAT ARE THE CHANGED CONDITIONS OF THE AREA WHICH YOU FEEL MAKE THIS PROPOSAL WARRANTED? This area has not changed, but areas nearby have dramatically increased in population as developments have encroached around us. This has caused increased traffic on all roads. Mission recently had a sewer line brought by a developer but the rest of the area is still not part of the 6 year sewer plan. This has created an inequitable situation. Those with money are purchasing public services at the expense of capacity that the general public on the plan should have been receiving. Also, others desiring sewer, cannot develop their properties and may be delayed even longer as capacity of our waste water treatment facility reaches capacity `officially in 2009." One citizen should not receive special treatment over another for public services. Present road conditions on the secondary roads such as Baldwin, Indiana, Montgomery, Riverway, Long and Greenacres Road, are narrow and not well maintained. In winter, we are not plowed on snow days. It usually stops at Mission, and days later we may have our streets plowed. This will create more hazardous road conditions with the hundreds of new cars that are expected to travel daily down these roads. Neighbors have already commented they have had near misses with head on collisions when they have moved over on the road to accommodate a bicyclist. Any reduction in homes will lessen the traffic and hopefully avert more serious problems but 1 believe the roads are not up to the standards needed for any significant increase in traffic. Concurrency is demanded by GMA, UR 3.5 is the only zoning available to try to mitigate the road problem that is being created. During summer months, slow moving vehicles such as tractors and harvesting equipment utilize Flora and some of the other roads. WHAT FACTORS SUPPORT THE ZONE RECLASSIFICATION? CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: To quote the Short Course on Planning, "the perception or reality that existing roads cannot handle present traffic and that they would be overtaxed by significant new levels of use - would be a barrier to increasing densities in existing urban or suburban areas. The Comprehensive Plan demands that capital facilities funding is provided for in the present. The courts have ruled that you cannot hold an area's land indefinitely. There must be a clear need for those lands for housing and without that it is a taking of property that must be compensated. It is too early to know where the people want to put our growth and what we want to preserve. The County Comprehensive Plan 7ANTNr D GrI ACCTFTrATTAN ADDI Tr ATTnN Dana 7 of COMPLIANCE WITH PURPOSE AND INTENT OF ZONING: Zoning is to prevent urban sprawl and must have capital facilities in place. Good planning would not initiate large developments in an area without sewer services for the entire area. We need to have good management of what already exists before we attempt to increase the population and traffic of an area. Schools are full and there is a need for more schools. While there may not be enough room for new students, by law schools cannot turn any student away and so we must not just follow the letter of the law but the intent and purpose of insuring there is money and capacity in the present school system. Otherwise, students that move into an area are bused outside of their neighborhood and cannot begin making friends and their educational experience is interrupted by school moves beyond their physical move to an area. Poor development standards may cause the larger community to bear the expense of retrofitting the development to meet urban standards. l J requires a 4 house average per acre of new housing. The zoning would conform to this goal while North Greenacres waits out this Interim period. The land use element of the plan and the finance piece of the capital facilities element must be coordinated and consistent. WHAT IMPACT WILL THE PROPOSED ZONE RECLASSIFICATION HAVE ON THE SURROUNDING AREA? It will be consistent with zoning adjacent to the South Boundary on Mission WHAT MEASURES DO YOU PROPOSED TO MITIGATE YOUR PROPOSAL'S IMPACT ON SURROUNDING LAND USE? Animal keeping should not be a variance since 71% of the area support this use. We would like to see something created to permit this use, to be submitted with the community comprehensive plan amendments if needed. Likely, this is a bureaucratic decision that can be made at this time. The present zoning is injurious to the historical and present land uses and deprives us of rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in this vicinity such as Otis Orchards and South Greenacres area. This is a takings that can be rectified. In addition, the following measures should be enacted to mitigate the interim zoning that was enacted to assist the proposed zoning. In order to preserve the scenic view, 1 1/2 story houses should also have a 10 foot setback so there is not a visible wall created since that is the setback required of 2 story homes. Since it is more than one story, it should be treated as a 2 story not a single story structure. 7ANTPJf DCf1 ACCTCTeATTAN ADD' TfATTAN Dane R 'If S Setbacks should be a minimum of 10 to 12 feet if there is animal keeping on adjacent to the proposed building project. This is to protect both neighboring property owners from harm to one another. Fencing should be required of any PUD or housing development along the entire perimeter of the development to protect the neighboring properties. The benefits to the local area to continue agricultural use is of public interest. Residential development adjacent to these lands should be advised that these uses shall not be considered a nuisance if conducted and maintained according to beset farming and animal management practices. Informing new or potential purchasers of the daily activities and potential "inconveniences" (i.e. dust, odors, machinery operation, sounds, etc.) would be helpful in maintaining a harmonious neighborhood, while such notices do not have any real force of law. If one is determined to live in an area that has these and uses they should be prepared to accept inconveniences or discomfort as a normal and necessary aspect of living in an area with a rural character. Definitions: Agricultural Operations means, but is not limited to, the cultivation and tillage of the soil, production, irrigation, frost protection, cultivation, growing, harvesting and processing of any agricultural commodity, including viticulture, horticulture, timber or apiculture, the raising of livestock and poultry, any agricultural practice or process, private or commercial, performed as incident to or in conjunction with such operations, including recycling of agricultural waste, preparation for market, delivery to storage or to carriers for transportation to market. A Grievance Committee could be established to assist in the resolution of any disputes that might arise regarding agricultural operations and the right to farm or use your property. Electric fence should be encouraged and provided for in our zoning ordinances to prevent damage to neighboring property and fences - since it discourages leaning on the fence and does not pose any harm beyond a shock to any child or adult touching the fence. (Any planner wishing to touch an electric fence as a trial is welcome to try.) Penalties for unlawful interference, theft, trespassing, or vandalism to owners in agricultural pursuits should be created since a large majority of the area are grandfathered with these uses and should be protected. DATE SUBMITTED: RECEIVED BY: FILE NUMBER: PART II (For Staff Use Only) 7ANTNf Cirri ACCTFTPATTAN ADD. TrATTAN On A of Spokane Valley Planning Commission Approved Minutes Council Chambers — City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave. September 23, 2004 1. CALL TO ORDER Planning Commission Chair Gothmann called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. 1I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGI.ANCE The Commission, audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. Tl_l. ROLL CALL Fred Beaulac — Present Bob Blum — Present David Crosby — Excused Absence Gail Kogle — Present VI. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. Bill Gothmann — Present Ian Robertson — Present John G. Carroll — Present IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Gothmann suggested that the Public Hearings for REZ -17 -04 (Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone) and CPA -06 -04 be moved to the top of the scheduled list of hearings. Commissioner Robertson moved that the September 23, 2004 agenda be approved as amended Commissioner .Kogle seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Gothmann asked that the record reflect an excused absence for Mr. Crosby on August 26, 2004. It was moved by Commissioner Beaulac and seconded by Commissioner Robertson that the minutes of theAugust 26, 2004 Planning Commission meetings be approved as amended. Motion passed unanimously. VII. COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Robertson thanked the Planning staff for the new Comprehensive Plan Community Meeting format. It worked very well at Zion Evangelical Lutheran Church on September 9, 2004. Ms. Sukup announced the dates of the final three Community Meetings: October 7, 2004 at Bowdish Middle School, October 28, 2004 at Pratt Elementary School, and November 4, 2004 in the City Hall Council Chambers. Commissioner Kogle reported that the Clear View Triangle Ordinance and Street Vacation Request fSTV -04 -04 were both advanced to a second reading on October 28, 2004, by the City Council. Commissioner Gothmann reminded the Commissioners that there will be two vacancies on the Planning Commission as of December 31, 2004. City Council has decided to open the positions up to interested community members, and Commissioners Crosby and Blum have been asked to submit applications to formally reapply. He also complimented the Planning staff on the Couplet Economic Analysis presentation and Charrette held on Monday, September 20, 2004. VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Ms. Sukup notified the Planning Commission that some of their regularly scheduled meetings in October and November have been changed to accommodate the final three Comprehensive Plan Community Meetings. The October 28, 2004 regular meeting has been cancelled to accommodate a Community Meeting at Pratt Elementary School on that date. Since both regular meetings in November fall on City holidays, meetings will be changed to the first and third Thursdays of the month with a Community Meeting on November 7, 2004, and a regular meeting on Thursday, November 18, 2004. A current Community Development Calendar was passed out to all Commissioners. IX. COMMII.SSION BUSINESS A. NEW BUSINESS: Public Hearing: Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone Application #REZ-17 -04 Chairman Gothmann opened the public hearing for REZ -17 -04 at 6:50 p.m. Mr. Greg McCormick, Planning Division Manager, provided the Commission and audience with a brief overview of the area -wide rezone application. REZ -17 -04 is a request from over 51% of Greenacres area citizens to rezone a site generally bounded by Mission Avenue on the south, Barker Road on the east, and the Spokane River on the north and west from UR -3.5 and UR. -7* to UR -3.5 only. Planning Division staff recommended the requested rezone be approved with one exception: existing property owners in the area maintain the ability to rezone back to UR -7* through the City's formal application and Hearing Examination process. Conunissioner Carroll asked Mr. McCormick if there were any property owners within the boundaries of this area -wide rezone who were already 2 vested to be zoned outside the proposed UR -3.5 zone. Mr. McCormick affirmed that the City has some preliminary plat applications from this area that are consistent with the UR -7* usage. Commissioner Carroll responded that it would be worthwhile for the Planning Commission to be provided a map containing details about the properties which are already vested to be zoned outside the UR -3.5 zone. In preparation for public testimony, Commissioner Gothmann read the audience the associated Rules of Procedure. He explained that individual testimony would be limited to three minutes. Those providing testimony for groups would be allowed to speak for five minutes. Public Testimony for REZ -17 -04 was opened at 6:58 p.m. Mary Pollard, Applicant, 17216 E. Baldwin Ave., Spokane Valley Ms. Pollard was speaking on behalf of the 71% of Greenacres area citizens who signed the petition in favor of an area -wide rezone to UR -3.5. She thanked the Planning Commission and Planning Division staff for their assistance with this area -wide rezone application. Ms. Pollard strongly suggested that after this area has been successfully rezoned, all property owners within the stated borders be required to present their rezone requests as annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments to limit sudden and random land use activity. The application for REZ -17 -04 contained a written narrative of citizens' concerns, which were briefly outlined during Ms. Pollard's presentation to the Commission. She emphasized her community's belief that building high density structures within this area would be detrimental in many ways. She assured the Commission that she and other members of her group will be paying careful attention to any new developments, and will be forwarding their zoning concerns throughout the GMA process. Vicky Dalton, 1816 N. Greenacres, Spokane Valley Ms. Dalton spoke in favor of the area -wide rezone request. She has lived in Grcenacres for thirteen years, and it is a very close knit community. Grecnacres citizens understand that development will occur. They would, however, like to participate in the design and structure of what their neighborhood will look like in the future. This rezone application was submitted to buy them time so they can continue to share the closeness of the community with everyone moving in or visiting. Ms. Dalton thanked the Planning Commission and Planning Division staff for their help with the area -wide rezone application. Commissioner Robertson read the names of audience members who were in favor of the proposed area -wide rezone but did not wish to speak. They were: Bob and Pat Lowcree, E. 16908 Indiana, Spokane Valley John Bowditch, 17725 E. Montgomery, Spokane Valley Rich & Alice Beattie, 17324 E. Montgomery, Spokane Valley Nahlah Abdal -Wahcd and Mohamed El- Bakkush, 18410 E. Riverway, Spokane Valley Mr. Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner, submitted letters and emails from citizens in favor of REZ -17 -04 to the Planning Commission. These letters will become part of the permanent record and were from: John Bowditch, 17725 E. Montgomery Ave., Spokane Valley Grace & Al Frederick (no address provided) Bob and Pat Lowcree, E. 16908 Indiana Ave., Spokane Valley A petition in favor of the rezone application was submitted by Gary & Laurie Hopkins, 1306 N. Long Road, in Greenacres and signed by eighteen other citi living in or around the subject area. It will be placed in the permanent record. Citizens opposing the proposed Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone were called to testify: Jaen Courchaine, 17201 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley Ms. Courchaine was opposed to REZ- 17 -04. She owns and operates Arbor Grove Mobile Home Park, which is a 96 -unit adult Mobile Home Park. She purchased some UR -7* zoned property on the corner of Indiana and Greenacres in December 2003 to extend her Mobile Home Park and potentially build duplex units. She recently discovered that this property is now within the proposed boundaries of the area -wide rezone to UR -3.5, which would prohibit her from development. Ms. Courchaine has already hired an engineer to begin development of her property. She was told by a City Planner that if she requested an exclusion of her property from the area -wide rezone, the Planning Commission could grant her request. Mr. McCormick affirmed that the Planning Commission does have the power to exclude Ms. Courchaine's property from the rezone request at this time so it could maintain its UR -7* zoning. Rick Berg, 18313 E. River-way, Spokane Valley Mr. Berg requested his property and another parcel of land at 18319 E. Riverway be exempted by the Planning Commission from REZ -17 -04 so the UR -7* zoning can be maintained. Dan Frickle, 18400 E. Indiana, Spokane Valley Mr. Frickle lives next door to Ms. Courchaine, and requested that the Planning Commission exempt his property from R.EZ -17 -04 so it can maintain its present UR -7* zoning. Mr. Kuhta submitted two letters to be placed into the permanent record in opposition to REZ- 17 -04. One was a letter from Attorney Margaret L. Arpin, Arpin Law Office, and requesting exemption of the following properties: Lots N Land, L.L.C. Properties: Parcel numbers 55073.0715, 55073.1235 and 55074.0303 have received preliminary plat approval and are vested to be reviewed under the zoning in effect today. The second was a letter from: Joe & Jayne House, 17406 E. Montgomery Ave., Spokane Valley Vicky Dalton, 1816 N. Greenacres, Spokane Valley Ms. Dalton stepped up to the microphone a second time to ask the Planning Commission not to remove the requested parcels from the area - wide rezone application. They are directly north of her home and there are serious electrical infrastructure issues in that area. The applicants wish to have their area looked at in its entirety, she asked the Planning Commission not to allow spot zoning at this time. Jaen Courchaine, 17201 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley Her main concern in attending this public bearing was to protect her rights as a landowner. She has no intention of growing quickly, but wishes to take her time to do it right. Jerry Norman, 18321 E. Riverway, Spokane Valley Mr. Norman explained that Greenacres citizens are not afraid of development, but they wish to halt congested development. He doesn't want to see empty lots fill up with seven houses per acre. He is against spot zoning as well. The hearing was closed to further public testimony at 7:30 p.m. The Commission raised the question of the different processes for exemption from the requested rezone to UR -3.5. Property owners have two options: to gain exemption from the UR -3.5 zoning designation by direct request to the Planning Conunission at the time of public hearing, or to submit a rezone request to the City at a cost of $1,800 for processing and Hearing Examiner fees. Commissioner Robertson moved that the Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone Request #REZ- 17 -04 be approved as presented by the staff. Motion seconded by Commissioner Beaulac. Motion tabled Ms. Sukup explained to the Planning Commission that it could draw the boundaries for the area -wide rezone proposal, excluding requested parcels, but she did not recommend that. It was moved by Commissioner Blum that an amendment be made to Commissioner Robertson's original motion to exclude the four parcels requested by Jayn Courchaine, Rick Berg and Dan Fricke, plus the three parcels requested in Attorney Margaret Arpin's letter on behalf of Lots N Land, L.L.C. Properties. The amendment was seconded by Commissioner Carroll. Commissioners Carroll, Blum and Robertson voted in favor of the amendment. Commissioners Kogle, Beaulac and Gothmann voted against the amendment Motion for amendment to the original motion failed to carry. The Planning Commissioners continued its discussion of REZ- 17 -04. Commissioner Kogle moved to table the original motion to approve the Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone as presented, and to table the Public Hearing on REZ -17 -04 to the next regular meeting of the .Planning Commission October 14, 2004. Commissioner Carroll seconded the motion. Commissioners Kogle, Beaulac, Blum and Carroll voted in favor of the motion. Commissioners Gothmann and Robertson voted against the motion. Motion passed 4 -2. Planning Division star will gather information on present land actions and requested parcel exemptions in order to prepare a map for the Commissioners to study and discuss at the October 14, 2004 public hearing. At 7:50 p.m., Public Hearing on R:EZ -17 -04 was tabled for continuation on October 14, 2004. The Commission took a break from 7:50 to 8:00 p.m. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -06 -04 Commissioner Gothmann opened the hearing for CPA -06 -04 at 8:00 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application by the Crosby Family Land, LLC for approximately 8 acres of land located on the east 6 side of Adams Road, approximately 400 feet south of Mission Avenue; Parcel No. 45141.9003. Applicant's proposal: change the property from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential and to change the zoning from UR -3.5 to UR -22. The application states the intent to develop the property into an adult living/assisted living facility. Staff recommendation: no change to the current Comprehensive Plan designation. The area is surrounded by large, undeveloped parcels of land with limited infrastructure available to support higher densities. The area should be reviewed during the City's Comprehensive Plan process with community input into the design of the Land Use Plan. Public Testimony for CPA -06 -04 was opened at 8:03 p.m. Commissioner Robertson explained that there were no speaker cards submitted in favor of the proposal. The following citizens spoke in opposition to CPA- 06 -04: Ron Van Tassel, 1003 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Mr. Van Tassel's rear property line abuts the subject property. Staff recommendation coincides with his opinion. He submitted a petition signed by over 200 residents of the area in opposition to the change in Comprehensive. Plan designation and zoning. Existing infrastructure cannot support a high- density development. Area residents don't want this development. Ruth Maddox, 919 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Ms. Maddox explained that the vacant lot is presently being used as a park. She is happy to know that the staff doesn't recommend the proposed changes. Gary Ramsey, 1207 N. Adams Road, Spokane Valley Mr. Ramsey reported that the sewer is new this year, and is not capable of high - density flow. Doug, Slaton, 1.5311 E. 15 Avenue, Spokane Valley Mr. Slaton concurs with the staff recommendation and the views of the previous speakers. Lillian Mittman, 1010 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Ms. Mittman concurs with all the previous speakers in opposition to this proposal. She has lived in this neighborhood since 1957, and finds it stable and established. There are already many care centers in the area. Sewer capabilities are of major concern to area residents. Bill Downie, 14215 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley Mr. Downie agrees with the previous speakers. He doesn't believe adding high- density development to this low- density neighborhood would be prudent. 'T'raffic, especially on the comer of Cataldo and Evergreen, has become a problem. He believes that this vacant lot would be a perfect. location for a park. Commissioner Gotlunann suggested that Mr. Downie speak to Mike Jackson, Parks & Recreation Director, about the Parks Department Long Range Plan. Gretchen Hov, 1218 N. Marcus, Spokane Valley Ms. Iloy owns four properties adjacent to the Crosby Family Land property. Access to the Crosby property is a concern to her. She presented the Commission with a copy of a letter to be placed into the permanent record. Amanda Clemmons.1006 N. Warren, Spokane Valley Ms. Clemmons' concern is for the safety of her children. She moved to a low- density area so there would be less traffic danger. .fill Woolf, 524 N. Adams Road, Spokane Valley Ms. Woolf teaches school at Progress Elementary. All of the school children in this area walk to school. There are no sidewalks or curbs, and no street lights except on Broadway. This high - density development adds to the safety issues already existing in the neighborhood. Other citizens present, who were opposed to Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. CPA -06 -04 but did not wish to speak, were: Vic Headlee, 1017 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley *Linnea and Karin Hall, 1021 N. Calvin Road, Spokane Valley Mary E. Summerson, 1107 N. Warren Road, Spokane Valley Martha L. Summerson Witter, 1105 N. Warren Road, Spokane Valley Sam and Andria Delgado, 14513 E. Mallon, Spokane Valley Franklin and Nancy Smith, 917 N. Warren Road, Spokane Valley Karl H. Garlock, 921 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Dave and Dani Fergcn, 14316 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley Robert and Maryann Adams, 14507 E. Mallon, Spokane Valley Chris and Jamie Owens, 14511 E. Mallon, Spokane Valley Thomas Endicott, 1115 N. Warren, Spokane Valley Rich and Peggy Cannon, 1103 Burns Road, Spokane Valley Debbie Downie, 14215 E. Cataldo Avenue, Spokane Valley Leonard and Lena Lyson, 1111 N. Burns Road, Spokane Valley Eric and Colleen Meyer, 14207 E. Cataldo Avenue, Spokane Valley Tanner Woolf, 524 N. Adams Road, Spokane Valley Jeff and Kristie James, 14315 E. Cataldo, Spokane Valley *Joan E. Colwell- Hartung, 918 N. Calvin Road, Spokane Valley Paul Swavely, 924 N. Calvin Road, Spokane Valley *Letters from these citizens were received by the Planning Commission and placed intopermanent record. Mr. Kuhta presented the Commission with a letter opposing CPA -06 7 04 to include in the permanent record from: Gary L. Collins, 1204 N. Calvin, Spokane Valley Public Testimony for the hearing on CPA -06 -04 was closed at 8:24 p.m. Commnissioner Carroll moved that the .Planning Commission accept the staff's recommendation on CPA - 06-04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further action. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Blum. Motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Robertson commended the neighborhood for banding together on this issue. The Commission took a second break from 8:25 to 8:33 p.rn. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -01 -04 Commissioner Goth.mann opened the hearing for CPA -01 -04 at 8:33 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Warren and Sylvia Riddle for approximately 4.23 acres of land located on the south side of Dishman -Mica Road, west of Bowdish Road; Parcel Nos. 45333.9024 and 45333.9155. Applicants' proposal: change the land use designation from Low - Density Residential to Community Commercial; change zoning from B -3 and UR -3.5 to B -2. Staff recommendation: change property to Community Commercial and zone entire property B -2. The property is not suited for residential use due to railroad adjacent to southern parcel boundary and a busy arterial intersection. Public Testimony for CPA -01 -04 was opened at 8:36 p.m. Sylvia Riddle, Applicant, 13616 C. Mt. Spokane Drive, Spokane County (home), 11210 E. Dishman -Mica Road, Spokane Valley (work) Mrs. Riddle grew up in the Chester Township. She and her husband bought this property in chunks with the express purpose of breathing new life into a stretch of property that was once Chester Township's community center (post office, grade school, etc.). They now need to sell the property, and wish to have it rezoned consistently with the surrounding. parcels so it can more easily be sold to another entrepreneur. She asked the Planning Commission to approve the request. Public Testimony for CPA -01 -04 was closed at 8:43 p.m. It was moved by Commissioner Robertson and seconded by Commissioner Carroll that the Planning Commission accept the stairs recommendation on CPA- 01 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council forfurther action. Motion passed unanimously. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment #CPA -01 -04 was closed at 8:45 p.m. Ms. Sukup explained to the Commission and audience that Comprehensive Plan Amendments will be presented to the City Council for a first reading at its November 23, 2004 meeting. Public Bearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -02 -04 Public Hearing on CPA -02 -04 was opened at 8:46 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Robert G. Curry for approximately 1.4 acres of land located on the north side of Broadway Avenue, east of Ella Road; Parcel No. 45812.9035. Applicant's proposal: change land use designation from Low - Density Residential to High- Density Residential; change zoning from UR -3.5 to UR -22. Staff recommendation: change the Comprehensive Plan designation to High - Density Residential for the subject property and the property surrounding the subject that is currently zoned UR -22. Staff also recommends changing the zone of the subject parcel to UR -22. • Public Testimony for CPA -02 -04 was opened at 8:48 p.m. Robert Currv, Applicant, P.O. Box 1031, Chewelah, WA 99109 Mr. Curry's aim with this application is to make the subject and surrounding property more compatible for development. Public Testimony for CPA -02 -04 was closed at 8:49 p.m. It was moved by Commissioner Beaulac that the Planning Commission accept the staffs recommendation for CPA -02 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further action. Motion passed unanimously. 10 Public Hearing on CPA -02 -04 was closed at. 8:50 p.m. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -03 -04 Chairman Gothmann opened the public hearing for CPA -03 -04 at 8:50 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Dwight Hume, representing the Pring Corporation, for 1.45 acres of land located on the south side of Springfield Avenue, west of Sullivan Road, one block north of Valleyway; Parcel No. 45144.0245. Applicants' proposal: change the land use designation from Medium- Density Residential to High - Density Residential; change zone from UR -7 and B -2 to UR -22. The Applicant indicates that the site would be an ideal location for a medical office facility, and that the current Comprehensive Plan designation would not allow for medical offices. Staff recommendation: staff recommends changing the Comprehensive Plan designation to High - Density Residential and implementing with the UR -22 zone. Public Testimony for CPA -03 -04 was opened at 8:53 p.m. Dwight Hume, Applicant, 9101 N. Mt. View Lane, Spokane Mr. Hume reviewed the staff report and agreed with the recommendation. Greg Waggoner, 1531 E. Springfield Avenue, Spokane Valley Mr. Waggoner approves the zoning change with the understanding that a medical office, not an apartment building, will be built on the land. Road improvements are needed in this area, and this development may encourage pavement and curbs. John Rohrback, 15311 E. Springfield, Spokane Valley Mr. Rohrback's major concern with the zone change is that apartments may be built on the land, and he is totally opposed to any use of the property other than for a medical office building. Planning staff explained to Mr. Waggoner and Mr. Rohrback that the Planning Commission has no control over land use after a zone has been determined. Public Testimony for CPA -03 -04 was closed at 8:56 p.m. Commissioner Kogle moved, and Commissioner Blum seconded, a motionfor Planning Commission to accept the staff's r ecommendation for CPA -03 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further 11 action. Commissioners .Blum, Beaulac, Gothmann, Robertson and 1►ogle voted in favor of the motion. Commissioner Carroll voted against the motion. Motion passed 5 -1. Staff explained that UR -22 is the only existing zone that would allow for a medical office to be built on the property, so it was the only viable rezone option. Public Hearing for CPA -03 -04 was closed at 9:00 p.m. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Application #CPA -04 -04 Public Hearing for CPA -04 -04 was opened at 9:00 p.rn. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Paul Gillespie, Jr. for 4.85 acres of land located on the south side of Broadway Avenue, about 4,000 feet east of Sullivan Road; Parcel No. 45134.0206. Applicant's proposal: change property from Low - Density Residential to High- Density Residential; change zone to UR -22. Staff recommendation: staff recommends no change to the current Comprehensive Plan designation. The area is surrounded by large, undeveloped parcels of land with limited infrastructure available to support higher densities. The area should be reviewed during the City's Comprehensive Plan process with community input into the design of the Land Use Plan. Public Testimony for CPA -04 -04 was opened at 9:03 p.m. Paul Gillespie, 740 E. Plateau Road, Spokane Mr. Gillespie explained that there is some development occurring in the area, noting the Wal -Mart shopping area, and he doesn't think east Broadway will remain a two -lane road forever. He foresees a need in the area for small, well- built, multi - family areas. Public Testimony for CPA -04 -04 was closed at 9:07 p.m. Staff explained that the City of Spokane Valley has not scheduled any road improvements for east Broadway in its six -year road plan. There are no sewers in the area. Mr. Gillespie's proposal does not appear to be the best choice for his property at this time. Although Mr. Gillespie has made some good points in his application, the absence of design standards negatively affects the timing for approval. Commissioner Beaulac moved that the Planning Commission accept the staff's recommendation for CPA -04 -04 as written, and forward it to the 12 City Council for further action. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Carroll Motion passed unanimously. Public Hearing for CPA -04 -04 was closed at 9:10 p.m. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -05 -04 Public Hearing for CPA -05 -04 was opened at 9:11 p.m. Mr. Kuhta provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Vernon Eden for 1.75 acres of land located on the north side of Val]eyway Avenue, about 150 feet off Sullivan Road; Parcel Nos. 45133.0524 and 45133.0540. Applicants' proposal: change property from Low - Density Residential to Regional Commercial; change zone from UR -22 to 8-1. Staff recommendation: Planning staff recommended changing the property to Regional Commercial and applying the B -2 zone. Staff further recommended no further commercial zoning east of the subject property along Valleyway. There was no Public Testimony for CPA- 05 -04. Commissioner Robertson moved that the Planning Commission accept the staffs recommendation for CPA -05 -04 as written, and forward it 10 the City Council for further action. Commissioner Blum seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Public Hearing for CPA -05 -04 was closed at 9:19 p.m. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA-07-04 — Mansfield Road Alignment Public IIeari.ng for CPA -07 -04 was opened at 9:20 p.m. Mr. Kuhta introduced Sandra Raskell, P.E., who works in the City's Public Works Department. He provided a brief overview of this application submitted by Todd R. Whipple, P.E., on behalf of Chris Ashenbrener and Bill Lawson, for the undeveloped portion of Mansfield Avenue between Houk and Mirabeau Parkway, measuring approximately 2,000 feet. Applicants' proposal: amend the Interim Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan by removing Mansfield Avenue between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway. Staff recommendation: Community Development and Public Works staff recommends denial of the proposed Arterial Road Plan change. Extension of Mansfield Avenue would provide traffic relief from Indiana Avenue and connectivity of the City street system. Public Testimony for CPA -07 -04 was opened at 9:23 p.m. Chris Ashenbrcner, 202 E. Trent, #400, Spokane Mr. Ashenbrener presented the Commissioners with copies of a document entitled 'Argument for Removal of Mansfield Extension to Spokane Valley Arterial Road Plan ". This document will become a part of the permanent record. Commissioner Gothmann moved that the meeting be extended to 9:45 p.m. Motion was seconded by Commissioner I►ogle. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Ashenbrener spoke to each of the points detailed in his four -page proposal to remove the Mansfield Extension from the Spokane Valley Road Plan. In summary, he believes that the existing north and south streets provide adequate access in that particular area of development. It was moved by Comrnissioner Gothmann, and seconded by Commissioner Robertson that the meeting be extended to 10:00 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Todd Whipple. 13218 E. Sprague Ave., Spokane Valley Mr. Whipple presented the Commissioners with copies of his five -page letter intended to help clarify poi.nts from his testimony. This document will become a part of the permanent record. He spoke to each of the points detailed in his letter, giving the Commission and remaining audience a historical overview of the issue. In summary, Mr. Whipple believes that the line that was drawn from Houk to Mirabeau Parkway was a mistake. Commissioner Gothmann moved to extend the meeting to 10:15 p.m. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Kogle. Motion passed unanimously. It was moved by Commissioner Carroll that the Planning Commission continue the hearing and public testimony for CPA -07 -04, and table the Commissioner's discussion until October 14, 2004. Commissioner Blum seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Whipple asked that Mr. Wayne Frost be allowed to speak at this hearing. The Commission agreed to hear Mr. Frost. Wayne Frost, Centennial Properties, 3320 N. Argonne Rd., Spokane Valley Mr. Frost works with the Inland Empire Paper Company and stated that it is true that his organization has extended Mansfield to the west of their property line. They also plan to extend M.irabeau Parkway. He asked the Commission to take into consideration the "Bridging the Valley" project which could potentially provide better arterial access for the City within the next ten years. Staff will take a look at the information that. was handed out at the public hearing by Mr. Ashenbrener and Mr. Whipple before the October 14 meeting. Public Works staff will present the City's proposal at that time. Commissioner Gotlunann moved to extend the meeting to 10:30 p.m. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Kogle. Motion passed unanimously. At 10:12 p.m., Public Hearing for CPA -07 -04 was tabled for continuation on October 14, 2004. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -08 -04 Public Hearing for CPA -08 -04 was opened at 10:12 p.m. Mr. Kuhta . provided a brief overview of this application submitted by the City of Spokane Valley, for ten (10) acres of land located north of Rutter Road and west of Dora Avenue, on the southeastern boundary of Felts Field. it is the only portion of Airport property located within the City of Spokane Valley. Applicant's proposal: change the land use designation from Low - Density Residential to Light Industrial; change zoning from UR - 3.5 to 1 -2. Staff recommendation: change property to Light Industrial and zone I -2, consistent with current uses. Public Testimony for CPA -08 -04 was opened at 10:13 p.m. Rodney Rick, 1920 N. Dora Road, Spokane Valley Mr. Rick's family has had problems with the fumes from landing airplanes. The fumes get stuck in his basement. He doesn't know what to do about this, and is worried that if the Planning Commission approves this proposal, things will get worse for his family. Commissioner Gothrnann suggested that Mr. Rick contact the F.A.A. He offered the City's support with Mr. Rick's efforts. Commissioner Kogle also recommended that shrubs or other protective landscaping be 15 considered by both Mr. Rick and the Airport. Mr. Kuhta agreed to speak with someone. from the Airport about considering fume mitigation through the use of protective landscaping. .John Gordon, 7105 E. Euclid, Spokane Valley Mr. Gordon believes that increased Airport traffic will break up the roads in that area well before their time. He is also concerned about-the property values in the area, having already lost his view of the sunset. Mr. Gordon is concerned about adequate Airport use regulation, and an increase. of hazardous waste in the area. Public Testimony for CPA -08 -04 was closed at 10:25 p.m. Mr. Kuhta explained that this is a routine and expected land transaction, which is not really negotiable. It was moved by Commissioner Blum that the Planning Conunission accept the staff's recommendation for CPA -08 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further action. Commissioner Robertson seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Public hearing for CPA -08 -04 was closed at 10:27 p.m. Commissioner Kogle recommended that the Planning Commissioners and staff members use respect and caution when speaking in public. It was obvious to her that people were tired and wanted to rush the hearing process, and she felt the final two citizens waiting all night to testify bore the brunt of that impatience unnecessarily. OLD BUSINESS: B. Tabled Public Hearing on Street Vacation Request No. STV -03 -04 There was a change of scope for Street Vacation Request #STV -03 -04, so it has been re- noticed and will be opened again for public testimony on October 14, 2004. Ms. Sukup handed out a revised Request for Planning Commission Action on this proposal. X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER Commissioner Carroll asked staff if the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code contain information regarding air quality issues. He asked staff if the City should consider this in the Comprehensive Plan process. Ms. Sukup explained that this is typically the job of the Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority. 16 X.1 ADJOURNMENT "There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:32 p.m. SUBMITTED: APPROVED: Debi Alley, Administrative Assistant William H. Gothmann, Chairman 17 unanimously. Spokane Valley Planning Commission DRAFT Minutes Council Chambers — City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave. October 14, 2004 1. CALL TO ORDER Planning Commission Chair Gothmann called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Commission, audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Fred Beaulac — Present Bob Blum — Present David Crosby — Present Gail Kogle — Excused Absence VI. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment, Bill Gothmann — Present Ian Robertson — Present John G. Carroll — Present IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Kuhta requested a change under "Old Business" to move the continued hearing for CPA -07 -04 ahead of the hearing for REZ- 17 -04. Commissioner Crosby moved that the October 14, 2004 agenda be approved as amended CommissionerBeaulac`seconded the motion. Motion passed V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Kuhta requested that Page 5 of the September 23, 2004 meeting minutes be corrected to reflect that Rich & Alice Beattie, Nahlah Abdal -Wahed and Mohamed El- Bakkush were in favor of the Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone proposal (REZ- 17 -04).. It was moved by Commissioner Robertson and seconded by Commissioner Gothmann that the minutes of the September 23, 2004 Planning Commission meeting be approved as amended. Motion passed unanimously. VII. COMMISSION REPORTS Commissioner Blum reported that he had attended the City Council meeting on October 12. He and Commissioner Crosby were reappointed to the Planning Commission for an additional three year term, commencing January 1, 2005. Commissioner Crosby reported that he also attended the October 12 City Council meeting to present an Ad Hoc Sign Committee progress report. The Council had DRAFT very few questions in response to his report. The Ad Hoc Sign Conunittee met on Wednesday, October 13, 2004, to review a discussion draft of the Revised Sign Code. Discussion focused on height and area standards, sign maintenance, and treatment of obsolete/abandoned signs. Comnussioner Gothmann explained to the Commission that due to family emergencies, he had not been able to gather the local Planning Commission Chairs together for a meeting this past summer as promised. Additionally, he was traveling throughout New England recently, trying to keep abreast of Comprehensive Plan processes in several towns and cities. He noticed that each individual plan reflected the community's values, and he is looking forward to the continued development of the City of Spokane Valley's plan. VIII. AI)MINISTRATIVE REPORTS Ms. Sukup reminded Commissioners of the Joint Meeting with other local Planning Commissions on Wednesday, October 27, 2004, from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. The City of Spokane is hosting the event at the City Library, 906 W. Main, Room 1-A. Topic of discussion will be changes in the Countywide Planning Policies (CWPPs). l , \- Planning Commission meetings in November have been changed from the second and fourth Thursdays of the month to the fir:Si :and third Thursdays because of the holidays. A Community Workshop of Spokane' Valley Church of the Nazarene will be held on Thursday, November 4, 2004. 'Findings from the previous Community Meetings will be summarized and public discussion will begin on the Parks & Recreation Master Plan. ThePlanning Commission will hold a regular mecting in the Council Chambers on Thursday, November 18, 2004. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS A. OLD BU SINESS: Continued Public :Hearing: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application No. CPA -07 -04 Mr. Kuhta explained to the Commission that he received an email from Applicants Todd Whipple and Chris Ashenbrener requesting a continuance of this hearing until November 18, 2004. They received new information from the City's Public Works Department and would like more time to prepare a transportation model for the subarea. Commissioner Crosby moved that the Planning Conunission continue the Public Hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA- 07 -04, to include public testimony, at its next regular meeting on 2 Novemher 18, 2004. Commissioner Gothmann seconded Mr. Croshy's motion. Motion passed unanimously. >+ ,1 U L-2;. Continued Public Fearing for Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone Application No. REZ -17 -04 The Public Hearing for Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone Application #REZ- 17-04 was continued at 6:45 p.m. Commissioner Gothmann reminded the Commission and audience that there was still a motion on the floor to adopt the staff recommendation as presented on September 23, 2004. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission approve the requested area -wide rezone. Mr. Kuhta provided the Comrnission.with an update report. At the September 23, 2004 hearing, public testimony was closed. The Planning Commission agreed to continue the Commission discussion section of the hearing on October 14, 2004. In the, meantime, staff was asked to construct a map of the proposed rezone area, indicating the lots with vested land actions pending and the lots ,that citizens requested be excluded from the area -wide rezone on September 23. The revised map was sent to the Commission and posted on the web. Mr. Kuhta explained that the map.shows four lots with preliminary plat approvals, two other vested lots with land use action applications pending, and four lots which requested exclusion from the rezone at the last meeting, for a total of ten lots. In addition, a.letter sent by Joe and Jayne House in opposition to the area -wide rezone application was entered into public record on September 23, 2004. The letter requested that the City make the west boundary of the rezone area FloraRoad. The area west of Flora Road was not indicated as a requested exclusion on the revised map. None of the other property owners in that area signed the Houses' letter nor filed a petition to be excluded. Mr. Gothmann asked Mr. Kuhta to address the appropriateness of excluding individual parcels from the rezone. Mr. Kuhta deferred the question to Director Sukup. Ms. Sukup informed the Commission that spot zoning is illegal. The Commission could change the outer boundary of the rezone area, as long as they don't make the area larger. Commissioner Crosby favored pulling the area west of Flora out of the area -wide rezone proposal for development purposes. Mr. Crosby asked for staff opinion. Staff recommended that the Commission consider the arca -wide rezone request as a whole. If the Commission wants to consider excluding land from the rezone, they must have justification, and it is up 3 to the Commission to decide the issue based on information provided in public testimony. Staff recommended rezoning the entire area UR -3.5. The Commission proceeded with a lengthy discussion on the matter. Mr. Kuhta explained to them that if the area -wide rezone is approved, and the properties in the area which are presently vested are not developed within the land use action application deadline, the undeveloped parcels will revert to UR -3.5 zoning. if the presently vested properties are exempted from the area -wide rezone request and are not developed, they will remain UR -7 *. Commissioner Crosby moved to amend the original area -wide rezone boundaries by excluding the area west of Flora Road and north of Mission Avenue from the proposed boundaries. Commissioner Gothmann seconded Commissioner Crosby's amendment. Those in favor: Commissioner Crosby. Those opposed: Commissioners Beaulac, Blum, Carroll, Gothmann and Robertson. Motion failed 5-1. It was moved by Commissioner Carroll and seconded by Commissioner Blum to amend the original area -wide rezone boundaries by excluding the area south of Indiana and east -of Greenacres. Those in favor: Commissioners Carroll and Blum. Those opposed: Commissioners Beaulac, Crosby, Gothmann and Robertson. Motion failed 4 -2. A motion was made by Commissioner Carroll to combine the last two amendments by excluding both the area west of Flora Road and north of Mission Avenue and the area south of Indiana and east of Greenacres. Commissioner Crosby seconded the motion. Those in favor: Commissioners Carroll and Crosby. Those opposed: Commissioners Beaulac, Blum, Gothmann and Robertson. Motion failed 4 -2. Comnissioner.Blttrn moved that the Planning Commission amend the original area -wide rezone boundaries by excluding the six vested properties shown on the snap. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Crosby. Those in favor: Commissioners Blum and Crosby. Those opposed: Commissioners Beaulac, Carroll, Gothmann and Robertson. Motion failed 4 -2. Chairman Gothmann called for the main motion: approval of the Greenacres A rea -Wide Rezone Request #REZ -17 -04 as presented. Those in favor: Commissioners Beaulac, Gothmann and Robertson. Those opposed: Commissioners Blum, Carroll and Crosby. Motion tied 3 -3. The Planning Commission was unable to develop a recommendation on the requested rezone. The matter will be forwarded to the City Council without a Commission recommendation. Public Nearing for RE Z-17-04 was closed at 7:45 p.m. The Planning Commissioners took a ten - minute break. R. NEW BUSINESS: Public Rearing for Amended Street Vacation Request No. STV -03 -04 Commissioner Gothmaim opened the hearing for Amended Street Vacation Request #STV -03 -04 at 7:55 p.m. Chris Linc Properties, L.L.C. is requesting the vacation of a remainder of the Appleway right -of -way acquisition and a portion of David Road located between Sprague Avenue and Appleway, west of Thierman.Road. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 26, 2004, but tabled the decision pending additional information concerning WS.DOT's interest in David Road. Since that time, the applicant amended the original request, proposing to exclude that portion of David Road under the jurisdiction of WSDOT, but including the property acquired by Spokane County for the Appleway Extension. Applicant proposes to use the property to construct 208 swales. Staff made the following two recommendations to the Planning Commission: • Approve vacation of that portion of David Street within the City's jurisdiction, subject to the requirements of the ordinance for survey and utility easements with conditions required by the utility; and • Provide notice to the Council of a proposal to declare the remainder of the Appleway right -of -way acquisition as surplus property. Commissioner Carroll suggested that the City vacate the triangle of land now and then sell its 50% immediately to simplify the process. Ms. Sukup explained that there are legal reasons this cannot be done. The red crosshatched area on the map, north and east of the triangle of land, belongs to the Washington State Department of Transportation. It first needs to be turned over to the County, and then turned over to the City before vacation can occur. Public Testimony for STV -03 -04 was opened at 8:02 p.m. Marshall Clark, Applicant, 2320 N. Atlantic, Spokane, \VA 99205 Mr. Clark. asked that the City vacate the triangle of land, and .David Road, as quickly as possible. That was his original proposal. The land in question is only about 1,000 s.f. Public Testimony for STV -03 -04 was closed at 8:05 p.m. Commissioner Robertson moved that the Planning Conunission accept the staff recommendation to approve the street vacation request, advising City Council of a proposal by the correct department to declare the small triangle of land as surplus. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Beaulac. .Those in favor: Commissioners Beaulac, Carroll, Gothmann and Robertson. Those opposed: Commissioner Crosby. Abstaining: Commissioner Blum. Motion passed 4 -1. Public Hearing for STV -03 -04 was closed at. 8:12 p.m. Public Hearing for Ordinance Amending Regulations Relating to Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) A Public Hearing was opened at8 :12 p.m. to amend City Ordinance No. 03 -053, Sections-408..19 and 4 :15.01 of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code relating to Planned Unit Development and Residential Dimensional. Standards;, repealing Chapter 14.704.00 of the Interim Development Regulations; and establishing an effective date. Ms. Sukup provided the Commission with an overview of present City standards and new County Amendments regarding these issues. These proposed revisions are intended to add to the safety and quality of new Planned Unit:Developments (PUDs). Public Testimony was opened and closed at 9:02 p.m. Following discussion, the Commission requested that the following changes be made to the proposed draft ordinance: Section 4.08.19.02 Applications and Process, Number 2.a: Commissioner Crosby suggested that the extension of time referred to in the last sentence be defined. Ms. Sukup recommended it be twelve months. Section 4.15.1 Residential Zone Dimensional Standards Chart: Commissioner Beaulac asked that the column labeled "Residential PUDs" for Building Height (in stories) be changed to read "Zone ". 6 Commissioner Crosby moved to accept the draft ordinance related to Planned Unit Developments as amended. Commissioner Blum seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. The Public Hearing was closed at 9:17 p.m. DRAFT X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER Commissioner Carroll recommended that the Commission review its policies and procedures. He doesn't think the Commission should let anything leave its purview without some sort of reconunendation. It was suggested as a discussion item on the November 18, 2004 meeting agenda. It was moved by Commissioner Crosby and seconded by Commissioner Carroll that the Planning Commission discuss Public Hearing policies, particularly with regard to forwarding recommendations to the City Council, at the November 18, 2004 regular meeting. Motion passed unanimously. XI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. SUBMITTED: APPROVED: Debi Alley, Administrative Assistant William H. Gothmann, Chairman 7 MEMO TO: Scott K.uhta, AICP, Long Range Planner, City of Spokane Valley FROM: Dee Caputo, AJCP, Senior Planner, CTED /Growth Management Services DATE: 9/21./04 RE: DRAFT Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Includes Greenacres Area Wide Rezone Request Here are my informal observations that I promised today to send to you on your two draft comprehensive plan documents under 60 -day review and comment in our office right now. I hope my remarks are helpful at your planning commission hearing on September 23. DRAFT Comprehensive Plan Amendments — Land Use Designations 1.) The provision of extra information in the form of various zone maps, aerial photographs and staff reports to accompany initial submittal of comprehensive plan land use designation maps is quite helpful for this review. Additionally, effective communication via phone with City of Spokane Valley staff is much appreciated and quite informative! Thank you for the rapid response to my request of these materials via email. 2.) The rationale for each application's recommendation for approval or denial by staff within the report for the eight comprehensive plan amendments is easy to comprehend; appears defensible with findings of fact to support each stance, and is simple to digest by being presented in a standardized format. 3.) Recommendations by staff appear reasonable and predictable, based on the supporting evidence contained within the staff reports. 4.) Public participation is soundly documented. 5.) The initial maps CThD received from the city are simple to interpret when accompanied by the supplemental text (mentioned in 4 1 of this memo) that elaborates on each application. 6.) Good linkage is provided between the applications and their relationship to the comprehensive plan, as it currently exists. 7.) We commend you for the thorough job of analysis and the clearly stated presentation of materials! DRAFT Greenacres Area Wide Rezone Request 1.) Conversation via phone with city staff on this application helped to clarify the issues attendant to this case. 2.) Clarification mentioned above satisfied me that the overall likely impact to this and the surrounding area will be minor, and actually, quite possibly favorable, given the downzone effect of the requested action. If anything, less traffic is probable, as well as less pressure on schools due to the probability of a smaller number of incoming students. Given that this area apparently is challenged by lack of infrastructure resources, that may help solve local problems in the near term. Also, within the written text, it states that further rezone applications on a case -by -case, quasi-judicial basis may continue to occur, thereby adding to the overall density over time. 3.) From conversation with staff, it is our understanding that the reduced density allowed, should this request be granted, represents less than a diference of 2 dwelling units per acre, and with averaging, will have no impact on the overall density of the community's current 4 /Dus /ac. 4.) Again, with the addition of the staff report and aerial photograph sent subsequent to the initial materials sent in for 60 -day review and comment, we find providing comment on the merits of this application is now possible. 5.) The staff report, like those mentioned above in the first section of this memo, contains sufficient information clearly presented to support adequately the recommendation for approval by staff. Findings of fact further support the recommendation. 6.) As stated above, good linkage provided between this application and its relationship to the comprehensive.plan as it currently exists. 7.) Public participation is soundly documented. 8.) We commend you for the thorough job of research of previous county efforts, analysis and the clearly stated presentation of materials! Message Page 1 of 2 Debi Alley From: Marina Sukup Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 8:40 AM To: Debi Alley Cc: Scott Kuhta Subject: FW Planning for Spokane Valley Deb- we need to put in the file with the areawide rezone. Marina M. Sukup, AICP, CFM Director of Community Development/Planning City of Spokane Valley 11707 Sprague Avenue, Ste. 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Original Message From: Mike Devleming Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2004 6:47 PM To: 'sbrckn @comcast.net' Cc: Marina Sukup Subject: RE: Planning for Spokane Valley Thank you for your email. I will forward this on to our Community Development Dir. Marina Sukup. Please feel free to call or write if you have any other questions or concerns. Mike DeVleming 11/1/2004 --- -Original Message--- - From: sbrckn @comcast.net [mailto:sbrckn @comcast.netj Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 4:06 PM To: Mike Devleming Subject: Planning for Spokane Valley Mayor DeVleming: RECEIVED NOV I 1 2004 SPOKANE VALLEY COMMUNrTY DEVELOPMENT I am a resident of the North Greenacres Neighborhood. The area has been designated on the city map as an area to receive development for new residences. We are an area in dark yellow as having been changed from R -1 to R -7. On July 1, 2004, the residents of this specific area turned in a legal document along with the required signatures, over 70% of the owners of the land involved along with the required $1800.00 so the petition would be legally turned in. It was accepted by the city as a legal document. Since that time there have been meetings of the planning board discussing our petition signed by the residents, taxpayers, owners, voters of this area. The petition requests that our area by spared the designation of R -7 so that we can remain closer to the most recent designation of 1 houre per acre and a semirural area. The petition requests we be designated the only other option at present as R -3.5. At the most recent meeting of the planning board that I attended, on 10/14/2004, our cause was message rage 2 or 2 11/1/2004 mocked by members of the board. It was suggested that two sections of our area, an area designated as an area by the city map, be removed from the neighborhood for the purpose of making those two areas R -7. In fact the owners of those areas have signed the petition to reduce density. It was said by a member of the board that people bought land in this North Greenacres neighborhood so that they can develop and build to increase density. Again, 70% signed the petition saying no to density. It was said by a board member that we are not as good a neighborhood as two other neighborhoods in Spokane Valley that were mentioned. In fact we are a fine neighborhood of people you do want in Spokane Valley. We are actively following the rules to present our cause of reducing density. It was said by a board member that the North Greenacres neighborhood should be filled in with population so more people can enjoy the natural area, the river and the Centennial Trail. It is important to consider roads, sewage, water, recharge of the aquifer, traffic patterns, public transportation. Has this board member not taken these topics into consideration? In reading parts of the growth management topics I see that it is not the point to change neighborhoods by dropping little cities into the rural 1 house per acre neighborhoods. We are not agains growth. We are presenting our hope that we can be less dense in housing that R -7. We have done everything legally. We should be addressed with the e' respect that residents, citizens, taxpayers, voters of Spokane Valley deserve. Thank you for your time. Susan Bracken 18508 B. Riverway Spokane Valley, WA 99016 509- 924 -3903 I hope others who attended the recent Planning Board meeting addressed their concerns about the very negative tone of the meeting by some of the board members. Other board members did point out that the residents went through the process required, raised the funds, and have been active in going the correct route to accomplish our goal. I also have issues with the format of no speaking from the floor. As a result, the meeting went on with misinformation that none of us could correct. It is very important to have appropriate people on the boards for the city. People with hidden agendas and conflict of interest should not be on the board. I request we be given the right to present our case and have it heard in a more professional manner. Scott Kuhta From: Clive Tobin [clive@webband.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 12:52 PM To: Scott Kuhta Cc: Greg McCormick; Micki Hamois; Chris Bainbridge Subject: Re: Areawide Rezone Page 1 of 1 Dear sir. Please exclude our property from the Greenacres area -wide proposed rezone to larger lots, instead retaining the present UR -7' zoning. We did not sign the rezone petition, nor did we pay money towards it. Our property is parcel number 55073.1348 which is located at 17128 (formerly 17120) East Baldwin Avenue, Spokane Valley WA 99016 -9506. It is also known as Lot 1 of SP- 03 -19. Any questions please call us at 922 -3645, fax to 922 -7841 or email to the below link. Thanks, Clive & Donna Tobin cb ye @webband.com http://wwv, 10/20/2004 Scott Kuhta From: Clive Tobin [clive @webband.00mj Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 1:07 PM To: Scott Kuhta Cc: Greg McCormick; Micki Hamois; Chris Bainbridge Subject: Re: Areawide Rezone p.s. p.s.- I might add that it is not universally recognized outside the small group of activists that the area -wide rezone has been proposed. Also other residents (besides ourselves until today) might not realize that it may be possible to have individual parcels excluded from it. Or, upon reflection they may decide that rezoning is a dumb idea that will adversely impact their financial well -being years down the road when this becomes a densely populated urban area. May I suggest that a mailing take place to all property owners advising them of the proposed rezone, and also that their property can possibly be excluded from it upon their request? Thanks, Clive Tobin cliveur'kwebband.com, http://www.tobincinemasystems.com — Original Message — From: Clive Tobin To: Scott Kuhta Cc: Greg McCormick ; Micki Harnois ; Chris Bainbridge Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 12:52 PM Subject: Re: Areawide Rezone Clive & Donna Tobin clive@wcbband.com http://www.tobincincmasystems.com 10/20/2004 Page 1 of 1 Dear sir. Please exclude our property from the Greenacres area -wide proposed rezone to larger lots, instead retaining the present UR -7' zoning. We did not sign the rezone petition, nor did we pay money towards it. Our property is parcel number 55073.1348 which is located at 17128 (formerly 17120) East Baldwin Avenue, Spokane Valley WA 99016 -9506. It is also known as Lot 1 of SP- 03 -19. Any questions please call us at 922 -3645, fax to 922 -7841 or email to the below link. Thanks, Sfiaane DATE: October 20, 2004 TO: Sue Golman- Council - Marina VIA: Phone, E -mail, Walk -in FROM: Walt DeWitt ADDRESS: 16804 E. Indiana PHONE: 926 - 7464 RE: Zoning Walt lives on Indiana which is a dead end. The city wants to re -zone in this area. Walt insists that it stay the way it is. Walt said that he was at a meeting which Mr. Crosby stated he wants to exempt the area from a zone change. Mr. Crosby said very insulting statements at this meeting. He said there is not enough character in this neighborhood to worry about. He told those in the neighborhood they were being selfish by not allowing others to live by the river. He will be giving Sally Jackson $10,000 for the disincorporation if this goes through. He said he has already lost his horse back riding area when the centennial trail was put in. RESPONSE: I told him I would pass this onto the council. C: Citizen Contact /Walt DeWitt Citizen Contact City of Spokgrie 'Galley 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane' Galley, WA 99206 (509) 688 -0180 (509) 688 -0194 rFAX OCT 0 8 2004 SPOKANE VALLEY Dear Mr. Kuhta, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT We would ask that Spokane Valley Planning Commission deny File No. ArewidcRezone — 01 -04 Submitted by Applicant, Maly Pollard, representing property owners signing petition, requesting a zone change from UR -7 to UR -3.5 We've had 3 developments recently approved for UR -7 in this particular area and believe the remaining 49% of the property owners would be discriminated against if this re -zone request is approved. The 51 % of the property owners who are requesting the zone change from UR -7 to 3.5 do not need a zone change to keep their individual properties at 3.5. Spokane Valley City, which incorporated in 2003, would decrease their revenue if this re- zoning request is allowed to be changed from UR -7 , Keeping the zoning at UR -7 will increase the city's tax base in the coming years. We would rather see the tax base raised by single family homes instead of increasing our taxes, cutting services and eliminating programs. By keeping the UR -7 zoning, the tax base increase will also help with the improvements for schools and the road system in this 457 acre area. We would ask if you do grant this re -zone request, we would ask that it only be granted for 1 year and no longer. We would also request that the boundary stop at Flora Road making Flora the west boundary. Sincerely, 1 7406 E Montgomery Ave. Greenacres, Wash 99016 509- 928 -5807 September 19 2004 640-601; r7, ATI./ RECEIVED RECEIVED OCT 0 8 2004 To: Spokane Valley Planning Commission Dear Mr. Kuhta, We would request the 3 parcels of property that we own in the proposed 457 -acre area -wide rezone request to be left at the current zoning of UR7. The parcel #'s are: 45124.0110, 55073.0310, and 55073.0208. Please review the attached letter that we submitted on 9- 19 -04. We would ask again to keep the UR7 zoning in this 457 acre's. We .need the tax base to help prevent an increase in our taxes. The tax base generated will also, as we've said before, help with the improvements needed with the schools and the .road system with -in the proposed area -wide re -zone request. We would also like to reiterate, we would request that the boundary stop at Flora road, making Flora the west boundary for the proposed re -zone request. Sincerely, Joe Hous f yne House *itk, 17406 E Montgomery Ave. Greenacres, Wash 99016 509 928 -5807 October 7, 2004 SPOKANE VALLEY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Scott Kuhta From: John Bowditch [tripletzr @yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 4:47 PM To: Scott Kuhta Subject: File No. Areawide Rezone - 01- 04 M.r. Kuhta, I live in this proposed rezone area. I own two lots approx. 4 acres in size. I have lived in this area since 1982. I believe it is in the best intrest of our neighborhood to see this rezone gain approval from the Spokane Valley Planning Commission. This area consist of many homes with large lots or acerage, peole maintain livestock on their properties and commercial agraculture still exsist here. Many of the residents of this area have been here for many years and remain because of our rural style enviornment. This area is on the edge of the growth management boundaries and rezoning to UR 3.5 would be more compatable with properties outside the boundaries, and would also act as a buffer between the higher density areas to the south and east. 1 also believe that the road system in this area is not capable of handling traffic from a UR -7 designation. Also, the Spokane River which is the northern boundary of this area is already facing ecological problems, to restrict building in this area to UR 3.5, would be a victory to help save our precious river from further degradation. I support a UR 3.5 designation for this neighborhood. The necessary signatures of property owners within this area were collected. Their collective voice is telling you what we want in our neighbor. It is vital for city officals to listen to what the citizens ask for. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this issue. John Bowditch 17725 E. Montgomery Ave. Spokane Valley, WA. Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http: / /vote.yahoo.com 1 C; • Spokane Valley Planning Commission Approximately 11 years ago, Spokane County rezoned our neighborhood to SR 3.5 east of Flora Rd. and to Industrial west of Flora Rd.( even though there is no industry in our neighborhood). The neighborhood fought to change the zoning to something more in keeping with the area and lifestyle. We were rezoned to SR. 1. In or around 2001 without our knowledge and with no notice Spokane County changed our zoning to SR 7 (the County said that they mailed notices, however not one person in our neighborhood says that they received them ). SR 7 is not appropriate for our semi - rural area. The lots vary from V4 acre to approximately 20 acres. There are some small farms and many people keep large and small farm animals. The roads are too narrow for the number of cars that high- density housing would bring. Most of us moved to this area looking for a semi -rural lifestyle. We know that in time it will change, however we are being forced to accept high- density housing when there many other areas where this housing would more appropriate. - Areas closer to the freeway and to arterials. - Areas closer to shopping. - Existing areas already zoned for high- density housing. We think that rezoning our area to SR 3.5 would be a good compromise. The area south of Mission Ave. is zoned SR. 3.5 yet is closer to the freeway. Pat and Bob Loweree E. 16908 Indiana Ave. Phone # 926 -2551 Sep. 23. 2004 4:28PM Planning Commission City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Ave., Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Re: Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone Lots N Land, L.L.C. Properties Dear Commissioners: cc: Ken Tupper 74/2":42.catt Vice 1117 East 35 Avenue Spokane, Washington 99203 (509) 838 -9066 Fax: (509) 838 -9051 September 23, 2004 I represent Lots N Land, L.L.C., which owns property within the area proposed to be rezoned from UR -7* to UR -3.5; specifically, parcel numbers 55073.0715, 55073.1235 and 55074.0303. Lots N Land requests that the Planning Commission not rezone these parcels as part of the rezone. My client recently received preliminary plat approval for parcel number 55073.0715, and parcels 55073.1235 and 55074.0303 are the subject of preliminary plat applications, and are vested to be reviewed under the zoning in effect today. Therefore, any rezone of the property as part of the area- wide rezone would have no practical effect. However, my client would like the zoning to remain UR -7 in order to be consistent with the pending applications anticipated approval of the same. Thank you for your consideration of this request. If you have any questions, please - do not hesitate to contact me. 0o.0009 P. 2 RECEIVED SEP 2 3 2004 City of Spokane Valley GARY Q LAURIE HOPKINS 1306 North Long Road Greenacres, WA 99016 September 22, 2004 Mr. Scott Kuhta City of Spokane Valley, WA Dear Mr. Kuhta: On behalf of the undersigned, this letter is to show support for the proposed rezoning of 457 acres from UR7 to UR3.5 in the area bordered approximately by Mission Ave. to the south and the Spokane River to the north, and by Flora Road to the west and Barker Road to the east, as petitioned by Mary Pollard. Residents whose signatures appear below live in or around the neighborhood. We support the proposed rezoning to ensure that our neighborhoods remain as rural as possible, and that fewer homes will be built in the area. We are concerned not only about the additional traffic and congestion that further development in the area is bringing, but also in the extreme changes in the look and feel of our idyllic neighborhoods. Thank you for taking our support into consideration. Sincerely, Signature xukct Print Name Address RECEIVED SEP 2 3 2004 City of Spokane Valley 1,\AML1MI5 )�o? 10 G A u I i ' � 7`Co i,� S 4 306 Al 1-d /1 Rei( aver (1Eanc2o - 1 v dJ. roc. XD, b, GARY & LAURIE HOPKINS 1306 North Long Road Greenacres, WA 99016 Signatur Print Name Address _A • / i I?1 11 Iz r O A. • / p , . i �r ? Ad . . J gcea4.C)u \1i sA \-0:? h, Lone e , nn M I ! , _ 4S a,.. � K L 13 v /s /.?6-2, N L- O Af ' fi d /1 iost. ) -, 11 4 1 - i2 v Inv, Gf. • 30 71 , 4 ' 3 k s . C7 vRc V ' `\� 3Q A r-t-, ,e,S� vko)<-6 t.5 31, g . (--)c e suvo +us-ez-, Q r&O1c0 -0 1 ` 1 S Q— S) e�� 0 /ray 4.rec f_Ay 6,..� ,, ,9 rre /60i ft a Llitra i1 s'• CAA CI_ 17 221 ■ I‘ki sS � 1 of September 19 2004 Dear Mr. Kuhta, Sincerely, yne House Hous 17406 E Montgomery Ave. Greenacres, Wash 99016 509- 928 -5807 We would ask that Spokane Valley Planning Commission deny File No. ArewideRezone — 01 -04 Submitted by Applicant, Mary Pollard, representing property owners signing petition, requesting a zone change from UR -7 to UR -3.5 . We've had 3 developments recently approved for UR -7 in this particular area and believe the remaining 49% of the property owners would be discriminated against if this re -zone request is approved. The 51 % of the property owners who are requesting the zone change from YJR -7 to 3.5 do not need a zone change to keep their individual properties at 3.5. Spokane Valley City, which incorporated in 2003, would decrease their revenue if this re- zoning request is allowed to be changed from UR -7 . Keeping the zoning at UR -7 will increase the city's tax base in the coming years. We would rather see the tax base raised by single family homes instead of increasing our taxes, cutting services and eliminating programs. By keeping the UR -7 zoning, the tax base increase will also help with the improvements for schools and the road system in this 457 acre area. We would ask if you do grant this re -zone request, we would ask that it only be granted for 1 year and no longer. We would also request that the boundary stop at Flora Road making Flora the west boundary. September 19 2004 Dear Mr. Kuhta, Sincerely, 174 1 6 E Montgomery Ave. Greenacres, Wash 99016 509 -928 -5807 We would ask. that Spokane Valley Planning Commission deny .File No. ArewideRezone — 01 -04 Submitted by Applicant, Mary Pollard, representing property owners signing petition, requesting a zone change from UR -7 to UR -3.5 . We've had 3 developments recently approved for UJR -7 in this particular area and believe the remaining 49% of the property owners would be discriminated against if this re -zone request is approved. The 51 % of the property owners who are requesting the zone change from UR -7 to 3.5 do not need a zone change to keep their individual properties at 3.5. Spokane Valley City, which incorporated in 2003, would decrease their revenue if this re- zoning request is allowed to be changed from UR -7 . Keeping the zoning at UR -7 will increase the city's tax base in the coming years. We would rather see the tax base raised by single family homes instead of increasing our taxes, cutting services and eliminating programs. By keeping the UR. -7 zoning, the tax base increase will also help with the improvements for schools and the road system in this 457 acre area. We would ask if you do grant this re -zone request, we would ask that it only be granted for 1 year no longer. We would also request that the boundary stop at Flora Road making Flora the west bout'.:. Siokane Memorandum To: David Mercier, City Manager, and Members of Council From: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Date: November 30, 2004 Re: Monthly Report — Summary of October 2004 Activities 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org Contract Negotiation and Administration • Spokane County Contracts. City and County staff met several times to discuss a consistent costing methodology for many of the 2005 contracts. Staff will provide an update at the December 21 Council meeting. • Managed Competition. Staff evaluated the two library proposals and the four park maintenance proposals. Interviews were conducted with three of the park maintenance proposers. Presentations to Council on both service areas were scheduled in November. Operations • Employee Training. Seventeen employees attended a two -part training session on business communications. Focus was on written communication, including Powerpoint presentations and use of e-mail. • Employee Recruitment. Part -Tine Traffic Engineer Don Ramsay resigned. The City has begun the recruitment to fill this .4 FTE position. Committees • Ad Hoc Library Committee. The ad hoc library committee was formed and met three times to evaluate the two proposals and develop a recommendation to Council. That recommendation was presented to Council on November 2. Web Site • Budget and Utility Tax Information. In an attempt to seek more public involvement in the 2005 budget process and discussions about a potential utility tax, the City has placed all Powerpoint presentations on those topics on the web site. The site is continuously updated with new information. The complete 2005 budget is also on -line. The monthly Web Site Summary follows. Web Site Summary — Month of October Unique User Sessions 1.1,032 Top Five Pages Viewed* Employment 892 Council Agendas and Minutes 269 GIS /Maps 259 Community Development 255 Departments 249 Top Five "Referrer" Web Sites Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC) 153 Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce 52 Spokane County 43 Spokane County Library District 41 WorkSource Spokane 40 Deputy City Manager Monthly Report — October 2004, continued November 30, 2004 Page 2of2 *Note: Numbers reflect full or majority weeks of the month. Spokane . Memorandum To: Dave Mercier, City Manager From: Ken Thompson, Finance Director CC: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Date: November 15, 2004 Re: Monthly Report Finance employees worked in the following areas during the month of October. 2005 budget The two final 2005 budget hearings were held during October. The city council adopted the 2005 budget in early November. A final version will be prepared and sent to the Association of Washington Cities, the Municipal Research and Services Center and those agencies involved with city bond transactions. A limited number of copies will be available for citizens who ask for this information at city hall. Business registration Utility tax options 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org 3300+ businesses are in our database. We have been working closely with representatives of the Washington State Department of Licensing to generate renewal notices. The applications for new businesses will be processed through the state system even though businesses may send these documents to the city. Several utility tax options have been prepared for council review. A utility tax would assist the General and Street Funds in balancing budgets in future years. A utility tax would also assist in funding capital improvements. Special studies to offset city costs Preparatory work is being done to identify consultants that have experience in allocating operating costs to various city activities. The purpose of this study would be to assign a fair share of city costs to grants so that appropriate grant reimbursements can be made to the city. This effort would also assist the city in recovering costs from city enterprise funds, developers and capital projects funded through outside agencies. Staff is also seeking consultants that conduct impact fee studies. An impact fee would be assessed when a building permit is issued and would be dedicated to paying for capital improvements needed because of growth. CenterPlace technology needs Our new facility at Mirabeau Point will have a high technology lecture hall, computers for employees housed there, and technology capable of handling small conferences. We have met with fiber and internet access providers and consultants who specialize in audio and video equipment to identify options. The city has drawn all donated funds which were being held by Foundation NW to pay contractors. Spokane County still holds additional funds for the senior center. Approximately S4 million remains in the city's bond sale fund for this project. The project is within our budget. Budget variance /investment reports Reports showing a comparison of fund revenues and expenditures to our 2004 amended budget at October 31, 2004, are attached. if revenues and expenditures flowed to the City equally over twelve months, we would expect to see 83% in the right -hand column. Revenues and expenditures do not flow equally in twelve monthly installments to the city so the percentages appearing in the right hand column will often be skewed. Overall, revenues and expenditures are in line with our projections. The investment report at October 31, 2004 is also attached. General Fund Revenues: Property Tax Sales Tax Gambling Tax Leasehold Excise Tax Franchise Fees State Shared Revenues Planning & Building Fees Fines and Forfeitures Recreation Program Fees Investment Interest Operating Transfers General Fund Expenditures: Legislative Branch Executive & Legislative Support Public Safety Operations & Administrative Svcs Public Works Planning & Community Dev. Library Services Parks & Recreation General Government 11/1812004 11:31 Aivl City of Spokane Valley General Fund Budget Variance Report For the Period January 1 - October 31, 2004 Budget 2004 S 9,265,809 11,920,000 690,000 5,000 640,000 882,816 1,139, 000 1,000,000 201,000 18,000 42,500 $ 25,804,125 Budget 2004 $ 215,372 438,482 14,693,990 917,605 631,079 1,574,519 2,053,250 1,601,780 3,450,578 $ 25,576,655 October Revenues $ 161,401 1,257,349 35,956 206 162,263 127,152 105,709 115,244 2,176 7,149 S 1,974,605 October Expenditures $ 11,552 26,964 1,223,301 63,335 36,968 137,849 119,619 93,981 $ 1,713,569 YTD Revenues $ 5,042,303 10,940,684 471,342 3,516 482,087 816,771 1,498,033 952,517 120,127 45,157 34,300 $ 20,406,837 YTD Expenditures $ 164,861 294,451 11,965,645 672,373 502,556 1,120,786 1,010,148 1,164, 826 872,546 $ 17,768,192 Unrealized Percent Revenue Realized $ 4,223,506 979,316 218,658 1,484 157,913 66,045 (359,033) 47,483 80,873 (27,157) 8,200 $ 5,397,288 54.42% 1 91.78 68.31 70.32 75.33 92.52 131.52 14 95.25 59.76 250.87 80.71 79.08% Unrealized Percent Expenditures Realized S 50,511 144,031 2,728,345 245,232 128,523 453,733 1,043,102 436,954 2,578,032 $ 7,808,463 76.55% 67.15 81.43 73.27 79.63 71.18 49,20 4 72.72 25.29 16,19 69.47% Other Funds Revenues: Street Fund Arterial Street Fund Trails and Paths Hotel /Motel Fund Debt Service - LTGO 03 Capital Projects Fund Special Capital Projects Fund Street Capital Projects Mirabeau Point Project Street Bond Capital Projects CD Block Grant Fund Capital Grants Fund Barker Bridge Reconstruction Sewer Fund Stormwater Mgmt Fund Equip. Rental & Replacement Risk Management Other Funds Expenditures: Street Fund Arterial Street Fund Hotel /Motel Fund Debt Service LTGO 03 Capital Projects Fund Special Capital Projects Fund Street Capital Projects Mirabeau Point Project Street Bond Capital Projects CD Block Grant Fund Capital Grants Fund Barker Bridge Reconstruction Sewer Fund Stormwater Mgmt Fund Equip. Rental & Replacemnt Risk Management 11118/2004 11:31 AM City of Spokane Valley Other Funds ' Budget Variance Report For the Period January 1 - October, 2004 Budget 2004 $ 2,062,200 $ 108,445 S 542.000 49,979 12,800 380,000 39,561 800,000 840,000 89,890 840,000 89,516 3,230,000 122,003 3,000,000 5,993 30,000 3,585 504,000 5,000 837,000 6,200 702,000 747,500 146,634 137,500 $ 14,811,634 $ Budget 2004 $ 3,773,184 600,000 475,000 800,000 180,000 300,000 3,219,700 9,500,000 2,460,000 504,000 837,000 702,000 238,608 518,700 43,600 137,500 S 24,289,292 October Revenues 51 8,739 132 41 529,135 October Expenditures 3,214 8,073 YTD Revenues 276,250 225,561 720,004 717,982 538,293 1,432,784 30,945 5,000 92,500 285 435,166 64.769 130,217 5 6,145, 328 YTD Expenditures $ 288,675 $ 2,467,841 5,000 5,000 13,153 355,835 225,561 25.945 225,945 121,621 537,251 1,087,711 4,363,725 128,200 430,804 964 4,633 6,208 92,423 1,068,216 $ 993,984 51.80% 19 407,356 134,644 75.16 12,800 18 103,750 72.70 574,439 28.20 20 119,996 85.71 122,018 85.47 2,691,707 16.67 8 1,567,216 47,76 (945) 103.15 499,000 0.99 8 744,500 11.05 8 702,000 - 8 (285) 312,334 58.22 81.865 44.17 11 7,283 94.70 197,594 56,558 55,454 111,066 $ 1,662,819 $ 9,155,635 Unrealized Percent Revenue Realized $ 8,666,306 41.49% Unrealized Percent Expenditures Realized $ 1,305,343 595,000 119,165 574,439 154.055 74,055 2,682,449 5,136,275 2,029,196 499,367 744,577 702,000 41,014 462,142 (11,854) 26,434 $ 15,133,657 65.40% 0.83 7 74.91 28.20 20 14.41 7 75.32 16.69 8 45.93 8 17.51 8 0.92 8 11.04 8 8 82.81 10.90 9 127.19 80.78 37.69% C.) FOOTNOTES Note: 1 Revenue from property taxes is received in May and November 3 State shared revenues (liquor) are received quarterly on succeeding months. 4 Second payment due late 2004 7 Used primarily for capital projects. Cash not actually moved from these funds (expenditures) to the construction funds until needed 8 Capital projects often take a number of years to plan, engineer, acquire right of way and construct 9 60% of this budget is tied to projects not yet underway 11 Internal transfer will be made twice /year 14 New construction projects are exceeding our estimates 16 40% of this budget is reserves. Emergency use only 18 Transfer for trails planned for late 2004 19 Loan repayment scheduled for late 2004 20 Next debt transaction will be late 2004 11118/2004 11:31 AM 11/18/2004 11:31 AM dec Beginning Deposits Withdrawls Interest Ending City of Spokane Valley Investment Report For the Month Ending October 31, 2004 LGIP* $ 8,741,002.09 1,579,258.68 (1, 360, 000.00) 12,933.03 $ 8,973,193.80 General Fund Street Fund Arterial Street Hotel/Motel Capital Projects Spec. Capital Proj. Street Capital Proj. Mirabeau Point Proj. Street Bond Proj. Sewer Stormwater Mgmt. Equipment Rental Risk Management Balances by Fund Total F &M MM Investments S 5,362,295.49 $ 16,054,354.34 1,579,258.66 (1,360,000.00) 9,017.48 21,950.51 $ 5,371,312.97 $ 14 344 506.77 $ 3,625,254.29 403,222.36 688,692.64 139,601.92 1,303,293.20 1,030,271.13 2,273.07 4,056,368.12 2,042,649.11 30,284.49 924,966.37 72,699.49 24,930.58 $ 14,344,506.77 *Local Government Investment Pool 0 Siiokan j�alley Memorandum To: Dave Mercier, Nina Regor, Members of City Council From: Mike Jackson Date: November 18, 2004 Re: Monthly Report, November 2004 Administration and Parks: 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevafey.org • Senske Lawn and Tree Care was selected for negotiations to provide park maintenance services for the City. • Staff is exploring opportunities to contract pool operations and programming which will no longer be provided through Spokane County. • The Parks and Recreation Master .Plan consultant held the first community meeting November 4` at the Spokane Valley Church of the Nazarene. In addition, there were several meetings with focus groups comprised of representatives from the community and local businesses including: the Chamber of Commerce, youth sports, adults sports, conservation/ goverment, cultural arts, and Scope. All of the meetings were well attended. The consultants also distributed surveys to solicit conununity input. • Staff is developing and finalizing job descriptions for CenterPlace staff positions. • CenterPlace construction is proceeding on schedule. Progress has also been made in selection of furnishings, kitchen equipment, telephone and technology. • Work with the Senior Center Ad -Hoc committee continues. Senior Center: • The 2005 election results for Association Board members with three -year terms are: Patricia VanRoy, Ray Kiefel, Joyce Ohanesein, and Chuck Chandler. Faun Clark will fill the vacancy left by John Haley. • The Senior Center received two more donations totaling $700 towards the wooden floor at CenterPlace. The Association has collected enough to pay for their portion of the floor ($8,700). • The association currently has 670 paid members. • The Senior Nutrition Program is served everyday. The regular Tuesday/Thursday attracts about 70 people. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MONTHLY REPORT FOR OCTOBER 2004 LONG RANGE PLANNING DIVISION: Planning Commission The Spokane Valley Planning Commission met on October 14, 2004 to continue a public hearing on the Greenacres Area -Wide Rezone application (REZ- 17 -04); as well as to conduct public hearings on Street Vacation Application No. STV- 03 -04, and an Ordinance Amending Regulations Related to Planned Unit Developments (PUDs). The Planning Commission was unable to develop a recommendation on the requested rezone. The matter will be forwarded to the City Council without a Commission recommendation. STV -03 -04 and the PUD Ordinance were both accepted by the Planning Commission, with amendments, and forwarded to City Council for final approval. Planning Commission will meet next on Thursday, November 18, 2004. A public (Th hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment #CPA -07 -04 will be continued at that time. Also on the agenda will be a discussion on the Greenacres Area petition requesting a moratorium on new development, election of Planning Commission Officers for 2005, and a discussion of Planning Commission Rules of Procedure, specifically Section 9. Community Meetings The City's Community Development Department hosted two Comprehensive Plan Community Meetings in October. The first meeting was held on October 7 at Bowdish Middle School, the second was held on October 28 at Pratt Elementary School. After a staff presentation and Comprehensive Plan update, citizens attending the meetings were divided into small groups to discuss "Hot Topics ", which included neighborhood preservation, transportation, and City Center /City Identity. The small groups were given time to present their findings at the end of the meeting. This phase of community involvement will provide focus for Comprehensive Plan priorities. A final fall meeting was scheduled for November 4 at Spokane Valley Church of the Nazarene. Results from the fall Comprehensive Plan Community meetings will be provided before the kick -off of the Parks Master Plan public participation element. Comprehensive Plan Development Long Range staff continues to develop draft chapters of the first Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan. A draft of all Comprehensive Plan chapters has been posted on the City's home page and the Long Range Planning web page for discussion purposes. Page 1 of 7 Ad Hoc Sign Committee The Ad Hoc Sign Committee held meetings on Wednesday, October 13 and Thursday, October 28 Discussion of the City's existing Signage Standards was completed, and a draft of the revised Sign Code was completed and will be submitted to the Planning Commission for a study session on December 9, 2004, and a public hearing on January 13, 2005. The Ad Hoc Sign Committee was adjourned until further notice. CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION: The Current Planning Division opened 35 land use application files in October. In addition, 14 licenses /permits were sold. In order to make the chart below easier to follow, activity has been consolidated into two categories: License /Permits (adult entertainment, sign review permits); and Land Actions (binding site plans, rezones, subdivisions, short plats, boundary line adjustments, street vacations, site plan reviews and SEPA reviews). ■ Lund Actions 100% 50% 0% • Licenses/Rwrnits A comparison of new application /permit/license activity through the month of October to the annual projection for each of these is shown on the following page: Site Flan Review Sign Permit Review Boundary Line Adjustments SEPA Review Short Flat Subdivision Rezone Home FYofession Binding Site Ran !. Adult Entertainment License City of Spokane Valley Department of Community Development Monthly Report for October 2004 2004 MONTHLY CURRENT PLANNING ACTIVITY BY CATEGORY 2004 CURRENT PLANNING ACTIVITY ANNUAL COMPARISON 0 20 40 60 I ❑ 2004 Rejections • Activity to late Page 2 of 7 80 100 120 140 160 City of Spokane Valley Department of Community Development Monthly Report for October 2004 Monthly revenue for the Current Planning Division totaled $23,930 in October. The Division's total 2004 income stands at $195,956. The entire Planning Division (Long -Range and Current) has generated $286,261 in revenue as of October 31, 2004, exceeding its 2004 revenue projection estimate of $137,000 by 108 %. 400 300 200 $30,000 $20,000 $1 0,000 so BUILDING DIVISION: 100 —� 0 0 2004 CURRENT PLANNING REVENUE c c iD m 0 A < 0 In October 2004, the Current Planning Division served 230 customers at the Planning Counter, and returned or answered 255 phone calls. Commercial building permit applications reviewed by Current Planning during the month of October include: one retail space (6,721 total square feet), 198 apartments, a dental office, two storage buildings (2,240 total square feet), an espresso booth and a cabinet shop with a paint booth. Five pre - application conferences were also held for various commercial building permits. They will be mentioned in future reports as applications occur. The Building Division issued 243 permits in October. This is 85% of the number of permits issued in September. New commercial construction involved three of those permits. Thirteen new single - family dwellings and two two- family structures were also permitted. Commercial permits included a new dental office building at 1107 N. Pines. 2004 BUILDING PERMITS SOLD T m y o cr wan Page 3 of 7 Conrrercial Permts a Residential Nero is -r� T — (17 0 Z 0 m e, o 0 O C o In an effort to compare the number of City of Spokane Valley Building Permits to Actual Value, the charts below have been developed. As you will see, permit sales and value of associated property continue to increase in 2004: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY BUILDING PERMIT SALES Com parison of 2003 (411- 12f31) to 2004 (111- 10131) 3,000 2,500 -V 2.000 1,500 1,000 500- 0 8 2003 • 2004 The Permit Center collected $76,071.87 in Permit and Plan Review Fees in October, bringing our yearly total income to $1,155,072.76. Revenue total for FY 2004 as of October 31, 2004 exceeds the projected 2004 revenue estimate of $882,000 by over 30 %. The Permit Center reports that there is no noticeable decrease in activity as our community continues to grow. We expect November to be one of our most active months this year as interest rates continue to be low and the weather very mild. s15Q000,o0 5125,000.00 s100,00a00 $75,000.00 550,030,00 525,000.00 50.03 Con imrcial Residential I Totals 76 1,220 1,296 180 2,324 2,504 T d 0 Q City of Spokane Valley Department of Community Development Monthly Report for October 2004 2004 BUILDING REVENUE Page 4of7 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY BUILDING PERMIT VALUATION Comparison of 2003 (411.12(31) to 2004 (1N- 10131) S150,030,030 J S100,000,000- 550,000,000 5o Cunrerc I 0 2003 521,671,735 ti 2004 S63,034,976 T GO c G tr to .7 10 T O Residontial 520,600,125 542,271,860 853,957,391 5116,992,367 0 Total A comparison of Building Division fiscal activity through the month of October to annual budget projections is shown on the next page: City of Spokane Valley Department of Community Development Monthly Report for October 2004 L Rans Check Fee License & Nrmt Fees In 21 business days we performed 1,015 inspections. This averages out to just over 48 inspections per day. Although we continue to use on -call inspection staff to supplement our workload, using one on -call inspector five days per week and another on -call inspector intermittently, our current inspection activity exceeds our target level of twelve inspections /inspector /day. Our on -call inspectors performed 320 of the inspections in October. This confirms the assistance these additional staff members have given our full -time staff. Our workload has continued to be more manageable using this labor resource. Over the next few months, we continue to expect a larger volume of inspections since inspection requests track actual permit activity. We continue to expect to use the second on -call inspector for a few months to help us maintain the capacity of excellent customer service the Building Division strives to sustain. 1200 - 1000 - B00 - 600 400 200 0 2004 BUILDING FISCAL ACTIVITY ANNUAL COMPARISON SO $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 5500,000 $600,000 5700,000 $800,000 $900,000 f o Actual YTD Revenue • Annual Revenue Projection 2004 BUILDING INSPECTIONS D = - - v m o Y a v N • m a 4 R • m In October, the Building Division met with the Washington Survey and Rating Bureau to provide information concerning the effective operation of the City Building Division. The program is labeled the "Building Code Effectiveness Rating Schedule ". This rating is used by insurance underwriters to provide hazard premium discounts for those buildings built within the timeframe of the rating. We were able to score #3 for our first review, a score that puts us in the same classification as Seattle, Spokane, Vancouver and Kent. We are reviewing the results of that rating and making changes in our operation plan. We hope to move to #2 in the next rating period. The City will request a second review in the summer of 2005. Page 5 of 7 City of Spokane Valley Department of Community Development Monthly Report for October 2004 The Building Official attended the fall Washington Association of Building Officials business meeting. Next June, WABO will be holding the summer meeting in the Tri- Cities at the same time the Washington Association of Cities is meeting. The Building Official has been appointed to a committee to help prepare a presentation for WAC. CODE ENFORCEMENT: The number of "Violations Reported" on the following chart reflects actual Spokane Valley Zoning Code violations, plus complaints received which were not violations. The complaints received are added to the total because they reflect time officers spent in the field conducting investigations. In addition, the "Investigated" and "Pending" columns accurately reflect Code Enforcement's current ability to process and investigate backlog cases due to additional staffing. CODE ENFORCEMENT STATUS Page 6 of 7 s Violations Reported ta Abatements 0 He Transfers It Rending Files The chart on the following page provides a monthly comparison of the types of Spokane Valley Code violations reported. In order to make the chart easier to follow, activity has been consolidated into the following five categories: Environmental (sewer /septic, critical areas, animal and nuisance violations); Property (Right of Way, property use, dangerous building, landlord /tenant, illegal business and signage violations); Junk Auto; Solid Waste (solid waste, illegal dumping, and household waste violations); and Complaint — No Violation. City of Spokane Valley Department of Community Development Monthly Report for October 2004 2004 CODE VIOLATIONS REPORTED (BY TYPE) 28 19 10 14 11 19 31 i 18 O Juik Alrto 10 21 16 11 251 24 E property 9 13 6 16 15 31 O Environrn11rtc4 9 I 13 9 6 14 17 14 19 17 16 15 23 22 19 16 24 21 19 10030. 90% • 8036- 70%. 60% 5055 4096 30% 20% le% 09S r, Caipla nt • No viaasa, o Sold %Vasty Page 7 of 7 Sj�k 0 ..Va1iey Wastewater: • Wastewater Treatment — The County is currently working to provide financial information regarding the County's sewer utility as it relates to the assumption of the County owned sewer facilities. • County submitted the SRF Loan to the Department of Ecology and has received conditional approval. • As a result of the incorporation of the City of Spokane Valley the Department of Ecology was concerned about enforcement issues pertaining to industrial wastewater pretreatment. Initially the City and the County had included a section in the proposed wastewater interlocal agreement which addressed Ecology's issues. Since the wastewater interlocal is currently on hold pending the receipt and review of the County's terms and conditions regarding transfer of all or part of the County owned wastewater facilities, Ecology requested a meeting to discuss the current status of enforcement of industrial pretreatment. As a result of that meeting, Ecology has determined that the County and the City of Spokane currently have authority to administer the pretreatment program to their present and future customers with the City of Spokane Valley and no interlocal agreement will be required. • Draft Spokane River Use Attainability Analysis (UAA) is available on the UAA web site at http://www.spokaneriveruses.net/links.htm (1 Agreements for Services Adopted and in Operation: • County Street Maintenance Proposed Contract Changes for 2005: o In 2005 Contract, propose to delete reference under 'Basic Services' that work be done as customarily done by the County and add that work be as directed by the City. o More detailed definition will be developed to the list of activities. • Street Maintenance - WSDOT • County Utilities - Storm Water Management Contract ends on December 31, 2004. • Solid Waste - Regional Solid Waste Interlocal Capital Projects: • Construction Projects PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT October 2004 • Federal grant applications were prepared and submitted to SRTC for 2004 -2007 Call for Projects. Projects submitted were based on the City's adopted 2005 -2010 Transportation Improvement Plan • Centerplace Construction on the CenterPlace Project continues according to schedule. All interior framing is completed with rough -in of electrical, mechanical, and HVAC work in progress. The application of the roof insulation on the roof deck is nearing completion with installation of roof tile to follow. Window frames have been installed on the West Wing of the structure with the glass installation to follow this week. Upon completion of glass installation, contractor will heat portions of the structure to allow initiation of the sheet rock(GWB) work in the interior. Landscaping activities on the site have ceased due to weather conditions and the irrigation system for the South half of the site winterized. o Evergreen Road /Sutters Sanitary Sewer Project Project complete — minor punch list items remain. o 16th Avenue Project Finishing the installation of sidewalk and driveway approaches. Yard put back, swale work at Dishman- Mica and Pines swales. Project scheduled to be open to traffic the week of November 22 o Park Road Project 1 lift of asphalt placed, concrete work remains. 2 " lift of asphalt and striping remain in 2005. Project scheduled to be open to traffic the week of November 22 " o 24th Avenue Sidewalk Project Project completed o Sullivan & 4th Signal Project complete — adding additional luminaries at the Northeast and Northwest corners — coordinating with Vera. o South Greenacres Sanitary Sewer Project (Flora & Mission) Project Complete o Weatherwood /Owens Sanitary Sewer Project Project Complete o Veradale Sanitary Sewer Project Project Complete o Sipple Sanitary Sewer Project Project Complete o Carnahan Sanitary Sewer Project Construction to be carried over until next spring. Project awarded to Norms — Construction scheduled to begin March 2005 Maintenance Activity: • Estimated cost from the County for 2004 is $3,113,268. • City 2004 budget is $2,120,000. Additionally, we budgeted $300,000 for contracted minor road maintenance that we are using to cover the County contract. • Through the end of October the County has billed $1,971,512 or 93% of the budgeted funds. Land Development • Applications Reviewed /Conditions Prepared (Including Comm. Pre -App): Commercial Projects — 12/73*, Residential Projects — 7/48 • Road and Drainage Plan Review: Commercial — 0 /4, Residential — 3/25 • Hearings Held: Commercial —115, Residential — 2/9 • Construction Walk - Throughs: Commercial — 5/6, Residential — 2/6 • Rezone Applications: Commercial — 217, Residential — 1/10 • Right -of -Way Permits for 2004 — 930 issued, 168 inspected and closed out. '(current month totals /annual totals) S ane Valley 2004 PROPOSED PROJECTS Road Construction Projects Evergreen Road Sullivan Road & 4th Ave. Signal Park Road - Project 2 16th Avenue - Project 2 24th Avenue Sidewalk Project Pines/Mansfield Road Design Projects Barker Road Reconstruction Barker Road Bridge Replacement Sewer Projects Carnahan Weatherwood /Owens Sipple Veradale South Green Acres - Phase 1 Burns Road Miscellaneous Projects Miscellaneous Valley Couplet Road Replacement Projects Consultant Contract Centerplace at Mirabeau Point Construction in Progress Stormwater Drainage Projects Statewide Transportation Plan (STIP) Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) Bridge Replacement Advisory_ ommittee (BRAC) 2004 Construction Projects (MR)- October 16th Ave. to 2nd Ave. Sullivan & 4th 8th Ave. to 2nd Ave. Dishman -Mica to SR 27 Bowdish to Pines Wilbur Rd. to Pines Rd., Pines to 190 Boone to Barker Rd. Bridge Barker Rd. at Spokane River 1 -90 to 8th, Havanna to Eastern McDonald to Mamer, Mission to Mallon Vercler to Mamer, I -90 to Boone Dalton to Rutter, Bradley to Vista Catvin to Sommer, Springfield to Main Indiana to Mission & Flora to Long Rd. Capital Improvement Projects Project Location Completion Date Design Construction Complete Complete 8/18/04 100% 100% 9/1/04 100% 100% 6/1/05 100% 80% 11/30/04 100% 90% 9/1/04 100% 100% 10/1/05 0% 0% 10/15/05 0% 12/1/06 0% 7/1/05 100% 11/1/04 100% 11/1/04 100% 100% 9/1/04 100% 100% 7/31/04 100% 100% 9/1/04 100% 100% 2004 Funding $ 1,521,000 $ 15,700 $ 821,000 $ 1,932,000 $ 198,000 $ 620,000 Total Project Cost $ 2,787,000 $ 165,000 $ 972,000 S 3,302,000 $ 198,000 $ 3,134,000 0% $ 1,150,000 $ 2,998,200 0% $ 702,000 $ 8,057,615 0% $ 2,569,000 $ 2,569,000 100% $ 4,083,000 $ 4,083,000 S 2,914,000 $ 2,914,000 $ 2,985,000 $ 2,985,000 $ $ 380,000 $ 31,000 5 31,000.00 $ 50,000 $ 50,000.00 11/04 $ 15,000 $ 15,000.00 $ 830,000 $ 830,000,00 $ 60,000 $ 60,000.00 5/05 100% 30% $ 9,500,000 $ 9,500,000 $ 200,000 S 200,000.00 Total $ 30,196,700 $ 45,230,815 TO: Dave Mercier, City Manager RE: Monthly Report October 2004 ADMINISTRATIVE: No report this month, COMMUNITY-ORIENTED POLICiNG: MEMO FROM: Cal Walker, Chief of Police Dale Golman, Administrative Sergeant DATE: November 15, 2004 Attached is the activity report for October for the Spokane Valley Police Department. There were a total of 5,187 computer -aided dispatch (CAIN) incidents. These are self- initiated officer contacts, as well as calls for service. Out of those 5,187 incidents, 1,663 actual reports were taken during the month of October. Attached is the breakdown describing those incidents. Additionally, there were 1,737 traffic stops conducted that resulted in 196 traffic reports. Included are the hotspot maps for October residential burglaries, October traffic accidents and October commercial burglaries, alone, with September & October stolen vehicles. Representatives of Bond Chiropractic Center, 307 W. Francis, presented Spokane Valley Police Officer Rich Gere and Spokane County Sheriffs Deputy Jennifer Sutter with new ballistic vests at Blumenthal's Uniforms, 1306 N. Howard. Bond employees have collected donations to purchase ballistic vests for sheriffs deputies for several years now. OPERATIONS: (This month's report highlights pursuits and the dangers our officers go through to apprehend criminals. The Spokane Valley Police Department follows a strict Pursuit Policy. When an officer is involved in a pursuit, supervisors monitor it. The pursuing officers must give immediate information on road, traffic, and surrounding conditions or the pursuit is discontinued. if a supervisor deems the pursuit to be too dangerous to the public, officers, or the suspect, or if it is not in the interest of public safety that the suspect is apprehended (depends on the severity of the crimes committed), the pursuit is discontinued. All efforts are made to insure the safety of the public, officers, and the suspects.) Forgery Suspects Run, Assault Officer: A Pullman man and his female accomplice are in the Spokane County Jail, charged with a dozen felony crimes after a check forging spree in Spokane Valley that ended with a pursuit, minor collision and assault on one of the arresting officers. Spokane Valley Police Officers Rob Stevens and Robert King responded to a forgery complaint reported by employees at the Fred 1 Meyer store at Sprague and Sullivan R.oad. The caller advised that the male and female suspects were last seen driving north on Sullivan in a blue Cadillac. As the officers were approaching the area, they spotted a blue Cadillac. The officers chased the car for about three minutes until the driver eventually turned onto a dead -end street. The suspect was taken into custody. Although he complied with the officers' orders during the handcuffing process, the suspect afterward began twisting around and digging at his waistband as if trying to reach a weapon. During efforts to control his movements for a search, the suspect kicked Officer Joseph Badman, causing him intense pain. The suspect was controlled with pepper spray and a knife was removed from the pocket of his cargo pants. Officers found a stolen checkbook, receipts for items purchased with the checks and seven fraudulent temporary driver's licenses. Inside the trunk of the car were products purchased at Wal -Mart, Toys -R -Us and Michael's, as well as a backpack containing heroin and marijuana. A search of the roadway where officers had seen the suspects tossing items from the car turned up a black jewelry box containing three syringes loaded with Methamphetamines. Pursuit, Drugs Lead To Suspect's Arrest: Officers had to break out a window and cut the seatbelts of a car in order to arrest a 32 -year -old Spokane man at the end of a pursuit in the Spokane Valley. Ide was later booked into the Spokane County Jail on felony charges of Attempting To Elude A Police Vehicle, Third Degree Assault and Possession of Methamphetamines. The suspect also was booked on three outstanding misdemeanor warrants charging him with Driving While License Suspended. Officer Tim Jones was dispatched to check on a vehicle parked and blocking one of the lanes of Sullivan Road at Fourth Avenue. I-Ie found the suspect slumped over the wheel, apparently asleep or unconscious. Jones attempted to wake the driver, first by calling out to him and then by tapping on the window when he got no response. The suspect awoke, looked at the officer, and then put the car in gear and squealed the tires driving away. During the pursuit, the suspect jumped the curb and was driving directly at a home. Jones felt the suspect was deliberately trying to ram the house and drove onto the lawn to intercept. Both drivers tried to stop at the last moment and the patrol car nudged the suspect's door with its push bars. Before the officer could talk the suspect out of the car, the suspect threw the car into reverse and spun the Lumina's tires back into the street. Officer Jones followed the car for several more blocks as the driver rummaged around inside the car. Jones noted that one of the Lumina's tires was flattened and the engine was smoking. The suspect finally stopped the car but did not comply with repeated orders to exit the vehicle. Officer Scott Bonney did break the front passenger window, but the suspect still refused to acknowledge the officers' demands. Not being able to unbuckle the suspect's seatbelt, Officer Jeff Thurman cut the strap and the officers pulled the suspect from the car and away from the shattered glass in the. street. The suspect fought with officers and was finally controlled with pepper spray and a taser application. However, before he was controlled he managed to assault Officer Jones. A second officer, Sarah Riojas, slashed her hand on broken glass during the suspect's extrication and had to have several stitches in one of her fingers. Officers found a baggie of methamphetamine and a glass drug pipe on the front seat of his Lumina. He told officers he had been awake for three or four days in a row. Valley Burglar Can't Outrun Victim, Officers: Spokane Valley Police arrested a burglar after the suspect first failed to outrun his victim who was following him on foot, then failed to elude the patrol sergeant who wouldn't drop out of the chase. The incident began when a resident dropped by his home for a break while on his way to a nearby jobsite. He found his front door locked with the deadbolt that he hadn't set. Armed with a cell phone, he entered the home, found the interior ransacked and heard noises in the basement. As he called 9 -1 -1 the suspect came charging up out of the basement and out the hack door. The homeowner chased the suspect and saw him get into his blue Ford pickup. He was giving the 9 -1 -1 operator the suspect's description and saw him drive away. About the same time, Sgt. Martin O'Leary pulled in behind the Ford. The homeowner told 9 -1 -1 that there was a police car behind the suspect, confirming for O'Leary that he was behind the correct suspect vehicle. The chase went on for several minutes with the suspect cutting corners at intersections and driving through yards in a vain attempt to lose the sergeant. The chase went onto the freeway briefly, but because of the construction chutes and early morning traffic, the suspect became bottled up and could not gain much speed or headway. He reversed course at the Evergreen interchange, but when he took the westbound off ramp at Pines, officers surmised, "he saw nothing but patrol cars every direction." The suspect had too much speed to reverse course and the truck jumped the curb and ended up stuck against the roadbed of the nearby Union Pacific Railroad tracks. The suspect jumped from the truck and ran north to a nearby strip mall with Officers Jerad Kiehn and .Dale Toliver in foot pursuit. After a foot chase through a business and an apartment complex, the suspect stopped and complied with the officers' comirnands to surrender. The suspect had stolen jewelry, sports cards and other items found inside his pants pockets. He was driven to the Spokane County Jail and booked on felony counts of Residential Burglary and Attempting To Elude A Police Vehicle. Valley Police Chase, Capture Car Thief: Officers responding to a report of a vehicle theft spotted the stolen car leaving the area and ended up chasing the car until it failed mechanically and the thief had to abandon it. A resident called and reported his vehicle having just been stolen. Officer Robert Stevens was responding when he spotted the vehicle. He attempted to stop the car. Although the driver at first pulled to the side of the roadway, he quickly sped off again. In the next 25 minutes, the thief drove at speeds up to double the limit and ran more than a dozen stop signs. However, there was little to no other traffic. and officers followed him until the Honda began smoking and blew a tire. The stolen car finally died and the suspect hailed out and ran from Stevens and other pursuing officers. He was quickly apprehended when he tripped over a small retaining wall while running in the dark. Inside the car, officers discovered a shaved key in the ignition as well as property belonging to another Spokane Valley resident. They called the man and he found his 1986 Toyota pickup missing. Officers booked the suspect into the Spokane County Jail on felony charges of First Degree Theft and Attempting To Elude A Police Vehicle. Ex -con Didn't Want the Ticket: Sheriffs Deputy Kevin Richey spotted a white car traveling without headlights. Richey attempted to stop the car, but the driver took off and quickly accelerated to 80 mph on Appleway, still running without headlights. The deputy lost sight of it briefly. However, within minutes the abandoned car was located. The ignition was torn apart and the stereo was hanging out of the dash by its wiring. A witness there pointed out a female seen closing the passenger door on the car immediately after it stopped. Additional investigation led officers to a nearby residence where the suspect was found cowering in the bathroom. The suspect was arrested and booked into the Spokane. County Jail on felony counts of Attempting To Elude A Police Vehicle and First Degree Possession of Stolen Property. The suspect, an unlicensed driver, told officers 3 at the scene that he had just been released from prison on October 14 and did not want to violate his probation by getting a ticket. SCHOOL RESOURCE DEPUTIES Student brings a gun to school: A 14- year -old University Fligh School student was arrested after a teacher spotted him brandishing an air gun aboard a Central Valley School bus. School Resource Officer Jeff Duncan arrested the 14- year -old boy and booked him into Spokane County Juvenile Detention on a charge of Possession of a Dangerous Weapon on School Property. A teacher assigned to Evergreen Middle School was following the University High bus when he noticed the teenager displaying what appeared to be a Beretta semi - automatic pistol. The teacher called the high school, and two vice principals met the bus when it arrived. They separated the suspect from other students and seized his book bag. Inside was the pellet pistol. SRO Duncan said the pellet pistol resembled a real gun and did not have a red tip or other marking to identify it as not being an actual firearm. SHARED RESOURCES Task Force Nabs Fraud Suspects, Funny Money, Dope: Detectives assigned to the Spokane County Sheriff's Property Crimes Task Force (Shared Resource) began investigating several suspects when counterfeit payroll checks began surfacing at Spokane -area banks and convenience stores. Detectives served search warrants on a pair of Valley motel rooms and arrested five fraud suspects, seized a substantial quantity of marijuana and discovered more that $12,000 in counterfeit bills. Secret Service agents have been called into the case to examine the counterfeit cash, and investigation into the counterfeiting and cashing of checks continues. Valley Felon Sentenced To Decade In Prison: A Spokane Valley man found in possession of a sawed - off shotgun last February was sentenced to 10 years in federal prison. James S. Jordan, 29, was arrested by Spokane Valley Police Officers Jeff Welton and Jeff Getchell February 18 when the two responded to a home in the 5400 block of East Sharp on a drug complaint. Jordan and another plan were standing in the driveway. The sawed -off shotgun was discovered a short distance from Jordan and he had atrununition on his person. The suspect had four prior felony convictions, including two for Second Degree Burglary, one for Conspiracy To Deliver/Manufacture Controlled Substance and one for First Degree Malicious Mischief. The officers arrested him on a state charge of Unlawful Possession of a Firearm. Because he was an Armed Career Criminal candidate, Spokane Firearms Task Force Detective Mike Ricketts (Shared Resource) obtained a federal arrest warrant charging the suspect with Felon In Possession of a Firearm. (This sentence falls under the purview of Project Safe Neighborhoods (PSN), a partnership of federal, state and local law enforcement officers and prosecutors working together to reduce criminal gun violence in Eastern Washington. Under PSN, investigation and review of gun crime is being coordinated to identify and pursue the maximum penalties available under state and federal law.) 4 2004 OCTOBER CRIME REPORTS October, 2004 October, 2003 2004 to Date BURGLARY 83 66 835 FORGERY 42 54 360 MALICIOUS MISCHIEF 119 78 1071 NON - CRIMINAL 89 65 777 PROPERTY OTHER 130 130 1,454 RECOVERED VEHICLES 43 23 325 STOLEN VEHICLES 50 41 490 THEFT 227 249 2,408 UIOBC 3 6 9 VEHICLE OTHER 1 4 40 VEHICLE PROWLING 104 98 1118 TOTAL PROPERTY CRIMES 891 814 8,887 ASSAULT 74 77 744 DOA/SUICIDE 15 14 142 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 63 51 645 HOMICIDE 0 0 3 KIDNAP 2 2 19 MENTAL 42 39 322 MP 7 8 88 PERSONS OTHER 141 134 1,407 ROBBERY 5 7 47 TELEPHONE HARASSMENT 13 18 156 TOTAL MAJOR CRIMES 362 350 3,573 ADULT RAPE 3 1 30 CHILD ABUSE 11 20 101 CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE 8 13 164 SEX REGISTRATION F 0 0 4 INDECENT LIBERTIES 2 1 19 CHILD MOLESTATION 4 3 66 CHILD RAPE 1 2 27 RUNAWAY 46 38 369 SEX OTHER 10 14 134 STALKING 4 4 27 SUSPICIOUS PERSON 32 35 303 TOTAL SEX CRIMES 121 131 1,244 DRUG 93 52 858 ISU OTHER 0 0 1 TOTAL !SU 93 52 859 TOTAL TRAFFIC REPORTS 196 313 2,417 TOTAL REPORTS RECEIVED 1,663 1,660 16,980 0 7 Jose 0.5 1 Mies 0 Frederick to Mission R• t rne .ka. , or Wok Ind`tia� rtMission 1 7 / Indiana ) 12th uclid _I13 c o ra�:e emu- 1-: d aN. x e w 0, 35th - I Belie Terr cn ©etl Visa ti d En$ e f September & October 2004 Stolen Vehicle Hotspots 3 Mae Produced: 9 Novenmer 2901 pko 3y r� c Mal 12a 3- 4th o; M.' 8111 • L. `r 30th = n 9 g o .f�, 7 w I -31 -5 oill 144th f -3 l 1 P 0 1 / w. w L 24 32nd cs G) m - Cs tn f .Y Stolen Vehicles CJ Cl Low Medium MI High NIP .e • MI 1 , . OW m 7 d. U ll kith - ctht 3J 7th 1.s Frederick n ry so m- I��c a \ j21st co V ye 7 ' 43,d'' w � O • „ to__ are 0 Jose 1 .1 1 '_m 18th fi - Jenn a % 25th f ^' �� . V 31st 3 m - y •m a 6 44th 0 CD fi r „ � p 4 0. Cl1 I 5th �i ��5 57th R OS 1 Mies Z - m J Prince orv T ill r 44 II' to cL oCli uox am 4th 2 i XI at 131t Mission V - e vw p F agu but 3rd ist 34th, 'fie Mirabeeu aaxxell • Boo i n sr Me tfue 7th, m: th tg 1 at 64: t '' >!e - o 1 lb r • '25 w i •'S5)' 40th Sansoll 0 ' � A Forker 0 D eseret t S - -- _'7111 • ri � . 12 164 Indiana ' -z. or 1 ueen Ar:lle g 1 Ri a. , 6� - 1- • a. Ki - D co Euclid O ..I90 Sin o /90 Ids ,fey is E ; 3rd 8h gL is �5t October 2004 Residential Burglary Hotspots Ibti{ aL�t co I 2n oi in � 381h � Belle 'e r> N �3 �`` Ball 1 co 13e1t 46th 7, r --1 -� }be' C cgs Nloritcgom Q 'Indiana 0 ,°, I Miss on `5 n L c T1- ` ml ' 1 4is Ma 2 00 1 2nd 1 , g a m 4th S 7 m 7 3 0 O 3 0 • 9th 44th 9 a O 3 _4 0 0 -o 0 3 C � -unite ey �- -� m 7 . ,, U m' 97 )—<0 ) ) 24th r` N ap Plvduced: a eeo..m4.. 20D1 0 0 Euclid m • Stroke Btl�}S eW Catalco� 24th 8th 1 Residential Burglary =3 Low II R Medium ® High CO 7 Jose 011 e Aon Ida le "'r . 1 • MB Pro ➢ -- `t 1?rinl ete " I u hq rr t Ga Ntission • Main a�ilic H=a'1 on i - tt i c. Braadwd -u 1 - std Frederick . n o .�cT \J m I't (4 rd43rd t., 11 Alk a) U 3N ( f N tv ca 16 21st Jennie' 25th 31st 1 �disle = i S is r ' < Mission Sharp �harp , II p 11.. W m n (E m ca ca RU cat co S esva a,A% � e��t < 0 ;1 44th 1 •gg ,,� ilfr 18th m Mari _ l ale o r f CU .. fiair ' ` 13 5'5 th 58111 { G_? � / ° 11 II l 1, \57th `� �� i t r � Fl r\ � -. J t 0 as t Moos 8 7_� Princ m Iered. N -n m • 7 th eo o M " NO 0 o tt t1i 6th u m 0 tv !�• 37t j 1 \ th •t y tm-�7 nkrlt� de i XC 9 t5 -kjtta 2Ot rd -E, Sfh aa Mirabeau s t 0 FOrker Sanson O 7lr1difna - Norm_ J e Apt 40th ` 0 1 0 v r n ia- bue : n g 1h' m O 190 Stnto rig refit - m rd `tr 9 t� . 12th I ° , 11 th- v 1 . � t . le <t October 2004 Commercial :Burglary Hotspots Eu lid 1. M 'e 1a a Oat 0 "1- 3.t I gelle Terl e � — r_-- B I�elia•Vi 46th o 6 r ol b e n t; 441 Ve — b ay 1�G 0 44th 0 0 Alia �o 0 ->• L B ,r Ott a 1 t-$ 4thl 8th i° 1 30th - 8th 1 0 CO 3 to Mao Produced: 9 Novelrter 2(04 9fihica 40 4 \12 m o° • Catal 24th, 32nd AF114 I 0 �1s1 tn i I I Commercial Burglary =Low Medium MIN High c:3.< tnl e ~ r l , J 1""tte�t v fS (Stange lanZ Olive— Frederick G a e < Broad ir) ndian '4 Mission Mirabeau Indiana 7 -1-loroy allejr.v Lrz r - ar 4 I h rd. 0 Bth Traffic Accidents Low EJ Medium Low NE Medium OM High 0 0.5 1 Miles October 2004 Traffic Accident Hotspots Roducsch 9 Nortraber 20011 INCIDENT TYPE Year to Date Jan Feb Marc! April May June 1 July August Sept Oct Nov Dec 11-S Structure Fire Single Response 210 31 18 16 10 24 19 31 24 22 15 11-F Structure Fire 106 10 11 12 17 11 11 13 10 5 6 11-W Working Fire 171 2 3 0 1 2 3 0 0 3 3 13-S Vehicle Fire 79 7 7 8 4 6 9 12 13 7 6 14-UH Brush Fire -Low 69 0 3 7 3 9 6 20 15 2 4 15S Trash Fire 28 0 2 2 7 4 3 3 2 3 2 18 -5 Alarm System-Single Response 89 16 11 10 7 14 4 6 4 7 10 18-F Alarm System- Full 317 54 32 27 22 21 27 26 37 32 39 31-A/B BLS EMS Alarm 2131 211 163 206 184 218 211 240 230 216 252 31-C/D ALS EMS Alarm 2343 235 202 232 2351 251 235 240 257 228 228 31 -F 2nd alarm EMS /Mass Casualty 0 0 0 0 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 35-F Extrication 13 2 0 1 3 0 1 1 0 2 3 36 -F Water Rescue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 0, 0 37-F Tech Rescue 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 0 11 0 11 0] 8 0 6 0 8 40-1 Hazmat Investigation 68 6 6 4 40-F Hazmat Full Response 8 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 0 1 1 46 -A/B Auto Accident • Unknown Injuries 561 63 46 351 57 57 76 68 52 50 57 46-C/D Auto Accident - Life Threats 52 7 1 7 3 7 4 8 7 4 4 50 -S Service Call 137 26 10 14 13 18 9 10 17 10 10 MONTHLY TOTAL 6228 670 515 5811 669 648 631 692 676 598 648 0 0 Memorandum To: City Council Members From: Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney and Cal Walker, Police Chief CC: Dave Mercier, City Manager Date: November 19, 2004 Re: Public comment on panhandling on November 9, 2004 On November 9, 2004, Troy Dilley, a citizen of our city, provided public comment that outlined an interaction he had with a panhandler. The general flavor of his comment was that he was unhappy with having had to deal with somebody trying to solicit funds from him in this manner while he was in his car. As the Council is aware from a recent presentation by Police Chief Cal Walker, we as a city are attempting to respond to the overall homeless /panhandling issues with what is a unique approach for this area. As Chief Walker explained, when the police receive information about the location of a temporary encampment, the police notify the appropriate social workers from the Regional Health District and related agencies. An officer and social worker will then go out to visit the encampment to determine what can be done to assist them. The Council agreed that this is a good approach, and that we as a city would continue to monitor the homeless /panhandling issue for a reasonable amount of time to see if it altered the current situation. Consistent with that recommendation Last month, staff will continue to monitor and advise the Council from time to tine. Please let me know if you would like additional information. Cary P. Driskell Deputy City Attorney 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org jai Memorandum To: City Council Members From: Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk CC: Dave Mercier, City Manager Date: November 19, 2004 Re: Response to Public Comment: Initiative and Referendum 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org On November 9, 2004, two citizens, Clark Hager and Dick Behm, expressed concern with the citizens not having the right of initiative and referendum and asked Council to immediately take that under advisement. During the November 16, 2004 Council Study Session, Councilmember Denenny asked that staff add the topic of initiative and referendum to the. advance agenda. That item is now tentatively scheduled for the December 21, 2004 Council meeting.