Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2004, 12-14 Regular Meeting
VOUCHER LIST DATE VOUCHER Numbcrf sl TOTAL VOUCHER AMOUNT 11 -24- 2004 5884 -5919 2,609,240.42 12 -03 -04 5932- 5953 29,345.50 GRAND TOTAL 2,638,585.92 AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING #57 Tuesda }, December 14, 2004 CITY HALL AT REDWOOD PLAZA 11707 East Sprague Avenue, First Floor Council Requests All Electronic Devices be Turned OR During Council Meeting CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION: Pastor Steve Farnworth, Living Water Community Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALI, APPROVAL OF AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS COMMITTEE, BOARD. LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS M.AV OR'S REPORT: PUBLIC COMMENTS For members of the Public to speak to the Council regarding matters NOT on tht Agenda. Please state ynur name and address for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. 1. CONSITT AGENDA Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. A Councilmcmbcr may remove an item from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. a. Approval cif Regular Council Meeting Minutes of November 30, 2004 b. Approval of Study Session Minutes of December 7, 2004 c. Approval of Resolution 04 -026 Amending Resolution 04 -018, Student Advisory Council d. Approval of Student Advisory Council Bylaws e. Approval of Resolution 04 -027, Creating an Engineer Classification and Job Description f. Approval of Payroll of November 30, 2004 of S145.234.78 g. Approval of the Following Vouchers. Council Agenda )214.4}4 Rtgufar Meeting rage 1 of 6:00 p.m. NEW BUSINESS 2 First Reading Proposed Ordinances to Amend Comprehensive Plan — Scott Kilian a. Ordinance 04 -049, File No. CPA 01 -04. south side of Dishrnan -Mica Road [public comment' b. Ordinance 04 -050, File No. CPA 02 -04. north side of Broadway Avenue (public comment' c. Ordinance 04 -051, File No. CPA 03 -04, south side of Springfield Avenue [public comment' d. Ordinance 04-052, File No. CPA 05 -04, north side of Vatlrywa) Avenue [public commentl e. Ordinance 04 -053, File No. CPA 08 -04, north of Rutter Road [public comment] 3. first Reading Proposed Ordinance 04 -054, REZ 17-04; Arca Wide Rezone - Scan Kuhta [public comment" 4. Motion Consideration: Council Approval, Lodging Tax Advisory Grant Recommendations - Councilmcmbcr Flanigan [public comment" 5. Motion Consideration: Approval of Contract for Supply and installation of Kitchen Equipment at CenterPlace - Steve Worley/Mike Jackson [public comment] PUBLIC COMMENTS (Maximum of three minutes please; state your name and address for the record) 6. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: [no public comment] Business License/Registration Update -- Ken Thompson 7. INFORMATION ONLY: [no public comment] Response to Previous Public Comment ADJOURNMENT FUTURE SCHEDULE Regular Council Meetings are generally beld 2nd and 4'' Tuesdays, beginning at 6 :OO p.m. Council Study Sessions are generally held l 3'' and 5th Tuesdays, beginning at 6 :00 p. m. Other Tentative Upcoming Meetings /Events: December 28, 2004 - 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, Q a.m. - noon NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing- or other impairments, please contact the City Clerk at (509)921-1000 as soon as possible so silt arrangements may be made. Council Agenda 12 -14414 Regular hireling Page 2 n r 2 DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday, November 30, 2004 Mayor Wilhite called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the 56 meeting. Attendance: Councilmembers: Diana Wilhite, Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike DeVleming, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Absent: Rich Munson, Deputy Mayor (excused) Gary Schimmels, Councilmember (excused) Steve Taylor, Councilmember (excused) Staff: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Cary Driskcll, Deputy City Attorney Ken Thompson, Finance Director Mike Jackson, Parks & Recreation Director Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Tom Scholtens, Building Official Scott Kuhta, Long Range Planner John Hohman, Senior Engineer Bing (Greg) Bingaman, IT Specialist Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Wilhite led the Pledge of Allegiance. _INVOCATION: Mayor Wilhite gave the invocation. ROLL CALL It was moved by Councilmember De Vleming, seconded by Councilmember . Denenny and unanimously approved to excuse Deputy Mayor Munson and Courici nemhers Schimmels and 'Taylor from tonight's meeting. City Clerk Bainbridge called roll; Mayor Wilhite and Councilmembers Denenny, DeVleming, and Flanigan in attendance. Deputy Mayor Munson, and Councilmembers Taylor and Schimmels excused. APPROVAL OF AGENDA It was moved by Councilmember Flanigan, seconded by Councilmember Denenny and unanimously agreed upon to approve the agenda as submitted. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND P'RES>NTATIONS Mayor Wilhite acknowledged and welcomed members of Boy Scout Troop 431. COM T TEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS Councilmember Flanigan: Reported that the Hotel/Motel Tax Advisory Committee met yesterday and reached consensus on bringing forth a recommendation for grant allocation, and that a report will be given to Council at the December 7 meeting. Councilmember Delle,ning: Thanked all the SCOPE volunteers who worked to assemble the community Christmas tree, and that he looks forward to the lighting of the tree this Thursday. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Wilhite thanked former Mayor leVleming for assistance in preparing for tonight's meeting.. Council Meeting: 11 -30 -04 Page 1 of 6 Approved by Council; VOUCHER LiST DATE VOUCHER Number(s) TOTAL VOUCHER AMOUNT 11 -05 -04 5809 -5845 1,029,1 59.30 11 -12 -04 5846 -5874 436,301.21 GRAND TOTAL 1,465,460.51 DRAFT PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Wilhite invited public comment for items not on tonight's agenda. James Pollard, 17216 East Baldwin: spoke concerning the North Greenacres moratorium request which was denied by the Planning Commission; said that there were certain issues the Commission was not aware of and a decision was made in haste (he gave a letter to the Clerk for Council distribution); said this mechanism is needed to slow down the development. and give the City an opportunity to put development standards in place; he also expressed concern about the five -month lag time from the time the petition was presented to the time it was brought before the Council; and he expressed other concerns as noted in his letter handed to the clerk for distribution. Maria Duthie, 117 N Flora Road: said that when Council expects a large crowd at these meetings, that a larger facility should be secured to accommodate everyone. Nancy Mishinuri, 15103 E Valley Way: said she is dealing with a nuisance situation in her neighborhood and she would like to propose adoption of an additional part into our code; (she gave copies of the City of Spokane Code to the clerk for distribution); she stated that she has been working with our code enforcement officer who is working very hard on this case; that the person creating the nuisance apparently moved his business off Sprague Avenue where he was asked to remove the nuisance; and that it is now in her neighborhood; that this person is conducting an ongoing yard sale; and that she intends to speak to the Deputy City Attorney regarding this issue also. 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 November 9, 2004 b. Approval of Study Session Minutes of November 16, 2004 c. Approval of Payroll of November 15, 2004 of $107,236.00 d. Approval of the Following Vouchers: It was moved by Mayor Wilhite and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to waive the reading and approve the consent agenda. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 2. Motion Consideration: Proposed Contract for Library Services — Nina Regor Mayor Wilhite voiced appreciation to the citizens attending tonight's meeting, and to those who called and e- mailed Councilmembcrs regarding this issue; and apologized for not responding to all e-mails as our system was down for several days. Mayor Wilhite explained that it was never this City Council's desire to close the Spokane Valley library branch, but that it is her understanding that the Spokane County Library District voted to close the Valley library if the City Council did not accept the contract based on the .500 per $1,000 assessed value; that she was personally told that the Spokane Library felt that the cost of funding the library was a fairness issue based on the .500 per $1,000 taxation rate which was used in the rest of the County; however, she said that the notice was not articulated to the Council but that the Library Board let their position be known through the media. Mayor Wilhite said that the City Council has not received anything to date in writing from the Spokane County Library District Board regarding their vote; and that the situation could have been remedied earlier if the SCLD Board had conveyed their demands directly to the Council; and that no one likes to hear from other sources that an ultimatum has Council Meeting: 1 1 -30 -04 Page 2 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT been issued. Mayor Wilhite stressed that she is hopeful that this manner of negotiation will not become the norm and that they wish to establish a healthy partnership with the SCLD Board and their staff for the benefit of all the citizens to have access to all libraries. It was moved by Councilmember DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan that we sign the library services contract with Spokane County Library District that is based on the proposed assessed property value and instruct staff to prepare the discussion in the latter part of 2005 for annexation options. Deputy City Manager Regor explained via her PowerPoint presentation, the library services managed competition for 2005 and beyond including the scope of work, ad hoc library committee recommendations, subsequent actions, usage model, summary of proposed agreement, and staff-proposed technical amendments. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment. The following people spoke in support of the library contract. as proposed by SCLD, and in support of keeping the library open: I . Judy Belous, 8803 E 44 Ave. 99206; 2. John Snediker, 18316 E Broadway; 3. Steve Peck, 3508 E 50 Ave, Spokane; 4. Ellen Pierce, 13212 E Blossey; 5. Karl Albrecht, E. 10809 35 Ave; 6. Bill Gothmann, 10010 E 48 ; 7. Margaret Mortz, 3420 S Rid Drive; 8. Norma Trefry, 13222 E Nixon; 9. Jerry Hengen, 14506 N Woodlawn; 10. Mariah Hanley, Summit School, 10717 E 21 11. April Morrow, Summit School, 11920 E 30 12. Kristen Simpson, Summit School, 891 -6099; 13. David Sani, Spokane County Library District Board Trustee; 14. Marie Salisbury, 12465 East Olive Drive; 15. Rick Lloyd, E 14216 13 16. Tammy Fosburg, 4307 S Bowdish; 17. Margaret Cook, 15515 E 27 Ave; 18. Pat Munts, 4903 S. Mohawk; 19. Eugene Golubenko, 13900 East 17 Main Ave; 20. Doris Gearhart, 12108 East 21 21. James Pollard, 17216 Baldwin; 22. Chris Fosburg, 4307 S 13owdish; 23. Katrina Henning, 101 1 1 E. Broadway. Mayor Wilhite invited further comment; no further comments were offered. Councilmember Denenny explained that the $2.10 per $ 1,000 property assessment total tax received includes providing services to the community, and that the library funding comes out of that 52.10; that prior to incorporation, 500 went to the District, leaving $1.60; that Council needs to purchase what is needed as efficiently as possible. He added that this was done in negotiating the Sheriff's contract; and that the community attitude toward that contract was not to spend any more than what is being received within the community and to ensure that we are getting dollar value for services rendered, and are not supporting other communities with the Sheriffs contract; and added that the Sheriff's contract was successfully negotiated within approximately six months for a total contract of 513 million; yet the County Library District indicated it cannot agree to a 52 million contract; and that no one ever discussed trying to close the library or not provide equal services. Councilmember Denenny explained that a Council Meeting: 11 -30 -04 Page 3 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT request for a proposal is not a request for a bid; and that he feels some of the discourse in the community has been grossly blown out of proportion and there was a breakdown in communication. Councilmember DeVleming said that he heard that the community wants the County library service, and that the price is not an issue; that he continues to support managed competition; and that he believes that Spokane Valley continues to supplement portions of the rest of Spokane County via current contract structure; and that if we were to ask Spokane residents to assist in the police contract, or Cheney to assist in the Parks Maintenance contract, that we would be denied any assistance; and that he emphasized that Councilmembers are doing everything possible to ensure that revenues received are spent as efficiently as possible. He also thanked everyone for their letters, phone calls and e- mails; and stated his pleasure in so many people attending tonight's council meetings as that is a way for community members to fulfill part of their civic duty as it gives the public the opportunity to step forward and be heard, and added that this is the benefit of having local control and local government. Councilmember DeVleming stated he looks forward to a good relationship with the County Library District and of the future annexation discussions. Councilmember Flanigan voiced his support of the Library, of the Community, and stated that this issue became very politicized; and said that information selectively culled out of a large mass of information was used in informing community members and that at times that likely hurt the process. He emphasized that Council's intent was to make sure that revenues are thoroughly analyzed to assure the public of getting the best value for services. He also urged the community to remain in direct contact with Councilmembers, and thanked everyone for their attendance. Mayor Wilhite also stressed the importance of getting correct communication from all involved parties. Councilmember DeVleming moved, seconded by Council,netnber Denenny, to modem the motion to include the reference of the four items .suggested by staf• payment regarding delinquent and uncollectibles; termination clause, capital facilities, and modifications regarding any changes in revenues. Brief discussion ensued regarding possible annexation discussion and timeline, and because not all Councilmembers were in attendance, to continue annexation discussion at a later date. To clarify, Councilmember DeVleming stated that council wants to add the standard termination clause of a year, to go with the original five -year proposal but that annexation would nullify that; and to instruct the city manager to sign the contract. Deputy City Manager Regor re- capped that the amended motion would include directing staff to sign the agreement as proposed with the following amendments: that the technical amendments associated with capital facilities, payment and modifications be negotiated, with the Library District as conceptually proposed; and that a termination clause be added to the agreement with a one. -year notification period, and that the City Manager be authorized to sign the agreement within those parameters. City Clerk Bainbridge then read the motion to amend: to authorize staff to sign the agreement with the following amendnents, including capital facilities, modifications regarding re- negotiation in the event a revenue - reducing initiative is approved; payment provision for delinquencies and uncollectibles, add a termination clause with a one-year period, and to authorize the City Manager to sign within those parameters. Vote to amend the motion: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. A9otior carried to amend the notion. City Clerk Bainbridge then reiterated the amended motion: to sign the library services contract with Spokane County Library District that is based on the proposed assessed property value and instruct staff to prepare the discussion in the latter part of 2005 for annexation options, and to authorize staff to sign the agreement with the following amendments, including capital facilities, modifications regarding re- negotiation in the event a revenue - reducing initiative is approved; payment provision for Council Meeting: 11 -30 -04 Approved by Council: Page 4 of 6 DRAFT delinquencies and wzcollectibles, add a termination clause with a one-year period, and to authorize the City Manager to sign within those parameters; Vote on the amended motion: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried to approve the amended motion. Mayor Wilhite called for a recess at 7:20 p.rn.; and reconvened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENT: Mayor Wilhite invited public comment. Marie Dutchie, 117 N Flora Road: spoke concerning the park department future planning and of the need for a dog park to help maintain the lease laws. Sandy Haupt, 13217 E 10`'' Ave, 99216: stated that she was here for several meetings about the library; that she feels this City could be something better than before; that there is a need for a vision of how we want to see things, and that citizens would be supportive if they knew tax dollars went to what they want; that such a vision should go beyond just doing it cheaper; and that she hopes to learn more of the long range vision of where we want the city to go. Mayor Wilhite invited further public comment; no further comments were given. Administrative Reports 3.. Spokane Valley Arts Council — Norma Ventris Norma Ventris explained that she has been working on the Spokane Valley Arts Council; she explained the Arts Council mission, history, structure, background, status (501c3) and future plans. At the end of the +presentation, Ms. Ventris asked for support from Council; and it was Council consensus to lend the City's name as a supporter of the SVAC. 4. Winter Snow Handling Report — John Hohman Engineer 1-Iohman gave his PowerPoint presentation on winter snow handling, and added that the 2004 snow removal budget was $875,204 while the 2005 proposed snow removal budget is $802,564; and that there are no in -house dedicated City staff to handle these services; that all services are contracted; the crews work on shifts; and that the level of service has not changed since incorporation. 5. New Employee Position Descriptions — Nina Regor Deputy City Manager Regor gave her PowerPoint presentation describing the new employee classification positions of two new engineer positions (project manger for CIP and stormwater program), and of the CenterPlace coordinator, which was first budgeted in 2004 but will not be filled until 2005; she explained the general responsibilities of the positions and accompanying recommended classifications of grade 16 for each position. After brief discussion it was Council consensus that staff draft a resolution to amend the classifications, for staff to inform the three absent Councilmembers of specific issues concerning this proposal, and if everyone then concurs, to place this item on the next council consent agenda. 6. Proposed 2004 Comprehensive Plan amendments — Scott Kuhta/Marina Sukup Planner Kuhta explained the procedure for implementing changes to the Comprehensive Plan, and then explained proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, adding that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on these amendments September 23, 2004; that notices were mailed to property owners concerning the public hearings; the sites were posted with a sign announcing the public hearing; and that the proposals were sent to the Office of Community Development. He stated that there are eight proposed amendments, and continued by explaining each proposal. it was also noted that file CPA 02 -04 recommendation should read "change to UR -22" rather than "no change." Mr. Kuhta stated that the Commission had two continuances an CPA 07 -04 and that is now set for January 13, 2005. It was Council consensus to move forward for a first reading (except CPA 07 -04) on December 14, 2004. Council Meeting: 11 -30-04 Page 5 of 6 Approved by Council: DRAFT 7. Proposed Area -wide Rezone Request N. Greenacres area — Scott Kuhta After his PowerPoint presentation explaining the requested rezone, Mr. Kuhta explained that at the September 23 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission voted on four separate motions to exclude areas from the proposed rezone; that the Commission could not agree to amend the boundary of the rezone request and each motion failed; that the Commission then voted on the original proposal to rezone the entire area to UR -3.5, resulting in a 3 -3 tie, one Commissioner being absent from the meeting. Again on November 18, 2004, the Planning Commission reconsidered the Greenacres area wide rezone; that a motion was passed to put the motion to adopt the rezone back on the table, and after lengthy discussion, the Commission voted 4 -3 to recommend approval of the rezone from UR -7* to UR -3.5. Mr. Kuhta also stated that significant testimony was received from the neighbors that they wanted the entire area to be re- zoned and were not happy with the idea of excluding any property from that rezone. Regarding the moratorium, Mr. Kuhta said the neighbors in this area also submitted a petition for a moratorium to limit development in the interim to one -acre lots; the request was sent to the Planning Commission for recommendation; the Commission considered the moratorium and voted to recommend (by a 7 -0 vote) to reject the moratorium request; that the request now goes before Council, and added that there is no public hearing requirement to establish a moratorium. Councilmember DeVleming asked about the requirement for placing sewer in this area. Mr. Kuhta said that developers are required to extend sewer to this area; it is not under a sewer program, and we are not extending this and because there are so few houses in the area it is not on the septic tank elimination program; and at this point, if any of these developments occur, developers are required to extend sewer to this area. Mr. Kuhta said there is sewer extended down Mission to start with these developments. Councilmember DeVleming said he would like to see more information concerning mitigating the road problem, and addressing more specifically what the sewering plans or potential options are for that area. Councilmember Flanigan added that he would like to have included as additional information, the Barker Street construction project as that project will impact that area for several years. It was Council consensus to gather this additional information before moving forward so that the remaining Councilmembers are appraised of the details and issue; and to schedule that as a future agenda item as soon as practicable. Prior to adjournment, Deputy City Manager Regor distributed revisions to the baseline financial forecast to Councilmembers, indicating that the original baseline forecast used an 8% expenditure growth assumption, and this has now been changed to 6 %; and that the other change made to the baseline was to examine the way we were handling the contingency which was budgeted in a certain part of general government, and which was moved to the reserve section of the budget. Ms. Regor also indicated these changes will be implemented on the City's interactive webpage. It was moved by Councilmember Flanigan, seconded, and unanimously agreed upon to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p. m. ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Diana Wilhite, Mayor Council Meeting: 11 -30 -04 Page 6 of 6 Approved by Council: Draft Attendance: Councilmembers: Diana Wilhite, Mayor Rich Munson, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike DeVleming, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember MINUTES CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY STUDY SESSION Tuesday, December 7, 2004, 6:00 p.m. Staff: Dave Mercier, Deputy City Manager Nina Itegor, 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 Courtney Moore, Accountant Budget Analyst Bing (Greg) Bingaman, IT Specialist Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Wilhite 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 Wilhite presented a plaque to Councilmember DeVleming thanking him and commemorating his tenure as first Mayor of Spokane Valley. Councilmember DeVleming received a standing ovation for his work. Mayor Wilhite also announced that the Regional Sports Commission, in their efforts to bring various activities to this city, is pleased to announce that the 2006 National Junior Olympics for the Cross - Country Championships will be held at the Plantes Ferry Complex December 9, 2006, and that our City was chosen over other cities of Salt Lake City, Reno, and Portland; and that this event is expected to bring an estimated $2 million in economic impact to this community, with an estimated 6,000 visitors for this event scheduled to be held over three to four days; and she also thanked the efforts of the Inland Northwest Track and Field Association. 1. Student Advisory Council Bylaws — Councilmember DeVleming Councilmember DeVleming explained that after many months of work, the student advisory council was formed, they began to meet, elected a Chair, Vice -Chair and Historian; and began work on a draft Student Advisory Council bylaws; and in keeping with Resolution 04 -018, those bylaws are to be approved by the Spokane Valley City Council. Councilmember DeVleming introduced the members of the S.A.C., and Chair Michael Green, Vice -Chair Katie Osterback, and Historian Randee Berg and those students went through their PowerPoint presentation and explained their draft by -laws. After brief Council discussion concerning the need to amend the current resolution (04 -018, section 2C) to conform with the term limits outlined in the by -laws, it was Council consensus to place the by -laws as well as the proposed amended resolution on the next council consent agenda. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. 2. First Reading, Proposed Utility Tax Ordinance — Ken Thompson After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, Finance Director Thompson gave his PowerPoint presentation, highlighting the three financial problems of the General Fund (problem statement # 1), the Street Fund (problem statement 42), and the Capital Project Shortfall (problem statement #3). Director Thompson stated that it is staff's recommendation to impose the 6% tax on the five utilities shown on Study Session Minutes of 12.07 -04 Page 1 of 6 Approved by Council: Draft page three of his accompanying documents. He also mentioned some minor changes in the ordinance, such as the effective date of March 1, 2005 instead of January 1, 2005, and adding a section that would provide relief for those on low incomes, including senior citizens. Mr. Thompson said that this 6% utility tax recommendation includes electricity, and assumes an 8% increase for City expenditures. Director Thompson stated that staff seeks further direction on this proposed ordinance. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson to move ordinance 04 -045 to a second reading based on changing page three to change the rate of the tax to 4 %; and to delete paragraph d of section 2, which includes light and power electricity. There was no second and the motion was not considered. Councilmember Flanigan said he would consider such a motion with the changes only and not moving the ordinance forward to a second reading. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to change the rate to 4% and delete paragraph d of section 2. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Munson, Councibnembers Taylor, Flanigan, Denenny, and DeVleming. Opposed: Councilmember Schimmels. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Deputy Mayor Munson explained that there are uncertainties of what will actually occur between now and 2007; and that this motion is based on the hope that things will be financially better than currently forecasted; and that as part of the budget process each year, this tax will be evaluated and adjusted if needed. Councilmember DeVleming asked in reference to the delinquency noted on page five, of who would pay the utility tax and Mr. Thompson said the payment would be made by the utility company. Councilmember DeVleming also asked concerning rate changes in section 11, why were telephone and natural gas specifically mentioned and nothing about refuse collection or the other utilities to be taxed. Director Thompson said he would check on that and report at the next reading. It was also noted that there is no sunset clause in this ordinance, but council always has the option of changing ordinances when they so desire. In response to Councilmember Schimmel's question concerning how the low income and senior relief would apply, Director Thompson said the specifics were not included in the ordinance, but the plan would be to come back to Council to gather those specifics of income levels to consider, who it would apply to, etc. and then to contract with a firm that does that type of work in this area, and provide the funds and using council set guidelines, they would decide who would have that relief thereby not directly involving staff in that operation, but providing the funds from the tax to take care of that work. Deputy City Manager Regor mentioned regarding electricity assistance, that staff has had contact with SNAP and Valley Center and they are ready to work with us regarding assistance to seniors. Councilmember Denenny asked if an analysis was done on what percentage of our community are natural gas customers, and what percentage of the projected revenues come from natural gas. Director Thompson said that the electricity portion represented about 42 %; and that he is not sure staff has information concerning the natural gas portion. Budget Analyst Courtney Moore stated that the original estimate for the 6% utility tax on the five utilities mentioned, that the natural gas portion of that was only approximately one -half million dollars of tax revenue; and if that 6% changes to 4 %, the resulting natural gas revenue would reduce to approximately $300,000 or $400,000; and that the largest component of those funds would come from telephone. Deputy Mayor Munson stated that there have been some questions in the community of the legality of levying this tax against electricity of certain providers, and that although we have received legal opinion issued from our City and from Municipal Research Service Center (MRSC), because of the amount of money involved, Deputy Mayor Munson would like us to ask an outside agency, another law firm which specializes in this kind of law, to give us a legal opinion if electricity can be included from what we feel arc now, exempt providers, and added that if we address this now, we could authorize finding a firm and Study Session Minutes of 12 -07 -04 Page 2 of 6 Approved by Council: Draft getting a cost to come back to Council for a decision, and later to make any changes necessary in the ordinance. City Manager Mercier said we had that question examined by then acting interim City Attorney Stanley Schwartz, and by Deputy City Attorney Cary Driskell, and by consultation with the attorney group at MRSC; and all feel that Vera Power did qualify as a special purpose district and therefore would not be subject to this taxation. In Council's conversations about this matter, Mr. Mercier said Council weighed the philosophical points of view as to whether one of the electrical providers may not be subject to the taxation and if council would want to apply taxes to the other. Councilmember Taylor added that there is an opinion that this specific issue has not been addressed in court and we are therefore dealing with opposing interpretations of the law, and that he feels it is important to get through this without taxing electricity at this point, but wants to have full range of options in the future; and that he does not see how a tax can be placed on electricity at any time in the future if not applied evenly; and that he is not convinced that the opinions received are the correct opinions and that it needs to be tested in court. City Manager Mercier said that if Council wants another legal firm to review that subject, that he suggests we select a firm at the far side of the state that specializes in those types of utility services. It was council consensus to have Mr. Mercier examine what it would cost to acquire such an opinion. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and seconded by Councilmember Denetmy to advance ordinance 04 -045 to a second reading to he announced at a later date; and that ordinance to be advanced is as amended in the earlier vote. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment. Steve Schultz, 310 S Greenacres Road: said that he has had a business here since 1975; that running a business is a struggle especially with expenses and property taxes going up; that natural gas and electricity almost doubled since 2000; and that this tax will be discriminatory and be against people who heat by gas and not by electricity; that all will be hurt with any tax; and that he has to live within his budget and has had to cut expenses; and hopes we don't create a new business tax.. Bill Gothmann, 10010 E 48 Ave: has a request before this tax is passed; that he would like to see what it would cost him, or the average taxpayer, per month or how it would affects him should this be passed. Don Swanson, 312 S Farr Road: stated that he was assured from people he talked to that there would be no new taxes, so he bought a house here; had he known he would not have done that; that he would rather have his money; and is appalled that some salary ranges for staff are between $7,000 and $9,000 per month; that he is looking at a high budget staff; and that he would qualify as a senior citizen but does not want to be subsidized by his children or his grandchildren; and that Council needs to look at the hard choices; and suggests perhaps throwing out the budget. and starting over again. Mayor Wilhite invited further public comment; no further comments were offered. Councilmember Taylor stated his concern about having to raise taxes; and that he'd like to see some cuts made in some of the contract services, and that a discussion should take place in terms of how the utility tax is framed within the entire financial plan; that by raising taxes without looking at possible cuts would be a disservice; that he would like to see the impact if we were to cut five positions from the police force as that would likely cover the general fund needs, street fund needs and capital needs until the end of 2005, and would recognize an approximate 8500,000 yearly savings. Councilmember DeVleming asked about examining the law enforcement contract to see if any flexibility exists. Deputy City Manager Regor stated that there is a one -year notification period for the law Study Session Minutes of 12 -07-04 Page 3 of 6 Approved by Council: Draft enforcement contract; and that it is possible to modify the agreement through a negotiation process, but that primarily for cancellation, there is a one -year notification clause; and unless there is a mutually agreed upon negotiated solution, any reduction in the law enforcement contract would not be effective until 2006. After further council discussion concerning any change in the law enforcement contract, it was Council consensus to wait to take any action until after Cal Walker's December 21 presentation; but that those conversations and discussions concerning changes in the law enforcement contract should definitely take place, including discussions on the efficiency of service and analyzing law enforcement service levels in general. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Munson, Councilmembers Schimmels, Taylor, Denenny, and Del/tenting. Opposed: Councilmember Flanigan. Abstentions: !None. Motion carried. Mayor Wilhite called for a recess at 7:25 p.m.; and reconvened the meeting at 7:36 p.m. 3. Council Guidance on Filling Vacancy of City Attorney — Dave Mercier City Manager Mercier explained that there are two options to fill the vacancy of City Attorney: either contract with another law firm or fill the position in-house; and that he recommends we fill the position in- house, and some of the advantages of doing so include having 100% of that person's attention; that the turn- around time on work products is quicker; there would be institutional memory and knowledge; there would be a holistic understanding of the entire organization and the opportunity to use fixed assets in personnel to expand their attention beyond reacting to issues and could move to problem avoidance. Mr. Mercier added that there is sufficient legal work that needs attention to have this position in- house; and that he is hoping to determine from Council if resources can be allocated to hire in -house or contract outside. Mr. Mercier also brought Council attention to the December 7 memo from Nina Regor, addressing city attorney recruitment, which discusses AWC's data on salary range, and also recruitment costs. Councilmember Flanigan stated he would like a listing of all reporting communities if possible; and Councilmember Schimmels said he would prefer not to spend funds to seek out an attorney and feels such a fee would be excessive. Discussion continued concerning advantages of contracting such as having a broader range of expertise by contracting with a firm; other disadvantages such as the issue of conflict of interest, the benefits of using recruiting firms, such as they follow the careers of individuals, they have fairly good sense of success of folks elsewhere; they develop a good sense of client community and most: maintain mailing lists of those they deal with; and they provide background checking and screening services. Councilmember Flanigan asked about hiring another deputy city attorney or someone to work under our current Deputy City Attorney. While Councilmember Schimmels said he would support hiring in- house, Councilmember DeVlcming said he would like more information on available community resources. Councilmember Flanigan stated his has no objection in gathering additional information and wants to explore the possibility of having someone under our current Deputy City Attorney, and /or the possibility of using contract specialists where necessary. Deputy Mayor Munson stated his support with use of a search agency to see what the market might hold. Councilmember Taylor stated his opinion that the cost benefits are in favor of contracting with an attorney rather than bringing someone in -house at this time. Further discussion continued on cost for a true search, and cost of hiring in -house including salary, benefits, and other overhead; and on determining conflicts of interest. At the end of the discussion, it was noted that four Councilmembers prefer to contract with another law firm, and three Councilmembers prefer hiring in- house. City Manager Mercier stated that he will announce the position and request proposals be submitted from firms; that he would ask for their qualifications and of their notice of pricing strategies, and will likely issue a RFP some time next week or so; then allow a few weeks for responses; Study Session Minutes of 12 -07 -04 Page 4 of 6 Approved by Council: Draft and then examine those responses. Deputy Mayor Munson added that technically it is up to the City Manager to make the hiring decision, and that there will not be a vote on which firm will be chosen. 4. Ordinance Adopting Framework for Development Code — Marina Sukup Community Development Director Sukup explained that the goal is to eventually consolidate and integrate all regulations in a single document, including subdivision, zoning and development standards, and that in so doing, it will provide well - organized, concise, clear and readable regulations to ensure informed, consistent interpretation and enforcement of City policies which affect land development and the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. She also mentioned that sections for which no ordinance or regulations have been adopted are shown as "reserved" for possible future action. 1t was Council consensus to move forward with this proposal. 5. Lodging Tax Advisory Cnmrnittee Grant Recommendations Report— Councilmember Flanigan Councilmember Flanigan introduced Lodging Tax Advisory Committee members Jeff Fiman and Liz Beck; and explained that the committee came to an agreement on the grant allocations, as shown in the attached documentation; and that the 59,000/59,000 match for the Fairgrounds was because the Fairgrounds wanted to fund an economic impact study or analysis with projected expenses of $18,000 with us providing $15,000 and 53,000 from county; but that the committee came up with $9,000 matching or for every $1,000 the County puts forward, they can recoup an equal amount from us. Councilmember Flanigan also explained that funds for the Museum would be used for production and brochure distribution; that the YMCA sought funds for marketing for their skate park; the Sports Commission recommendation is $75,000; the Visitor Convention Bureau allocation recommendation is $136,000; and there is also the previously approved $40,000 for CenterPlace. Councilmcmber Flanigan also explained that he feels the committee is looking for more accountability from each entity and specifics on how each proposal would benefit Spokane Valley; adding that the committee will meet next Monday to look at contract language to include good ways to provide that accountability. Committee member Jeff Fiman then expressed his concern on the process of fund allocation; and stated his opposition to the recommendations that other members agreed upon, that he feels there is an injustice in the decision process; that the Valleyfest and the Museum will not generate increased tourism and additional tax dollars; that he is concerned that two members of the committee are also applying for funds; that other vendors were not notified of this process; and that the CVB does the most but we are giving them far Tess than their original request. Councilmember Flanigan explained the process and added that the City of Spokane also recommendation allocations of 525,000 for the CVB, $25,000 to the Sports Commission, 510,000 to Sister Cities Association, $10,000 to the Symphony, 57,500 each to the International Film Festival and to the Spokane Arts, 55,000 each to Inland NW Dance and to the MAC; S3,000 to Assistive Listening and 52,000 to Neighborhood Business. Liz Beck mentioned that Mr. Fiman's views come as a surprise as during the committee meeting, he did not voice any opposition to what was agreed upon at the meeting. Councilmember Flanigan added that although Valleyfest might not generate heads in beds, the Valley Mall indicated they had large sales during that event; and also that the intent of these funds is to promote this community as an entity of its own. in response to Deputy Mayor Munson's question about having questionnaires in hotel /motel rooms as a way to measure allocation of funds, Mr. Fiman said to his knowledge that has not been done, but he can include that in the rooms and it would not be a problem. It was Council consensus to put this item on the next Council agenda. 6. Official Newspaper Proposals — Chris Bainbridge City Clerk Bainbridge explained the background of choosing the official newspaper, and concluded by stating that the Valley News Herald is staff's recommendation due to cost savings. It was council consensus to stay with the Valley News Herald and review this issue again next year. 7. Declaration of Easement Report (ChrisLinc Properties, LLC) — Cary Driskell Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained precious council action with adoption of Ordinance 04 -043, vacating a portion of David Road; and that Marshall Clark, owner of the remaining property comprising Study Session Minutes of 12 -07.04 Page 5 of 6 Approved by Council: Draft the triangular piece of land bordered by Sprague, Appleway and Tierman, requests an easement for the purpose of placing draining facilities; that Council declared this properly surplus for public use, and this intended use fits within that declaration yet maintains city fee ownership in the event the City determines a substantial future need. It was Council consensus to move forward with this proposal and place this matter for Council consideration on the January 4, 2005 agenda. 8. Court Related 2005 Contract — Cary Driskell Deputy City Attorney Driskell stated that we have several contracts with the County regarding court related services; that most of those are two -year contracts and expire the end of 2004; that staff has had discussions with County staff on how to renew those if that is the will of Council and County, and of what form those renewals will take; that they are discussing and want to develop model boilerplate language for all contracts, and have consistency on scope of services and cost method for each contract; and that he will meet with his County counterparts this Thursday to further refine the process and anticipates bringing the specific contracts forward soon. 9. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor Wilhite It was decided to place the second reading of the utility tax on the advance agenda under "other pending issues." 10. Council Check in — Dave Mercier Deputy Mayor Munson mentioned the addition of an advance agenda item concerning a public information officer, and that the first touch will be written information only; and will later schedule discussion based on the information he will provide. 11. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier City Manager Mercier said that in polling interest of other law firms to provide consultation to the City, that we wants to alert Council to one provision that will be included in the RFP, that such firm would forgo representation of any city land use matters with any other clients; and that he feels this is a fair play representation and believes the consequence of adding that provision will dampen enthusiasm for some firms to submit their RFP (response for proposal). Mr. Mercier also mentioned that the Council now has a draft of the agreement with SCLD and that the language in there now reflects the cautionary notes embedded in Council's votes; and that Mike Wirt was cooperative and understanding for the issues they were looking for control for; and that our understanding is that it is all agreeable with them. Mayor Wilhite asked that staff send a copy of the proposed press release to all Councilmembers for their comment. Additionally, Mr. Mercier mentioned that during a public comment two weeks ago, someone asked about initiative /referendum, and that staff is researching that topic and anticipates having a report ready for a January Council meeting. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Diana Wilhite, Mayor Study Session Minutes of 12 -07 -04 Page 6 of 6 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 12 - 14 - 04 Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business XX new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Resolution No. 04 -026 Amending Resolution 04 -018 relating to the Student Advisory Council. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Resolution 04 -007 and 04 -018. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Study session discussion 12 - - 04. BACKGROUND: During the December 7, 2004 Council study session, Deputy Mayor Munson noted a discrepancy in the term limits in the resolution and in the bylaws, and suggested amending the current resolution (04 -018, section 2C) to conform to the bylaws term limit of two years. It was Council consensus to place the by -laws as well as the proposed amended resolution on the next council consent agenda. The attached proposed Resolution 04 -026 would make that amendment. OPTIONS: Approve Resolution 04 -026; or remove this item from the consent agenda to discuss separately. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Motion to approve Resolution 04 -026 on the Consent Agenda on 12- 14 -04. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager; Mike DeVleming, Councilmember. ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Resolution 04 -026 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 04-018, AMENDING RESOLUTION 04 -007, CREATING THE STUDENT ADVISORY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY. WHEREAS, the City Council for Spokane Valley adopted Resolution No. 04 -018, amending Resolution 04 -007, Creating the Student Advisory Council for the City of Spokane Valley; and WHEREAS, changes in certain wording have been suggested to more accurately reflect the intent of the resolution creating the Student Advisory Council. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, that Resolution 04 -018, be amended as follows: Section 1. Resolution 04 -018 Section 2(C) shall be amended as set forth below: C. Length of terms: Each student member of the Student Advisory Council shall serve a two -year term. Each two -year term shall run from September 1 of the first year to June 30 of the second year of the term. The exception is the at -largc student member, who shall serve a one -year term. One - half of the initial student advisory council shall only have one -year terms. Section 2. Remainder of Resolution 04 -018 Unchanged. The remaining sections of Resolution 04 -018 will remain unchanged. Section 3. Severability: If any section, sentence, clause or phrase:of this resolution shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution. Section 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effective upon adoption. Adopted this 14` day of December, 2004. ATTEST: Diana Wilhite Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney CITY OF SPOICANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 04 -026 City of Spokane Valley Resolution 04 -026 Amending 04-018 S.A.C. Page 1 of 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 12 -14 -04 Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business XX new business ❑ public hearing 0 information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Student Advisory Council Bylaws GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Resolution 04 -007 and 04 -018. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Study session discussion 12 -7 -04. BACKGROUND: During the December 7, 2004 Council study session, Deputy Mayor Munson noted a discrepancy in the term limits in the resolution and in the bylaws, and suggested amending the current resolution (04 -018, section 2C) to conform to the bylaws term limit of two years. It was Council consensus to place the by -laws as well as the proposed amended resolution on the next council consent agenda. OPTIONS: Approve attached bylaws; or remove this item from the consent agenda to discuss separately. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Motion to approve Student Advisory Council bylaws BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager; Mike DeVleming, Councilmember. ATTACHMENTS: Student Advisory Council Bylaws SPOKANE VALLEY STUDENT ADVISORY COUNCIL BY- LAWS Intent The by -laws are the rules that govern the Student Advisory Council for the City of Spokane Valley. Scope The by -laws should direct all student council activity during meetings. Definitions Council Student Advisory Council Term Two years (September thru June) unless otherwise noted 10.00 MEETING SCHEDULE & LOCATION 10.10 Council meetings will start in September and end the following June. 10.20 Meetings will be held on the 1 & 3` Thursday unless otherwise noted. 10.30 It is the intent that on the first meeting in June, the council will finalize its recommendation for the next slate of Student Advisory Council Members to the Spokane Valley City Council for approval. 10.40 Council meetings will be held in the Spokane Valley Council Chambers unless otherwise noted. 10.50 Council Meetings will start at 6:30 p.m, and will adjourn no later than 8:00 p.m. unless a motion and second to extend the meeting receives a majority vote. 20.00 ATTENDANCE 20.10 Council members will attend all council meetings. 20.20 Absences (other than illness) must be approved by council. 20.30 Two (2) unexcused absences will be grounds for removal from council. 30.00 ELIGIBILITY & MAKEUP 30.10 Council will consist of: (1) Representative from Valley Christian School. (2) Representatives from East Valley High School. (2) Representatives from West Valley High School. (3) Representatives from Central Valley High School. (3) Representatives from University High School. S.A.C. By -laws Page 1 of 3 30.20 All appointments to the council will be made by Mayor and confirmed by City Council. 30.30. Length of Terms 40.00 OFFICERS (1) Student At Large. (1) Spokane Valley Mayor or their designated representative. (1) Spokane Valley City Manager or their designated representative. (1) Representative of the business community. 30.30.01 30.30.02 30.30.03 30.30.04 30.30.05 40.10 The selection of officers will be performed during the first S.A.C. meeting in September. 40.20 Officers will consist of one (1) Council Chair. 40.20.01 Council Chair will be elected by a simple vote of the S.A.C. and will serve a one -year term (September thru June). 40.20.02 Council Chair will be responsible for presiding over council meetings and setting agendas. 40.20.03 Council Chair will appoint chairs of all sub committees. 40.30 Officers will consist of one (1) Council Vice -Chair 40.30.01 ` 40.30.02 High School representatives will serve two (2) years. The terms of the high school representatives will be staggered so that at least four (4) S.A.C. members will be returning. Student at Large will serve one (1) year. Mayor (or representative), City Manager (or representative) and Business representative will serve consecutive one -year terms. S.A.C. applications for high school representatives will be advertised in April and recommendations from the S.A.C. will be made in June to the City Council. Council Vice -Chair will be elected by a simple vote of the S.A.C. and will serve a one -year term (September thru June). Council Vice -Chair will assume the Chair position in the second year of their term (September thru June). S.A.C. By -laws Page 2 of 3 40.30.03 Council Vice -Chair will preside over meetings in the absence of the Chair. 40.40 Officers will consist of one (1) Council Historian 40.40.01 Council Historian will be elected by a simple vote of the S.A.C. and will serve a one -year term (September thru June). 40.40.02 Council Historian will be responsible for the recording of all minutes taken during the S.A.C. meetings. 40.40.03 Council Historian will preside over meetings in the absence of both the Chair and the Vice - Chair. 40.40.04 Council Historian will be responsible for advanced agenda scheduling. 50.00 SUB COMMITTEES 50.10 Committees will be created, as necessary by the S.A.C., with a specific task. 50.20 Committees will dissolve once the specific task has been accomplished. 50.30 Committees can consist of other citizens (fellow students, business people community members, and other citizens). 60.00 GENERAL 60.10 The S.A.C. is an advisory council to the City Council. 60.20 All recommendations to the City Council are suggestions only. 60.30 S.A.C. by -laws will be designed and written by S.A.C. and will require City Council approval to ratify. 60.40 All S.A.C. meetings are public and open. S.A.C. By -laws Page 3 of 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 14, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: El consent L0 old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Resolution No. 04 -027, Creating an Engineer Classification and Job Description for the City of Spokane Valley GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: 2005 Budget adoption 11/9/04; Council Administrative Report 11/30/04 BACKGROUND: At the November 30 Council meeting, staff presented a draft position description for an Engineer classification, and recommended Grade 16. The 2005 budget includes two new Engineer positions — one for Capital Projects, and one for the Stormwater program. Grade 16 is slightly below the statewide average salary range for this type of position according to the AWC annual salary and benefit survey. However, it is slightly higher than similar positions in the City of Spokane and Spokane County. It is reasonable to conclude that Grade 16 is in line with the regional market. The following table shows the engineering structure in the Spokane Valley classification system. POSITION Eng ineering Technician Assistant En• ineer En• ineer • ro . osed Part-Time Senior Eng ineer non -su • erviso Full -Time Senior Engineer — Capital Projects; Development su •erviso GRADE 14 15 16 17 18 Resolution No. 04 - 027 adopts the job description and places the Engineer at Grade 16. There was consensus to place this item on the consent agenda, unless there were subsequent questions by Council members. Staff has received no additional questions from Council on the Engineer position. OPTIONS: Approve Resolution 04 -027, or provide additional direction to staff. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Resolution No. 04 -027. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Funds are included in the 2005 budget to fill the positions. STAFF CONTACT: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Resolution No. 04 -027 A RESOLUTION CREATING AN ENGINEER CLASSIFICATION AND JOB DESCRIPTION FOR THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY WHEREAS, the City Council from time to time must create new employee classifications and adopt conditions of employment for those newly- created classifications; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Spokane Valley Municipal Code provision 2..50.070, which, in part, provides that position classifications and job descriptions shall be developed for new positions; and WHEREAS, the City Council through Resolution No. 03 -031 adopted job descriptions for City positions. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, as follows: Section I. New Employee Classification and Position Description for Engineer Adopted. The City of Spokane Valley creates the new employee classification of "Engineer ", and adopts the position description for the position of Engineer, attached hereto as Attachment 1, as if fully set forth herein. This job description includes a pay grade classification of 16. Section 2. Remaining Job Descriptions Unchanged. The remainder of the job descriptions contained in Resolution No. 03 -031 as adopted or amended remain unchanged by this action. A 1 EST: Section 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. Adopted this day of December, 2004. Christine .Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE. COUNTY, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 04 -027 City of Spokane Valley Mayor Diana Wilhite Resolution 04 -027 Creating Engineer Position Classification Page 1 of 1 Class Title: Engineer Department: Public Works Division: NA Date: January 1, 2005 GENERAL PURPOSE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY POSITION DESCRIPTION Job Code Number: 31 Grade Number: 16 FLSA Status: Exempt Location: City IIall ATTACHMENT 1 Resolution No. 04 -027 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 RL+"CEIVED: Works under the general guidance and direction of a Senior Engineer. SUPERVISION EXERCISED N/A ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 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 decisionsfor the following: • Design standards and Deviation Requests 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 storrnwater 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 MINIMUM 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 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. (B) Position Description: Engineer 2 (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 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. 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 City Manager Effective Date: January 1, 2005 Revision History: New Position Description: Engineer 4 Meeting Date: 12 -14 -04 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: x consent ❑ old business 111 new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Payroll for Period Ending November 30, 2004 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Payroll for period ending 11 -30 -04 Salary: $ 99,303.54 Benefits: $ 45,931.24 $ 145,234.78 STAFF CONTACT: Daniel Cenis /Courtney Moore ATTACHMENTS CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: 12 -14 -04 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: x consent ❑ old business ['new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approve claims for vouchers: voucher numbers 5884 -5919 for $2,609,240.42; and voucher list 5932 -5953 for $29,345.50; for a total of $2,638,585.92 BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Mary Baslington ATTACHMENTS Voucher Lists CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Voucher List of claims vchlist 11/24/2004 2:46:51PM Bank code : apbank 5886 11/24/2004 000030 AVISTA UTILITIES 410069444 11/4/04 5887 11/24/2004 000120 AWC EMPLOYEE BENEFITS TRUST 11/16/04 5888 11/24/2004 000671 BUILDING PERMITS LAW BULLETIN BPLB -HO-04 5889 11/24/2004 000604 CAMERON CONTRACTING, INC. 2218 1117 2004 -0066 5890 11/24/2004 000101 CDWG PK89590 40331 5891 11/24/2004 000670 CITY OF CHENEY 11/15/04 Meeting 5892 11/24/2004 000109 COFFEE SYSTEMS INC 25788 5893 11/24/2004 000606 COLUMBIA FIBER SOLUTIONS 3856 11/30/04 5894 11/24/2004 000152 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RE- 313- ATB41109077 Voucher List Page: 1 Spokane Valley Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount 5884 11/19/2004 000081. STATE OF WA, DEPART OF REVENUE Sales Tax Oct USE TAX FOR OCTOBER 87.88 5885 11/24/2004 000037 AMERICAN LINEN 519535 FLOOR MAT SERVICE 45.78 SIGNAL & ILLUMINATION MAINT. 6,059.60 RE- 313- ATB41109078 STATE ROUTE ROADWAY MAINT. 6,076.36 Total : 12,135.96 5895 11/24/2004 000278 DRISKELL, CARY 11/16/04 CD Reimb. TRAVEUMILEAGE 23.63 Total : 23.63 STREET LIGHTING /SIGNAL POWEF Total : COUNCIL AWC BENEFITS SUBSCRIPTION Total : Total : Total : MIRABEAU MEADOWS APPROACH Total : SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE COFFEE SUPPLIES DARK FIBER LEASE Total : 1,235.74 Total : MAYORS MEETING LUNCHEON Total : Total : Total : 87.88 45.78 18,071.65 18, 071.65 1,235.74 99.00 99.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 116.93 116.93 30.00 30.00 90.65 90.65 32.52 32.52 1 vchlist 11/24/2004 2:46:51 PM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 5896 11/24/2004 000179 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFF ASSOC 0031582 5897 11/24/2004 000002 H & H BUSINESS SYSTEMS 5898 5899 5900 5901 5902 5903 5904 11/24/2004 000669 HOPE FUND 11/24/2004 000288 INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL 11/24/2004 000265 JACKSON, MIKE 11/24/2004 000266 JAMES, GAY 11/24/2004 000033 MCPC 11/24/2004 000484 MOONEY & PUGH CONTRACTORS INC. 04 -001 10 -31 -04 11/24/2004 000652 OFFICE DEPOT 5905 11/24/2004 000119 PIP PRINTING 126068 126099 126100 126101 126102 126173 f ,J Voucher List Spokane Valley 11/9/04 Facility 0833522 -IN 11/10/04 MJ Reimb. 11/18/04 GJ Reimb. 4636968 263808007 -001 263808836 -001 264336310 -001 264338181 -001 1330028585 PO # 40319 40346 40176 PROJECT BILLING AT CENTERPLA Total : 40343 40343 40343 40348 40348 40344 Description /Account MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL COST PER COPY CHARGES COST PER COPY CHARGES COST PER COPY CHARGES COST PER COPY CHARGES COST PER COPY CHARGES COST PER COPY CHARGES MEETING SUPPLIES PUBLICATION REIMB_ TRAVEUMILEAGE OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES TAX CODE STICKERS Total : Total : Total : Total : Tota I : REIMB. FOR KITCHEN SUPPLIES Total : Total : Total : } Page: 2 Amount 560.00 560.00 249.25 142.56 50.51 153.22 68.40 44.14 708.08 105.00 105.00 202.74 202.74 9.73 9.73 26.75 26.75 18.63 18.63 935,385.00 935,385.00 504.31 110.93 316.34 178.60 1,110.18 1,406.79 Page: 2 vchlist 11/24/2004 2:46:51 PM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor 5905 11/24/2004 000119 PIP PRINTING 5906 11/24/2004 000322 QWEST 5907 11/24/2004 000172 SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEER 5908 11/24/2004 000656 SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEERS 5910 11/24/2004 000001 SPOKANE COUNTY TREASURER 5911 11/24/2004 000668 SPOKANE COUNTY TREASURER 5913 11/24/2004 000311 SPRINT PCS 5914 11/24/2004 000257 STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE 5915 11/24/2004 000398 TAN MOORE ARCHITECTS 5916 11/24/2004 000591 THE ACTIVE NETWORK Invoice (Continued) 1330028630 509 -921 -6787 511B 16401 5909 11/24/2004 000090 SPOKANE COUNTY INFORMATION, SYS 41566 Voucher List Spokane Valley 11/19/04 County 35233.0310 35233.1217 5912 11/24/2004 000328 SPOKANE VALLEY SENIOR, CITIZENS A 11/15/04 SVSC Reimb. 0141276664 -3 11/14 L51684 P3983 Regiiest#11 INV0004144 PO # 40337 Description /Account BUSINESS CARDS TELEPHONE CHARGES CITRIX LICENSES REIMB. INTERNET /DSL 04 -34 COUNTY ENGINEERING SERVICES 04 -35 COUNTY ENGINEERING SERVICES Total : Total : Total : COUNTY ENGINEERS SERVICES Total : CELL PHONE CHARGES Total : COUNTY CONTRACT PAYMENTS Total : PROPERTY TAX STATEMENT TAXES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMTS Total : Total : Total : STATUTORY AUDIT SERVICES Total : MIRABEAU POINT CENTERPLACE I Total : Page: 3 Amount 130.95 1,537.74 38.13 38.13 188,099.98 201,998.68 390,098.66 677.97 677.97 1,040.00 1,040.00 1,222, 594.91 1, 222, 594.91 27.12 26.25 53.37 37.99 37.99 611.28 611.28 1,556.60 1,556.60 12,676.94 12, 676.94 RECWARE SAFARI SOFTWARE 6,599.00 ie. 3 vchlist 11/24/2004 2:46:51 PM I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been famished, the services rendered, nr 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 Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 4 Bank code: apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount 5916 11/24/2004 000591 000591 THE ACTIVE NETWORK (Continued) Total : 6,599.00 5917 11/24/2004 000672 TJ LANCO LLC REZ- 20- 04!SUB -14 -04 REFUND PLANNING FEES 280.00 Total : 280.00 5918 11/24/2004 000167 VERA WATER & POWER 0007 017753.01 STREET POWER LIGHTING/WATEF 16.78 Total : 16.78 5919 11/24/2004 000667 WSDOT, ENGINEERING PUBLICATIONS 11/22/04 WSDOT Pub. 40352 PUBLICATIONS 325.20 Total : 325.20 36 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 2,609,240.42 36 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 2,609,240.42 Page: 4 vchlist 12/03/2004 10:40:46AM Bank code: apbank Voucher 5932 12/3/2004 000335 ALTON'S TIRE 5933 12/3/2004 000120 AWC EMPLOYEE BENEFITS TRUST 5934 12/3/2004 000673 BUDGET ARBOR & LOGGING LLC 5935 12/3/2004 000101 CDWG 5936 12/3/2004 000326 CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION DIST, #19 05859.0 5937 12/3/2004 000028 FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANK 5938 12/3/2004 000106 FEDEX 5939 12/3/2004 000410 GRIFFIN PUBLISHING INC. 5940 12/3/2004 000070 INLAND POWER AND LIGHT CO 5941 12/3/2004 000388 IRVIN WATER DIST. #6 5942 12/3/2004 000117 JOURNAL NEWS PUBLISHING Date Vendor Invoice 25359 25360 25361 25362 25363 25364 Voucher List Spokane Valley 6-187 12/3/04 AWC 11/29/04 Refund PR28736 PO # 11/15/04 MasterCard2 11 -15 -04 MasterCard 40340 7 -873 -01865 05056 94202 -010 112500.0 Irvin Description /Account NEW TIRES COUNCILMEMBER BENEFITS Total : REFUND RELOCATION INSP. FEE Total : 40351 SMALL TOOLS & MINOR EQUIPMEI Total : WATER CHARGES CREDIT CARD CHARGES CREDIT CARD CHARGES FED EX SHIPPING ADVERTISING ADVERTISING ADVERTISING ADVERTISING ADVERTISING ADVERTISING Total : Total : Total : Total : SV SENIOR CENTER NEWSLETTEF Tota I : STREET POWER LIGHTING Total : WATER CHARGES Total : Page: 1 Amount 272.64 272.64 101.04 101.04 47.00 47.00 165.78 165.78 37.50 37.50 1,525.24 281.96 1,807.20 48.80 48.80 349.05 349.05 176.40 176.40 165.00 165.00 45.00 50.25 34.50 64.50 82.50 77.25 1 vchlist 12/03/2004 10:40:46AM Bank code : apbank Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description /Account Amount 5942 12/3/2004 000117 JOURNAL NEWS PUBLISHING (Continued) 25365 ADVERTISING gg_75 25366 ADVERTISING 93.75 25395 ADVERTISING 54.00 25396 ADVERTISING 38.25 Total : 639.75 5943 1213/2004 000387 MODEL IRRIGATION DIST. #18 06- 0400.0 WATER CHARGES 590.20 Total : 590.20 5944 12/3/2004 000636 MOORE IACOFANO GOLTSMAN, INC. 0017260 PARK & REC MASTER PLAN 8,473.00 Total : 8,473.00 5945 12/3/2004 000239 NORTHWEST BUSINESS STAMP 51445 40357 MAGNETIC NAME TAGS 54.80 Total : 54.80 5946 12/3/2004 000652 OFFICE DEPOT 262478058 -001 40336 COUNCILCHAMBER CHAIRS 418.56 265058358 -001 40349 OFFICE SUPPLIES 91.85 265058983 -001 40349 OFFICE SUPPLIES 6.25 265059063 -001 40349 OFFICE SUPPLIES 210.55 Total : 727.21 5947 12/3/2004 000029 PITNEY BOWES CREDIT CORP. 5618533 -NVO4 COPIER RENTAL PAYMENT 448.77 Total : 448.77 5948 12/3/2004 000324 SCWD #3 170 - 0040 -03 WATER CHARGES 25.52 Total : 25.52 5949 12/3/2004 000230 SPOKANE CNTY AUDITORS OFC, RECO 11/12/04 Recording RECORDING FEES 384.00 Total : 384.00 5950 12/3/2004 000617 SPOKANE COUNTY TREASURER, C/0 C 11/24/04 Liquor LIQUOR TAXES & PROFITS 3RD 01 4,566.46 Total : 4,566.46 5951 12/3/2004 000407 SPOKANE VALLEY JUNIOR, SOCCER A: 12/1104 Soccer As soc LODGING TAX MONIES 9,697.55 Total : 9,697.55 5952 12/3/2004 000488 SUKUP, MARINA 11/30/04 MS Reimb. REIMB. TRAVEL /MILEAGE 141.51 Page: 2 vchlist 12/03/2004 10:40:46AM Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 5952 12/3/2004 000488 000488 SUKUP, MARINA (Continued) Total : 141.51 5953 12/312004 000167 VERA WATER & POWER 11/12-23104 VERA STREET POWER LIGHTING/WATEF 426.32 Total : 426.32 22 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 29,345.50 22 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 29,345.50 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 Voucher List Page: 3 Spokane Valley 3 DATE: December 1 2004 City of Spokane Valley Request for Council Review TYPE: ❑ Consent (l Old Business ❑ New Business ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Legislation ❑ Information n Administrative Report AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Study Session GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Interim Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council study session on November 30, 2004. 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. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 IJ12 -22 on approximately 1.4 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to High Density Residential and zone UR -22 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 13 -2 to UR -22 on approximately 1.45 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to High Density Residential and zone UR -22 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 - Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 I -2 on approximately 10 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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. The Council reviewed the proposed amendments at their meeting on November 30, 2004. After reviewing the amendments, the Council directed Staff to prepare ordinances for first reading. Ordinances have only been prepared for those amendments recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. COUNCIL OPTIONS: Move ordinances to second reading, send amendments back to Planning Commission or conduct a public hearing. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report, application materials, vicinity, zoning and comprehensive plan maps, public comment correspondence, Planning Commission minutes and ordinances for amendments recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. STAFF CONTACT: Scott Kuhta, AICP, Senior Planner 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments December, 2004 Spokane jUailey Comprehensive Plan Amendments ➢ Comprehensive Plan amended annually July 1St cut off for applications ➢ Planning Commission conducts Public Hearing ➢ PC recommendation to City Council ➢ Council may accept PC recommendation or conduct their own Public Hearing Council makes final decision (by December) Appeals to Growth Management Hearings Board Zone Changes with Comp Plan Amendment State Environmental Policy Act >Environmental Checklists submitted by each applicant >DNSs issued for each amendment >DNSs published in paper and mailed to affected jurisdictions >No substantive comments were received Public Hearing Process > Hearing notice published in paper >Notices mailed to property owners within 400' of each amendment >Each site posted with sign >Notice sent to Wash. State Office of Community Development CPA -01 -04 Location: South side of Dishman -Mica Rd., west of Bowdish. Comp Plan Designation: Low Density Residential and Community Commercial Proposed Designation: Community Commercial Size: 4.23 acres Comp Plan Category r low ar redder: Wedum nand Irma d :a - 11101 dryad Fe rk:td IR”atl Len — Oonnutp Cann -Lk ,MJraa Cub, © Ii.rtgnopo Caromed Ooomno Conwdr - %de i Co=ra.vr upte isfn la En limns kdadd I= Waked lmoi Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -01 -04 August, 2004 CPA-01 -04 Zoning: UR-3.5 and B-3 Proposed Zoning: B Current Use: Office, residence, vacant Zoning Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-01-04 August, 2004 Sfiokane .00 ,0 0 Val ley CPA -01 -04 PC Recommendation: > Change to Community Commercial; zone B -2 r - - te 'V a tV t ;;: , 4-L � Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -01-04 CPA -02 -04 ➢ Location: North side of Broadway, east of Ella Rd. ➢ Comp Plan Designation: Low Density Residential ➢ Proposed Designation: High Density Residential ➢ Size:1.4 acres 111 nu win 91 IN iii ...,--- sis 4L111"; Comp Plan Category Low Density RI n Mutton Ceresty Rpbemal - IV Netts Resbere 11 .Mixed Use - COMM*, CeMr - Uttan Attie Cener Yk6lGnanota Cannktcal ® Ccm =urtti Ccm =ercal - rt•Oral Com.e12171 Uhl Ibucitial - Beaty InO t:C O NYrdal Lent Comprehensive Plan Map Site is t •f Density Residential Low Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -02-04 August, 2004 *Thane j Mi1Iey CPA -02 -04 ➢ Zoning: UR -3.5 ➢ Proposed Zoning: UR -22 ➢ Current Use: Residence, vacant Zoning Catogory ueas i= UR -7 UR -7• UR-12 Ea UR -22 ( &2 ® B-3 �.'} RH•10 I Hs EZ 12 NNW MZ Zoning Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -02 -04 Augusl, 2004 CPA -02 -04 PC Recommendation: ➢ Change subject parcel to High Density Residential and zone UR-22 ➢ Change surrounding property currently zoned UR-22 to High Density Residential Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -02 -04 CPA -03 -04 Location: South side of Springfield, west of Sullivan. Comp Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential Proposed Designation: High Density Residential Size: 1.45 acres Comprehensive Plan Map Comp Plan Category f low Cenytl Rci mial F Me]um Defray Reddeaaal ® HO t»a Re lerlid Q ?fixed lrae MEI Ca munsty ccmrr U13n Achit1 Cecte3 PickpbarAced CernwpM - Ccmmilfy Canrnen93l — Regional Camm_3dol �_ u 3M Iei2ta imp I teaxry Mu -.Aria =I sfnHal fast INN Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -03 -04 August, 2004 Siokane CPA-03-04 Zoning: UR-7 and B-2 Proposed Zoning: UR-22 Current Use: Vacant / '■„. Zoning Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-03-04 August, 2004 CPA -03 -04 PC Recommendation: Change to High Density Residential; zone UR-22 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -03 -04 CPA -04 -04 Location: South side of Broadway, 4000 ft east of Sullivan Rd. Comp Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Proposed Designation: High Density Residential Size: 4.85 acres Comp Plan Category L] Uwe WO" Re3elerti31 Malian Cemy ResiCerttal _e Certify Resi]emal Mlmd the Cotrmmry Cerfst - urar A&thertr Cen- n 8 t:egtl d1D:Cum~ertfm I® Cos:minty Cm,. -mod - Re$omI Carmnetal n an:r M I Hew, lritvstdsl Mhenelidd Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -04 -04 August, 2004 S �IO�n� jN lIey CPA-04-04 • Zoning: UR • Proposed Zoning: UR • Current Use: Residence, vacant Zoning Catogory LlaaS UR-7 CD UR-7* V'M UR-fl 8.1 B./ E:1 9.3 MIRR-10 01 W11.2 13 = 1 .12 Zoning Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-04-04 August, 2004 CPA-04-04 PC Recommendation: No change to current designation Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-04-04 CPA -05 -04 Location: North side of Valleyway, 150 ft. east of Sullivan Rd. Comp Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Proposed Designation: Regional Commercial Size: 1.75 Comprehensive Plan Map Comp Plan Category _ J Law Cent( Resid n1 I Mmlun Oms14 Rp+deli71 MI Hip audit? Rnile:id Q Mbze Use Co muritt Centel - Uhtan Actirty Certer HetMatIOOO CommerOal COCmu:ity Connen:al ReA ri Cenrenirl t Light trtlusUW Hew, In3ztrii O Paean Lmd Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -05 -04 August, 2004 .. Mil ley CPA -05 -04 Zoning: UR -22 (2001) Proposed Zoning: B -1 � Current Use: 2 residences Zoning Category UR -9.5 UR•7 UR•7* UR -12 EE UR -22 B-1 r a2 ®e.a i2 -,o ®w2 ® w MZ Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -05 -04 CPA -05 -04 PC Recommendation: Change to Regional Commercial; zone B -2 Aerial Map IMO Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -05 -04 August. 2004 . Valley CPA -06 -04 Location: East side of Adams Rd., 400 ft. south of Mission Avenue Lot Size: 8 acres 9 Comp Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Proposed Designation: High Density Residential Size: 8 acres .. 1 11 gra/ Ho m ft Pa! Comprehensive Plan Map ma Is 1 site u� rii11 ai m t M r r Comp Plan Category L _i Law Density Residential Q Motion Dem;ty Resbmtirl ►fan Oeety Reseemial Mhul Us. Vensmunty Comae - Urban .41x4ay Centel Neghbedho 0 Cem�srcitl Commonly Co=nercal - Renal Comma' dal ® Heart hs7u ^. tPi Mineral 1.810 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -06 -04 Spo kane nlagust, 2004 j Val tey Existing Zoning: UR Proposed Zoning: UR Current Use: Vacant r CPA-06-04 1 Zoning Catogory t UR-3 5 CD UR-7 tat-r• UR-12 rz UR-22 r --- M 134 ▪ B tUa RR-10 1-1 Ea5 14 E ll 1 4 MZ Zoning Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-06-04 August, 2004 SOOkane ..•01; CPA -06 -04 PC Recommendation: No change to current designation. Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -06-04 �, J CPA -07 -04 Proposal: Amend Arterial Road Plan — Remove Mansfield Avenue between Houk Street and Mirabeau Parkway. Comp Plan: Surrounding land use designations include Mixed Use and Light Industrial Comprehensive Plan Map Future Mansfield Road Alignment Comp Plan Category Law Dmsty Reidanin1 71 Median Der* Rabrntal I ,N Cendry RerttM uoeo um • Caranarty Caner - Man ACMtyCorder G rk6trartuoo Crm-caal 11 :LI - Rgnml C on7e+arl Henry ryliz717; E tArc rallarn Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -07 -04 Aug test. 2004 kane j Val k'►r CPA-07-04 Surrounding Zoning: SRR-10 and 1-2 Current Land Uses: Mostly vacant, office and IDY42 zoning polygon un-35 una _ _111R-12 TA W 712 B-2 EEN B' 1 RR-10 11111 1-3 012 uiflIU Zoning Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-07-04 August, 2004 •"\-. 'lane . Icy Arterial Road Plan MIN Nolon C =En: 1 L N E en= 1111L_A 1101111 IN u am Ha 11111 III III IVINISIRM• Itik jtiIIIJIIU • 111 i unam rat% CPA-07-04 PC Recommendation: No PC Recommendation to date. Hearing continued to January 13, 2005 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-07-04 OV[Va&LII. CONCEPT PLAN OF PINES HOMD (SH 27) IMPROVENE Pines Road Improvements — Concept Plan AVENUE - MONTGOMERY DRIVE 10 PINES AVENUE - 1100K 10 MtRABEAU POINT )64 PINES ROAD non 2-NORTH BOUND LEFT TURN LANE MTE 7 30 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. Comp Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Proposed Designation: Light Industrial Size: 10 acres qtr 01$polane Felts Field Comp Plan Category Lo. DMA ReSi1a0e1 Medvm DccLy Residential - Nlga Density Re- .iderrdol ® Mired the S Ccmrraaity Center - Man A2.Ily Centel Neaht»M1oad Co mmemial Cuoo wily Cammoal - Rerpml Cnrnmaelal L tIt Indential ® Heavy Iroug:2al Mmomi land Comprehensive Plan Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -08-04 August, 2004 Sjibl:ane j1 11ev CPA -08 -04 Existing Zoning: UR-3.5 and UR-22 Proposed Zoning: 1 - Current Use: Airplane hangars, vacant 06/0 Zoning Category 1 s 1% 7 uR•r uR -12 UR-22 r 1 9-1 Vein 8 &3 72/ RR -10 ESSI 1 ' 2 ® PAZ i...AN.t Ch at Ecotone Felts Field Site r Zoning Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -08 -04 August, 2000 CPA -08 -04 PC Recommendation: Change to Light Industrial; zone 1 -2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -08-04 File No. CPA -04 -04 City of Spokane Valley Request for Council Review DATE: December 14, 2004 TYPE: ❑ Consent [Z] Old Business ❑ New Business ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Legislation ❑ Information n Administrative Report AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Study Session GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Interim Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council study session on November 30, 2004. 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 tllflr•"` Location: South side of Dishpan-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 13-2, Community Commercial, on approximately 4.23 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to Community Commercial and zone B -2. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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: Change to High Density Residential and zone IJR -22 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 8-1 on approximately 1.75 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to Regional Commercial and zone B -2 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 1 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 I -2 on approximately 10 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to Light Industrial and zone I -2. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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. The Council reviewed the proposed amendments at their meeting on November 30, 2004. After reviewing the amendments, the Council directed Staff to prepare ordinances for first reading. Ordinances have only been prepared for those amendments recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. COUNCIL OPTIONS: Move ordinances to second reading, send amendments back to Planning Commission or conduct a public hearing. ATTACPNTS: Staff Report, application materials, vicinity, zoning and comprehensive plan maps, public comment correspondence, Planning Commission minutes and ordinances for amendments recommended for approval by the Planning Conunission. STAFF CONTACT: Scott Kuhta, AICP, Senior Planner CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 04 -049 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS PROI'ERLY RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, incorporated on March 31, 2003 and adopted Land Use plans and regulations as set forth below: (1)Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Plan, and Maps as the Interim Comprehensive Plan of the City through Ordinance No. 52; (2) The Spokane County Zoning Code as supplemented and amended by the Phase I Development Regulations as the Interim Development Regulations of the City through Ordinance NO. 53; and (3) The Spokane County Zoning Maps as the Interim Zoning Maps of the City through Ordinance No. 54; WHEREAS, to facilitate and promote reasonable land use in the City it is periodically necessary to review and amend the City Comprehensive Plan, Development Regulations and Zoning Map following a public process before the Planning Commission and City Council; WHEREAS, the owner and or applicant, of the property described in this Ordinance submitted an application to the City to modify one or more of the following: the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map, Development Regulations and /or Zoning Map of the City for the purpose of beneficially using the property described herein; WHEREAS, following the application to the City, staff conducted environmental review to determine the potential environmental impacts from the request in the application, made a recommendation to the Planning Commission concerning the application and the Planning Commission, following notice and a public hearing, received evidence and information on the application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that this Ordinance be approved for the purposes set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as follows: Section 1. Ptpr ose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the City Comprehensive Plan and Map(s) adopted through Ordinance No. 52 and amend the City Zoning Map adopted through Ordinance No. 54 in order to permit the property described herein to be used in a matter consistent with the same. Section 2. Findings,. The City Council acknowledges that the Planning Commission: (1) conducted appropriate investigation and study; (2) held a public hearing on the Application; and (3) recommends approval of the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code set forth in this Ordinance in a manner which promotes the best interest of the City through appropriate and reasonable Ordinance 04 -049; CPA -01 -04 Page 1 of 3 land uses. The City Council further recognizes that the amendments set forth herein promote the best interests of the City and fulfill the objectives of the Growth Management Act as set forth in RCW 36.70A, do not cause a significant environmental impact (as mitigated or otherwise) and promote the reasonable and orderly development of the City. Section 3. Property. The property which is subject to this Ordinance is described on the attaches! Attachment "A ". Section 4. Comprehensive Plan and Map Amendment. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.073 the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan and Map as adopted through Ordinance No. 52 is hereby amended as set forth on the attached Attachment "A ". The Plan Amendment is generally described as follows: File No. CPA -01 -04 Location: South side of Dishman -Mica Road, west of its intersection with Bowdish Rd. Propery Description: Parcel No. 45333.9024 and 9155 Decision: Change property shown on Attachment "A" from Low Density Residential to Community Commercial Section 5. Zoning Map /Official Controls. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.100, for the purpose of regulating the use of land and to implement and give affect to the Comprehensive Plan the City hereby amends the Official Zoning Map of the City as set forth on Attachment "A ". The Zoning Map Amendment is generally described below. File No. CPA -01-04 Location: South side ofDishman -Mica R.oad, west of its intersection with Bowdish Rd. Property Description: Parcel No. 45333.9024 and 9155 Decision: Change property shown on Attachment "A" from UR -3.5 and B -3 to B -2 Section 6. Adoption of Other Laws. To the extent that any provision of the Spokane County Code, or any other law, rule or regulation referenced in the attached Zoning Map(s) is necessary or convenient to establish the validity, enforceability or interpretation of the Zoning Map(s), then such provision of the Spokane County Code, or other law, rule or regulation is hereby adopted by reference. Section 7. Map - Copies on File- Administrative Action. The Comprehensive Plan (with Maps) and Zoning Map(s) are maintained in the office of the City Clerk as well as the City Department of Community Development. The City Manager or designee, following adoption of this Ordinance, is authorized to modify the Comprehensive Plan Map and the Zoning Map in a manner consistent with this Ordinance. Section 8. Liability. The express intent of the City of Spokane Valley is that the responsibility for compliance with the provisions of this ordinance shall rest with the permit applicant and their agents. This ordinance and its provisions are adopted with the express intent to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general public and are not intended to protect any particular class of individuals or organizations. Section 9. Severability. if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Ordinance 04 -049; CPA -01 -04 Page 2 of 3 Section 10. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after the date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City. ATTEST: PASSED by the City Council this _ day of December, 2004 City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved As To Form: Deputy City Attorney, Cary Driskell Date of Publication: Effective Date: Mayor, Diana Wilhite Ordinance 04 -049; CPA -01 -04 Page 3 of 3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA-01-04 CPA-01-04 Attachment 'A' 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 13-2. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 11■9 File No. CPA -02 -04 4� 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: Change to High Density Residential and zone UR -22 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC DATE: December 14, 2004 TYPE: ❑ Consent 0 Old Business n New Business ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Legislation [1 Information ❑ Administrative Report AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Study Session GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Interim Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council study session on November 30, 2004. 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 -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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC File No. CPA -04 -04 City of Spokane Valley Request for Council Review 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC File No. CPA -05 -04 Location: North side of Valley gay 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 13-1 on approximately 1.75 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to Regional Commercial and zone B -2 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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. --all Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 I -2 on approximately 10 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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. The Council reviewed the proposed amendments at their meeting on November 30, 2004. After reviewing the amendments, the Council directed Staff to prepare ordinances for first reading. Ordinances have only been prepared for those amendments recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. COUNCIL OPTIONS: Move ordinances to second reading, send amendments back to Planning Commission or conduct a public hearing. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report, application materials, vicinity, zoning and comprehensive plan maps, public comment correspondence, Planning Commission minutes and ordinances for amendments recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. STAFF CONTACT: Scott Kuhta, AICP, Senior Planner CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 04 -050 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATED THERETO. W1{EREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, incorporated on March 31, 2003 and adopted Land Use plans and regulations as set forth below: Ordinance 04 -050 (CPA -02 -04) (1)Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Plan, and Maps as the Interim Comprehensive Plan of the City through Ordinance No. 52; (2) The Spokane County Zoning Code as supplemented and amended by the Phase I Development Regulations as the Interim Development Regulations of the City through Ordinance NO. 53; and (3) The Spokane County Zoning Maps as the Interim Zoning Maps of the City through Ordinance No. 54; WHEREAS, to facilitate and promote reasonable land use in the City it is periodically necessary to review and amend the City Comprehensive Plan, Development Regulations and Zoning Map following a public process before the Planning Commission and City Council; W1- [EREAS, the owner and or applicant of the property described in this Ordinance submitted an application to the City to modify one or more of the following: the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map, Development Regulations and /or Zoning Map of the City for the purpose of beneficially using the property described herein; WHEREAS, following the application to the City, staff conducted environmental review to determine the potential environmental impacts from the request in the application, made a recommendation to the Planning Commission concerning the application and the Planning Commission, following notice and a public hearing, received evidence and information on the application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that this Ordinance be approved for the purposes set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the City Comprehensive Plan and Map(s) adopted through Ordinance No. 52 and amend the City Zoning Map adopted through Ordinance No. 54 in order to permit the property described herein to be used in a matter consistent with the same. Section 2. Fin The City Council acknowledges that the Planning Commission: (1) conducted appropriate investigation and study; (2) held a public hearing on the Application; and (3) recommends approval of the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code set forth in this Ordinance in a manner which promotes the best interest of the City through appropriate and reasonable land uses. The City Council further recognizes that the amendments set forth herein promote the best Page 1 of 3 interests of the City and fulfill the objectives of the Growth Management Act as set forth in RCW 36.70A, do not cause a significant environmental impact (as mitigated or otherwise) and promote the reasonable and orderly development of the City. Section 3. Property. The property which is subject to this Ordinance is described on the attached Attachment "A ". Section 4. Comprehensive Plan and Map Amendment. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.073 the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan and Map as adopted through Ordinance No. 52 is hereby amended as set forth on the attached Attachment "A ". The .Plan Amendment is generally described as follows: File No. CPA -02 -04 Location: North side Broadway Avenue, east of Ella Road, specifically located in the NW 1/4 of Section 18, Township 25 North, Range 44 EWM. Prope Description: Parcel No. 45182.9035 Decision: Change property shown on Attachment "A" from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential Section 5. Zoning Map /Official Controls. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.100, for the purpose of regulating the use of land and to implement and give affect to the Comprehensive Plan the City hereby amends the Official Zoning Map of the City as set forth on Attachment "A ". The Zoning Map Amendment is generally described below. File No. CPA -02 -04 Location: North side Broadway Avenue, east of Ella Road, specifically located in the NW 'A of Section 18, Township 25 North, Range 44 EWM. Property Description: Parcel No. 45182.9035 Decision: Change property shown on Attachment "A" from UR -3.5 to UR -22 Section 6. Adoption of Other Laws. To the extent that any provision of the Spokane County Code, or any other law, rule or regulation referenced in the attached Zoning Map(s) is necessary or convenient to establish the validity, enforceability or interpretation of the Zoning Map(s), then such provision of the Spokane County Code, or other law, rule or regulation is hereby adopted by reference. Section 7. Map - Copies on File Administrative Action. The Comprehensive Plan (with Maps) and Zoning Map(s) are maintained in the. office of the City Clerk as well as the City Department of Community Development. The City Manager or designee, following adoption of this Ordinance, is authorized to modify the Comprehensive Plan Map and the Zoning Map in a manner consistent with this Ordinance. Section 8. Liability. The express intent of the City of Spokane Valley is that the responsibility for compliance with the provisions of this ordinance shall rest with the permit applicant and their agents. This ordinance and its provisions are adopted with the express intent to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general public and are not intended to protect any particular class of individuals or organizations. Section 9. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Ordinance 04 -050 (CPA- 02 -04) Page 2 of 3 Section 10. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after the date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City. ATTEST: PASSED by the City Council this _ day of December, 2004 City Clerk, Christine. Bainbridge Approved As To Form: Deputy City Attorney, Cary Driskell Date of Publication: Effective Date: Mayor, Diana Wilhite Ordinance 04 -050 (CPA- 02 -04) Page. 3 of 3 Vicinity Map Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -02 -04 August, 2004 CPA -02 -04 Attachment `A' DATE: December 14, 2004 i'VPE: ❑ Consent ❑ Legislation File No. CPA -04 -04 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: Council study session on November 30, 2004. 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 Dishrnan-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. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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: Change to High Density Residential and zone UR -22 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC File No. CPA -03 -04 Location: South side of Springfield Avenue, west of Sullivan Road, one block north of Valleyway. R.equest: 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC Location: South side of Broadway Avenue, about 4000 feet cast 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 I -2 c approximately 10 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC The Spokane Valley Planning Conunission 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. The Council reviewed the proposed amendments at their meeting on November 30, 2004. After reviewing the amendments, the Council directed Staff to prepare ordinances for first reading. Ordinances have only been prepared for those amendments recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. COUNCIL OPTIONS: Move ordinances to second reading, send amendments back. to Planning Commission or conduct a public hearing. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report, application materials, vicinity, zoning and comprehensive plan maps, public comment correspondence, Planning Commission minutes and ordinances for amendments recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. STAFF CONTACT: Scott Kuhta, A1CP, Senior Planner CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 04-051 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON, AMENDING TIE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, incorporated on March 31, 2003 and adopted Land Use plans and regulations as set forth below: (1)Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Plan, and Maps as the Interim Comprehensive Plan of the City through Ordinance No. 52; (2) The Spokane County Zoning Code as supplemented and amended by the Phase 1 Development Regulations as the Interim Development Regulations of the City through Ordinance NO. 53; and (3) The Spokane County Zoning Maps as the Interim Zoning Maps of the City through Ordinance No. 54; WHEREAS, to facilitate and promote reasonable land use in the City it is periodically necessary to review and amend the City Comprehensive Plan, Development Regulations and Zoning Map following a public process before the Planning Commission and City Council; WHER.FAS, the. owner and or applicant of the property described in this Ordinance submitted an application to the City to modify one or more of the following: the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map, Development Regulations and/or Zoning Map of the City for the purpose of beneficially using the property described herein; WHEREAS, following the application to the City, staff conducted environmental review to determine the potential environmental impacts from the request in the application, made a recommendation to the Planning Commission concerning the application and the Planning Commission, following notice and a public hearing, received evidence and information on the application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that this Ordinance be approved for the purposes set forth herein. follows: NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the City Comprehensive Plan and Map(s) adopted through Ordinance No. 52 and amend the City Zoning Map adopted through Ordinance No. 54 in order to permit the property described herein to be used in a matter consistent with the same. Ordinance 04 -051 (CPA -03 -04) Page 1 of 3 Section 2. Findin Ts. The City Council acknowledges that the Planning Commission: (1) conducted appropriate investigation and study; (2) held a public hearing on the Application; and (3) recommends approval of the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code set forth in this Ordinance in a manner which promotes the best interest of the City through appropriate and reasonable land uses. The City Council further recognizes that the amendments set forth herein promote the best interests of the City and fulfill the objectives of the Growth Management Act as set forth in RCW 36.70A, do not cause a significant environmental impact (as mitigated or otherwise) and promote the reasonable and orderly development of the City. Section 3. Property. The property which is subject to this Ordinance is described on the attached Attachment "A ". Section 4. Comprehensive Plan and Map Amendment. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.073 the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan and Map as adopted through Ordinance No. 52 is hereby amended as set forth on the attached Attachment "A ". The Plan Amendment is generally described as follows: File No. CPA -03 -04 Location: South side of Springfield Avenue, west of Sullivan Road, one block north of Valleyway; specifically located in the SE '/ of Section 14, Township 25 North, Range 44 EWM. Property Description: Parcel No. 451 44.0245 Decision: Change property shown on Attachment "A" from Medium Density Residential to 14igh Density Residential Section 5. Zoning Map/Official Controls. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.100, for the purpose of regulating the use of land and to implement and give affect to the Comprehensive Plan the City hereby amends the Official Zoning Map of the City as set forth on Attachment "A ". The Zoning Map Amendment is generally described below. File No. CPA -03 -04 Location: South side of Springfield Avenue, west of Sullivan Road, one block north of Valleyway; specifically located in the SE V. of Section 14, Township 25 North, Range 44 EWMvl. Property Description: Parcel No. 45144.0245 Decision: Change property shown on Attachment "A" from UR -7 and 13 -2 to UR -22 Section 6. Adoption of Other Laws. To the extent that any provision of' the Spokane County Code, or any other law, rule or regulation referenced in the attached Zoning Map(s) is necessary or convenient to establish the validity, enforceability or interpretation of the Zoning Map(s), then such provision of the Spokane County Code, or other law, rule or regulation is hereby adopted by reference. Section 7. Map - Copies on File- Administrative Action. The Comprehensive Plan (with Maps) and Zoning Map(s) are maintained in the office of the City Clerk as well as the City Department of Community Development. The City Manager or designee, following adoption of this Ordinance, is authorized to modify the Comprehensive Plan Map and the Zoning Map in a manner consistent with this Ordinance. Section 8. Liability. The express intent of the City of Spokane Valley is that the responsibility for compliance with the provisions of this ordinance shall rest with the permit applicant and their agents. This ordinance and its provisions are adopted with the express intent Ordinance 04 -051 (CPA- 03 -04) Page 2 of 3 ■ to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general public and are not intended to protect any particular class of individuals or organizations. Section 9. Sever-ability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 10. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after the date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City. ATTEST: PASSED by the City Council this _ day of December, 2004 City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved As To Form: Deputy City Attorney, Cary Driskell Date of Publication: Effective Date: Mayor, Diana Wilhite Ordinance 04 -05i (CPA- 03 -04) Page 3 of 3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -03 -04 Spokane August, 2004 ‘ ,411 ey CPA -03 -04 Attachment `A' City of Spokane Valley Request for Council Review DATE: December 1.4, 2004 TYPE: �. ❑ Consent (0 Old Business ❑ New Business '(l P..dblic Dearing ❑ Legislation ❑ Information n Administrative Report AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Study Session GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Interim Spolcane Valley Comprehensive Plan PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council study session on November 30, 2004. 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. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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: Change to High Density Residential and zone UR -22 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC File No. CPA -O5-04 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 13 -1 on approximately 1.75 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to Regional Commercial and zone B -2 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 LTR-3.5 to I -2 on approximately 10 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to Light Industrial and zone 1 -2. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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. The Council reviewed the proposed amendments at their meeting on November 30, 2004. After reviewing the amendments, the Council directed Staff to prepare ordinances for first reading. Ordinances have only been prepared for those amendments recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. COUNCIL, OPTIONS: Move ordinances to second reading, send amendments back to Planning Commission or conduct a public hearing. ATTACHIVIE NTS: Staff Report, application materials, vicinity, zoning and comprehensive plan maps, public comment correspondence, Planning Commission minutes and ordinances for amendments recommended for approval by the Planning Conunission. STAFF CONTACT: Scott Kuhta, AICP, Senior Planner CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 04 -052 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAIN AND ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, incorporated on March 31, 2003 and adopted Land Use plans and regulations as set forth below: (1)Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Plan, and Maps as the Interim Comprehensive Plan of the City through Ordinance No. 52; (2) The Spokane County Zoning Code as supplemented and amended by the Phase 1 Development Regulations as the Interim Development Regulations of the City through Ordinance NO. 53; and (3) The Spokane County Zoning Maps as the Interim Zoning Maps of the City through Ordinance No. 54; WHEREAS, to facilitate and promote reasonable land use in the City it is periodically necessary to review and amend the City Comprehensive Plan, Development Regulations and Zoning Map following a public process before the Planning Commission and City Council; WHEREAS, the owner and or applicant of the property described in this Ordinance submitted an application to the City to modify one or more of the following: the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map, Development Regulations and/or Zoning Map of the City for the purpose of beneficially using the property described herein; WHEREAS, following the application to the City, staff conducted environmental review to determine the potential environmental impacts from the request in the application, made a recommendation to the Planning Commission concerning the application and the Planning Commission, following notice and a public hearing, received evidence and information on the application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that this Ordinance be approved for the purposes set forth herein. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the City Comprehensive Plan and Map(s) adopted through Ordinance No. 52 and amend the City Zoning Map adopted through Ordinance No. 54 in order to permit the property described herein to be used in a matter consistent with the same. Section 2. Findings. The City Council acknowledges that the Planning Commission: (1) conducted appropriate investigation and study; (2) held a public hearing on the Application; and (3) recommends approval of the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code set forth in this Ordinance in a manner which promotes the best interest of the City through appropriate and reasonable land uses. The City Council further recognizes that the amendments set forth herein promote the best interests of the City and fulfill the objectives of the Growth Management Act as set forth in RCW Ordinance 04 -052 (CPA- 05 -04) Page 1 of 3 36.70A, do not cause a significant environmental impact (as mitigated or otherwise) and promote the reasonable and orderly development of the City. Section 3. Property.. The property which is subject to this Ordinance is described on the attached Attachment "A ". Section 4. Comprehensive Plan and Map Amendment. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.073 the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan and Map as adopted through Ordinance No. 52 is hereby amended as set forth on the attached Attachment "A ". The Plan Amendment is generally described as follows: File No. CPA -05 -04 Location: North side of Valleyway Avenue, approximately 150 feet east of Sullivan Road; specifically located in the SW '/4 of Section 13, Township 25 North, Range 44 EWM. Perty Description; Parcel No. 45133.0524 and 45133.0540 Decision: Change property shown on Attachment "A" from Low Density Residential to Regional Commercial Section 5. Zoning Map /Official Controls. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.100, for the purpose of regulating the use of land and to implement and give affect to the Comprehensive Plan the City hereby amends the Official Zoning Map of the City as set forth on Attachment "A ". The Zoning Map Amendment is generally described below. File No. CPA -05 -04 Location: North side of Valleyway Avenue, approximately 150 feet east of Sullivan Road; specifically located in the SW 'A of Section 13, Township 25 North, Range 44 i;WM. Property Description: Parcel No. 45133.0524 and 45133.0540 Decision: Change property shown on Attachment "A" from UR -22 to B-2 Section 6. Adoption of Other Laws. To the extent that any provision of the Spokane County Code, or any other law, rule or regulation referenced in the attached Zoning Map(s) is necessary or convenient to establish the validity, enforceability or interpretation of the Zoning Map(s), then such provision of the Spokane County Code, or other law, rule or regulation is hereby adopted by reference. Section 7. Map - Copies on File- Administrative Action. The Comprehensive Plan (with Maps) and Zoning Map(s) are maintained in the office of the City Clerk as well as the City Department of Community Development. The City Manager or designee, following adoption of this Ordinance, is authorized to modify the Comprehensive Plan Map and the Zoning Map in a manner consistent with this Ordinance. Section 8. Liability. The express intent of the City of Spokane Valley is that the responsibility for compliance with the provisions of this ordinance shall rest with the permit applicant and their agents. This ordinance and its provisions are adopted with the express intent to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general public and are not intended to protect any particular class of individuals or organizations. Section 9. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Ordinance 04 -052 (CPA- 05 -04) Page 2 of 3 Section 10. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after the date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City. ATTEST: PASSED by the City Council this _ day of December, 2004 City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved As To Form: Deputy City Attorney, Cary Driskell Date of Publication: Effective Date: Mayor, Diana Wilhite Ordinance 04-052 (CPA- 05 -04) Page 3 of 3 CPA -05 -04 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -05 -04 August, 2004 Sp lan e 4 .Mdlley Attachment `A' City of Spokane Valley Request for Council Review DA'Z'E: December 14, 2004 TYPE: ❑ Consent QI Old Business [1 New Business ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Legislation ® Information ❑ Administrative Report AGENDA ITEM. TITLE: 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Study Session GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Interim Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council study session on November 30, 2004. 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. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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: Change to High Density Residential and zone UR -22 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC Pile 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC File No. CPA -05 -04 Location: North side of Valleyway Avenue, about 150 feet cast of Sullivan Road. Request: Comprehensive Plan Map A.mendment 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 13 -2 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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 I -2 on approximately 10 acres of land. PC Recommendation: Change to Light Industrial and zone I -2. Staff Recommendation: Concur with PC 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. The Council reviewed the proposed amendments at their meeting on November 30, 2004. After reviewing the amendments, the Council directed Staff to prepare ordinances for first reading. Ordinances have only been prepared for those amendments recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. COUNCIL, OPTIONS: Move ordinances to second reading, send amendments back to Planning Commission or conduct a public hearing. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report, application materials, vicinity, zoning and comprehensive plan maps, public comment correspondence, Planning Commission minutes and ordinances for amendments recommended for approval by the Planning Conunission. STAFF CONTACT: Scott Kuhta, AICP, Senior Planner CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 04 -053 AN ORDINANCE OF 'I'M CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY WASFIINGTON, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAPS OF THE CITY AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, incorporated on March 31, 2003 and adopted Land Use plans and regulations as set forth below: (1)Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Plan, and Maps as the Interim Comprehensive Plan of the City through Ordinance No. 52; (2) The Spokane County Zoning Code as supplemented and amended by the Phase 1 Development Regulations as the Interim Development Regulations of the City through Ordinance NO. 53; and (3) The Spokane County Zoning Maps as the Interim Zoning Maps of the City through Ordinance No. 54; WHEREAS, to facilitate and promote reasonable land use in the City it is periodically necessary to review and amend the City Comprehensive Plan, Development Regulations and Zoning Map following a public process before the Planning Commission and City Council; WHEREAS, the owner and or applicant of the property described in this Ordinance submitted an application to the City to modify one or more of the following: the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map, Development Regulations and/or Zoning Map of the City for the purpose of beneficially using the property described herein; WHEREAS, following the application to the City, staff conducted environmental review to determine the potential environmental impacts from the request in the application, made a recommendation to the Planning Commission concerning the application and the Planning Commission, following notice and a public hearing, received evidence and information on the application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that this Ordinance be approved for the purposes set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the City Comprehensive Plan and Map(s) adopted through Ordinance No. 52 and amend the City Zoning Map adopted through Ordinance No. 54 in order to permit the property described herein to be used in a matter consistent with the same. Section 2. Findings. The City Council acknowledges that the Planning Commission: (1) conducted appropriate investigation and study; (2) held a public hearing on the Application; and (3) recommends approval of the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code set forth in this Ordinance in a manner which promotes the best interest of the City through appropriate and reasonable Ordinance 04 -053 (CPA- 08 -04) Page 1 of land uses. The City Council further recognizes that the amendments set forth herein promote the best interests of the City and fulfill the objectives of the Growth Management Act as set forth in RCW 36.70A, do not cause a significant environmental impact (as mitigated or otherwise) and promote the reasonable and orderly development of the City. Section 3. Property. The property which is subject to this Ordinance is described on the attached Attachment "A ". Section 4. Comprehensive Plan and Map Amendment. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.073 the City of Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan and Map as adopted through Ordinance No. 52 is hereby amended as set forth on the attached Attachment "A ". The Plan Amendment is generally described as follows: File No. CPA -08 -04 Location: North of Rutter Road, west of Dora Avenue on the southeastern boundary of Felts Field Airport; specifically located in the NE' /. of Section 12, Township 25 North, Range 43 EWM. Property Description: Parcel No. 35121.2803, 2904, 3005, 1003, 7100 and 1002 Decision: Change property shown on Attachment "A" from Low Density Residential to Light Industrial Section 5. Zoning Map /Official Controls. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.100, for the purpose of regulating the use of land and to implement and give affect to the Comprehensive Plan the City hereby amends the Official Zoning Map of the City as set forth on Attachment "A ". The Zoning Map Amendment is generally described below. File No. CPA -08 -04 Location: North of Rutter Road, west of Dora Avenue on the southeastern boundary of Felts Field Airport; specifically located in the NE 1/4 of Section 12, Township 25 North, Range 43 EWM. Property Description: Parcel No. 35121.2803, 2904, 3005, 1003, 7100 and 1002 Decision: Change property shown on Attachment "A" from UR -3.5 and UR -22 to 1 -2 Section 6. Adoption of Other Laws. To the extent that any provision of the Spokane County Code, or any other law, rule or regulation referenced in the attached Zoning Map(s) is necessary or convenient to establish the validity, enforceability or interpretation of the Zoning Map(s), then such provision of the Spokane County Code, or other law, rule or regulation is hereby adopted by reference. Section 7. Map - Copies on File- Administrative Action. The Comprehensive Plan (with Maps) and Zoning Map(s) are maintained in the office of the City Clerk as well as the City Department of Community Development. The City Manager or designee, following adoption of this Ordinance, is authorized to modify the Comprehensive Plan Map and the Zoning Map in a manner consistent with this Ordinance. Section 8. Liability. The express intent of the City of Spokane Valley is that the responsibility for compliance with the provisions of this ordinance shall rest with the permit applicant and their agents. This ordinance and its provisions are adopted with the express intent to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general public and are not intended to protect any particular class of individuals or organizations. Section 9. Severabilit . if any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Ordinance 04 -053 (CPA- 08 -04) Page 2 of 3 Section 10. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after the date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City. ATTEST: PASSED by the City Council this _ day of December, 2004 City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved As To Form: Deputy City Attorney, Cary Driskell Date of Publication: Effective Date: Mayor, Diana Wilhite Ordinance 04 -053 (CPA- 0S -04) Page 3 of 3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment CPA -08 -04 CPA -08 -04 Attachment `A' DATE: December 14, 2004 TYPE: ❑ Consent ❑ Legislation City of Spokane Valley Request for Council .Review ® Old Business ❑ 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: Study session on November 30, 2004. 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 a 3 -3 tie, one Conunissioner being absent from the meeting. On November 18, 2004, the Commission voted to reconsider the motion to approve the rezone from the previous meeting. By a 4 -3 vote, the Commission is now recommending that the rezone be approved. On November 30, 2004, Council reviewed the rezone request, expressing some concern about the adequacy of roads and sewers in the Greenacres area. Council directed Staff to bring back information on how subdivisions are reviewed in relation to the adequacy of roads and the future plans for sewering Greenacres. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve request for rezone from UR -7* to UR -3.5 COUNCIL OPTIONS: Council may move ordinance to second reading, conduct its own public hearing or send the issue back to the Planning Commission for further review. ATTACITMFNTS: Staff report to Planning Commission including vicinity, zoning, and comprehensive plan maps, map showing vested projects within proposed rezone area, public testimony correspondence Planning Commission minutes and a draft ordinance. STAFF CONTACT: Greg McCormick, AICP - Planning Division Manager Scott Kuhta, AICP - Senior Planner CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 04 -054 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAPS OF THL CITY AND PROVIDING FOR OTHER MATTERS PROPERLY RELATED THERETO. WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley, incorporated on March 31, 2003 and adopted Land Use plans and regulations as set forth below: (1)Comprehensive Plan, Capital Facilities Plan, and Maps as the Interim Comprehensive Plan of the City through Ordinance No. 52; (2) The Spokane County Zoning Code as supplemented and amended by the Phase I Development Regulations as the Interim Development Regulations of the City through Ordinance NO. 53; and (3) The Spokane County Zoning Maps as the interim Zoning Maps of the City through Ordinance No. 54; WHEREAS, to facilitate and promote reasonable land use in the City it is periodically necessary to review and amend the City Comprehensive Plan Development Regulations and Zoning Map following a public process before the Planning Commission and City Council; WHEREAS, the owner and or applicant of the property described in this Ordinance submitted an application to the City to modify the Zoning Map of the City for the purpose of beneficially using the property described herein; WHEREAS, following the application to the City, staff conducted environmental review to determine the potential environmental impacts from the request in the application, made a recommendation to the Planning Commission concerning the application and the Planning Commission, following notice and a public hearing, received evidence and information on the application; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council that this Ordinance be approved for the purposes set: forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley do ordain as follows: Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the City Zoning Map adopted through Ordinance No. 54 in order to permit the property described herein to be used in a matter consistent with the same. Section 2. Findings. The City Council acknowledges that the Planning Commission: (1) conducted appropriate investigation and study; (2) held a public hearing on the Application; and (3) recommends approval of the amendment to the Zoning Map set forth in this Ordinance in a manner which promotes the best interest of the City through appropriate and reasonable land uses. The City Council further recognizes that the amendments set forth herein promote the best interests of the City and fulfill the objectives of the Growth Management Act as set forth in RCW 36.70A, do not cause a significant environmental impact (as mitigated or otherwise) and promote the reasonable and orderly development of the City. Ordinance 04 -054 Arca -Wide Rezone REZ -17 -04 Page 1 of 3 Section 3. Property. The property which is subject to this Ordinance is described on the attached Attachment "A ". Section 4. Area wide Rezone. Pursuant to Chapter 14.402 of the Interim Spokane Valley Zoning Code, as adopted through Ordinance No. 53, the City of Spokane Valley Interim Zoning Map is hereby amended as set forth on the attached Attachment "A ". The rezone is generally described as follows: REZ -17 -04 Location: That area located north of Mission Avenue, south and east of the Spokane River and west of Barker Road, currently zoned UR -7 *. Decision: Change property shown on Attachment "A" from UR -7* to UR -3.5 Section 5. Adoption of Other Laws. To the extent that any provision of the Spokane County Code, or any other law, pule or regulation referenced in the attached Zoning Map(s) is necessary or convenient to establish the validity, enforceability or interpretation of the Zoning Map(s), then such provision of the Spokane County Code, or other law, rule or regulation is hereby adopted by reference. Section 6. Map - Copies on File - Administrative Action. The Comprehensive Plan (with Maps) and Zoning Map(s) are maintained in the office of the City Clerk as well as the City Department of Community Development. The City Manager or designee, following adoption of this Ordinance, is authorized to modify the Comprehensive Plan Map and the Zoning Map in a manner consistent with this Ordinance. Section 7. Liability. The express intent of the City of Spokane Valley is that the responsibility for compliance with the provisions of this ordinance shall rest with the permit applicant and their agents. This ordinance and its provisions are adopted with the express intent to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the general public and are not intended to protect any particular class of individuals or organizations. Section 8. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or • phrase of this ordinance. Section 9. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall he in full force and effect five (5) days after the date of publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City. PASSED by the City Council this _ day of December, 2004 ATTEST: Mayor, Diana Wilhite City Clerk, Christine Bainbridge Approved As To Form: Deputy City Attorney, Cary DriskelI Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 04 -054 Area -Wide Rezone REZ -I 7-04 Page 2 of 3 ! f 1 I sl���,►� . 1�'. r. Nr , 111 11111Pliardailial Mild iti Mae kj_,---_Jht 1. R ic l /1 �� � - ' liggiurrouri . ., � Ilk F. itimp "' WIT S A- �` � iii • , / ?.a .. il Si • 1 T � t' RFZ -17 -04 Greenacres Areawide Rezone August, 2004 mTir SOkane . Attachment `A' Greenacres Areawide Rezone November 30, 2004 Spokane �Ualley Areawide Rezone by Property Owner Petition Zoning Code provides for areawide rezone by petition of property owners — 51 Spokane Valley received petitions signed by more than 51% of property owners in area proposed for rezone. ➢ Planning Commission conducts public hearing ➢ PC Recommendation to City Council ➢ Council makes final decision 0 Planning Commission Recommendation ➢ PC Hearing on September 23, 2004 ➢ PC requested map showing vested properties and individual properties requesting to remain zoned UR7* ➢ PC reviewed map on October 14, voted 3 -3 on motion to approve rezone Commission reconsidered motion to approve on November 18 —voted 4 -3 to approve the rezone Greenacres Areawide Rezone Location: 457 acres, bounded by Spokane River to the north and west, Mission to the south and Barker to the east. Existing Comprehensive Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Comp Pbn Category J to. Dccat rxavea O Welk. ae.ry Onerreo E rtp, trey nesif¢nat ED Lewd U. - � utmr.�:xy cam N yew CC neei.i pamitiN -Re WlCaeneNl , Ill! = = � ® ,k..,,� 1 111' Greenacres Areawide Rezone Current Zoning: UR - 7* Proposed Zoning: UR - 3.5 Current Uses: Large lot development 0 Zoning Map } F ■ Greenacres Areawide Rezone August, 2000 Spokane . Val ley Nrorth ree a Greenacres Areawide Rezone 31 Lots 9 Acres 55 Lots 11.6 Acres 15 Lots 3.1 Acres -- m—F—LEL=s 7 Lots re s� ..: ,.. Courshain 2 Acres Courshaine 2 Acres Berg .80Acres Frickle 1.3 Acres land Action Applications and Plats Approved and Recorded Since + Phase 1 Crossover In Proposed Gr+eenacres URA to UR-3.5 Areawide Rezone — Papua/ %sem — Oared garde" haw. lino Mtbw..f f %Z%. £ O-33 4I le L'4e C. d Io&u VSI!a' — Clnrdl rnn O— l7tKIN /li�ir�i g= ®= .7,: . 207 Lots 45.9 Acres 4.5 Lots per Acre I 1 I _ ini 1 ill Lots 9.6 Acres 1• • A ispo 01111111 min RAI Esa Moratorium >Petition submitted to City requesting moratorium on new development over 1 acre in size >Request sent to PC for recommendation >PC voted 7-Oto reject moratorium - Nov 18 >Council direction? MEMO Spokane . 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 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. 0 I s1�i rie I j Valley Hearing Date: September 23, 2004 REZ r17- 04— GrcenacresArrawideRezone Pagc 1 of 4 STAFF REPORT SUBJECT: AREA WIDE REZONE -01 -04 Community Development Department PLANNING DIVISION • 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. 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. LUZ -17 -04 — Grecnaetw Arcawide 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 -3.5 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 — Grecnaacs Areawide Rezone Page 3 of 4 IV. 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 RE Z -17-04 — Gre A,amide Rezone Page 4 or4 n Spool a le Po . M 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 -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 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, 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 7flNTM( DFPI ACCTFTrATTf1111 ADDI TCATTf1N Dan '7 of requires a 4 house average per acre of new housing. The zoning would conform to this goal Nhile 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 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 '/z 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. 7ANTNl: DFPI ACCTFTrATTl1N ADD, TrATTl1N Dana 2 of C 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" (Le. 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. PART II (For Staff Use Only) DATE SUBMITTED: RECEIVED BY: FILE NUMBER: 7niurnJa uc(I A CTCTrATTnM ADD, rrerrnru Oaten a ni Aerial Map _ 1 1 st _ -4 • - 1 '4 • . T INN • t •r • • • 4. • • . . r ••• • • • 3 1 • . ,. ' . 1 ►• . a• • ... • ti � 7 _ • ' • 1 .•r • • •• '• • • • • M • • • • • • •_11 • ••.• -i - • •: . 11 - -.1 • • - j4 1 1 1 z. 7_ • • - ' r � y . N . I •• •• • * 1 • YI • • Greenacres Areawide Rezone August. 2004 J 11111 1 raati�,rr�.�111i V III Mint rs* =c; w+� wIU•n�: im S r ar r__ ,, I r_ um ��� ma uu>ir!` Comp Plan Category Low Density Residential n Medium DerJity Resdlentiai Int High DemIty RcIdontial ED taxed Use Co: mutdtyCenter - Urban Ac M1y Center El Neighborhood Commercial =I Community Commercial - Regional Commercial Ugil Indisttial j Heavy Industrial 1 1 Mineral Land Comprehensive Plan Map Greenacres Areawide Rezone August, 2004 im« � kan �alle y "0 12.3 4 0(4 SO 7 0:0APM z"Arr,..40/ itirAivreM. s 0 1/4\ \ 1/4 \1 I I I 1 A Le end � � ‘4,N1 i 1-1 uR.3.5 UR -7- tUt•,z .�': 1 G Mil in .��� i MI 9 ' 2 MI 111 m F., 0 a r . `p� �w.!, tU� •f to ern . ...i� .® �A %�i � .. pr otifir al Jlfgdk ap art /lccipltr! 7tt1144 01-1 SL.11-12-04 11 1 obi 3.1 .M rr. 1 Applk4lian Acaeptrd 1191131 D2 Subdivision 51)8.11.04 45 !ob 94 Acres j r APPLICANT OR REPRESENTATIVE: Mary Pollard MAILING ADDRESS: 17216 East Baldwin CITY: Spokane Valley . 1sT: 1 i— . •a N i r a .14: r ' 4 i`F D ,E PART.MENT OF CO'IM:M'UNITY D.EVE L F,-, ` " . ham` - - ,. • .. C UR RENT P ANNI G r? T.rY:s 4- 722,-- K t$ . _cn� , wto. . n Y _r >; : yj r it .may • S a ra ` is -R.i,.: °.." - 41 Y' :.:,4• * i -t. T -1£' .- j ...A.. "..?, :: ,, 7 Y .-� ` - .nr; " _ ,, 1� AREA WIDE REZONE APPLICATION }- f' � 9f rr -r�^ 9, - > t �y ,. ,1` e: r o' 1, .r g rT. .. 7.71 F4.1 i '� imci..i Y ` 'L x � t ."° - • i77..4. -„ ,.. i5 `:`4+'z` ,`.'.' ..c, a �1. 1*'. ' 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, dassic 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 UST 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 Tine 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, 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 7ANTN(' DFr, ACCTFTf ATTAPJ ADDI TrATTAPJ Dana ') 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 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 PROPOSALS 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. 7ANTNf_ Orr; ACCTCTrfTTr1N A DDI TrATTON Dann 1 of C 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) 7nNTNr_ oeri eccTCTrerT( J ADDI TrerTAN Dana d .. Spokane. Valley Planning Commission Approved Minutes Council Chambers — City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave. September 23, 2004 L CAI.,L TO ORDER Planning Commission Chair Gothmann called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. H. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Commission, audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Fred Beaulac — Present Bob Blum— Present David Crosby — Excused A.bsence Gail Koglc — Present VI. PUBLIC COM.MENT 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 I -Iearings 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. 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 tiSTV -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. 1-le 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 filial 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. CONIIVIISSION BUSINESS A. NEW BUS__INESS: 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. 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 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 Conunissioner 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 forREZ-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 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 conununity 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 Loweree, 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 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 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: Javn 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 arca -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 Nanning 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. Riverway, Spokane Valley Mr. Berg requested his property and another parcel of land at 1 8319 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. Prickle lives next door to Ms. Courchaine, and requested that the Planning Commission exempt his property from REZ -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 -1 7 -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. Grecnacres, Spokane Valley Ms. Dalton stepped up to the microphone a second time to ask the Planning Commission not to remnove 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 Her 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. .lerry 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. I-Ie 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 ov iers have t vo 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 NLand, B.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 RF.Z- -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 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. 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 I-Iigh 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 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. Traffic, especially on the corner 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 Valley 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 Beadlee,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 II. 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, 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 Tyson, 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, 1431.5 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.rn. Commissioner Carroll moved that. the Planning Commission accept the staffs 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.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-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 E. 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 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 Hearing 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 11R -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 Curry, Applicant, P.O. Box 1031, Cbewelah, 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 staff's reconunendation for CPA -02 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Council for further action. Motion passed unanimously. 10 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 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 detemiined. 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 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 action. Commissioners Blum, Beaulac, Gothmann, Robertson and Kogle 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 Nearing 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 tinting 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 ivas 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 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 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 to 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 Rearing 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. He 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 stafrecommends 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 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 Kogle. Motion passed unanimously. Mr. Ashenbrcner 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 Commissioner Gothmann, and seconded by Commissioner Robertson that the meeting be extended to I0:00 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. 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 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 Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA -08 -04 Public Nearing 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 Malley. Applicant's proposal: change the land use designation from Low- Density Residential to Light Industrial; change zoning from UR -3.5 to 1 - Staff recommendation: change property to Light Lndustrial and zone 1 -2, consistent with current uses. Public Testimony for CPA -08 -04 was opened at 10:13 p.rn. 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 Gothmann suggested that Mr. Rick contact the F.A.A. He offered the City's support with Mr. Rick's efforts. Commissioner Kogle also reconunended 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. lair. 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 Commission accept the staff's recommendation for CPA -08 -04 as written, and forward it to the City Councillor 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: 13. 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 XI. 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 Spokane Valley Planning Commission DRAFT Minutes Council Chambers — City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave. October 14, 2004 1. CALL TO ORDER Planning Commission Chair Gotlunann called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Commission, audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. 111. ROLL CALL Fred Beaulac — Present Bob Blum — Present David Crosby — Present Gail Kogle — Excused Absence Bill Gothmann — Present Ian Robertson — Present John G. Carroll — Present 1'V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Kuhta requested a change under "O1d"Business" to move the continued hearing for CPA -07 -04 ahead of.the hearing for R.EZ- 17 -04. Commissioner Crosby moved that :the October 14, 2004 agenda be approved as amended. Comm ssionerBeaulac`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 continent. VII. COMMISSION REPORTS Conunissioner 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 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. 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. VTQ.. 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 the°City Library, 906 W. Main, Room 1 -A. Topic of discussion will be changes in the Countywide Planning Policies (CWPPs). Planning Commission meetings in Novem er been changed from the second and fourth Thursdays of the month,.to.the firsstLand third Thursdays because of the holidays. A Community Workshop at`Spokand Church of the Nazarene will be held on Thursday, November 4, 2004.'•. Findings from the previous Comm.unity 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 Chairibers-on,Thursday, November 18, 2004. IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS A. OLD BUSINESS: 2 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 Commission continue the Public _Hearing on Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #CPA- 07 -04, to include public testimony, at its next regular meeting on November 18, 2004. Commissioner Gothmann seconded Mr. Crosby's motion. Motion passed unanimously. tru 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 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 Commission °with an update report. At the September 23, 2004 hearing, public testimony was closed. The Planning Commission agreed to continuethe Commission discussion section of the hearing on October 14, 2004. In the, meantime, staff was asked to construct a map of the proposed rezone arca, indicating the lots with vested land actions pending and the lots citizens requested be excluded from the area-wide rez me 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 therezone 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 Flora Road. 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 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 -wide rezone boundaries by excluding the area south of Indiana and east eGreenacres. Those in favor: Commissioners Carroll and Bluin. Those opposed: Commissioners Beaulac, Crosby, Gothmann and ^Robertson. Motion failed 4 -2 A motion was made by Co»irnissioner Carroll to combine the last two amendments by excluding bath the area west of Flora Road and north of Mission Avenue and the.area south of Indiana and east of Greenacres. Commissioner'Crosbv seconded the motion. Those in favor: • Commissioners Carroll and Crosby. Those opposed: Commissioners Beaulac, Bluik 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 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 Area -Wide Rezone Request fREZ- -17 -04 as presented Those in favor: Commissioners Beaulac, Gothmann and Robertson. Those opposed: Commissioners Blum, Carroll and Crosby. Motion tied 3 -3. w 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 recomm endation. Public Nearing for REZ -17 -04 was closed at 7:45 p.m. The Planning Comunissioners 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 Line 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 Thiermap Road._ The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 26, 2004 biit 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 Roadunder the jurisdiction of WSDOT, but including the property acquired by Spokane County for the Appleway Extension. Applicant 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. 5 Marshall Clark, Applicant, 2320 N. Atlantic, Spokane, WA 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 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 close&at:8:12 p.m. Public Hearing for Ordinance Amending :Regulations Relating to Planned UnitDevelopments (PUDs) 1 , A Public Hearingyvas opened at 12.p.m. to amend City Ordinance No. 03 -053, Sections`4.'08.19 and 4':15.0 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 AD.IOLTRNMENT Commissioner Crosby proved 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 TILE 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. 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 Kuhta, AICP, Long Range Planner, City of Spokane Valley FROM: Dee Caputo, MCP, 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 CTED 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 Arca 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! i 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 Original Message--- - From: sbrckn @comcast.net [mailto:sbrckn @comcast.net] 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 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOP AENT 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 1 attended, on 10/14/2004, our cause was message rage z or z 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 Grecnacres 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 respect that residents, citizens, taxpayers, voters of Spokane Valley deserve. 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 Thank you for your time. Susan Bracken 18508 E. Riverway Spokane Valley, WA 99016 509 -924 -3903 Scott Kuhta From: Clive Tobin [clive @webband.com) Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 12:52 PM To: Scott Kuhta Cc: Greg McCormick; Micki Harnois; 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 Tots, 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 Zink Thanks, Clive & Donna Tobin clive@tivebband.com http : / /www.tobincinemasystems.com Scott Kuhta From: Clive Tobin [clive @webband.com[ Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 1:07 PM To: Scott Kuhta Cc: Greg McCormick; Micki Hamois; Chris Bainbridge Subject: Re: Areawide Rezone p.s. Page 1 of 1 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 clive@webband.com hiip: / /www.tohincinem asystems.com — Original Message — From: Clive Tobin To: Scott Kuhta Cc: G req McCormick ; Micki Harnois ; Chris Bainbridge Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 12:52 PM Subject: Re: Areawide Rezone 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 Zink. Thanks, Clive & Donna Tobin Clive we hanc1.com http://www.tobincinemaystems.com 10/20/2004 Sony' ^1 � Valley DATE: October 20, 2004 TO: Sue Golman- Council -Marina VIA: Phone, E -mail, Walk -in FROM: Walt DeWitt ADDRESS: 16804 E. Indiana RESPONSE: . C: Citizen Contact /Walt DeWitt Citizen Contact 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. I told him I would pass this onto the council. Cit of Spokgne valley 11707 E. Sprague) venue, Suite 106 Spofgne galley, WA. 99206 (509) 688 -0180 (509) 688 -0194 TAX RECEIVED OCT 0 8 2004 Dear Mr. Kuhta, SPOKANE VALLEY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 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 tJR -3.5 . i 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 DR-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 is no longer. We would also request that the boundary stop at Flora Road making Flora the west boun r. Sincerely, 17406 E Montgomery Ave. Greenacres, Wash 99016 509- 928 -5807 September 19 2004 elee)ali r 7 i GVO 1 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 ayne House 1.7406 E Montgomery Ave. Greenacres, Wash 99016 509 928 -5807 October 7, 2004 RECEIVED OCT 0 8 2004 SPOKANE VALLEY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Scott Kuhta Mr 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. I 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. From: John Bowditch [tripletzr @yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 4:47 PM To: Scott Kuhta Subject: File No. Areawide Rezone - 01- 04 John Bowditch 17725 E. Montgomery Ave. Spokane Valley, WA. Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http: / /vote.yahoo.com 1 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 R.d_( 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 % 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: 1 1c- Vice 1117 East 35`" Avenue Spokane, Washington 99203 (509) 838 -9066 Fax: (509) 838 -9051 September 23, 2004 N o. 0009 P. 2 RECEIVED SEP 2 3 2004 City of Spokane Valley 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. cc: Ken 'tipper GARY a 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 Address AA 21S 5E AA L22 S /20,49 2.U,f /fit i/ .6 Ap r,7.S LlJ gC Print Name \.". RECEIVED SEP 2 3 2004 City of Spokane VaLev i S 1 `I. 6 2- E J , e rnrcl .' ncrof 1 G /i b GARY � LAURIE HOPKINS 1306 North Long Road Greenacres, WA 99016 Signatur Print Name Address 7hL Mdf),6 log Lot ' - fir,.P,Urrr.�1- E L,athp at al s I3Q 07 r_onl� A .1os1,u,k v Ly 122 in 6 Kell / C Pr2a? L ,4 315 s . �� �qc .� c 3e ,�e.S) 1 . a sJrNct. il • C e Q r» r �5 Q r(C 1 nS C-5') /Cl (7 rife /LJ I ✓t Cd)(ACA 1 / 4 -44 L'. ,11 `�: & e o rL 7 2Z4 .kid ay.._ `r K` September 19 2004 Dear Mr. Kuhta, © [DV 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 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, Hous 17446 E Montgomery Ave. Greenacres, Wash 99016 509- 928 -5807 September 19 2004 Dear Mr. Kuhta, Sincerely, Hous yne House 17416 E Montgomery Ave. Grcenacres, Wash 99016 509- 928 -5807 ` L . 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 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 ,r no longer. We would also request that the boundary stop at Mora Road making Flora the west bour'i. Meeting Date: December 14, 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 : Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Grant Recommendations Report GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Approval of Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Grant recommendations as presented. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None CONTACT: Councilmember Flanigan ATTACHMENTS Recommendations for 2005 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Entity Request , Recomiiiendatiori`i- , - 9 00 0 7 9 0 0 0 ' matct .; t ' ;. `15,000 M::+± '1 ,� '10;000 Mike Peggy Jayne Liz Jeff Fairground 21,000 9,000/9,000 match 20,000 20,000 18,00019,000/9 ,000 match Valleyfest 27,200 15,000 27200 18,000 10,00 5,000 Heritage Museum 22,100 8,000 22,100 18,000 10,000 5,000 YMCA 12, 000 r 1 1 ■ w; , 3i': + r" { • .i �,6 z "` Y �75 000 ;; ` &136 " p� '. `}� i Z 000 ttj 9,000 12,000 9,000 6,000 6,000 SRSC 100,000 100,000 65,000 75,000 75,000 76,000 CVB 200,000 110,000 260,000 113,700 260,000 100,000 240,000 141,000 260,000 150,000 260,000 382,300' f � R Y 1,',:''''l ' t '1:.;., `i l :' Fl Y 't ._, _.,. Committee members include Counilmehlber Mayor Diana Wilhite as alternate Jeff Fiman Liz Beck Peggy Doering Jayne Singleton Hotel/Motel Tax Committee 2004 Allocatir'.^s. frr 2005 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 14, 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: CenterPlace — Kitchen Equipment Package GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Ordinance 03 -071, Policy for the Purchase and Disposition of Goods, Services, Equipment, Supplies, and Property. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council awarded the CenterPlace construction contract to Mooney & Pugh Contractors, Inc. in March 2004. Council has also approved several change orders to the construction contract prior to delegating change order authority (up to $50,000) to the City Manager. On September 28, 2004 Council approved a change order for the completion of the second floor classrooms in the amount of $315,155. BACKGROUND: The Centerplace Project at Mirabeau Point Park is a community facility which will provide dining facilities for large groups. The project scope and budget included acquiring kitchen equipment to store and prepare food for these groups. On 18 November, 2004, the City of Spokane Valley received bids for the kitchen equipment designed for the Centerplace Project. The bid instructions required that the respective bidders were to price out all of the equipment as specified on the equipment list. Having done that they were then able to list on a separate sheet any proposed substitutions and the respective price of that proposed substitution. The only bidder to supply a list of proposed substitutions was the apparent low bidder, Spokane Restaurant Equipment, Inc. The bid list, along with the list of substitutions, was then forwarded to Scott Peterson, the kitchen design consultant, for review and approval of acceptable substitutions. Those recommendations have been incorporated into the proposed contract total. City staff and the Project Architect/Consultant have reviewed the cost and schedule impacts associated with the awarding of this contract and recommend Council approval. In an effort to keep the construction of Centerplace moving forward in a timely manner, it is requested that the City Manager be granted an additional $50,000.00 in change order authority for Mooney & Pugh's contract for Centerplace. OPTIONS: Approve or not approve the proposed kitchen equipment contract award, approve or not approve an additional $50,000 in change order authority to the City Manager, provide additional direction to staff. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Authorize the City Manager to award the bid and enter into contract for the furnishing and installation of the Kitchen Equipment Package (Project No. 04 -005) for Centerplace at Mirabeau Point Park to Spokane Restaurant Equipment, Inc., in the amount of $218,331.86 and approve the City Manager an additional $50,000 in change order authority for Mooney & Pugh's contract for the construction of Centerplace. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The CenterPlace budget included $250,000 for kitchen equipment. The award of this contract is under this budget amount and would bring the total construction cost of the project to date to $8,876,060.10. The project budget has sufficient funds to cover the awarding of this contract. STAFF CONTACT: Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Mike Jackson, Parks & Recreation Director ATTACHMENTS: 1) Bid Tabulation Sheet — Kitchen Equipment Package for Centerplace at Mirabeau Point Park Spokane ®�Va1iey BID TABULATION - Kitchen Equipment Package for CenterPlace at Mirabeau Point Park PROJECT NO. 04-005 BID OPENING DATE November 18, 2004, 3:00 P.M. Calculation of sales tax corrected to 8.4% as indicated in the bid package and Base Bid Totals recalculated. Note 1: Spokane Restaurant Equipment bid with approved altenates is $218,331.86 Bid Item 1 - Lump Sum Base Bid Rank Bidder Base Bid Tax Total 1 Spokane Restaurant Equipment, Inc. 1750E Trent, Spokane, WA 99202, Note 1 $200,692.19 $16,858.14 $217,550.33 2 Duray * P 0 Box 14500, Spokane. WA 99214 $201,073.00 $16,890.13 $217,963.13 3 Bargreen Ellingson, Inc. * 223 W Boone, Spokane, WA 99201 $202,037.33 $16,971.14 $219,008.47 4 Smith & Green 314 E Jackson Ave., Spokane, WA 99207 $209,490.00 $17,597.16 $227,087.16 Spokane ®�Va1iey BID TABULATION - Kitchen Equipment Package for CenterPlace at Mirabeau Point Park PROJECT NO. 04-005 BID OPENING DATE November 18, 2004, 3:00 P.M. Calculation of sales tax corrected to 8.4% as indicated in the bid package and Base Bid Totals recalculated. Note 1: Spokane Restaurant Equipment bid with approved altenates is $218,331.86 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: December 14, 2004 City Manager Sign -off: new business ❑ public hearing X information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Information update on City Business License PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: In August of this year the city council adopted a business license fee of $13/year beginning in 2005. BACKGROUND: A city business license has been discussed since early 2003. The license requirement (registration) was implemented in 2003 but with no fee. In early 2004 city staff proposed a fee to offset the costs of maintaining the file of businesses who were licensed with the city. After considering a city operated licensing system, a system operated by Microflex and the State's Master Licensing System, a decision was made to partner with the state to provide "one stop licensing" for both the state and city license for those businesses needing two or more licenses. The state renewal fee is $9 each year ($15 for new applications). The city eventually settled on a $13 fee for a total of $22/year ($28 if a new application). As originally proposed, the city would have implemented a $25 fee which would have included the state fee. Several questions have surfaced during the last 30 days. The questions and answers are shown below: 1. Is the $9 state renewal fee included in the $13 city fee, or is it in addition to the city fee? At a council meeting in June, staff presented information regarding revenues and costs (see attachment A) for both a combined licensing approach with the state, and a 'City Fee Only" approach without state fees. The footnote relating to column 2 indicates the $13 city fee did not include the state fee. 2. How do the two fees show on the renewal notice sent by the state? Attachment B is a copy of a Master License Renewal Application which lists both the Spokane Valley General Business License of $13 and the Renewal Application Fee of $9. 3. What fee do I pay if I'm licensing my business for the first time? If you are licensing your business for the first time with either the state or the city, you will pay a $15 fee plus the city's $13 license fee. If you are already licensed with the state but need to add other state or city licenses which require a new state master license application, then you will pay the $15 state fee and the $13 city fee. Those businesses that were in the city's database when it was forwarded to the state (November 2004) are not required to pay the $15 state application fee because the city processed the application and entered the data into the database. The state used the database created by the city to electronically "load" the state database for future billing activities which saved the state hours of data entry time, thus no state fee for the original transaction. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: No action is recommended at this time. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None STAFF CONTACT: Ken Thompson, Finance Director Ken Thompson, Finance Director Spokane Valley Council Meeting December 14, 2004 Business License Information Answer 3 questions 1. What is the cost to license? 2. Does the City's $13 include the State fee of $g? 3. What does the State renewal invoice display? Cost to License? City State Renewal $22 $13 $ 9 Fi $13 $15 * or to add licenses and /or modify state database 12/3/2004 3 Does City fee include State's fee? A CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY BUSINESS REGISTRATION EST. REV /EXP - DOL OPTION JUNE 8, 2004 1 2 TASK STATE DOL CITY FEE ONLY Revenues $ 75.000 < -525 $ 39.000 < -513 less uncollectibles $ (3,750) $ (1.950) Total Revenues $ 71,250 $ 37.050 EXPENSES: Telephone calls, walk -In traffic. questions $ 6,500 $ 6.500 Finance Dir. Time $ 2.200 $ 2,200 Half -time employee $ - $ Fee to Microflex/DOL $ 27,000 $ - Register new businesses $ 5.200 $ 5,200 Software (over 3 yrs) $ $ - Desk. chair. computer (over 3 yrs) $ - $ - Bank fees for cr. Cards $ 1,750 $ 1.000 Forms, letters, postage $ - $ Add non -profits (over 3 years) 5 5,000 $ 5,000 Recover costs from prior yr $ 12.000 $ 9.000 2004 costs only Total Exp. $ 59.650 $ 28,900 Net to City If estimates $ 11,600 $ 8,150 arc accurate Column 1: From council meeting Juno 1 Column 2: Does not include 2003 city costs, nor state registration fees Note: Column 1 revenues Include the 59 fee paid to the state and the 518 proposed city registration fee discussed at the June 1 council meeting. Column 1 expenditures include the $27,000 In fees which would have been r by businesses to the state. Column 2 reflects ant) those transactions between businesses , he city. What does the State invoice display? Return ranovrel end ce■rne4St t•,,: D3PAPTNc14T OP _:iehia:rao M.ABTE,Z LICCIJSE SERv;cr3 PO DOX 904e OLY(.MPi.e. WA 35507-00 TLL11PMGI4E! !3901 0 -1414 MASTER LICENSE F? -FHat. `•A!. 1 .P` l UNIFIED BUSINESS ID: 602 1.11.1110 001 0001 0USINESG OWNER r1AthE G MAILING .4DDi•'.E0a: UBI d 602 411.11.0100 1 1 9 CV.AF,REiJT EXPIRATION DATE: 12 - - 2004 ISXPIP.ATION DATE: 12 -31 -2005 FOCI VALI:DAY.ON ONLY 01C...400 0446 -W EU 8t1:L'SS FIRM NAME & LOCATION ADDRESS: REPAIR AVE SPOKANE VALLEY WA 99206 3851 S OKANE VALLEY WA 99216 0000 Pipette melee any correctlonu to the bualnosa nsme, malling or bus :neat address. For your :cnvenience, we encourage renewing early to avoid delays receiving your liaanao. FRyrnent reyuss :ad by: 1.2-1 5 _2004,� RENEW ONLINE? Go to www.dol.wo.Oov/ Uao your UBI* and the password: K832 F533 Your licences will be invalid and lots change= may apply if.your complotcd 1 opplieotion and any foes duo ono not received by the. expirotion dote. SPOKANE VALLEY GENERAL BUSINESS RENEWAL APPLICATION FEE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE: Met.o cvt•eC:k pe ehly l•0 STATE TREASURER In U.S. funds only 22.00 13.00 9.00 5 Sj6Ian� jValley Memorandum To: Dave Mercier, Spokane Valley City Manager From: Tom Scholtens, Spokane Valley Building Official CC: Nina Regor, Spokane Valley Deputy City Manager (e -mail) Cary Driskell, Spokane Valley Deputy City Attorney (e -mall) Chris Bainbridge, Spokane Valley City Clerk (e -mail) Date: 12/10/2004 8:53 AM Re: Public Comment: Nancy Mishinuri, 15103 E Valley Way 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhallcspokanevalley.org Marina Sukup, Spokane Valley Community Development Director (e -mail) Staff has researched Ms. Mishinuri's concern expressed during the Public Comment portion of the November 30 Regular City Council Meeting. That concern was centered on a continual "Yard Sale" being conducted in that citizen's neighborhood. After our research we are convinced that the City of Spokane Valley has no regulations prohibiting this continual activity. Many jurisdictions have established restrictions on "Yard Sales" or "Garage Sales ". Those ordinances typically restrict an event to a certain number of days as well as restricting the number of possible events during a year. Often those ordinances restrict the placement of advertising and also establish that the advertising is removed within a definite timeframe of the sale date. With City Council's direction, staff will prepare a Study Session agenda item dealing with this issue and possible solutions to Ms. Mishinuri's concern.