Loading...
2006, 04-25 Regular Meeting MinutesMayor Wilhite called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the 90 meeting. Attendance: Diana Wilhite, Mayor Steve Taylor, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember B ill Gothmann, , Councilmember Rich Munson, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday April 25, 2006 City Staff: Dave Mercier, City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Ken Thompson, Finance Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Mike Jackson, Parks & Rec Director Mike Connelly, City Attorney Greg McCormick, Planning Manager Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION: In the Pastor's absence, Deputy Mayor Taylor gave the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Wilhite led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present except Councilmember DeVleming. It was moved by Councilmember Schimmels, seconded, and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmember DeVleming from tonight's meeting. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor, seconded, and unanimously agreed to approve the agenda. COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Councilmember Schimmels: reported that he attended the Spokane Regional Transportation Committee meeting a few weeks ago; he attended the recent meeting on Solid Waste where it was determined that beginning in January, any unsecured load or untied load going into the transfer station, will automatically be fined; he also visited with the Valley Arts Commission and Mr. Jackson concerning how they want to proceed with their art group. Councilmember Denenny: said that he attended the Spokane Transit Authority (STA) meeting last week where lengthy discussion was held on the light rail. Deputy Mayor Taylor: mentioned the recent announcement that Spokane will not host the 2009 World Figure Skating Championships. Councilmember Gothmann: stated that he attended the State of the City Address /Luncheon; attended a Weed and Seed meeting; and a Chamber of Commerce breakfast where the speaker addressed ways to reduce the cost of medicine. Councilmember Munson: explained that he also attended the State of the City Address /Luncheon; and attended the STA meeting where it was decided to re -write the resolution with the understanding that the Board of Directors makes the decisions; and that they did not commit to build or not to build, as they needed more information on the total cost, including capital outlay, acquiring right -of -way, and operation and maintenance. He said he also attended Japan week in downtown Spokane. Council Meeting: 04 -25 -06 Page 1 of 7 Approved by Council: 05 -09 -06 MAYOR'S REPORT: Other than preparing and delivering the State of the City Address, Mayor Wilhite reported that she attended a study with the Department of Transportation regarding rail; they are doing a comprehensive state -wide study on rail, passenger and freight, the short lines, and with Burlington, to discuss the types of rail serviced needed; and she attended a tourism meeting through the Greater Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Wilhite invited general public comments. Mary Pollard, 17216 E Baldwin Avenue: wanted to give recognition to Mike Jackson for the work on the Parks and Recreation Masterplan, and thanked everyone for their hard work and commitment. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Continued Hearing on Draft Comprehensive Plan. At 6:13 p.m., Mayor Wilhite opened the continuation of the public hearing on the draft Comprehensive Plan, and invited public comments. Doug Gore, of Northwest Renovators, Inc, 6422 E 17 Avenue: voiced his concern regarding his property located on the corner of 16 and Sullivan (1604 S. Sullivan); he stated that there are many uses which could be placed on the lot to conform with the B1 requirements, businesses such as an art gallery, studio, barber shop, florist, realtor's office; that he feels the parcel would also be a perfect fit for an insurance agency; that he questioned how safe it would be to have a single family home around a sub - station, with two major roads on either side and no residents in between; that if the designation were changed, he would still need to go through the formal process to change the zone, which would require public comment; that this is not spot zoning but is changing the designation of a property; regarding ingress and egress, any plans would have to be approved; and as a neighborhood commercial lot, he would be required to install parking lots with safe turnarounds; and he asked that those councilmembers who voted against this change, to re -vote and change their vote. Michael Lee, Northwest Renovators, 415 S Alpine Drive, Liberty Lake: gave a summary of what they hope will result in a change to the Comprehensive Plan concerning 1604 S. Sullivan Road; that although he asked for a re -zone in his April 11 letter, they are really not asking for a rezone but are asking for a designation change in the Comprehensive Plan process; and that once the Plan supports that type of development, they would go to Planning for a rezone; and if approved, demolish the house, and then through the planning department, work out the issues of ingress and egress; he said that an opportunity exists now while the house is vacant, to change that parcel into something beneficial; and he asked for approval of the change in the Comprehensive Plan for this parcel. Mary Pollard, 17216 E Baldwin Avenue, North Greenacres neighborhood: she read her April 15 letter addressing where the Plan needs strengthening, such as re- development of areas such as North Greenacres; that the ability to plan interconnected trails are lost since the development project plans are piecemeal; that the Park level of service should adopt 2.15 acres per thousand; and that the development regulations need to support the vision of the Comprehensive Plan so development can occur accordingly. Jacob Fisk, 16701 E Broadway Avenue: spoke concerning the property located at 13119 East Broadway Avenue, which is the two parcels (about 1.5 acres, with one single family residence on the front parcel) adjacent to the Summit School; that he proposes the zoning be changed to match the zoning in the area; that the zoning across the street is UR -22; and he proposed his area (currently 3.5) be designed as MDR for a density up to 12 units; that he would like to build some condos /townhouses on the back side of the lot; that he could build properties that would provide housing for under $200,000; he feels access to housing is limited in this area and there are few housing areas under $200,000. Council Meeting: 04 -25 -06 Page 2 of 7 Approved by Council: 05 -09 -06 VOUCHER LIST DATE VOUCHER #s TOTAL VOUCHER AMOUNT 04 -05 -2006 8871 -8886 31,083.70 04 -06 -2006 8888 -8904 1,382,859.85 04 -11 -2006 8905 -8923 8,238.71 04 -19 -2006 8931 -8984 258,573.06 GRAND TOTAL 1,680,755.32 Dennis Dwyer, 4142 South Sundown Drive: said that he had a question about the proposed development going in north of Shafer on Sundown Drive; that he is curious as what affect that development might have on his property. Mayor Wilhite indicated staff would respond back to him at a later date. Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner: explained that two additional letters were received, for the record: (1) e -mail from Alden Sherrodd, concerning the Montgomery Road issue discussed at the last council meeting; and (2) letter from Washington State Department of Transportation, Aviation Division, an agency required to review comprehensive plans; that they recommend council "Protect Felts Field Airport from adjacent incompatible land uses and /or activities that could impact the present or future use of the airport as an essential public facility, or promote inadvertent growth of incompatible land uses. Incompatible land uses may include residential, multi- family, height hazards, uses that attract large concentrations of people, wildlife hazards, and special uses such as schools, hospitals and nursing homes, and explosive /hazardous materials." Mr. Kuhta said the letter further recommends as an addition to the Economic Development Chapter: "Protect the viability of the airport as a significant economic resource to the community by encouraging compatible land uses and densities that protect the airport as an essential public facility." Mr. Kuhta suggested if Council does not want to address these issues tonight, and since these issues are not critical to the Comprehensive Plan, an option would be to consider these issues at the Plan's first amendment, likely in 2007. Mayor Wilhite invited further public testimony; no further comments were offered and Mayor Wilhite closed the public hearing at 6:36 p.m. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Amended 2006 Transportation Improvement Plan — Steve Worley/Neil Kersten Mayor Wilhite opened the public hearing at 6:37 p.m. Public Works Director Kersten explained that this is a resolution to amend the 2006 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP); that this brings the 2006 TIP into line to more accurately reflect what got funded, and what projects are under construction; and he further explained which projects received or did not receive funding, as per the April 25, 2006 Request for Council Action. Mayor Wilhite invited public comments; no comments were offered and Mayor Wilhite closed the public hearing at 6:39 p.m. 3. 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. Following claim vouchers: b. Payroll for Pay Period Ending April 15, 2006: $139,446.24 c. Resolution 06 -006 Setting Planning Commission Public Hearing for Street Vacation Request STV -01 -06 d. Minutes of April 11, 2006 Regular Council Meeting It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the consent agenda. Council Meeting: 04 -25 -06 Approved by Council: 05 -09 -06 Page 3 of 7 NEW BUSINESS 4. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 06 -008 Amending Interim Zoning re Plastic Injection — Marina Sukup After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded, to approve ordinance 06 -008. Planning Manager McCormick, standing in for Community Development Director Sukup, explained that this ordinance addresses the permitting of plastic injection molding in the B -2 and B -3 Districts; adding that the present use matrix did not include plastic injection molding; that the use is identified in the industrial use matrix, but the process is not defined or described. Mr. McCormick said there have been no changes to the draft ordinance since the first reading. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 5. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 06 -009 Amending Sign Ordinance (bus benches) — Mike Connelly /Cary Driskell After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember Munson and seconded, to adopt ordinance 06 -009. Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained that the ordinance addresses bus bench structures by providing a definition, includes the advertising on the bus benches as an exception to the prohibited signs located within the public right -of -way; and that there have been no changes since the first reading other than to correct minor scrivener's errors. Mr. Driskell mentioned that he would also like Council to address a motion on the proposed agreement. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. It was then moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded, to approve the form of the model agreement for placement of bus benches, and authorize the City Manager or designee to enter into agreements with private parties as appropriate. Mr. Driskell again explained that there have been no changes since the first reading of the accompanying ordinance. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 6. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 06 -010 Adopting Comp Plan — Mike Connelly /Cary Driskell After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, Attorney Connelly addressed some of the suggestions for Council consideration: change the parcel on 16 and Sullivan to neighborhood commercial; and change the parcel on Broadway to UR -12, both of which were commented upon by citizens tonight. Deputy Mayor Taylor asked if Councilmembers cared to re- consider the last motion concerning the property on 16th and Sullivan; and as no councilmember who voted on the prevailing side of that last meeting's motion was willing to make a motion to reconsider, the matter was not pursued. Council discussion ensued regarding the two proposals, with Deputy Mayor Taylor voicing his objection to the process of requiring one requestor to go through the formal amendment process in 2007 for a Comprehensive Plan change, and not requiring the same of others, that Council heard more information tonight, that the process for this first comprehensive plan allows council to open the entire map to changes, and he voiced opposition to not considering all properties in the same manner. It was moved by Councilmember Gothmann and seconded to leave the designation the way it is on this particular parcel, 13119 E. Broadway. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment. Mary Pollard, 17216 E Baldwin Avenue: said the process confuses her; that this is a public hearing on the comprehensive plan; and if there is no time to make changes, then it is a moot point to have a hearing Council Meeting: 04 -25 -06 Page 4 of 7 Approved by Council: 05 -09 -06 tonight and questioned why anyone would even come to speak and also asked for clarification on the process. Jacob Fisk, 16701 E Broadway Avenue: said he feels the current designation does not equate with the area; that there are apartments all the way down Broadway; and that the overall appearance is one of higher density. Doug Gore, 6422 E 17 said they initially brought this issue to the City Planning, who recommended they bring it forward in the formal process as a change in the comprehensive plan; that this is the formal process and he is now confused about the entire process, as planning already made a recommendation. Deputy Mayor Taylor explained the difference between the City's Planning Department and the Planning Commission; and that this is the time now to open the entire map and make designation changes outside the annual amendment process; and to do otherwise will delay the request by almost a year and he opposes that; said that he cannot agree to approving one property tonight without considering the other property, and would be more willing to support it if the prior subject property discussion could be re- opened. Councilmember Schimmels stated that they set precedence last week and unless there is a legal objection, he fails to see why Council would act on one property one way last week, and elect to do something different tonight. Attorney Connelly confirmed that Council has made approximately 70 unique and individual changes to the land use map and can do for these two requests as well. Vote on the motion to leave the designation the way it is on this particular parcel, 13119 E. Broadway Avenue: In Favor: Deputy Mayor Taylor, and Councilmembers Schimmels, Gothmann, and Munson. Opposed: Mayor Wilhite and Councilmember Denenny. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded, to approve ordinance 06 -010. Attorney Connelly explained that this ordinance documents the satisfaction of the legal requirements to adopt a Comprehensive Plan; and includes necessary findings of fact. In response to Councilmember Munson's question about what jurisdictions were included in this process, Mr. McCormick explained that it includes all the neighboring jurisdictions, and staff sent out notices concerning workshops, community meetings, and even mailed to the jurisdictions, a compact disk containing the initial public hearing draft, as well as the final environmental impact statement. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment. Doug Gore 6422 E 17 said he does not understand how council can adopt the Plan without having all the information; that they were told one can't bring something up for another year until there is a review of the comprehensive plan; and if he brings something up a year from now, will he be told it has to go through the formal process; and if that is the case, one can never reach that formal process; an that all issues should be addressed prior to the Plan's adoption. Vote on the motion to approve ordinance 06 -010: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Mayor Wilhite noted for the record that Councilmember Munson is leaving the meeting due to illness. She then called for a short recess at 7:14 p.m. Mayor Wilhite reconvened the meeting at 7:26 p.m. 7. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 06 -011 Adopting Crossover Matrix — Mike Connelly After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded, to approve ordinance 06 -011. Attorney Connelly explained that this ordinance will implement the Comprehensive Plan in a way that requires few changes to the current zoning code; that the matrix will replace certain sections of the interim Phase 1 Development Regulations and will amend the Interim Zoning Code Section 14.416.000 number of uses per lot; and that the ordinance should serve well until our own development regulations can be adopted. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments Council Meeting: 04 -25 -06 Page 5 of 7 Approved by Council: 05 -09 -06 were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 8. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 06 -012 Amending Regulations for Off -road Vehicles — Cary Driskell After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded, to advance ordinance 06 -012 to a second reading at a future meeting. Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained that this ordinance was written in response to neighbor complaints of off -road vehicles in residential areas; that Council instructed staff to draft the proposed ordinance; that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the matter March 23, 2006, and they recommend approval. Mr. Driskell also said the ordinance states that any existing off -road vehicle use shall be abated no later than six months following the effective date of the ordinance. Mr. Driskell explained that start -up vehicle engine or instances where work is occurring on the vehicle, are not violations of this ordinance; that this ordinance is strictly for use of off -road vehicles on private property for recreational purposes. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment. Dick Behm, 3626 S Ridgeview Drive: asked that Council consider control in other areas, and not just for off -road vehicles but also for mountain bikes and skateboarders; as there needs to be a way to control them as eliminating their use in residential areas forces the use to move elsewhere. After Council discussion, it was determined to move this ordinance forward now and those other issues can be addressed at a later point. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 9. Proposed Resolution 06 -007 Adopting Amended 2006 Transportation Improvement Plan — Steve Worley It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded, to approve resolution 06 -007 amending the 2006 Transportation Improvement Plan. Mr. Kersten explained that this is the resolution previously explained during the public hearing, which will activate the approval of the amended 2006 Transportation Improvement Plan. He also mentioned that bridging of the valley was not funded, and that project will be re- shuffled in the new 2007 plan. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 10. Proposed Resolution 06 -008 Adopting the Parks & Recreation MasterPlan — Mike Jackson It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded, to adopt the Parks and Recreation Masterplan by Resolution 06 -008. Parks and Recreation Director Jackson stated that there is one additional change to make, that of adding the number and letter designation to the bike and trail map; he also noted that this plan meets the requirements of the Washington Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation, which makes the City eligible for grants from that agency. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 11. Proposed Resolution 06 -009: Washington Interagency Committee Parks & Recreation Grant — Mike Jackson It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded, to approve resolution 06 -009 Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program authorizing resolution for Greenacres Neighborhood Park. Parks and Recreation Director Jackson explained that the Parks and Recreation Department requests approval to apply for a grant from the Washington Interagency Committee (IAC); that the application deadline is May 1; that the Parks and Recreation MasterPlan identified the Greenacres Neighborhood as an area requiring a public park, that potential park properties have been located; the property owner has indicated an interest in selling the property; and that the school board may have an interest in exploring joint planning and park facilities use. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Council Meeting: 04 -25 -06 Page 6 of 7 Approved by Council: 05 -09 -06 12. Proposed Resolution: Supporting Spokane County's Application for Indians Baseball Stadium Infrastructure Repair — Dave Mercier It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded, to approve the resolution supporting Spokane County's Application for Indians Baseball Stadium Infrastructure Repair; authorize the Mayor to send a letter of support, and authorize the City Manager or designee to complete and sign the "Self Certification of Growth Management Compliance Form." Mr. Mercier explained that Spokane County is poised to submit an application for CERB Job Development Fund in response to a call for projects; that they require the support form Spokane Valley as the stadium is located in the city; adding that Mr. Ross Kelly is here should Council have any questions. Mr. Kelly further explained that the resolution is the City's endorsement that the project has the City's support. He then introduced Otto Kline, Senior Vice President of the Spokane Indian's, who said they look forward to making the structural and safety improvements to the stadium as some of the insides of the stadium are about 50 years old and in need of repair. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 13. Motion Consideration: Valley Corridor Project: Transportation Improvement Board funds for Federal Funds through Spokane Regional Transportation Committee (SRTC) - Neil Kersten Public Works Director Kersten explained that as stated in the accompanying letter from SRTC General Manager Glenn Miles, they have offered to substitute federal Surface Transportation Program Urban funds for the currently approved State Transportation Improvement Board funds for the Valley Corridor project; that staff in working with the SRTC to complete the environmental assessment on the Valley Corridor project has been extremely time consuming, beginning in January 2004 and ending with a model in January 2006; that with the extension of time we are not able to keep the funds previously allocated by the Transportation Improvement Board, and SRTC made an offer to extend $4.2 million of federal fiends in lieu of that TM funding, if we relinquish those funds back, which we will as that schedule cannot be met. It was moved by Councilmernber Denenny and seconded, to accept the SRTC Board offer as stated in the letter dated March 20, 2006 from Glenn Miles of SRTC, and to authorize noting the Transportation Improvement Board that we are relinquishing the funding previously set aside for that project. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Wilhite invited general public comments. Gail Stiltner, 10119 E 44 Avenue: she spoke concerning the off -road vehicles; she said that she has property in the Ponderosa, one of which has over two acres; and that some parcels in Ponderosa have five acres; that it is not unusual for kids to run off -road vehicles on those properties; that she wonders about the ability to implement the ordinance; while at the same time she appreciates that it is not appropriate if a neighborhood is being used as a racetrack; and she asked that consideration be given to the property size rather than simply saying residential. As the other agenda items were for information only, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:12 p.m. ATTEST: lristine Bainbridge, 'ity Clerk Council Meeting: 04 -25 -06 Approved by Council: 05 -09 -06 04-0.AALk kifuHti, Diana Wilhite, Mayor Page 7 of 7 City of Spokane Valley City Council RE: Parcel # 45261.0407 Councilmember's, Northwest Renovators, Inc. 'may PO Box 885 l_ibcrts Luke. WA Q90I9•0885 Page 1 of 4 April 25, 2006 First 1 would like to apologize for not being at the last council meeting where you voted on our property located on the southwest corner of 16` and Sullivan. We were under the belief that public comment would not be allowed and therefore we were not present. At that meeting, questions about what our parcel could be used for were left unanswered. Some of the uses under a B1 zone could include businesses such as an art gallery or studio, barber shop, bike shop, book store. camera shop, florist, gift store. hobby shop. jewelry store, locksmith, medical office. professional office, candy shop, photo studio and so on. We think this parcel is perfect fit for a Realtors office. insurance agency (we have talked with an Allstate Agency), CPA, appraisal office. attorney office, city council member's office. florist, or a number of other uses. But that is who we would be marketing the property to. We would be otTering proper use of the property. A comment was made about safety in regards to the Vera Sub Station that will eventually be going in. The reality is. how safe is it to have a single home surrounded by a power sub station on two sides and two major roads on the other two sides. There is no other residence unless you cross a major intersection or walk past an eventual large power sub - station then go over a large vinyl fence into a true neighborhood. What part of that says that it's safe as a single. single family residence? A comment was made as to ingress and egress. Any building plans we submit would need to be reviewed by. and then approved by. the proper governing authority's to insure safety. As a side note, can you imagine a mom trying to back out of that driveway ever} morning with her two kids in the car? The driveway fronts a major intersection that is protected by a traffic signal. Every morning she would be backing into a turn Ianc that is heavily used by school busses and morning commuters. As a neighborhood commercial. we would be required to install a parking lot with ample room for turn around so as to safely enter this heavy traffic intersection! f\ Northwest t Renovators, Inc. Pagc_2of4 Someone inquired as to if a home currently sits on the property. 1 submit the pictures to you so that you can see. it's not a home it's a run down shack with no real heat system. no real kitchen or bathroom. bedrooms with non egress windows and very low head room. Its built on the ground and needs the tender touches of a bull dozer. At this time it is not a livable dwelling nor should it ever be turned back into a livable dwelling. Mr. Gothman voted against because he would like for us to go thru the re- zoning process and does not want to do "spot zoning ". I submit to you that we are going thru the re-zone process at this very moment. if the council passes the motion to change the designation under the comp plan. we then must go thru a formal proems to actually change the zone. This requires the public comment that you were concerned about. And spot zoning is not what you are doing. You are changing the designation of properties, a major part of this comp plan, making right the wrongs if you will. Re- zoning will take place later in the process aver the applications have been filed and the public has been heard. Please change your vote so that the public can be heard. Mr. Munson voted against because he didn't want to put the city in a position of saying "here's a commercial lot and here are two things you can build on it ". if he were the developer he would put his hands up in the air and walk out if he were limited in what he could build_ I submit to you sir that there are numerous uses for this property that can greatly benefit the local community, as 1 have previously explained. Please change your vote and give this property the only designation that truly fits. Mr. Denenny voted for because It does not fit....it can't be single residential ". How very true that statement is. Mr. Denenny made the comment that the home is "boxed in by Quasi Public Property ". Let's look at it as if the property was already zoned commercial and we were trying to re-zone to residential. This same council would look at the parcel and say that "there is no way that we are going to allow you to build a home that is surrounded on two sides by a planned huge power substation and two major roads on the other two side. The corner is protected by signal lights and we can't allow a family to he hacking in and out of that property ". 1 ask you to really look at this parcel and ask yourself if this is a parcel that should have a home built on it. Look at the tall fences that will be erected by a power sub station (totally encompassing two sides). then look at the two major roads with turn lanes. 1'11 liox 885 i ibcrty Luke. WA 990 19 -0885 Northwest Ren ova tors. Inc '9, rt C¢wwfih& tlaerrwae• Mr. Denenny also suggested that you should go term your maps and see how many of these comp plan changes that you have done. all without saying that the public should have a chance to comment and the property owners should go thru a "formai process" Page )cif 4 Mr. Taylor stated that a change was a good thing and would defiantly make an improvement_ He also stated that he can't believe the neighbors would complain about any improvement of this run down property. Any improvement would be welcomed by the community and I gotta tell yte I do not know of anyone that would rehab this property back into a livable dwelling? It will always be a rundown eyesore as a residential property because it doesn't fit. Our company is willing to invest in this city and help get rid of an eyesore, as we did with the old burnt down tattoo parlor on East Sprague. An eyesore that sat dangerous and vacant for over three years! L.et's not have this eyesore continue to sit Mr. DeVieming voted against and said that the parcel was not out of place" and that three of the four comers were residential. Mr. DcVlcming. I submit to you that this parcel is out of place and is one of those three parcels that you referred to as being residential. If we look at the entire picture we see thai the other two residential comers do not front the busy sections of the major arterial streets. In fact one faces wept and is on Century not 16 or Sullivan and the other faces the lower traffic east side of 1 di Ave. and is not impacted by a rum lane. I also submit to you that both of those properties have neighbors. You walk out your door and greet the person next to you while you go pick up your moaning paper. Our property has no neighbors at all! You merest cross a major intersection or go over a vinyl fence (after walking in front of an eventual power sub- station that your company will be building) to even think about talking to someone. Mr. DeVlening also stated that he was concerted that "we (the city) allow something, it falls and then it just sits there and is empty for a long period of time before somebody comes in and tries to resat -met it ". I say HERE WE ARE! This place has failed (as a residence), it has been sitting, empty for a long period oftime. and we would like to resurrect it. Give us that chance, you and the community have nothing to loose. Please change your vote. Mr. Shimmels voted no for the stone reasons as Mr. Guthman and the fact that we have not gone thru the process. Again I submit to you that we are going thru the process at this very moment and the public will have the opportunity to comment and more so has already had the opportunity to comment at all the hearings on the comp plan. You're making changes and they have had the right to step forward at any time and voice any concerns. I ask you to look at the parcel, does a home belong there? Should a family live there? You commended us for wanting to do something but you voted no because we have not gone thru the "pry ". That is what we are doing. Please Sir change your vote_ I'() Box tg 5 1 shirr Lake, WA 04019-08 85 Northwest Renovators, Inc. '1»uw8►y In Quaky 7-io.,rer' Page 4 of 4 Mr. McCormick also tried to remind this council that you were not approving a "zone change" and that we as thc owners will have to go thru a formal process. We will have to file an application to re -zone with proper notifications, hearings and time frames for public comment. Approving thc comp plan change does not take away anyone's rights it's just the right thing to do. It is the start of the process that several of you are concerned about. This council asked the staff for a recommendation on this property. The recommendation was a clear belief that this property should be changed and did not fit as residential. Your staff looked at all the issues in order to make a recommendation and it did not seem as if the recommendation was even taken into consideration. Madam Mayor voted yes after listening to all the council members' points of view. without making any comments of her own. I believe that she was duly elected by the people of this city because the people of this city believe in her and her ability to properly see the vision of this city. They believe she has the ability to guide this city in the proper direction. She must have voted in the direction that she felt was proper for this city and the parcel. 1 ask you all to join her and us in moving the city and this parcel in the right direction. Please make a motion to re-vote, second that nwtion, and then re-vote with the facts and photos in front of you. Doug Gore (509) 487-1508 Michael E. Lee (509) 993 -2739 PO 13ns NHS Liberty Lake. WA 999{)19 -0885 , Google Maps - 1604 S Sullivpn Rd, Veradale, WA 99037 Google h tp:. mahs.eoov!r.com Page 1 of 1 4 :.:5" 106 ;*:„ -- IL, ILJ 1116,sk p a t _ /-70/ April 25, 2006 City Clerk City of Spokane Valley 1707 E Sprague Ave, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: 1604 South Sullivan R.oad In the review of the current comprehensive plan, Northwest Renovators, Inc. requests the City of Spokane Valley approve a change to the comprehensive plan for the property at 1.604 South Sullivan Road, (Parcel number 45261.0407) from residential 3.5 to neighborhood commercial B 1. The requested property is located at the southwest comer of the heavy traffic intersection of 16 Avenue and Sullivan Road. The current condition of the property is a dilapidated foreclosure and serves as an eyesore for the community We believe, along with the City of Spokane Valley Planning Department, the evidence greatly supports changing this parcel to neighborhood commercial. The Neighborhood Business Zone (B1) Chapter 14.624.100 paragraph two (2) states "The number of such areas shall be limited by spacing such areas a minimum of one -half (1/2) mile apart." The closest comparisons would be approximately'/ of a mile away at 5th Avenue and Sullivan Road. This paragraph further states "whenever possible in a one - business island centrally located in the trade area...." As you can see from the exhibits, this parcel is certainly a centrally located "island ". In addition, this parcel is surrounded by Quasi Public, which supports the change to neighbor commercial. Furthermore, paragraph three (3) states "Site access should be provided by a Collector Arterial or higher arterial road classification." Sullivan Road and 16 Avenue are both designated urban principal arterials. Again, supporting neighborhood commercial. We appreciate your time and effort in considering 1604 South Sullivan Road for a change in the comprehensive plan that will support this parcel for neighborhood conlrnercial. Sincerely, Michael Lee (509) 993 -2739 Northwest R nov t Ihc. "9nverlinj Jn G?.uafiN : 7-lomar" Doug Gore (509) 487 -1508 PO Box 885 Liberty Lake, WA 99019 -0885