The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 08/09/2007 SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA COUNCIL CHAMBERS -CITY HALL 11707 E. SPRAGUE AVENUE AUGUST 9, 2007 6:00 TO 9:00 PM I, CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES VI. PUBLIC COMMENT VII. COMMISSION REPORTS VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS- PUBLIC HEARING: UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODE ZONING MAP OLD BUSINESS- X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER XI. ADJOURNMENT COMMISSIONERS CITY STAFF GAIL KOGLE, CHAIR GREG MCCORMICK, ACTING DIRECTOR, AICP ROBERT BLUM, VICE-CHAIR SCOTT KUHTA, LONG RANGE PLANNER, AICP FRED BEAULAC MIKE BASINGER, ASSOCIATE PLANNER,AICP JOHN G. CARROLL CARY DRISKELL, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY DAVID CROSBY IAN ROBERTSON DEANNA GRIFFITH MARCIA SANDS WWW.SPOKANEVALLEY.ORG CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Planning Commission Asti•n Meeting Date: August 9, 2007 Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ® public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing for consideration of the Uniform Development Code draft zoning district map. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A—Growth Management Act PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTION TAKEN: Previously the Planning Commission made a recommendation of Title 19, Zoning to the City Council. BACKGROUND: The City Council adopted the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan on April 25, 2006, effective on May 10, 2006. After the Comprehensive Plan was adopted, staff began to develop the new development regulations to implement the Comprehensive Plan policies and land use map. Staff has been working with the Planning Commission to refine the new development regulations to further implement the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission has completed their review of the development regulations. A draft zoning map is ready for Planning Commission review and recommendation. The map represents the locations of the zoning districts identified in the Planning Commission's recommended draft of Title 19 as well as being consistent with the previously adopted Comprehensive Plan land use map. The zoning district map is the final phase of implementation of our community's Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission had a study session on July 26, 2007 to start initial review of the draft zoning map. The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation for the City Council's consideration. The zoning map should be adopted concurrent with adoption of the development regulations. OPTIONS: Recommend approval to the City Council, recommend approval with changes, return to staff for revisions RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Recommend approval of the proposed draft of the Uniform Development Code Zoning Map to the City Council for approval. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None. STAFF CONTACT: Mike Basinger, AICP, Associate Planner ATTACHMENTS: Draft zoning map and methodology s 10111111"1\422121141, SIoKane Valley 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ® Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 ♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhall@spokanevalley.org Memorandum To: Spokane Valley Planning Commissioner From: Mike Basinger,AICP, Associate Planner Date: July 26, 2007 Re: Zoning District Map Methodology The proposed Zoning District Map has undergone significant revision from the interim adopted zoning map in order to put our newly adopted Comprehensive Plan into practice. Planning staff will continue to recommend improvements to the zoning map by exploring additional tools to help shape our community's future. At this time,the Planning Commission is tasked with reviewing staff's methodology for implementing our first Zoning District map. The Zoning District map must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use map. The following information outlines the process used to implement the Zoning District Map. Low Density Residential(LDR): The LDR Comprehensive Plan designation addresses a range of single-family residential densities from one dwelling unit per acre up to and including six dwelling units per acre. Existing lot sizes and community character will be strongly considered _ when developing the City's zoning map (Rotchford Acres &Ponderosa). Typical lot sizes will range from 7,000 to 10,000 square feet. The following residential zones are included the LDR Comprehensive Plan land use category. 19.40.030 R-1 —Single-Family Residential Estate District Low density residential development intended to preserve the character of existing development and to allow for a limited number of horses and other large animals. Minimum lot size=40,000 Methodology: The assumption was made that property designated Urban Residential -1 (UR-1) in the interim zoning district map within the LDR comprehensive plan category would cross- over to R-1. There are 572 R-1 parcels in the new zoning districts map. UR-1 R-1 Lot Area 40,000 40,000 (25,000) Lot Width 80 80 Lot Depth 100 100 Front&Flanking Setback 35 35 Page 1 of 11 Rear Yard Setback 20 20 Side Yard Setback 5 5 Lot Coverage 30% 30% Building Height 35 35 19.40.040 R-2—Single-Family Residential District Low density residential development intended to preserve the character of existing development. Minimum lot size= 7,500 Methodology: The assumption was made that property designated Urban Residential -3.5 (UR- 3.5) in the interim zoning district map within the LDR comprehensive plan category would cross-over to Single-Family Residential District(R-2). There are 20,670 R-2 parcels in the new zoning districts map. UR-3.5 R-2 Lot Area 10,000 7,500 Lot Width 80 65 Lot Depth N/A 90 Front &Flanking Setback 15 15 Rear Yard Setback 20 20 Side Yard Setback 5 5 Lot Coverage 50% 50% Building Height 35 35 19.40.050 R-3—Single-Family Residential Urban District Low density residential development intended to preserve the character of existing development. Minimum lot size= 6,000 Methodology: The assumption was made that property designated Urban Residential-7* (UR- 7*) and Urban Residential -7 (UR-7) in the interim zoning district map within the LDR comprehensive plan category would cross-over to Single-Family Residential Urban District(R- 3). There are 2,866 R-3 parcels in the new zoning districts map of which 791 were designated Urban Residential—7* (UR-7*) and 2075 were designated Urban Residential-7 (UR-7). The UR-7* zoning designation was part of the County's Phase 1 Zoning implementation and stipulated that there could only be 6 units per acre opposed to UR-7 which allowed for 7 units per acre. UR-7* UR-7 R-3 Lot Area 6,000 6,000 6,000 Lot Width 65 65 50 Lot Depth N/A N/A 80 Front &Flanking 15 15 15 Page 2 of 11 Setback Rear Yard Setback 20 20 20 Side Yard Setback 5 5 5 Lot Coverage 55% 55% 55% Building Height 35 35 35 Medium Density Residential(MDR): The MDR Comprehensive Plan designation addresses a range of housing types to accommodate anticipated residential growth. The Land Use chapter encourages the development of housing types, such as duplexes, townhouses, and condominiums in existing multi family areas and within mixed-use development in commercial areas. The MDR designation will allow up to 12 dwelling units per acre. The MDR designation should be used as transitional zoning between higher intensity land uses such as commercial and office, to lower density single-family neighborhoods. The following residential zones are included the MDR Comprehensive Plan land use category. 19.40.70 MF-1 —Medium Density Multifamily Residential District The Medium Density Residential (MF-1) designation is intended to be used as transitional zoning between higher intensity land uses. MF-1 should be located near services and high capacity transit facilities or transit routes. Minimum lot size=3,600 Methodology: The assumption was made that property designated Urban Residential - 12 (UR- 12) in the interim zoning district map within the MDR comprehensive plan category would cross-over to MF-1. There are 1,920 MF-1 parcels in the new zoning districts map. UR-12 MF-1 Lot Area 4,200 3,600 Lot Width 50 50 Lot Depth 80 80 Front&Flanking Setback _ 15 15 Rear Yard Setback 20 10 Side Yard Setback 5 5 Lot Coverage 60% 60% Building Height 40 40 High Density Residential(HDR): The HDR Comprehensive Plan designation provides for existing multi family residential development developed at a density in excess of 12 units per acre. Additionally, HDR designated areas are also located in areas near higher intensity development, such as a City Center. Generally, this zoning designation is appropriate for land which is located adjacent to the arterial street system served by public transit, and is in close proximity to business and commercial areas. The following residential zones are included the HDR Comprehensive Plan land use category. Page 3 of 11 19.40.71 MF-2—High Density Multifamily Residential District The High Density Residential (MF-2) designation is intended to be used as transitional zoning between higher intensity land uses. MF'-2 should be located near services and high capacity transit facilities or transit routes. Minimum lot size=3,600 Methodology: The assumption was made that property designated Urban Residential - 22(UR- 22) in the interim zoning district map within the HDR comprehensive plan category would cross- over to MF-2. There are 1,103 MF-2 parcels in the new zoning districts map. UR-22 MF-2 Lot Area 1,600 2,000 Lot Width 20 20 Lot Depth 80 80 Front&Flanking Setback 15 15 Rear Yard Setback 20 10 Side Yard Setback 5 5 Lot Coverage 65% 65% Building Height 50 50 Office Designation: The office comprehensive plan designation is intended primarily for office development with limited retail or commercial uses. Developments within the Argonne/Mullan Couplet, Pines Road, and Evergreen Road corridors are representative of office development. Retail and commercial uses are limited to those that are clearly subordinate to the primary office use, or the retail function primarily serves the office uses in close proximity to the retail or commercial use. Office uses can act as buffers or transition areas between higher intensity land uses and lower intensity land uses. The following zones are included the Office Comprehensive Plan land use category. 19.60.020 GO—Garden Office District The Garden Office designation is intended primarily for low-rise office development with limited retail or commercial uses. The primary uses include medical and dental facilities, education services, insurance, real estate, financial institutions, design firms, and legal services. Methodology: Using the Assessor's property use code and a windshield survey staff identified existing office uses. Office uses setback off major transportation corridors adjacent to residential were zoned GO to create a buffer between higher intensity office uses and residential neighborhoods. There are 213 GO parcels in the new zoning districts map. Page 4 of 11 GO UR-12 UR-22 Lot Area N/A 6,000 1,600 Lot Width N/A 60 60 Lot Depth N/A N/A N/A Front&Flanking 20 15 15 Setback Rear Yard Setback 20 (adj. to residential) 20 20 Side Yard Setback 20 (adj. to residential) 5 5 Lot Coverage N/A 60% 65% Building Height 45 40 50 19.60.030 0—Office District The Office (0) designation is intended primarily for medium to high-rise office development with limited retail or commercial uses. The primary uses include medical and dental facilities, education services, insurance, real estate, financial institutions, design firms, and legal services. Methodology: Using the Assessor's property use code and a windshield survey staff identified existing office uses. Land uses located on major transportation corridors associated with higher intensity uses were designated Office. There are 218 Office parcels in the new zoning districts map. Spokane County's implementing zones for office were UR-12 and UR-22. 0 UR-12 UR-22 Lot Area N/A 6,000 1,600 Lot Width N/A 60 60 Lot Depth N/A N/A N/A Front&Flanking 20 15 15 Setback Rear Yard Setback 20 (adj. to residential) 20 20 Side Yard Setback 20 (adj.to residential) 5 5 Lot Coverage N/A 60% 65% Building Height 100 40 50 Commercial Designations: Existing commercial areas are auto-oriented and characterized by one-story low intensity development. In the future, these areas will become more intensively developed and pedestrian oriented, and in some designations, accommodate housing. Transforming existing areas into places where people want to live, shop, and work requires changes. Commercial areas should contain street furniture, trees,pedestrian shelters, well marked crosswalks, and buildings oriented to and along the street to provide interest and allow easy pedestrian access. The following zones are included the Commercial Comprehensive Plan land use category. 19.60.040 NC—Neighborhood Commercial District Page 5 of 11 The Neighborhood Commercial (NC) classification designates areas for small-scale neighborhoods serving retail and office uses. Neighborhood business areas should not be larger than two acres in size, and should be located as business clusters rather than arterial strip commercial developments. The Neighborhood Commercial is intended to provide a limited number of commercial goods and services to surrounding residential neighborhoods. Methodology: The assumption was made that all Neighborhood Business (B-1) zoning designations in the interim zoning district map within the Neighborhood Commercial comprehensive plan category would cross-over to NC. There are 20 NC parcels in the new zoning districts map of which the acreage range is 0.2 to 1.8 complying with provision that NC areas should not exceed two acres in size. NC B-1 Lot Area N/A 5,000 Lot Width N/A 50 Lot Depth N/A N/A Front&Flanking Setback 20 35 Rear Yard Setback 20 (adj. to residential) 15 Side Yard Setback 20 (adj. to residential) 20 (adj. to residential) Lot Coverage N/A 50% Building Height 35 35 19.60.050 C—Community Commercial District The Community Commercial (C) classification designates areas for retail, service and office establishments intended to serve several neighborhoods. Community Commercial areas should not be larger than 15-17 acres in size and should be located as business clusters rather than arterial strip commercial development. Methodology: The assumption was made that property designated Community Commercial in the comprehensive plan would cross-over to Community Commercial (C). The following interim zoning designations are included in the C zoning designation. Interim Zoning Class Parcel Count Total Acreage B-1 29 16.66 B-2 120 67.25 B-3 291 282.44 I-2 17 32.35 UR-22 30 22.76 UR-3.5 46 20.57 UR-7 19 6.77 UR-7* 2 1.47 There are 554 C parcels in the new zoning districts map. The largest parcel size in the C designation is 16 acres in size, complying with provision that C areas should not exceed 17 acres in size. Page 6 of 11 C B-2 Lot Area N/A N/A Lot Width N/A N/A Lot Depth N/A N/A Front&Flanking Setback 20 35 Rear Yard Setback 20 (adj. to residential) 15 Side Yard Setback 20 (adj.to residential) 15 (adj. to residential) Lot Coverage N/A 55% Building Height 35 35 19.60.060 RC—Regional Commercial District The Regional Commercial District (RC) designation allows a large range of commercial and business uses. The Regional Commercial designation encompasses two major retail areas of the City. It covers the"strip"retail areas along Sprague Avenue which includes the automobile dealerships located at the western end of the Sprague Avenue corridor and the"big box"retail area found in the Sullivan Road area from Sprague Avenue north to the Interstate 90 interchange, and includes the Valley Mall and Wal-Mart. Methodology: The assumption was made that property designated Regional Commercial in the comprehensive plan would cross-over to Regional Commercial (RC). The following interim zoning designations are included in the RC zoning designation. Interim Zoning Class Parcel Count Total Acreage B-1 2 0.31 B-2 8 21.72 B-3 181 357.88 I-2 85 78.70 I-3 7 48.96 UR-3.5 5 3.44 UR-7 7 7.30 There are 298 RC parcels in the new zoning districts map. RC B-3 Lot Area N/A N/A Lot Width N/A N/A Lot Depth N/A N/A Front&Flanking Setback 20 35 Rear Yard Setback 20 (adj. to residential) 15 Side Yard Setback 20 (adj. to residential) 25 (adj. to residential) Lot Coverage N/A 60% Building Height 35 60 Page 7 of 11 Mixed-use Designations: The concept of"Mixed-use" has been around for centuries. Prior to the advent of automobile and the proliferation of the road and highway system, Mixed-use was predominant urban form. The "rediscovery" of this development type may be due in part to the negative impacts of sprawl, which have resulted in traffic congestion, decline in air quality, and inefficient use of resources and infrastructure. The following zones are included the Mixed-use Comprehensive Plan land use category. 19.60.070 MUC—Mixed Use Center District The Mixed Use Center designation allows two or more uses on a site that can either be vertically or horizontally mixed and includes employment, lodging, retail along with higher density residential uses. Methodology: The assumption was made that all Mixed Use Areas in the comprehensive plan would cross-over to Mixed Use Centers (MUC). There are 389 MUC parcels in the new zoning districts map. The following interim zoning designations are included in the MUC zoning designation. Interim Zoning Class Parcel Count Total Acreage B-2 51 30.50 B-3 71 44.11 I-1 4 14.98 I-2 103 312.84 I-3 10 27.18 MZ 19 1.41 RR-10 3 17.45 UR-22 14 42.85 UR-3.5 114 79.08 There are 389 MUC parcels in the new zoning districts map. MUC Lot Area N/A Lot Width N/A Lot Depth N/A Front &Flanking Setback 20 Rear Yard Setback 20 (adj. to residential) Side Yard Setback 20 (adj. to residential) Lot Coverage N/A Building Height 60 19.60.080 CMU—Corridor Mixed Use District Page 8 of 11 Corridor Mixed Use (CMU) designation is intended to enhance travel options, encourage development of locally serving commercial uses, multi-family apartments, lodging and offices along major transportation corridors. Methodology: The assumption was made that property designated Corridor Mixed Use in comprehensive plan would cross-over to Corridor Mixed Use (CMU). The following interim zoning designations are included in the CMU zoning designation. Interim Zoning Class Parcel Count Total Acreage B-1 36 17.08 B-2 215 116.71 B-3 634 481.88 I-2 25 39.53 I-3 14 16.68 UR-22 113 50.17 UR-3.5 134 70.31 UR-7 24 11.30 UR-7* 5 5.38 There are 1200 CMU parcels in the new zoning districts map. CMU B-3 (40% of corridor) Lot Area N/A N/A Lot Width N/A N/A Lot Depth N/A N/A Front&Flanking Setback 20 35 Rear Yard Setback 20 (adj. to residential) 15 Side Yard Setback 20 (adj. to residential) 25 (adj. to residential) Lot Coverage N/A 60% Building Height 50 60 19.60.090 CC—City Center District(implementation with sub-area plan) Public/Quasi-Public Designations: The Public/Quasi-Public designation is intended to protect and preserve areas of the City devoted to civic, cultural, educational, and similar facilities. The following zones are included the Public/Quasi-Public Comprehensive Plan land use category. 19.60.100 CF—Community Facilities District The"CF" Community Facilities District designation is intended to protect and preserve areas of the City devoted to civic, cultural, educational, and similar institutional facilities. These facilities provide for the social needs of the community as those needs relate to public services, open space and institutions whether they are publicly or privately sponsored or operated. Moreover,this designation provides for and protects parks, open space, and other natural Page 9 of 11 physical assets of the community. Uses in these areas may include those identified as "Essential Public Facilities". Methodology: The assumption was made that property designated Public/Quasi-Public in the comprehensive plan would cross-over to Community Facilities (CF). There are 518 CF parcels in the new zoning districts map. The following interim zoning designations are included in the CF zoning designation. Interim Zoning Class Parcel Count Total Acreage B-1 3 3.52 B-2 21 34.02 B-3 29 35.64 GA 1 8.05 I-2 59 343.81 I-3 27 182.43 MZ 2 24.23 RR-10 2 100.39 UR-1 5 9.54 UR-12 1 0.17 UR-22 33 174.40 UR-3.5 285 1072.94 UR-7 35 88.1 UR-7* 15 30.57 Industrial Designation: Providing for industrial land is important for the economic health of Spokane Valley. Industrial businesses help drive the local economy and create and economic multiplier effect throughout the region. Providing an adequate supply of usable land with minimal environmental constraints and infrastructure in place helps ensure that Spokane Valley will be an attractive place for industrial businesses to locate and prosper. The following zones are included the Industrial Comprehensive Plan land use category. 19.70.010 LI—Light Industrial District Light Industrial designation is planned industrial area with special emphasis and attention given to aesthetics, landscaping and internal and community compatibility. Typical uses would include technology and other low-impact industries. Light industrial areas may also include office and commercial uses as ancillary uses within an overall plan for industrial development. Methodology: The assumption was made that property designated Light Industrial (LI) in the comprehensive plan would cross-over to Light Industrial (I-1). There are 410 I-1 parcels in the new zoning districts map. 19.70.020 HI—Heavy Industrial District Page 10 of 11 Heavy Industrial designated property is characterized by intense industrial activities which include manufacturing, processing, fabrication, assembly, freight handling and similar operations. Heavy industry may have significant noise, order or aesthetic impacts. Methodology: The assumption was made that property designated Heavy Industrial (HI) in the comprehensive plan would cross-over to Heavy Industrial (I-2). There are 767 I-2 parcels in the new zoning districts map. Page 11 of 11 Sanne Valley STAFF REPORT �/ PROPOSED VACATION OFA PORTION OF SHANNON AVENUE Prepared by: Michael L.Basinger,MCP,Associate Planner,Department of Community Development Date: August 10,2007 Findings: 1. Abutting Property No. 1: The following parcels numbers abut the north side of the proposed vacation of First Avenue: 45191.0407, 45191.0408,45191.9113,45191.9114 and 45191.9112. The south side of First Avenue abuts parcel numbers: 45191.0502,45191.0503,and 45191.0601. These parcels are all owned by AutoNation, Inc.the parent company of Appleway Toyota, and Appleway Chevrolet. No objection from abutting property owners was received. 2. Abutting Property No.2: The following parcel numbers abut the east side of the proposed vacation of Sipple Avenue: 45191.9023 and 45191.9112. The west side of First Avenue abuts parcel number 45191.9175. Parcels abutting the east side of Simple Avenue are owned by AutoNation,Inc.the parent company of Appleway Toyota, and Appleway Chevrolet. The parcel abutting the west side of Sipple Avenue is owned by CoJohn Co.,LLC (Gus Johnson Ford). No objections from abutting property owners were received. 3. Utilities: The following easements will be retained for all necessary underground and/or overhead utilities. a. Sewer: There is a public sewer running in the right-of-way of First Avenue. The applicant states these utilities will be retained within an easement. b. Water: East Spokane Water District No. 1 has a 10"main line that runs down Sipple Avenue and First Avenue. There is an 8"line running half way down the strip. The applicant states these utilities will be retained within an easement. c. Telephone/Fiber Optics: Qwest Communications has several telephone lines adjacent to Sipple Avenue with services crossing the right-of-way. There are no fiber optics lines within the right-of-way. The applicant states these utilities will be retained within an easement. d. Gas and Electricity: Avista Corporation has electricity and gas lines within right-of-way. The applicant states these utilities will be retained within an easement. e. Cable Television: Comcast Cable has infrastructure within the right-of-way. The applicant states these utilities will be retained within an easement. All of the utility providers have been contacted by the applicant and their correspondence is attached. The specific location of easements is a requirement of the record of survey. 4. Stormwater Drainage facilities: The applicant stated in the application that there were no stormwater drainage facilities within the subject right-of-way. Based on City of Spokane Valley's Stormwater inventory, segments of Sipple Avenue and First Avenue contain four catch basins and six drywells. 5. Spokane Valley Fire District No. 1: The City of Spokane Valley Fire Department has the following requirements for this street vacation: a. A 20-foot clear fire lane must be established in the street's place. b. The existing fire hydrants must be accessible from this fire lane. c. The fire lane must remain open after hours. No car may be parked either by patrons or for sale in fire lane. d. This fire lane must be clearly marked with"No Parking-Fire Lane" signs posted on both sides. e. Lane surface must be painted indicating that this is a fire lane. 3 of 6 6. Access: Both Simple Avenue and First Avenue are currently being utilized for traffic circulation;most of the traffic volume is related to adjacent businesses. On-street parking is utilized on both Simple Avenue and First Avenue. 7. Zoning-Zoning surrounding the proposed vacation Regional Commercial(B-3). 8. Transportation — City of Spokane Valley, Division of Public Works need assessment recommends that the vacation of Sipple Avenue be denied, and the vacation of First be allowed only if an agreement can be made to extend Sipple Avenue through to Appleway Blvd. 9. Land Use - City of Spokane Valley's Comprehensive Plan Chapter 2-Land Use 2.9.1 Street Connectivity states that Street design can have a significant impact on community development. It also states all new developments should give special consideration to emergency access routes. Policy LUP-7.1 calls for improved traffic circulation around and through the City Center by extending the street network and creating smaller blocks. Policy LUP-16.1 encourages new developments, including multifamily projects, to be arranged in a pattern of connecting streets and blocks to allow people to get around easily by foot,bicycle,bus, or car. 10. Condition - The proposed areas to be vacated are paved with no sidewalks and currently used for traffic circulation. 11. Assignment of vacated portions of right-of-way—Absent objections from abutting properties owners,right-of- way should be assigned to the petitioners. Abutting property owners have received notice of the proposed vacation. Conclusions: 1. The Public Works Department has stated that the vacation as proposed will not better serve the public. 2. Both streets are utilized for traffic circulation and on street parking. 3. The implementation of the'Sprague Appleway Revitalization Plan could place greater reliance on local streets for access and circulation. 4. The Public Works Department has proposed that the vacation of Sipple Avenue be denied, and the vacation of First Avenue allowed only if an agreement can be made to extend Sipple Avenue through to Appleway Blvd. The extension of Simple Avenue would improve circulation and access to businesses on the north side of Sprague. 5. The City of Spokane Valley's Comprehensive Plan encourages connecting streets and blocks. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION August 23,2007 The following findings have been prepared by Staff for the Planning Commission in the event there is concurrence with the recommended conditions of approval. Findings: 1. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 23,2007 to receive testimony concerning the vacation of approximately 750 feet in length of First Avenue and 265 feet of Sipple Avenue. The date of the hearing was set by City Council on July 24,2007 by Spokane Valley Resolution No. 07-013. Notice of the hearing was published on July 27,2007 in the Valley Herald,the official newspaper of the City,was posted in three conspicuous locations within the City,was provided to the petitioners and abutting property owners,and a sign was placed on the property providing notice of the hearing also completed on July 27,2007. 2. The Planning Commission reviewed the report prepared by the Spokane Valley Community Development Department in detail. 4 of 6 3. The vacation of First Avenue and extension of Simple Avenue will permit full development of the property for beneficial uses and permit appropriate levels of maintenance. 4. The Public Works Department submitted comments that the vacation of Sipple Avenue be denied, and the vacation of First Avenue allowed only if an agreement can be made to extend Sipple Avenue through to Appleway Blvd. The extension of Simple Avenue would improve circulation and access to businesses on the north side of Sprague. 5. City of Spokane Valley's Comprehensive Chapter 2-Land Use 2.9.1 Street Connectivity states that Street design can have a significant impact on community development. It also states all new developments should give special consideration to emergency access routes. Policy LUP-7.1 calls for improved traffic circulation around and through the City Center by extending the street network and creating smaller blocks. Policy LUP-16.1 encourages new developments, including multifamily projects, to be arranged in a pattern of connecting streets and blocks to allow people to get around easily by foot,bicycle,bus, or car. 6. Agency comments when applicable are included as conditions of approval. Recommendations: The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends to the City Council that the vacation of Sipple Avenue be denied, and the vacation of First Avenue allowed only if an agreement can be made to extend Sipple Avenue through to Appleway Blvd. The extension of Simple Avenue would improve circulation and access to businesses on the north side of Sprague. i`f 6 1. The following easements will be retained for all necessary underground and/or overhead utilities. The specific location of easements is a requirement of the record of survey a. Sewer: There is a public sewer running in the right-of-way of First Avenue. The applicant states these utilities will be retained within an easement. b. Water: East Spokane Water District No. 1 has a 10"main line that runs down Sipple Avenue and First Avenue. There is an 8"line running half way down the strip. The applicant states these utilities will be retained within an easement. c. Telephone/Fiber Optics: Qwest Communications has several telephone lines adjacent to Sipple Avenue with services crossing the right-of-way. There are no fiber optics lines within the right-of-way. The applicant states these utilities will be retained within an easement. d. Gas and Electricity: Avista Corporation has electricity and gas lines within right-of-way. The applicant states these utilities will be retained within an easement. e. Cable Television: Comcast Cable has infrastructure within the right-of-way. The applicant states these utilities will be retained within an easement. 2. Spokane Valley Fire District No. 1: The City of Spokane Valley Fire Department has the following requirements for this street vacation: a. A 20-foot clear fire lane must be established in the street's place. b. The existing fire hydrants must be accessible from this fire lane. c. The fire lane must remain open after hours. No car may be parked either by patrons or for sale in fire lane. d. This fire lane must be clearly marked with"No Parking-Fire Lane"signs posted on both sides. e. Lane surface must be painted indicating that this is a fire lane. 3. Following the City Council's passage of the ordinance approving the proposal to vacate the street or alley, a record of survey of the area to be vacated,prepared by a registered surveyor in the State of Washington and 5 of 6 including an exact metes and bounds legal description,and specifying if applicable any and all easements for construction,repair and maintenance of existing and future utilities and services,shall be submitted by the proponent to the Director. The record of survey shall contain the professional stamp and signature of the registered surveyor and filed upon completion with the Spokane County Auditor.The surveyor shall provide the City of Spokane Valley with a mylar copy of the recorded survey and the Auditor's Document Number and date of recordation. 4. The surveyor shall locate at least two monuments on the centerline of the vacated right-of-way with one located at the intersection of the centerline of the vacated right-of-way with each street or right-of-way in accordance with the standards established by the Spokane County Standards for Road and Sewer Construction. 5. All necessary easements shall be shown on the record of survey and written documentation from all utility companies is required to be submitted to the Community Development Director, or designee verifying all easements have been indicated. 6. All direct and indirect costs of title transfer of the vacated street or alley from public to private ownership including but not limited to title company charges, copying fees,and recording fees are to be borne by the proponent. The City will not assume any financial responsibility for any direct or indirect costs for the transfer of title. 7. The zoning district designation of the properties adjoining each side of the street or alley to be vacated shall be automatically extended to the center of such vacation, and all area shall included in the vacation shall then and henceforth be subject to all regulations of the extended districts. The adopting ordinance shall specify this zoning district extension inclusive of the applicable zoning district designations. 8. A certified copy of the ordinance vacating a street or alley or part thereof shall be recorded by the city clerk in the office of the Spokane County auditor. 9. All conditions of city council authorization shall be fully satisfied prior to any transfer of title by the City. Approved this 23rd day of August,2007 Gail Kogle,Chairman ATTEST Deanna Griffith,Administrative Assistant 6 of 6 WITHERSPOON, KELLEY, DAVENPORT & TOOLE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CORPORATION ATTORNEYS&COUNSELORS ROBERT L MAGNUSON NED BARsvMIMEs•• 1515 SWOORTLANDD OFFISU1TE 690 1100 U.S.BANK BUILDING COEURD'ALENE OFFICE WIWAIL LAMP THE SPOKESMAN REVIEW BUILDING K ROBTHOERT H.CONNOLLY PORTLAND,OREGON 97201 422 WEST RIVERSIDE AVENUE 608 NORTHWEST BOULEVARD,SUITE 401 THOMAS D.COCHRAN Telephone:(503)546-2391 SPOKANE,WASHINGTON 99201-0300 COEUR D'ALENE,IDAHO 83814.2146 UANE M.SWIN ONN Fax:(503)546-3889 Telephone:(509)624-5265 TelepIL WESSMANhone:(08)667-0000 JEFFREY L SUMMER' Fax:(509)458-2728 LESLIE K WEATHERHEAD•I MICHAEL D.CURRIN BRIAN T.REKOFKE• EDWARD J.ANSON.* RCHAAX EEL TTEK MICHAEL ' June 4, 2007 NN M.RILEY EIFIJ DENNIS .DAIII DAN• IEL L FINN EY DANIEL E FMNEY MARY R GIANNIM•j C IV` TIMOTHY M.LAWLOR ../// / �.t`� WIW AM M SYMMES•I MARX A.ELLNGSEN•> STANLEY M.SCH WARTZ• DAVID M.KNUTSON / MICHAELCH L O LOFT SKj J(�� O ROSS P.WHITE Y (((J JOELRICHARD LMOUNT Ms. Marina Sukup SPpr/ IOELP.NAZEL• Co DEPA . Eq ROBERTS.CALDWELL• (1---lJrrr///AVVV! ROELLEV N.RIPLLTJIEIS•' Community Development MMU M LizCHR CHRISTO N.RIPLEY ^ly KIMBERLY A. AMEL.10•j NDN IV r KIMBERLY AUDOINL• Planning Director Epp RYAN Al.BEAUDOIN• STACY A BIORDAHL MFN ns PATRICIA L JOHNSON IARA L HEMINGWAY City of Spokane Valley RICHARD A.REPP• BENJAMIN S.COLEMAN 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 RYAN K.JENSEN TRACY N.L,ROYn> ASON R.WHITELEY• Spokane Valley, WA 99206 GEANA VAN DESSEL • STEVEN I.DIXSON OF COUNSEL Re: Vacation of Sipple Road and First Avenue IVm.A.Davenport Jahn E Hndl.Jr. Allan K Teale DonHJ J.Wku •Also admitted in Idaho Dear Marina: I Also admitted in Oregon >ALso admi,M in Montana ••Also admitted in California +Also admitted in New York »Almedmittcdinll8nois Please find enclosed an application for the vacation of Sipple Avenue from Sprague to ++Admitted in Idaho only First Avenue, and First Avenue from Sipple to Sargent Road. This application is submitted on behalf of those property owners which abut both sides of the right-of-way. The area consists of multiple parcels, which comprise the Appleway Chevrolet/Toyota group as well as the Gus Johnson Ford group. Those parcels are as follows: Appleway Chevrolet Parcels 45191.9112, 45191.9113, 45191.0502, 45191.0503, 45191.0501, 45191.9187; Pring Corporation, Parcel No. 45191.0407, 45191.0408, 45191.9114; Pring, Bradley, Timothy, Karen,Parcel No. 45191.9022. CoJohn Co., LLC is the owner of Parcel 45195.9175. The property owners have jointly authorized F.J. Dullanty, Jr. of Witherspoon, Kelley, Davenport & Toole, P.S. to represent their interests and execute all documents on their behalf. The primary purpose of seeking a vacation of First Avenue is to allow the Appleway Chevrolet/Toyota group to redevelop the entire site facing both Sprague Avenue and Appleway Avenue. In addition, Sipple Road is no longer required and currently serves only as an entrance point for Gus Johnson Ford and Appleway Chevrolet: First Avenue is no longer used for access and primarily serves only the needs of the Appleway Chevrolet/Toyota group. Ms. Marina Sukup June 4,2007 Page 2 Vacation of both streets, will result in the revitalization and redevelopment of the area in accordance with the policy and goals of the City of Spokane Valley's Comprehensive Plan with respect to Auto Row. Should you have any questions,please feel free to give me a call. Very truly yours, WITHERSPOON, KELLEY, DAVENPORT 7 OLE, '.S. 4_,,ge /F.J. DULLANTY, JR. FJD/ks Enclosure Cc: Harry Brumley Gus Johnson Vonn Jones • G:\A\Autonation 6081\Correspondence\Sukup 060407 re app for vacation.doc Spokani CITY OF SPOKANE V .EY (FL staff Use Only) ane Community Developm:.,,c Department - .0jValley Current Planning Division DATE SUBMITTED: 6��-I/oti f RECEIVED BY: ) 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 FILE NO./NAME: ��.. 0-S -a'-) Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Tel: (509) 921-1000 O 00,2(5 ts —t Fax: (509) 921-1008 _ planninci@ spokanevalley.orq CURRENT PLANNING FEE: /3vU-- ENGINEERING FEE: STREET VACATION APPLICATION 11:1E.c /r/ Eao PART I-APPLICATION INFORMATION s SUN 4 ?00I C� Sp° F PROJECT INFORMATION: MM�N��AgNri Name of Public Street Proposed for Vacation: Sipple Avenue and First Avenue MENr Section/Township/Range of Public Street Proposed for Vacation: N'/z; Sec 19;T 25N; Range 44E.W.M. Area (Square Feet) of Public Street to be Vacated: 50,750 S.F. First: 750' 50' Dimensions of Public Street to be Vacated: Sipple: 265' wide 50' deep Street Address/Tax Parcel No of Abutting Property#1: 8514 E.First Ave. ; 45191.0601; 45191.0503; 45191.0502; 45191.9187 ; AS‘ k ,04f,,c ; 4S i�li o ko j 4S l9!.At tl, 4519 .`tklA AS v‘k 311; Street Address/Tax Parcel No of Abutting Property#2: 8408 E. Sprague Ave., 45191.9023' 45191.9112 J AND 8300 E. Sipple Road 45195.9175 Zoning Designation of Abutting Property#1: B-3 Zoning Designation of Abutting Property#2: B-3 Previous Land Use Action,If Applicable (state Project File No. &Name: NONE KNOWN APPLICANT/OWNER INFORMATION*: Please note: - Submit on a separate sheet of paper the required applicant/owner information specified below if there are more than two (2) applicants submitting for the Street Vacation. Applicants must be the same as property owners specified on the current Spokane County Assessor's Office parcel records. ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNER NO. 1: APPLICANT NAME: Appleway Chevrolet c/o F.J. Dullanty, Jr. MAILING ADDRESS: 422 W. Riverside Ave. . Suite 1100 CITY: SPnkanP STATE: WA ZIP: 99201 PHONE: (HOME/WORK)_624-5265 _(FAX) 458-2717 (CELL) Please Circle u04Cc,\ � ,,�, Cc,iNN. *PLEASE NOTE: Per RCW 35.79.040 (Title to Vacated Street or Alley) the property within a public street or alley vacated by the City Council shall belong to the abutting property owners, one-half to each. Therefore, if there is more than one property owner abutting the public street or alley proposed for vacation, each property owner shall be required to sign the street vacation application. Revised 4/23/2007 ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNER NO.2: APPLICANT NAME: CcJohnCo LLC MAILINGADDRESS• c/o Gus Johnson Ford, 8300 E. Sprague, Spokane Valley, WA 99212 CITY: STATE: ZIP: PHONE:(HOME/WORK) 509/924-1000 (FAx) 509/921-9127 (CELL) Please Circle PART II—EVALUATION CRITERIA The following is criteria evaluated by the Planning Commission in formulating a recommendation to the City Council. On a separate sheet of paper the following questions shall be answered in a detailed manner. 1. I-How does a change of use or vacation of the street/alley improve service to the public? 2. Is the street or alley no Ionger required for public use or public access? Explain. 3. Would substitution of a new and/or different public right-of-way better serve the public? Explain. 4. How will use or need for this right-of-way be affected by future conditions? Explain. 5. Will easements be retained for all underground and overhead utilities? The requested vacation is located in the service area of what utility companies.(Specify)? 6. Petitioner(s)contacted the following utilities/agencies with this proposal for their concurrence. (Attach correspondence) Telephone _Cable Electric _Other(Specify) _Water District _Fire District _Gas Utility _Sewer Utility 7. Does the right-of-way include storrnwater drainage facilities(Specify)? NOTE: ALL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED IN THE STREET VACATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST SHALL BE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE STREET VACATION APPLICATION WILL BE PROCESSED. • • • • • Revised 7/26/2005 PART II-LEGAL OWNER SIGNATURE Please note:-Submit on a separate sheet of paper the required legal owner signature specified below if there are more than two(2)property owners submitting for the Street Vacation.ss ARMING PROP4Y OWNER No.1: I, ,' (11./1&•24/ yr • , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVE RESPONSES TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT -i= • ;r• = ` :,_' • - 11_!_ ._r-_• •• : •: D _ e -! • t. a !11 N, f g _ -',' ..._._•e I •, o = II---v P `ii' , ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF. nn ADDRESS: V Z iP P PHONE: 6- Z 9- 5-Z j / • ZIP: I %ZZG/ (City) ze, (State) :17 ignature ) NOTARY (For Part II above) STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day of 01,LAUL ,20 Or' I NOTARY SEAL n / 611/00t ELLEN M. CANFIELD NOTARY SIGN NOTARY PUBU ' Notary Public in Ind for t►e State of Washington •• STATE OF WASHINGTON i' COMMISSION EXPIRES Residing at: n( UJL!/ • APRIL 11,2009 seeltial My appointment expires:• 4( I 06 Revised 7/26/2005 ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNER No.2: Cc., �.`.I ;7 c� G, `�c_. , (print name) SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ABOVE RESPONSES ARE MJ171DE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. I FURTHER SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT I-A I a A, ' • : e — QED r -1_ :• .- s ► ' _ .. : • �. s .L G_R ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF. C ADDRESS: Z-L- • t 2 =�r r��f,�r1� PHONE: � Z. V c„Z6 -4 ZIP: (City)71) (State) TSigna�u e) (Date'f NOTARY (For Part II above) STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss: COUNTY OF SPOKANE ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this day of 0 20 () NOTARY SEAL .t� �� Q�� • ELLEN M. C.';NHEL NOTARY SI TUBE .4 NOTARY PUBL!C Notary Public i and for the State of Washington STATE CE WAS:-1111670N x" f� COMMISSION EXPIRES Residing at. 1 APRIL 1I`�2000 111 My appointment expires: • • • Revised 7/26/2005 AutoNation SM civ ' Wednesday, May 30,2007 JUN 0 4 2jji COMM FNgL TY T 0 VELOPM�. City of Spokane Valley Spokane County,Washington RE: AUTHORIZATION OF F.J. DULLANTY, JR. TO REPRESENT AND EXECUTE DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLEWAY TOYOTA AND APPLEWAY CHEVROLET, INC., IN THE MATTER OF THE SIPPLE AND FIRST AVENUE ROADWAY VACTION IN SPOKANE WASHINGTON. To whom it may concern, This letter authorizes F.J. (Rick) Dullanty, Jr, to represent and execute documents on behalf of Appleway Toyota and Appleway Chevrolet, Inc, in the matter of the Sipple and First Avenue Roadway vacation in Spokane Washington. Please contact me directly regarding any questions or additional documentation regarding Mr. Dullanty's represe tation. ice ely, a- :rum ey D rector of Real Estate A oNa '.n, Inc. (Parent Company f .pleway Toyota, and Appleway Chevrolet) 110 S 6th Street Suite 1700 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 (954) 769-7134 Direct (954)401-1535 Cell (954) 769-2067 Fax 110 S.E.6`h Street, 17`h'Floor,Ft.Lauderdale,Florida 33301 (954)769-7000 nt6J }44Zb(b 06/04/2007 15:01 5094442675 i GUSJOHNSON I PAGE 01/02 CEFEI JOHNSON FORD RECEIVE Wednesday, May 30, 2007 JUN 0 4 2007 City of Spokane'valley sPoE COMM Spokane County, Washington N n'D&/E mElrttT RE: AUTHORIZATION OF F:J. DULLANTY JR. TO REPRESENT AND EXECUTE DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF COJOHNCO LLC,IN THE MATTER OF THE SIPPLE ROADWAY VACATION 1N.SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON. To Whore. It May Concern: This letter authorizes F.J. (Rick) Dullanty Jr. to represent and execute documents on behalf of CoJohnCo LLC, in the matter of the Sipple Roadway vacation in Spokane Valley, Washington. Please contact me directly regarding any questions or additional documentation regarding Mr. Dullanty's representation, Sincerely, • Gus Jo . sot • Me .•er anager Co,ohn . LLC Ph aA924-1.000 Fax 509-444-2678 • CeJ1 509-4751399 • FOO E. Spree, ue s SpokeneValley, Washington V G9212 D8-924-1 DOQ 'V BOO-8E9-0277 V Pax: SO2-921 -91I 27 V gusjohnsonford.corn PART II—EVALUATION CRITERIA i Sipple Avenue and First Avenue Vacation sp �� 0 ,00? coMMoN/ kit 1. How does a change of use or vacation of the street/alley improve service to theti ? Vacating Sipple Avenue and First Avenue between Sprague Avenue and Sargent Road would increase public safety. Autonation owns and operates properties on both sides of the First Avenue right-of-way and on the east side of the Sipple Avenue right-of-way. Gus Johnson Ford owns property which abuts the west side of Sipple Avenue. Employees and other vehicles routinely cross these streets as part of their daily operations. Vacating Sipple Avenue and this portion of First Avenue would allow Autonation to combine their facilities into one site plan without vehicles having to cross a public roadway. Gus Johnson Ford and Appleway Chevrolet would jointly maintain Sipple Avenue as an entrance to the facilities. 2. Is the street or alley no longer required for public use or public access? Explain. The majority of traffic flow is to/from the primary arterial, Sprague Avenue, to the north and Sargent Road to the east. Sipple Avenue does not exist south of the subject property and First Avenue does not exist west of the subject property. As a result, Sipple Avenue is not a primary access to Sprague Avenue and First Avenue is not a primary access to Sargent Road. These properties, and those to the south of the subject properties, have direct access onto Sprague Avenue, Sargent Road, and Appleway Avenue. There are no significant utilities located within the Sipple and First Avenue right-of-way. Minor utilities will either be placed within easements or abandoned. 3. Would substitution of a new and/or different public right-of-way better serve the public? Explain. No. Sprague Avenue, Sargent Road, and Appleway Avenue are adjacent to subject properties, thereby providing adequate circulation and utility corridors. 4. How will use or need for this right-of-way be affected by future conditions? Explain. This area is a developed commercial area where transportation and utility routes have previously been established. The Owners will reconfigure their sites to incorporate the vacated roadways into a comprehensive and coordinated site plan. 5. Will easements be retained for all underground and overhead utilities? The requested vacation is located in the service area of what utility companies (Specify)? Yes, easements will be retained for all necessary underground and/or overhead utilities. The following outline existing utilities. A. Sewer. City of Spokane Valley. Contact: Billy Urhausen. There is a public sewer running in the right-of-way of First Avenue. The public sewer well be retained within an easement. 1 f � B. Water. East Spokane Water District No. 1. Contact: Rick Adkins. There is a 10 inch main line which runs down Sipple Avenue and First Avenue. There is an 8 inch line running half way down the strip. The public water well be contained within and easement. C. Telephone/Fiber Optics. Qwest Communications. Contact: Kelly Lackner There are several telephone lines adjacent to Sipple Avenue with services crossing the right-of-way. These utilities will be retained within an easement. There are no fiber optics lines within the right-of-way. C. Gas and Electricity. Avista Corporation. Contact: Donna Claypool There are electricity and gas lines within the right-of-way. These utilities will be retained within an easement. D. Cable Television. Comcast Cable. Conctact: Richard Barnes There are cable television lines within the right-of-way. These utilities will be retained within an easement. 6. Petitioner(s) contacted the following utilities/agencies with this proposal for their concurrence. (Attach Correspondence) Each utility company identified in Item 5 above has been contacted. Their correspondence is attached. The fire district is Spokane Valley Fire District No. 1. Contact: Kevin Miller. Mr. Miller responded via telephone that he would prefer to respond directly to the City of Spokane Valley regarding the Department's position on the proposed vacation. 7. Does the right-of-way include stormwater drainage facilities (Specify)? No. There are no existing stormwater drainage facilities within the subject right-of-way. 2 Proposed SippM Avenue rnd First Avenue Vacation b tween Spry ue Avenue and Appleway A venue, West of Sargent *ow" C. ell - - )\ SP��p,F��E\-0,11 OI a First Avenue looking West from Sargent Road OS a f i , - wS Sipple Avenue Looking East on First Avenue Page 1 of 2 X l t. / ' i ;_- ', . �1�� 6b .moi . �^ ] 4-- ,1 I;1 PteG \I A1_ • p�lE. OF • COM��tt First Avenue Looking North on Sipple Avenue 4.a .a's. l�'F J• :. 1' ://:,,, wry —a np'c ama , .0:4;�k._ - ="'• _ ------------- Sprague Avenue Looking South on Sipple Avenue Page 2 of 2 �• •'r Spirit 4t,50trt JUN 0 4 2001 March 19, 2007 COMM t R OP 4NAr y ELOPMENT Taylor Engineering, Inc . 106 W. Mission Ave Spokane, WA 99201 Re : First Ave & Sipple Rd Vacation Dear Don: Qwest has cable facilities in the area and would like to retain utility easement rights . These rights should provide for maintenance, construction, and reconstruction as needed. If you have any questions or concerns, please call me on (509) 455-2314 . Sincerely, Kelly Lackner Sr. Design Engineer Message � Page 1 of 2 Don Renish Q,w1�J r From: Stoddard, Karen [Karen:Stoddard@gwest.com] Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 4:10 PM To: donrenish@taylorengr.com Subject: RE: Right-of-way Vacation -First Ave. &Sipple Rd. Attachments: Stoddard, Karen.vcf; Sipple Rd & First Ave.dat Hi Don, RECENED Attached is the drawing with Qwest aerial cable. JUN 0 4 207 Karen COMA N R SET OF LOPMENT Karen Stoddard Capacity Provisioning Specialist Qwest Corporation 904 N.Columbus St Spokane,WA 99202 Office: 509-455-2101 Fax: 509-455-2104 Original Message From: Stoddard, Karen Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 3:17 PM To: 'donrenish@taylorengr.com' Subject: RE: Right-of-way Vacation - First Ave. &Sipple Rd. Hi Don, Attached is the Vacation Letter for First Ave and Sipple Rd. Karen Karen Stoddard Capacity Provisioning Specialist Qwest Corporation 904 N. Columbus St Spokane,WA 99202 Office: 509-455-2101 Fax: 509-455-2104 Original Message From: Lackner, Kelly Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 3:00 PM To: Stoddard, Karen Subject: FW: Right-of-way Vacation - First Ave. &Sipple Rd. 3/19/2007 RECEIVED JUN 0 4 2007 SPOKANE VALLEY DEPARTMENT OF OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ,.,-:.. �. • - ti _..- � r ltv {) �` rw� S67951�°- - ..._-.._ '• 6OX' _ -.__-'['T .... � .~ , � �5BBo8 ��!`]�sl 5�. ,L'1,�oftt.� �.�,! 6A4160 f� .�'}� �p607 ��i. - ��1 I ::_.....i, •�^ '� - .� SB7,827- p...-- r f- rV '�liiv ! 1 \ s\ �a M. iL - /" Q , kF-t a ri � 8417:18423:a 84 tr ... �' s{ f f j O851Ty .~�% c> ,{SE76E9 'f.I�a' ,C .n � �857 �' , '� ��.� • ml,!,.‘,1.E7670 t l� y �1 fv} IP.:,...; m 41n •! % a it 5-- ! °! - r Ilw /.1 w f8611 4•:617 91{18 MN ' N OOT ,t _, 4 N @. _i. t 'P>� ttj0.Q" r A,• i 1,.'.1 ''' ,.�..r:+d —--a L — '' _ - 4 ,i;^ Sprague iil ' 4;}F2CU,wlNP „ i6+/.:�+. .1 n y R i.A3 1',� N---- -1-V; 4;� 8412 66od 1, 0, ' 1..4� i 1'KIt t1 J .SG6906; ;.I! i .,:4'».:: • f �- Nn } /:r :700 1 I Q' , i, 17 Z , �. .. t,i r i. ' A c� SE5.3- / T1.-1",v. `.. f 4. p ,2,,1N I F'e Q 7�uj tg. �'; r' ° "' • 1 11 -- S.''; 4#6CU w/N ��y 1 ' ; 414 _ F � "'�— O s r3 'i 1 iN 8,f192 5 2 % _\� .7 r r. 1!. " ♦ry 'll[� � t--••••---.! [ ��, �,i';r L h£ _ t l0 4k it �iSicii, I' . • m !ILi _ II. �1` MI. 'f�� 44 .a " ® �+;��•,�+ P n=} t.v.., -, 1753 �*v �c f t.i ..•C _... r". '..;:,... . , ... �: _ ;F F,,;;:r t,' ; ,-f.- .- ii S�rIPUMP • I 1 , , .�� .. ,.. 1rr /�� 295 'r.i i � .. .. _' .� tt.trEtF '``\i. ,..r;.., SF19,71 11 1, r. til V. S ;; 11. , .) CITY OF Y_ FL Jj .� _ _ � �r COO J _ I h S�]okane 9 cr n i E,T S S`76: Valley DATE: (f/ '7/6 NAME (PLEASE PRINT) ADDRESS WISH TO SUBJECT E-MAIL SPEAK? 8_' 7-1 (`e_.vu �S1'�C` ' `�er d 1,�U e,-Rr`U ' SLC z,9-!4.:-.A L 41u 6.6, I ,7yo(rLJ1 m� , /0C ) . 7� _ L. _ , Xar��-tax/2� I �o l� �5 c/-e_.3 � 2yV\I clod a r a615 �. a 5-47L A16 47-21,---- CI E7 IT g OF O SCITY ��C. [ I !� n SAGS [ Valley® DATE: 1 q 1 U7 NAME (PLEASE PRINT) ADDRESS WISH TO SUBJECT E-MAIL SPEAK? Jrn.e .& •1, C-i fleLl i ) Cie L ‘ /-1) ye S 011,1- 2en,-} 6 re- 3..-e.).`n /1d /Le CE.t/E ;�ffF.✓ 1941-2�5. atfeuvis/T 7�5 ir/i41 . �P o SCITYkn ngCani _ l_ _ t-C- 2 _ e II]poane ogiii ars Sheer6: Valley DATE: 9- 07 NAME (PLEASE PRINT) ADDRESS WISH TO SUBJECT E-MAIL SPEAK? Q_.) -� �1n 1 i� cg ( 1) 1 � . c-\ \\A\ 1Y ,n ��LUSc- A'oetZej41--gL,,L3AA k ©/2 —i � i \ C� /J 4 A �✓�6L y &j1T G •!J�)frl L�`, v Zea 11, Al G. 49) of v/yo �[ 62rbf E:1 ye,- ' ` MailLi.tA-- 7 ' "'raft yr ,, z O n 1"nc�-� _L) / 1C7 (0– PePrp-a �06 2' 61:14/1/. 4) )7G S M i 1 60 (! C 6 ,_..___ `i -li vv\ 1-1-uk-V-\-eA.kyvv, Pr' 1 30(,,, S V;\^eif v.) ie,_ Li( E__, -71 'il.-7? J `s k. r 44 7-re 5 7 vt i pi- / �� `7,-;:i- ... .sJ',►l -- -----;:_,-,-..i.=;.1_1" ,►ci / `y !J/.L/,.., !�I9�Y�.—/�_ �i la ! ,..AO '']\/L�`�f F / �,/ i s arcP x/l/L6,r k Lr/ i? -z.c.),..., 1 0/1_0(k 0- e_ lccIA-6-0ti•.5 ✓4r9n, .a(.,., ). / ('t%c - is-;L0 i. c'✓4,e,fc2 y 2_0-x,` , To: City of Spokane Valley, WA. Planning Commission: August 7,2007 Gail Kogle, Chair David Crosby Robert Blum,Vice Chair Ian Robertson Fred Beaulac Marcia Sands John G. Carroll Dear Commissioners: I will not be able to attend your meeting on August 9, 2007. Therefore I am submitting the following for your consideration. I believe you are aware of our situation at 4308 S. Woodruff in the Ponderosa Fourth Addition, Spokane Valley because of my previous verbal and written communications with you. It is obvious that our previous requests have been determined not acceptable. The following is a somewhat different approach for solving our`dilemma'. Add an `allowable exception' to Title 19, Sections 19.40.020& .030 (R-1 Zone)as follows: Exception: A parcel of 40,000 sq ft or more may be divided into a maximum of two parcels provided that: 1. Smallest parcel size is no less than 20,000 sq ft. 2. All other requirements of R-1 are complied with. 3. Access to each parcel is by public road/street. Access via easement through adjoining property is not permitted. 4. Present property owner obtained the property prior to Janl,2004. (This may not be necessary with conditions 1, 2&3 above). I believe the above exception would have minimal impact to the area&neighbors. Certainly, there would be few that would qualify. .It would give those of us who have had previous plans the possible opportunity to accomplish our goal - such as my wife&I being able to place our retirement home on our property and be near our daughter&family in our remaining years. If you have questions or comments,please contact me at your convenience. Thank you,again, for your consideration. Leonard Bouge 304 S. Conklin Rd- Ofc. Spokane Valley, WA 99037 Phones: Home-922-4443 Office-926-5300(w/voice mail) Cellular-999-5327(w/voice mail) E-mail: Birch1990@aol.com cc: Mayor Wilhite Grog McCormick, AICP Residential Standards • Thursday,August 9, 2007 3:31:43 PM - Page 1 01 2 WebTV Networks /0/0.04i& 5 et---1— --v im E.maii messages !� aie,, From: normals@webtv.net(robin) Date: Thu, Aug 9, 2007, 3:23pm To: normals@webtv.net �Z� �x, tz��trTic� Subject: Residential StandardsA�% � • 19.40.020 UR.3.4 UR 7 Lot frontage 80 80 no mention of 50 ft pre existing allowed to build on . Yet was allowed to build permit issued. Lot DeptH. no mention or listed on Residential Standards. 5 FT ALLOWANCE FROM BUILDING ON EACH SIDE TO PROPERTY LINES. Width. not being followed. HEIGHT IS VERY BIG ISSUE; Height for building in existing areas should be determined by the homes in the area. By allowing your standard height of 35 feet which allows a building of a home to exceed other homes in the area. This detracts from the value of the existing homes when you have a house or houses standing higher then homes already built. Example, see E 11202 , 17th 22 ft. house next to a lower built home in the 1960 a split level, E 11214 - 17 18 feet tall built on 50 ft lot also is on a hill side therefore makes this higher then the any pre existing homes in the block. It towers over the homes on E 18th . Perm4 should be considered in height by persisting homes, this can be controlled by simply having the builder take photo of the homes in the immediate area of next to building site, This height can then be adjusted to fit the homes already in the area. People do not appreciate having their privacy invaded by homes that tower over their back yard or front yard. Hi density building on narrow lots and on hills sides have a affect on property owners. that are next to property. Privacy is a very big issue. You cannot plant trees on the property line in back because of the power lines. No fence can be built without being 12 to 16 feet tall. . Also creates more homes that will need more parking, schools, fire service, sewer, all this affects every home owner. Streets are not made to accommodate dense housing and the traffic increases for the size of the streets. To change the lot size is only going to create more expense for the city to provide services for. Who pays, the home owners. We are being penalized by allowing the change in lot size. Yes we like our homes, Residential Standards - Thursday✓, August 9, 2007 3:32:42 PM • Page 2 of WebTV Networks area we choose, We do not like HIGH DENSITY HOMES We also have to consider the fire danger of smaller lots sizes the closer the homes are the more danger of more homes being burned. Insurance rates go up. Do not allow smaller lots and consider the height of the building before the permit is issued . The Height Should Be no higher then the existing homes, THE ONLY REASON FOR THE SMALLER LOT IS TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF THE HOME , THEREFORE THE 35 foot SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED . Height of the new construction should be granted if it meets the same heights as homes in the area or next to. BUILDER CAN BRING A PHOTO IN AT THE TIME HE SUBMITS HIS PLANS AND REQUEST FOR PERMIT. Please do not reduce the lot size to smaller or allow more dense house building on Acrea . Keep the 80 foot wide lot . Small homes with two levels are homes that people do not stay in very long, We need homes that are built for families to stay in. THEY ARE TWO SMALL. To add smaller lot sizes and more high denisty only creates a larger tax base and that is all you see. Long term you do not live with the affects of denise housing. More vacant homes and more repros. Thank you, Norma Shane 11207 E 18th Spokane, Washington 99206 509-926-4845 Deanna Griffith From: Allan Scharton [AScharton@bannerbank.com] Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 8:41 AM To: Deanna Griffith Subject: RE: Out of Office AutoReply: Planning Commission Agenda 8-9-07 Well, I see you're out of the office, so I will go ahead and write my comment for the meeting next Thursday "for the record": Dear Planning Commissioners: I own residential property located at 12012 E. Valleyway. The proposed "Draft" zoning map will bring this property into compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The new zoning designation will be M1 (or Multifamily). This new designation is suitable for my property because there are multifamily developments on both sides of it. Therefore, I am in agreement with the proposed "Draft" zoning map. Thank you, Allan Scharton VP Builder Banking 509-892-4662 FAX: 509-892-4509 F & M Bank a Division of Banner Bank 25 N. Mullan Rd. Suite 200 Spokane, WA 99206 Original Message From: Deanna Griffith [mailto:dgriffith@spokanevalley.org] Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 8:30 AM To: Allan Scharton Subject: Out of Office AutoReply: Planning Commission Agenda 8-9-07 I will be out of the office from Friday Aug 3 and Monday Aug 6, with no access to email. If this is an emergency please contact Joyce Fontaine at jfontain@spokanevalley.org 688-0240 or I will take care of your request when I return. Have a nice weekend. 1 Q I B C I D E F / Spokane SpnokraafitzezoViallillegy i I-_ 1=l- ,j / _4 I e $ ;t, , Is: J ' , I ,. _� j �' a .... z / - 11( '+' I , '', _, I_ �j. r Ir Legcnd .' T26N Iu �� ...4.4...1 t �- T26N / �.a).1............- °"•-'" - ... - --�--- -y IJ p '1M r� --II_ — r�dQ.J.xv,nanit uw.rn>,tlnlr _ Ml I ��I I I ,4\ /mo i -�y •jl = ° _ 1'- —i= 0`..., mo.l d ��`,D ( /i rn w nifitt:' _ ccr am _ 7 it _-IF 1 ua J *.1 ' ` - y 17 •i I_•,-...,�'v t 1 I? __,d°L� r�. - M4rl..:-. il,'I! - l i�lJ , gg;; F. I i� + rFr <r � 171 Ili IJ ti �.' ,ii F ii-_:I., ,-_4:414.--i-p-2-. 7T rIONMi r ., I ",•� .!."..______111.1 C I :: e , '1F S c._'., II Ira '- I I v6' , ; t' �/. 3- �.5" -`.9 4, ,11-,,At• j-.' - , fI -k-- J ref,-4-1 I 1-•r , t. _ So Wr alt. Rr�t_ R Vs ri v o fir. �., �} gf E ----L-----1,7-7______-,..-----2---:__,:---_,.199 — "s iii 5 ,tuatrsiaa� t,}G' �s` I i 'I' ►< ", 1 ft 1''''11 ' 7 3 - - ---,..a,,,,_--4, ' i Vdi EJ. _.ielr'. ,� .<S::�I r..� -Imo+ ,I! - ^iru-� ' '-1-r FYI l '1.n.rr('' - -I- - - i T,�.,- §•_=-=------=,-; ,pry ".1,A,.,.,--- .kvtsEti3" fl6E '( % e tt •�' tr��°ri i �a3 A 1 B I c D 1 E I F / City of Spokane _ _ i _ Valley Zoning Legend • 173 ®_o _ —ter.. „.6 -r- '1 i-1-,RC1 - J _ _ �` _I' 1 _ L..�:- •'11,-,. `i "-rte ! 2 e = -_- - _ 2 +'gp°!' t iy�-.= To,vli.>if1c111b�ood �i _ --- �� _ ▪ _ _ _ fit. yl i ,-- •;•dr!-_- �` - (/� i -,4-• r S / i it — 1— p sl as '- I 4 �' ' sttiT ,.Gih''o{Spokane; .....,F",-;:-..-- 1 F ' I---I 1 1-! - I.:. 'A �i '''-.,y`J.,4, i-11'�1� ' T-Li6cn GiAc ▪ _ E. 71 E • r .:r .;--• L -1: - :r _ 1 - — �`i" k F"}1 `p' 1 i7 '_ I •t i _ 4. _. : t _..v.,„_I ' ,, '3 Ill): i '_. 3 3 _ f '-14 r I_•�~-Ai., ', . l''' ' 1; , �`1 •__- i IPi:• • o f — 1 t'1;IC'1`` I �' • 1 {! {y�'� - _ I _ i � ��- ' —is - 1! ?. a f { :I: { 1 `lt _ . _. _ • -- — t !tel ._ : � t��. _ ! I r — 1 i. .e. moi , •).1... --, ,-,•... E7 7: -,,""•; .,'...I.I..„,:II': \,..=L.-. .1— !-11'--' .:I......... EzIIII,,:.': -i,_:: -. -�T—=L .c. ave I �.., - n, t.ISI - •I � 1� J�1._. _. ...... "ie-- ,-. - �� _. ,` __ f•1 CJI L' - ....... _ J� /7 , l _ t I 1 1Til ' •- la = _ �1 I _ - ;� _ ..� _ s roan' I j • :� ; I 1 s s - _ / A I B I __,_•, Message Page 2 of 2 From: Clark, David Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 2:53 PM To: 'Don Renish' Cc: Lackner, Kelly Subject: RE: Right-of-way Vacation - First Ave. &Sipple Rd. Hi Frank, This area of the Spokane Valley is in Kelley Lackner's area. I'm including him in this reply, so he'll get the attachment and you'll have his email address. His phone number is 455-2314. Thanks, Dave Clark Original Message From: Don Renish [mailto:donrenish@taylorengr.com] Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 10:23 AM To: Clark, David Subject: Right-of-way Vacation - First Ave. &Sipple Rd. Hi Dave I wasn't sure who to talk with, so I'm starting with you, thank you. We're working for AutoNation who are proposing to remodel their existing facilities. AutoNation is located between Sprague Ave. and Appleway Ave.just west of Sargent Rd. They would like to vacate the block of First Ave. running east and west and the short block of Sipple Rd.that runs north and south, as it bisects their property and affects their operation. Part of the Vacation Application to the City of Spokane Valley requires acquiring comments from various utility purveyors. Could you please review your records to see if you have any utilities within this portion of First Ave. &Sipple Rd. right-of-way. If so, please state whether these utilities could be re-routed, eliminated, or must remain with an easement. An email returned to me should be sufficient. Feel free to pass this request on to someone else, but please let me know who you're forwarding it to so I can follow up. Thank you for your time and effort. Frank This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential or privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error,please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the communication and any attachments. 3/19/2007 ?i • r� • • ti; .: • r___. . .: ' • , .... ., :: g: Jf X4r3f *01'1' ie ..1 ;` .mro. • IA .S Trost y t i. ��'3t "fin Y' ,�. •'.y W.-- a 7 .7:saw,.: =b �! '(O•! "' . ,1• t Q• r..• • ,1 Thl, • imF1J; , '.• • •, a, O6Gi f ! . siiPL _ • .' 1' -ibtl�j .. - s r7 '•',r;0;.'tr.'ifA .. •.i . • ./-=� �: ._ '•ywA •• a4 :'it:.If'li{t J �r 7 ; s .b I t'�ol n , . __ Y.'" rsfod•e'�4 F�1'�idtli'.g �r yy,q .tFoCi+tf I`. i'�• 't,� ','4. _ :1 :IV': � ... J. , • -- - :..-... i44.' mu). - •:;q4/4.,;', �..i...�_ •. ,CCi��,.. T, ..nr. x-l—. r-^ •rr ^1..-."-A.:::-- l: _ - Ft fP f, '��9 SS .m: • fy, �Y},FixTn�-Y e .: .K ,r '.L-'''.,...... ..'II: '�,.. .�t_„.'!•''''• ' M. - ...al. •Pi•'' — n .. - d'.i • R ® t sono'�f* ;a'4 a gg • a ai {{ Y • ''' l 1, it p i ? ' w ( n 4: ?i y` 1 ..fi -.�i' . fd;:l• i I S nn{arn. . .„ss' ";o `:c' a £�GD.'1: ab4o1 zosor. + • Id • rt.,.. ,tom r,.• ...6. Inr. w. . .Vii,. ,. d` .. T .. i i x, !aT•L• '.;C`;j!IrlCmll `i�'!!hi( '[�f Ii{ ! It n ILLI i .. ', •.i. 9 y : I .— — — — ----' -,i ` ••. ••.,...-. {Y,I ure.a t,d,il�ltl i,1 i{S P� 6 A�'1111 I„l�I��III �'ul llk�uut!11t1�lll�6 ll. s is f; I z +,. T . .. ,,�. Ir. ',T � A F ' ! :d e: :I I '�).. � ,>f7AC.if.,J :(!".1''< N, 'Iti[pl' 1 I� 'a�I'a' I k I; •1. ,!.1. pi R i,�{� -' ,c �r: rif 1 '''.1' r yC”` 1:,'.1 " 4 �+ , . ,;'+'�";'f '., f-I:i Y5. I niet x fiti4G 5. J vS • • 'u", • mei A.: ,Fsie•{,"ra.j: tfi •a• F' 4. �� 1i6m- �ti. iy.�. nlrar ; for t7a[ R. rior'. •s (�o%�: moi' l ! i i� p t • p ,1` ta,' ! i .. iP: - :;,� ,". Il'!ll.C; L '� (t. tt t , - 1 4: . . I ji liar �, : 42,.#Pili. �44 i f I 6 rf • . Page 1of1 Don Renish From: Don Renish [donrenish@taylorengr.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 9:49 AM �tf� To: Billy Urhausen P/1 Subject: Right-of-way Vacation- First Ave. &Sipple Rd /(j Attachments: First Ave Vacation Exhibit.pdf 00i MorningBillyC�i4�j N �NEPARfi N Fy EVELarME-1\17- Thank jENTThank you for returning my phone call. We're working for AutoNation who are proposing to remodel their existing facilities. AutoNation is located between Sprague Ave. and Appleway Ave.just west of Sargent Rd. They would like to vacate the block of First Ave. running east and west and the short block of Sipple Rd. that runs north and south, as it bisects their property and affects their operation. Part of the Vacation Application to the City of Spokane Valley requires acquiring comments from various utility purveyors. Could you please review your records to see if you have any utilities within this portion of First Ave. &Sipple Rd. right-of-way. If so, please state whether these utilities could be re-routed, eliminated, or must remain with an easement. An email returned to me should be sufficient. Feel free to pass this request on to someone else, but please let me know who you're forwarding it to so I can follow up. Thank you for your time and effort. Don 3/6/2007 • R— CEP ir,--.-. r- 1n — — Lout° JUN 01' i CID O 1 SPOKANE VALLEY z DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT H — — — SPRAGUE AVE • co _ r� co 1.1 1 I • 1� �m, n U.-�+ 1919CO IAxll 1 : . 9111 Z Ig ,997 L f- I 1'1.1111$ 1.91711 ° , 19,15 W1 17 I 3.0101 I ,1311.91 o, .. l3 I r.'-:1 Ix 19113 IIF I� 1 i�p1�. 1 .1( _. 3 " u r a -- Z If, 1 ti 1 _1 J 1-.J . 1311: 3 I ' I 2 i+r v.1 / rr. i� I 31�. L_ 1 L L L_1 + IL >. n a . Gc m L J I a In:ot I �1 t AVE --^ ' r — — -- — o E , 1 e7 n° ' 11177 . i I p 1 £Ρ 2"10 @ �r --,— • — • -- l LN.'_._ rnr :::_ rm13 , r._.. =lL J' _ �_311 °1I IKI r— oo '�- n,w rfr - 5 S '11 ®psr pp-� T7`/`'y1 F'a,?,1,-1 I=�-,.�v1 , sqfY ', + +f , 6 i I I ,I, T ,�i4� 1 1 f-T`C , C ;I-1 1.61111 , j ',1'.,• ,.1137 1 p1 �� nr, 1 Iq,W IL �� _}4,1-- _4:- cI p I`.,I Io 7 ,. �, , r I t J H labs IC= CO 1911r I `_ -SECOND AVE P.— 1 ' — — — •fl.I-7(.. :- 7 rra ptp...„--) ^ -- SitJ 111 ISN Vet, L. _ �--_.—.---�f' e �i 11 1'1•• �FS I -� i 1.1,<] I 1 q i'i 071 .1'1.1•i7 � ..;r, ADPL a, . 4 1 ' ! ' , 1 �.1 G n . . n E �,, sps lo: t 1J I b e TAYu . ■■■Y _ _ _ I ' 1 I a ' ao r�� ,• 1 W ° r{{7 y A o /.0 iY{}C] PIS} lr 12 1./304 1ZO('4' (iI`L_Y� Ty 1713.8 , m n 1 i i 1/1211r 1.90 1.5101 ,134 1 MO OoL �C-��IL"�2 $1UO J J A> 14 M , =�'9ApNi N 9 WIl R 1.901 s A ?o' t-tin1. 01QCi C 9„5 w� 10 ` c . Stv2 E OF Poe 1/171 ' 1 44.5o , 1Ofl l.>¢/ c� ► +.m e _ o 1`O 'riot r rJ►4-OLes Sao \ , f • 417 . 7z,g8 Page 1 of 2 Don Renish wlrfR From: Don Renish [donrenish@taylo[engr.com]. : .. .ri,,., :•• r Sent: Monday, February 26; 20'07 3:23 PM• • To: 'Rick Adkins r , Subject: RE: Right-of-way Vacation - First Ave. &Sipple Rd. Rick S oiiv 4 200, Thanks for the quick response. Our Fax number is 328-8224. cOMMv�N�M��CTo Y �pMF • NT Thanks again Don From: Rick Adkins [mailto:dist_1@icehouse.net] Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 2:36 PM To: 'Don Renish' Subject: RE: Right-of-way Vacation - First Ave. &Sipple Rd. Hi Don There is a 10 inch main line witch runs down sipple and first with fire hydrants also I have a 8 inch line running half way down the strip feeding a hydrant and service.I need your fax so I can send a map.Thanks Rick From: Don Renish [mailto:donrenish@taylorengr.com] Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 9:20 AM To: Rick Adkins Subject: Right-of-way Vacation - First Ave. &Sipple Rd. Hi Rick We're working for AutoNation who are proposing to remodel their existing facilities. AutoNation is located between Sprague Ave. and Appleway Ave.just west of Sargent Rd. They would like to vacate the block of First Ave. running east and west and the short block of Sipple Rd. that runs north and south, as it bisects their property and affects their operation. Part of the Vacation Application to the City of Spokane Valley requires acquiring comments from various utility purveyors. Could you please review your records to see if you have any utilities within this portion of First Ave.&Sipple Rd. right-of-way. If so, please state whether these utilities could be re-routed, eliminated, or must remain with an easement. An email returned to me should be sufficient. Feel free to pass this request on to someone else, but please let me know who you're forwarding it to so I can follow up. Thank you for your time and effort. Don No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446/Virus Database: 268.18.4/703 -Release Date:2/26/2007 2:56 PM 3/8/2007 Page 2 of 2 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version:7.5.446/Virus Database:268.18.4/703 -Release Date:2/26/2007 2:56 PM 3/8/2007 Page 1 of 1 Don Renish From: Barnes, Richard L-WA[Richard_Barnes@cable.comcast.comj Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 2:08 PM CE/Vf To: Don Renish JUN 0 4 Subject: RE: Right-of-way Vacation - First Ave. &Sipple Rd. SP 200? Attachments: SZEL Taylor Engr. 1st and Sipple vacation request.dwf COMM R R 1LL Y ELOPMFNT Don, I've attached a marked up DWF to this e-mail. Please note that we have an overhead cable crossing north to south over 1st Ave. that we'd like to retain easement for. We are attached to Avista poles along there. Rich From: Don Renish [mailto:donrenish@taylorengr.com] Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 1:48 PM To: Barnes, Richard L-WA Subject: Right-of-way Vacation - First Ave. &Sipple Rd. Richard Back on the 12th of March, Frank Ide from our office sent you an email concerning the Right-Of-Way Vacation dealing with First Ave. & Sipple Rd. I have been out of the office for the past week and was wondering what the status is of our request. Thank you for your time and assistance with this request. R. Don Renish Taylor Engineering, Inc. 106 W. Mission Ave. Spokane, WA 99201 donrenish@taylorengr.com V1O/7nm •• 1 t • • • t -.I • c:>r r -------------------- • • • • • • • • ,., . ,�=•N syn �, . :.. • • • • } • 1 RECEIVED Ut 04 t3Ui DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT cn Co C7 i t7 v - te i i = �� GJ G�'��S:nCo G: Cn Imo,X NU) � o cn _ -MN IV 1J ," 1111111c� ;n• r.`- .N CA 0 0 0 co 0 cn w o -01- CA IW < i 177;r- T— I`i`i ^ goi -= On 7 C 0 rn m Z n a Page 1 of 2 Don Renish 64s 4f. 64.fi_c a From: Claypool, Donna [Donna.claypool@avistacorp.com] �, Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 1:23 PM �eCpt' � To: donrenish@taylorengr.com Subject: RE: Right-of-way Vacation -First Ave. & Sipple Rd s JUN 0 4 200? Don, ev COMM CPN pEAu OF Opm— At Sipple and 1st, the electric lines go across 1st, north and south, and will not create any problems. However, the gas will be a problem as there are gas mains on Sipple south from Sprague and a service going across Sipple. There is also a gas main on the north side of 1st going toward Sargent. Avista would need access to both gas mains and the service and would need to continue any and all easements attached to these. If you have any questions, you can e-mail me or call me at 495-4304. Donna Claypool Customer Project Coordinator Avista Utilities 495-4304 From: Carroll, Nancy Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 8:13 AM To: 'Don Renish' Cc: Claypool, Donna Subject: RE: Right-of-way Vacation - First Ave. &Sipple Rd Hi Don, I am sorry I did not get back to you sooner-I have forwarded this message to Donna Claypool to research and get back to you. Nancy A. Carroll Joint Underground Services Technician Avista Utilities Office: (509) 495-8016 Pager: (509) 880-0442 Fax: (509) 777-5156 From: Don Renish [mailto:donrenish@taylorengr.com] Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 10:40 AM To: Carroll, Nancy Subject: Right-of-way Vacation - First Ave. &Sipple Rd Hi Nancy I wasn't sure who to talk with, so I'm starting with you, thank you. We're working for AutoNation who are proposing to remodel their existing facilities. AutoNation is located 3/5/2007 Page 2 of 2 between Sprague Ave. and Appleway Ave.just west of Sargent Rd. They would like to vacate the block of First Ave. running east and west and the short block of Sipple Rd. that runs north and south, as it bisects their property and affects their operation. Part of the Vacation Application to the City of Spokane Valley requires acquiring comments from various utility purveyors. Could you please review your records to see if you have any utilities within this portion of First Ave. &Sipple Rd. right-of-way. If so, please state whether these utilities could be re-routed, eliminated, or must remain with an easement. An email returned to me should be sufficient. Feel free to pass this request on to someone else, but please let me know who you're forwarding it to so I can follow up. Thank you for your time and effort. Frank 3/5/2007 August 9, 2007 inecroft Members of the City of Spokane Valley Plan Commission BUSINESS PARK 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 RE. Zoning map Dear Members: Pinecroft LLC is the owner of the Pinecroft Business Park on Mirabeau Parkway in Spokane Valley. We have been providing input to the new uniform development code for the past two years. Attached are several letters we have written to the planning commission and the city council with comments and concerns. We have also provided verbal testimony about the development code and standards. So far many of our concerns have not been addressed. We believe that the Mixed Use Center Zone has many positive aspects and would allow uses which would enhance Pinecroft as a community asset. However that zone may conflict with some of the existing uses and future uses that are currently allowed in the 1-2 Zone. There may be several ways of resolving these conflicts: Provide a business park overlay to the Mixed Use Zone allowing all of the current 1-2 uses. Change the use matrix to resolve any conflicts Make part of the Pinecroft and Mirabeau area 1-2 Pinecroft LLC has provided the Vision for the development that has become the Pinecroft Business Park. We have done zone changes, short plats and binding site plans. We have completed a traffic mitigation project, done a ULID, RID and completed construction of Pinecroft Way. This has all been done to build the finest business park in the Inland Northwest. The Mixed Use Zone can allow even a better environment provided that it allows the 1-2 uses. Thank you for your cooperation. Ver-yir[ y yours, • • • ( // inecrojt P' ecroft LLC BUSINESS PARK John G Miller, Manager 12310 E Mirabeau Parkway,Suite 150•SpokaneVallea,WA 99216 12310 E Mirabeau Parkway,Suite 150• Spokane Valley,WA 99216 • 509.92 509.927.7400•Fax 509.9275989•www.PinecroftBusinessPark.com PINECROFT B U S I N ESS PARK PINES AVENUE & MIRABEAU PARKWAY CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY . WA TRENT AIME 1,1 A '• �Fyo �'�q� .irlOilli l A \ F ✓j,. �, O'MF yF• M FUT El c F N �P o DEVELOP - EA OIIIIItom r IIIIIL:�. 1 �\ o '�IAli ,< •.• i. uunimm�unm ri E1 p y �� Ila L1. 1\\ ji d 7t. 1 Ca I '� Ofri, }—1i , : '••...P SpA.. ��.;1� — - it ��I..S 0 - 4J 1 ,......_ .... „in.• \, ,,,\ L,, ,___, L. .,_.„.,__. :_.L__. ,...„,„.,,. . y Tr �� 1 ,,,,,,,,„_:,...,,,l _. p�l�ll��1111111111111111111 / • I �i.,..� PINECROFT NATURAL AREA I � `� ��lift � � 1� �� \C,I,R JYr ,..i." ,,:.:,\::\i,`N NT W'.d r :.,... MIRA ADO c.t��.MEADOWS �� 11 • ,__. TO FREEWAY mo ICO. Glum0. �"i -- ICC I1:1145 \ 1•1• INEMMI NO. \ \` 1•-10ud `- D WCON, INC a.,v.,.�.� P.O. BOX 1570E SPOKANE,WA 9920E I �� im RE (809)466-8900 I �\ 1 ) gg g ARL'HIIIBCIURAL VENTURES I RON R.YACKIE ((809)922-8257 t �I MME. 12310 MIRABEAU PARKWAY SPOKANE.WA 99216 /y City Council Members City of Spokane Valley 11703 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite B-3 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 Re: Zoning Code Dear Council Members: Thank you having public input into the proposed Zoning Code. Pinecroft Business Park is the premier business campus in the Inland Northwest. We have over 26 different businesses located in Pinecroft from many different business sectors including financial services, medical, engineering, construction, manufacturing, warehousing, real estate and technology. All of these business types are housed in a campus setting with no complaints between those uses. All of our property is currently zoned I-1, 1-2, Ur22, Ur3.5, and B3. We have two pending actions which will change the zoning to I-1 and 1-2 and a change of conditions from a previous zone change to allow the requirements of the existing 1-2 zone. The proposed zoning code provides a mixed use center zone district which would allow industrial, commercial and residential uses in a mixed use setting. This category would allow us to have some retail uses and a residential componet within the business park. Since some of These uses are ones that we want to offer and have been requested by some of our clients we initially had no objection to the mixed use design zone in the Pinecroft and Mirabeau Point area. The proposed zoning map, in fact, includes both Pinecroft and Mirabeau Point as a mixed use district. Our initial comments were that we wanted to make sure that in such a zone we would be able to have all of the uses allowed in our current 1-1 and 1-2 zones. We believe that if the area is rezoned to MUD we will have several properties and uses that will be nonconforming. An example would be the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife outside storage and the Itronix manufacturing facility. Pinecroft Business Park requests that the City Council allow staff to meet with us to see if alternative language can be adopted in the Mixed Use Zone district or that we be allowed to keep our current zoning. Pinecroft is the Spokane area's only true Business Park and would like to include other uses. We must, however, keep our primary purpose of being a Business Park. Thank you for your consideration. PINECROFT BUSINESS PARK John G Miller Manager August 1, 2007 City Council Members City of Spokane Valley 11703 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite B-3 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 Re: Zoning Code Appendix 19-A Schedule of Permitted Uses Dear Council Members: Thank you for accepting our input on the proposed Zoning Code. At the time of our testimony we were unaware of the Planning Commission's recommended draft of Appendix 19-A. We have since reviewed that document and made changes that reflect the types of uses we believe should be in the Mixed Use Center and the Industrial Zones. We are attaching our proposed modifications. The modifications that we have proposed use the following logic: Any use allowed in the mixed use corridor should be allowed in the mixed use center and visa versa. Almost all uses that are allowed in the mixed use and commercial zones should be allowed in the industrial zones. The market and common sense will dictate what is actually done in the industrial zone, for instance an apparel/tailor shop that caters to work clothes and safety apparel might want to be in the industrial zone but not a tux shop. A barber shop might want to be in an industrial zone as might a college that is teaching engineering and mechanics. DIVCON Inc, a related party to Pinecroft, is locating its world headquarters in the Pinecroft Business Park. DIVCON is a commercial contractor and will have a portion of the building which will provide space to do some carpenter work. It will certainly be unobtrusive and other businesses in the area will not even know that the work is being done. If Pinecroft ends up as a mixed use center that should be allowed. Dwellings that are above the proprietor's shop are at the heart of the mixed use concept. The Pinecroft Business Park has existing uses that will certainly be non conforming under the Mixed use Zone. Edmo operates a mail order and catalog sales company selling to aircraft owners all over the world. It would be nonconforming in the MUC. DIVCON's office and warehouse might also be non conforming if we prefabricate forms there. The Incyte lab at Mirabeau Point might also be non conforming. The Fish and Game facility has lots of out side storage. An instant sign and banner company would not be allowed. The industrial zone might not allow other uses that are currently there or planned: A restaurant that serves the trail, park and the businesses might be disallowed. DIVCON's new building has some area for storage for other tenants in the Park. The FMC dialysis center and adjacent doctor's office might be non conforming. We do some locksmith work on site. Would that be allowed? A residential area near the river would not be allowed without a zone change. The design standards that are being developed along with the codes, covenants and restrictions that have been implemented by the project developers determine the aesthetics. Users will determine whether they fit into our park based upon economics and the image that they seek. We embrace the concept of the multi use center provided it allows an if the uses in the Currents I-1 and 0�2 zones. Codes and standards should not undermine the architects and developers vision and execution. Thank you for your consideration and cooperation. PINECROFT BUSINESS PARK John G Miller Manager April 2, 2007 Members of the Planning Commission The City of Spokane Valley 11707 East Sprague, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: PP.posed Changes Zoning Regulations (Title 19) Design and Development Mandated (Tiitie 22) Dear Members of the Planning Commission: Thank you for allowing us the time to prepare written comments about the proposed Zoning Regulations (Title 19) and Design and Development Standards (Title 22) of the proposed Uniform Development Code. At the time I spoke to the commission we believed that the zone designations had changed and that the Pinecroft Business Park was being rezoned to Mixed Use Center. We understand that our current zoning, which is 1-2, will change to Mixed Use or I-1 when all of the changes to the Uniform Development Code are finally adapted. The Pinecroft Business Park is the Inland Northwest's premier business park. It incorporates over 95 acres and currently houses over 24 companies located in multiple buildings. These businesses include a computer manufacturer, back office accounting, call centers, mail-order warehousing, engineers, architects, back-up data center, sales of data routers, medical office and a dialysis center. In reviewing Title 19 some of these uses are not mentioned in Appendix 19-A. We have tried to attract other "high tech" uses including a biotech firm, pharmaceutical company, software company, hardware manufacturing and R&D, biotech equipment manufacturing, banks and other pure office uses. All of these uses will change over time and other uses that have not even been thought of yet will become customers at Pinecroft. From this prospective we offer the following comments and recommendations: We believe that all of the uses allowed in a Mixed Use Center should be allowed in I-1 in so much as a Mixed Use land classification is to include I-1. Also all I-1 uses should be allowed in Mixed Use. The buildings in Pinecroft are all flex type buildings. They provide work space that has aesthetic appeal to the community and a pleasant work environment to the employees that work in the Business Park. The way that the buildings are designed it is virtually impossible to know what is happening inside the various buildings. As long as there are no harmful emissions or excess truck traffic our corporate citizens do not care what their neighbor does. Appendix 19-A Mixed Use use I-1 Example Ag Processing X X Hollister Stier Vet Clinic X X Small Animal Clinic? Appliance Sales and Service X X Appliance Manufacturer X X Bakery Products X X What size? Bakery Retail X X Building Supply—Hardware X X Wholesale Hardware Carpenter Shop X X Catalog and Mail Order X )( Yellow Pages Contractors Yard X X Dry Cleaners X X Indoor Recreation X X Gyms Farm Machinery Only Regional Commercial? Film Developing X X Film Camera Sales and Service X X Huppins/One Call Furniture Manufacturing X X Depends on Size Garmet Manufacturing X X Mumms Quilting Hardware Store X X Labs Bio Safety X X What are the definitions? Machine Manufacturing X X What type and size? Manufacturing X X What size? Medical Office X X Metal Fabrication X X Size and type? Photographic Studio X X Group Photographers Plastic Injection Molding X X Thermo Set and Thermoplastic Printing Reprographics X X UPS Store, Abadan Restaurant Drive Through X X Espresso, Fast Food Apprenticeship Training and/or Schools Public X X Vocational Specialized Training Schools X X Storage Self Serve X X Mini-Storage Storage Indoor X X Indoor Climate Controlled Mini-Storage Storage Outdoor X X If screened who cares? Tavern X X Textile Manufacturer X X Upholstery Shop X X Page 2 of 7 April 2, 2007 Proposed Changes Pinecroft Business Park and DIVCON, Inc. Referring to the above Appendix A, all of these uses are not allowed in one or other of the Mixed Use or I-1 zone. Why can't they be in both? A carpenter shop that is 10,000 sf would not be objectionable in a Mixed Use area nor would a tavern be out of place in an Industrial zone. The point is that the economics of the property and the size of the use will self regulate most uses. There are numerous gymnastic studios within industrial areas because those properties meet the rent requirements of the gymnastic studio and have large spaces that those studios need. Maybe some consideration should be made as to the size of the use. Obviously a Huntwood Cabinets is inappropriate in the Mixed Use zone but a smaller cabinet shop may be desirable. The I-1 zone (19.70.010) states that, "The light industrial areas may also include office and commercial uses as ancillary uses..." The Appendix 19-A shows office allowed. Which one is correct? The Pinecroft Business Park has numerous pure office functions with over 600 people working in an office capacity. That might not be allowed in the future 1-1 if office is only allowed as an ancillary use. Pinecroft also has a catalog and mail order business with warehouse which would not be allowed in a Mixed Use zone. Pinecroft also has a medical office which would not be allowed in an I-1 zone. Unless there are is more commonality hi uses Phiecro r Bu&mesa Park will have numer.us n; nconf_ rming uses no matter what zone it is aaei jned. Currently no one in the Park cares what the zone is and the government is happy to collect the taxes. Please note that the business area in Liberty Lake that has the greatest aesthetic appeal includes electronics manufacturing, sheet metal fabrication, dental offices, restaurants and numerous other uses. It appears that those uses are all compatible. Regarding 19.60.05 Table 19.60.-1 we recommend the following building heights: GO 0 NC C RC CC C1-1 !-2 55 100 35 45 80 100 55 80 55 75 There needs to be allowed at least 15 foot of space per floor in any office. This allows for the building structure, space for the mechanical, electrical and fire sprinkler distribution and a 10 foot ceiling height. In order to drain the roof there needs to be an allowance of 2 foot of slope on the roof if it is a " flat roof" or more if it has a 4/12, 5/12 or other roof slope. In addition there needs to be a parapet of 2 to 5 foot as a visual buffer of the mechanical units. Access to the roof requires an 8 foot height if using a stair. The result would be 15+ 15+ 15+ 2+ 4+ as a minimum for a three story building or 51 Feet. It should allow more if a higher ceiling is required. Page 3 of 7 April 2, 2007 Proposed Changes Pinecroft Business Park and DR/CON, 9nc. Modern warehousing and manufacturing is typically 30 foot clear with allowance for roof structure and drainage slope. This height combined with ancillary office and special conveying systems increase the height requirements. Unless there is a compelling reason to limit height it is best to allow designers the greatest latitude. Regarding 19.60.010, 19.60.020, 19.60.030, 19.60.040, 19.60.050, all of these mention shared access with adjacent properties. What does that mean? Property owners have no contractual relationship with their neighbors and shared access may be difficult to achieve depending on the meaning of "shared access." This needs additional clarification and definition prior to becoming a part of the Uniform Development Code. Regarding 22.60.020 1. v., does the expanded parking only have to allow for the amount of space expanded or does it cause a recalculation of the parking for the entire building? Regarding 22.60.020 2. 1., the standard states parking to be located within 300 feet of the building. Depending on the access to the building and the security provisions this might not be practical. Regarding Table 22.60-3, the table reads that 90 degree parking has a minimum of 58'6" width. That will not allow most pickups and SUVs to park. 60 feet should be the minimum. Regarding 22.60.020 5. d., usually compact car spaces are fit in where a full space is not attainable. If all compact spaces are to be in one area this eliminates the design flexibility. What if the compact cars all take the normal spaces? There would not be any spaces for normal cars. Who is going to enforce this? Regarding 22.60.020 6. a., in a multi tenant structure with several entry's where are the vanpool cars to park. It could be in front of an entry with an office that has fewer than 50 employees. This requirement and the accessible parking requirement should be left to the Feds who claim control. Regarding 22.60.30 b. the formula in this sentence is misstated. Shouldn't the number of cars be divided by the number of entries? Regarding 22.60.40 1. a. ii., is each space 15 x 60 x15? Or are they 15 x 30 x15 x two spaces? Page 4 of 7 April 2, 2007 Proposed Changes Pinecroft Business Park and DIN/COIN, Inc. Regarding Table 22.60-7, where do offices fit in the table? Regarding 22.60.40 2. a., does this mean that all roll-up doors which are for loading and unloading cannot face a street? There are hundreds of buildings that would be in violation of this requirement. While front loaded building may be not as aesthetically pleasing as rear loaded, they are a very practical way of increasing the overall density(less sprawl) and keeping the spaces affordable. Regarding 22.60.40 Bicycle Parking, the number 22.60.40 is already used. Regarding 22.70 Outdoor Lighting Standards, the lighting of parking lots and buildings is for personal and property protection. This entire section should be reviewed by a lighting designer or engineer. The pole height formula will require a substantial increase in the number of lights on a site and make it difficult to meet the energy requirements. When we have submitted a lighting photometric plan in the past some of the city personnel did not understand the diagrams. They are typically in foot candles. The various light fixtures direct the light so it does not leave the property. Since many of our Pinecroft customers operate 24/7 the lighting is extremely important for safety. Also we have had vandals and theft in the past and ample outdoor lighting helps deter this behavior. We need to keep adequate light so the police and private security patrols can observe the sites and buildings. I would be very happy to help arrange a meeting with some professional lighting designers who could offer insight on this issue. Lighting issues are much different for residential areas. The same thought processes and reasoning does not apply to commercial uses. Regarding 22.80.020 c. a., the height of a truck will not allow vision of the clear view triangle if the trees are only limbed to 7' The truck drivers eyes are above the 7 foot height. This poses a problem in commercial areas with the landscape requirements. Most street trees cannot be limbed that height when first planted. Regarding 22.80.020 5., A screen of only 8 foot will not screen many of the emergency generators used in large buildings. This poses the question of, if a wall structure encloses an out side space is it a fence? We may need to have a definition of fence and sight screen. Currently any fence over 6 foot is permitted (building permit) as a structure. An example is a dumpster enclosure. Regarding 22.80.30 2 a. A chain link fence with slats is not totally sight obscuring, the vegetative planting is in addition? 2 b. i Why are 50% of the trees evergreen? ii Why are the shrubs to be 75% evergreen? iv If only the planting adjacent to public or private rights of way are to be located on the out side of the fence then the others can be on the inside? Page 5 of 7 April 2, 2007 Proposed Changes Pinecroft Business Park and CIVCON, Inc. Regarding 22.80.30 3 a. 1., Why is there a maximum of 75% of the trees deciduous? At Pinecroft along Mirabeau Parkway all of the trees along the street are deciduous street trees. Other than the requirement for evergreen trees we exceed the points required. This appears to be in conflict with 22.80.30 5 Street Trees? Regarding 22.80.030. 6 1., Headlight screening of 30 " will not screen an SUV or pickup headlight. Regarding 22.80.30 5. ii., Why one tree? Why not shrubs? Regarding 22.80.30. 8 A drawing of what is desired for screening of loading spaces would be helpful. Some of the screening should be deleted in industrial zones. The screening will make it more difficult for police to monitor activity during off hours. Regarding 22.80.30 9. Xerscaping mentions hardscape but the landscaping precludes rock mulching. This seems to be in conflict. The director may modify the landscape requirements if xeriscaping is proposed. Most people won't make such a proposal because it requires a special proposal. Regarding Landscaping plans, the requirement that plans be prepared and sealed by a landscape architect seems to add additional cost and process to the cost of projects. Most residential and commercial landscaping is designed by landscape contractors, nurserymen, and home owners. Virtually all irrigation design is done by contractors and suppliers. Landscaping design does not include life safety issues. The point system that is part of Title 22 is very straight forward. If the plan contains the detail required, a landscape architect should not be a requirement. The certification that is required for a certificate of occupancy can be done by almost any competent person. Why not state that the plan be prepared and certified by a Landscape Professional? This would allow more design flexibility. As a landscape contractor for the past 30 years we are competent to do the certification! In many of the sections there are requirements for evergreen shrubs and trees. Evergreen shrubs are the most difficult to maintain and keep looking good. The proper mix of trees and shrubs should be left to the landscape professional provided that the point requirements are met. The point system appears to offer more flexibility in design which is very desirable. Pinecroft Business Park is currently zoned I-1, 1-2, UR-22, and B-3. We have submitted a Zone Change Application to change the whole Park to 1-2. Pinecroft is bordered on Page 6 of 7 April 2, 2007 Proposed Changes Pinecroft Business Park and UIVCON, Inc. the south by a Nature Preserve, into perpetuity, that is zoned Residential so we are required to have a landscape buffer so the dead trees in the Nature Preserve can not look out onto our landscaped buildings. On the north Pinecroft is bordered by the railroad tracks that are zoned Residential so we must have more buffering so the railroad trains will not be able to see our landscaped buildings. While these two examples seem extreme they are both good examples of why staff should be able to waive buffer requirements when it is reasonable to do so. Thank you for taking the time to read the comments provided to you regarding Title 19 and Title 22 of the Uniform Development Code. If anyone on the Planning Commission would be interested in taking a tour of Pinecroft Business Park to see some of my examples first hand, I would be more than happy to meet with them to review the proposed changes ori would be available via a conference call to discuss these items in more detail and provide further insight into our concerns. If you have any questions you can reach me at the offices of DIVCON, Inc. at 466.8600 or at the Pinecroft Business Park at 927.7400. Very truly yours, John G. Miller DIVCON, Inc., President Pinecroft, LLC, Manager Page 7 of 7 April 2, 2007 Proposed Changes Pinecroft Business Park and DIVCON, Inc. Members of the Planning Commission The City of Spokane Valley 11707 East Sprague, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 RE: Proposed Zoni:i g Regulations (Title 19)and Design and Development Standard (Title 22) Dear Members of the Planning Commission: Thank you for the opportunity to provide written comments about the proposed changes to Zoning Regulations and Design and Development Standards associated with the Uniform Development Code. I am the property manager and leasing agent for the Pinecroft Business Park, the premier business campus in the Inland Northwest. I have reviewed the proposed changes to Title 19 and Title 22 in detail along with John Miller, Manager of Pinecroft, LLC and President of DIVCON, Inc. John has submitted a letter discussing in detail several areas of concern. My assessment of the proposed changes are concurrent with those outlined in detail by John. I would like to reiterate one point outlined in John's letter, the issue of Nonconforming Uses that will become an issue if the new zoning regulations are put into place as currently drafted. The Pinecroft Business Park incorporates over 95 acres and currently houses over 24 companies located in multiple buildings. These businesses include a computer manufacturer, back office accounting, call centers, mail-order warehousing, engineers, architects, back-up data center, sales of data routers, medical office and a dialysis center. In reviewing Title 19 some of these uses are not mentioned in Appendix 19-A. We have tried to attract other "high tech" uses including a biotech firm, pharmaceutical company, software company, hardware manufacturing and R&D, biotech equipment manufacturing, banks and other pure office uses. All of these uses will change over time and other uses that have not even been thought of yet will become customers at Pinecroft. From this prospective we offer the following comments and recommendations: We believe that all of the uses allowed in a Mixed Use Center should be allowed in I-1 in so much as a Mixed Use land classification is to include I-1. Also all I-1 uses should be allowed in Mixed Use. The buildings in Pinecroft are all flex type buildings. They provide work space that has aesthetic appeal to the community and a pleasant work environment to the employees that work in the Business Park. The way that the buildings are designed it is virtually impossible to know what is happening inside the various buildings. As long as there are no harmful emissions or excess truck traffic our corporate citizens do not care what their neighbor does. Why can't the uses in the Mixed Use Zone also be in the Industrial Zone? Why can't they be in both? A carpenter shop that is 10,000 sf would not be objectionable in a Mixed Use area nor would a tavern be out of place in an Industrial zone. The point is that the economics of the property and the size of the use will self regulate most uses. There are numerous gymnastic studios within industrial areas because those properties meet the rent requirements of the gymnastic studio and have large spaces that those studios need. Maybe some consideration should be made as to the size of the use. Obviously a Huntwood Cabinets is inappropriate in the Mixed Use zone but a smaller cabinet shop may be desirable. The I-1 zone (19.70.010) states that, "The light industrial areas may also include office and commercial uses as ancillary uses..." The Appendix 19-A shows office allowed. Which one is correct? The Pinecroft Business Park has numerous pure office functions with over 600 people working in an office capacity. That might not be allowed in the future I-1 if office is only allowed as an ancillary use. Pinecroft also has a catalog and mail order business with warehouse which would not be allowed in a Mixed Use zone. Pinecroft also has a medical office which would not be allowed in an I-1 zone. U less there is more commonality in uses Pinecroft Business Park will have numerous nonconforming uses no matter what zone it is assigned. Currently no one in the Park cares what the zone is and the government is happy to collect the taxes. My concern as the leasing agent at Pinecroft, is that the new zoning regulations proposed in the Uniform Development code will limit my ability to lease the current and future buildings within the business park. If I currently lease space to a customer that has a nonconforming use, will I have to kick them out when their lease expires? Will I have to get special permission from the City of Spokane Valley to continue leasing space to them when they want to renew their lease? What happens when I have a company that wants to lease space but their business use can not be positioned within one of the allowed uses within the code? There are too many "what ifs" that come to mind when thinking of how the proposed changes to the zoning code will affect Pinecroft. I would suggest making the allowed uses for the Mixed Use Zone as discussed in detail in this letter. If you have any questions or concerns,please contact me at 927.7747. Siin�c�erely, g COMMU RC1<AIL REAL ESTATE,LLC Jamie M. Traeger, CCIM Deanna Griffith From: Allan Scharton [AScharton@bannerbank.com] Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 8:41 AM To: Deanna Griffith Subject: RE: Out of Office AutoReply: Planning Commission Agenda 8-9-07 Well, I see you're out of the office, so I will go ahead and write my comment for the meeting next Thursday "for the record": Dear Planning Commissioners: I own residential property located at 12012 E. Valleyway. The proposed "Draft" zoning map will bring this property into compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The new zoning designation will be M1 (or Multifamily). This new designation is suitable for my property because there are multifamily developments on both sides of it. Therefore, I am in agreement with the proposed "Draft" zoning map. Thank you, Allan Scharton VP Builder Banking 509-892-4662 FAX: 509-892-4509 F & M Bank a Division of Banner Bank 25 N. Mullan Rd. Suite 200 Spokane, WA 99206 Original Message From: Deanna Griffith [mailto:dgriffith@spokanevalley.org] Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 8:30 AM To: Allan Scharton Subject: Out of Office AutoReply: Planning Commission Agenda 8-9-07 I will be out of the office from Friday Aug 3 and Monday Aug 6, with no access to email. If this is an emergency please contact Joyce Fontaine at jfontain@spokanevalley.org 688-0240 or I will take care of your request when I return. Have a nice weekend. 1 Mr. Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 Re: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Categories Dear Scott Thank you for allowing me to testify at the special council meeting last night. I stayed for some time after the hearing to listen to the council members discuss several of the land use standards and found it extremely interesting. Because of the land use discussion, and our further analysis, we believe that the designation on the south side of Mirabeau Parkway should be changed to Mixed Use. The concept of Mixed Use is fine provided it includes all of the Industrial componets that are required in a business park environment. That could also be accommodated by a Buisness Park overlay. John G Miller City Council The City of Spokane Valley 11707 E Sprague Ave, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 RE: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Categories Dear Council: The proposed Draft Comprehensive Plan Map 2.1 includes the Pinecroft Business Park with two different land use categories. The Pinecroft Business Park is a 90 acre business park that currently includes different business uses including office, warehouse, manufacturing, medical, and research and development. We anticipate that the park will include some retail and restaurant facilities in the future which will be ancillary to the other business uses. The existing zoning is I1 and I2. Our review of the proposed comprehensive plan categories shows that current uses may not be allowed under the new classifications as follows: e In the proposed Office category on the south side of Mirabeau Parkway we currently have Office,R&D, Medical ,Warehousing and Manufacturing uses. e In the proposed mixed use area on the north side of Mirabeau Parkway we currently have Office, R&D and Manufacturing uses. There is a restaurant that we are pursuing. Will our current uses be allowed under the new categories? We have concern that the land use categories proposed could result in future actions that would render some of our existing uses to be nonconforming. Examples would be: ® The warehousing on the south side of Mirabeau Parkway could not be allowed. That would also include our flex buildings that were designed to allow for future warehouse activities as well as light manufacturing. Is the office category proposed going to allow for these uses? ® The mixed use category proposed on the north of Mirabeau Parkway does not specifically state that manufacturing, R&D, and warehousing would be an allowed use. The Itronix facility which we are completing might not be conforming with the new land use category as it includes all of the uses mentioned. The Pinecroft Business Park is truly a business park that is planned to include a multitude of business uses. Included in those are all of those anticipated in the Mixed Use Category City Council The City of Spokane Valley December 12, 2005 Page 2 and almost all uses allowed in the Light and Heavy Industrial categories. We hope that the City will include all of these uses when adopting the Comprehensive Plan for the Pinecroft Business Park. We do not want to have to have future conflict over non conforming uses. Please visit the Pinecroft Business Park web site, www.PinecroftBusinessPark.com for additional information about our park. Pinecroft is The Ili 14 Northwest's Premier easiness Campus. We respectfully request that the Comprehensive Plan Map be revised to include all current and future uses so that the business park can continue to grow to its full capacity of 900,000 square feet of business use and support the City of Spokane Valley. Very truly yours, Pinecroft Business Park John G Miller Manager cc: Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner City of Spokane Valley June 1, 2005 Members of the City of Spokane Valley Plan Commission 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, Washington 99206 Re: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Categories Dear Members: Pinecroft, LLC is the owner of the Pinecroft Business Park on Mirabeau Parkway in Spokane Valley. We have been developing this project for several years and have completed eight buildings and currently have the 107,000 square foot Itronix World Headquarters under construction. There are approximately twenty-four separate businesses located at Pinecroft with a myriad of uses including research and development, warehousing, general office, medical services, manufacturing, and assembly. We are in negotiations with several other companies that could need additional uses such as processing, and food service. We have studied the Draft Comprehensive Plan and have concluded that our current uses may be in conflict with the draft plan in its current form. The Draft Comprehensive Plan shows an office use on the south side of Mirabeau Parkway and a light industrial use on the north side of Mirabeau Parkway in the area of the Pinecroft Business Park. There are currently research and development, warehousing, electronics and assembly uses on the south side of Mirabeau Parkway which do not appear to be allowable in the proposed office use zone on the Draft Comprehensive Plan. On the north side of Mirabeau Parkway there are office, restaurant, and processing uses proposed which do not appear to be allowed in light industrial zone on the draft plan. We are currently working with a client who wants to open a restaurant in the area to serve the anticipated 2,000 people who will eventually be working at Pinecroft. The current proposed zoning of the land that comprises the Pinecroft Business Park in the Draft Comprehensive Plan for the Spokane Valley does not allow for the required flexibility necessary for the continued development of the Pinecroft Business Park. Changes must be addressed before finalizing the comprehensive plan. One possible consideration would be to add a land use category called "Business Park." This use would allow all uses permitted in the office and light commercial categories and some of the heavy industrial uses. Another idea is for a "Mixed-use City of Spokane Valley Plan Commission June 1, 2005 Page 2 Business" category. This would allow residential uses associated with corresponding business uses such as a printer who might want to live above his shop. The category would provide attention to aesthetics and compatibility to the community. Pinecroft Business Park is similar to thousands of vibrant business parks around the country which provide an excellent work environment for the work force, a great environment for the companies who are located in the business park and great aesthetics and tax base for the community. It is an example of combining uses to accommodate flexibility. In order to continue to develop the Pinecroft area into a thriving business community, we will need to make changes to the Draft Comprehensive Plan. Please review our concerns. I am available to discuss these items at any time. You can contact me at 466.8900 or via email at johnm@divcon- inc.com. Very truly yours, Pinecroft, LLC John G Miller, Manager cc: Greg McCormick, Long Range Planning Manager, City of Spokane Valley inecioft BUSINESS PARK About Us - An Introduction Welcome to Pinecroft Business Park, the Inland Northwest's premier office „,:_V-.1r..:04'-T-':- �r _ tie w yv ,..t.-..a t = z 4,� > �campus, located in the Spokane Valley amidst a host of amenities and = r2 unparalleled natural beauty. It is a unique ; F”" ::,, W IIi!'i (Al- t 1 = u 11 business campus, built from the ground r' ...." • up with state of the art infrastructure to "`` meet the demands of a competitive "` .. business environment. Our on-site 1', management and leasing responds A portion of the thirty-seven mile Centennial Trail, withinminuteswalkingdistanceofPinecroft to the needs of your business. This professionally landscaped campus has superb transportation access with is surrounded by natural areas which ideal proximity to downtown Spokane, offer a wide range of recreational the airport, and North Idaho. opportunities. The eighty acre Pinecroft Natural Area and fifty-two Our prestigious campus will enhance acre Mirabeau Point Park border the employee recruitment, retention, and business campus to the south and east. productivity. Pinecroft Business Park The campus is buffered on the north by the scenic Spokane River. The thirty- , -�` seven mile Centennial Trail follows the Spokane River connecting Spokane and Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. ,, Pinecroft Business Park is a III II III 1! 8_�-�_ premier business campus, offering II " -6, - space, technology, and a scenic - r natural environment to help your 12710 E Mirabeau Parkway business prosper. 12:11(1 E Mirabeau Pal kt,at',Suite 150•Spokane Valley,WA 99216•509.927.7400• Fax 509.927.5959• xvN\•lv.PinecrottBusinessPark.corn inecyoft BUSINESS PARK Amenities - Special Features A ..I-. :(- A ' ' - - - ,. 1 P''. -*per ' *•fe '1 - �'_# _ _ -.- �4 ".t% ,q N!.``.t_ • Professionally developed campus-like setting benefits from on-site management. • Master Plan provides up-scale professional space and protects architectural continuity. • Beautiful landscaping complements the parking with up to six car parks per 1000 square feet. • Multiple fiber-optic providers offer reliable and affordable services. • Central location provides easy access for employees and visitors. • Three convenient I-90 freeway on/offramps and two major arterials assure accessibility. • The Spokane International Airport is only twenty minutes away. • The regional Spokane Valley Mall is within five minutes driving time. • The scenic Spokane River with a walking/bike trail, stretching from Spokane to Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, flows along the northern boundary of the property. • Adjacent Pinecroft Natural Area and beautiful Mirabeau Point Park offer nature's respite to the east and south. • The new Spokane Valley YMCA and Center Place Community Center are within walking distance. 1231(1 E Mirabeau Parkway,Suite 150•Spokane Valle,WA 9921h•509.927.740(1• Fax 509.927.5989• t+•ww.PinecruttBusinessPark.com inccro t BUSINESS PARK Infrastructure Communications- Super Fast Data Transmission The Pinecroft infrastructure has been designed since its inception to access state of the art data and voice communications. You will benefit from multiple telecommunications options. Qwest, Electric Lightwave, Time Warner Telecom, and XO Communications all provide fiber-optic and other telecommunication services to the business park. Both Qwest and Electric Lightwave offer superb reliability by having a complete fiber loop outside of the park. All buildings within the park are connected with additional conduit to allow for future expansion. Electrical- Dependable Power An abundance of hydro-electric power offers Spokane's business community some of the lowest electrical rates in the nation. Electrical service is provided by Avista Utilities. Pinecroft Business Park is currently served by three substations to give you a secure, reliable, and affordable power source. Miscellaneous- Police Department Water Spokane Valley Police Department, Irvin Water District Subcontracted to Spokane County Sheriff's Department Sewer Fire Department Spokane County Spokane Valley Fire Department, Closest station less than 1 mile away at Garbage 2110 N Wilbur Road Waste Management 12310 E Miraheau Parkway,Suite 150•Spokane Valley,WA 99216•509.927.74(X)• Fax 509.927.5989• www.PinecroftBusinessPark.com 12310 E Mirabeau Parkway ' --,_ -,-,..,,,,,%,:-..y,,,;-,...' ,,, - slF e f "„tr j L a,,,; 3 IR ;t N -------.: ! f . .... -1 l',vt.i...,:_„--millum . MIN , a..`,'`c. NMI Mir 1 - _ = u rrcy pie "•yT". _l+K Location 12310 East Mirabeau Parkway 11111.0•11 ir.4 Total Area 25,800 square feet q Parking --* 3"----- , „ �` 4 car parks per 1,000 square feet ' $ 1�, CGS _ _ rr— NORTH I4 a Contact I4 A COMMERCIAL REALMMEREE SR TE Jamie M.Traeger Phone: 509.927.7747 Fax: 509.927.5989 i n e cro f t E-mail:jtraeger@jmacommercial.com BUSINESS PARK 72310 E Mirabeau Parkway,Suite 150•Spokane Valley,WA 99216• 500.927.7400• Fax 509.027.5989• www.PinecrottBusinessPark.com 12410 E Mirabeau Parkw _ ,,.,,,,.:,,„,,,:_.‘,.ii.,----:A.: ' ay . ''''''', , � F s y p., .� �1 ,4 4 N Asa . d iii Ili4--,61,,ik;_ . o ;ii r r !__6 r . Location 12410 : :: auPark et -00111 _-I `" . \ CM. I r --)r--------91 rr� Parking ,,�4-.1 , „ it 4 car parks per 1,000 square feet f $ Jil f:.ii.ilc,—.7't - NORTH Contact PAW REALMESTAITE L Jamie L. Miller Phone: 509.927.7747 i n e c r o f t Fax: 509.927.5989 E-mail:jmiller@jmacommercial.com BUSINESS PARK 12310 E Miraheau Parkway,Suite 150•Spokane Valley,WA 99216• 509.927.7400• Fax 509.9275989• www.PinecroftBusinessPark.com 12610 E Mirabeau Parkway c. i1i1fl111 1fii1H I i :5-ii.,---;'-'-'-'25 -11-'-'1'11 4": Location 12610 East Mirabeau Parkway .',, 111111. ---0" Total Area 41,000 square feet -CN. • Parking r-,i �--�� 6 car parks per 1,000 square feet ;( 11 i IlL h.,,XIM. NOR , Contact kAWREAL COMMERCIAL ESTATE Jamie L. Miller Phone: 509.927.7747 i n e ero f t Fax: 509.927.5989 E-mail:jmiller n jmacommercial.com BUSINESS PARK 12310 E Mirabeau Parkway,Suite 150•Spokane Va11ey,WA 99216•509.927.74(X)• Fax 509.927.5989• www.PinecroftBusinessPark.com 12730 E Mirabeau Parkway :,_,_,,,,P _ln ll{Iumn1lnObh1p" � - nna/11411111--"4111 4unn: i1ilmlInII{III1 i Jr�` MnH ' n {r r . •TY N1Ip� , I .• � L-r- .....--;_--..ti,-,:.:•-••••:-7•-4•ittl---:--: ....- -•'-' -_ , 24,-... .s- --s-z..42.....:,-r.:::4.--aitrit-Inki _z.r.: -.... ,...- -- __ .''' ...IX.; '''',---%4Ziat-arill-.Z.-E.---ii.-4.7:-t2i 21-,,I.:- .7--44:--- ---.7----- - -- :.?':Lt. , N,„+: ,-,_;, kt , klt , 1- log iiiCCC a=r:Esr.'�.� 1'Z t lfi s. �+ ---�� om• _ /, , , t .�. _. Location ` 12730 East Mirabeau Parkway . 111111I Total Area 15,834 square feet Parking 0,-.11L-..1 4--.3 •�� 6 car parks per 1,000 square feet ra2 iii rI NORTH -6-4 a� Contact WA,aCOCAL REALMMERESTATE Jamie L.Miller Phone: 509.927.7747 i n e c r u f t Fax: 509.927.5989 E-mail:jmiller@jmacommercial.com BUSINESS PARK 12310 E Mirabeau Parkway,Suite 150•Spokane Valley,WA 99216•509.927.7400• Fax 509.927.5989• www.PinecroftBusinessPark.com 12409 E Mirabeau Parkway d�',w a,`''-f ,4s r.r ,,:„.E.:�'s '+`'-'':-.41:1-4341H11\:-: 1 'J� R n El , i _ .moi, ilill �� 9i�+ ua e=- a 04 F•�a. 1i _ ----- ; '\ / Location ' 12409 East Mirabeau Parkway .,, Total Area iii ..,, , ♦, ' 10,438 square feet pi N . Parkin s U— 5 car parks per 1,000 square feet LrJ . ,r-rt,, --/- -' � °Additional Information l "°$18 50 per square foot, __7, NORTH 1,000-10,000 square feet available a o Contact kAVACOMMERCIAL REALMMERESTATE Jamie M.Traeger Phone: 509.927.7747 i n e CYO f t Fax: 509.927.5989 E-mail:jtraeger@jmacommercial.com BUSINESS PARK 17110 E\lirabeau Parkway,Suite 150•Spokane Valley,WA 99216• 509.927.7400• Fax 5(19.927.5989• Nvww.PinecrottBusine'ssPark.conn