Agenda 05/26/2005 SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Council Chambers -City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Avenue
6:00 p.m.—9:00 p.m.
'May*May 26, 2005
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ROLL CALL
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTE—
• May 12, 2005
VI. PUBLIC COMMENT
VII. COMMISSION REPORTS
VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS
Old Business
Public Hearing (continued): An ordinance relating the use, handling and
storage of critical materials. (Mr. Scholtens requests that the hearing be
continued until July 14, 2005, to allow additional technical participation by
stakeholder industry.)
New Business
Public Hearing: Street Vacation Request STV 03-05 for a portion of Shannon
Avenue east of Houk Street abutting Assessor Parcels Nos. 45103.0205,
45103.0206 and 45103.0208 and the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way.
X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER
c
XI. ADJOURNMENT
COMMISSIONERS CITY STAFF
Fred Beaulac Marina Sukup, AICP
Robert Blum Greg McCormick, AICP
John G. Carroll, Vice-Chair Scott Kuhta, AICP
David Crosby, Chair Deanna Griffith
William Gothmann
Gail Kogle
Ian Robertson www.spokanevalley.org
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Planning Commission Action
Meeting Date: May 26, 2005 City Manager Sign-off:
Item: Check all that apply: [' consent ❑ old business ® new business ® public hearing
❑ information [' admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing — Street Vacation Request SN 03-05 for a portion of
Shannon Avenue east of Houk Street abutting Assessor Parcels Nos. 45103.0205, 45103.0206
and 45103.0208 and the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: City Council adopted Resolution No. 05-007 on of
May 10, 2005 setting the date for a public hearing.
BACKGROUND:
VAR
= Ma r e 1 ensio imtur "}
!F 111117,, ■ ■ >s ■ ■ alai, ■ ■ ■ �
FE.-L.:'_iz------1-'•4.121,.....4 itrfr-,4';,'.,1.1,-.V.,., , *
' h
-ht:'1/4-4a: .'',,--7.11'4'' ...1 . ' *
la
•
E tr.,
,'13
iltil
,,
�,� — it,,,,--1 .... ..,,..„ , k }paki
S e
4
-I_ __ ,..
. map . 4... ......„,://7, ... ...,
• m
. ,
__
. ., .. .. .. , . . ty
,. ..
. ____ , ,
. . . .
. .
.... ,,,,,:„...,_ . __. " , 7. ..i. i - 1 ; ..: .. :: ... ri
r
Applicant Bill Lawson, 202 E. Trent Avenue, #400, Spokane, Washington, 99202 the owner of
Assessor Parcels Nos. 45103.0205, 45103.0206 and 45103.0208 requests the vacation of a
portion of Shannon Avenue east of Houk Street.
Proponent proposes to develop a multi-family complex on the property, vacating a portion of the
Shannon Avenue right-of-way, dedicating additional right-of-way for a cul-de-sac, and retaining
the existing 30 foot right-of-way as a utility and limited access easement for the Hamilton
property to the east. Avista, Qwest, Spokane County Utilities and Consolidated Irrrigation
District presently have facilities within the right-of-way.
The Planning Commission must make findings on the following as part of their recommendation
to City Council:
A. Whether a change of use or vacation of the street or alley will better serve the public;
B. Whether the street or alley is no longer required for public use or public access;
\\SV-FS1\public\Community Development\RCA\Planning Commission\Street vacations\2005\052605 Stv 03-05 Shannon.doc
C. Whether the substitution of a new and different public way would be more useful to the
public;
D. Whether conditions may change in the future as to provide a greater use or need than
presently exists; and
E. Whether objections to the proposed vacation are made by owners of private property
(exclusive of petitioners) abutting the street or alley or other governmental agencies or
members of the general public.
Mansfield Road will be extended in the future from Mirabeau Parkway to Pines Road. The
applicant proposes to dedicate additional right-of-way for a cul-de-sac to serve the
development.
OPTIONS: Recommend approval, approve with conditions, or recommend denial.
RECOMMENDATION: Approval of findings and a recommendation for approval of the
proposed vacation subject to filing a record of survey which includes reservation of all utility
easements, execution by the City of a Quit Claim deed to entitled property owners, and
placement of monuments in accordance with the Spokane County Standards for Road and
Sewer Construction.
STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, AICP, Community Development Director
\\SV-FS1\public\Community Development\RCA\Planning Commission\Street vacations\2005\052605 SW 03-05 Shannon.doc
Scir\'tc STAFF REPORT
po ane PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF SHANNON
\iiIIey AVENUE EAST OF HOUK STREET
Prepared by: Marina Sukup, AICP, Director, Department of Community Development
Date: April 26, 2005
Findings:
1. Abutting Properties. The right-of-way proposed for vacation is east of Houk Street.
Applicant's property abuts the right-of-way on the north (Assessor Parcels Nos.
45103.0205, 45103.0206 and 45103.0208) and the Union Pacific Railway Company
abuts the property on the south (no parcel number). The property is does not abut a
body of water.
2. Utilities. Avista, Qwest, Spokane County Utilities and Consolidated Irrrigation District
presently have facilities within the right-of-way. Proponent will retain a utility and limited
access easement within the area to be vacated. The specific location of easements is a
requirement of the record of survey.
3. Access. The Hamilton property located to the east of applicant's will have a limited
easement within the area to be vacated to serve an existing residence. Additional
development on both properties will take access from the extension of Mansfield to be
constructed at a later date.
4. Zoning. Zoning for the property and abutting tracts to the west is UR-22 High Density
residential. The property to the east remains zoned RR-10 Rural Residential.
5. Transportation. The proposed extension of Mansfield Road will provide improved
access and circulation to these tracts and improve overall traffic mobility in the area.
6. Condition. The property is unimproved except for utility installations. The size, access
and condition of the property precludes use by the City.
7. Assignment of Vacated portions of right-of-way. Absent objections from abutting
properties owners, right-of-way should be assigned to the petitioners, inasmuch
research indicates that the area to be vacated was part of the parent tract. Abutting
property owners have received notice of the proposed vacation.
Conclusions.
1. The vacation of the street/alley will permit full development of the property for beneficial
uses and permit appropriate levels of maintenance.
2. Shannon Avenue east Houk Street is no longer required for general public use or public
access;
3. The proposed extension of Mansfield Road substitutes a new and different public way
which will provide enhanced access and mobility to both abutting properties and the
general public.
4. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to provide for a cul-de-sac at the termination of
Houk/Shannon; and
5. The vacated portion of Shannon Avenue shall be retained as a limited access and public
utility easement.
\\SV-FS1\public\Community Development\RCA\Planning Commission\Street vacations\2005\052605 Stv 03-05 Shannon.doc
6. The proposed extension of Mansfield Road will provide for the ultimate development of
all properties, and it is unlikely that conditions will change in the future to provide a
greater use or need than presently exists for the right-of-way proposed for vacation; and
7. No objections have been received to the proposed vacation.
\\SV-FSI\public\Community Development\RCA\Planning Commission\Street vacations\2005\052605 Stv 03-05 Shannon.doc
draft
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING
COMMISSION
May 26, 2005
Findings.
1. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 26, 2005, to receive
testimony concerning the vacation of a portion of Shannon Avenue east of Houk
Street. The date of the hearing was set by City Council on May 10, 2005 by
Spokane Valley Resolution No. 05-007. Notice of the hearing was published on May
13, 2005 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.
2. The Planning Commission reviewed the report prepared by the Spokane Valley
Community Development Department in detail.
3. The vacation of the street/alley will permit full development of the property for
beneficial uses and permit appropriate levels of maintenance.
4. Shannon Avenue east of Houk Street is no longer required for public use or public
access.
5. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to provide for a cul-de-sac at the
termination of Houk/Shannon.
6. The vacated portion of Shannon Avenue shall be retained as a limited access and
public utility easement.
7. The proposed extension of Mansfield Road substitutes a new and different public
way which will provide enhanced access and mobility to both abutting properties and
the general public;
8. The proposed extension of Mansfield Road will provide for the ultimate development
of all properties, and it is unlikely that conditions will change in the future to provide a
greater use or need than presently exists for the right-of-way proposed for vacation;
and; and
9. No objections have been received to the proposed vacation.
Conclusions.
The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends to the City Council that that
portion of Shannon Avenue located east of Houk Street be vacated to the petitioners subject to:
a) a record of survey prepared by a registered surveyor in the State of Washington and
including an exact metes and bounds legal description and specifying if applicable any and
\\SV-FS1\public\Community Development\RCA\Planning Commission\Street vacations\2005\052605 Stv 03-05 Shannon.doc
all easements for construction, repair and maintenance of existing and future utilities and
services. The record of survey shall contain the professional stamp and signature of the
registered surveyor and should be 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; and
b) Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to provide for a cul-de-sac at the termination of
Houk/Shannon; and
c) The vacated portion of Shannon Avenue shall be retained as a limited access and public
utility easement.
d) Placement of 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.
e) Payment of 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.
Approved this 26th day of May, 2005
David Crosby, Chairman
ATTEST
Deanna Griffith, Secretary
\\SV-FS1\public\Community Development\RCA\Planning Commission\Street vacations\2005\052605 Stv 03-05 Shannon.doc
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
Approved Minutes
Council Chambers —City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Ave
May 12, 2005
I. CALL TO ORDER
Planning Commissioner Crosby called the meeting to order at 6:00 pm
Staff attending the meeting: Gregory McCormick, Planning Manager; Scott
Kuhta, Long Range Planner and Deanna Griffith, Administrative Assistant
Community Development
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Commission, audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
III. ROLL CALL
Fred Beaulac— Present Bill Gothmann — Present
Bob Blum —Absent* Gail Kogle—Present
John G. Carroll — Present Ian Robertson — Present
David Crosby— Present
"Excused absence, arrived at 6:10 pm
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Kogle moved that the May 12, 2005 agenda be approved as
presented. Commissioner Robertson seconded the motion. Motion
passed unanimously.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Kogle stated that her name was spelled incorrectly.
It was moved by Commissioner Beaulac seconded by Commissioner
Carroll that the minutes of the April 28, 2005 Planning Commission meeting
be accepted as amended. Motion passed unanimously.
VI. PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
VII. COMMISSION REPORTS
Commissioner Kogle stated that she had attended the Light Rail Meeting and
that they are looking to have a draft available soon of their plan. As soon as she
is able she will get a copy for our review.
Commissioner Gothmann stated that he had attended the City Council meeting
on May 10th, 2005. He stated they discussed the Full Width Paving Ordinance.
He thought that this issue should be part of the Comprehensive Plan. Greg
McCormick told him it was indeed in the Comprehensive Plan in the
April 28,2005 Planning Commission Minutes Page 1 of 4
Spokane Valley Planning Commission Minutes
Transportation Chapter. He said they also discussed the Greenacres
Moratorium Request. The Council has scheduled further discussion of this
matter to June 7th Study Session. Council stated that they would like to have the
Planning Commission's perspective for the reason they recommend denial of
their request.
Commissioner Crosby reported that he, also, had attended the Council meeting.
They had the second reading of the sign ordinance. They have scheduled it for
further discussion in June. They have a few questions in regards to the time
limits on obsolete signs and time limits. Staff is to discuss concerns about
nonconforming signs which may need repairs or replacement. Commissioner
Crosby stated more in depth the Council's concern regarding the North
Greenacres Moratorium Request. They question if the Commissioners had a
copy of their plan when the decision was made for denial. It was at the Nov. 18tH
2004 meeting that the recommendation for denial was made. Commissioner
Crosby stated that at least a couple of commissioners will need to attend this
study session in order to help the Council to understand the Planning
Commissions decision.
Commissioners Beaulac, Blum, Carroll and Robertson had nothing to report.
VIII. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
Planning Manager, Greg McCormick wanted to remind everyone that we are
having an Open House on May 19th, and June 1st in the Council Chambers for
the Comprehensive Plan. We will not be accepting any public input at that time,
but will have copies of the plan for people to read and plenty of maps for them to
look at. Also, the joint meeting between the City/County/City Planning
Commissions is on Wed. the 18th.
IX. COMMISSION BUSINESS
A. OLD BUSINESS:
Public Hearing: Street Vacation STV 02-05, for an unimproved
remainder of Knox Avenue conveyed as right-of-way deeds and recorded
under auditor's File Numbers 7504170236 and 7504170237.
Planning Manager Greg McCormick presented the staff report on the
proposed vacation. Commissioner Crosby Opened Public Hearing for
public comments at 6:25 pm
Jeff Johnson, 130 W. High Dr.: Mr. Johnson stated he was
representing the investor group, Fort Knox Investors, LLC, who are one of
the parties requesting this vacation. Mr. Johnson relayed to the
Commission that his group has made arrangements for this property to be
developed into a RV/Boat Condominium storage facility.
There was then discussion about how the property was to be accessed,
how it would affect the surrounding neighbors, why it could not be
developed into viable traffic usage and how the public would have access
to it. There are two access points, one to the north end of the property
April 14,2005 Planning Commission Page 2 of 4
Spokane Valley Planning Commission Minutes
behind Tidyman's and one that would access from the road that feed the
4 B's restaurant and the Super 8 Motel.
Ken Scholz, 2119 N. Locust, 99212: Mr. Scholz explained that his father
originally owned the property and Knox was never a road between
Argonne and Locust His father had planned to develop the site to build a
house but it never came about.
It was explained that the fire department had been to the site and has
said that there is plenty of access to the property as far as they are
concerned.
Commissioner Crosby, seeing there was no more public comment, closed
the public hearing at 6:40.
Commissioner Gothmann made a motion that the Planning Commission
recommends to City Council that a portion of Knox Ave. located west of
Locust St. be vacated to the petitioners subject to the conditions stated in
the draft proposal. Commissioner Robertson seconded the motion.
Passed unanimously.
B. New Business
None
X. FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER
Commissioner Crosby wants to find a time solution for the Commissioners to
meet with staff and go over all the chapters in the Comprehensive Plan in order
to be better prepared for the upcoming public hearings on the Plan. Everyone
will have hard copies by the middle of next week. Mr. McCormick and Mr. Kuhta
explained that they will only explaining what is already in the plan. Because of
the process there can be no changes to the Plan now. We will have the public
hearings in June, the commissioners will discuss the changes and public input
throughout the month of July and they will be taking the recommendation draft to
the City Council on August 16th, 2005.
It was determined that the Commissioners would meet at 11:30 to approx. 1:00
on the Wednesday dates of May 25, June 1st, June 8th and June 15th.
Commissioner Crosby requested that a list of meetings be sent around to the
Commissioners so that they could make sure they had all the dates.
It was requested that an inquiry be made to the Deputy City Attorney, Cary
Driskell, regarding whether or not it is appropriate for any commissioner, who is
considering running for elected position with in the city, to remain on the Planning
Commission during that time.
April 14,2005 Planning Commission Page 3 of 4
Spokane Valley Planning Commission Minutes
XL ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:06 p.m.
SUBMITTED: APPROVED:
Deanna Griffith, Administrative Assistant David Crosby, Chairman
April 14,2005 Planning Commission Page 4 of 4
.0,1\14......
Spokane
Valley
' 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 ♦ Spokane Valley WA 99206
509.921.1000♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhall@spokanevalley.org
Memorandum
To: Dave Mercier, City Manager,and Members of the Spokane Valley City Council
From: Marina Sukup,AICP, Community Development Director
Date: June 8,2004
Re: Street Vacation Requests STV 02-05 and 03-05
Two Street Vacation requests will be presented to City Council on June 28, 2005.
STV 02-05: an unimproved remainder of Knox Avenue (SW 02-05) conveyed as right-of-way
deeds and recorded under Auditor's File Nos. 7504170236 and 7504170237, requested by Fort
Knox Investors, LLC.
7x:.1 .66•11h: .. - _
(}4j ' 7.7*::- 4' ,•.- tsti . * ii z '}
i _ 1
t
r�
111 la !
q, , ..., _.... 3,,__ ..„._
\ 1 . - +z. '
\ ; t
t,
4
' J , it . 4N
rte ;wit_.- �n
A
,.::-,,,,„. . • 1 f-1 . , ,,,..,t,1-..,•7, . ,...2.!:" '. ia:',.... ., onitke 7
ini.,
- , 2� r _ • ami K �s..i.. _�1"--4 ' . ---!
- 5 Z.,;:,_;; �'- ' •',r$,ter+ - r
l1 ' _
., l ,
fS C.
11:4:47.777- :j. LS: <_ —2.....,_..
The
e.z-
The Staff prepared a report and the Planning Commission made findings following a public
hearing. The reports are attached.
spoi
ane
ValleySTAFF REPORT
.00.
PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF KNOX AVENUE
Prepared by: Marina Sukup, AICP, Director, Department of Community Development
Date: April 15, 2005
Findings:
1. Abutting Properties. The right-of-way proposed for vacation is located east of Argonne
and west of Locust Street. There is no record of vacation of any portion of Knox Avenue
by Spokane County in this area. Existing development to the north includes multi-family
properties owned by Cedar Ocean View Partners, LLC (Assessor Parcel No.
45083.0231) and Ferris View Properties/Gough Trust (Assessor Parcel No.
45083.0241). Tidyman's owns property abutting the proposed vacation to the west
(Assessor Parcel No. 45083.0256). The improved portion of Knox Avenue ends at the
Tidyman's property line. The property is does not abut a body of water.
2. Utilities. A thirty-foot easement will be reserved for Spokane County Utilities. Other
easements may also be required for existing or future utilities including Modern Electric,
Avista, Comcast, and Qwest. The location of these easements is a requirement of the
record of survey.
3. Access. The properties of the petitioners Ft. Knox Investors, LLC have access through
recorded access easements through the Tidyman's property to the west. Petitioner
Kenneth Scholz has frontage on Locust Street. A gate installed by Spokane County
Utilities restricts access from Locust Street.
4. Zoning. Zoning for the property and abutting tracts is B-2 Community Commercial.
5. Transportation. Existing development precludes the possibility of extending Knox
Avenue to the east.
6. Condition. The property is unimproved except for utility installations. The size, access
and condition of the property preclude use by the City. The property has not been
maintained.
7. Assignment of Vacated portions of right-of-way. Absent objections from abutting
properties owners, right-of-way should be assigned to the petitioners, inasmuch as it
appears that any portion of the right-of-way to which they would lay claim has been
transferred to them by land use action. Abutting property owners have received notice
of the proposed vacation.
Conclusions.
1. The vacation of the street/alley will permit full development of the property for beneficial
uses and permit appropriate levels of maintenance.
2. Knox Avenue is no longer required for public use or public access;
3. The substitution of a new and different public way is neither necessary nor feasible.
4. Given the present age and condition of adjacent development, it is unlikely that
conditions will change in the future to provide a greater use or need than presently
exists; and
5. No objections have been received to the proposed vacation.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING
COMMISSION
May 12, 2005
Findings.
1. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 28, 2005, to receive
testimony concerning the vacation of a portion of Knox Avenue west of Locust Street
and east of Argonne. The date of the hearing was set by City Council on April 12,
2005 by Spokane Valley Resolution No. 05-004. Notice of the hearing was
published on April 15, 2005 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. The hearing was continued until May 12, 2005 at the
request of the applicant.
2. The Planning Commission reviewed the report prepared by the Spokane Valley
Community Development Department in detail.
3. The vacation of the street/alley will permit full development of the property for
beneficial uses and permit appropriate levels of maintenance.
4. Knox Avenue is no longer required for public use or public access;
5. The substitution of a new and different public way is neither necessary nor feasible.
6. Given the present age and condition of adjacent development, it is unlikely that
conditions will change in the future to provide a greater use or need than presently
exists; and
7. No objections have been received to the proposed vacation by abutting property
owners.
Conclusions.
The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends to the City Council that that
portion of Knox Avenue located west of Locust Street be vacated to the petitioners subject to:
a) a record of survey prepared by a registered surveyor in the State of Washington and
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. the record of survey shall contain the professional stamp
and signature of the registered surveyor and should be 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; and
b) Placement of 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.
c) Payment of 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.
Approved this 12th day of May, 2005
David Crosby, Chairman
TT T
D na Griffith, Secretary
SN 03-05: a portion of Shannon Avenue east of Houk Street abutting Assessor Parcels Nos.
45103.0205, 45103.0206 and 45103.0208 and the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way
requested by Bill Lawson. The right-of-way proposed for vacation is 30 feet in width. Applicant
presently has permits submitted for a 168 unit multi-family development.
c -- L r7.$a : - .
� • . s F;
S� ,E....„ ate`
z: -
= s
4 _,. .t.:-4,-
_.
--v.<-ate ...,r-- jam
yo
i
v3 'r--t, t .,_r . ... iL.., t_.. cam: _ti i_14 —_—Ffi•"d.-1,__,_
n
The Staff prepared a report and the Planning Commission made findings following a public
hearing. The reports are attached.
STAFF REPORT
p7a1"rS ' ' '
�` PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF SHANNON
� AVENUE EAST OF HOUK STREET
.00Valley
Prepared by: Marina Sukup, AICP, Director, Department of Community Development
Date: April 26, 2005
Findings:
1. Abutting Properties. The right-of-way proposed for vacation is east of Houk Street.
Applicant's property abuts the right-of-way on the north (Assessor Parcels Nos.
45103.0205, 45103.0206 and 45103.0208) and the Union Pacific Railway Company
abuts the property on the south (no parcel number). The property is does not abut a
body of water.
2. Utilities. Avista, Qwest, Spokane County Utilities and Consolidated Irrigation District
presently have facilities within the right-of-way. Proponent will retain a utility and
limited access easement within the area to be vacated. The specific location of
easements is a requirement of the record of survey.
3. Access. The Hamilton property located to the east of applicant's will have a limited
easement within the area to be vacated to serve an existing residence. Additional
development on both properties will take access from the extension of Mansfield to
be constructed at a later date.
4. Zoning. Zoning for the property and abutting tracts to the west is UR-22 High
Density residential. The property to the east remains zoned RR-10 Rural
Residential.
5. Transportation. The proposed extension of Mansfield Road will provide improved
access and circulation to these tracts and improve overall traffic mobility in the area.
6. Condition. The property is unimproved except for utility installations. The size,
access and condition of the property preclude use by the City.
7. Assignment of Vacated portions of right-of-way. Absent objections from abutting
properties owners, right-of-way should be assigned to the petitioners; inasmuch
research indicates that the area to be vacated was part of the parent tract. Abutting
property owners have received notice of the proposed vacation.
Conclusions.
1. The vacation of the street/alley will permit full development of the property for beneficial
uses and permit appropriate levels of maintenance.
2. Shannon Avenue east Houk Street is no longer required for general public use or public
access;
3. The proposed extension of Mansfield Road substitutes a new and different public way
which will provide enhanced access and mobility to both abutting properties and the
general public.
4. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to provide for a cul-de-sac at the termination of
Houk/Shannon; and
5. The vacated portion of Shannon Avenue shall be retained as a limited access and public
utility easement.
6. The proposed extension of Mansfield Road will provide for the ultimate development of
all properties, and it is unlikely that conditions will change in the future to provide a
greater use or need than presently exists for the right-of-way proposed for vacation; and
7. No objections have been received to the proposed vacation.
8. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION
June 9, 2005
Findings.
1. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 26, 2005, to receive testimony
concerning the vacation of a portion of Shannon Avenue east of Houk Street. The date
of the hearing was set by City Council on May 10, 2005 by Spokane Valley Resolution
No. 05-007. Notice of the hearing was published on May 13, 2005 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. The hearing was continued until
June 9, 2005.
2. The Planning Commission reviewed the report prepared by the Spokane Valley
Community Development Department in detail.
3. The vacation of the street/alley will permit full development of the property for beneficial
uses and permit appropriate levels of maintenance.
4. Shannon Avenue east of Houk Street is no longer required for public use or public
access.
5. Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to provide for a cul-de-sac at the termination of
Houk/Shannon to serve applicant's development.
6. The vacated portion of Shannon Avenue shall be retained as a limited access and public
utility easement.
7. The proposed extension of Mansfield Road substitutes a new and different public way
which will provide enhanced access and mobility to both abutting properties and the
general public;
8. The proposed extension of Mansfield Road will provide for the ultimate development of
all properties, and it is unlikely that conditions will change in the future to provide a
greater use or need than presently exists for the right-of-way proposed for vacation; and;
and
9. No objections have been received to the proposed vacation.
Conclusions.
The Spokane Valley Planning Commission therefore recommends to the City Council that that
portion of Shannon Avenue located east of Houk Street be vacated to the petitioners subject to:
a) a record of survey prepared by a registered surveyor in the State of Washington and
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. The record of survey shall contain the professional stamp and signature of
the registered surveyor and should be 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; and
b) Additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to provide for a cul-de-sac at the termination of
Houk/Shannon; and
c) The vacated portion of Shannon Avenue shall be retained as a limited access and public
utility easement.
d) Placement of 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.
e) Payment of 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.
Approved this 9th day of June, 2005
David Crosby, Chairman
ATTEST
717
Dea a Griffith, Secretary ii
/4\anillb,
SC1oTV
kane
.0.0galley
11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206
509.921.1000♦ Fax: 509.921.1008 ♦ cityhall@spokanevalley.org
Memorandum
To: Planning Commission
From: Tom Scholtens,Spokane Valley Building Official
Copy: Marina Sukup,Community Development Director
Date: 5.26.05
Re: Storage Tank Ordinance
City Staff has been in contact with the Conoco/Phillips and Exxon/Mobile tank farm
management teams over the last few weeks. On 10 May staff went to 6317 E. Sharp on a site
visit to see how a large tank is rehabilitated with a new double bottom.
At this time it appears as if there are several distinct issues with above ground storage tanks.
The first issue is how we protect the environment from a slow tank leak that would occur
through a faulty tank bottom. The way one tank farm company does it is to test and use the
existing steel tank as the bottom layer, cover that layer with sand and then put a new steel
bottom on the sand. They test for integrity and weld strength throughout the new bottom
installation and then place both electronic and odor monitoring in the sand layer. The other
tank farm company actually removes the old steel tank bottom and replaces that with a PVC
liner specially engineered and welded as the bottom layer and combined with a sump to drain
any leakage to a concentrated site for monitoring. A middle layer of sand is installed and then
a new steel bottom on the sand. Once again a monitoring system is installed to verify that no
leaks are developing in the new tank bottom.
The second area of concern is the 110% of volume containment area and the underground
pipes. Both tank farms are pulling the pipes above ground so if a leak would develop in a pipe,
it would at least be obvious. The new ordinance requires a membrane installed throughout the
containment area and on the dikes to guard against aquifer contamination during a
catastrophic tank failure or a tank filling incident causing a critical material spill. There are
questions about the proper installation of this membrane as a heavy truck repeatedly driving
over the same section might cause the membrane to develop flaws. Earlier we talked about
placing monitoring wells under this layer, but it seems as if that may be counter productive.
Driving holes through this layer may conduct a surface spill through the membrane
contaminating the area around the well and under the membrane. Once we have a spill
outside the footprint of the tank, it will be obvious and the cleanup will be concentrated on
the surface of the containment area and that cleanup would require a rapid response.
Many of those who have commented about our proposed ordinance are concerned over the 10K
gal lower compliance limit expressed in the ordinance. Staff would request direction
concerning this limit. Should it be lowered or raised? What amount of storage would be
acceptable without stringent safeguards?
Another concern expressed is determining the required timetable for retro-fitting or
rehabilitating existing tanks and tank farms. For example, when is it imperative to place a
second bottom under a tank or when do we need to require a better or improved containment
area?
Additionally, some of the definitions and sections of the proposed ordinance are not as clear
now that we understand these issues in greater depth.
Staff would request a continuance of the hearing to enable a broader understanding of these
issues and to propose a rewritten ordinance.
ExxonMobil Pipeline Company Karen R. Bailor
Post Office Box 2220 Safety, Health and Environment
Houston,Texas 77002 Manager
713 656 0227 Telephone
713 656 8232 Facsimile
E onMobil
Pipeline
May 18, 2005
IECEUVED
Mr.
Tom Sholtens
City of Spokane Valley Planning Commission
11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 °r _
Spokane Valley, Washington 99206
D D [IN
Re: Proposed City Ordinance
Establishing Article II, Section 10.03.03.09
Relating to the Use, Handling, and Storage of Critical Materials
Within the Aquifer Sensitive Area
Dear Mr. Sholtens:
The purpose of this letter is to request an extension until June 9, 2005, of the May 26th
hearing regarding the above referenced ordinance. ExxonMobil Pipeline Company is
analyzing the proposed ordinance, and is requesting this extension so that we can more fully
comment and provide technical input to the ordinance.
We appreciate the opportunity to submit comments on the City's proposed ordinance. If you
have any questions, please contact Moraima Grinnell at 713-656-9026.
Sincerely,
‘-5/400,)
An ExxonMobil Subsidiary
Memorandum
To: Tom Scholtens,City of Spokane Valley
From: Ed Parry,Department of Health Office of Drinking Water
Date: April 28, 2005
Re: Comments—Proposed Tank Construction Standards,City of Spokane Valley
Thank you for the opportunity to review the City of Spokane Valley's proposed ordinance on storage
tanks, and the protection of the region's drinking water supply. The Office of Drinking Water commends
the City for their leadership on this issue.
General:
1. The City's email indicated that their ordinance is modeled on Spokane County's ordinance (SCC
3.15). In relation to the County's ordinance,the City's ordinance:
• Does not appear to contain a section analogous to SCC 3.15.190.b (Division's authority
to order certain actions).
• Does not appear to contain a section analogous to SCC 3.15.190.d (Division may order
removal from service if a leak or leak risk is created by corrosion or some unknown
cause).
2. Due to the regional impact of a contamination event within the City of Spokane Valley, we
recommend that the City synchronize the proposed ordinance, as well as enforcement and
response actions, with regulations and procedures developed by the Department of Ecology and
other regional agencies.
10.03.03.09.03.3
"...listed on the critical materials list...": We recommend that the ordinance include a reference to the
WAC and/or the City's Interim Zoning Regulations.
10.03.03.09.07
We recommend there be a requirement for the Bldg. Dept to determine that "all critical materials
associated with the activity are stored or used in such a manner that the performance criteria of(the
"Standards for Non-Residential Uses")are satisfied..."prior to release of a Certificate of Occupancy for a
change in building use.(analogous to Spokane County Code 3.15.080.c).
Memorandum
City of Spokane Valley
Proposed Storage Tank Standards
April 28,2005
Page 2 of 2
10.03.03.09.08
Above-Ground Storage (under 10,000 gallons) appears to be addressed in 10.03.03.09.08. However, the
wording of the section does not appear to clearly address both new and existing above-ground tanks (as
does 10.03.03.09 for tanks exceeding 10,000 gallons capacity). We recommend that this section be
worded so as to clearly apply to new and existing above-ground storage tanks of less than 10,000 gallons.
We also recommend that the ordinance contain a retrofit schedule for the smaller tanks, structured along
the lines of the retrofit schedule noted for the larger tanks.
10.03.03.09.13.b
We recommend that the Building Official be authorized to order additional
testing/monitoring/certification of corrective actions related to suspected or actual leaks from USTs
(analogous to SCC 3.15.190.c).
10.03.03.09.13.c
This section appears to be missing.The section numbering runs from 10.03.03.09.b to 10.03.03.09.d.
oe City of
401111W\
• • ', t\% PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
iii,q '
bile
April 21, 2005
Marina Sukup, AICP
City of Spokane Valley
11707 E. Sprague Ave. Ste. 106
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Re: Determination of Non-Significance
Dear Ms. Sukup:
• Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Determination of Non-Significance we
received regarding the ordinance establishing Section 10.03.03.9 of the Spokane Valley Uniform
Development Code establishing strict performance standards for the use, handling, or storage of
critical materials to protect a sole source aquifer and to prohibit the disposal of critical materials
within the Aquifer Sensitive Area.
In light of the recent events involving the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Co.'s
refueling station in Hauser, ID, we hope that the City of Spokane Valley does what is necessary
to prevent any similar occurrences.
The City of Liberty Lake supports your efforts and any ordinances that protect the aquifer. If we
can help in any way to help you achieve this goal, please contact us.
If you have any questions, please call me at (509)755-6706.
Sincerely, �'
t
Doug S Director
22710 E.COUNTRY VISTA BLVD..LIBERTY LAKE WA 99019
TELEPHONE(509)755-6707 FAx:(509)755-6713
WW W.LIBERTYLAKEW A.GOV
®E= 1
April 22, 2005 D E C 1 IIE
E C W-E Fr9
Tom Scholtens
'
Cityof Spokane Valley
11707 E. Sprague Ave. Ste. 106 DQ Q E?
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Re: Comment on Handling/Storage of Critical Materials
Dear Tom:
Listed below are our comments on the draft ordinance.
Sec, 10.03.03.09.09 Above ground bulk storage of critical material
(b) 2 Section refers to new single-bottom tanks. Secondary containment means
double bottom?
Our recommendation is that "all" tanks should be double walled. Also the ten thousand gallon
threshold could be circumvented by multiple smaller tanks.
(c) Who will enforce and make sure tanks are upgraded when emptied for
inspection/repair? Very expensive for owners to comply and therefore no incentive for compliance.
10.03.03.09.16 Enforcement and Penalties
Suggest additional violation for not complying with Section 10.03.03.09.09 Section(c).
Please contact our office if you have any questions regarding this matter.
Sincerel ,
Ay,
Robert O. Ashcra
Manager
ROA:slk
CONSOLIDATED IRRIGATION DISTRICT
120 NORTH GREENACRES ROAD • GREENACRES,WASHINGTON 99016 • 924-3655 FAX:924-3927
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,
WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO.05- •�
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING 4)Li
ARTICLE H SECTION 10.03.03.09 OF THE SPOKANE UNIFORM DEVELOPMENT CODEQ )S6\'
RELATING TO THE USE,HANDLING AND STORAGE OF CRITICAL MATERIALS WITHIN
THE AQUIFER SENSITIVE AREA, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND EFFECTIVE C9
DATE.
WHEREAS; Title 10 Article V Section 10.05.25 of the Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code \\\\
established Critical Areas regulations in accordance with RCW 35A.11.020;and 7\$ , ,
�\-\\
WHEREAS;the Interim Comprehensive Plan establishes goals and policies that include prevention and
degradation of groundwater quality, protection of groundwater quality, consistent enforcement of ,�
regulations and regular updating of critical aquifer recharge protective measures;and 0
v
WHEREAS,the City of Spokane Valley proposes to supplement development regulations within the e
Aquifer Sensitive Area,in accordance with those Goals and Policies;and
WHEREAS,the proposed development regulations must be submitted to the Washington Department of
Community Trade and Economic Development pursuant to WAC 365-195-620;
NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley,Washington,ordains as follows:
Section 1.Section 10.03.03.09 is hereby established to read as follows:
"ARTICLE II USE,HANDLING&STORAGE OF CRITICAL MATERIALS
10.03.03.09.01 Purpose and intent.
The purpose and intent of these supplemental regulations within the aquifer sensitive area(ASA) is to
protect the source of the Spokane area water supply from additional long term contamination. This article
applies to any person,firm or corporation which establishes or proposes to establish,a land use or activity
which involves the storage or use of critical materials within the ASA.
10.03.03.09.02 Objectives.
The objectives of this chapter are:
(I)To allow use,handling or storage of critical materials where adequate protection of the aquifer
resource can be,or is,assured;and
(2)To establish strict performance standards for use,handling or storage facilities associated with
critical materials so as to preclude their introduction into the aquifer;and
(3)To prohibit disposal of critical materials within the ASA.
10.03.03.09.03 Definitions.
1. "API 653" means the American Petroleum Institutes' standards for Tank Inspection,
Repair,Alteration,and Reconstruction.
2. Building Official shall mean the Spokane Valley Building Official or his duly authorized
representative.
3. "Critical material" means as any substance stored, used or handled within the aquifer
sensitive area that is listed on the critical materials list(Where is this list kept?) and is
present in a quantity equal to or greater than that defined on the list.
1
4. "Critical material activity" means any non-residential land use which has on-site, for
storage, sale use in manufacturing or other purpose, any substance listed in a quantity
equal to that listed.
5. "Interstitial space" means the volume between two separate layers of a secondary or
multiple containment system.The space may be filled with air or other gas or it may be
filled with a porous material. (What about an interstitial space tilled with liquid. i.e.
brine solution. for double containment sumps or underground vessels?)
6. "Interstitial monitoring"means a method of leak detection based on determining if there
has been a failure of one of the containment layers surrounding an interstitial space.
Monitoring methods may include the detection of pressure changes within the space,the
detection of vapors from the contained material within the space or, the physical
detection of contained material or water from outside the container within the space.
7. "Leak detection" means a procedure for determining if the material in a primary
container has escaped into the outside environment or has invaded an interstitial space in
a multiple containment system.
8. "Multiple containment system" is a means of spill or leak control involving a
containment structure having one or more layers of material between the primary
container and the environment. Containment layers must be resistant to the material
stored.The volume within the containment system must be at least as large as the primary
container.Containment layers may be separated by an interstitial space.
9. "NFPA 30" means the National Fire Prevention Association's Flammable and
Combustible Liquids Standard. (Isn't the NFPA being replaced by the International Fire
Code?)
10. "Primary container"is the container that is in direct contact with the material of concern
during the course of normal transport,use or storage.
11. Regulated substance.For purposes of this chapter"regulated substance"referred to in 42
U.S.C.6991(2)means"critical material."
12. "Secondary containment" is a means of spill or leak containment involving a second
barrier or tank constructed outside the primary container and capable of holding the
contents of the primary container.
13. "Underground storage tank" means any storage container meeting the definition in 42
U.S.C.6991(1).Aggregates of tanks that are hydraulically connected are considered to be
one tank.Any tank and the associated piping used for the storage of liquids which is to be
installed so that ten percent or more of the total volume(including the volume contained
in piping)lies below the ground surface.
10.03.03.09.04. Administrative guides for implementation.
(a)The geographic extent of the aquifer sensitive area(ASA) is delineated on maps, as now or
hereafter may be updated and supplemented.
(b)The Building Official may use design standards contained in the International Building Code,
the International Fire Code or standard practices of the industry.
10.03.03.09.05 Designation of critical materials use activities.
(a)The Building Official may require that the application for any nonresidential building permit
be accompanied by a list of chemicals to be maintained on site.
2
(b) Based on the list of materials provided,the Building Official shall designate any proposed
facility that will have one or more critical materials on site as a critical materials activity.
(c)Upon reviewing the plans,the Building Official will define the areas subject to the secondary
containment requirements.
(d)When it is determined that a use for which a permit has been required is a critical use activity,
a fee will be assessed pursuant to Master Fee Schedule(Is this schedule available for review?)for
the review and inspection of critical use activity and materials.
(e) Any facility approved without secondary containment after the effective date of this article
later found to have critical materials on-site, shall be modified to incorporate appropriate
containment facilities or be subject to loss of the certificate of occupancy.
10.03.03.09.06 Critical materials lists.
Any activity which involves the use,handling or storage of a critical quantity of material on the Critical
Materials List shall be designated a critical materials use activity and is subject to the provisions of this
code.
(a) Critical materials include all those substances for which ground water standards have been
established under 173-200 WAC, water quality standards for ground waters of the state of
Washington,or for which drinking water standards have been established under 246-290 WAC,
drinking water regulations of the state of Washington and included in the list contained in Section
14.706.200 of the Interim Zoning Regulations,as it may be amended from time to time.
(b) Critical material activities are those nonresidential land used activities that maintain on-site a
quantity of material equal to or greater than that tabulated under"critical quantity."
(c) The critical materials activity list contained in Section 14.706.300 of the Interim Zoning
Regulations,as it may be amended from time to time,is a tabulation of business activity types in
the county likely to have critical materials on site.While not exhaustive,the list serves as a guide
to aid in project review and will be available for review by building proponents and the general
public.
10.03.03.09.07 Application of critical materials standards.
(a) Plans submitted shall show appropriate safeguards included in the design of newly constructed or
remodeled buildings, including the installation of underground storage tanks, meeting the
performance criteria established in Section 10.03.03.09.08.
(b) A certificate of occupancy shall be required for all new or re-occupied facilities using, handling
or storing critical materials.
10.03.03.09.08 Standards for nonresidential uses.
(a) Any above ground storage of critical materials requires:
1. A secondary containment mechanism that will prevent any leak or spill from leaving the site or
infiltrating into the ground below.
a) Secondary containment shall be provided in areas of the facility where the critical
materials are stored, used and along corridors(Does this include pipe ways. truck (Formatted:Highlight
loading racks,andior driveways into and out of the facility'?)where chemicals(Is this
different than critical materials?)are moved within the facility.
b) The containment facility shall be capable of holding one hundred ten percent(110%)
of the volume of critical material or three times the volume of the largest container of
3
material (why the change to 3 times the volume?: The DOT/SPCC/NFPA standard
has always been 110°x).,whichever is greater.
c) Outdoor facilities shall make provision for containing the required volume of spill
and precipitation that occurs during a storm event equivalent to that required for
storm drainage design.
2. Secondary containment facilities should facilitate the proper clean up and disposal of spills or
leaks.
a) No secondary containment facility shall be connected to any sanitary or storm sewer
system, including drywells, without pretreatment facilities appropriate to the
substances maintained on-site, installed between the containment facility and the
discharge. Can we design/install an independent storm water disposal system which
would NOT be tied into Storm water systems?
b) A spill clean up plan shall be developed to define proper procedures for maintaining
and cleaning containment facilities and to identify proper disposal practices for any
critical materials removed from the containment facilities. We do not want to create
a new plan for City of Spokane Valley. We already have and maintain an SPCC plan
and Facility Response Plan(FRPI that would cover any clean up activities in the event
of a loss of containment.
3. Permanent disposal of any waste containing critical materials shall not be allowed within the
aquifer sensitive area.
(b) When underground storage for any critical materials is included in the design of any facility,the
storage vessel and associated piping and transfer equipment shall be protected by a secondary
containment system. How does this section differ from existing DOE UST reculations? Does
this section apply to new construction only? We propose that any UST requirements for the City
of Spokane Valley be consistent with existing DOE reculations.
1. In addition to any product inventory monitoring program the tank owner may institute,
the interstitial space between primary and secondary containment shall be monitored on a
schedule approved by the Building Official. We propose that any UST monitoring be
consistent with current DOE reculations.
2. Monitoring records shall be retained for not less than two years. Records for the latest
six-month period shall be available on twenty-four-hour notice. Those older than six
months shall be available within five working days.
3. Underground tanks installed solely for the purpose of containing spills or leaks are
exempt from secondary containment requirements.
10.03.03.09.09 Above ground bulk storage of critical materials.
(a) In addition to the containment prescribed in Section 10.03.03.09.08 and the requirements of Chapter
173-180A WAC, new facilities with aboveground tanks having an individual net storage capacity of
ten thousand gallons or more of critical materials shall include special provisions to insure all
facilities will meet API Standard 2610 for Design, Construction, Operation, Maintenance, and
Inspection of Terminal and Tank Facilities, and shall include provisions for secondary containment
for the following:
1. All pipes, pumps and valves associated with carrying critical materials to or from the storage
facility,and shall be located aboveground to the extent possible.
2. All areas where critical materials are transferred from conveyances, such as trucks,rail cars and
pipelines,to the bulk storage facilities.
4
(b)New aboveground tanks for the storage of critical materials with an individual net storage capacity of
ten thousand gallons or more, shall meet the secondary containment requirements outlined in
10.03.03.09.08 of this article and 173-180A-080 WAC.In addition,the following requirements shall
apply:
1. Any new tank installed to store critical materials shall be equipped with a multiple containment
system and leak detection.
2. Any new single-bottom tank constructed of steel or similar shall have secondary containment,
leak detection and cathodic protection installed as an integral part of the tank structure.
"Secondary containment" means a double bottom with interstitial monitoring or an equivalent
system of tank liners and leak detection.
3. Any new tank system shall be installed within new diked areas totally lined by a multiple
containment system composed of material resistant to the chemical stored in the facility having
hydraulic conductivity less than I x 10-6 centimeters per second at the anticipated hydrostatic
loads.Interstitial monitoring shall be provided between the containment layers when appropriate.
(Note for interpretation: This means that the secondarily contained tank described in subsection
(b)(1)above lies within a secondary containment berm--creating a multiple containment system.)
4. Uncovered diked areas shall be constructed to contain one hundred ten percent of the volume of
the largest tank within the containment area.Stormwater management for runoff generated within
the diked areas shall conform to the Department of Ecology's State General Permit and Spokane
Valley's guidelines for stormwater management prior to disposal.
5. When used for emergency containment of tank contents,dikes shall be designed and constructed
to comply with the requirements of NFPA 30.
6. For any new tanka tank leak detection system shall be installed and monitored for leakage by
visual, mechanical or electronic leak detection methods. Monitoring reports shall be kept on file
for a period of five years and shall be available for review at the request of the director.
Inspection reports prepared for compliance with Chapter 173-180D WAC shall be considered
adequate for compliance with this section.
(c)Any individual aboveground tank with a net storage capacity of ten thousand gallons or more in bulk
storage facilities in existence at the time of adoption these regulations shall be required to meet the
following requirements( Does this section require a re-inspection of tanks that have been inspected and
upgraded per the Spokane County ordinance?):
1. Be inspected and repaired as required by API Standard 653;and
2. Meet the compliance schedule as required by the existing United States Department of
Transportation, United States Environmental Protection Agency and Washington Department of
Ecology regulations.Tanks inspected and upgraded in compliance with the above schedule prior
to the adoption of this regulation shall be re-inspected and upgraded in accordance with this
article within ten years of the initial inspection;and
3. Be upgraded,when the tank is emptied for inspection and repair in accordance with the applicable
compliance schedule to include a coated, cathodically protected single bottom and under-tank
leak detection, a double bottom,with interstitial monitoring or an equivalent system of tank [Deleted:and
bottom lining,leak detection and interstitial monitoring;and
4. When the tank is upgraded,the bermed area around the tank shall also be upgraded.The bermed
area outside the footprint of the tank shall be equipped with a multiple containment system
composed of two or more layers of material with a hydraulic conductivity less than 1 x 10-6
centimeters per second at the anticipated hydrostatic loads. (The installation of 2 layers for
multiple containment is infeasible from a technical standpoint. It is practically impossible to
5
install and"test''2 lavers of 10-6 lavers without compromising the integrity of system itself. We
would propose to adopt a single laver of 10-6 similar to what Spokane County agreed to in an
amendment to the original 2001 County ordinance. The multiple containment layers of the
bermed areas shall be sealed to the tank to prevent any spilled or leaked material from migrating
under the tank;and
5. Uncovered diked areas shall be constructed to contain one hundred ten percent (110%) of the
volume of the largest tank within the containment area. Stormwater management for runoff
generated within the diked areas shall conform to the Department of Ecology's State General
Permit and Spokane Valley's guidelines(Where are the Spokane Valley guidelines for
review?1,for stormwater management prior to disposal;and Deleted:
6. When upgraded, pumps, pipes and other facilities associated with tanks shall be placed
aboveground within bermed containment areas or be replaced with double walled units with
interstitial monitoring at the time the tank containment is upgraded.Aboveground facilities shall
be protected from impact with vehicles and machinery by protective walls or bollards. Pumps,
pipes and other facilities not within secondary containment areas shall be pressure tested at least
once a year. Records of pressure testing shall be kept on file for at least five years; or (This
section is preemptive for DOT regulated facilities. Pressure testing should remain under the
jurisdiction of the DOT).
7. The facility shall be upgraded to multiple containment standards if such tank is relocated.
(d)Retrofitting an aboveground tank with an individual net storage capacity of ten thousand gallons or
more with multiple containment shall require a building permit...
(e) Annual inspection of aboveground tanks with an individual net storage capacity of ten thousand
gallons or more shall be conducted to verify that required secondary containment facilities are
maintained,that clean up materials and equipment needed to implement clean up plans are available and
that proper notification of leaks and spills occurs.Inspection reports shall be kept on file for a period of
five years and shall be made available for review at the request of the Building Official.Inspection reports
prepared for compliance with Chapter 173-180D WAC shall be considered adequate for compliance with
this section.
10.03.03.09.10 Underground tanks
(a) This section implements provisions of Subchapter IX,Regulation of Underground Storage Tanks,of
"The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984"(Sec. 1,P.L.98-616;42 USC 6991-6991(i)
and 42 USC 6901, et seq.("Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976."(RCRA) How does
this section differ from existine DOE UST regulations? Does this section apply to new construction
only? We propose that any UST requirements tier the City of Spokane Valley he consistent with
existine DOE regulations.
(b) UST's are classified as follows:
1. "Active use UST"means a UST in actual use for receipt,storage or delivery of substances,as a
UST,within any ninety-day period.
2. "Short-term out of service UST"means a UST not in active use within any ninety-day period.
3. "Long-term out of service UST" means a UST not in active use within any one-year period or
longer,where application for this status is approved prior to placing it out of service.
4. "Abandoned in place USE' means a UST permanently prepared for nonuse and left in place,
where application for this status is approved prior to placing it out of service..
6
(b) No person may own or maintain an underground storage tank(UST)installation,unless the same is
registered and approved pursuant to a permit and a current approval tag has been issued. (UST's are
currently retzistered and approved by the DOE. IS the City of Spokane Valley to become the
jurisdictional ag.ency for UST's?
(c) To secure an initial permit, to transfer an existing permit or to maintain an approval tag, the
installation shall provide evidence that the UST passed a precision leak test approved by the
Building Official. The permit or approval tag is conditioned upon annual leak tests for any UST not
installed with secondary containment for the duration of the permit. The permit shall be valid for a
period of five(5)years.
(d) Leak tests shall be conducted not more than six months prior to an application for a permit or tag
approval. Leak test methods shall be based on statistically reliable measurement, down to five
hundredths of a gallon per hour, including temperature compensation, or in accordance with the
latest recommendations of the National Fire Protection Association.
(e) The Building Official may approve alternative methods of monitoring leaks.
(f) Approval tags or tank certificates shall be displayed in a conspicuous location on the premises at all
times.
(g) Approval tags or tank certificates may be revoked for any of the following reasons:
1. Failure to maintain adequate records;or
2. Violation of any condition or requirement of the permit;or
3. Failure to comply with an order of the Building Official.
(h) The building official shall provide prior written notice to any property owner of an impending
enforcement action. This section does not limit emergency enforcement powers or liabilities of any
party.
10.03.03.09.11 Required inventory and test records. This section seems to pertain mainly to
service station UST's. That about UST's that are utilized for overflow protection only as at a
products terminal?
(a) Records of UST shall be maintained on the premises and shall be available for inspection during
regular business hours. Records shall include the following information:
1. Type of product received,stored or delivered;
2. Volume thereof;and
3. Name and address of vendor of product:and
4. Test results for the term of the permit.
(b) Records of UST's holding substances not intended for resale or transfer to a third party may be
reconciled on a weekly basis rather than daily if,and only if:
1. Individual or aggregate UST(connected hydraulically)capacity is less than one thousand one
hundred gallons;or
a. Weekly volume exchange is less than five percent(5%)of tank capacity.Exchanges within a
system of tanks not involving exterior product release or receipt are not considered volume
exchanges for purposes of this provision.
(e) As used herein, "reconcile" means any method approved by the Building Official wherein the
beginning and ending tank volumes are compared to logs or reliable records of vehicles or other vessels
7
transferring product in or out of the subject tank. Where output metering is in place, alternative
monitoring or testing may be approved in lieu of reconciliation.
10.03.03.09.12 Reporting failures,leaks and leak risks.
(a) The following events shall the reported within three business days, regardless of cause or fault:
Again. renortine is regulated by DOE and should remain under their jurisdiction.
1. A failure to perform accurate records reconciliation;
2. A reconciliation discrepancy,irregularity or apparent loss or gain of product not explained as
normal variation in permittee's inventory records.
3. A loss or destruction of records or information needed to accomplish reconciliation or
otherwise required to be kept hereunder;and/or
4. Failure of any monitoring method to function or otherwise confirm tank safety.
(b)The discovery of any leak or circumstances indicating possibility of a leak of a UST shall immediately
be reported to the Building Official.This obligation shall extend to product vendors and repair or testing
personnel,as well as permittee.
10.03.03.09.13 UST Spill prevention and protection.
(a)The Building Official is authorized to require additional leak testing;additional monitoring; removal
of UST contents; UST reinforcement, modification, repair or replacement; prohibition of UST usage;
revocation or suspension of permit and/or approval tags or certificates;additional permit conditions;spill
clean-up or any additional measure to protect the health and safety of the public,or to protect the aquifer
in the event of:
1. A violation of this article or any provision of permit approval;
2. Reasonable cause exists to believe a spill or seepage is occurring;
3. A leak test failure;
4. Monitoring does not disclose a leak or possible leak;or
5. Other environmental risk.
(b)The Building Official may order the top of the UST installation exposed,if reasonable investigation
indicates the possibility of leakage, and may permit repair where the leak is not the result of corrosion,
tank failure,or other serious malfunction.
(d)Underground storage tanks and associated underground piping shall be permitted to be repaired only
once. Thereafter,said UST installation must be either replaced or abandoned.
10.03.03.09.14 Requirements for out of service and abandoned in place USTs
(a)A short-term out of service UST shall be secured in accordance with the requirements of the adopted
fire code,as it may be amended from time to time.
(b) Long-term and abandoned in place USTs shall not require a permit, provided the classification is
approved by the Building Official,subject to such conditions as s/he may deem appropriate.
(c) The Building Official may require removal of the UST for failure to meet conditions established to
the long-term and abandoned in place UST.
(d) Removal of any UST shall be in accordance with the requirements of the Building Official.
10.03.03.09.15 UST Maximum useful life.
8
(a) All existing single-walled UST installations (tanks and associated piping) without secondary
containment shall be conclusively presumed to have a maximum useful life of forty years.
(b) On or before the fifth anniversary of the effective date of this chapter, all single-walled UST
installations forty years old or older as of said effective date and without secondary containment,shall
have been withdrawn from operation and either physically removed or converted to satisfy abandoned
status.
(c) A repaired,expanded or remodeled UST shall not exceed a forty-year life unless.
1. An approved tank liner of fiberglass reinforced epoxy or similar material is installed on a
single-walled UST;and
2. Liners are installed prior to the time that a tank reaches its fortieth birthday. The additional
life resulting from the installation of a tank liner shall be equal to the length of the warranty
provided by the company installing the liner.
Provided, however that liners shall not be used to repair a leaking single-walled tank for the
purpose of extending its useful life. It is further provided that a single-walled tank may be lined
only once.
10.03.03.09.16 Enforcement&Penalties
(a) It shall be a violation of this article to:
1. Submit false,incomplete or inaccurate permit application or test information or fail to correct any
such error immediately when it is or should have been known;
2. Tamper with or fail to display any approval tag lawfully issued,or to display any invalid,expired
or revoked tag or facsimile;
3. Fill any UST to which a current,valid approval tag is not conspicuously affixed.This provision
applies specifically to all parties including the tank owner and any vendor of products
encompassed in this chapter;
4. Alter,tamper with,obscure,destroy or fail to maintain updated,accurate inventory records or any
other records or information required hereunder;
5. Falsify, misstate, conceal or withhold information regarding product delivery, date, amount or
tank capacity or any other records or information required by this article;
6. Fail to comply with any regulation or order imposed as a condition of permit approval;
(b) This article shall be enforced in accordance with Section 10.01.20 Enforcement& Penalties of the
Spokane Valley Uniform Development Code."
SECTION 2.— Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance, or any
regulation, rule or order adopted pursuant to the authority thereof be determined invalid or
unconstitutional,it shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section,sentence,clause or
phrase of this ordinance.
SECTION 3 — Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after
publication of this ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City as provided by
law.
9
PASSED by the City Council this day of May,2005.
Diana Wilhite,Mayor
ATTEST:
Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk
Approved as to form:
Cary P.Driskell,Deputy City Attorney
Date of publication:
Effective date:
10